Lessons from Nahjul Balagha [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

Sermons
Sermon
163

SERMON 163

When people went to Amir
al-mu'minin in a deputation and complained to him through what
they had to say against Uthman, and requested him to speak to him
on their behalf and to admonish him for their sake, he went to see
him and said: (1)

The people are behind
me and they have made me an ambassador between you and themselves;
but by Allah, I do not know what to say to you. I know nothing (in
this matter) which you do not know, nor can I lead you to any
matter of which you are not aware. You certainly know what we
know, we have not come to know anything before you which we could
tell you; nor did we learn anything in secret which we should
convey to you. You have seen as we have seen and you have heard as
we have heard. You sat in the company of the Prophet of Allah as
we did. (Abu Bakr) Ibn Abi Quhafah and (Umar) ibn al-Khattab were
no more responsible for acting righteously than you, since you are
nearer than both of them to the Prophet of Allah through kinship,
and you also hold relationship to him by marriage which they do
not hold.

Then (fear) Allah, in
your own self; for, by Allah, you are not being shown anything as
if you are blind or being apprised of anything as if you are
ignorant. The ways are clear while the banners of faith are fixed.
You should know that among the creatures of Allah, the most
distinguished person before Allah is the just Imam who has been
guided (by Allah) and guides others. So, he stands by the
recognised ways of the Prophet's behaviour and destroys
unrecognised innovations. The (Prophet's) ways are clear and they
have signs, while innovations are also clear and they too have
signs. Certainly, the worst man before Allah is the oppressive
Imam who has gone astray and through whom others go astray. He
destroys the the accepted sunnah and revives abandoned
innovations. I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "On the
Day of Judgement the oppressive Imam will be brought without
anyone to support him or anyone to advance excuses on his behalf,
and then he will be thrown into Hell where he will rotate as the
hand-mill rotates, then (eventually) he will be confined to its
hollow."

I swear to you by
Allah that you should not be that Imam of the people who will be
killed because it has been said that, "An Imam of this people
will be killed after which killing and fighting will be made open
for them till the Day of Judgement, and he will confuse their
matters and spread troubles over them. As a result, they will not
discern truth from wrong. They will oscillate like waves and would
be utterly misled." You should not behave as the carrying
beast for Marwan so that he may drag you wherever he likes,
despite (your) seniority of age and length of life.

Then Uthman said to
Amir al-mu'minin: "Speak to the people to give me time until
I redress their grievances." Amir al-mu'minin then said:
"So far as Medina is concerned here is no question of time.
As for remoter areas you can have the time needed for your order
to reach there."

(1).
During the Caliphate of Uthman when the Muslims were weary of the
oppression of the Government and its officials collected in Medina
to complain to the senior companions of the Prophet, they came to
Amir al-mu'minin in a peaceful manner and requested him to see
Uthman and advise him not to trample on the Muslims' rights and
to put an end to the troubles which were proving the cause of the
people's ruin, whereupon Amir al-mu'minin went to him and uttered
these words.

In order to make the
bitterness of the admonition palatable Amir al-mu'minin adopted
that way of speech in the beginning which would create a sense of
responsibility in the addressee and direct him towards his
obligations. Thus, by mentioning his companionship of the Prophet,
his personal position, and his kinship to the Prophet as against
the two previous Caliphs, his intention was to make him realise
his duties; in any case, this was obviously not an occasion for
eulogising him, so that its later portion can be disregarded and
the whole speech be regarded as an eulogy of his attainments,
because from its very beginning it is evident that whatever
Uthman did, he did it wilfully, that nothing was done without his
knowledge or his being informed, and that he could not be held
unaccountable for it because of his being unaware of it. If the
adoption of a line of action which made the whole Islamic world
raise hue and cry in spite of his having being a companion of the
Prophet, having heard his instructions, having seen his behaviour
and having been acquainted with the commandments of Islam can be
regarded as a distinction, then this taunt may also be regarded as
praise. If that is not a distinction then this too cannot be
called and eulogy. In fact, the words about which it is argued
that they are in praise are enough to prove the seriousness of his
crime, because a crime in ignorance and unawareness is not so
serious as the weight given to the seriousness of the commission
of a crime despite knowledge and awareness. Consequently a person
who is unaware of the rise and fall of a road and stumbles in the
dark night is excusable but a person who is aware of the rise and
fall of the road and stumbled in broad day light is liable to be
blamed. If on this occasion he is told that he has eyes and is
also aware of the rise and fall of the way, it would not mean that
his vastness of knowledge or the brightness of his eye-sight is
being praised, but the intention would be that he did not notice
the pitfalls despite his eyes, and did not walk properly, and that
therefore for him, having or not having eyes is the same, and
knowing or not knowing is equal.

In this connection
great stress in laid on his being a son-in-law, namely that the
Prophet married his two daughters Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthum to him
one after the other. Before taking this to be a distinction, the
real nature of Uthman's son-in-lawship should be seen. History
shows that in this matter Uthman did not enjoy the distinction of
being the first, but before him Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthum had been
married to two sons of Abu Lahab namely Utbah and Utaybah, but
despite their being sons-in-law, they have not been included among
people of position of pre-prophethood period. How then can this be
regarded as a source of position without any personal merit, when
there is no authority about the importance of this relationship,
nor was any importance attached to this matter in such a way that
there might have been some competition between Uthman and some
other important personality in this regard and that his selection
for it might have given him prominence, or that these two girls
might have been shown to possess an important position in history,
tradition or biography as a result of which this relationship
could be given special importance and regarded as a distinction
for him? If the marriage of these two daughters with Utbah and
Utaybah in the pre-prophethood period is held as lawful on the
ground that marriage with unbelievers had not till then been made
unlawful, then in Uthman's case also the condition for lawfulness
was his acceptance of Islam, there is no doubt that he had
pronounced the kalimah ash-shahadatayn (there is no god but Allah
and Muhammad is His Messenger) and had accepted Islam outwardly.
As such this marriage can be held a proof of his outward Islam,
but no other honour can be proved through it. Again, it is also
not agreed that these two were the real daughters of the Messenger
of Allah, because there is one group which denies them to be his
real daughters, and regards them as being the daughters of
Khadijah's sister Halah, or the daughters of her own previous
husband. Thus, Abu'l-Qasim al-Kufi (d. 352 A.H.) writes:

"When the
Messenger of Allah married Khadijah, then some time thereafter
Halah died leaving two daughters, one named Zaynab and the other
named Ruqayyah and both of them were brought up by the Prophet and
Khadijah and they maintained them, and it was the custom before
Islam that a child was assigned to whoever brought him up."
(al-lstighathah, p. 69)

Ibn Hisham has written
about the issues of Hadrat Khadijah as follows:

"Before marriage
with the Prophet she was married to Abi Halah ibn Malik. She
delivered for him Hind ibn Abi Halah and Zaynab bint Abi Halah.
Before marriage with Abi Halah she was married to Utayyiq ibn
Abid ibn Abdillah ibn Amr ibn Makhzum and she delivered for him
Abdullah and a daughter." (as-Sirah an-nabawiyyah, vol. 4,
p. 293)

This shows that of
Hadrat Khadijah had two daughters before being married to the
Prophet and according to all appearance they would be called his
daughters and those to whom they were married would be called his
sons-in-law, but the position of this relationship would be the
same as if those girls were his daughters. Therefore, before
putting it forth as a matter for pride the real status of the
daughters should be noted and a glance should be cast at Uthman's
conduct. In this connection, al-Bukhari and other narrators (of
traditions) and historians record this tradition as follows:

Anas ibn Malik relates
that: "We were present on the occasion of the burial of the
Prophet's daughter Umm Kulthum, while the Prophet was sitting
beside her grave. I saw his eyes shedding tears. Then he said, 'Is
there any one among you who has not committed a sin last night?'
Abu Talhah (Zayd ibn Sahl al-Ansari) said, 'I', then the Prophet
said, 'Then you get into the grave,' consequently he got down into
the grave."

The commentators said
about 'committed sin' that the Holy Prophet meant to say 'one who
had not had sexual intercourse.' On this occasion the Holy Prophet
unveiled the private life of Uthman and prevented him from
getting down into the grave, although it was a prominent merit of
the Prophet's character that he did not disgrace or belittle any
one by making public his private life, and despite of knowledge of
others' shortcomings, ignored them; but in this case the filth was
such that it was deemed necessary to disgrace him before the whole
crowd.

Since Uthman did not
show any regard for the demise of his wife (Umm Kulthum) nor was
he moved or felt sorry (for this event), and paid no heed to the
cutting off his relationship with the Holy Prophet (for being his
son-in-law), he (Uthman) had sexual intercourse on the same
night, therefore the Holy Prophet deprived him of this right and
honour. (al-Bukhari, as-Sahih, vol. 2, pp. 100-101, 114; Ahmad ibn
Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 3, pp. 126, 228, 229, 270; al-Hakim,
al-Mustadrak, vol. 4, p. 47; al-Bayhaqi, as-Sunan al-kubra, vol.
4, p. 53; Ibn Sad, at-Tabaqat al-kabir, vol. 8, p. 26;
as-Suhayli, ar-Rawd al-unuf, vol. 2, p. 107; Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah,
vol. 4, p. 489; Fath al-bari, vol. 3, p. 122; al-Ayni, Umdah
al-qari, vol. 4,p. 85; Ibn al-Athir, an-Nihayah, vol. 3, p. 276;
Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-Arab, vol. 9, pp. 280-281; az-Zabidi, Taj
al-arus, vol. 6, p. 220).