The Incident of Qirtas and the Background

Virtues and Outstanding Traits of Sayyiduna Umar
September 18, 2015
Accusation of Doubt in His Verification of Iman
September 18, 2015

 BACK Return to Table of contents

 

The Incident of Qirtas and the Background

It is the beloved pastime of some people to criticise the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, especially the first three khulafa’ and the Ummahat al Mu’minin, may Allah be pleased with all of them. It has remained the cherished work of authors and compilers in every era to level criticism against the noble Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

The scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah have replied to these baseless criticisms in every generation. Subsequently, there is a long list of such criticisms levelled against the second khalifah, Sayyidina ‘Umar al Faruq radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Presently, there is a journal published, entitled Yad-e Faruq, which in addition to other (baseless) criticisms and objections, the objection relating to the incident of Qirtas was also mentioned. It carried the heading ‘The Obedience of Hadrat Faruq, The analogy of Allah and His Rasul in the commentary of the Hadith of Qirtas’.

In the following pages, the discussion will revolve around dismissing this criticism and clarity will be presented on behalf of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

 

Days of the Final Illness

A number of important incidents took place during the final illness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The scholars of hadith and sirah have discussed them at length. In short, there were a number of bequests made to the ummah and a number of other instructions were given for various needs by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Certain statements were made specifically for certain individuals like Sayyidina Usamah ibn Zaid radiya Llahu ‘anhu. There were certain instructions given regarding the pure spouses and the Ahlul Bayt. The details of this can be studied in the following works:

  1. Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d vol. 2 pp. 10-48
  2. Dala’il al Nubuwwah vol. 7
  3. Al Ihsan bi Tartib Sahih Ibn Hibban vol. 9 p. 201-205
  4. Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5
 

One of these incidents that took place was the incident of Qirtas. It took place during the final illness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, on Thursday, during the first ten days of Rabi’ al Awwal 11 A.H. The following Monday, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went on to meet Allah Ta’ala and he left this temporary world.

 

Summary of the Incident of Qirtas

Amongst the various narrations of the incident of Qirtas, we present a narration of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, through which a broad picture of the incident of Qirtas will come to light and one will be guided to the reality of the incident, away from all the exaggeration of this particular narration.

This narration has been transmitted by Abu Ya’la al Mowsuli rahimahu Llah (d. 307 A.H), in his work Musnad Abu Ya’la, with the following words:

 

سفيان بن عيينة عن سليمان الاحول عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس قال : يوم الخميس وما يوم الخميس يوم اشتد برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وجعه فقال ايتوني اكتب لكم كتابا لا تضلون بعده فتنازعوا ولا ينبغي عند النبي تنازع قال دعوني فما انا فيه خير مما تسئلوني عنه قال امرهم بثلاث قال اخرجوا المشركين من جزيرة العرب واجيزوا الوفد بنحو ما كنت اجيزهم …الخ

 

Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu said: “What is Thursday? Thursday was when the pain of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam worsened, so he said to those present: “Bring a paper. I shall write something after which you will not go astray.” Upon this, those present had a difference of opinion and argued, whereas it is not appropriate to argue in front of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. So Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “Leave me. The condition I am in is better than that which you ask me about.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then issued commands regarding three things: the polytheists should be removed from the Arabian Peninsula; the delegations should be dealt with in a good way as he used to deal with them…[1]

 

Subsequently, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam put off the matter of writing and he did not dictate anything.

This was the initial events surrounding the incident of Qirtas (referred to as the incident of the pen and paper by the Shia).

Soon after this, during his last days and in fact the same Thursday, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam delivered an important sermon to the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum when he experienced some relief. In this sermon, he explained a number of important matters and together with this, he mentioned a number of points of special importance and the virtues of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, for example:

 

فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ان امن الناس على في صحبته وماله أبو بكر وفي رواية ولو كنت متخذا خليلا من الناس لأتخذت أبابكر لا يبقى في المسجد باب الا سد الا باب أبي بكر

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “In terms of companionship and wealth, the one who benefitted me the most was Abu Bakr.” Another narration states: “If I were to take a close friend from the people, then I would have made Abu Bakr my close friend, but there is the bonds of Islam.” He also said: “All the doors opening into the Masjid should be closed except for the door of Abu Bakr.”[2]

 

Moreover, Ibn Kathir rahimahu Llah says in al Bidayah wa al Nihayah:

 

وفي قوله عليه السلام سدوا عني كل خوخة يعني أبواب الصغار الى المسجد غير خوخة أبي بكر ، إشارة إلى الخلافة اى ليخرج منها الى الصلوة بالمسلمين

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said that all the small doors opening into the Masjid should be closed, except for the door of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. There is clear indication in this to the khilafah of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, that he will come from this door to lead the Muslims in salah.[3]

 

Research of Ibn Kathir

In order to resolve the issue of Qirtas, ‘Allamah ibn Kathir rahimahu Llah has clarified in al Bidayah wa al Nihayah:

 

وهذا الحديث مما قد توهم به بعض الاغبياء من اهل البدع من الشيعة وغيرهم كل مدع انه كان يريد ان يكتب في ذالك الكتاب ما يرمون اليه من مقالاتهم وهذا هو التمسك بالمتشابه وترك المحكم واهل السنة ياخذون بالمحكم ويردون ما تشابه اليه وهذه طريقة الراسخين في العلم كما وصفهم الله عزوجل في كتابه وهذا المواضع مما زل فيه اقدام كثير من اهل الضلالات واما اهل السنة فليس لهم مذهب الا اتباع الحق يدورون معه كيفما دار وهذا الذي كان يريد عليه الصلوة والسلام ام يكتبه قد جاء في الاحاديث الصحيحة التصريح بكشف المراد منه

 

Some of the innovators, amongst the Shia etc., have misconstrued (from the narration of Qirtas) that in this letter, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended to dictate that which supports there ideologies(in other words that a decree in favour of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was going to be written). This is grasping onto conjecture and abandoning that which is resolute; whereas the Ahlus Sunnah grasp onto the resolute and refute that which is conjecture. This is the method of those who are firm in knowledge, as Allah Ta’ala explains in the Qur’an. This is the position where the feet of the deviated have slipped, but we — the Ahlus Sunnah — follow the way of the truth and wherever the truth goes, that is where the Ahlus Sunnah can be found. What Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended to dictate has been reported in other authentic ahadith, and he clarified his intention.[4]

 

Narration of Umm al Mu’minin Sayyidah ‘A’ishah al Siddiqah

Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha narrates:

 

عن عائشة قالت قال لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في مرضه ادعي لي أبابكر وأخاك حتى اكتب كتابا فاني اخاف ان يتمنى متمن ويقول قائل انا أولى ويأبى الله والمؤمنون إلا أبابكر

 

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to me (Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha) during his illness: “Summon for me Abu Bakr, your father, and your brother so that I may write a letter; for I fear that some desirous person may be tempted and someone will claim to be better. Whereas Allah and the believers will refuse everyone except Abu Bakr.”[5]

 

Narration of Sayyidina ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Bakr

There is another narration that has the same subject matter, narrated from Sayyidina ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

 

عبد الرحمن بن أبي بكر رضي الله عنه قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ائتني بدواة وكتف اكتب لكم كتابا لن تضلوا بعده أبدا ثم ولا ناقفاه ثم اقبل علينا فقال يأيى الله والمؤمنون إلا أبا بكر…قال الذهبي اسناده صحيح

 

During these last days, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to him: “Bring ink and paper. I shall write something for you, so that you will never go astray later on.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then turned his back to us. A little while later, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam turned to us and said: “Allah and the believers will refuse everyone except Abu Bakr.”[6]

 

The summary of this discussion is that the initial instruction of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam when asking for the paper was concise and vague in terms of its purpose. However, when Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam spoke later on — after feeling a little better — he clarified his intentions and was resolute therein that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was worthy of leading the salah and worthy of standing as the deputy of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and no other could share this position with him. It is as though the previous concise message was now explained in detail.

 

Research of ‘Allamah al Bayhaqi

At this point, al Bayhaqi rahimahu Llah has mentioned the statement of Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah rahimahu Llah, from which the view of the Taba’ Tabi’in is clarified:

 

قال سفيان انما زعموا اراد ان يكتب فيها استخلاف أبي بكر

Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah rahimahu Llah says that the objective was to dictate the khilafah (succession) of Abu Bakr.[7]

 

Also, ‘Allamah al Bayhaqi rahimahu Llah has mentioned at this point:

 

ثم نبه امته على خلافته باستخلافه اياه في الصلوة حين عجز عن حضورها

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam informed the ummah by appointing Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu in his place when he could not come for the salah, of the succession of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[8]

 

In other words, appointing Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu in his place was a gesture from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu would succeed him, thus the verbal directive which Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended to write initially — in the incident of Qirtas — was actually executed in deed.

 

Explanation of the Narration

Then, at this point, the hadith scholars have mentioned a number of explanations for this incident. ‘Allamah Badr al Din al ‘Ayni rahimahu Llah says:

 

ثم ظهر للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ان المصلحة تركه او اوحى اليه

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam felt it more expedient to leave out the writing, or revelation came to him in this matter.[9]

 

Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahu Llah clarifies this matter in his work Fath al Bari in the following way:

 

وعزمه صلى الله عليه وسلم كان اما بالوحى واما بالاجتهاد وكذالك تركه ان كان بالوحى فبالوحى والا فبالاجتهاد ايضا

The intention of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam (to dictate) was either by wahi or based upon his ijtihad, similarly, his decision to abandon it was based either on wahi or ijtihad.

 

In short, he changed his previous intention and abandoned the matter of writing.

 

Support from the Shi‘ah

The Shia scholars also accept this:

 

اما سكوته عليه السلام بعد التنازع ما كان من عنده بل كان بوحى كما بين في مقامه فصار امر الكتابة منسوخا بالوحى

The silence of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam after the argument was not from his own side, but it was on account of wahi, as will be explained in its place. So, the matter of writing was abrogated through wahi.[10]

 

The summary of the discussion is that in whatever way the matter of writing was abandoned, the desired result was still achieved, and the matter of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu being the successor of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was clarified, and the intention of the incident of Qirtas was clarified.

 

A doubt and the reply

The critics of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum raise a question here that in the above mentioned incident, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended to dictate the khilafah of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, but on account of the opposition of some Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam could not dictate the instruction.

 

Ponder over the following points in order to dispel the doubt:

  • Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu himself discusses this issue and says that during the final illness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instructed him to bring a paper so that he could write an instruction so that the ummah does not fall into deviation after him. Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu says that looking at the worried nature of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he had the fear that it should not be that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam passes away in his absence. He said: “Tell me, I shall protect the instruction and keep it in my mind.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:
 

قال اوصى بالصلوة والزكوة وما ملكت ايمانكم

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam made a bequest regarding salah, zakat and slaves.

The following senior scholars have mentioned the above mentioned narration:

  1. Musnad Imam Ahmed rahimahu Llah vol. 1 p. 90
  2. Al Adab al Mufrad p. 26
  3. Tabaqat ibn Sa’d vol. 12 p. 37
  4. Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 238
 

This narration of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu clarifies the matter that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam made this bequest to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu on this occasion and this narration is testimony that the khilafah of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not meant.

 
  • Similarly, there is another similar narration from Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Sayyidina ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu. This is also a reason to say that on this occasion it was not the objective to write the khilafah of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

It is reported that during the final illness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Sayyidina ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu said to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu: “I see the signs of death on the face of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.” Therefore, we must ask regarding the successor of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. If this matter is in our favour, then we should know and if it is in the favour of someone else, then Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam should make a bequest for us.” Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu said in reply to this proposal of Sayyidina ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

 

فقال علي اني لا اساله ذالك والله ان منعناها لا يعطينا ها الناس بعده ابدا

I shall never ask Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam regarding this. By Allah, if Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam forbids us in this matter, then people will never give us an opportunity later on.[11]

 
  • Similarly, there are other narrations from Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in which the concept of khilafah bila fasl (khilafah without interruption) is negated. However, at this time, we suffice upon only two narrations.

By means of the two above mentioned narrations, the khilafah bila fasl of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is negated.

The subject matter of the incident of Qirtas mentioned in the narrations that were presented, it has nothing to do with proving khilafah bila fasl for Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, but in these narrations we find indication towards the succession and deputation of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

 

Other points

If it is accepted that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wanted to dictate khilafah bila fasl for Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, but Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu or the other Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum prevented him from doing so, then the point that we must turn our attention to is that the incident of Qirtas took place on a Thursday. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam remained alive for four days after this incident and passed away on Monday. During this time, those who disputed would have definitely gone and there would have been a number of occasions where Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would have been alone. During this time, why did he not write out the necessary document (regarding the khilafah of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu)? Why was this matter not concluded?

Subsequently, ‘Allamah al Bayhaqi rahimahu Llah mentions this in the following text:

 

ولو كان ما يريد النبي صلى الله عليه سلم ان يكتب لهم شيئا مفروضا لا يستغنون عنه لم يتركه باختلافهم ولغطهم لقول الله عزوجل بلغ ما أنزل اليك من ربك كما لم يترك تبلغ غيره بمخالفه من خالفه ومعاداه من اداه

 

If Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended to dictate something necessary, something that could not be left out, then Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam could not have left it out because of the mutual difference of opinion and the noise because Allah Ta’ala said: “Convey whatever has been revealed to you from your Rabb,” and just as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam never left out conveying and propagating religion on account of the opposition and enmity of the enemies.[12]

 

‘Allamah al Dhahabi rahimahu Llah has discussed this issue in his work Al Muntaqa in a number of places. He has written that if Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wanted to dictate something necessary, he would have definitely dictated and had it written. Nothing could stop him. “O Rasul, convey what has been revealed to you from your Rabb and if you do not, then you have not conveyed the message.”[13]

This means that whatever Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended to write, if the guidance of the ummah was dependent on it, then Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would not have left it out, simply because this will negate the position of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as being the guide of the ummah, and contradicts his status as a propagator of the message of Allah.

 

Leading the Salah

One aspect on this topic that the senior scholars discuss in establishing the khilafah of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and its true nature is the matter of leading the salah. In light of it, the vagueness of the incident of Qirtas will be clarified.

During his final illness, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instructed Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to lead the salah, appointing him as the imam. He salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:

 

مروا ابا بكر فليصل بالناس

Instruct Abu Bakr that he should lead the people in salah.

 

The Shia and Sunni scholars have mentioned this statement in their books. Subsequently, at the top of the list are the following references:

  1. Bukhari vol. 1 p. 93
  2. Dala’il al Nubuwwah vol. 7 p. 182
 

Support from the Shi‘ah

We shall present only two references from the Shia scholars, who are considered reliable by them. Ibn Abi al Hadid writes in Sharh Nahj al Balaghah:

 

قال علي والزبير انه صاحب الغار وانا لنعرف له سنه امره رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بالصلوة وهو حى

‘Ali and Zubair said: “Indeed he was the companion in the cave and indeed we recognise his seniority, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instructed him to perform the salah during his lifetime.[14]

 

In Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, this reference is mentioned in the following text:

 

فلما اشتد به المرض امر ابا بكر ان يصلي بالناس…وان ابا بكر صلى الناس بعد ذالك يومين ثم مات

When the illness increased, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam gave the command that Abu Bakr should lead the people in salah and Abu Bakr led the people for two days in salah, then Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam passed away.[15]

 

Subsequently, some scholars have mentioned that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu led seventeen salah and some say that he led twenty, by the instruction of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

 

وقال الزهري عن ابي بكر بن ابي سبرة ان ابا بكر صلى بهم سبع عشرة صلاة وقال غير عشرين صلاة فالله اعلم

Zuhri narrates from Abu Bakr ibn Abi Sabrah that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu led seventeen salah and according to some, he led twenty salah.[16]

 

The objective of this is that salah, which is the most important and greatest form of worship in Islam, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam chose Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and put him forward (to lead the Muslims during his lifetime).

 

Statement of Sheikh al Ash‘ari

On this occasion, there is an excellent text of Sheikh Abu al Hasan al Ash’ari rahimahu Llah, which Ibn Kathir rahimahu Llah has mentioned in his work al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 236:

 

وقال تقديمه له دليل على انه اعلم الصحابة واقرؤهم لما ثبت في الخبر المتفق على صحته بين العلماء ان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال يوم القوم اقرؤهم لكتاب الله فان كانوا في القراه سواء فاعلمهم بالسنة فان كانوا في السنة سواء فاكبرهم سنا فان كانوا في السن سواء فاقدمهم اسلاما قلت وهذا من كلام الاشعري رحمه الله مما ينبغي ان يكتب بماء الذهب ثم قد اجتمعت هذا الصفات كلها في الصديق رضي الله عنه وارضاه

 

Putting Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu forward in the matter of religion (establishment of salah) is proof that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the most knowledgeable amongst the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, and he was the greatest Qari among them.

It is based on the narration – whose authenticity the scholars agree upon – that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “The one who is the greatest Qari of the Book of Allah should lead, if those present are equal in this standard, then the one who has the most knowledge of the sunnah, if those present are equal in this standard, then the one who is the eldest should lead, if those present are equal in this standard, then the one who is the oldest in Islam should lead.”

 

Ibn Kathir rahimahu Llah says that these words of al Ash’ari rahimahu Llah are worthy of being written in gold. All these qualities collectively were found in Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, may Allah be pleased with him and may Allah keep him pleased.

Every quality discussed above was found to a perfect degree in Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. It is for this reason that he was declared worthy of this position and he had the honour of leading the ummah in salah. This was what indicated to the khilafah of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and we find proof herein of him being the deputy of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. It was accepted without any difference by the senior luminaries of the ummah.

 

Narration of Sayyidina Abu Mas‘ud al Ansari

There is another famous Muhaddith, Abu ‘Awanah, who transmits the narration of Sayyidina Abu Mas’ud Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu. In the light of this hadith, it is proven that the khalifah and deputy of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Abu ‘Awanah says:

 

فدل قوله في خبر ابو مسعود حيث قال ولا يؤمن رجل في سلطانه انه خليفة عليهم بعده والله اعلم

The hadith mentioned by Sayyidina Abu Mas’ud Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu: “No one should lead the territory of someone else (except with his permission)” points out that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu became the khalifah after Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. This is because during the era of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu fulfilled the leadership of the Muslims, according to the instruction of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[17]

 

Research of Shah Wali Allah

Just as the senior scholars substantiated from the appointment of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to lead the salah, by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam during his final illness, Shah Wali Allah Muhaddith Dehlawi rahimahu Llah also indicated this in the following text of his book, Qurrat al Aynayn:

 

During the final illness, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam appointed Abu Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhu to lead the salah and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam refused to let anyone else lead the salah. This is proven from Mutawatir narrations. Then, the jurists amongst the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum like Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu came to the conclusion regarding Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu being the khalifah from his being appointed to the position of Imam in salah, and the rest of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum adopted silence and accepted.[18]

 

So, in this way, this matter was agreed upon and the indication of this incident becomes resolute and definite.

The summary of the discussion is that in the light of the above narrations, it has been clarified that during the last part of the era of nubuwwah, the leadership of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu in Salah is a clear indication to his khilafah bila fasl. It is an excellent indication of the reasoning behind the incident of Qirtas, and through it one will be guided correctly.

 

Removal of doubts

The incident of Qirtas has provided those opposed to the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, more so to Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, with ammunition to attack the noble Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The following texts are presented in order to remove them.

1. One objection is that during the final illness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wanted to write an important document for the ummah, in the presence of which, the ummah will not go astray. However, according to some narrations, Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu said: “The Book of Allah is sufficient for us” and he prevented the document from being written. In this way, he refuted the sunnah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and he was disobedient to his Rasul. The other Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum with him are also equally guilty.

 

Answer

The precise details of what transpired in the incident of Qirtas is not known, but whatever is mentioned in the general narrations, the following can be said in the light of it:

  • The primary criticisms are directed towards Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, but in some of the narrations not even the name of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu is mentioned, and the words “the book of Allah is sufficient for us,” is not reported to have been said, as is the case with the narration of Musnad Abu Ya’la mentioned in the beginning of the discussion. In such a case, such criticisms have no basis.
  • In some narrations where it is mentioned that Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu said these words, then the objective was to consider the health of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in his final illness.

The scholars have written:

 

إنما قصد عمر بن الخطاب بما قال التخفيف على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حين رآه قد غلب عليه الوجع …الخ

‘Umar’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu purpose behind his statements was to ease matters for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam when he saw that he had been overcome with pain.[19]

 

Moreover, the statement of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu “the Book of Allah is sufficient for us,” was not incorrect. In fact, his intention was to turn the attention of those present to the verse, “this day I perfected for you your religion,” i.e. the religion has been completed and there is no form of deficiency in it and the Book of Allah is protected for us and sufficient for us. Assuming that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not dictate anything, then there is no problem. If it was something important, then we do not need to hurry. After some relief came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he would have dictated it to us.

 
  • Assuming that the above mentioned words of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu were wrong on the occasion and they were sinful, then Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would never have remained silent. He would have rejected them because the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam will never remain silent on some wrong or sin, but he will refute it.

From this we learn that the above mentioned words of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu were not sinful, nor were they based on stubbornness or corruption, but it was in accordance to the demand of the time.

 
  • Also, we cannot take the meaning from the sentence of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, “the book of Allah is sufficient for us,” to mean that only the book of Allah is sufficient for us, so there is no need for the sunnah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The verse:
 

حَسْبُنَا اللهُ وَ نِعْمَ الْوَكِيْلِ

Allah is sufficient for us and He is the best helper.

cannot be taken to mean that Allah is sufficient for us and we have no need for the risalat and nubuwwah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

In short, to negate the sunnah from the statement “the book of Allah is sufficient for us,” is incorrect. This would be attributing such words to the speaker which he would never condone.

 
  • Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instructed all those present to bring ink and paper, Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu also among them, yet he also did not bring the pen and paper. Therefore, if there is any criticism directed towards ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu then this will apply to all the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, including Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. In fact, Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu says that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instructed him to bring a paper so that he can write, and through this, the ummah will not fall into deviation after Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:
 

عن علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه قال امرني النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم ان آتي بطبق يكتب فيه ما لا تضل امته من بعده

Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu narrates: “Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam commanded me to bring a paper in which something will be written and through it the ummah will not be deviated after him.”[20]

Subsequently, in this case, the responsibility for bringing the pen and paper was that of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu because he was given a direct and special command, whereas there was no separate command for Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

In these circumstances, if the pen and paper was not presented, then the objection of disobedience will fall on all (we seek the protection of Allah).

 
  • If Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wished to dictate something compulsory, then from Thursday until the day of his demise, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not dictate it, nor did he dictate it to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu or anyone else of the Ahlul Bayt, whereas Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not present all the time to prevent it being written. Shah ‘Abdul ‘Aziz rahimahu Llah says:

Whereas Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not present then to go against the bequest.[21]

These things are worthy to ponder over.

From this we learn that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not wish to dictate something compulsory. If he did have that intention initially then he changed his mind and felt that there was no need to have it written.

In other words, we find agreement between the views of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and therefore Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam aborted this action.

In this incident we find that the view of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was correct and that he possessed deep understanding of din. This was not opposition, but it was a sign of his religious foresight, understanding and wisdom. This incident can be counted as part of the Muwafaqat ‘Umar[22], but the opposition have turned it around, giving it a different colour.

 

2. There is another objection from the opposition at this point that some Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum and Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu attributed delirium to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and said:

 

اَهَجَرَ اِسْتَفْهَمُوْهُ

To which they say: “This is insolence of this highest degree with regards to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, which they are guilty of. This is because the meaning of delirium is that a person utters incoherent speech on account of his mind being unstable.”

 
  • Firstly, it must be known that the above mentioned words are not found in some of the narrations. The narrations in which they are found, it is mentioned with the plural form, i.e. they said. Those present in the gathering said, and not that one particular individual said this. Therefore, in terms of these narrations, the one who uttered this was not a single person, but there were a number of people who said these words. Therefore, to attribute these words only to Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu is unfounded and futile.
 
  • The scholars of hadith have commented on those narrations which contain these words that the meaning of ‘هجر يهجر’is ‘separation’ and here the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum were addressing each other asking: ‘Is Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam leaving us? Ask him.’
 
  • Another meaning of ‘هجر يهجر’ is mentioned in the dictionary, which is the occurrence of delirium on account of severe illness. However, it is forbidden to attribute delirium to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam based on these narrations and it is far from the status of nubuwwah to do so. This is because Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was ma’sum (infallible) and protected from such occurrences during health and sickness.

Ibn Hajar rahimahu Llah clarifies in al Fath al Bari:

 

وقوع ذالك من النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم مستحيل لانه معصوم في صحته ومرضه لقوله تعالى وما ينطق عن الهوى

It is impossible for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to experience this, because he is ma’sum during health and sickness, since Allah Ta’ala says: “He does not speak of his desire.”[23]

 
  • The scholars have written regarding those narrations where these words are mentioned, that whoever said:

اَهَجَرَ اِسْتَفْهَمُوْهُ

said this as a rhetorical question. In other words this was not said to attribute delirium but to deny it, and was uttered by those who were in favour of having the document written. They objected to the hesitance of their companions and said that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was not experiencing delirium, and the paper should be brought in accordance with the instructions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

This makes it clear that whoever said this was not Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, because he was not in favour of having the document written at that time.

Assuming that the attribution of delirium was implied, then on account of the word ‘اِسْتَفْهَمُوْهُ’ (ask him), the text will be disjointed, and meaningless. Since questioning a person whom you perceive to be experiencing delirium is futile. Thus, it was never intended to be literal but was asked rhetorically.

‘Allamah al Kirmani rahimahu Llah quotes Imam al Nawawi rahimahu Llah in his commentary of Bukhari:

 

قال النواوي رحمته الله عليه هو (اهجر) بهمزه الاستفهام الانكاري اى انكروا على من قال لا تكتبوا اى لا تجعلوا امره كامر من هذا في كلامه …او هو من الهجر ضد الوصل اى هجر من الدنيا واطلق بلفظ الماضي لما رواه فيه من علامات الهجر من دار الفناء

 

Imam al Nawawi rahimahu Llah says that the word ‘اهجر’ contains the letter hamza (ا) which is used to indicate a rhetorical question for negation. In other words, it was to negate those Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum who were not in favour of having the document written, that ‘do not make the matter of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam akin to one who speaks unstable things because of delirium.’

 

Alternatively, this word ‘هجر’ means separation, the opposite of connecting, i.e. the questioner asked is Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam leaving this temporary world?

The word (هجر) is used in the past tense (to denote certainty) because the signs of departure from this temporary world were clearly evident.

 

Summary

Firstly, this word (اهجر) is not found in all versions of the narration but in some only. Then, wherever this word is mentioned, is mentioned in plural form and not singular, implying that it was a statement made by a few people.

Moreover, the scholars of hadith have explained its meaning to be separation. If the meaning of delirium is taken then it will not consolidate with the intended purpose of their statement and in fact, by taking this meaning, the entire text of the narration will be disjointed.

The commentaries of Bukhari, al Fath al Bari and Kirmani etc., have mentioned the purport and subject matter of the narration, as was clarified earlier.

In short, it is incorrect to direct this allegation at Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu or to claim that he was the one who uttered these words.

 

3. The third objection raised by the critics is that the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum showed no consideration for the honour of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in this gathering, and they disputed and argued, raised their voices and went against the command of Allah Ta’ala. They were thus responsible for perpetrating an impermissible act. It is for this reason that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “Leave my presence.”

In reply, the following is said:

 

In essence, it is not incorrect to voice ones difference of opinion. During the era of nubuwwah there were differences on a number of rulings, and when such differences occur it is a natural tendency — albeit unknowingly at times — for one to raise his voice. On this occasion too, this had happened. Voices were raised unintentionally, but it did not occur on purpose or with intention.

 

The Sahabah always adhered to the directives of the Qur’an and the etiquettes required for the gathering of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. A few such incidents can be found supporting this. An incident of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu is reported in al Musannaf of ‘Abdul Razzaq that one day Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu entered Masjid al Nabawi, and at that time a person was speaking in a raised voice. Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu called him and asked: “Which tribe are you linked to?” He replied: “I am from the Banu Thaqif.” He then asked: “From which locality are you?” He said: “I am a resident of Ta’if.” Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu then said to him:

 

قال اما انك لو انك كنت من اهل بلدنا هذا لا وجعتك ضربا ان مسجدنا هذا لا يرفع فيه الصوت

If you were from our city (Madinah), I would have punished you. The law is that no voice is raised in this Masjid al Nabawi of ours.[24]

 

There is another narration of the same purport in Bukhari. The story of Sayyidina Sa’ib ibn Yazid radiya Llahu ‘anhu is mentioned in the following text:

 

كنت قائما في المسجد فحصبني رجل فنظرت اليه فاذا هو عمر بن الخطاب فقال اذهب فاتني بهذين فجئته بهما فقال ممن انتما ومن اين انتما قالا من اهل الطائف قال لو كنتما من اهل البلد لاوجعتكما ترفعان اصواتكما في مسجد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

 

Sa’ib ibn Yazid radiya Llahu ‘anhu says: “One day I was standing in Masjid al Nabawi when a person threw pebbles in my direction. I turned to him and it was Sayyidina ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He instructed me: ‘Go and call those two people before me.’ And I brought them to him. He then asked them: ‘From where are you?’ They replied: ‘We are of the people of Ta’if.’ He said: ‘If you were from the people of this city, I would have punished you, you are raising your voices in the Masjid of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.’”[25]

 

From the above incidents it is clear that Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu would not raise his own voice in Masjid al Nabawi and he would stop others from raising their voices too.

In light of this, it is proven that the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum would always adhere to the etiquettes of the gathering of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Therefore, during the incident of Qirtas, the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum who were present did not discard any etiquette and they did not intentionally utter anything contrary to the normal decorum.

The meaning of those narrations that speak about voices being raised is that this was an act of impulse, and at times a person tends to raise his vice without realising. However, it was not his intention to do so.

To this explanation the critics say: why did Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then say: “Leave my presence”? In reply to this, it needs to be kept in mind that these words “Leave my presence’, were not directed by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to a specific person, but was to all those present, and in essence was a command to end the difference of opinion by commanding them to leave and abandoning this discussion.

The reasoning behind this is that we find the words “leave my presence,” being used as such in hadith:

 

قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم اقراؤ القرآن ما ائتلفت عليه قلوبكم فاذا اختلفتم قوموا عنه

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “Recite the Qur’an as long as your heart is firm and attached to it and when you tire, then leave it.”[26]

 

Here, the words “قوموا عنه” (which literally means leave its presence) are used. The meaning is that an action or speech should be left out. In a similar manner, the statement “leave my presence,” will also mean ‘leave out this difference’.

Moreover, there is another verification of this meaning; namely that in some of the narrations the words “leave me,” are found instead, and the purport and understanding of leaving out is clearly understood from here.

So, through these proofs, the purport of ‘leave my presence,’ has been established and it is clear that its meaning is not that they should get up and leave, but rather ‘leave it’. This is the correct meaning.

 

Conclusion

In the light of the above, the objection no longer has any relevance and Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum were not disrespectful towards Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam at all and the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum were never disobedient to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

 

Final word

Effort has been made in the previous pages to answer the allegations against the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum with regards to the incident of Qirtas. We have clarified that the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, especially Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu never disobeyed Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Furthermore, this incident does not refer to the khilafah of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. If Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had intended to appoint his successor or appoint a leader for the ummah after him, then he salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam confirmed this for Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu by his actions and word. The directive of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was fulfilled, and the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum obeyed completely in this regard; accepting the leadership and khilafah of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

رضي الله عنهم ورضوا عنه

Conclusion of the discussion, on a critical basis

A number of critical points on the narration of Qirtas will be mentioned below. The scholars will pay attention to them and those of foresight will ponder over them, which will prove helpful in solving the matter and will be beneficial in removing any doubt, Allah willing.

All of the narrations quoted by the opposition in this regard are narrated by Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who was very young at the time. He was about 13, 14 years old and was counted as young compared to the senior Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

Despite this, the narrations of the senior Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum such as that of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Sayyidina Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Sayyidina ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha, contain nothing to support such allegations, and generally, no objections are raised on these narrations. Assuming there is something objectionable; even then, it is very weak.

However, when one casts a cursory glance at the narration of the incident of Qirtas, narrated by Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, then the terms used by the narrators create strange confusion and throw the general reader into bewilderment. In certain places, the narrator says something and in another place, he says something else. Subsequently, we mention a few aspects below:

  1. In certain narrations, it is mentioned that Sayyidina Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu cried in abundance, whereas this is not found in other narrations. In fact, other narrations do not even mention crying.
  2. In certain narrations, the name of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuis found among those that had a different view as compared to Sayyidina Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the words ‘the book of Allah is sufficient for us’ are narrated from him, whereas this is not mentioned in other places.
  3. In some narrations from Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the words, (اهجر، يهجر) are found to have been uttered by some of those present, whereas other narrations this is not mentioned.
  4. In certain narrations of Sayyidina Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is reported to have said: “Leave my presence.” In other narrations, the following words are narrated from him salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “Leave me, that which I am in is better than that which you call me towards.” There is nothing objectionable about these words.
  5. In certain narrations from Sayyidina Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the words “Indeed the calamity is a total calamity,” are found, whereas in other narrations there is no mention of any calamity and this aspect was not referred to as such.

The variant wordings of the narrations of Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the contradictions in the text is something to ponder over. Moreover, although it is a general practice to narrate in meaning, to what extent can it be correct to have such great differences in wording that cause a change in the objective and purport? The incident in these narrations is the same and the narrator is the same.

There is no mention of the objectionable aspects in the narrations of the blessed wives K and the other senior companions that were present, as compared to the narrations from Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu. In fact, in their (the blessed wives and the other senior companions that were present) narrations, the entire subject matter of the narration of Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu is not found, nor is there any support for it.

The narrations of the above mentioned companions are in the books and we have quoted some of them at various places, but the subject matter worthy of criticism and the purport worthy of objection is not found in them, as is found in the narration of Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

 

By looking at all these aspects, we learn that Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu narrated the original incident of Qirtas and he mentioned the circumstances of the time, as in the narration of Musnad Abu Ya’la. We have explained this in the beginning of the discussion on the incident of Qirtas.

However, the narrators later on transmitted it with a great amount of change, which was then reported from them. Sometimes an explanation was given and on other occasions, objectionable things were added. In this way, we find an addition of objectionable things attributed to the narrators in the original incident.

In short, by looking justly at the incident of Qirtas, it is proven that based on the variant terms of the people, objectionable things are found to be part of the narration, otherwise there is nothing objectionable in the original incident.

 

NEXT⇒ Accusation of Doubt in His Verification of Iman


[1]Musnad Abu Yaʿla vol. 3 p. 32

[2]Al Ihsan bi Tartib Sahih Ibn Hibban vol. 9 p. 200

[3]Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 230

[4]Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 228, Bukhari vol. 2 p. 138

[5]Muslim vol. 2 p. 273, Bukhari vol. 2 p. 846, Mishkat p. 549, Musnad Imam Ahmed vol. 6 p. 144, al Ihsan bi Tartib Sahih Ibn Hibban vol.9 p.202, ʿIlal al Hadith vol. 2 p. 383, al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 228

[6]Mustadrak vol. 3 p. 477

[7]Dala’il al Nubuwwah vol. 7 p. 182

[8]Dala’il al Nubuwwah vol. 7 p. 184

[9]  Ayni: Sharah al Bukhari vol. 2 p. 171

[10]Fulk al Najat vol. 1 p. 339

[11]Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 251, Musnad Imam Ahmed vol. 1 p. 263

[12]Dala’il al Nubuwwah vol. 7 p. 184

[13]Al Muntaqa pp. 349, 561, 562

[14]Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 1 p. 154

[15]Durrah Najafiyyah p. 225

[16]Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 5 p. 235

[17]Musnad Abu ʿAwanah vol. 2 p. 121

[18]Qurrat al ʿAynayn p. 5-6

[19]Dala’il al Nubuwwah vol. 7 p. 184

[20]Musnad Ahmed vol. 1 p. 90, al Adab al Mufrad p. 26

[21]Tuhfa Ithna ʿAshariyyah p. 291

[22]Muwafaqat ʿUmar refers to those instances where the opinion of Sayyidina ʿUmar I supported by divine decree.

[23]Al Fath al Bari vol. 8 p. 108

[24]Al Musannaf ʿAbd Razzaq vol. 1 p. 437, 438

[25]Bukhari vol. 1 p. 67

[26]Bukhari vol. 2 p. 295

Back to top