By hastening to Saqifa and leaving behind the body of the Prophet (S), they succeeded in usurping the Caliphate from Imam Ali (a.s.). As the very first act, the Caliph invited the Banu Umayya, the inveterate enemies of Islam and more particularly of the Banu Hashim, to participate in the administration. They recalled the exiled Marwan and Amr bin al-‘Aas and entertained them as close confidants, secretly in the beginning and openly during the period of the third Caliph. The Caliphs also appointed Abu Sufyan’s sons as governors of Syria, Iraq, and Egypt.
The conspiracy extended beyond these overt acts. The conspirators resolved to follow a system by which:
[a] the traditions [sayings] and the Sunna [deeds] of the Prophet (S) were prohibited from being cited, repeated, or recorded.
[b] Altogether new traditions were invented to justify the exclusion of Ali (a.s.) from the first three stages of the Caliphate.
[c] Traditions were so interpreted as to justify the assumption of the Caliphate by persons other than Ali (a.s.).
[d] Traditions were distorted in favour of the legitimacy of the first three Caliphs and the ruling Caliph.
[e] New traditions were invented as parallels to those traditions which were known to be in favour of Ali (a.s.).
[f] Traditions were coined to show that the Prophet (S) and his progeny (a.s.) were not different from other people and therefore, they were fallible.
[g] Just criticism was shut down by inventing the need for expeditions and wars under the name of Jihad, and people were sent to foreign countries, or at least their attention was diverted from local problems by innovating Tarawih prayers..
[h] The meaning of Zakat and Khums was so misinterpreted that it excluded the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) from their rightful share.
A consummate politician that he was, Umar achieved his objectives, first as an advisor to Abu Bakr and later himself as the second Caliph. The appointment of the third Caliph was made contingent upon his agreeing to follow the aforesaid precedents of the first two Caliphs. Imam Ali (a.s.) rejected the condition and refused to follow the footsteps of the first two Caliphs, saying that he would not be bound by anything except the Qur’an and the Sunna. On the other hand, Uthman, who agreed to abide by this stipulation, became the Caliph and followed the footsteps of the first two Caliphs.
The Prophet (S) had laid the foundation of Islam. Polytheism was abolished. Women, for the first time in the history of the world, were given personal rights and inheritance. The Arabs were weaned away from their pagan beliefs. The Qur’an became the constitution. The rules for a peaceful and pious society were laid down and put into practice. All that was required had been fully explained in the sayings and actions of the Prophet (S) that are known as Hadith.
Agha S.N. Mirza writes:“The sources of information on all questions in Islam are three; the Qur’an, the Hadith or the Sunna, and History. There is no dispute about the provisions of the Holy Qur’an; the dispute arises only in respect of its interpretation, and it is the interpretation of the Qur’an alone that all the numerous sects, said to be seventy-three in number, appeal as the basis of their cult. All traditions are, of course, traced to the Prophet (S), and the interpretation put on the different verses of the Qur’an by the Prophet (S) are known only through the Hadith. Thus, so far as disputed questions in Islam are concerned, the source of their solution or information are two; Hadith and History.”1
Having gained the throne, the second phase of the conspiracy was set in motion. The first Caliph, instead of collecting, collating, and propagating the Hadith, reiterated the words of Umar and declared that the Qur’an alone was sufficient guidance for Muslims.
As the first measure, he strictly prohibited the narration, recording, or relying upon the Prophet’s words and deeds- collectively called the Sunna or Hadith. Ath-Thahabi records that Abu Bakr said, “Do not relate among yourselves the traditions of the Prophet (S). Traditions are likely to cause differences of opinion. The differences will be more serious after us. I warn you against narrating any sayings of the Prophet (S). If anyone inquires about what the Prophet (S) said in regard to any matter, tell him that the Book of God is sufficient for all purposes.”2 Abu Bakr is also reported to have burnt a book containing a collection of the sayings of the Prophet (S) declaring that the traditions are irrelevant, redundant, and unnecessary as Muslims had the Qur’an for their guidance.3
Umar, during his Caliphate stringently enforced the edict by adding that if traditions were narrated, people would abandon the Qur’an.4 So fierce was Umar in enforcing the prohibition that for narrating Hadith, he sent to prison ibn Mas’ud, Abu ad-Darda, and Abu Mas’ud al-Ansari who were all noted companions of the Prophet (S).5
Umar proclaimed that anybody found narrating any tradition should be beheaded forthwith. A shallow reason touted for the stringent prohibition was that different people narrated different traditions which was likely to cause confusion. However, no explanation is given as to why the method followed by the three caliphs in collecting the Qur’an was not adopted for collecting the Hadith.
Quraidha ibn Ka’b says that Umar accompanied the army proceeding towards Iraq for some distance and said, “The chief reason for my accompanying you is that since you are going to foreign lands where they recite the Qur’an in a buzzing voice like bees, I want to tell you not to mention the Prophet’s Hadith to them, lest their recital of the Qur’an might be interrupted. Stop at the Qur’an; abstain from relating the Hadith of the Prophet (S). I am with you in this matter.” Due to this injunction, when people inquired about the sayings of the Prophet (S), Quraidha used to say that Umar had prohibited everyone from relating any tradition.6
All the three caliphs, Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman prohibited the narration, recording, and reference to any tradition. Anybody contravening these orders was subjected to heavy penalties and severe punishment such as whipping, imprisonment, and even banishment.
Thus, all the sayings of the Prophet (S) in any manner relating or referring to Imam Ali (a.s.), were effectively stifled and consigned only to the memory of a few close companions of the Prophet (S) or in rare books secretly written and well hidden.
Despite this, Imam Ali’s exegesis, sermons, sayings, letters, and directions issued to his governors, forming the back-bone of the earliest Islamic literature, were zealously preserved by his Shia and are available even today. No such literature can be traced to the first three Caliphs or the Umayyad or Abbasid rulers.
Immediately after the Prophet’s death, Abu Bakr, as the first Caliph, appointed Abu Sufyan’s son Yazid as the Governor of Syria. On the death of Yazid bin Abu Sufyan, his brother Mu’awiya was made the Governor of Syria.
Marwan, who was banished by the Prophet (S) for sedition, was recalled and retained as a special and trusted advisor to the Caliph. He was later made the Governor of Egypt. Abu Sufyan, Marwan, and their respective offspring were inveterate enemies of Imam Ali (a.s.). They formed the seed of the Umayyad Dynasty that ruled over Muslims for about a century. They indulged in spreading systematic calumny against the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) in general and Ali (a.s.) in particular.
The amount of success they achieved can be measured from the fact that most people in Syria, Iraq, and Egypt did not know who Ali (a.s.) was. Some claimed that he was a bandit who fought against Islam. How this was achieved, constitutes an important and integral part of the conspiracy. Again, this was done in two parts, firstly by degrading the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) from on the pulpits, and secondly by coining false traditions in favour of the opponents of Ali (a.s.) and the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.).
As the first step, a false propaganda was launched that the Prophet (S) did not nominate anyone as his successor. Secondly, a false story was circulated that the Ansar had planned to usurp the Caliphate. The fact, as we saw earlier, was that the Ansar assumed and were willing to accept the Caliphate of Imam Ali (a.s.) since they had no candidate equal to him among them. It was only when the Ansar witnessed the rebellious attitude of Umar at the Prophet’s deathbed, that they realized that Ali (a.s.) was being sidestepped and someone else was going to usurp the Caliphate. Thirdly, another false story was circulated that Abu Bakr was elected by the majority, whereas the fact was that the Banu Hashim, Quraysh, and other Muhajirin, Ansar, and companions of the Prophet (S) as well as the Muslim public were all assembled, at that very moment, at the house of the dying Prophet (S). Those who were present at Saqifa were  Abu Bakr  Umar  Abu Ubaida ibn al-Jarrah  Sa’d bin Ubadah  Qays bin Sa’d  Khuzaymah bin Thabit  Usayd bin Hudhair  Uthman bin Affan  Abu Haytham bin at-Tayyihan  Hassaan bin Thabit  Abdurrahman bin Awf  Thabit bin Qays bin Shammas  Hubab bin Munthir  Mu’ath bin Adiy  Bashir bin Sa’d al-A’war and  Harith bin Hisham and a handful of other Muslims.
The next step was [i] to twist and modify well-known traditions so as to completely change their import and context or [ii] to fabricate, introduce, and propagate altogether new traditions glorifying the Banu Umayya and the first three Caliphs and [iii] for every existing tradition in favour of Imam Ali (S) and the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), invent a corresponding new tradition in favour of their opponents. These steps were zealously and fully executed.
The foundation was laid on the very first day of Abu Bakr’s Caliphate. Imam Ali (S) recalled before the congregation all those occasions and traditions wherein the Prophet (S) had nominated him (Ali) as his successor. In one voice, the assembly vouched for the veracity of every one of those occasions and traditions. Abu Bakr feared that the people might rise in support of Ali (S). Therefore, Abu Bakr invented a false tradition and said, “All that you have recounted is absolutely true, for I myself had seen and heard and I do still remember all those words of the Prophet (S) as a witness to all those occasions. But, I have also heard the Prophet (S) declaring:‘We the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) were especially chosen by Allah not for leadership in this world but for the leadership in the eternal life hereafter’ Abu Bakr then added:‘Allah has not decreed that the Prophethood and Caliphate should remain in one house’.”7
In saying so, Abu Bakr bifurcated religious leadership from temporal leadership. This is an invention that contradicts the Qur’an and History which show that every Prophet (S) appointed his own brother, son, or near relative as his Caliph or successor.8 Out of the large congregation, only Umar, Abu Ubaida ibn al-Jarrah, Salim, and Mu’ath bin Jabal supported Abu Bakr by saying that they were present on that occasion.9
Agha M.S. Mirza gives a list of over a dozen prophets who nominated their children, brothers, or other close relatives as their successors.10 In fact, every Prophet (S) had unfailingly described, identified, or named his successor. The office of the successor to a prophet, like the office of Prophethood itself, lay within the domain of the Divine Choice and Will. Never was the choice of succession to Prophethood left to men.11 That they were Divinely appointed is proved when the prophets performed miracles as for instance when Jesus (a.s.) spoke from the cradle. Where no successor is appointed, as in the case of Jesus, the Prophet (S) is kept alive, even among the Shia where nomination ended with the eleventh imam and the twelfth imam did not nominate another as his successor imam, the twelfth imam is kept alive but in occultation.
Abu Bakr’s claim is an obvious fabrication, for whenever the Prophet (S) spoke about Ali (S), from the first day of Youm ad-Dar to the last day of his life, he consistently referred to his relationship with Ali (S) as a subsisting one ‘in this world and the next’. On numerous occasions, the Prophet (S) said, “O Ali, you are to me like Aaron was to Moses. You are my brother in this world and the next.”12 He said, “O Ali, you are my Vizier, Guardian, Caliph, Vicegerent, and Deputy in this world and the next.” This fact is uniformly recorded in the books of the Shia and the Sunni alike.
As against the preponderance of such traditions, Abu Bakr set up a single tradition without quoting its context, the reason, or occasion for the Prophet (S), excluding the temporal leadership from the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). The tradition is also falsified by the fact that contrary to his own words, the Prophet (S) himself acted as the temporal as well as religious leader of the Muslims throughout his life. Abu Bakr was aware of this glaring contradiction, and therefore he added that ‘God did not wish to keep the Prophethood and Caliphate in one house’.13
Yazid bin Abu Sufyan and later on his brother Mu’awiya, during their tenure, lavishly distributed money and property to those leaders of congregation who made false accusations, abused, and cursed Imam Ali (a.s.) from on the pulpit after every prayer, till it became a routine affair. Abu Huraira and Amr bin al-Aas gained notoriety for gaining immense wealth by fabricating false traditions. The notoriety caused great uproar among the public and compelled Umar to confiscate their illegal wealth. History books are full of instances of Banu Umayya’s persecution of those who refused to impute false allegation, abuse, and curse Imam Ali (a.s.). They were treated as renegades and were mercilessly penalized, punished, banished, or even killed.
For the first time, the Umayyad rulers employed their henchmen ostensibly to collect and compile traditions, but in fact to invent and popularize false traditions against the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). The compilers were persons obliged to the caliph for the material comforts showered on them. They were aware about the direction in which they could find their safety, welfare, progress, and material comforts. There was yet another category of persons who hated Imam Ali (a.s.), simply because at some battle or skirmish, their forefathers or other near relatives had challenged the Prophet (S), and in defense of Islam, Imam Ali (a.s.) had killed them. All these kind of people combined against Imam Ali (a.s.) to invent false stories defaming him and glorifying his enemies. Another class of narrators were those who bore an innate hatred toward Imam Ali (a.s.).14 They compiled only those traditions that did not conflict with the Banu Umayya’s position as caliphs. They scrupulously avoided any tradition in favour of the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), particularly the traditions that spoke of the virtues, supremacy, or nomination of Imam Ali (a.s.).
A well-known Sunni writer Shibli has devoted a chapter under the heading ‘Collection and Compilation of learning Commenced at the Instance of the Rulers’.15 He writes, “Though Hadith and Fiqh were promulgated to a considerable extent during the period of the Caliphs and many centers of learning had been established, yet all of it was by word of mouth only. But, the Umayyad kings ordered the Ulema to reduce it to writing… First of all, Mu’awiya sent for Ubaid ibn Sharriyya from Yemen to prepare the history of the ancients. After him, Abdul Malik ibn Marwan commanded Sa’d bin Jubair to write books on every art.”
Regarding Imam az-Zuhri who was the role model and mentor for Imam Al-Bukhari, Shibli writes, “In collecting Hadith, he took great pains. He would go to the house of every one of the Ansar and would interrogate their young and old, men and women… He was attached to the durbar of Abdul Malik son of Marwan, who honored him greatly. It must be particularly said that the said Imam was connected with the durbar of kings and was among their closest friends; the education of Marwan’s children was specially entrusted to him.”16
In his biography of Abu Hanifa named ‘Seeratun No’man’, Shibli wrote:“First of all, Imam az-Zuhri prepared a collection of Hadith under the orders of the Umayyad rulers of the time. Copies of this collection were sent by the rulers to all the Islamic countries. From that time on, this collection of Hadith became common.”17
Every Muslim knew the famous tradition of the Prophet (S) that ‘Hasan and Husayn were the two masters of the youth in Paradise’. The Banu Umayya fabricated a tradition that Abu Bakr and Umar are the masters of the old men in Paradise.18 This is, ex facie an absurdity, for in Paradise, there should then be a master of infants, a master of middle aged persons, and a master for all other imaginable categories of people…etc., ad nauseam.
Another instance is where they distorted the tradition of al-Najm, wherein the Prophet (S) allegedly said that all his companions were like the stars shedding the light of wisdom and that the ummah was at liberty to follow any one of them as all the companions were of the same status. The fact is that many of the companions were addicted to the prohibited vices. At any rate, most of them, like Umar himself, were ignorant of the true meaning of the Qur’anic verses. After a careful analysis, many learned Sunni Ulema have held that the tradition of al-Najm is a fabrication.19 The distortion was made by substituting the names of the Imams (a.s.) with the words ‘companions’.
The original tradition of al-Najm is as follows:“Allah chose twelve successors from my progeny as the rightful guides for my Ummah. Among them, one succeeding another, there are eleven Imams after my brother Ali. When one of them passes away, the next one takes his place. Their example is that of the stars in the sky; when one disappears, another manifests itself, because they are themselves rightly guided and they shall rightly guide the Muslim Ummah. All of them are Authorities appointed by Allah on the earth. They are the Witnesses over His Creation. Whoever obeys them, in fact, obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys them disobeys Allah. They are all with the Qur’an and the Qur’an is with them. They will not separate from the Qur’an and the Qur’an will not separate from them till they meet me at the Fountain in Paradise.”20
Agha S.N. Mirza analyses the reasons for so much animosity against Imam Ali (S), which made them go to the extent of fabricating false traditions. He wrote, “Their firm conviction that Imam Ali (a.s.) was the rightful claimant to the Caliphate, which they had deprived him of by intrigue and clever moves, naturally made them see in him a most formidable rival who must be carefully watched and strictly kept down if they were to breathe easily in their usurped power. The Caliphate owed its life to the opposition to the Prophet’s scheme in which Ali (S) was to be the first Caliph. The position which the Prophet (S) had created for Imam Ali (a.s.), coupled with the deeds of heroism which Imam Ali (a.s.) had performed to save Islam, and the sacrifices he had made at the risk of his life to establish the Islamic state, made him a formidable rival in the eyes of the rulers who never forgot that what they had obtained by a coup d'état, was not theirs by right. They, therefore, regarded Imam Ali (a.s.) with that dread mingled with hatred and enmity which is generally the hallmark of a precarious position obtained by fraud and held up by force, and they used those devices and stratagems which are generally resorted to by persons similarly holding office without legitimacy, employing all the available means in their power… They tried to keep Imam Ali (a.s.) down and erected enormous barriers between him and the Caliphate. One of these, which in the end proved insurmountable, was the push to prominence given by the first two Caliphs to the Banu Umayya, the hereditary rivals and inveterate foes of the Banu Hashim, with the result that when Imam Ali’s precarious rule began, he found himself surrounded by hostile elements with an independent and antagonistic kingdom in Syria confronting him… The Banu Umayya inherited the policy as well as the government of the first three Caliphs and the circumstances under which they wrested power from the Banu Hashim added even more venom to the already poisoned sting.”21
Abu Huraira, who spent hardly a few years with the Prophet (S), was credit with the maximum narration of traditions and is considered a reliable narrator by the Sunnis. He was generously rewarded by Mu’awiya, the governor of Syria, for coining false traditions against Ali (a.s.) and in favour of the Banu Umayya and the first three Caliphs. It is said that by spinning out false traditions, Abu Huraira amassed so much unaccounted wealth and became notorious that Umar, in a show of propriety, had to confiscate his property along with that of Amr bin al-Aas.22
Several occasions arose when the three Caliphs found themselves at a loss to solve many legal and social issues relating to fiqh (jurisprudence), fara’idh (obligations), jizya,23 kharaj,24 dhimmis,25 converts…etc., merely by relying on the Qur’an. In all such matters, where the three Caliphs could not find a solution or precedent in the Qur’an, they had no option but to convene an assembly of the companions of the Prophet (S) to inquire and ascertain if any of them knew any tradition applicable to the matter in question. In this manner, Umar learnt many traditions relating to simple matters such as ‘Takbir’26 at funerals, ablutions after coitus, jizya to be collected from the Magi… etc.27
The fact that Umar learnt, only much later in his life, about simple and fundamental, day to day, matters such as ‘Takbir’ at funerals, ablutions after coitus…etc., shows that not everybody knew or remembered what was taught by the Holy Prophet (S). If this was the state of knowledge of the Caliph, we can well imagine the state of ordinary Muslims living in remote places. To some of them, the Qur’an was unintelligible; and when they attempted to interpret it with their conjecture, the Qur’an appeared to be full of contradictions. Thus, the three Caliphs found that an omnibus prohibition against narrating traditions was impractical and that they had no other option but to refer to traditions, in order to explain not only verses from the Qur’an, but also matters relating to Islamic practices, whenever the occasion arose.
Thus compelled to rely upon traditions, the Caliphs resorted to a unique method of collecting them. Only those traditions narrated by the Banu Umayya or the Ansar were taken into consideration. Specifically ignored and excluded from the exercise of collecting traditions were the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) and the Banu Abdul Mutallib, who, being members of the house, were the best source for narrating traditions. The Caliph sought traditions for the particular occasion and matter on hand. No attempt was made to collect, collate, or compile traditions. Meanwhile, many of the companions who had memorized traditions or witnessed the Prophet (S) speaking about the virtues and supremacy of Ali (a.s.) over all Muslims, and his nomination as the successor, had either died or were killed. The surviving sincere narrators of traditions such as Salman, Ammar, Kumail, Hudhaifa, Miqdad, Harith…etc., were banished to the desert by the Caliphs on flimsy trumped up charges.
Though the sole motive in prohibiting the narration of traditions was to suppress the Prophet’s nomination of Imam Ali (a.s.) to the caliphate, the move left a profound ill effect on Islam itself. As a direct consequence, inept and ignorant persons took control of the nascent Islamic State. About Abu Bakr, the Prophet (S) is reported to have said, “Heathenism is still imperceptibly working within you like the underground movement of ants.”28
The matter became more confounded when newly initiated Muslim Bedouin Arabs, who were yet to understand the depth of the Islamic philosophy and thought, were ordered to march against ancient civilizations such as Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Rome, Greece, India, and China. The three caliphs by prohibiting the narration of traditions, had in effect, prevented a proper understanding of the Qur’an and the philosophy of Islam.
The prohibition against narrating traditions left a bankrupt legacy to Islam bereft of any philosophy of thought or action. This bankruptcy of thought was the undoing of the zealous young and old soldiers, who were confronted by the wisdom and philosophies of the ancient civilization of Assyria, Babylon, Greece, Persia, India, China…etc.
Agha M.S. Mirza wrote, “The discomfiture on the part of the Muslims was due to the fact that the early and premature conquests had brought them to the world stage before they had thoroughly imbibed the principles of Islam for it to be infused into their very existence. They had only outwardly left paganism, and old habits of thought that had been ingrained in their nature by centuries of continuous conduct and practice were still lurking in their minds, and like old companions of childhood, held more attraction to them than the new tenets of Islam that were so different to what they had hitherto known and experienced.”29
The poverty of Islamic thought was such that the Muslim conquerors were not aware of any suitable arguments to debate with the ancient wisdom of Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece and India. The conquerors became dumfounded students absorbing the philosophies from their subjects. Their ego did not allow them to abandon the banner of Islam under which they had marched in conquest, but they remained Muslims only in name. Faced with such inconvenient situations, the early three Caliphs issued an edict saying that where no solution could be found readily in the Qur’an, one should use his own conjecture to arrive at a conclusion and deduce a plausible argument. This corrupted the real philosophy of Islam, and instead of searching for a solution in the Qur’an and the Sunna, each one who had any following, invented his own sect of Islam.
- 1. The Caliphate, p. 75.
- 2. Tathkiratul Huffadh, vol. 1 p. 3, The Caliphate, p. 58.
- 3. Shibli’s Al-Faruq, Part 2, p. 225, ath-Thahabi’s Tathkiratul Huffadh, vol. 1, p. 5.
- 4. Tathkiratul Huffadh, vol. 1, p. 7, Shibli’s Al-Faruq, Part 2, p. 223.
- 5. Tathkira of ath-Thahabi, vol. 1, p. 7, Abdul Salam an-Nadawi’s Tarikh al-Fiqh al-Islami, p.161-162, The Caliphate, p. 58-64.
- 6. Shibli’s Al-Faruq, Part 2, p.223, The Caliphate, p. 59.
- 7. Kitab Sulaym bin Qais, tradition No.5, p.57, 61, 91, 108 [Eng.Tr. by Sayyid Ali Abid Rizvi & Nilam Rizvi, Pub. by S & N Rizvi, 2001, Honslow, England.
- 8. The Bible, Genesis, V, at-Tabari, vol. 1, p.76-87, Tarikh al-Kamil of ibnul Athir, vol.1, p 20-26.
- 9. Kitab Sulaym bin Qais, p. 108.
- 10. The Caliphate, p. 120.
- 11. Qur’an, Al Baqara 2 :246 – 251.
- 12. Muhibbuddin at-Tabari’s Ar-Riyadun Nadira, Part 2, Ch.4, Sec. 6, p.163, Mawaddatul Qurba, Mawaddat 6.
- 13. Kitab Sulaym bin Qais, p. 57, 61.
- 14. Ibn Abil Hadid, vol. 1, p. 370.
- 15. Shibli’s Seeratun Nabi, p. 39-49.
- 16. Shibli’s Seeratun Nabi, p. 15-17.
- 17. The Caliphate, p.78.
- 18. Kitab Sulaym bin Qais, tradition No.10, p.93.
- 19. Agha S.N. Mirza’s al-Balaghul Mubin, Part 2, p.1326-1361 quoting ibn Taymiyya’s Minhajus Sunna, ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s Takhrijul Ahadith, al Kashshaf.
- 20. Kitab Sulaym bin Qais, tradition No.10, p.140.
- 21. The Caliphate, p.56-57.
- 22. A study of Islamic History, p.144.
- 23. A tax levied on non-Muslims living in Muslim countries.
- 24. Land taxation.
- 25. Non-Muslims of other Divine religions who live under the Muslim rule.
- 26. The reciting of ‘Allahu Akbar’.
- 27. Al Fru, Part 2, p.217, the Caliphate, p.60-64, ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol. 2, Part 2, p.109, Abdul Salam an-Nadwi’s Tarikh al Fiqh al-Islami, p.161-162 .
- 28. As-Suyuti’s ad-Durrul Manthur, vol.4, p.54.
- 29. The Caliphate, p. 338.