SERMON 3
Known as the Religious speech of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah(1)
Be aware (of something dangerous)! By Allah the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr)(2) dressed himself with it (the important Muslim religious leaderate) 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 upto me. I put a curtain against the important Muslim religious leaderate and kept myself detached from it.
Then I began to think whether I should attack or last through/tolerate calmly the very bright/extreme darkness of troubles wherein the grown up are made weak and the young grow old and the true believer acts under strain till he meets Allah (on his death). I found that (ability to last through/tolerate bad times) thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was pricking in the eye and suffocation (of extreme embarrassment) in the throat. I watched thestealing (and leaving behind almost nothing) of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Important Muslim religious leaderate to Ibn al-Khattab after himself.
(Then he quoted al-A`sha's verse).
My days are now passed on the camel's back (in difficulty) while there were days (of ease) when I enjoyed the company of Jabir's brother Hayyan.(3)
It is strange that during his lifetime he wished to be released from the important Muslim religious leaderate 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 Important Muslim religious leaderate in a tough enclosure where the statement was snobby and the touch was rough. Mistakes were in plenty and so also the excuses therefore. One in contact with it was like the rider of an angry and disobedient camel. If he pulled up its rein the very nostril would be slit, but if he let it loose he would be thrown. (as a result), by Allah people got involved in dangerous carelessness, evilness, unsteadiness and moving away.
Anyway, I remained patient despite length of period and stiffness of trial, till when he went his way (of death) he put the matter (of Important Muslim religious leaderate) in a group(4) and regarded me to be one of them. But good Heavens! what had I to do with this "discussion (with other people)"? Where was any doubt about me relating to/connected to the first of them that I was now considered the same as 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 food. With him his children of his grand-father, (Umayyah) also stood up swallowing up Allah's wealth(5) like a cameleating/destroying the green plants of spring, till his rope broke down, his actions finished him and his overeating brought him down flat.
At that moment, nothing took me by surprise, but the crowd of people rushing to me. It advanced towards me from every side like the mane of the hyena so much so that Hasan and Husayn were getting crushed and both the ends of my shoulder article of clothing were torn. They collected around me like the group of animals of sheep and goats. When I took up thecontrols of government one party broke away and another turned disobedient while the rest began acting wrongfully as if they had not heard the word of Allah saying:
That home in the existence after death, We assign it for those who intend not to celebratethemselves in the earth, nor (to make) mischief (therein); and the end is (best) for the religiousones. (Qur'an, 28:83)
Yes, by Allah, they had heard it and understood it but the world appeared glittering in their eyes and its artistic additions flirted with them. Look, 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 promise of Allah with the learned to the effect that they should not give in in the overeating of the (person who badly mistreats people) and the hunger of the badly mistreated I would have cast the rope of Important Muslim religious leaderate on its own shoulders, and would have given the last one the same treatment as to the first one. Then you would have seen that in my view this world of yours is no better than the sneezing of a goat.
(It is said that when Prince/governor al-mu'minin reached here in his religious speech a man of Iraq stood up and handed him over a writing. Prince/governor al-mu'minin began looking at it, when Ibn `Abbas said, "Of Prince/governor al-mu'minin, I wish you resumed your Religious speech from where you broke it." After that he replied, "Of Ibn `Abbas it was like the foam of a Camel which gushed out but lessened." Ibn `Abbas says that he never suffered (from a loss) over any statement as he did over this one because Prince/governor al-mu'minin could not finish it as he wished to.)
ash-Sharif ar-Radi says: The words in this religious speech "like the rider of a camel" mean tobring across that when a camel rider is stiff in drawing up the rein then in this fight the nostril gets bruised, but if he lets it loose in spite of the camel's angry disobedience, it would throw him somewhere and would get out of control. "ashnaq an-naqah" is used when the rider holds up the rein and raises the camel's head upwards. In the same sense the word "shanaqa an-naqah" is used. Ibn as-Sikkit has talked about this in Islah al-mantiq. Prince/governor al-mu'minin has said "ashnaqa laha" instead of "ashnaqaha", this is because he has used this word in harmony with "aslasa laha" and harmony could be kept/held only by using both in the same form. So,Prince/governor al-mu'minin has used "ashnaqa laha" like in place of "in rafa`a laha ra'saha", that is, "if he stops it by holding up the controls."
(1). This religious speech is known as the religious speech of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah, and is counted among the most famous religious speeches of Prince/governor al-mu'minin. It was delivered at ar-Rahbah. Although some people have denied it to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's statementand by attributing it to as-Sayyid ar-Radi (or ash-Sharif ar-Radi) have laid blame on hisadmitted/recognized/responded to integrity, yet truth-loving educated people have denied itstruthfulness. Nor can there be any ground for this denial because `Ali's (p.b.u.h.) difference of view in the matter of Important Muslim religious leaderate is not a secret matter, so that such hints should be thought of as something alien. And the events which have been suggested in thisreligious speech are preserved in the records of history which says in court/gives proof them word by word and sentence by sentence. If the same events which are related by history are(remembered and retold) by Prince/governor al-mu'minin then what is the ground for denying them? If the memory of discouraging facts or conditions (that surround someone) faced by him soon after the death of the Predictor of the future appeared unacceptable to eat (or to believe) to him it should not be surprising. No doubt this religious speech hits at the fame/respect of certain personalities and gives a set back to the faith and belief in them but this cannot be sustained by denying the religious speech to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's statement, unless the true events are analysed and truth uncovered and showed off; otherwise just denying it to bePrince/governor al-mu'minin's statement because it contains criticism of certain people carries no weight, when similar criticism has been related by other history experts also. This way (Abu `Uthman) `Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz has recorded the following words of a religious speech ofPrince/governor al-mu'minin and they are not less serious than the criticism in the "Religious speech of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah."
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 cut off.
(as a result), the idea that it is the production of as-Sayyid ar-Radi is far from truth and a result ofone-party thinking and (unfair liking). Or else if it is the result of some research it should be brought out. Otherwise, remaining in such wishful fake image does not change the truth, nor can the force of clear arguments be controlled down by mere disagreement andunhappiness/irritation.
Now we explain in detail the evidence of those educated people and traditionists who have clearly held it to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's production, so that its historical importance should become known. Among these educated people some are those before as-Sayyid ar-Radi's period, some are his (other people of about the same age) and some are those who came after him but they all related it through their own chain of authority.
1) Ibn Abi'l-Hadid al-Mu`tazili writes that his master Abu'l-Khayr Musaddiq ibn Shabib al-Wasiti (d. 605 A.H.) stated that he heard this religious speech from ash-Shaykh Abu Muhammad `Abdullah ibn Ahmad al-Baghdadi (d. 567 A.H.) known as Ibn al-Khashshab and when he reached where Ibn `Abbas expressed sadness for this religious speech having remained incomplete Ibn al-Khashshab said to him that if he had heard the expression of sadness from Ibn `Abbas he would have certainly asked him if there had remained with his cousin any further unsatisfied desire because excepting the Predictor of the future he had already spared neither the people or things that came before nor followers and had spoken all that he wished to speak. Why should therefore be any sadness that he could not say what he wished? Musaddiq says that Ibn al-Khashshab was a man of happy heart and decent taste. I asked from him whether he also regarded the religious speech to be a lie/construction when he replied "By Allah, I believe it to bePrince/governor al-mu'minin's word as I believe you to be Musaddiq ibn Shabib." I said that some people regard it to be as-Sayyid ar-Radi's production when he replied: "How can ar-Radi have such guts or such style of writing. I have seen as-Sayyid ar-Radi'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 as-Sayyid ar-Radi, and I have seen it in familiar writings about which I know by which educated people or men of letters they werecollected/made. At that time not only ar-Radi but even his father Abu Ahmad an-Naqib has not been born."
2) After that Ibn Abi'l-Hadid writes that he saw this religious speech in the collections/creations of his master Abu'l-Qasim (`Abdullah ibn Ahmad) al-Balkhi (d. 317 A.H.). He was the Imam of the Mu'tazilites in the rule of al-Muqtadir Billah while al-Muqtadir's period was far earlier than the birth of as-Sayyid ar-Radi.
3) He further writes that he saw this religious speech in Abu Ja`far (Muhammad ibn `Abd ar-Rahman), Ibn Qibah's book al-Insaf. He was the pupil of Abu'l-Qasim al-Balkhi and a person who studies God of Imamiyyah (Shi`ite) religious group. (Sharh of Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.1, pp.205-206)
4) Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani (d. 679 A.H.) writes in his explanation/statement of opinions that he had seen one such copy of this religious speech which bore writing of al-Muqtadir Billah's minister Abu'l-Hasan `Ali ibn Muhammad ibn al-Furat (d. 312 A.H.). (Sharh al-balaghah, vol.1., pp.252-253)
5) al-`Allamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi has related the following chain of authority about thisReligious speech from ash-Shaykh Qutbu'd-Din ar-Rawandi's collection/creation Minhaj al-bara`ah fi Sharh Nahj al-balaghah:
ash-Shaykh Abu Nasr al-Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim informed me from al-Hajib Abu'l-Wafa' Muhammad ibn Badi`, al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn Badi` and al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd ar-Rahman and they from al-Hafiz Abu Bakr (Ahmad ibn Musa) ibn Marduwayh al-Isbahani (d. 416 A.H.) and he from al-Hafiz Abu'l-Qasim Sulayman ibn Ahmad at-Tabarani (d. 360 A.H.) and he from Ahmad ibn `Ali al-Abbar and he from Is'haq ibn Sa`id Abu Salamah ad-Dimashqi and he from Khulayd ibn Da`laj and he from `Ata' ibn Abi Rabah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (Bihar al-anwar, 1st ed. vol.8, pp.160-161)
6) In the big picture al-`Allamah al-Majlisi has written that this religious speech is also contained in the collections/creations of Abu `Ali (Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab) al-Jubba 'i (d. 303 A.H.) .
7) In connection with this very realness al-`Allamah al-Majlisi writes:
al-Qadi `Abd al-Jabbar ibn Ahmad al-Asad'abadi (d. 415A.H.) who was a strict Mu`tazilite explains some expressions of this religious speech in his book al-Mughni and tries to prove that it does not strike against any previous/coming before important Muslim religious leader but does not deny it to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's composition. (ibid., p.161)
8) Abu Ja`far Muhammad ibn `Ali, Ibn Babawayh (d. 381 A.H.) writes:
Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Is'haq at-Talaqani told us that `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Yahya al-Jaludi (d. 332 A.H.) told him that Abu `Abdillah Ahmad ibn `Ammar ibn Khalid told him that Yahya ibn `Abd al-Hamid al- Himmani (d. 228 A.H.) told him that `Isa ibn Rashid related this religious speech from `Ali ibn Hudhayfah and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (`Ilal ash-shara'i`,vol.1, chap. 122, p.144; Ma`ani al-akhbar, chap.22, pp.360-361)
9) Then Ibn Babawayh records the following chain of authorities :-
Muhammad ibn `Ali Majilawayh related this religious speech to us and he took it from his uncle Muhammad ibn Abi'l-Qasim and he from Ahmad ibn Abi `Abdillah (Muhammad ibn Khalid) al-Barqi and he from his father and he from (Muhammad) Ibn Abi `Umayr and he from Aban ibn `Uthman and he from Aban ibn Taghlib and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (`Ilal ash-shara'i`, vol.1, chap.122, p.l46; Ma`ani al-akhbar, chap.22, p.361)
10) Abu Ahmad al-Hasan ibn `Abdillah ibn Sa`id al-`Askari (d.382 A.H.) who counts among greateducated people of the Sunnis has written explanation/statement of opinions and explanation of this religious speech that has been recorded by Ibn Babawayh in `Ilal ash-shara'i` and Ma`ani al-akhbar.
11) as-Sayyid Ni`matullah al-Jaza'iri writes:
The author of Kitab al-gharat Abu Is'haq, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ath-Thaqafi al-Kufi (d. 283 A.H.) has related this religious speech through his own chain of authorities. The date of completion of writing this book is Tuesday the 13th Shawwal 255 A.H. and in the same year, Murtada al-Musawi was born. He was older in age than his brother as-Sayyid ar-Radi. (Anwar an-Nu`maniyyah, p.37)
12) as-Sayyid Radi ad-Din Abu'l-Qasim `Ali ibn Musa, Ibn Tawus al-Husayni al-Hulli (d. 664 A.H.) has related this religious speech from Kitab al-gharat with the following chain of authorities:-
This religious speech was related to us by Muhammad ibn Yusuf who related it from al-Hasan ibn `Ali ibn `Abd al-Karim az-Za`farani and he from Muhammad ibn Zakariyyah al-Ghallabi and he from Ya`qub ibn Ja`far ibn Sulayman and he from his father and he from his grand-father and he from Ibn `Abbas. (Translation of at-Tara'if, p.202)
13) Shaykh at-Ta'ifah, Muhammad ibn al- Hasan at-Tusi (d. 460 A.H.) writes:
(Abu'l-Fath Hilal ibn Muhammad ibn Ja`far) al-Haffar related this religious speech to us. He related it from Abu'l-Qasim (Isma`il ibn `Ali ibn `Ali) ad-Di`bili and he from his father and he from his brother Di`bil (ibn `Ali al-Kuza`i) and he from Muhammad ibn Salamah ash-Shami and he from Zurarah ibn A`yan and he from Abu Ja`far Muhammad ibn `Ali and he from Ibn `Abbas. (al-Amali, p.237)
14) ash-Shaykh al-Mufid (Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn an-Nu`man, d. 413 A.H.) who was the teacher of as-Sayyid ar-Radi writes about the chain of authorities of this religious speech:
A number of relaters of traditions have related this religious speech from Ibn `Abbas throughmany chains. (al-Irshad, p.135)
15) `Alam al-Huda (symbol of guidance) as-Sayyid al-Murtada who was the older brother of as-Sayyid ar-Radi has recorded it on pp. 203,204 of his book ash-Shafi.
16) Abu Mansur at-Tabarsi writes:
A number of relaters have given an account of this religious speech from Ibn `Abbas throughdifferent chains. Ibn `Abbas said that he was in the audience of Prince/governor al-mu'minin at ar-Rahbah (a place in Kufah) when conversation turned to Important Muslim religious leaderate and those who had happened before him as Important Muslim religious leaders, whenPrince/governor al-mu'minin breathed a sigh and delivered this religious speech. (al-Ihtijaj, p. 101)
17) Abu'l-Muzaffar Yusuf ibn `Abdillah and Sibt ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi (d. 654 A.H.) writes:
Our ash-Shaykh Abu'l-Qasim an-Nafis al-Anbari related this religious speech to us through his chain of authorities that ends with Ibn `Abbas, who said that after loyalty had been paid toPrince/governor al-mu'minin as Important Muslim religious leader he was sitting on the pulpit when a man from the audience enquired why he had remained quiet till then after whichPrince/governor al-mu'minin delivered this religious speech unprepared/on-the-spot. (Tadhkarat khawass al-ummah, p.73)
18) al-Qadi Ahmad ibn Muhammad, ash-Shihab al-Khafaji (d. 1069 A.H.) writes relating to/connected to its realness:
It is stated in the statements of Prince/governor al-mu'minin `Ali (Allah may be pleased with him) that "It is strange during life time he (Abu Bakr) wanted to give up the Important Muslim religious leaderate but he strengthened its foundation for the other one after his death." (Sharh durrat al-ghawwas, p.17)
19) ash-Shaykh `Ala ad-Dawlah as-Simnani writes:
Prince/governor al-mu'minin Sayyid al-`Arifin `Ali (p.b.u.h.) has stated in one of his brilliantReligious speeches "this is the Shiqshiqah that burst forward." (al-`Urwah li ahl al-khalwah wa'l-jalwah, p3, book in Nasiriah Library, Lucknow, India)
20) Abu'l-Fadl Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Maydani (d. 518 A.H.) has written in connection with the word Shiqshiqah:
One religious speech of Prince/governor al-mu'minin `Ali is known as Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah (the religious speech of the Camel's Foam). (Majma` al-amthal, vol.1, p.369)
21) In fifteen places in an-Nihayah while explaining the words of this religious speech Abu's-Sa`adat Mubarak ibn Muhammad, Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari (d. 606 A.H.) hasadmitted/recognized/responded to it to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's statement.
22) Shaykh Muhammad Tahir Patni while explaining the same words in Majma` bihar al-anwarsays in court/gives proof this religious speech to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's by saying, "`Ali says so."
23) Abu'l-Fadl ibn Manzur (d. 711 A.H.) has admitted/recognized/responded to it asPrince/governor al-mu'minin's statement in Lisan al-`Arab, vol.12, p.54 by saying, "In the sayings of `Ali in his religious speech 'It is the camel's foam that burst forward then lessened.'"
24) Majdu'd-Din al-Firuz'abadi (d. 816/817 A.H.) has recorded under the word "Shiqshiqah" in hisword list/vocabulary (al-Qamus, vol.3, p.251):
Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah is by `Ali so named because when Ibn `Abbas asked him to resume it where he had left it, he said "Of Ibn `Abbas! it was the foam of a camel that burst forward thenlessened."
25) The collector/maker of Muntaha al-adab writes:
Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah of `Ali is attributed to `Ali (Allah may honor his face).
26) ash-Shaykh Muhammad `Abduh, Mufti of Egypt, recognising it as Prince/governor al-mu'minin's statement, has written its explanations.
27) Muhammad Muhyi'd-Din `Abd al-Hamid, Professor in the Teachers/professors of Arabic Language, al-Azhar University has written notes on Nahj al-balaghah adding a foreword in the beginning wherein he recognises all such religious speeches which contain criticizing statementsto be the statements of Prince/governor al-mu'minin.
In the face of these evidences and definitely true proofs is there any scope to hold that it is notPrince/governor al-mu'minin's production and that as-Sayyid ar-Radi prepared it himself?
(2). Prince/governor al-mu'minin has talked about Abu Bakr's rising up to the Important Muslim religious leaderate in a symbolic way as having dressed himself with it. This was a common metaphor. So, when `Uthman was called to give up the Important Muslim religious leaderate he replied, "I will not put off this shirt which Allah has put on me." No doubt Prince/governor al-mu'minin has not attributed this dressing of Important Muslim religious leaderate to Allah but to Abu Bakr himself because according to (every single person agrees) opinion his Important Muslim religious leaderate was not from Allah but his own affair. That is why Prince/governor al-mu'minin said that Abu Bakr dressed himself with the Important Muslim religious leaderate. He knew that this dress had been stitched for his own body and his position with relation to theImportant Muslim religious leaderate was that of the axis in the hand-mill which cannotkeep/hold its central position without it nor be of any use. (in almost the same way), he held "I was the central spin around of the Important Muslim religious leaderate, were I not there, its entire system would have gone away from what's right from the spin around. It was I who acted as a guard for its organisation and order and guided it through all difficulties. Currents of learning flowed from my chest and watered it on all sides. My position was high beyond imagination but sexual desire of world searchers (for something) for government became a tumbling stone for me and I had to confine myself to hiding/privacy. Very bright/extremedarkness won all round and there was intense sadness/darkness everywhere. The young grew old and the old left for the graves but this patience-breaking period would not end. I kept watching with my eyes the stealing (and leaving behind almost nothing) of my own inheritance and saw the passing of Important Muslim religious leaderate 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 Predictor of the future of Islam the presence of such a personality was unavoidable who could stop the community from disintegration and guard the religious law against change,change 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 series of thePredictor of the future that the group in Saqifah of Banu Sa`idah should have been considered more important than the burial of the Predictor of the future. If the need is recognised, the question is whether or not the Predictor of the future too realised it. If it is held he could not pay attention to/take care of it and appreciate its need or absence of need it would be the biggest proof for regarding the Predictor of the future's mind to be blank for thinking of means to stop the evils of inventions of new things and apostasy in spite of having given warnings about them. If it is said that he did realise it but had to live it unresolved on account of some advantage then instead of keeping it hidden the advantage should be clearly pointed to/showed otherwise silence without purpose would make up/be equal to irresponsibility/unpaid status in the discharge of the obligations of Predictor of the futurehood. If there was some obstacle, it should be told (to people) otherwise we should agree that just as the Predictor of the future 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 what was that course of action. If it is taken to be the group opinion of the community then it cannot truly happen as in such agreement agreement of every person isnecessary; but taking into account the difference in human personalities 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 disagreement. How then can such a basic need be made dependent on the event of such an impossible event - need on which comes together the future of Islam and the good of the Muslims. Therefore, the mind is not prepared to accept this judging requirement. Nor is tradition in harmony with it, as al-Qadi `Adud ad-Dinal-'Iji has written in Sharh al-mawaqif:
You should know that Important Muslim religious leaderate cannot depend upon (where every single
22) Shaykh Muhammad Tahir Patni while explaining the same words in Majma` bihar al-anwarsays in court/gives proof this religious speech to be Prince/governor al-mu'minin's by saying, "`Ali says so."
23) Abu'l-Fadl ibn Manzur (d. 711 A.H.) has admitted/recognized/responded to it asPrince/governor al-mu'minin's statement in Lisan al-`Arab, vol.12, p.54 by saying, "In the sayings of `Ali in his religious speech 'It is the camel's foam that burst forward then lessened.'"
24) Majdu'd-Din al-Firuz'abadi (d. 816/817 A.H.) has recorded under the word "Shiqshiqah" in hisword list/vocabulary (al-Qamus, vol.3, p.251):
Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah is by `Ali so named because when Ibn `Abbas asked him to resume it where he had left it, he said "Of Ibn `Abbas! it was the foam of a camel that burst forward thenlessened."
25) The collector/maker of Muntaha al-adab writes:
Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah of `Ali is attributed to `Ali (Allah may honor his face).
26) ash-Shaykh Muhammad `Abduh, Mufti of Egypt, recognising it as Prince/governor al-mu'minin's statement, has written its explanations.
27) Muhammad Muhyi'd-Din `Abd al-Hamid, Professor in the Teachers/professors of Arabic Language, al-Azhar University has written notes on Nahj al-balaghah adding a foreword in the beginning wherein he recognises all such religious speeches which contain criticizing statementsto be the statements of Prince/governor al-mu'minin.
In the face of these evidences and definitely true proofs is there any scope to hold that it is notPrince/governor al-mu'minin's production and that as-Sayyid ar-Radi prepared it himself?
(2). Prince/governor al-mu'minin has talked about Abu Bakr's rising up to the Important Muslim religious leaderate in a symbolic way as having dressed himself with it. This was a common metaphor. So, when `Uthman was called to give up the Important Muslim religious leaderate he replied, "I will not put off this shirt which Allah has put on me." No doubt Prince/governor al-mu'minin has not attributed this dressing of Important Muslim religious leaderate to Allah but to Abu Bakr himself because according to (every single person agrees) opinion his Important Muslim religious leaderate was not from Allah but his own affair. That is why Prince/governor al-mu'minin said that Abu Bakr dressed himself with the Important Muslim religious leaderate. He knew that this dress had been stitched for his own body and his position with relation to theImportant Muslim religious leaderate was that of the axis in the hand-mill which cannotkeep/hold its central position without it nor be of any use. (in almost the same way), he held "I was the central spin around of the Important Muslim religious leaderate, were I not there, its entire system would have gone away from what's right from the spin around. It was I who acted as a guard for its organisation and order and guided it through all difficulties. Currents of learning flowed from my chest and watered it on all sides. My position was high beyond imagination but sexual desire of world searchers (for something) for government became a tumbling stone for me and I had to confine myself to hiding/privacy. Very bright/extremedarkness won all round and there was intense sadness/darkness everywhere. The young grew old and the old left for the graves but this patience-breaking period would not end. I kept watching with my eyes the stealing (and leaving behind almost nothing) of my own inheritance and saw the passing of Important Muslim religious leaderate 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 Predictor of the future of Islam the presence of such a personality was unavoidable who could stop the community from disintegration and guard the religious law against change,change 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 series of thePredictor of the future that the group in Saqifah of Banu Sa`idah should have been considered more important than the burial of the Predictor of the future. If the need is recognised, the question is whether or not the Predictor of the future too realised it. If it is held he could not pay attention to/take care of it and appreciate its need or absence of need it would be the biggest proof for regarding the Predictor of the future's mind to be blank for thinking of means to stop the evils of inventions of new things and apostasy in spite of having given warnings about them. If it is said that he did realise it but had to live it unresolved on account of some advantage then instead of keeping it hidden the advantage should be clearly pointed to/showed otherwise silence without purpose would make up/be equal to irresponsibility/unpaid status in the discharge of the obligations of Predictor of the futurehood. If there was some obstacle, it should be told (to people) otherwise we should agree that just as the Predictor of the future 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 what was that course of action. If it is taken to be the group opinion of the community then it cannot truly happen as in such agreement agreement of every person isnecessary; but taking into account the difference in human personalities 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 disagreement. How then can such a basic need be made dependent on the event of such an impossible event - need on which comes together the future of Islam and the good of the Muslims. Therefore, the mind is not prepared to accept this judging requirement. Nor is tradition in harmony with it, as al-Qadi `Adud ad-Dinal-'Iji has written in Sharh al-mawaqif:
You should know that Important Muslim religious leaderate cannot depend upon (where every single
person agrees) of election because no logical or traditional argument can be advanced for it.
In fact when the fighters (for something) of (every single person agrees) election found that(where every single person agrees) of all votes is very hard they adopted the agreement of the majority as a substitute for (where every single person agrees), ignoring the difference of the minority. In such a case also it often happens that the force of fair and foul or correct and wrongways turns the flow of the majority opinion in the direction where there is neither individualhonor/difference nor personal good quality/good qualities as a result of which (able to do something well/very good) people remain hidden while unable to do what needs to be donepeople stand forward. When abilities remain so controlled and personal ends stand in the way as hurdles, how can there be expectation for the election of correct person. Even if it is assumed that all voters have an independent fair view, that none of them has his own goal and that none has any other consideration, it is not necessary that every legal decision of the majority should be correct, and that it cannot go away from what's right. Experience shows that after experiment the majority has held its own legal decision to be wrong. If every legal decision of the majority is correct then its first legal decision should be wrong because the legal decision which holds it wrong is also that of the majority. In this facts or conditions (that surround someone) if the election of the Important Muslim religious leader goes wrong who would be responsible for the mistake, and who should face the blame for the ruination of the Islamic government/society. (in almost the same way) on whom would be the liability for the violence and death and murderfollowing the very upset confusion and activity of the elections. When it has been seen that even those who sat in the audience of the Holy Predictor of the future could not be free of back and forth/equal between people argue/argument and battle(s)/tension how can others 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 win because here again coming together of humanpersonalities on one point is not necessary nor can they be assumed to rise above personal ends. In fact here the chances of conflict and crash would 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 obstacles in his way as best as possible. Its unavoidable resultwould be back and forth/equal between people struggle and mischief-mongering. So, it would not be possible to fight 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 judging requirement for these people in authority? The same as has usually been, namely whoever collects a few supporters and is able to create noise and craziness in any meeting by use of forceful words would count among the people of authority. Or would abilities also be judged? If the mode of judging the abilities is again this very common vote then the same difficulties and conflicts would arise here too, to avoid which this way was adopted. If there is some other standard, then instead of judging the abilitiesof the voters by it why not judge the person who is considered good for the position in view. Further, how many people in authority would be enough to give a legal decision? Apparently alegal decision once accepted would be (something important that came before) for good and the number that would give this legal decision would become the judging requirement for future. al-Qadi `Adud ad-Din al-'Iji writes:
Rather the nomination of one or two people by the people in authority is enough because we know that the companions who were strict in religion thought of/considered it enough as the nomination of Abu Bakr by `Umar and of `Uthman by `Abd ar-Rahman. (Sharh al-mawaqif, p.351 )
This is the account of the "(every single person agrees) election" in the Hall of Bani Sa`idah and the activity of the advice-giving assembly: that is, one man's action has been given the name of(every single person agrees) election and one person's deed given the name of advice-givingassembly. Abu Bakr had well understood this reality that election means the vote of a person or two only which is to be attributed to common simple people. That is why he ignored the needed things of (every single person agrees) election, majority vote or method of choosing through electoral assembly and selected/hired `Umar by nomination. `A'ishah also considered that leaving the question of important Muslim religious leaderate to the vote of a few particularpeople meant inviting mischief and trouble. She sent a word to `Umar on his death saying:
Do not leave the Islamic community without a chief. Nominate a Important Muslim religious leader for it and leave it not without an authority as otherwise I understand/capture mischief and trouble.
When the election by those in authority proved useless/pointless it was given up and only "might is right" became the judging requirements-namely whoever controls/calms others and binds them under his sway and control is accepted as the Important Muslim religious leader of thePredictor of the future and his true (person or thing that comes after something else). These are those self-adopted principles in the face of which all the Predictor of the future's sayings spoke in the "Feast of the Relatives," on the night of hijrah, at the fight of Tabuk, on the occasion ofbringing across the Qur'anic chapter "al-Bara'ah" (at-Tawbah, chap.9) and at Ghadir (the spring of) Khumm. The strange thing is that when each of the first three important Muslim religious leaderates is based on one person's choice how can this very right to choose be denied to thePredictor of the future himself, especially when this was the only way to end all thedisagreement, namely that the Predictor of the future should have himself settled it and saved the community from future disturbances and spared it from leaving this decision in the hands of people who were themselves involved in personal aims and objects. This is the correct procedure which stands to reason and which has also the support of the Predictor of the future's definite sayings.
(3). Hayyan ibn as-Samin al-Hanafi of Yamamah 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-A`sha whose real name was Maymun ibn Qays ibn Jandal enjoyed the position of being his good friend and led a decent happy life through his reward. In this verse he has compared his current life with the previous one that is the days when he roamed about in search of job and those when he led a happy life in Hayyan's company. Generally Prince/governor 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 Predictor of the future when he was free from all sorts of troubles and enjoyed mental peace. But taking into account the occasion for making this comparison and the subject matter of the verse it would not be far fetched if it is taken to point to/show the difference between the unimportant position of those in power during the Predictor of the future's life time and the authority and power enjoyed by them after him, that is, at one time in the days of the Predictor of the future no listen to 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 `Umar was wounded by Abu Lu'lu'ah and he saw that it was hard for him to survive because of the deep wound, he formed an advice-giving committee and nominated for it `Ali ibn Abi Talib, `Uthman ibn `Affan, `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf, az-Zubayr ibn al-`Awwam, Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas, and Talhah ibn `Ubaydillah and bound them that after three days of his death they should select one of themselves as the Important Muslim religious leader while for those three days Suhayb should act as Important Muslim religious leader. On receipt of these instructions some members of the committee requested him to point to/show what ideas he had about each of them to enable them to proceed further in their light. `Umar therefore told (to people) his own view about each individual. He said that Sa`d was harsh-tempered and hot headed; `Abd ar-Rahman was the Pharaoh of the community; az-Zubayr was, if pleased, a true believer but ifmade unhappy an unbeliever; Talhah was the expression (or form) of pride and snobbiness, if he was made important Muslim religious leader he would put the ring of the important Muslim religious leaderate on his wife's finger while `Uthman did not see beyond his male relatives.Regarding `Ali he is in love with the Important Muslim religious leaderate although I know that he alone can run it on right lines. Anyway, despite this admission, he thought it necessary tomake up/be equal to the advice-giving Committee and in selecting its members and laying down the working procedure he made sure that the Important Muslim religious leaderate would take the direction in which he wished to turn it. So, a man of ordinary caution and intelligence can draw the end/end result that all the factors for `Uthman's success were present therein. If we look at its members we see that one of them namely `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf is the husband of `Uthman's sister, next Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas besides bearing cruelty and evilness towards `Ali is a relation and male relative of `Abd ar-Rahman. Neither of them can be taken to go against `Uthman. The third Talhah ibn `Ubaydillah about whom Prof. Muhammad `Abduh writes in hisnote on Nahj al-balaghah:
Talhah was drawn tos `Uthman and the reason for it was no less than that he was against `Ali, because he himself was at at-Taymi and Abu Bakr's rising up to the Important Muslim religious leaderate had created bad blood between Bani Taym and Banu Hashim.
Regarding az-Zubayr, even if he had voted for `Ali, what could his single vote achieve. According to at-Tabari's statement Talhah was not present in Medina at that time but his absence did not stand in the way of `Uthman's success. Rather even if he were present, as he did actually reach at the meeting (of the Committee), and he is taken to be `Ali's supporter, still there could be no doubt in `Uthman's success because `Umar's intelligent mind had set the working procedure that:
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 win because here again coming together of humanpersonalities on one point is not necessary nor can they be assumed to rise above personal ends. In fact here the chances of conflict and crash would 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 obstacles in his way as best as possible. Its unavoidable resultwould be back and forth/equal between people struggle and mischief-mongering. So, it would not be possible to fight 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 judging requirement for these people in authority? The same as has usually been, namely whoever collects a few supporters and is able to create noise and craziness in any meeting by use of forceful words would count among the people of authority. Or would abilities also be judged? If the mode of judging the abilities is again this very common vote then the same difficulties and conflicts would arise here too, to avoid which this way was adopted. If there is some other standard, then instead of judging the abilitiesof the voters by it why not judge the person who is considered good for the position in view. Further, how many people in authority would be enough to give a legal decision? Apparently alegal decision once accepted would be (something important that came before) for good and the number that would give this legal decision would become the judging requirement for future. al-Qadi `Adud ad-Din al-'Iji writes:
Rather the nomination of one or two people by the people in authority is enough because we know that the companions who were strict in religion thought of/considered it enough as the nomination of Abu Bakr by `Umar and of `Uthman by `Abd ar-Rahman. (Sharh al-mawaqif, p.351 )
This is the account of the "(every single person agrees) election" in the Hall of Bani Sa`idah and the activity of the advice-giving assembly: that is, one man's action has been given the name of(every single person agrees) election and one person's deed given the name of advice-givingassembly. Abu Bakr had well understood this reality that election means the vote of a person or two only which is to be attributed to common simple people. That is why he ignored the needed things of (every single person agrees) election, majority vote or method of choosing through electoral assembly and selected/hired `Umar by nomination. `A'ishah also considered that leaving the question of important Muslim religious leaderate to the vote of a few particularpeople meant inviting mischief and trouble. She sent a word to `Umar on his death saying:
Do not leave the Islamic community without a chief. Nominate a Important Muslim religious leader for it and leave it not without an authority as otherwise I understand/capture mischief and trouble.
When the election by those in authority proved useless/pointless it was given up and only "might is right" became the judging requirements-namely whoever controls/calms others and binds them under his sway and control is accepted as the Important Muslim religious leader of thePredictor of the future and his true (person or thing that comes after something else). These are those self-adopted principles in the face of which all the Predictor of the future's sayings spoke in the "Feast of the Relatives," on the night of hijrah, at the fight of Tabuk, on the occasion ofbringing across the Qur'anic chapter "al-Bara'ah" (at-Tawbah, chap.9) and at Ghadir (the spring of) Khumm. The strange thing is that when each of the first three important Muslim religious leaderates is based on one person's choice how can this very right to choose be denied to thePredictor of the future himself, especially when this was the only way to end all thedisagreement, namely that the Predictor of the future should have himself settled it and saved the community from future disturbances and spared it from leaving this decision in the hands of people who were themselves involved in personal aims and objects. This is the correct procedure which stands to reason and which has also the support of the Predictor of the future's definite sayings.
(3). Hayyan ibn as-Samin al-Hanafi of Yamamah 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-A`sha whose real name was Maymun ibn Qays ibn Jandal enjoyed the position of being his good friend and led a decent happy life through his reward. In this verse he has compared his current life with the previous one that is the days when he roamed about in search of job and those when he led a happy life in Hayyan's company. Generally Prince/governor 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 Predictor of the future when he was free from all sorts of troubles and enjoyed mental peace. But taking into account the occasion for making this comparison and the subject matter of the verse it would not be far fetched if it is taken to point to/show the difference between the unimportant position of those in power during the Predictor of the future's life time and the authority and power enjoyed by them after him, that is, at one time in the days of the Predictor of the future no listen to 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 `Umar was wounded by Abu Lu'lu'ah and he saw that it was hard for him to survive because of the deep wound, he formed an advice-giving committee and nominated for it `Ali ibn Abi Talib, `Uthman ibn `Affan, `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf, az-Zubayr ibn al-`Awwam, Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas, and Talhah ibn `Ubaydillah and bound them that after three days of his death they should select one of themselves as the Important Muslim religious leader while for those three days Suhayb should act as Important Muslim religious leader. On receipt of these instructions some members of the committee requested him to point to/show what ideas he had about each of them to enable them to proceed further in their light. `Umar therefore told (to people) his own view about each individual. He said that Sa`d was harsh-tempered and hot headed; `Abd ar-Rahman was the Pharaoh of the community; az-Zubayr was, if pleased, a true believer but ifmade unhappy an unbeliever; Talhah was the expression (or form) of pride and snobbiness, if he was made important Muslim religious leader he would put the ring of the important Muslim religious leaderate on his wife's finger while `Uthman did not see beyond his male relatives.Regarding `Ali he is in love with the Important Muslim religious leaderate although I know that he alone can run it on right lines. Anyway, despite this admission, he thought it necessary tomake up/be equal to the advice-giving Committee and in selecting its members and laying down the working procedure he made sure that the Important Muslim religious leaderate would take the direction in which he wished to turn it. So, a man of ordinary caution and intelligence can draw the end/end result that all the factors for `Uthman's success were present therein. If we look at its members we see that one of them namely `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf is the husband of `Uthman's sister, next Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas besides bearing cruelty and evilness towards `Ali is a relation and male relative of `Abd ar-Rahman. Neither of them can be taken to go against `Uthman. The third Talhah ibn `Ubaydillah about whom Prof. Muhammad `Abduh writes in hisnote on Nahj al-balaghah:
Talhah was drawn tos `Uthman and the reason for it was no less than that he was against `Ali, because he himself was at at-Taymi and Abu Bakr's rising up to the Important Muslim religious leaderate had created bad blood between Bani Taym and Banu Hashim.
Regarding az-Zubayr, even if he had voted for `Ali, what could his single vote achieve. According to at-Tabari's statement Talhah was not present in Medina at that time but his absence did not stand in the way of `Uthman's success. Rather even if he were present, as he did actually reach at the meeting (of the Committee), and he is taken to be `Ali's supporter, still there could be no doubt in `Uthman's success because `Umar's intelligent mind had set the working procedure that:
If two agree about one and the other two about another then `Abdullah ibn `Umar should act as the (referee or judge in an argument). The group whom he orders should choose the Important Muslim religious leader from among themselves. If they do not accept `Abdullah ibn `Umar'slegal decision, support should be given to the group which includes `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf, but if the others do not agree they should be (chopped off the head) for opposite (or fighting against) this legal decision. (at-Tabari, vol.1, pp.2779-2780; Ibn al-Athir, vol.3, p.67).
Here disagreement with the legal decision of `Abdullah ibn `Umar has no meaning since he was directed to support the group which included `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf. He had ordered his son `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 `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf. (at-Tabari, vol.1, pp.2725,2780; Ibn al-Athir, vol.3, pp.51,67).
In this instruction the agreement with the majority also means support of `Abd ar-Rahman because the majority could not be on any other side since fifty (badly wanting to kill, or see violence) swords had been put on the heads of the (fighting force/bad feelings) group with orders to fall on their heads on `Abd ar-Rahman's request. Prince/governor al-mu'minin's eye had fore-read it at that very moment that the Important Muslim religious leaderate was going to `Uthman as appears from his following words which he spoke to al-`Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib:
"The Important Muslim religious leaderate has been turned away from us." al-`Abbas asked how could he know it. Then he replied, "`Uthman has also been joined/connected 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 `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf. Now Sa`d will support his cousin `Abd ar-Rahman who is of course the husband of `Uthman's sister." (ibid )
However, after `Umar's death this meeting happened in the room of `A'ishah and on its door stood Abu Talhah al-Ansari with fifty men having drawn swords in their hands. Talhah started the proceedings and inviting all others to be witness said that he gave his right of vote to `Uthman. This touched az-Zubayr's sense of honor as his mother Safiyyah daughter of `Abd al-Muttalib was the sister of Predictor of the future's father. So he gave his right of vote to `Ali. After thatSa`d ibn Abi Waqqas made his right of vote to `Abd ar-Rahman. This left three members of theadvice-giving committee out of whom `Abd ar-Rahman said that he was willing to give up his own right of vote if `Ali (p.b.u.h.) and `Uthman gave him the right to choose one of them or one of these two should buy/own/receive this right by withdrawing. This was a trap in which `Ali had been tangled up from all sides namely that either he should abandon his own right or else allow `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 `Uthman or `Abd ar-Rahman. So, he clung to his right, while `Abd ar-Rahman separating himself from it assumed this power and said to Prince/governor al-mu'minin, "I pay you loyalty on your following the Book of Allah, the sunnah of the Predictor of the futureand the conduct of the two Shaykhs, (Abu Bakr and `Umar). `Ali replied, "Rather on following the Book of Allah, the sunnah of the Predictor of the future and my own findings." When he got the same reply even after repeating the question three-times he turned to `Uthman saying, "Do you accept these conditions." He had no reason to refuse and so he agreed to the conditions andloyalty was paid to him. When Prince/governor al mu'minin saw his rights being this way stepped all over 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 `Uthman Important Muslim religious leader but in the hope that he would give back the Important Muslim religious leaderate to you."
After recording the events of ash-Shura (advice-giving committee), Ibn Abi'l-Hadid has written that when loyalty had been paid to `Uthman, `Ali addressed `Uthman and `Abd ar-Rahman saying, "May Allah plant seed/cause/produce the seed of disagreement among you," and so it happened that each turned a bitter enemy of the other and `Abd ar-Rahman did not ever after speak to `Uthman till death. Even on death bed he turned his face on seeing him.
On seeing these events the question rises/comes up whether ash-Shura (advice-givingcommittee) means confining the matter to six people, after that to three and finally to one only. Also whether the condition of following the conduct of the two Shaykhs for Important Muslim religious leaderate was put by `Umar or it was just a hurdle put by `Abd ar-Rahman between `Ali (p.b.u.h.) and the Important Muslim religious leaderate, although the first Important Muslim religious leader did not put forward this condition at the time of nominating the secondImportant Muslim religious leader, namely that he should follow the former's footsteps. What then was the occasion for this condition here?
However, Prince/governor 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 favour and that he himself got away from the advice-givingcommittee and did not give them an opportunity of selecting him.
(5). About the rule of the third Important Muslim religious leader, Prince/governor al-mu'minin says that soon on `Uthman's coming to power Banu Umayyah got ground and began stealing (and leaving behind almost nothing) the Bayt al-mal (public fund), and just as cattle on seeing green grass after drought step all over it away, they dangerously and carelessly fell upon Allah's money and ate/destroyed it. At last this (doing a lot of selfish things just to make yourself happy)and (giving family members better jobs than non-family members) brought him to the stage when people attacked his house, put him to sword and made him vomit all that he had swallowed.
The maladministration that happened in this period was such that no Muslim can remain unmoved to see that Companions of high position were lying uncared for, they were suddenly made very sick with poorness and surrounded by very poorness while control over Bayt al-mal (public fund) was that of Banu Umayyah, government positions were occupied by their young and inexperienced people, special Muslim properties were owned by them, meadows gave/givengrazing but to their cattle, houses were built but by them, and orchards were only for them. If any kind person spoke about these excesses his ribs were broken, and if someoneupset/shook/shaken this capitalism he was externed from the city. The uses to which zakat and charities which were meant for the poor and the miserable and unfortunate and the public fund which was the common property of the Muslims were put may be watched/followed from the following few illustrations;
1) al-Hakam ibn Abi'l-`As who had been (permanently removed from a country) from Medina by the Predictor of the future was allowed back in the city not only against the Predictor of the future's sunnah but also against the conduct of the first two Important Muslim religious leadersand he was paid three hundred thousand Dirhams from the public fund. (Ansab al-ashraf, vol.5, pp.27, 28, 125)
2) al-Walid ibn `Uqbah who has been named person who doesn't follow (his or her) own rules in the Qur'an was paid one hundred thousand Dirhams from the Muslim's public fund. (al-`Iqd al-farid, vol.3, p.94)
3) The Important Muslim religious leader married his own daughter Umm Aban to Marwan ibn al-Hakam and paid him one hundred thousand Dirhams from the public fund. (Sharh of Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.1, pp.198-199).
4) He married his daughter `A'ishah to Harith ibn al-Hakam and granted him one hundred thousand Dirhams from the public fund. (ibid.)
5) `Abdullah ibn Khalid was paid four hundred thousand Dirhams. (al-Ma`arif of Ibn Qutaybah, p.84)
6) Allowed the khums (one fifth religious duty) from Africa (amounting to five hundred thousand Dinars) to Marwan ibn al-Hakam. (ibid)
7) Fadak which was withheld from the beautiful daughter of the Predictor of the future on the ground of being general charity was given as a royal favour 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 Predictor of the future 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 Abi'l-Hadid, vol.l, p.l99)
10) After his death (`Uthman's) 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 landed estate he owned in Wadi al-Qura and Hunayn was one hundred thousand Dinars. There were huge numbers of camels and horses. (Muruj adh-dhahab, vol.l, p.435)
11) The Important Muslim religious leader's relations ruled all the principal cities. So, at Kufah, al-Walid ibn `Uqbah was the governor but when in the state of drunkenness of wine he led the morning prayer in four instead of two rak`ah and people upset/shook/shaken he was removed, but the Important Muslim religious leader put in his place a person who doesn't follow (his or her) own rules like Sa`id ibn al-`As. In Egypt `Abdullah ibn Sa`d ibn Abi Sarh, in Syria Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, and in Basrah, `Abdullah ibn `Amir were the governors selected/hired by him (ibid.)
Here disagreement with the legal decision of `Abdullah ibn `Umar has no meaning since he was directed to support the group which included `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf. He had ordered his son `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 `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf. (at-Tabari, vol.1, pp.2725,2780; Ibn al-Athir, vol.3, pp.51,67).
In this instruction the agreement with the majority also means support of `Abd ar-Rahman because the majority could not be on any other side since fifty (badly wanting to kill, or see violence) swords had been put on the heads of the (fighting force/bad feelings) group with orders to fall on their heads on `Abd ar-Rahman's request. Prince/governor al-mu'minin's eye had fore-read it at that very moment that the Important Muslim religious leaderate was going to `Uthman as appears from his following words which he spoke to al-`Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib:
"The Important Muslim religious leaderate has been turned away from us." al-`Abbas asked how could he know it. Then he replied, "`Uthman has also been joined/connected 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 `Abd ar-Rahman ibn `Awf. Now Sa`d will support his cousin `Abd ar-Rahman who is of course the husband of `Uthman's sister." (ibid )
However, after `Umar's death this meeting happened in the room of `A'ishah and on its door stood Abu Talhah al-Ansari with fifty men having drawn swords in their hands. Talhah started the proceedings and inviting all others to be witness said that he gave his right of vote to `Uthman. This touched az-Zubayr's sense of honor as his mother Safiyyah daughter of `Abd al-Muttalib was the sister of Predictor of the future's father. So he gave his right of vote to `Ali. After thatSa`d ibn Abi Waqqas made his right of vote to `Abd ar-Rahman. This left three members of theadvice-giving committee out of whom `Abd ar-Rahman said that he was willing to give up his own right of vote if `Ali (p.b.u.h.) and `Uthman gave him the right to choose one of them or one of these two should buy/own/receive this right by withdrawing. This was a trap in which `Ali had been tangled up from all sides namely that either he should abandon his own right or else allow `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 `Uthman or `Abd ar-Rahman. So, he clung to his right, while `Abd ar-Rahman separating himself from it assumed this power and said to Prince/governor al-mu'minin, "I pay you loyalty on your following the Book of Allah, the sunnah of the Predictor of the futureand the conduct of the two Shaykhs, (Abu Bakr and `Umar). `Ali replied, "Rather on following the Book of Allah, the sunnah of the Predictor of the future and my own findings." When he got the same reply even after repeating the question three-times he turned to `Uthman saying, "Do you accept these conditions." He had no reason to refuse and so he agreed to the conditions andloyalty was paid to him. When Prince/governor al mu'minin saw his rights being this way stepped all over 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 `Uthman Important Muslim religious leader but in the hope that he would give back the Important Muslim religious leaderate to you."
After recording the events of ash-Shura (advice-giving committee), Ibn Abi'l-Hadid has written that when loyalty had been paid to `Uthman, `Ali addressed `Uthman and `Abd ar-Rahman saying, "May Allah plant seed/cause/produce the seed of disagreement among you," and so it happened that each turned a bitter enemy of the other and `Abd ar-Rahman did not ever after speak to `Uthman till death. Even on death bed he turned his face on seeing him.
On seeing these events the question rises/comes up whether ash-Shura (advice-givingcommittee) means confining the matter to six people, after that to three and finally to one only. Also whether the condition of following the conduct of the two Shaykhs for Important Muslim religious leaderate was put by `Umar or it was just a hurdle put by `Abd ar-Rahman between `Ali (p.b.u.h.) and the Important Muslim religious leaderate, although the first Important Muslim religious leader did not put forward this condition at the time of nominating the secondImportant Muslim religious leader, namely that he should follow the former's footsteps. What then was the occasion for this condition here?
However, Prince/governor 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 favour and that he himself got away from the advice-givingcommittee and did not give them an opportunity of selecting him.
(5). About the rule of the third Important Muslim religious leader, Prince/governor al-mu'minin says that soon on `Uthman's coming to power Banu Umayyah got ground and began stealing (and leaving behind almost nothing) the Bayt al-mal (public fund), and just as cattle on seeing green grass after drought step all over it away, they dangerously and carelessly fell upon Allah's money and ate/destroyed it. At last this (doing a lot of selfish things just to make yourself happy)and (giving family members better jobs than non-family members) brought him to the stage when people attacked his house, put him to sword and made him vomit all that he had swallowed.
The maladministration that happened in this period was such that no Muslim can remain unmoved to see that Companions of high position were lying uncared for, they were suddenly made very sick with poorness and surrounded by very poorness while control over Bayt al-mal (public fund) was that of Banu Umayyah, government positions were occupied by their young and inexperienced people, special Muslim properties were owned by them, meadows gave/givengrazing but to their cattle, houses were built but by them, and orchards were only for them. If any kind person spoke about these excesses his ribs were broken, and if someoneupset/shook/shaken this capitalism he was externed from the city. The uses to which zakat and charities which were meant for the poor and the miserable and unfortunate and the public fund which was the common property of the Muslims were put may be watched/followed from the following few illustrations;
1) al-Hakam ibn Abi'l-`As who had been (permanently removed from a country) from Medina by the Predictor of the future was allowed back in the city not only against the Predictor of the future's sunnah but also against the conduct of the first two Important Muslim religious leadersand he was paid three hundred thousand Dirhams from the public fund. (Ansab al-ashraf, vol.5, pp.27, 28, 125)
2) al-Walid ibn `Uqbah who has been named person who doesn't follow (his or her) own rules in the Qur'an was paid one hundred thousand Dirhams from the Muslim's public fund. (al-`Iqd al-farid, vol.3, p.94)
3) The Important Muslim religious leader married his own daughter Umm Aban to Marwan ibn al-Hakam and paid him one hundred thousand Dirhams from the public fund. (Sharh of Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.1, pp.198-199).
4) He married his daughter `A'ishah to Harith ibn al-Hakam and granted him one hundred thousand Dirhams from the public fund. (ibid.)
5) `Abdullah ibn Khalid was paid four hundred thousand Dirhams. (al-Ma`arif of Ibn Qutaybah, p.84)
6) Allowed the khums (one fifth religious duty) from Africa (amounting to five hundred thousand Dinars) to Marwan ibn al-Hakam. (ibid)
7) Fadak which was withheld from the beautiful daughter of the Predictor of the future on the ground of being general charity was given as a royal favour 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 Predictor of the future 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 Abi'l-Hadid, vol.l, p.l99)
10) After his death (`Uthman's) 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 landed estate he owned in Wadi al-Qura and Hunayn was one hundred thousand Dinars. There were huge numbers of camels and horses. (Muruj adh-dhahab, vol.l, p.435)
11) The Important Muslim religious leader's relations ruled all the principal cities. So, at Kufah, al-Walid ibn `Uqbah was the governor but when in the state of drunkenness of wine he led the morning prayer in four instead of two rak`ah and people upset/shook/shaken he was removed, but the Important Muslim religious leader put in his place a person who doesn't follow (his or her) own rules like Sa`id ibn al-`As. In Egypt `Abdullah ibn Sa`d ibn Abi Sarh, in Syria Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, and in Basrah, `Abdullah ibn `Amir were the governors selected/hired by him (ibid.)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
0 comments:
Post a Comment