Last week we included parts of Justice Ibn Al-Arabi’s argument refuting the allegations against the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) with regard to Ali’s position, making absolutely clear that none of them tried to usurp Ali any position to which he was entitled on the basis of any instructions given by the Prophet. He has more to say in defending the procedure that led to the appointment of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman as caliphs, before Ali could succeed to that position. He now speaks of the attitude of those whom he calls “the preservers of the faith.” These are scholars who do not hesitate to give good counsel to serve the interests of the Islamic faith. He identifies four types of scholars:
1. Those who have recorded and preserved the statements, traditions and guidance of the Prophet. They may be likened to officials in charge of safe storage of people’s food;
2. Scholars specialized in the fundamentals of the faith. They have defended Islam against the onslaught by innovators and determined aggressors. These are the heroes of Islam who fight to preserve its purity and steer people away from error;
3. Scholars who have verified all aspects of worship, outlined the rules governing transactions, distinguished what is lawful from what is unlawful, established the rules of agricultural taxes and penalties for offences against others, explained the meanings of oaths, vows and pledges, as also the legal provisions applicable to legal claims and suits. In as far as religion is concerned, they are akin to trustees in charge of funds and properties;
4. Those who are dedicated to service, attending mostly to worship and living mostly in isolation. In the life to come, their place is akin to that of a king’s trusted servants.
Ibn Al-Arabi explains in his other book, Siraj Al-Muridin, which of these four types is best and how they rank in relation to each other. In his refutation of the false arguments, he further says: “All the texts and statements we have quoted clearly explain, either explicitly or in implicit reference, what actually took place and how wise people acted in different situations.”
After having explained all this, he adds: “Had there been any clear statement on the succession after the Prophet, either excluding Abu Bakr or in Ali’s favor, Ali would have had to make it the basis of his claim. Indeed, other companions of the Prophet from among the Muhajirin or the Ansar would have also made the claim on his behalf. As for the Hadith at Ghadeer Khum, it provides no argument in support of such a claim. In this Hadith the Prophet is quoted as saying to Ali: “With me, you are in the same relation as Aaron was to Moses, except that there is no prophet after me.” (Related by Al-Bukahri and Muslim)
There is no question about the authenticity of this Hadith, but there is disagreement about its import, with the Shiites claiming that it indicates who should succeed him. Ibn Al-Arabi and all Sunni scholars argue that the question of succession does not arise here. He explains that the Prophet made Ali his deputy in Madinah during his own lifetime, in the same way as Moses appointed Aaron as his deputy when he went away for dedicated worship. All Jews agree that Moses died later than Aaron. How could such comparison, then, indicate succession?
The Prophet also said in reference to Ali: “My Lord! Befriend those who befriend him and oppose those who oppose him. Support whoever supports him and abandon whoever abandons him.” (Related by Ahmad). Commenting on this Hadith, Ibn Al-Arabi says: “This is perfectly authentic and the prayer contained here has certainly been answered. No one stands against Ali except the Shiites who assign to him a position other than his rightful one. To exceed one’s limits is to detract from his position. Had Abu Bakr been a usurper, he would not have been the only one. Indeed, all the Prophet’s companions would have been equally usurpers, because they helped him in what he would not have had any right to take, but the case was not so.”
Yet nothing of this is surprising. After all, they claim that the Prophet tried to appease them, gratifying their wishes in some hypocritical fashion. Far be it from him to do so. How could this compare with the authentic Hadith which mentions that Aishah suggested that Umar should lead the prayer during the Prophet’s illness, rather than her father, Abu Bakr. On hearing her, the Prophet said: “You, women, are like the ones who tried to lure Joseph. Ask Abu Bakr to lead the prayer.” We have already quoted other Hadiths in the same vein.
Those who make such claims are indeed perpetrating an enormity. When it was clear that Umar should address the question of succession after he was stabbed, he chose to leave the matter to be decided by consultation. In doing so, he followed in the footsteps of the Prophet and Abu Bakr, saying: “If I were to nominate a successor, a better person than I (meaning Abu Bakr) nominated his successor. If I do not nominate one, I would be following the Prophet’s example who did not specify who should succeed him.” (Related by Muslim and Ahmad). No one objected to this statement by Umar.
When Umar had deliberated over the matter, he said: “I will leave the question to be decided by consultation among the group of the Prophet’s companions with whom he was pleased at the point of his death.” (Related by Al-Bukahri). Indeed the Prophet was pleased with a much larger number than the six Umar appointed, but those six were the elite among the Prophet’s companions who were specifically mentioned as worthy of leadership.
Another false assertion accuses Abd Al-Rahman ibn Awf, one of the six nominated by Umar, of resorting to cunning schemes culminating in Uthman’s appointment as the third caliph. Ibn Al-Arabi says that if Ibn Awf’s action was merely an act of cunning, the ultimate say in the matter belonged to God, not to him. If people’s actions were mere cunning devices while matters are determined by power, then all power belongs to God. Everyone was fully aware that there could be only one caliph. Abd Al-Rahman ibn Awf excluded himself and took over the task, promising to do his best to ensure what is best for the Muslim community. He did exactly that and gave the post to the one who deserved it. None of the others had a better or stronger claim to it than Uthman.