In Part One we examined the early life of Uthman ibn Affan; his virtues, his extraordinary generosity, his military conquests from Cyprus to Kabul, and his greatest legacy: the standardisation of the Quran into a single authoritative text.
.In this part we discuss how the fitnah, which led to Uthman’s unjust killing started. The fitnah against Uthman started in Iraq and then spread to Egypt
Introduction
The agitation against Uthman’s authority began in Iraq. Sālim ibn Abdullah ibn ‘Umar said that the Messenger of Allah said: “Tribulation will come from there” and he pointed towards the East. Ibn Kathīr relates the statement of Ḥudhayfah, “The first of the tribulations is the killing of ʿUthman and the last of them is the appearance of the Dajjāl.” Thus the killing of Uthman by the Saba’iyyah had consequences that are being felt today. From the Saba’’iyyah emerged two groups, the Khawārij, and the Raafidah.
Abdullah ibn Saba
One of the central figures in the agitation against and the eventual killing of Uthman was a Yemeni Jew called Abdullah ibn Saba who claimed to profess Islam He entered Islam with the sole intention destroy it. He claimed that Ali should have been the first caliph, as he had been appointed by a clear text of the Quran, and that Ali was infallible. He would say; “Uthman took the caliph unlawfully, here we have Ali, the true heir of the Prophet, get up and do something about it”. He led people to believe that there was a rift between the Companions. Abdullah ibn Saba was able to successfully exploit underlying tensions in the provinces.
Egypt
In Egypt, there was discontent with Uthman for replacing ‘Amr bin Al ‘Ăṣ with Abdullah bin Sa’d, as well as Uthman’s decision to assign the latter one fifth of the booty from the North African campaign. In Baṣra, complaints had been made against the governor, Abū Mūsa al Ash’arī in the time of ‘Umar and Uthman acquiesced to their demands.
Contemporary ‘thinkers’ attack Uthman
Many Muslim and non-Muslim historians accuse Uthman of nepotism. Those who accuse him of this include Taha Hussain in his book ‘Othman’, S. Khuda Bukhsh in his book ‘Contributions to the history of Islamic Civilisation, Volume 1’ as well as most Shi’i historians. This allegation was also made by Uthman’s adversaries and they used this, along with other allegations to disparage his integrity and to encourage the people to revolt against him. Syed Qutb the Egyptian writer and Mawdudi also unjustly criticise Uthman. Qutb claimed that he was not a just leader.
None of the scholars of ahl sunnah made these accusations. If we look at ‘Alī, during Caliphate, he appointed six immediate members of his family of which four were cousins, as governors. But this was never an issue. So why should it have been an issue for Uthman. ‘Alī appointed those whom he thought was best. And so did Uthman. These were men who were trusted and loved by the Prophet. They aided Islam during its most difficult times. And when they were appointed as Khulafā, they feared Allah in everything they did. The Prophet didn’t promise them Jannah except for a tremendous reason. Out of 12 provinces in the Islamic state, only in four; Egypt, Syria, Kūfa and Baṣra were relatives of Uthman appointed. The foster son of Uthman, Abū Hudhayfa was not given any position of authority by Uthman, much to his annoyance.
When a fair-minded person investigates the allegations of nepotism, they will conclude that all of them were unfounded. In the following section, I will discuss the four governors who were related to Uthman; Walīd ibn Uqba, Abdullah ibn Sa’d, Mu’āwiya and Abdullah bin Ămir, to refute the allegation of nepotism. Most of them were not immediate relatives of Uthman. But the real issue was – were they suitable and capable of fulfilling the responsibilities given to them. The allegations of nepotism have three main strands:
- he gave preference to his family members when appointing governors.
- the governors he appointed were incompetent.
- he ignored their incompetence.
Walid ibn Uqba – Kufa
Kūfa was a rebellious town, and the Khulafā tried hard to appease them. In 25 AH Walīd ibn Uqba, the foster brother of Uthman replaced Sa’d ibn Abī Waqqās as governor of Kūfa after the latter had a dispute with Abdullah ibn Ma’sūd.
In the first five years of his governorship, Walīd was very popular with the local people; he suppressed the revolts in Armenia and Ădharbayjān, and he acquired a large amount of booty. Prior to this, in the khalifate of Abū Bakr, Walīd was entrusted with carrying secret messages of war between Abū Bakr and Khalid bin Walīd. He was then sent as a general to conquer East Jordan. He was also given positions of authority in the time of ‘Umar.
Hence Walīd had a proven track record as an effective governor and statesman. Uthman stated that: “I did not appoint al-Walīd because he is my brother, I appointed him because he is the son of Umm Hakim al-Bayda, the aunt of the Messenger of Allah, (salahu alaihi wa sallam).
However, when Walid had ordered the execution of several men from nobility of Kūfa for their participation in a murder, the fathers of these men were aggrieved by this, and were looking for an opportunity for revenge. A false allegation of drinking was made against Walīd ibn Uqba and two men falsely testified against him. Uthman said to Waleed: “We shall carry out the had punishment ordered by Allah and let the one who bears false witness dwell in Hell. Be patient, O my brother“. Uthman then had him flogged and dismissed as governor, replacing him by Sa’īd ibn Al-’Ăṣ in 30AH. This rebuts the argument of those who accuse Uthman of favouring him by appointing him as governor.
Abdullah ibn Sa’d- Egypt
In the reign of ‘Umar, Egypt was divided into two provinces; Upper and Lower Egypt. Abdullah ibn Sa’d was placed in charge of Upper Egypt, and ‘Amr bin Al- ‘Ăṣ was in charge of Lower Egypt. Uthman reintegrated Egypt into one province, disposing of Amr bin Al- ‘Ăṣ and placing his foster brother, Abdullah ibn Sa’d in charge of the province. This move was unpopular with some of the Egyptians. ‘Amr bin Al- ‘Ăṣ was a popular military leader, and it was under him that Egypt was conquered. However the claim that the change of governorship was a politically foolish move, motivated only by Uthman’s desire to please his relatives does not hold.
Firstly the deposed Amr bin Al- ‘Ăṣ was also a relative of Uthman; his (step) brother in law. Secondly, the revenues from Egypt increased under Abdullah ibn Sa’d governorship showing that his appointment brought financial benefit to the Caliphate. Under his governorship, most of north Africa was conquered and along with it, a huge amount of spoils. Abdullah bin Sa’d built a strong navy and defeated the Romans in numerous navel battles. Both Al-Hasan and Al-Hussain were present in the army of Abdullah bin Abi Sarh according to Ibn Khuldoon in the year 26 AH. (Tareekh Ibn Khuldoon, 917) Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain were in the army of Sa’eed bin Al-Aas who invaded Tabristan in the year 30 AH. (Tareekh Al-Tabari, 2/765)
Mu’awiyah – Syria
Under Uthman, Syria, Jordan and Palestine were consolidated into a single province, with Mu’āwiyah as its governor. This was not a new appointment. Under ‘Umar, Mu’āwiyah’s authority prior to this covered most but not all of Syria. Uthman renewed and extended his authority to include Palestine and Emessa. Syria was of great strategic importance. Unlike the Persians, the Byzantines were far from defeated. The Byzantines were a formidable enemy and for hundreds of years after the conquest of Syria they were still threatening to retake the land they had lost. Syria was on the front line against the Byzantines and needed to be defended from land and sea. Mu’āwiyah defeated the Byzantine navy, conquering their strategically vital naval port of Cyprus, repulsed the Byzantine attack on Syria and led an, albeit unsuccessful attack on Constantinople. By launching annual attacks on the Byzantines, he kept them in a state of unease, and hence protected the northern border.
Mu’āwiyah’s twenty-year rule over Syria was one of justice. Ibn Taymīyyah said: “The behaviour of Mu’āwiyah with the people was the best behaviour of any ruler”. Ibn Abbās said: ‘I have not seen a man more suited to rulership than Mu’āwiyah…how can Uthman be censured for appointing him when ‘Umar appointed him before him, and he was appointed by Abū Bakr before ‘Umar”. It is a testament to his skill, that there was no dissention in Sham during his rule. Mu’āwiyah was one of the scribes of the Prophet. The Prophet said about him:
O Allah, make him a guide, and guided ,and guide others through him. (S̩ah̩īh̩ Tirmidhi)
Ibn Taymiyah said concerning him: It is proven in mutawaatir reports that Mu’āwiyah was appointed to a position of authority by the Prophet as he appointed others, and he fought in jihad with him. The Prophet regarded him as honest and trustworthy; he used to write down the Revelation for him and he never had any doubts concerning his writing down of the Revelation. He was appointed as a governor by ‘Umar ibn al- Khattab, who was one of the best judges of character. Mu’awiyah is regarded as one of those who had the honour of narrating hadeeth from the Messenger of Allah the reason being that he stayed close to the Messenger of Allah after the conquest of Makkah, because he was his brother-in-law and his scribe. Mu’awiyah narrated 163 ahadeeth from the Messenger of Allah
Abdullah bin Amir, Basra
Abū Mūsā Al Ash’arī was the governor of Baṣra under ‘Umar. Prior to this the Prophet had appointed him as a governor in Yemen. In the time of Abū Bakr he played an active role in fighting the apostates. During this time, the people of Baṣra made a number of allegations against him. ‘Umar thoroughly investigated these complaints and found them to be false. Under Uthman, the Baṣrans complained against Abū Mūsā Al Ash’arī again. Uthman replaced him with his cousin Abdullah bin Ămir. Thus the appointment of his cousin was not arbitrary; it was a response to the requests of the local population.
Abdullah bin Ămir was a military genius. Although aged only twenty-five when he took his position as governor, within a few years he conquered huge territories in the eastern provinces of Persia reaching as far as Kabul. Hence, the appointment of Abdullah bin Ămir brought huge military and financial gains to the Caliphate and paved the way for further conquests during the Umayyad period. He used his personal wealth to develop an economic infrastructure in Basra building marketplaces and digging cannels for irrigation of the land. He was a humble man whose door was open day and night to all of the residents. He was also the son of Prophet’s aunt.
The allegations of nepotism were baseless
The above four examples demonstrate that criticism of Uthman’s choice of governors in the four strategic provinces of Kūfa, Egypt, Syria, Baṣra is baseless when we examine the achievements of these governors. In the main it is the Rafidah Shi’a who propagate these lies, however a number of ignorant Sunni writers blindly follow the Shi’a historians and also propagate these views.
Qāḍī Abū Bakr Ibn al Arabi states in his book Defence Against Disaster : the Accurate Position of the Companions after the Prophet’s Death:
“Anyone 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 in government. He will feel no hesitation in confirming that they were among the architects of the strong basis of the administrative and military glory of Islam”
Abdullah ibn Saba spreads fitnah throughout the provinces
Abdullah ibn Saba settled in Madina to delve into the affairs of the Muslims and to study their weak points. In 33AH he heard that an individual in Baṣra called Hakam bin Jabalah had been temporarily imprisoned for criminal activities. Ibn Saba travelled to Baṣra and befriended ibn Jabalah. Together they started a propaganda campaign against the governor and the Caliph. He also started propagating false beliefs such as the divine right of ‘Alī to be the Caliph. His display of love for ‘Alī was expressed so eloquently that soon a party in support of ‘Alī was formed. Differences between Arabs and non-Arabs, between Umayyads and Hashimites, between Bedouins and city dwellers were exploited. In the same year, the governor expelled him from Bas̩ra and he left for Kūfa. However he left behind a following on Baṣra. In Kūfa, Ibn Saba found fertile ground for his activities. Mālik ibn Ashtar was already working against the governor and the Caliph, and they jointly carried out propaganda against the Caliph.
Mālik ibn Ashtar and his co-conspirators were expelled from Kūfa for their anti –government activities. They were detained in Sham by Abdur Rahmān ibn Khalid bin Walīd. Ashtar repented and was sent to Medina to see Uthman. He accepted their repentance and allowed him to return to Kūfa. After his expulsion from Kūfa, Ibn Saba travelled to Syria, where he tried to win Abū Dharr to his cause. Abū Dharr had a dispute with Mu’āwiyah regarding the Baytul Māl, which Ibn Saba tried unsuccessfully to exploit. He left Damascus and travelled to Egypt.
Egypt
In Egypt, there was already discontent against the governor Abdullah ibn Sa’d. The latter was busy with the campaigns in North Africa and was not able to give the internal problems his immediate concern. In Egypt, Ibn Saba maintained letter contact with his supporters in Baṣra and Kūfa. A letter writing campaign was started as a result of which countless letters of complaints of alleged atrocities against the governors of Kūfa, Baṣra and Egypt, (and by implication against Uthman who appointed these governors) were arriving in Madina. The people of each region read those falsified letters to the people who were with them. They heard about the faults of governors in other provinces and they said: We are safe from the problems that Muslims are facing in that land, and they believed what they heard. In addition, forged letters were sent to these regions in the name of ‘Alī, Ṭalḥa and Zubair, complaining against Uthman. Many sincere but gullible people were led to belief that the leading Companions in Madina were against Uthman.
Uthman calls a meeting
In 34 AH, Uthman called a meeting of the governors in Madina after the Hajj to discuss the situation. Mu’āwiya from Syria, Abdullah bin Sa’d from Egypt, Sa’īd bin Al-’Ăṣ from Kūfa and Abdullah bin Ămir from Basra attended, as did governors of smaller provinces. It was agreed that there was very little substance behind the complaints. However Uthman was reluctant to take punitive action. This was due to his ardent desire not to spill the blood of his fellow Muslims. The view of Sa’īd ibn Al-’Ăṣ was that the leaders of the sedition should be punished severely, even executed as this would be the best way to prevent the situation from escalating. However Uthman hoped that by showing kindness and mercy to them, they would see the error of their ways and sincerely repent.
While Sa’īd ibn Al-’Ăṣ was still in Medina, Ashtar returned to Kūfa, having repented in front of Uthman for his previous mischief. Arriving at Kūfa, he claimed that the Sa’īd ibn Al-’Ăṣ was telling the Caliph to take punitive action against the Kufans. Uproar ensued and a thousand Kufans marched to Madina to see Uthman. Although Uthman managed to pacify them, they were insistent that Sa’īd ibn Al-’Ăṣ be deposed and replaced by Abū Mūsā Al Ash’arī . Uthman agreed to this.
The Complaints against Uthman are investigated
The influx of complaints from the provinces led some Companions to approach Uthman. He agreed to send reliable individuals to the provinces to investigate and report back. Muḥammad bin Maslamah was sent to Kūfa, Usama bin Zayd to Baṣrah and Ibn ‘Umar to Syria. They reported back stating that the allegations against the governors were unfounded. After the Hajj season, Uthman agreed to hear any complaints from the people. A number of objections were raised. Qāḍī Abū Bakr Ibn al Arabi in his book Al Awaasim bil Qawaasim mentions a number of complaints made against Uthman, and a rebuttal of these complaints.
1) It was alleged that Uthman gave lavish gifts to his relatives. Uthman replied that this was so, however it was from his personal wealth and not the Treasury
2) Uthman burnt copies of the Qur’ān. ‘Alī ibn Tālib said: ‘If I were in charge when Uthmaan had been, I would have done the same as he did’. He also said: “By Allah, he only burnt them with permission from the assembly of the Companions”.
3) Uthman did not attend Badr and was defeated on the day of Uhud. He was not at the covenant of Ridwān at Hudaybiya. Bukhārī that Ibn ‘Umar replied to this doubt by saying: “As for his flight on the day of Uhud, I testify that Allah has forgiven him and pardoned him. As for his absence from Badr, the daughter of the Messenger… was his wife and she was ill”. The Prophet (salahu alaihi wa sallam) assigned him a portion of the booty from Badr, and hence he is considered as one of the people of Badr despite his absence. Regarding the pledge of Ridwān, it was taken to avenge the blood of Uthman, after a false rumour spread that the Quraysh had killed him. The pledge was done for Uthman. The Prophet held out his right hand saying: This is the hand of Uthman”.
4) The claim that he beat Ibn Masūd until his ribs were broken was a fabrication. In fact in the dispute between Sa’d ibn Waqqās and Ibn Masūd, Uthman judged in favour of the latter.
5) The claim that he beat ‘Ammār until his intestines were split open is a complete fabrication. abarī narrates that a dispute occurred between ‘Ammār and Abbās ibn Utba which led Uthman to discipline both by beating them. Ibn al Arabi mentions that if his intestines had split open, he would never have lived.
6) Uthman allegedly exiled Abū Dharr to Ar-Rabthah. Abū Dharr was critical of the governors of Uthman for, as he saw it, hoarding up gold and silver. And those who hoard gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah – give them tidings of a painful punishment. (9:34) No other scholar held this opinion. Other companions including ibn ‘Umar, Uthman and Mu’āwiyah did not consider wealth on which zakāt had been paid as horded treasure. Mu’āwiya disagreed and complained the Uthman who summoned him to Medina. Abū Dharr requested that Uthman send him to Ar-Rababha, a place three miles from Madina as the Prophet had commanded him to leave Madina when the built-up area reached an area called Sal. Uthman gave him permission and provided him with camels and slaves. Hence Abū Dharr was not exiled but chose to leave Madina. The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said that he would live alone, die alone and be resurrected alone. [Al-Haakim]. He died in 31 A.H. and was buried in Ar-Rabthah. Ibn Ma’sud performed his funeral prayer.
In part three we trace the events that led to the martyrdom of Uthman.
Taken from The Biography of Uthman Ibn Affan – Dr. Ali Muhammad Sallabi
