Verses Proving The Caliphate Of Three Caliphs
Previously the writer has presented his research on verse of Surah Fath:
“Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah, and those with him…”1
In the same way he has expressed his opinion on the following verse of Surah Taubah:
“If you will not aid him, Allah certainly aided him….”2
And also the following verse of Surah Noor:
“Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good…”3
There are nine more verses of Quran that Sunnis use to prove the Caliphate of the three Caliphs.
Below the writer expresses his opinion on every verse. People who love justice are requested to peruse the following discussion with attention.
“O you who believe! whoever from among you turns back from his religion, then Allah will bring a people, He shall love them and they shall love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers, they shall strive hard in Allah’s way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer…”4
Ahlul Sunnat use the above verse to prove that Allah has promised the Prophet that those who apostatize after him, in order to keep them away the Almighty Allah will bring a community and that community is Abu Bakr as after the passing away of the Prophet he killed the apostate Arabs.
The reply to this is that there are many differences between the commentators. Tafseer of Nishapuri5 says that Hasan, Qatada Zahak and Ibn Jarih say that community means Abu Bakr and his followers. Mujahid says that it denotes the people of Yemen and some other people say that it stands for the people of Quraish and there is no unanimity that it denotes the companions of Abu Bakr.
Traditions prove that this verse was revealed in the honor of Helpers (Ansar) and since in the expedition of Tabuk, most companions had apostized, this incident of apostasy is connected to the Messenger of Allah (S) and not to the battles of Abu Bakr after the Prophet. Nishapuri, the commentator, says that this verse denotes Imam Mahdi (a.j.) and Thalabi says that Allah implies His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) in this verse and it is based on this incident, because all procedures of infidels and apostates were dealt only through His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). Allah’s promise seen in the verse is wholly connected to the battles of the Holy Prophet (S). As Imam Razi mentions, that it cannot denote the battles of Umar and Abu Bakr as the battles of the Holy Prophet (S) were the most difficult.
The writer asks that of those battles had not been the most difficult, why the three Caliphs needed to flee from them? And only the sword of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) used to display feats and only he used to be the swordsman in the war. Neither the three Caliphs hurt anyone, nor did they suffer any injury.
Thus, the saying of Thalabi that this verse is related to Ali (a.s.) is not contrary to any matter. Now, the people of justice may decide how the above verse proves the validity of the Caliphate of the three Caliphs?
“Certainly Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquility on them and rewarded them with a near victory. And many acquisitions which they will take…”6
Ahlul Sunnat prove the excellence of three Caliphs from this verse but it does not prove any excellence. It does even prove the validity of the Caliphate of the three Caliphs. As a matter of fact, the Holy Prophet (S) had taken an oath from such people under the tree who were not trustworthy or who had recently accepted Islam and besides the three Caliphs were not present at that time, because the incident took place at the time of the Tabuk expedition.
If suppose the three Caliphs were present at the time of the allegiance of the tree, and Ahlul Sunnat say that the Holy Prophet (S) put his hand on Uthman’s hand and took allegiance, this matter is more wistful, that even after obtaining the allegiance of the tree, the three Caliphs fled from the battle of Hunayn leaving the Prophet among the enemies of Islam.
The flight of the three Caliphs from the battlefield of Hunayn is proved beyond any doubt, as the Prophet had addressed the people who were fleeing as the people of the tree in order to make them ashamed. Thus, how can such absconders be deserving of tranquility of Allah?
This verse cannot concern the absconders of Uhud or Hunayn. But the descent of tranquility has a great concern with His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and those who follow the path of bravery of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). Therefore, on the basis of descent of tranquility also, this verse is not concerned with the three Caliphs. So in this condition, the claim of Ahlul Sunnat is weak and baseless. In short, this verse neither proves any excellence of the three Caliphs nor does it prove the validity of the Caliphate of the Prophet for any of them.
“And (as for) the foremost, the first of the migrants (from Mecca) and the helpers (among the people of Medina), and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them forever…”7
This verse indicates the excellence of precedence in Islam, but according to Maalimut Tanzil8 and Seerate Muhammad9 Amirul Mo-mineen (a.s.) was the first to bring faith and perform the Prayer. Ali (a.s.) himself says that he preceded all Muslims in Islam and also the commentators of Quran state this fact.10
The revelation of this verse is for the companions of the first period and they were only: Abu Amama, Auf, Qutba, Rafe, Uqbah, Jabir and Bani Najjar.
Due to their deep love, how poor Ahlul Sunnat can forget their Caliphs? They included their Caliphs in the queue of “foremost of the first” (As-sabiqoon al- Awwaloon) without any thought. Apparently, this verse is not concerned with the three Caliphs. But what is the cure of obstinacy? Ahlul Sunnat demand the right of their beloveds at every step. How funny that every Sunni knows about the precedence of Ali (a.s.) in faith, but yet they lay baseless claims of the precedence of three Caliphs in Islam.
In brief, this verse does not in any way prove any excellence of the three Caliphs; leave alone their right to Imamate and Caliphate.
“O Prophet! Allah is sufficient for you and (for) such of the believers as follow you.”11
According to Baidhawi, this verse was revealed at the time of the Battle of Badr and it is said that at that time only thirty-nine persons had entered the fold of religion and then Umar accepted Islam.12
According to the tradition of Saeed bin Jubair in Tafseer Nishapuri13 22 men and 6 women accepted faith and after that Umar converted to Islam, ‘and thus the figure of forty was complete for us neo-Muslims.’ Only after that was the above verse revealed. According to Tafseer Nishapuri, we can say that this verse was revealed in the Battle of Badr. The author of Tafseer Kabir also states that this verse was revealed at the time of Badr.14
The writer asks that if this verse was revealed in the Battle of Badr, how can it be related to Umar’s faith in Islam? Umar had converted to Islam in Mecca itself and if the verse is really concerned with the Battle of Badr, then it is not related to Umar. In the same way, the word of ‘believers’ mentioned in this verse is considered by Ahlul Sunnat as referring to the three Caliphs. We cannot find the reason of limiting it to the three Caliphs. There were so many believers; then why only the three are mentioned as ‘believers’? The condition of Ahlul Sunnat is like a drowning man who clutches at the straw.
Just people can see that this verse is not concerned with Caliphate and Imamate. In spite of this, Ahlul Sunnat think that this verse proves the validity of the Caliphate of the three Caliphs. Now the writer shall express his pure opinion about this verse as follows. We should know that the Almighty Allah says:
“O Prophet! Allah is sufficient for you and (for) such of the believers as follow you.”15
The writer says this verse is not concerned with Umar. Generally, we think that this verse was revealed in Mecca or at the time of Badr. If we accept the explanation of Baidhawi and Razi that this verse was revealed in Battle of Badr, then it cannot be accepted to have any connection with Umar. Because, what he has done in the Battle of Badr or in any other battle that he could be said to have followed the Holy Prophet (S)?
Either he used to take flight or avoided fighting the enemies of religion. In Badr, Umar did not face the enemies of faith (infidels of Mecca), because his maternal uncle, Abu Jahl, had come to fight the Messenger of Allah (S). In such a situation, reason cannot accept that Allah should lovingly tell His Prophet, “My Apostle, I suffice for you, and Umar from the believers suffices for you.”
The statement of the Almighty Allah can never be absurd. The words, “and (for) such of the believers as follow you,” can never denote Umar. In what way has Umar followed the Holy Prophet (S) that Allah should reassure His Apostle about the personality of Umar? Therefore, this verse has no connection with Umar at all. Now, as for the possibility that this verse is Meccan and if it was revealed in honor of Umar, this too is a remote possibility.
The Almighty Allah well knew what Umar would do during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (S) and after his passing away. Allah knew that Umar would not participate in the Battle of Badr and refuse to face Amr bin Abd Wudd in the Battle of Khandaq and flee from the Battle of Uhud. In Khaybar, being defeated for two days in row he will come running to the tent of the Messenger of Allah (S) and in the Battle of Hunayn also he would act as he did in Uhud.
That he would express his strong doubts regarding prophethood after the treaty of Hudaibiya and refuse to give paper and a pen to the Messenger of Allah (S); opposing the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Thaqalayn), he would make the claim of “We have the Book of Allah…” would deprive himself from attending the funeral rites of the Messenger of Allah (S); overlooking the rights of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and under the pretext of Abu Bakr, make himself the Caliph. After becoming the Caliph, against the practice of the Holy Prophet (S) give a high status to Bani Umayyah and make Muawiyah the ruler of Syria leading to the martyrdom of Imams Hasan and Husayn (a.s.); would be ready to burn the house of Lady Fatima (s.a.) and would give a severe blow to the stomach of Fatima (s.a.), causing miscarriage.
That he will be the cause of killing and torture of the Pure Imams and make the blood of Sadaat flow like water. In the same way, there are many other things that cannot be mentioned here due to brevity. In brief, even if this verse is Meccan, it cannot be connected with Umar. The Almighty Allah can never label such persons as followers of the Prophet. Thus, in view of the writer, this verse was revealed for one who had really followed the Prophet and all his life he did not give up following the Prophet. He was Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.). Umar could not fit the description of “such of the believers as follow you” in any way, though Ahlul Sunnat may say whatever they like.
Recently, a Sunni scholar told me that Allah has mentioned such excellences of the three Caliphs that He says:
“…and take counsel with them in the affair…”16
This proves their Caliphate and Imamate. It means that Allah commanded His Prophet to seek advice from the three Caliphs. The reply is that the Holy Prophet (S) cannot take advice from anyone in his prophethood, because it is unlawful to take advice from anyone. As regards worldly matters, it is not necessary that if he consults anyone he would be his successor and Imam after his passing away. The Prophet had the right to seek counsel with Jews, Christians and Muslims in worldly affairs; but Jews, Christians and Muslims cannot become his successors or Imams after his passing away.
Besides being a religious leader, the Prophet was also the worldly ruler, lawmaker, judge and army chief. Therefore, if Allah ordered him to consult people from worldly aspect, what was wrong in it? But Ahlul Sunnat considered it an opportunity to make it a pretext of excellence of the three Caliphs. The pronoun used in the verse can be applied to anyone, but most fitting is for His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). And apart from him, there were other persons also from the Helpers and Emigrants. Rather, good counsel can also be expected from non-Muslim citizens of Islamic states; but the Prophet never consulted them.
In brief, when taking advice in propagation of prophethood was unlawful, in such circumstances, if in worldly affair, if the Prophet takes advice from three Caliphs or some other Muslim or non-Muslim, the status of advisers cannot be so magnified that they may qualify to become Caliphs or Imams after the passing away of the Messenger (S). The condition of Ahlul Sunnat is that of the drowning man who clutches at the straw. They have not left any effort to prove the Caliphate and Imamate of the three Caliphs, but in the view of just people, all their struggles are useless.
We should know that Ahlul Sunnat wanted the three Caliphs to somehow become partners of prophethood. Leave alone sharing of prophethood and attachment to the Holy Prophet (S), Maulavi Abdul Ali has also proved the partnership of Umar in divinity as mentioned in the previous part of this book. In the writer’s opinion, their being partners and confidantes of the Prophet is too much to be expected; it would be sufficient if they are proved to be Muslims.
“Surely those who believed and those who fled (their home) and strove hard in the way of Allah, these hope for the mercy of Allah and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”17
Ahlul Sunnat prove the excellence of three Caliphs, their acceptance of faith, migration and performing Jihad through this verse.
The writer humbly states that the explanation of this verse is general and it cannot be restricted to the three Caliphs. Commentators of Quran also do not say that this verse was revealed in honor of the three Caliphs. So this verse cannot be accepted as a special proof of the excellence of the three Caliphs. Rather, a part of this verse: “those who strove hard in the way of Allah,” is not at all concerned with the actions of the three Caliphs. It cannot be concerned with those who fled hearing the name of Jihad as mentioned in connection with the engagements of Badr, Uhud, Khandaq, Khaybar and Hunayn. Though it is applicable to Ali (a.s.) and those who follow his example.
Rather, the complete verse seems to be about these gentlemen only. It is clear to those who know that the faith of Abu Bakr was not perfect, that he should be considered as the person intended in this verse. In the words of Waqidi, on the day of Uhud Battle, the Holy Prophet (S) addressed Abu Bakr and said, “We don’t know what you would do after my death.” If Abu Bakr’s faith was complete, the Holy Prophet would not have made such a statement and Abu Bakr would not have announced: “The Messenger (S) has been killed. Turn back to infidelity.” In the same way, Umar also did not have complete faith. After the treaty of Hudaibiya, expressing a strong doubt in the prophethood of Prophet (S) does not prove perfection of the faith of the second Caliph.
Besides, according to the tradition of Mishkat, the Prophet told Umar: “If Prophet Moosa (a.s.) appears, you would follow him. leaving me.” This clearly shows that the faith of Umar was defective and not perfect. As a matter of fact, Umar, due to his severity of temperament and hard-heartedness, was very much inclined to the Jewish faith. He earnestly wanted to apply the same strictness to Islamic procedures as demanded by the religion of Moosa (a.s.). Obviously, with such inclination of Umar, the Messenger of Allah (S) said: “If Prophet Moosa (a.s.) appears, you would follow him. leaving me.” Undoubtedly, if Umar had not been inclined to Judaism, the Holy Prophet (S) would not have spoken to him thus.
“Those who believed and fled (their homes), and strove hard in Allah’s way with their property and their souls, are much higher in rank with Allah; and those are they who are the achievers (of their objects).”18
Ahlul Sunnat also use this verse to prove the excellence of three Caliphs and their rightfulness to Caliphate. But Vol. I of Baidhawi, Pg. 329, clarifies that this verse is general and it was not revealed for anyone in particular. Baghawi, Razi and Nishapuri also do not restrict it for the three Caliphs. The writer says, “Of course, His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and his followers can be subject of this verse.”
And as a matter of fact, only such people are intended in this verse and the three Caliphs cannot in any case be intended, because they never performed the Jihad of self in the way of Allah. Either they fled from the battlefield or avoided fighting the enemies of religion. People of justice may note how Ahlul Sunnat struggle to prove the rightfulness of the Caliphate of the three Caliphs, but all their efforts are fruitless. We should know that as long as the foundation of religion is not based on truth, it is never accepted as a true religion by the people of perception; let the bigots and biased ones consider it truth.
“And away from it shall be kept the one who guards most (against evil), who gives away his wealth, purifying himself. And no one has with him any boon for which he should be rewarded, except the seeking of the pleasure of his Lord, the Most High. And he shall soon be well-pleased.”19
Ahlul Sunnat say that this verse was revealed for Abu Bakr, while according to Shias it was revealed for His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). Author of Tafseer Nishapuri says that Shias attribute this verse to Ali (a.s.) because the Quran has frequently mentioned how Imam Ali (a.s.) spent on Zakat and Sadaqah (alms).
Therefore, to consider the revelation of this verse, like other verses, to be in the honor of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) is not wrong. In such a condition, no sane person can restrict this verse to Abu Bakr. How the Caliphate of Abu Bakr is proved from this verse is not understood by anyone, except Ahlul Sunnat. O people of justice, see that what excellence of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) is evident from Quran and traditions. But Ahlul Sunnat cannot see any of them; on the contrary, they go to great lengths to prove from such unrelated verses, the merits and rightfulness of the three Caliphs. Indeed, prejudice is a great misfortune, and may Allah protect the people from prejudice as it is this prejudice which takes one to hell.
“Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way in ranks as if they were a firm and compact wall.”20
Ahlul Sunnat consider this verse to be about the Jihad of the three Caliphs and thus about their excellence. According to Vol. 2 of Baidhawi21, this verse was revealed in the Battle of Uhud and all commentators of Quran like the authors of Maalimut Tanzil, Tafseer Kabir and Abu Saad, the author of Tafseer Jalalin, Ibn Abbas etc., are unanimous that this verse was revealed in the Battle of Uhud.
O Ahlul Sunnat! After all, modesty is the necessity of faith. I ask you, what Jihad procedure was performed by the three Caliphs in this battle? If running away is another name of Jihad, then certainly it was manifested by them! What a shameful behavior on their part!
Such a flight as manifested in Uhud by the three Caliphs, has not been shown by any honorable man either before Uhud or after it. It is strange that a community of a person whose creed it recites and whose love and friendship it claims, should be having a person who regards himself as his Caliph after him, but leave him injured and flee the battlefield? Such an act can never be expected from a noble person. Flight of the three Caliphs is a historical fact.
Umar himself says, “at that time, we were jumping like mountain goats on the rocks.” Allah forbid! The event of the day of Uhud is very shameful for respectable persons, but Ahlul Sunnat consider this verse in favor of their Caliphs! O people of Sunni community, how can your Caliph be the evidence of a strong wall when they are experts in fleeing from the battlefield? How can they be like a ‘compact wall’?
They ran away jumping like mountain goats and then earned the title of ‘compact wall’? While the fact is that it was His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) who saved the Prophet and eliminated the enemies of religion. He was wounded by the infidels of Mecca, but he did not flee from the battlefield and always cleared the battlefield of the enemies.
O Allah! Why don’t these Ahlul Sunnat people come to senses? How the love for their Caliphs has imbued their hearts that they cannot even see the truth and are ever ready to support a wrong claim! May Allah give you the discernment of truth and falsehood. Although, this was about the Battle of Uhud, the three Caliphs did not perform any feat in any of the battles of the Prophet and every time they ran away from the battlefield and continued to avoid taking part in the conflict.
They never did anything that could be used to hype their excellence. In short, this verse has no concern with the excellence of the three Caliphs. This verse was revealed especially in the honor of Imam Ali (a.s.) and generally for the Muslim fighters of Bani Hashim and Helpers (Ansar). These holy warriors were such that they co-operated with His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) in the Battle of Uhud with a firm faith and because of their firmness, they were called a ‘compact wall’.
“After me, follow Abu Bakr and Umar.”
This ‘tradition’ is narrated by Ahmad and Ibn Majah. According to Tirmidhi, this tradition is sound and Ibn Habban and Hakim consider it authentic. Shias have raised following objections against this statement:
In Tohfatul Akhyar22, Abdul Hai Lucknowi says that this tradition is addressed to the followers, because companions directly oppose the two Caliphs in many cases, but the two Caliphs didn’t object to it, while it was objected to by the four jurisprudents. Therefore, this tradition is not the proof of the Caliphate of the three Caliphs.
This tradition opposes the tradition of ‘stars’, in which ‘following’ is prescribed for all the companions in general.
This tradition goes against that of Tirmidhi and Mishkat, which says: “Follow the guidance of Ammar and remain attached to the covenant of the son of the Slave Mother.”
This tradition goes against the tradition of: “There will be twelve Imams and all of them shall be from Quraish.”
Abu Bakr and Umar has different opinion in almost in every matter due to the exercise of personal exertion, therefore it is impossible to follow both at the same time.
This ‘tradition’ opposes the tradition of the “judges are of three kinds; one is destined to Paradise and two are doomed to Hell.” One who gives the right opinion is delivered and one who expressed an opinion against truth purposely or due to ignorance and on the basis of analogy, are both hellish. Therefore, what opinion do the people of justice have regarding Usamah, stoning to death of the insane, penalty for drinking wine, inheritance of the grandfather and Mutah marriage etc?
The writer states that Ahlul Sunnat may construe whatever meaning they like from the above tradition, but it is certain that the Messenger of Allah (S) cannot issue such a saying in the presence of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). Abu Bakr did not excel His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) in any way.
The first Caliph had no knowledge of Quran in comparison to His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). If he had any knowledge, he would have compiled the Holy Quran during his reign and not appointed Zaid bin Thabit, Ubayy Ibn Kaab etc. for this job. Since Ali (a.s.) had full knowledge of the Quran, he could collect the verses together himself and he had no need to appoint a council for this. Abu Bakr’s traditional knowledge was also imperfect, because he spent more time in the markets of Medina, which was not wrong, but because of this, he had fewer opportunities to hear the statements of the Messenger of Allah (S).
Even if this did not affect his knowledge of traditions, he was not equal to Ali (a.s.) in this regard. No doubt, he was also like Ali (a.s.), not an illiterate person. After Ali (a.s.), the most superior of the people was Salman Farsi.
In short, Abu Bakr was not at all equal to Imam Ali (a.s.) in knowledge and excellence. Sermons of Imam Ali (a.s.) which are present in Nahjul Balagha and other books, prove the literary level of the Imam. The Diwan (collected works) of the Imam is a masterpiece of Moral Science. Compilation of the laws of Arabic grammar started from him only. He had an astounding knowledge of maths.
No one was his equal during the Prophet’s time and he was the best judge among the companions and even Umar fully acknowledged this. Abu Bakr had no power of judgment like him. He was so brave that the religion of the Prophet was secured by his sword. In bravery, Abu Bakr cannot even compete with his shadow. It is clear that when Abu Bakr fled from battles and could not take any action, in the same engagements, Ali (a.s.) displayed unrivalled firmness and feats of wonder. In brief, it can never be that in the presence of Ali (a.s.) the Holy Prophet (S) could say, “after me, follow Abu Bakr and Umar.”
Apparently, Ali (a.s.) was also included in this order of the Messenger of Allah (S)! Was it possible that the Holy Prophet (S), a wise prophet, can give such an advice to his followers? It is highly inconceivable that the Prophet advised Ali (a.s.) to follow Abu Bakr. The writer asks his opponents in what matter could Ali (a.s.) need Abu Bakr’s lead? If not in Quran, traditions, sermons, warfare, honesty, serenity, patience, gratefulness, prayers, exercise of judgment, bravery, humility, abstinence, then in what topic could Ali (a.s.) possibly need to follow Abu Bakr?
And now what kind of leadership of Umar can His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) require? Umar was even less than Abu Bakr and was totally illiterate in comparison to Ali (a.s.). How can a learned follow the ignorant? Umar had no knowledge of Quran at all. Even an old woman knew that the Caliph was completely ignorant of Quran. He also had no power of judgment and was also ignorant of the Shariah. He simply ordered the stoning of a pregnant woman! If His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) had not be there, the Caliph would been responsible for spilling innocent blood.
A famous saying of Umar is that if Ali had not been there, Umar would have perished. Another order is that of the stoning of insane woman, which even a person of ordinary understanding cannot issue. In the matter of whipping of the drunkard also, he issued a controversial judgment. How can the Messenger of Allah (S) give the leadership of community to these Caliphs and how can they be fit for leading the nation?
How can they lead Ali (a.s.) when they were not even capable of leading the ordinary people of the community? Umar was even lower than Abu Bakr. How can the Messenger of Allah (S) ask Ali (a.s.) to follow him? In short, this statement cannot be accepted as an utterance of the Holy Prophet (S) and it must have been fabricated by those with vested interests. Even though, according to Sunni scholars it is accepted as authentic, it is cannot be accepted by logic and reason. No doubt, it is among the thousands of sayings fabricated to prove the Caliphate of three Caliphs and that is why it seems to be absolutely absurd.
It is based on the statement of Ibn Umar in Sahih Bukhari23. In the chapter of the excellence of Abu Bakr, are the following words of Abdullah Ibn Umar:
“During the time of the Holy Prophet (S) Abu Bakr, Uthman and Umar commanded excellence in the descending order.” Ahlul Sunnat prove their Caliphate and leadership in this order. This claim is first of all rejected, because it is the saying of Abdullah Ibn Umar and not a tradition of the Prophet. Abdullah’s words do not command the position of an established proof, if it had been so, urinating in the standing position would have to be accepted as correct!
After that, Ahlul Sunnat would have to accept the validity of Mutah of Hajj. Similarly, his allegiance at the hand of Yazeed would have to be accepted as valid. This statement is a personal view and nowhere does it show that other companions or the Messenger of Allah (S) accepted it to be correct. If this statement had the status of an established text (Nass), why Abu Bakr Baqilani and Allamah Sayyid Sharif would have considered this grading to be interpretative.
Secondly, if this statement of Abdullah Ibn Umar is right, then the following statements would be incorrect that: ‘Ali is the best of people’ and ‘I was having such a position with the Messenger of Allah (S) as was not held by anyone.’ Thirdly, if Umar had precedence on His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) he would not have said, “If Ali has not been there, Umar would have perished.”
Fourthly, Allah’s words that those who fight the holy war are superior to those who just sit at home, disprove the statement of Ibn Umar. That is, His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) was superior to the three Caliphs, who were among those who sit at home.24
Fifthly, the statement of Ibn Umar is also negated by Umar himself, when he says that Ali had three such qualities as were not possessed by any of us. He got a wife like Fatima; he got permission to live in the Mosque like the Prophet and he was given the standard in the Battle of Khaybar by Allah’s command.
Sixthly, the statement of Umar that ‘Ali is the most equitable among us,’ proves the superiority of Ali (a.s.).
Seventhly, the excellence of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) is proved according to the tradition of Ibn Abbas, Ibn Asakir, Saeed bin Mustaiyan and Imam Ahmad.
Eighthly, the majority of scholastic theologians and companions of companions have unanimity that Uthman had no superiority over His Eminence, Ali (a.s.).
The writer inquires what excellence did Abu Bakr and Umar have over Ali (a.s.), that poor Uthman should be expected to be having some excellence?
Sufyan Thawri and Abu Tufail are clearly convinced of the excellence of Ali (a.s.) over Uthman. Thus, if the statement of Ibn Umar is having the status of established proof, how so many theologians and companions of companions are against it? Ninthly, even if we accept the statement of Ibn Umar, it would be only as a view based on personal exertion and will not have the status of consensus. Tenthly, Maulavi Waliullah in Izalatul Khifa attributes Imamate to the Pure Imams and Caliphate in the meaning of ruler to the Righteous Caliphs.
In such a situation, the statement of Ibn Umar becomes ineffective. Besides, in Shawahidun Nubuwwah of Jami and Futoohate Makkiya of Ibn Arabi, Imamate is established on the lines, which are clearly opposed to the system advocated by Abdullah bin Umar. Allamah Taftazani also does say that the Caliphs were more excellent than His Eminence, Ali (a.s.). In short, the view of Abdullah Ibn Umar cannot be accepted to be authentic.
The Messenger of Allah (S) said, “If I had made anyone as my successor from my community, I would have made Abu Bakr, who was my brother and my companion at Hauz Kauthar (heavenly pool) and due to formula of brotherhood with him is good in Islam.”25
Commentator of this tradition says that the difficulty is that another tradition says, “No one is my successor from the children of Adam, except Allah.” Therefore, it is clear that although the prior tradition was a great thing in favor of Abu Bakr, but due to another tradition it is not worthy of consideration.
The Prophet said, “When you don’t find me, refer to Abu Bakr.” Commentator of this tradition says that the chains of narrators of this tradition are weak and it is possible that it is also from the fabricated ones.26
According to a tradition of Sahih Bukhari27, the Prophet said, “Abu Bakr helped me by his self and property.” Commentators say that this tradition is having solitary status and Burhanuddin Shafei has labeled it to be weak in his book of Seerate Halabiyah. The writer says that it is possible that Abu Bakr might have helped the Prophet by his wealth, but it is not proved by history or tradition that he ever could help by his self, as one who flees from the battlefields cannot save anyone except his own life. Readers may once again take a look at the events of Uhud, Khandaq, Khaybar and Hunayn.
According to Izalatul Khifa28, ‘A’ysha states that the Holy Prophet (S) picked up a stone, then Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman one by one, to build a mosque. “I asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah (S), are these people helping you in this work?’ The Prophet said, ‘O ‘A’ysha, they would be my Caliphs after me.’”
It is surprising that if this tradition was true, why did they not present it in Saqifah before the Helpers (Ansar)? And why for satisfaction sake, it was not related to His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), Zubair and people of Bani Hashim? This tradition also seems to be fabricated and this story also seems to be absurd. What relation does stones of a mosque have with the Caliphate of Prophet? Ahlul Sunnat are always busy trying to make the earth meet the sky!
O Ahlul Sunnat people! When according to Sahih Muslim and Aqaide Jalali, the Prophet did not appoint anyone as Caliph, how can this tradition be reliable? Besides, Baqilani says that if the Messenger of Allah (S) had left a written order, why there would have been discord about Caliphate among Muslims? In short, the tradition of laying the foundation stone cannot be trusted and the Caliphate of the three Caliphs cannot be proved from it. Indeed, Ahlul Sunnat are like the drowning man who clutches at the straw. It is really a matter of great regret that Ahlul Sunnat do not pay any attention to the verses and tradition in favor of the Caliphate of Amirul Mo-mineen (a.s.) and try to prove the Caliphate of the three Caliphs by even the weakest of evidences.
In Izalatul Khifa29, it is quoted from Safina, the freed slave of Umme Salma, that after the Morning Prayer, the Holy Prophet (S) asked his followers, “Has anyone of you seen a dream?” One of them said, “I saw a pair of scales descending from the sky. First, the Holy Prophet (S) was weighed against Abu Bakr and the Prophet was found to be heavier than Abu Bakr. After that, Abu Bakr was weighed against Umar and Abu Bakr came heavier. After that, Umar was weighed against Uthman and Umar came out heavier. After that, the scale again went to the sky.”
Ahlul Sunnat people say that this dream proves the Caliphate of the three Caliphs in their proper sequence. The writers says that this dream has not made any mention of weighing of Uthman against Ali (a.s.), which shows that Caliphate ended with Uthman. Therefore, from the tradition of the scales, Ali’s Caliphate should be proved invalid. It is clear that if Uthman had been weighed with Ali (a.s.), the Caliphate of Ali would have been accepted as the fourth Caliphate. How can he become the Caliph without being weighed? Doubtlessly, the above dream proves that the period of Righteous Caliphate ended with the Caliphate of Uthman.
But Ahlul Sunnat count the Caliphate of Ali to be within the Righteous Caliphate! Now the people of justice should themselves evaluate the merits and demerits of this tradition. The writer does not want to say more about this. Apparently, this dream also disproves the tradition of ‘thirty-year Caliphate’. The religion of Ahlul Sunnat is only as each individual member of the community conceives it to be!
According to Mishkat and Sahih Muslim, it is narrated from Abi Malika that he said: “We heard about ‘A’ysha that somebody asked her, to whom the Holy Prophet (S) wanted to make the Caliph?” She replied, “Abu Bakr, and after his death, Umar; and after him, Abu Ubaidah bin Jarrah.” It is a matter of great surprise that being acquainted with the Unseen, the Prophet did not know that Abu Ubaidah will die before the Caliphate of Uthman? And if he knew about his death, why the Prophet included Abu Ubaidah among the Caliphs?
The fact is that this tradition is absurd. And if it is true, Uthman’s Caliphate also become invalid as it is not mentioned in it. Only the Caliphates of Abu Bakr and Umar are proved from it, which shows that the Righteous Caliphate only lasted till the tenure of the two Caliphs. And this is entirely against the religion of Ahlul Sunnat.
In Tarikhul Khulafa30 Abu Huraira reports that when the Holy Prophet (S) went to the sky on Ascension night, he found written: “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and Abu Bakr is the Siddiq (truthful),” on every layer. It is good that Allamah Suyuti has written that the chain of narrators of this report is weak. Now the writer does not wish to discuss more about it. It seems that to prove the Caliphate of Abu Bakr right, Ahlul Sunnat fabricators have left no stone unturned.
In the same Tarikhul Khulafa31, Ibn Umar has stated that the Holy Prophet (S) informed that Allah has issued the truth on the tongue and heart of Umar and the whole Quran was revealed according to the opinion of Umar. If it is true, Ahlul Sunnat should create reasonable interpretation of Umar’s refusal of the death of the Messenger (S) and his verdicts on the punishment of the insane woman and penalty for drinking alcohol. No doubt, this tradition is clearly fabricated and at the time of fabricating this tradition, the fabricator forgot all these things.
Again in Tarikhul Khulafa32, Uqbah bin Amira has reported from the Holy Prophet (S) that ‘if there had been any prophet after me it would have been Umar.’ This tradition is also fabricated, as infallibility is a necessary requirement for prophethood. Umar was among the Arab infidels before Islam. He was neither born purified of greater and smaller sins, nor did he die purified of greater and smaller sins. Thus, how can he ever qualify for prophethood?
In the same Tarikhul Khulafa33, it is narrated from ‘A’ysha that the Holy Prophet (S) said, “I saw the Shaitans from Jinns and men that all fled from Umar.” This proves that Umar was more excellent than Prophet Adam (a.s.), because only one Shaitan caused Adam to err while not one, but many Shaitans ran away seeing Umar!
In the same Tarikhul Khulafa34, Ibn Abbas says that Jibraeel came to the Holy Prophet (S) and said: “Convey Allah’s salutation to Umar and inform him that Umar’s anger is respectable and his pleasure is a command of the Shariah.” We should know that this tradition is fabricated. According to the verse of Quran:
“Surely Allah and his angels bless the Prophet…”35
…was revealed on the Messenger of Allah (S), and the Prophet showed the path of righteousness to his followers, saying that they should invoke blessings on Muhammad (S) and his progeny; and he did not ask them to invoke blessings on Umar! From the above tradition, the status of Umar seems to be higher than that of the Prophet! Therefore, it doubtlessly, is a fabricated tradition. What to say of the recitation of Umar? His anger and pleasure? And to convey salutation from Allah and that also through the Prophet, who disliked all these actions of Umar? The Holy Prophet (S) also disliked Umar’s recitation of Taurat and his leading of prayer during his illness!
If Allah liked his anger and pleasure, why his deeds should be disliked by the Prophet? The details of Umar’s deeds are as follows: Umar had special attachment to Taurat. One day, he came to the Holy Prophet (S) with a copy of Taurat and started reading it. The Messenger of Allah (S) disliked this and his face became red in anger. The Prophet told him harshly, “If Moosa (a.s.) were to reappear, surely you people would leave me and join him.” Doubtlessly, these words inform about the great displeasure of the Prophet.
We fail to understand how Allah can be pleased with those acts of Umar that the Holy Prophet (S) dislikes so intensely? In the same way is the case of Umar’s leading the Prayer. Since Umar’s voice was loud and abominable, the Prophet heard him praying and he immediately issued orders to stop it, and Umar could not complete the Prayer. Another example is that once Abu Bakr and Umar were quarrelling in a loud voice in the presence of the Holy Prophet (S). Allah disliked the manner of these two gentlemen, so a verse was revealed that companions of the Messenger (S) should not speak loudly and that their voice should not be louder than the Prophet’s.
In short, keeping all this in view, the tradition under discussion cannot be accepted as a statement of the Holy Prophet (S). It contains so many absurd things that any sensible person will not hesitate in labeling it to be fabricated.
According to Tibrani and Dailami, Ibn Abbas says that the Holy Prophet (S) stated, “After me, the truth is with Umar.” But here a question is whether truth was with Umar in the matter of Usamah’s expedition, deposition of Khalid, verdict of lashing the drunkards, and the question of Prophet’s passing away? According to this tradition, truth should have been with Umar. But the fabricators of tradition were not sensible people. If they were, they would not have fabricated such absurd traditions in the first place.
In Tarikhul Khulafa36, Ibn Masood states that if knowledge of all the world is placed in one pan of the scale and knowledge of Umar in the other, the knowledge of the whole world would be ninth of Umar’s knowledge. If this tradition was true, why the Messenger of Allah (S) said, “I am the city of knowledge and Ali (a.s.) is its gate?”37
If Umar’s knowledge really had some value, he would not given 80 lashes to the drinker of wine and neither would he have considered the stoning to death of the insane woman permissible. This seems to be the actions of ignorant. It is also proved that Umar had very less knowledge of Quran and was most of the time reciting Taurat, so he did not get time to recite Quran.
Although he is called a jurist among Ahlul Sunnat, but due to lack of knowledge, he could not issue proper justice. So, he appointed a committee consisting of Zaid bin Thabit, Ubayy Ibn Kaab and Abdullah bin Masood etc. On the other hand, His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) always adjudged cases on his own and never felt the need of any advisor.
People of justice should decide whether Umar’s knowledge was higher than that of the whole world and also more than the Prophet’s knowledge? What an absurd notion! Some manner is needed even if you want to lie. No doubt that fabricators of traditions about the three Caliphs did not follow any decorum, otherwise, they would not have fabricated such traditions.
How can they fabricate traditions that disprove the Prophet’s being the city of knowledge and Imam Ali (a.s.) being the gate of the city of knowledge? But more regretful are those who consider such false traditions as the soul of their faith and leave the world with such misconceptions. According to a Persian proverb, success in the Hereafter depends on correct belief and a wrong belief does not benefit anyone in the Hereafter.
In the same Tarikhul Khulafa38, it is mentioned that Umar states, “The Quran agrees to my opinion in three instances. First, regarding the Place of Prophet Ibrahim (a.s.), secondly, in the matter of veiling the females and thirdly, in divorcing of the wife.” But there is difference of views among the commentators as far as these three verses are concerned. For example, in the matter of the place of Ibrahim (a.s.), Mujahid, Ataa and Ibn Abbas have different views.
If Quran had been compatible with Umar’s opinion, why is difference seen among the sayings of companions and companions of companions (Tabiin)? Obviously, they had no enmity with Umar!
In Sahih Muslim39, it is stated that when Abdullah Ibn Ubayy died, the Holy Prophet (S) was called to perform the funeral prayer. When the Prophet arose to go there, Umar came and said, “O Messenger, do not pray for any such hypocrite.” We should know that this statement clarifies that Umar used to coach the Prophet against Allah’s will. Not only this, even Allah had to conform to his instructions! It proves that Umar had a status higher than that of being a partner in prophethood, because not only did he reform the sayings and deeds of the Prophet, he also showed the right path to assist the Almighty Allah.
All this clearly shows Umar’s excellence over the Prophet. The Messenger of Allah (S) did not even know that he should not pray the funeral prayer of Abdullah Ibn Ubayy! Umar showed him the right path or he would have prayed the funeral prayer of a hypocrite. Doubtlessly, this incident proves the Prophet’s mistake. And immediately a verse of Quran was revealed that mentioned divine wrath.
O Sunni brothers! Why are you so much drowned in the love of Umar that you have no regard for the honor of Allah and no respect for the Holy Prophet (S)? What is the position of Umar with relation to the Prophet? It is a fact that if Umar had any say over Allah and His Prophet’s affairs, he would not have given wrong verdicts based on his personal opinion in the case of one who drinks wine and in the matter of the stoning of the insane woman.
The matter of drinking of wine is also found in the same Tarikhul Khulafa. According to Ahlul Sunnat commentary of the following verse:
“They ask you about intoxicants…”40
…it was Umar who became instrumental in the prohibition of wine. That is Umar asked about wine and it was prohibited by Allah. Apparently, it does not seem that wine was prohibited because Umar asked about it. Baidhawi, says in his Tafseer, that Abdul Rahman bin Auf recited Surah Kafiroon wrongly since he was intoxicated, therefore wine was prohibited.
In the same way, Ahlul Sunnat say that the following verse of Surah Nisa:
“O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated.”41
…was also revealed according to the wish of Umar, but famous commentators like Baidhawi, Razi, Nishapuri and Suyuti etc. have not mentioned this. Similarly, according to Ahlul Sunnat, when the Holy Prophet (S) decided to fight the Battle of Badr, he consulted Umar and this verse was revealed:
“Even as your Lord caused you to go forth from your house…”42
It is surprising that Ahlul Sunnat say that the verse was revealed for Umar, although the decision of Badr was taken by the Holy Prophet (S). Though the Messenger of Allah (S) was more prominent in giving advice than Umar, Ahlul Sunnat say that the Prophet took advice and this verse was revealed! And the Holy Prophet (S) was superior to Umar in every way. But the surprising fact is that Umar did not take part in the Battle of Badr.
He advised the Holy Prophet (S) for war but he himself did not participate in it, putting forward the lame excuse that his maternal uncle, Abu Jahl had come to fight from Mecca, so how could he fight against him? Though Ahlul Sunnat have found this excuse acceptable, the truth is that Umar had no guts to fight for Islam. And this was proved at the time of the battles of Uhud, Khandaq, Khaybar and Hunayn also.
People of justice should see that though Umar advocated conflict in the Battle of Badr and also earned the dignity of the revelation of verse, but when the actual battle began, he sheathed the sword for the sake of his uncle, Abu Jahl, an infidel of Mecca!
In the same Tarikhul Khulafa, it is written that Umar said about the allegation against ‘A’ysha that it was a great calumny. So Ahlul Sunnat say that this verse of Surah Noor:
“This is a great calumny.”43
…was revealed according to Umar’s wish. But according to Maalimut Tanzil44, we know that Abu Ayyub also expressed this opinion and many other people agreed with Abu Ayyub. Therefore, the following verse is not restricted for Umar. Let Ahlul Sunnat say whatever they like.
According to the tradition of Ibn Abbas in Maalimut Tanzil45, we come to know that in the beginning, sexual intercourse with the wife was unlawful even during night in the month of Ramadhan, but Umar had intercourse with his wife; so Allah made it lawful.
We should know that this verse is not based on consensus and according to religious law, it is not proper to accept a solitary report before a widely related narration. Ahlul Sunnat try very hard to show the revelation of this verse to be according to Umar’s deed, which is a very regretful act on their part.46
It is also mentioned47 that the following verse of Surah Baqarah:
“Whoever is the enemy of Allah and His angels and His apostles and Jibraeel and Mikaeel, so surely Allah is the enemy of the unbelievers.”48
…was revealed through the tongue of Umar. The context of revelation of this verse was that a Jew met Umar and said, “The Jibraeel that your master talks about is the same Jibraeel who is our enemy.” Umar said. “If one is the enemy of Allah, His angels, prophets, Jibraeel and Mikaeel and Allah is also an enemy of infidels.”
Upon this, the verse was revealed in the same words. We should know that Ahlul Sunnat’s claim that this verse was revealed according to Umar’s wish would have been valid if there had been no difference of opinion among the commentators with regard to the revelation of this verse. Controversy among the exegesists shows that this traditional report is not reliable.
According to a tradition49, one day, Umar came across Abu Huraira, who was proclaiming that one who recites the Islamic creed of monotheism would be admitted to Paradise. Abu Huraira says, “All of a sudden Umar hit out at my chest and I fell down stunned. Then he said: ‘Go away from here.’ I returned to the Holy Prophet (S) crying. The Prophet asked Umar, ‘O Umar! What is wrong with you? Why do you interfere in my work?’ Umar replied, ‘I was afraid that people would rely on this tradition, because he was only proclaiming that, ‘There is no god except Allah,’ and not that ‘Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’. The Prophet said, ‘Good, discontinue that announcement.’” It should be clear that that the above act was not unexpected from Umar.
Once, Umar had also hit out at a lady’s belly. And which lady? She was the daughter of the Prophet and the Lady of Judgment Day, the most superior one and the wife of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), mother of Hasan and Husayn (a.s.) and the grandmother of the other Imams (a.s.). She had miscarriage as a result of this strike of Umar.
So what was the value of Abu Huraira?! That Umar gave him with a resounding blow. Although Abu Huraira was not guilty of any sin and he was only proclaiming according to the order of the Messenger of Allah (S). Anyway, here, an objection is raised by the Imamiyah sect; that the proclamation was according to divine revelation, so it was propagation of prophethood.
Therefore, what is the position of Umar’s interference? Obviously, this tradition, related by Abu Huraira, is fabricated. And if it is not so, it seems that Umar considered himself to be a partner in prophethood and eligible to be a prophet. In both the cases, this tradition cannot prove any excellence of Umar. It only proves that Umar was a short-tempered old man. We should know that one more tradition is recorded in Sahih Muslim50 from Uthman on the above subject. He relates that one who knows creed of monotheism and he dies, would enter Paradise.
Noodi says that there is unanimity among Ahlul Sunnat that all believers in monotheism will enter Paradise. Umar had no right to interfere in Abu Huraira’s announcement, which was based on the Prophet’s instruction. Beside, the Prophet’s discontinuation of proclamation under suggestion of Umar is against this tradition, which has the consensus of Muslims.
In Sahih Bukhari51, it is narrated by Abu Huraira that the Prophet stated, “You will be greedy of Caliphate very soon and due to this you will be ashamed and regretful on Judgment Day.” The writer says that greed of Caliphate causing shame and regret in hereafter has no need of any proof. The result of such acts will be bad only, according to the saying, “As you sow, so shall you reap.”
But in Izalatul Khifa52 is mentioned the tradition of ‘A’ysha regarding lifting of the stones which shows that first Abu Bakr, then Umar and then Uthman will become the Caliph. Apparently, this saying of ‘A’ysha negates the above tradition. It means that if according to Abu Huraira, Muslims will be guilty of greed regarding Caliphate, after the Prophet and will be ashamed on Judgment Day, how can we consider the Caliphates of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman to be valid?
It was only Abu Bakr and Umar who turned their attention to rulership after the Prophet. Thus, who else can be deserving of divine punishment according to the saying of Abu Huraira, except Abu Bakr and his helpers? Anyway, scholars of traditions say that the narrator of ‘A’ysha’s tradition is unreliable, therefore it should be abandoned. As a result of that, Abu Huraira’s tradition remains on its own condition and its effect reaches to Abu Bakr and Umar and their helpers.
According to the tradition of Abdur Rahman bin Auf53 it seems that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Talha, Zubair, Abdur Rahman bin Auf, Saeed bin Ali, Saeed bin Zaid, Abu Ubaidah bin Al-Jarrah are indeed blessed with Paradise. His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) is not included among these nine people. But in another traditions there are ten names and Ali’s name is also included.
This shows that the subject of Ashra Mubashera (the lucky ten) is controversial and disputed. We should know that though this tradition proves that these nine or ten people are blessed with Paradise, it is not necessary that they have to be Caliph or Imam. Therefore, this tradition cannot prove the Caliphate of the three Caliphs.
The prophetic tradition that, “There is nothing that Allah inspired me with, but that I transferred it completely to Abu Bakr,” is said by the writer of Safar Sadaat to be fabricated. There is nothing surprising in this matter, as fourteen thousand traditions were fabricated by the order of Muawiyah only in praise Abu Bakr; so this may be also be one of them.
In brief, all the verses and tradition that Ahlul Sunnat believe to be in support of the Caliphate of the three Caliphs; not even one of them in the view of this writer is such that it could withstand the scrutiny of a researcher. All these are only the antics of the supporters of three Caliph, otherwise, there is no evidence in Quran or tradition about the rightfulness of their Caliphate. The fact is that all these Caliphates were the actions of Ummah and they do not have even an iota of support in Islamic texts.
- 1. Surah Fath, 48:29
- 2. Surah Taubah 9:40
- 3. Surah Noor 24:55
- 4. Surah Maidah 5:54
- 5. Vol. 2, Pg. 28.
- 6. Surah Fath 48:18-19
- 7. Surah Taubah 9:100
- 8. Pg. 419
- 9. Pg. 517
- 10. Refer Maalimut Tanzeel, Pg. 419; Tafseer Razi, Vol. 4, Pg. 721; Isafur Raghebeen, Pg. 21; Seerate Muhammadiya, Pg. 175 etc.
- 11. Surah Anfal 8:64
- 12. Tafseer Baidhawi, Vol. I, Pg. 323
- 13. Vol. 2, Pg. 221.
- 14. Ref. Vol. 2, Pg. 563 of this Tafseer.
- 15. Surah Anfal 8:64
- 16. Surah Aale Imran 3:159
- 17. Surah Baqarah 2:218
- 18. Surah Taubah 9:20
- 19. Surah Lail 92:17-20
- 20. Surah Saff 61:4
- 21. Pg. 363
- 22. Pg. 7
- 23. Pg. 69
- 24. Ref. Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 6, Pg. 96 regarding Abu Bakr.
- 25. Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 6, Pg. 70.
- 26. Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 6, Pg. 71.
- 27. Vol. 6, Pg. 72.
- 28. Pg. 304
- 29. Pg. 404
- 30. Pg. 53
- 31. Pg. 16
- 32. Pg. 112
- 33. Pg. 116
- 34. Pg. 117
- 35. Surah Ahzab 33:56
- 36. Pg. 118
- 37. Ref. Mishkatul Masabih
- 38. Pg. 120
- 39. Vol. 2
- 40. Surah Baqarah 2:219
- 41. Surah Nisa 4:43.
- 42. Surah Anfaal 8:5
- 43. Surah Noor, 24:12.
- 44. Pg. 624
- 45. Pg. 174
- 46. More regretful is the fact that Ahlul Sunnat do not even consider the other aspect of this tradition in their blindness in devotion for the second Caliph. What a shameful deed it was that Umar had committed, since it was prohibited at that time and till something has not been lawful by Allah, anyone who commits it, is indeed committing a sin. So what is so great in it? And on top of that Allah even makes it lawful after that! Is it not an impossible scenario? But the devotees of Umar have become blind in his love!
- 47. Maalimut Tanzil, Pg. 74
- 48. Surah Baqarah 2:98
- 49. Sahih Muslim, Vol. 1, Pg. 44.
- 50. Vol. 1, Pg. 41
- 51. Vol. 10, Pg. 18
- 52. Vol. 1, Pg. 84
- 53. Mishkat 2; Ashra Mubashera, Pg. 558.