Identity of first male Muslim
Encyclopedia : I : ID : IDE : Identity of first male Muslim
| Part of a of articles on Islam |
| Beliefs and practices |
|
Oneness of God Profession of Faith Prayer • Fasting Pilgrimage • Charity |
| Major figures |
|
Muhammad • Ali Abu Bakr • Umar Household of Muhammad Companions of Muhammad Prophets of Islam |
| Texts & Laws |
|
Qur'an • Hadith Jurisprudence • Theology Biographies of Muhammad Esotericism (Sufism) • Exotericism (Sharia) |
| Branches of Islam |
| Sunni • Shi'a • Ibadi |
| Societal aspects |
|
Academics • Theology Philosophy • Science Art • Architecture • Cities Calendar • Holidays Women • ..in the Qu'ran Leaders • Politics Islamism • Liberalism |
| See also |
|
Vocabulary of Islam |
The early historian Ibn Ishaq puts Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad's cousin and foster-son, first; Tabari presents three candidates, and does not decide between them. One account in Tabari says that the first male convert was Zayd ibn Harithah, a freed slave who had become Muhammad's adopted son. Other accounts say that it was Abu Bakr, a man of standing among Meccans and a distant kinsman of Muhammad, who was the first convert.
Introduction
This conversion would have happened sometime between 610 CE, when Muhammad started sharing his experiences (visions of divine origin) with his immediate family, and 612 CE, when Muhammad first began preaching in public to his fellow citizens in Mecca, in what is now north-western Saudi Arabia.Why is the question of priority important? After the Muslim conquests began, a Muslim's standing in the Islamic state depended on his services to the community, and especially on the length of time he had been a member of the community. Early converts (who had faced persecution with Muhammad) had a much higher status than later converts (who may have joined only after there were worldly reasons to do so). The first male convert may thus be presumed to have a special status.
Arguments for and against the claims of Ali or Abu Bakr are especially significant in the light of the disputes over the leadership of the Muslim community after the death of Muhammad. Ali and his followers felt that Muhammad had clearly indicated that he wanted Ali, his cousin and son-in-law, to succeed him; other Muslims stood behind Abu Bakr. After a period of internal dissension or even strife, Abu Bakr was recognized as the first caliph. This event is discussed in detail in the article Succession to Muhammad.
Differences in opinion over the succession, and the later course of affairs in the Muslim community, ultimately led to a split between the majority Sunni denomination and the minority Shi'a denomination.
Shi'a view
Shi'a Muslims all assert that Ali was the first male to accept Muhammad as a prophet, a special distinction that foreshadows his later role as rightful successor to Muhammad. They say that Muhammad, Khadija (Muhammad's wife), and Ali all gathered for prayer before the Kaaba, thus becoming the first Muslims to worship in public.
Some Shi'as assert that Ali should not even be called a convert, as he and Muhammad were hanif, pre-Islamic monotheists, and had refused to worship idols even from birth.
In any case the question of who was the first male to accept Islam is not of the utmost importance to determine who deserved to be the first Caliph. Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him), on several authentic occasions documented in the Hadith, made it very clear that Abu Bakr was the most pious Muslim, followed by Omar, Othman and then Ali.
Sunni view
Sunni Muslims are more apt to dismiss the claims of Ali and advance those of Abu Bakr -- or, to dismiss Ali's conversion as the act of an obedient child, not of the conscious choice of a grown man who had much to lose by following Muhammad.
It is universally accepted, however, that Abu Bakr was the first adult male to accept Islam. Therefore when Prophet Muhammad died, Muslims did not dispute among themselves and aggreed on Abu Bakr as the successor. It is noteworthy here also that Ali himself never expressed to be the first caliph. The issue of the dispute on the first caliph rose years later after Ali died and some sects regarded him to be worthy of being the first caliph.
Academic historians
The identity of the first male Muslim is of little importance to Western historians of Islam. The one historian who has treated the question is William Montgomery Watt, the author of one of the more detailed English biographies of Muhammad. His position:
- "It is universally agreed that Khadijah was the first to believe in her husband and his message, but there was a hot dispute about the first male. At-Tabari has a large selection of source material, and leaves the reader to decide for himself between the three candidates, Ali, Abu Bakr, and Zayd b. Harithah. The claim of Ali may in a sense be true, but for the Western historian it cannot be significant, since Ali was admittedly only nine or ten at the time and a member of Muhammad's household. The claim made for Abu Bakr may also be true in the very different sense that, at least from the time of the Abyssinian affair, he was the most important Muslim after Muhammad; but his later primacy has probably been reflected back into the early records. As a matter of sheer fact Zayd b. Harithah has possibly the best claim to be regarded as the first male Muslim, since he was a freedman of Muhammad's and there was a strong mutual attachment; but his humble status means that his converions has not the same significance as that of Abu Bakr." (Watt 1953, p. 86)
As the quote from Watt indicates, academic historians are reluctant to speak with much certainty on the matter. All the texts relating to the first years of Islam were written down some 150 years after the events in question -- as well as after the events had become matters of intense dispute. In the eyes of the academic, there is not enough reliable data to form a firm conclusion.
Sources Shi'a have advanced in support of Ali's claim
- Ibn Ishaq, as translated by Guillaume; see below
- al-Hakim, Mustadrak al-Hakim
- Tabari, Tarikh al-Tabari
- al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, History of Baghdad
- Seyyed Razi, Peak of Eloquence (Nahj al Balagha), sermons 187 and 127
- Nasr, , 1989, p. 133, ISBN 0-887-06843-X
- Reza Aslan, No god but God, p. 41, 2005, ISBN 1-4000-6213-6
- Betty Kelen, , 2001, p. 29, ISBN 0-929-09312-7
- F. E. Peters, Muhammad and the Origins of Islam, 1994, p. 153, ISBN 0-791-41876-6 (accepts Ibn Ishaq's account)
- Andrew Rippin, Muslims, 2001, p. 41, ISBN 0-415-21781-4
- S.M. Imamuddin, A political history of the Muslims, 1970 Vol 2, Part1. p.41
- Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, 1991. p.102.
- H.M. Balyuzi, Muhammad and the course of Islam, Publisher: G. Ronald (1976) ISBN 0-853-98060-8, p.24.
- Haykal, Muhammad Husayn, The Life of Muhammad, (1995) Islamic Book Service. ISBN 1577311957, p.82.
- Ghulam Malik (Associated Press writer), Muhammad, An Islamic Perspective, University Press of America (1996), ISBN 0761803076, p.30
- M.A. Salahi, Muhammad: Man and Prophet, 1995, ISBN 1-85230-703-x, p.73.
- A.H. Siddiqui, The Life of Muhammad, 1983. Islamic Publications. ISBN 0-935782-14-1, p.64
General references
- Alfred Guillaume -- Life of Muhammad, Oxford University Press, 1955.
- William Montgomery Watt -- Muhammad at Mecca, Oxford University Press, 1953.
See also
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.