WHEN IJMA CONTRADICTS NASS: ABU BAKR’S ELECTION VERSUS IMAM ALI’S DIVINE APPOINTMENT
STAGE FOUR
The Initial Bay‘ah of Abu Bakr Was Not a Universal Ijma
Stage One established that no explicit sahih or hasan Prophetic narration names Abu Bakr as the caliph after the Messenger of Allah.
Stage Two established that a genuine ijma cannot override or contradict the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah.
Stage Three established that a bay‘ah extracted through fear, threat or coercion is not equivalent to a free and legally binding pledge.
The next question is historical and legal:
Did all the principal Companions, Ahl al-Bayt, Muhajirun and Ansar freely and immediately agree upon Abu Bakr’s caliphate?
Or do Sunni sources establish that prominent Companions were absent, proposed alternative leadership, remained apart from the initial bay‘ah, delayed their pledge or refused it altogether?
The evidence from Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunni legal theory and Sunni historical sources demonstrates that Abu Bakr’s initial bay‘ah was not a simultaneous and universal ijma of all the relevant members of the Muslim community.
This does not by itself settle every later question concerning the practical establishment of Abu Bakr’s government.
Sunni political theorists may argue that the Imamate can be established through the bay‘ah of a sufficient number of ahl al-hall wa al-‘aqd, followed by wider public acceptance.
That is a separate argument.
The narrower and historically demonstrable conclusion of this stage is:
The initial Saqifah decision cannot accurately be described as an immediate, free and universal agreement of all the leading Companions, Ahl al-Bayt, Muhajirun and Ansar.
PART ONE
THE QUR’ANIC STANDARD OF CONSULTATION AND COMMUNAL DECISION-MAKING
The following Qur’anic verses do not independently prove what happened at Saqifah.
They establish the standard against which claims of comprehensive consultation and collective agreement must be measured.
1. The affairs of believers are conducted through mutual consultation
Arabic:
وَالَّذِينَ اسْتَجَابُوا لِرَبِّهِمْ وَأَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَىٰ بَيْنَهُمْ وَمِمَّا رَزَقْنَاهُمْ يُنْفِقُونَ
Translation:
“And those who respond to their Lord, establish prayer, conduct their affairs through mutual consultation among themselves, and spend from what We have provided them.”
Reference: Qur’an 42:38.
Ibn Kathir explained:
Arabic:
لَا يُبْرِمُونَ أَمْرًا حَتَّى يَتَشَاوَرُوا فِيهِ
Translation:
“They do not conclusively decide a matter until they have consulted one another concerning it.”
Reference: Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Azim, commentary on Qur’an 42:38.
Al-Sa‘di explained:
Arabic:
لَا يَسْتَبِدُّ أَحَدٌ مِنْهُمْ بِرَأْيِهِ فِي أَمْرٍ مِنَ الْأُمُورِ الْمُشْتَرَكَةِ بَيْنَهُمْ
Translation:
“No one among them acts independently through his own opinion concerning an affair shared by them.”
Reference: Al-Sa‘di, Taysir al-Karim al-Rahman, commentary on Qur’an 42:38.
2. Even the Prophet was commanded to consult the believers
Arabic:
فَبِمَا رَحْمَةٍ مِنَ اللهِ لِنْتَ لَهُمْ ۖ وَلَوْ كُنْتَ فَظًّا غَلِيظَ الْقَلْبِ لَانْفَضُّوا مِنْ حَوْلِكَ ۖ فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ وَشَاوِرْهُمْ فِي الْأَمْرِ ۖ فَإِذَا عَزَمْتَ فَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللهِ ۚ إِنَّ اللهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَوَكِّلِينَ
Translation:
“It was by Allah’s mercy that you were gentle with them. Had you been harsh and hard-hearted, they would have dispersed from around you. So pardon them, ask forgiveness for them and consult them in the matter. Then, when you have decided, place your trust in Allah. Surely Allah loves those who trust Him.”
Reference: Qur’an 3:159.
Al-Tabari records that this command corresponds to Allah’s praise:
Arabic:
وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَىٰ بَيْنَهُمْ
Translation:
“Their affairs are conducted through consultation among them.”
Reference: Al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan, commentary on Qur’an 3:159.
Al-Qurtubi wrote:
Arabic:
وَالشُّورَى مِنْ قَوَاعِدِ الشَّرِيعَةِ وَعَزَائِمِ الْأَحْكَامِ
Translation:
“Consultation is among the foundations of the Shariah and the firmly established legal principles.”
Reference: Al-Qurtubi, al-Jami‘ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, commentary on Qur’an 3:159.
3. Major public matters are affairs of common concern
Arabic:
إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِاللهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَإِذَا كَانُوا مَعَهُ عَلَىٰ أَمْرٍ جَامِعٍ لَمْ يَذْهَبُوا حَتَّىٰ يَسْتَأْذِنُوهُ
Translation:
“The believers are only those who believe in Allah and His Messenger and, when they are with him upon a matter of common concern, do not depart until they have sought his permission.”
Reference: Qur’an 24:62.
Al-Qurtubi explained:
Arabic:
فَإِذَا كَانَ أَمْرٌ يَشْمَلُهُمْ نَفْعُهُ وَضَرُّهُ جَمَعَهُمْ لِلتَّشَاوُرِ فِي ذَلِكَ
Translation:
“When there is a matter whose benefit and harm encompass them, he gathers them to consult concerning it.”
Reference: Al-Qurtubi, commentary on Qur’an 24:62.
4. Believers may seriously disagree over important commands
Arabic:
وَلَقَدْ صَدَقَكُمُ اللهُ وَعْدَهُ إِذْ تَحُسُّونَهُمْ بِإِذْنِهِ ۖ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا فَشِلْتُمْ وَتَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي الْأَمْرِ وَعَصَيْتُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا أَرَاكُمْ مَا تُحِبُّونَ ۚ مِنْكُمْ مَنْ يُرِيدُ الدُّنْيَا وَمِنْكُمْ مَنْ يُرِيدُ الْآخِرَةَ
Translation:
“Allah certainly fulfilled His promise to you when you were overcoming them by His permission, until you lost courage, disputed concerning the command and disobeyed after He had shown you what you desired. Among you were some who desired this world, and among you were some who desired the Hereafter.”
Reference: Qur’an 3:152.
5. A group of believers may be unwilling concerning a decision
Arabic:
كَمَا أَخْرَجَكَ رَبُّكَ مِنْ بَيْتِكَ بِالْحَقِّ وَإِنَّ فَرِيقًا مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ لَكَارِهُونَ
Translation:
“Just as your Lord brought you out of your home with the truth, while a group among the believers was unwilling.”
Reference: Qur’an 8:5.
6. Two opposing groups may both remain described as believers
Arabic:
وَإِنْ طَائِفَتَانِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ اقْتَتَلُوا فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَهُمَا ۖ فَإِنْ بَغَتْ إِحْدَاهُمَا عَلَى الْأُخْرَىٰ فَقَاتِلُوا الَّتِي تَبْغِي حَتَّىٰ تَفِيءَ إِلَىٰ أَمْرِ اللهِ
Translation:
“If two groups of believers fight one another, make peace between them. But if one of them transgresses against the other, fight the transgressing group until it returns to the command of Allah.”
Reference: Qur’an 49:9.
PART TWO
SUNNI LEGAL THEORY: A MAJORITY IS NOT THE SAME AS UNIVERSAL IJMA
7. Ijma requires the agreement of all qualified mujtahids
A standard Sunni usul definition states:
Arabic:
اتِّفَاقُ جَمِيعِ الْمُجْتَهِدِينَ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ فِي عَصْرٍ مِنَ الْعُصُورِ بَعْدَ وَفَاةِ الرَّسُولِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلَى حُكْمٍ شَرْعِيٍّ
Translation:
“The agreement of all Muslim mujtahids in an age after the death of the Messenger of Allah upon a legal ruling.”
8. Al-Amidi: Ijma is established only where agreement of all is known
Arabic:
إِنَّ الِاحْتِجَاجَ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ إِنَّمَا يَكُونُ حَيْثُ عُلِمَ الِاتِّفَاقُ مِنَ الْكُلِّ، إِمَّا بِصَرِيحِ الْمَقَالِ أَوْ قَرَائِنِ الْأَحْوَالِ
Translation:
“Reliance upon ijma is valid only where the agreement of all is known, either through explicit statements or through the indications of the circumstances.”
Reference: Sayf al-Din al-Amidi, al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam, issue concerning whether the agreement of the majority constitutes ijma.
9. The majority Sunni position: agreement of the majority does not constitute ijma
Arabic:
الْجُمْهُورُ عَلَى أَنَّ الْإِجْمَاعَ لَا يَتَحَقَّقُ إِلَّا بِاتِّفَاقِ كُلِّ الْمُجْتَهِدِينَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْعَصْرِ، وَأَنَّ مُخَالَفَةَ وَاحِدٍ أَوْ أَكْثَرَ تَخْرِمُ الْإِجْمَاعَ
Translation:
“The majority hold that ijma is not realized except through the agreement of every mujtahid of the age and that the disagreement of one or more prevents ijma.”
Reference: Sunni usul discussion concerning whether one or two dissenters prevent ijma.
10. Ibn Qudamah: The majority’s position does not constitute ijma
Arabic:
وَلَا يَنْعَقِدُ الْإِجْمَاعُ بِقَوْلِ الْأَكْثَرِينَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْعَصْرِ فِي قَوْلِ الْجُمْهُورِ
Translation:
“According to the majority, ijma is not constituted through the opinion of the majority of the people of an age.”
Reference: Ibn Qudamah, Rawdat al-Nazir wa Junnat al-Munazir, chapter concerning whether the majority constitutes ijma.
11. The Maliki school and the majority: one qualified dissenter prevents ijma
Arabic:
لَا بُدَّ فِي الْإِجْمَاعِ مِنِ اتِّفَاقِ جَمِيعِ الْمُجْتَهِدِينَ، فَلَا يَنْعَقِدُ الْإِجْمَاعُ مَعَ مُخَالَفَةِ مُجْتَهِدٍ وَاحِدٍ
Translation:
“All mujtahids must agree for ijma to exist. Ijma is not constituted when even one mujtahid disagrees.”
Reference: Nashr al-Bunud ‘ala Maraqi al-Su‘ud, discussion of the participants whose agreement establishes ijma.
12. Silence does not necessarily mean agreement
Sunni discussions of silent consensus recognize that silence may occur because of:
Arabic:
الْخَوْفِ وَالْمَهَابَةِ وَالتَّرَدُّدِ فِي الْحُكْمِ
Translation:
“Fear, awe or hesitation concerning the ruling.”
13. Later agreement does not retroactively create an initial ijma
Sunni usul scholars disputed whether a later generation’s agreement upon one of two earlier positions eliminates the earlier disagreement.
Some regarded the later agreement as a new consensus.
Others held that the earlier position does not disappear merely because its original holders died.
PART THREE
SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: THE MUSLIMS WERE DIVIDED INTO SEPARATE GROUPS
14. The Ansar gathered separately, while Imam Ali a.s, al-Zubayr and those with them also remained apart
Umar ibn al-Khattab stated:
Arabic:
وَإِنَّهُ كَانَ مِنْ خَبَرِنَا حِينَ تُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنَّ الْأَنْصَارَ خَالَفُونَا، وَاجْتَمَعُوا بِأَسْرِهِمْ فِي سَقِيفَةِ بَنِي سَاعِدَةَ، وَخَالَفَ عَنَّا عَلِيٌّ وَالزُّبَيْرُ وَمَنْ مَعَهُمَا
Translation:
“When the Messenger of Allah died, the Ansar separated from us and gathered, all together, in the hall of Banu Sa‘idah. Ali, al-Zubayr and those with them also remained apart from us.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6830; Musnad Ahmad.
Grading: Sahih.
15. A fuller Sunni wording says Imam Ali a.s and al-Zubayr remained in the house of Bibi Fatima s.a
Arabic:
أَنَّ عَلِيًّا وَالزُّبَيْرَ وَمَنْ كَانَ مَعَهُمَا تَخَلَّفُوا فِي بَيْتِ فَاطِمَةَ
Translation:
“Ali, al-Zubayr and those who were with them remained behind in the house of Fatima.”
Reference: Variant of Umar’s Saqifah report transmitted in Sunni hadith and historical sources.
Status:
The core separation of Imam Ali, al-Zubayr and those with them is established in Sahih al-Bukhari. The specification of Bibi Fatima’s house appears in fuller routes.
16. The Ansar proposed a different political arrangement
Arabic:
مِنَّا أَمِيرٌ وَمِنْكُمْ أَمِيرٌ، يَا مَعْشَرَ قُرَيْشٍ
Translation:
“There should be a leader from us and a leader from you, O people of Quraysh.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6830.
Grading: Sahih.
17. The gathering became noisy and Umar feared disagreement
Arabic:
فَكَثُرَ اللَّغَطُ، وَارْتَفَعَتِ الْأَصْوَاتُ، حَتَّى فَرِقْتُ مِنَ الِاخْتِلَافِ
Translation:
“The noise increased and the voices rose until I feared disagreement.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6830.
Grading: Sahih.
18. Umar initiated the pledge because he feared the Ansar might establish another bay‘ah
Arabic:
خَشِيتُ إِنْ فَارَقْنَا الْقَوْمَ وَلَمْ تَكُنْ بَيْعَةٌ أَنْ يُحْدِثُوا بَعْدَنَا بَيْعَةً، فَإِمَّا أَنْ نُبَايِعَهُمْ عَلَى مَا لَا نَرْضَى، وَإِمَّا أَنْ نُخَالِفَهُمْ فَيَكُونَ فَسَادٌ
Translation:
“I feared that if we left the people without a bay‘ah, they might establish another bay‘ah after us. We would then either have to follow them in something with which we were not satisfied, or oppose them and corruption would result.”
Reference: Umar’s Saqifah account in Sahih al-Bukhari.
PART FOUR
UMAR’S OWN DESCRIPTION OF THE INITIAL BAY‘AH
19. Umar called Abu Bakr’s bay‘ah a sudden occurrence
Arabic:
إِنَّ بَيْعَةَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ كَانَتْ فَلْتَةً، أَلَا وَإِنَّهَا كَانَتْ كَذَلِكَ، إِلَّا أَنَّ اللهَ وَقَى شَرَّهَا
Translation:
“The bay‘ah of Abu Bakr was a sudden occurrence. Indeed, it was so, but Allah protected against its harm.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6830.
Grading: Sahih.
Ibn Hajar explained:
Arabic:
أَيْ فَجْأَةً وَزْنُهُ وَمَعْنَاهُ
Translation:
“That is, it occurred suddenly—this is both its form and its meaning.”
Reference: Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6830.
20. Umar warned against repeating a pledge without Muslim consultation
Arabic:
مَنْ بَايَعَ رَجُلًا عَنْ غَيْرِ مَشُورَةٍ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ فَلَا يُبَايَعُ هُوَ وَلَا الَّذِي بَايَعَهُ، تَغِرَّةً أَنْ يُقْتَلَا
Translation:
“Whoever gives bay‘ah to a man without consultation with the Muslims, neither he nor the one to whom he gave bay‘ah is to be followed, lest both expose themselves to being killed.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6830.
Grading: Sahih.
PART FIVE
SAHIH AL-BUKHARI AND SAHIH MUSLIM: IMAM ALI A.S HAD NOT PLEDGED DURING THE SIX MONTHS OF BIBI FATIMA’S LIFE
21. Sahih al-Bukhari explicitly records the delayed bay‘ah
Arabic:
فَالْتَمَسَ مُصَالَحَةَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَمُبَايَعَتَهُ، وَلَمْ يَكُنْ يُبَايِعُ تِلْكَ الْأَشْهُرَ
Translation:
“Ali then sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and to give him bay‘ah, and he had not been giving bay‘ah during those months.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, nos. 4240–4241.
Grading: Sahih.
22. Sahih Muslim contains the same explicit statement
Arabic:
فَالْتَمَسَ مُصَالَحَةَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَمُبَايَعَتَهُ، وَلَمْ يَكُنْ بَايَعَ تِلْكَ الْأَشْهُرَ
Translation:
“Ali then sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and to give him bay‘ah, and he had not given bay‘ah during those months.”
Reference: Sahih Muslim, no. 1759.
Grading: Sahih.
23. Imam Ali a.s explained that the matter had been decided independently of Ahl al-Bayt
Arabic:
وَلَكِنَّكَ اسْتَبْدَدْتَ عَلَيْنَا بِالْأَمْرِ، وَكُنَّا نَرَى لَنَا حَقًّا لِقَرَابَتِنَا مِنْ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ
The wording in Sahih al-Bukhari states:
Arabic:
وَلَكِنَّكَ اسْتَبْدَدْتَ عَلَيْنَا بِالْأَمْرِ، وَكُنَّا نَرَى لِقَرَابَتِنَا مِنْ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَصِيبًا
Translation:
“But you acted independently of us in the matter, while we believed that, because of our relationship to the Messenger of Allah, we possessed a right/share in it.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, nos. 4240–4241; Sahih Muslim, no. 1759.
Grading: Sahih.
24. Abu Bakr publicly acknowledged Imam Ali’s remaining behind from the bay‘ah
Arabic:
وَذَكَرَ شَأْنَ عَلِيٍّ وَتَخَلُّفَهُ عَنِ الْبَيْعَةِ، وَعَذَرَهُ بِالَّذِي اعْتَذَرَ إِلَيْهِ
Translation:
“Abu Bakr mentioned the matter of Ali and his remaining behind from the bay‘ah, and he accepted the explanation with which Ali had excused himself.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, nos. 4240–4241; Sahih Muslim, no. 1759.
Grading: Sahih.
PART SIX
SUNNI COMMENTATORS ADMIT THAT ABU BAKR’S IMAMATE DID NOT REQUIRE THE PERSONAL PLEDGE OF EVERY MUSLIM
25. Ibn Hajar transmits the Sunni response that universal participation was unnecessary
While explaining Imam Ali’s delayed bay‘ah, Ibn Hajar transmitted from al-Maziri:
Arabic:
يَكْفِي فِي بَيْعَةِ الْإِمَامِ أَنْ يَقَعَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْحَلِّ وَالْعَقْدِ، وَلَا يَجِبُ الِاسْتِيعَابُ
Translation:
“For the bay‘ah of an Imam, it is sufficient that it occur through the people of authority and deliberation; complete inclusion of everyone is not obligatory.”
Reference: Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari, nos. 4240–4241.
PART SEVEN
EARLY SUNNI HISTORICAL CORROBORATION OF SEPARATION AND PRESSURE
26. A Sunni historical report says several Muhajirun became angry over Abu Bakr’s bay‘ah
Arabic:
أَنَّ رِجَالًا مِنَ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ غَضِبُوا فِي بَيْعَةِ أَبِي بَكْرٍ، مِنْهُمْ عَلِيٌّ وَالزُّبَيْرُ، فَدَخَلَا بَيْتَ فَاطِمَةَ بِنْتِ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَمَعَهُمَا السِّلَاحُ
Translation:
“A number of men from the Muhajirun became angry concerning the bay‘ah of Abu Bakr, among them Ali and al-Zubayr. They entered the house of Fatima, daughter of the Messenger of Allah, carrying their weapons.”
Reference: Report of Musa ibn ‘Uqbah from Ibrahim ibn Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, transmitted in Sunni historical works.
Status:
Al-Salihi al-Shami described its chain as good:
بِإِسْنَادٍ جَيِّدٍ
Reference: Al-Salihi al-Shami, Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad, account of Saqifah.
27. The same report describes al-Zubayr’s sword being taken and broken
Arabic:
أَخَذَ أَحَدُهُمْ سَيْفَ الزُّبَيْرِ، فَضَرَبَ بِهِ الْحَجَرَ حَتَّى كَسَرَهُ
Translation:
“One of them took al-Zubayr’s sword and struck it against a stone until it broke.”
Reference: Musa ibn ‘Uqbah’s report, preserved in Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad.
28. Ibn Abi Shaybah records that Imam Ali a.s and al-Zubayr consulted Bibi Fatima s.a concerning their position
Arabic:
أَنَّهُ حِينَ بُويِعَ لِأَبِي بَكْرٍ بَعْدَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، كَانَ عَلِيٌّ وَالزُّبَيْرُ يَدْخُلَانِ عَلَى فَاطِمَةَ بِنْتِ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَيُشَاوِرُونَهَا وَيَرْتَجِعُونَ فِي أَمْرِهِمْ
Translation:
“When bay‘ah was given to Abu Bakr after the Messenger of Allah, Ali and al-Zubayr used to enter upon Fatima, daughter of the Messenger of Allah, consult her and reconsider their affair.”
Reference: Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, no. 37045.
Status:
Its transmitters to Aslam are reliable, but there is a possible historical disconnection concerning whether Aslam personally witnessed the earliest events.
It should be presented as an early historical report rather than at the level of a fully connected Sahih al-Bukhari narration.
29. The same report preserves a threat to end their continued gathering
Arabic:
وَايْمُ اللهِ مَا ذَاكَ بِمَانِعِي إِنِ اجْتَمَعَ هَؤُلَاءِ النَّفَرُ عِنْدَكِ أَنْ أَمَرْتُهُمْ أَنْ يُحَرَّقَ عَلَيْهِمُ الْبَيْتُ
Translation:
“By Allah, that will not prevent me—if these men continue gathering at your house—from ordering that the house be burned over them.”
Reference: Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, no. 37045.
Status:
Early historical report with the disconnection caveat stated above.
PART EIGHT
BANU HASHIM AND OTHER DELAYED PLEDGERS IN SUNNI HISTORICAL SOURCES
30. Al-Zuhri’s report extends the six-month delay to Banu Hashim and al-Zubayr
Arabic:
بَقِيَ عَلِيٌّ وَبَنُو هَاشِمٍ وَالزُّبَيْرُ سِتَّةَ أَشْهُرٍ لَمْ يُبَايِعُوا أَبَا بَكْرٍ حَتَّى مَاتَتْ فَاطِمَةُ فَبَايَعُوهُ
Translation:
“Ali, Banu Hashim and al-Zubayr remained for six months without giving bay‘ah to Abu Bakr, until Fatima died, after which they gave him bay‘ah.”
Reference: Report attributed to al-Zuhri and preserved in Sunni historical works.
Status:
Imam Ali’s six-month non-bay‘ah is independently established by Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.
The extension of the same delay to all Banu Hashim and al-Zubayr is historical evidence and should not be presented at the same canonical level as the Sahih narration.
31. Another Sunni source states that no one from Banu Hashim pledged until Imam Ali a.s did
Arabic:
لَمْ يُبَايِعْ أَبَا بَكْرٍ أَحَدٌ مِنْ بَنِي هَاشِمٍ حَتَّى مَاتَتْ فَاطِمَةُ
Translation:
“No one from Banu Hashim gave bay‘ah to Abu Bakr until Fatima died.”
A report from al-Zuhri is also cited:
Arabic:
لَا وَاللهِ وَلَا أَحَدٌ مِنْ بَنِي هَاشِمٍ حَتَّى بَايَعَهُ عَلِيٌّ
Translation:
“No, by Allah, nor did anyone from Banu Hashim until Ali gave him bay‘ah.”
Reference: Al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, account of the events following the Prophet’s death.
Status:
Historical report with the same caution concerning the level of proof.
32. Aban ibn Sa‘id delayed his own pledge while waiting to see what Banu Hashim would do
Arabic:
وَكَانَ أَبَانُ أَحَدَ مَنْ تَخَلَّفَ عَنْ بَيْعَةِ أَبِي بَكْرٍ لِيَنْظُرَ مَا يَصْنَعُ بَنُو هَاشِمٍ، فَلَمَّا بَايَعُوهُ بَايَعَ
Translation:
“Aban was among those who remained behind from the bay‘ah of Abu Bakr in order to see what Banu Hashim would do. When they gave bay‘ah, he gave bay‘ah.”
Reference: Sunni biographical works concerning Aban ibn Sa‘id.
Status: Sunni biographical-historical report.
PART NINE
SA‘D IBN ‘UBADAH NEVER GAVE BAY‘AH TO ABU BAKR
33. Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah initially refused the demand to give bay‘ah
Arabic:
لَا وَاللهِ، حَتَّى أَرْمِيَكُمْ بِمَا فِي كِنَانَتِي، وَأَخْضِبَ سِنَانَ رُمْحِي، وَأَضْرِبَ بِسَيْفِي، وَأُقَاتِلَكُمْ بِأَهْلِ بَيْتِي وَمَنْ أَطَاعَنِي، وَلَوِ اجْتَمَعَ مَعَكُمُ الْجِنُّ وَالْإِنْسُ مَا بَايَعْتُكُمْ حَتَّى أَعْرِضَ عَلَى رَبِّي
Translation:
“No, by Allah, not until I shoot you with everything in my quiver, stain the point of my spear, strike with my sword and fight you with my household and whoever obeys me. Even if the jinn and mankind gathered with you, I would not give you bay‘ah until I meet my Lord.”
Reference: Sunni historical accounts of the events following Saqifah, including Ibn Kathir’s al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah.
Status: Historical report.
34. His non-bay‘ah was tolerated because forcing him risked bloodshed
Arabic:
إِنَّهُ قَدْ لَجَّ وَأَبَى، وَلَا يُبَايِعُكُمْ حَتَّى يُقْتَلَ، وَلَيْسَ بِمَقْتُولٍ حَتَّى يُقْتَلَ مَعَهُ أَهْلُهُ وَطَائِفَةٌ مِنْ عَشِيرَتِهِ، وَلَا يَضُرُّكُمْ تَرْكُهُ، وَإِنَّمَا هُوَ رَجُلٌ وَاحِدٌ
Translation:
“He has persisted and refused. He will not give you bay‘ah unless he is killed, and he will not be killed until his family and a group of his tribe are killed with him. Leaving him will not harm you; he is only one man.”
Reference: Sunni historical account of Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah’s refusal.
35. Sunni defenders admit that Sa‘d died without giving bay‘ah to Abu Bakr or Umar
Arabic:
وَسَعْدُ بْنُ عُبَادَةَ مَاتَ وَلَمْ يُبَايِعْهُ وَلَا بَايَعَ عُمَرَ، وَمَاتَ فِي خِلَافَةِ عُمَرَ
Translation:
“Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah died without giving bay‘ah to him, nor did he give bay‘ah to Umar, and he died during Umar’s caliphate.”
Reference: Sunni work defending Abu Bakr’s caliphate, citing Ibn Taymiyyah’s Minhaj al-Sunnah.
PART TEN
MALIK IBN NUWAYRA: DISPUTED SUBMISSION TO ABU BAKR’S GOVERNMENT AND HIS KILLING BY KHALID’S FORCES
The disagreement surrounding Abu Bakr’s authority was not confined to the principal figures in Madinah.
The case of Malik ibn Nuwayra demonstrates that outside Madinah, the transfer of political and financial obedience to Abu Bakr’s government was also neither immediate nor universally uncontested.
This case must be presented with methodological caution.
The surviving Sunni historical sources disagree concerning:
Whether Malik had apostatized.
Whether he merely refused to transfer zakat to Abu Bakr.
Whether he continued to identify himself as a Muslim.
Whether he had entered a political agreement with Sajah without accepting her religious claims.
Whether Khalid misunderstood his words.
Whether Malik and his companions had been granted safety.
Whether Khalid intentionally ordered their execution or his command was misunderstood.
Whether Khalid committed an unlawful killing or an excusable error of judgment.
Therefore, it would be historically unsafe to claim without qualification:
“Malik ibn Nuwayra and his entire tribe formally gathered and rejected Abu Bakr’s bay‘ah.”
The stronger and better-supported conclusion is:
Malik had been an official zakat collector appointed by the Prophet. After the Prophet’s death, he did not transfer the collected zakat to Abu Bakr’s government but distributed it among his own people. His submission to the new government was therefore absent or disputed. He and several of his companions were subsequently captured and killed by Khalid ibn al-Walid’s forces in circumstances that major Sunni sources themselves preserve as deeply controversial.
36. The Prophet appointed Malik ibn Nuwayra to collect the zakat of his people
Arabic:
وَبَعَثَ مَالِكَ بْنَ نُوَيْرَةَ عَلَى صَدَقَاتِ بَنِي حَنْظَلَةَ
Translation:
“The Messenger of Allah appointed Malik ibn Nuwayra over the charitable dues of Banu Hanzalah.”
Reference: Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh, events of the tenth year after Hijrah; also mentioned in Sunni biographical and historical works concerning the Prophet’s zakat officials.
Status: Sunni historical report.
37. After the Prophet’s death, Malik did not send the collected zakat to Abu Bakr
Arabic:
فَلَمَّا بَلَغَتْهُ وَفَاةُ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَمْسَكَ الصَّدَقَةَ وَفَرَّقَهَا فِي قَوْمِهِ
Translation:
“When news of the death of the Messenger of Allah reached him, he withheld the zakat and distributed it among his people.”
Reference: Sunni historical and biographical accounts concerning Malik ibn Nuwayra.
Status: Historical report.
38. Poetry attributed to Malik expresses conditional obedience to whoever truly upheld the religion
Arabic:
فَقُلْتُ خُذُوا أَمْوَالَكُمْ غَيْرَ خَائِفٍ
وَلَا نَاظِرٍ فِيمَا يَجِيءُ مِنَ الْغَدِ
فَإِنْ قَامَ بِالدِّينِ الْمُحِقُّ قَائِمٌ
أَطَعْنَا وَقُلْنَا الدِّينُ دِينُ مُحَمَّدِ
Translation:
“I said: Take back your property without fear,
and without waiting to see what tomorrow may bring.
If one who truly upholds the religion rises to authority,
we shall obey and say: the religion is the religion of Muhammad.”
Reference: Poetry attributed to Malik ibn Nuwayra in Sunni historical discussions concerning his withholding and redistribution of the zakat.
Status: Historical attribution.
39. Sunni sources describe Malik as remaining apart while other tribal leaders submitted
Arabic:
فَاسْتَقْبَلَهُ أُمَرَاءُ بَنِي تَمِيمٍ بِالسَّمْعِ وَالطَّاعَةِ، وَبَذَلُوا الزَّكَوَاتِ، إِلَّا مَا كَانَ مِنْ مَالِكِ بْنِ نُوَيْرَةَ، فَإِنَّهُ مُتَحَيِّرٌ فِي أَمْرِهِ، مُتَنَحٍّ عَنِ النَّاسِ
Translation:
“The leaders of Banu Tamim received him with hearing and obedience and offered the zakat, except for Malik ibn Nuwayra, who remained uncertain concerning his position and withdrew from the people.”
Reference: Sunni historical account of Khalid ibn al-Walid’s expedition to al-Bitah.
Status: Historical report.
40. A Sunni historical account states that no clear apostasy became manifest from Malik
Arabic:
لَمَّا تُوُفِّيَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَارْتَدَّتِ الْعَرَبُ، وَظَهَرَتْ سَجَاحُ وَادَّعَتِ النُّبُوَّةَ، صَالَحَهَا مَالِكٌ، وَلَمْ تَظْهَرْ مِنْهُ رِدَّةٌ، وَأَقَامَ بِالْبِطَاحِ
Translation:
“When the Prophet died, the Arabs apostatized, and Sajah appeared and claimed prophethood. Malik reached an agreement with her, but no apostasy became manifest from him, and he remained at al-Bitah.”
Reference: Ibn al-Athir’s historical account, quoted by al-Dhahabi in Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’.
Status: Historical report.
41. Malik reportedly identified himself as a Muslim
Arabic:
قَالُوا:
نَحْنُ الْمُسْلِمُونَ.
فَزَعَمَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ:
وَأَنَا عَبْدُ اللهِ الْمُسْلِمُ.
Translation:
“They said:
‘We are the Muslims.’
Abu Qatadah stated that Malik replied:
‘And I am a Muslim servant of Allah.’”
Reference: Historical report from al-Zuhri preserved in Sunni historical works, including al-Dhahabi’s account of Malik ibn Nuwayra.
Status: Historical report.
42. Malik and his companions laid down their weapons and were taken as prisoners
Arabic:
قَالَ:
فَضَعِ السِّلَاحَ.
فَوَضَعَهُ فِي اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ رَجُلًا.
فَلَمَّا وَضَعُوا السِّلَاحَ رَبَطَهُمْ أَمِيرُ تِلْكَ السَّرِيَّةِ، وَانْطَلَقَ بِهِمْ أُسَارَى
Translation:
“He was told:
‘Then put down your weapon.’
He and twelve men laid down their weapons. When they had laid down their weapons, the commander of the detachment bound them and took them away as prisoners.”
Reference: Historical report transmitted in al-Dhahabi’s account of the killing of Malik ibn Nuwayra.
Status: Historical report.
43. Abu Qatadah testified that Malik and his companions had called the adhan and prayed
Arabic:
وَفِيهِ أَنَّ أَبَا قَتَادَةَ شَهِدَ أَنَّهُمْ أَذَّنُوا وَصَلَّوْا
Translation:
“The report contains that Abu Qatadah testified that they had called the adhan and performed the prayer.”
Reference: Al-Dhahabi, Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’, account of Malik ibn Nuwayra, quoting earlier Sunni historical material.
Another Sunni historical summary states:
Arabic:
فَشَهِدَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ أَنَّهُمْ أَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ، وَقَالَ آخَرُونَ: إِنَّهُمْ لَمْ يُؤَذِّنُوا وَلَا صَلَّوْا
Translation:
“Abu Qatadah testified that they had established the prayer, while others said that they had neither called the adhan nor prayed.”
Status: Conflicting historical testimony.
44. Another Sunni report says Malik’s people professed Islam and prayed with Khalid’s soldiers
Arabic:
فَلَمَّا غَشُوا قَوْمًا مِنْهُمْ أَخَذُوا السِّلَاحَ، وَقَالُوا:
نَحْنُ مُسْلِمُونَ.
فَقِيلَ لَهُمْ:
ضَعُوا السِّلَاحَ.
فَوَضَعُوهُ، ثُمَّ صَلَّى الْمُسْلِمُونَ وَصَلَّوْا
Translation:
“When the force approached a group from among them, they took up their weapons and said:
‘We are Muslims.’
They were told:
‘Put down your weapons.’
They put them down, and the Muslims then prayed and they prayed with them.”
Reference: Historical report of Ibn Ishaq preserved by al-Dhahabi.
Status: Historical report.
45. Malik reportedly maintained that he remained upon Islam
Arabic:
قَالَ خَالِدٌ:
بَلِ اللهُ قَتَلَكَ بِرُجُوعِكَ عَنِ الْإِسْلَامِ.
فَقَالَ:
أَنَا عَلَى الْإِسْلَامِ.
Translation:
“Khalid said:
‘Rather, Allah has killed you because you turned back from Islam.’
Malik replied:
‘I remain upon Islam.’”
Reference: Historical account preserved by al-Dhahabi.
Status and caution:
This is a disputed historical report and not a narration from Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim.
Its relevance is that an important Sunni historical compilation preserves Malik’s explicit rejection of the allegation that he had left Islam.
46. Malik and a group of his people were killed by Khalid’s forces
Arabic:
أَتَى خَالِدُ بْنُ الْوَلِيدِ بِمَالِكِ بْنِ نُوَيْرَةَ فِي رَهْطٍ مِنْ قَوْمِهِ بَنِي حَنْظَلَةَ، فَضَرَبَ أَعْنَاقَهُمْ
Translation:
“Khalid ibn al-Walid was brought Malik ibn Nuwayra together with a group from his people, Banu Hanzalah, and their necks were struck.”
Reference: Historical report of Ibn Ishaq preserved by al-Dhahabi.
Status: Historical report.
47. Abu Qatadah objected and maintained that Malik had professed Islam and possessed safety
Arabic:
فَحَدَّثَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ خَالِدًا أَنَّ لَهُمْ أَمَانًا، وَأَنَّهُمْ قَدِ ادَّعَوْا إِسْلَامًا
Translation:
“Abu Qatadah informed Khalid that they had been granted safety and that they had professed Islam.”
A report further attributes to Abu Qatadah the statement to Abu Bakr:
Arabic:
تَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُ كَانَ لِمَالِكِ بْنِ نُوَيْرَةَ عَهْدٌ، وَأَنَّهُ ادَّعَى إِسْلَامًا، وَإِنِّي نَهَيْتُ خَالِدًا فَتَرَكَ قَوْلِي
Translation:
“You know that Malik ibn Nuwayra had a covenant of safety and that he professed Islam. I warned Khalid, but he disregarded my words.”
Reference: Sunni historical account preserved by al-Dhahabi.
Status: Historical report.
48. Umar accused Khalid of killing a Muslim man
Arabic:
فَلَمَّا قَدِمَ خَالِدٌ قَالَ عُمَرُ:
يَا عَدُوَّ اللهِ، قَتَلْتَ امْرَأً مُسْلِمًا، ثُمَّ نَزَوْتَ عَلَى امْرَأَتِهِ، لَأَرْجُمَنَّكَ
Translation:
“When Khalid returned, Umar said:
‘Enemy of Allah! You killed a Muslim man and then went to his wife. I shall certainly stone you.’”
Reference: Ibn al-Athir’s account, quoted by al-Dhahabi in his discussion of Malik ibn Nuwayra.
Status: Historical report.
Another version states that Umar said to Abu Bakr:
Arabic:
يَا أَبَا بَكْرٍ، إِنَّ فِي سَيْفِ خَالِدٍ رَهَقًا، وَإِنَّ هَذَا لَمْ يَكُنْ حَقًّا، فَإِنَّ حَقًّا عَلَيْكَ أَنْ تُقِيدَهُ
Translation:
“O Abu Bakr, there is recklessness in Khalid’s sword. This was not right, and it is your duty to subject him to legal retaliation.”
Reference: Sunni historical report preserved by al-Dhahabi.
49. Abu Bakr reportedly paid Malik’s blood money and returned the captives and property
Arabic:
قَدِمَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ الْأَنْصَارِيُّ عَلَى أَبِي بَكْرٍ فَأَخْبَرَهُ بِقَتْلِ مَالِكِ بْنِ نُوَيْرَةَ وَأَصْحَابِهِ، فَجَزِعَ لِذَلِكَ، ثُمَّ وَدَى مَالِكًا وَرَدَّ السَّبْيَ وَالْمَالَ
Translation:
“Abu Qatadah al-Ansari came to Abu Bakr and informed him of the killing of Malik ibn Nuwayra and his companions. Abu Bakr was deeply troubled by it, then paid the blood money for Malik and returned the captives and property.”
Reference: Sunni historical report preserved by al-Dhahabi in his biographical and historical works.
Status: Historical report.
50. Abu Bakr reportedly described Khalid’s killing as an error of interpretation
Arabic:
هَلْ تَزِيدُونَ عَلَى أَنْ يَكُونَ تَأَوَّلَ فَأَخْطَأَ؟
Translation:
“Do you say anything more than that he interpreted the matter and erred?”
Reference: Sunni historical account preserved by al-Dhahabi.
Status: Historical report.
51. Ibn Kathir explicitly stated that Khalid erred in killing Malik
Arabic:
وَاسْتَمَرَّ أَبُ بَكْرٍ بِخَالِدٍ عَلَى الْإِمْرَةِ، وَإِنْ كَانَ قَدِ اجْتَهَدَ فِي قَتْلِ مَالِكِ بْنِ نُوَيْرَةَ وَأَخْطَأَ فِي قَتْلِهِ
Translation:
“Abu Bakr continued Khalid in command, even though Khalid exercised his judgment concerning the killing of Malik ibn Nuwayra and erred in killing him.”
Reference: Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, events of 11 AH.
52. What the case of Malik ibn Nuwayra establishes
The case of Malik ibn Nuwayra does not prove with certainty that his entire tribe held a formal council and declared:
“We reject the caliphate of Abu Bakr.”
Nor does every report concerning Malik possess a sahih connected chain.
The case establishes the following narrower points:
1. Malik had been a Muslim official appointed by the Prophet to collect zakat.
2. After the Prophet’s death, he did not deliver the collected zakat to Abu Bakr’s government.
3. He instead distributed or returned the property among his own people.
4. His immediate political and financial submission to Abu Bakr’s authority was therefore absent or disputed.
5. Sunni historical sources disagree concerning whether Malik had apostatized.
6. One Sunni historical wording expressly states that no apostasy became manifest from him.
7. Malik and his companions are reported to have identified themselves as Muslims.
8. Abu Qatadah reportedly testified that they had called the adhan and performed prayer.
9. Another report states that they prayed together with Khalid’s soldiers.
10. Malik and his companions laid down their weapons and were taken as prisoners.
11. Malik and several members of his people were subsequently killed by Khalid’s forces.
12. Abu Qatadah objected to their killing.
13. Umar reportedly accused Khalid of killing a Muslim and demanded legal retaliation.
14. Abu Bakr reportedly paid Malik’s blood money and returned the captives and property.
15. Abu Bakr is reported to have described Khalid’s conduct as an erroneous interpretation.
16. Ibn Kathir explicitly stated that Khalid erred in killing Malik.
17. Relevance to the claim of universal ijma
Malik’s case should be treated as supporting historical evidence rather than the primary proof against universal ijma.
The primary evidence remains:
Imam Ali a.s.
Al-Zubayr.
Those with them.
The separate gathering of the Ansar.
The alternative Ansari political proposal.
Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah’s continued refusal.
Malik’s case nevertheless expands the historical picture beyond Madinah.
It shows that Abu Bakr’s authority was not immediately received throughout Arabia through peaceful and uncontested agreement.
In at least some regions:
Zakat was not transferred to the new government.
Tribal leaders did not immediately offer clear obedience.
Military expeditions were sent to enforce the authority of Madinah.
The distinction between political resistance, withholding zakat and religious apostasy became heavily disputed.
Persons who professed Islam and performed prayer could nevertheless be arrested and killed because their political and financial submission was contested.
Therefore, the post-Prophetic situation cannot accurately be reduced to the statement:
“All Muslims freely and unanimously accepted Abu Bakr, while only proven apostates resisted him.”
The Sunni historical record is considerably more complex.
Malik ibn Nuwayra is one of the clearest examples of that complexity.
PART ELEVEN
ADDITIONAL NAMES IN SUNNI HISTORICAL LITERATURE
Later Sunni historical and biographical works list additional figures among those who initially remained outside Abu Bakr’s bay‘ah or expressed opposition, including:
Al-‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib.
Talhah ibn ‘Ubayd Allah.
Salman al-Farsi.
Abu Dharr al-Ghifari.
Al-Miqdad ibn ‘Amr.
‘Ammar ibn Yasir.
Khalid ibn Sa‘id.
Aban ibn Sa‘id.
Ubayy ibn Ka‘b.
Al-Bara’ ibn ‘Azib.
Abu Sufyan.
Necessary caution:
The evidence concerning these individuals is not equal.
Some are named in later historical lists without strong individual chains.
Others are supported through biographical notices or reports whose continuity is disputed.
Therefore, they should be placed in a graded historical appendix and not presented as if every name were established at the level of Sahih al-Bukhari.
The central Stage Four argument does not depend upon these additional names.
It is already established through:
Imam Ali a.s.
Al-Zubayr.
Those with them.
The separate gathering of the Ansar.
The alternative Ansari proposal.
Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah.
The case of Malik ibn Nuwayra provides additional evidence that political and financial submission outside Madinah was also disputed.
PART TWELVE
THE STRONGEST SUNNI COUNTER-REPORT: AN EARLY BAY‘AH BY IMAM ALI A.S AND AL-ZUBAYR
54. A connected report from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri says Imam Ali a.s and al-Zubayr pledged early
Arabic:
فَلَمَّا قَعَدَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ نَظَرَ فِي وُجُوهِ الْقَوْمِ فَلَمْ يَرَ عَلِيًّا رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ، فَسَأَلَ عَنْهُ، فَقَامَ نَاسٌ مِنَ الْأَنْصَارِ فَأَتَوْا بِهِ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ: ابْنَ عَمِّ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَخَتَنَهُ، أَرَدْتَ أَنْ تَشُقَّ عَصَا الْمُسْلِمِينَ؟
فَقَالَ:
لَا تَثْرِيبَ يَا خَلِيفَةَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ.
فَبَايَعَهُ.
ثُمَّ لَمْ يَرَ الزُّبَيْرَ بْنَ الْعَوَّامِ، فَسَأَلَ عَنْهُ حَتَّى جَاءُوا بِهِ، فَقَالَ:
ابْنَ عَمَّةِ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَحَوَارِيَّهُ، أَرَدْتَ أَنْ تَشُقَّ عَصَا الْمُسْلِمِينَ؟
فَقَالَ مِثْلَ قَوْلِهِ:
لَا تَثْرِيبَ يَا خَلِيفَةَ رَسُولِ اللهِ.
فَبَايَعَاهُ.
Translation:
“When Abu Bakr sat upon the pulpit, he looked at the faces of the people and did not see Ali. He asked about him, and some men from the Ansar went and brought him.
Abu Bakr said:
‘Cousin of the Messenger of Allah and his son-in-law, did you intend to divide the unity of the Muslims?’
Ali replied:
‘There is no blame, O successor of the Messenger of Allah.’
He then gave him bay‘ah.
Abu Bakr then did not see al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam. He asked about him until they brought him.
He said:
‘Son of the aunt of the Messenger of Allah and his disciple, did you intend to divide the unity of the Muslims?’
Al-Zubayr replied similarly:
‘There is no blame, O successor of the Messenger of Allah.’
They then gave him bay‘ah.”
Reference: Al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra and Dala’il al-Nubuwwah; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri.
Status:
Its chain from Abu Sa‘id is connected and has been accepted or authenticated by a number of Sunni scholars.
55. Sunni scholars reconcile the reports by proposing two bay‘ahs
Some Sunni scholars argue:
Imam Ali a.s gave an initial pledge shortly after the public bay‘ah.
He later remained politically distant because of the dispute concerning Bibi Fatima s.a and inheritance.
After Bibi Fatima’s death, he renewed the bay‘ah publicly to remove the visible estrangement.
Reference: Sunni reconciliation discussed by Ibn Kathir, Ibn Hajar and later Sunni scholars.
56. The wording of Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim nevertheless remains explicit
Arabic:
وَلَمْ يَكُنْ بَايَعَ تِلْكَ الْأَشْهُرَ
Translation:
“He had not given bay‘ah during those months.”
Reference: Sahih Muslim, no. 1759.
Arabic:
وَلَمْ يَكُنْ يُبَايِعُ تِلْكَ الْأَشْهُرَ
Translation:
“He had not been giving bay‘ah during those months.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, nos. 4240–4241.
57. The central non-ijma argument survives either interpretation
Even if the early-bay‘ah report is accepted:
Imam Ali a.s was absent from the original Saqifah deliberation.
Al-Zubayr was absent from it.
Banu Hashim were not represented there.
The Ansar were proposing a competing leadership arrangement.
The meeting became noisy and contentious.
Umar feared that the Ansar would establish a different bay‘ah.
The first pledge occurred suddenly.
Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah never pledged.
Malik ibn Nuwayra’s political-financial submission outside Madinah remained disputed and was followed by military action.
Therefore, the claim of an immediate and simultaneous universal ijma remains historically unsustainable even if Imam Ali a.s gave a subsequent early public pledge.
PART THIRTEEN
INITIAL BAY‘AH, PUBLIC BAY‘AH, LATER RECONCILIATION AND IJMA ARE DIFFERENT CLAIMS
The following categories must not be merged:
1. The initial Saqifah pledge
This was the immediate handclasp initiated by Umar during the dispute at Saqifah.
2. The broader public bay‘ah
This occurred afterward at the mosque and included a larger number of Muslims.
3. Individual later pledges
Some individuals pledged after the initial decision or, according to the apparent wording of the Sahih narration, after a substantial delay.
4. Political submission
A person may refrain from armed opposition and obey the government in lawful matters without necessarily approving the original selection process.
5. Reconciliation
A person may later reconcile for the sake of Muslim unity and public welfare.
6. Financial submission to the central government
A tribal leader might accept Islam and the obligation of zakat while disputing whether the collected zakat must be transferred to the new ruler in Madinah.
The case of Malik ibn Nuwayra illustrates why financial and political submission must not automatically be equated with acceptance or rejection of Islam.
7. Technical ijma
According to the majority Sunni usul definition, this requires the agreement of all relevant qualified authorities.
These categories are not interchangeable.
A later public pledge cannot make Imam Ali a.s retrospectively present at Saqifah.
A later reconciliation cannot make Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah a pledger.
Military enforcement cannot prove that political submission had previously been voluntary.
A political majority cannot automatically become technical ijma.
Silence cannot automatically become explicit approval.
A decision made first and accepted later cannot be described as if everyone had agreed before it was made.
PART FOURTEEN
THE CORRECT AND FAIR CONCLUSION
The evidence does not require the exaggerated claim:
“Almost no one accepted Abu Bakr.”
That would be historically false.
Abu Bakr obtained significant support, received a broad public bay‘ah and became the effective ruler of the Muslim community.
The accurate conclusion is narrower:
The initial bay‘ah was not a simultaneous, unanimous and universally consulted agreement of all principal Companions.
The strongest Sunni evidence establishes:
1. The Qur’an presents mutual consultation as a quality of the believing community.
2. Sunni tafsir describes consultation as a foundational legal principle in shared affairs.
3. According to the majority Sunni usul definition, technical ijma requires agreement of all relevant mujtahids, not merely the majority.
4. The disagreement of even one qualified mujtahid prevents technical universal ijma according to the majority view.
5. Silence cannot automatically be treated as consent because it may result from fear, awe, hesitation or political weakness.
6. The Ansar initially gathered separately at Saqifah.
7. The Ansar proposed an alternative political arrangement:
مِنَّا أَمِيرٌ وَمِنْكُمْ أَمِيرٌ
“A leader from us and a leader from you.”
8. The Saqifah discussion became noisy and contentious.
9. Imam Ali a.s, al-Zubayr and those with them remained apart from the initial gathering.
10. Imam Ali a.s and al-Zubayr were absent from the original decision.
11. Umar feared that the Ansar would establish another bay‘ah.
12. Umar described the first bay‘ah as a sudden occurrence.
13. Umar warned against bay‘ah without consultation with the Muslims.
14. Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim explicitly state, according to their apparent wording, that Imam Ali a.s had not given bay‘ah during the months of Bibi Fatima’s life.
15. Imam Ali a.s stated that Abu Bakr had acted independently of Ahl al-Bayt in the matter and that they believed they possessed a right or share in it.
16. Abu Bakr’s public speech acknowledged Imam Ali’s remaining behind from the bay‘ah.
17. Sunni commentators defended Abu Bakr’s practical Imamate by arguing that complete participation was unnecessary, thereby distinguishing limited establishment from universal agreement.
18. Sunni historical reports describe anger among some Muhajirun concerning the bay‘ah.
19. Sunni historical reports preserve a separate gathering in the house of Bibi Fatima s.a.
20. An early Sunni report preserves a threat to burn the house if the gathering continued.
21. Historical reports extend the delay to Banu Hashim and al-Zubayr, though these reports do not all possess the status of the two Sahih collections.
22. Aban ibn Sa‘id reportedly delayed his pledge to observe what Banu Hashim would do.
23. Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah refused the pledge and died without giving bay‘ah to Abu Bakr or Umar.
24. Malik ibn Nuwayra, a zakat official appointed by the Prophet, did not transfer the collected zakat to Abu Bakr’s government but distributed it among his people.
25. Sunni historical sources disagree over whether Malik had apostatized.
26. One Sunni historical account explicitly states that no apostasy became manifest from Malik.
27. Malik and his companions are reported to have professed Islam and performed prayer.
28. Malik and his men reportedly laid down their weapons and were taken as prisoners.
29. Malik and several of his companions were killed by Khalid ibn al-Walid’s forces.
30. Abu Qatadah reportedly objected to the killing and testified to their Islam and prayer.
31. Umar reportedly accused Khalid of killing a Muslim and demanded legal action.
32. Abu Bakr reportedly paid Malik’s blood money and returned the captives and property.
33. Abu Bakr is reported to have defended Khalid on the basis that he interpreted the situation and erred.
34. Ibn Kathir explicitly stated that Khalid erred in killing Malik.
35. The strongest counter-report states that Imam Ali a.s and al-Zubayr gave an earlier bay‘ah.
36. Even if that counter-report is accepted, neither Imam Ali a.s nor al-Zubayr participated in the original Saqifah deliberation.
37. The presence of later bay‘ah or reconciliation cannot retroactively create an initial universal ijma.
Therefore:
Abu Bakr’s government may be defended through a Sunni theory of selection by a sufficient number of ahl al-hall wa al-‘aqd, followed by wider acceptance.
It may be defended as an effective political authority that eventually received broad public recognition.
But it cannot accurately be described as having begun through an immediate, free and universal ijma of all Ahl al-Bayt, Muhajirun, Ansar and leading Companions.
The historical record instead describes:
A limited emergency gathering.
Competing political claims.
Absent principal figures.
A sudden initial pledge.
A later broader public bay‘ah.
Delayed individual pledges.
Continued dissent by Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah.
Political and financial resistance outside Madinah.
Military action to enforce the authority of the new government.
Serious disagreement over whether some of those who resisted were apostates or Muslims whose political submission was disputed.
Consequently, the claim of universal ijma cannot be used to erase or override the Qur’anic and Prophetic evidence concerning Imam Ali a.s and Ahl al-Bayt.
The next question is therefore unavoidable:
If Abu Bakr’s initial bay‘ah was not based upon an explicit Prophetic appointment and was not a simultaneous universal ijma, what positive Qur’anic and Prophetic evidence exists concerning the authority and succession of Imam Ali a.s and Ahl al-Bayt?
That is the subject of Stage Five.
Stage 4: When Ijma Contradicts Nass
Primary Category :
Secondary Category :
Loading comments...