A Victim Lost in Saqifah 1-4
Did Amirul Momineen (a.s.) Have Positive Outlook To Battles of Caliph’s Period?
As you know battles in the period of Caliphs particularly the Second Caliph are viewed from different angles, especially by the unity-mongers.
Thus they say:
“Regrettably of our doubts is that Ali (a.s.) did not find any worth of Islamic battles…we see how much he supported these battles?”![1]
For the scrutiny of this claim, we invite you to read the translation of Political Analysis of the life of Imam Hasan Mujtaba by Allamah Ja’far Murtuza Amili. (2nd edition) pages 170-200. Which in fact is to refute the conjecture propagated that Imams Hasan and Husain participated in battles during the rule of Caliphs.[2]
That which we wish to remind in this section is their claim that participation of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) and his associates in the victories proves their support and co-operation to the Caliphs’ regime. This is same as claim of participation in other matters. Thus they claim:
“If this unity was not preserved by Ali and if there was no co-operation, understanding and tolerance among Caliphs all these battles would have not been attained by the Muslims within such a short span of time.”[3]
While it should not be overlooked that in all these types of matters there had always been in existence a wide gulf and crevice between Imam’s motives and those of Caliphs. To consider them to be on friendly terms is a basic and fundamental mistake. We quote here another mistaken claim:
“Our belief is that leaders of truth do not approve participation in these battles. They do not think these battles to be useful to Muslims and Islam.
Imams desired extension of influence of Islam and its expansion as far as the length of globe. But they want it in congruity with divine laws and the way Caliphs undertook was wrong and detrimental.”[4]
[1] Muhammad Waizzaada Khorasani: Interview in ‘Haft Aasmaan’ (Seven
Skies) Magazine, Issues 9 & 10, Spring & Summer 80, Pg. 34
[2] Like the claim that: The Imam sent his dear son, Hasan Mujtaba
to command forces in the area of hostilities. (Zainul Aabideen Qurbani:
Ilal Peshraft wa Inhitaat-e-Muslimeen (Causes of Progress and
Decadence of Muslims), Pg. 88)
[3] Sayyid Ahmad Mawassaqi: Istiratazi-e-Wahdat (Strategy of
Unity), Vol. 1, Pg. 137
[4] Allamah Ja’far Murtuza Amili: Tahlili Az Zindagi-e-Siyasi Imam
Hasan Mujtaba (a.s.) (1st Edition), Pgs. 193-194
“Accordingly if we accept and surrender to principle of battles and military action of Caliphs, we cannot deny the fact that most methods of persons in charge of actions from Caliphs’ side were not coherent with decorum of Prophet or warriors of Prophet’s days. But in some cases, they differed greatly so the stance of Ali and Hasan and Husain is different. So it is obvious when Ali and Hasan and Husain did not accept Caliphate and they disputed its legitimacy they of course cannot accept their battles, the motive of battles and consequent battles therefrom.”[1]
Even then it is said:
“They wanted Imam’s co-operation; His Eminence refrained from giving it.”[2]
On the basis of this Imam did not take any initial step with regard to battles. He did not participate in any of them.
“In Shia historical sources we do not find any evidence that could prove Imam’s personal presence in any battles; likewise, presence of Hasan and Husain also. Beyond this, we do not have any Sunni source that could prove for us direct presence of Imam Ali (a.s.) in Caliph’s battles.”[3]
“So history denies their presence. The least we can agree is their presence as consultants and advisors. This they did because they wanted to address their mistakes. We believe that they (the Imams) having had said not a word that could reflect their approval of Caliphs’ government or policies.”[4]
Although in this regard, they have claimed:
“It is evident that if Imam Ali (a.s.) had ill will to Umar or he were displeased with him, and regarded him usurper of his rights, he would always have been awaiting every opportunity to get back his right and for getting rid of the usurper of his rights…advised him to go personally to the battlefield and get killed there.”![5]
[1] Abdullah Khanaqli Hamadani: Siyasat Imam Ali-o-Hasnain Dar
Raabita Ba Hukoomat-o-Futuhaat Kholafa, Pgs. 58-59
[2] Sayyid Ja’far Murtuza Amili: Tahlili Az Zindagi-e-Siyasi Imam
Hasan Mujtaba (a.s.) (1st Edition), Pg. 197
[3] Abdullah Khanaqli Hamadani: Siyasat Imam Ali-o-Hasnain Dar
Raabita Ba Hukoomat-o-Futuhaat Kholafa, Pg. 124
[4] Ibid. Pg. 130
[5] Abdul Qadir Dahqaan Siraawaani: Article quoted in Nida-e-Islam
Magazine, Issue No. 11, Autumn 81, Pg. 7
“One of the clearest proofs of Ali’s sincerity and friendship to Abu Bakr…and support to Caliphate!...was his attitude when Abu Bakr departed…he took charge of the army...God forbid, if Ali had any rancor and malice at heart against Abu Bakr, or had paid allegiance to him by force under dissimulation, this was an excellent opportunity for him. But on the contrary he advised Abu Bakr against going to the battlefield.”![1]
Therefore it can be said:
The only period when Caliphs took to expand borders of country that entailed military actions did Amirul Momineen (a.s.) interfere at the level and to the extent of advice and consultation. He did this to minimize pillage and plunder. This resulted in safety of Islam and Muslims. Although there was a wide difference between the motive of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) in dispensing advice and the motive of the Caliphs in seeking the counsel of the Imam (a.s.). They were exactly opposite.
Here we point to one of the political aims:
“To wage wars in name of Jihad in the way of God is the best way to hold differences at home. In those circumstances if one wanted to knock the door of Justice to regain his usurped right and the applicant, however noblest among the people, was easily blamed as a world loving man or one who is after power.
On the basis of this, it was an excellent opportunity for men of government to achieve their cherished political aims and consolidate their position.”[2]
Did associates of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) have Active Presence in Caliphs’ government?
Another conjecture repeated in wrong analyses of participation of and support of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) with the Caliphs in administrative affairs is that the special and selected associates and companions of the Imam (a.s.) with concurrence of Imam himself, were in contact with the Caliphs.
In such a way that ultimately these respected persons were put under the command of the Caliph. Thus it is said:
“Companions and friends of Imam followed their leader (Ali) in their conduct and behavior. And they behaved with the Caliphs like Ali did,
[1] Ibid. Article quoted in Nida-e-Islam Magazine, Issue No. 15,
Autumn 82, Pgs. 11-12
[2] Yusuf Gholami: Pas az Ghuroob (After Sunset), Pgs. 293-294
during the tenure of the Caliphs as well as after that. The Second Caliph appointed Salman Farsi as governor of Madayn. Ammar Yasir was appointed as governor of Kufa. Others by order of Caliph were sent to battlefield...”[1]
We recommend the translation of Salman Farsi by Sayyid Ja’far Murtuza Amili, New Edition,[2] page 67-76 to our readers to acquaint themselves with facts. Here we just quote a few points:
Firstly, in all analyses especially regarding motive of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) in his acceptance of participation is proved. This applies to his friends also. The informal presence in the scene for protection of religion but with this difference:
“Ali has the same attitude in practice also. He personally did not accept any official post from any Caliph. He did not accept command of army or governorship of a district. He also did not accept administration of Hajj or anything else.
If he had accepted any one of so many proposed offers, it was tantamount to withdrawal of demand of his right and in other words co-operation, while safeguarding unity of Islam was important to him.
Although he himself did not accept any office he did not restrain his friends or family members from accepting posts or offices whatever their desire was or whatever the offer was. He never viewed this as co-operation. In his view, it was never an approval to their Caliphate or his sanction for their occupying his seat.”[3]
“Another important point here is that government of the Caliph was not inclined to utilize services of friends of Ali except in few instances.
In this period, even companions of Prophet were ignored in political and government affairs.
The First Caliph has pointed out that the reason was their own unwillingness. The Second Caliph indicates the reason as restriction he had imposed on them from leaving Medina, i.e. their compulsory stay in Medina.
[1] Muhammad Waizzaada Khorasani: Article quoted in Kitab Naqd
Magazine, Issue No. 19, (Vol. 2), Summer 80, Pgs. 24-25
[2] This book is republished in 1382 in co-operation with Shirkat
Chaap O Nashr Bainul Milal.
[3] Ustad Murtuza Mutahhari: Imamat-o-Rahbari (Imamate and
Leadership), Pgs. 20-21
Perhaps the Caliph feared that if they left Medina since they could not be put under a check or control they might become a pivot of people’s attention and this might lead to problems for the regime.”[1]
In the same way: “During the reign of all three rulers, not one Hashemite was given any post.”[2]
On the basis of this such instances of co-operation can only be called such when there is willingness on both sides.
Otherwise reason must be searched behind policies of Caliphs.
“Ibne Shahar Aashob says about this: Umar appointed Salman as governor of Madayn. Umar’s motive by this act was to spoil Salman’s reputation and destroy his credibility if he happened to make a mistake. But Salman did not accept it before taking permission from Amirul Momineen Ali (a.s.).
He went to Madayn and as long as he lived he remained there. He used to gather fuel wood in his outer gown. Half of which was his floor covering while the other half was his outer covering.”[3]
Before deceptive and political attitudes of the regime we cannot but say:
“In the instance some senior and sincere Companions took part in these battles it should be remembered that apparently they were unaware of the reality of the matter and their aim was only service to God by rendering service to Imam and Muslims. They were not knowing the view of the Infallible leaders regarding these battles. Because as we have seen it was openly endeavored that people do not come to know the opinion of Ali (a.s.) and most probably the government institutions exercised force to send them to battlefronts.”[4]
In the same way:
“It is necessary to mention that the presence of Ali’s friends and followers in battles was not to support the regime and Caliphate. But it was to expand borders of Islam. They were absolutely sincere about it
[1] Asghar Qaidan: Tahleeli Bar Mawaze Siyasi Ali Ibne Abi Talib
(a.s.) [Research on political stands of Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.)], Pg.
118
[2] Yusuf Gholami: Pas az Ghuroob (After Sunset), Pg. 282
[3] Sayyid Ja’far Murtuza Amili: Salman Farsi, Pg. 85; quoting from:
Ad-Darajaat ar-Rafia (Elevated Positions), Pg. 215
[4] Ibid. Pg. 200
and their aim was not to gain spoils of war, such as fertile lands and rich cultivation,[1] but it was only to gain God’s pleasure and spread Islam did they participate in these battles.”[2]
“There is no doubt that Ali and his sons had no share in any of these battles. People know the brilliant record of Ali and his bravery in battles. So it was not fear of death or his isolation.
The only reason was he did not like to be in service of one who was usurper of his Caliphate. His co-operation would have provided credibility to Governments of those who had occupied his place.
In addition to this his awareness about their motive in these territorial expansion was an impediment to his easy participation in those wars.
What could be said about Imam Ali (a.s.) was that he did not refrain his associates and followers to participate in the campaigns...so that they may stop them from committing tyrannies and inhuman acts in contravention of teachings of Islam.”[3]
Conclusion
In a bird’s eye view, it can be said about the presence of some prominent associates of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) in the battles that:
1 - Some of these gentlemen were such that their presence minimized atrocities. Secondly, they could achieve the aims that their Imam had designed and sketched for them.
2 - Some other of these respectable gentlemen were present there because they were forced by the Caliphs due to hidden aims of the Caliphs in sending them to the battlefronts. They were actually exiled by the establishment on this pretext.
It was such an exile that it was hoped that they would not return alive from there.
3 - Dishonest hands of interpolators and falsifiers of historical realities have added the names of these persons in the list of fighters of the Caliphs in order to
[1] [‘Iqta’ is in the meaning of ‘Qate-Zameeni’ a piece of land that
a king allotted to a person so that he may earn his livelihood from
it.]
[2] Asghar Qaidan: Tahleeli Bar Mawaze Siyasi Ali Ibne Abi Talib
(a.s.) [Research on political stands of Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.)], Pg.
116
[3] Yusuf Gholami: Pas az Ghuroob (After Sunset), Pg. 290
show that the regime of Caliphs was not usurped one and to grant it legitimacy.
The best of these lists are taken from Sunni sources. So perhaps this analysis may be the nearest to reality.
Conjecture mentioned in Haft Aasmaan Magazine**[1]** – A Reply to it
Based on the premise that the Caliphs held consultations with Amirul Momineen (a.s.) and also that His Eminence Ali (a.s.) and his associates participated in the battles of this period the conjecture says:
“We start this short investigation of ours about the battles during the period of the Caliphs with three questions in this regard:
First question: What do you conclude by Ali’s help to Caliphs in many events and fate-making guidance at critical moments, besides, participation of Imam Hasan and Husain in battles and Ali’s participation in some battles of Caliphs; and also his bearing of responsibilities in the government of the Caliphs? How do you justify them?”[2]
In continuation of these questions, the writer coins three examples. One of them relates to Abu Bakr’s seeking advice of Ali in the first year of his Caliphate about waging war against people of Kinda.
Ali advised him to stay in Medina and send others to combat. Similarly Ali advised Umar to not go himself in war against Romans and Iranians.[3] From these cases the writer derives the following conclusion:
“For the sake of Allah! If Ali had your outlook about Caliphs’ wars he could not have given such useful advice to Umar.”[4]
The article writer in continuation of the first question as another example regarding consultation of the Caliphs with Amirul Momineen (a.s.) further adds:
[1] Since this reply needs an introduction the readers may once more
refer to the prefaces in the second and third section of this book.
[2] Sayyid Muhammad Reza Tabatabai: Article quoted in Haft Aasmaan
Magazine, Issue Nos. 12-13, Winter 80 & Spring 81, Pg. 225
[3] Refer: Tables in Section Two.
[4] Ibid. Article quoted in Haft Aasmaan Magazine, Issue Nos.
12-13, Winter 80 & Spring 81, Pg. 226
“Many a times Amirul Momineen (a.s.) accepted to substitute for Umar during his absence. Like when Umar had left to supervise the fronts, or he went to Jerusalem, Ali accepted to depute for Umar in Medina.”[1]
In continuation of these three instances, which he terms to be ‘many’ he mentions the instance of participation of his associates in the battles and concludes thus:
“These examples truly disprove the idea that Caliphs’ battles were a good pastime for people and a setback for progress of Islam.”
Can this be accepted that men of knowledge and experience and staunch belief like Salman, Ammar, Hujr bin Adi and Adi Hatim were not aware of facts and ignorant of Imam’s opinion?”[2]
In continuation of his writing and from that which he is influenced, he concludes:
“Imams of Ahle Bayt (a.s.) had a positive outlook to foreign wars. Some proofs of this are as follows:
A) Anxieties of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) regarding Muslim battles during the period of the Caliphs and his concern for their victory in those battles and also his solving of problems for the Caliphs who were also leaders in those battles.
B) Participation of Hasan and Husain in some wars
C) Participation of some first grade companions of Prophet like Salman, Ammar, Hujr bin Adi in the wars and their administration of the conquered districts. As these could not have been without permission of the Infallible Imam (a.s.)...[3]”![4]
They mostly quote these narrations in order to defend the battles of the period of Caliphs and the claim that the Imams (a.s.) were having a positive outlook to foreign wars of Muslims. They are as follows:
[1] Ibid. Article quoted in Haft Aasmaan Magazine, Issue Nos. 12-13,
Winter 80 & Spring 81, Pg. 228
[2] Ibid. Article quoted in Haft Aasmaan Magazine, Issue Nos. 12-13,
Winter 80 & Spring 81, Pg. 229
[3] [Arguments of the writer continue]
[4] Ibid. Article quoted in Haft Aasmaan Magazine, Issue Nos. 12-13,
Winter 80 & Spring 81, Pgs. 231-232
Point 1 – Ali’s helps to Caliph in solving problems etc. while they were in fact also leaders of those wars!
Point 2 – Ali’s counsel and guidance to Caliphs in their most stringent circumstances. Also the fact that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) never refused to heed their request for advice!
Point 3 – Anxieties of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) regarding Muslim battles during the period of the Caliphs and his concern for their victory in those battles. Ali’s occupation of Umar’s seat in Medina in the days of battles!
Point 4 – Numerous instances of Hazrat Ali (a.s.) substituting for Umar in Medina, and that also during the period of the battles!
Point 5 – Participation of Hasan and Husain (a.s.) in some battles of the Caliphs!
Point 6 – Participation of Hazrat Ali’s associates in some battles of the Caliphs supposing their being aware of the view of the Infallible Imam (a.s.)!
Point 7 – Acceptance of responsibilities by Hazrat Ali’s associates in Caliphs’ government and their participation in administration of conquered regions by approval of Infallible Imam (a.s.)!