Khalid bin Walid(R.A) and the alledged killing of Malik bin Nuwayrah
Khalid bin Walid(R.A) and the alledged killing of Malik bin Nuwayrah
by: Molana Muhammad Taha Karaan rahimahu Llah
Question:
It is alleged that during the Caliphate of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the Sahabi military commander, killed Malik ibn Nuwayrah, and married his widow on the very eve of his murder, without even waiting for her ‘iddah to expire. What is the truth of this allegation?
Answer:
The incident of Malik ibn Nuwayrah is one of those cases which are frequently cited by Shia propagandists whose first step in the direction of convincing and converting the Ahlus Sunnah almost invariably assumes the form of an attempt to prove how innately corrupt and evil the Sahabah were (na’udhu billah).
These are historical issues, and must be treated as such. This means that in judging their historicity one should firstly include all the evidence which exists around the issue, both general and specific, and secondly, be objective enough to look critically at the authenticity of one’s material. Seeking to brand persons, and more especially the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, as corrupt and irreligious on grounds of only one side of the available evidence, and stubbornly refusing to critically scrutinise the historical material upon the basis of which a claim of this serious nature is made, can only point to the fact that the accusers have an agenda — an agenda which they are committed to promote and uphold, no matter to what extent truth and honesty might be compromised in the process.
It is indeed a sad indictment of the objectivity of the Shia propagandists that they refuse point blank to take into consideration, when discussing the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, the wealth of ayat in the Qur’an which announce the merits of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Similarly, they refuse to pay any attention to the numerous ahadith, both general and specific, in which Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam himself extolls the virtues of his companions. Thirdly, they cannot bear to even cast a glance at the services rendered to the cause of Islam by any particular Sahabi. To them the vaguest notion of a black spot on the character of a companion of Rasulullah and a champion of Islam — even if amounts to nothing more an unsubstantiated, or even forged, report in a book on history — is enough to render null and void decades of dedicated service to the cause of Islam, despite the fact that his service had been rewarded with approval by Allah and His Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
Let us turn now to the actual issue. We will discuss it under two headings:
1_ The execution of Malik ibn Nuwayrah
2_ Khalid’s alleged marriage to Malik’s wife
The execution of Malik ibn Nuwayrah
Shortly after the demise of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam a number of tribes in the Arabian peninsula turned away from Islam. With many of them apostasy was expressed in the form of a refusal to pay the zakat. From Madinah Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu dispatched a number of punitive expeditions. Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu was placed in command of one such expedition.
After his victory against some of the apostate tribes, Khalid set out for Banu Sulaim, another of the apostate tribes. On his way towards Banu Sulaim he passed through the lands of Banu Tamim. Malik ibn Nuwayrah was a member of this tribe, and he had been appointed zakat – collector of Banu Tamim by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Reports had been circulating that Malik too, was withholding the zakat.1 There were even more disturbing reports about him having started to speak ill about Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and referring to him in derogatory terms.2
Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu had orders from Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to inspect the practices of the people of the various locations he passed by in order to find out whether they were Muslims or whether they too, had forsaken Islam. If they heard the adhan and saw the people performing salah they could conclude that they were Muslims, and if they did not see them upholding the salah that would be an indication that they were not Muslim.3 In the case of Banu Tamim, Sayyidina Khalid’s spies differed: some claimed that they did not make salah, while others claimed that they did.4
According to one report, their mu’adhin, a person by the name of Abu al Jalal, was absent, which was the reason why no adhan was heard.5 It has even been reported that they encountered armed resistance from Malik and his men at an oasis called al Ba’udah.6 Those who put up the resistance, including Malik, were captured and brought before Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He decided that they must be put to death. This is how Malik ibn Nuwayrah was killed.
In Sayyidina Khalid’s party was the Sahabi Sayyidina Abu Qatadah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He was amongst those who claimed that they had seen Malik’s people making salah. He was thus understandably upset at the decision of Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and returned immediately to Madinah to complain to Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu insisted that Khalid be removed from his position as commander on account of his impetuousness. Khalid was summoned back to Madinah and interrogated by the khalifah, who concluded that Khalid’s deed was an error of judgement, for which it was not necessary to dismiss him.7
Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was guided in this decision by two things. Firstly, the hadith of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wherein he described Khalid as “the sword which Allah unsheathed against the unbelievers”.
The second was the fact that a similar occurrence took place in the time of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, also with Khalid ibn al Walid. He was put in command by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam of an expedition to Banu Jadhimah. When Khalid asked them to accept Islam they responded by saying: “saba’na, saba’na”, a word which literally means “We have become Sabeans”, but which had come to be used in the general sense of changing one’s religion. To Khalid this was not sufficient evidence of their acceptance of Islam, and he gave the order for their execution. When the news of their execution reached Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam he lifted his hands and said: “O Allah, I dissociate myself from what Khalid has done.”8 Although Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam dissociated himself from the haste Khalid made himself guilty of, he did not punish him, since it was an error in judgement on his part. A very regrettable error it was, but it was still an error. It was for this reason that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not hesitate to give Khalid command over other expeditions as well.
Shortly after the Banu Jadhimah incident, Rasulullah entrusted him with the mission to destroy the temple of the pagan goddess ‘Uzza at a place called Nakhlah.9 In Jumad al Ula in the year 10 A.H, he was sent on a da’wah mission to Banu Harith ibn Ka’b, and they accepted Islam at his hands without a drop of blood being shed.10 It was also to Khalid that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam entrusted the expedition to Ukaydir ibn ‘Abdul Malik.11
Above all there was the day, at the battle of Mu’tah in the year 8 A.H, when Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu would prove his valour and military genius by saving the day for Islam and the Muslim ummah in its first ever encounter with the Roman Empire. The three generals appointed by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam all attained martyrdom in succession, and the standard was taken over by the valiant Khalid, who through his sheer genius managed to save the honour of Islam by effecting a tactical withdrawal after what seemed like certain defeat. Rasulullah was informed by Allah of what had happened at Mu’tah, and although his eyes were filled with tears at the martyrdom of his beloved cousin Jafar ibn Abi Talib, his adopted son Zaid ibn Harithah and the poet ‘Abdullah ibn Rawahah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, he saw reason to give the Muslims in Madinah the glad tidings of Khalid’s victory, saying: “then the standard was taken up by a Sword from amongst the Swords of Allah, and upon his hands did Allah grant victory.”12
All of this shows that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saw the Banu Jadhimah incident, as regrettable as it was, as a mistake on the part of Khalid. In not punishing Khalid for the execution of Malik ibn Nuwayrah, and not dismissing him from his post as commander, Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was thus completely justified. His interrogation of Khalid revealed that Khalid had committed an error of judgement, and the insistence of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu that Khalid be dismissed was met by a resolute answer form Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu: “I will not sheath the sword that was drawn by Allah.”13 Like Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did in the case of Banu Jadhimah, Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu paid out blood money to Malik’s brother Mutammim, and ordered the release of all captives taken by Khalid.13
Khalid’s alleged marriage to Malik’s wife
With the passage of time the incident of Malik ibn Nuwayrah became the object of the attention of certain unscrupulous transmitters of history. An obnoxious tail was soon introduced into the story in the form of Malik’s wife, who is named as Umm Tamim bint Minhal. Khalid, it was said, was so enamoured of the beautiful Umm Tamim that he saw fit to slaughter Malik and his entire tribe in order to possess her, and barely was the slaughter over when he took her as his own wife.
In an allegation as serious as this, one would have expected the party leveling the accusation to produce reliable evidence to support their claim. However, all that is ever produced is fragments of statements by historians. The accusers consistently fail to realise that a quotation is of no value for as long as it cannot be authenticated. While they display great vigour in leveling the accusation and stating their references, complete with volume and page numbers, they conveniently and consistently forget to authenticate those “facts”. The great imam ‘Abdullah ibn al Mubarak stated a most profound truth when he said:
Isnad (stating the chain of narration) is part of din. Were it not for isnad, anyone could have said just what he wished.14
A study of the texts wherein reference is made to the story of Malik ibn Nuwayrah reveals that not a single one of them is reported with an uninterrupted chain of narration that consists of reliable authorities. We may confidently say that we have looked at almost all the available material on the issue of Malik ibn Nuwayrah, and we have found that they may be classified into two types:
1_ reports in which no mention at all is made of Malik’s wife, and
2_ reports in which she is mentioned.
The former type includes material narrated via authentic as well as unauthentic chains of narration. As for the latter type (the reports which make mention of Malik’s wife), they have been handed down exclusively through highly unreliable chains of narration. They all suffer from two deficiencies: untrustworthy or unknown narrators, and suspicious interruptions in the chain of narration. We might, for example, look at the reports about Malik’s wife mentioned in sources like al Tabari’s Tarikh and Ibn Hajar’s al Isabah:
(1) Khalid married Umm Tamim the daughter of Minhal, and left her till her period of waiting ended.15
This report appears in a long narrative documented by al Tabari on the authority of the following chain of narration:
Al Tabari — (narrates from) — al Sari ibn Yahya — (who narrates from) — Shu’ayb ibn Ibrahim — (who narrates from) — Saif ibn ‘Umar — (who narrates from) — Sahl (ibn Yusuf) — (who narrates from) — Qasim (ibn Muhammad) and ‘Amr ibn Shu’ayb, who say…
This isnad is extremely defective, on several counts. Firstly, it runs through the historian Saif ibn ‘Umar al Tamimi, whose extreme unreliability is a matter of consensus among the rijal critics. Ibn Hibban has summed up their opinions of him in the words: “He narrates forged material from reliable narrators. They (the critics) say he used to forge hadith.” He adds that Saif was suspected of zandaqah (sacrilege).16 Of recent there has been much protest by Shia authors about reliance upon Saif’s narrations about ‘Abdullah ibn Sabaʼ, (despite the fact that Saif is not the only historian who mentions Ibn Sabaʼ and his role). However, it seems when the very same Saif narrates historical material in which the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum are maligned, a blind eye must be turned to his proven mendacity.
The second problem is with the person who narrates from Saif, namely Shu’ayb ibn Ibrahim. This person, we are told by Ibn Hajar in Lisan al Mizan, was virtually unknown. He quotes Ibn ‘Adi who says: “He is not known. He narrates ahadith and historical reports which are uncorroborated to a certain extent, and in which there is an element of prejudice against the Salaf (early Muslims). ”17 Is it in any way acceptable to use information that was handed down by a non-entity such as this to malign a man who was named “the Sword of Allah” by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam , and who is one of those of whom it was stated in the Qur’an:
لَا یَسْتَوِیْ مِنْكُمْ مَّنْ اَنْفَقَ مِنْ قَبْلِ الْفَتْحِ وَ قٰتَلَؕ اُولٓئِكَ اَعْظَمُ دَرَجَةً مِّنَ الَّذِیْنَ اَنْفَقُوْا مِنْ ۢ بَعْدُ وَ قٰتَلُوْاؕ وَكُلًّا وَّعَدَ اللّٰهُ الْحُسْنٰیؕ وَ اللّٰهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُوْنَ خَبِیْرٌ
Those of you who spent (their wealth) before the conquest (of Makkah) are not equal (to the rest). They are greater in status than those who spent thereafter and fought. And all of them have been promised good by Allah. (al Hadid: 10)
Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu became Muslim before the conquest of Makkah.
The third point of criticism against this isnad is the person who appears as Saif’s direct source: Sahl ibn Yusuf al Ansari. This person, like Shu’ayb ibn Ibrahim, is unknown.18 The same may therefore be said of him as a narrator, and of the nature of his narration in maligning the character of a Sahabi who sacrificed so much for Islam, as was said of Shu’aybs narration.
Finally, even if we were to assume, for argument’s sake, that this isnad is free from all defects right up to Sahl ibn Yusuf, there remains one crucial problem. The persons who allegedly narrate the story appear here as Qasim ibn Muhammad and ‘Amr ibn Shu’ayb. Neither of these two figures were even born at the time when the incident of Malik ibn Nuwayrah occurred. Whichever way one looks at it, this report simply does not conform to the two most basic conditions for authenticity: reliability of the narrator, and an uninterrupted chain of narration.
Let us now look at another narration in Tarikh at-Tabari:
(2) ‘Umar told Khalid: “You enemy of Allah! You killed a Muslim man and thereafter took his wife. By Allah, I will stone you.”19
The chain of narration on the authority of which this report reached al Tabari is as follows:
Al Tabari — (narrates from) — (Muhammad) ibn Humaid (al Razi )— (who narrates from) — Salamah (ibn al Fadl al Razi) — (who narrates from) — Muhammad ibn Ishaq — (who narrates from)— Talhah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Bakr — who says that it used to be Abu Bakr al Siddiq’s instruction to his armies…
This isnad too, is defective and unreliable. It is unreliable on account of Muhammad ibn Ishaq, who was a much more truthful historian than Saif ibn ‘Umar, but who used to commit tadlis. Tadlis is when a narrator intentionally omits the name of his direct source and ascribes his information to a source higher up in the chain of narration. Ibn Hibban states about him: “The problem with Ibn Ishaq is that he used to omit the names of unreliable narrators, as a result of which unreliable material crept into his narrations. However, if he makes it clear that he has actually heard from the person whom he states as his source, then his narration is authentic.”20 When we look at the way in which Ibn Ishaq has narrated this incident from Talhah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Bakr, we find that he has not explicitly stated that he heard this information from him. He uses the ambiguous term ‘an, which was a common device used by narrators committing tadlis. Ibn Ishaq, we are told by Ibn Hajar, was well-known for committing tadlis by omitting the names of unreliable and unknown persons, and even from narrators who are regarded as unreliable for more serious reasons.21
Besides Ibn Ishaq himself, it must also be taken into consideration that Muhammad ibn Humaid al Razi, who appears in the isnad as al Tabari’s direct source, has come under severe criticism from the muhaddithin. Many of them have clearly labelled him as an outright liar. He has also been proven to be dishonest in his claim to narrating the Maghazi of Ibn Ishaq from Salamah ibn Fadl. Some of the muhaddithin who at one stage entertained a good opinion of him had to change their opinions when it became clear that the man was a shameless forger. One critic expresses his opinion as follows: “I have never seen a natural liar, except for two persons: Sulaiman al Shadhakuni and Muhammad ibn Humaid. He used to memorise all of his ahadith, and his hadith used to grow longer every day.”22
Besides the above, it must not be forgotten that the final source for this narration was not even born when Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu allegedly spoke these words to Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu. These were events that supposedly took place in the time of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, but the one who tells us about it is his great grandson — three generations later. Like the previous report, this one too, suffers from a huge gap in the chain of narration.
Shia authors have the habit of supplying incidents like this with multiple references. In order to fully convince the uninformed Sunni reader, they will quote not only al Tabari as the source for the incident, but also Ibn Kathir’s al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, Ibn al Athir’s al Kamil, etc. They conveniently forget that Ibn Kathir and Ibn al Athir, and like them, most later historians, draw directly from al Tabari, and have stated as much in their respective introductions. It is thus of no benefit to quote them as separate references, since all they do is quote al Tabari. As for al Tabari himself, he has never claimed all the material in his huge work to be the truth. On the contrary, he states very clearly in his introduction:
Whatever is to be found in this book of mine as quoted from some past source, which the reader finds unacceptable or the hearer deems repugnant for the reason that he does not see any authenticity in it or does not find real meaning in it, let it be known that we are not responsible for it. The one responsible for it would be one of those who transmitted it down to us. We for our part have only reproduced what has been transmitted to us.
A third report mentioning the wife of Malik ibn Nuwayrah, which is widely quoted by those wishing to add a tragically romantic flavour to their basic aim of harming the reputation of Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu, is the following:
(3) Khalid saw the wife of Malik ibn Nuwayrah. She was very beautiful. Thereupon Malik told his wife: “You have killed me,” meaning that she will be the cause of his death. And so it happened.23
This twist to the story is usually quoted with Ibn Hajar’s work al Isabah as reference. Closer inspection however of that work reveals that Ibn Hajar quoted it from a source called al Dalaʼil by one Thabit ibn Qasim. Despite a lengthy search for information about this author or his book, we were unable to unearth a single fact about him in any of the biographical dictionaries available to us. Neither the classical works (such as the biographical works of al Bukhari, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Hibban and al Khatib al Baghdadi) nor the works of later scholars (such as al Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar) provide any clue as to who Thabit ibn Qasim was, when his book al Dala’il was composed, and what it contains. Even a contemporary work like al A’lam of al Zirikli contains no information whatsoever about a person called Thabit ibn Qasim. Therefore we may say with a great degree of confidence that this report, as tragic and romantic as it may be, amounts to nothing more than a fable spurned by the fertile imagination of some unscrupulous person. A fable such as this would only be used against a Sahabi like Sayyidina Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu by a person whose hatred of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum has blinded him against all truth and reason.
It is extremely unfortunate that the vicious and unscrupulous propaganda of the Shia missionaries has succeeded in turning the sentiments of many a Muslim against this great son of Islam and the pride of its military commanders. Having swallowed the story about the wife of Malik ibn Nuwayrah hook, line and sinker, they now cannot bear to think of Khalid ibn al Walid except in the vilest of terms. They find themselves unable to associate his name except with the concocted legend of the wife of Malik ibn Nuwayrah. All his services rendered to Islam, and even the title of “Saifullah” given to him by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam are simply ignored, and on the basis of nothing but a fable. It is heart rending to see the brazenness with which Shia authors like Muhammad Tijani Samawi in his book Then I was Guided challenge the title of “Saifullah” (Sword of Allah) bestowed upon Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu by none other than Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and to see them labelling him “the crippled sword of the devil.”24 Such, unfortunately, is the destiny of those whose faith is founded upon fables and legends.
There is another point which definitely merits mention in this regard. The Imami (Ithna ‘Ashari) Shia, for all their political rhetoric, have never in the history of Islam been known for positive political or military action.25 It is for this reason that the Shia, unlike the Ahlus Sunnah, do not have military leaders like Sayyidina Khalid radiya Llahu ‘anhu of whom to be proud, and whose names to invoke as paragons of courage and valour. Thus, when the need arose for a person like Khomeini to speak about Islam’s military successes of yesterday, he could not find anything of that nature within the legacy of his own tradition. It was the history of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhu — those very same Sahabah whom he and his ilk had been slandering and denouncing as apostates, hypocrites and unbelievers for centuries— to which he was forced to turn. Look at the tongue-in-cheek manner in which he writes in his book Kashf al Asrar:
The rulers of Islam in those days did not sit in their courts upon silk carpets, because the Prophet of Islam forbade its use. The religious spirit was firmly implanted within them, to the extent that it led a great Muslim commander to swallow a quantity of lethal poison in the firm belief that the Rabb of Islam and the Qurʼan will protect him before the enemies of Islam. That is exactly what happened when sixty persons from the Muslim army attacked a Roman army of sixty thousand and gained the upper hand over them. Similarly, a few thousand of them defeated seven hundred thousand Romans, and a small number of Muslims overran the whole land of Iran. All of that was achieved through the power of religion and faith, and not because they thought of religion and its tenets as a shame and a disgrace. What is there in you which resembles that which they had? They believed that death and martyrdom is happiness, and that martyrs enjoy the life of the hereafter by the favour and grace of Allah. It was on account of this that they achieved such astonishing success. The point is that they had a great amount of love for din, belief in the unseen and partiality towards religiousness. As for ourselves, we are different in all of those things, and thus will we remain…26
These words speak for themselves. They are in no need of commentary of any sort. However, there is maybe just one thing upon which light needs to shed, and that is the identity of the “great Muslim commander who swallowed a quantity of lethal poison in the firm belief that the Rabb of Islam and the Qurʼan will protect him before the enemies of Islam”. That leader was none other than the Sword of Allah, Sayyidina Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The incident is documented by al Dhahabi in his work Siyar A’lam al Nubala from two separate sources, both of which we reproduce here:
•Qais ibn Abi Hazim says: “I saw poison being brought to Khalid, and it was asked: “What is this?” The answer was given: “It is poison.” He said: “Bismillah” and drank it. I said: “By Allah, this is a miracle, this is true courage.”
•Abu al Safar says: Khalid stayed in al Hirah at the house of the mother of the Banu Marazibah. They said: “Be on your guard against the Persians, lest they poison you.” He said: “Bring it to me.” He took it and said: “Bismillah”, and did him no harm.”27
Maybe we can now understand why Khomeini thought it prudent not to mention the name of that “great Islamic leader.” But if one such as he could see and admit (albeit grudgingly) that men like Khalid ibn al Walid “had a great amount of love for din, belief in the unseen and partiality towards religiousness” and that “we ourselves are different in all of those things, and thus will we remain” (in other words that we can never compare ourselves to men like Khalid ibn al Walid) then why is it that some Shia neophytes, who regard themselves as followers of Khomeini, cannot bear to spare even a single good thought for the “great Islamic leader” Khalid ibn al Walid, and continue to spread calumnious falsehoods about him? Why does revolutionary Iran, which regards itself as the manifestation of Khomeiniʼs political philosophy, flood the Muslim world with literature in which Sayyidina Khalid ibn al Walid radiya Llahu ‘anhu is acrimoniously denounced as “the crippled sword of the devil”? Is it in order to achieve the sanctimonious goal of Muslim unity, or simply to score a point for Shi’ism against the Ahlus Sunnah?
We will leave the reader to ponder over these questions.
REFERENCES
1_ Ibn Hajar, al Isabah 6 p. 36 (Dar al Kutub al ‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut n.d.); Ibn Hibban, Kitab al Thiqat vol. 2 p. 164 (Dar al Kutub al ‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut, reproduced from Hyderabad edition)
2_ al Isabah 6 p. 37; compare Tarikh al Tabari vol. 2 p. 273 (Dar al Kutub al ‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut 1408/1988) Note that it is by no means our contention that all of these reports were in fact true or that they have been authentically narrated. We quote it merely to show that there is another face to the narrated material on the issue of Malik ibn Nuwayrah as well— a face that the Shia propagandists would rather keep hidden and unknown.
3_ Khalifah ibn Khayyat, Tarikh 104 (ed. Dr. Akram Diyaʼ al ‘Umari, Dar Taybah, Riyadh, 2nd edition 1405/1985
4_ al Dhahabi, Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ 1 p. 377 (ed. Shu’ayb al Arnaʼut et al, Muʼassasat al Risalah, Beirut, 7th edition 1410/1990)
5_ Khalifah ibn Khayyat, Tarikh 105
6_ p.104
7_ p. 105. Also cited in 8_ Siyar vol. 1 p. 376
9_ Sahih al Bukhari 4339
Sirat Ibn Hisham 4 p. 1282 (Dar al Fikr, Cairo n.d.)
10_ vol. 4 p. 1448
11_ vol. 4 p. 1378
12_ Sahih al Bukhari 4262
13_ al Isabah 6 p. 37
14_ Sahih Muslim 1 p. 87 (with al Nawawiʼs commentary)
15_ Tarikh al Tabari 2 p. 273 (Dar al Kutub al ‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut 1408/1988)
16_ Cited in al Mizzi, Tahdhib al Kamal 12 p. 326 (ed. Dr. B.A.Ma’ruf, Muʼassasat al Risalah, Beirut, 1413/1992)
17_ Lisan al Mizan 3 p. 176 (Dar al Fikr, Beirut)
18_ vol. 3 p. 146
19_Tarikh al Tabari 2 p. 274
20_ Tahdhib al Kamal 24 p. 428
21_ Ibn Hajar, Ta’rif Ahl al Taqdis 38 (ed. Taha ‘Abdul Ra’uf Sa’d, Maktabat al Kulliyyat al Azhariyyah, Cairo n.d.)
22_ Tahdhib al Kamal 25 p. 105
23_ al Isabah 6 p. 37
24_ Samawi, Then I Was Guided 188, (Ansariyan Publications, Qum, n.d.)
25_ Khomeiniʼs reinterpretation of the doctrine of Wilayat al Faqih, and his widening of its scope to include the political arena as well, is unprecedented in the history of Shi’ism. (See Nazriyyat Wilayat al Faqih by Dr. ‘Irfan ‘Abdul Hamid Fattah, Dar ‘Ammar, Amman, 1988.) It was, and still is regarded by many of the leading mujtahids of Iran and Iraq as an innovation in Jafari jurisprudence.
26_ Khomeini, Kashf al Asrar 23 (translated into Arabic by Dr. Muhammad al Bundari, Dar ‘Ammar, Amman, 1987)
27_ Siyar A’lam al Nubala 1 p. 376.
*During the Battle of the Trench: “Each Rasulﷺ has a disciple, and my disciple is Zubair(R.A).”*
The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said on the day of the Trench: “Who will bring me news of Banu Quraydhah?” Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said: “I will.” So he went on a horse and brought news of them. Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said that a second time and Zubair said again: “I will.” The same thing happened a third time and Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “Each Rasul has a disciple, and my disciple is Zubair.”[23]
What is meant by his words “my disciple is Zubair” is “the closest to me of my Sahabah and supporters”. The same Arabic word (hawari) is used to refer to the disciples or Sahabah of ‘Isa ‘alayh al Salam those who were his inner circle and supporters. The helper or disciple is one who offers support and is a close companion. This hadith refers to this great virtue by which Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was distinguished. Hence when ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu heard a man saying:
I am the son of the disciple.
He said:
If you are one of sons of Zubair, that is correct; otherwise it is not.[24]
In Umdat al Qari fi Sharh Sahih al Bukhari by al ‘Ayni, it says:
If you say: all of the Sahabah are supporters of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and close to him, so why is Zubair singled out for this title? We would say: “He said this on the day of the Trench, when Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam asked: ‘Who will bring me news of the people?’ and Zubair said: ‘I will.’ That happened three times, and undoubtedly on that occasion he offered more support than anyone else.”[25]
On the day of the Trench, the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to him:
May my father and mother be sacrificed for you.
It was narrated that ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
On the day of the Trench, ‘Umar ibn Abi Salamah and I were put in charge of the women. I looked and saw Zubair on his horse, going through the area of Banu Quraydhah two or three times. When I went back, I said: O my father, I saw you going a few times.” He said: “Did you see me, O my son?” I said: “Yes.” He said: “The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: ‘Who will go to Banu Quraydhah and bring me news of them?’ so I went out, and when I came back, the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mentioned me and his parents in the same sentence, saying: ‘May my father and mother be sacrificed for you.’”[26]
This hadith clearly indicates the virtue of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, because the words spoken by the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in, which he expressed his appreciation for his actions and the high esteem in which he held him, are only said to a person whom one respects and for whom one would sacrifice oneself or the dearest of one’s family.[27]
At the Battle of the Trench, Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu earned an immortal badge of honour which will last until the end of time:
Each Rasul had a disciple, and my disciple is Zubair.[28]
The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam described Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu as a disciple, which has a profound and far reaching meaning. The one who studies this meaning will understand all the ramifications of this word disciple (hawari), and its secrets and depths. Those who are in greatest need of paying such attention to these meanings are the scholars, the callers to Islam and the educators. Islamic da’wah requires the preparation of helper’s and disciples who will present a living example, because a practical example is more powerful and effective in spreading principles and ideas.
It is an embodiment and practical implementation of those ideas that can easily be seen and followed, because true disciples follow the Sunnah of Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and obey his commands.[29]
As it says in the hadith:
There is no Rasul whom Allah sent to any nation before me who did not have from among his nation helper’s and Sahabah who followed his way and obeyed his commands.[30]
It is the nature of things that the da’wah will go through trials and tribulations and be tested by means of both friends and enemies. Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was keen to guide the Muslims with regard to these variables and developments, so he said:
Then there will come after them generations who say what they do not do and do what they do not believe.[31]
What is the mission of the disciple? Setting a good example of applied faith, sincerity and sacrifice are among the most prominent attributes of the disciples; thus they are a true example of the heirs of the messengers. They strive to spread the truth and goodness, to guide the ummah and to lead it out of its backwardness. They sacrifice everything precious for the sake of Allah, in order to bring back the vitality and radiance of Islam at time when those with little ambition do not care about anything but their personal interests.[32]
Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam radiya Llahu ‘anhu is a brilliant example of embodiment of these principles. He grew up in the lap of da’wah, under the care of Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and received a proper education that enabled him to carry its burdens from an early age. Zubair’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu attitude at the Battle of the Trench shows us his character and his upbringing in the qualities of courage, support and love of Rasul s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
History shows us that he was a man of difficult missions, imbued with qualities of courage and bravery, so he was given the mission of finding out enemy secrets. What happened to Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu indicates that it is prescribed to divide tasks among the people of da’wah according to their sincerity, spirit of sacrifice, talents and abilities.[33]
Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu took part in all the campaigns of Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and carried out honourable exploits. At the time of the Rightly Guided Khulafa’ radiya Llahu ‘anhum, he was one of the pillars of the state during the major conquests.
At the Battle of Yarmuk
It was narrated from ‘Urwah that the Sahabah of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu on the day of Yarmuk: “Why do you not charge, and we will charge with you?” He said: “If I charge, you will let me down.” They said: “We will not do that.” So he charged at the enemy, penetrating their ranks passing through them, but there was no one with him. He came back, and they took hold of his reins and struck him twice on his shoulder, and one of them struck a wound that he had received on the day Badr. ‘Urwah said: “I used to put my fingers in those scars when I was small, playing with them.”
‘Urwah also said: “‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was with him that day, and he was ten years old. He put him on a horse and entrusted him to a man to look after him.”[34]
Al Dhahabi said in al Siyar, commenting:
This battle was al Yamamah, Allah willing, because at that time ‘Abdullah was ten years old.[35]
Ibn Kathir said that the battle was Yarmuk, but there is no reason why it could not have happened on both occasions.
Ibn Kathir said:
Among those who were present at Yarmuk was Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who was the best of the Sahabah there; he was a brave and courageous knight. A number of heroes rallied around him on that day and said: “Why do you not attack, and we will attack with you?’ He said: “You will not be steadfast.” They said: “Yes, we will.” So he attacked, and they attacked, but they stopped when they were met by the Byzantine ranks. He went ahead and penetrated the Byzantine ranks until he came out the other side and returned to his Sahabah. Then they came to him again, and the same happened as had happened the first time. On that day, he received two wounds between his shoulders, and according to another report, he was injured.[36]
Ibn Kathir said on another occasion:
He went out with the people to Syria as a fighter of jihad; he was present at Yarmuk, and they were honoured by his presence. He performed brilliant acts of courage on that day, penetrating the Byzantine ranks twice from front to back.[37]
The conquest of Egypt
When ‘Amr ibn al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anhu went to conquer Egypt, he did not have sufficient forces, so he wrote to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu asking for support and reinforcements. ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was worried about the small number of ‘Amr’s forces, so he sent Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam with twelve thousand men. It was also said that ‘Umar sent four thousand led by the great Sahabah Zubair, al Miqdad ibn al Aswad, ‘Ubadah ibn al Samit and Maslamah ibn Makhlad. (Other narrators said that Kharijah ibn Hudhafah was the fourth.) He wrote to ‘Amr:
I have sent to you four thousand men, each thousand of whom is led by a man who is equal to a thousand.
Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the leader of those men.[38]
When Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu reached ‘Amr, he found him besieging the fortress of Babylon. Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu quickly mounted his horse and went around the trench surrounding the fortress, then he spread his men out around the trench. The siege lasted for seven months, then Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was told that there was a plague inside it. He said:
We have come to stab and plague them.[39]
Conquest was slow for ‘Amr ibn al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anhu, so Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
I will offer myself for the sake of Allah hoping that Allah may grant victory thereby to the Muslims.
He set up a ladder against the wall of the fortress, on the side of the market place of al Hamam, and then he climbed up. He told them that when they heard his takbir, they should all respond. It was not long before Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was at the top of the fortress, shouting takbir wielding his sword. The people began to climb up the ladder until ‘Amr told them not to; for fear that the ladder might break. When the Byzantines saw that the Arabs had captured the fortress, they withdrew. The fortress of Babylon opened its gates to the Muslims thus ending a decisive battle in the conquest of Egypt. The rare courage of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the direct cause of the Muslims’ victory over Muqawqis.[40]
The protective jealousy of Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam(R.A)
It was narrated that Asma’ bint Abi Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anha said:
When I got married to Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he owned nothing in this world apart from a camel for carrying water and a horse. I used to feed his horse, bring water, prepare his saddle and make dough, but I was not good at baking. Some women of the Ansar who were my neighbours used to bake my bread for me, and they were good women. I used to bring the dates from some land which the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had given to Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, carrying them on my head. The land was two-thirds of a farsakh (approximately three miles) away. One day, I was corning with the dates on my head, and I met the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with a group of the Ansar. He called me and made his camel kneel down so that I could ride behind him. But I felt too shy to go with the men, and I remembered Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu and how jealous he was, for he was the most jealous of men. The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam realised that I felt too shy, so he went on his way. I came to Zubair and told him: “I met the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam while I was carrying the dates on my head, and there was a group of his Sahabah with him. He made his camel kneel down so that I could ride on it, but I felt too shy, because I remembered your jealousy.” He said: “By Allah, your having to carry the dates is harder for me than you riding with him.” Later on, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu sent a servant who took care of the horse, and it was as if I had been set free from slavery.[41]
Zubair(R.A) named his sons after martyred Sahabah(R.A)
Due to of Zubair’s deep love of martyrdom, he named his sons after martyred Sahabah. Hisham ibn ‘Urwah narrated that his father said:
Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said: “Talhah named his sons after ambiya’ when he learnt that there would be no Rasul after Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. But, I named my children after martyrs, in the hope that they will attain martyrdom: ‘Abdullah after Abdullah ibn Jahsh, al Mundhir after al Mundhir ibn ‘Amr, ‘Urwah after ‘Urwah ibn Mas’ud, Hamzah after Hamzah, Jafar after Jafar ibn Abi Talib, Mus’ab after Mus’ab ibn ‘Umair, ‘Ubaidah after ‘Ubaidah ibn al Harith, Khalid after Khalid ibn Sa’id and ‘Amr after ‘Amr ibn Sa’id ibn al ‘As, who was killed at Yarmuk.[42]
Zubair(R.A) concealing acts of worship
Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
If anyone can conceal any of these righteous deeds, let him do so.[43]
Poetry of Hassan ibn Thabit in praise of Zubair(R.A)
Zubair passed by a gathering of the Sahabah of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam where Hassan was reciting his poetry to them, but they were not listening attentively to him. Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu sat down with them, and then he said:
Why do I see you not listening attentively to the poetry of ibn al Furay’ah? The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam used to listen attentively to him, reward him generously and not get distracted from him.
Then Hassan spoke in verse, praising Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu in many lines in which he described his great commitment to Islam, his adherence to the way of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his sacrifice and service for Islam.[44]
Generosity of Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam(R.A)
It was narrated that ‘Urwah ibn Zubair said:
Seven of the Sahabah appointed Zubair to be the guardian of their children after they died, including ‘Uthman, Ibn Mas’ud and ‘Abdul Rahman. He would spend on the heirs from his own wealth and protect their wealth.[45]
This is an excellent example of generosity and sincerity that embodies noble ideals that will have a strong impression on the heart of every man of dignity. A person may show generosity time after time and then tire of it, but for this generous man to be in charge of spending on the heirs of many of the Sahabah and protecting their wealth is a unique example in real life and an indication of the sublime attitude that the Sahabah attained, may Allah be pleased with them.[46]
The time has come to depart … and the Rasul’sﷺ testimony of entering paradise
Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam radiya Llahu ‘anhu left the Battle of the Camel during the first round, for reasons that we have explained above. When he left the battlefield, he was repeating these lines of poetry:
Giving up on things that I fear may have bad consequences, for the sake of Allah, is better in both worldly and religious terms.
It was also said that he spoke the following lines of verse:
I know, and I hope that I will benefit from what I know, that life is very close to death.[47]
After he left, he was followed by ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz, Faddalah ibn Habis and Nafi’, along with a group of the evildoers of Banu Tamim. It was said that when they caught up with him, they ganged up on him and killed him; it was also said that the one who caught up with him was ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz. ‘Amr said to him: “I need something from you.” He said: “Come closer.” The freed slave of Zubair, whose name was ‘Aytah said: “He has a weapon!” He said: “Even so.” So he came to him and started talking to him, and it was time for prayer, so Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said to him: “Let us pray.” He said: “Let us pray then.” Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu went forward to lead them both in prayer, and ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz stabbed him and killed him. It was also said that ‘Amr caught up with him while he was taking a nap in a valley that was known as Wadi al Siba’, and he attacked and killed him there. This is the most well-known version, and the poetry of his wife ‘Atikah bint Zaid ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl testifies to that. She was the last of his wives; before him, she was married to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who left her a widow when he was killed. Before ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, she was married to ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr al Siddiq, who was also killed and left her a widow. When Zubair was killed, she eulogised him in beautiful verse.[48]
When ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz killed Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he cut off his head and brought it to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, thinking that this would bring him closer to him. He asked for permission to enter, and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
Give the killer of Safiyyah’s son (meaning Zubair) the tidings of hell.
Then ‘Ali said:
I heard the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say: “Each Rasul had a disciple, and my disciple is Zubair.”[49]
When ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu saw the sword of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he said:
How often this sword defended the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and brought cheer to him.[50]
According to another report, Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu refused to let ibn Jurmuz enter upon him, and he said:
Give the killer of Safiyyah’s son the tidings of hell.[51]
It was said that ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz killed himself during ‘Ali’s reign; it was also said that he lived until Mus’ab ibn Zubair became governor of Iraq. He hid from him, and it was said to Mus’ab:
‘Amr ibn Jurmuz is here and is in hiding. Do you want to capture him?
He said:
Let him show himself, for he is safe. By Allah, I am not going to kill him in retaliation for Zubair, because he is too insignificant for me to make him equal to Zubair.[52]
Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam foretold that Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu would die as a martyr. It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was once atop Mount Uhud when the mountain shook. The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:
Be still, for there is no one on you but a Rasul, a Siddiq and a martyr.
On top of the mountain were Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum.[53]
Al Nawawi said:
This hadith represents one of the miracles of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, for he foretold that these people would be martyrs, and all of them, except Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, died as martyrs. ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum were all killed unlawfully and died as martyrs. The deaths of the first three are well known. Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was killed in Wadi al Siba’, near Basrah, as he was leaving the battlefield, not wanting to fight. Talhah also withdrew from the battle because he did not want to fight, but an arrow struck him and killed him. It is proven that whoever is killed unlawfully is a martyr.[54]
Al Sha’bi said:
I met five hundred or more of the Sahabah who said: ‘Ali, ‘Uthman, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum are in paradise.
Al Dhahabi said:
I say: Because they are among the ten about whom it was testified that they would be in paradise; they were present at Badr, they were among the people who swore allegiance in the Pledge of Ridwan; and they were among the foremost to embrace Islam,[55] of whom Allah said that He is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him. All four were killed and were granted martyrdom, so we love them and we hate the four who killed these four.[56]
The time has come to depart … and the Rasul’s testimony of entering paradise
Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam radiya Llahu ‘anhu left the Battle of the Camel during the first round, for reasons that we have explained above. When he left the battlefield, he was repeating these lines of poetry:
Giving up on things that I fear may have bad consequences, for the sake of Allah, is better in both worldly and religious terms.
It was also said that he spoke the following lines of verse:
I know, and I hope that I will benefit from what I know, that life is very close to death.[47]
After he left, he was followed by ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz, Faddalah ibn Habis and Nafi’, along with a group of the evildoers of Banu Tamim. It was said that when they caught up with him, they ganged up on him and killed him; it was also said that the one who caught up with him was ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz. ‘Amr said to him: “I need something from you.” He said: “Come closer.” The freed slave of Zubair, whose name was ‘Aytah said: “He has a weapon!” He said: “Even so.” So he came to him and started talking to him, and it was time for prayer, so Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said to him: “Let us pray.” He said: “Let us pray then.” Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu went forward to lead them both in prayer, and ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz stabbed him and killed him. It was also said that ‘Amr caught up with him while he was taking a nap in a valley that was known as Wadi al Siba’, and he attacked and killed him there. This is the most well-known version, and the poetry of his wife ‘Atikah bint Zaid ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl testifies to that. She was the last of his wives; before him, she was married to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who left her a widow when he was killed. Before ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, she was married to ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr al Siddiq, who was also killed and left her a widow. When Zubair was killed, she eulogised him in beautiful verse.[48]
When ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz killed Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he cut off his head and brought it to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, thinking that this would bring him closer to him. He asked for permission to enter, and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
Give the killer of Safiyyah’s son (meaning Zubair) the tidings of hell.
Then ‘Ali said:
I heard the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say: “Each Rasul had a disciple, and my disciple is Zubair.”[49]
When ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu saw the sword of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he said:
How often this sword defended the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and brought cheer to him.[50]
According to another report, Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu refused to let ibn Jurmuz enter upon him, and he said:
Give the killer of Safiyyah’s son the tidings of hell.[51]
It was said that ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz killed himself during ‘Ali’s reign; it was also said that he lived until Mus’ab ibn Zubair became governor of Iraq. He hid from him, and it was said to Mus’ab:
‘Amr ibn Jurmuz is here and is in hiding. Do you want to capture him?
He said:
Let him show himself, for he is safe. By Allah, I am not going to kill him in retaliation for Zubair, because he is too insignificant for me to make him equal to Zubair.[52]
Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam foretold that Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu would die as a martyr. It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was once atop Mount Uhud when the mountain shook. The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:
Be still, for there is no one on you but a Rasul, a Siddiq and a martyr.
On top of the mountain were Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum.[53]
Al Nawawi said:
This hadith represents one of the miracles of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, for he foretold that these people would be martyrs, and all of them, except Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, died as martyrs. ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum were all killed unlawfully and died as martyrs. The deaths of the first three are well known. Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was killed in Wadi al Siba’, near Basrah, as he was leaving the battlefield, not wanting to fight. Talhah also withdrew from the battle because he did not want to fight, but an arrow struck him and killed him. It is proven that whoever is killed unlawfully is a martyr.[54]
Al Sha’bi said:
I met five hundred or more of the Sahabah who said: ‘Ali, ‘Uthman, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum are in paradise.
Al Dhahabi said:
I say: Because they are among the ten about whom it was testified that they would be in paradise; they were present at Badr, they were among the people who swore allegiance in the Pledge of Ridwan; and they were among the foremost to embrace Islam,[55] of whom Allah said that He is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him. All four were killed and were granted martyrdom, so we love them and we hate the four who killed these four.[56]
The time has come to depart … and the Rasul’s testimony of entering paradise
Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam radiya Llahu ‘anhu left the Battle of the Camel during the first round, for reasons that we have explained above. When he left the battlefield, he was repeating these lines of poetry:
Giving up on things that I fear may have bad consequences, for the sake of Allah, is better in both worldly and religious terms.
It was also said that he spoke the following lines of verse:
I know, and I hope that I will benefit from what I know, that life is very close to death.[47]
After he left, he was followed by ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz, Faddalah ibn Habis and Nafi’, along with a group of the evildoers of Banu Tamim. It was said that when they caught up with him, they ganged up on him and killed him; it was also said that the one who caught up with him was ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz. ‘Amr said to him: “I need something from you.” He said: “Come closer.” The freed slave of Zubair, whose name was ‘Aytah said: “He has a weapon!” He said: “Even so.” So he came to him and started talking to him, and it was time for prayer, so Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said to him: “Let us pray.” He said: “Let us pray then.” Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu went forward to lead them both in prayer, and ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz stabbed him and killed him. It was also said that ‘Amr caught up with him while he was taking a nap in a valley that was known as Wadi al Siba’, and he attacked and killed him there. This is the most well-known version, and the poetry of his wife ‘Atikah bint Zaid ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl testifies to that. She was the last of his wives; before him, she was married to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who left her a widow when he was killed. Before ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, she was married to ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr al Siddiq, who was also killed and left her a widow. When Zubair was killed, she eulogised him in beautiful verse.[48]
When ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz killed Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he cut off his head and brought it to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, thinking that this would bring him closer to him. He asked for permission to enter, and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
Give the killer of Safiyyah’s son (meaning Zubair) the tidings of hell.
Then ‘Ali said:
I heard the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say: “Each Rasul had a disciple, and my disciple is Zubair.”[49]
When ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu saw the sword of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he said:
How often this sword defended the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and brought cheer to him.[50]
According to another report, Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu refused to let ibn Jurmuz enter upon him, and he said:
Give the killer of Safiyyah’s son the tidings of hell.[51]
It was said that ‘Amr ibn Jurmuz killed himself during ‘Ali’s reign; it was also said that he lived until Mus’ab ibn Zubair became governor of Iraq. He hid from him, and it was said to Mus’ab:
‘Amr ibn Jurmuz is here and is in hiding. Do you want to capture him?
He said:
Let him show himself, for he is safe. By Allah, I am not going to kill him in retaliation for Zubair, because he is too insignificant for me to make him equal to Zubair.[52]
Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam foretold that Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu would die as a martyr. It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was once atop Mount Uhud when the mountain shook. The Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:
Be still, for there is no one on you but a Rasul, a Siddiq and a martyr.
On top of the mountain were Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum.[53]
Al Nawawi said
This hadith represents one of the miracles of the Rasul of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, for he foretold that these people would be martyrs, and all of them, except Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, died as martyrs. ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum were all killed unlawfully and died as martyrs. The deaths of the first three are well known. Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was killed in Wadi al Siba’, near Basrah, as he was leaving the battlefield, not wanting to fight. Talhah also withdrew from the battle because he did not want to fight, but an arrow struck him and killed him. It is proven that whoever is killed unlawfully is a martyr.[54]
Al Sha’bi said:
I met five hundred or more of the Sahabah who said: ‘Ali, ‘Uthman, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum are in paradise.
Al Dhahabi said:
I say: Because they are among the ten about whom it was testified that they would be in paradise; they were present at Badr, they were among the people who swore allegiance in the Pledge of Ridwan; and they were among the foremost to embrace Islam,[55] of whom Allah said that He is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him. All four were killed and were granted martyrdom, so we love them and we hate the four who killed these four.[56]
Zubair’s eagerness that his debts should be paid off when he died
It was narrated that ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
On the day of the Camel, Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu left instructions that I was to pay off his debts. He said: “If you have any difficulty in doing so, then seek help from my Master.” By Allah, I did not understand what he meant until I said: “O my father, who is your Master?” He said: “Allah is my Master; I never had any difficulty paying a debt but I would say: ‘Master of Zubair, pay it off on his behalf’ and He paid it off.” The debt that he owed was that a man would come to him and give him some wealth as a trust, but Zubair would say: “No; rather it is a loan, for I fear that it may be lost.” When he was killed, he did not leave behind any dinars or dirhams, but he had a piece of land. I sold it and paid off his debts. The sons of Zubair said: “Share out our inheritance.” I said: “By Allah, I will not share it out among you until I announce for four years during the hajj season: If anyone has a debt owed by Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, let him come to us so that we may pay it off.”
He made this announcement every year during the hajj season, and then when four years had passed, he shared it out among them. Zubair had four wives, and each wife got 1,200,000. The total sum of his wealth was 50,200,000.[57]
The report of Bukhari is to be understood as referring to the total of his wealth at the time of his death, which is different from the surplus that was left four years later.[58]
There a great deal of blessing in his estate,[59] and Allah blessed his land after he died; his debt was paid off, and his wealth increased a great deal. From this story we learn a number of lessons:
a. Zubair said to his son:
O my son, if you have any difficulty in doing so (paying off the debts), then seek help from my Master.
This is an example of his deeply-rooted certainty and strong faith that resulted from sincere trust in Allah and turning to Him to meet his needs and relieve his distress. The true believer firmly believes that everything is in the hands of Allah. If he finds himself in hardship and distress, the first thing that crosses his mind is Allah and how He dominates and controls everything.
Those created beings that may have some connection to his situation are also in the hands of Allah, their hearts are in His hand, and He directs them as He wills. So the believer turns to Allah before anyone else asks Him to meet his needs and relieve his distress. Then he follows the principle of cause and effect that Allah has made a means of reaching the desired results, while believing that they are no more than means and that the One Who does and decrees things is Allah. He radiya Llahu ‘anhu is able to cause the means to have no impact, so that they do not lead to the usual results.[60]
b. Was Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu a wealthy man? From the text above, we see that Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not one of the wealthy who were known for their wealth. Instead, he felt a sense of hardship and was concerned about the trusts and debts that he owed; he was afraid that his land and property would not be sufficient to pay off all that he owed. This text also shows us that ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, like his father, was expecting that the debts would be more than the wealth and land. When his father asked him:
Do you think that what we owe will leave anything of our wealth?
‘Abdullah could not answer him. If he was expecting anything other than what his father was expecting, he would have given him an answer to put his mind at rest at this critical moment, to tell him that the matter was different from what he thought and was expecting; however, he went along with his father in his expectations. When Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu suggested seeking help from his Master, ‘Abdullah asked: “Who is your Master?” expecting him to mention some individual whom he could ask for help. No one can claim that ‘Abdullah was not aware of his father’s wealth or did not know about his property; because at that time ‘Abdullah was thirty-five years old, and a man that old is a great help to his father and knows all about his situation and wealth, especially if he is the oldest son. Zubair’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu question to his son: “Do you think that what we owe will leave anything of our wealth?” indicates that ‘Abdullah was aware of his father’s situation and finances. Indeed, Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu stated that the matter of paying off the debts was not easy, as he said:
Allah is my Master; I never had any difficulty paying a debt but I would say: “O Master of Zubair, pay it off on his behalf,’ and He paid it off.[61]
Another sign that Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not regarded as one of the rich and wealthy, and that what he expected with regard to the amount of his debts in comparison to his wealth was correct, is the fact that Hakim ibn Hizam radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the paternal cousin of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, met ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu and said to him:
I do not think that you will be able to pay off all these debts. If you are unable to pay any of them, come to me for help.[62]
A fourth point is that ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who was owed four hundred thousand by Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, came to ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu and said: “If you wish, I will leave it for you.” ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu said: “No.” ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar radiya Llahu ‘anhu said: “Then if you wish, you may leave it and pay later than others.”[63]
This is testimony that two of the senior Sahabah expected that the property of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu would not be enough to pay off all the debts that he owed, and that they regarded him as one who needed help. Moreover, those two were close to Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu and aware of his situation. One of them was Hakim ibn Hizam radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Zubair’s paternal cousin, the other was his maternal cousin, because the mother of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was Safiyyah bint ‘Abdul Muttalib radiya Llahu ‘anha, the paternal aunt of Rasul salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and he used to deal with him, giving and taking, borrowing and entrusting. These four points constitute evidence about which there is no doubt that Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not a wealthy man.[64]
There were many rumours about the wealth of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu and how rich he was, and there was a great deal of talk about his slaves and horses. In some sources, it says that he had a thousand slaves and that the thousand slaves used to pay him land tax every day, but that none of this wealth entered his house because he used to give it all in charity.[65]
The famous Orientalist Will Durant put the figure at ten thousand, saying:
Zubair owned ten thousand slaves, and he added one thousand horses.[66]
Of course, this smart Orientalist omitted the part that says that he gave the land tax of his slaves in charity.[67]
This report cannot stand up to the report of Bukhari, in which it says:
When Zubair was killed, he did not leave behind any dinar or dirham, but there was some land which included al Ghabah eleven houses in Madinah, two houses in Basrah, a house in Kufah and a house in Egypt.[68]
The report is clear and states that he did not have anything except those properties, in the context of talking about the distress caused by debt and difficulties in seeking to pay it off.
If there were a thousand slaves, they would have been mentioned and their value estimated; was not one slave worth at least two thousand dirhams?[69]
In that case, the value of the slaves alone would have covered almost the entire debt, and that is if we assume that there were only one thousand. If we go along with the wild exaggeration of Will Durant, which suggests that there were ten thousand slaves, this would mean rejecting Bukhari’s report completely, because ten thousand slaves and thousand horses, even if their price was low, would have been enough to pay off his debts and drown his heirs in a sea of wealth.
Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu would not have needed to say to his son: “One of my greatest worries is my debt”; or to ask him: “Do you think that what we owe will leave anything of our wealth?” to instruct him: “If you have any difficulty in doing so (paying off the debts), then seek help from my Master.”[70]
Discussing the biographies of Zubair, Talhah, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, Abu Musa al Ash’ari and the Mother of the Believers Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anhum is in harmony with the aim of this book, which is to present the life and times of Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu. These individuals are focal points in his life and times, and their biographies have been distorted in history books and literary works that speak of internal conflict and turmoil.
It is essential to highlight their biographies, character and attitudes so that the reader will come away with correct knowledge and will not be influenced by weak reports or false that were fabricated by the Rafidi Shia historians to distort the image of these noble characters. Talking about the biography of Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu and other senior Sahabah who contributed to the events that took place during the lifetime of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is in harmony with the author’s aims and what he wants to convey in his study of the era of the Rightly Guided Khulafa’.
[1] al Isabah, 1/526-528
[2] al Tabaqat al Kubra, 3/100; al Isabah, 1/526-528
[3] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/41
[4] Al Tabrani: al Kabir, 1/122
[5] Siyar al Salaf, 1/226. The report is mursal.
[6] Fada’il al Sahabah, 2/914, no. 1260. Its chain of narration is weak reliable because of corroborating evidence.
[7] Ibn Hisham: as-Sirah, 1/279; Ashab ar-Rasul, 1/274
[8] Ibn Hisham: as-Sirah an-Nabawiyyah, 1/279
[9] Riyad ‘Abdullah: Ahl al Shura’ al Sittah, p. 67
[10] Al Tabrani: al Kabir, no. 230 – its chain of narration is mursal sound; Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/46
[11] Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab al Maghazi, no. 3998
[12] Al Tarikh al Islami, 4/163
[13] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/46; the report is mursal.
[14] Fada’il al Sahabah, 2/918, no. 1267. Its chain of narration is sound.
[15] Muslim, Kitab Fada’il al Sahabah, no. 2470
[16] al Bidayah wan-Nihayah, 4/18
[17] ibid.
[18] Surah, Al Imran: 172
[19] Surah, Al Imran: 174
[20] Bukhari, no. 4077
[21] Ibn Hisham: al Sirah al Nabawiyyah, 3/108
[22] Musnad Ahmed, 3/34; al Mawsu’ah al Hadithiyyah. Its chain of narration is reliable.
[23] Muslim, no. 2414
[24] Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, no. 12219. Sound.
[25] ‘Umdat al Qari, 19/2239
[26] Bukhari, no. 3720
[27] Tuhfat al Ahwadhi, 10/246
[28] Muslim, no. 2414
[29] Sahih Muslim bi Sharh al Nawawi, 2/26, 27
[30] Al A’dhami, Dirasat Tarbawiyyah, p. 206
[31] Sahih. Muslim bi Sharh al Nawawi, 2/26, 27
[32] Dirasat Tarbawiyyah fil-Ahadith an-Nabawiyyah, p. 207
[33] Dirasat Tarbawiyyah, p.208
[34] Bukhari, 3975
[35] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/63
[36] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, 1/63
[37] op. cit., 7/260
[38] Futun Misr wa al Maghrib, p. 61; Qa’dat Fath al Sham wa Misr, p. 208-226
[39] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/55
[40] Qa’dat Fath al Sham wa Misr, p. 209-227. Muqawqis was the ruler of Egypt at that time. [Editor].
[41] Hayat al Sahabah, 2/691; Ashab al Rasul, 1128
[42] Tarikh al Islam, ‘Ahd al Khulafa’ al Rashidin, p. 505; al Tabaqat, 3/101
[43] Ibn al Mubarak: al Zuhd, p. 392
[44] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/56, 57
[45] op. cit., 1/131
[46] al Tarikh al lslami, 17/131
[47] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/60
[48] al Bidayah wan-Nihayah, 7/261
[49] Fada’il al Sahabah, 2/920
[50] al Bidayah wan-Nihayah, 7/261
[51] al Tabaqat, 31105 – its chain of narration is reliable; ‘Abdul Hamid: Khilafat ‘Ali, p. 164
[52] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, 7/261
[53] Muslim, no. 2417
[54] Sharh. an-Nawawi ‘ala Sahih Muslim, 15/271
[55] See at-Tawbah 9: 100
[56] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/62
[57] Bukhari, no. 3129
[58] Shadharat al Dhahab, 1/209
[59] Ibn Hajar: al lsabah, 2/461
[60] At-Tarikh al lslami, 20/30
[61] Bukhari, 3129
[62] ibid.
[63] ibid.
[64] ‘Abdul-’Adhim ad-Dib: az-Zubair ibn al ’Awwam, ath-Tharwah wath-Thawrah, p. 9
[65] Siyar as-Salaf as-Salihin, 1/227. There is some weakness in its chain of narration.
[66] az-Zubair ibn al ’Awwam, ath-Tharwah ath-Thawrah, p. 11
[67] op. cit., p. 13
[68] Bukhari, 3129
[69] az-Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam, ath- Tharwah wath- Thawrah, p. 14
[70] Bukhari, no. 312