Martyrdom

When the Seceders were annihilated one of the companions of the Imam said to him: "Ameer Al-Mumineen the Seceders have perished completely." The Imam said: "No by God they are still sperms in the bodies of men and wombs of women. Whenever a "horn" of them appears it will be cut off until their last generation becomes thieves and robbers." ( 1)

The Imam was not deceived by his victory against the Seceders. He did not believe that their death meant the death of their doctrines or that it represented a drastic solution to their problem. He was fully aware that doctrines and principles do not die by the death of their innovators. His combat of the Seceders was nothing but a temporary measure the purpose of which was to slow their speedy movement and to lighten their growing danger. His combat of the Seceders was only a mission with which the Messenger commissioned him and made clear to him its details descriptions and marks more than two decades before its time.

The Messenger commissioned the Imam Ali with that mission only because it is a sacred duty which represents the defense of the freedom of belief and the defense of the innocent lives and blood which the Seceders went on shedding for no reason except that their victims did not believe in their falsehood.

( 1 ) Imam Ali Nahjul-Balaghah (collection of the Imam Ali's Sermons and Words) part 1 p. 107.

( 434 )

The Imam himself with all of what the Holy Messenger said about him of being the ally of the truth did not believe that he should force the Muslims to share with him his opinions or to follow the right road. On the contrary he used to excuse his opponents and acknowledge their righ in the freedom of thinking. He is the one who said: "Kill not the Seceders after me; the one who sought the truth and missed it is not like the one who sought the falsehood and acquired it."( 2 )

Had the Seceders believed in their wrong doctrines without attempting to impose it by force on the rest of the Muslims the Imam would have left them alone and this was his wish. But they prohibited the Muslims to speak the truth or to believe in it. They forced them to believe in the falsehood and to take it as a religion. They went on killing people because they did not believe in their innovation.

The Battle of Nahrawan succeeded in stopping the speed of the movement and its growing danger against the Muslims. But as the Imam expected it did not succeed in eliminating that danger. Nor did it succeed in restoring the determination of the Imam's army to fight the unjust Omayad party.

The Imam tried after the Battle of Nahrawan to go directly to the land of Syria to face Muaweyah in a decisive battle. But the army and its leaders expressed their desire to camp at Nukhailah near Kufa for a short rest through which they could regain their strength and renew their weapons and rest their animals of transportation. As they camped at Al-Nukhailah they started to desert their camp gradually and secretly entering into Kufa as groups and individuals and they never came back. The Imam was finally forced to enter Kufa urging them day after day to go and face their enemies but they hated to go and they remained at their homes.( 3 )

It is not difficult to know the causes of the failures of these people to poerform their duties. The righteous men 

( 2 ) Imam Ali Nahjul-Balaghah part 1 p. 108.

( 3 ) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubra part 2 p. 107.

( 435 )

who were the brains of the revolution such as Ammar Ibn Yasir Malik Al-Ashtar Khuzaimah Ibn Thabit (the man of two testimonies) Abdullah Ibn Badeel and Hashim Al-Mirqal had already died at the battle of Siffeen or outside that battle.

These righteous men were highly enlightened. They were concerned with the future of Islam and ready to sacrifice for the sake of the truth their wealth and their lives. They were the links which used to tie the masses of the people with the Imam and inform them of his right and urge them to obey him and show them by their own action the living examples of obedience and sincerity towards his principles. They were always the first to respond to his call seeing in him the true representative of the Holy Prophet in word and deed. These righteous people had already met their Lord. They were replaced by people such as Ashaath whose hearts were not occupied by faith or by men such as Hijr Ibn Oday and Oday Ibn Hatam who did not lack faith or sincerity but lacked the wide influence and the power of attracting the masses.

The masses of people who fought with the Imam in three wars had already paid with the blood of their sons and brothers. They became tired of fighting and inclined to an easier and peaceful life without having foresight which makes them concerned with the future and worried about Islam.

The crisis of the Seceders brought about division in the camp of the Imam and destroyed the unity of his followers. The Seceders were annihilated at the Battle of Nahrawan but their death was not expected to raise the morale of the army which annihilated them. They were the sons the brothers and the friends who recently had been the comrades of the soldiers of the Imam and his supporters against his enemy. For a Kufite or a Bassrite to kill another Kufite or Bassrite was not expected to generate in his mind a feeling of victory. It would rather generate only sadness and a feeling of loss.

The Battle of Nahrawan did not bring an end to the propaganda activity of the Seceders; nor did it bring their 

( 436 )

bloody action to a complete stop. They spread their propaganda among people turning them against the Imam.

Whenever a group of them felt strong enough to challenge the Imam's authority they came out carrying their swords on their shoulders spreading panic horror and death among innocent people.

Ashras Ibn Ouf Al-Shaibani along with a group parted with the Imam. Then he was followed by Hilal Ibn Alqamah then Ash-hab Ibn Bishr then Sa-eed Ibn Nufail Al-Taimi.3 After these Khirreet Ibn Rashid from Bani Najeyah and others followed the same method. ( 4 ) Whenever a group of these people defied the Imam he was forced to send a regiment or regiments to fight them.

All that destroyed the morale of the Imam's camp and its unity as it destroyed its determination to fight. By this the military and political initiative moved from the hand of the Imam to the hand of Muaweyah. As Muaweyah knew of the destruction of the unity in the camp of the Imam he decided to invade Egypt and occupy it knowing that people of Iraq will not respond to the Imam's call if he calls upon them to send an army for its defense.

Muaweyah accomplished what he wanted and the people of Iraq received the news of the invasion of Egypt the death of its governor Mohammad Ibn Abu Bakr and the burning of his body as if the matter did not concern them at all. ( 5)

Success brings success and failure brings failure. Suc-

cess made Muaweyah more ambitious. He tried to usurp

Bassrah from the Imam because he knew that the majori-

ty of its people were still holding grudges against him for

what they lost in the Battle of Bassrah. Muaweyah sent

Abdullah Al-Hadrami to Bassrah to try to turn its people

against the Imam. He did not succeed in his mission and 

( 4 ) Ibn Al-Atheer Al-Kamil part 3 p. 187-188 Ibn Al-Atheer Al-Kamil part 3 p. 183.

( 5 ) Ibn Al-Atheer Al-Kamil part 3 pp. 180-181.

( 437 )

was killed but only after he generated division among the people of Bassrah. ( 6)

Muaweyah sent Naaman Ibn Bashir (a companion of the Prophet) with a thousand soldiers then Sufyan Ibn Ouf with six thousand then Al-Dhahak Ibn Quais with three thousand to various areas of Iraq for invasions by which they spread destruction and death. Most of the time these invaders went back without meeting from the people of Iraq more than token resistance. Muaweyah sent regiments to Yemen and Hijaz. They did to the Muslims there what non-Muslims would hesitate to do. The invading regiments went back successfully without being hurt. ( 7 ) The Imam used to gather people time after time urging them to defend themselves. Sometimes he spoke to them harshly but the Iraqis had been weakened and lost their will to fight. One time he spoke to them in the following manner: "Which country after your country shall you defend and with which Imam after me shall you fight? The deceived one is the one you have deceived. And whoever had you in his party certainly had the losing party. I lost my hope in your help and I would not believe your words.

May God separate between me and you..." "You shall meet after me a general humiliation and an annihilating sword along with a discrimination against you which the unjust ruler will make a rule. He will divide your community... and bring poverty to your homes and you will wish soon that you had seen me and helped me.

You shall know the truth of what I say. May God put the unrighteous out of His Mercy." It would not do any good to blame Muaweyah for corrupting and dividing people and committing incalculable crimes by killing people and destroying their properties or purchasing their conscience. The Imam knew that Muaweyah and his relatives were and continued to be the enemies of truth and its message. Muaweyah was a seeker 

( 6 ) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubra part 2 pp. 130-131.

( 7 ) Ibn Al-Atheer Al-Kamil part 3 pp. 188-189.

( 438 )

of worldly affairs and a man of falsehood. The Imam did not expect him to do but what he was doing.

Only the followers of the Imam were to be blamed.

They were expected to be the means for straightening the crookedness of the nation and re-directing it towards a future in which the light of Islam goes high and spreads throughout the world and leads all nations.

Instead of being the Imam's solution to the problems of the nation the Kufites became an additional problem to him and to the nation. In one of his addresses the Imam told them the following words: "My aim was to medicate the problem of the nation through you but you have become my main problem.

God the fighters of this disease have gotten tired . . ." ( 8 ) The falsehood certainly acquired victory through the failure of the Kufites their disobedience and divisions.

The Kufites did not only lose their spiritual values but the value of their worldly life and honorable future on the face of this earth as well. Their enemy whom they fought violently at the beginning and wanted to strangulate and worked for his annihilation was not expected to be merciful with them after they cowardly turned their back to him in their retreat.

The Imam told them: "You shall experience after me a comprehensive humiliation a destructive sword and a constant discrimination against you. Your enemy shall be your ruler. He shall divide you bereave you and impoverish you." These words which may arouse a coward and awaken a comatose did not move the Kufites nor did it succeed in awakening them.

He told them again: "How amazing your attitude is. It

paralyzes the heart puzzles the mind and defies the

human understanding to see the determination of Mua-

weyah's party supporting their falsehood and your

failure to support your right. Thus you have become a 

target constantly being hit and never hitting and invaded 

( 8 ) The Imam Ali Nahjul-Balaghah part 1 p. 234.

( 439 )

but never invading. God is disobeyed and you are satisfied. If I tell you to invade them in the winter you say: The weather is too cold! If I tell you to invade them in the summer you say: This is the heat of the summer; give us respite until the heat ends. If you are afraid of hot and cold weather you will be more afraid of the sword.

"O you who look like men but never truly are . . . by God you have ruined my strategies through your disobedience. You have filled my heart with anger." Thus the Qureshites said: "Ibn Abu Talib is a brave man but he does not have the know-how to run a war. .. Who knows about war more than I? Who had experienced war more than I did? By God I entered war before I was twenty years old. And now I have passed sixty. But a disobeyed man cannot substantiate the wisdom of his opinion." ( 9 ) With all the setbacks and problems accumulated in his path the Imam did not lose his determination. His camp caused him to lose the military initiative and imposed upon him an unsuccessful defensive position. Yet he continued to believe in the possibility of regaining the military initiative and destroying all his enemy's gains by dealing with him decisively. Should the Imam's camp regain its unity Muaweyah will not benefit from the occupation of Egypt or winning several skirmishes prior to that decisive battle.

Finally the Imam decided to force those evasive followers of his to take a firm attitude after he despaired of their voluntary co-operation. He tried to put them on the spot and put all of what they had of honor and religion at stake. They either defend all that or they will have a shame which will never be washed. The Imam wanted to open their eyes to the fact that he has already made a very dangerous decision which he has the power to fulfill because it belongs to his own person. They knew certainly that when he says something he will do it. He is the hero who was never afraid of any sacrifice regardless of its magnitude. He gathered them and told them the following:

( 9 ) The Imam Ali Nahjul-Balaghah part 1 pp. 69-70.

( 440 )

"O people you have called upon me by your election to serve and I did not turn you down. You pledged your allegiance to me and I did not ask you to do that. Some challengers confronted me and God took care of them.

They fell on the battlefield in humiliation. There is still a community which is disobedient to God following their selfish interest deviating from truth. They claim what they are not qualified for. If they are told to advance they advance and when they advance they do not know the truth as they know the falsehood. Nor do they fight the wrong as they fight the right." "I have become tired of talking to you and blaming you. I would like you to make your intention clear to me.

If you are determined to go to our enemy this is what I ask and love. If you are reluctant to do that be frank with me. Let me know your intention so I will form my opinion.

"By God if you do not go with me to your enemy in order to fight them until God judges between us and them (and He is the Best of the Judges) I shall pray God to punish you then I will go to our enemy even if I am not accompanied with more than ten men. Do the riffraff of Damascus and its ignorants have more patience and stronger co-operation for helping the falsehood and assisting the wrong than you have for your truth and right? What happened to you? What is your medicine? Your enemies are like you. If they are killed they will not be resurrected before the Day of Judgment."(10

By this important declaration the Imam put them face

to face with their responsibilities. They believed that he

was going to fulfill his decision and he will go to his

enemy even if he does not have more than ten persons

and they know that he will find more than ten. They know that

if he does that he will meet his death and they will have a

shame which they were not ready to accept. Probably 

(10) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubra part 2 pp. 142-143 (quoting Al-Balathori in his book: Ansab Al-Ashraf)

( 441 )

some of them feared if the Imam prays to God to punish them God will answer his prayer.

The listeners stood up and spoke well and left him after they showed him that they have decided to help him.

They went to their tribes urging them to fight their enemies. They gained some unity and seemed to be ready to leave ready to confront their enemy after they prepared manpower and supplies to face the forces of heresy anarchy and evil in a decisive battle. ( 10a)

Was that task force really as healthy as it appeared? Did the hearts of the leaders of the army rally behind the truth? Were Ashaath and others like him cured of the disease of hypocrisy? Would some of the leaders of the newly mobilized army conspire with the enemy to deliberately defeat themselves at the battle for bribes necessitating the Imam to enter into a desperate battle in which he will meet his death? Did the Imam believe in their sincerity? History does not give us any clear answer for these questions because the army did not go through that trial.

The Imam met his Lord before the newly mobilized army moved from its camp. History however accuses Ashaath who was among the leaders of that army with being an accomplice in the Imam's assassination.

I am inclined to believe that the events which took place before the mobilization of this army had made the Imam lose his confidence in his followers. He told them on one occasion: "By God I visualize that when the future battle takes place and the fight progresses you will leave Ibn Abu Talib alone and run away"... ( 11 ) The Imam was not a man who threw his words vainly.

His words always conveyed realities which he used to

foresee through the light of God. The Imam would not be

deceived by the new mobilization. He knew that the

gathering included men who subscribe to the Seceders'

opinion and others believed for their short-sightedness 

(10a) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubrah part 2 p. 143.

(11) The Imam Ali Nahjul-Balaghah part 1 p. 83.

( 442 )

that victory against Muaweyah had become impossible and that the regime of the Imam was coming to its end. People of this kind were always ready to co-operate with the enemies of the Imam. Of course there were men who were truly sincere but these people were few and their presence would not make the Imam reach his goal and prevent the defeatists from bringing his army to a catastrophe.

the trial of the Imam and his tragedy in this nation were great. He was looking at the truth and seeing it clearly in front of him. He knew that the election which he received reluctantly had put on his shoulders the huge responsibility of trying to bring the Muslim World back to the road of righteousness validating what the Holy Qur'an validates and invalidating what the Holy Qur'an invalidates.

He believed and he was right in what he believed that he was the most entitled to be obeyed after the Holy Prophet. He was to him as Aaron to Moses.

On the other hand he knew the tragic fact: The nation had ignored his right and was divided while it walked in unity and obedience under the banner of men below him in endeavoring for the religion of God and in knowledge and relation to the Holy Prophet.

Then he looked around and found that a portion of those who went along with him have turned against him fighting him and offering all of what they had of power to thwart his efforts. The other portion who stayed with him did not give him obedience except untrue promises and cheap excuses.

The enemy who was about to be defeated and whose falsehood was nearing its end until he resorted to hoisting the Qur'an in order to avoid the danger of annihilation became the man of the hour. He became capable of attacking without being attacked and usurping provinces which were under the Imam's authority. The enemy does all that not because his followers are more numerous or powerful but because the numerous followers of the Imam had lost their determination and their unity had been destroyed.

( 443 )

The Imam was right when he considered his followers worse to him than his enemies because they were the ones who enabled his enemy by their defeatist attitude to have the upper hand and to become the victorious party. Thus it was not surprising to see the Imam wishing to part with his followers by death or assassination. On more than one occasion he asked God to separate him from them and make him join people better than them knowing that God will not make him join better than them while he was living on this earth. He knew that this wish would never be realized unless he departed from this world to join his beloved the Messenger of God and his party.

It is amazing that he asked God to do that for him when he saw the Messenger of God in his dream shortly before he was assassinated and after the newly mobilized army was formed for the decisive battle. This was evidence that the Imam believed that his new army will not be able to fulfill its mission because a portion of that army does not have good intentions and that they were with his enemy and not with him.

Ibn Saad in his Tabaqat ( 12 ) Ibn Abdul Barr in his Istee-ab ( 13 ) lbn Al-Atheer in Osd Al-Ghab ( 14 ) recorded that Al- Hassan and Al-Hussein reported that Ameer Al-Mumineen (the Imam) told them that he complained to the Messenger of God in his dream saying to him: "O Messenger of God the crookedness and hostility which I have experienced from your nation are amazingly terrible.

The Messenger said to him: Pray to God to punish them." The Imam prayed saying: "My Lord make me join better than these people and give them a leader worse than I."And the prayer of the Imam was answered.

(12) Ibn Saad Al-Tabaqaat part3 p. 36.

(13) Ibn Abd Al-Barr Al-Istee-ab part 3 p.1127.

(14) lbn Al-Atheer Osd Al-Ghab part 4 p.36 (quoted by Al-Fairouzabadi Fadha-il Al-Khamsah part 3 p.56)

( 444 )

THE FULFILLED PROMISE

Had the Imam expected any good out of the newly mobilized army confident of its reliability and the intention of its leaders he would not have asked the Almighty to make him join better people by expediting his departure from this world.

There was nothing more desirable to the Imam than to reform what was corrupt of the affairs of the Muslims and to avoid the Muslim World what was threatening it at the hands of the future tyrant rulers in order to illuminate the road to the future generations.

Had the Imam been confident of what had been available of force he would have found in it his wish and he would have prayed to the Almighty to prolong his life in order to realize his goal.

Evidently he believed that those who were around him had lost their determination and will for sacrifice. It seems that he felt that a number of the leaders of his army were ready to let him down at the decisive hour and leave him on the battlefield facing thousands of Muaweyah's soldiers alone to be killed while his army deserted him.

They had done what is uglier than that at the war of Siffeen when they were in a better situation and a bigger determination.

Had this happened the life of the Imam would have ended in a battle in which he would be defeated and deserted. But the Almighty wanted for His beloved servant Ali Ibn Abu Talib not to taste the bitterness of defeat and humility. He is the sword of God who never was defeated in any battle before. God wanted to move His servant from this world while he is in a dignified state apparently with a powerful state. Thus a huge army was gathered at his command before he met his martyrdom so that he would depart from this world while in power and dignity.

It became clear to the Imam after he went through the

most cruel experience that those who wanted evil for the

nation were serious in their work and dedicated for 

( 445 )

reaching their ends while those who used to seek good justice prevalence of truth and the heavenly law were weakened and deteriorated. The Imam lost all hope in achieving his goals. Seeing all evidence indicating that falsehood is on the rise and that the truth will meet its death the Imam wished that he himself will meet his death before witnessing the death of the truth.

The Imam longed for a long time to meet his martyrdom. It was his greatest wish in life. He was saddened when he did not receive his martyrdom at the Battle of Ohod. He informed the Prophet of his sadness because he was deprived of martyrdom. The Holy Prophet said to him: "Be cheerful; martyrdom is coming to you." When the following verse was revealed: "Do people think that they will be left to say that we have believed and they will not be tested? We have tested those who were before them and God surely knows those who were true and those who were liars " the Imam reminded the Prophet of his prophecy concerning his martyrdom. The Prophet re-affirmed his prophecy saying: "It shall be so. How shall your patience be?" The Imam replied: "Messenger of God that is not a place of patience! It is rather a place for cheerfulness and thanks." ( 15)

The Holy Prophet told him once: "The nation will betray you after me. You shall live according to my precept. Whoever loves you loves me and whoever hates you hates me and this (pointing to the beard of the Imam) shall be reddened from this (pointing to the head of the Imam)." ( 16)

He told him also along with Ammar Ibn Yasir: "Shall I inform you of the most wicked among mankind?" Ali and Ammar said: "Yes Messenger of God." The Prophet said: "The Red of Thamoud who hamstrung the female camel

(of the Prophet Saleh) and the one who hits you on 

(15) The Imam Ali Nahjul-Balaghah part 2 p.50.

(16) Al-Hakim Al-Mustadrak part 3 p.142

( 446 )

this (pointing to the head of Ali) and makes this (pointing to the beard of Ali) moistened by its blood." ( 17 ) The prophecy was realized on a morning of a day from the month of Ramadan forty years after the Hijrah. The wickedness which does not recognize any boundary motivated a Seceder (called Abdul-Rahman Ibn Muljam an obscure person from a lowly family) to assassinate the Imam Ali the brother minister and successor of the Prophet Mohammad while praying to his Lord in a house of God. Yet the assassin testified by his tongue that there is no God but the Almighty and that Mohammad is the Messenger of God.

A man with a spark of faith in his heart cannot pass this point from the history without shedding a tear on a martyr who obtained from every virtue its highest degree.

That is the martyr who offered for the sake of his religion and his nation what no other man after the Holy Prophet ever offered of sacrifice. Then the nation for which he offered so much formed an attitude towards him which it may feel ashamed to take towards its worst enemy.

It is difficult for any Muslim that is concerned with the future of the faith of Islam to pass this point of our history without shedding a tear. It is impossible to measure the losses which beset the Muslims and the faith of Islam through the death of this unique leader before he was able to fulfill his goal and his message to a world which was and is still in a great need of that message.

The loss which the Muslims suffered when they missed the Brother and Successor of their Prophet was great and unique in its magnitude. The Muslims never experienced similar to it after the death of the Holy Prophet.

Unequalled Loss

The Muslims who were living at the time of the death

of the Imam were unable to measure its magnitude and

dimensions and its great consequences. It is worthy to 

(17) Al-Hakim Al-Mustadrak part 3 p.141.

( 447 )

mention two important consequences that took place immediately after the death of the Imam: 1. By the death of the Imam the Muslims lost the clear and pure source of religious information from which they used to obtain the true interpretation of the Holy Qur'an and the authentically reported instructions of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet was the city of knowledge and Ali was the gate of that city. When the Prophet departed from this world Ali remained the gate of his knowledge and the treasure of his secrets and the heir of his wisdom. Through him the Muslims were able to hear the voice of the Messenger informing them of the genuine Islamic rules in the areas of their disputes.

It is true that a number of the Imam's children and grandchildren had acquired his knowledge and they were capable of providing the Muslims with the interpretation of the Book of God and conveying to them the actual instructions of the Holy Prophet. However the Muslims who refused to follow the Imam himself with all his acknowledged superiority in knowledge were not expected to follow the Imam's offspring.

The Muslims did not try to acquire from the Imam's knowledge what could spare them the problems of difference and divisions; nor did they give him the time or the true opportunity to provide them with what they needed of knowledge. Therefore the Muslim World was not expected to enable the Imams from his descendants to realize what the Imam himself could not realize. On the contrary these Imams from Ali's children and grandchildren were killed and exiled.

Thus the Muslim World with the lack of clear source of knowledge was forced to adopt various schools in the details of the Islamic Law. Had the Imam been given sufficient time to write and publicize what the Muslim generations needed of knowledge in the Book of God and the instructions of the Holy Prophet the Muslims would not have adopted various schools of jurisprudence.

( 448 )

The End of the Righteous Caliphate

2. The other immediate consequence which inflicted the Muslims by the death of the Imam was the end of the period of the Righteous Caliphate forever.

Abu Bakr died and Omar was assassinated; then Othman was assassinated and the righteous caliphate did not end by the death of any of these three Caliphs. But the death of the Imam Ali immediately transferred the Muslim World from a rule led by the Book of God and the precepts of the Holy Prophet to a despotic rule which did not respect the sacred rights and founded itself on shedding the sacred blood spreading falsehood and silencing the voice of truth.

The presence of the Imam was the only barrier between the Omayads and the establishment of their despotic rule over the provinces of the Muslim World. When he was assassinated their rule became inevitable.

Had the Muslim World given the Imam the opportunity to erect the pillars of his regime for a sufficient time the Righteous Caliphate could have lasted generation after generation. The Muslim generations could have lived under the protection of its enlightened just and generous rule which the human generations so far could not reach.

The Imam among the followers of the Messenger was their most knowledgeable in the Book of Cod and the teachings of the Holy Prophet. He was the wisest among them their closest to the Holy Prophet the most similar to him and most adherent to the Law of God and the instructions of the Holy Prophet. He was also the highest magistrate in the nation the greatest endeavorer in the Way of God and the most determined in enforcing the Divine Law.

Yet the nation in spite of all of the Imam's mag-

nanimity did not obey him. Thus he could not establish the pillars of his regime nor could he fulfill his goals. Peo-

ple were and are still looking at the outcome regardless of the circumstances which may have led to those results. The

absence of these achievements was a source of a continu-

( 449 )

ous controversy around his policy. Most of the students of history believed that the Imam adopted an idealistic policy which could not succeed in a non-ideal society. Had he been less idealistic and more realistic he could have achieved his goal.

Some scholars blame the Imam for his policy in administering the public funds. He insisted on taking the Muslims back to the days of the Holy Prophet when the public funds were distributed among the Muslims equally.

But people at the time he came to power had already been accustomed to the policy of unequal distribution which Omar and Othman had adopted.

Some scholars blame the Imam for his insistence on dismissing Muaweyah. They believe that he could have gained the support of Muaweyah if he did not try to dismiss him. Had he done that the war of Siffeen would not have taken place and Muaweyah would not have challenged his authority.

Others blame him for being too lenient with his opponents. He did not punish them when they declared their opposition to him. Some of these critics accuse the Imam of attempting to rule the nation as a preacher rather than a ruler.

Therefore it would be appropriate to discuss these aspects then list the true factors which led to the absence of what the Imam endeavored for.

The Imam's Policy Concerning Public Funds

Some of the students of history believed that one of the main factors in the absence of peace during the Imam's reign was his policy concerning the public funds. He tried to treat the leaders and the followers equally in distributing the public funds.

With Talhah and Al-Zubeir

Had he preferred some distinguished men such as Talhah and Al-Zubeir the two companions would have remained loyal to him and the war of Bassrah would have been avoided. The cause of war was the disagreement of Al-Zubeir and Talhah with the Imam conceriling the distribution of the public funds. The two companions and a number of other companions were accustomed to the poli cy of unequal distribution which was started by Omar.

They thought that the policy of the Imam meant to deprive them of their acquired privileges. Talhah and Al-Zubeir and other preferred companions and children of these companions believed that the Imam would return most of their properties and funds to the Islamic treasury for a good portion of their wealth was acquired through gifts they received from Othman. ( 1)

( 1 ) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubrah part 1 p. 77.

( 451 )

With Chiefs of the Arab Tribes

Had the Imam given preference to the chiefs of the tribes and presented them with gifts as Muaweyah did the Imam would have earned the loyalty of those chiefs and he would have established the unity of his followers and prevailed against his enemies.

Does Islam Allow Preference?

These critics believed that the Imam could have done all that without breaking the Islamic Law. Such preference actually could have been in agreement with the Holy Qur'an and the precepts of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Qur'an declares clearly that the recipients of the Zakat are eight categories including the ones who are to be attracted to Islam by generous gifts. The Holy Prophet gave Abu Sufyan Aqra-a Ibn Habis and Oyainah Ibn Hissn Al-Fuzari from the spoils of Hawazin much more than he gave righteous Muslims. ( 2)

The Three Leaders

The reliable information which we find in history concerning Ayeshah Talhah and Al-Zubeir does not support such criticism. It rather contradicts the opinion of these critics. Ayeshah declared her opposition to the Imam as soon as she knew of his election while she was on her way to Medina coming back from her pilgrimage. She said to the man who informed her of the Imam's election: "I wish that the Heaven falls on the earth if your man (Ali) succeeds in this affair." Then she returned to Mecca starting her campaign to avenge the blood of Othman before she reached Mecca. She did all that before she knew anything about the Imam's policy concerning the distribution of the public funds. ( 3)

( 2 ) Ibn Husham Al-Seerah Al-Nabaweyah (Biography of the Prophet) part 2 pp.493-494. .

( 3 ) Ibn Al-Atheer Al-Kamil part 3 p.102.

( 452 )

It is a well known fact in history that Othman preferred Ayeshah Talhah and Al-Zubeir in his distribution of money. He granted Al-Zubeir six hundred thousand Dirhams. ( 4 ) He granted Talhah two hundred thousand Dirhams. ( 5 ) But his preference of these two companions did not prevent them from being the leaders of his antagonizers who called for his assassination. Why would they be expected to be in peace with the Imam if he had preferred them in distribution when we know that Ayeshah and Talhah were more resentful to the Imam than they were to Othman? Al-Zubeir was not less than Ayeshah and Talhah in resenting the Imam in his last years after he became obedient to his son Abdullah the one who carried a great deal of hatred towards the Imam.

Each of the two companions was thinking that the election of the Imam deprived him of reaching the caliphate which he thought to be within his reach.

Ayeshah's Grudge

In addition to her old unfriendly attitude towards the Imam Ayeshah thought that the leadership of the Imam would be a strong barrier to the return of the caliphate to her clan of Tyme which was headed by her father the First Caliph. On more than one occasion during the days of Othman Ayeshah expressed her hope that the caliphate would come back to Tyme through her cousin Talhah. ( 6 )

She used to see in Al-Zubeir a good substitute for Talhah because Al-Zubeir was her brother-in-law and she used to consider his son Abdullah a son of hers.

The Two Companions' Motives

It is reported that Talhah and Al-Zubeir criticized the Imam's policy in distributing the public funds and they complained that he equalized them in allotment with those 

( 4 ) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubrah part 2 p.77.

( 5 ) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubrah part 2 p.77.

( 6 ) Al-Balathori Ansab Al-Ashraf part 1 of volume 4 p.75.

( 453 )

who are below them. But their criticism of the Imam was nothing but propaganda aimed at arousing the preferred class from among the companions against the Imam. They criticized his distribution of the funds equally while they knew that he did that because he wanted to follow the method of the Prophet. They accused him of the blood of Othman while they knew his innocence and that they were the ones who were responsible for Othman's blood. The motive for their criticism was the same as their accusation.

They were hopeful to reach the caliphate. Their ambition was inflamed when Omar made them members of the Electoral Convention. Because of this they instigated people against Othman and sought his assassination and for the same reason they criticized the Imam and accused him of the murder of Othman. And for the same motive they breached their covenant by which they pledged their loyalty to him.

With Chiefs of the Tribes

It is said that the Imam could have secured the loyalty of the chiefs of the Muslim tribes by showering them with gifts and preferring them in distribution. I do not believe that the Imam was religiously able to treat those chiefs as the Prophet treated similar chiefs when trying to attract them to Islam by financial preference.

The chiefs whom the Imam had to deal with had adopted Islam a long time before he came to power. They lived under the Islamic law for twenty-five years after the death of the Holy Prophet. Omar discontinued paying the appeased men their share from the Zakat less than ten years after the death of the Holy Prophet.

It should be mentioned though it does not have much bearing on the subject of discussion that it is doubted that the Messenger gave Abu Sufyan Aqra-a Ibn Habis and Oyaihah Ibn Hissn Al-Fuzari three hundred camels from the Zakat at the Battle of Hunain as the critics mentioned.

The share of the appeased men is to come from the Zakat.

But the Messenger gave the three chiefs from the spoils of 

( 454 )

the battle and no Zakat is to be paid out of the spoils. The fifth is to be paid out of the spoils. It seems that the Holy Prophet gave the three men from the fifth of the spoils which he had the right to administer its half (which be longs to God and to the Messenger and to the relatives of the Messenger) as he found it in the public interest.

We believe that the Imam Ali had what the Messenger had of the right to administer half of the fifth. But the three Caliphs before him had ignored such a right for the duration of their regimes. I do not think that the Imam could have exercised that right without bringing a problem to himself.

Granted that he had the right and the capability of giving the influential individuals from the shares of the appeased ones and that he was able to give them out of the half of the fifth without difficulty. Yet it was difficult to secure the loyalty of the chiefs through the shares of the appeased or through half of the fifth. The time of the Imam was not like the time of the Messenger.

Those whom the Prophet tried to attract to Islam through his gifts were few. The recipients of his gifts whose names are recorded in books of history as far as I could determine do not amount to a hundred. It was possible to satisfy those people with what was less than the eighth of the Zakat or half of the fifty. The greed of the people did not grow at the time of the Holy Prophet as it grew during the time of the Caliphs. The Holy Prophet gave Abu Sufyan one hundred camels. This was a very huge gift by the measure of the time of the Holy Prophet.

The Islamic State at the time of the Imam became vast and the number of the Muslims went up to millions. The number of chiefs of tribes went up to hundreds and thousands. For the Imam to open upon himself the door of purchasing people's loyalty with money it meant that he had to pay hundreds or thousands of chiefs. To give one chief would inflame the appetite of many other chiefs.

The price of loyalty went up very high. A gift of one chief sometimes reached one hundred thousand dirhams and 

( 455 )

sometimes hundreds of thousands of dirhams (a dirham is equivalent to $2.00)

We have mentioned in the twenty-first chapter that Khalid Ibn Oseid (from the Omayads) came to visit Othman while heading a delegation. The Caliph gave him three hundred thousand dirhams. He also gave every member of the delegation one hundred thousand. ( 7 ) This took place while the Third Caliph was ruling the whole Muslim World without any competitors where he did not need to purchase people's loyalty.

Should the number of the chiefs (who were to be paid for their loyalty) reach one thousand it would have required about one hundred million dirhams. Had the Imam opened on himself the door of gifts the eighth of the Zakat and the half of the fifth would not have been sufficient to satisfy the appetites of the chiefs. Nor would the whole fifth be enough. We should not forget that the spoils of the war during the time of the Imam were not very abundant because the Islamic revenues were decreased during the years of his reign due to the civil wars.

Furthermore had the Imam wanted to open the door of gifts on himself he would have had to compete with Muaweyah for purchasing the loyalty of the chiefs. This meant that he would have had to give most of the public funds for pleasing the chiefs and deprive the masses of the people of their shares in the public funds. This is what the faith of Islam does not allow nor would Ibn Abu Talib do.

WAS IT POLITICALLY SOUND?

It may be said that the Imam should have done that

even if it were not permissible in the faith of Islam under

normal circumstances. The Imam had to do that in com-

pliance with the rule of necessity. In other words the Im-

am had two alternatives. He had either to observe justice

in distributing the public funds then he would lose the 

( 7 ) Taha Hussein Al-Fitnatul-Kubrah part 1 p. 193.

( 456 )

caliphate and the Muslims would lose the Righteous Caliphate forever or he would preserve his caliphate and sacrifice justice in distribution of the funds for a few years until he prevails against his opponents and reaches a peaceful time. By this he could preserve for Islam its future and for the Muslims the Righteous Caliphate for a long time.

These two duties were competing with each other. But securing a good future for Islam is more important than observing justice in distribution. It would be forbidden in Islam to give priority to the important above the more important. Why did the Imam give priority to the important above the more important?

It would be easy for a person who does not analyze the events of history and its factors to criticize the policy of the Imam without taking into consideration what the circumstances and the principles of the Imam were dictating at that time. An objective criticism requires more than this superficial thinking. To try to understand the events which filled the period of the caliphate of the Imam we have to take into consideration the following factors: 1. The Islamic principles which the Imam was trying to live up to were expected to limit a great deal of his freedom of action.

2. The hard circumstances which preceded his election had accompanied his reign and continued to escalate the revolution during his era.

In addition to this we ought to consider the unlimited freedom of action which his opponents enjoyed due to their lack of principles.

The Imam was elected after an insane revolution which

brought the life of the Third Caliph to an end. The source

of the revolution was the policy of the Third Caliph in

handling the public funds and preferring his relatives and

friends allowing them vast lands and granting them hun-

dreds of thousands and sometimes millions of dirhams

from the Islamic treasury. The rebellious groups were

seeking through revolution to reform the situation and to

bring the nation back to its right road and to prevent the 

( 457 )

minority from enriching itself at the expense of the millions of Muslims. These rebels and those who shared their opinion from among the Muslims were the ones who prepared the election of the Imam.

These rebellious ones were in agreement with the Imam concerning justice in the distribution of the public funds.

They elected the Imam and pledged their loyalty to him on the condition that they would follow the Book of God and the precepts of the Messenger of God. The Imam would not have accepted their election on any other basis. These were the supporters of the truth and the representatives of the reformatory camp of the Muslim World. Had the Imam reversed his attitude by following a policy of appeasement and purchasing the loyalty of people with public funds he would not have benefited politically. He would rather have lost the unity of his camp at the beginning of his reign and his supporters would have stood away from him as they did from Othman.

History records that when the Imam appointed Abdullah Ibn Al-Abbas governor of Bassrah and his brother Obeidullah a governor of Yemen Malik Al-Ashtar with all his loyalty to the Imam said to him "Why did we kill the old man yesterday?" He meant that the revolution which brought the life of Othman to an end was caused by his policy of preference. ( 8 ) What would be the attitude of Al-Ashtar and others like him if the Imam had tried to purchase the loyalty of the chiefs of the tribes through public funds.

The majority of those who opposed him later from among his followers after the war of Siffeen were not from the people of selfish interests. The Seceders who opposed him after the war of Siffeen were the most remote people from materialism. They were radical immaterialists and excessive in keeping away from all selfish interests.

They were enemies of the policy of appeasement and of purchasing loyalty. Their excessiveness is what made them antagonize the Imam and fight him.

( 8 ) Taha Russein Al-Fitnatul-Kubrah part 2 p. 53.

( 458 )

Of course there were among the followers of the Imam some hypocrites such as Ashaath. Yet it is not substantiated that the resentment of these people towards the Imam and their conspiracy with his enemy against him was the result of their materialism.

It is not substantiated that the Imam was able to purchase the loyalty of these people by gifts or bribery. In fact many were working with the Imam's opponents for no materialistic gain or a position they were seeking or wanted. They were doing that only because their sympathy was with his opponents. Take for example Abu Musa Al- Ashari whom the Imam appointed governor of Kufa the most important province in the Islamic State. He was able to preserve his position for the duration of the Imam's caliphate by co-operating with him. He chose to stand against the Imam and tried to prevent people from supporting him though he knew that this would put his own position in jeopardy. This shows that he did not oppose him for a material gain nor for a position. He did that only because he disliked the Imam and liked his opponents.

I think that the attitude and motives of Ashaath and others like him towards the Imam were like the attitude and motives of Abu Musa towards the Imam. However the Imam was not able to purchase the loyalty of Ashaath and others even if their loyalty was for sale. It was not possible for the Imam as a man of principle or a flexible statesman to purchase their loyalty. Many companions and sincere followers of Islam would have opposed him and he would have expedited the hostility of the extremists such as the leaders who became Seceders later for reasons much less than the mismanagement or embezzlement of public funds.

Ashaath by himself would not have been able to bring

the war of Siffeen to its end if he did not have the support

of extremist readers who later became Seceders. Only

through their support he was able to do damage to the

Imam and the Muslim world though Ashaath and the Se-

ceders had different motives behind the attitude which

they shared. The religious fanaticism of these leaders 

( 459 )

made them consider the rejection of the invitation to the Holy Qur'an a great sin and this attitude gave Ashaath the effectiveness which brought the Battle of Siffeen to its saddening end.

Thus an objective look at the circumstances which preceded the election of the Imam and the foundation on which his election was based and the elements of which his supporters were composed would prove that the policy which he followed in distributing the public funds was not only righteous but also the wisest course he could take.

Thus the principles for which he lived and endeavored and the circumstances which surrounded him dictated the same policy which he chose.

Had the Imam followed what these critics suggested he would have lost politically and militarily and the Islamic history would have lost the only example of the idealism which was embodied in the person of the Imam.