Loading...
Loading...
Chapter 115 of 1482 min read
سيرة علي بن أبي طالب — الجزء 115
allegiance to Mu'Slwiyah as caliph after the arbitration is not correct. Ibn ' A s W narrated, with a chain of narration whose men are trustworthy, that Sa'eed ibn 'Abdul-'Azeez atTanookhi, the most knowledgeable of the people regarding ~yria,"' said: "Ali was in Iraq and was called Amir alMu'mineen, while Mu'iwiyah was in Syria and was called the amir. When 'Ali died, Mu'iwiyah in Syria was called Amir alMu'n~ineen.""~ This text explains that allegiance was not sworn to MuCSlwiyah as caliph until after the death of 'Ali. This is also the view of at-Tahari, who said concerning the last events of 40 AH: In this year, allegiance was sworn to Mu'Slwiyah as caliph in Aelia.l14 Ibn Katheer commented on this by saying: Governors at the time of 'Ali ibn Abi Ttlib "Meaning that when 'Ali died, the people of Syria swore allegiance to Mu'iiwiyah as caliph, because there was no longer anyone who could dispute with him."115 The people of Syria knew that Mu'iiwiyah was not as qualified for the caliphate as 'Ali (&+) and that it was not permissible for him to become a caliph when it was still possible for 'Ali (&) to be caliph. 'Ali's superiority, seniority, knowledge, religious commitment, courage and all his virtues were obvious and well known, like the virtues of his brethren Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthmiin and others (may Allah he pleased with them all)."6 In addition to that, there are texts which forbid giving allegiance to another caliph when the first one is still in place. Muslim narrated in his sahih that Ahu Sa'eed al-Khudri said: "The Messenger of AUah (g) said: 'If allegiance has been sworn to two caliphs, then kill the second one."'"' There are many other similar texts, so it is impossible that the Companions would have done anything contrary to that.Iis 2. He said: 'Amr ihn al-'AS made an agreement with Mu'iiwiyah to the effect that Egypt would he his so long as he lived. This story was narrated by Ibn 'As&ir with a chain of narration that contains an unknown narrator."' It was also mentioned by adhDhahabi in such a way that implied that it was weak, hence it is worthless and should he ignored.