The Beginning Of The Detailed Study (2024)

The Companions Of The Prophet As Seen By The Shi’a And The Sunnis

One of the most important studies which I consider to be the cornerstone for all the studies that lead to the truth is the research into the life of the Companions, their affairs, their deeds and their beliefs; because they were the foundations of everything, and from them we took the principles of our religion, and they enlightened our darkness, so that we can see the rules of Allah. Many Muslim scholars- convinced of the above - embarked on the study of the lives and deeds of the Companions, among them: “Usd al-Ghabah fi Tamyeez al-Sahabah”, and “al-Isabah fi Maarifat al-Sahabah”, and “Mizan al-I'tidal” and various other books which look critically and analytically at the lives of the Companions, but all from the point of view of the Sunnis.

There is a slight problem here, and that is that most of the early scholars wrote in the way which suited the Ummayyad and Abbasid rulers who were well known for their opposition to Ahl Al-Bayt and all their followers. Therefore, it is not fair to depend on their works alone without reference to the works of the other Muslim scholars who were persecuted and ultimately killed by these governments simply because they were followers of Ahl Al-Bayt and the cause behind the revolutions against the oppressive and deviant authorities.

The main problem with all that was the Companions themselves, for they disagreed about the wish of the Messenger of Allah (S) to write them a document which would help them to remain on the right path until the Day of Judgment. This disagreement deprived the Islamic nation of a unique virtue, and has thrown it into darkness until it was divided and plagued with internal quarrels and finally ended up as a spent force.

It was they who disagreed on the issue of the Caliphate (the successorship of the Prophet), and were divided between a ruling and an opposing party, thus dividing the nation into the followers of ‘Ali and the followers of Mu’awiyah. It was they who differed in the interpretations of the Book of Allah and the sayings of His Messenger, which led to the creation of the various creeds, groups and subgroups; and from them came many scholars of scholastic theology and schools of thoughts and philosophies inspired by political ambitions with one aim in mind and that was to obtain power.

The Muslims would not have been divided and in disagreement had it not been for the Companions, for every disagreement that has been created in the past, or is being created at the present time is due to their disagreement about the Companions. There is one God, one Qur'an, one Messenger and one Qiblah, and they all agree on that, but the disagreement among the Companions started on the first day after the death of the Messenger (S), in the Saqifa (house) of Bani Saidah, and has continued up to the present day, and will continue for as long as Allah wills it.

Through my discussions with the Shi’ite scholars, I discovered that, in their views, the Companions were divided into three categories:

The first category included the good Companions who knew Allah and His Messenger truly well, and they acclaimed him (the Messenger) to the last moments of their lives. They were truly his friends by words and deeds, and they never abandoned him, but rather stood their ground with him. Allah - the Most High - praised them in many places in His Holy Book, and the Messenger of Allah (S) also praised them in many places. This group of Companions are mentioned by the Shi’a with reverence and respect, they are also mentioned by the Sunnis with the same reverence and respect.

The second category were the Companions who embraced Islam and followed the Messenger of Allah (S) either through choice or through fear, and they always showed their gratitude to the Messenger of Allah (S) for their Islam. However, they hurt the Messenger of Allah (S) on a few occasions, and did not always follow his orders, in fact, they often challenged him and challenged the clear text with their points of view, until Allah, through the Holy Qur'an, had to intervene by rebuking them or threatening them. Allah exposed them in many Qur'anic verses, also the Messenger of Allah (S) warned them in many of his sayings. The Shi’a mention this group of Companions only because of their deeds, and without respect or reverence.

The third type of Companions were the hypocrites who accompanied the Messenger of Allah (S) to deceive him. They pretended to be Muslims but inside themselves they were bent on blasphemy and on deceiving Islam and the Muslims as a whole. Allah has revealed a complete Surah in the Qur'an about them, and mentioned them in many other places, and promised them the lowest level in Hell. Also, the Messenger of Allah (S) mentioned them and issued warnings about them, and even informed some of his close friends about their names and characteristics. The Shi’a and the Sunnis agree in cursing this group of Companions and have nothing to do with them.

There was a special group of Companions who distinguished themselves from the others by being relatives of the Prophet (S), in addition to having possessed ethical and spiritual virtues and personal distinctions from Allah and His Messenger that no one else was honoured with. These were Ahl Al-Bayt (the Prophet's Family) whom Allah cleansed and purified, and ordered us to pray for them in the same way as he ordered us to pray for His Messenger.

He made it obligatory for us to pay them one fifth of our income, and that every Muslim must love them as a reward for the Muhammadan Message. They are our leaders and we must obey them; and they are people firmly rooted in knowledge who know the interpretation of the Holy Qur'an and they know the decisive verses of it, as well as those verses which are allegorical.

They are the people of al-Dhikr whom the Messenger of Allah equated with the Holy Qur'an in his saying “the two weighty things” (al-Thaqalayn), and ordered us to adhere to them1, He equated them to Noah's Ark: whoever joined it was saved, and whoever left it drowned2. The Companions knew the position of Ahl Al-Bayt and revered them and respected them. The Shi’a follow them and put them above any of the Companions, and to support that they have many clear texts as proofs.

The Sunnis respect and revere the Companions but do not accept the above classification and do not believe that some of the Companions were hypocrites; rather, they see the Companions as being the best people after the Messenger of Allah. If they classify the Companions then it would be according to their seniority and their merits and their services to Islam. They put the Rightly Guided Caliphs in the first class, then the first six of the ten who were promised with heaven, according to them. Therefore, when they pray for the Prophet (S) and his household they attach with them all the Companions without exception.

This is what I know from the Sunni scholars, and that is what I heard from the Shi’i scholars regarding the classification of the Companions; and that is what made me start my detailed study with the issue of the Companions. I promised my God - if He led me on the right path - to rid myself from emotional bias and to be neutral and objective and to listen to what the two sides said, then to follow what was best, basing my conclusions on two premises:

1. A sound and a logical premise: that is to say that I would only depend upon what everybody is in agreement with, regarding the commentary on the Book of Allah, and the correct parts of the honourable Sunnah of the Prophet.

2. The mind: for it is the greatest gift that Allah has given to human beings, and through it He honoured them and distinguished them from the rest of creation. Thus, when Allah protests about what His worshippers do, He asks them to use their minds in the best possible way, and He says: Do they not understand? Do they not comprehend? Do they not see? etc”.

Let my Islam primarily be the belief in Allah, His angels, His Books and His messengers; and that Muhammad is His servant and His Messenger; and that the Religion of Allah is Islam; and that I will never depend on any of the Companions, regardless of his relation to the Messenger or his position, for I am neither Ummayyad nor Abbasid nor Fatimid, and I am neither Sunni nor Shi’i, and I have no enmity towards Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman or ‘Ali or even Wahshi, the killer of our master al-Hamzah, as long as he became a Muslim, and the Messenger of Allah forgave him. Since I had forced myself into this study in order to reach the truth, and since I had rid myself, sincerely, from all my previous beliefs, I decided to start, with the blessing of Allah, by considering the attitudes of the Companions.

1. The Companions At The Peace Treaty Of Al-Hudaibiyah

Briefly the story is as follows: In the sixth year after the Hijrah (emigration of the Prophet from Mecca to Madinah), the Messenger of Allah with one thousand and four hundred of his Companions marched towards Mecca to do the Umrah. They camped in “Dhi al-Halifah” where the Prophet (S) ordered his Companions to put down their arms and wear the Ihram (white gowns worn especially for the purpose of the pilgrimage and the Umrah), then they dispatched al-Hady (an offering for sacrifice) to inform Quraysh that he was coming as a visitor to do the Umrah and not as a fighter.

But Quraysh, with all its arrogance, feared that its reputation would be dented if the other Arabs heard that Muhammad had entered Mecca by force. Therefore, they sent a delegation led by Suhayl Ibn Amr Ibn Abd Wadd al-Amiri to see the Prophet and ask him to turn back that year, but said that they would allow him to visit Mecca for three days the year after. In addition to that, they put down some harsh conditions, which were accepted by the Messenger of Allah as the circ*mstances warranted such acceptance, and as revealed to him by his God, Glory and Might be to Him.

A few of the Companions did not like the Prophet's action and opposed him very strongly, and Umar Ibn al-Khattab came and said to him, “Are you not truly the Prophet of Allah?” He answered, “Yes, I am”. Umar asked, “Are we not right and our enemy wrong?” The Prophet answered, “Yes”. Umar asked, “Why do we then disgrace our religion?”

The Messenger of Allah (S) said, “I am the Messenger of Allah and I will never disobey Him and He is my support”. Umar asked, “Did you not tell us that we would come to the House of Allah and go around it?” The Prophet answered, “Yes, and did I tell you that we were coming this year?” Umar answered, “No”. The Prophet said, “Then you are coming to it and going around it”. Umar later went to Abu Bakr and asked him, “O Abu Bakr, is he not truly the Prophet of Allah?” He answered, “Yes”. Umar then asked him the same questions he had asked the Messenger of Allah, and Abu Bakr answered him with the same answers and added, “O Umar he is the Messenger of Allah, and he will not disobey his God, Who is his support, so hold on to him”.

When the Prophet had finished signing the treaty, he said to his Companions “Go and slaughter (sacrifices) and shave your heads”. And by Allah one of them stood up until he had said it three times. When nobody obeyed his orders, he went to his quarters, then came out and spoke to no one, and slaughtered a young camel with his own hands, and then asked his barber to shave his head. When the Companions saw all that, they went and slaughtered (sacrifices), and shaved one another, until they nearly killed one another.3

This is the summary of the story of peace treaty of al-Hudaibiyah, which is one of the events whose details both the Shi’a and Sunnah agree upon, and it is cited by many historians and biographers of the Prophet such as al-Tabari, Ibn al-Athir, Ibn Sa’ad, al-Bukhari and Muslim.

I stopped here, for I could not read this kind of material without feeling rather surprised about the behaviour of those Companions towards their Prophet. Could any sensible man accept some people's claims that the Companions, may Allah bless them, always obeyed and implemented the orders of the Messenger of Allah (S), for these incidents expose their lies, and fall short of what they want! Could any sensible man imagine that such behaviour towards the Prophet is an easy or acceptable matter or even an excusable one! Allah, the Almighty, said:

“But no! By your God! They do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not and any straightness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with entire submission” (Holy Qur’an, 4:65).

Did Umar Ibn al-Khattab succumb to them and find no difficulty in accepting the order of the Messenger (S)? Or was he reluctant to accept the order of the Prophet? Especially when he said, “Are you not truly the Prophet of Allah? Did you not tell us? Etc”. and did he succumb after the Messenger of Allah gave him all these convincing answers?

No, he was not convinced by his answers, and he went and asked Abu Bakr the same questions. But did he succumb after Abu Bakr answered him and advised him to hold on to the Prophet? I do not know if he actually succumbed to all that and was convinced by the answers of the Prophet (S) and Abu Bakr! For why did he say about himself, “For that I did so many things …”. Allah and His Messenger know the things which were done by Umar.

Furthermore, I do not know the reasons behind the reluctance of the rest of the Companions after that, when the Messenger of Allah said to him, “Go and slaughter (sacrifices) and shave your heads”. Nobody listened to his orders even when he repeated them three times, and then in vain.

Allah, be praised! I could not believe what I had read. Could the Companions go to that extent in their treatment of the Messenger? If the story had been told by the Shi’a alone, I would have considered it a lie directed towards the honourable Companions. But the story has become so well known that all the Sunni historians refer to it.

As I had committed myself to accept what had been agreed on by all parties, I found myself resigned and perplexed. What could I say? What excuse could I find for those Companions who had spent nearly twenty years with the Messenger of Allah, from the start of the Mission to the day of al-Hudaibiyah, and had seen all the miracles and enlightenment of the Prophethood? Furthermore, the Qur'an was teaching them day and night how they should behave in the presence of the Messenger, and how they should talk to him, to the extent that Allah had threatened to ruin their deeds if they raised their voices above his voice.

2. The Companions And The Raziyat Yawm Al-Khamis

2. The Companions And The Raziyat Yawm Al-Khamis (The Calamity Of Thursday)

Briefly the story is as follows:

The Companions were meeting in the Messenger's house, three days before he died. He ordered them to bring him a bone and an ink pot so that he could write a statement for them which would prevent them from straying from the right path, but the Companions differed among themselves and some of them disobeyed the Prophet and accused him of talking nonsense. The Messenger of Allah became very angry and ordered them out of his house without issuing any statement.

This is the story in some details:

Ibn Abbas said: Thursday, and what a Thursday that was! The Messenger's pain became very severe, and he said, “Come here, I will write you a document which will prevent you from straying from the right path”. But Umar said that the Prophet was under the spell of the pain, and that they had the Qur'an which was sufficient being the Book of Allah. Ahl Al-Bayt then differed and quarrelled amongst themselves, some of them agreeing with what the Prophet said, while others supported Umar's view. When the debate became heated and the noise became louder, the Messenger of Allah said to them, “Leave me alone”.

Ibn Abbas said: “The disaster was that the disagreement among the Companions prevented the Messenger from writing that document for them”.4

The incident is correct and there is no doubt about its authenticity, for it was cited by the Shi’i scholars and their historians in their books, as well as by the Sunni scholars and historians in their books. As I was committed to consider the incident, I found myself bewildered by Umar's behaviour regarding the order of the Messenger of Allah. And what an order it was! “To prevent the nation from going astray”, for undoubtedly that statement would have had something new in it for the Muslims and would have left them without a shadow of doubt.

Now let us leave the points of view of the Shi’a, that is that the Messenger wanted to write the name of ‘Ali as his successor, and that Umar realized this, so he prevented it. Perhaps because they do not convince us initially with that hypothesis, but can we find a sensible explanation to this hurtful incident which angered the Messenger so much that he ordered them to leave, and made Ibn Abbas cry until he made the stones wet from his tears and called it a “great disaster”? The Sunnis say that Umar recognized that the Prophet's illness was advancing, so he wanted to comfort him and relieve him from any pressure.

This type of reasoning would not be accepted by simple-minded people, let alone by the scholars. I repeatedly tried to find an excuse for Umar but the circ*mstances surrounding the incident prevented me from finding an excuse. Even if I changed the words “He is talking nonsense”, God forbid, to “the pain has overcome him”, I could not find any justification for Umar when he said, “You have the Qur'an, and it is sufficient being the Book of Allah”.

Did he know the Qur'an better than the Messenger of Allah, for whom it was revealed? Or was the Messenger of Allah, God forbid, unaware of what he was? Or did he seek, through his order, to create division and disagreement among the Companions, God forbid.

Even if the Sunni reasoning was right, then the Messenger of Allah would have realized the good will of Umar and thanked him for that and perhaps asked him to stay, instead of feeling angry at him and telling them to leave his house. May I ask why did they abide by his order when he asked them to leave the room and did not say then that he was “talking nonsense”?

Was it because they had succeeded in their plot to prevent the Prophet from writing the document, so that there was no need for them to stay any longer? Thus, we find them creating noise and difference in the presence of the Messenger, and divided into two parties: one agreeing with the Messenger of Allah about writing that document, while the other agreed with Umar “that he was talking nonsense”.

The matter is not just concerned with Umar alone, for if it was so, the Messenger of Allah would have persuaded him that he could not be talking nonsense and that the pain could not overcome him in matters of the nation's guidance and of preventing it from going astray. But the situation became much more serious, and Umar found some supporters who seemingly had a prior agreement on their stand, and so they created the noise and the disagreement among themselves and forgot, or perhaps pretended to forget, the words of Allah, the Most High:

“O You who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet, and do not speak loud to him as you speak loud to one another, lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive” (Holy Qur’an, 49:2).

In this incident they went beyond raising their voices, and talking loudly, to accusing the Messenger of Allah of talking nonsense, God forbid, then they increased their noise and differences until it became a battle of words in his presence.

I think the majority of the Companions were with Umar, and that is why the Messenger of Allah found it useless to write the document, because he knew that they would not respect him and would not abide by the command of Allah by not raising their voices in his presence, and if they were rebellious against the command of Allah, then they would never obey the order of His Messenger.

Thus, the wisdom of the Messenger ruled that he was not to write the document because it had been attacked during his lifetime, let alone after his death.

The critics would say that he was talking nonsense, and perhaps they would doubt some of the orders he passed whilst on his death-bed, for they were convinced that he was talking nonsense.

I ask Allah for forgiveness, and renounce what has been said in the presence of the holy Messenger, for how could I convince myself and my free conscience that Umar Ibn al-Khattab was acting spontaneously, whereas his friends and others who were present at the incident cried until their tears wet the stones, and named the incident “the misfortune of the Muslims”. I therefore decided to reject all the justifications given to explain the incident, and even tried to deny it so that I could relax and forget about the tragedy, but all the books referred to it and accepted its authenticity but could not provide sound justification for it.

I tend to agree with the Shi’i point of view in explaining the incident because I find it logical and very coherent.

I still remember the answer which al-Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr gave me when I asked him, “How did our master Umar understand, among all the Companions what the Messenger wanted to write, namely the appointment of ‘Ali as his successor, as you claim, which shows that he was a clever man?”

Al-Sayyid al-Sadr said: Umar was not the only one who anticipated what the Messenger was going to write. In fact, most of the people who were present then understood the situation the same way as Umar did, because the Messenger of Allah had previously indicated the issue when he said, “I shall leave you with two weighty things: the Book of Allah and the members of my Family (Ahl Al-Bayt) and their descendants, if you follow them, you will never go astray after me”.

And during his illness he said to them, “Let me write you a document, if you follow its contents, you will never go astray”. Those who were present, including Umar, understood that the Messenger of Allah wanted to reiterate, in writing, what he had already said in Ghadir Khum, and that was to follow the Book of Allah and Ahl Al-Bayt and that ‘Ali was the head of it. It was as if the holy Prophet (S) was saying, “Follow the Qur'an and ‘Ali”. He said similar things on many occasions, as has been stated by many historians.

The majority of Quraysh did not like ‘Ali because he was young and because he smashed their arrogance and had killed their heroes; but they did not dare oppose the Messenger of Allah, as they had done at the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyah, and when the Messenger prayed for Abdullah Ibn Abi al- Munafiq, and on many other incidents recorded by history. This incident was one of them, and you see that the opposition against writing that document during the Prophets illness encouraged some of those who were present to be insolent and make so much noise in his presence.

That answer came in accordance with what the saying meant. But Umar's statement, “You have the Qur'an, and it is sufficient, being the Book of Allah” was not in accordance with the saying which ordered them to follow the Book of Allah and the Household (Ahl Al-Bayt) together. It looks as if he meant to say, “We have the Book of Allah, and that is sufficient for us, therefore there is no need for Ahl Al-Bayt”.

I could not see any other reasonable explanation to the incident other than this one, unless it was meant to say, 'Obey Allah but not His Messenger”. And this argument is invalid and not sensible. If I put my prejudices and my emotions aside and base my judgment on a clean and free mind, I would tend towards the first analysis, which stops short of accusing Umar of being the first one to reject the Prophet's Tradition (al-Sunnah) when he said, “It is sufficient for us, being the Book of Allah”.

Then if there were some rulers who rejected the Prophet's Traditions claiming that it was “contradictory”, they only followed an earlier example in the history of Islam. However, I do not want to burden Umar alone with the responsibility for that incident and the subsequent deprivation of the nation of the guidance. To be fair to him, I suggest that the responsibility should be borne by him and those Companions who were with him and who supported him in his opposition to the command of the Messenger of Allah.

I am astonished by those who read this incident and feel as if nothing happened, despite that it was one of the “great misfortunes” as Ibn Abbas called it. My astonishment is even greater regarding those who try hard to preserve the honour of a Companion and to correct his mistake, even if at the cost of the Prophet's dignity and honour and at the cost of Islam and its foundations.

Why do we escape from the truth and try to obliterate it when it is not in accordance with our whims…why do not we accept that the Companions were human like us, and had their own whims, prejudices and interests, and could commit mistakes or could be right?

But my astonishment fades when I read the Book of Allah in which He tells us the stories of the prophets- may Allah bless them and grant them peace - and the disobedience they faced from their people despite all the miracles they produced. Our God! Make not our hearts to deviate after thou hast guided us aright, and grant us from Your Mercy; surely You are the Most Liberal Giver.

I began to understand the background to the Shi’a's attitude towards the second Caliph, whom they charge with the responsibility for many tragic events in the history of Islam, starting from “Raziyat Yawm al-Khamis” when the Islamic nation was deprived of the written guidance which the Messenger wanted to write for them. The inescapable fact is that the sensible man who knew the truth before he encountered the men seeks an excuse for the Shias in this matter, but there is nothing we can say to convince those who only judge truth through men.

3. The Companions In The Military Detachment Under Usamah

The story in brief is as follows: The Prophet (S) organized an army to be sent to Asia Minor two days before his death. He appointed Usamah Ibn Zayd Ibn Haritha, (who was eighteen years old), as its commander in chief, then the holy Prophet attached some important men, both Muhajirin and Ansar, to this expedition, such as Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Obaydah and other well-known Companions.

Some people criticized the Prophet for appointing Usamah as the commander in chief of that army, and asked how could he have appointed so young a man as their commander. In fact, the same people had previously criticized the Prophet for appointing Usamah's father as an army commander before him. They went on criticizing until the Prophet became so angry that he left his bed, feverish and with his head bandaged, with two men supporting him and his feet barely touching the ground (may my parents be sacrificed for him).

He ascended the pulpit, praised Allah highly then said, “O People! I have been informed that some of you object to my appointing Usamah as commander of the detachment. You now object to my appointing Usamah as commander in chief as you objected to me appointing his father commander in chief before him. By Allah, his father was certainly competent for his appointment as commander in chief and his son is also competent for the appointment”.5

Then he exhorted them to start without further delay and kept saying, “Send the detachment of Usamah; deploy the detachment of Usamah, send forward the detachment of Usamah”. He kept repeating the exhortations but the Companions were still sluggish, and camped by al-Jurf.

Events like that made me ask, “What is this insolence towards Allah and His Messenger? Why all that disobedience towards the orders of the blessed Messenger who was so caring and kind to all the believers?”

I could not imagine, nor indeed could anybody else, an acceptable explanation for all that disobedience and insolence. As usual, when I read about those events which touch on the integrity of the Companions, I try to deny or ignore them, but it is impossible to do so when all the historians and scholars, Shi’a and Sunnis, agree on their authenticity.

I have promised my God to be fair, and I shall never be biased in favour of my creed, and will never use anything but the truth as my criterion. But the truth here is so bitter, and the holy Prophet (S) said, “Say the truth even if it is about you, and say the truth even if it is bitter…”. The truth in this case is that the Companions who criticized the appointment of Usamah disobeyed all the clear texts that could not be doubted or misinterpreted, and there is no excuse for that, although some people make flimsy excuses in order to preserve the integrity of the Companions and “the virtuous ancestors”.

But the free and sensible person would not accept such feeble excuses, unless he is one of those who cannot comprehend any saying, or is perhaps one of those who are blinded by their own prejudice to the extent that they cannot differentiate between the obligatory task that must be obeyed and the prohibition that must be avoided. I thought deeply to find an acceptable excuse for those people, but without success.

I read the points of view of the Sunnis which provide us with an excuse based on the fact that these people were the elders of Quraysh, and were among the early followers of Islam, whereas Usamah was a young man who had not fought in the decisive battles that gave Islam its glory, such as Badr, Uhud and Hunayn; and that he was a young man with no experience of life when the Messenger of Allah appointed him military commander. Furthermore, they thought that human nature, by its inclination, makes it difficult for elderly people to be led by young men, therefore they (i.e. the Companions) criticized the appointment and wanted the Messenger of Allah to appoint a prominent and respectable Companion.

It is an excuse which is not based on any rational or logical premise, and any Muslim who reads the Qur'an and understands its rules must reject such an excuse, because Allah- the Almighty - says:

The Opinion Of The Qur’an Regarding The Companions

First of all, I must say that Allah - praise be to Him the Most High - commended, in many places in His Holy Book, the Companions of the Messenger of Allah who loved, obeyed, and followed the Messenger without personal greed and without opposition or arrogance, and only wanted the acceptance of Allah and His Messenger; those Companions have pleased Allah and He pleased them, and that is the way for those who fear Allah.

This group of the Companions are appreciated by the Muslims because of their attitude towards the Prophet (S) and their works with him, therefore they are liked and respected by all Muslims, and they are appreciated whenever people mention their names.

My study does not concern itself with this group of Companions who are respected by both the Sunnis and the Shi’a, nor is it concerned, with those who were well known for their hypocrisy, and who are cursed by all Muslims, Shi’a and Sunnis, whenever their names are mentioned.

However, my study is concerned with the group of Companions about whom the Muslims have expressed different views. There are verses in the Holy Qur'an where they are rebuked and threatened because of their attitudes in certain positions, and the Messenger of Allah (S) warned them on many occasions, and warned other people about them.

The outstanding differences between the Shi’a and the Sunnis is concerned with this group of Companions, because the Shi’a criticize their sayings and deeds and complain about their justice, whereas they are respected by the Sunnis, in spite of their contradictions. My study is concerned with this group of the Companions because through it I will be able to reach the truth, or part of it. I say that, so that no one may think that I have neglected the Qur’anic verses which commend the Companions to the Messenger of Allah, and that I exposed the verses which criticize them. In fact, through my research I discovered that some verses contain praise for the Companions, but if you read in between the lines, you find that they contain criticism of them, and vice versa.

I shall not write here about all the hard work that I have done in the past three years in preparing this study, but I will confine myself to some Qur'anic verses as examples, and not for any specific reason. For those who want to go further, I advise them to research and compare, as I did, in order that they may find the Right Faith by themselves, and through their own work. That is what Allah wants for everybody, and that is what the conscience of each individual wants. Thus, one would achieve an absolute conviction that will not be shaken by any storm. After all, the divine guidance which results from personal conviction is far better than that which comes as a result of external factors.

Allah - the Most High says in praise of His Prophet (S):

“And found you unable to see (the way) then He showed you the way” (Holy Qur’an, 93:7).

That is He found you searching for the truth, so He led you to it. He also said:

“And those who strive hard for Us, We will guide them in Our ways” (Holy Qur’an, 29:69).

1. The Turning Back Verse

Allah - the Most High says in His Glorious Book:

“And Muhammad is no more than a messenger, the messengers have already passed away before him, if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least, and Allah will reward the grateful”. Allah, the Great, has told the truth” (Holy Qur’an, 3:144).

This Qur'anic verse is clear about how the Companions will turn back upon their heels, and only a few will stand their ground, as the above Qur'anic verse indicated in the expression of Allah about them. Those who stand their ground and do not turn back are the grateful, for the grateful are only a small minority, as in the words of Allah- the Most High:

“And very few of My servants are grateful” (Holy Qur’an, 34:13).

Also, there are many sayings of the Holy Prophet (S) which explain the “turning back,” and we will refer to some of them, and even if Allah, the Most High, did not specify the punishment of those who turned back on their heels in this Qur'anic verse: He glorified the grateful who deserve His reward. However, it is important to know that those who turned back on their heels do not deserve the reward of Allah and His forgiveness, as has been emphasized by the Messenger of Allah (S) in many of his sayings, some of we will discuss, if Allah wills, in the course of this book.

2. The Holy War (Jihad) Verse

Allah, the Most High, said:

“O You who believe, what (excuse) have you that when it is said to you: Go forth in Allah's way, you should incline heavily to earth; are you contented with this world's life instead of the Hereafter? But the provision of this world's life compared with the Hereafter is but little” (Holy Qur’an, 9:38).

“If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisem*nt and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things” (Holy Qur’an, 9:39).

This Qur'anic verse is clear about the reluctance of the Companions to go and fight in the Holy War (Jihad), and how they chose to be content with the life on earth, in spite of their knowledge of its short duration. Their action warranted a rebuke and a threat from Allah - the Almighty - that a terrible torture was awaiting them, and that He would change them for others who were true believers.

The threat to change them came in many Qur'anic verses which indicate clearly that they showed their reluctance to fight in al-Jihad- Holy War - more than once, and Allah, the Most High, says:

“And if you turn back He will bring in your place another people, they will not be like you” (Holy Qur’an, 47:38).

Also, the Almighty says:

“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, this is Allah's grace, He gives it to whom He pleases, and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing” (Holy Qur’an, 5:54).

If we want to investigate the Qur'anic verses which emphasize this issue and talk about the classification of the Companions, which the Shi’a advocate, then we would need a special book for it. The Holy Qur'an expressed all that in the most direct and eloquent way: Let there arise out of you a nation, inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong, and these it is that shall be successful.

And be not like those who became divided and disagreed after receiving clear signs and these it is that shall have a grievous chastisem*nt.

“On the day, some faces will be white (lit up) and some faces will be black (in the gloom), to those whose faces will be black (will be said): Did you reject the faith after accepting it? Taste then the chastisem*nt for rejecting the faith” (Holy Qur’an, 3:106).

“But those whose faces will be white, they will be in Allah's mercy, therein to dwell” (Holy Qur’an, 3:107).

These Qur'anic verses as every scholar knows are addressing the Companions and warning them of the division and disagreement among themselves after they have already been shown the Right Path. They also tell them that a great torture is awaiting them, and divide them in two groups: The first group: when they will be resurrected on the Day of Judgment, every one of them would have a white face, and those are the grateful who deserve the mercy of Allah. The second group: when they will be resurrected on the Day of Judgment, every one of them would have a black face, and those are the apostates, whom Allah, the Almighty, promised the great torture.

It is well-known that the Companions were divided after the death of the Messenger of Allah. They disagreed among themselves to such an extent that they fought each other bloody wars which led to the regression and the backwardness of the Muslims and made them easy target for their enemies. The above Qur'anic verse could not be interpreted in any other way except that which is readily accepted by people.

3. The Submissiveness

Allah, the Most High, said:

“Has not the time yet come for those who believe that their hearts should be submissive for the remembrance of Allah and what has come down of the truth? And (that) they should not be like those who were given the book before, but the time became prolonged to them, so their hearts hardened, and most of them are transgressors” (Holy Qur’an, 57:16).

In al-Durr al-Manthur by Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, the author says: “When the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (S) came to al-Medinah and started to enjoy a higher standard of living after having lived through many hardships, they seemed to slow down, so they were punished for that, and hence the verse ‘Has not the time yet come for those who believe’ was revealed”.

Another version of the story, which came from the Prophet (S), was that Allah, the Most High, found some reluctance in the Muhajirin seventeen years after the first revelation of the Holy Qur'an, and therefore Allah revealed the verse “Has not the time yet come for those who believe”. If those Companions, who are the best people according to the Sunnis, did not feel humble before the name of Allah or His right revelation of seventeen years, so that Allah found them slowing down, and rebuked and warned them for their hardened hearts which were leading them to corruption, we cannot blame the people of Quraysh who only entered Islam in the seventh Hijri year after the conquest of Meccah.

These were some examples which I have selected from the Glorious Book of Allah which give us clear indications that not all the Companions were right, as the Sunnis believe.

If we study the sayings of the Prophet (S), then we will find many more examples, but just to be brief, I shall refer to some of those examples and the interested reader may further his own knowledge if he so wishes.

The Opinion Of The Messenger Regarding The Companions

1. The Hadith Of The Pool

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: “As I was standing, there came a group of people whom I recognized, and a man stood between the group and myself, then said: ‘Let us go.’ I said, ‘Where to?’ He said, ‘To Hell, by Allah!’ I asked, ‘What have they done?’ He answered, ‘They turned back after you had departed, and I expect only a few will reach salvation.’”14

The Messenger of Allah (S) also said: “I shall arrive at the pool before you, and he who passes by me will drink, and whoever drinks from it will never feel thirsty. There will come to me people that I know and they know me, but we shall be separated, then I shall say, ‘’My companions.’ An answer shall come, ‘You do not know what they did after you left.’ Then I shall say, ‘Away with those who changed after me.’”

When we look deeply at the various sayings that have been referred to by the Sunnis in their books, we will have no doubt that most of the Companions changed or even became apostates after the departure of the Messenger of Allah, except a few who were considered to be the minority. The above sayings could not be applied to the third type (of Companions), for they were the hypocrites, and the text states: “I shall say, ‘My companions.’”

These sayings confirm and explain the Holy Qur'anic verses that we mentioned earlier on, which talked about their retreat and their apostasy and the terrible torture awaiting them.

2. The Hadith Of The Competition Of The World

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: “I lead you and am your witness, and by Allah I now look at my pool and have been given the keys to the treasures of the earth (for the earth's keys), and by Allah I am not worried that you become polytheist after me, but I am worried that you will compete for it”.15

The Messenger of Allah (S) was right. They competed for this world to the extent that they fought against each other, and each party accused the other of blasphemy. Some of the famous Companions were eager to collect gold and silver, and historians such as al-Masudi in Muruj al-Dhahab and al-Tabari and others stated that the wealth of al-Zubayr on its own came to fifty thousand Dinars and a thousand horses with one thousand slaves and many holdings in Basra al-Kufa Egypt and many other places.16

The agricultural products from Iraq alone brought Talhah one thousand Dinars every day, and perhaps more than that. Abdul Rahman Ibn Awf had one hundred horses, one thousand camels and ten thousand sheep. After his death, quarter of his wealth which was divided among his wives came to eighty-four thousand Dinars.17

Uthman Ibn Affan left on the day of his death one hundred and fifty thousand Dinars apart from an enormous wealth of land, cattle and villages. Zayd Ibn Thabit left an amount of gold and silver that had to be broken by hammers! Apart from money and agricultural holdings which came to one hundred thousand Dinars.18

These were just a few historical examples. Since we do not want to go into detailed analysis of their importance at the moment, we only mention them as a proof and support of the sayings, that they (these companions) were more interested in the present life.

The Opinion Of The Companions About Each Other

1. Their Testimony That They Themselves Have Changed The Tradition Of The Prophet

Abu Saeed al-Khudari said: On the first days of 'Id al-Fitr (breaking the fast of Ramadan) and 'Id al-Adha (celebrating the end of the Pilgrimage), the first thing the Messenger of Allah (S) used to do was to say his prayers in the mosque, then he went to see the people, who sat in rows in front of him, and then he started to deliver advice or orders or even finalize outstanding issues, and after all that he would leave. Abu Saeed added: The situation continued to be like that, until one day, either Fitr or Adha, I went with Marwan, who was the governor of al-Medinah.

When we arrived at the mosque, which had a new pulpit built by Kathir Ibn al-Salt, Marwan headed for the pulpit (before praying), so I pulled him by his clothes, but he pushed me and went up on to the pulpit. He addressed the people before he prayed, so I said to him, “By Allah you have changed it”. He replied, “O Abu Saeed, what you know has gone”. I said, ‘By Allah, what I know is better than what I do not know.’ Marwan then said, ‘People did not sit for us after the prayers, so I put (it) before the prayers.’”19

I looked for the reasons which led those Companions to change the Sunnah (the tradition) of the Messenger of Allah (S), and found that the Ummayyads (and most of them were Companions of the Prophet) and Mu’awiyah Ibn Abi Sufian (writer of the revelation, as he was called) in particular used to force people to swear at ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib and curse him from the pulpits of the mosques, as most of the historians have mentioned in their books.

Muslim, in his Sahih, wrote in a chapter entitled, “The virtues of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib,” the following: Mu’awiyah ordered his governors everywhere to take the curse (of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib) as tradition, and that all the speakers must include it in their speeches. When some of the Companions protested very strongly against such a rule, Mu’awiyah ordered their killing and burning. Among the famous Companions who were killed at the order of Mu’awiyah were Hijr Ibn Adi al-Kindi and his followers, because they protested and refused to curse ‘Ali, and some of them were buried alive.

Abu al-Aala al-Mawdudi wrote in his book “Caliphate and Kingdom”: Abu al-Hasan al-Basri said: Mu’awiyah had four features, and if he had only one of them, it would have been considered a great sin:

Making decisions without consulting the Companions, who were the light of virtues.
Designating his son as his successor. His son was a drunkard, corrupt and wore silk.
He claimed Ziyad (as his son), and the Messenger of Allah said, “There is offspring for the honourable woman, but there is nothing for the whor*”.
His killing of Hijr and his followers. Woe unto him from Hijr and the followers of Hijr.20

There were some good Companions who used to dash out of the mosque immediately after the prayers so that they did not have to listen to the speeches which always ended with the cursing of ‘Ali. For that reason, the Ummayyads changed the tradition of the Messenger of Allah. They put the speech before the prayers, so that people listened to it against their will.

What kind of Companions were these people! They were not afraid of changing the tradition of the Messenger of Allah, or even the laws of Allah, in order to reach their wicked and low objectives and to satisfy their sinister desires. They cursed a man whom Allah had kept cleansed and purified, and made it obligatory for people to pray for him in the same way as they prayed for His Messenger. Furthermore, Allah and His Messenger made it obligatory for people to love him, and the Prophet (S) said, “Loving ‘Ali is believing, and hating him is hypocrisy”.21

But these Companions changed the rules and said, “We heard, but we disobey”. And instead of loving him, praying for him and obeying him, they swore at him and cursed him for sixty years, as has been mentioned in the history books.

Whereas the Companions of Moses plotted against Aaron and tried to kill him, some of the Companions of Muhammad killed his Aaron and pursued his sons and followers everywhere. They removed their names from the Diwan (account books of the treasury) and prohibited anyone to be named after them. As if that was not enough for them, they cursed him and forced the faithful Companions to do so unjustly and by force.

By Allah! I stand astonished and perplexed when I read in our Sihahs how much the Messenger of Allah loved his “brother” and cousin ‘Ali and how he put him above all the Companions, and even he said, “You are to me as Aaron was to Moses, but there will be no prophet after me”.22

He also said the following things about ‘Ali:

“You are from me, and I am from you”.23

“Loving ‘Ali is believing, and hating him is hypocrisy”.24

“I am the city of knowledge, and ‘Ali is its gate”.25

“‘Ali is the master of all the believers after me”.26

“Whoever accepted me as his master, then he should also accept ‘Ali as his master. O Allah be friendly with his friends, and be enemy to his enemy”.27

If we study all the virtues that the Prophet (S) attributed to ‘Ali, which have been mentioned and approved by our scholars in their books, then we would need to write a whole book.

So, how did the Companions ignore all these texts, swear at him, plot against him, curse him from the pulpits of the mosques and then fight against him and finally kill him?

I tried in vain to find a reason for the behaviour of those people, but found nothing except the love of this life and the competition for it, in addition to the tendency to apostatize and turn back on their heels. I have also tried to attach the responsibility to a group of bad Companions and some hypocrites, but regrettably those were only a few among the famous and the important. The first who threatened to burn his house, with its inhabitants, was Umar Ibn al-Khattab, and the first who fought him were Talhah, al-Zubayr, A’ishah Bint Abi Bakr - Umm al-Mu’minin, Mu’awiyah Ibn Abi Sufian, Amr Ibn al-'Aas and many others.

I am astonished, and my astonishment will never end, and any responsible free thinker would agree with me, as to how the Sunni scholars agree on the righteousness of all the Companions and ask for the blessings of Allah to be upon them and pray for all of them without exception, although some of them say: “Curse Yazid, and no further”. But where is Yazid amongst all these tragedies which no religion or logic could approve?

I appeal to the Sunni people, if they truly follow the Prophet's tradition, to ask themselves how they could accept somebody to be righteous when the laws of the Holy Qur'an and the Prophetic tradition judge him as being corrupt, an apostate and an unbeliever. The Messenger of Allah (S) said, “He who insults ‘Ali, insults me. He, who insults me, insults Allah. And he who insults Allah, Allah will throw him into Hell”.28 If that is the punishment for those who insult ‘Ali, one wonders about the punishment of those who fought him and ultimately killed him. What are our scholars' opinions regarding all these facts, or are their hearts locked solid?! Say, O God please protect us from the tricks of the devil.

2. The Companions Even Made Changes In Prayers

Anas Ibn Malik said: I knew nothing during the lifetime of the Prophet (S) better than the prayer. He said: Have you not lost what you have lost in it? Al-Zuhri said: I went to see Anas Ibn Malik in Damascus, and found him crying, I asked him, “What is making you cry?” He answered, “I have known nothing but these prayers and they have been lost”.29

I would like to make it clear that it was not the followers who implemented the changes after all the intrigues and civil wars, rather it was the caliph Uthman who first made changed in the Prophet's tradition regarding the prayers.

Also, Umm al-Mu’minin A’ishah was involved in these changes. Al-Bukhari and Muslim, both stated in their books that the Messenger of Allah (S) performed two prayers at Mina, and Abu Bakr after him, then Umar and Uthman who later performed four prayers.30

Muslim also stated in his book that al-Zuhri asked 'Urwah, “Why did A’ishah complete her prayers during the journey?” He answered, “She improvised in the same way as Uthman did”.31

Umar used to improvise and interpret the clear texts of the Prophet's tradition, and even the Holy Qur'anic texts. Like he used to say: “Two pleasures were allowed during the life of the Messenger of Allah, but now I disallow them and punish those who commit them and I tell the person who is in a state of ritual impurity or cannot find water not to pray”. This in spite of the words of Allah, the Most High, in Surat al-Maidah: “If you do not find water, then use clean sand”32.

Al-Bukhari stated in his book, in a chapter which deals with ritual impurity: “I heard Shaqiq Ibn Salmah saying: ‘I was with Abdullah and Abu Musa, and Abu Musa asked, ‘What do you say about a man who is unclean but cannot find water?’ Abdullah answered, ‘He should not pray until he finds water.’ Abu Musa then asked, ‘what do you think about what the Prophet said to Ammar (regarding the issue of impurity) when Ammar asked him?’

Abdullah said, ‘For that reason Umar was not satisfied with (that).’ Abu Musa said, ‘Forget about what Ammar said, but what do you say about the Qur'anic verse?’ Abdullah did not know what to say, but he justified his stance by saying, ‘If we let them do that, then whenever the water becomes cold, they avoid using it to clean themselves, and instead they use sand.’ I said to Shaqiq, ‘Abdullah is most certainly hated for that.’ He said, ‘Yes.’”33

3. The Companions Testify Against Themselves

“Anas Ibn Malik said that the Messenger of Allah (S) said to al-Ansar: ‘You will notice after me some great selfishness, but be patient until you meet Allah and His Messenger by the pool. Anas said: We were not patient.’34

“Al-Ala Ibn al-Musayyab heard his father saying: ‘I met al-Bara Ibn Azib, may Allah honour them both, and said to him, ‘Bless you, you accompanied the Prophet (S) and you voted for him under the tree.’ He said, ‘My son, you do not know what we have done after him.’”.35

This early Companion, who was one of those who voted for the Prophet under the tree, and who received the blessing of Allah, for Allah knew what was in their hearts, testifies against himself and his companions that they did not keep the tradition. This testimony is confirmation of what the Prophet (S) talked about and predicted in that his Companions would break with his tradition and fall back on their heels.

How could any sensible person, after all this evidence, believe in the righteousness of all the Companions, as the Sunnis do? He, who believes that, is definitely reversing the order of logic and scholarship, and there will be no intellectual criteria for the researcher to use in his quest for the truth.

4. The Testimony Of The Shaykhan Against Themselves

In a chapter entitled “The virtues of Umar Ibn al-Khattab,” al-Bukhari wrote in his book: “When Umar was stabbed, he felt great pain and Ibn Abbas wanted to comfort him, so he said to him, “O Commander of the Believers, you accompanied the Messenger of Allah and you were a good companion to him, and when he left you, he was very pleased with you.

Then you accompanied Abu Bakr, and you were a good companion to him, and when he left you, he was pleased with you. Then you accompanied their companions and you were a good companion to them, and if you left them, they would remember you well”.

He said, “As for the companionship of the Messenger of Allah and his satisfaction with me, that is a gift that Allah, the Most High, has granted to me. As for the companionship of Abu Bakr and his satisfaction with me, that is a gift that Allah, Glory be to Him, has granted to me. But the reason you see me in pain is for you and your companions. By Allah, if I had all the gold on earth, I would use it to ransom myself from the torture of Allah, Glory and Majesty be to Him, before I saw Him.36

He has also been quoted as saying the following, “I wish I was my family's sheep. They would have fattened me up to the maximum. When they were visited by friends, they would have killed me and roasted part of me, and made qadid (meat cut into strips and dried) from the other part of it, then they would have eaten me, and lastly, they would have relieved me with their bowel evacuation ... I wish I had been all that, rather than a human being”.37

Abu Bakr apparently said a similar thing to the above. He looked at a bird on a tree, and then said, “Well done bird ... you eat the fruits, you stand on the trees and you are not accountable to anybody nor indeed can anybody punish you. I wish I was a tree by the road and that a camel would come along and eat me. Then relieve me with his bowel evacuation ... I wish that I had been all that, rather than a human being”.38

Minhaj as Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyya, vol 3 p 120 He also said, “I wish that my mother had not given birth to me ... I wish I was a straw in the mud”.39 These are some texts that I used just as examples and not for any specific reason.

And this is the Book of Allah which gives the good news to the worshippers of Allah who believe in Him:

“Now surely the friends of Allah, they shall have no fear, nor shall they grieve” (Holy Qur’an, 10:62).

“Those who believe and were pious” (Holy Qur’an, 10:63).

“They shall have good news in this world's life and in the Hereafter, there is no changing in the words of Allah; that is the great achievement” (Holy Qur’an, 10:64).

Allah also says:

“(As for) those who say, our Lord is Allah, then continue in the right way, the angels descend upon them, saying, ‘Fear not, nor be grieved, and receive good news of the garden which you were promised” (Holy Qur’an, 41:30).

“We are your guardians in this world's life and in the Hereafter, and you shall have therein what your souls desire and you shall have therein what you ask for” (Holy Qur’an, 41:31).

“A provision from the Forgiving, the Merciful” (Holy Qur’an, 41:32).

How could the two Shaykhs, Abu Bakr and Umar, wish that they were not from the human race, which Allah honoured and put it above all His creation? Even the ordinary believer, who keeps on the straight path during his lifetime, receives the angels to tell him about his place in heaven, and that he should not fear the torture of Allah, nor be depressed about his legacy in life, and that he has the good news while he is in this life before reaching the life Hereafter.

Then how could the great Companions, who are the best of creation after the Messenger of Allah (so we have been taught), wish they were excrement or a hair or a straw when the angels had given them the good news that they would go to heaven? They could not have wished to have all the gold on earth to ransom themselves from the torture of Allah before meeting Him.

Allah, the Most High, said:

“And if every soul that has done injustice had all that is in the earth, it would offer it for ransom, and they will manifestly regret when they see the chastisem*nt and the matter shall be decided between them with justice and they shall not be dealt unjustly” (Holy Qur’an, 10:54).

Allah also said:

“And had those who are unjust all that is in the earth and the like of with it, they would certainly offer it as ransom (to be saved) from the evil of the punishment on the day of resurrection; and what they never thought of shall become plain to them from Allah” (Holy Qur’an, 39:47).

“And the evil (consequences) of what they wrought shall become plain to them, and the very thing they mocked at shall beset them” (Holy Qur’an, 39:48).

I wish sincerely that these Qur'anic verses did not involve great companions like Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar al-Faruq. But I often pause when I read these texts so that I can look at some interesting aspects of their relations with the Messenger of Allah (S), and how that relation went through much turmoil.

They disobeyed his orders and refused him his wishes, even in the last moments of his blessed and honourable life, which made him so angry that he ordered them all to leave his house and to leave him. I also recall the chain of events that took place after the death of the Messenger of Allah, and the hurt and lack of recognition that afflicted his daughter Az-Zahra’. The Messenger of Allah (S) said, “Fatimah is part of me, he who angers her angers me”.40

Fatimah said to Abu Bakr and Umar: “I ask you in the name of Allah, the Most High, did you not hear the Messenger of Allah (S) saying, ‘The satisfaction of Fatimah is my satisfaction, and the anger of Fatimah is my anger, he who loves my daughter Fatimah loves me, and he who satisfies Fatimah satisfies me, and he who angers Fatimah angers me?’ They said, ‘Yes, we heard it from the Messenger of Allah (S).’ Then she said, ‘Therefore, I testify before Allah and the angels that you have angered me and did not please me, and if I meet the Prophet I will complain to him about you.’41

Let us leave this tragic story for the time being, but Ibn Qutaybah, who is considered to be one of the great Sunni scholars, and was an expert in many disciplines and wrote many books on Qur'anic commentary. Hadith Linguistics, grammar and history might well have been converted to Shiism, as somebody I know once claimed when I showed him Ibn Qutaybah's book “History of the Caliphs”.

This is the type of propaganda that some of our scholars use when they lose the argument. Similarly, al-Tabari was a Shi'ite, and al-Nisa'i, who wrote a book about the various aspects of Imam ‘Ali, was a Shi’ite, and Taha Husayn, a contemporary scholar who wrote “Al-Fitnah al-Kubra” and other facts, was also a Shi'ite!

The fact is that all of these were not Shi’ites, and when they talked about the Shi’a, they said all sorts of dishonourable things about them, and they defended the fairness of the Companions with all their might. But the fact is that whenever a person mentions the virtues of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, and admits to the mistakes that were committed by the famous Companions; we say that he has become a Shi’ite.

And if you say in front of them, when you mention the Prophet, “May Allah bless him and his Family” or say, “‘Ali, may Allah's peace be upon him” then you are branded a Shi’ite. According to that premise, one day, during a debate, I asked one of our scholars, “What do you think of al-Bukhari?”

He said, “He is one of the leading authorities in Hadith (the Prophetic tradition) and we consider his book to be the most correct book after the Book of Allah, as all our scholars agree”. I said to him, “He is a Shi’ite”. He laughed and said, “God forbid that Imam al-Bukhari be a Shi’ite”. I said, “Did you not say that whoever says ‘Ali, may Allah's peace be upon him, is Shi’ite?” He answered, “Yes”. Then I showed him and those who were with him al-Bukhari's book, and in many places when ‘Ali's name appears, he put “May Allah's peace be upon him” as well as the names of Fatimah and al-Husayn. The man did not know what to say.42

Let us return to the incident mentioned by Ibn Qutaybah in which Fatimah allegedly was angered by Abu Bakr and Umar. If I doubt the authenticity of that story, then I could not doubt the authenticity of al-Bukhari's book, which we consider to be the most correct book after the Book of Allah. As we have committed ourselves to the fact that it is correct, then the Shi’ites have the right to use it in their protestation against us and force us to keep to our commitment, as is only fair for sensible people.

In his book, al-Bukhari writes in a chapter entitled “The virtues of the relatives of the Messenger of Allah” the following: The Messenger of Allah (S) said, “Fatimah is part of me, and whoever angers her angers me”. Also, in a chapter about “The Khaybar Raid” he wrote: According to A’ishah, Fatimah- may Allah's peace be upon her - daughter of the Prophet, sent a message to Abu Bakr asking him for her share of the inheritance of the Messenger of Allah, but he refused to pay Fatimah anything of it. Fatimah became so angry at Abu Bakr that she left him and never spoke to him before her death.43

The final result is one, al-Bukhari mentioned it briefly and Ibn Qutaybah talked about it in some detail, and that is: the Messenger of Allah (S) is angry when Fatimah is angry, and he is satisfied when Fatimah is satisfied, and that she died while she was still angry with Abu Bakr and Umar.

If al-Bukhari said: She died while she was still angry at Abu Bakr, and did not speak to him before she died, then the end result is quite clear. If Fatimah is “the leading lady among all the ladies” as al-Bukhari declared in the section al-Isti'dhan, and if Fatimah is the only lady in this nation whom Allah kept clean and pure, then her anger could not be but just, therefore Allah and His Messenger get angry for her anger. Because of that Abu Bakr said, “May Allah, the Most High, save me from His anger and Fatimah's anger”. Then he cried very bitterly when she said, “By Allah, I will curse you in every prayer that I do”. He came out crying and said, “I do not need your pledge of allegiance and discharge me from my duties”.44

Many of our historians and scholars admit that Fatimah, may Allah's peace be upon her, challenged Abu Bakr in many cases such as the donations, the inheritance and the shares of the relatives, but her challenge was dismissed, and she died angry at him. However, our scholars seem to pass over these incidents without having the will to talk about them in some detail, so that they could as usual, preserve the integrity of Abu Bakr. One of the strange things that I have read regarding this subject, is what one of the writers said after he had mentioned the incident in some detail: God forbid that Fatimah should claim something that does not rightly belong to her, and God forbid that Abu Bakr denied her rights.

The writer thought that through this weak reasoning, he would be able to solve the problem and convince the researchers. He appears to be saying something similar to the following: God forbid that the Holy Qur'an should say anything but the truth, and God forbid that the sons of Israel should worship the calf. We have been plagued with scholars who say things that they cannot comprehend, and believe in the object and its antithesis, simultaneously. The point is that Fatimah claimed and Abu Bakr dismissed her claim, so she was either a liar - God forbid - or Abu Bakr treated her unjustly. There could be no third solution for the case, as some of our scholars would wish.

Logical reasoning and traditional proofs prevent the Mistress of Ladies from being accused of lying, due to the confirmation of her father (s) in his saying: “Fatimah is a part of me, and whoever hurts her hurts me”. Hence, intuitively, whoever lies does not deserve this kind of statement (of honour) by the Messenger of Allah (S). Therefore, the saying itself is a clear indication of her infallibility.

The purification verse from the Holy Qur'an is another indication of her infallibility, and it was revealed in her honour and the honour of her husband and her two sons, as A’ishah herself testified.45 Hence, there is nothing left for sensible people but to accept the fact that she was unjustly treated, and that she was easy to be branded a liar by somebody who was willing to let her burn unless the remaining people in her house came out to vote for him.46

Because of that, she, may Allah's peace be upon her, refused entry to Abu Bakr and Umar when they asked her permission. Even when ‘Ali allowed them to enter, she turned her face to the wall and refused to look at them.47 Furthermore, before she died, she asked to be buried secretly, and at night, so that none of them could be present at her funeral,48 and to this day, the grave of the Prophet's daughter is unknown.

I would like to ask why our scholars remain silent about these facts, and are reluctant to look into them, or even to mention them. They give us the impression that the Companions are like angels, infallible and sinless, and when you ask them why the caliph of the Muslim's Uthman was murdered, they would say: It was the Egyptians, and they were not believers who came and killed him thus ends the subject with two words.

When I had the opportunity to carry out research into history, I found that the main figures behind the killing of Uthman were the Companions themselves, and that A’ishah led them, calling for his death publicly and saying: “Kill Na'thal (the old fool), for he was not a believer”.49

Also, we know that Talhah, al-Zubayr, Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr and other famous Companions besieged him in his house and prevented him from having a drink of water, so that they could force him to resign. Furthermore, the historians inform us that they did not allow his corpse to be buried in a Muslim cemetery, and that he was finally buried in “Hashsh ka*wkab” without washing the corpse and without a shroud.

O Allah, praise be to You, how could they tell us that he was unjustly killed, and that those who killed him were not Muslims. This is another case similar to that of Fatimah and Abu Bakr: Uthman was either unjustly treated, therefore we may pass judgment on those Companions who killed him or those who participated in his killing that they were criminal murderers because they unlawfully killed the caliph of the Muslims, and threw stones at his funeral, and humiliated him when he was alive and then when he was dead; or that the Companions killed him because he committed certain deeds which were not compatible with Islam, as the historical sources tell us.

There is no third option, unless we dismiss the historical facts and accept the distorted picture that the Egyptians, who were not believers, killed Uthman. In both cases there is a definite rejection of the common belief that all the Companions were right and just, without exception, for either Uthman was unjust or his killers were not just, but all of them were Companions, and hence our proposition becomes void. Therefore, we are left with the proposition of the followers of Ahl Al-Bayt, and that is that some of the Companions were right and some others were wrong.

We may ask a few questions about the war of al-Jamal, which was instigated by Umm al-Mu’minin A’ishah, who played an important role in it. How could Umm al-Mu’minin A’ishah leave her house in which Allah had ordered her to stay, when the Most High said:

“And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yours” (Holy Qur’an, 33:33).

We may also ask, how could A’ishah allow herself to declare war on the caliph of the Muslims, ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, who was the master of all Muslims? As usual, our scholars, with some simplicity, answer us that she did not like Imam ‘Ali because he advised the Messenger of Allah to divorce her in the incident of al-Ifk. Seemingly these people are trying to convince us that that incident - if it was true - namely ‘Ali's advice to the Prophet to divorce A’ishah, was sufficient for her to disobey the orders of her God and her husband, the Messenger of Allah.

She rode a camel that the Messenger of Allah forbade her from riding and warned her about the barking of al-Hawab's dogs,50 she travelled long distances from al-Medinah to Mecca then to Basrah, she permitted the killing of innocent people and started a war against the commander of the believers and the Companions who voted for him, and she caused the deaths of thousands of Muslims, according to the historians.51 She did all that because she did not like ‘Ali who advised the Prophet to divorce her.

Nevertheless, the Prophet did not divorce her so why all this hatred towards Imam ‘Ali? History has recorded some aggressive stances against ‘Ali that could not be explained and these are some of them. When she was on her way back from Mecca, A’ishah was informed that Uthman was killed, so she was delighted, but when she learnt that people had voted for ‘Ali to succeed him she became very angry and said, “I wish the sky would collapse on the earth before Ibn Abi Talib succeeds to the caliphate”. Then she said, “Take me back”. Thus, she started the civil war against ‘Ali, whose name she never liked to mention, as many historians agree.

Had A’ishah heard the saying of the Messenger of Allah (S): “Loving ‘Ali is believing, and hating him is hypocrisy”?52 To the extent that some of the Companions used to say, “We recognized the hypocrites by their hatred of ‘Ali”. Had A’ishah not heard the saying of the Prophet: Whoever accepts me as his master, then ‘Ali is his master? Undoubtedly, she heard all that, but she did not like it, and she did not like mentioning his name, and when she learnt of his death she knelt and thanked Allah.53

Let us move on, for I do not want to discuss the life of Umm al-Mu’minin A’ishah, but I have tried to show how many of the Companions violated the principles of Islam and disobeyed the orders of the Messenger of Allah (S), and it suffices to mention the following incident which happened to A’ishah during the civil war, and on which all historians tend to agree.

It has been said that when A’ishah passed by the waters of al-Hawab and heard the dogs barking, she remembered the warning of her husband, the Messenger of Allah, and how he prevented her from being the instigator of “al-Jamal” war. She cried, and then she said, “Take me back. Take me back!” But Talhah and al- Zubayr brought fifty men and bribed them, then made them testify that these waters were not al-Hawab's waters. Later she continued her journey until she reached Basrah. Many historians believe that those fifty men gave the first falsified testimony in the history of Islam.54

O Muslims! You, who have enlightened minds, assist us in solving this problem. Were these truly the honourable Companions, of whom we were always led to believe in their righteousness, and that they were the best people after the Messenger of Allah (S)! How could they give a falsified testimony when the Messenger of Allah considered it to be one of the great sins, whose punishment is Hell?

The same question crops up again. Who was right and who was wrong? Either ‘Ali and his followers were wrong, or A’ishah and her followers and Talhah and al-Zubayr and their followers were wrong. There is no third possibility. But I have no doubt that the fair researcher would take ‘Ali's side and dismiss A’ishah and her followers who instigated the civil war that devastated the nation and left its tragic marks to the present day.

For the sake of further clarification and for the sake of my own satisfaction I mention here what al-Bukhari had to say in his book about the civil war. When Talhah, al-Zubayr and A’ishah travelled to Basrah, ‘Ali sent Ammar Ibn Yasir and al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali to al-Kufah. On their arrival, they went to the mosque and addressed the congregation, and we heard Ammar saying, “A’ishah had gone to Basrah and by Allah she is the wife of your Prophet in this life and the life hereafter, but Allah, the Most High, is testing you to know whom you obey: Him or her”.55

Also al-Bukhari wrote in his book a chapter about what went on in the houses of the Prophet's wives: Once the Prophet (S) was giving a speech, and he indicated the house where A’ishah was living, then said, “There is the trouble…there is the trouble…there is the trouble…from where the devil's horns come out ...”.56

Al-Bukhari wrote many strange things in his book about A’ishah and her bad manners towards the Prophet to the extent that her father had to beat her until she bled. He also wrote about her pretention towards the Prophet until Allah threatened her with divorce... and there are many other stories but we are limited by space.

After all that I ask how did A’ishah deserve all that respect from the Sunnis; is it because she was the Prophet's wife? But he had so many wives, and some of them were better than A’ishah, as the Prophet himself declared.57

Or perhaps because she was Abu Bakr's daughter! Or maybe because she played an important role in the denial of the Prophet's will for ‘Ali, and when she was told that the Prophet recommended ‘Ali, she said, “Who said that? I was with the Prophet (S) supporting his head on my chest, then he asked me to bring the washbowl, as I bent down, he died, so I cannot see how he recommended ‘Ali”.58

Or is it because she fought a total war against him and his sons after him, and even intercepted the funeral procession of al-Hasan, Leader of the Heaven's youth, and prevented his burial beside his grandfather, the Messenger of Allah, and said “Do not allow anybody that I do not like to enter my house”.

She forgot, or maybe ignored the Messenger of Allah's sayings about him and his brother, “Allah loves those who love them, and Allah hates those who hate them,” Or his saying, “I am at war with those who fight against you, and I am at peace with those who appease you”. And there are many other sayings in their honour. No wonder, for they were so dear to him!

She heard many more sayings in honour of ‘Ali, but despite the Prophet's warning, she was determined to fight him and agitate the people against him and deny all his virtues. Because of that, the Ummayyads loved her and put her in a high position and filled the books with her virtues and made her the great authority for the Islamic nation because she had half of the religion.

Perhaps they assigned the second half of the religion to Abu Hurayrah, who told them what they wanted to hear, so they bestowed on him various honours: they gave him the governorship of al-Medinah, they gave him al-Aqiq palace and gave him the title of “Rawiat al-lslam”, the transmitter of Islam.

He made it easy for the Ummayyads to create a completely new religion which took whatever pleased them and supported their interests and power from the Holy Qur'an and the tradition of the Prophet. Inevitably, such a religion lacked any seriousness and became full of contradictions and myths; hence most of the facts were buried and replaced by lies. Then they forced the people to believe in these lies so that the religion of Allah became a mere joke, and no one feared Allah as much as they feared Mu’awiyah.

When we ask some of our scholars about Mu’awiyah's war against ‘Ali, who had been acknowledged by al-Muhajirin and al-Ansar, a war which led to the division of Islam into Sunnis and Shi’ites and left it scarred to this very day, they simply answer by saying, “‘Ali and Mu’awiyah were both good Companions, and both of them interpreted Islam in his own way. However, ‘Ali was right, therefore he deserves two rewards, but Mu’awiyah got it wrong, therefore, he deserves one reward. It is not within our right to judge for them or against them, Allah, the Most High, said:

“This is a people that have passed away, they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did” (Holy Qur’an, 2:134).

Regrettably, we provide such weak answers that neither a sensible mind nor a religion, nor indeed a law would accept. O Allah, I am innocent of idle talk and of deviant whims. I beg You to protect me from the devil's touch.

How could a sensible mind accept that Mu’awiyah had worked hard to interpret Islam and give him one reward for his war against the leader of all Muslims, and for his killing of thousands of innocent believers, in addition to all the crimes that he committed? He was known among the historians for killing his opponents through feeding them poisoned honey, and he used to say, “Allah has soldiers made of honey”.

How could these people judge him as a man who worked hard to promote Islam and give him a reward for that, when he was the leader of a wrong faction? There is a well-known Hadith of the Prophet, and most of the scholars agree its authenticity, “Woe unto Ammar…he will be killed by the wrong faction”. And he was killed by Mu’awiyah and his followers.

How could they judge him as a promoter of Islam when he killed Hijr Ibn Adi and his companions and buried them in Marj Adhra in the Syrian desert because they refused to curse ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib?

How could they judge him a just Companion when he killed al-Hasan, leader of the Heaven's youth, by poisoning him?

How could they judge him as being correct after he had forced the nation to acknowledge him as a caliph and to accept his corrupt son Yazid as his successor, and to change the Shurah (consultative) system to a hereditary one?59

How could they judge him as a man who had worked hard to promote Islam and to reward him, after he forced the people to curse ‘Ali and Ahl al- Bayt, the Family of the chosen Prophet, and killed those Companions who refused to do so, and made the act of cursing ‘Ali a tradition? There is no power but in Allah, the Most High, the Great.

The question crops up over and over again. Which faction was right, and which faction was wrong? Either ‘Ali and his followers were wrong, or Mu’awiyah and his followers were wrong, and the Messenger of Allah (S) explained everything.

In both cases, the proposition of the righteousness of all the Companions does not hold ground and is incompatible with logic. There are many examples for all these subjects. and if I want to study them in detail and discuss them for all their aspects, then I would need volumes.

But I wanted to be brief in this study so I mentioned a few examples, but thank Allah, for they have been enough to refute the claims of my people who froze my mind for a period of time, and prevented me from looking at the Hadith (prophetic tradition) and the historical events with an analytical view, using the intellect and the legal yard-sticks which the Holy Qur'an and the honourable Prophet's tradition taught us to do.

Therefore, I shall rebel against myself and rid myself of the dust of prejudice with which they engulfed me. I shall free myself from all the chains and fetters that I have been tied with for more than twenty years, and say, “I wish my people knew that Allah has granted me forgiveness and made me among the honourable people. I wish my people could discover the world they know nothing about, but nevertheless oppose”.

1. Among the sources of Hadith ath-Thaqalayn (the two weighty things) are Kanz al- Ummal Vol. 1 page 44, Ahmad's Musnad Vol. 5 page 182.
2. Among the sources of Hadith al-Safinah (the ship) are al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim (al-Dhahabi's abridgement) Vol. 3 page 151, and Al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah by Ibn Hajar pages 184-234.
3. This story had been cited by many historians and authors of Sirah. It has also been cited by Sahih, Bukhari, Book of al-Shurut, Chapter: al-Shurut fi al-Jihad vol. 2 page 122; Sahih Muslim, the chapter about al-Hudaybiyah's treaty Vol. 2.
4. Sahih, Bukhari, Chapter: About the saying of the sick, vol. 2, Sahih, Muslim, End of the book of al-Wasiyyah, vol. 5 page 75, Musnad, Ahmad, vol. 1 page 335, vol. 5 page 116. Tarikh, Tabari, vol. 3 page 193, Tarikh, Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2 page 320.
5. Al-Tabaqat by Ibn Sa'ad Vol. 2 page 190; Tarikh Ibn al-Athir Vol. 2 page 317; Al-Sirah al-Halabiyah Vol. 3 page 207; Tarikh al-Tabari Vol. 3 page 226.
6. For more detail read: Al-Khilafah wa al-mulk by Abu al-Aala al-Mawdudi; Yawm al-Islam by Ahmad Amin.
7. Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid Vol. 8 page 111.
8. Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, Vol.2 page 106.
9. Futuh al-Buldan page 437.
10. Sahih al-Bukhari Vol. 1 page 52.
11. Tarikh al-Tabari and Tarikh Ibn al-Athir.
12. Al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah by Ibn Qutaybah.
13. See An-Nass wa Al-Ijtihad by Abdul Husayn Sharaf al-Din.
14. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 4 pages 94-99, 156, vol. 3 page 32; Sahih Muslim, vol. 7 page 66.
15. Muruj al-Dhahab, al-Masudi, vol. 2 page 341.
16. Muruj al-Dhahab, al-Masudi, vol. 2 page 341.
17. Muruj al-Dhahab, al-Masudi, vol. 2 page 341.
18. Muruj al-Dhahab, al-Masudi, vol. 2 page 341.
19. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 1 page 122 (al-Idayn book).
20. al-Khilafah wa al-Mulk, Syed Abu al-‘Ala Maududi, page 106.
21. Sahih, Muslim, vol. 1 page 61.
22. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 305; Sahih, Muslim, vol. 2 page 356; Mustadrak al-Hakim, vol. 3 page 109.
23. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 1 page 76, Sahih, Tirmidhi, vol. 5 page 300 Sunan, Ibn Majah, vol. 1 page 44.
24. Sahih, Muslim, vol. 1 page 61; Sunan, al-Nasa’i, vol. 6 page 117; Sahih, al-Tirmidhi, vol. 8 page 306
25. Sahih, Tirmidhi, vol. 5 page 201; Mustadrak al-Hakim, vol. 3 page 126
26. Musnad, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, vol. 5 page 25; Mustadrak al-Hakim, vol. 3 page 134; Sahih, al-Tirmidhi, vol. 5 page 296
27. Sahih, Muslim, vol. 2 page 362; Mustadrak al-Hakim, vol. 3 page 109; Musnad, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, vol. 4 page 281
28. Mustadrak, hakim, vol. 3 page 121; Khasais, al-Nasa’i, page 24; Musnad, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, vol. 6 page 33; al-Manaqib, al-Khawarizmi, page 81; al-Riyadh al-Nadira, Tabari, vol. 2 page 219; Tarikh, al-Suyuti, page 73.
29. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 134.
30. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 154; Sahih, Muslim, vol. 1 page 260.
31. Sahih, Muslim, vol. 2 page 134.
32. Refer to Holy Qur’an, 5:6 [Note Al-Islam.org].
33. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 1 page 54.
34. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 135.
35. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 3 page 32, Chapter on al-Hudaybiyya battle.
36. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 201.
37. Minhaj as Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyya, vol. 3 page 131; Hilyat al-Awliya, Ibn Abi Nuaym, vol. 1 page 52.
38. Tarikh, Tabari, page 41; al-Riyadh al-Nadira, vol. 1 page 134; Kanz al-Ummal, page 361.
39. Tarikh, Tabari, page 41; al-Riyadh al-Nadira, vol. 1 page 134; Kanz al-Ummal, page 361; Minhaj as Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyya, vol. 3 page 120.
40. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 206.
41. Al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah, Ibn Qutaybah, vol. 1 page 20; Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, Fadak in History, page 92.
42. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 1 page 127, 130, vol. 2 page 126, 205.
43. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 3 page 39.
44. Tarikh al-Khulafa, Ibn Qutaybah, vol. 1 page 20.
45. Sahih, Muslim, vol. 7 page 121 & 130.
46. Tarikh al-Khulafa, vol. 1 page 20
47. Tarikh al-Khulafa, vol. 1 page 20
48. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 3 page 39.
49. Tarikh, Tabari, vol. 4 page 407; Tarikh, Ibn Athir, vol. 3 page 206; Lisan al-Arab, vol. 14 page 193; Taj al-Arus, vol. 8 page 141; al-Iqd al-Farid, vol. 4 page 290
50. Al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah.
51. al-Tabari, Ibn al-Athir and other historians who wrote about the events in the Year 36 A.H..
52. Sahih, Muslim, vol. 1 page 48.
53. al-Tabari, Ibn al-Athir, who wrote about the events in the Year of 40 Hijri
54. al-Tabari, Ibn al-Athir and other historians who wrote about the events of the Year 40 A.H
55. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 4 page 161
56. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 2 page 128
57. Sahih al-Tirmidhi; al-Istiab, Ibn Abd al-Barr, Biography of Safiyya.
58. Sahih, Bukhari, vol. 3 page 68.
59. Read: Khilafat o Mulukiyat by Abu al-’Ala Maududi.

The Beginning Of The Detailed Study (2024)

The Companions Of The Prophet As Seen By The Shi’a And The Sunnis

1. The Companions At The Peace Treaty Of Al-Hudaibiyah

2. The Companions And The Raziyat Yawm Al-Khamis

3. The Companions In The Military Detachment Under Usamah

The Opinion Of The Qur’an Regarding The Companions

1. The Turning Back Verse

2. The Holy War (Jihad) Verse

3. The Submissiveness

The Opinion Of The Messenger Regarding The Companions

1. The Hadith Of The Pool

2. The Hadith Of The Competition Of The World

The Opinion Of The Companions About Each Other

1. Their Testimony That They Themselves Have Changed The Tradition Of The Prophet

2. The Companions Even Made Changes In Prayers

3. The Companions Testify Against Themselves

4. The Testimony Of The Shaykhan Against Themselves

References