A friend of mine had asked four questions from me. I responded to
three earlier and since the 4th question was a topic in itelf, I answered
it under the heading ‘Is Quran as we know it today the same as what Allah told
Mohammad via Gibreel.’ Nearly two thousand people have already read this post
in less than two days.
In response to this post, I got a comment from a friend which said:
“This is ridiculous Mr. Alvi. I have been liking your posts till now but you
are saying that Mohammad and Allah wanted appoint Ali as successor. Islam is
in favor of democracy and a council (shura) appointed all the four caliphs.
This council of elders appointed the caliphs and Ali was appointed as the
caliph no. 4. You are saying everything new.”
Though I gave her a response, I promised her that I will post in
brief how the 5 caliphs were chosen. The response that I gave to her is as
follows: “Thanks for liking my posts. I am sure you
liked them because I have been talking reason all the while. I try to give
proofs wherever possible and avoid saying anything without proofs. I wish to
make it clear that Islam has given no concept of democracy at the top level.
Rather the democracy is at the lower levels, where everybody has to be treated
equally and the benefits have to reach down to the lowest rung of society.
Islam wants adherents to bow down to the will of Allah. The Quran says to Arabs
that had it been in your hand you would have appointed a rich and powerful
chief as your Prophet. But instead Mohammad was appointed Prophet as he was the
best among all in terms of truthfulness, piety and righteousness. This is if we
discount his role as a noor (deva) who took birth only for the express purpose
of guiding us towards righteousness and the path of the God. The real guides
and leaders, as per the Divine Plan, have a link with both; human beings on one
side as they took birth as humans and the Paramatma on the other side, because
of the noor that is inside them. Hence they are the rope that leads us to God.
When the noor had descended in human form, and the proofs of which are
available everywhere, be it in Vedas and Gita, Buddha's and Jesus's teaching,
how could our leader be a mortal human being. In fact the real problem why
Muslims digressed from the teachings of Mohammad was because of not obeying to
the last command, which was so important that God said that if this command is
not passed on, it will be akin to Mohammad not doing any work at all. I have
been repeatedly saying and proving that not just Mohammad, all the 14 Ahlulbayt
who comprise the 'Spirit of Truth' as per Jesus, had come with the purpose of
giving us guidance. But we didn't recognize their true role and hence couldn't
learn much from them. Instead, we tortured and killed them to the extent
possible. You say that all the four caliphs
were appointed by a shura. Do you have a notion that there was a group of
elders who chose one caliph after another and finally chose Ali as the 4th
position? This is a mistaken belief of yours. I wanted to avoid this subject
but if you want I can give you in brief how the first five Caliphs viz.
Khalifa-e-Rashidun became the Caliphs of Islam. I will merely present the
historical facts and leave upon you and the readers to frame your own opinion.”
Fact is that I
am reluctant to post such a subject. You will naturally ask ‘why’? Because this
subject endorses the view of a sect of Islam viz. the Shias, who claim to be
following the Ahlulbayt. They will get reason to feel proud, though the fact is
that they too are yet to understand who Ahlulbayt really are, why they were
sent on earth and what they expect from us. They are engaged in some meaningful
and some meaningless rituals in the name of Ahlulbayt but their character and
conduct in general can not be called befitting the character and conduct of a
true Muslim.
Fact is that
the Devas (who took birth as human beings and were called Ahlulbayt) and who
have been referred to as the ‘Spirit of Truth’ by Jesus due their relationship
with Paramatma came on earth to culminate the teachings of all the previous
avatars (prophets) and to be the guides for the man of kaliyug, who was to
become scientifically advanced with time. We must remember that though they
came at the onset of the kaliyug, and at a time when the art of writing and
keeping records had developed, particularly among the Arabs, so that the later
day man can know their true teachings and character whenever he realized their
true position. But it was the Divine Will that their True Position will be
realized by mankind only in this age of advancement, when our intellect is
developed enough to understand the power of the noor and that of the invisible.
After all, it was their mission to lead us to the worship of the Absolute God
viz. Ishwar or Allah.
We must
understand that the man of medieval period was not intellectually developed to
understand the Noor. And since it was the Divine Will that Forces of Darkness
will get exposed and people will realize the true role of the Forces of
Guidance in this age and period, we are nobody to criticize and talk ill of the
people of yore. You must remember that it is not the role of the Forces of
Guidance to fight with the Forces of Darkness. They both are working within the
Divine Plan. It is man who has to defeat the Forces of Darkness and get united
with the Forces of Guidance so as to empower them enough. Fact is that we all
have sort of aligned with Zulmat (Forces of Darkness) and hence our mind and
body is controlled by Zulmat, howsoever much we shout and cry that we love the
Ahlulbayt. The day we will bereft our mind and body from Zulmat and align our Atma
with the Paramatma, through the path laid down for us by the emissaries of
Noor, we will climb the symbolic ‘rope’ and thus fulfil the purpose for which
the Noor had descended in human bodies. In short, our minds are offices of
sort. When Zulmat has found place inside us, it means that we are working as an
office for Zulmat. Get rid of this, cleanse your soul, and open an office
inside you, of Noor. The more the offices of Noor, the greater have you
empowered Noor and fulfilled our role in defeating the Zulmat. As an Upanishad
says, we are like animals (without getting aligned with the Noors) and every
animal matters i.e. their guidance is for each of us and it is we who have to defeat
the Zulmat as God has shown confidence on the ability of this man and has not
talked of Noor.
Therefore, instead
of making adverse comments on one personality or another, realize that this was
a Divine Plan that Zulmat will get defeated in this age and hour and strive to
make an office of Noor inside your body. Anybody giving adverse comment here
should know that he or she is actually working for Zulmat and is yet to
establish a relationship of his self with Noor.
As you read,
note that while living as humans, the devas didn’t show anything to reveal
their Divine Role because the mind was not prepared for it. We who at times say
that our forefathers were all extremely intelligent should beat their chests
and lament that they didn’t recognize those who had a direct relationship with
Parmatma.
THE BEGINNING AND THE END OF THE CALIPHATE
The divinely instituted system of the godly guidance and leadership
through appointment of 12 Imams or Leaders (Maruts, as per Vedas), after
Mohammad had culminated the teachings, should not be confused with the movement
started with political exigencies for the secular power and authority called
the ‘Caliphate’ which was started by man and ended by man himself.
Khilafat-e-Rashida
The Holy Prophet had not even breathed his last, the people who
only waited for his departure from this world to gain hold over the vast Muslim
Empire, quarreled among themselves as to who should hold the Authority-Supreme,
the Mohajirs, (i.e. those who had migrated from Makkah to Medina) or the
Ansars (the helpers (i.e. the Medinites) who gave the Mohajirs,
the emigrants, the asylum. The people deserted the Holy Prophet, in his
death-bed and assembled at a place called the ‘Saqeefa-e-Bani Sa’ada’.
We put the question to you! Where would you like to be if you
believe in a Prophet from God and that prophet is about to depart for his final
journey? Look in the pages of history to find where were some of the most
prominent Muslims of the time when Prophet was dying.
According to the author of Ghiayathul-lughat, Saqifah
was a secret location where the Arabs used to gather for their evil activities.
Here Saad ibn Ubadah, who was then ailing, was led to a stately chair and made
to sit upon it, wrapped in a blanket, so that he might be elected as the
Caliph. Saad then delivered a speech in which he recounted the virtues of the
ansar and told them to take over the caliphate before anyone else could do so.
The ansar agreed and said that they wanted him to be the Caliph. But then among
themselves, they began to ask: “What reply should we give to the mujajirun
(emigrants from Makkah) of the Quraysh if they oppose this move and put forth
their own claim?
A group said: “We shall tell them, let us have one
leader from among you and one from among us.” Saad said: “This is the first
weakness you have shown.”
Someone informed Omar ibn al-Khattab of this gathering
saying: “If at all you desire to acquire the dignity of rulership you should
reach the Saqifah before it is too late and difficult for you to change
what is being decided there.” On receiving the news, Omar, along with Abu Bakr,
rushed to the Saqifah. Abu Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah also accompanied them.
At-Tabari, Ibnul-Athir, Ibn Qutaybah and others proceed
with their narrations stating that having reached the Saqifah, Abu Bakr, Omar
and Abu Ubaydah had hardly taken their seats when Thabit ibn Qays stood up and
began enumerating the virtues of the ansar and suggested that the office
of the caliphate should be offered to someone from the ansar. Omar is
reported to have said later on: “When the speaker of the ansar finished
his speech, I made an attempt to speak as already I had thought over some
important points, but Abu Bakr beckoned me to keep quiet. Therefore, I remained
silent. Abu Bakr had more competence and knowledge than myself. He then said
the same things I had thought of and expressed them even better.”
According to Rawdatus-Safa, Abu Bakr addressed the
assembly at the Saqifah thus: “Assembly of the ansar! We
acknowledge your good qualities and virtues. We have also not forgotten your
struggles and endeavours for promoting the cause of Islam. But the honour and
respect the Quraysh have among the Arabs is not enjoyed by any other tribe, and
the Arabs will not submit to anyone other than the Quraysh.”
In as-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, it is added:
“However, it is a fact that we the muhajirun were
the first to accept the Islamic creed. The Prophet of Islam was from our tribe.
We are the relatives of the Apostle. . . and therefore we are the people who are entitled to caliphate.
. . It will be advisable to have the leadership among us and for you to take
the ministry. We will not act unless we consult with you.”
Heated arguments started during which Omar cried: “By
Allah, I will kill him who opposes us now.” Al-Hubab ibn al-Mundhir ibn Zayd,
an ansari from the Khazraj tribe, challenged him saying: “By Allah, we
will not allow anyone to rule over us as a caliph. One leader must come from
you and one from us.” Abu Bakr said: “No, this cannot be; it is our right to
the rulers and yours to be our ministers.” Al-Hubab said: “O ansar! Do
not submit yourselves to what these people say. Be firm. . . By Allah, if
anyone dares to oppose me now, I will cut his nose with my sword.” ‘Omar
remarked: “By Allah, duality is not advisable in the caliphate. There cannot be
two kings in one regime, and the Arabs will not agree to your leadership,
because the Apostle was not from you tribe.”
It is to be noted that the concept of one Ummah was
broken right there. Selection on the basis of kinship and tribal relations were
given as the reasons. If you look at the reasons Abu Bakr gave to justify his
own caliphate they were all those in which Ali was better than him. He said,
“We are the relatives of the Apostle” and Ali was a closer relative. Another
reason given was that the Muhajirun were the first to accept the Islamic
creed and the world knew that Ali was first among all men in the world to
accept the message of Islam. If Prophet of Islam was from Abu Bakr’s tribe, Ali
was his first cousin and also son-in-law.
Whatever the reasons given, Ghadeer and other
traditions of the Prophet regarding Ali were forgotten!
At-Tabari and Ibnul-Athir both state that there was a
fairly prolonged exchange of words between al-Hubab and Omar on this
matter. Omar cursed al-Hubab: “May Allah
kill you.” Al-Hubab retorted: “May Allah kill you.”
Omar then crossed over and stood at the head of Saad
ibn Ubadah and said to him: “We want to break every limb of yours.” Infuriated
by this threat, Saad got up and caught Omar’s beard. Omar said: “If you pull
out even one hair, you will see that all will not be well with you.” Then Abu
Bakr pleaded with Omar to be calm and civil. Omar turned his face from Saad who
was saying: “By Allah, had I strength enough just to stand you would have heard
the lions roar in every corner of Medina
and hidden yourselves in holes. By Allah, we would have made you join again
with those people among whom you were only a follower and not a leader.”
Ibn Qutaybah says that when Bashir ibn Saad, the chief
of the tribe of Aws, saw that the ansar
were uniting behind Saad ibn Ubadah, the chief of the Khazraj, he was overcome with envy and
stood up supporting the claim of the Qurayshite muhajirun.
In the midst of this melee, ‘Omar said to Abu Bakr:
“Hold out your hand so that I may give my bayat (i.e. pledge of
loyalty).” Abu Bakr said: “No, you give me your hand so that I may give my
bayat, because you are stronger than me and more suitable to the caliphate.
Omar took the hand of Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance
to him saying: “My strength is not of any value when compared to your merits
and seniority. And if it is of any value then my strength added to yours will
successfully manage the caliphate.”
Bashir ibn Saad followed suit. Khazrajites cried to him
that he was doing it out of envy for Saad ibn Ubadah. Then the tribe of Aws
talked amongst themselves that if Saad ibn Ubadah was made caliph that day, the
tribe of Khazraj would always feel themselves superior to the Aws, and not one
from the Aws would ever achieve that dignity. Therefore, they all pledged their
allegiance to Abu Bakr.
Someone from the Khazraj tribe took out his sword but
was overcome by the others. Thus, the first Caliph of the Muslims was chosen.
It is this selection, on the basis of which Muslims to this day, claim to be
torchbearers of democracy. To what extent democracy was the guiding principle
for choosing subsequent Caliphs will be seen later.
Amidst all this unseemly wrangling, Ali and his friends
attended to the washing of the body of the Holy Prophet and the proper
observances regarding burial. By the time these were over, Abu Bakr had
achieved a fait accompli.
Ibn-Qutaybah writes: “When Abu Bakr had taken the
caliphate, Ali was the first towards whom the ire was turned and bayat
(allegiance) was demanded from him. The door of Ali’s house was put on fire.
The burning door fell on the ribs of Prophet’s daughter, Fatima, and she broke
not only the ribs but also the child in her womb died due to this. Ali was
dragged to Abu Bakr with a rope tied to his neck as he repeatedly declared, ‘I
am the slave of Allah and the brother of the Messenger of Allah.’ Then Ali was
commanded to take the oath of allegiance of Abu Bakr.
Ali said: “I have more rights to the caliphate than
anyone of you. I will not pledge obedience to you. As a matter of fact, you
should give the pledge of obedience to me. You called the ansar to give
their bayat on the ground that you had blood relations with the
Messenger of Allah. You are usurping the caliphate from us, the members of his
house. Did you not reason with the ansar that you have better rights to
the caliphate than they because the Apostle was of your kinship, and they
handed over the government to you and accepted your leadership? Therefore, the
very reason put forth by you before the ansar is now forwarded by me.
Our relations with the Apostle in life as well as in death are much closer than
those of anyone of you. If you are
faithful to your argument, you should do justice; otherwise you know that you
have knowingly moved towards tyranny.’
“Omar said, ‘Unless you give bayat, you will not
be released.’ Ali cried, ‘Milk out as much as you can for the udders are in
your hand. Make it as strong as possible today, for he is going to hand it over
to you tomorrow. Omar, I will not yield to your commands: I shall not pledge
loyalty to him.’ Ultimately Abu Bakr said, ‘O Ali! If you do not desire to give
your bayat, I am not going to force you for the same.’
Several aspects of the above-mentioned events deserve
more attention:
1.
It was the tradition of the Arabs that once a person was declared,
even by a small group, to be the chief of the tribe, others did not like to
oppose him, and willy-nilly followed suit. This tradition was in the mind of Abbas,
the Prophet’s uncle, when he told Ali: “Give me your hand so that I may pledge
allegiance to you . . . because once this thing is taken over no one will ask
him to relinquish it.”
And it was this tradition which prompted Saad to exhort
the ansar to ‘take over the caliphate before anyone else could do so.’
And it was because of this tradition that Omar was told
to reach Saqifah ‘before it was too late and difficult for him to change
what was being decided there.’ And it was because of this custom that once some
people accepted Abu Bakr as Caliph, the majority of the Muslims in Medina
followed suit.
2.
Ali was well-aware of this custom. Then why did he refuse to
extend his hand to accept the bayat of Abbas, telling him, “Who else,
other than I, can call for such pledge of allegiance?”
It was because Ali knew that the khilafah
(caliphate) of the Holy Prophet was not the chieftainship of the tribe. It was
not based on the declaration of allegiance by the public. It was a
responsibility given by God, not by the people. He also knew his own role in
the Divine Plan. And as he had already been publicly appointed by Allah through
the Prophet to the Imamate, there was no need for him to rush to the public to
seek their allegiance. He did not want the people to think that his Imamate was
based on the bayat of men; if the people came to him on the basis of the
declaration of Ghadeer-e-Khumm, well and good; if they did not, it was
their loss, not his.
3.
Now we turn to the events of Saqifah: During the lifetime
of the Holy Prophet, the Mosque of the Prophet was the centre of all Islamic
activities. It was here that decisions of war and peace were made, deputations
were received, sermons were delivered and cases were decided. And the news
spread of the death of the Holy Prophet, the Muslims assembled in that very mosque.
Then why did the partisans of Saad ibn Ubadah decide to
go three miles outside Medina to meet in Saqifah which was not a place
of good repute? Was it not because they wanted to usurp the Caliphate without
the knowledge of other people and then present Sad as the accepted Caliph?
Keeping in view the declaration of Ghadeer-e-Khumm
and the tribal custom of Arabia there can be no other explanation.
4.
When Omar and Abu Bakr came to know of that gathering, they were
in the mosque. A majority of the Muslim were at the mosque. Why did they not
inform any other person about that gathering? Why did they, together with Abu
Ubaydah, slip out secretly? Was it because Ali and Banu Hashim were present in
the mosque and in the house of the Prophet, and Omar and Abu Bakr did not want
them to know of the plot? Was it because they were afraid that if Ali came to
know of that meeting of Saqifah, and if by a remote chance he decided to
go there himself, no one else would have had a chance to succeed?
5.
When Abu Bakr was extolling the virtues of muhajirun as
being from the tribe of the Holy Prophet, did he not know that there were other
people with much more stronger right to that claim because they were members of
the very family of the Holy Prophet and his own flesh and blood?
It was this aspect of the pretence that prompted Ali
ibn Abi Talib to comment: “They argued by the strength of the tree (tribe) and
then destroyed the fruit (i.e., the family of the Prophet).”
Looking dispassionately at this event, we are unable to
call it an ‘election’, because the voters (all the Muslims scattered throughout
Arabia, or, at least, all the Muslims of Medina) did not even know that there
was to be an election, let alone when or where it was to be held. Aside from
the voters, even prospective candidates were unaware of what was happening at
Saqifah. Again we are reminded of the words of Imam Ali in connection with the
two points mentioned above:
“If you claim to have secured authority over the
Muslims’ affairs by consultation,
How did it happen when those to be consulted were
absent!
And if you have scored over your opponents by (the
Prophet’s) kinship,
Then someone else has greater right on the Prophet and
is nearer to him.”
And we cannot call it even a ‘selection’ because a
majority of the prominent Companions of the Holy Prophet had no knowledge of
these events. Ali, Abbas, Uthman, Talhah, Zubayr, Saad ibn Abi Waqqas, Salman
Farsi, Abuzar Ghaffari, Ammar ibn Yasir, Miqdad, Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf – none of
them were consulted or even informed.
The only argument which can be offered for caliphate is
this: “Whatever the legal position of the events of Saqifah, as Abu Bakr
succeeded (because of tribal custom) in taking the reins of power in his hands,
he was a ‘constitutional’ Caliph.”
In simple language, Abu Bakr became a constitutional
Caliph because he succeeded in his bid for power. Thus, the Muslims who have
been taught to glorify this event are inadvertently taught that the only thing
which counts is the ‘power’. Once you are secure in the seat of power,
everything is all right. You will become the ‘constitutional’ head of state.
In the end, I should quote a comment of Omar himself,
who was the author of this caliphate. He said in a lecture during his
caliphate:
“I have been informed that someone said: ‘When Omar
dies, I will pledge allegiance to so-and-so.’ Well no one should be misled like
this, thinking that although the allegiance of Abu Bakr was by surprise, it
became all right. Of course, it was by surprise, but Allah saved us from its
evils. Now if anyone wishes to copy it I will cut his throat.” (Sahih-al-Bukhari)
Nomination of Omar
The majority of Muslims believe that what happened at Saqifah
was a manifestation of the “democratic” spirit of Islam. In view of that belief
it was reasonable to expect the ‘democratic election’ (whatever it’s meaning in
the context of Saqifah) to continue as the basis of Islamic caliphate.
But this was not to be.
Abu Bakr was indebted to Omar for establishing his
caliphate and he knew that if the masses were given freedom of choice, Omar had
no chance. (He was known as “rude and of harsh nature.”) Therefore, he decided
to nominate his own successor – Omar.
At-Tabari writes: “Abu Bakr called Uthman – when the
former was dying – and told him to write an appointment order, and dictated to
him: ‘In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. This is the order of
Abdullah ibn Abi Quhafah (i.e., Abu Bakr) to the Muslims. Whereas. . .’ Then he
fell unconscious. Uthman added the words: ‘I appoint Omar ibn al-Khattab as my
successor among you.’
“Then Abu Bakr regained his consciousness and told
Uthman to read the order to him. Uthman read it; Abu Bakr said: Allah-o-Akbar’,
and was pleased and commented, ‘I think you were afraid that people would
disagree amongst themselves if I died in that state.’ Uthman replied, ‘Yes.’
Abu Bakr said: ‘May Allah reward you on behalf of Islam and the Muslims.’ Thus
the appointment letter was completed and Abu Bakr ordered it to be read before
the Muslims.
Ibn Abil-Hadid al-Mutazli writes that when Abu Bakr
regained his consciousness and the scribe read what he had written and Abu Bakr
heard the name of Omar, he asked him, “How did you write this?” The scribe
said, “You could not pass him over.” Abu Bakr replied, “You are right.”
Shortly afterwards Abu Bakr died.
Omar gained the caliphate by this appointment. Here one
is reminded of a tragedy which occurred three or five days before the death of
the Holy Prophet.
In the Sahih of Muslim there is a tradition
narrated by Ibn Abbas that: “Three days before the Prophet’s death Omar ibn
al-Khattab and other Companions were present at his side. The Apostle said,
‘Now let me write something for you by way of a will so that you are not misled
after me.’ Omar said, ‘The Apostle is talking in delirium; the Book of Allah is
sufficient for us.’ Omar’s statement caused a furor among those present there.
Some were saying that the Apostle’s command should be obeyed so that he might
write whatever he desired for their betterment. Others sided with Omar. When the
tension increased the Apostle said: ‘Go away from me’.”
A few Quranic injunctions should be mentioned here:
Muslims should not raise your voices above the voice of
the Prophet. . .’lest your deeds become null while you perceive not (49:2). The
Holy Prophet’s words were “revelation” from Allah: ‘Nor does he speak out of
(his) desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed (53:3-4). And
Muslims were expected to follow his command without any ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’:
‘Whatever the Apostle gives you, take it; and from whatever he forbids you,
keep back. (59:7)
And when such an Apostle, three days before his death
wished to write a directive to save Muslims from going astray, he was accused
of ‘talking in delirium’.
When Abu Bakr who had no such Divine protection from
error, began dictation of the appointment letter in such critical condition
that he fell unconscious before naming his successor, Omar did not say that he
was talking in delirium!
No one can be sure of what it was the Holy Prophet
wanted to write. But the phrase he used gives us an idea. On several occasions
the Holy Prophet had declared:
O People! Verily, I am leaving behind among you Two
Precious Things, the Book of Allah and My Descendants who are my family
members. So long as you keep hold of them sincerely, you will never go astray
after me.
When he used the same phrase three days before his
death (“. . . Let me write something for you by way of a will so that you are
not misled after me”), it was easy enough to understand that the Holy Prophet was
going to write what he had been telling them all along about the Quran and his Ahlul-bayt.
Perhaps Omar guessed as much, as is apparent from his
claim: “The Book of Allah is sufficient for us.” He wanted to make it known to
the Prophet that he would not follow ‘the Two Precious Things’. One was enough
for him.
And he himself admitted in a talk with Abdullah ibn
Abbas, in which he, inter alia said: “And surely he (the Prophet) intended
during his illness to declare his (Ali’s) name, so I prevented it.” (Ibn
Abil-Hadid)
Perhaps the word “delirium” would have served his
purpose even if the Prophet had written the directive. Omar and his partisans
would have claimed that as it was written “in delirium” it had no validity.
Ash-Shura: The Committee
After ruling for about ten years, Omar was fatally
wounded by a Zoroastrian slave, Firuz.
Omar was very indebted to Uthman (because of the
appointment letter) but did not wish to openly nominate him as his successor;
nor did he allow the Muslims to exercise their free will after him. He
ingeniously invented a third system.
He said, “Verily the Apostle of Allah died and he was
pleased with these six people from the Quraysh: Ali, Uthman, Talhah, Zubayr,
Saad ibn Abi Waqqas and Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf. And I have decided to make it
(the selection of caliph) a matter of consultation among them, so that they may
select one from among themselves.”
They were called when he was nearing death. When he
looked at them, he asked, “So, every one of you wants to become caliph after
me?’ No one answered. He repeated the question. Then Zubayr said, “And what is
there to disqualify us? You got it (the caliphate) and managed it; and we are
not inferior to you in the Quraysh either in precedence or in relation (to the
Holy Prophet).”
Omar asked, “Should not I tell you about yourselves?”
Zubayr said, “Tell us, because even if we ask you not
to tell, you will not listen.” Then Omar began enumerating the bad character
points of Zubayr, Talhah, Saad ibn Abi Waqqas and Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf. Then he
faced Ali and said, “By Allah you deserved it had it not been that you are of
humorous nature. However, by Allah, if you people made him your ruler, he would
surely lead you towards clear truth and on the enlightened path.”
Then he looked towards Uthman and said, “Take it from
me. It is as though I am seeing that the Quraysh have put this necklace
(caliphate) around your neck because of your love; then you have put the Banu
Umayyah and Banu Abi Muayt (Uthman’s tribe) on the shoulders of the people (as
rulers) and have given them exclusively the booty (of the Muslims); thereupon a
group from the wolves of Arab have come to you and slaughtered you in your
bed.”
“By Allah if the Quraysh give the caliphate to you, you
will surely give exclusive rights to the Banu Umayyah; and if you do so, the
Muslims will surely kill you.” Then he caught the forehead of Uthman and said:
“So if it happens, remember my words; because it is bound to happen.”
Then Omar called Abu Talha al-Ansari and told him that
after his (Omar’s) burial, he was to collect fifty people from the ansar,
armed with swords, and gather the six above-mentioned candidate-voters in a
house to select one from among themselves as the caliph. If five agree and one
disagrees, he should be beheaded; if four agree and two disagree, those two
should be beheaded; if there is a division of three and three, the choice of
the group of Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf should prevail and if the other three do not
agree to it they should be beheaded. And if three days pass and they are unable
to reach a decision, all of them should be beheaded and the Muslims should be
left free to select their caliph.”
The Shia author Qutbud-Din Rawandi narrates that when
Omar decreed that the group of Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf would prevail, Abdullah ibn
Abbas told Ali: “Again this is lost to us. This man wants Uthman to be the
caliph.” Ali replied, “I also know this; still I will sit with them in the Shura,
because Omar by this arrangement has, at least publicly, accepted that I
deserve the caliphate, while before he was asserting that nubuwat (prophethood)
and Imamat could not be joined in one family. Therefore, I will
participate in the Shura to show the people the contradiction of his actions
and his words.” (Ibn Abil-Hadid)
Why were Ibn Abbas and Ali sure that Omar wanted Uthman
to be the caliph? It was because of the constitution of the Shura and
its terms of reference.
Abdur-Rahman was married to Uthman’s sister; and Saad
ibn Abi Waqqas and Abdur Rahman were cousins.
Seeing the hold which family ties had in Arabia, it was
unthinkable that Saad would oppose Abdur-Rahman or that Abdur-Rahman would
ignore Uthman. So three votes were safely in the custody of Uthman, including
the deciding vote of Abdur-Rahman.
Talhah (ibn Ubaydillah) was from the clan of Abu Bakr,
and since the day of Saqifah the Banu Hashim and Banu Taym felt nothing but
enmity towards each other. On a personal level, Ali had killed his uncle; Umayr
ibn Uthman, his brother Malik ibn Ubaydilah and his nephew Uthman ibn Malik in
the battle of Badr. It was impossible for him to support Ali. Zubayr was the
son of Safiyyah, Ali’s aunt, and after Saqifah, he had taken out his
sword to fight those who had entered the house of Ali to take him to Abu Bakr.
And it was reasonable to expect him to favour Ali. But on the other hand, he
could be tempted to stand for the caliphate himself.
Thus, the most Ali could hope for was that Zubayr was
in his favour. Still four would have gone against him and he would have lost.
Even if Talhah had favoured Ali, he could not be caliph because in case of
equal division, the opinion of Abdur-Rahman would have been upheld.
After this study of the terms of reference, what
happened in the Shura is of academic interest only. Talhah withdrew in
favour of Uthman; prompting Zubayr to withdraw in favour of Ali and Saad in
favour of Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf.
On the third day, Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf withdrew his
name and told Ali that he would make him caliph if Ali pledged to follow the
Book of Allah, the traditions of the Holy Prophet and the system of Abu Bakr
and Omar. Abdur-Rahman knew very well what Ali’s reply would be. Ali said, “I
follow the Book of Allah, the traditions of the Holy Prophet and my own
beliefs.”
Ali told Abdur-Rahman: “By Allah, you did not do it but
with the same hope which he (Omar) had from his friend.” (He meant that
Abdur-Rahman had made Uthman caliph hoping that Uthman would nominate him as
his successor.)
Then Ali said, “May Allah create enmity between you
two.” After a few years Abdur Rahman and Uthman grew to hate each other; they
did not talk to each other till Abdur-Rahman died.
The unwarranted condition of his own that Abdur Rahman laid down in
front of Ali that the successor to Omar should abide by the tradition laid down
by the previous Caliphs, besides the Holy Quran, could not have been acceptable
to Ali.
Anybody who aspired for the supreme authority of the State would
have readily accepted the condition to act or not according to the terms, later
on. But Ali who detested the worldly glory, could never accept it when it
included the acceptance of new authority set up parallel to the Word of God and
the Tradition of Holy Prophet. Ali said he would rule the State by the Word of
God as explained by the word of the Holy Prophet and if any of the traditions
of the former Caliphs were opposed to these two authorities they would
naturally be unworthy to follow. Abdur Rahman insisted upon his own innovated
condition and Ali rejected the offer which was diametrically opposed to the
Spirit of Islam. Uthman accepted the condition and Abdur Rahman appointed
Uthman as the Caliph. It is quite evident that the condition was intentionally
innovated and particularly Abdur Rahman knew the loyalty of Ali to the Holy
Quran and the Holy Prophet; with which Ali would never accept anything in the
world which is opposed to even any one of these two. At the appointment of
Uthman, the entire Muslim world viz. Egypt,
Iraq, Iran, Hejaz and Yeman ran in chaos and disorder
and the people who suffered the maladministration under the rulers appointed by
Uthman, sent their deputations to Medina
to enquire against some allegations against the governing authorities. Uthman
however did not agree to the deputationists to redress their grievances against
the maladministration which ended in the murder of Uthman.
After Uthman’s death, whole multitude of the Muslims approached Ali
to handle the affairs as the Caliph. Although the approach was unanimous from
the people and was pressing on him to accept the Caliphate, Ali bluntly refused
and ultimately when it became unavoidable and also expedient that the chaos in
the public life should be halted and Peace and Order be restored, Ali accepted
the Caliphate declaring openly in Mosque of the Holy Prophet, fully packed by
the people, that he would be guided only by the Word of God and the tradition
of the Holy Prophet and nothing else. Thus at the unanimous persistent
imploration of the people consisting of the representatives of the various
units of the Muslim
State as a whole, Ali
accepted to be the Caliph.
During the time of Uthman, the third Caliph, the most
deceitful and materialistic minded people from the tribe of Umayyads had come
to acquire high positions. They did all they could to play with the power that
had come to their hands. Close companions of the Prophet, including the likes
of Abuzar Ghaffari, were ill-treated or killed.
During the twenty five years, which had passed since the death of
the Holy Prophet, the nature and outlook of the Muslims had changed to such an
extent that many prominent people found Ali’s administration (which was based
on absolute justice and equality, just like the government of the Holy Prophet)
unbearable; they could not think of themselves as being treated equal to
non-Arab Muslims. Muawiya - the governor of Syria appointed by Uthman -
revolted and Ali was forced to meet Muawiya’s insurgent forces at Siffin.
Another revolt headed by Ayesha (Prophet’s wife) is known as the Battle of ‘Jamal’. Ali had
to meet another revolt at Nahravan. Ultimately a plot to do away with the godly
rule by Ali - the Vicegerent of God on earth - succeeded in martyring him while
he was engaged in the Morning Prayer in the Mosque of Kufa on the 19th of the Holy Month of Ramazan and on the 21st of the same Holy Month, Ali departed from this
world. History records Ali’s prophesies about his martyrdom and the wonderful
events which accompanied his funeral, and burial.
After the martyrdom of Ali, Hasan -
the eldest son of Ali and Fatima, the First grandson of the Holy Prophet -
remained a Caliph only for six months. He wanted to continue the war with
Muawiya. But most of his officers were, meanwhile, bribed by Muawiya; and many
were the commanders who, when sent ahead to intercept Muawiya, changed sides
and went over to the enemy. When Muawiya’s intrigues, conspiracies and mischief
began hurting the general interest of the poor people, particularly of those
faithfully attached to the family of the Holy Prophet and more particularly
those pious ones who called themselves the Shias of Ali, i.e., followers of
Ali, Hasan in the interest of the public peace and safety concluded a Truce
with Muawiya with the following conditions:
(1) That Muawiya would
follow the Holy Quran and the tradition of the Holy Prophet in word and action.
(2) That Muawiya would stop abusing Ali, which he had enforced even
from the pulpits in the Mosques.
(3) That Muawiya would give protection of life, property and honour
of the devotees of Ali.
(4) That Muawiya would not appoint any one as his successor to the
throne.
Thus Imam Hasan relinquished the Caliphate and Muawiya became the
Caliph but violated the terms of the truce and the same treachery and tyranny
continued and converted the Caliphate into Kingship, i.e., a Hereditary
Monarchy. Thus the rule called the Caliphate, virtually ended and in its place
started the despotic hereditary kingdom.
The Caliphate or the rulership ran in the following order:
(1) Abu-Bakr who ruled for 2 years 4 months
(2) Omar who ruled for 10 years 6 months
(3) Uthman who ruled for 11 years 11 months
(4) Ali who ruled for 4 years 9 months
(5) Hasan who ruled for 6 months
————————————————
about
30 years in all.
Calculating the exact dates of the months of the start and the end
of the Caliphate and the Prophet had already prophesied the start and the end
of this institution.
The Holy Imam Hasan, after relinquishing the Caliphate retired into
seclusion, having nothing at all to do with politics or any of the political
leaders and yet he was black-mailed through all sorts of degrading fabrications
against him and was ultimately martyred through poison, and even his body was
not allowed to be buried besides his Grandfather, the Holy Prophet. As his
funeral proceeded, arrows were shot at the coffin and some of the arrows had
even entered the coffin and some were stuck in the holy body of the poisoned
Imam. Hasan was ultimately forced to be buried in the public cemetery of the
‘Jannatul Baqi’.
Muawiya followed none of the points in the Truce. However, the
Omayyad rule commenced from Muawiya and Muawiya against the Truce, appointed
Yazid who was an acknowledged brute in human frame, who enacted the wholesale
massacre of the Holy Imam Husain, his kith and kin, and his godly comrades at Karbala.
The Omayyad rule continued till Marwan II (133 A.H.). To know about
the manners and conduct of the Omayyad rulers who called themselves the
successors of the Holy Prophet, a reference to the detailed work by Hitti - the
well-known historian who has given a detailed version of the Muslim rule, with the
documentary evidence - will suffice.
VIEWPOINT
The Muslims recognize four principles for appointing a
caliph.
a)
Ijma:
that is, consensus of men of power and position on a certain point. The
agreement of all the followers of the Prophet is not necessary, nor is it
essential to secure the consent of all the persons of power and position in the
ummah.
b)
Nomination by the previous caliph.
c)
Shura,
that is, selection by a committee.
d)
Military power; that is, if anyone acquires power by military
force he will become a caliph.
The author of Sharhul-maqasid has explained that
when an Imam dies and a person possessing the requisite qualifications claims
that office (without the oath of allegiance – bayat – having been taken
for him and without his having been nominated to succeed), his claim to
caliphate will be recognized provided his power subdues the people; and
apparently the same will be the case when the new caliph happens to be ignorant
or immoral. And similarly when a caliph has thus established himself superior force
but is afterwards subdued by another person, he will be deposed and the
conqueror will be recognized as Imam or caliph.
The fourth ‘constitutional’ way was framed after the
peace treaty of Imam Hasan with Muawiya, which resulted in Muawiya becoming the
‘Caliph’ of the entire Muslim region and from then onwards, the ‘Caliphate’
passed from one to another within the tribe of Umayyads until they were ousted
by the Abbasids.
There is another very important point to be noted! In
the realm of politics, usually the constitution of a country is prepared
beforehand. And when time comes to elect a government or enact legislation,
every function is carried out according to the provisions of the constitution.
Whatever conforms to it is held valid and legal; whatever is contrary to it is
rejected as invalid and illegal.
Since, according to the aforementioned point of view,
it was the duty of the ummah to appoint a caliph, it was necessary for
Allah and His Prophet to provide them with a constitution (with details of the
procedure for election of such a caliph). And if that was not done, then the
Muslims themselves should have appointed the constitutional measures in advance
before proceeding to elect a caliph.
But strangely enough this was not done. And now we find
a unique ‘unsettled constitution’ in which actions do not follow a constitution
because there is none; rather the constitution follows the circumstances.
The best argument put forward by the Muslims to support
their claim is that the Muslims of the first era considered it their duty to
appoint a caliph, and that they regarded it so important that they neglected to
attend the funeral of the Holy Prophet and went to Saqifah of Banu
Saidah to settle the question of the caliphate. From that event they concluded
that the appointment of a caliph was the duty of the ummah.
But they fail to understand that it is the validity of
that very so-called ‘election’ which is challenged by some people.These people
claimed that that event was illegal; the majority of Muslims claim that it was
legal and correct. How can they put their claim as their argument and proof?
To put their claim as proof is like saying: “This
action of mine is legal because I have done it.” Which court of justice would
uphold such an argument?
The Practical Problems
Let us see what effects this had on the Muslim
leadership and the Muslim mindset.
Within thirty years after the death of the Holy Prophet
every conceivable way of acquiring power was used and canonized: election,
selection, nomination and military power. The result is that today every Muslim
ruler aspires to occupy the seat of the khilafat and “spiritual
leadership” of the Muslims; and it is this basic defect of the Muslims’ outlook
which has always been, and is today the underlying cause of political
instability in the Muslim world. Every Muslim ruler who, as a Muslim, has been
taught that “military supremacy” is a constitutional way to khilafat
tries to weaken the other Muslim rulers so that he himself may emerge as the
most supreme among the Muslim rulers. In this way, this “constitution” has
directly contributed to the weakness of the Muslims in the world.
Apart from that, let us see once again how
‘all-encompassing’ these methods proved immediately after they were invented.
This four-sided boundary of caliphate is so unsafe that anyone may enter into
it, irrespective of his knowledge or character. The first caliph after Muawiya
was his son, Yazid, who was ‘nominated’ by Muawiya and had undisputed “military
power”. Muslims had given their bayat during the lifetime of Muawiya; thus,
there was Ijma (consensus) also. So he was a “constitutional caliph”.
But what were his beliefs and character? Yazid was a man who bluntly refused to
believe in the Holy Prophet. He frankly stated his beliefs in a poem in which
he said: “Banu Hashim had staged a play to obtain the kingdom; actually there
was neither any news (from God) nor any revelation.”
Neither did he believe in the Day of Judgment: “O my beloved! Do not believe in meeting me
after death, because what they have told you about our being raised after death
for judgment is only a myth which makes the heart forget the pleasures of this
real world.” (Tazkirah-Sibt ibn al-Jawzi)
After assuming the caliphate, he openly made fun of
Islamic prayers; and showed his disrespect for religion by putting the robes of
religious scholars on dogs and monkeys. Gambling, and playing with bears were
his favourite pastimes. He spent all his time drinking (wine), regardless of
place or time and without any hesitation. He had no respect for any woman, even
those of the prohibited degrees such as step-mother, sister, aunt and daughter.
They were just like any other woman in his eyes.
He sent his army to Medina. That holy city of the
Prophet was freely looted. Three hundred girls, apart form other women, were
criminally assaulted by his soldiers. Three hundred qurra (reciters) of
the Quran and seven hundred Companions of the Prophet were brutally murdered.
The Holy Mosque of the Prophet remained closed for many
days; the army of Yazid used it as their stable. Dogs made it their shelter and
the pulpit of the Prophet was deified.
Finally, the Commander of the army compelled the people
of Medina to submit before Yazid by giving their bayat in these words:
“We are the slaves of Yazid; it is up to him whether he gives us back our
freedom or sells us in the slaves’ market.” Those who wanted to swear
allegiance on the condition that Yazid should follow the instruction of the
Quran and traditions of the Prophet were put to death. It may not be out of
place to mention that the Prophet once said: “May Allah curse him who frightens
the people of Medina!”
Then the army, on the order of Yazid, proceeded to
Makkah. That holiest city of Allah
was besieged. They could not enter the city, so they used manjaniq
(catapult; an ancient military device used to throw heavy stones towards
distant targets). With this, they threw stones and flaming torches towards the
Kaaba. The kiswah (canopy of the Kaaba) was burnt and a portion of that
holiest building was damaged.
Yazid was not just a stray exception; it sadly proved
to be the general rule. Al-Walid ibn Yazid ibn Abdil-Malik was another caliph
from the Banu Umayyah. He was a drunkard. One night he was drinking with one of
his concubines, they heard the azaan (call for prayer) of the dawn
prayer. He swore that the concubine would lead in the prayer. She wore the robe
of the caliph and lead in the prayer in the same condition of drunkenness.
One day he molested his teenage daughter in the
presence of her servant woman. She said that (it was not Islam) it was the
religion of the Majus. Al-Walid recited a couplet: “A man who cares for
the (tongues of) people, dies in sorrow; the daring man gets all the
pleasures.”
Harun Rashid, the famous Caliph of One Thousand and One
Nights who is thought as one of the greatest caliphs, wanted to sleep with one
of his late father’s concubines. The woman rightly pointed out that this would
be incest since she was in a position like his mother. Harun Rashid called Qazi
Abu Yusuf and told him to help him find a way to satisfy his lust. The Qazi
said: “She is just a slave woman. Should you accept whatever she says? No. Do
not accept her words as true.”
So the Caliph satisfied his desire. Whether the present
day system of fatwas started then or even before, cannot be said with
certainty!
Ibn Mubarak comments: “I do not know who among these
was more surprising: the Caliph who put his hand into the blood and property of
the Muslims and did not respect his step-mother; or the slave woman who refused
to grant the desire of the Caliph; or the Qazi who allowed the Caliph to
dishonour his father and sleep with that concubine who was his step-mother?”
Ibn Mubarak may not have known the answer. Most
surprising is the Muslims who continue to regard Harun Rashid as an epitome of
best that Islam has to offer!
Even today there are Muslims who have nothing but
praises to shower on Yazid. This is because they can give no argument as Yazid
was the constitutionally elected caliph of the Muslims. After all, if they
criticize Yazid’s actions they will be criticizing the very systems on the
basis of which they have built the foundations of their caliphate.
Consequently, teachings of Islam got derailed. Muslims
got weakened politically and were compelled to obey anyone who succeeded in his
bid for power irrespective of his qualifications or character.
As though it was not enough, it compelled them to
change their total religious outlook and beliefs.
First of all, an overwhelming majority of the caliphs
were devoid of any sense of religious propriety or piety. To justify the
caliphate of such people, they claimed that even the prophets used to commit
sins. Thus, the belief in the ismah (sinlessness) of the prophets was
changed.
As there were perhaps hundreds of people more
knowledgeable, more pious and more qualified for the caliphate than the caliph
on the throne, they were compelled to say that there was nothing wrong with
giving preference to an inferior person over a superior and a more qualified
one.
When it was pointed out by some that it was ‘evil’
according to reason to give preference to an inferior person when a superior person
was available, they declared that nothing was good or evil in itself, whatever
Allah orders becomes good; whatever He forbids, becomes evil.
As for ‘reason’, they denied that it exists anywhere in
the religion. This logic was extended to such an extent that till the time of
Mughals, mathematics was not taught in the madrasas as it initiated the
person to ‘reason’. If despite such an approach, the Muslims became the leaders
of learning in the entire world for two hundred years after the Prophet, it
speaks of the power that the message of Islam contained.
World got to understand Islam as a religion that spread
through sword. Territories were annexed and booties collected; people were
forcefully converted; their places of religious worship targeted. Yet Muslims
continued to justify all this and more.
To protect these wayward caliphs, not only the prophets
were deprived of their ismah (sinlessness) but even Allah was deprived
of His Justice and it was said that being ‘Just’ is not necessary for the
Creator. From this vantage point, we may easily understand the full
significance of the verse revealed at Ghadeer-e-Khumm:
O Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from
your Lord; (i.e., the Caliphate of Ali) and if you do it not, then you have not
delivered His message (at all); and Allah will protect you from the people. . .
(5:67)
The purity of Islamic beliefs and deeds depended upon the continuance of
the Divine Will; if that one message was not delivered, then it would be as
though no message were delivered at all. How could it be that when Mohammad was
chosen to have a Divine Role, at a time when nobody believed so, all accepted
it, and when Mohammad himself confirmed that it was the Divine Command that
Caliphate be with Ali, we doubted to it. By doubting it, we compromised with
the very reputation of Islam, so much so that to this day are not in position
to give a reasonable reply to the attacks that are made on them and on Islam as
a whole.
