Nahjul Balagha [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

This is a Digital Library

With over 100,000 free electronic resource in Persian, Arabic and English

Nahjul Balagha [Electronic resources] - نسخه متنی

| نمايش فراداده ، افزودن یک نقد و بررسی
افزودن به کتابخانه شخصی
ارسال به دوستان
جستجو در متن کتاب
بیشتر
تنظیمات قلم

فونت

اندازه قلم

+ - پیش فرض

حالت نمایش

روز نیمروز شب
جستجو در لغت نامه
بیشتر
لیست موضوعات
توضیحات
افزودن یادداشت جدید

SERMON 3


Known as the Sermon of
ash-Shiqshiqiyyah(1)

Beware! By Allah the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr)(2) 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 upto me. I put a
curtain against the 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 made feeble
and the young grow old and the true believer acts under strain till he meets Allah (on his
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 throat. 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.

(Then he quoted al-Ashas verse).

My days are now passed on the camels back (in
difficulty) while there were days (of ease) when I enjoyed the company of Jabirs brother
Hayyan.(3)

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 so 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 would be thrown. Consequently, by Allah people got involved in recklessness,
wickedness, unsteadiness and deviation.

Nevertheless, I remained patient despite length of
period and stiffness of trial, till when he went his way (of death) he put the matter (of
Caliphate) in a group(4) and regarded me to be one of them.
But good Heavens! what had I to do with this "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 his
grand-father, (Umayyah) also stood up swallowing up Allahs wealth(5)
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 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 garment were torn. They collected around me like the herd of sheep and goats.
When I took up the reins 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 abode in the hereafter, We assign it for those
who intend not to exult themselves in the earth, nor (to make) mischief (therein); and the
end is (best) for the pious ones. (Quran, 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 not 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 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 Amir al-muminin reached here
in his sermon a man of Iraq stood up and handed him over a writing. Amir al-muminin began
looking at it, when Ibn Abbas said, "O Amir al-muminin, I wish you resumed your
Sermon from where you broke it." Thereupon he replied, "O Ibn Abbas it was
like the foam of a Camel which gushed out but subsided." Ibn Abbas says that he
never grieved over any utterance as he did over this one because Amir al-muminin could
not finish it as he wished to.)

ash-Sharif ar-Radi says: The words in this sermon
"like the rider of a camel" mean to convey that when a camel rider is stiff in
drawing up the rein then in this scuffle the nostril gets bruised, but if he lets it loose
in spite of the camels unruliness, 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 camels head upwards. In the same sense the word "shanaqa an-naqah" is used.
Ibn as-Sikkit has mentioned this in Islah al-mantiq. Amir al-muminin has said
"ashnaqa laha" instead of "ashnaqaha", this is because he has used
this word in harmony with "aslasa laha" and harmony could be retained only by
using both in the same form. Thus, Amir al-muminin has used "ashnaqa laha" as
though in place of "in rafaa laha rasaha", that is, "if he stops it by
holding up the reins."
(1).
This sermon is known as the sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah, and is counted among the most
famous sermons of Amir al-muminin. It was delivered at ar-Rahbah. Although some people
have denied it to be Amir al-muminins utterance and by attributing it to as-Sayyid
ar-Radi (or ash-Sharif ar-Radi) have laid blame on his acknowledged integrity, yet
truth-loving scholars have denied its veracity. Nor can there be any ground for this
denial because Alis (p.b.u.h.) 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
testifies them word by word and sentence by sentence. If the same events which are related
by history are recounted by Amir al-muminin then what is the ground for denying them? If
the memory of discouraging circumstances faced by him soon after the death of the Prophet
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 the sermon to be Amir al-muminins utterance, unless
the true events are analysed and truth unveiled; otherwise just denying it to be Amir
al-muminins utterance because it contains disparagement of certain individuals carries
no weight, when similar criticism has been related by other historians as well. Thus (Abu
Uthman) Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz has recorded the following words of a sermon of Amir
al-muminin and they are not less weighty than the criticism in the "Sermon 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 severed.
Consequently, the idea that it is
the production of as-Sayyid ar-Radi is far from truth and a result of partisanship and
partiality. Or else if it is the result of some research it should be brought 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-muminins
production, so that its historical importance should become known. Among these scholars
some are those before as-Sayyid ar-Radis 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-Mutazili
writes that his master Abul-Khayr Musaddiq ibn Shabib al-Wasiti (d. 605 A.H.) stated that
he heard this sermon 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 sorrow for
this sermon having remained incomplete Ibn al-Khashshab said to him that if he had heard
the expression of sorrow from Ibn Abbas he would have certainly asked him if there had
remained with his cousin any further unsatisfied desire because excepting the Prophet he
had already spared neither the predecessors nor followers and had uttered all that he
wished to utter. Why should therefore be any sorrow that he could not say what he wished?
Musaddiq says that Ibn al-Khashshab was a man of jolly heart and decent taste. I inquired
from him whether he also regarded the sermon to be a fabrication when he replied "By
Allah, I believe it to be Amir al-muminins word as I believe you to be Musaddiq ibn
Shabib." I said that some people regard it to be as-Sayyid ar-Radis production when
he replied: "How can ar-Radi have such guts or such style of writing. I have seen
as-Sayyid ar-Radis 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 scholars or men of letters they were compiled. At that time not only ar-Radi but
even his father Abu Ahmad an-Naqib has not been born."
2) Thereafter Ibn Abil-Hadid
writes that he saw this sermon in the compilations of his master Abul-Qasim (Abdullah
ibn Ahmad) al-Balkhi (d. 317 A.H.). He was the Imam of the Mutazilites in the reign of
al-Muqtadir Billah while al-Muqtadirs period was far earlier than the birth of as-Sayyid
ar-Radi.
3) He further writes that he saw
this sermon in Abu Jafar (Muhammad ibn Abd ar-Rahman), Ibn Qibahs book al-Insaf. He was
the pupil of Abul-Qasim al-Balkhi and a theologian of Imamiyyah (Shiite) sect. (Sharh of
Ibn Abil-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
writing of al-Muqtadir Billahs minister Abul-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 this Sermon from ash-Shaykh
Qutbud-Din ar-Rawandis compilation Minhaj al-baraah fi Sharh Nahj al-balaghah:
ash-Shaykh Abu Nasr al-Hasan ibn
Muhammad ibn Ibrahim informed me from al-Hajib Abul-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
Abul-Qasim Sulayman ibn Ahmad at-Tabarani (d. 360 A.H.) and he from Ahmad ibn Ali
al-Abbar and he from Ishaq ibn Said Abu Salamah ad-Dimashqi and he from Khulayd ibn
Dalaj 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 context al-Allamah
al-Majlisi has written that this sermon is also contained in the compilations of Abu Ali
(Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab) al-Jubba i (d. 303 A.H.) .
7) In connection with this very
authenticity al-Allamah al-Majlisi writes:
al-Qadi Abd al-Jabbar ibn Ahmad
al-Asadabadi (d. 415A.H.) who was a strict Mutazilite explains some expressions of this
sermon in his book al-Mughni and tries to prove that it does not strike against any
preceding caliph but does not deny it to be Amir al-muminins composition. (ibid., p.161)
8) Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Ali,
Ibn Babawayh (d. 381 A.H.) writes:
Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Ishaq
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 sermon from Ali ibn Hudhayfah
and he from Ikrimah and he from Ibn Abbas. (Ilal ash-sharai,vol.1, chap. 122, p.144;
Maani al-akhbar, chap.22, pp.360-361)
9) Then Ibn Babawayh records the
following chain of authorities :-
Muhammad ibn Ali Majilawayh
related this sermon to us and he took it from his uncle Muhammad ibn Abil-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-sharai, vol.1, chap.122, p.l46;
Maani al-akhbar, chap.22, p.361)
10) Abu Ahmad al-Hasan ibn
Abdillah ibn Said al-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 Ilal ash-sharai and Maani al-akhbar.
11) as-Sayyid Nimatullah
al-Jazairi writes:
The author of Kitab al-gharat Abu
Ishaq, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ath-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 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-Numaniyyah, p.37)
12) as-Sayyid Radi ad-Din
Abul-Qasim Ali ibn Musa, Ibn Tawus al-Husayni al-Hulli (d. 664 A.H.) has related this
sermon from Kitab al-gharat with the following chain of authorities:-
This sermon was related to us by
Muhammad ibn Yusuf who related it from al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Abd al-Karim az-Zafarani
and he from Muhammad ibn Zakariyyah al-Ghallabi and he from Yaqub ibn Jafar ibn Sulayman
and he from his father and he from his grand-father and he from Ibn Abbas. (Translation
of at-Taraif, p.202)
13) Shaykh at-Taifah, Muhammad ibn
al- Hasan at-Tusi (d. 460 A.H.) writes:
(Abul-Fath Hilal ibn Muhammad ibn
Jafar) al-Haffar related this sermon to us. He related it from Abul-Qasim (Ismail ibn
Ali ibn Ali) ad-Dibili and he from his father and he from his brother Dibil (ibn Ali
al-Kuzai) and he from Muhammad ibn Salamah ash-Shami and he from Zurarah ibn Ayan and he
from Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Ali and he from Ibn Abbas. (al-Amali, p.237)
14) ash-Shaykh al-Mufid (Muhammad
ibn Muhammad ibn an-Numan, d. 413 A.H.) who was the teacher of as-Sayyid ar-Radi writes
about the chain of authorities of this sermon:
A number of relaters of traditions
have related this sermon from Ibn Abbas through numerous chains. (al-Irshad, p.135)
15) Alam al-Huda (emblem of
guidance) as-Sayyid al-Murtada who was the elder 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 sermon from Ibn Abbas through various chains. Ibn Abbas said that he was
in the audience of Amir al-muminin at ar-Rahbah (a place in Kufah) when conversation
turned to Caliphate and those who had preceded him as Caliphs, when Amir al-muminin
breathed a sigh and delivered this sermon. (al-Ihtijaj, p. 101)
17) Abul-Muzaffar Yusuf ibn
Abdillah and Sibt ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi (d. 654 A.H.) writes:
Our ash-Shaykh Abul-Qasim an-Nafis
al-Anbari related this sermon to us through his chain of authorities that ends with Ibn
Abbas, who said that after allegiance had been paid to Amir al-muminin as Caliph he was
sitting on the pulpit when a man from the audience enquired why he had remained quiet till
then whereupon Amir al-muminin delivered this sermon extempore. (Tadhkarat khawass
al-ummah, p.73)
18) al-Qadi Ahmad ibn Muhammad,
ash-Shihab al-Khafaji (d. 1069 A.H.) writes with regard to its authenticity:
It is stated in the utterances of
Amir al-muminin Ali (Allah may be pleased with him) that "It is strange during life
time he (Abu Bakr) wanted to give up the Caliphate 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:
Amir al-muminin Sayyid al-Arifin
Ali (p.b.u.h.) has stated in one of his brilliant Sermons "this is the Shiqshiqah
that burst forth." (al-Urwah li ahl al-khalwah wal-jalwah, p3, manuscript in
Nasiriah Library, Lucknow, India)
20) Abul-Fadl Ahmad ibn Muhammad
al-Maydani (d. 518 A.H.) has written in connection with the word Shiqshiqah:
One sermon of Amir al-muminin Ali
is known as Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah (the sermon of the Camels Foam). (Majma al-amthal,
vol.1, p.369)
21) In fifteen places in an-Nihayah
while explaining the words of this sermon Abus-Saadat Mubarak ibn Muhammad, Ibn al-Athir
al-Jazari (d. 606 A.H.) has acknowledged it to be Amir al-muminins utterance.
22) Shaykh Muhammad Tahir Patni
while explaining the same words in Majma bihar al-anwar testifies this sermon to be Amir
al-muminins by saying, "Ali says so."
23) Abul-Fadl ibn Manzur (d. 711
A.H.) has acknowledged it as Amir al-muminins utterance in Lisan al-Arab, vol.12, p.54
by saying, "In the sayings of Ali in his sermon It is the camels foam that burst
forth then subsided."
24) Majdud-Din al-Firuzabadi (d.
816/817 A.H.) has recorded under the word "Shiqshiqah" in his lexicon (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
"O Ibn Abbas! it was the foam of a camel that burst forth then subsided."
25) The compiler of Muntaha al-adab
writes:
Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah of Ali
is attributed to Ali (Allah may honour his face).
26) ash-Shaykh Muhammad Abduh,
Mufti of Egypt, recognising it as Amir al-muminins utterance, has written its
explanations.
27) Muhammad Muhyid-Din Abd
al-Hamid, Professor in the Faculty of Arabic Language, al-Azhar University has written
annotations on Nahj al-balaghah adding a foreword in the beginning wherein he recognises
all such sermons which contain disparaging remarks to be the utterances of Amir
al-muminin.
In the face of these evidences and
undeniable proofs is there any scope to hold that it is not Amir al-muminins production
and that as-Sayyid ar-Radi prepared it himself?
(2).
Amir al-muminin has referred to Abu Bakrs accession to the Caliphate metaphorically as
having dressed himself with it. This was a common metaphor. Thus, when Uthman was called
to give up the Caliphate he replied, "I shall not put off this shirt which Allah has
put on me." No doubt Amir al-muminin has not attributed this dressing of Caliphate
to Allah but to Abu Bakr himself because according to unanimous opinion his Caliphate was
not from Allah but his own affair. That is why Amir al-muminin said that Abu Bakr dressed
himself with the Caliphate. He knew that this dress had been stitched for his 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
"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 organisation and
order and guided it through all difficulties. Currents of learning flowed from my bosom
and watered it on all sides. My position was high beyond imagination but lust of world
seekers for government became a tumbling stone for me and I had to confine myself to
seclusion. Blinding darkness prevailed all round 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
PROPHETS CALIPH AND THE MODE OF HIS APPOINTMENT.
After the Prophet of Islam the
presence of such a personality was inevitable who could stop the community from
disintegration and guard the religious 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 that
the assemblage in Saqifah of Banu Saidah should have been considered more important than
the burial of the Prophet. If the need is recognised, the question is whether or not the
Prophet too realised 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 Prophets mind to be
blank for thinking of means to stop the evils of innovations 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 indicated otherwise silence without purpose would constitute delinquency
in the discharge of the obligations of Prophethood. If there was some impediment, it
should be disclosed otherwise we should agree that just as the Prophet 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 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 event - 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 al-Qadi Adud
ad-Dinal-Iji has written in Sharh 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. In such a case also it often happens that the force of fair and foul or 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 forward. When capabilities remain so
curbed 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
unbiased view, that none of them 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 circumstances 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 audience of the Holy Prophet could not be free of mutual quarrel and strife
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 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 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 impediments in 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 which this way was adopted. If there is some
other standard, then instead of judging the capabilities of the voters 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 future. al-Qadi Adud ad-Din al-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 Umar and of
Uthman by Abd ar-Rahman. (Sharh al-mawaqif, p.351 )
This is the account of the
"unanimous election" in the Hall of Bani Saidah and the activity of the
consultative assembly: that is, one mans action has been given the name of unanimous
election and one individuals deed given the name of consultative assembly. 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 requirements of
unanimous election, majority vote or method of choosing through electoral assembly and
appointed Umar by nomination. Aishah also considered that leaving the question of
caliphate to the vote of a few particular individuals 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 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 it was given up and only "might is right" became the
criteria-namely whoever subdues others and binds them under his sway and control is
accepted as the Caliph of the Prophet and his true successor. These are those self-adopted
principles in the face of which all the Prophets sayings uttered in the "Feast of
the Relatives," on the night of hijrah, at the battle of Tabuk, on the occasion of
conveying the Quranic chapter "al-Baraah" (at-Tawbah, chap.9) and at Ghadir
(the spring of) Khumm. The strange thing is that when each of the first three caliphates
is based on one individuals choice how can this very right to choose be denied to the
Prophet himself, particularly when this was the only way to end all the dissension, namely
that the Prophet 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 Prophets 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-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 roamed about in search of livelihood
and those when he led a happy life in Hayyans company. Generally Amir al-muminins
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 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 indicate the difference between the unimportant position of those in power during the
Prophets life time and the authority and power enjoyed by them after him, that is, at one
time in the days of the Prophet no heed was paid to them because of Alis 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 Luluah and he saw that it was difficult for him to survive
because of the deep wound, he formed a consultative committee and nominated for it Ali
ibn Abi Talib, Uthman ibn Affan, Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf, az-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam, Sad
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 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. Umar therefore disclosed his own view about each individual. He
said that Sad was harsh-tempered and hot headed; Abd ar-Rahman was the Pharaoh of the
community; az-Zubayr was, if pleased, a true believer but if displeased an unbeliever;
Talhah was the embodiment of pride and haughtiness, if he was made caliph he would put the
ring of the caliphate on his wifes finger while Uthman did not see beyond his kinsmen.
As regards Ali he is enamoured of the Caliphate although I know that he alone can run it
on 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 Uthmans 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 Uthmans sister, next Sad
ibn Abi Waqqas besides bearing malice towards Ali is a relation and kinsman 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 his annotation on Nahj al-balaghah:

Talhah was inclined towards Uthman
and the reason for it was no less than that he was against Ali, because he himself was at
at-Taymi and Abu Bakrs accession to the Caliphate had created bad blood between Bani Taym
and Banu Hashim.
As regards az-Zubayr, even if he had
voted for Ali, what could his single vote achieve. According to at-Tabaris statement
Talhah was not present in Medina at that time but his absence did not stand in the way of
Uthmans success. Rather even if he were present, as he did actually reach at the meeting
(of the Committee), and he is taken to be Alis supporter, still there could be no doubt
in Uthmans success because Umars sagacious 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 arbitrator. The group whom he
orders should choose the Caliph from among themselves. If they do not accept Abdullah ibn
Umars verdict, support should be given to the group which includes Abd ar-Rahman ibn
Awf, but if the others do not agree they should be beheaded for opposing this verdict.
(at-Tabari, vol.1, pp.2779-2780; Ibn al-Athir, vol.3, p.67).
Here disagreement with the verdict
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 blood-thirsty swords had been put on the heads of the
opposition group with orders to fall on their heads on Abd ar-Rahmans behest. Amir
al-muminins eye had fore-read it at that very moment that the Caliphate was going to
Uthman as appears from his following words which he spoke to al-Abbas ibn Abd
al-Muttalib:
"The Caliphate has been turned
away from us." al-Abbas asked how could he know it. Then he replied, "Uthman
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 Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf. Now Sad will support his cousin Abd
ar-Rahman who is of course the husband of Uthmans sister." (ibid )
However, after Umars death this
meeting took place in the room of Aishah 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-Zubayrs sense of honour as his mother Safiyyah daughter of Abd al-Muttalib was the
sister of Prophets father. So he gave his right of vote to Ali. Thereafter Sad ibn Abi
Waqqas made his right of vote to Abd ar-Rahman. This left three members of the
consultative 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 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 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 Amir
al-muminin, "I pay you allegiance on your following the Book of Allah, the sunnah of
the Prophet and the conduct of the two Shaykhs, (Abu Bakr and Umar). Ali replied,
"Rather on following the Book of Allah, the sunnah of the Prophet and my own
findings." When he got the same reply even after repeating the question thrice he
turned to Uthman saying, "Do you accept these conditions." He had no reason to
refuse and so he agreed to the conditions and allegiance was paid to him. When Amir al
muminin saw his rights being thus 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 Uthman Caliph but in the hope that he would
give back the Caliphate to you."
After recording the events of
ash-Shura (consultative committee), Ibn Abil-Hadid has written that when allegiance had
been paid to Uthman, Ali addressed Uthman and Abd ar-Rahman saying, "May Allah
sow the seed of dissension 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
arises whether ash-Shura (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 Shaykhs for Caliphate was put by Umar or it was just a
hurdle put by Abd ar-Rahman between Ali (p.b.u.h.) 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 formers footsteps. What then was the occasion for this
condition here?
However, Amir al-muminin 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 evaded the consultative committee and did not give them an
opportunity of selecting him.
(5).
About the reign of the third Caliph, Amir al-muminin says that soon on Uthmans coming
to power Banu Umayyah got ground and began plundering the Bayt al-mal (public fund), and
just as cattle on seeing green grass after drought trample it away, they recklessly fell
upon Allahs money and devoured it. At last this self-indulgence and nepotism brought him
to the stage when people besieged his house, put him to sword and made him vomit all that
he had swallowed.
The maladministration 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 stricken with poverty and surrounded by
pennilessness while control over Bayt 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
externed from the city. The uses to which zakat 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 Abil-As who had
been exiled from Medina by the Prophet was allowed back in the city not only against the
Prophets sunnah but also against the conduct of the first two Caliphs and 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 hypocrite in the Quran was paid one hundred thousand Dirhams from the Muslims
public fund. (al-Iqd 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 from
the public fund. (Sharh of Ibn Abil-Hadid, vol.1, pp.198-199).
4) He married his daughter Aishah
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-Maarif 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
angelic daughter of the Prophet 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 Prophet 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 Abil-Hadid,
vol.l, p.l99)
10) After his death (Uthmans) 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 countless camels and horses. (Muruj adh-dhahab, vol.l, p.435)
11) The Caliphs relations ruled all
the principal cities. Thus, at Kufah, al-Walid ibn Uqbah was the governor but when in the
state of intoxication of wine he led the morning prayer in four instead of two rakah and
people agitated he was removed, but the Caliph put in his place a hypocrite like Said ibn
al-As. In Egypt Abdullah ibn Sad ibn Abi Sarh, in Syria Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, and in
Basrah, Abdullah ibn Amir were the governors appointed by him (ibid.)

.

Forward to Sermon 4.

Back to Sermon 2.

/ 247