Second aspect
The second topic, which we shall discuss is firstly: the Caliph’s imposing
such fellows on lives and honor of Islam as Khalid and Zirar bin Azur, who drank liquor and were absolutely merciless,1
with advice to the fighters to burn the apostates although Islamic Shariah has prohibited that.2
And secondly: His overlooking this calamity and serious crimes; as if they
were not worth mention! As if the ears of the world had not heard screams about
this event and no condemnation of their act is heard.
Why did the Caliph not make Khalid accountable for killing Malik and his
Muslim companions, whereas the murder was proved to him?
Why did he not take retaliation from him and did not apply the penalty of
fornication on him? And why he did not lash him for lying? And why didn’t he
punish him for oppression and trespassing sanctities of Muslims? Why he did not
dismiss Khalid, whereas he was distressed at his act and he paid the blood money
to Mutammam bin Nuwairah, brother of Malik; and ordered Khalid to divorce the
wife of Malik as is mentioned in Al-Isabah.3
In addition to all this, at least they should have enjoined good and forbid
evil, and condemned him for the deed, as Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) says:
“The least denial (opposition) is that you meet the sinners with an angry
countenance.”4
Why did Caliph approved defense of Khalid and his crime [and did not
condemn him]?! And sometimes he says:
“He performed independent judgment (Ijtihad) and made a mistake.”
Sometimes he made excuses for him saying: “He is a sword from the swords
of God;” and prohibited Umar from talking ill of him; and ordered him to let him
go and not to dispute with him as is mentioned in Sharh Ibne Abil Hadid.5
He was also enraged on Qatada as he had regarded the act of Khalid to be evil.
In this discussion, we shall remain content to call the attention of readers and
do not wish to the enter depth of meaning and its end, because there is no one,
who does not understand that none of these two excuses were correct and
acceptable.
Does a Muslim not know that justification and independent judgment
(Ijtihad) has no scope in such crimes and serious transgressions? And it is not
allowed for any doer and non-doer to deem these two as his shields in his defects
and deviations and to ward off limits at this pretext and shed blood wrongly and trespass on sanctity of ladies and throw away to winds, divine commands
regarding lives, honors and properties.
The ruler also, will not approve regarding one, who claims justifications and
independent judgment (Ijtihad); as Qudama bin Mazun, who drank liquor,
claimed that he had exercised his independent judgment (Ijtihad), but Umar did
not accept his excuse and issued penalty on him to be lashed as is mentioned in
Sunan Baihaqi6 other books.
Also, Ibne Abi Shaibah7 and Ibne Manzar have narrated from Maharib bin
Daththar that: A group of companions of Prophet drank liquor in Shaam and said:
We drank wine for the sake of statement of Almighty Allah:
لَيْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّلِحَتِ جُنَاحٌ فِيمَا طَعِمُوا
“On those who believe and do good there is no blame for what they eat.”8
So, Umar awarded penalty on them.9
Abu Ubaidah awarded penalty to Abu Jundal Asi bin Suhail, who had drunk
liquor and tried to justify through this verse.10
Does anyone have doubt that the sword, which Allah, Mighty and the High
has taken out from the sheath, is not a kind of injustice, mischief and sorrow and
bloods, which are unlawful to be shed, is not shed through it. Divine sanctities
are not trespassed and means for satisfying lusts are not achieved and it does not
come out to subdue carnal desires and only the purified ones, those who are away
for evil and corruption, hold it?
Who is Khalid and what value he had that the Caliph can award this great
excellence to him? And regards him as the sword, which Almighty Allah has
drawn against enemies: whereas Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) declared immunity from
Khalid a number of times.11
Are these statements without evidence not exaggerations, lies and ridicule in
the religion of God? How can we regard Khalid as the sword, which Almighty
Allah has drawn, while it is clearly reported to us that
“He was very cruel and he used to stab from behind. When he was enraged,
he did not even respect the principles of religion.”12