| This article is part of the series: |
| Islam |
|---|
|
|
|
See also
|
There is some disagreement among Muslims, and among historians of Islam, as to the identity of the first male convert to Islam after Muhammad.
The early historian Ibn Ishaq puts Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, first; Tabari presents three candidates, and does not decide between them.[1] 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 as well as good friend, who was the first convert.
Contents |
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 west-central 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 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.
Shi'a cite that when the Prophet Muhmmad asked who is a believer, Ali, at 13, was the first to declare his affirmation. Muhammad went on to ask two more times, no one else step forward. In fact, after the third time, people started to wonder and snicker at the 13 year old, at which Muhammad replied that the wisdom Ali contained exceed the wisdom of the group assembled.
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.
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 commonly said that Abu Bakr was the first grown man to accept Islam, and Ali the first child; this formulation does not draw any conclusions as to whether Abu Bakr or Ali was the very first male.
The identity of the first male Muslim is of little importance to Western historians of Islam. William Montgomery Watt, the author of one of the more detailed English biographies of Muhammad. He wrote:
Since no political or religious faction ever formed behind Zayd, his claims to priority have been only intermittently advanced.
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.