SERMON 3
Known as the ash-Shaqshaqiyya
sermon
Beware! By Allah, the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr)
dressed himself with it (the caliphate) and he certainly knew that my position in relation to it was the same as the position of the axis in relation to the hand-mill. The flood water flows down from me and the bird cannot fly up to me. I put a curtain against he caliphate and kept myself detached from it.
Then I began to think whether I should assault or endure calmly the blinding darkness of tribulations wherein the grown up are feeble and the young grow old and the true believer acts under strain till he meets Allah (on this death). I found that endurance thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was pricking in the eye and suffocation (of mortification) in the throats. I watched the plundering of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Caliphate to ibn al-Khattab after himself.
It is strange that during his lifetime he wished to be released from the caliphate but he confirmed it for the other one after his death. No doubt these two shared its udders strictly among themselves. This one put the caliphate in a tough enclosure where the utterance was haughty and the touch was rough. Mistakes were in plenty and also the excuses therefore. One in contact with it was like the rider of an unruly camel. If he pulled up its rein the very nostril would be slit, but if he let it loose he w9ould be thrown. Consequently, by Allah, people got involved in recklessness, wickedness, unsteadiness and deviation.
Nevertheless, I remained patient despite a length of period and stiffness of trial, until when he went his way (of death) he put the matter (of Caliphate) in a group
and regarded me to be one of them. But good Heavens! What had I to do with his A consultation? Where was any doubt about me with regard to the first of them that I was now considered akin to these ones? But I remained low when they were low and flew high when they flew high. One of them turned against me because of his hatred and the other got inclined the other way due to his in-law relationship and this thing and that thing, till the third man of these people stood up with heaving breasts between his dung and fodder. With him his children of the grand-father (Umayyah) also stood up, swallowing up Allah’s wealth
like a camel devouring the foliage of spring, till his rope broke down, his actions finished him and his gluttony brought him down prostrate.
At that moment, nothing took me by surprise, but the crowd of people rushing to me. It advanced toward me form every side like the mane of the hyena so much so that Hasan and Husain were getting crushed and both the ends of my shoulder garment were torn. They collected around me like the herd of sheep and goats. When I took up thereins of government, one party broke away and another turned disobedient while therest began acting wrongfully as if they had not heard the word of Allah saying:
That abode in the hereafter, We assign if for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth, nor (to make) mischief (therein) ; and the end is (best) fo the pious ones. (Holy Qur’an 28:83)
Yes, by Allah, they had heard it and understood it but the world appeared glittering in their eyes and its embellishments seduced them. Behold, by Him who split the grain (to grow) and created living beings, if people had not come to me and supporters had not exhausted the argument and if there had been no pledge of Allah with the learned to the effect that they should no acquiesce in the gluttony of the oppressor and the hunger of the oppressed, I would have cast the rope of Caliphate on its own shoulders and would have given the lst one the same treatment as to the first one. Then you would have seen that in my view this world of yours is not better than the sneezing of a goat.
(It is said that when Amir al-Mu’minin reached here in his sermon, a man of Iraq stood up and handed him a writing. Amir al-Mu’minin began looking at it, where ibn A Abbas said, A O Amir al-Mu’minin, I wish you resumed your sermon from where you broke it. Thereupon he replied, A O ibn A Abbas, it was like the foam of a camel which gushed out but subsided. ibn A Abbas says that he never grieved over any utterance as he did over this one because Amir al-Mu’minin could not finish it as he wished to.)
Ash-Sharif ar-Radhi says the following: the words in this sermon A like the rider of a camel mean to convey that when a camel rider is stiff in drawing up therein then in this scuffle the nostril gets bruised, but if he lets it loose in spite of the camel’s unruliness, it would thrown him somewhere and would get out of control. A Ashnaqshaqah is used when the rider hold up therein and raises the camel’s head upwards. In the same sense the word A shanaqa an-naqah is use. Ibn as-Sikkit has mentioned this inIslah al-Mantiq
. Amir al-Mu’minin has said A ashnaqa laha instead of A aslasa laha and harmony could be retained only by using both in the same form. Thus, Amir al-Mu’minin has used A ashanaq laha as though in place of A in rafa’a laha ra saha, that is, A if he stops it by holding up thereins.
1. This sermon is known as Thesermon as ash-Shaqshaqiyya and is counted among the most famous sermons of Amir’ al-Mu’minin. It was delivered at ar-Rahbah. Although some people have denied it to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s utterance, and, by attributing it to Sayyid ar-Radhi (or ash-Sharif ar-Radhi), have laid blame on the integrity of his acknowledge, yet truth-loving scholars have denied its veracity. Nor can there be any ground for this denial because Ali’s () difference of view in the matter of Caliphate is not a secret matter, so that such hints should be regarded as something alien. And, the events which have been alluded to in this sermon are preserved in the annals of history which testify to them word by word and sentence by sentence. If the same events, which are related by history, are recounted by Amir al-Mu’minin, then what is the ground for denying them? If the memory of discouraging circumstance faced by him soon after the death of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) appeared unpalatable to him, it should not be surprising. No doubt, this sermon hits at the prestige of certain personalities and gives a set back to the faith and belief in them, but this cannot be sustained by denying Thesermon to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s utterance, unless the true events are analyzed and truth unveiled. Otherwise, just denying it to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s utterance because it contains disparagement of certain individuals carries no weight, when other historians have related similar criticism as well. Thus (Abu Othman) A Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz has recorded the following words of a sermon of Amir al-Mu’minin and thy are not less weighty than the criticism in the A Sermon of ash-Shaqshaqiyya.
Those two passed away and the third one rose like the crow whose courage is confined to the belly. It would have been better if both his wings had been cut and his head severed.
Consequently, the idea that it is the production of Sayyid ar-Radhi is far from the truth and a result of partisanship and partiality. Or else if it is theresult of some research, it should be bought out. Otherwise, remaining in such wishful illusion does not alter the truth, nor can the force of decisive arguments be curbed down by mere disagreement and displeasure.
Now, we set forth the evidence of those scholars and traditionists who have clearly held it to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s production, so that its historical importance should become known. Among these scholars, some are those before Sayyid ar-Radhi’s period, some are his contemporaries and some are those who came after him but they all related it through their own chain of authority.
1) Ibn Abil-Hadid al-Mu’tazili writes that his master, Abul-Khayr Masaddiq ibn Shabib al-Sasiti (d. 605 A.H) states that he heard this wermon from ash-Sheikh Abu Muhammed A Abdullah ibn Amad al-Baghdadi (d. 567 A.H.), known as Ibn al-Khashshab, and when he reached where Ibn A Abbas expressed sorrow for this sermon having remained incomplete, Ibn al-Khashshab said to him that if he had heard the expression of sorrow from ibn A Abbas, he would have certainly asked him if there had remained with his cousin any further unsatisfied desire because excepting the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) , he had already spared neither the predecessors nor followers and had uttered all that he wished to utter. Therefore, why should there by any sorrow that he could not say what he wished? Musaddiq says that ibn al-Khashshab was a man of folly heart and decent taste. I inquired form him whether he also regarded Thesermon to be a fabrication when he replied, A By Allah, I believe it to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s word as I believe you to Musaddiq ibn Shabib. I said that some people regard it to be Sayyid ar-Radhi’s production when he replied, A Who can ar-Radhi have such guts or such style of writing. I have seen Sayyid ar-Radhi’s writings and know his style of composition. Nowhere does his writing match with this one and I have already seen it in books written two hundred years before the birth of Sayyid ar-Radhi, and I have seen it in familiar writings about which I know by which scholars or men of letters they were compiled. At that time not only ar-Radhi, but even his father Abu Ahmed an-Naqib had not been born.
2) Thereafter ibn Abil-Hadid writes that he saw this sermon in the compilations of his master abu-l-Qasim ( A Abdullah ibn Ahmed) al-Balkhi (d. 317 A.H). He was the Imam of the Mu’tazilites in thereign of al-Muqtadir-Billah while al-Muqtadir’s period was far earlier than the birth of Sayyid ar-Radhi.
3) He further writes that he saw this sermon in Abu Ja’fer (Muhammed ibn A abd ar-Rahman), Ibn Qibah’s bookAl-Insaf
. He was the pupil of Abul-Qasim al-Balkhi and a theologian of the Imamiyya (Shi’ite) sect.Sharh
of Ibn Abul-Hadid, Vol. 1, pp. 205-206.
4) Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani (d. 679 A.H.) writes in his commentary that he had seen one such copy of this sermon which bore the writing of al-Muqtadir Billah’s minister Abul BHasan Ali ibn Muhammed ibn al-Furat (d. 312 A.H.).Sharh
al-Balagha, Vol. 1l, pp. 252-253
5) Al-A
allama
Muhammed Baqir al-Majlisi has related the following chain of authority about this sermon from Sheikh Qutbud-Din ar-Rawandi’s compilation ofMinhaj al-Bard’ah fi
Sharh
Nahjul-Balagha
:
6) In the context,A
allama
al-Majlisi has written that his sermon is also co ntined in the compilations of Abu Ali (Muhammed ibn A Abdul-Wahhab) al-Juba’i (d. 303 A.H.)
7) In connection with this very authenticityA
allama
al-Majlisi writes:
Al-Qadi (Judge) A Abdul-Jabbar ibn Ahmed al-Asad-Abadi (d. 415 A.H.) who was a strict Mu’tazilite explains some expressions of this sermon in his bookAl-Mughni
and tries to prove that it does not strike against any preceding caliph but does not deny it to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s composition. (ibid., p. 161)
8) Abu Ja’fer Muhammed ibn Ali, Ibn Babawayh (d. 381 A.H.) writes:
Muhammed ibn Ibrahim ibn Ishaq at-Talaqani told us that A Abdul- A Aziz ibn Yahya al-Jalludi (d. 332 A.H.) told him that Abu A Abdillah Ahmed ibn A Ammar ibn Khalid told him that Yahya ibn A Abdul-Hamid al-Himmani (d. 228 A.H) told him that A Isa ibn Rashid related this sermon from Ali (A.S) ibn Huthayfah and he from A Ikrimah and he from Ibn A Abbas. ( A Ilal ash-Shara’i’, Vol. 1, pp. 122, p. 144: Ma’ani al-Akhbr, cha, p. 22, pp.360-361)
9) Then Ibn Babawayh records the following chain of authorities:
Muhammed ibn Ali Majilawayh related this sermon to us and he took it from his uncle Muhammed ibn Abul-Qasim and he form Ahmed ibn Abu A Abdillah (Muhammed ibn Khalid) al-Barqi and he from his father and he from (Muhammed) ibn Abu A Umayr and he from Aban ibn A Othman and he from Aban ibn Taghlib and he from A Ikrimah and he from Ibn A Abbas. (A
Ilal al-Shara’i’
, Vol. 1, cha, p. 122, p. 146; Ma’ani al-Akhbar, pp. 22, 361).
10) Abu Ahmed al-Hasan ibn A Abdillah ibnSa’id al- A Askari (d; 382 A.H.) who counts among great scholars of the Sunnis has written commentary and explanation of this sermon that has been recorded by ibn Babawayh in A Ilal ash-shara’i’ and Ma’ani al-akhbar.
11) As-Sayyid Ni’matullah al-Jaza’iri writes:
The author ofKitab al-Gharz
, namely A Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Muhammed al-Thaqafi al-Kufi (d. 283 A.H.), has related this sermon through his own chain of authorities. The date of completion of writing this book is Tuesday the 13
Shawwal 255 A.H. and in the same year, Murtada al-Musawi was born. He was older in age than his brother Sayyid ar-Radhi (Al-Anwar an-Nu’maniyya
, p.37).
12) Sayyid Radi ad-Din A Abul-Qasim Ali ibn Musa, Ibn Tawus al-Husaini al-Hilli (d. 664 A.H.) has related this sermon fromKitab al-Gharz
with the following chain of authorities:
This sermon was related to us by Muhammed ibn Yusuf who related it from al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn A Abdul-Karim az-Za’far Sa’id, and he form Muhammed ibn Zakariyyah al-Ghallabi and he from Ya’qub ibn Ja’fer ibn Sulayman, and he from his father and he from his grandfather and he from ibn A Abbas. (Translation ofAl-Tara’if
, p. 202)
13) Sheikh al-Ta’ifa, Muhammed ibn al-Hasan at-Tusi (d. 460 A.H.) writes:
(Abul-Fath Hilal ibn Muhammed ibn Ja’fer) al-Haffar related this sermon to us. He related it from Abul-Qasim (Isma’il ibn Ali ibn Ali (Du’bul and he from his father and he from his brother Du’bul (ibn Ali al-Khuza’i) and he from Muhammed ibn Salamah al-Shami and he from Zurarh ibn A’yan and he from A Abu Ja’fer Muhammed ibn Ali (Sheikh al-Saduq) and he from Ibn A Abbas (Al-Amali
, p. 237).
14) Sheikh al-Mufid (Muhammed ibn Muhammed ibn an-Nu’man, (d. 413 A.H.) who was the teacher of Sayyid ar-Radhi writes about he chain of authorities of this sermon;
A number of relaters of traditions have related this sermon form ibn A Abbas through numerous chains. (al-Irshad
, p. 135)
15)A
Alam al-Huda
(flag-posts of guidance) Sayyid al-Murtada, who was the elder brother of Sayyid ar-Radhi, has recorded it on pp. 203-204 of his bookAl-Shafi
.
16) Abu Mansur at-Tibrisi writes the following:
A number of relaters have given an account of this wermon from ibn A Abbas through various chains. Ibn A Abbas said that he was in the audience of Amir al-Mu’minin at ar-Rahba (a place in Kufa) when conversation turned to caliphate and those who had preceded him as Caliphs when Amir al-Mu’minin berated a sign and delivered this sermon. (Al-Ihtijaj, p. 101)
17) Abul-Muzaffar Yusuf ibn A Abdillah and Sibt ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi (d. 654 A.H.) write the following:
Our Sheikh Abul Qasim an-Nafis al-Anbari related this sermon to us through his chain of authorities that ends with ibn A Abbas, who said that after allegiance had been paid to Amir al-Mu’minin as caliph, he was sitting on the pulpit when a man from the audience inquired why he had remained quiet still then, whereupon Amir al-Mu’minin delivered this sermon ex-tempore. (Tathkirat Khawass al-Umma
, p. 73)
18) Judge Ahmed ibn Muhammed, ash-Shihab al-Khafaji (d. 1069 A.H.) writes the following with regard to its authenticity:
It is stated in the utterances of Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (A.S) that A It is strange during his lifetime he (Abu Bakr) wanted to give up the Caliphate, but he strengthened its foundation fo the other one after his death. ) (Sharh Durrat al-Ghawwas
, p. 17)
19) Sheikh A Ala ad-Dawla as-Simnani writes:
The Commander of the Faithful and the Master of people of knowledge Ali (A.S) has stated in one of his brilliant sermons A This is the Shaqshaqah that burst forth. (Al- A Urway li ahl al-khalwa wal-jalwa, p. 3, manuscript at the Nasiriyya Library, Lucknow, India)
20) Abul-Fadl Ahmed ibn Muhammed al-Maydani (d. 518 A.H.) has written in connection with the word A Shaqshaqah:
One sermon of Amir al-Mu’minin Ali is known as Khutbat ash-Shaqshaqiyya (Thesermon of the camel’s foam). (Majma’ al-Amthal
, Vol. 1, p 369)
21) In fifteen places inAl-Nihaya
, while explaining the words of this sermon, A Abus-Sa’ada, namely Mubarak ibn Muahmmed ibn al-Athir al-Jazri (d. 606 A.H) has acknowledged it to be Amir al-Mu’minin’s utterance.
22) Sheikh Muhammed Tahir Patni, while explaining the same words inMajma’ Bihar al-Anwar,
testifies that this sermon belongs to Amir al-Mu’minin, saying, A Ali (A.S) says so.
23) Abul-Fadl ibn Manzur (d. 711 A.H.) has acknowledged it as Amir al-Mu’minin’s utterance in his lexicon titledLisan al-
A
Arab
, Vol. 12, p. 54 by saying, A In the sayings of Ali in his sermon A It is the camel’s foam that burst forth then subsided.
24) Mujaddid al-Din, namely al-Firuz A Abadi (d. 816/817) A.H.) has recorded under the words A Shaqshaqah in his lexicon (Al-Qamus
, Vol. 3, p. 251)
The Shaqshaqiyya sermon is by Ali (A.S) ; it is named so because when Ibn A Abbas asked him to resume it where he had left it, he said, A OIbn A Abbas! It was the foam of a camel that burst forth then subsided.
25) the compiler ofMuntaha al-Adab
writes the following:
The Shaqshaqiyya of Ali is attributed to Ali (Allah may honor his face).
26) ash-Sheikh Muhammed A Abdoh, themufti
of Egypt, recognizing it as Amir al-Mu’minin’s utterance, has written its explanations.
27) Muhammed Muhyi’d-Din A Abdul-Hamid, professor of Arabic at Al-Azhar University, has written annotations onNahjul-Balagha
, adding a Foreword in the beginning wherein he recognizes all such sermons which contain disparaging remarks to be the utterances of Amir al-Mu’minin.
In the face of these evidences and undeniable proofs is there any scope to hold that it is not Amir-al-Mu’minin’s production and that Sayyid ar-Radhi prepared it himself?
2. Amir al-Mu’minin has referred to Abu Bakr’s accession to the caliphate metaphorically as having dressed himself with it. This was a common metaphor. Thus, when A Othman was called to give up the Caliphate, he replied, A I shall not put off this shirt which Allah has put on me. No doubt Amir al-Mu’minin has not attributed this dressing of Caliphate to Allah, but to Abu Bakr himself with the Caliphate. He knew that this dress had been stitched for this own body and his position with relation to the Caliphate was that of the axis in the hand-mill which cannot retain its central position without it nor be of any use. Similarly, he held A I was the central pivot of the Caliphate, were I not there, its entire system would have gone astray from the pivot. It was I who acted as a guard for its organization and order and guided it through all difficulties. Currents of learning flowed form my bosom and watered it on all sides. My position was high beyond imagination but lust of world seekers for governance became a tumbling stone for me and I had to confine myself to seclusion. Blinding darkness prevailed all around and there was intense gloom everywhere. The young grew old and the old departed for the graves but this patience-breaking period would not end. I kept watching with my eyes the plundering of my own inheritance and saw the passing of Caliphate from one hand to the other but remained patient as I could not stop their high-handedness for lack of means.
Need for the Prophet’s Caliph and the Mode of his Appointment
After the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) of Islam the presence of such a personality was inevitable who could stop the community form disintegration and guard thereligious law against change, alteration and interference by those who wanted to twist it to suit their own desires. If this very need is denied then there is no sense in attaching so much importance to the succession of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) that the assemblage insaqifa
of BanuSa’idah should have been considered more important than the burial of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) If the need is recognized, the question is whether or not the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) , too, realized it. If it is held he could not attend to it and appreciate its need or absence of need it would be the biggest proof for regarding the Prophet’s mind to be blank for thinking of means to stop the evils of innovations and apostasy in spite of having given warning about them. If it is said that he did realize it but had to leave it unresolved on account of some advantage, then instead of keeping it hidden, the advantage should be clearly indicated; otherwise, silence without purpose would constitute delinquency in the discharge of the obligations of Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) hood. If there was some impediment, it should be disclosed; otherwise we should agree that just as the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) did not leave any item of religion incomplete, he did not leave this matter either and did propose such a course of action for it, that if it was acted upon religion would have remained safe against the interference of others.
the question now is that was that course of action. If it is taken to be the consensus of opinion of the community, then it cannot truly take place as in such consensus acquiescence of every individual is necessary; but taking into account the difference in human temperaments, it seems impossible that they would agree on any single point. Nor is there any example where on such matters there has been no single voice of dissent. How then can such a fundamental need be made dependent on the occurrence of such an impossible even B need on which converges the future of Islam and the good of the Muslims. Therefore, the mind is not prepared to accept this criterion. Nor is tradition in harmony with it, as judge A Adud ad-Din al- A Iji has written inSharh
al-Mawaqif
:
You should know that Caliphate cannot depend upon unanimity of election because no logical or traditional argument can be advanced for it.
In fact, when the advocates of unanimous election found that unanimity of all votes is difficult they adopted the agreement of the majority as a substitute for unanimity, ignoring the difference of the minority. Also, in such a case, it often happens that the force of fair and foul would correct and incorrect ways turns the flow of the majority opinion in the direction where there is neither individual distinction nor personal merit as a result of which competent persons remain hidden while incompetent individuals stand forwards. When capabilities remain so cubed and personal ends stand in the way as hurdles, how can there be expectation for the election of the correct person. Even if it is assumed that all voters have independent, unbiased views, that no one has his own objective and that none has any other consideration, it is not necessary that every verdict of the majority should be correct and that it cannot go astray. Experience shows that after experiment, the majority has held its own verdict to be wrong. If every verdict of the majority is correct then its first verdict should be wrong because the verdict, which holds it wrong, is also that of the majority. In this circumstance, if the election of the Caliph goes wrong, who would be responsible for the mistake and who should face the blame for the ruination of the Islamic polity. Similarly on whom would be the liability for the bloodshed and slaughter following the turmoil and activity of the elections? When it has been seen that even those who sat in the audi3ence of the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) could not be free of mutual quarrel and strife, how can other avoid it?
If, with a view to avoid mischief, it is left to the people of authority to choose anyone they like, then here too, the same friction and conflict would prevail because here again, convergence of human temperaments on one point is not necessary nor can they be assumed to rise above personal ends. In fact, here the chances of conflict and collision could be stronger because if not all, at least most of them would themselves, be candidates for that position and would not spare any effort to defeat their opponent, creating impediments I his way as best as possible. Its inevitable consequence would be mutual struggle and mischief-mongering. Thus, it would not be possible to ward off the mischief for which this device was adopted and instead of finding a proper individual, the community would just become an instrument for the achievement of personal benefits of the others. Again, what would be the criterion for these people in authority? the same as has usually been, namely whoever collects a few supporters and is able to create commotion in any meeting by use of forceful words would count among the people of authority. Or would capabilities also be judged? If the mode of judging the capabilities is again this very common vote, then the same complications and conflicts would arise here too, to avoid in which this way was adopted. If there is some other standard, then instead of judging the capabilities of the voter by it, why not judge the person who is considered suitable for the position in view. Further, how many persons in authority would be enough to give a verdict? Apparently a verdict once accepted would be precedent for good and the number that would give this verdict would become the criterion for the future. Al-Qadi A Adud ad-Din al- A Iji writes:
Rather the nomination of one or two individuals by the people in authority is enough because we know that the companions who were strict in religion deemed it enough as the nomination of Abu Bakr by A Omer and of A Othman by A Abd ar-Rahman. (Sharh
al-Mawaqif
, p. 351)
This is the account of the A unanimous election in the Hall of Banu Sa’idah and the activity of the consultative assembly; that is, one man’s action has been given the name of unanimous election and individual’s deed given the name of consultative assembly. Abu Bakr had well understood this reality that election means the vote of the person or two only which is to be attributed to common simple people. That is why he ignored therequirements of unanimous election, majority vote or method of choosing through electoral assembly and appointed A Omer by nomination. A A’isha also considered that leaving the question of caliphate to the vote of a few particular individuals means inviting mischief and trouble. She sent a word to A Omer on his death saying:
Do not leave the Islamic community without a chief. Nominate a Caliph for it and leave it not without an authority as otherwise I apprehend mischief and trouble.
When the election by those in authority proved futile is was given up and only A might is right became the criteria Bnamely whoever subdues others and binds them under his sway and control is accepted as the Caliph of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) and his true successor. These are those self-adopted principles in the face of which all the Prophet’s saying uttered in the A Feast of therelatives, on the night of hijra, at the battle Tabuk, on the occasion of conveying the Holy Qur’anic chapter A Bara’a (Tawaba, Ch. 9) and at Ghadir (the swamp of) Khumm. The strange thing is that when each of the first three caliphates is based on one individual’s choice, how can this very right to choose be denied to the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) himself, particularly when this was the only way to end all the dissensions, namely that the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) should have himself settled it and saved the community from future disturbances and spared it from leaving this decision I the hands of people who were themselves involved in personal aims and objects. This is the correct procedure which stands to reason and which also has the support of the Prophet’s definite sayings.
3. Hayyan ibn as-Samin al-Hanafi of Yamama was the chief of the tribe Banu Hanifah and the master of fort and army. Jabir is the name of his younger brother while al-Asha whose real name was Maymun ibn Qays ibn Jandal enjoyed the position of being his bosom friend and led a decent, happy life through his bounty. In this verse, he has compared his current life with the previous one that is the days when he raomed about in search of livelihood and those when he led a happy life in Hayyan’s company. Generally, Amir al-Mu’minin’s quoting of this verse has been taken to compare this troubled period with the peaceful days passed under the care and protection of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) when he was free from all sorts of troubles and enjoyed mental peace. But taking into account he occasion for making this comparison and the subject matter of the verse, it would not be far-fetched if it is taken to indicate the difference between the unimportant position of those in power during the Prophet’s life time and the authority and power enjoyed by them after him. That is, at one time in the days of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) no heed was paid to them because of Ali’s personality but now the time had so changed that the same people were masters of the affairs of the Muslim world.
4. When A Omer was wounded by Abu Lu’lu’ah and he saw that it was difficult for him to survive because of the deep wound, he formed a consultative committee and nominated Ali (A.S) ibn Abu Talib, A Othman ibn A Affan, A Abd ar-Rahman ibn A Awf, az-Zubayr ibn al- A Awwam, Sa’d ibn Abu Waqqas and Talhah ibn A Ubaydillah. The n, he bound them that after three days of his death, they should select one of themselves as the Caliph while for those three days Suhayb should act as Caliph. On receipt of these instructions, some members of the committee requested him to indicate what ideas he had about each of them to enable them to proceed further in their light. Omer therefore disclosed his own view about each individual. He said that A Sa’d as harsh-tempered and hot-headed; A Ad ar-Rahman was the Pharaoh of the community; as-Zubayr was, if pleased, a true believer, but if displeased, an un-believer; Talhah was the embodiment of pride and haughtiness and if he was made caliph, he would put the ring of the caliphate on his wife’s finger while A Othman did not see beyond his kinsmen. As regards Ali (A.S) , he is enamored of the Caliphate although I know that he alone can run it on the right lines. Nevertheless, despite this admission, he thought it necessary to constitute the consultative committee and in selecting its members and laying down the working procedure, he made sure that the Caliphate would take the direction in which he wished to turn it. Thus, a man of ordinary prudence can draw the conclusion that all the factors for A Othman’s success were present therein. If we look at its members, we see that one of the them, namely A Abd ar-Raman ibn A Awf is the husband of A Othman’s sister, next Sa’d ibn Abu Waqqas besides bearing malice towards Ali (A.S) is a relative and kinsman of A Abd ar-Rahman. Neither of them can be taken to go against A Utham. The third, Talhah ibn A Ubaydullah about who Professor Muhammed A Abdo writes in this annotation on Nahjul-Balagha:
Talhah was inclined towards A Othman and thereason for it was no less than that he was against Ali, because he himself was an A at-Taymi’ and Abu Bakr’s accession to the caliphate had created bad blood between Banu Taym and Banu Hashim.
As regards az-Zubayr, even if he had voted for Ali what could his single vote achieve. According to al-Tabari’s statement, Talhah was not present in Medina at that time, but his absence did not stand in the way of A Othman’s success. Rather, even if he were present, was reached at the meeting (of the Committee), and he was taken to be Ali’s supporter, still there could be no doubt in A Othman’s success because A Omer’s sagacious mind had set the working procedure that:
If two agree about one and the other two about another then A Abdullah bin A Omer should act as the arbitrator. The group whom he orders should choose the Caliph from among themselves. If they do not accept A Abdullah ibn A Omer’s verdict, support should be given to the group which includes A Abd ar-Rahman ibn A Awf, but if the others do not agree they should be beheaded for opposing this verdict. (al-Tabari, Vol. 1 pp. 2779-2780; Ibn al-Athir, Vol. 3, p. 67).
Here, the disagreement with the verdict of A Abdullah ibn A Omer has no meaning since he was directed to support the group which included A Abd ar-Rahman ibn A Awf. He had ordered his son A Abdullah and Suhayb that:
If the people differ, you should side with the majority, but if three of them are on one side and the other three on the other, you should side with the group including A Abd ar-Rahman ibn A Awf. (al-Tabari, Vol. 1, pp. 2725, 2789; Ibn al-Athir, Vol. 3, pp. 51, 67.)
In this instruction, the agreement with the majority also means support of A Abd ar-Rahman because the majority could not be on any other side since fifty blood-thirsty swords had been put on the heads of the opposition group with orders to fall on their heads on A Abd ar-Rahman’s behest. Amir al-Mu’minin’s eye had foreseen it at that very moment that the caliphate was going to A Othman as appears from his following words which he spoke to A Abbas ibn A Abdul-Muttalib:
A The Caliphate has been turned away from us. Al- A Abbas asked how could he know it. Then he replied, A Othman has also been coupled with me and it has been laid down that the majority should be supported; but if two agree on one and two on the other, then support should be given to the group which includes A Abd ar-Rahman ibn A Awf. Now Sa’d will support his cousin A Abd ar-Rahman who is of course, the husband of A Othman’s sister (Ibid
.).
However, after A Omer’s death, this meeting took place in the room of A A’isha and on its door stood Abu Talhah al-Ansari with fifty men having drawn swords in their hands. Talhad started the proceedings and inviting all others to be witness said hat he gave his right of vote to A Othman. This touched az-Zubayr’s sense of honor as his mother, Safiyya daughter of A Abdul-Muttalib, was the sister of the Prophet’s father. So, he gave his right of vote to Ali. Thereafter, Sa’d ibn Abu Waqqas made his right of vote to A Abd ar-Rahman. This left three members of the consultative committee out of whom A Abd ar-Rahman said that he was willing to give up his own right of vote if Ali (A.S) and A Othman gave him the right to choose one of them or one of these two should acquire this right by withdrawing. This was a trap in which Ali had been entangled from all sides, namely that either he should abandon his own right or else allow A Abd ar-Rahman to do as he wished. The first case was not possible for him; that is, to give up his own right and elect A Othman or A Abd ar-Rahman. So, he clung to his right, while A Abd ar-Rahman, separating himself from it, assumed this power and said to Amir al-Mu’minin, A I pay you allegiance on your following the Book of Allah, theSunna
(teachings) of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) and the conduct of the two Sheikhs (Abu Bakr and A Omer). Ali (A.S) replied, A Rather on following the book of Allah, theSunna
of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) and my own findings. When A Abd ar-Rahman got the same reply even after repeating the question thrice, he turned to A Othman saying, A Do you accept these conditions? A Othman had no reason to refuse and so he agreed to the conditions and allegiance was paid to him. When Amir al-Mu’minin saw his rights being trampled, he said:
This is not the first day when you behaved against us. I have only to keep good patience. Allah is the Helper against whatever you say. By Allah, you have not made A Othman caliph but in hope that he would give back the caliphate to you.
After recording the events of theshura
(consultative committee), Ibn Abul-Hadid has written that when allegiance had been paid to A Othman, Ali (A.S) addressed A Othman and A Abd ar-Rahman saying, A May Allah sow Theseed of dissension among you, and so it happened that each turned a bitter enemy of the other and A Abd ar-Rahman did not ever after speak to A Othman till death. Even on his deathbed, he turned his face on him.
On seeing these events, the question arises whethershura
(consultative committee) means confining the matter to six persons, thereafter to three and finally to one only. Also, whether the condition of following the conduct of the two Sheikhs [Abu Bakr and A Omer] for caliphate was put by A Omer or it was just a hurdle put by A Abd ar-Rahman between Ali (A.S) and the caliphate, although the first caliph did not put forth this condition at the time of nominating The second caliph, namely that he should follow the former’s footsteps. What then, was the occasion for this condition here?
However, Amir al-Mu’minin had agreed to participate in it in order to avoid mischief and to put an end to arguing so that others should be silenced and should not be able to claim that they would have voted in his favor and that he, himself, evaded the consultative committee and did not give them an opportunity of selecting him.
5. About thereign of the third caliph [ A Othman ibn A Affan], Amir al-Mu’minin says that soon on A Othman’s coming to power Banu Umayyah got ground and began plundering thebayt al-mal
) (public fund), and just as cattle on seeing green grass after a drought trampled it away, they recklessly feel upon Allah’s money and devoured it. At last, this self-indulgence and nepotism brought him to the stage when people besieged his house, put him to the sword and made him vomit all that he had swallowed.
The mal-administration that took place in this period was such that no Muslim can remain unmoved to see that companions of high position were lying uncared for, they were striken with proverty and surrounded by bankruptcy while control overbayt al-mal
(public fund) was that of Banu Umayyah, government positions were occupied by their young and inexperienced persons, special Muslim properties were owned by them, meadows provided grazing but to their cattle, houses were built but by them and orchards were but for them. If any compassionate person spoke about these excesses, his ribs were broken and if someone agitated this capitalism, he was expelled from the city. The uses to whichzakat
(poor-rate) and charities which were meant for the poor and the wretched and the public fund which was the common property of the Muslims were put may be observed from the following few illustrations:
1) Al-Hakam ibn Abul- A As who had been exiled form Medina by the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) , was allowed back in the city, not only against the Prophet’sSunna
(teachings) but also against the conduct of the first two Caliphs. He was paid three hundred thousand dirhams form the public fund. (Ansab al-Ashraf
, Vol. 5, pp. 27, 28, 125)
2) Al-Walid ibn A Uqbah, who has been naed hypocrite in the Holy Qur’an, was piad one hundred thousand Dirhams from the Muslims’ public fund. (al- A qd al-farid, Vol. 3, p. 94)
3) the caliph married his own daughter, Umm Aban, to Marwan ibn al-Hakam and paid him one hundred thousand dirhams for the public fund. (Sharh
of Iban Abul-Hadid, Vol. 1, pp. 198-199).
4) He married his daughter A A’isha to Harith ibn al-Hakam and granted him one hundred thousand dirhams for the public fund (Ibid.
).
5) A Abdullah ibn Khalid was paid four hundred dirhams. (Al-Ma’arif
of Ibn Qutaybah, p. 84)
6) He allowed thekhums
(one-fifth religious tax) from Africa (amounting) to five hundred thousand dinars to Marwan ibn al-Hakam. (Ibid
.).
7) Fadak, which was withheld from the angelic daughter of the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) on the ground of being general charity, was given as a royal favor to Marwan ibn al-Hakam. (ibid).
8) Mahzur, a place in the commercial area of Medina which had been declared a public trust by the Prophet (P.B.U.H. and His Household) , was gifted to Harith ibn al-Hakam. (Ibid.
).
9) In the meadows around Medina, no camel except those of Banu Umayyah were allowed to graze. (Sharh
of Ibn Abul-Hadid, Vol. 1, p. 199)
10) After his Othman’s death, one hundred and fifty thousand dinars (gold coins) and one million Dirhams (silver coins) were found in his house. There was no limit to tax-free lands and the total value of the land estate he owned in Wadi al-Qura and Hunain was one hundred thousand dinars. There were countless camels and horses. (Muruj al-Thahab
, Vol. 1, p.435)
11) the Caliph’s relatives ruled all the principal cities. Thus, at Kufa, al-Walid ibn A Uqbah was the governor, but when in the state of intoxication of wine, he led the morning prayer in four instead of two rak’ah. People were agitated and demanded his removal, but the Caliph put in his place a hypocrite like Sa’id ibn al- A s. In Egypt, A Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abu Sarh, in Syria Mu’awiyah ibn Abu Sufyan and in Basra, A Abdullah ibn A Amir were the governors appointed by him (ibid).
0%
Translator: Yasin T. al-Jibouri
