Trespassing sanctities, imprisonments, vulgarity, severe abusing, insults,
torture, punishment, killings, crimes, which will never be forgiven. They saw all
this with their own eyes. And the righteous members of Ummah of Muhammad
condemned and confronted him, because they had heard Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.a.) cursing him and prohibiting others to assist him and command of the
Prophet to fight him and defining him to be from the rebels (Qasiteen) and the
rebellious group is mentioned and this was a well known statement of the
Prophet:
“Whenever you see Muawiyah on my pulpit, you should eliminate him.”1
And also: “Caliphate is in Medina and kingdom is in Shaam.”2 If I only knew what attitude Ibne Umar has with all these circumstances
And this statement of Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), which removes all disputes:
“Caliphs will be there and they will be numerous.”
They asked: “What do you order us to do?”
He replied: “Give allegiance to the first and after him to the next.”3
And this statement: “When allegiance is taken for two Caliphs, kill the
second one.”4
And this statement narrated from Abdullah bin Amr Aas that: “One, who
pays allegiance to an imam, if he can, he should honor his pledge, thus if another
one comes and there is a dispute with him, you should strike off his neck.”
Nawawi has mentioned in Sharh Muslim, gloss on Irshadus Sari that:5
“The meaning of the statement of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is: That if another
person claims Caliphate and a dispute develops regarding him, you should strike
off his head, is that you should drive away the second one, because he has staged
an uprising against the imam; from this aspect if there is no option, except to
fight, then fight him; if the battle would lead to his killing, his killing is allowed
and no one is responsible for that, because he is an oppressor and has come in the
battle of his own accord.”
Then with attention to this report, it was obligatory on Ibne Umar to have
paid allegiance to Ali (a.s.) and not to have refrained from it, whereas all Muhajireen and Ansar and those who had participated in the Battle of Badr and those who were present at the Pledge of Rizwan had paid allegiance to him.
Ibne Hajar writes in Fathul Bari, that:6
“Allegiance to Ali (a.s.) for Caliphate took place after the killing of Uthman
at the beginning of Zilhajj, 35 A.H. and Muhajireen and Ansar and all who were
present, paid allegiance to him and allegiance to him was written to other places.
So all of them approved it, except Muawiyah from the people of Shaam and after
that occurred what came to pass.”
If this man had been a well wisher of Islam and had followed the conduct of
Islam, and had followed the clear Sunnah, and had faith in what Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) had brought, he should have fought against Muawiyah, who staged an
uprising against the Holy Imam (a.s.).
On the contrary, it was as Abdullah bin Hashim Mirqal said:
“Even if there was no reward and punishment, and Paradise and Hell,
fighting on the side of Ali is better than fighting at the side of Muawiyah, son of
Hind, the liver eater.”
Which two well-informed individuals of the Ummah disputed the allegiance
of Caliphate for Ameerul Momineen (a.s.)? And from that time that legal
selection was established which people were united in allegiance to the Caliph, as
they were united for Ali (a.s.)?
And as was mentioned before,7 no one refused to pay allegiance to Imam
(a.s.), except few supporters of Uthman: and they were seven and Ibne Umar was
the eighth. Then what is the value of allegiance of some people who did not
number even ten, to consensus on allegiance to Abu Bakr and made following
him obligatory on Ibne Umar and made it unlawful for him to seek aloofness
from him, but the consensus of Ummah from Muhajireen and Ansar and people
of country allegiance to Ali (a.s.) and opposition of some few individuals can it
be called as dispute?
Alas, if Ibne Umar does not accept the command of Quran and Sunnah
regarding Caliphate, he should accept the viewpoint of his father that: “This
matter will be placed before the people of Badr as long as even one of the them is
alive; and then before the people of Uhad, and then before so and so and so and
so, the freed slave or son of the freed slave or those who converted to Islam after
the victory, they have no share in Caliphate.”8
Umar said to Ibne Umar: “Do not dispute; indeed, if you dispute, Muawiyah
from Shaam and Abdullah bin Abi Rabia will come to you from Yemen and will
not see excellence in your seniors and indeed this matter is not deserving for the
freed slaves and their sons.”
Perhaps this point of view among the predecessors was definite and
established and Maula Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) has argued through the same in
a letter he wrote to Muawiyah:
“Know that; you are a freed slave, for whom Caliphate is not allowed; and
the pledge of Imamate is not made for them; and they are not included in Shura.”9