Saqifa by Jafri

--

SAQIFA EVENT IN FULL.

[ Note : - Shia Muslims claim that in 632 C.E. Prophet Muhammad appointed Ali as his successor at Ghadir. Prophet died 3 months later. The power hungry disciples carried out a secret coup. Ali was deprived of his right. They moved to take over power. This is an account by Dr Jafri regarding the events following the death of Holy Prophet Muhammad. He gives details about a plot to take over political power from Ali, the legitimate heir designated by the Prophet. Dr Jafri uses ancient books that tell us about the Saqifa Plan that resulted in the installation of Abu Bakr as the first ruler of muslims. Below is an edited extract from Dr Jafri’s book.]

--

ORIGINS OF SHIA ISLAM

By Dr Jafri [abridged version]

Islam in general has been subject to numerous studies,

but Shia Islam has received insufficient attention, except heresay

founded on political and economic considerations.

A more reliable basis for research maybe found in the historical texts.

My aim is to present the how leadership appeared after

the Prophet's death, based on testimony of the historical sources.

Conceptual Foundations

In this series of events, the famous but

controversial tradition of Ghadir Khum, upon which the

shia place the utmost importance, has been intentionally

ignored. This event is named after a place called Ghadir

Khum, a pool or a marsh with some shady trees, situated only

a few miles from Mecca on the road to Medina, from where

people disperse to their different destinations.

When Muhammad was returning from his Farewell Pilgrimage he stopped

at Ghadir Khum on 18 Dhul-Hijja (I8 March 632) to make

an announcement to the pilgrims who accompanied him

from Mecca and who were to disperse from this junction. By

the orders of the Prophet, a special dais or pulpit made of

branches of the trees was erected for him. After the noon

prayer the Prophet sat on the pulpit and made his last public

address to the largest gathering before his death three months

later. Taking Ali by the hand, Muhammad asked his

followers whether he was not superior in authority and

person (awla) to the believers themselves. The crowd cried

out in one voice: "It is so, O Apostle of God." He then declared:

"He of whom I am the mawla [the patron, master, leader,

Friend?], of him Ali is also the mawla (man kuntu mawlahu fa

Ali-un mawlahu). O God, be the friend of him who is his

friend, and be the enemy of him who is his enemy (Allahumma

wali man walahu wa adi man adahu)."

Conservative sunni authorities, which have recorded this event are:

Ahmad b. Hanbal in his Musnad, Tirmidhi, Nasai, Ibn Maja,

And Abu Daud. [Professor Veccia Vaglieri mentions exact references]

Disagreement is in the meaning of the word mawla used

by the Prophet. The shias unequivocally take the word

in the meaning of leader, master, and patron, and therefore

the explicitly nominated successor of the Prophet.

The sunnis, on the other hand, interpret the word mawla

in the meaning of a friend, or the nearest kin and confidant.

In conclusion, the idea that the question of the succession

was primarily religious, rather than merely political, the

popular notion of the hereditary sanctity of the Banu Hashim,

coupled with the events which took place during the lifetime

of the Prophet in favour of Ali; led to the crystallization of a

point of view concerning the succession to the leadership of

the community in which a number of Muhammad's Com-

panions felt that Ali was the most suitable person to keep the

covenant intact. In the heated debates of the Saqifa incident,

right after the Prophet's death, these Companions did not

hesitate to voice their opinions. The resulting disagreement,

to which we now turn, marks the beginning of what was

eventually to develop into a permanent division of the Umma

into sunni and shia.

Saqifa: The First Manifestations

Before narrating Umar's speech, Ibn Ishaq opens with an

introduction, without isn4d, which can be found in Baladhuri

on the authority of Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Ayyub from

Ibrahim b. Sad from Ibn Ishaq from Zuhri. It reads as follows:

"When the Apostle died, this clan of the Ansar gathered round Sad bin Ubada in the hall of Banu Saida; and Ali and az-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam and Talha bin Ubayd Allah separated themselves in Fatima's house while the rest of the Muhajirun gathered round Abu Bakr accompanied by Usayd bin Hudayr with the Banu Abdul-Ashhal. Then someone came to Abu Bakr and Umar telling them that this clan of the Ansar had gathered round Sad in the hall (Saqifa) of Banu Saida: 'If you want to have command of the people, then take it before their action becomes serious.' Now [the dead body of] the Apostle was still in his house, the burial arrangements not having been completed, and his family had locked the door of the house. Umar said, 'I said to Abu Bakr, let us go to these our brothers of the Ansar to see what they are doing'."

After this Ibn Ishaq records Umar's famous speech, for

which the chain of transmitters has been examined in each of

our sources above. Passing over those parts which do not deal

with the Saqifa, it reads:

"In connection with these events [selection of Abu Bakr] Abd Allah bin Abu Bakr told me from Ibn Shihab Az-Zuhri from Ubayd Allah bin Abd Allah bin Utba bin Masud, from Abd Allah ibn Abbas who said, 'I was waiting for Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf in his station in Mini while he was with Umar in the last pilgrimage which Umar performed. When he [Abd ar-Rahman] returned he found me [Abd Allah ibn Abbas] waiting, for I was teaching him to read the Quran. Abd ar-Rahman said to me: "I wish you could have seen a man who came to the Commander of the Faithful [Umar] and said: O Commander of the Faithful, would you like a man who said 'By God, if Umar were dead I would do fealty to so-and-so'?" Fealty given to Abu Bakr was an unpremeditated affair (falta) and was ratified'."

Here we must point out that this speech, though recorded

by the vast majority of writers, includes neither the name of

the person who talked to Umar nor the name of the one to

whom he wished to pay fealty, except in Baladhuri, I, pp. 581,

582. In tradition No.1176 Baladhuri quotes Umar as saying

that the person speaking to Umar was Zubayr, and that the

person Zubayr wanted to hail as caliph was Ali. In tradition

No. 1181, Baladhuri gives only one name: "Umar delivered

a sermon in which he said that 'so-and-so says if Umar dies

we Will pay our homage (baya`na) to Ali. "'Baladhuri's report

can be confirmed by later writers such as Ibn Abi '1-Hadid,

who gives the name of Ali on the authority of al-Jahiz 54 It is,

however, of great importance to note that it was Ali's name

which caused Umar to deliver such an important and fiery speech:

Umar was angry [when he heard this) and said, "God willing, I shall get up among the men tonight and warn them against those who desire to usurp power over them."
I (Abd ar-Rahman) said, do not do it, Commander of the Faithful, for the festival brings together the riff-raff and the lowest of the people; they are the ones who will be in the majority in your proximity [assembly] when you stand among the people. I fear lest you should stand and say something which they will repeat everywhere, not understanding what you say or interpreting it correctly; so wait until you come to Medina, for it is the home of the Sunna and you can confer privately with the jurists (fuqaha) and the nobles of the people. You can say what you like and the jurists will understand what you say and interpret it properly. Umar replied: "By God, if He wills, I will do so as soon as I reach Medina."
We came to Medina at the end of Dhul-Hijja and on the Friday, I (Ibn Abbas) returned [to the mosque] quickly when the sun had set. Umar sat on the pulpit, and when the muezzins were silent he praised God, as was fitting, and said: "Today I am about to say to you something which God has willed that I should say and I do not know whether perhaps it is my last utterance. He who understands and heeds it let him take it with him wherever he goes; and as for him who fears that he will not understand it, he may not deny that I said it. I have heard that someone [Zubayr] said: If Umar were dead I would do fealty to so-and-so [Ali]. Do not let a man deceive himself by saying that acceptance of Abu Bakr was a hasty mistake (falta) which was ratified. Admittedly it was that, but God averted the evil of it. There is none among you to whom people would devote themselves as they did to Abu Bakr. He who accepts a man as ruler without consulting the Muslims, such acceptance has no validity for either of them: and they are subject to death [punishment.] What happened was that when God took away His Prophet [from among us], the Ansar opposed us and gathered with their leaders in the Saqifa [hall] of Banu Saida, and Ali and az-Zubayr and their companions [and those who were their supporters] withdrew from us, while the Muhajirun gathered to Abu Bakr."

From Umar's own statement, it is clear that there was

serious opposition to Abu Bakr's candidacy not only from the

Ansar, but also from Ali and his supporters. Thus, no sooner

had the news of Muhammad's death come out than the Ansar

of Medina, undoubtedly fearful of Meccan domination and

perhaps aware of their designs, hastily assembled in the

Saqifa Banu Saida to elect a leader from among themselves.

Umar b. al-Khattab, upon hearing people saying that

Muhammad was dead, stood and furiously remonstrated that

the Prophet could not die. Claiming that Muhammad had

simply disappeared for a time, he threatened he would kill

anyone who claimed that Muhammad was dead. Abu Bakr,

who had been at his house in Sunh, a suburb of Medina, then

arrived on the scene. Hearing Umar's altercations, he went

straight into the Prophet's house. Discovering that Muham-

mad had passed away, Abu Bakr came back and confirmed

his death to the people gathered around Umar.

At this point we have three different versions. The first

reports that when Abu Bakr was addressing the people, an

informant came and told him and Umar about the Ansar's

meeting in the Saqifa. Both Abu Bakr and Umar, along with

those around them, then rushed to the Saqifa. This version

must be rejected on the simple grounds that Abu Ubayda b.

al-Jarrah does not appear anywhere in this tradition, contra-

dicting all other reports, where he is one of the three most

important persons in the whole drama.

The second version reports that after confirming the

death of the Prophet to the people, Abu Bakr and Umar

went to the house of the Prophet and joined his relatives,

who were busy with the burial preparations.

Two informants then came and told them about

the Saqifa, whereupon the three, Abu Bakr, Umar, and Abu

Ubayda, ran to the Saqifa.

This version also does not appear to be correct because:

1: it presupposes that these three most

important companions were completely unaware of both the

serious tension, often conflict, which had been developing

over the last few years between the Muhajirun and the Ansar,

and the gravity of the situation under the circumstances;

2: itcontradicts Umar's statement that Ali and his supporters

separated themselves from the others and locked the door of

the house;

3: it is a tradition recorded only by Baladhuri,

and on a rather weak isnad.

The third version, which is repeatedly narrated by

all of our sources with the exception

of Ibn Saad, reports that after addressing the people regarding

Muhammad's death, Abu Bakr, along with Umar and Abu

'Ubayda, went to the house of; most probably, Abu Ubayda.

There they met to deliberate on the critical leadership crisis

which had arisen owing to the death of the Prophet, and

certainly keeping in view the resentful feelings of the Ansar

which had been developing for quite some time. It was

there that the council of the Muhajirun was interrupted by

an informant who rushed in to tell them what the Ansar were

doing. Hearing that, Abu Bakr, Umar, and Abu Ubayda

rushed to the Saqifa to prevent any unexpected development.

Returning again to Umar's speech, we are told:

"I told Abu Bakr that we should go to our brothers the Ansar, so we went off to go to them when two honest fellows [Uwaym bin Saida and Maan bin Adi] met us and told us of the conclusion the people had come to. They asked us where we were going, and when we told them they said that there was no need for us to approach them and we must make our own decision. I said, by God, we will go to them. And [when we arrived] we found them [the Ansar] in the hall of Banu Saida. In their midst was a man wrapped up. In answer to my inquiries, they said that he was Sad bin Ubada and that he was sick. When we sat down there, a speaker pronounced the Shahada and praised God as was fitting and then continued: 'We are God's Helpers and the squadron of Islam. You, O Muhajirun, are a family of ours and a company of your people have come to settle down [among us].' I [interrupted] said: And look, they were trying to cut us off from our origin and wrest authority from us.
When the Ansar's speaker finished, I wanted to speak, for I had prepared a speech in my mind which pleased me much. I wanted to produce it before Abu Bakr and to repulse the roughness and asperity of the speaker of the Ansar. But Abu Bakr said, 'Gently, Umar!' I did not like to anger him and so he spoke. He was a man with more knowledge and dignity than I, and by God he did not omit a single word which I had thought of and he uttered it in his inimitable way better than I could have done. Abu Bakr said: 'All the good that you have said about yourselves you duly deserve. But the Arabs will not recognize authority except in this tribe of Quraysh. They are the best and the noblest of the Arabs in descent, blood, and country [i.e. settled in the centre)'."

An addition from Baladhuri completes Abu Bakr's speech

and shows further how he argued against the

Ansar: "We are the first people in Islam; and among the

Muslims, our abode is in the centre, our descent is noblest,

and we are nearer to the Prophet in relation; and you [Ansar]

are our brothers in Islam and our partners in religion; you

helped us, protected us and supported us, may God reward

you His best. So we are the rulers (umara') and you are the

deputies (wuzara'). The Arabs will not submit themselves

except to this clan of the Quraysh. Certainly a group from

among you [present] knows well that the Prophet said, 'The

leaders are from the Quraysh (al-a'immat-u min al-Quraysh),

therefore, do not compete with your Muhajir brothers in

what God has bestowed upon them."'

Now we return again to Umar's speech.

"[Abu Bakr said,] 'So I offer you one of two men; accept whichever you please.' Thus saying he took hold of my hand and that of Abu Ubayda b. al-Jarrah, who was sitting between us. Nothing he ever said displeased me more than that. By God, I would rather have come forward and have had my head struck off--if that were no sin-than rule over a people of whom Abu Bakr was one"

In Yaqubi's account, "[Abu Bakr said] The

Quraysh are closer to Muhammad than you, so here is Umar

b. al-Khattab, for whom the Prophet prayed, "O God, confirm

his faith," and the other is Abu Ubayda, whom the Prophet

declared "a trustee of this Umma"; choose either one whom

you like and pay homage to him.' But both of them refused

and said, 'We cannot take preference over you, you are the

companion of the Prophet and only second of the two [in the

cave at the time of the Hijra]."'

In one of Baladhuri's accounts

when Abu Bakr suggested the name of Umar, the

latter exclaimed: "And while you are alive? Who could set

you aside from your place in which the Prophet had installed

you?" Yaqubi describes Abu Ubayda as saying:

"O people of Ansar, you were the first to help [Islam] so do not

be the first to differ and change." Yaqubi continues: "Then

'Abd ar- Rahman b. 'Awf stood and said: 'You have your

merits, but you do not have [any one among you] like Abu

Bakr, Umar, and Ali.' On this, one of the Ansar, AI-Mundhir

b. Arqam, sharply replied: 'We do not reject the merits you

have mentioned; indeed there is among you one with whom

no one can dispute, if he seeks this authority, and that man is

'Ali b. Abi Talib."'

It was at this stage of suggestions and counter suggestions

by Abu Bakr, Umar, and Abu Ubayda for each other that

Al-Hubbab b. Mundhir from the Ansar offered a compromise

solution. Thus continues Umar:

"One of the Ansar said, 'I am the rubbing post and the fruitful propped-up palm [i.e. a man who can cure people's ills and is held in high esteem because of his great experience]. Let us have one ruler from among ourselves, and another ruler from among yourselves, O Quraysh.' Altercations waxed hotter and voices were raised until, when a complete breach was to be feared, I said,
Stretch forth your hand, Abu Bakr. He did so and I paid him homage; the Muhajirun followed and then the Ansar. [In doing so] we jumped on Sad bin Ubayda and someone said that we had killed him. I said, God kill him."

Here ends Umar's historic speech, accepted by almost all

of those who wrote on the Saqifa. Before we proceed further

it might be of interest to note Umar's reply to Hubbab's

suggestion as it is recorded by Tabari in a separate

account narrated by Abu Mikhnaf: "Umar said: 'How

preposterous; two swords cannot be in one sheath. By God,

the Arabs will never agree to your authority while their

Prophet is from others [i.e. from ourselves]."'

It is also Tabari who records for us from one of

his most trusted and frequently cited authorities, Abu

Ma`shar, that even after Umar's homage to Abu Bakr, there

were still some of the Ansar who protested against the

decision and exclaimed: "We will not pay our homage to

anyone except Ali." But this and some other similar voices

were lost in the tumult and, following the examples of Umar

and Abu Ubayda, those of the Muhajirun present paid

homage to Abu Bakr, and were followed by the. Ansar for one

reason or another, as we shall see presently.

Before we describe the events which followed the assembly

of Saqifa, it would be helpful to examine briefly the complex

situation and unique circumstances which made Abu Bakr's

selection possible.

Firstly, clan rivalries among the Quraysh,

or among the Muhajirun in particular, made it easier for

them to accept the leadership of Abu Bakr-a man of an

insignificant branch, Banu Taym b. Murra. Because of its

inconspicuous place among Meccan ruling clans, Banu Taym

had never been involved in the power struggle and political

conflicts that had plagued the rival clans of the Quraysh.

Secondly, the Muhajirun, as a whole, were also fearful of the

possibility of Medinan domination should the' Muhajirun

involve themselves in their own clannish rivalries and

internecine fighting. To them Abu Bakr was thus the best

compromise candidate.

Thirdly, as far as the Ansar were

concerned, we should take note of the deep-rooted and old

enmity between the Banu Aws and the Banu Khazraj. Sad

b. Ubada was the chief of the Khazraj; the Banu Aws

accordingly found it much more tolerable and profitable to

submit themselves to a Qurayshite leader than to allow a chief

of the rival tribe to rule over them. This is evident from the

fact that the first among the Ansar to pay homage to Abu

Bakr was one of the chiefs of the Banu Aws, Usayd b.

Hudayr.

[Note: Description of him as a Khazraji leader must be a scribal error.]

According to Tabari, "Some of the

Aws, among them Usayd b. Hudayr, spoke among themselves,

saying, 'By God, if the Khazraj become rulers over you once,

they will continue to maintain this superiority over you and

will never let you have any share in it, so stand up and pay

homage to Abu Bakr.' Then they [the Aws] stood and paid

homage to Abu Bakr." We may also recall that this Usayd '0.

Hudayr was the only one from the Ansar who took part if' the

deliberations of the Muhajirun, certainly knowing of Sad b.

`Ubada's candidacy and thus acting against him and the

Khazraj.

As for the Banu Khazraj, they realized that their position

was far too weak to face a united front of the Muhajirun and

the Banu Aws, their old rivals, or rather enemies, in the city

politics of Medina. The constant wars and deadly feuds

between the Aws and the Khazraj are commonplace stories

of the ayyam al-`Arab ("Battle Days") literature. Thus the

Khazraj found it unwise to lag behind in giving support to

and gaining the favour of the ruling authority upon which

agreement had very nearly been reached. Moreover, Sad b.

`Ubada was envied by some of his own cousins or clansmen,

as was a common feature of the Arab clans; and according to

some the first who paid homage to Abu Bakr was Sad's own

cousin Bashir b. Sad. [Sources are not clear on who paid

homage first. Yaqubi says it was Bashir b. Sad, while

according to Baladhuri it was Usayd b. Hudayr.]

It is thus clear that as a result of group

politics, clan rivalries, and personal jealousies, Abu Bakr was

able to exact homage from most of the people. To these factors

must be added the overall impression in the sources that Abu

Bakr did enjoy a certain prestige and was held in high esteem

for his sobriety, old age, his close association with and support

of Muhammad, and his valuable services to Islam from the

very advent of the Prophet's mission.

Thus the impact of his

personality, which grew over the years under the Prophet,

should not be ignored in analysing the results of the Saqifa.

The material preserved in the sources also strongly suggests

that Abu Bakr and Umar had formed an alliance long before,

possibly with Abu Ubayda b. al-Jarrah as a third member,

and that these three did carry considerable weight and

influence in the newly emerging Islamic nobility, as well as in

group politics against the old Meccan aristocracy.

Finally,it must also be noted that Abu Bakr's succession was realized

neither through a free election in any sense of the term nor

through a free choice of the community. It was simply a

decision by a particular group from among the Muhajirun

which was hastily forced or thrust upon all others. Its success

was due only to the delicate existing group conflicts in

Medina.

This is obvious from Umar's own statement quoted

above that, "Admittedly it was a hasty affair (falta) but God

averted the evil of it" The arguments advanced by Umar

and Abu Ubayda in favour of Abu Bakr-lineage in the

Quraysh, early conversion to Islam, long companionship to

the Prophet, services to the cause of Islam, and lastly his close

relationship to and the esteem in which he was held by

Muhammad, are in effect of the same nature as those

advanced in favour of Ali against Abu Bakr, and they

certainly lend more strength to Ali's claims than to those of

Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr's only exclusive claim to the succession-

his leadership of the prayer during the Prophet's illness-

reflects later theological colour, and the traditions pertaining

to it are often confused and contradictory.

Keeping in view the arguments and counter-arguments

at the Saqifa, the choice of Abu Bakr seems to have been

an accident of circumstances. The conflict between the

supporters and the opponents of Abu Bakr centred on

considerations of what is necessary under the circumstances,

and what ought to be. The former principle soon resulted in

the establishment of a mighty and sweeping caliphate-empire.

The latter principle of what ought to be led a group of the

community, though small, to develop its own interpretation

of Islamic ideals and polity.

The task of consolidation of Abu Bakr's authority as the

successor to the Prophet, however, was still far from complete

after the Saqifa meeting. Ali b. Abi Talib, the most important

candidate from the Prophet's family, as is unanimously

attested by sunni and shia sources alike, along with his Close

associates and the family of Hashim, was not even aware of

the decision taken in the Saqifa. They came to hear about it

only when, after securing homage at the Saqifa, Abu Bakr,

along with his supporters, came to the mosque of the Prophet

and an unusual tumult arose from the gathered mob.

[Note: We are not sure whether the demand of

homage from Ali and his supporters was made immediately after

they came to the mosque from the Saqifa, or after the burial of the

Prophet on the following day when general homage was being paid

to Abu Bakr. A careful reading of Baladhuri strongly suggests,

however, that it was demanded as soon

as they came to the mosque from the Saqifa.]

Though the timing of the events which followed is confused, it is

perhaps at this point that Ali and a number of his supporters

both from the Ansar and the Muhajirun assembled in

Fatima's house and started deliberating on what was to be

done. Besides numerous references to this effect, it is also

supported by the first part of Umar's speech when he said,

"And Ali and Zubayr with their companions withdrew from

us." Abu Bakr and Umar, fully aware of Ali's claims and also

of the respect he commanded in a certain group of the

companions, and fearing lest there be some serious reaction

on his and his partisans' part, summoned them to the mosque

to pay homage. They refused to come.

Umar, with his cut-and-thrust policy, advised Abu Bakr to act promptly before it

was too late. The two men marched to Ali's house with an

armed party, surrounded the house, and threatened to set it

on fire if Ali and his supporters would not come out and pay

homage to the elected caliph. Ali came out and attempted to

remonstrate, putting forward his own claims and rights and

refusing to honour Abu Bakr and Umar's demands. The

scene soon grew violent, the swords flashed from their

scabbards, and Umar with his band tried to pass on through

the gate. Suddenly Fatima appeared before them in a furious

temper and reproachfully cried:

"You have left the body of the Apostle of God with us and you have decided among yourselves without consulting us, and without respecting our rights. Before God, I say, either you get out of here at once, or with my hair dishevelled I will make my appeal to God."

[ Many versions of this tradition may be found in Baladhuri,

Yaqubi, Ibn Hadid Iqd, Imama wal Siyasa. Though its

attribution to Ibn Qutayba is incorrect, it is certainly a very early

work extremely rich in sources; and gives a very detailed account of the

episode of Umar and Abu Bakr's attack on the house of Fatima and

the force used to secure Ali's homage. See Vaglieri’s article

"Fatima", who, commenting on these events, says "Even if

they have been expanded by invented details, they are based on facts."]

This made the situation most critical, and Abu Bakr's band

was obliged to leave the house without securing Ali's

homage. He could not, however, resist for long and had to

yield before the growing pressure. The traditions vary and

are often contradictory as to when he was reconciled with

Abu Bakr. According to one or two very weak and isolated

traditions, which clearly reflect later theological tendency,

Ali paid homage to Abu Bakr instantly, only complaining

that he had not been consulted; according to some others he

did so the same day but under compulsion and with the

conviction that he had better claims to the office. But

according to the most commonly reported traditions, which

must be accepted as authentic because of overwhelming

historical evidence and other circumstantial reasons, Ali held

himself apart until the death of Fatima six months later.

Insisting that Ali should have been chosen, a number of

his partisans from among both the Ansar and the Muhajirun

who had delayed for some time in accepting Abu Bakr's

succession were fain to yield, however. They gradually, one

after the other, were reconciled to the situation and swore

allegiance to Abu Bakr. Their names and number vary in

different sources, but the most distinguished among them

and most commonly recorded by the majority of the sources

are as follows.

1 Hudhayfa b. al-Yaman, a Medinese halif of the Aws and a

most distinguished Companion of the Prophet. Known as a

great warrior who fought at Uhud and served the Prophet as

a special counsellor at Khandaq, his personal loyalty and

attachment to Ali remained unchanged even after his

allegiance to Abu Bakr. Before his death, he asked his two

sons to support Ali, which they did until they were killed at

the battle of Siffin while fighting for Ali against Muawiya.

2 Khuzayma b. Thabit, from the tribe of Aws, whom the

Prophet called "Dhu`sh-Shahadatayn", the one whose testi-

mony was worth that of two men. He fought alongside `Air at

the battles of Al-Jamal and Siffin and was killed in the latter

by Muawiya's army.

3 Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, whose father, Khalid b. Kulayb,

belonged to Banu Najjar and whose mother was from the

Khazraj. He was one of the most important Companions

among the Ansar and was the host of the Prophet in Medina

until his house was built. He fought for the cause of ~Ali in the

battles of Al-Jamal, Siffin, and Nahrawan.

4 Sahl b. Hunayf, from the tribe of Aws, who fought for the

Prophet at Badr and other battles. He was a great friend of

Ali, came with him from Medina to Basra, and fought at

Siffin. Ali appointed him governor of Persia.

5 Uthman b. Hunayf, brother of Sahl and a great favourite

of Ali, who appointed him governor of Basra.

6 Al-Bara'a b. Azib al-Ansari, from the tribe of Khazraj and

one of the aristocrats of Medina representing pro-'Alid Ansar.

He came with Ali to Kufa and fought for him at Al-Jamal,

Siffin, and Nahrawan.

7 Ubayy b. Kab, 76 from a branch of the Banu Khazraj and one

of the leading jurists and Quran readers among the Ansar.

8 Abu Dharr b. Jundab al-Ghifari, 77 one of the earliest followers

of Muhammad, an ascetic, and extremely devoted to piety.

He had always been a most vocal supporter of Ali and is one

of the four pillars of the first shia. The Caliph Uthman

exiled him to his birthplace, a small village known as Rabdha,

where he died.

9 Ammar b. Yasir, a south Arabian affiliated with the clan of

Makhzum of the Quraysh, an early convert to Islam, and one

of the four pillars of the first shia.

10 Al-Miqdad b. Amr, a south Arabian either from Kinda or

Bahra, adopted by a certain Aswad b. Abd Yathuth of the

Banu Makhzum. He was one of the seven early converts to

Islam and one of the four pillars of the first shia.

11 Salman al-Farisi, a Persian by origin and an ardent follower

and companion of the Prophet, who ransomed him from

slavery and adopted him as his mawla and member of the Ahl

al-Bayt. He had always been an ardent supporter of 'Air, and

his support to Ali at the time of Abu Bakr's selection has been

mentioned distinctly even by Baladhuri.

12 Az-Zubayr b. al-Awwam, one of the most distinguished

Companions of the Prophet from the Quraysh. He was the

most energetic supporter of Ali and no doubt sincere in his

enthusiastic attitude. He came out of the house of Fatima,

sword in hand, when Umar arrived there and tried to force

those in the house to pay homage to Abu Bakr. A serious

encounter between him and Umar is recorded by almost all

of our historians. It was, however, only twenty-five years later

that ambition made him strive for the caliphate, which

resulted in the battle of al-Jamal between him and Ali.

Khalid b. Said, from the clan of Umayya, only third or

fourth after Abu Bakr to become Muslim, and the only one

from this clan who seriously resisted Abu Bakr's succession

in favour of Ali. As the representative of the Prophet, he was

at Sunh when Muhammad died. When he reached Medina

a few days after Abu Bakr's selection, he offered his allegiance

to Ali saying, "By God, no one among all the men is more

entitled to take the place of Muhammad than you." Though

Ali declined to accept his homage, Khalid refused to

recognize Abu Bakr for three months.

The seriousness of their opposition to or resentment of

Abu Bakr before they become reconciled to him is almost

impossible to ascertain, since the shia sources exaggerate this

to the extreme whereas the sunni sources try to ignore or

minimize it as much as possible. Historically it cannot be

denied, however, that these men formed the nucleus of the

first Alid party, or the shia. It cannot be claimed that all

were equally enthusiastic and warm supporters; some of them

were lukewarm supporters who recognized Ali's position as

the most worthy for the office of the caliphate because of his

personal merits, but nevertheless paid homage to Abu Bakr

without much resentment. The attitude of Ammar, Miqdad,

Abu Dharr, and Salman must have been different from that

of the others. These four companions are regarded by all the

shias as "the Four Pillars" (al-arkan al-arba’a) who formed

the first shia of Ali. After Ali's compromise with Abu Bakr,

however, reasons for further opposition on the part of his

supporters ceased to exist and this elite of the first shia

dwindled away physically. But can ideas, once introduced,

ever die out? The later years in the history of the development

of Islamic thought provide an answer to this question.

The discussion above will suffice to elucidate our view that

the origins of Shia feelings and inclinations may be found in

the conception of the sanctity for which the Banu Hashim

were widely known, in the special consideration with which

Ali was held by Muhammad (who was, above all, fully

conscious of his family's traditionally religious heritage and

exalted position), and lastly, in the events in favour of Ali

which took place during Muhammad's lifetime. Since the

first convergence of these convictions focused on the questions

and issues involved in the Saqifa incident, this episode marks

both the first open expression of and the point of departure

for what ultimately developed into the Shia understanding of

Islam.

* * *

--