Ten years, six months and four days had passed since `Umar took the reins of governance in his hands when Abū-Lu’lu’ah Fayrūz, the slave of Mughirah ibn Shu`bah, struck him with a double edged poniard. Some people lifted him and shifted home. A physician was immediately called to treat him. The injury was so severe that the wine administered through his mouth came out of the injury inflicted by the blow through the stomach. People around him were confused and confounded. They thought that the throne of the caliphate will be vacant and were whispering to each other about the probable successor. Some said that it would be better if he nominated someone and save the people from the trouble of selecting his replacement. Therefore, some important persons came to `Umar and suggested to him to nominate someone as his successor. He said with a sigh that he had none in view. He added that if Abū-`Ubaydah was living he would willingly have transferred the burden to him. Then if Allah had questioned him, he would have said that he had entrusted the caliphate to a person who was termed by the Prophet (a.s) as the Trustee of the Ummah. He said that if Hudhayfah’s slave Salim was alive, he could have given the position to him. If Allah asked him, he would reply that he had given the control to a person about whom the Prophet (a.s) had said that he loved Allah very much. Ibn Qutaybah had written about Khalid ibn al-Walid and Mu`adh ibn Jabal in this connection that `Umar remembered them as probable candidates for succession. The person who mooted the idea of Yazid succeeding Mu`awiyah, Mughirah ibn Shu`bah, suggested to `Umar to nominate his son `Abdullah ibn `Umar to the caliphate. In reply `Umar said:
“May Allah destroy you! By Allah! You have not said this without keeping Allah in front of you. How can I make a person the caliph who is helpless even to divorce his own wife?”[1]
Ibn Hajar al-Makki writes
[1] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 3, Page 192
(387)
“This is an indication towards the event when `Abdullah, during the days of the Prophet (a.s), gave divorce to his wife during the period of menstruation and the Prophet (a.s) instructed `Umar to ask `Abdullah to go to his wife”[1]
After rejecting Mughirah’s suggestion, `Umar told the gathering that if he nominated anyone the caliph, there will be no problem because Abū-Bakr too had nominated him, and he (Abū-Bakr) was better than himself! He added that even if he did not nominate a successor, there would not be any problem, because the Prophet (a.s) did not nominate anyone as well! And he was better than both of them were! In that time `A’ishah sent word through `Abdullah ibn `Umar that he must nominate a successor to save the people from confusion and unrest. `Umar said that he had given a serious thought to the matter and was of view that `Ali ibn Abi-Talib (a.s), `Uthman ibn `Affan, `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, Sa`d ibn Abi-Waqqas, al-Zubayr ibn al-`Awwam and Talhah ibn `Ubaydullah should form a committee The Prophet (a.s) was happy with those persons during his last days. They are capable that they can select one amongst themselves to be the next caliph. When he was alone he said that if they unanimously select `Ali (a.s) he will lead the Ummah on the Right Path. `Abdullah ibn `Umar said that if that was his opinion, he ought to nominate `Ali (a.s) for the succession himself. To this `Umar replied, “I do not like to carry the burden both in this life and the Hereafter.”[2]
After deciding about the membership of the Shūra Council, `Umar called the selected members to apprise them of the procedure for the selection. When the six assembled at his place, he told them that he knew they all aspired to be the caliph al-Zubayr did not keep quiet. He said that it was natural that they were desirous of the position. He said that in precedence in accepting Islam and in status they were not less than `Umar. He added that if he, `Umar, could be the caliph, why not they! Ibn Abil-Hadid had said that `Umar was lying mortally injured; therefore al-Zubayr was talking fearlessly. If it were some other occasion, he would not have dared to talk in that manner. `Umar kept quiet at his talk, but when he commented on the members of the Shūra he indicated that he was upset with al-Zubayr. Therefore, he addressed al-Zubayr and said, “O al-Zubayr! You are avaricious, small hearted and ill tempered. In anger, you are an infidel and a mu’min if in a happy mood! If you get the caliphate you will fight for a little barley!” He told about Talhah, “He is
[1] Al-Sawā`iq al-Muhriqah, Page 104
[2] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 104
(388)
proud and conceited. On one occasion he talked such an impertinent thing that the Prophet (a.s) was very upset with him and remained so until the end!”
He then turned towards Sa`d and said, “You are a good archer but the caliphate is out of your reach because you are from Banū-Zahrah and what Banū-Zahrah has to do with the caliphate!” He told `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, “You are very fond of rest and pleasures! If you become the caliph, you might leave the affairs of the caliphate to your wife!” Ibn Qutaybah records the following words:
“O `Abd al-Rahman! I might have given the caliphate to you, but you are the Pharaoh for this Ummah!”[1]
If the members select one person unanimously, it is well and good.
`Umar told `Uthman, “If the caliphate is given to you, then you will put the burden of Banū-Umayyah and Banū-al-`As on the necks of the people! The bayt al-mal will become the fiefdom of your tribe.” Finally he turned to `Ali (a.s) and said, “You are suitable in all respects for the position of the caliph. But the trait of humor dominates your nature!”
After these comments he asked the members of the Shūra to decide about the successor within three days. He also asked them to invite al-Hasan ibn `Ali (a.s), `Abdullah ibn `Abbas and some more important persons from the Ansar. But they should not have any say in the matter of the Caliphate. Abū-Talhah al-Ansari was appointed the director of the Shūra. He asked Abū-Talhah to gather all the members of the Shūra after his death in the room of `A’ishah and tell them that they must decide about the successor within the allotted time and during the interim period the responsibility of leading the prayers should rest with Suhayb al-Rūmi. If they select the successor unanimously, it is well and good. If five are on one side and one is in opposition, then he must be killed. If three are on one side and the three on other, then his son, `Abdullah ibn `Umar to be the arbiter. Whichever side he supported, the caliph will be their nominee. Then he advised his son, “If there is difference of opinion in the Ummah you should side with the majority. If three are on one side and three on the other, you should opt for the side in which `Abd al-Rahman is there.”[2]
`Umar expired after three days of struggle between life and death. When his burial was over, at `A’ishah’s room or the house of `Abd al-Rahman ibn
[1] Al-Imāmah was-Siyāsah, Page 24.
[2] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 3, Page 265
(389)
`Awf’s nephew, Musawwir ibn Makhramah the Committee of the Shūra met. Abū-Talhah stood with a contingent of fifty persons at the door. Mughirah ibn Shu`bah and `Amr ibn al-`As too came and sat near the door to make their personalities prominent. When Sa`d ibn Abi-Waqqas saw them, he threw pebbles at them and said, “Do you want to show off that you too are the members of the Shūra?”[1]
Both of them escaped from there when Sa`d threw pebbles on them and the proceedings of the Shūra commenced. Talhah and Sa`d gave their vote to `Uthman. Al-Zubayr voted for `Ali (a.s). Now `Ali (a.s), `Uthman and `Abd al-Rahman remained to cast their lot. `Abd al-Rahman told `Ali (a.s) and `Uthman to withdraw from the contest and take the right of selecting one from the remaining two, or that he will withdraw from the contest and take the right of selecting one from the two, `Uthman or `Ali (a.s). `Ali (a.s) and `Uthman both did not agree to withdraw from the contest. Then `Abd al-Rahman said that they must accept him as the arbitrator. `Uthman immediately agreed to the suggestion. But `Ali (a.s) was hesitant. When he was persuaded very much he made a condition that `Abd al-Rahman should not be governed by any base instinct in coming to a decision on the basis of the consideration of his kin. `Abd al-Rahman agreed that his decision will be based on true facts. When `Abd al-Rahman was appointed the arbitrator, he assembled the Muhajirūn and Ansar along with the members of the Shūra in the al-Masjid al-Nabawi (the Holy Prophet’s Mosque) and asked them as to who they wanted to select as the Caliph. `Ammar ibn Yasir told the people that if they wanted peace and tranquility they should opt for `Ali (a.s). Al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad agreed with him. `Abdullah ibn Abi-Sara and `Abdullah ibn Rabi`ah spoke in favor of `Uthman. On this, some harsh words were exchanged between `Ammar and Ibn Abi-Sara. When `Abd al-Rahman saw the argument prolonging, he quietened the persons. Then he addressed `Ali (a.s) and said, “You must make a pledge that you will act on the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of the Prophet (a.s) and those of the two Caliphs.”[2]
`Ali (a.s) said, “I hope that, to the extent of my knowledge and capability, I shall do my duty.”[3]
Then `Uthman was asked the same question. He immediately agreed to follow the example of the first two Caliphs. On this `Abd al-Rahman gave his hand
[1] Vol 3, Page 295 [2] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 3, Page 297
[3] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 2, Page 297
(390)
to `Uthman in bay`ah and announced his Caliphate. `Ali (a.s) saw this situation and said, “This is not the first day that you have inflicted an excess on us. What else can we do than being patient? What things you do, Allah only must help! By Allah! You have given the Caliphate to `Uthman on the hope that he will turn it over to you tomorrow.”[1]
The supporters of `Uthman and Banū-Umayyah came forward to owe their allegiance to him. Mughirah ibn Shu`bah, who was an opportunist, started telling `Uthman that if `Abd al-Rahman supported someone else, he himself would not have approved of that person. When `Abd al-Rahman heard this flattering talk, he said, “O unlucky person! You are telling a blatant lie! If I had owed my allegiance to someone else, you would have followed suit and told him what you have told now (to `Uthman).”[2]
The following conclusions can be drawn from the Shūra of `Umar:
(1) It is not necessary for the Caliph to be a Qurayshi. Even a freed non-Arab Slave could also qualify for the position and the Tradition, “Leaders must be from Quraysh” was just concocted to meet the requirement of the selection of the first caliph!
(2) People’s opinion for selection of the Caliph is not necessary. The Caliph is entitled to make a selection of the successor or can nominate a committee of two or more persons to do the selection.
(3) If someone from the Shūra raises his voice against the majority of the members of the committee he will be liable to be executed for that crime even if he was a Companion of the Prophet (a.s)!
(4) The Ummah could remain without a Caliph for three days. It was not necessary that on the death of one caliph the successor to be in place without break. Only at the time of the demise of the Prophet (a.s) the dispatch with which the caliph was selected, without even waiting for his last rites, was the need of the time and the political expedient!
(5) The failings and the defects which the Second Caliph pointed out in the members of the Shūra were pride, conceit, avarice, nepotism and impertinence with the Prophet (a.s) were no disqualifications for being considered as candidates for the caliphate. Nor there was any need of knowledge, experience and moral qualities to qualify for selection as the caliph.
[1] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 37
[2] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 3, Page 298
(391)
If we consider this Shūra and the procedures followed for the earlier selection of the caliphs, we do not find any particular rule or procedure to be followed. If we accept that, the selection of the caliph has to be done by a group of wise men or it has to be done through the popular opinion then how the important companions, like `A’ishah and `Abdullah ibn `Umar, advice `Umar to nominate someone as his successor. Did not they know that selection of the caliph was the prerogative of the wise men or the populace? Instead of rejecting the suggestion, `Umar sites the precedence set by `Umar in nominating him as the second caliph. Then he says that if Abū-`Ubaydah or Salim were living he would have nominated one of them as his successor. If the caliph has the right to nominate his successor, the Prophet (a.s) must have had a bigger right to nominate a caliph and successor! `Umar says that if he nominated a successor, it would be following the tradition of Abū-Bakr and if he did not nominate the successor he would be following the tradition of the Prophet (a.s)! But in practice, what he did was neither the way of his predecessor nor of the Prophet (a.s) the truth is that neither `Umar wished to nominate anyone nor did he have confidence in the popular opinion that will select the person he had in his mind. Therefore, he constituted a Shūra of six persons that was free of the popular opinion and constituted in such a way that the success of his favorite candidate was certain. In the process, he took the names of certain persons that if they were living, he would have nominated one of them. Of the two Abū-`Ubaydah was a Qurayshi, and fitted well into the condition made at the time of the selection of the first caliph. The second person was Salim who was a freed non-Arab slave and therefore did not qualify the test of being a Qurayshi on which count the Ansar were denied the right of contesting to the caliphate at the time of selection of the first caliph. But now `Umar was not bothered about that condition and would have nominated Salim to the caliphate if he lived. The other names that came up were Mu`adh ibn Jabal and Khalid ibn al-Walid. Mu`adh ibn Jabal was from the tribe of Khazraj and `Umar was opposed to consider the Ansar for the caliphate. The other person was Khalid ibn al-Walid with whom `Umar never saw eye to eye. As soon as `Umar assumed the caliphate he deposed Khalid from the position he held. When he did not tolerate to even keep him under his own control, how could he nominate him to be the caliph over all the Muslims! Ibn al-Athir writes:
“(On assuming the Caliphate) the first decree `Umar issued was in the name of Abū-`Ubaydah al-Jarrah to take the command of the troops from Khalid and consider him dismissed. The reason for this was that from the time of Abū-
(392)
Bakr, `Umar was angry on him because of his attack on Malik ibn Nuwayrah and other acts that Khalid committed during the campaign. The first action that `Umar took as the caliph was to dismiss Khalid and saying that he will not be given any position under him.”[1]
`Umar had also taken the name `Ali (a.s) for nomination as the caliph but avoided the issue by saying that he did not want to shoulder the responsibility. It is surprising that he was willing to take the responsibility of nominating Abū-`Ubaydah or Salim if they were alive, but not of `Ali (a.s). In spite of recognizing and accepting `Ali’s capability and suitability, he was referring his candidature to the Shūra for the selection. Thus he turned the caliphate in another direction very cleverly constituting the Shūra to push through his favorite candidate. `Abd al-Rahman was the brother-in-law of `Uthman and would certainly support him. Sa`d ibn Abi-Waqqas was the cousin of `Abd al-Rahman and would naturally go with him. Talhah was from the tribe of Taym and was against `Ali (a.s). Only al-Zubayr was with `Ali (a.s) because his mother Safiyyah bint `Abd al-Muttalib was an aunt of `Ali (a.s). If Talhah had voted for `Ali (a.s) both sides would have had three votes each. In such an event `Umar had instructed that `Abdullah ibn `Umar will be the arbiter and instructed him to select the candidate on whose side will be `Abd al-Rahman. He was also sure that `Abd al-Rahman will be on the side of his favorite candidate. Now the only alternative for the opposing candidate was to side with `Abd al-Rahman and accept `Uthman as caliph or lose his own life. This was the strategy of `Umar that with all permutations the caliphate would ultimately come to `Uthman. Therefore, the author of al-Riyad al-Nadirah writes:
“At the halt during the Hajj `Umar was asked who will be the caliph after him. He said `Uthman ibn `Affan.”[2]
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) saw the constituents of the Shūra and had understood that the entire process was to select `Uthman for the position and had said to `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib, “The direction of the caliphate has been turned away from us. `Abbas asked, ‘How do you know this?’ ‘`Uthman has been attached with me and has asked us to support the majority. If two are on one side and two on the other, then you must opt for the side, in which `Abd al-Rahman is there. Then Sa`d will support his cousin, `Uthman, and `Abd al-Rahman is his brother-in-law.”[3]
[1] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 293
[2] Al-Riyād al-Na¤irah, Page 153.
[3] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 4, Page 294
(393)
If `Uthman was to be brought to power, then instead of setting up the Shūra, he could have directly nominated him. That would have eliminated lot of mischief and internecine fighting. Because of the constitution of the Shūra the thoughts of avarice and position came to the minds of the members and every individual started thinking that he was the candidate for the caliphate because of this state the door for conflicts between the Muslims was opened. And as a result Talhah and al-Zubayr later on rose against `Ali (a.s), although al-Zubayr was `Ali’s supporter before the Shūra. The battles of Jamal and Siffin were the natural consequence of the Shūra. Ibn `Abd-Rabbih writes that once Ibn Husayn, went as a courier of Ziyad to Mu`awiyah. Mu`awiyah once called him in seclusion and asked what was the reason of the internecine differences between the Muslims? He replied, it was the assassination of `Uthman. Mu`awiyah said that he had heard he was very shrewd and clever but his reply was very shallow. Ibn Husayn, “Was it the Battle of Siffin?” Mu`awiyah said, “No!” He asked, “The Battle of the Camel?” Mu`awiyah said, “Not even that!” Finally Ibn Husayn said, “I cannot visualize any other cause!” Mu`awiyah said, “The fountainhead of the conflict was the constitution of the Six Member Committee of the Shūra by `Umar; therefore, “every member of that group started expecting to be the caliph and his conscience bent towards the thought of power and even his tribe and family started thinking in the same terms.”[1]
Another reason for the greed for the caliphate was the affluence of the members of the Committee. Where there is excess of wealth, the desire for power too comes in. Therefore, when we look at the members of the Shūra, the history indicates that excluding `Ali (a.s), all other members were very rich. If it was necessary to constitute the Shūra, he should have opted for persons who had the welfare of the common man at heart instead of picking up a group of persons of high affluence. Even if the selecting is taken as a political expedient, making their decision subservient to one person under the sharp edge of the sword was the biggest impediment to the freedom of opinion and had made a farce of the Shūra!
`Umar had made the yardstick for the selection of the members of the Shūra their closeness to the Prophet (a.s) and his liking for them. But the question arises whether these persons only were those who were liked by the Prophet (a.s) and there were none else who would have similar or better qualification than they did? Was `Uthman selected because the Prophet (a.s) liked him or
[1] al-`Iqd al-Farīd, Vol 3, Page 75
(394)
because he was to the liking of `Abd al-Rahman? The Holy Qur’an says thus about the true believers:
لَقَدْ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُونَكَ تَحْتَ الشَّجَرَةِ.
“Certainly, Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you under the tree. (48/18)”
It is certainly not possible that those whom Allah likes, the Prophet (a.s) would not like them. When the privilege of the Prophet’s liking was also enjoyed by other persons as well, then restricting the ‘liking’ only to the six persons is certainly full of meaning. Was the Prophet (a.s) happy with only six Muhajirūn and with none from the Ansar? If the Prophet (a.s) liked these six, the reasons for the liking should have been highlighted by the selector. But instead of highlighting these, the failings and shortcomings of the members are mentioned in a very ridiculing manner. Abū-`Uthman al-Jahiz writes:
“If someone had said to `Umar that he said that the Prophet (a.s), at the time of his death, was happy with the six persons and he says that the Prophet (a.s) was unhappy with Talhah until he died. He was thus contradicting what he (`Umar) himself said.”[1]
Talhah’s talk that disturbed the Prophet (a.s) was that at the time of the revelation of the verse of Hijab he had said that the Prophet (a.s) was keeping his spouses under the curtains at that time but that they would marry them after his death. After this event, the following Verse was revealed:
وَمَا كَانَ لَكُمْ أَنْ تُؤْذُوا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَلَا أَنْ تَنْكِحُوا أَزْوَاجَهُ مِنْ بَعْدِهِ أَبَدًا.
“And it does not behoove you that you should give trouble to the Messenger of Allah, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever. (33/53)”
There was a time when such impertinent words came out of the mouth of Talhah that were highly objectionable, but what `Umar uttered at the time of the Truce of al-Hudaybiyah were words much more objectionable than what Talhah said. If by doubting about the Prophethood and saying that the Prophet (a.s) was talking gibberish in delirium of sickness one could reach the position of the caliphate, why should not Talhah rise to the Committee of the
[1] Sharh Nahj al-Balāghah by Ibn Abil-Hadīd, Vol 1, Page 37
(395)
Shūra? What was the need to taunt at Talhah during the important and crucial conclave of the Shūra?
The opinion that `Umar expressed about `Ali (a.s) is nothing more than a personally devised talk. Just after the Prophet (a.s) it was said that `Ali (a.s) was too young to aspire for the Caliphate and an old person was suitable for the position. But now when the excuse of age was not there, it was said that he had propensity for humor and the caliphate needs a person with a serious demeanor. This utterance of `Umar gave the opportunity to others to air this opinion around. Therefore, `Amr ibn al-`As put it into the minds of the Syrians that `Ali’s nature was just to keep joking. Hearing about this propaganda, `Ali (a.s) said, “That son of a bad woman surprises me when he says that there is an element of jesting in my nature and I keep jesting around all the time!” No doubt `Ali (a.s) was having an excellent sense of humor that reflected the sense of humor of the Prophet (a.s). He never hurt anyone with his humor. If this element of humor is not a disadvantage for the august position of prophethood, how could it be a disqualification for the caliphate? A person in the position of power need not always keep an angry face. With his sense of humor `Ali (a.s) combined an aura of respect and carriage that attracted the respect of people. Ibn `Abbas says, “When `Ali (a.s) used to sit with us, we never had the courage to start the conversation.”[1]
`Ali (a.s) says in his Will:
“Beware! Do not bring talks that provoke laughter during important discussions even if they are quoted from others.”[2]
Therefore the allegation that `Ali (a.s) used to jest around is absolutely wrong. `Umar had to say something about all the six members. If he did not say what he said, he would have said something else. As far as keeping the caliphate away from `Ali (a.s) was concerned, the very constitution of the Shūra was indicative of that.
Although the Shūra was an invention of `Umar’s mind, `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf put it into practice with his cunning. He himself did not expect to get the caliphate because `Umar had cleverly made his son, `Abdullah, the arbiter in the event of a tie. `Abd al-Rahman did not give the opportunity of arbitration to `Abdullah by bringing about the corollary of telling to `Ali (a.s) that he would support his candidature if he agreed to abide by the sirat al-
[1] Sharh Nahj al-Balāghah by Ibn Abil-Hadīd, Vol 3, Page 170
[2] Nahj al-Balāghah
(396)
shaykhayn (the conducts of the two Caliphs—Abū-Bakr and `Umar) and `Ali (a.s) did not agree to this suggestion. Hence, `Abd al-Rahman supported `Uthman.
Under the basic tenet of Islam `Ali (a.s) had refused to abide by the sirat al-shaykhayn. The intention was to make the sirat al-shaykhayn a part of the Islamic Shari`ah. The Islamic Shari`ah has to be based on the Qur’an and the Holy Prophet’s conduct. Even the two sheikhs were bound to abide by these two! Then what was the need to include the sirat al-shaykhayn or the conduct of any other person as a condition for the caliphate? If that condition was accepted by `Ali (a.s), it would have become a part of the Islamic identity. Therefore, Mulla Qari writes:
“`Ali (a.s) declined to do the emulation of the two Caliphs and `Uthman did agree to that condition.”[1]
Even if `Ali (a.s) is not accepted as the Imam and Khalifah by the Nass, he will certainly be acknowledged as a mujtahid (Interpreter) of very high caliber. Making one mujtahid bound to the interpretations of another is not correct according to the norms. One interpreter cannot be asked to abide by what another has done. Such conditions will create intellectual stagnancy and disturb the spirit of thinking and interpretation. When one has eyes, he has the right to look around. When a person has the ears, he must listen and decide about the things with the help of this sense. Someone asking people to become deaf and blind and toe his line may not be acceptable to them. This has nothing to do neither with wisdom and intellect nor with the Faith of Islam.
If by sirat al-shaykhayn they mean the modus operandi adopted by the first two caliphs in the day-to-day operations of the State, it cannot be made compulsory to be adopted because the circumstances change with the times and the actions have to be devised according to the needs of the day. For example, during the days of `Umar, Iran and Rome were conquered and that brought tremendous wealth to the Arabs. On account of heavy cash-flow, the quantum of pensions and allowances too increased. Now, will following his conduct mean that whether there was sufficient cash in-flow or not, the pensions must be maintained at the inflated levels? Therefore, what was possible during the time of `Umar might not be possible in the subsequent times. It is quite possible that the reason for insisting on following `Umar’s conduct was that they wanted the pensions issued by him to continue during
[1] Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar, Page 82
(397)
the regime of the next caliph! This condition therefore becomes only an economic requirement and does not have anything to do with the caliphate.
After analyzing the events of the Shūra, one comes to the conclusion that `Ali (a.s) had a very radiant side to his personality that with one word he rejected power and pelf to protect the Book and the Sunnah of the Prophet (a.s). If he had accepted the caliphate against the voice of his conscience, whether he acted on the conditions put to him or not, the world would have pointed a finger at him blaming him of opportunism. He has set an immaculate example of taking the Right Path.
This fact is also worth considering that when the past acts of the previous incumbents were not acceptable to him, then how he could accept to emulate them in his own career. When the sirat al-shaykhayn was not worthy of emulation for him, the only alternative for him was to refuse the caliphate with this condition attached to it!
THE ALLEGIANCE TO IMAM `ALI
`Uthman assumed the reins of office at the age of seventy on the first of Muharram 24 H. Unfortunately his period, excepting the Umayyads, was not very good for the Muslims in general. The people were put to too much hardship. Even very senior, and octogenarian, Companions of the Prophet (a.s) were ill-treated. The ribs of `Abdullah ibn Mas`ūd were broken. `Ammar ibn Yasir was tortured. Abū-Dharr al-Ghifari was exiled. Cruelty and torture was rampant. Voices were raised against this attitude of `Uthman. There was unrest amongst the people. From amongst the members of the Shūra, `Ali (a.s) was already unhappy with the way the succession was effected. Talhah and al-Zubayr too turned openly hostile to the caliph. `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf who was instrumental in bringing `Uthman to the caliphate by playing the ruse of sirat al-shaykhayn was repentant and not very happy for promoting him. He was so angry that he did not talk to `Uthman until his death. Ibn `Abd-Rabbih writes:
“During the illness of `Abd al-Rahman, `Uthman went to inquire about his condition. Looking at him, `Abd al-Rahman turned his face towards the wall.”[1]
`Uthman was killed in his house on the eighteenth of Dhul-Hijjah 35 H because of the general unrest amongst the people owing to his nepotism with Banū-Umayyah and general maladministration.
These twelve years of misrule awakened the people about the wrong choice of the ruler. They realized that the control should be in capable hands and a person who had the welfare of the people at heart and not that the wealth of the nation got concentrated in one person and his cohorts hands. Therefore, as soon as the position of the caliphate was vacant, the leading Companions and the public looked towards `Ali (a.s). If `Uthman had died a natural death, the caliphate might not have come to the focal point where it ought to have been. If `Uthman had sufficient time, he might have put the mill of Saqifah and Shūra into operation as did his predecessors. But death was sudden and did
[1] Al-`Iqd al-Farīd, Vol 3, Page 79
(399)
not give him respite to organize the succession. The cohorts of `Uthman were the people who were using him in their personal interests. They too would not have tolerated to see a person in the position of the caliph who would put a stop to their activities of loot and pillage. It can be said with certainty that Mu`awiyah, `Amr ibn al-`As and the other functionaries appointed by `Uthman knew `Ali’s nature very well. They would have put all sorts of impediments that `Ali (a.s) was defeated in the race for the succession. They had also prepared `A’ishah to toe their line. She was, in fact, in the first lines of the opponents of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s). These persons would have advised `Uthman to set up a new Shūra and repeat the history again! They could have persuaded him to nominate someone using the subterfuge of the sirat al-shaykhayn to justify the decision. But the circumstances changed so fast that they did not get the opportunity to put their plans into operation. `Uthman paid with his own life for the maladministration that was perpetrated during his regime.
After the Prophet (a.s), `Ali (a.s) spent a long period with no concern for the governance and the life style that he lived attracted the attention of the people. They therefore reached a conclusion that there is no person better than `Ali ibn Abi-Talib (a.s) to be at the helm of affairs. Therefore, the important persons from the Muhajirūn and Ansar gathered at the al-Masjid al-Nabawi and decided unanimously that `Ali (a.s) be requested to take the reins of the caliphate in his hands. After this decision they sent a delegation to `Ali (a.s). In this delegation, Talhah and al-Zubayr too were there. The delegation made their request with `Ali ibn Abi-Talib (a.s). `Ali (a.s) hesitated in accepting their request and said that he did not like to interfere in their affairs and that they should look elsewhere for another person. He wanted them to leave him to his own scruples. Those people said:
“We do not consider anyone other than you deserving of the Caliphate, nor is anyone more eminent than you on the basis of the past services to the Faith. There is none near to you in the closeness with the Prophet (a.s).”[1]
`Ali (a.s) refused once again. But they pleaded with him very much. When they saw that `Ali (a.s) was not yielding to their requests they literally begged him:
“We request you in the name of Allah! You are seeing the condition we are in! Are not you seeing the state of Islam and
[1] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 98
(400)
the mischief that is rampant? Are you not concerned about the mischief?”[1]
`Ali (a.s) refused to accept their request, but when their insistence increased very much, he felt that for Fulfillment of the Condition, despite unfavorable circumstances, he could not any more resist the call of duty, he said:
“I accept! But remember one thing that this acceptance is on condition that I shall take you on the path that I think is better for you!”[2]
It was the charisma of the changing circumstances that after `Umar the condition of sirat al-shaykhayn was imposed along with the offer of the Caliphate, that was rejected by `Ali (a.s). Now the same Caliphate was offered to him and he was putting forth his own conditions before he accepted it that he would use his own discretion in performing the task rather than depending on others advice.
After `Ali (a.s) accepted the Caliphate, the general bay`ah was organized on Friday, the twenty-fifth of Dhul-Hijjah 35 H. Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) emerged from Bayt al-Sharaf and came to the al-Masjid al-Nabawi where a huge gathering was already there. In his simplicity `Ali (a.s) was wearing an ordinary turban on his head, carrying the footwear in one hand and, instead of the staff, a bow in the other, entered the precincts of the Mosque. When he arrived, there was a movement in the crowd. He went past the crowd towards the pulpit of the Mosque and sat at the place where the Prophet (a.s) used to sit. He rested his arm on the bow and the process of the bay`ah was commenced. Talhah and al-Zubayr were the first to extend their hands to owe their allegiance to him. Husayn Diyarbakri writes:
“First Talhah and al-Zubayr did the bay`at and then the others followed.”[3]
Talhah had lost one of his hands in the Battle of Badr When Habib ibn Dhu’ayb saw him doing the bay`ah, he said:
“A person with the useless hand has done the bay`ah. It will not be successful!”[4]
[1] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 99
[2] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 99
[3] Tārīkh al-Khamīs, Vol 2, Page 276
[4] Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Vol 3, Page 451
(401)
After this men came forward for the bay`ah in hordes as the thirsty come to quench their thirst. None from the participants in the Battle of Badr who was living had missed the bay`ah of `Ali (a.s). Ibn Hajar al-Makki writes:
“None from the people of Badr was missed. All of them came to `Ali (a.s) and said that they considered none more deserving of the Caliphate than him. They asked him to extend his hand in bay`ah. Thus the allegiance was accomplished.”[1]
Among the people who did the bay`ah not only there were the people of al-Madinah, but also there were men from Yemen, Egypt and Iraq as well. Everyone owed his allegiance to the Imam (a.s) happily and pledged to be faithful to him. Thus, unanimously his Caliphate was established.
After the accomplishment of the bay`ah, the representative of the Ansar, Thabit ibn Qays, said on behalf of his group:
“By Allah! O Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s)! Although they had taken precedence over you in assuming the reins of the governance, they did not have precedence over you in embracing the Faith! Then they went ahead of you, but now you are at that place! With them around neither your status was hidden nor your position unknown! They were dependent on you for the matters about which they were ignorant, and you, with your knowledge did not have to depend on anyone!”[2]
The Ansar, in general, took very active part in the bay`ah. But some of them who were affiliated to the `Uthmanite coterie abstained from the bay`ah. Therefore, Hassan ibn Thabit, Ka`b ibn Malik, Maslamah ibn Muqallid, Abū-Sa`id al-Khidri, Muhammad ibn Maslamah, al-Nu`man ibn Bashir, Zayd ibn Thabit, Rafi` ibn Khudayj, al-Fadl ibn `Ubayd and Ka`b ibn Hajar did not do the bay`ah. These men remained at their respective homes.
`Ali (a.s) did not deprive any person of his right of choice. He did not bring about any pressure on any one nor forced people to come to owe their allegiance. Those who came willingly, he did bay`ah with them. But he did ask Sa`d ibn Abi-Waqqas and `Abdullah ibn `Umar to come for the bay`ah because their appearances indicated that they might try to prevent others from coming for the bay`ah. Therefore, Sa`d ibn Abi-Waqqas and `Abdullah ibn `Umar were particularly sent for and their allegiance was demanded. Sa`d said
[1] Al-Sawā`iq al-Muhriqah, Page 118
[2] Tārīkh al-Ya`qūbī, Vol 2, Page 118
(402)
that when the others owe their allegiance, he too would do it. He added that even if he did not do the bay`ah, he would not openly oppose `Ali (a.s). When `Abdullah ibn `Umar refused to do the bay`ah, he was asked to commit that he would not try to disrupt the peace and tranquility of the realm. He refused to give any such guarantee. At this Malik al-Ashtar was angry and asked `Ali’s permission to cut away `Abdullah’s head. `Ali (a.s) said, “You need not do anything to him! I take the responsibility on his behalf! He had been stubborn in his childhood and is the same even now!”
There were several persons who did bay`ah at the hands of Amir al-Mu’minin, who were very active at that time but went back on their promise later on and became rebellious. Among such persons were Talhah and al-Zubayr who did the bay`ah in front of a crowd. But when their expectations of undue benefits were not fulfilled, they said that they had owed their allegiance under duress and not willingly! The manner in which Amir al-Mu’minin’s bay`ah was conducted, any fair person would not accept the canard of Talhah and al-Zubayr. After much persuasion by the Muslims the Imam (a.s) conceded to their demand for taking over the Caliphate and there was no element of coercion in the conduct of the bay`ah. There were several persons who refused to owe their allegiance and they were happily going around without any fear. What was the importance of the insignificant Talhah and al-Zubayr that their bay`ah, willing or unwilling, was thought absolutely necessary and under the shadow of the sword, as alleged by them, they were forced to owe allegiance! Then this process could also have been followed for Sa`d and `Abdullah ibn `Umar. Why they were left to their own scruples and the twin of Talhah-al-Zubayr were coerced to give their allegiance!
With the bay`ah of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) both worldly and spiritual power was vested in him. Caliphate, in fact, is from Allah for enforcing His Commands and running the society according to the norms of the Shari`ah. The caliphate is through Nass and not the prerogative of the people or a small coterie of persons who manipulate the circumstances to acquire power for personal gains and aggrandizement. The caliphate that was offered to `Ali (a.s) was just a worldly position that he accepted under much persuasion from the people and he had made it clear to them that all his actions would be in consonance with the Shari`ah. Therefore, in one of his sermons he says,
“If the presence of those who came for the bay`ah and those who supported me, had not persuaded me, and the pledge that Allah has taken from the Ulema that they should not remain
(403)
quiet at the tyranny of the cruel and the penury of the poor, I would have left the caliphate on others shoulders.”
Although he remained away from the power after the demise of the Prophet (a.s), he was not away from the divinely commissioned caliphate for a single moment. Whether he had worldly power or not, he was to be obeyed as the Holy Prophet’s successor and a Divinely commissioned Imam. Even those who considered obedience to him was not necessary ultimately came round and owed their allegiance to him for the worldly caliphate. Although obedience was the common factor in both the groups -one group owed total allegiance, both worldly and spiritual, to the Imam (a.s) and the other group only the worldly allegiance!
The worldly power is the height of achievement for the mundane creatures, but Amir al-Mu’minin’s status is much more elevated. Before this worldly caliphate there was no shortcoming in him nor did, the caliphate enhanced his status in any way. Sa`sa`ah ibn Sawhan al-`Abdi told `Ali (a.s) at the time of the bay`ah:
“By Allah! O Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s)! You have enhanced the status of the caliphate. The caliphate has not elevated you in any way! You have taken it to greater heights by accepting it. You did not need it, the caliphate needed you!”[1]
Once a discussion was started about the caliphate in the presence of Ahmad ibn Hanbal when he said:
“O people! Why are you talking so much about `Ali (a.s) and the caliphate, and the caliphate and `Ali (a.s)? Caliphate had not enhanced `Ali’s status in any way. It was `Ali (a.s) who gave the status to caliphate!”[2]
[1] Tārīkh al-Ya`qūbī, Vol 1, Page 135 [2] Tārīkh Baghdād, Vol 1, Page 135
AMIR AL MU’MININ’S STYLE OF GOVERNANCE
For ages, the system of rule by the kings has been dominating on the human race. As a result of this system, the craving for power had become a part of the human instinct. Therefore, the ancient Egyptians and the Japanese had a belief that the kings were born to rule over the people and that others were their serfs and servants! This created an inferiority complex in other people of those races. They were used as bonded slaves of the ruling elite. Despite all the tyranny, they thought they had no right to protest against the injustices of their masters. They thought the purpose of their lives was to abjectly surrender to the will of their rulers.
When the voice of Islam rose from the desert of Arabia, the conditions there were almost the same. The weak were helpless in front of the persons with power. The poor persons always remained in the clutches of the usurers or the shackles of the masters. Slavery was rampant. Islam gave them the tiding of freedom and equality. It removed the differences of color and race. It abolished the rule of men and established Allah’s Rule! The meaning of Allah’s Rule is that the people believe that He is our Master and observes all our words and deeds. We are subservient only to His Commands and answerable to Him! This new concept did away with idolatry and hypocrisy and the minds and hearts were endowed with brotherhood and equality.
The prophet of Islam (a.s) was not having the political power and pelf in his view. The purpose of his Annunciation was to establish Allah’s Rule among the people. Therefore, he gave the lesson of the Unity of Allah to the people. And invited all people to gather at one focal point and give birth to a clean society. The society in which there was knowledge instead of ignorance and where there was justice in place of tyranny. The Prophet (a.s) was not doing this only for his own time. His message was for the posterity as well. He advocated a system that is termed Divinely commissioned leadership. The one to establish the divinely commissioned leadership was to set an example to the people with his beliefs and actions in accordance to the Commands of Allah. The people should obey him accepting him as the Representative of Allah amongst them. The acceptance of Allah’s Commands is to follow his directives! Therefore, Allah says:
(405)
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ.
“O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you. (4/59)
This is an undeniable fact that after the Prophet (a.s) the weak democracy that was the basis of the governance was the forerunner of the monarchy of the type followed by Caesar and Khusrow. Instead of Allah’s Rule, the hegemony of individuals was enforced on the people. In divinely commissioned government, there is no place for personal aggrandizement. The yardstick of Allah’s Rule is neither power nor pelf of individuals but the one who administers and enforces the norms and Commands Revealed by Allah. No doubt, those who came to the caliphate were called Muslims. But the Islamic Rule does not mean that a person who has embraced Islam comes on the top to rue. But it is the implementation of the life style that the Prophet (a.s) had enunciated. If anyone establishes rule contrary to those norms, then that is not an Islamic regime. Therefore, the rule of Yazid, Marwan, `Abd al-Malik and persons of that ilk cannot be called as Muslim rulers. In fact, they were the images of Heracles and Caesar in an Islamic environment!
`Ali’s rule was truly Islamic. He had accepted the caliphate only on condition that no one should interfere in his running the administration exactly in accordance with the norms laid down by the Shari`ah of Islam. Although his period was dominated by intrigue and troubles created by his enemies, that in his brief rule he presented an administration that was in accord with the style of governance of the Prophet (a.s) and implicitly followed the Commands of Allah. If he had not taken the reins of governance in his hands, people would have forgotten what is divinely commissioned government. Running the governance on the Islamic norms is something and acquiring power through politics is something else.
Amir al-Mu’minin’s entire life is a proof that every act of his was in accordance to the Commands of Allah. If he accepted the caliphate, he did it with the condition that it would be the divinely commissioned government and not personal rule. He gave real interpretation to “Who has not a partner in the kingdom, (17/111)” through his actions as the caliph. If he were interested in personal aggrandizement, he would not have dismissed the functionaries of the previous regime against many well-meaning advisers. He went against their advice because he knew that those functionaries were promoting their own interests instead of governing according to the norms set by Allah. He had accepted the caliphate only to do away these personal and corrupt
(406)
coteries. If the Imam (a.s) was interested in his personal power, he could have closed his eyes to the misdeeds of those persons. But in his eyes, personal power and influence had no meaning. His intent was to educate and inform the people about the Islamic norms. Once he was mending his foot wear when he told Ibn `Abbas:
“By Allah! If in my view the establishment of the Truth and the destruction of the Falsehoods was not there, this footwear would be dearer to me than being the ruler.”[1]
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) has described the purpose of his rule in two simple sentences. The first is the establishment of the Truth and the second the destruction of the Falsehood. During his rule, he kept these two things in view. His main aim was to propagate the Islamic norms and practices. Not only he was firm on his stand, but also he created movement in the stagnant natures of the people with his actions. Although he was not interested in the annexation of other territories, but conquering hearts and developments of the minds is a bigger achievement. No doublets the other rulers annexed large territories and were termed conquerors, `Ali (a.s) tried to put the Islamic society on healthy ground. Despite all the unrest and mischief in the realm, `Ali (a.s) proceeded with his task of reforming the society. He heard the complaints of the people against their exploitation by the functionaries of the state and removed unnecessary restrictions imposed on the people. He crushed the destructive and disruptive forces and kept an eye on the activities of the functionaries. He fixed the duties and responsibilities of the persons responsible for the collection of zakat. He abolished the racial discrimination among the people and promoted equality and fraternity among all.
`Ali (a.s) had such an ideal society in his view that it should be free of injustice, cruelty, bribery, cheating and other such ills. He promoted legal and societal equity among the people. He wanted to inculcate the sense of responsibility among the people and he used to sound them, from time to time, with his writings and sermons. At the top of these writings and lectures there used to be an exhortation to the people to adopt piety and a reminder about the Day of Reckoning. Although every writing of his is a document of advice, but the letter that he wrote to Malik al-Ashtar while nominating him as the governor to Egypt is a reflection of the Divine Instruction. The document covers the norms of statecraft in such perfection that until today the human mind cannot think more than that on the subject. With all the
[1] Nahj al-Balāghah
(407)
developments taking place, no additions could be thought of on the basic norms enunciated therein. George Jordac, a Christian Scholar, comments on the comprehensiveness of the document in these words:
“Among his writings this is a great document of advice and instruction. It is a comprehensive instrument of the laws of citizenship and city life and encompasses the rights and privileges of the common man.”[1]
In this document, the Imam (a.s) has encompassed the lowest rung of the society to the elites, the rights and duties of each stratum, and has mentioned about the rights of the workers, the traders, artisans, soldiers, judges, advisers and viziers. He described the functions of the departments of finance, interior, foreign affairs, the covenants of the state, the relations between the Muslims and the Dhimmis; about administration of justice, the duties of the functionaries in all the departments and their staff…
This document, as far as its efficacy is concerned, is not bound by conditions of time and place. `Ali (a.s) had created this document 1,400 years ago and the picture that he had drawn of the administrator and the administered still holds good, and will hold good until this world exists! The wonderful thing about the document is that it is as efficacious to the democratic societies as it is to the totalitarian environments as well! If the countries that raise the slogans of universal peace and equity take guidance from this document, neither then there will be any conflict between the landlord and the tiller, nor will the factory worker raise the slogan of injustice by the factory owner. There will not be any grouse about iniquitous distribution of wealth nor will economic inequality exist. Such peaceful environment will result that it will be an example of welfare and justice!
Instead of copying the document here, we recommend to the reader to peruse “Nahj al-Balaghah”, the compendium of `Ali’s writings and sermons. However, in this book, we shall present the relevant extracts from the book as we proceed with our writing.
[1] Sawt al-`Adālah al-Insāniyyah, Vol 1, Page 335
THE NORMS FOR SELECTION OF THE FUNCTIONARIES
The progress of a society very much depends on the organization of the State on proper lines, be it a monarchy or a democracy for that matter. Whether it is Islamic or otherwise. When there is good law and order in a state and respect for the human rights, it is a well-managed welfare state. All this depends on the wisdom and sagacity of the head of the state and the capability and efficiency of the functionaries of the state. These functionaries provide efficient administration and make the people law-abiding citizens of the state. All these functionaries are appointed to the various provinces of the state at the discretion of the head of the state. If it is an Islamic state, the functionaries will be responsible for efficient collection of the zakat and jizyah in addition to the other duties like law and order, dispensation of justice to the people etc.
This is a fact that the people take inspiration from their administrators. They adopt the way their administrator follows. If the administrator in an Islamic state is pious and follows all the tenets properly, the people too try to emulate him. If the administrator is selfish, corrupt and ill mannered, the people in that area will also behave in that manner. Therefore, it is imperative that maximum care is exercised to select administrators after proper screening of their dossiers.
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) used to judge his functionaries on the basis of their piety, honesty and capability to perform the function assigned to them. He gave key positions only to persons with immaculate honesty, nobility and straightforwardness. Ibn `Abd al-Barr writes:
“`Ali (a.s) appointed only those persons as the governors of provinces who were trustworthy and honest.”[1]
He never considered the family background, the tribe to which the person belonged and the recommendations of important persons for appointment as functionaries of the state. He used to instruct these functionaries not to retain
[1] Al-Istī`āb, Vol 3, Page 47
(409)
any person on the basis of recommendations. Therefore, he said on one occasion:
“Do not accept any recommendation for retaining personnel; only consider that they are trustworthy and honest.”[1]
Among the functionaries of the `Ali (a.s) there were some Hashemites as well. Among them were the sons of `Abbas; `Abdullah, `Ubaydullah and Qathm. Some people started thinking that he had retained them because of his close relationship with them. They said that if `Uthman had favored Banū-Umayyah as functionaries of state, what was wrong? The question is whether these functionaries were honest, just and capable of performing the assignment entrusted to them. But `Uthman’s functionaries were conceited, ill behaved and absolutely incapable of good administration. If he had placed persons who were men of piety, honest and capable, the criticism of nepotism would not have been leveled. The persons whom `Ali (a.s) appointed were above criticism as far as their honesty, piety and capability were concerned. Just because of the relationship with the caliphs, putting the functionaries of both the administrations on the same level is not justifiable. This comment would be justifiable if the Hashemite functionaries were appointed all over as the Umayyad functionaries were predominantly all over the realm during `Uthman’s caliphate. During `Ali’s period there were only a few Hashemites in important positions and their antecedents were immaculate. Was no Hashemite deserving of any important position? If they were capable, keeping them away from assignments just because they were Hashemite was no justice. It is surprising that over a period of twenty-five years after the Prophet (a.s) no Hashemite is seen in any important position of the state! `Ali’s yardstick for appointment of any person was his piety, capability and character. If the person did not measure up to these requirements he would not consider him fit for the assignment, be he a Hashemite, Muhajir or Ansar! If any functionary were found committing an impropriety, he would not be spared of the punishment, whosoever he was.
[1] Alfu Kalimah
ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE FUNCTIONARIES
The functionaries of the state can be both constructive and destructive in their action and attitude. With their constructive actions, the state develops and prospers. If they adopt a contrary attitude, it would certainly be harmful for the state. The head of a state needs to monitor the activities of the functionaries and should not relax after assigning them to their tasks. However honest and trustworthy the functionaries, they are fallible human beings. They might get attracted to the luster and lucre of wealth and stray from the right path if left to their own scruples for long. They might indulge in bribery, misappropriation and other such destructive activities. Instead of serving the people, they might turn self-serving.
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) knew the futility of the human nature very well. He did not believe in closing the eyes and ears in trusting people. Besides, some of the functionaries of the previous administration had convinced him of their reliability and were continuing in service, for example: Abū-Mūsa al-Ash`ari, al-Ash`ath ibn Qays and Masqalah ibn Hubayrah. It was necessary that all their activities were monitored and the cash inflows and outflows audited. Therefore, Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) used to keep an eye on every minute thing like the lifestyle of these persons. He praised them for good performance and reprimanded them if he found any oversights, defects or dereliction of duty in their activities. He used to check the account of bayt al-mal regularly. If he received reports of misappropriation by any functionary, he used to lift his eyes towards the sky and say:
“O Allah! You know that I have placed them over Your creatures not to harm them and defy Your Rights.”[1]
He then used to conduct an audit and punish the person according to the seriousness of his misdemeanor. From some he used to recover the misappropriated funds and some he incarcerated as a punishment for their crime. Some of such events are mentioned her in brief.
[1] Al-Istī`āb, Vol 3, Page 48
(411)
The governor of al-Basrah, `Uthman ibn Hunayf attended a party. `Ali (a.s) came to know about it and wrote to `Uthman,
“I did not expect that you would accept their invitation from whose doors the beggars and the needy are chased away and the affluent entertained! The morsels that you chew, you must first look at carefully! Leave aside those morsels that give you some suspicion. O Ibn Hunayf! Fear Allah and remain contented with your own bread so that you get relief from the fire of the Hell!”
Some reports of misdemeanor came about al-Ash`ath ibn Qays, who was the governor of Azerbaijan since the times of `Uthman. After the Battle of the Camel, `Ali (a.s) wrote to him, “You are the treasurer of all the funds of Allah that are in your trust until you hand them over to me!” al-Ash`ath understood that he was about to be dismissed. He gathered whatever amounts he could and told some of his friends about `Ali’s letter and that he intended to go under the protection of Mu`awiyah. His friend said that it was not proper for him to leave behind his tribesmen and go to Syria. On the advice of his friends, he gave up his intention of going there. `Ali (a.s) sent Hijr ibn `Adi to him, who somehow brought him to al-Kūfah. When his baggage was rummaged, they recovered 400,000 dirhams in cash. `Ali (a.s) gave him 30,000 dirhams as a compensation for his services and the rest was transferred to the bayt al-mal.
Al-Mundhir ibn al-`Abdi, whom he appointed as the governor of Astkhar did some misappropriation. `Ali (a.s) wrote to him, “I have been informed that you are losing your Hereafter to make this world! You are breaking your link with the Faith and doing favors with your relations! You do not deserve to be in a position of trust or to depend on you for protecting others from misappropriation. Therefore, as soon as you get this letter, come and report to me!” When al-Mundhir came, his accounts were audited. It was found that he was short of 20,000 dirhams. But he denied having that money with him. `Ali (a.s) asked him to make the statement under oath, that he refused. He was sent to the jail. After some time he was released at the instance of Sa`sa`ah ibn Sawhan.
Reports of cheating came about Ziyad ibn Sumayyah, who was on a deputation in place of Ibn `Abbas, at al-Basrah. `Ali (a.s) wrote to him, “If I find that you have misappropriated the funds of Muslims and you have done malpractice in anything big or small, I shall give you such punishment that
(412)
will make you empty handed, weak and discredited among people!”
`Ali (a.s) wrote to the governor of Ardshir, Maslamah ibn Hubayrah, “The funds that were earned through the tips of the Muslims’ lances and the hoofs of their horses, for which they had shed their blood and sweat, you are distributing to the Bedouin of your tribe. If this is proved right, you will come down in my estimation! In this fund, the Muslims who are with me here and those who are with you there are equal partners!”
When some persons from Banū-Tamim complained about the harsh treatment of Ibn `Abbas, `Ali (a.s) wrote to him, “May Allah be kind on you! Whatever good or bad that comes from your mouth and the hands about the people, do not hasten in doing that! Remember, we are both equal partners in whatever you do!”
`Ali (a.s) wrote to the governor of Halwan, al-Aswad ibn Qatbah, “When a person in authority has different attitudes towards different persons, then mostly it may not be a just act! Therefore, justice demands that all people must be equal in your consideration! Protect your psyche and protect the people to the best of your ability!”
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
One of the important functions of the state is the dispensation of justice to the people. It has to constitute such courts that unbiased and fair judgments are made on disputes between the citizens. If the poor and needy are not protected by the state, the foundations of such a state become weak and peace will not prevail there for long. This will bolden the perpetrators of cruelty on one side and on the other, the suffering poor might rise in rebellion. Therefore, it is said, “A country can exist with infidelity but not under oppression.”
The constitutional regimes of the world form courts for civil, criminal and small causes, but people have to make rounds of the courts for hearings and pay heavy fees to the attorneys seeking redressal for, in most cases, a just cause. But Islam has devised such system of justice that, if it is followed properly, neither there will be any difficulty in delivering justice nor will the supplicant have to be burdened with heavy expenses. In this system, there is no scope for partiality or bribery. In Islam, only such persons are authorized to deliver justice who have attained a high degree of piety and have an interpretational awareness of the Islamic law of justice. They must be self-respecting and with a clear conscience. They have to be highly respected persons in the society so that they do not stoop to bribery and favoritism in dispensing justice.
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) gave special attention to the department of justice during his regime. At every prominent place, he constituted courts. He appointed as qadis only persons of piety, honesty, integrity, and knowledge about the Islamic Laws and jurisprudence. `Ali (a.s) himself had served as a qadi during the time of the Prophet (a.s) and he is known for his dispensation of justice in the annals of the History of Islam. After this practical experience, none could match his skills in the organization of the department of justice. Keeping the human weakness in mind, he provided sufficient compensation to the qadis that they need not think of malpractices and bribery in the discharge of their duties. As a check, strict vigilance was kept on their activities and the lifestyles. If any suspicions arose, they were either reprimanded or removed from their positions. Therefore, the qadi of al-Kūfah, Shurayh Ibn Harith, who
(414)
was serving in that position since the times of `Umar, was found that he had bought a house for eighty Dinars. `Ali (a.s) called him and said, “I have heard that you have bought a house for eighty Dinars!” Shurayh replied, “Yes!” `Ali (a.s) looked at him in anger and said, “O Shurayh! Is it that you bought the house with someone else’s money or through ill-gotten money? If it is so, then you lost this world and the Hereafter too!”
Islam is a religion of justice. It wants to see justice in all walks of life. Then the very purpose of the department of justice is specifically for deliverance of justice! Therefore, the Holy Qur’an says:
وَإِذَا حَكَمْتُمْ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ أَنْ تَحْكُمُوا بِالْعَدْلِ.
“…And that when you judge between people, you judge with justice. (4/58)”
The requirement of this justice is that during the hearings the judge must be absolutely impartial and unbiased. Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) was very particular about equitable treatment of the contesting parties whether they were Muslim or they were Dimmi. He gave strict instructions to the judges to follow this rule meticulously without any consideration for any one. The author of wafiyyat al-a`yan has written that with one Dhimmi he (`Ali) went as a contesting party to the court of Shurayh the judge. Shurayh the judge stood up to receive him with due respect. The Imam (a.s) said, “This is your first injustice!” Once a person was `Ali’s guest and during the same period he made an appeal against another person in the Imam‘s court. He told him that he was a contestant and the Prophet (a.s) has said that it is against the requirements of justice that the judge keeps one of the contesting parties as his guest and not the other. Therefore, he asked him to move away from his place. It is recorded in the books of tradition that once `Ali (a.s), during the period of `Umar, visited him in connection with a case. `Umar addressed him as Abul-Hasan and the contesting party as the opponent! At this signs of unease came on the face of `Ali (a.s). When he was asked about his disturbance, he said that the requirement of justice is that the way of addressing the contesting parties must be equitable. Addressing the one with his kunyah and the other in a different way smacks of making difference between the two!
Mentioning about a couple of instances, that are an infinitesimal part of innumerable such instances, it has to be accepted that the eyes of `Ali (a.s) used to be focused on the requirements of justice and even minute aspects did not escape his attention. In the events narrated here, it has certainly become
(415)
evident that he did not like welcoming one contestant to the hearing and neglecting the other, or addressing one with more respect than the other. Such intricacies will be noted by a person who keeps intently focused on the details of the matter. He made the Judges understand that although what they did was not very important but the attitude might reflect the possibility of bias creeping into their verdict. Will there be any person in this world who would object being addressed with due respect, when he is certainly deserving of all respect! But the Imam’s sense of justice was such that he felt that there was an element of bias when the other party and he were addressed in a different way.
These days we hear a lot that the judiciary must be free of extraneous pressures so that it did not become an instrument in the hands of the establishment and instead of protecting the public interest, it starts serving the functionaries of the state. No doubt, to this extent the independence of the judiciary is very essential. The judiciary is the institution for the translation of the laws and statutes into practice and the laws are not restricted to the people but also the state is subservient to them. But this does not mean that the judiciary is given total liberty to act as it wished. There must be someone to review the functions of the judiciary. It is the responsibility of a just establishment to evaluate the judgments of the department of justice and review the decisions wherever necessary. Therefore, Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) made it mandatory for the judiciary to communicate the verdict on important cases to him for review before they were pronounced. The author of Wasa’il al-Shi`ah writes that the Imam (a.s) told the Shurayh the judge:
“Beware! Do not pass any verdict on cases of qisas or the matters requiring Divine Justice and about the Rights of the Muslims before referring them to me.”[1]
As far as freedom to the judiciary in the ordinary cases was concerned, he stressed on the qadis to practice the utmost equity and fairness in their verdicts. He was very particular of the judges not favoring anyone, however important he might be. Therefore, when he was returning from the Battle of Siffin, he lost one of his armor chain. After some time he saw a Christian wearing the same armor. The Christian insisted that it was his property. `Ali (a.s) went in appeal to the court of the Shurayh the judge. On inquiry by the judge, the Christian said that the armor belonged to him and that he was in possession of it was the proof of his ownership. Shurayh asked `Ali (a.s) his
[1] Wasā’il al-Shī`ah, Vol 3, Page 395
(416)
proof of the ownership of the material. The Imam (a.s) said, “The armor is mine! I have neither sold it nor have I gifted it to anyone!” Shurayh was confused that on the one hand the claim of `Ali (a.s) could not be wrong and on the other hand the respondent had the strong proof of the possession of the material. With the evidence available, the verdict would go against `Ali (a.s). The qadi was reluctant to pass the verdict against him. Noticing this, the Imam (a.s) told him to give a verdict that was according to the requirement of justice. Therefore, the verdict went against `Ali (a.s) and the Christian retained the armor with him.
When we analyze this case, several aspects of justice become evident that highlight `Ali’s great sense of justice. As the head of state, he could have passed a verdict on the case. The verdict would have been in his favor only because he knew that the armor was his own stolen property. But he did not want the supplicant himself to give a verdict. Therefore, he went before the Shurayh the judge. Instead of telling to the qadi that the property was stolen by the respondent or he might have bought it from the thief, `Ali (a.s) told that he had neither sold nor gifted the armor to anyone. Although the intent was clear that the property was stolen, he did not say that the person was a thief. Although he lost the case, it was his moral victory. The result was that the Christian felt defeated even after winning the case. When he came out of the court he could not look straight into the eyes of `Ali (a.s). He apologized to `Ali (a.s) and said that he had picked up the aromor on the way from Siffin and wanted to give it to him. He praised the Imam’s high morality, sense of justice and in fact, he was so impressed, that he embraced Islam at that instant. `Ali (a.s) was very happy that the person had embraced Islam and gifted that armor along with a horse to him!
PROTECTION OF BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS
Every person, on attaining the age of consent, starts feeling on the one hand that certain duties are imposed on him and on the other that the society in which he lives, he has certain rights and privileges. This feeling requires that he recognizes his duties and protect his rights, be the rights the individual rights or the collective rights! He also has to see that not only his rights are not denied, but the rights of his fellow men too are protected. If some impediments come in the way of these rights, he must try to the best of his capabilities to remove them. The biggest responsibility for protecting the rights of the individual and the society rests on the state. Therefore, the states, in their statutes give a pride of place to the individual and human rights. They do this to preclude a feeling of insecurity from the minds of the people
These rights, basically, are four in number.
The Right to Live
The first right is the right to live. Every individual in this world has a right to live. The individual or group of individuals have no right to deprive a person the right to live. Islam, which is a system based on the norm of peace, considers murder as the most heinous crime. One blatant murder is termed such a huge sin by Islam as if an entire race has been killed. Therefore, Allah says:
…أَنَّهُ مَنْ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا.
“…Whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men. (5/32)”
This verse also permits that killing a person who is guilty of making mischief on the earth is permissible. Because the person himself had been guilty of killing others and creating mischief in the society. Islam prescribing the punishment of a life for a life has very efficiently controlled the urge for taking human life for no reason at all. A person, before killing any one thinks twice that soon he will meet the same end at the hands of Justice! Therefore,
(418)
the Holy Qur’an terms the Law of qisas as the very life of the human race:
وَلَكُمْ فِي الْقِصَاصِ حَيَاةٌ يَا أُوْلِي الْأَلْبَابِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ.
“And there is life for you in the law of retaliation (qisas), O men of understanding, that you may guard yourselves. (2/179)”
Similarly, killing someone who attacks with an intention of killing too is not forbidden. It is done in self-defense.
Islam not only forbids killing someone else, but committing suicide too is a major sin in the Faith. In fact severing any part of one’s body is not allowed. Man is made the trustee of his life and the act of killing oneself or severing the parts of one’s body too are taboo. Although in some countries suicide is considered an act of valor, but the truth is that it is the worst type of cowardice and defeatist tendency in the person. The Holy Qur’an has prohibited people from this act:
وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ بِكُمْ رَحِيمًا.
“And do not kill your people; surely Allah is Merciful to you. (4/29)”
While Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) was the protector of the human values, he was also aware of the importance of the human life. He did not like or tolerate taking human lives needlessly. Although he was in the forefront during the battles fought during the time of the Prophet (a.s), he even fought some battles during his reign as well, but all these battles were in self-defense and not aggressive battles for conquest and self-aggrandizement, as some others did. The Prophet (a.s) took up his sword when the enemy had attacked. Similarly `Ali (a.s) initiated action only when the enemy aggressively came and started hostilities. In fact, he always tried to nip the conflict in the bud and find ways of establishing peace with the enemy. `Ali (a.s) never made a preemptive attack on the enemy and retaliated only when the attack started from the opposing side. Also, he tried to make the hostilities as short as possible to limit loss of lives on both sides. He refrained from taking men captive and forgave even the known sworn enemies. Therefore, after the Battle of the Camel, with a single stroke of pen he gave amnesty to all people of al-Basrah. He did not seek any reparations from Marwan, `Abdullah ibn `Umar, `Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr and sent Umm al-Mu’minin from the battlefield to al-Madinah with all the respect! The Iraqis and the Syrians who were taken prisoner during the Battle of Siffin were released unconditionally. At the end of the Battle of Nahrawan, the injured Khawarij (the
(419)
excommunicated) who numbered 400 were released from detention unconditionally. The people from their tribes were called to take them away. He wanted them to be treated and sent to al-Kūfah after total recovery. Every fair thinking person can make out from the attitude of `Ali (a.s) that his purpose in fighting was just to curb the mischief and not to kill men and plunder territories, as was done by some others not very long ago!
While `Ali (a.s) was very much against unnecessary bloodletting, he did not permit anyone’s blood going waste without the application of qisas. Therefore, when `Umar was killed, his son `Ubaydullah killed al-Harmuzan and a few other innocent persons. `Uthman closed his eyes to this and was not willing to punish the guilty. When Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) took reins in his hands, he determined to extract qisas for the life of al-Harmuzan. But the culprit flew and went to the protection of Mu`awiyah in Syria. Ibn al-Athir writes:
“When `Ali (a.s) took reins of office, he decided to get `Ubaydullah executed, but he (the culprit) escaped to Mu`awiyah in Syria.”[1]
`Ubaydullah ibn `Umar was finally killed fighting against `Ali (a.s) in the Battle of Siffin.
The Right of Thought
The second right is the freedom of thought. This means that every individual must be free of extraneous pressures in his thought process so that he is able to independently decide what is good for him and what is bad. If this freedom of thought is curbed, then he will say a thing is good if the powerful say it is good, and he will accept a thing as bad when the persons in power say that it was bad. He will thus be subservient to the thinking of others and will not have any independent opinion about things. The freedom of thought is the most important aspect of freedom and wherever it is curbed, there the society becomes retrograde.
Islam brought forth this freedom of thought to its followers and broke all the oppressive practices of the Days of Ignorance (jahiliyyah). There is no place for coercion in Islam and its beliefs have never been forcefully thrust on anyone. Those who wanted to embrace Islam were invited to freely think about it and decide for themselves if they were willing to embrace the Faith.
[1] Al-Kāmil fit-Tārīkh, Vol 3, Page 40
(420)
Therefore, the Qur’an tells in very clear terms:
لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ قَدْ تَبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنْ الغَيِّ.
“There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error. (2/256)”
The period of Amir al-Mu’minin’s reign was a period of independence of though for the people. When, at the end of the third caliphate the people wanted to owe their allegiance to him, `Ali (a.s) asked them to think over the matter before casting their lot. He gave them a full week to think over the matter. `Ali (a.s) had in his mind that in their selection the people should not act on the spontaneous emotions because such decisions are not durable. One day they decide something in a hurry and the next day they go back on it. So, instead of making an emotional decision at the spur of the moment, they must make a well considered and thought of decision. Although the cunning and seasoned politicians take, advantage of such emotions of the people and win their election campaigns with this policy. But Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) gives the people all the time to think and decide. Such an example cannot be cited in the annals of the elections anywhere in the world.
Similarly, in the matter of religion neither he closed the avenues of thought nor he enforced any change of Faith under coercion. People of all faiths, viz: Jews, Christians, and Magians, etc… had total freedom to practice their creeds.
The Right of Action
The third right is the right to act. Man is free, to a certain degree, to act the way he wishes. He cannot be forced to act contrary to his own wishes. He will do what he himself thinks is right for him and shuns what he thinks is harmful. He is within his rights to do this as far as his action does not go against the interest of the people in general. Therefore, certain restrictions are imperative with the right of action. In every civilized society, such restrictions are deemed necessary.
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s).believed in freedom of action as well as freedom of thought. He never forced any person to do things that he personally did not want to do. Therefore, when some persons refused to owe allegiance to him, he did not force them to agree. When Talhah and al-Zubayr went back after pledging their allegiance to `Ali (a.s), he told them that no one forced them to do the bay`ah. When they wanted to go to Makkah, he told them that it would
(421)
be better for them to stay at al-Madinah. But when they insisted on going, he told them that if they wished to go, they might. About `Umar the history records that he forced important Companions to stay put in al-Madinah lest they go out and hatch conspiracies against him! But Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s), despite knowing the nature of the two persons that their intention in traveling was to create mischief, did not curb their freedom of action. But when they headed towards al-Basrah for raising a rebellion, it became necessary to control them. Similarly Mu`awiyah too raised the standard of rebellion in Syria and steps had to be initiated against him. The step was not taken because he had refused to owe allegiance to the Caliph. The action was necessary because he was creating mischief and disturbing law and order in the realm. Mu`awiyah was only a governor in a province and his action was a clear rebellion by any standards of statecraft. Similarly, the Khawarij were left to their own scruples until they crossed their bounds and started to become rebellious.
`Ali (a.s) respected the freedom of action of the individual so much that even in very delicate situations he did not interfere with it. Even during battles, he allowed this privilege to persons. When he received word that some persons had escaped to Syria, he told Sahl ibn Hunayf, the chief of al-Madinah, “I am told that some of your people are stealthily going to Mu`awiyah. Do not worry about those who have gone. These are worldly-wise persons and they will bend towards worldly things! They have understood, seen and felt justice and learned it well that here, according to their rights, all are equal. Therefore, they have run away to a place where partiality is rampant!” One can know from these few instances to what extent he allowed personal freedom to people: be it a friend or a foe, strong or weak, a known person or a stranger; none was deprived of this freedom. And this is the freedom that the people of a civilized society demand from their rulers. The purpose of this freedom is not that people keep doing anything they wanted to do. When the establishment finds that people have abused the freedom given to them, then drastic action can also be instituted against such persons.
Right of Racial Equality
The fourth right is the right to racial equality. This means that discrimination on the basis of race, color and geographical origin has to be done away with. Every person, by virtue of the fact that he is a human being is entitled to the same respect as any other human being. All the social and economic rights for all individuals in the society have to be maintained at the same level. It is
(422)
immaterial whether the person is rich, poor, Arab or non-Arab, rich or poor, black or white. They are all the creature of the same Allah and belong to the human kind. The differences that existed among the people were the creation of the Days of Ignorance. This was done to put into the minds of the people that some were superior to others! Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ مِنْ ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَى وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ.
“O you men! Surely, We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most careful (of his duty); surely Allah is Knowing, Aware. (49/13)”
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) was the torchbearer of Islamic equality and the guardian of human rights. He treated Qarashi, Arab, non-Arab, freemen, slaves and everyone else on an equal footing. He did not tolerate discrimination between men on the basis of tribal and racial differences.
From the bayt al-mal, a freed slave would get as much allowance that was received by a Qarashi. The way he treated others, he had the same attitude towards his own relations. He never took others and outsiders for granted. His attention was shared in equal measure by all. Once he learned about a governor that he had misused some money. He wrote to the person, “By Allah! If al-Hasan or al-Husayn (a.s) had done what you did, I would not have shown any consideration to them, nor would they be able to influence my decision!”
This was the equity of treatment that the Vicegerent of the Prophet (a.s) presented to the world. Today the Charter of Human Rights is given much importance by all the nations in the world. But Amir al-Mu’minin, in his time, practiced all the norms of human and the individual’s rights that are very dear to the people in these modern times!
THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM
In modern day, the economic system of countries revolves around capitalism and socialism. The capitalist system is an independent economic order in which every one is free to pursue acquisition of wealth keeping aside all norms of religion and morality. Neither there is any moral bonding in hoarding wealth nor does the society prevent them from doing so. In this system, the individual’s interest dominates over the interest of the society! The capitalists’ eyes are always focused on the hoards of wealth. This avarice reaches such heights that the capitalist crushes the common interest of the people and adopts the way of selfishness and considers that his aim is to keep running in the race of accumulating wealth. He neither refrains from harming anyone in this pursuit nor does he feel ashamed of sucking the blood of the poor workers in his factories and establishments. Because of the behavior of these capitalists, the instinct of hate arises in the minds of the suffering workers. The worker thinks that the profit that goes into the coffers of the capitalist is the result of his hard toil. The capitalist on the other hand thinks that the profit comes because of his wisdom, planning and investment. He thinks that the worker is only a cog in the machines of his factory that can be thrown away when it gets rusted and is useless! This economic exploitation and the difference in the status of the owner and the worker create the socialist movements. The aim of socialism is to eliminate the capitalist and distributing the wealth equitably to all the people in the society. In the view of these socialists, without removing the single ownership of businesses, the gap between the rich and the poor cannot be bridged.
The idea of socialism is not new or a product of the past century. In 500 B.C., Plato noticed the ups and downs of the economy and the wrong attitude of the government of Greece when he laid the foundation of the concept of socialism. In 3rd Century A.D. during the reign of Qabad, a person by name of Mazdak termed women and wealth as joint capital and propagated the concept of socialism. His contemporaries, and those who followed him, accepted the concept of socialism. But this concept was followed by very few people and after sometime, it almost disappeared. In the I9th Century A.D. Again,
(424)
socialism was heard of. Some people made efforts to adopt it. But their efforts did not bear fruit. In the year 1847 A.D. one German born Jew, Karl Marx enunciated the norms of socialism as a Concept of Economics. He believed that it was the remedy for all the economic and social ills This was the time when in Russia there was excess of wealth and the affluent groups were rolling in wealth and on the other hand, due to unemployment and economic problems there was general discontent among the masses. The majority of people was farmers and because of coming up of industries, a new group of workers too came into existence. The farmers were at the mercy of the landlords and the workers were subservient to the factory owners. Because of the ill treatment by the factory owners and the landlords, the workers were striking work and the farmers started agitations. Ultimately, the people started hating the moneyed classes and the path was thus leveled for the rise of socialism. Therefore, after the death of Marx, Lenin rose and in 1917 A.D., he formally launched the concept of Socialism. He gathered around himself the Russian youth with the slogan of equitable distribution of wealth and crushed the opposing voices with force. He ultimately succeeded in formulating a system based on the concept of Socialism. Some other countries too were impressed with the concept and accepted it with some minor changes. Whether it is the concept of Capitalism or that of Socialism, both revolve around worldly economics and economic growth. They neither have any consideration for religious and moral norms nor other values of material. The difference between the two is that capitalism believes in Economic Freedom and Concept of Individual Ownership of assets, but there is no guarantee of Economic Safety. In Socialism, there is Guarantee of Economic Safety but the individual ownership of assets is not permitted.
The Islamic Economic System that is quite close to nature provides solution for all the economic ills and problems. This system neither depends on experimentation nor is it the result of the thoughts of experts in economics. It is the Concept propounded by Allah and presented by the Prophet of Islam (a.s). The System, instead of depending on the personal or group interests, stresses on collective interests of the society. The reason is that Allah is not the Creator only of any particular person or a group. Everyone owes his, and her, existence to Him! Therefore, in the Economic System propounded by Him the Collective Interest of the entire Ummah is envisaged
From the Islamic point of view, the real owner of everything in the world is Allah. Therefore, He exhorts about the distribution of the wealth thus:
(425)
وَآتُوهُمْ مِنْ مَالِ اللَّهِ الَّذِي آتَاكُمْ.
“And give them of the wealth of Allah which He has given you. (24/33)”
In Allah’s wealth, basically all humans have equal right of use. They are all equally entitled to utilize it all the things that come out of the earth, or are produced from the earth, or those that are found in the world, are for the benefit of all men. Therefore, Allah says:
هُوَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ لَكُمْ مَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا.
“He it is Who created for you all that is in the earth. (2/29)”
However, a person who acquires, through legitimate means, more or less, wealth through either hard labor or toil like trading, farming, doing jobs or gets it as inheritance without any effort, becomes his. But to maintain a balance between men in the society, a share has been fixed out of this wealth of the person for the society in general. One reason for this is that the individual remains connected with the society and the society remains in touch with the person and the relationship of mutual brotherhood and equity remained intact.
Islam does not believe in capitalism to the extent that the wealth gets intensely concentrated in only a few hands and others live at their mercy. Nor is it so much opposed to capitalism that the person is denied right over the wealth generated with his personal toil and effort. Islam preaches contentment and treading the middle path and its economic system is based on this concept. In this system, neither unfettered capitalism is allowed that is free of all neither religious nor moral bindings nor socialism that takes away all the individual rights to ownership of wealth and property. The individual’s efforts are bought by the society for provision of food and clothing in the socialistic system and a special group gets authorized to make use of the wealth thus generated. Islam neither backed capitalism that an unjust and unbalanced social structure came into existence, nor has it preached the unnatural concept of socialistic equality that the state keeps all the resources of production in its control and become responsible for meeting the needs of the individuals.
With this coercive equity, the spirit of competition among the people gets curbed because the individual has been deprived of the right of ownership and finds no incentive in putting in maximum efforts at work. Islam, instead of the forced equity of socialism, has kept equity in the economic resources and has provided equal opportunities for every individual that he generate
(426)
livelihood depending on his capability and toil. Therefore, the Holy Qur’an says:
وَأَنْ لَيْسَ لِلْإِنسَانِ إِلَّا مَا سَعَى.
“And that man shall have nothing but what he strives for. (53/39)”
Under this system, there will be difference between the individuals according to their capability and the efforts put at work. Not all the persons are of the same level of intelligence and learning and therefore the results achieved by them in their fields of activity too will be different. Instead of creating artificial equity, Islam has tried to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. It has not enforced such conditions on the affluent sections that after complying with them neither there will be imbalance in the society nor did any individual remains deprive of his basic needs.
Islam has provided individual ownership of wealth in addition to economic independence. The sense of ownership is such a human sentiment that has been recognized by Islam and has been promoted with certain checks and conditions. The Holy Qur’an has highlighted this:
وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُمْ بَيْنَكُمْ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتُدْلُوا بِهَا إِلَى الْحُكَّامِ لِتَأْكُلُوا فَرِيقًا مِنْ أَمْوَالِ النَّاسِ بِالْإِثْمِ وَأَنْتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ.
“And do not swallow up your property among yourselves by false means; neither seeks to gain access thereby to the judges, so that you may swallow up a part of the property of men wrongfully while you know. (2/188)”
Islam not only gives personal ownership rights to the individual, but it has also stressed on respecting and strengthening it. Therefore, stringent punishment for thefts is prescribed to provide these safeguards only. Islam does not tolerate using others wealth clandestinely or utilizing it without the consent of the owner. Therefore, the Prophet (a.s) has said:
“The use of the assets of another person without his consent is not legitimate.”
Although Islam has given the right of ownership to the individual, it has enforced certain conditions to prevent unrestricted capitalism. Therefore, clear differentiation has been made between legitimate and taboo. One big source of capital growth is usury. Islam has declared usury as taboo to curb capitalism. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
(427)
وَأَحَلَّ اللَّهُ الْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ الرِّبَا.
“And Allah has allowed trading and forbidden usury. (2/275)”
We have presented a brief outline of the economic system in Islam before we discuss the economic policy during the caliphate of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) that he had implemented those norms that had been prescribed by Islam. Although the period was not conducive for enforcing Islamic economic reforms because it followed the period of conquests and plunder and the treasury created capitalistic tendencies in the people because of the heavy gifts and allowances that were given to them. There was already a group of capitalists who had abandoned the Islamic norms of plain living and indulged in luxury and pomp. Without giving any importance to this group, `Ali (a.s) started revolutionizing the economic system. Therefore, as soon as he assumed his position he ordered confiscation of the feudatory gifts of land given to some persons by the former regimes. He said, “By Allah! If I had noticed such wealth that had been spent on the dowry of women and buying slave girls, I would have withdrawn it!” Therefore he confiscated swords, armors and camels meant for sadaqah from `Uthman’s place and announced that whosoever had the wealth gifted by `Uthman must deposit it in the bayt al-mal. This announcement created commotion among the Umayyads and other capitalists. Al-Walid ibn `Uqbah came to `Ali (a.s) and said that they would owe allegiance to him if he allowed them to retain the gifts given by `Uthman to them. `Ali (a.s) said:
“Do you want me to leave the wealth that has been illegitimately usurped by you? It is not in my power to relinquish Allah’s Right that is with you and other rich capitalists.”[1]
To run the economic system on proper lines, Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) thought it necessary to bring the people and the ruling class on the same level. Therefore, he said, “Allah has made it binding on the Imams (a.s) that they keep themselves in penury at the level of the common man, so that the downtrodden do not feel dejected of their economic difficulties.” He spent all his life in that manner. His standard of life, food and other habits were the same as a common poor person. Neither he liked to eat food better than that of the common man nor did he dress lavishly. He says, “Shall I eat to my fill when I find people around me who starve. Or should I be the way a poet
[1] Sharh Nahj al-Balāghah by ibn Abil-Hadīd
(428)
describes, ‘Is it a lesser ailment that you sleep after a large meal and around you there are hungry hearts who crave for dried crumbs!”
Amir al-Mu’minin wanted to put the economy on a pedestal that the gap between the rich and the poor was narrowed. He did not like the society to be divided into two distinct groups of ‘very rich’ and ‘very poor’. He did not want that on the one side there are palatial mansions and on the other dilapidated shacks. On one side grand raiment and on the other tattered and patched clothes. On one, hand even the dogs of the rich appeared well fed and on the other starving, emaciated men! On the one hand people wasting the nation’s wealth and on the other men, to name one, the Prophet’s favorite Companions, perishing without food and medicine in the wilderness of al-Rabadhah! These are the consequences of undue accumulation of wealth by the privileged few and denial of the rights of the poor. `Ali (a.s) has therefore said:
“Allah has kept the sustenance of the poor in the wealth of the rich. If a beggar starves, it is because a rich person has hoarded wealth and Allah is going to seek account of it from them.”[1]
Instead of this uneven economic situation, `Ali (a.s) wanted to establish a system where the needs of every individual were fulfilled and that none, wherever he was, suffered from want of basic necessities of life. He wanted that in the resources of production, everyone got his legitimate share and everyone got equal opportunity to toil and generate fair livelihood. This is the Islamic concept of equity which is very practicable. The spirit of equality amongst people is evidenced from the concepts of khums, zakat and the institution of Hajj when all the Muslims, irrespective of their status come to perform the pilgrimage. Therefore, `Ali (a.s) said:
“The betterment of men lies in their being different from each other. They will perish if they are all equal.”[2]
It is evident that when all men are on the same economic level then one will not need the other. As a result of this, the contacts between them will be weak and the economic relations will be disturbed.
If we view the economic system during the time of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s), it becomes evident that besides freedom to trade, the resources were owned by the people. Everyone was free to adopt any profession, viz: agriculture,
[1] Nahj al-Balāghah
[2] al-Amālī by Shaykh al-Sadūq
(429)
trading, handicraft etc. This is the yardstick of any good economic system that the people are free to pick the profession or avocation of their own choice. On the other side, they must have total economic protection so that every individual will have assurance that the desired results will emanate from his toils. `Ali (a.s) did not like people sitting at home doing nothing and becoming a burden on the society. Such drones depend on others’ income instead of earning their own livelihood. However, if a person was incapacitated to work due to some physical disability, he was supported by the bayt al-mal.
`Ali (a.s) considered agriculture and trading as the mainstay of the economy. Therefore, he said:
“One who has land and water for irrigation, and even then he is poor, then Allah should keep him away!”
About trading, he said:
“Do trading! Trading is that investment which will keep you contented from money and wealth!”
For the encouragement of agriculture and trading `Ali (a.s) did farming himself. He also was a trader. Therefore, he used to reclaim fallow lands and digging wells, he used to create oases. Similarly, for creating interest in trading, he promoted sales of loincloths in these words:
“I have bought this loincloth for five dirhams. If someone gives me a dirham extra, I shall sell it tohim!”
Whenever he had free time, he used to sit at his friend, `Ammar ibn Yasir’s shop. When `Ammar used to be away on some work, `Ali (a.s) would sell the dates. He never felt belittled doing this task.
`Ali (a.s) used to keep a watch on the trading community to ensure that they did not inflate the prices. Therefore, he used to go round the bazaar and inquire the prices of different commodities. He also used to look at the weights and measures with the traders. Abul-Sahba’ says:
“I have seen `Ali (a.s) going round al-Basrah inquiring the selling rates of different materials.”
Hoarding materials to create artificial scarcity is a big economic crime. To stop this malpractice, `Ali (a.s) announced that if any trader, for inflating prices, hoards more than necessary inventories of materials, he will be liable for punishment. Therefore, he wrote to Malik al-Ashtar, “Warn traders against hoarding because the Prophet (a.s) was against it. Whenever anyone is found
(430)
hoarding materials, give him suitable punishment!”
The balance in the economic system is possible when extravagance and unnecessary purchasing is avoided. `Ali (a.s) considered both these habits as the cause of the economic structure of any society. Therefore, about the habit of incurring unnecessary expenses he says:
“Cultivate moderation and avoid extravagance. Do not forget today that there is a tomorrow!”
About accumulating unnecessary things `Ali (a.s) said:
“The thing that you do not need, leave it! Acquire only the things that you need.”
When man shuns moderation and becomes extravagant, the result is that he becomes poor and dependent on others. Therefore, extravagance at the time of marriages and other occasions people mortgage or sell their houses and other property to meet the unnecessary and in fructuous expenses. Many times, they become indebted to meet the expenses of such occasions. They spend with both hands and are praised by friends and neighbor for the excellent arrangements for the function. But, in fact, the person traps himself in heavy debts and falls into the clutches of the usurers. Similarly, unnecessary purchasing too affects the economy. When a thing is bought without its need by a person, he sells it at a heavily reduced price when he needs money for some other important requirement. If this habit of buying without need spreads in the society, it will affect the economy very badly.
DISTRIBUTION FROM THE BAYT AL-MAL
The Prophet (a.s) used to distribute the zakat, alms and booty of wars as soon as it was collected, within the city where they were received. And therefore he neither constituted the bayt al-mal nor did he ever feel the need of such an institution. After the passing away of the Prophet (a.s), when Rome and Persia were conquered, treasures were brought to al-Madinah and the bayt al-mal was founded. To maintain it, a separate department of revenue was constituted. Under this department the accumulated wealth was kept. From this money, development activities were organized and annual pensions were paid. During the period of the Prophet (a.s), the funds were distributed equitably. After him, the method of distribution was changed. During `Umar’s time there was no equity that some got more from the bayt al-mal and others less. The wives of the Prophet (a.s) were given more than the other ladies and `A’ishah received 2,000 more than the other wives of the Prophet (a.s). Those who participated in the campaign of Badr received more pension than those who were not present there. The Muhajirūn received more than the Ansar. During the period of `Uthman even this procedure was not followed. Even after making a pledge that he would follow the Book, the Sunnah and the sirat al-shaykhayn, he neither made equitable distribution nor he followed the method of ranking of the recipients of the pensions. He distributed the funds of the Muslims to his kinsmen in the tribe of Banū-Umayyah. He gave as much as he wanted to these Umayyads.
When Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) took control of the bayt al-mal in his hands, according to the practice of the Prophet (a.s), arranged distribution of the funds in the city where they were received. When some funds were remaining after the distribution, and were sent to al-Madinah, he distributed them instead of retaining in the bayt al-mal. Such distribution was done on every Friday when, generally the bayt al-mal was rendered empty of funds. When that happened, `Ali (a.s) would sweep the floor of the premises with his own hands. After doing this, he would offer two prostrations of thanksgiving to Allah! He used to say after such events that he was thankful to Allah that he was going empty handed from there as he had come empty-handed! Ibn `Abd al-Barr writes
(432)
“`Ali (a.s) did not allow it to happen that he spent a night and funds remained lying in the bayt al-mal. He used to distribute the funds before nightfall. If some other important thing came in the way, he would keep it for the morrow.”[1]
Once the funds arrived when it was already, dusk. He said that the money must be distributed immediately. People said that it was already night and the distribution could be done next morning. He asked if they were sure that he would be alive until the morning. He added that about death only Allah knows. He insisted on distributing the funds immediately. Torches were lighted and all the money was distributed then and there.
The iniquitous distribution of the funds from the bayt al-mal rendered the economy unbalanced. `Ali (a.s) felt the need of changing the system and making the distribution more equitable. He removed the distinction of big and small while distributing the pensions. The influential persons did not like the change and the affluent opposed it. `Ali (a.s) did not budge a little from his stand that was exactly in accordance with the norms of Islam. Therefore, `Abdullah ibn Abi-Rafi` narrates that when Talhah and al-Zubayr saw that in the distribution of the funds their status was being compromised, they came to `Ali (a.s) and said that `Umar was giving them such and such an amount as pension. They asked him to keep that in mind. `Ali (a.s) asked them to forget what someone else used to give them. He asked them to tell what the Prophet (a.s) used to give them. At this, they kept mum. When the Imam (a.s) found them quiet, he said whether the Prophet (a.s) was not following the method of equitable distribution of funds. Both the persons affirmed. Then, he asked them tell him whether the Sunnah was more worthy of following than the Sunnah `Umar? They said that definitely the Sunnah has to be emulated but added that they had the privilege of taking active part in the Prophet’s ghazawat and that they had been close to him. `Ali (a.s) asked them if they had precedence in embracing Islam or him? They agreed that he had the precedence. He asked them if they took more part in jihad than him. They agreed that he took more part. He asked if they were more closely related to the Prophet (a.s) or him. They affirmed that he was more closely related to the Prophet (a.s) `Ali (a.s) pointed towards a laborer standing there and said that from the fund he took the same share as this person gets! When I do not claim more pensions for my status, how could you expect to get more?
`Ali (a.s) believed that the share of big, small, Qarashi or others, is equitably
[1] Al-Istī`āb, Vol 2, Page 50
(433)
same in the funds of the bayt al-mal. He did not make any discrimination on the basis of color, descent, nationality or the place of origin of the people. He had announced that he would eliminate all discrimination on the basis of status in the society. When `Aqil heard this, he asked `Ali (a.s) whether he wanted to treat him on par with the Nubian Slave? The Imam (a.s) said:
“Sit down! May Allah be kind on you! If you want to have precedence over him, it could only be on the basis of Piety and precedence in embracing the Faith!”
Once two women came to `Ali (a.s) He gave them equal amounts to both. One said that she was an Arab woman and free and the other woman was a slave girl. She complained that he was treating them equally though she was superior to her. `Ali (a.s) lifted some earth from the ground, looked at it, and said:
“It is not in my knowledge that Allah has made one superior over the other, unless one is more pious than the other!”
Once Sahl ibn Hunayf brought his Abyssinian slave along with him and told `Ali (a.s) that the slave had come to take his share from the bayt al-mal. Sahl asked how much the slave will get? The Imam (a.s) asked how much he himself had received. He said every one got 3 Dinars each. The Imam (a.s) said then he too would get three Dinars!
Once Ummu-Hani’ bint Abi-Talib came to the Imam (a.s) He gave her 20 dirhams from the bayt al-mal. She turned to her non-Arab slave and asked her what she had received? She replied that she had also received 20 dirhams. Then Ummu-Hani’ came to the Imam (a.s) and said that she had been given the same allowance as was given to her slave, not considering her superior status. `Ali (a.s) said:
“By Allah! In this money Banū-Isma`il has no preference over Banū-Ishaq!”
`Ali’s sense of justice and equity did not permit him to give any preference to relationship to change the norms of distribution of the funds of the bayt al-mal. Therefore, when `Aqil, his brother, complained of his poverty and penury and asked for money from the bayt al-mal, `Ali (a.s) asked him to be patient for some more days when others would get their allowances and he too will be given. When `Aqil insisted very much to be given some money, `Ali (a.s) asked a person to take `Aqil to the bazaar where he should break the lock of a shop and take the money. `Aqil was upset and said that he was asking him to steal and get a bad name in the society. The Imam (a.s) then said, “Do you also want me to steal from the funds of the Muslims and give to you!”
(434)
Once `Aqil’s children invited the Imam (a.s) home for a meal. When the food was served he asked from where it had come? They said that they were saving their share of the barley for some days. The barley was sold to buy the food. The Imam (a.s) said that if you have been able to save, it means that your allowance was that much more and from that time, the allowance of barley for them would be reduced by that quantity. `Aqil got angry on this. The Imam (a.s) heated an iron rod and took it near `Aqil. `Aqil was taken aback. The Imam (a.s) said that `Aqil was scared of just one hot steel rod and wanted to consign him, his brother, to the perpetual Hellfire!
Once `Abdullah ibn Ja`far told the Imam (a.s), “Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s)! Give me something from the bayt al-mal. My predicament is that I am unable to meet the daily expenses unless I dispose of my horse!” The Imam said:
“By Allah! I do not have anything with me to give you. But you tell your uncle to steal and give you!”
Whether it was a relative or any outsider, Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) would not show the smallest undue favor to anyone. If he had closed his eyes and distributed favors, none could have questioned him. Therefore, once `Amr ibn Salamah, who was the governor of Isfahan, brought some shortening and honey from there. Ummu-Kulthūm took a small quantity of the materials for her use. The next day when the containers reached `Ali (a.s), he did not find them in their original condition. When he inquired, `Amr said that Ummu-Kulthūm had taken out small quantities. `Ali (a.s) sent both the containers to the assessors and asked them the value of the material taken out from them. After evaluation, they said that the shortening and honey taken out was worth approximately 5 dirhams. He asked Ummu-Kulthūm to pay the value and the entire quantity of the products was distributed to the people.
Once, from al-Basrah came a valuable string of pearls. Ummu-Kulthūm asked Abū-Rafi`, the keeper of bayt al-mal, to lend it to her for three days. Abū-Rafi` sent to her the necklace. When Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) saw the pearls with her, he asked from where she got them. Ummu-Kulthūm said that she had borrowed it from the bayt al-mal and requested him to give it to her. The Imam (a.s) said how he could give it to her until every Muslim woman had such a necklace in her neck! He also said that she was pardoned because she had just borrowed it from the bayt al-mal, or else she would be liable to be punished for theft! He then ordered it to be deposited with the bayt al-mal.
(435)
With the sense of responsibility, Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) used to give much importance to even very small things. He would not be content until everything at the bayt al-mal was distributed. Once he found a rope, lying in the bayt al-mal after the distribution process was over. He ordered that also to be given to a deserving person. Once when materials arrived from Isfahan, there was a bread in the packages. While he had made seven portions of the materials for the seven tribes, he divided the bread too in seven portions! Once cloth was being distributed. Imam al-Hasan (a.s) found a cap in the packages of the cloth. He asked for the cap to be given to him. Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) refused the request and the cap went to the share of al-Hamdani person. People told him that Imam al-Hasan (a.s) had liked the cap but Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) had refused to give it to him. The al-Hamdani sent the cap to Imam al-Hasan (a.s).
These few events would give a clear idea that Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) followed the same practices for the distribution of materials to the people as did the Prophet (a.s). Neither he hoarded the materials in the bayt al-mal nor did he make any distinction of status or importance in the matter of equitable distribution. Can an example be cited that his own brother pleading for help from the bayt al-mal in the form of a few seers of barley for the feeding of his hungry children, but he is refused help to maintain equity in the process of distribution! When a sister asks for increase of a few dirhams in her pension, she is refused. He did not allow the smallest favor to his relatives from the bayt al-mal. He did not want to put even the smallest of burden on the Muslims by showing the smallest of favors to his own family. Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) used to buy his own requirements of grains from the bazaar of al-Madinah and did not take from the bayt al-mal although he was entitled to it. Harūn ibn `Antarah says that he saw the Imam (a.s) at Qurnaq using an old rug that was insufficient to protect him from the cold. He told the Imam (a.s) that he was entitled to a share in the material in the bayt al-mal and he could take a new rug from there for his use. The Imam (a.s) said:
“By Allah! I do not want to take anything from your assets! The rug that I am using I have brought from al-Madinah!”
THE SYSTEM OF ZAKAT
zakat tax is a tenet in Islam that is applicable to wheat, barley, dates, raisins, gold, silver, cattle, goats and sheep, camels; and is mandatory for every major Muslim at prescribed rate. The meaning of the word zakat is purity and cleanliness and the Shari`ah too has used the word in the same sense. The purpose is that the person pays this tax to cleanse his or her assets. When the zakat is not paid, the holdings of a person are deemed unclean. After payment of the zakat they affects of a person are clean and even the mind will be free of miserliness, avarice and undue love for wealth. Therefore, the Holy Qur’an said:
خُذْ مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ صَدَقَةً تُطَهِّرُهُمْ وَتُزَكِّيهِمْ بِهَا.
“Take alms out of their property, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby. (9/103)”
The basic purpose of zakat is providing help to the poor and needy that none in the society remains helpless. Therefore, zakat has eight uses. Out of the eight, seven are applicable to individuals and one pertains to the collective requirement of the society. The Holy Qur’an says:
إِنَّمَا الصَّدَقَاتُ لِلْفُقَرَاءِ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَالْعَامِلِينَ عَلَيْهَا وَالْمُؤَلَّفَةِ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَفِي الرِّقَابِ وَالْغَارِمِينَ وَفِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَاِبْنِ السَّبِيلِ فَرِيضَةً مِنْ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ.
“Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and the officials (appointed) over them, and those whose hearts are made to incline (to truth) and the (ransoming of) captives and those in debts and in the way of Allah and the wayfarer; an ordinance from Allah; and Allah is knowing, Wise. (9/60)”
zakat can bridge the economic imbalances to a greater extent. The reason is that a substantial amount of wealth goes from the hands of the affluent for the benefit of the poor. Although it does not reduce the difference between the rich and the poor very much, but certainly it does make appreciable difference in the living standards of the poor. One of the main purposes of the zakat is
(437)
that the wealth does not stagnate in the hands of a few and a part of it percolates to the poor and needy. Therefore, the Holy Qur’an describes the purpose of alms in these words:
كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنْكُمْ.
“…so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you. (59/7)”
In some circles there is a feeling that the quantum of zakat prescribed is so meager that it is neither sufficient to bridge the economic gap between the rich and the poor, nor the numbers of the poor and needy could be brought down with this amount. The best reply for this thinking has been given by Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq (a.s),
“Allah has affixed the share of the poor in the assets of the rich that is sufficient to meet their needs. If Allah had thought that it would not suffice for the poor, He would have enhanced the quantum.”
In fact, if Allah wanted He could have apportioned an equal share for the poor in the wealth of the affluent or even more! But the Divine Wisdom is that He leaves more for the affluent because it is the product of their hard work and toil. If the poor have a share in it, the rich too owns the wealth as a matter of right!
The truth is that the quantum of zakat is not less because it is fixed in such a manner that the rich do not make excuses to avoid it which, they might have done, if the quantum was fixed higher. If the zakat is paid honestly and regularly by all, there is no doubt that the poor will rise above their economic problems and there will be general well being.
zakat is a religious obligation and therefore people should have the spirit of intent, nearness to Allah and sense of fulfillment of duty. They should not think that they are delivering any favor to the recipients but must know that it is the right of the society that had been endowed by Allah. Therefore, the Holy Qur’an says:
وَفِي أَمْوَالِهِمْ حَقٌّ لِلسَّائِلِ وَالْمَحْرُومِ.
“And in their property was a portion due to him who begs and to him who is denied (good). (51/19)”
(438)
was raised by the representatives and spent on predetermined heads. Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) who was the wali `Amr after the Prophet (a.s) started the department of zakat during his regime. This department took special care to observe the steps that the Prophet (a.s) used to take in the matter of the zakat. Therefore, such persons were appointed to this task that was known for their piety and honesty. The Imam (a.s) used to exhort them not to use coercive tactics in demanding for the payment of the zakat. If someone voluntarily declared the quantity of the zakat applicable to him, that was collected. When some people said that the zakat was not applicable to them, no questions were asked. He told the zakat collectors that they should not give an impression to persons that they were not trusted. The collectors were also asked not to demand any particular animal from the flocks towards settlement of the zakat. It was always the discretion of the assessed to part with whatever he deemed fit to be given as the zakat. But the people were asked not to give lame, sickly and emaciated animals towards the zakat. `Ali (a.s) also instructed his men to take proper care of the animals that came in their charge as a settlement of zakat. He asked them not to bring them through ways that had no possibility of getting fodder and water for long spells. He asked them to keep the she camels and their young ones together. They were also asked not take all the milk from the mother that the little ones suffered want of feed.
These steps of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) indicate that he was not in favor of force or coercion in the matter of zakat. In fact, he wanted to create the right spirit in the minds of the people to come forward voluntarily that they fulfill this mandatory duty of theirs.
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) used the zakat money only on heads that have been prescribed in the Holy Qur’an and never mixed it in the funds for other requirements of the State.
THE SYSTEM OF TRIBUTE
Of the territories annexed by the Muslims, certain were those that were acquired through warfare and some others were annexed peacefully. In the areas annexed through warfare, the uncultivable barren land consisting of mountainous and marshlands were termed as anfal or the land that belong to Allah and the Prophet (a.s). The Holy Qur’an says:
يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنْ الْأَنْفَالِ قُلْ الْأَنْفَالُ لِلَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ.
“They ask you about the windfalls. Say: The windfalls are for Allah and the Messenger. (8/1)”
After the Prophet (a.s), the Vicegerent and Imams (a.s) have the authority to utilize the minerals and other resources from this land for the welfare of the people. Without the permission of the wali al-amr of the time, or his deputy, none has the authority to exploit such lands in any manner. The cultivated lands that were acquired through warfare used to be distributed amongst the Muslims so that they took crops on them and boosted the prosperity of the people. Those areas where the people, of their own free consent, embraced Islam, their ownership of the lands were not disturbed and they continued to use them as in the past. The examples of such areas are al-Madinah, Bahrain and a major part of Yemen. They were only required to pay the zakat on the returns they derived from the cultivation of those lands. If the people in such places wished not to embrace Islam, they will be bound by the terms of truce with them. If in the terms of truce it was decided that they would continue to have the use and ownership of the land, they will not be evicted from them. However, they will be treated as Dhimmis and were liable to pay the jizyah. If the truce was with the condition that they would forego the ownership of the lands, then such lands were to be distributed amongst the Muslims. Such lands were called the lands of tribute. They are called the lands of tribute because they have been received as tribute from the people who had surrendered in terms of the truce with them. From the persons who cultivate such lands, in addition to the zakat, they have to pay land revenue which is either in kind called in cash that is termed khiraj. The quantity of khiraj is fixed by the wali al-amr at his discretion.
(440)
During his time, Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) fixed the limits of the khiraj and determined the norms for the collection of this revenue. But he had more concern for land use than collection of the tributes to ensure that there was prosperity among the people. Therefore, he instructed Malik al-Ashtar, “More than collection of the tribute, concentrate on the promotion of the use of land for cultivation because tribute is generated when the land is in use!” One, who wants to take tribute without putting the land to use, becomes the cause of destruction of the state and the people. Such regimes do not last for long.” Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) was not in favor of using coercion in the collection of the tribute and asked his representatives to have a soft attitude in the matter of collecting the land revenue. Therefore, when he retained a person from Banū-Thaqif to collect the tribute from a certain area, he told him:
“Beware! For the sake of the dirhams of tribute, do not trouble Muslims, Jews and Christians. Do not confiscate and sell farm animals to collect the tribute from the tillers. We have been commanded only to take from them what is in excess of their needs.”[1]
Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) had fixed a very nominal rate for the collection of the tribute from the farmers. Buladhari has written in Futūh al-Buldan that Mus`ab Ibn Yazid said that his father was appointed for the collection of the tribute for the lands irrigated with the waters of Euphrates. He said that the rate of tribute for wheat, if the crop was good, was 1.5 dirham or three seers of the produce per jurayb (land measuring approximately 120 square feet), if the crop was average the tribute was one dirham and for a poor crop two thirds of a dirham. For the barley crop, the tariff was half of this. For gardens, like dates and other fruits, the tribute was ten dirhams per jurayb. The grape vines that reached the fourth year after planting, the tribute were ten dirhams per jurayb. For vegetable, linseed, cotton and miscellaneous crops no tribute was collected.
[1] Bihār al-Anwār, Vol 9, Page 538
source : http://www.imfi.ir/
