History, Science and Faith in Islam
1: The Death of Prophet Muhammed (sas)
By Professor Nazeer Ahmed
Concord, CA

The Qur’an teaches us: “Soon shall We show them Our Signs on the horizon and within their own Selves until it is clear to them that it is indeed the Truth.”
Thus history, science and the study of the soul take on a sacred character in Islam. History, science and the soul are interrelated through Tawhid. They are different modes of knowing the Names of Allah, who alone is the Source of all knowledge. This perspective distinguishes our approach from a secular approach where history and science are subject to cause and effect while the soul is entirely absent from the scene.
We live in an age when the only limits to human progress are the speed of light and the human capacity to absorb change. In these times, it is even more important to know the interrelationship between science, the soul and the ongoing human struggle on earth.
Secular science has made a serious error in taking the soul out of the equation. Islam provides an integrated vision in which history, science and the soul are not antagonists but partners on the path to the Truth. Each is a Sign from God. Secular science confuses the Sign with the destination.
At the end of each of our lectures in this series, several questions will stare at us: What Signs did we witness in the events we covered today? How did those who came before us read those Signs and renew their faith or fall short in their efforts? What can we learn from the Signs and from the successes and failures of the past?
Islam burst upon the global scene in the 7th century and transformed a nomadic people into prime movers of a world civilization. Prophet Muhammed (sas) was the architect of that transformation. His death in 632 CE presented the Islamic community with its first major challenge. The Muslims met this challenge by establishing the institution of the Khilafat and affirming the continuity of historical Islam. The nascent Islamic community, successfully defended itself from the predatory reach of the Byzantine and Persian Empires. But that very success sowed the seeds of dissension in the community. The captured wealth of Persia brought greed and nepotism and resulted in the assassination of the third KhalifaUthman bin Affan (r). The fourth Khalifa, Ali ibn Abu Talib (r) tried to stem the tide of corruption and return to the pristine purity of faith but he was swept away by the whirlwinds created by the assassination of Uthman (r). With the death of Ali (r), the curtain fell on the age of faith in Islamic history.
Civilizations are tested with crises just as individuals are tried with adversity. It is these critical moments that bring out the character of a civilization, just as individual tests bring out the character of an individual. Propelled by faith, great civilizations measure up to their challenges and grow more resilient with each crisis, turning adversity into opportunity. It is much the same way with individuals. Critical moments in history test the mettle of humans. Great men and women bend history to their will, whereas weaker ones are swallowed up in the convulsions of time.
The death of Prophet Muhammed (sas) was the first historical crisis faced by the Islamic community. The process by which the community met this crisis has determined its strengths and its weaknesses in the subsequent centuries. The shape of the historical edifice of Islam was cast in that hour. The death of the Prophet brought forth the towering personalities of Abu Bakr as Siddiq, Omar ibn al Khattab, Uthman bin Affan and Ali ibn Abu Talib into the historical process. What these Companions did and did not do has influenced the course of Islamic history in the subsequent 1,400 years.
The Prophet was the fountainhead of Muslim life. No other person in history occupied a position in relation to his people, as did Prophet Muhammed (sas) with respect to his. He was the focus for all social, spiritual, political, economic, military and judicial activities. He was the Prophet and the Messenger of Allah. When he passed away, he left a vacuum that seemed impossible to fill. His legacy was tested immediately upon his death. At stake was the continuity of the historical process. The Prophet had welded together a community of believers transcending their allegiance to tribe, race or national origin. The glue that had cemented this process was the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet. Now the Prophet was gone and it seemed that the divisive forces that Islam had overcome would resurface and tear apart the newborn community.
The questions facing the community were basic: What was to be the structure of leadership after the Prophet? Was it to be unitary or shared leadership? Who was to be the leader? What was the process for selection of the leadership? Had the Prophet (sas) left specific instructions for succession?
The first reaction to the death of the Prophet was shock, disbelief and denial. So great was the love of the Companions for the Prophet that they could not part with their love. So central was he to the life of the community that they could not imagine a life without his presence. When Omar ibn al Khattab heard that the Prophet (sas) had passed away, he was so distraught that he drew his sword and declared: “Some hypocrites are pretending that the Prophet of Allah- may Allah’s blessings be upon him—has died. By Allah I swear that he did not die; that he has gone to join his Lord, just as other Prophets went before. Moses was absent from his people for forty nights and returned to them after they had declared him dead. By Allah, the Prophet will return just as Moses returned. Any man who dares to perpetrate a false rumor such as Muhammed’s death shall have his arms and legs cut off by this hand.” People listened to Omar Ibn al Khattab, too stupefied to believe that the man who had transformed Arabia from the backwaters of history to the forefront of the historical process was dead. The situation was grave indeed.
The resilience of Islam showed itself in the person of Abu Bakr Siddique. After confirming that the Prophet (sas) had indeed passed away, he entered the mosque where Omar Ibn al Khattab was speaking to the people and recited the following passage from the Qur’an: “Muhammed is but a Prophet before whom many prophets have come and gone. Should he die or be killed, will you give up your faith? Know that whoever gives up his faith will cause no harm to Allah, but Allah will surely reward those who are grateful to Him” (Qur’an, 3:144). It was as if the people had heard this passage for the first time; it struck them like a bolt of lightning. Omar (r) related later that when he heard it, his legs shook as he realized that the Messenger of Allah had indeed departed from this world. The mortality of the Prophet was established, while the transcendence of God was reaffirmed. The civilization of Islam was to be God-centered, not man-centered. Islam was to have its anchor in Allah and His Word. The Prophet (sas), as the man who had brought the Divine Word and fulfilled his historical mission, had departed, but the light that had shone through him was to show the way to succeeding generations. Islam retained its transcendent character. It was to survive the physical absence of the Prophet (sas) and was to hurl itself as a dynamic force into the historical process.
The situation was fluid, uncertain and fraught with grave risks. The body of the Messenger who had led one of the greatest spiritual revolutions known to humankind was in the corner of a small room. Imagine, if your imagination can bear it, that you were one of those privileged to have lived in those blessed times and you were standing in front of the house of the Prophet (sas) on the day he had departed from this world. What would be your emotions? Here was the man who had transformed a tribal society into a community of believers and had propelled them into the forefront of history. Wave after wave of men moved past the house, sobbing, shaking their heads, unsure of the future. They were now without the anchor that had supported them, without the leader who had sustained them, without the teacher who had taught them, without the statesman who had led them, without the Prophet who had brought the message of Divine transcendence.
The process of succession and its legacy for future generations were at stake. Islam had set for itself a mission to create a global community enjoining what is right, forbidding what is evil and believing in Allah. How was this mission to be fulfilled in the matrix of history without the physical presence of the Prophet (sas)? How was the edifice of a God-conscious community to be erected without the architect who had conceived it? Did the Prophet (sas) leave behind specific instructions on the issue of succession? If he did not, what was the wisdom behind that decision?
Immediately upon the death of the Prophet (sas), competing positions emerged regarding the issue of succession. The first position was that of the Ansar, the residents of Madina who had provided protection and relief to the Muhajirs from Mecca. They felt that as the hosts who had stood by the Prophet at the hour of need, they deserved the leadership of the community. At the minimum, they argued that leadership should be shared. They proposed a committee of two, composed of one person from the Muhajirs and one from the Ansar, to lead the community. The second position was that of the supporters of Abu Bakr. They based their position on the fact that the Prophet, when he had become too ill before his death to lead the congregational prayers, had nominated Abu Bakr (r) as the Imam. Abu Bakr (r) was the first man to accept Islam and was also one of the closest of his Companions. The third position was that of the supporters of Ali. Ali (r) was a cousin of the Prophet and was married to SayyedaFatimatuz Zahra (r), beloved daughter of the Prophet. He was the first youth to embrace Islam and the Prophet had referred to him as his heir and his brother. The Islamic community reconciled the first two positions in the first hours following the death of the Prophet (sas) but differences of opinion remained on the third issue. These differences led, in later years, to the Shi’a-Sunni schism, which runs like a great earthquake fault through Islamic history. Its recurrent divisive and destructive power shows itself at critical moments such as the massacre at Karbala (680 CE), the Battle of Chaldiran (1517 CE) and the Iran-Iraq war (1979-1987 CE).
What was wisdom in the decision of the Prophet (sas) to leave the issue of succession to the collective judgment of the community? A universal religion must have validity for all peoples and at all times. It must have relevance to the people of the 21st century as it did to those who lived at the time of the Prophet. It must have meaning to the most sophisticated person as well as to the bushman in the jungle. The wisdom of the Prophet lies in the fact that whereas the principles of Islam are spelled out in their complete form in the Qur’an and are exemplified in the Sunnah of the Prophet (sas), their implementation at specific times and in specific locations is left to the historical process. In other words, Islam is an existential religion. Its realization and fulfillment is a process that is eternal and incumbent upon each generation of believers.
Urged by the community leaders to prevent an open rift, Abu Bakr (r), along with Omar ibn al Khattab, proceeded to the courtyard of BanuSaida where the Ansar were holding a congregation to elect their leader. One of the Ansar put his position thus: “We are the Ansar—the helpers of Allah and the army of Islam. You, the Muhajirun are only a brigade in the Army. Nonetheless some amongst you have gone to the extreme of seeking to deprive us of our natural leadership and to deny us our rights.” Abu Bakr (r) spoke to the Ansar: “O men of Ansar! We, the Muhajirun were the first to accept Islam. We enjoy the noblest lineage and descent. We are the most reputable and the best esteemed as well as the most numerous in Arabia. Furthermore, we are the closest blood relatives of the Prophet. The Qur’an itself has given us preference. For it is Allah—may He be exalted in praise—Who said, “First and foremost were al Muhajirun, then al Ansar and then those who have followed these two groups in virtue and righteousness.” Then taking the hands of Omar ibn al Khattab and Abu Ubaida, who were seated on either side of him, Abu Bakr Siddique said, “Either one of these two men is acceptable to us as leader of the Muslim community. Choose whomever you please”. At this time Omar ibn al Khattab raised the hand of Abu Bakr Siddique and said: “O Abu Bakr! Did not the Prophet command you to lead the Muslims in prayer? You, therefore, are his successor. In electing you, we are electing the best of all whom the Prophet of Allah loved and trusted”. The Ansar and the Muhajirun then stepped forward and took the oath of allegiance (baiyah) to Abu Bakr Siddique (r).
Thus it was that the nascent Islamic community resolved the issue of succession and embarked on constructing the edifice of their history. The process did not quite satisfy those who supported Ali ibn Abu Talib for the leadership of the community. This group included the noted Sahaba Talha ibn Ubaidallah and Zubair ibn al Awwam. Ali (r), representing the family of the Prophet, was busy with the funeral preparations. Talha and Zubair were not in the preliminary consultations. According to some chronicles, initially, Ali (r) withheld his oath of allegiance. But when Abu Sufyan approached him to declare himself the Khalifa, Ali (r) saw the dangers of division in the community and accepted the Khalifat of Abu Bakr Siddique. According to Ibn Khaldun, Ali ibn Abu Talib took his baiyah forty days after the death of the Prophet. According to Ibn Kathir, this happened only after the death of Fatimatuz Zahra six months after the Prophet’s death.
The Shi’a chroniclers do not accept the majority version, maintaining instead that the Caliphate rightfully belonged to Ali (r) by deputation from the Prophet. However, there is consensus among all chroniclers that any differences regarding the issue of succession were quiescent during the time of Abu Bakr and Omar and did not surface in the open until the Khilafat of Uthman. It was much later, as positions hardened during the Umayyad (665-750) and Abbasid (750-1258) dynasties, that both sides advanced doctrinal arguments to support partisan opinions on the Khilafat and Wilayat / Imamat. Thus it was that Shi’a-Sunni differences were based not on religion or faith but had their origin in the politics of succession and history.
There is yet another view, a spiritual view, on the issue of succession. According to this view man is first spirit. Since an Ummah represents a certain stage in the spiritual development of humankind, the head of an Ummah, a man or a woman, must be a person of the highest spiritual attainment.
The Sufis represent the spiritual and esoteric dimension of Islam. Their enormous impact profoundly influenced the course of Islamic history. In their vision, the spirituality of humankind revolves around a Qutub in every age. The word Qutub means pivot, pole, chief and leader. When there is a Prophet on earth, he is the Qutub. He cleanses the consciousness of humanity so that it becomes worthy of receiving Divine Illumination. Moses was the Qutub for the spirituality of humankind when he was alive, as were David, Solomon, Joseph and Jesus in their times. As long as Muhammed (sas) was alive, he was the spiritual pole for humankind. Upon his death, the mantle of spirituality passed on to Fatima (r), daughter of the Prophet. After Fatima (r), the mantle passed on to Ali ibn Abu Talib (r). Most Sufi orders claim their spirituality from Ali (r) and by virtue of continuity, through Fatimatuz Zahra and ultimately from Prophet Muhammed (sas). As long as Fatimatuz Zahra was alive, the Sufis maintain, Ali (r) could not have given his baiyah to Abu Bakr Siddique. It was only after Fatimatuz Zahra passed away, six months after the Prophet’s death, that Ali (r) finally gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr Siddique. According to this view, the mantle of spirituality continued to reside in Ali ibn Abu Talib to whom important juridical issues were referred by the Caliphs Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and even by the faction headed by Muawiya.
Thus it was that Ummat e Muhammadi met its first challenge to establish historical continuity after the passing away of our Prophet Muhammed (sas). It was the first exercise of the principle of Ijtihad in Islamic history. This Ijtihad affirmed that Islam was to be a God-centered faith based on Tawhid, not a man centered faith. The leader of this faith based community was a Trustee, a Khalifa who had both spiritual and temporal authority. Unitary leadership was chosen over dual leadership or a troika. The process for selection of a leader was parliamentary, namely, consultation and consensus of most if not all of the Companions, thereby establishing the principle of ijma which as we shall in later sessions forms the third dimension of the principles of fiqh in all five of the major schools of fiqh, namely, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii, Hanbali and IthnaAshari. The price paid for this approach was the Shia-Sunni split which runs like a giant fault throughout Islamic history and continues to tear it apart even in modern times.
This first session raises a large number of challenging questions: What Signs were there in the death of the Prophet (sas)? How did the Suhaba read those Signs and how did they renew their faith? In modern times, what were the doctrinal underpinnings of the writings of Allama Iqbal in Pakistan, Ali Shariati in Iran and Zia Barani in Kemalist Turkey about the political structure of an Islamic state? Why do some thinkers claim that the structure of a Khilafat is NOT suitable for the modern Islamic world? How important is the individual in Islam and what is the interface between the individual and the state? How is it to be applied in a modern secular state? Does the position of an individual as a majority or a minority make a difference in civil society? We will throw some light on these and other fundamental questions as we proceed into this series of articles.