Some tribes among the Bedouins refused to pay Zakat after the passing of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), while most tribes abandoned Islam and the Muslims rebelled against the collective order. They did not distinguish between religious obligations and political obedience.
They attempted, just as the leadership of the Quraysh had been established over the Arabian Peninsula through a Qurayshi Prophet, to become rulers in Arabia by appointing their own tribal prophets.1 They openly claimed that their false prophets were better than the true Prophet of the Quraysh.2
Under the leadership of the first Caliph, Abu Bakr (RA), the Muslims subdued them once again. They accepted Islam again. However, there was no change in their characteristics.3
A large number of them belonged to the tribes of Rabi’ah, who were descendants of Prophet Isma’il. They considered themselves rivals of the Quraysh. Among them, the Banu Tamim was a prominent tribe. A large portion of the Banu Tamim resided in the areas surrounding Kufa and Basra. During the caliphate of Umar, when the garrisons of Kufa and Basra were established, these people, among other tribes, settled there by forming their own neighborhoods.4 These very cities later became the centers of their movement. The dignitaries and noblemen of these regions gradually receded into the background, and elements of impulsive temperament, who held tribal hatred and prejudice against the Quraysh, increasingly came to prominence.5 They openly expressed their prejudice against the Quraysh.6
Due to the presence of military garrisons, prisoners of war were also brought to Kufa and Basra, particularly Persian captives, whose homeland was adjacent to these regions. Among them, the slaves were distributed among the people, while a number of free individuals, even after being released, chose to settle here permanently. According to Arab tradition, they would gain the patronage of a tribe. These individuals were referred to as mawali. Their loyalty rested with the tribe under whose patronage they lived. These slaves and mawali also participated in the anti-government movements as followers of the Arabs.
In Egypt, there was another group that was opposed to the government. This consisted of young men from the aristocratic Quraishi class who were discontent with the old school of the Companions. Due to a lack of competence or qualifications in governance, they had not been able to attain positions of authority. The long reign of Uthman (RA) did not show them any signs of the administrative changes they desired. Consequently, they initiated anti-government propaganda in Egypt. Among these aristocratic youths, the names of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfah stand out prominently.7 Like-minded individuals from Kufa,
Basra, and Fustat (Egypt) began to establish contact with one another. Abdullah ibn Saba also played a significant role in this anti-government propaganda. Thus, the opposition movement began to flourish in these cities.
The youth of Madinah, who during the era of Uthman had become accustomed to vain pleasures due to their affluence—such as pigeon racing, narcotics, etc.—were subjected to strictness and the implementation of punishments by Uthman, and some among them were exiled. This caused them to become opponents of Uthman.8 They also supported those Bedouins who sought the removal of Uthman.
The era of Uthman’s rule was a time of wealth and prosperity. The treasures of the public treasury (Bayt al-Mal) were being spent on the people. Even zakat was not collected from the people; rather, they would pay it of their own accord. The Companions who became wealthy through their own abilities were also extremely generous. However, despite this, the general affluence brought changes in lifestyle and expenditure that were not acceptable to the righteous ascetics and to the religious mindset that defined religion through asceticism. They interpreted this as worldliness, whereas the teachings of religion, on the contrary, indicate that the adornments of the world were created specifically for the believers.9 The example of Prophet Solomon (PBUH) was also present before them, yet the general religious mindset usually does not pay attention to that and instead considers simplicity alone to be a requirement of religion and piety. Nevertheless, none among these pious individuals took part in any movement against the government. However, their criticisms were used with great exaggeration in anti-government propaganda, and the gullible fell victim to it.
The anti-Quraysh movement began with the success of having the governors of Kufa replaced one after another. They would express dissatisfaction with every governor, level baseless accusations against them, carry out false propaganda, and demand their dismissal. Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, Mughirah ibn Shu’bah, ‘Ammar ibn Yasir, Walid ibn ‘Uqbah, and Sa’id ibn al-‘As—all of them became targets of their accusations and were dismissed. Walid ibn ‘Uqbah was even punished despite unreliable testimonies. The noble and wise people of Kufa played no role in this and remained passive spectators.
Later, when the government realized that it should not accept all the demands of these troublemakers without scrutiny, the matter had already slipped out of control. Thus, during the caliphate of ‘Uthman, when the government showed some resistance to the demand to dismiss Sa’id ibn al-‘As from the governorship of Kufa, these people did not allow Sa’id ibn al-‘As to enter Kufa10 and openly challenged the authority of the government. Despite this, no action was taken against them, and a governor of their own preference was appointed. This further emboldened them, and they began to organize themselves with the aim of deposing the Caliph himself.
At the time when their numbers were few, they were expelled from Kufa on the complaint of the nobles of Kufa for the purpose of discipline.11 Among them, the name of Harith ibn Malik al-Ashtar al-Nakha’i stands out. He was sent to Syria. Mu’awiyah (RA) tried to persuade him not to disrupt the collective order of the Muslims, warning that otherwise, civil strife (fitnah) would erupt. However, these individuals openly expressed their prejudice against the leadership of the Quraysh12 and behaved disrespectfully toward Mu’awiyah. Yet he, as per his custom, acted with patience and informed ‘Uthman of their situation, stating that these people were far from reason and sought division.
Uthman (RA) ordered that they be sent to Hims (Emesa) to the custody of ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Khalid ibn al-Walid. ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Khalid disciplined them with severity. Consequently, they sought pardon and returned,13 but they remained committed to their political agenda. Exploiting the longstanding tribal prejudice and rivalry of their clans against the Quraysh, they continued gathering like-minded individuals. In addition to Kufa, they began to find supporters in the military garrisons of Basra and Fustat.
They also began to receive support from Persian elements who wished to avenge their national defeat at the hands of the Arabs. Moreover, slaves who were oppressed by their masters, peasants who were unhappy with their condition, and Qurayshi youths who had failed to secure any share of power within the current system of governance—all these groups began to gather around them.
Towards the end of the caliphate of Uthman (RA), these Bedouins succeeded—through those very characteristics and tactics mentioned in Surah Al-Hujurat—in disrupting the collective order of the Muslims. They unleashed a storm of misconduct and verbal abuse (tanabuz bil-alqab). They carried out propaganda based on false accusations and wrote letters to people. After embracing Islam, even their insults and allegations took on a religious dimension. Consequently, every opponent of theirs came to be labeled as irreligious, sinful, or even a disbeliever. In fact, later on, with few exceptions, the entire community of the Companions (Sahabah) was declared misguided.
These, in any case, were only a few factions. The majority of Muslims were displeased with them. They considered them a source of evil. These groups, from the aforementioned three cities (Kufa, Basra, and Fustat), coordinated and gathered to reach Madinah with the intention of deposing the Caliph and appointing a new Caliph of their own choosing, thereby acquiring positions in the government according to their desires.
They expected that the demand for the dismissal of the Caliph would, like the dismissal of the governors, eventually be accepted. However, Uthman refused to accept their demand at any cost. This situation was unexpected for some among them. If they returned unsuccessful, their political movement would suffer a severe blow, their dream of participation in power would be shattered, and, in fact, due to their betrayal of the state, they would likely be executed.
In this context, they saw only one path forward: to kill the Caliph and place one of their own Qurayshi individuals on the seat of the Caliphate, thereby bringing matters under their control. Choosing a Caliph from among the Quraysh was a necessity for them, since the Arabs could never agree on a ruler from a tribe other than Quraysh. This is exactly what they did. They killed Uthman (RA) and placed Ali (RA) on the seat of the Caliphate, who himself was displeased with the Quraysh and held inclinations against them.14
Thus, as soon as he assumed authority, he dismissed all officials of the former government without exception, did not include any senior Qurayshi companion in the administration,15 and further, transferred the capital to Kufa, which was a stronghold of the rebels. In this way, the wishes of the Bedouins were fulfilled. Their long-standing dream of establishing their own rule — a dream they had been pursuing since the era of Prophethood — was to a large extent realized.
After that, they did the same with their elected caliph as they had done with the third caliph. First, they leveled various accusations against him, refused to accept his explanations, insisted on their baseless allegations, and then killed him as well. After that, they continued to fight among themselves and also against the collective order of the Ummah. The Ummah endured tremendous losses and, under the leadership of the Quraysh, once again defeated them and succeeded once more in restoring its collective order.
[To be continued…]
- The Qahtani tribes of Yemen had, in earlier times, established great kingdoms. The Himyari branch of Banu Qahṭan founded the kingdom of Saba, which is also mentioned in the Qurʾan. Another branch of Banu Qahṭan, the Kahilani tribes, had established rule in the surrounding regions of Syria. The Ghassanid kingdom of Syria was among the states they had founded. These tribes had a longstanding rivalry with the Adnani tribes. The Quraysh belonged to the Adnani lineage. Following the ascendancy of the Quraysh after the advent of the Prophet [pbuh], there emerged among the Qahṭani tribes a movement to revive their lost grandeur. They too adopted the same strategy of political assertion that some Bedouin tribes had resorted to—namely, appointing a prophet from within their own tribe to claim power. Aswad al-ʿAnsi, who claimed prophethood, belonged to the tribe of ʿAns, itself a branch of the Kahilani tribes of Qahṭan (see Muʿjam al-Buldan, 4:161). Musaylimah the Liar had written a letter to the Prophet [pbuh], in which, after declaring his own claim to prophethood, he demanded authority over half of the Arabian Peninsula. He wrote:
أن مسيلمة، لعنه الله، كتب إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم، من مسيلمة رسول الله إلى محمد رسول الله، سلام عليك، أما بعد، فإني قد أشركت في الأمر معك، فلك المدر ولي الوبر. ويروى : فلكم نصف الأرض ولنا نصفها ، ولكن قريشا قوم يعتدون
(al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, 9:508) “Musaylimah—may God curse him—wrote a letter to the Messenger of God (PBUH): In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. From Musaylimah, the Messenger of God, to Muhammad, the Messenger of God. Peace be upon you. To proceed: I have been made a partner with you in this matter (i.e., prophethood). So for you is the cultivated land (al-madr), and for me is the wilderness (al-wabr). According to another narration: For you is half the earth, and for us the other half—but the Quraysh are a people who exceed all bounds.” - The ʿAdnani tribes were divided into two principal branches: Mudar and Rabiʿah. There existed an old rivalry between these two lineages as well. The Quraysh belonged to the Mudar branch, while Musaylimah the Liar was from Banu Hanifah, which was a sub-branch of the Rabiʿah tribes. A statement attributed to one of Musaylimah’s followers has been preserved in historical sources:
أشهد أنك كذاب وأن محمدًا صادق، ولكن كذاب ربيعة أحب إلينا من صادق مضر
(Tarikh al-Ṭabari, 3:286)
“I bear witness that you are a liar and that Muhammad (PBUH) is truthful. However, the liar of Rabiʿah is dearer to us than the truthful one of Mudar.” - These Bedouin tribes would often turn against their own chieftains. When such rebellion occurred, the chieftain would be compelled to relinquish leadership (Fajr al-Islam, Amin Miṣr, p. 19). This same spirit of autonomy manifested itself in Kufa, where they repeatedly demanded the replacement of governors appointed by the caliphal court. In doing so, they resorted to propaganda and fabricated accusations to justify their demands. This very disposition was evident in their call for the dismissal of Uthman, and subsequently in their breaking of allegiance to Ali (RA). Thereafter, they remained a constant source of trouble for the Umayyad caliphs and, on occasion, came close to toppling the regime. Their leader, ʿAbd al-Rahman b. Ashʿath, nearly succeeded in his rebellion (al-Akhbar al-Ṭiwal, p. 316). Their opposition was not limited to the Quraysh; they were also adversaries of hereditary leadership. They elected their leaders independently and deposed them by collective decision. This same libertarian tendency made them unwilling to submit even to one another’s authority, often forming factions over minor disputes and engaging in internecine warfare. In essence, their disposition was uncivilized, averse to organized social order, anti-state, and anarchic. (For details, see Khawarij: A Study by Professor Dr. Nigar Sajjad Ẓahir.)
- The Banu Tamim resided in the vicinity of Baṣrah before the city itself was established (Fajr al-Islam, Amin Miṣri, p. 18). Once Baṣrah and Kufa were founded, these Bedouin tribes—like many others—settled in these garrison towns (Umar, Abu al-Naṣr, Tarikh-i Khawarij, p. 45; cited in Dr. Nigar Sajjad Ẓahir, Khawarij: A Study, p. 89). Apart from Kufa and Baṣrah, the third major centre of anti-government agitation was the Egyptian city of Fusṭaṭ. In Egypt, the anti-caliphal propaganda led by Muhammad b. Abi Bakr and Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah played a pivotal role in inciting public sentiment against Uthman. Both had become orphans in their childhood. Ali (RA) had raised Muhammad b. Abi Bakr, while Uthman (RA) had brought up Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah. These two young men of Quraysh descent aspired to governorship in Egypt. However, due to a lack of personal merit and limited opportunity, they found no path forward, and thus turned against Uthman. In Egypt, they successfully inflamed public sentiment against his caliphate. The delegation that arrived from Egypt to oppose Uthman (RA) was largely a product of their efforts. Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah, in fact, seized control of Egypt after the departure of Uthman’s appointed governor, ʿAbd Allah b. Abi Sarh. When Ali (RA)’s government was established, Muhammad pledged allegiance to him, and Ali (RA) retained him as governor of Egypt. After some time, however, Ali (RA) dismissed him and appointed Qays b. Saʿd in his place. Subsequently, Qays too was removed, and Muhammad b. Abi Bakr—who also aspired to the position—was appointed governor (Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubalaʾ, 3:479). Upon observing Muhammad b. Abi Bakr’s incompetence, Ali (RA) initially dispatched Malik al-Ashtar to replace him, but Malik was killed en route. Ali (RA) then intended to appoint Hashim b. Utbah in his stead, but refrained out of concern for Muhammad’s feelings. When Egypt was eventually lost and Muhammad b. Abi Bakr was killed, Ali (RA) deeply regretted the decision (see Nahj al-Balaghah, Letter 34 and Sermon 66).
- In Tarikh al-Ṭabari (4:279), it is recorded:
فَكَتَبَ إِلَى عُثْمَانَ بِالَّذِي انْتَهَى إِلَيْهِ: إِنَّ أَهْلَ الْكُوفَةِ قَدِ اضْطَرَبَ أَمْرُهُمْ، وَغَلَبَ أَهْلُ الشَّرَفِ مِنْهُمْ وَالْبُيُوتَاتِ وَالسَّابِقَةِ وَالْقِدْمَةِ، وَالْغَالِبُ عَلَى تِلْكَ الْبِلادِ رَوَادِفٌ رَدِفَتْ، وَأَعْرَابٌ لَحِقَتْ، حَتَّى مَا يُنْظَرُ إِلَى ذِي شَرَفٍ وَلا بَلاءٍ مِنْ نَازِلَتِهَا وَلَا نَابِتَتِهَا.
Accordingly, a report was sent to Uthman (RA) stating: “The affairs of the people of Kufa have become unsettled. The noble lineages, established households, and those with precedence have been overpowered. Those now dominant over the region are latecomers who followed after others, and Bedouins who have recently joined. So much so that no one pays regard to people of noble lineage or merit, whether they are recent settlers or long-established residents.” On one occasion, when Yazid b. Qays sought to incite rebellion against Uthman (RA) and provoked the people with false accusations against Saʿid b. al-ʿĀṣ, urging them to go to Madinah to complain, those who responded to him were primarily individuals lacking reason and prone to disorder—excluding the dignified and reputable. Al-Ṭabari writes:
وبقي حلماء الناس وأشرافهم ووجوههم في المسجد، وذهب من سواهم.
(Tarikh al-Ṭabari, 4:332) “The wise, the nobles, and the dignitaries remained in the mosque, while the others departed.” - On one occasion, in response to a message from Muʿawiyah (RA) , one of the local representatives boldly expressed his views against the Quraysh in the following words:
فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ مِنَ الْقَوْمِ: أَمَّا مَا ذَكَرْتَ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ فَإِنَّهَا لَمْ تَكُنْ أَكْثَرَ الْعَرَبِ وَلا أَمْنَعَهَا فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ فَتُخَوِّفُنَا، وَأَمَّا مَا ذَكَرْتَ مِنَ الْجُنَّةِ فَإِنَّ الْجُنَّةَ إِذَا اخْتُرِقَتْ خَلَصَ إِلَيْنَا
(Tarikh al-Ṭabari, 4:319)
“One of the men from the group said: As for what you mentioned regarding Quraysh, they were neither the largest Arab tribe nor the most powerful in the pre-Islamic era that we should fear them. And as for your mention of the ‘shield’ (that Quraysh represent for the community), then once the shield is pierced, the battleground opens up to us.” Regarding their conduct, Saʿid b. al-ʿĀṣ, the governor of Kufa, wrote to the central government informing them of the subversive activities of certain individuals:
إِنَّ رَهْطًا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ سَمَّاهُمْ لَهُ عَشَرَةً يُؤَلِّبُونَ وَيَجْتَمِعُونَ عَلَى عَيْبِكَ وَعَيْبِي وَالطَّعْنِ فِي دِينِنَا، وَقَدْ خَشِيتُ إِنْ ثَبُتَ أَمْرُهُمْ أَنْ يَكْثُرُوا .
(Tarikh al-Ṭabari, 4:323)
“Indeed, a group from among the people of Kufa—he named ten of them—are inciting others and gathering together to slander both you and me, and to revile our religion. I fear that if their influence becomes firmly established, their numbers will increase.” - Muhammad b. Abi Bakr was the son of Abu Bakr, the first caliph. After his father’s death, his mother, Asmaʾ bint Umays, married Ali (RA), who raised Muhammad in his household. Being the son of the first caliph, Muhammad desired a role in political leadership, yet he lacked the necessary capability. He aspired to govern Egypt, and when he was granted governorship during Ali’s caliphate, his incompetence led not only to the loss of that province but also to his own death. Likewise, Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah had been orphaned at a young age and was raised by Uthman. As the grandson of a chieftain from Banu Umayyah, he too was ambitious for political power. However, Uthman, recognizing his lack of ability, did not assign him any official post. Frustrated, he departed to Egypt, where he began to incite opposition. The group that later came from Egypt to challenge Uthman (RA) was organized and sent by him. His inclination toward disorder had already manifested earlier, as documented by al-Ṭabari:
كَانَ أول ما سمع من مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَة حين ركب الناس البحر سنة إحدى وثلاثين، لما صلى عبد الله بن سَعْدِ بْنِ أبي سرح بالنَّاسِ العصر ، كبر مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَة تكبيرًا ورفع صوته حَتَّى فرغ الإمام عبد الله بن سَعْدِ بْنِ أبي سرح، فلما انصرف سأل: مَا هَذَا؟ فقيل لَهُ: هَذَا مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَة يكبر ، فدعاه عبد الله بن سَعْدٍ ، فَقَالَ لَهُ: مَا هَذِهِ البدعة والحدث؟ فَقَالَ لَهُ : مَا هَذِهِ بدعة ولا حدث، وما بالتكبير بأس، قَالَ : لا تعودن قَالَ : فأسكت مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَة، فلما صلى المغرب عبد الله بن سَعْدٍ كبر مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَة تكبيرًا أرفع من الأول، فأرسل إلَيْهِ: إنك غلام أحمق ، أما والله لولا أني لا أدري ما يوافق أمير الْمُؤْمِنِينَ لقاربت بين خطوك، فَقَالَ مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَةٌ: وَاللَّهِ مَالَكَ إِلَى ذَلِكَ سبيل، ولو هممت بِهِ مَا قدرت عَلَيْهِ قَالَ: فكف خير لك، والله لا تركب معنا، قَالَ : فأركب مع الْمُسْلِمِينَ؟ قَالَ: اركب حَيْثُ شئت قَالَ: فركب في مركب وحده مَا مَعَهُ إلا القبط. قَالَ: وأقام عَبْد الله بذات الصواري أياما بعد هزيمة القوم ، ثُمَّ أقبل راجعا، وجعل مُحَمَّد بن أبي حُذَيْفَة يقول للرجل : أما والله لقد تركنا خلفنا الجهاد حقا، فيقول الرجل: وأي جهاد؟ فيقول: عُثْمَان بن عَفَّانَ فعل كذا وكذا ، وفعل كذا وكذا حَتَّى أفسد الناس فقدموا بلدهم وقَدْ أفسدهم ، وأظهروا من القول ما لم يكونوا ينطقون به. (تاريخ الطبرى 291/4 (292
“When the Muslims set out by sea in the year 31 AH and ʿAbd Allah b. Saʿd b. Abi Sarh led the afternoon prayer, Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah loudly raised his voice in takbir (saying ‘Allahu Akbar’). This was the first instance in which his disruptive behavior was noticed. After the prayer, ʿAbd Allah b. Saʿd asked, ‘What was that?’ and was told, ‘It was Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah making takbir.’ He summoned him and asked, ‘What is this innovation and deviation?’ Muhammad replied, ‘This is neither innovation nor deviation. There is no harm in making takbir.’ ʿAbd Allah said, ‘Do not repeat this again.’ Muhammad remained silent. However, at the Maghrib prayer, he raised his voice even louder in takbir. At this, ʿAbd Allah sent word to him: ‘You are a foolish youth. By God, were I not uncertain about the Caliph’s opinion on this, I would have dealt with you harshly.’ Muhammad replied, ‘By God, you have no power to do that. Even if you attempted it, you would not be able.’ ʿAbd Allah said, ‘Then be silent—it is better for you. You will not travel with us.’ Muhammad said, ‘Shall I not ride with the Muslims?’ He replied, ‘Go wherever you please.’ So Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah boarded a boat alone, accompanied only by some Coptic (Egyptian) men. After defeating the enemy, ʿAbd Allah remained for several days at Dhat al-Ṣawari and then began his return. During the journey, Muhammad b. Abi Hudhayfah was overheard saying to someone, ‘By God, we have left behind the true jihad.’ The man asked, ‘What jihad?’ Muhammad responded, ‘Uthman (RA) b. ʿAffan has done such and such…’ and he continued in this manner until he corrupted the minds of the soldiers. By the time they returned to their homeland, their views were distorted, and they began to voice sentiments they had never dared to express before.” - In Tarikh al-Ṭabari (4:398), it is narrated:
عن عُثمان بن حكيم ابن عباد بن حنيف، عَنْ أَبِيهِ ، قَالَ : أول منكر ظهر بِالْمَدِينَةِ حين فاضت الدُّنْيَا، وانتهى وسع الناس طيران الحمام والرمي على الجلاهقات، فاستعمل عَلَيْهَا عُثْمَان رجلا من بني ليث سنة ثمان، فقصها وكسر الجلاهقات وَكَتَبَ إِلَيَّ السري، عن شعيب، عن سيف، عن محمد بن عبد الله، عن عمرو بن شعيب، قَالَ أول من منع الحمام الطيارة والجلاهقات عُثْمَان، ظهرت بِالْمَدِينَةِ فأمر عَلَيْهَا رجلا ، فمنعهم منها. وَكَتَبَ إلى السري، عن شعيب، عن سيف، عن سَهْلِ بْنِ يُوسُفَ، عَنِ الْقَاسِمِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ نحوا مِنْهُ، وزاد: وحدث بين الناس النشو. قَالَ : فأرسل عُثْمَان طائفا يطوف عليهم بالعصا، فمنعهم من ذَلِكَ، ثُمَّ اشتد ذَلِكَ فأفشى الحدود، ونبأ ذَلِكَ عُثْمَان، وشكاه إِلَى النَّاسِ، فاجتمعوا على أن يجلدوا في النبيذ، فأخذ نفر مِنْهُمْ فجلدوا.
Uthman (RA) b. Hakim narrated from his father that when prosperity spread throughout Madinah and people’s wealth reached its peak, the first social corruption to appear in the city was the flying of pigeons and target shooting with slings at fixed objects (jalahiqat). To curb this, in the eighth year of his caliphate, Uthman (RA) appointed a man from the Banu Layth tribe. This man clipped the wings of the pigeons and dismantled the target shooting structures. According to another narration from ʿAmr b. Shuʿayb, Uthman (RA) was the first to prohibit pigeon flying and target shooting. When this practice emerged in Madinah, he appointed a man to suppress it. A similar report is transmitted from al-Qasim b. Muhammad from his father, with the addition that another form of corruption also appeared among the people: indulgence in intoxicants. To counter this, Uthman (RA) dispatched a patrol that would go about carrying staffs to deter people from such behavior. When excessive use of nabidh (a fermented drink) spread and the matter worsened, the issue was brought to Uthman’s attention, and complaints were raised before him. As a result, consensus was reached that flogging should be prescribed for consuming nabidh. Consequently, several individuals were arrested and subjected to corporal punishment. - Al-Aʿraf 7:32:
قُلْ مَنْ حَرَّمَ زِينَةَ اللهِ الَّتِي اَخْرَجَ لِعِبَادِهِ وَ الطَّيِّبَتِ مِنَ الرِّزْقِ قُلْ بِيَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فِي الْحَيُوةِ الدُّنْيَا خَالِصَةً يَوْمَ الْقِيمَةِ كَذَلِكَ نُفَصِّلُ الْآيَتِ لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ
“Say [O Prophet], ‘Who has forbidden the adornment of God which He has brought forth for His servants and the wholesome things of provision?’ Say, ‘They are [meant] for those who believe, in the life of this world [as well], but on the Day of Resurrection they will be exclusively theirs.’ Thus We make Our signs clear for people who have knowledge.” - Tarikh al-Tabari 4/335
- In Tarikh al-Ṭabari (4:318), it is recorded:فَكَتَبَ أَشْرَافُ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ وَصَلَحَاؤُهُمْ إِلَى عُثْمَانَ فِي إِخْرَاجِهِمْ “The nobles and the righteous people of Kufa wrote to Uthman (RA) requesting that these individuals be expelled from Kufa.”
- In the year 33 AH, the disruptive actions of Malik al-Ashtar and his companions deeply agitated and alarmed the noble class of Kufa. As a result, these agitators were expelled from Kufa and sent to Syria. Upon learning of their oppositional stance, Muʿawiyah (RA) attempted to counsel them and urged them not to cause discord in political affairs. In response, one of their representatives boldly replied:
أَمَّا مَا ذَكَرْتَ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ فَإِنَّهَا لَمْ تَكُنْ أَكْثَرَ الْعَرَبِ وَلا أَمْنَعَهَا فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ فَتُخَوِّفُنَا، وَأَمَّا مَا ذَكَرْتَ مِنَ الْجُنَّةِ فَإِنَّ الْجُنَّةَ إِذَا اخْتُرِقَتْ خَلَصَ إِلَيْنَا.
(Tarikh al-Ṭabari, 4:319) “As for what you said about the Quraysh, they were neither the most numerous of the Arabs nor the most powerful during the Age of Ignorance, such that we should fear them. And as for your reference to them as a shield for the ummah—once the shield is broken, the field will be open to us.” - History of al-Ṭabari, History of the Prophets and Kings, and the continuation (Silah) of Tarikh al-Ṭabari, Volume 4, pages 325 and 330.
- The expression of Ali (RA)’s aversion and frustration with Quraysh is found in several sermons attributed to him. In one sermon, the following supplication is reported from him:
اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسْتَعْدِيْكَ عَلَى قُرَيْشٍ وَ مَنْ أَعَانَهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ قَطَعُوْا رَحِمِي، وَ صَغَرُوا عَظِيمَ مَنْزِلَتِي، وَ أَجْمَعُوْا عَلَى مُنَازَ عَتِي أَمْرًا هُوَ لِي ثُمَّ قَالُوْا : أَلَا إِنَّ فِي الْحَقِّ أَنْ تَأْخُذَهُ، وَ فِي الْحَقِّ أَنْ تَتْرُكَه
“O God, I seek Your help against Quraysh and those who support them! For they have severed my kinship, diminished the greatness of my station, and have united in contention against a matter [the caliphate] that is rightfully mine. Then they say: ‘Indeed, it is part of justice that you take it, and it is also part of justice that you leave it.’” (Sermon 170) On another occasion, he expressed his repulsion toward Quraysh in these words:
مَالِي وَلِقُرَيْشٍ وَاللهِ! لَقَدْ قَاتَلْتُهُمْ كَافِرِينَ، وَلَأُقَاتِلَنَّهُمْ مَفْتُوْنِيْنَ، وَ إِنِّي لَصَاحِبُهُمْ بِالْأَمْسِ، كَمَا أَنَا صَاحِبُهُمُ الْيَوْمَ .
“What concern have I with Quraysh! By God, I fought them when they were disbelievers, and I shall fight them again now that they are deluded by falsehood. I was their adversary yesterday, just as I am their adversary today.” (Sermon 33) In a letter to his brother ʿAqil, he wrote:
فَدَعْ عَنْكَ قُرَيْشًا وَ تَرْ كَاضَهُمْ فِي الضَّلَالِ، وَ تَجْوَالَهُمْ فِي الشَّقَاقِ، وَ جِمَاحَهُمْ فِي التَّيْهِ، فَإِنَّهُمْ قَدْ أَجْمَعُوْا عَلَى حَرْبِي كَاجْمَاعِهِمْ عَلَى حَرْبِ رَسُوْلِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَبْلِي، فَجَزَتْ قُرَيْشًا عَنِّي الْجَوَازِى ، فَقَدْ قَطَعُوْا رَحِمِي، وَ سَلَبُوْنِي سُلْطَانَ ابْنِ أُمِّي (Letter 36)
“Leave aside Quraysh, and their frenzied racing into misguidance, their roaming in discord, and their wild arrogance in error. For they have united in waging war against me just as they once united to wage war against the Messenger of God [pbuh] before me. May Quraysh receive recompense for what they have done! They severed my kinship and usurped from me the authority of my mother’s son.” - ʿAbd Allah b. ʿAbbas and al-Mughirah b. Shuʿbah—may God be pleased with both—advised Ali (RA) not to take the drastic step of dismissing all the previous governors at once. However, Ali (RA) did not heed their counsel. His decision indicates a clear desire to restructure the administration along new lines, deliberately excluding the “old school” of Quraysh and senior Companions from positions of governance. This is evident from the fact that he did not include any senior Companion in his administration. When Ṭalhah and al-Zubayr expressed a desire to participate in governance, he refused them outright. Offended, they departed. Both had hoped to be appointed governors of Kufa and Baṣrah, where, with the help of their loyal supporters, they aimed to suppress the insurgents. Even a shrewd statesman and seasoned strategist like al-Mughirah b. Shuʿbah was not invited to take part in the affairs of state. He remained politically isolated until, after the Battle of Ṣiffin and the end of civil war, he aligned himself with Muʿawiyah (RA) . Similarly, ʿAmr b. al-ʿĀṣ—a skilled administrator and accomplished commander—waited for a summons from Ali (RA) that never came and eventually joined Muʿawiyah (RA) ’s camp. Moreover, even among the veteran Companions who initially supported Ali (RA), many were gradually alienated by him. Abu Musa al-Ashʿari—may God be pleased with him—had pledged allegiance to Ali (RA) but wished to avoid civil war. He regarded these internal conflicts as part of the fitnah foretold by the Prophet [pbuh] and thus advised Muslims not to engage in them. For this, Ali (RA) dismissed him from the governorship of Kufa and rebuked him so harshly that he withdrew from public affairs. Likewise, Jarir b. ʿAbd Allah al-Bajali—may God be pleased with him—had also pledged allegiance to Ali (RA). When he advised caution in launching a military campaign against Syria, Malik al-Ashtar humiliated him in Ali (RA)’s presence, prompting him to leave Kufa altogether. In response, Ali (RA) had his house set ablaze. Even ʿAbd Allah b. ʿAbbas, who remained with Ali (RA) throughout, found his counsel frequently disregarded. In summary, Ali (RA) distanced the entire old guard of the Companions from the structure and functioning of his government.