The message of the Holy Qur’an is believed to be relevant for all Muslims, including those who lived when it was first revealed (between 610 and 632) and those who will come until the end of time. Based on the incidents faced by Muslims over 23 years during the time of revelation and the stories of former nations, the Qur’an provides guidelines in the form of commandments, prohibitions, and good advice, which are simultaneously incident-specific and universally relevant, dynamically forced and firmly static.

The first collocutors of this Divine Address were fortunate to be able to perceive the Divine Intention without any synthetic interpretation and commentary; and whenever they needed any further explanation, they were guided by Prophet Muhammad himself, peace be upon him. Subsequent generations could engage in that endeavor only by accurately settling the association between facts and norms. The Prophet is the Final Messenger and the Holy Qur’an is the Final Divine Message and Scripture; thus Divine Messages that are believed to be “universal,” “comprehensive,” and “meta-historical” could by no other means be discovered and implemented. Intellectual rigor was required.

The Companions, the successors of the Companions, and their immediate successors engaged in an intensive intellectual endeavor, right after the Prophet passed away. While usul sciences set the methodology for their work, disciplines like Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), Islamic theology (kalam), Islamic tradition (hadith), and Islamic exegesis (tafsir) reveal the outcomes of these methodical studies. Studies on the biography of the Prophet (seerah), military chronicles (maghazi), and the history of Islam (tarikh) also provided authentic or inauthentic resources to these disciplines.

These activities lost verve with time. Seeking Divine purpose by preserving the constants as they initially were and developing theoretical interpretations and practical transformations according to the ever-changing and evolving social, political, economic, moral, legal, military, etc. circumstances, have not always been possible. Social changes require dynamism, for dynamism – not inertia – is the nature of things and life. For many Muslim societies, a social life that remained frozen as exactly as it was in the time of the Prophet was one of the problems. Another problem was considering the surface meanings of the Qur’anic verses and the Hadith enough as solutions for real social problems.

This frozen social structure that sustained during the codification (tadwin) period affected Muslim viewpoints of the Qur’an and the Hadith, as well as their methodology of knowledge. Principles such as “the universality of the Qur’an,” or tenets like “Acting on the text is better than abandoning it,” “The particular cause of any Qur’anic revelation (asbab al-nuzul) does not mean its judgment does not have any universal validity,” and “Independent reasoning (ijtihad) cannot be exercised when there is explicit statement,” formed the keystones of knowledge production across many centuries. I believe this is a very important matter that needs to be covered in a separate article.

The verses of the Holy Qur’an are not detached from the social realities experienced between 610 and 632 in Mecca and Medina. In the words of Nasr Hamid, a creative and prolific dialogue existed between the Divine Intention and the first addressees of the Qur’an. Severing this correlative link between God and the community of revelation is the foremost reason for triggering what may be called the alienation from the Qur’an.

The first condition for accurately understanding the Divine Intention is knowing what the first addressees of the Qur’an had understood of and practiced from those verses during the course of revelation. Attempting to understand “what the Qur’an tries to tell” without knowing “what the Qur’an tells” does not lead to accurate results. On the contrary, such an attempt may turn out to be the first step taken toward disastrous results such as making God speak for one’s own pleasure and making the Qur’an say whatever one wants it to say.

Browsing the Qur’an from the perspective of “creative and prolific dialogue,” there are pages of narrations about events of the time. Among these events were, but not limited to, the battles of Badr, Uhud, and Khandaq, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the conquest of Mecca, the Tabuk and Mu’tah campaigns, the codes of conduct toward prisoners of war, how the daily prayers are to be performed in the event of war, etc. There are verses that cover the dispute between Khawla bint Tha’labah and her husband Aws ibn Samit and how God adjudicated that dispute conclusively. Other narrations in the Qur’an include Zayd ibn Harithah’s divorcing his wife Zainab and her subsequent marriage to the Prophet, the impending fate of Abu Lahab and his wife Umm Jamil due to their persecution of the Prophet, the funeral prayer of Abdullah ibn Ubayy ibn Salul, and tens or hundreds of events such as these. All of these point at the correlative relationship between God and society. Consequently, it may be said that it is impossible to think about the Holy Qur’an as detached from the social incidents experienced during the course of its revelation.

Jihad

The same applies to the Qur’anic verses about concepts like jihad (endeavor), qatl (killing), and qital (warfare) – generally, the verses about military jihad. Each of these verses was revealed independently as related to particular incidents and expressed, in a crystal-clear style, how Muslims should react to incidents; in other words, the Qur’an produced tangible solutions to tangible problems. For instance, when looked at from the perspective which we attempt to illustrate, it is seen that the verses “(While at war) kill them wherever you come upon them, and drive them out from where they drove you out (thus recovering your lands from their usurpation). (Though killing is something you feel aversion to,) disorder (rooted in rebellion against God and recognizing no laws) is worse than killing”; and “(But if they persist in causing disorder, continue to) fight against them until there is no longer disorder rooted in rebellion against God, and the religion (the right for worship and the authority to order the way of life is recognized) for God.” (2/191 and 193) are from the roadmap detailed by God for Muslims to solve their problems with the polytheists of Mecca. However, many adopt a universal, atomic, or overgeneralizing approach, and these verses are discriminatorily interpreted as proof that Islam is “a religion of violence.”

These verses, from Surah al-Baqarah, were not revealed separately and at different times, but within a bundle of six verses revealed before the “Compensatory Minor Pilgrimage,” meant to be performed a year after the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. The cause of revelation was to teach Muslims how to respond should the polytheists of Mecca – who a year earlier had violated the prohibitions for the forbidden months – violate the Treaty once again and wage war against the Muslims. Therefore, an accurate interpretation of these verses is possible by understanding “what God says” before “what God means to say” and handling this bundle of verses while considering the cause of revelation as a whole.

Scholars must jointly deliberate on the cause of revelation, analyze the links within the verse and with other verses, take into consideration the holism of the Qur’an, and social, economic, military, cultural, and religious conditions at the time. All of this is necessary contextual information. When taking these factors into account, it is clear that Islam is not a religion of violence or war, as claimed by some orientalists. This approach would also falsify the argument that considers the warfare as essential and peace as secondary in Islam, as some so-called Muslim scholars purport. These are deeply troubled arguments that are seriously radicalized and ethically flawed.

Yet, it is upsetting that there were and are groups that define themselves as Muslims and reach such conclusions. ISIL, Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda, etc. are violent groups that have adopted methods exploiting the Holy Qur’an, severing the Qur’anic verses from their contexts and cherry-picking concepts to legitimize their defective approaches. Having been engaged in such violent exploits, they generated a theology, and later laws, from their political ideology. Unfortunately, while they perpetrate heinous crimes, they forget the Qur’anic verses which expound that enmity is to be shown to oppressors only, not to others (2:193); belief is a personal choice and what falls on Muslims is only advice (18:29; 49:14); that there is no coercion in religion (2:256); and that hatred and anger harbored against non-combatant unbelievers should not prevent believers from doing good to them (60:8; 5:2). They disregard the practices of the Prophet and accepted them as overruled, such as the Charter of Medina, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the general amnesty during the Conquest of Mecca, and the prohibition on the killing of women, children, the old and the men of religion even on the battlefield.

When trying to understand the true meaning of Qur’anic verses, it is important to delineate the line between the fact and the norm, between realpolitik and idealism. While facts or realpolitik is the context for which the Qur’anic verses bring tangible solutions to the incidents experienced during the course of revelation, idealistic perspective refers to the values and principles that need to be obtained from a holistic look toward the Qur’an, including the jihad verses. “Kill them wherever you find them,” in Baqara 191, (“them” referring to the aggressive polytheists of Mecca) indicates realpolitik circumstances of revelation. “Disorder (i.e. oppressing and torturing people because of their faith) is worse than killing,” indicates idealism and stipulates freedom of belief and conscience.

Concepts introduced by the Qur’an

During its course of revelation, the Qur’an did not only use the established concepts of the contemporary society, but introduced its own concepts as well. The concept of jihad is in the second category. Other concepts such as zihar, nikah, and talaq (concepts about marriage and divorce), which are mentioned in the Qur’an, were already in the lexicon of the society. However, the concept of jihad has gone through sharp semantic shifts and variations over the fifteen centuries since the time of revelation, and especially after the freedom movements in Muslim countries during the nineteenth century for independence from colonialism. This shift moved further from the Qur’anic foundations due to the works of orientalists; media outlets thriving on an anti-Islamic furor; and persecution of Muslim minorities. The weakness of Muslim states, authoritarian regimes, distribution of oil revenue, economic crises, and a large youthful population that cannot be easily brought under control given current circumstances are other major reasons that have led to the misuse of the concept of jihad. The idea has also been exploited by numerous radical-minded Muslim individuals, groups, and organizations. Concepts are like living organisms. The meanings encompassed by them contract, expand, change, and transform according to experienced realities. Nowadays, it is incumbent on Muslims to revert this concept to its original state by placing it back on the Qur’anic foundations in theory and practice.

Consequently, I think neither the battle cry “Islam is a religion of war” nor the slogan – yes, I term it a slogan – “Islam is a religion of peace” are accurate. Indeed, I think such a reductionist and cliché discourse form a massive intellectual block, preventing a complete understanding of Islam as a religion. The jihad verses in the Qur’an seems to have received their share from this minimalism. A literalist approach to the Qur’anic verses addressing realpolitik conditions is an indication of adopting the Qur’an solely as a book of law or policy. Individuals having this viewpoint may exploit the Qur’an to have it speak to their desire. It is compulsory to make a distinction among the Ideal Islam experienced during the lifetime of the Prophet, the Scholarly Islam expressed theoretically in the course of the academic activities of scholars in subsequent years, and the Historical Islam that has been experienced by Muslims in various locations worldwide for the last fifteen centuries. The minimum condition to achieve this distinction is studying the Qur’anic verses vis-à-vis the circumstances and context behind their revelation and understanding what the Qur’anic verses really “say,” before going deeper into analyzing what they “mean to say.” Intra-textuality, inter-textuality, reason for revelation, holistic approach to the Qur’an, and contextual knowledge are key terms for reference in this regard.

Question: Why are the elite having difficulty in accepting truths?

Answer: In every period of history, as well as today, there exists an oligarchical minority who try to suppress people who think differently from them and who are not one of them. They wish to design the world according to their own will.

Defending rights

It is wrong to imagine that they can always dominate the society. There have been times, particularly during periods when religious and moral thought prevailed in the true sense, when they regressed and were condemned to remain in a narrow sphere. However, even when they had to withdraw, it is a reality that they retained their thoughts about enslaving society, and moreover, they kept on developing new projects and plans with the aim of moral destruction. When they gain the opportunity, they invade all areas of life, resort to brutal force and smash everyone who does not side with them.

However, this situation should not be solely attributed to their obstinacy and oppression. Other factors such as the heedlessness and negligence of the masses, the failure of virtuous people who could actually struggle against them to maintain a spirit of togetherness, and their acting without any forethought or plans, also play an important role in the emergence of this tyranny. Actually, seeing every trouble and hardship we suffer as a consequence of our own mistakes and wrongs is a piece of advice from the Qur’an. God Almighty, may His glory be exalted, states in the Qur’an: “Whatever affliction befalls you, it is because of what your hands have earned, and yet He overlooks many (of the wrongs you do)” (ash-Shura 42:30).

The late poet, Mehmed Akif, said that the sole true owners of right in this world were those who speak up for defending their rights. In this regard, merely shouting and making a fuss in the face of oppression and the violations of the oligarchical elite will not yield positive results. On the contrary, it is necessary to struggle by means of reason and logic. If we have been unable to defend certain rights, we must make every possible effort to reclaim them. The right to live humanly must be reclaimed by endeavoring within a legal framework of law and justice.

The powerful voice of truth

Just as it happened yesterday, today, the people who control the capital, power, government and certain high positions look down on the rest of the people as if looking down to the ground, and they see themselves as being so high up, as if they are looking at the firmaments. In our present time, their number has become so large that even calling them an oligarchical minority will not suffice. Surely, their power bears no importance against the strength and power of God Almighty and does not really mean anything for those who seek refuge in Him. The void that appears as a result of our inactivity and weakness is what makes power more meaningful, and the oligarchical minority is using that power against us.

It is not correct to think that such elites that leech off the people will always remain in such a position. One day, there may appear some among them who regret the oppressions they have committed, who become sincerely repentant, who change their feelings and thoughts, and prefer to live in a human way. We can see so many examples of this during the Prophet’s time. Although at the beginning of Islam, the majority of the believers were poor people—such as Bilal al-Habashi, Ammar ibn Yasir, and Abdullah ibn Masud—who worked near the controllers of wealth and power, the leading personalities of Mecca also came to be included in this blessed circle in later years.

By studying the identities of the people who accepted faith first and formed the center, it is possible to make some psycho-sociological analyses. For example, you can say that they had been seeking a savior to save them from the negative life conditions they were experiencing, and when they saw the prince of the Prophets with his truthfulness, decency, Prophetic intelligence and resolution, they ran to him with the intention of seeking refuge in him. Or, by considering that those people owned very few worldly possessions and did not have much to lose, you may think that it was easier for them to dedicate their lives to the path of God. You may also think that the Messenger of God’s treating those oppressed people with his immense compassion, opening his bosom for them and supporting them was a factor in their speedy acceptance of Islam. Additionally, you might also interpret the fact that people in abject poverty followed such an infinite light as a result of Divine guidance. However, no matter which factor you ascribe this result to, you see that the majority of the heroes that formed the first rank of Muslims were poor people disdained by those prominent in society.

However, there came the day when those prominent people, who accosted the Muslims at every opportunity and tried to smash them, also joined their ranks. For example, during the sixth year of Islam, the unpleasant invectives against the noble Prophet tugged at the humane feelings of Hamza, who took a stance against the polytheists in return. Abu Sufyan, who was unparalleled in obstinacy, took his place near the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, after the conquest of Mecca. Like him, so many leading figures from among the polytheists submitted to the truth and changed sides later on.

Nobody should be deprived of the goodness

On account of the reasons we mentioned so far, from the oligarchical minority who in their imaginations see themselves at the uppermost level of the caste system and behave as if it were their essential right to oppress others, God knows what potential heroes may appear and may lend you a hand with your ideal of establishing universal values. Even today, it is possible to say that its signs can be seen—not as showers but rather like dewdrops on leaves. There are people who have ample worldly means, seen by some as being at the uppermost level of their imagined caste system, who see themselves as having a distant worldview from you and whom you do not see as likely to share your ideals; when they witness the beautiful things you do, they may support the activities on the path of humanity and peace. You may see that some of them want to open a school somewhere, others wish to sponsor a university to be opened somewhere, while others want to provide a field for a new educational institution to be opened. As they also set an example for others with such services, those who see this will also wish to do the same.

Therefore, the duty that falls to us is taking care of all individuals in society without making any distinction. The thought that the reformation can only be carried out by poor or middle class people is not correct. These people may have welcomed the good things done and have opened the doors of their hearts wide from the very beginning. You may rather have spent time with them at the beginning. However, on account of the great scope of the tasks needed to be done for the sake of humanity today, it is necessary to spread our wings wide, and try to reach every place and every person. For this reason, it is necessary to make efforts to include those who have worldly means and look down on others. However, while making this effort, you should not forget that in order for them to accept the values you believe, although a single day or week may suffice for some, for some of them it may be necessary to make visits for a month or even a year.

Who knows how many times the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, knocked the door of Abu Jahl and communicated his message to him? Without getting angry or feeling bitter, he made use of every opportunity and tried to make him feel the truths of faith. Note that Abu Jahl was one of the prominent figures of the Banu Makhzum tribe. Those days, the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, did not solely make visits to Abu Jahl, but also went to all the leaders of Mecca time and time again; he presented his message to them without growing weary or being broken down. Although Abu Jahl was not honored with faith, a day came when his son Ikrima accepted faith before the beneficence and compassion of God’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him.

In this regard, it is necessary to utilize every opportunity to reach all sections of society and to advance with alternatives. It is necessary to knock on everybody’s door without becoming weary, giving in to hopelessness, or feeling broken.

As recounted in the Qur’an (14: 34–41), Abraham left his wife Hagar and son Ishmael in the valley of Mecca on God’s command. There was the Ka’ba there, but it had been destroyed in time. When Ishmael was young, Abraham re-constructed the Ka’ba together with him. Because of the sanctity of the Ka’ba, people began to settle around it, and this is how Mecca appeared as a town and a center of pilgrimage and trade connecting merchants on caravans from Syria and Jordan, all the way to Abyssinia (Ethiopia). Organized in tribes, Mecca suffered from racial fanaticism and feudal warfare for centuries, leaving women without a value as they could not take part in wars.

In a larger context, the Byzantium and Persian Empires were in constant conflict and intermittently fought for over sixty years, which exhausted their respective peoples. There was a desperate need for a message that prioritized peace over war, a message that celebrated freedoms and rights for everyone regardless of color, race, or gender. And came the Prophet from Mecca, who taught and promised all of these. He was not alone in his mission, and his closest Companion was Abu Bakr.

Also called As-siddiq (“The Upright” in Arabic), Abu Bakr was approximately two years younger than the Prophet. Before embracing Islam, he was known as Abdul Ka’ba (the servant of Ka’ba), then the Prophet changed his name to Abdullah (the servant of God).

Among the youth, frolics, dissipations and frivolities were very common behaviors, but Abu Bakr was completely different. He had a very disciplined life. Once he was asked if he had drunk wine in his days of ignorance. He said he had never touched the wine because he had wanted to keep his reputation and respectability. This shows that he enjoyed a good reputation and respectability even before Islam (Ibn al-Athir, 1280).

He did not receive a formal education as many other Arab men, but he was a keen observer; he was continually observing what was going on around him. He had a very good memory. He could recite verses if he heard them only once. He attended poetical events (Ibn al-Athir, 1280).

Abu Bakr traveled to different countries including Abyssinia, Yemen, and Syria. These business trips brought him wealth, experience and broadened his outlook on life. He became one of the richest businessmen of Mecca. Accordingly, his social importance increased among people. He was hardworking, generous, friendly, truthful, committed. He had a lot of influence among his friends and acquaintances. As a trader, he was always fair, he never deceived people. He would visit the sick; he gave alms to the poor (at-Tabarî, 1987). One day the Prophet asked his people, “Is there anyone here who visited a sick one today?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” “Is there anyone who fasted today?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” “Is there anyone who participated in a funeral?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” “Is there anyone who assisted someone who was poor?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” Then the Prophet said, “Whoever does these four deeds in one day is counted among the people of heaven.”

While Abu Bakr was still young, he volunteered for an office which decided the blood money for the killed or injured. It was like a judge or magistrate’s office. He always satisfied both sides with his fair decisions. (at-Tabarî, 1987).

When God’s message was revealed to Muhammad, the first man to believe in him was Abu Bakr. On the day that he stated his belief, he gave his decision quickly and without hesitation showing he had complete trust in Muhammad. The Prophet admired his acceptance of Islam with the words, “Except Abu Bakr, everyone I have invited to Islam has experienced some period of hesitation. But Abu Bakr accepted my invitation without any hesitation” (Bukhari, 870). In fact, Abu Bakr had always doubted the validity of idolatry and had no enthusiasm for worshiping idols.

When Islam began to spread in Mecca, Meccan polytheists inflicted torture and intimidation on the believers, forcing many of them to immigrate to Abyssinia. Yet, Abu Bakr did not leave. He preferred to stay with the Prophet to support him in his time of need. And he was going to be the company to the Prophet in the Hijrah, his historic journey to Medina, which would transform the course of history forever.

Later when the battles of Badr and Uhud took place between Muslims and the Arab pagans, Abu Bakr, along with a few other companions, was entrusted with the Prophet’s safety. When Mecca was at last subdued in 630 AD, all the tribes of Arabia were convinced that Muhammad was a messenger sent to them by God. They stopped resisting and sent delegates to Medina proclaiming their allegiance to him. While he was busy receiving delegates, he entrusted Abu Bakr to preside over the pilgrims. This incident proved of vital importance later when a caliph was chosen after the death of the Prophet (Ibnal-Kathir, Isma’il, 1932).

His leadership

The Prophet made a pilgrimage two years after the conquest of Mecca. This would be called the “Farewell Pilgrimage,” as the Prophet became ill on his return to Medina and died two weeks after the illness. During the last days of his illness, he could not lead the prayers in the Mosque. He gave instructions to his wife Aisha to tell her father Abu Bakr to lead the prayers. This was taken by the Muslims as another sign to choose Abu Bakr to be their caliph after the Prophet’s departure (Ibn Hisham, 1992).

When the Prophet died in 632 AD, many people, among whom was ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, were shocked and refused to believe that he died. But Abu Bakr, steadfast as usual, addressed the bewildered masses and convinced them that Muhammad was no more than a Prophet like other Prophets who had died before him, and that there was no reason why they should not acknowledge his death. After much debate, in which both sides—the Medinans and the Meccans—expressed their opinions elaborately and freely, Abu Bakr was unanimously accepted to be the first Caliph. Soon there was a public meeting in the Mosque, and people from near and far flocked there to swear their oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr (Ibn Hisham, 1992).

The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, categorically rejected racism and tribalism. He also put an end to tribal wars. Sir William Muir makes the following comment:

The first peculiarity, then, which attracts our attention is the subdivision of the Arabs into innumerable bodies… each independent of the others: restless and often at war amongst themselves; and even when united by blood or by interest, ever ready on some significant cause to separate and give way to an implacable hostility. Thus at the era of Islam the retrospect of Arabian history exhibits, as in the kaleidoscope, an ever-varying state of combination and repulsion, such as had hitherto rendered abortive any attempt at a general union… The problem had yet to be solved, by what force these tribes could be subdued or drawn to one common center; and it was solved by Muhammad (Muir,1988).

Instead of tribalism and tribal attachment, the Prophet Muhammad instituted virtue and God-consciousness. He also instituted allegiance or public consent. People were free to elect their administrator. So after the Prophet’s death, his followers came together and discussed among themselves who would be their new leader. Since the one who would lead the newly-established Muslim community would succeed the Prophet in his leadership in all things except Prophethood, he was named the Successor. The Caliph means the one who succeeds. So the leaders of the Muslim community after the Prophet’s death were called Caliph.

1- The Wars of Apostasy

Abu Bakr had to struggle with apostates and false prophets. What elements caused the wars of apostasy? First, the death of the Prophet was a great shock to Muslims. For the first time in the lives of both the Meccans and the Medinans, they were united around a single religion. Their centuries-old customs and feudal or tribal values and understandings were abolished. Their absorption of the new system would not be easy. They accepted this system in the footsteps of the Prophet Muhammad. So his death was a great shock. Adoption of the new system was difficult especially for the newly-converted desert tribes. Some of them left the new religion and followed false prophets who appeared among them and called them back to their old customs.

Secondly, Islam instituted zakat (alms-giving or charity). It was collected from the rich and spent for the well-being of the poor and for the wayfarers left without money to complete their travel. It was also used for those who cannot pay their debts, and for those who strive in “God’s cause”. Some desert tribes refused to pay it after the Prophet’s death. This signaled their revolt against the new administration in Medina.

Thirdly, the influence of the Romans from the north and the Persians and the Abyssinians from the east and the south encouraged the distant tribes to return back to their own beliefs and customs. (As?m, 1981).

Abu Bakr succeeded in putting down the rebellions and re-instituted unity in Arabia. His good reputation among people, his character, and his wise measures were influential in surpassing the rebellions and re-instituting the unity. He sent military units against the revolting tribes. In the end, those tribes gave up their disobedience.

2- Usame’s punitive expedition

The changes brought about by the Muslims in Arabia drew the attention of the Roman (Byzantium) Empire. In order to prevent their growing strength, they sent armies. During the time of the Prophet, Roman and Muslim armies fought in Muta, on the border of Jordan. No side could overpower the other in this first encounter. One year before the Prophet’s death, Romans organized another powerful army. On hearing this, the Prophet left Medina with his army and went as far as Tabuk, in the far north of Arabia. However, the Prophet’s illness caused this army to stay in Madina without departing. After his death, due to the news of rebellions in some desert tribes, some Muslims wanted to cancel this expedition. But Abu Bakr, as the newly-chosen Caliph, firmly opposed the idea, saying: “I will never cancel anything initiated by the Prophet”. The curious thing about this army was that it was made up of mostly the early Companions of the Prophet, but its leader was Usame ibn Zayd, who was only 18 years old. During the lifetime of the Prophet, his old Companions objected, but they were given a heated sermon in which both Usame and his father were praised as competent leaders (At-Tabarî, 1987).

3- Compilation of the Qur’an

1200 Muslims were killed in the battle called Aqraba, among them were many who were committing the Qur’an to memory. Umar ibn al Khattab, whose brother Zayd was among the dead, thought deeply of what might happen if wars continued and more such people were killed. He reached the conclusion that if the Qur’an was to be preserved, it ought to be compiled into one volume. At that time, it was scattered among the companions of the Prophet, with each preserving certain portions of it. Methods of preservation differed. Some had it written on parchment; others on palm branches stripped of leaves; a third group was written on bones; and a fourth on stone tablets; a large number also memorized it by heart. If many of those who had memorized it were killed, then a part of the Holy Book might disappear. So Umar went to the caliph, who was then sitting in the Prophet’s grand Mosque. He discussed his idea with him, but Abu Bakr rejected it because it was not something done by the Prophet. A lengthy debate followed, after which Abu Bakr was convinced that Umar was right (Ezzati, 1978).

Abu Bakr’s compilation of the Qur’an is regarded by many as his most significant legacy. It was even more significant than the wars of apostasy and the conquest of Iraq and Syria. Ali ibn Abi Talib used to say: “May God have mercy upon Abu Bakr! He is worthy of being superbly rewarded because he was unique in compiling the Qur’an” (Ibn Hajar, 1988).

Harun Gultekin is a teacher at Pioneer Academy of Science, New Jersey.

References

• Al-Bukhari, Muhammad. 870. SahihBukhari. Haidth no: 4/1701.
• at-Tabarî. 1987. Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir, Tarikh al-Umamwa al-Muluk, Beirut.
• Cevdet, Ahmed (Pa?a). 1976. K?sas-? Enbiya ve Tavarih-i Hulefa, Bedir Publishing, Istanbul.
• Ezzati, Abul-Fazl. 1978. An Introduction to the History of the Spread of Islam, London, News and Media Ltd.
• Ibn al-Athir. 1280. Usd al-ghaba fi ma’rifat al-sahaba, Cairo.
• Ibn al-Kathir, Abu’l-Fida’ Isma’il. 1932. al-Bidayahwa’n-Nihayah, Vol. 14, Beirut.
• Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. 1988. Al-Isabah fi Tamyiz as-Sahabah, Daru’l-Bayan, Cairo.
• Ibn Hisham. 1992. al-Sirah an-Nabawiya, Dar al- Fikr, Beirut.
• Köksal, M. Asim. 1981. ?slâmTarihi, ?amil Publishing, Istanbul.
• Muir, Sir William. 1988. Life of Muhammad, Osnabrück: Biblio.

After he began to call his people to belief, the Prophet had to face all kinds of torment during his peaceful mission for thirteen years in Mecca. After numerous grievous incidents, he had to leave his town and reluctantly immigrated to Medina. From most people’s point of view, the Meccans were absolutely to be declared as “the enemy”-or “the other.” However, the Prophet did not behave inimical to anyone. He always treated people humanely, no matter what lethal traps they set for him. He never failed to extend his tender hand with a candid clemency and compassion. Even during many inexorable combats, he always prayed to his Lord, chiefly for those who smashed his helmet off, broke his tooth, and left his face covered with blood in battles like Badr and Uhud. Not only did he hinder his followers from bearing any oppugnant attitude against their merciless foes, he also blocked maledictions and imprecations to any adversary, even those who, for instance on the day of Uhud, had ripped the bodies of nearly 70 beloved ones into pieces beyond recognition with an incredible brutality.

Although his opponents were bloodthirsty and yearning for war, his sword was never besmeared by red hot blood; he never killed anyone. He did not represent anything other than loving compassion in the world.

He never broke off his previous social connections. He did not approach anyone with a bias. He always held the door open in order to mildly flatter their vanities. He never hurt anyone’s pride deliberately. While his sworn enemies took the gloves off for any opportunity to assassinate him, he treated everyone amicably by taking into consideration the potential positions they would likely to hold in the near future. Because he knew that every individual had a respectable essence, he thought the most appropriate action was to awaken this divine kernel. He took action in this direction, though horrid provocations did not cease, and he did that with a worthy perseverance.

Glad tidings

The Prophet dealt with every one of his opponents with utmost care, and he took very strategic measures not to destroy them but to conquer their hearts.

Giving the glad tidings of a coming peace, the following verse was revealed right after the Battle of the Trench:

(When you obey God in His commands and prohibitions,) it may be that God will bring about love and friendship between you and those of them with whom you are in enmity. God is All-Powerful, and God is All-Forgiving, All-Compassionate. (60:7)

Peace was so close, just at their threshold. Having received this good news, the Prophet initiated immediate action by demanding to marry the daughter of Abu Sufyan, who was then the political leader of the Meccans. Establishing bonds of kinship with him would be a plausible step in order to eradicate hostility. Umm Habiba, Abu Sufyan’s daughter, was among the group of Muslims who had fled the Meccan torture and sought refuge in Ethiopia. However, her husband died there, and she was left alone with her child without any protection. By marrying her, the Prophet would not only save this devoted Muslim woman from despair and honor her, but would also form a connection with Abu Sufyan that would not be possible by any other way. This marriage was realized soon, and afterwards everything changed dramatically.

Abu Sufyan, who was one of the staunch enemies of the Prophet until that day, could easily enter the Prophet’s home to visit Umm Habiba, his daughter. Now, Abu Sufyan could learn more about Islam through his daughter Umm Habiba. He began to realize soon that Muslims were not as he had believed. In a short period of time, the difference in Abu Sufyan’s attitude became more and more obvious. He turned out to be more moderate, more cautious, and more candid in reciprocal dialogue attempts.

Prominent figures of Mecca, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Safwan ibn-i Umayya, Suhayl ibn Amr and Ikrima ibn al-Jahl were exerting pressure on Abu Sufyan to take drastic actions against believers. Despite all of their intolerable pressure, Abu Sufyan resisted their aggressiveness, having realized that they were the ones who were unfair, not those on the Prophet’s side.

Making peace

Even in the most critical conditions he did not give up. Despite all the provocations of evil-doers and his own fellow tribesmen’s objections, he made agreements with his crucial adversaries and fulfilled peaceful commitments with them.

The radical change of Abu Sufyan was an explicit hope for others. The Prophet tried his best to take advantage of every single opportunity to get in touch with any of them.

After his immigration to Medina, the economic and social conditions of Mecca had gradually deteriorated. The Meccans were suffering from drought, famine, hunger, and misery. For sure, he could not have remained indifferent to this heart-rending situation. He sent them food and other needed aid; he literally inundated them with an immense benevolent contribution on the back of hundreds of camels. But, unfortunately the Meccans rejected all of it. Then he sent all the aid directly to Abu Sufyan. Afterwards Abu Sufyan distributed everything to the poor and needy Meccans.

The Prophet those days gave weight to free commerce and trading with other communities, particularly with Meccans. He knew that business trading was an excellent opportunity to get in touch with others. Thus they could have found so many new ways to maintain peaceful relations.

Regrettably, all the peaceful attempts made by God’s Holy Messenger were either repelled or responded to with brutal violence by the Meccans. They once attacked a Muslim tribe in the pitch dark of midnight and slaughtered 23 civilians in a village near Medina. By committing this crime, the Meccans also violated the Hudaybiya peace treaty.

Following this brutal attack, the Messenger of God sent envoys to Mecca, offering them various options to solve the problem peacefully, rather than an immediate retaliation: he asked them to pay the blood money and cut their relations with other warring tribes that participated in this crime. Failing to obey these conditions would mean the Hudaybiya treaty was violated as well as a declaration of war. But the Meccans refused every amicable offer. The only option left for the Prophet was to march to Mecca. Realizing that they would not be able to resist, some of the eminent Meccans fled in confusion to distant towns of the Arab Sahara. God’s Messenger sent someone in pursuit of every missing Meccan. Umm Haqim, Ikrima’s wife, who had fled all the way to Yemen, went after him. She dared all dangers on the way to find her husband, another relentless enemy of the Prophet and the son of Abu Jahl, and to introduce him to the Prophet’s mercy. Umayr ibn Wahb, once a hitman hired by Safwan ibn Umayya to kill the Prophet, went after Safwan twice, reaching him in Jeddah en route to Ethiopia, and convinced to him to return to Mecca. Suhayl ibn Amr was brought back by Abdullah, his own son whom he tortured for years. He wrote letter after letter to Wahshi, who had murdered Hamza, the Prophet’s uncle, and invited Hind, who had hired Wahshi for this murder, to come in peace and that she was forgiven. The Prophet called them back home promising to forgive all their past assaults and guaranteed their protection. Mecca became a land of peace and serenity, thanks to his efforts and merciful invitation.

The Prophet’s immense forgiveness is an example for us today as to how we should engage with past atrocities. It is a message of self-reformation that teaches us that we can subdue feelings of revenge and hatred and build a society in compassion and love.

Fatih Harpci is a PhD candidate at the Temple University, Department of Religion, Philadelphia.

The only rose of my fate, sweet musk-scented hair

My enshrouding sphere, You bestow abundantly,

Wings of the angel lay down for you on the way to the Lote-tree.¹

The Station of Two-Bows’ Length, the highest peak of all,

You are the breath of the original nature,² the cosmos’ lofty call.

You are the rain of mercy and compassion from the most Supreme,

You are the Master of existence, prior even to Adam.

O the Ocean of Light! Would your grace cascade from a fountain?

The myriads of hearts would each become for you a crystal pool.

Black Locks you must be called, O the Beloved,

I wonder if my cry can reach you, dull, enfeebled.

My troubles are far too many, and I myself possess no cures at all,

I spent summers in vain, and am left in poverty in the fall.

“Perhaps a hand will be extended,” I thought, “if I knock on your door,”

“Perhaps my Master could find a cure for this sinner.”

I am afraid to hear you say, “Who is he?”

Then, all abodes would become a dungeon for me.

You are a cure for troubles, let this heart burn,

O the Beloved of the Merciful; to ashes let it burn.

Moons split at your command,³

Nothing but a full moon is seen in your face.

Purest water pours down from your fingers quenching armies,⁴

The hardest hearts soften in rapture with your breath.

Your blessed saliva is a heavenly river and a salve for the wounded,

Every moment in your company is time spent in heaven.

Black Locks I say, for the color of the Hira cave

Is united in harmony with that of the Miraj night.

Hajar al-Asad⁵ is imbued in black,

Inspired by the black of your hair, O the Beloved with rosebud lips.

Black Locks I say, for the pitch black of the Ka‘ba,

Draining the color of your eyes, as if from Kawthar.

O Black Locks, come before laments are no longer of use,

O Black Locks, come before my life comes to a close.

O Black Locks, come before my love fades in my heart,

O Black Locks, come before the Angel descends to take this life away.

With sparkling light, bestow upon me the horizons of future,

May all the horror on the road change into glory.

Burying my face into your prints in the dust,

Burning in flames, crying your name “O Muhammad!”

I wish to reach the land beyond, thirsty and tired,

On my lips, may cries of “water” and “Lord” become entwined.

Perhaps my burning could be the lowest of mercy,

A kiss from an angel whispering “He” while touching.

O Black Locks, all my days roam in this way,

Each ordeal passes engulfed in longing for you.

Stop this pain, put an end to this longing,

Uproot and hurl away this torment of separation from my heart.

Hurl it away to the unknown or to extermination,

Burn this heart forever with your light of reunion.

________________________

1. sidrat al-muntaha: (the Lote-tree of the Boundary) a station which the Prophet was raised during his Ascension.

2. fitrat: the original state in which humans are created by God

3. One of the well known miracles of the Prophet was “splitting the moon.” Once, the most staunched idolaters of Mecca came and asked him to show them a miracle to prove his mission. The Prophet prayed and the moon split. One half of the moon appeared above a mountain while the other half appeared above another mountain. This miracle is confirmed by the following verse: The Hour has approached and the moon split (Qamar 54:1).

4. This verse refers to one of the Prophet’s miracles. The Prophet dipped his fingers into a pot of water and immediately after he took them out, from each water flowed like a fountain.

5. Hajar al-Asad is the black stone that is found in one of the corners of the Ka‘ba in Mecca. Pilgrims start circumambulation from the corner on which this stone is placed.

There are close spiritual relations between the Cave of Hira in Mecca and the Aqsa Mosque, and between Mecca and Jerusalem. In Mecca- to be more specific, in the Cave of Hira-Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, devoted himself to worship, and the Revelation started there, while the Prophet’s journey from the Sacred Mosque (in Mecca) to the Aqsa Mosque ended in Jerusalem. The Aqsa Mosque was also the place from which the Prophet started his heavenly journey. In addition, the Aqsa Mosque was the first of the two qiblahs to which Muslims directed themselves in prayer, and it was the place where Prophet Muhammad led the other prophets in prayer. Mecca, on the other hand, is the place where the first of the Two Honorable Mosques lies, to which every Muslim pays a visit at least once in a lifetime if they can afford to do so. It is also the place where the Cave of Hira is located, where the Glorious Qur’an was revealed for the first time. This is why Muslims love and concern themselves with all these sacred places equally.

The Ottoman conquest

Jerusalem was under Mameluke rule before the Ottoman era, which lasted from 1517 until the downfall of the Ottoman Empire at the beginning of the nineteenth century. In 1517, Sultan Selim I put an end to the reign of the Mamelukes in Egypt, and consequently the same in Jerusalem, which was also under the Mamelukes’ sovereignty.

Once Sultan Selim I had established authority over Syria, Egypt, including the Two Honorable Mosques (the Sacred Mosque in Mecca and the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina), and the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, he decreed that no new churches or places of worship were to be built in the cities, the towns, or the villages of these areas. However, the places of worship already built were to be maintained in order to ensure that they were used according to their original purposes. The old buildings could be demolished only if they were rebuilt in their original places and in the same style of construction. By making such a decree, Sultan Selim I followed the example of the Commander of the Faithful, Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab, who, in 15 AH (637), acknowledged the due rights of all non-Muslim sects in writing. This conduct was likewise repeated by Sultan Selim I when he conquered Jerusalem; he proclaimed a written decree (firman) stating that all the rights of the Christians and Jews were to be observed. He thus ensured for all the sects of non-Muslims the right to practice their rituals freely. This decree, which was penned by the then judge of Jerusalem, was copied out by the Armenian Sarkiz Karakoç, from the original copy, which is found in the State Archives of the Armenian Patriarchy in Jerusalem. It is also found in the Book of Churches in the Prime Ministerial Ottoman Archives in Ankara. In the abovementioned decree, Sultan Selim I defined the rights of the non-Muslims and forbade any violations of such rights.

The following is a translation of the Arabic text of the decree, which in turn has been translated from the Turkish version of the document.

The Text of the Decree of Jerusalem

“Let this decree be duly abided by.

This honorable decree, decreed by His Majesty, bearing the monogram of the Sultan, with God’s help, states that:

With God’s help, we have arrived in Jerusalem on 25 Safar (the second month of the Arabic lunar calendar) 923 AH (1517). In the company of the other priest, the Armenian Patriarch, Sarkiz, who came asking us to grant his followers favors, in which regard they requested us to let them keep under their control the churches and other places of worship which from ancient times have been under their administration, as well as to renew the covenant granted to them by Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab and Salahuddin al-Ayyubi. Thereupon, it has been decided that the Armenian priests will continue to be authorized to hold under their control-as they have been doing-the Church of Qiyamah, the Cave of Bethlehem, where Jesus Christ was born, the keys of the gate to the north, the two candle-sticks and their candles at the gate of Qiyamah, the great churches, Mar Yaqub, the Churches of Dayr Az-Zaytun, Habs al-Masih and Nablus, including the churches of the Abyssinians, Copts, and Assyrians.

This honorable decree states that nobody from other religions shall interfere with them. I have issued this decree ordering this: let it be duly abided by. The control and disposition of the abovementioned great churches are to be for their owners. Similarly, this applies to the churches located in the suburbs and inside the borders of the Armenian Patriarchate in Mar Yaqub. The same also applies to the places of worship of other sects, such as the Abyssinians, Copts, and Assyrians, i.e., they also have the right to practice their rituals therein, and control such places of worship themselves. Further, no one has the right to interfere in appointing or dismissing those who are in charge of religious affairs and those who supervise the monks, priests, metropolitans, and bishops. Again, all their religious affairs, their churches, temples, monasteries, and other sacred places are under their authority, and no one has the right to interfere.

People of all sects have the right to enter the Church of Qiyamah, to go to the center and the tomb of Virgin Mary in the suburbs of Jerusalem. They also have the right to visit the Cave where Jesus Christ was born, the keys of the gate in the north, the two candlesticks at the Church of Qiyamah, the lamps inside the cemetery, and the candles. This may be done by keeping the ceremonies and acts of worship in the church Qiyamah performed according to the agreed beliefs.

Thus, people of any nation have the right to enter the Church of Qiyamah, walk around it, visit its door, see the gold and the precious stones in its windows, watch and visit the temple inside, and to visit all the wells and the shrine of Mar Yuhanna in the yard of the Church of Qiyamah. People also have the right to visit Habs al-Masih, which is located near Mar Yaqub in the suburbs, visit the rooms of Yaqub, which is also located in the suburbs, and visit the rooms and the guesthouses near the Cave of Bethlehem.

Furthermore, the previously mentioned Armenian patriarchate has the right to manage all the gardens and olive farms, and in general their churches, temples, monasteries, and shrines. They also have full control over all their possessions, their endowments, and whatever they own. No one should obstruct any Armenian person who comes to visit the Church or the Well called “Zamzam.” Similarly, no one is to cause any harm to their farms, their place of worship, or their shrines; no one has the right to forbid them from reaching such places.

From now on, this decree of the sultanate is to be abided to according to the way explained. No one from any different religion should interfere in their affairs. Let my honorable children, viziers, pious tutors, judges, beylerbeyis (governor general), governors of sanjaks (i.e. subdivisions of a province), voyvodes (native princes; governor or mayor), subashis (policy superintendents), and the like act by this. Finally, no one should oppose any of them, whatever the case may be, and nothing of what has previously been stated is to be altered or changed. If any one interferes, changes, or alters something, they will be considered to be among the criminals and sinners in God’s sight.

All should know that my orders, and my decree which bears my monogram-I, the conqueror of the world-will be certified, and let the content of this decree be duly abided by.

This is written in 923 after Hijrah.”

From this we can see that Sultan Selim I, having arrived in Jerusalem, received the Armenian patriarch, the clergymen, and subjects; he granted them safety, treated them generously, and, further, renewed Umar’s covenant and Salahuddin’s treaty.

It is worth mentioning that such treatment was not restricted to Jerusalem alone, but rather was introduced in many other places. For instance, Sultan Selim I also issued a similar decree for the monks of Saint Catherine Monastery in Sinai once he settled in Cairo in 1517. In this decree, Sultan Selim granted the monks of Saint Catherine the same rights he had previously granted to the Armenian patriarchate, the Abyssinians, and the Assyrian Copts in Jerusalem.

It is noteworthy that throughout history there has been no single incident in which a Muslim leader has besieged a church or a place of worship, attacked it, or forbade water or food to be taken inside such a place of worship. Never has a Muslim army or security force pursued anyone sought refuge in a place of worship.

The document presented here and many other documents remained in force throughout the ages. Even the decree of Selim I to the monks of Saint Catherine Monastery was preserved there until the Israeli occupation of Sinai; its whereabouts are now unknown to the author.

The Golden Age: Suleyman the Magnificent

Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent (1520-1560) showed remarkable excellence in the field of construction after he had ascended the throne; he also excelled in the field of lawmaking. After 55 years, all the Arab lands, up until Telmisan in Morocco, were within the borders of the Ottoman Empire.

Sultan Suleyman bestowed much of the spoils he gained in wars on the Two Honorable Mosques, as well as the Aqsa Mosque. He covered the external walls of the Dome of the Rock Mosque with flagstones made of ceramics of superior quality instead of using mosaic, which would have needed to be repaired from time to time. The result of this process was that the mosque attained a blue ceramic covering, instead of a mixture of red and green; this tiling has given the mosque its magnificent appearance, which has remained for many centuries. Also, instead of mosaic, Sultan Suleyman had the lower part of the walls covered with marble and surrounded the building from above with a girdle of dark blue ceramic with inscriptions in white. He further ordered that colored glass be fixed in the windows, which were firmly placed within cavities in bright white gypsum and plaster.

In addition, Sultan Suleyman ordered that all the walls of Jerusalem be repaired, to give them the appearance they maintained until recent times.

It is worth mentioning that the Church of Marqad Isa had no bells until 1545, so he commanded that bells be hung there. In 1555 there was a small building over the shrine in the circular part of the Church of Qiyamah, so he commanded that another structure, which was to be well designed and suitable to the shrine, be built instead of the older one.

At this time, the church was divided between various discordant Christian denominations. Such discordance prevented the necessary restoration and reconstruction from being carried out and thus no bell tower had been constructed. This was the case until 1719. By a government order, all the drawings, figures, and styles had been preserved as they originally were when the tower was being built and during the necessary restoration work. In fear of changing the original appearance, renovation work that should have been done to the Church of Qiyamah was abandoned. In 1808, a fire broke out in the Armenian Church, which led to the destruction of its entire western section, and it was agreed that the Armenians themselves would handle the necessary restoration and renovation work, by virtue of a decree issued by Sultan Mahmud II (1808–1839). According to existing texts, the gilding of the Dome of the Rock Mosque was renewed and the Sultan ordered that the Mosque be restored from the outside. It was the Christian denominational differences that prevented the Church of Marqad Isa and its ornaments from being renovated, and it would have been possible to make use of the remaining places so that the church may be turned back to the state it had during the Crusades.

The nineteenth century witnessed many events that disrupted the peace and tranquility of Palestine, in general, and Jerusalem, in particular. For instance, Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821), who was under siege in Egypt, attacked Palestine. As he set siege to Acre, he sent some French troops to attack Jerusalem. So the Turkish and French troops fought in front of Yisra’il; that is in front of Marj bin Amir, but the French troops were defeated. Then, in 1831, Palestine, in particular Jerusalem, was captured by the troops of Muhammad Ali Pasha, and this city came under Egyptian rule until the Egyptian issue was solved. Shortly after the enthronement of Sultan Abdulmecid I (1839-1861), the great powers at that time put pressure on the region. Eventually, France joined these nations and a treaty was convened in 1840 that forced Egypt to leave Palestine. After that, England and Austria exercised substantial pressure to restore Jerusalem to Ottoman rule. This continued until the end of World War I. However, during the last stage of the war, namely on December 8, 1917, Jerusalem was occupied by the British. Thus, this sacred city which had enjoyed an independent administration during the Turkish Ottoman era now was under British administration until 1948.

The story of Sultan `Abdulhamid II and what he did to protect Jerusalem is a long story that needs an entire article devoted to it.

One action in particular which has drawn much attention to the Muslim faith is jihad. The original meaning of jihad and the way it is still practiced today by the vast majority of Muslims is admirable, emphasizing perseverance towards a just, ever-lasting and rewarding goal-spiritual enlightenment (Gulen 208-227). However, jihad has recently been misinterpreted, misunderstood, and misused by many non-Muslims and by a few Muslim extremists. This has resulted in many great mistakes, made both by the extremists and non-Muslims alike. The extremists have taken jihad and manipulated its meaning to suit their own beliefs and dogmas. The end result of all this has been and will continue to be heavy criticism and scrutiny of Muslims for performing an action that in actuality is very peaceful and responsible in its meaning. The true meaning of jihad is to struggle, to persevere and the meaning of the word does not include implicit or explicit approval of the radical acts of terrorism that have been committed by extremists; such people have simply misinterpreted its meaning.

To strive or struggle is the most suitable translation of the word jihad (Gulen 208-227). Jihad is carried out (or at least is prescribed to be carried out) by Muslims both collectively and individually. There are two parts of jihad: the lesser and the greater. The greater jihad is the inner struggle that an individual Muslim goes through in order to fight against superstition, wrong belief, carnal desire, and evil inclinations while striving to obtain intellectual and spiritual enlightenment. The lesser jihad is encouraging others to strive for and reach the same goal of enlightenment. Both aspects are carried out in the name of God and both aspects are interdependent on each other, since one cannot work without the other.

If Muslims want to be successful in the greater jihad they must make their focus in life striving for the sake of God. This includes all aspects of their lives, from sleeping to coming home from work at the end of the day. Every thought and every action Muslims take up must be directed towards God so that they can overcome their primitive carnal impulses. The goal of this, as mentioned before, is to obtain spiritual and intellectual enlightenment (Gulen 208-227). The caliph Umar exemplified his jihad through some of his actions. An example is a story related about this caliph in which he was giving a sermon and interrupted his own sermon, saying: “O Umar, you were a shepherd taking care of your father’s sheep!” Later, he was asked why he had said this, and he replied: “I remembered that I was the caliph, and was afraid of feeling proud.” Another story which exemplifies his jihad is when Umar was asked why he was carrying a sack on his back, to which he replied “I felt some pride, and wanted to get rid of it” (Gulen 18-31). Through these two examples we can see how Muslims in the past strove to achieve spiritual enlightenment.

The lesser jihad a Muslim will strive for includes all outward actions towards others that are done for the cause of God. In other words, this means conveying God’s message to others through all aspects of a Muslim’s daily life. Given this idea, the lesser jihad will be practiced while going to war with others, but let us not forget that it will also be practiced in other more prosaic actions, such as shaking hands with someone. If the outwardly action will help one person or many people and it is carried out in the name of God then it is considered to be jihad. Forceful jihad is resorted to and permitted only when a person or many people seek to maintain a society or group that has been built on corruption, self-interest, oppression, and the degradation of the rights of others. This means that forceful jihad is only permitted when a society or group seeks to contain or even deflate the basic principles of Islam and in essence, Islam itself (Gulen 208-227). This point is clearly illustrated in the history of the persecution that the first converts to Islam faced while living in Mecca. Moustapha Akkad outlines this point successfully in his film, The Message: Muslims who were living in Mecca were facing extreme persecution from the pagans. It was upon God’s command that Muhammad, who was with his some of his followers in Medina, led his followers into battle against the persecuting Meccans. The Muslims in Medina took arms against the Meccans only because numerous Muslims in Mecca were facing severe persecution for their beliefs and practices. Thus jihad was necessary in order to save those who were victims of persecution. In his commentary on the revelation associated with this event, Abdullah Ali states how jihad was used justifiably,

Even from the human point of view, the cause of God is the cause of justice, the cause of the oppressed. In the great persecution, before Mecca was won again, what sorrows, threats, tortures, and oppressions were suffered by those whose faith was unshaken? Muhammad’s life and that of his adherents was threatened: they were mocked, assaulted, insulted, and beaten; those within the power of the enemy were put into chains and cast into prison … they could not even buy the food they wanted or perform their religious duties. (208)

Thus, there was need and justification for Muhammad and his followers to fight the persecuting Meccans. It is easy to see from this example that forceful jihad is used only as a method of last resort and it is only a small aspect of the lesser jihad. Hence, lesser jihad incorporates all aspects of Muslims’ outwardly actions, which unless otherwise directed by God, will be peaceful, since they will strive to share the message of God with others.

Lesser and greater jihad are interdependent of each other; Muslims must first be struggling and striving within their self before they can strive outwardly in the name of God. Fethullah Gulen explains this idea exceptionally well by saying, “the deeper [the believers’] belief in and submission to God, the deeper their concern for all creatures” (208-227). Gulen’s quote reflects the idea of individual inwardly action (deep belief in God), being interdependent of outwardly action (deep concern for all creatures). Thus he emphasizes the point that the lesser and greater jihad are dependent on each other.

It is important for Muslims to constantly be striving for God; if Muslims abandon this goal, they will become without an aim and this will be the cause of their own failure in the quest for intellectual and spiritual enlightenment (Gulen 208-227).

To further emphasize devotion to jihad I will examine some passages from the Qur’an. The first is found in chapter 9, verses 38 to 39. This passage focuses solely on the individual Muslim, his/her jihad and the implications of the jihad. The verse stresses the actions of the individual both inwardly and outwardly,

O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when you are asked to go forth in the Cause of God, you cling heavily to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless you go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; But Him you would not harm in the least. For God has power over all things. (449-450)

In this passage, God challenges the individual to go forth in God’s cause and to abandon clinging to worldly ideals. Focusing on the hereafter is an action that leads to perseverance and devotion for Muslims. In challenging the individual to go forth, God is commanding them to strive within themselves to win the inner struggle. That struggle is acting justly in the name of God in day to day life (the greater jihad). In giving the command to go forth, God also challenges the individual to go out into the world and spread the message of God to everyone; this is the second part of jihad. Nowhere in this passage is harming, fighting, or killing others in the name of God spoken of. The message here is that through peaceful, inner struggle the individual will not be punished, but will rather be unharmed and able to live in the hereafter.

The next section of the Qur’an to be looked at comes from chapter 8, verses 72 to 74. These lines focus on the lesser jihad of a group of Muslims rather than just one individual Muslim. It emphasizes the promotion of Islam by a group of Muslims to others through jihad (fighting for God and also through hospitality to others),

Those who believed, And adopted exile, And fought for the Faith, With their prosperity and their persons, in the cause of God, as well as those who gave (them) asylum and aid-these are (all) friends and protectors, one of another. As to those who believed but come into exile; You owe no duty of protection to them until they come into exile, but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance. And (remember) God sees all that you do. The unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless you do this, (protect each other), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief. Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of God, as well as those who give (them) asylum and aid-these are (all) in very truth Believers: For them is the forgiveness of sins and provision most generous. (433-434)

The line which reads “if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them” is God’s command to Muslims to promote Islam to others only if they ask for aid. This can be seen as the lesser jihad and though it is a very daunting task for any one Muslim, it is still a very tranquil, peaceful, and patient act as God says that religious aid should be provided only if they (friends and protectors) seek it. The gentleness of this passage is further extended when God says if the unbelievers and the Muslims do no protect each other then there will be tumult and oppression in the world. The exact opposite of violence and radical acts of terrorism is emphasized here (the people who it is implied to be protected here are Jews and Christians). So it is obvious that this passage shows that the lesser jihad Muslims should practice has peaceful aspects and has very little to do with violence.

The Qur’an does however contain passages that speak of fighting, going into battle, and taking prisoners. But as we will see, these actions are not associated in any way with the mass murders that Islamic extremists commit, claiming (obviously incorrectly) that such actions are performed in the name of God. Verses 74 to 75 of Chapter 4 read as follows:

Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God-whether he is slain or gets victory-soon shall we give him a reward of great (value). And why should you not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?-Men, women, and children, whose cry is: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect; and raise for us from You one who will help!” (207-208)

Emphasis in this passage falls upon fighting in the cause of God; fighting for the oppressed and the maltreated. However the reader must be aware of the context of the passage before drawing conclusions about what is being commanded. First of all, this revelation came to the Prophet when he and some of his followers were in Medina. It was around this time that the Muslims still living in Mecca were facing severe persecution from the pagans. Muslims in Medina had wanted to retaliate and fight back, but Muhammad only allowed for fighting back after God had commanded him to do so. Therefore, this passage is likely to be one of the revelations the Prophet received from God directing him and the other Muslims to fight the persecutors of their religion. It is important to note that only after the Muslims in Mecca came under direct attack did God command the Muslims in Medina to fight the persecutors. In this passage God does not give permission for random mass murders, but rather only to fight the oppressors. As Abdullah Ali says in his commentary of this passage, “… the cause of God is the cause of justice, the cause of the oppressed” (434). The idea of defending Islam by means of fighting is a part of jihad, but it is vital to understand that such fighting is only necessary after Islam and the followers of Islam have come under direct attack from oppressors. And even in that fighting, as Ali mentions, there should be justice, and justification for fighting. The justification is that Islam is coming under attack. Given these ideas about jihad, it becomes clear that Islam does not promote radical acts of terrorism committed by extremists today. The extremists are wrong in claiming that their killing of innocent people is for the cause of God.

After taking into account all these misinterpretations, acts of terrorism, and acts of striving for justice in the name of God (as individuals and as groups), where do we go from here? Robert Jewet and John Lawrence claim that today it is inappropriate to focus on a crusade against Islamic terrorists attacking the West. Rather, they say it is far more appropriate for the West, while seeking forms of international law enforcement, to examine their own religious traditions and through research find resources that transform zeal and jihad into dimensions that match the political values of the West (165). While I agree with the first part of this solution, I strongly disagree with the second part. It is true that when dealing with jihad and the way it is used by extremists, we should not persecute and scrutinize Islam. However, when dealing with this issue, we must not retreat back to Christianity, afraid to take a leap ahead. Christian doctrine is not the key to the solution, contrary to what Jewet and Lawrence suggest. The solution does not lie within books of scripture; why look away from a problem and into a book when instead we can literally face the problem head on? The solution rests on the shoulders of each and every person who has a brain and a heart and who knows how to effectively use both. We must use our brains to realize that this issue will never completely go away but that we can minimize it. We must also use our brains in a way that allows us to learn and understand Islam and its key doctrines, beliefs, and practices, because if we willingly adhere to ignorance then we do not deserve to be described in a way that is different from how Bin Laden has described the West. Bernard Lewis cites a letter from Bin Laden in his book, The Crisis of Islam, published in November 2002. Bin Laden says in this letter “[we want you] to stop your oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery” (157). He claims America is “without principles or manners” (158). We must use our hearts to allow us the patience and tranquility to understand the doctrines, beliefs, and practices of Islam, because if we cannot learn to accept Islam then we might as well deport all of the immigrants currently living in the West. The same must be done by Muslims who seek to deal with this issue, so that everyone will be working together to minimize the situation we find ourselves in. If we in the West do not seek to understand Islam and live peacefully with Muslims, then we will slowly lose our reputation as a multi-cultural society and we will slowly gain a reputation that is similar to that of the United States.

References

• Akkad, Moustapha. The Message. Released 1976.
• ‘Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an. 10th ed. Beltsville, Maryland: Amana, 1999.
• Gulen, M. Fethullah. The Messenger of God: Muhammad, The Light, Inc., New Jersey.
• Gulen, M. Fethullah. Questions and Answes about Faith I, The Light, Inc., New Jersey.
• Jewett, Robert and John Shelton Lawrence. Captain America and the Crusade Against Evil. The Dilemma of Zealous Nationalism. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans, 2003.
• Lawrence, Bruce B., Shattering the Myth. Islam Beyond Violence. New Jersey: Princeton, 1998.
• Lewis, Bernard. The Crisis of Islam. Holy War and Unholy Terror. New York: Modern Library, 2003.
• Lincoln, Bruce. Holy Terrors. Thinking About Religion after September 11, University of Chicago, 2003.

At this point, it is important to note that the motives for Muslims to engage in dialogue with non-Muslims have their roots embedded not in the recent past, but date back to the seventh century. Dialogue is not a civilized virtue of modern times, but rather a duty upon every Muslim, who is following the footsteps of the Prophet of Islam. Dialogue is not a temporary activity, but a way of living that spans a lifetime. In the very first days of his mission, the Prophet sought every possible means of communication with his fellow townsmen; despite fierce opposition and in the face of all kinds of dangers and threats, he was the one who took the first step and initiated “dialogue.” This attitude was not only limited to the Mecca period when Muslims were few in number and powerless to defend themselves. The Blessed Prophet sent aid to Mecca when his hometown was suffering a deadly famine; this happened when Muslims had won battles against Meccan pagans and the city state of Islam was laying its foundations more strongly than any other establishment in the Arabian Peninsula. It is also well known that the Prophet’s shield was in the custody of a Jew when he passed away; he never stopped making peaceful contacts with non Muslims.

Some of the articles in this issue focus on some significant concepts like tolerance, jihad, and dialogue between Muslims and Christians. The lead article shows believers how to respond to “. . . the coarsest thoughts and the crudest ideas, without losing our temper.” “Mildness is reminded in such situations we cannot tolerate, a kind of mildness presented in the Qur’an as “gentle words” which “is the result of a tender heart, a gentle approach, and mild behavior.”

Galymzhan Kirbassov analyzes Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” theory.

Studying interstate disputes during the post-Cold War period, his analysis proposes a qualitative result that conflicts occur more because of other reasons than civilizational differences. Evan Radford’s piece explores the Islamic concept of “jihad” that is highly unpopular in the West. Radford thinks this unpopularity is a result of misinformation; Westerners and some extremists have misinterpreted jihad and use this concept as a veil and as a means to legitimatize their politically motivated violent activities.

‘Yes,’ they replied. ‘Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah emerged alleging that he is a Prophet and lbn Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr) has followed him.’

‘I used to know Abu Bakr,’ said Talha. ‘He is an easy-going, amiable, gentle man. He was an honest and upright trader. We were quite fond of him and loved sitting in his company because of his knowledge of Quraysh history and genealogy.’

Later, Talha went to Abu Bakr and asked:

‘Is it true what they say – that Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah has appeared as a Prophet and that you follow him?’

‘Yes,’ replied Abu Bakr and went on to tell Talha about Muhammad and what a good thing it would be if he too followed him. Talha in turn told Abu Bakr the story of his strange recent encounter with an ascetic in the marketplace of Busra in Syria. The ascetic is said to have told Talha that someone called ‘Ahmad’ would appear in Mecca about that time and that he would be the last of the Prophets. He also told Talha, so the story goes, that the Prophet would leave the sacred precincts of Mecca and migrate to a land of black soil, water and palm trees…

Abu Bakr was astonished by the story and took Talha to Muhammad. The Prophet, peace be upon him, explained Islam to Talha and recited some portions of the Qur’an to him. Talha was enthusiastic. He related to the Prophet his conversation with the ascetic of Busra. There and then, Talha pronounced the Shahadah – that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God. He was the fourth person who had been introduced to Islam by Abu Bakr.

The Quraysh were astounded by the young Talha’s acceptance of Islam. The one who was most dismayed and unhappy was his mother. She had hoped that he would one day be a leader in his community because of his noble character and his outstanding virtues. Some of the Quraysh, anxious and worried, went to Talha as soon as they could to wean him away from his new religion but found him firm and unshakeable as a rock. When they despaired of using gentle persuasion to achieve their aim, they resorted to persecution and violence. The following story is related by Mas’ud ibn Kharash:

‘While I was making sa’y between al-Safa and al Marwa, there appeared a crowd of people pushing a young man whose hands were tied behind his back. As they rushed behind him, they rained down blows on his head. In the crowd was an old woman who lashed him repeatedly and shouted abuses at him.

I asked:

‘What’s the matter with this young man?’

‘This is Talha ibn ‘Ubaydullah. He gave up his religion and now follows the Ban-u Hashim man.’

‘And who is the woman behind him?’ I asked.

‘She is Sa’bah bint al-Hadrami, the young man’s mother,’ they said.

The Quraysh did not stop there. Nawfal ibn Khuwaylid, nicknamed the ‘lion of the Quraysh’ bound Talha with a rope and with the same rope he tied up Abu Bakr and then handed them over to the mindless and violent mob of Mecca to be beaten and tortured. The shared experience no doubt drew Talha and Abu Bakr closer together!

Years passed and events of great significance took place. Talha grew in stature as he bore the pain and suffering of being tested in the path of God and His Prophet. He gained the unique reputation among Muslims of being called the ‘living martyr’. The Prophet, peace be upon him, also called him ‘Talha the Good’ and ‘Talha the Generous’.

The name of the ‘living martyr’ was earned during the Battle of Uhud. Talha had missed the Battle of Badr. He and Sa’id ibn Zayd had been sent outside Medina on a mission by the Prophet and when they returned, the Prophet and his companions were already on the way back from Badr. They were both sad at having missed the opportunity of taking part in the first campaign with the Prophet but were tremendously pleased when he told them they would get the same reward as those who actually fought.

At the Battle of Uhud, when the Muslims fell into disarray at the beginning of hostilities, the Prophet became dangerously exposed. There were about eleven men of the Ansar at his side and one Muhajir – Talha ibn ‘Ubaydullah. The Prophet clambered up the mountain hotly pursued by some mushrikin. The Prophet, peace be upon him, shouted:

‘The one who repulses these people from us will be my companion in Paradise.’

‘I, O Messenger of God,’ shouted Talha.

‘No, stick to your position,’ replied the Prophet. A man from the Ansar volunteered and the Prophet agreed. He fought until he was killed. The Prophet went further up the mountain with the mushrikin still in close pursuit.

‘Isn’t there someone to combat these?’

Talha again volunteered but the Prophet ordered him to maintain his position. Another person immediately came forward, fought and was killed. This happened until all who stood by the Prophet were martyred except Talha.

‘Now, yes, ‘ signalled the Prophet and Talha went into battle. By this time, the Prophet’s teeth had been broken, his forehead had been slashed, his lips had been wounded and blood was streaming down his face. He was drained of energy. Talha plunged into the enemy and pushed them away from the Prophet. He turned back to the Prophet and helped him a little further up the mountain and put him to lie on the ground. He then renewed his attack and successfully repulsed the enemy.

About this occasion Abu Bakr said:

‘At that moment, Abu ‘Ubayda ibn al-Jarrah and I were far from the Prophet. When we came close to him to render assistance to him, the Prophet said:

‘Leave me and go to your companion (meaning Talha).’

There was Talha, bleeding profusely. He had numerous wounds, from sword, spear and arrow. His foot had been cut and he had fallen into a hollow where he lay unconscious.

Thereafter, the Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

‘Whoever is pleased to see a man still walking on earth who had completed his span (of life), let him look at Talha ibn ‘Ubaydullah.’

And, whenever Uhud was recalled, As-Siddiq, may God be pleased with him, would say:

‘That day, that entire day, belonged to Talha.’

That was the story of how Talha became to be called the ‘living martyr’.

There were innumerable incidents which led to him being called ‘Talha the Good’ and ‘Talha the Generous’.

Talha was an astute and successful merchant who travelled widely to the north and south of the Arabian peninsula. It is said that after one of his trips to Hadramawt, he had profits amounting to some seven hundred thousand dirhams. His nights would be anxious and worried on account of this vast wealth. On one such night, his wife, Ummu Kulthum the daughter of Abu Bakr said to him:

What’s wrong with you, O Abu Muhammad? Perhaps I have done something to hurt you?’

‘No,’ replied Talha. ‘You are a wonderful wife for a Muslim man. But I have been thinking since last night:How can a man think of his Lord and Sustainer when he goes to sleep with this wealth in his house?’

Why should it bother you so much?’ remarked Ummu Kulthum. ‘What about all the needy ones in your community and all your friends? When you get up in the morning share it out among them.’

‘God bless you. You are really marvellous, the daughter of a marvellous man,’ said Talha to his wife.

In the morning, Talha gathered up the money in bags and distributed it among the poor Muhajirin and Ansar.

It is related that a man came up to Talha requesting help and also mentioning some common family connection between them.

‘This family connection someone has mentioned to me before,’ said Talha who was in fact known for his generosity to all members of his clan. Talha told the man that he had just sold a piece of land to ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan for several thousand dirhams. The man could have the money or the land which could be re-purchased from ‘Uthman. The man opted for the money and Talha gave it all to him.

Talha was well-known for helping persons who had debt problems, heads of families who experienced hardship, and widows. One of his friends, Sa’id ibn Zayd, said of him:

‘I accompanied Talha ibn ‘Ubaydullah on journeys and I stayed with him at home and I have not found anyone who was more generous with money, with clothes and with food than Talha.’

No wonder he was called ‘Talha the Good’ and ‘Talha the Generous’.

The name Talha is also connected with the first fitnah or civil war among Muslims after the death of the Prophet, peace be upon him.

The seeds of trouble were sown during the caliphate of ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. There were many complaints and accusations against him. Some mischief-makers were not content with accusations only but were determined to finish him off. In the year 35 AH (656 CE) a group of insurgents stormed ‘Uthman’s house and murdered him while he was reading the Qur’an. It was one of the most shocking events in the early history of Islam.

‘Ali was persuaded to accept the responsibility of the Caliphate and all Muslims swore allegiance to him, including Talha and Zubayr ibn al-Awwam. Talha and Zubayr were deeply shocked by the murder of ‘Uthman. They were horrified and felt strongly that the murderers should be punished and that justice should be done. But the punishment of the murderers was not an easy task in as much as the crime was not just the work of a few individuals but involved a large number of persons.

Talha and Zubayr sought ‘Ali’s permission to go to Mecca to perform Umrah. They met ‘A’ishah the wife of the Prophet. She was greatly shocked when she heard of the assassination of ‘Uthman. From Mecca, Talha Zubayr and ‘A’ishah set off for Basra where large numbers were gathering to seek revenge for the death of ‘Uthman.

The forces gathered at Basra seemed to present an open challenge to ‘Ali. As the caliph of the Muslims and the head of the entire Muslim State, he could not tolerate any insurrection or armed revolt against the State. But what a difficult and awesome task he faced! To deal with the revolt, he had to confront his brothers, his companions and his friends – followers of the Prophet and his religion, those who often fought side by side with him against the forces of shirk, those whom he respected and loved.

The forces clamouring for vengeance for ‘Uthman and those supporting ‘Ali met at a place called Kuraybah, near Basra. ‘Ali desired to avoid war and settle matters by peaceful means. He used every means at his disposal to achieve peace. He clung to every hope of avoiding confrontation. But the dark forces at work against Islam – and how numerous were these – were determined that matters should come to a terrible and bloody end.

‘Ali wept. He wept bitterly when he saw ‘A’ishah, the ‘Mother of the Believers’ in her hawdaj or palanquin astride a camel at the head of the army which now emerged to fight him. And when he saw Talha and Zubayr, two close companions of the Prophet, in the midst of the army, he shouted to them to come out to him. They did and ‘Ali said to Talha:

‘O Talha, have you come with the wife of the Messenger of God to fight along with her…?’

And to Zubayr he said:

‘O Zubayr, I implore you, by God, do you remember the day when the Prophet, peace be upon him, passed by you and we were in such and such a place and he asked you:

‘Do you love ‘Ali?’ and you said:

‘Why shouldn’t love my cousin and one who follows my religion…?’

‘Ali continued talking to them reminding them of the bonds of brotherhood and faith. In the end both Talha and Zubayr withdrew from participation in this civil war. They withdrew immediately when they saw the situation in a different light. But they paid for that withdrawal with their lives.

As they withdrew, a man named ‘Amr ibn Jurmouz followed Zubayr and cowardly murdered him while he performed Salat. Talha was killed by an arrow allegedly shot by Marwan – a cousin of ‘Uthman who was too blinded by rage and the desire to seek revenge for his kinsman to respond to the possibility of avoiding war and bloodshed among Muslims.

The murder of ‘Uthman had become Talha’s tryst with destiny. He did not participate in the fighting and killing that followed that came to be known in history as the ‘Battle of the Camel’. Indeed, if he had known that the fitnah would have degenerated into such insane hatred and bitterness and resulted in such a bloody outcome, he would have resisted it. He was not keen to fight ‘Ali. He was simply appalled by the murder of ‘Uthman and wanted to see justice done. Before the beginning of the battle he had said in a voice choked with emotion:

‘O Lord, for the sake of ‘Uthman, take from me this day until You are pleased.’

Then when ‘Ali faced him and Zubayr, they saw the correctness of his position and withdrew from the field of battle .Yet, in these difficult circumstances, martyrdom was reserved for them.

The Battle of the Camel came to an end. ‘A’ishah, the Mother of the Believers, realized that she had precipitated matters and left Basra for the Sacred Mosque and then to Madina distancing herself from the conflict. ‘Ali provided well for her journey giving her all the comfort and honour due to her.

When the numerous deads from the battle were brought together, ‘Ali led the funeral prayer for them all, those who were with him and those who were against him. And when he had finished burying Talha and Zubayr he bade farewell to them with a heavy heart, a heart filled with tenderness and love.

‘I really hope,’ he said in simple and sublime words, ‘that Talha, Zubayr, ‘Uthman and I will be among those of whom God has said:

And We shall remove from their hearts any lurking sense of injury and rancour; they will be brothers joyfully facing each other on thrones of dignity. (al-Hijr, 15:47)

Then he looked tenderly and sorrowfully on the graves of his brothers in faith and said:

‘I have heard with these two ears of mine the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, saying:

‘Talha and Zubayr are my companions in Paradise!’