بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم,
4. As for the Hima (a place of pasture and water forbidden to the public), it already existed.(1) It is said that `Uthman added to it due to the increase in the herds. If the origin of its permissin is that need, then it is permitted to increase its size when the need increases.
5. As for his exiling Abu Dharr to Ar-Rabadha, he did not do it. (2) Abu Dharr was an ascetic. He used to scold the governors of `Uthman and he recited to them, "Those who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend it in the way of Allah, give them the good news of painful punishment" (9:34) He saw them increasing the amount of mounts and clothes and he objected to them doing that and wanted to divide up everything in their possession that was not a necessity. Ibn `Umar and other Companions said, "That on which zakat has been paid is not treasure." (3)
In Syria, some words passed between Abu Dharr and Mu`awiya. (4) Abu Dharr went to Medina and people gathered around him. He began to act in that way. `Uthman said to him,"If you were to retire..." meaning that you have a school which is not conducive to mixing with people. Mixing with people has preconditions and retirement has preconditions as well. Whoever is on the path of Abu Dharr has a state which demands that he should be on his own or mix with people allowing everyone their state providing it is not haram in the Shari`a. Therefore Abu Dharr went out to Ar- Rabadha as an excellent man of zuhd and he left excellent men behind him. All of them had good, blessing and excellence. The state of Abu Dharr was better but it is not possible for everyone. If they had based themselves on it, they would have been destroyed. (5) Glory be to the one who ordered the ranks! It is strange that he is criticised for something which `Umar did. It is related that `Umar b. al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, confined Ibn Mas`ud and some of the Companions for a year in Madina before he was martyred. Then `Uthman released them. He had them confined because the people had too many hadith from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. (6)
Some words passed between Abu Dharr and Mu`awiya. Abu Dharr used words which were not said in the time of `Umar. Mu`awiya relayed that to `Uthman. He feared that sedition would arise among the common people. Abu Dharr used to encourage them to take on zuhd and other things which not everyone can bear. They are only for a few. `Uthman wrote to him, as we have already said, to come to Madina. When he came, people gathered to him. He said to `Uthman, "I want to go to Ar-Rabdha." `Uthman told him, "Do it," so he retired. That alone was suitable for him due to the way he had taken. (7)
6. Some words passed between Abu'd-Darda' and Mu`awiya. Abu'd- Darda' was an excellent man of zuhd, one of their qadis. (8) When he was harsh in the truth and left the path of `Umar with the people they could not bear it and they dismissed him, (9) so he went to Madina.
All of these are benefits which do not diminish the deed. They do not affect the positon of any of the muslims by a state. Abu'd- Darda' and Abu Dharr were free from fault. `Uthman was completely and utterly innocent and had more integrity. If someone else relates that he was exiled and told of a cause for it, that is entirely false.
7. As for returning to Al-Hakam, it is not true. (10) Our `ulama' said in answer to it, "When the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, gave him permission for it, `Uthman spoke to Abu Bakr and `Umar an they said, `If there is a martyr with you, we will return him.'When he was appointed, he made the judgment according to his knowledge to bring him back. `Uthman would not bring back any one sent away by the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, even if it had been his own father, nor would he have overturned his judgment. (11)
8. As for abandoning the shortening of the prayer, it is ijtihad because he heard that some people were tempted by the shortening and did it in their homes. He thought that the sunna might lead to dropping the obligatory. Therefore he left it fearing that it would be the cause of that. (12)
However, a group of the `ulama' said, "The traveller can choose between shortening and doing it in full. (13) The Companions disagreed about that. (14)
9. As for Mu`awiya, `Umar appointed him. He gathered all of Syria for him and `Uthman confirmed him. Indeed, Abu Bakr as- Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, appointed him because he had appointed his brother Yazid. Yazid delegated him, so `Umar confirmed him since he was connnected to the government of Abu Bakr because the ruler had appointed him. `Uthman was joined to `Umar and he confirmed him. Look at this chain how reliable it is. (15) No one will ever bring the like of it after it. (16)
10. As for `Abdullah b. `Amir b. Kurayz, he appointed him, as he said, because he was noble in his maternal and paternal aunts. (17)
11. As for his appointement of al-Walid b. `Uqba, people, according to their false intentions, hastened to do evil things before good things. The liars mentioned that he appointed him for the reason which was already stated. `Uthman said, "I did not appoint al-Walid because he is my brother, (18) I appointed him because he is the son of Umm Hakim al-Bayda', the aunt of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the twin of his father. This will be clarified, Allah willing. (19) The appointment was by ijtihad. (20) `Umar dismissed Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas and advanced someone whose rank was less than his. (21)
12. As for the statement about Marwan and al-Walid, it is an attack on them, and their judgement that they were deviant (fasiq) is in fact deviation on their part. Marwan was a just man, one of the great ones of the community in the opinion of the Companions, the Tabi`un, and the fuqaha' of the muslims. As for the Companions, Sahl b. Sa`d as-Sa`idi related from him. (22) As for the Tabi`un, they are the same age as him, although he surpassed them by having the name of "Companion" accordig to one of the two statements. (23) As for the fuqaha' of the cities, all of them esteemed him, had respect for his khalifate, accepted his fatwa and followed his riwaya. As for the fools among the historians and men of letters, they speak according to their merits. As for al-Walid, one of the commentators related that Allah called him fasiq (deviant) when he said, "When a deviant brings you news, then make clear, lest you afflict a people by ignorance." (49:6) According to them, it was revealed about him that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent him to the Banu'l-Mustaliq, and he reported that they had apostatized. On this account the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent Khalid b. al-Walid to them and he ascertained what had happened and the invalidity of his words became clear. There is some disagreement about this. Some say that it was revealed about this incident. (24) It is said it is about `Ali while al-Walid has another story. It is said on the day of the conquest of Makka that al-Walid went ahead in a group of youths to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he patted their heads and blessed them. He said, "There was khaluq (coloured perfume) on my head, so the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, refused to pat it." When someone is that young, someone is sent to verify him. (25)
As for his hadd for wine, `Umar inflicted the hadd on Qudama b. Maz`un for wine while he was Amir and dismissed him. It is said that he later made up with him. (26) Wrong actions do not remove integrity when there is repentance.(27) It was said to `Uthman, "You appointed al-Walid because he is your brother by your mother Arwa bint Kurayz b. Rabi'a b. Habib b. `Abdu Shams." He said, "Rather it was because he is the nephew of the Messenger of Allah by the Prophet's aunt Umm Hakim al- Bayda', the grandmother of `Uthman and the grandmother of al- Walid by their mother Arwa. Umm Hakim was the twin of `Abdullah, the father of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. How can a man be forbidden to appoint the brother of his kin? (28)
As for his giving the Khums (fifth) of North Africa to one person,that is not true. (29)Even though Malik and a group believe that the Imam can have his own opinion regarding the Khums and use it for whatever his own ijtihad leads him to. If he gives it to someone, that is permitted. We have made this clear in its proper place.(30)
As for their statement that he beat with the staff, I have not heard it from anyone -neither rebel nor obedient. It is a falsehood which is related and a lie that is told. (31)
================================================== ======
1 When a noble man in the time of Jahiliyya settled on a piece of land he had a dog bark, and then made the area (within the bark of the dog) exclusive for his own horses, camels and beasts, and no one else could share it. When Islam came, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "There is no hima except for Allah and His Messenger." Al-Bukhari related it from the hadith of as-Su`ab b. Jathama in `The Book of Sharecropping' (book 42, chap. 11) and `The Book of Jihad' (book 56, chap. 146) in his `Sahih'. Imam Ahmad related it in his `Musnad' (4:71 & 73, first edition) from the hadith of as-Su`ab b. Jathama as well. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, made a hima at a place called an-Naqi'. This refers to Naqi' al- Khadmat, as in `The Musnad' of Imam Ahmad (2:91, 155 & 157, first edition, no. 565, 6438 & 6464, second edition) from the hadith of Abu `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Umar al-`Umari from Nafi` from Ibn `Umar that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, made an-Naqi` a hima for horses. Hammad b. Khalid, the transmitter of this hadith from `Abdullah b. `Umar al-`Umari said, "Oh `Abdu'r- Rahman, his horses?" He said, "The horses of the muslims." (i.e. Those kept for jihad or owned by the Treasury). This an-Naqi' is about 20 parsangs from Madina and its area was one mile by eight and is recorded in `The Muwatta" of Malik in the riwaya of Ibn Wahb. It is known that this continued during the khalifate of Abu Bakr the same as in the time of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, especially as there was more need of horses and camels for jihad than before. In the time of "Umar, the hima was widened and it included Sarf and ar-Rabadha. `Umar put an agent in charge of the hima who was a client of his called Hani'. In `The Book of Jihad' from the `Sahih' of al-Bukhari (book 56, chap. 180) from the hadith of Zayd b. Aslam from his father is the text of the instruction the Amir al-Mu`minin `Umar to his agent who was in charge of the hima to bar the animals of the wealthy like `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf and `Uthman b. `Affan but to be indulgent with the one with sheep and the one whose land had been reaped so that their animals would not be destroyed. As `Umar extended the hima to more than what it was in the time of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and Abu Bakr, due to the increase of the beasts of the Tresury in his time, so `Uthman expanded it because of the expansion of the state and the increase in conquests. That which the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, permitted for the beasts of the Treasury and which Abu Bakr and `Umar continued was permitted for the Treasury in the time of `Uthman. Any objection to it is an objection to a matter which is included in the Islamic Shari`a. When `Uthman replied to the question about the hima when he defended himself before the assembly of the Companions, he announced that those who were in charge of the hima limited it to the zakat animals of the muslims in order to protect them so that there would not be any conflict with other animals next to it. They did not deny nor push anyone away from it. He mentioned about himself that before he was appointed khalif, he had the greatest number of camels and sheep of the arabs. Then that time passed and he did not have more than two camels for his Hajj. He asked those of the Companions who knew that, "Is that not the case?' They replied, "Oh Allah, yes."
2. Abu Dharr chose to retire to ar-Rabadha and `Uthman agreed with him about it as will be seen. He honoured him and gave provisions which would give him ease.
3. Look at the clarification of Fiqh and the details of the Shari'a on this question in `The Path of the Sunna' by Ibn Taymiyya (3: 198-199).
4 At-Tabari (5:66) reported and gave a lot of Islamic sources that when Ibn as-Sawda' (`Abdullah b. Saba') came to Syria, he met Abu Dharr. He said, "Abu Dharr, aren't you amazed at Mu`awiya saying, "The property is the property of Allah. Doesn't everything belong to Allah? As if he means to cut it off from the muslims and erase the name of the muslims." Abu Dharr therefore came to him and said, "What leads you to call the property of the muslims the `property of Allah'?" Mu`awiya said, "May Allah have mercy on you Abu Dharr! Are we not the slave of Allah and is not all property His property, and all creation His creation, and all business His business?" Abu Dharr said, "Do not say that." Mu`awiya said, "I do not say that it does not belong to Allah, but I will say, `The property of the muslims." Ibn as-Sawda' (`Abdullah b. Saba') came to Abu'd-Darda' and Abu'd-Darda' said to him, "Who are you? By Allah, I think that you are a jew." Ibn Saba' came to `Abdullah b. as-Samit and busied himself with him. `Abdullah brought him to Mu`awiya and said, "By Allah , this is the one who sent Abu Dharr to you!"
5. That which I think, after pursuing the texts of the Shari`a about property, and seeing how the texts were applied during the lifetime of the Salaf and how they acted, is that the muslim can own property for himself and his kin which will be enough for him and them, according to what is customary for people like him and them among the people of integrity, ****************************ment and the deen. For anything beyond that, he must pay the zakat demanded by the Shari`a, directly according to his own ijtihad if he does not pay it to the Islamic government acting by the rules of the Shari`a. After paying zakat for it, the owner of the property remains in a state of trial from Allah to see if he will deal with it in a way pleasing to Allah and which increases the muslims in strength, happiness and might. If he is a merchant, it is by the path of trade, or if he is a farmer, it is by the ways of agriculture. If he is one with a craft, it is by the way of craft. In the areas where Islam was established, it benefited from the wealth of the rich Comapanions in help, aid and strength. When the commerce of the muslim merchant enables the muslims to dispense with the commerce of their enemies, it is considered to be a strength for them, according to the extent that one who has it, spends with this intention. It is the same with the craft of the muslim craftsman and the agriculture of the muslim farmer. The intention in these matters is a big thing. Its measure is by action when there is need for it. In general, the muslim can be rich without limit, provided that it is part of what he can properly dispose of, and that he takes enough from it according to what is commonly considered to be adequate, and always triesto free himself from servitude and yielding to luxuries. After he has paid the zakat on what he owns, what is more than his needs is like the trust of Allah in his possession. He does with it whatever will increase the muslims in wealth, strength, ease, might and happiness.
6 In `The Book of the Judgements' in `The Roots of the Judgements' by Ibn Hazm (2:139) is the mursal report which Ibn Shu`ba related from Sa`d b. Ibrahim b. `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf from his father (Ibrahim b. `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf) who said, "`Umar said to Ibn Mas`ud, Abu'd-Darda' and Abu Dharr, `This hadith is not from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace."' He said, "I believe that he did not let them leave Madina until he died." Ibn Hazm noted that this report is mursal and it is not permitted to use it as a proof. Shaykh Ahmad Shakir added to it that al-Bayhaqi agreed with Ibn Hazm that Ibrahim b. `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf (d. 65 or 66 when he was 75 years old) did not take directly from `Umar. I do not know whether Ibn al-`Arabi relied on this mursal report in this passage, or on another report which we have not read."
7. Qadi Abu'l-Walid b. Khaldun mentioned in `The `Ibar' and the rest of 2:139 that Abu Dharr asked `Uthman for permission to leave Madina. He said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, commanded me to leave it when the buildings reached Sal'." `Uthman gave him permission and he settled in ar-Rabadha and built a mosque there. `Uthman allotted him a herd of camels and gave him two slaves and provided him with provision. He used to visit Madina. There were three miles between Madina and ar-Rabadha. Yaqut said, "It was one of the best houses on the road to Makka."
8. i.e. In Damascus
9. Mu`awiya himself tried to act in the path of `Umar as Ibn Kathir transmitted in `The Beginning and the End' (8:131) from Muhammad b. Sa`d. He said, 'Arim related to us from Hammad b. Yazid from Ma`mar from az-Zuhri that Mu`awiya acted for two years as `Umar acted and did not cut off any of it. He was far from that." Someone who has not looked into the life of peoples and their politics supposes that the ruler can do whatever he likes wherever he is. This is an error. The environment has an effect on the ruler and the organisations of the ruler more than the effect that the ruler and the organisations of the ruler have on the environment. This is one of the meanings of the words of Allah, the Mighty, the Majestic, "Allah will not change a people until they change themselves."
10. i.e. The claim of the attackers of `Uthman was not true when they said that `Uthman opposed what the Shari`a demanded in that respect.
11. Ibn Taymiyya said in `The Path of the Sunna' (3:196), "Many of the people of knowledge attacked his exile (i.e. Al-Hakam's exile by the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and said that he went by his own choice. The story of the exile of al-Hakam is not in the Sahih volumes, nor does it have any isnad by which the affair is known." Then he said, "The Makkans who did not become muslim until the conquest of Madina did not live in Madina. His banishment was that he banished him from Makka, not from Madina. If he had exiled him from Madina, he would have sent him to Makka. Many of the people of knowledge attacked his exile as has already been stated and then said that he went by his own choice. When the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, disciplined a man by exile, he did not demand that he remain in exile forever. This is not known for any wrong action. The Shari`a does not mention a wrong action which leaves the one who does it forever in exile. `Uthman interceded for `Abdullah b. Sa`d b. Abi Sarh and he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, accepted his intercession for him and took his homage. How could he not accept his intercession for al-Hakam then? They related that `Uthman asked him to return him and he gave him permission. We know that his wrong action was less than the wrong action of `Abdullah b. Sa`d b. Abi Sarh. The story of `Abdullah is confirmed and known by isnads. As for the story of al-Hakam, it is mentioned by mursal. The historians who fabricated many lies mentioned it in what they related. There is no firm transmission here demanding one to detract from someone inferior to `Uthman. The virtues of `Uthman are known as well as the love of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, his praise of him, his singling him out for his two daughters and his testifying that he would have the Garden and sent him to Makka and took the oath from him. The Companions advanced him to the Khalifate. `Umar and others testified that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died while he was pleased with him. Things like this prove definitively that he was one of the great awliya' of Allah, the fearfully aware with whom Allah is pleased and who are pleased with Him. This is not rejected because of a transmission whose isnad is not firm and the manner of whose occurrence is not known. (Look also at 3:235- 236 of `The Path of the Sunna').
Imam Abu Muhammad b. Hazm transmitted in the book, `The Imamate and the Rivalry', included in part 4 of his book `al-Fisal' (p.154), the words of the one who gives `Uthman a prof against the one who objected to him doing that. The exile of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not have a necessary limit, nor is there anything in the Shari`a to make it last foreover. The punishment is for a wrong action which deserved exile but the door of repentance is open. If the perpetrator repents, that punishment falls from him. There is no diagreement about that among any of the people of Islam. The whole earth becomes permitted. The mujtahid of the Zaydis, Sayyid Muhammad b. Ibrahim al-Wazir al-Yamani (d. 840) quoted in his book, `The Smiling Meadows in the Defence of the Sunna of Abu'l-Qasim' (1:141-142), the words of al-Hakam al-Muhsin b. Kirama al- Mu'tazili al-Mutashayyi' from his book `The Free Springs', that the Messenger of Allah, may allah bless him and grant him peace, gave `Uthman permission for that. Ibn al-Wasir said, "The Mu'tazilites and the Shi`a from the Zaydis must accept this hadith and not object to `Uthman doing that because the opinion of the transmitter of the hadith was famous for reliability, knowledge and sound belief." Then al-Wazir spoke extensively on this subject with proofs and evidence filling three pages in defence of the Amir al-Mu'minin `Uthman in his recalling al-Hakam. These proofs are from one of the Imams of the Zaydis and their mujtahids after he had transmitted that hadith from the Shi'ite Mu'tazilite Imam. It had its particular proofs which I heard after that from one of the Imams of the people of the sunna, the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya and Qadi Ibn al-`Arabi and from the Imam of the people of the outward, Abu Muhammad b. Hazm.
12. That was in Mina in the Hajj `Id in 29. `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf censured `Uthman for completing the prayer while they were in Mina. (`Uthman made an excuse that some of those who were among the hajjis included people from the Yemen and coarse people who had said the previous year, "The prayer for the one at home is two rak`ats. This is your Imam,`Uthman, and he prays two rak`ats."). Then `Uthman said to `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf, "I have taken family in Mekka (i.e. that he had entered under the judgment of the resident, not the traveller.) I think that I should pray four rak`ats out of fear that I have for the people." Then `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf left `Uthman and met `Abdullah b. Mas`ud and spoke to him about that. Ibn Mas`ud said, "Dispute is evil. It has reached me that he prayed four, so I pray four with my companions." `Abdu'r-Rahman b. `Awf said, "It reached me that he prayed four, and I prayed two with my companions. Now, it will be by what you have fabricated." He means today we pray four with him. (at-Tabari 5:57-58)
13. How excellent is what Qadi Abu Bakr said about Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, that he left off shortening in the prayer in the journey and did ijtihad. In the hadith, "when the judge strives and is right, he has two rewards. If he errs, he has one reward;" `Uthman erred in this instance. The transmissions about that are clear. It is better to follow the truth. In spite of that, he is rewarded for his ijtihad.
The proof of his error lies in the words of Ibn `Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, "I kept the company of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he did not add more that two rak`ats to the travel prayer." Abu Bakr, `Uthman and `Umar were like that. Al-Bukhari and Muslim, may Allah have mercy on them, related it.
Imam ash-Shawkani said, "His words, `He did not do more that two raka`ats in the travel prayer' contains the fact that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, kept to the shortened prayer and did not pray in full."
The hadith of `A'isha is agreed upon, "The prayer demands two raka`ats and the travel prayer is confirmed and the prayer at home is completed."
There is a strong proof in these two hadith that it is obligatory to shorten it and not just recommended as some have claimed.
`Ali, `Umar and most of the `ulama' of the Salaf and the fuqaha' of the community and `Umar b. `Abdu'l-`Aziz, Qatada, al-Hasan and the Hanafites believed that it was obligatory to shorten the prayer. Hammad b. Sulayman said, "the one who prays four in the journey must repeat it. Malik said, "He repeats it as long as he is still in its time." Those who said that shortening was recommended, and not obligatory, have no definte proof and the hadiths which they used as evidence are not sound. The one who wants to verify that should refer to the book, `Obtaining the Desires' by ash-Shawkani (3:213).
A group of the Companions objected to `Uthman when he completed the prayer at Mina. They gave it various interpretations. Ibn al- Qayyim said, "He thought it good since he had family at Mina. When the traveller stays in a place and marries in it or has a wife, he does the full prayer." Ahmad related that `Uthman said, "Oh people, when I came, I had family here. I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, `When a man marries in a land, he should pray the prayer of the one who resides in it." Al-Bayhaqi faults this hadith since it is cut off and Ikrima b. Ibrahim is in its isnad. It is weak as al- Bayhaqi said. He said in `The Fath', "This hadith is not sound because it is cut off and one of its transmitters is one who is not used as a proof." Similarly, what is ascribed to `Uthman is not sound when it is said that he, may Allah be pleased with him, left off shortening fearing that some of the bedouins would think that the prayer was two rak`ats for the one at home.
Then it is sound that `A'isha, may Allah be pleased with her, interpreted the same as `Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, interepreted. He used to pray four in the journey and he agreed with them as preceded. We said about `Uthman that whoever strives and errs as the rightly-guided khalif erred. Complete protection only belongs to the Prophets.
14. Muhammad b. Yahya al-Ash`ari al-Maliki, known as Ibn Bakr (674-741), quoted in his book, `The Preface and Clarification about the Murder of the Martyr `Uthman', which is one of the publications of the Dar al-Kutub al-Misriyya (no. 23, History) that he related from a group of the Companions that the prayer was done in full on a journey. They included `A'isha, Salman and fourteen Companions. In the chapters of shortening from the `Sahih' of al-Bukhari (book 18, chap. 5, pt. 2, p. 36) is the hadith of az-Zuhri from `Urwa b. az-Zubayr from `A'isha that she said, "The prayer first made obligatory was two rak`ats, so that travel prayer is confirmed and the prayer of the one in residence is completed." Az-Zuhri said, "I said to `Urwa, 'Why did `A'isha complete it then?' He said, `She interpreted the same of `Uthman interpreted."' In the `Musnad' of Ahmad (94:4) from `Abbad b. `Abdullah b. az-Zubayr, he said, "When Mu`awiya came to us on Hajj, we went with him to Makka. He prayed Dhuhr with two raka`ats with us. Then he went to Dar an-Nadwa. On the other hand `Uthman would complete the prayer when he came to Makka and prayed Dhuhr, `Asr and `Isha' there with four rak`ats each. When he went to Mina and `Arafat, he shortened the prayer. When he finished Hajj and stayed at Mina, he did the full prayer until he left Makka. When Mu`awiya prayed Dhuhr with us with two rak`ats, Marwan and `Umar b. `Uthman went to him and said, `No one ever disgraced the son of your uncle with worse than that with which you disgraced him.' He said to them, `What is that?' They told him, `Don't you know that he completed the prayer in Makka?' He mentioned to them that he had prayed them with the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, Abu Bakr and `Umar. They said, `You did it in full."' It is clear that Mu`awiya thought that shortenng the prayer was allowed and that the traveller could choose. He prayed `Asr with four.
15. Here in the text it is the word, "end determined" and the clear text of another word. The meaning is not affected by dropping them.
16. The state of Islam in the Khalifate of Abu Bakr and `Umar reached its pinnacle in might. Examples were made of the human success and happiness of that society because by the light of Allah, the Mighty, the Exalted, Abu Bakr and `Umar uncovered the depths of character in its people and the elements of manliness in the men. The people appointed them to lead them and provided them with the keys of mastery and entrusted them with the community of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. These men knew that they were answerable for that before Allah, the Mighty, the Exalted. You saw in the footnotes that Yazid b. Abi Safyan and his brother Mu`awiya were among the men of the state of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq whom he selected to bear the burdens of the community in their wars and peace. He did it very well indeed. When Yazid was appointed to lead one of the armies, Abu Bakr went out walking with him to see him off (at-Tabari 4:30). Mu`awiya was mentioned in the history after his brother Yazid because he was younger than him, not because he was less than him in the perfection of the qualities of leadership and mastery. It is accepted that Mu`awiya was one of the men of the government of Abu Bakr and `Umar. He was one of those whom the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace,employed and from whom he sought help. He called him to do that once when Mu`awiya was eating and he was insistent in calling him and sent to him time after time to make him hurry to come to him. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, appointed Mu`awiya to something of his business before Abu Bakr and `Umar had appointed him. He also appointed Yazid b. Abi Sufyan, as in `The Opening of the Lands' by al-Baladhri (p. 48, published in Egypt in 1350). Those who are filled with hate and rancour for the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, especially the Banu Umayya among them, cannot fail to acknowledge the fact that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, appointed Mu`awiya to be his scribe. They said that he used to write for him, but that he did not write down the revelation. They say this by a `revelation' which has been revealed to them from Shaytan. They have no historical text in their possession or proof of Shari`a to which they refer. They make a distinction between matters for which they have no proof to make that distinction. If the Prophet, may allah bless him and grant him peace, had made a distinction between his scribes in a certain matter rather than other matters, that would have been given by multiple transmissions from him and the transmitters would have transmitted it, as has occurred with things less important than this. One of the young muslims of whom I have a good opinion once asked me, "What do you say about Mu`awiya?" I said to him, "Who am I that I should be asked about one of the great ones of this communtiy and a Companion who was one of the best Companions of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace? He was one of the lights of Islam. But this lamp shone at the side of four suns which filled the world with their lights. Their ligths overcame his light."
Ibn Kathir said in `The Beginning and the End' (8:133) from al- Layth b. Sa`d (the Imam, `alim and leader of Egypt who died in 175.) from Bukayr (who was Ibn `Abdullah al-Ashajj al-Madini al- Misri, who died in 127 A.H., and Imam an-Nasa`i said that he is reliable) from Busr b. Sa`id al-Madini (died 100 A.H.) and Ibn Ma'in said that he is reliable and al-Layth b. Sa`d said that he was one of the people of `Ibada and those who devoted themselves and one of the people of asceticism and scrupulousnesss in this world that Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas (one of the ten promised the Garden) said, "I did not see anyone who fulfilled a right after `Uthman more than the one with the door," i.e. Mu`awiya. Ibn Kathir also related (8:135) from `Abdu'r-Razzaq b. Humam as- San`ani, one of the notable Imams and people who knew the Qur'an by heart (he was ascribed to the Shi`a) from Ma`mar b. Rashid, Abu `Urwa al-Basri, then al-Yamani, who was one of the notables from Humam b. Munabbih as-San`ani (who was reliable). He said, "I heard Ibn `Abbas say. "I have not seen a man more suited to rulership than Mu`awiya." Is there a man who is the most suited of people to rulership other than one who is just, wise, and forbearing and strong in defence of his kingdom and one who seeks help from Allah to spread the call of Allah in other domains and to undertake the trust in the community over which Allah has entrusted him? Should `Uthman be censured for appointing the most suitable of people to rule? What an extraordinary thing. How can `Uthman be censured for appointing him when `Umar appointed him before him and he was appointed by Abu Bakr before `Umar? He was also appointed to one of the offices by the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, before the khalifate went to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman.
There is no doubt that the mind which Shaytan plays with and seduces by whisperings like this is an unsound mind. It perverts people's intellects and their logic before it perverts their deen and history for them. It is obligatory for those who love the truth and good to avoid all who think like this, as they would avoid the laper. Imam at-Tirmidhi related from Abu Idris al- Khawlani, one of the great `ulama' of the Tabi`un and the most knowledgeable of the people of Syria after Abu'd-Darda', that when `Umar b. al-Khattab dismissed `Umayr b. Sa`d al-Ansari al- Awsi from Hums and appointed Mu`awiya people said, "He has dismissed `Umayr and appointed Mu`awiya." (al-Baghawi said in `The Collection of the Companions', `"Umayr used to be called `the unique"') Ibn Sirin said that `Umar used to call him that due to his admiration for him. `Umayr was one of the people of zuhd. `Umar said, "Do not mention Mu`awiya with anything but good. I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, `Oh Allah, guide him."' It is related that the person who gave this testimony for Mu`awiya was the Amir al-Mu`minin, Umar. He was the one who testified to it for him and he related the supplication of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, for `Mu`awiya that Allah should guide him. That is a very big thing because of the greatness of `Umar's position. If the one who testified to that was `Umayr b. Sa`d al- Ansari and he was dismissed in favour of Mu`awiya from his appointment over Hums, that still does not detract from its greatness if `Umar himself gave that testimony for Mu`awiya.
You know that `Umayr was one of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and that he was one of the ascetics of the Ansar. Ibn Taymiyya said in the Path of the Sunna (3:189), "The conduct of Mu`awiya with his people was one of the best conducts even seen in a ruler. His people loved him.It is confirmed in the `Sahih' volumes that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, `The best of your Imams are those whom you love and who love you. You pray for them and they pray for you. The worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and who hate you. You curse them and they curse you."' There is no room here for more than this. We will elaborate the real form of Mu`awiya when his khalifate is mentioned so that you know to what extent we have been deceived by the lies of the enemies of the first generations of Islam. This is a portion from a sound hadith as you will see later.
17. He is Abu Shamsi of parentage, Hashimi by relationship through his maternal aunt, the mother of his father was Arwa bint Kurayz. Her mother was al-Bayda` by `Abdu'l-Muttalib b. Hasim, the paternal aunt of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. He said, "From the Banu Shams. This one is more like us than you." Then he spat in his mouth and he swallowed it. He, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "I hope that he will be a water-giver." He did not cultivate any land without water appearing in it. He grew up generous, noble, brave, blessed by nature with many virtues. He conquered all of Khorasan, the ends of Persia, Sijistan and Kerman until he reached the districts of Ghazna. He put an end to Yazdegerd b. Shariyar, the lst of the Persian kings. The Iranians believe that the chain of their kings appeared with their Adam whom they call Jiumart. The kingdom of his sons continued in a straight line until the last of them died by the force of Islam in the Khalifate of Amir-al- Mu'minin `Uthman, by the jihad of this man who was Abshami by parentage, Hashimi by maternal aunt, `Abdullah b. `Amir b. Kurayz. It is a fire in the hearts of the poeple of the Magian sect against Islam and against `Uthman and ibn Kurayz. They had rancour towards them and fought with them up until the present day with the weapons of lies, hate and intrigue. That will continue up until the Day of Rising. Were not those who confirmed Islam among those to whom Iran gave birth in the days when it was Shaif`ite in madhhab, when the `ulama' of the Muhammadan sunna emerged from it? They included great Imams, hadith scholars and fuqaha'. They stripped their hearts of any rancour they had towards those who believed and struggled with their property and themselves until Allah opened the lands at their hands. He guided the community because of them. The muslims love and respect them for their merits. We do not claim partisanship for anyone after the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and we remove error from every Companion or Tabi' or those who followed them by thinking the best of them.
As for those who filled this world with mountains of good deeds, some are blind to them and make slander in order to extract from it something they can use to cast blame. If they do not find it, they will invent a lie. Part of the nobility of the muslim to himself is that he lifts himself above listening to the likes of those men and is not deceived by them. You have enough evidence in the victory of `Abdullah b. `Amir b. Kurayz which reached the furthest east and his demolition of the end of the period of the Magian Empire. There is also documentation of the large quantity of the good deeds he performed. Ibn Kathir said in `The Begining and the End' (8:88), "He was the first to make cisterns at `Arafat for the hajjis to the House of Allah and make spring water flow to it." Ibn Taymiyya said about him in `The Path of Sunna' (3:189-190), "He is known for good deeds and the love people had for him in their hearts and that cannot be ignored." If men like them had been among the ancestors of the English and the French, their greatness would remain in the books of study, culture and education. Our sciences have been decimated and we tend to transmit that in our scholarly books so that our generation believes in the greatness of the forbears of the colonialists as for the greatness of our own forbears, Shaytan has overpowered it by means of false hearts which overflow with evil. Many of us confirm the lies and we proceed like a community without self-respect, asleep to the inheritance of a glory whose like humanity has never known.
18. He is his brother by his mother, Arwa bint Kurayz. Her mother was al-Bayda' bint `Abdu'l-Muttallib b. Hashim.
19. Any one who has no recognition of the beginning of this community supposes that the Amir al-Mu`minin `Uthman brought al- Walid b. `Uqba from the gutter and appointed him over Kufa. As for those whom Allah has blessed with the blessing of intimacy with the states of that age and its people, they know that the first Islamic state from the time of the Khalifate of Abu Bakr seized on this energetic, resolute youth of pleasing character and truthful iman. His gifts were employed in the way of Allah until Abu Bakr died. The first office that he held in the Khalifate of Abu Bakr was that he was entrusted with the secret messages of war which passed between the Khalif and his general, Khalid b. al-Walid in the battle of al-Madhar with the Persians in 12 A.H. (at-Tabari 4:7). Then he sent him to help his general `Iyad b. Ghanam al-Fihri (at-Tabari 4:22). In 13 A.H., al-Walid was put in charge of the zakat of Quda`a for Abu Bakr. Then when the Siddiq decided to conquer Syria, al-Walid was with him in the place of `Amr b. al-`As in respect, trust, and honour. He wrote to `Amr b. al-`As and to al-Walid b `Uqba to call them to lead the jihad. Ibn al-`As took the banner of Islam towards Palestine and al-Walid b. `Uqba went as a general east of the Jordan (at- Tabari 4:29-30). Then we see al-Walid in 13 AH as an Amir over the lands of the Banu Taghlib and the Arabs of the Peninsula (at- Tabari 4:155). He protected the mujahidin in the north of Syria so that no one could come at them from the rear. Rabi'a and Tanukh, both the muslims and kafirun among them were under his leadership. Al-Walid b. `Uqba made full use of the opportunity of his appointment and his generalship over this area, which was still full of christians from the arab tribes, because in addition to his military jihad and ********************istrative office, he also called the people to Allah, using all the means of wisdom and good warning to encourage the christians of Ayyad and Taghlib to become muslim like the rest of the Arabs. Ayyad fled from him to al-Andul which was still under the rule of the Byzantines. Al- Walid persuaded his khalif `Umar to write a letter threatening the Byzentine Emperor so he would return them to the borders of the Islamic state. Taghlib tried to revolt against al-Walid when he spread the Islamic call among their youths and children. He became very angry with a Mudari anger supported by Islamic belief. He uttered his famous words about them: "When I wrapped my head with a turban, Taghlib the daughter of Wa'il lured you from me".
These words reached `Umar and he was afraid that his general would fall upon the young men of the christians of Taghlib, so he took the reins from his hand at the moment when they were fighting with the muslims. Therefore he restrained the hand of al- Walid from them and moved him from their area. Al-Walid came into the khalifate of `Uthman with this excellent past. He appointed him over Kufa. He was one of its best governors as far as justice, compassion and charity are concerned. While he was in charge of Kufa, his armies went east in conquest and victory as we will mention later.
20. At the end of this book, the author has a section in which he indicates the meanings and realities which someone in command should take into consideration in his ijtihad when appointing governors or dismissing them. That has great fiqh and wondrous recognitions which the Imams and `Ulama' clarified in the details which they wrote about the Imamate and the politics of the state. This is found in their books about the roots of the deen. The tyrant of the Shi`a, the forger, al-Hasan b. al-Mutahhar al-Hulli claimed in his book, `The Path of Generosity', that `Uthman appointed someone who was not suited to govern over the affairs of the muslims. Ibn Taymiyya answered him in `The Path of the Sunna' (3:173-176) that `Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, appointed Ziyad b. Abi Sufyan and he appointed al-Ashtar an- Nakh`i and he appointed Muhammad b. Abi Bakr and others like them. The man of intellect knows beyond doubt that Mu`awiya b. Abi Sufyan was better than all of these. He said, "It is a wonder that the Shi`a object to `Uthman appointing his relatives from his father's side and his mother's side. He appointed `Abdullah b. `Abbas over Yemen. He appointed Qutham b. al-`Abbas over Makka and Ta`if. As for Madina, it is said that he appointed Sahl b. Hanif over it, and it is said that he appointed Thumana b. al- `Abbas. As for Basra, he appointed `Abdullah b. `Abbas over it. He appointed his foster son, Muhammad b. Abi Bakr over Egypt. He had raised him in his own house since he had married his mother after Abu Bakr had died when Muhammad was still a child. The Imamiyya claim that `Ali specified his sons for the khalifate, or for his son and his son and then his son and so on. It is known that the appointment of relatives was disliked. Then appointing a relative to be khalif is far worse than appointing someone to be governor.
When the speaker said that `Ali had a proof for what he did, we say to him, "The proof of `Uthman for what he did is greater." When he claims divine protection from wrong action and things like that for `Ali which stifles the tongues of attackers, ijtihad is claimed for `Uthman which also stifles the tongues of the attackers and which is more easily understood and conveyed. Then he said, "The Banu Umayya were employed by the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, while he was alive. After him, they were employed in the government by Abu Bakr and `Umar. It is not known that any of the tribes of Quraysh provided more governors for the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, than the Banu `Abdu Shams because they were numerous and they had nobility and leadership. In the beginning of Islam, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, appointed `Attab b. Usayd b. Abi'l-`As over the noble city of Makka. He appointed Abu Sufyan b. Harb b. Umayya over Najran. He appointed Sa`id b. al-`Asi over the zakat of the Banu Madh-haj and over Sana' and Yemen until the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died. He appointed `Uthman b. Sa`id b. al-`Asi over Tayma`, Khaybar and Qura `Uryayna. He appointed Aban b. Sa`id b. al-`As over some of the captives and then he appointed him over Bahrayn. He continued in charge of it after al-`Ala' b. al-Hadrami (the ally of the Banu Umayya) until the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died. `Uthman said, "I only appoint from among those the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, appointed and from those like them and from their tribe." It was the same with Abu Bakr and `Umar after him. The evidence for the permission to appoint men from the Banu Umayya is a confirmed text from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. That is clear to every man of intellect setting apart the claim that the khalifate is by stipulation for one particular individual from the Banu Hashim, because according to the consensus of the people of knowledge by transmission, this is a lie. It is confirmed by the agreement of of the people of knowledge of transmission. (Look also at `The Path of the Sunna', 3:236-237). Any one who considers the life of the governors of `Uthman and their jihad and their virtues will see that they are at the highest pinnacle of the men of government. He will feel no hesitation in confirming that they were among the architects of the strong basis of the ********************istrative and military glory of Islam. They have the reward of the successful results in conquest and in spreadig the call of Islam in what history considers to be one of the most extraordinary miracles ever witnessed.
21. That was in 21 A.H. Those who were appointed after Sa`d were `Abdullah b. `Abdullah b. `Utaban (and in his time the battle of Nahawand occurred), then Ziyad b. Hanzala (he asked to be retired and was dismissed.) and after them `Ammar b. Yasir was appointed. (at-Tabari 4:246 and before it.)
22. Its riwaya from him is in the Sahih of al-Bukhari and elsewhere.
23. In the forefront of those who related from him among the great Tabi`un was Zayn al-`Abdin `Ali b. al-Husayn as-Sibt. Ibn Taymiyya (in `The Path of the Sunna', 2:123) and Ibn Hajjar in `The Isaba' quoted that. You will see its details in `The Greater Tabaqat of the Shari'is' by as-Subki in the biography of the linguist, Abu Mansur Muhammad b. Ahmad b. al-Azhar, the author of `The Tadh-hib al-Lugha'(282-370). Among those whom Ibn Hajar quoted in the riwaya from Marwan were: Sa`id b. al-Musayyib, the head of the `ulama' of the Tabi`un, his brothers from among the seven fuqaha', Abu Bakr b. `Abdu'r-Rahman b. al-Harith b. Hisham al-Madkhzumi, `Ubaydullah b. `Abdullah, `Utba b. Mas`ud, `Urwa b. az-Zubayr and others like them such as `Urak b. Malik al-Ghifari al-Madini, the faqih of the people of Dahlak (who used to fast constantly) and `Abdullah b. Shaddad b. al-Had, one of those who transmitted from `Umar, `Ali and Mu`adh. The riwaya of `Urwa b. az-Zubayr from Marwan is in `The Musnad' of Imam Ahmad (First edition, 4:321, 323, 326, 328 and 5:179). The riwaya of `Arak from Marwan is transmitted by the Imam of the people of Egypt, al-Layth b. Sa`d from Yazid b. Hubayba in `The Musnad' of Ahmad (4:328). The riwaya of `Abdullah b Shaddad b. al-Had from Marwan is in the Musnad of Ahmad (6:317 & 323). Anyone who considers the hadith related which are from Marwan will find that those who relate them are reliable Imams whose riwaya has a chain from him over a period of two generations or more. All of them hold the highest rank in Islam among those who cooled the rancour which was in their hearts by attacking Marwan and those better than Marwan. Among the transmitters of the hadith of Marwan was `Abdu'r-Razzaq, the Imam of the people of Yemen, although he has some Shi`a tendencies in him. In `The Musnad' of Ahmad (6:312), there is the hadith of `Abdu'r-Rahman b. al-Harith b. Hisham that he was Marwan's messenger to the Umm al-Mu`minin Umm Salama to verify some of the judgments of the Shari`a. In 6:299 of `The Musnad' of Ahmad is a sample showing the great concern that Marwan had for the sunna of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, as far as he was capable of bringing it out from the Imams and Amirs of the muslims.
24. I was astoundd at how this ayat could have come down about al-Walid b. `Uqba, and Allah call him deviant, and then after that the two khalifs of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, Abu Bakr and `Umar would still give him the position which history has written that he had. This contradiction between the trust that Abu Bakr and `Umar had for al- Walid b. `Uqba and how one should deal with him if Allah had called him deviant, moved me to doubt this ayat was sent down him, not because it is unlikely that al-Walid did something by which he could be considered deviant, but because it is unlikely that the one described by "fisq" in the clear Qur'an would be the confidant of two of the friends of Allah, the Mighty, the Majestic, who were such that we do not know of anyone closer to Allah than them after His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Then after I was assailed by this doubt, I looked again at the reports which have come about the reason for the descent of this ayat: "When the deviant brings you news." When I applied myself to studying it, I found that it stopped with Mujahid, Qatada, Ibn Abi Layla or Yazid b. Ruman. None of them mentioned the names of the reciters of these reports in the period of 100 years or more which passed between their days and the time of the event. These 100 years are full of reciters from different sources. Those who have tendency to injure the reputation of people lke al-Walid and those of greater rank than al- Walid have filled this world with suspicious reports which have no scholarly worth. The transmitters of those reports, regarding the reason for the revelation of the ayat, are still unknown among the `ulama' who consider people to be just witnesses or not, (ta'dil) after the men to whom these reports reached. The scholars who consider people to be just witnesses or otherwise do not know anything about them, not even their names. It is not permitted in the Shari`a and history to judge that these sourceless broken reports are sound.
There are two direct reports. One of them is from Umm Salama. Musa b. `Ubayda claimed that he heard it from Thabit, the client of Umm Salama. an-Nasa`i, Ibn al-Madini, Ibn `Adi and a group considered Musa b. `Ubayda weak. This Thabit who is claimed to be the client of Umm Salama is not mentioned in anything referred to in the books of knowledge. He is not mentioned in `The Tadh-hib at-Tadh-hib' nor in `The Taqrib at-Tadh-hib' nor in the summary of `The Tadh-hib al-Kamal'. I did not find him nor do I have any suspicions about `The Balance of Justice' and `The Tongue of the Balance'. I went to the collection of the hadith of Umm Salama in `The Musnad' of Ahmad and I read them one by one, but I did not find this report among them. I did not find that Umm Salama had any report in which the name of a client of hers called Thabit was mentioned. In addition to all this, Umm Salama did not say in the report, if it is indeed sound - and there is no way to verify that it comes from her - that the ayat was revealed about al- Walid. She said, i.e. it is ascribed to her, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent a man for zakat of the Banu'l-Mustaliq."
The second report is related by at-Tabari in the tafsir from Ibn Sa`d, from his father, from his uncle, from his father, from his father, from Ibn `Abbas. At-Tabari did not meet Ibn Sa`d and did not take from him because when Ibn Sa`d died in Baghdad in 230, at-Tabari was a child six years and at that time had not left his home Amal in Tabaristan for Baghdad or anywhere else. If Ibn Sa`d himself was one of the people of integrity in the deen and majesty in knowledge, the `ulama' who judge integrity and its opposite do not know the names of most of the people in this chain before him, let alone anything about their states. All of these reports from first to last cannot censure an industrious man who was trusted by Abu Bakr and `Umar. He carried out services for Islam for which the greatest reward is expected, Allah willing. I add to all that has preceded the fact that at the time when this event occured with the Banu'l-Mustaliq, about which the ayat was revealed, al-Walid was still young as will come in the following passage.
25. This hadith about the age of al-Walid b. `Uqba on the day of the Conquest of Makka is related by Imam Ahmad in his `Musnad' (4:32, first edition) from a shaykh of his who is Fiyad b. Muhammad ar-Raqqi from Ja'far b. Barqan ar-Raqqi from Thabit b. al- Hajjaj al-Kilabi ar-Raqqi from `Abdullah al-Hamdani (and he is `Abdullah b. Malik b. al-Harith) from al-Walid b. `Uqba. It is apparent that al-Walid b. `Uqba related this hadith when he withdrew from people in the last two years of his life, and he chose to remain in a village he owned in the Raqqa area. The riwaya of the report has a chain in the transmitters of Raqqa and Imam Ahmad took it from a shaykh he knew among them. `Abdullah al-Hamdani is reliable, but his name is confused in other riwayats than these with another Hamdani whose kunya is Abu Musa and whose name is Malik b. al-Harith (i.e. according to the name of the father of `Abdullah al-Hamdani). He is known and trusted. Qadi Abu Bakr b. al-`Arabi relied on this riwaya and others like it in his judgment about the age of Walid b. `Uqba saying that he was a child when Makka was conquered and that the one about whom the ayat, "When the deviant brings you news" was sent down is someone else. It is extraordinary that those who have a tendency to slander the reputation of this young Companion who was a man of jihad, cheerfulness and good conduct among people, have tri- ed to refute the proof of his youthfulness at that time by another report related about his coming to Madina with his brother `Umara in the seventh year of the hijra to ask the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, to return their sister Umm Kulthum to Makka. The fact of this report,even if it is sound, is that in it the name `Umara is put ahead of that of al-Walid. From this it is gathered `Umara was the basis of this journey and that al-Walid came along to acompany him. What would prevent al- Walid from coming as a child with his elder brother, indeed that is a common occurrence every where? Al-Walid's statement that he was a child in the year of the conquest is not contradicted by the report about his coming with his elder brother to Madina in the seventh year of the hijra. So it should be clear to you that none of the report which have come about al-Walid b. `Uqba regarding him being the reason for the revelation of the ayat, "When the deviant brings you news." allow a learned person to base a judgment in the Shari`a or historical judgment on them. When you add to that the hadith of `The Musnad' of Imam Ahmad about the age of al-Walid in the year of the Conquest, then the wisdom of Abu Bakr and `Umar appointing al-Walid and their trust in him and their reliance on him although he was still a youth will be clear to you.
Through this disagreement, the `ulama' abandond even strong hadith with al-Walid in their isnad. How could a man be considered fasiq because of words like these? How could that be with a man from among the Companions of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace?
26. Qudama b. Maz`un al-Jumahi was one of the first of the forerunners. He went on hijra twice and he was at Badr. He was the in-law of the Umm al-Mu`minin, Hafsa bint `Umar and her brother, `Ubaydullah. While Qudama was in charge on Bahrayn during the Khalifate of `Umar, al-Jarud, the master of the Banu `Abdu'l- Qays, came to `Umar, from Bahrayn and claimed that `Qudama drank and became drunk. `Umar said to him, "Who will testify with you?" He said, "Abu Hurayra." He asked Abu Hurayra to testify. He said, "I did not see him drink, but I did see him drunk and vomiting." `Umar said to him, "You have been excessive in the testimony." He sent for Qudama from Bahrayn and al-Jarud said to `Umar, "Carry out the Book of Allah on this one." `Umar said to him, "Are you an opponent or a witness?" He said, "A witness." `Umar said, "You have given your testimony." So al-Jarud was silent. Then he came in the morning to `Umar and said, "Carry out the hadd of Allah on this one." `Umar said, "You hold your tongue or I will deal severely with you." He said, "`Umar, that is not proper. Your nephew drinks wine and then you treat me severely." He brought one of Qudama's wives and she gave testimony against her husband. `Umar wanted to carry out the hadd on him. The Companions said to him, " We do not think that you should carry out the hadd on him while he is ill." Then he came again and they said what they had said to him, "We do not think that you should carry out the hadd on him while he is ill." Then he came again and they said what they had said to him before. `Umar said, "I prefer that he meet Allah under the whip than I meet Him while he is on my neck." He had him flogged. Qudama was cross with him. When they returned from the Hajj, he was brought to `Umar. `Umar spoke to him and apologised to him. Part of the good fortune of Qudama b. Maz`un was that he was a Qureyshi from the Banu Jumah. If he had been a Qurayshi from the Banu `Abdu Shams, the tongues of evil would have uttered contempt against him and fabricated lies about him for as long as there is a lie in this world.
27. This is true, but it is like what happened to Qudama b. Maz`un and like what is famous with people about Abu Mihjan ath- Thaqafi, the poet-horseman who had a glorious day in the war of Qadisiyya. As for al-Walid b. `Uqba the mujahid, the just but wronged conqueror who made every effort to do all the good that he was able to for his community, he saw with his own eyes how the liars attacked the Salihun and how their falsehood was perpetrated against them. He withdrew from people after the murder of `Uthman to an estate he owned, cut off from the clamour of society. It was about fifteen miles from the city of Raqqa in the land of the peninsula where he had fought and where he had called its christians to Islam during the khalifate of `Umar. Now, the intrigues of the liars about him is uncovered some thirteen centuries later. The truth is old and evidence is not affected by age. When al-Walid b. `Uqba was appointed over Kufa by the Amir al-Mu`minin `Uthman, he wanted to be a model ruler in justice, nobility and good conduct with the people, as he was a model warrior in his jihad and establishing for Islam what was fitting in those who defended its call, those who bore its banner and spread its mesage. He ruled over Kufa for five years and his house was the only one in Kufa which did not have a door between him and the people whether they were people that he knew or not. Whoever wanted to could visit him whenever he liked, night or day. Al-Walid did not have any need to be veiled from the people.
All people should love a good Amir because he sets up house of hospitality for strangers and brings good to the people. He begins to divide up property for male and female slaves and gives each slave extra money every month through which they can find ease without making their masters pay for their provisions. In fact, the majority of the people had no choice but to love this model Amir for the length of the period of his rule - except for a party of the evil ones, the people of corruption whose tribe received the whip of the Shari`a for punishemnt at the hands of al-Walid. They devoted their lives to lying in ambush to harm him. These men include one who is called Abu Zaynab b. `Awf al- Azdi and another called Abu Mawra'. The third was called Jundub b. Abi Zahayr. The authorities had seized their sons because of the night in which they took revenge on Ibn al-Haysaman and murdered him. One of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had settled in his neighbourhood. He had been in charge of the army of Khuza`a on the day of the conquest of Makka. He and his son had come from Madina to Kufa to travel with one of the armies of al-Walid b. `Uqba which was going towards it in the direction of the east for conquest and to spread the call of Islam. This Companion and his son testified that in the night those evil men had attacked the house of Ibn al-Haysaman. He and his son gave testimony against those murderers. Al-Walid therefore carried out the judgment of the Shari`a on them at the door of the castle in the courtyard. Their fathers made a contract against themselves with Shaytan that they would work devices against this good and merciful Amir. They sent observers and spies to watch his movements, although his house was constantly open. One day he had some of the poets of the north come as his guests. There was a christian among his uncles from Taghlib in the land of the peninsula and he had become muslim at the hands of al-Walid. The spies of those who sought revenge thought that this poet who had been christian must be one of those who drank wine and perhaps al-Walid honoured him because of that. They called Abu Zaynab, Abu'l-Mawra' and their companions and broke into al-Walid's house from the mosque side, even though the house did not have a door. When they burst in, he pushed something under the bed. One of them reached under with his hand and brought it out without the permission of the master of the house. When he got it out from under the bed, it was a plate on which were some separated grapes. Al-Walid had put it away out of modesty lest the plate be seen with only separated grapes on it. They began to blame each other out of shame. People heard the story and began to curse and abuse them but al- Walid covered up for them, kept it from `Uthman and was silent about it and patient.
Then the machinations of Jundub, Abu Zaynab and Abu'l-Mawra' were repeated. They seized on every event and gave it a bad interpretation and forged lies. Some of those who were officials in the government left, so al-Walid removed them from their offices due to their bad behaviour. They went to Madina and began to complain about al-Walid to the Amir al-Mu`minin and to seek his dismissal from Kufa. While those men were in Madina, Abu Zaynab and Abu'l- Mawra' entered the Amir's house in Kufa with some other gullible people. They remained in it until al-Walid came back to rest. The rest of the people left and Abu Zaynab and Abu'l-Mawra' remained until they were able to steal al-Walid's ring from his house and then they left. When al-Walid woke up, he could not find his ring. He asked his two wives about it. They were in a bedroom looking at the visitors of al-Walid from behind a curtain. They said that the last who remained in the house were two men, and they described their appearance and clothes to al-Walid. He recognised that they were Abu Zaynab and Abu'l-Mawra and realised that they had only stolen the ring for some trick which they were contriving. He sent someone to look for them but they were not to be found in Kufa. They had travelled immediately to Madina as witnesses against al-Walid, stating that he drank wine (and I think that they took their false testimony from the details of the event which had already happened to Qudama b. Maz`un during the khalifate of `Umar). `Uthman said to them. "How did you see him?" They said, "We were in his retinue and we came in and he was vomiting wine." `Uthman said, "Only the one who drinks wine vomits it." Al-Walid was brought from Kufa and he swore to `Uthman and told him about them. `Uthman said, "We carry out the hudud and the false witness invites himself to the Fire."
This story about al-Walid being suspected of drinking wine, as in the events of 30 A.H. in the history of at-Tabari, had nothing in it except for this according to various old sources. The elements of the report according to at-Tabari are that the witnesses against al-Walid were two of the men who sought revenge and there are many witnesses to their rancour against him. No mention of the prayer has come in the testimony at all, let alone whether it was two or four rak`ats. The addition of the mention of the prayer is something else extraordinary. Its report is transmitted from al-Hudayn b. al-Mundhir (one of the followers of `Ali). He was with `Ali and `Uthman when the hadd punishment was carried out on al-Walid. This report is transmitted from him, Muslim wrote it in his `Sahih' (`The Book of the Hudud' chap. 8, pt. 38, pt. 5, p. 126) with the words, "I saw `Uthman b. `Affan when al- Walid was brought to him. He had prayed Subh with two rak`ats. Then he said, `Shall I make it more?' Two men testified against him. One of them was Hamran and he testified that he drank wine. The other testified that he saw him vomit." The two witnesses did not testify that al-Walid prayed Subh with two rak`ats and then said, "Shall I make it more?", that is something Hudayn said. Hudayn was not one of the witnesses and he was not in Kufa at the time of the alleged event. So this particular course of suspicion does not have any isnad to anyone who is known. It is a wonder that the same report which is in the `Sahih' of Muslim comes in three places in the `Musnad' of Ahmad, related from Hudayn. What he heard from Hudayn in the `Sahih' of Muslim is what was heard from him in the `Musnad' of Ahmad in three places. The first and second places (pt. 1, p.82 and 140, first edition, pt. 2, no. 264 & 1184, 2nd edition) contain no mention of the prayer on the tongue of Hudayn, let alone from anyone else. Perhaps one of the transmitters after him knew the discussion about the prayer was not the words of the two witnesses and was **************************** to mention the hadd punishment.
As for the third place from the `Musnad' of Ahmad (pt. 1, pp. 144-145, ist edition, pt. 2, no. 1229), it comes on the tongue of Hudyan that "Al-Walid prayed Subh with four rak`ats with the people." It contradicts what comes on the tongue of Hudayn himself in the `Sahih' of Muslim. There is change in one of the two riwayats and Allah knows best the reason for it. In both cases, the mention of the prayer is only according to the words of Hudayn, and Hudayn was not a witness and he did not relate from a witness, so this part of what he said is not considered.
After you know the business of those who sought revenge from what at-Tabari transmitted from the shaykhs, I will add for you the knowledge of the business of Hamran. He was one of the slaves of `Uthman who rebelled against Allah before he testified against al-Walid. In the city of the Messenger, he married a divorced woman and went to her bed while she was still in her `idda from her first husband. `Uthman got angry at him for this and for other matters before it and he drove him out of his courtyard and expelled him from Madina. He went to Kufa to spread corruption there. He visited the right-acting slave, `Amir b. `Abda'l-Qays and forged lies against him with the men of the government and he was the reason that b. `Abda'l-Qays travelled to Syria.
By my ijtihad, I think that witnesses like these do not cause the hadd of Allah to be carried out on anyone, even among the ordinary people who are under suspicion, so how could it be with a strong striving Companion in whose hands the khalif placed the trust of an area and the leadership of armies? Part of the opinion regarding him is good conduct with the people and sincere preservation of the trusts of Allah. He was trusted by three of the most perfect khalifs of Islam: Abu Bakr, `Umar, and `Uthman. The kinship of al-Walid to `Uthman which the liars claim was the reason for his partiality, was the proof according to them that `Uthman showed preference for his relatives. In any case, the witnesses who testified before `Uthman did not allege the story of the prayer, even though they themselves were not people who feared Allah and the Last Day.
28. It preceded that the Amir al-Mu'minin, `Ali b. Abi Talib appointed the Amirs in the period of his khalifate in many cities of his rule from people who were his kin and that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, appointed men of the Banu Umayya and their youths. That is now Abu Bakr and `Umar acted. `Uthman only acted according ly to what the Prophet, may allah bless him and grant him peace, and his two Companions had done before him. When `Uthman carried out the hadd on his brother for the sake of his community, he did something we do not think anyone else would have done on the testomony of biased witnesses who did not desire Allah by their testimony. The witnesses against al-Walid were of this biased type. A Qadi among the greatest Walis of Islam in knowledge, excellence and justice, Imam `Amir b. Sharahil ash-Sha`bi, testified to that. At-Tabari (5:60) related that ash-Sha`bi first heard about the bravery of Musallima b. `Abdul Malik, the grandson of al-Walid b. `Uqba in his jihad. Ash-Sha`bi said, "How would it be if you were to meet al-Walid when he commanded and raided? He used to raid and he reached far in these raids. No one said anything against him until he was dismised from his office, certainly not when he was `at the door' (i.e. at ad-Daraband which is beyond the Caspian Sea in Russia and is one of the strongest fortresses in the world) along with `Abdu'r-Rahman al-Bahili who was the greatest of his generals. Some of what `Uthman gave to people at the hand of al-Walid was that he returned to every slave in Kufa some of the extra money in the treasury three times every month which they could enjoy without any cost to their masters." This is a testimony from ash-Sha`bi for al-Walid about his victorious jihad and his kindness to his people. The false ones are dealt a heavy blow and the Salihun are delighted. The Amir al-Mu'minin `Uthman confirmed the state of his wronged brother's heart when he said, "We carry out the hudud and the false witness calls for the Fire".
29. The truth is that he gave a fifth of the Khums to `Abdullah b. Abi Sarh as a reward for his jihad. Then he retracted it and asked for him to return it. It comes in the events of 27 A.H. of the `History' of at-Tabari (5:49, Egypt, 1:2814-2815) that when `Uthman commanded `Abdullah b. Sa`d b. Abi Sarh to advance from Egypt to Tunis to conquer it, he said to him, "Allah will open North Africa to you tomorrow and you shall have a fifth of the Fifth (Khums) of the booty which Allah gives to the muslims." He went out with the army until he passed through Egypt and pressed into the land of North Africa and conquered it, both the flat land and the mountains. `Abdullah shared with his army what Allah had given him as booty taking a fifth of the Fifth and sent the four-fifths to `Uthman with Withayman an-Nasri. A delegation of those who came with him complained to `Uthman about what `Abdullah b. Sa`d had taken. `Uthman said to them, "I commanded him to do that. If you are resentful, it will be returned." They said, "We resent it." So `Uthman commanded `Abdullah b. Sa`d to return it and he returned it. `Abdullah b. Sa`d returned to Egypt having conquered North Africa.
30. i.e. In his other books when he goes into details about this question regarding the rules of Islamic fiqh. Imam `Amir b. Sharahil ash-Sha`bi said, "The fiefs take the form of booty making up a fifth of what Allah gives as booty." He said, `" Umar gave Talha, Jabir b. `Abdullah and ar-Rabbil b. `Amir fiefs. `Umar gave Abu Mufazzar a fief of Dar al-Fil." Among those to whom `Umar b. al-Khattab gave a fief was Nafi', the brother of Ziyad and Abu Bakra by their mother. He gave him a fief of some land in Basra (whose area was ten jurbas), as pasture for his horses and his camels. (Look at the biography of Nafi` in the Isaba). Qadi Abu Yusuf said in `The Book of the Kharaj' (p. 61) "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, gave fiefs and brought people close to Islam." The Khalifs after him gave fiefs to those they thought it was correct to give fiefs. (Abu Yusuf gives examples of this). Look at `The Book of Fiefs' on pp. 77-78 of `The Book of the Kharaj' by Yahya b. Adam al-Qurashi, published by as-Salafiyya. Imam ash-Sha`bi mentioned some of those to whom `Uthman gives fiefs. He said, "He gave a fief to az-Zubayr, Khabbab, `Abdulah b. Mas`ud, `Ammar b. Yasir and Ibn Habbar in the times of `Uthman. If `Uthman was mistaken, those before him erred as well, and they were those from whom we take our deen, (at-Tabari 4:148). `Ali b. Abi Talib gave a fief to Kardaws b. Hani' al-Kardawsiyya and he gave a fief of land to Suwayd b. Ghafala and his relatives. How can they object to `Uthman and then be silent about `Umar and `Ali? Qadi Abu Yusuf has some apt discussion on this subject in `The book of the Kharaj' (pp. 60-62, Salafiyya). As for people's claim about `Uthman loving his relatives and giving things to them, his love for his kin was one of his virtues. `Ali praised `Uthman for being the one who was closer to his family than the other Companions. `Uthman explained this position of his when he said. "They say that I love the people of my house and give to them, but it has not led to injustice. I give them what they are due. As for my giving to them, I give them from my property. I do not make the property of the muslims halal, nor myself, nor anyone else. I gave the great desired gift, the bulk of my own property, during the time of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, Abu Bakr and `Umar. Should I be avaricious and mean today? Is it a time that when the nobles from the people of my house come to me and when my life has passed, I should omit what I owe my family since the deniers say what they say?" At-Tabari (5:103) said, `"Uthman divided up his property and his land among the Banu Umayya and he gave his son the same as he gave the others. He began with the Banu Abu'l-`Asi and gave to the men of the family of al-Hakam fifteen thousand each. So they took one hundred thousand. He gave the same to the Banu `Uthman and he divided the rest among the Banu'l-`Asi and the Banu'l-`Is and the Banu Harb. Ibn Taymiyya took the broadest possible view and he said in the Path of the Sunna (3:187-188) that some of the fuqaha' believed that the relatives had a portion by virtue of their kinship with the Imam, as al-Hasan and Abu Thawr said. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to give to his relatives by the principle of guardianship. It was said that that was the privilege of those appointed to rule after him. He said, "In general, most of those who undertook to rule after `Umar singled out some of their relatives, either for appointment or money." Then he said in 3:237, "What `Uthman did regarding the property has three sources. One of them is that he was the agent for it and the agent has a due even when he is wealthy. The second is that those of kinship are those with kinship to the Imam. The third is that they (i.e. the relatives of `Uthman) were a numerous tribe unlike the tribe of Abu Bakr and `Umar. He needed to give to them and appoint them more than Abu Bakr and `Umar needed to appoint their relatives and give to them." This is part of what is transmitted from `Uthman in evidence for him.
31. The report and hadith are divulged: made public and evident. "Natha" is like praise, but it is in both good and evil. Praise is only for good.
By Allah, it is prohibited.
28-12-03, 04:04 PM
العرض العادي
