Ali's bayah to Abu Bakr and shura

Reposted

---

Asalamulakyum,

JazakAllah once again for your answers. It seems what happened after the Prophets s.a.w. death is not clear as some people make it out to be. Regarding the bayah, aren't there some sources which claim that Imam Ali (as) gave the bayah quite shortly after Abu Bakr r.a. became caliph? And what is your view on this particular sermon in Nahjul Balagha (Letter 6):

"Verily, the people who payed allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegiance to me based on the same principles as the allegiance to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him."

Walakam as Salaam

---

wa alaykum as salaam.

I pray that all is well with you and yours.

What happened after the Prophet's death, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, was very clear in the general sense. He commanded the Muslims to do something and they failed to do it. However, it is the details that were spotty. Historians and traditionalists have tried to exculpate the actions of those Muslims of the past and narrated many things. Some of which was contradictory to actual history. If that wasnt the case, we would not have had so many 'versions' of the same incident. The supposed bayah of Ali (as) is one example of this.

The 'official' history says that he took the bayah to Abu Bakr 6 months after the latter acceded to power. Coincidentally, it also says that Faatima az-Zahraa (as) died angry with the first two caliphs 6 months after Abu Bakr assumed leadership. Is there a correlation between the 6 months of the supposed bayah and the death of our Lady Faatima (as)? If the 'official' record says that he didnt take the bayah while Faatima (as) was alive, this would mean that his bayah was dependent on the life of Faatima (as).

If we were to believe the reports in the book Kitaab al-Imaama wa Siyaasa by Ibn Qutayba, the picture would be a lot clearer. In his book, he narrates that Umar and co. were prevented from killing (or attempting to kill) 'Ali by Abu Bakr because Faatima was still alive. Perhaps, he knew that if it was known that Umar and co. killed Ali while the Messenger's daughter was alive, she would protest and he would possibly lose his power base. Abu Bakr's and Umar's forceful grab for power angered the Ansar and the protest of Faatima (as) would probably enrage the Muhajirun. Of course, this is all conjecture. Nevertheless, one has to account for the correlation between the supposed bayah and the death of Faatima (as) with another satisfactory reason.

As I said, we do not hold that Imam Ali (as) took the bayah to any of the caliphs. If he did, it was not out of any virtue they had, rather, he was forced to by threat of sword. Some may ask, why would he refrain from fighting when he was known for bravery. In one of his sermons, Amir al-Mumineen (as) stated that he was not afraid of death. However, he was instructed to be patient.

Regarding your question about his letter, we must remember the context of the letter. He wrote this letter to Mu'awiya in order to elicit his allegiance. Since Mu'awiya held to the legitimacy of the first three caliphs, Imam 'Ali (as) argued that he was elected in the same way. Therefore, no one has a right to oppose his (as) election.

We must not assume from this, that Imam 'Ali (as) endorsed or agreed with the Shura. His attitude towards 'the Shura' was well-known. Please refer to Nahj al-Balagha Sermons 3, 139 and 172. It is with this light that we should understand what he said in his letter to Mu'awiya.

Also, there is a slight error in translation. A better way of translating this would be "...Verily the shura is only for the Muhajirun and Ansar. If they agreed upon a man, called him imam and had Allah's pleasure, then, if anyone were to come out against their matter, he has left obedience or must be summoned to return to what he left from..."

The sequential particle fa between 'Allah's pleasure' and 'If anyone' means that 'then' should be inserted between them. It's difficult to explain if you are not familiar with Arabic. Imam 'Ali (as) was definitely not saying that Allah was pleased with the Shura; rather, he is using it as a rhetorical device to say that if a shura were to take place and the Ansar and Muhajiun agreed on a person (as in his case), going against it would be going against the decision of the shura, and thus, the pleasure of Allah.

Hope this is clear.

And Allah knows best!

IRS