[Gubook Janggoon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliph


Caliph
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Anglicized/Latinized version of the Arabic word خليفة or Khalifah, is the term or title for the Islamic leader of the Ummah, or community of Islam. Selected by committee, the holder of this title claims rulership over all Muslims.

The Sunnis and Shi'as differ as to who was the first Caliph of Islam. According to Sunni thought, the first Caliph was Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, Muhammad's closest friend and father-in-law, and the first male believer, who was elected into the office of the Caliphate in 632. The Shi'a, on the other hand, believe that the honour should go to Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law Ali Ibn Abi Talib on the basis of his blood relation to the Prophet himself.

Following the conflict between the Fatimids and the Abbasids, other Muslim rulers began to claim the caliph title. With the defeat of these peripheral caliphates, the caliphate of the Ottomans began increasingly to be considered the undisputed primary caliphate. Thus, by the eve of the First World War, the Ottoman caliphate represented the largest and most powerful independent Islamic political entity.

The English word "caliph" comes from Arabic via French, which got it from Latin (calīpha), which romanized the Arabic word, Khalīfa (probably خليفة), literally "Successor of the Prophet". Khalīfa originates from the verb khalafa, meaning "to succeed" or "to be behind". Some Orientalists wrote it as Khalîf. Some movements in modern Islamic philosophy justify religious leadership via khalifa, meaning roughly "to steward" or "to protect the same things as God", and propose this to renew the Caliphate. The Rulers of the Ottoman state actually used title of khalifa for political purposes very seldomly. It is known that Mehmed II and his grandson Selim used it to justify their conquest of Islamic countries. At a later date, one of the last Sultans of the Ottoman Empire, Sultan Abdulhamid II, used it as a tool against the European colonisation and occupation of countries with large Muslim populations. Today a khalifa as a single person does not exist, since the last Ottoman (Uthmani) Khilafah title and powers were transferred from the Ottoman family line to the Turkish Grand National Assembly (parliament) on 3rd March 1924. The Turkish Direktorate of Religious Affairs (The Diyanet (http://www.diyanet.gov.tr)) still fulfills the duties of the khalifa within Turkey. There is no longer one symbolic ruler of the Muslims, which is considered by some to be a violation of the Islamic legislations, the Shariah. Others claim that after the four rightful kaliphas there never was one, and all of the people who claim to be "khalifa" are actually just "Melik" (king).

Note: The Caliphate is the application of Messengership of Prophets (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, until Jesus and Muhammad) as the institution to protect and order the Muslims according the Law of God (in the Quran and the Universe), with the structure imitating the structure of Heaven (Mulkiyah/Government) and Earth (Ummah/People).




List of Caliphs


The Rashidun

* Abu Bakr - 632 - 634
* Umar ibn al-Khattab - 634 - 644
* Uthman ibn Affan - 644 - 656
* Ali ibn Abi Talib - 656 - 661



The Umayyads of Damascus

* Muawiyah I - 661 - 680
* Yazid I - 680 - 683
* Muawiya II - 683 - 684
* Marwan I - 684 - 685
* Abd al-Malik - 685 - 705
* al-Walid I - 705 - 715
* Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik - 715 - 717
* Umar II - 717 - 720
* Yazid II - 720 - 724
* Hisham - 724 - 743
* Al-Walid II - 743 - 744
* Yazid III - 744
* Ibrahim ibn al-Walid - 744
* Marwan II - 744 - 750



The Abbasids of Baghdad

* Abu'l Abbas As-Saffah - 750 - 754
* Al-Mansur - 754 - 775
* Al-Mahdi - 775 - 785
* Al-Hadi- 785 - 786
* Harun al-Rashid - 786 - 809
* Al-Amin - 809 - 813
* Al-Ma'mun - 813 - 833
* Al-Mu'tasim - 833 - 842
* Al-Wathiq - 842 - 847
* Al-Mutawakkil - 847 - 861
* Al-Muntasir - 861 - 862
* Al-Musta'in - 862 - 866
* Al-Mu'tazz - 866 - 869
* Al-Muhtadi - 869 - 870
* Al-Mu'tamid - 870 - 892
* Al-Mu'tadid - 892 - 902
* Al-Muktafi - 902 - 908
* Al-Muqtadir - 908 - 932
* Al-Qahir - 932 - 934
* Ar-Radi - 934 - 940
* Al-Muttaqi - 940 - 944
* Al-Mustakfi - 944 - 946
* Al-Muti - 946 - 974
* At-Ta'i - 974 - 991
* Al-Qadir - 991 - 1031
* Al-Qa'im - 1031 - 1075
* Al-Muqtadi - 1075 - 1094
* Al-Mustazhir - 1094 - 1118
* Al-Mustarshid - 1118 - 1135
* Ar-Rashid - 1135 - 1136
* Al-Muqtafi - 1136 - 1160
* Al-Mustanjid - 1160 - 1170
* Al-Mustadi - 1170 - 1180
* An-Nasir - 1180 - 1225
* Az-Zahir - 1225 - 1226
* Al-Mustansir - 1226 - 1242
* Al-Musta'sim - 1242 - 1258



The Abbasids of Cairo

* Al-Mustansir - 1261
* Al-Hakim I - 1262 - 1302
* Al-Mustakfi I - 1302 - 1340
* Al-Wathiq I - 1340 - 1341
* Al-Hakim II - 1341 - 1352
* Al-Mu'tadid I - 1352 - 1362
* Al-Mutawakkil I - 1362 - 1383
* Al-Wathiq II - 1383 - 1386
* Al-Mu'tasim - 1386 - 1389
* Al-Mutawakkil I (restored) - 1389 - 1406
* Al-Musta'in - 1406 - 1414
* Al-Mu'tadid II - 1414 - 1441
* Al-Mustakfi II - 1441 - 1451
* Al-Qa'im - 1451 - 1455
* Al-Mustanjid - 1455 - 1479
* Al-Mutawakkil II - 1479 - 1497
* Al-Mustamsik - 1497 - 1508
* Al-Mutawakkil III - 1508 - 1517



The Ottomans

* Mehmed (Muhammed) II (the Conqueror) - 1451 - 1481 ((actively used title of Caliph and Caesar )
* Beyazid II - 1481 - 1512
* Selim I - 1512 - 1520 (actively used title of Caliph )
* Suleiman the Magnificent - 1520 - 1566
* Selim II - 1566 - 1574
* Murad III - 1574 - 1595
* Mehmed(Muhammed) III - 1595 - 1603
* Ahmed I - 1603 - 1617
* Mustafa I (First Reign) - 1617 - 1618
* Osman II - 1618 - 1622
* Mustafa I (Second Reign) - 1622 - 1623
* Murad IV - 1623 - 1640
* Ibrahim I - 1640 - 1648
* Mehmed (Muhammed) IV - 1648 - 1687
* Suleiman II - 1687 - 1691
* Ahmed II - 1691 - 1695
* Mustafa II - 1695 - 1703
* Ahmed III - 1703 - 1730
* Mahmud I - 1730 - 1754
* Osman III - 1754 - 1757
* Mustafa III - 1757 - 1774
* Abd-ul-Hamid I - 1774 - 1789
* Selim III - 1789 - 1807
* Mustafa IV - 1807 - 1808
* Mahmud II - 1808 - 1839
* Abd-ul-Mejid I - 1839 - 1861
* Abd-ul-Aziz - 1861 - 1876
* Murad V - 1876
* Abd-ul-Hamid II - 1876 - 1909 (actively used title of Caliph)

Note: From 1908 onwards constitutional monarch without executive powers, with parliament consisting of chosen representatives.

* Mehmed(Muhammed) V - 1909 - 1918 (constitutional monarch/Caliph without executive powers, parliament consisting of chosen representatives)
* Mehmed (Muhammed)VI - 1918 - 1922 (constitutional monarch/Caliph without executive powers, parliament consisting of chosen representatives)



The Republic of Turkey

* Abdul Mejid II - 1922 - 1924; only as Caliph (Head of state: Gazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha Ataturk)
* Grand National Assembly of Turkey (Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi) 1924-1937

Because the Caliph title is currently unused, it could be used again if the Turkish parliament were to decide.

[Yun]

A really long and wordy presentation that I prepared some years ago on the history of the first four caliphs. Comments are welcome, and if you are a Muslim, do approach it with an open mind.

Discuss the ideas and nature of governance of the Islamic State during the period of the four “Rightly Guided Companions”.
Yang Shao-yun

Main References:
- Wilferd Madelung The Succession to Muhammad: A study of the early Caliphate (Cambridge University Press, 1997)
- “Social and Religious Concepts of Authority in Islam” (Chapter V) in M.J. Kister Ideas and Concepts at the Dawn of Islam (Brookfield, Vermont: Variorum, 1997)
- Patricia Crones and Martin Hind God’s Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam (Cambridge University Press, 1986)

Key Terms:
Quraysh – the tribe of Muhammad, powerful in Arabia as keepers of the Kaaba in Mecca.

Muhajirun – the 72 Muslims (the earliest Companions of Muhammad) and their families who followed the Prophet on the Hijra (‘migration’) to Medina in 622 AD, which marks the first year of the Muslim calendar. Many were non-Meccan Arabs.

Ansar – the Arabs of Medina, mainly of the Aws and Khazraj tribes, who accepted Islam after the Hijra and helped Muhammad establish the first Islamic State in Medina.

Umayyads – the ruling aristocracy of the Quraysh, descended from Umayya and related to Muhammad through his great-great-grandfather Abd Manaf. Most rejected Islam in Mecca, boycotting relations with the Muslims and plotting to murder Muhammad. After the Hijra, they attacked the Muslims in Medina twice: first soundly defeated at Badr (624), then victorious at Uhud (625). But in 628 their leader Abu Sufyan and many others converted to Islam and pledged their loyalty to Muhammad at Al-Hudaybiyya. In 630 Muhammad returned to Mecca in triumph; the Umayyads who then converted under duress were known as taliq (‘freed captives’).

Political Realities of the Islamic State:
1) Both realpolitik and religious principles (piety) lay behind the decisions of the Caliphs and their political opponents – sometimes in tension, sometimes relatively harmoniously. No state, no matter how ideally conceived, is free of politics and political rivalries. Much more so for the early Caliphate, where political and religious authority were so thoroughly fused in one institution. It is not a pleasant thought for many Muslims, but it is necessary for objectivity in assessing why the “Ideal Islamic State” failed to last.

2) Family (or clan) ties were often the most important in determining political allegiance, although Islam had aimed to rectify this by bringing the umma beyond tribal and factional divisions. A look at the main protagonists should make this apparent:

a) Abu Bakr – Muhammad’s closest Companion and father-in-law.
b ) Aisha – Abu Bakr’s daughter, Muhammad’s most beloved wife in later life. Kinswoman to Talha and sister-in-law to al-Zubayr.
c) Umar – Another of Muhammad’s close friends and father of another wife, Hafsa.
d) Uthman – The only Umayyad Companion, grandson of Muhammad’s aunt Umm Hakim (twin sister of Muhammad’s father) and twice a son-in-law of Muhammad (first married Ruqayya and, after her death in 624, Umm Kulthum).
e) Ali – Muhammad’s cousin, son of the uncle Abu Talib who raised Muhammad after the early death of his parents. Married Muhammad’s daughter Fatima.
f) Muawiya – A taliq, son of the Umayyad Abu Sufyan and cousin of Uthman and Marwan.

3) Kister stresses “the Islamic concept according to which any decision by the ruler, or any action by an official of his, had to follow the deeds and actions of the Prophet and be in accordance with his utterances, commands, prohibitions, and injunctions. A decree or order of a Muslim governor could be considered lawful only if it was based on the practice of the Prophet, and, later on, that of the guided caliphs [Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali/Muawiya depending on one’s pledge of allegiance], who in turn acted according to the sunna of the Prophet. Hadith became the touchstone for the legitimacy of the government and its institutions, establishing whether the proceedings and decrees of rulers were lawful.” (p. 95)

Crones and Hind, however, believe that the first Caliphs including the early Umayyads had the religious authority (based on superhuman insight and divine guidance) to formulate their own law and set their own hadith, and that this legal authority was only usurped and wiped out of the historical record by the later ulama. Whatever the case, it should be recognised that the ‘discovery’ of a long-forgotten hadith often served as a political tool to legitimise someone’s political agenda, which is why the hadith vary in reliability and sometimes contradict one another even in prophecies attributed to the Prophet’s own mouth.

4) The events of the Classical Period (the Quranic generation and the first Inter-Muslim War) have been extensively mythologized by succeeding generations, incorporating many inconsistent, conflicting and deeply partisan accounts. The historiographical difficulties in sifting out the reliable evidence mean that even noted Western scholars like Caetani, Tyan, Lammens, Wellhausen and Madelung tend to have sharply contrasting interpretations of these events and assessments of the character or motivations of the persons involved.

The Caliphate of Abu Bakr (632-634)
The Succession
Did Muhammad appoint Abu Bakr as successor?

- Differing accounts of Aisha and Abd Allah b. (‘Ibn’ – son of) al-Abbas, cousin of the Prophet.

- Aisha’s account asserted that her father was the rightful successor by Muhammad’s implicit choice. At the beginning of his mortal illness, Muhammad had told the assembled Muslims that he knew no man more excellent in his actions among the Companions than Abu Bakr, and insisted, in spite of Aisha’s protests (that her father was too frail) that Abu Bakr and no one else should take his place in leading the prayers.

- Ibn al-Abbas, however, believed that the Prophet actually wanted to make a will (awsa) in Ali’s favour, but was prevented by Aisha and Hafsa from writing it or seeing Ali alone.

- Ibn al-Abbas: The Prophet before his death expressed the wish to write a letter for those present “after which you will not go astray.” Umar said: “The Messenger of God is overcomes by pain (i.e. delirious). You (the people) have the Qur’an, the Book of God is sufficient for us.” The people present started to quarrel, some demanding that the Prophet should be given the chance to write, others siding with Umar. As their noise pained Muhammad, he told them to leave him. Muhammad had also demanded: “Send for Ali.” Aisha, however, suggested: “Would you send for Abu Bakr?”, and Hafsa joined her, proposing: “Would you send for Umar?” When all three men assembled, Muhammad dismissed them.

- Although Ibn al-Abbas refrained from suggesting what the Prophet wanted to write or to say to Ali, it was assumed that he was hinting at Muhammad’s intention to name Ali his successor. The Shi’ites have always interpreted the report in this sense.

- Aisha countered the story with one of her own: “The Messenger of God told me during his illness: Call your father Abu Bakr and your brother to me so that I may write a letter, For I fear that someone (implying Ali) will have wishful fancies and someone will say: I am more worthy… God and the faithful refuse anyone but Abu Bakr.”

- Ibn al –Abbas: Muhammad gave the order for Abu Bakr to lead the prayer but Aisha objected that her father was too frail. Then Muhammad gave order that Umar lead the prayer, and only when Umar refused (out of respect) to precede Abu Bakr, did the latter go ahead. In the eyes of Muhammad, therefore, the leadership of the prayer had no significance for the task.

- Aisha’s report: The Prophet insisted three times against her objections (growing angry at the third time) that Abu Bakr, and only he, should lead the prayer of the Muslims in his place.

The Hall of the Banu Saida
- The events of the “Revolt of the Ansar” were revealed by Umar only in 644, 10 years after Abu Bakr’s death (and less than two weeks before Umar’s own assassination). After the death of Muhammad, the Ansar assembled in the Hall of the Banu Saida, to appoint the Companion Saad b. Ubada, chief of the Banu Saida clan and leader of the Khazraj tribe, as their leader. Informed of this attempt to “usurp the rule from us”, Abu Bakr, Umar and his friend Abu Ubayda, accompanied by family members and attendants, went to confront the Ansar.

- Abu Bakr spoke up: “O group of Ansar, every virtue you mention of yourselves you are worthy of, yet the Arabs will not recognise the rule of anyone but this tribe of Quraysh… I am satisfied with either of these two men for you, so swear allegiance to whichever you want.” Then he took both Umar and Abu Ubayda by the hand. The Ansar now proposed to settle the dispute fairly by agreeing that the Ansar and the Quraysh should each choose an amir (leader). Tempers flared and voices were raised.

- Umar was shocked that Abu Bakr, whom he deeply respected, would raise him up for leadership. He took the hint and told Abu Bakr: “Stretch out your hand,” and gave him the handshake of the pledge of allegiance (bay’a / bai’ih). At this point the Banu Aslam, a clan who were enthusiastic supporters of Muhammad and had been rewarded for their loyalty with the status of Muhajirun irrespective of whether they had gone on the hijra, arrived on the scene and readily swore allegiance to Abu Bakr. They were known to be enemies of the Ansar.

- Thus the Ansar, too, were compelled to give a general pledge of allegiance. Then the Muhajirun all jumped upon and trampled Saad b. Ubada (a sick man wrapped in a blanket) to teach him a lesson. Umar later said: “We feared if we left the people without a pledge of allegiance they might after our departure suddenly make a pledge (i.e. to one of the Ansar, like Saad). We would then have had either to follow them in [a choice] with which we were not pleased, or to oppose them, and evil would have resulted.” Saad remained bitter and died in exile in Syria.

- Abu Bakr and Umar justified their actions on the basis that the Prophet had explicitly warned against fitna (division and discord within the Community). Abu Bakr said that he accepted out of fear that there might otherwise be fitna leading to apostasy (Muslims leaving their religion). But he also maintained that it was Umar’s reminder to the people, during the debate, that the Prophet had ordered Abu Bakr to lead the prayer during his illness that swayed them to swear allegiance. Another account has it that the decisive argument was a quotation (hadith) from the Prophet himself: “Authority belongs to Quraysh.”

Falta better than fitna

- The Muhajirun claimed that the unity of the community and the future of Islam had been at stake at the Hall of the Banu Saida. However in Madelung’s view, the idea of the Caliphate, the succession of Muhammad in all but his prophetic mission, had not yet been born. The Ansar, while firm in their Muslim faith, considered their political allegiance to Muhammad as lapsing on his death. They therefore met to restore control over their own city, expecting that the Muhajirun would also return to Mecca. It was only Abu Bakr and Umar who were thinking in terms of a succession to Muhammad entailing rule over all the Arabs. And the Arab tribes would not submit to anyone but the Prophet’s tribe.

- Umar, however, later admitted that the outcome of that day had been a falta (arbitrary measure, hastily-made deal) because of the absence of the prominent Muhajirun, including the Prophet’s own family and clan, in legitimate consultation (shura). It was, he warned the community, to be no precedent for the future. “Whoever were to swear allegiance to any man without consultation among the Muslims, his oath of allegiance would be invalid and both of them would be subject to being killed.” Yet he also defended the outcome thus:
1) “God has warded off its evil”.
2) “Towards no one among you have necks been stretched out as for Abu Bakr” (i.e. Abu Bakr enjoyed the support of all).
3) There was no time for anything but an immediate oath of allegiance taken on behalf of all, because the Ansar could not be trusted to wait for a legitimate consultation.

- an unspoken reason (suggested by Madelung): Abu Bakr and Umar wanted to prevent Ali from candidacy in shura, since he would likely have received support from the Ansar and the Umayyads, who were more closely related to him (Muhammad’s great-grandmother was of the Khazraj). Why opposition to Ali?
1) Personal reason: Aisha deeply hated Ali, who had criticised her behaviour on many occasions. Her father thus also saw him as a political rival, and Umar and Abu Ubayda being his close friends also adopted his position. Abu Bakr was at the time an old man who could not expect to reign for long, nor did he have any sons suited to succeed him. He was primarily interested in Aisha’s future welfare.
2) Political reason: Abu Bakr was convinced that the rest of Quraysh would not accept rule by Muhammad’s kin, since this would combine the authority of Prophethood and Caliphate in a single family and make them overbearing. In order to keep the Islamic Community united firmly under Quraysh, Ali would have to be excluded from leadership.

Consolidation of Authority

- Abu Bakr adopted the title of khalifat rasul Allah (Successor or Vicegerent of the Messenger of God). It was his declared intention to follow the policies and practices of Muhammad in every respect, to be seen as acting in the name of the Prophet. It is said that when people addressed him as khalifat Allah (Deputy or Vice-regent of God), he explicitly rejected this, stating that he was merely the Prophet’s successor. Crones and Hind dismiss this as a later fabrication by the ulama in order to downgrade the religious authority of the Caliph, who in their view was known as khalifat Allah from the start. Madelung disagrees with this view, saying that it “takes no account of the historical situation.”

- Abu Bakr’s “acceptance speech” in the Hall of the Banu Saida:
I have been given authority over you but I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me, and if I do ill, then put me right. … Obey me as long as I obey God and His Messenger, and if I disobey them you owe me no obedience.
A splendidly idealistic definition of the Caliphate, considering its rather violent birth. “But in the idealism also lay the serious danger of continual challenge in the name of an elusive ideal” – namely that if the ruler is perceived as disobedient to God, he can be rightfully challenged.

- In Medina, Umar took charge of securing the pledge of allegiance of all residents. Ali, the Companion al-Zubayr and a few other Muhajrun were gathered in Fatima’s house. Umar threatened to set the house on fire unless they came out and swore allegiance to Abu Bakr. Ali still believed he had greater right to the succession, based on kinship to the Prophet and earlier merit in Islam (Ali was the 3rd to convert, and Abu Bakr the 2nd, but Ali had played a bigger role in the first battles). He withheld his oath of allegiance until Fatima died 6 months later.

- The Wars of the ridda (Apostasy): Many of the Arab tribes, while remaining Muslim and recognising Abu Bakr as the successor, declined to continue paying the annual alms-tax (or tithe, zakat). Abu Bakr declared them not just rebels, but apostates, and made war to subjugate them. Many were killed, since the penalty for apostasy was death. “By Qur’anic standards, Abu Bakr might at most have castigated the tribes withholding the alms-tax as hypocrites. He could not make war on them either as apostates or rebels” (Madelung). But he “rejected any compromise on the tax, making it the yardstick for the loyalty of the tribes to Islam itself.”

- Even Umar questioned this policy, citing the Prophet’s words: “I was ordered to fight people until they say that there is no god but Allah. If they say this, they safeguard themselves and their property from me.” The Qur’an also speaks thus of Muslim rebels: “If two groups of the believers fight, conciliate between them, but if one of them transgresses (i.e. breaks truce or commits aggression) upon the other, fight the one which transgresses until it returns to the order of God.”

- For the ridda tribes, the alms-tax threatened a surrender of tribal autonomy, the acceptance of tax officials and governors – the subjection of the tribes to a ruler or government, something they had always vigorously resisted. But for Abu Bakr, the Islamic State would have to be a caliphate by Quraysh as a ruling class over all Arabs. The caliph was not to be so much the religious leader of the umma, as Muhammad had been, but the ruler of all Arabs, commanding their obedience in the name of Islam. In this he was already bringing about a change in policy.

- Abu Bakr also eroded the privileged status of Muhammad’s family, except for Aisha, using a hadith known only to himself. When Fatima and al-Abbas (the Prophet’s uncle) came to collect their inheritance from Muhammad (including his lands), Abu Bakr told them: “I have heard the Messenger of God say: “We [the prophets] do not have heirs. Whatever we leave is alms (i.e. for the whole community).” Thenceforth they would receive alms if in need, like ordinary Muslims, rather than shares of the war booty and conquered lands. Abu Bakr, however, provided generously for the widows of Muhammad, including Aisha.

The Caliphate of Umar (634-644)
The Succession

- Abu Bakr died of illness in August 634, during the Muslim invasion of Byzantine-controlled Syria. On his sickbed, he had appointed Umar as his successor without prior consultation. Only after he had made up his mind did he confidentially ask the Companions Abd al-Rahman b. Awf and Uthman for their opinions. The former expressed some reservations on account of Umar’s well-known harshness and rudeness. Uthman was more diplomatic, saying that Umar was better on the inside than the outside, and that in any case “there is no one like him among us (the other Companions)”.

- Abu Bakr had actively courted the support of the Umayyads and other late converts among the Meccan aristocracy to counter the influence of the Ansar and Banu Hashim, giving them most of the important military commands in the ridda wars and the Syrian campaign. Umar, on the other hand, had been on bad terms with them ever since the battle of Badr (when he suggested the prisoners be killed rather than freed for ramsom). Abu Bakr knew they would only accept Umar by his formal appointment. A divisive election for a successor, in this crucial stage of the battle for Syria, could be fatal to the umma. Also, he saw it as a way to again prevent Ali from pressing his claim to the succession.

Islamic Meritocracy
- Umar adopted the titles khalifat khalifat rasul Allah (Successor to the Successor to the Messenger of God) and amir al-mu’minin (Commander/Leader of the Faithful). The latter, rather than khalifat, was the term by which the caliphs would be popularly referred to or addressed ever since.

- Umar did not have as much political astuteness as Abu Bakr, but probably excelled in piety. His greatest efforts were directed towards strengthening the Islamic character of the Caliphate and spreading Islam by military conquest.

- Central to his policies were the Qur’anic principles of shura and sabiqa (early merit in Islam). Umar’s heavy reliance on consultation (partly to compensate for the lack of shura in Abu Bakr’s succession and his) is illustrated by a report of Ibn al-Abbas on his voyage to Syria in 639, a year in which the plague broke out there. The caliph and his escort were met by the commanders of the Muslim armies in Syria, informing him of the seriousness of the plague and advising him to return to Medina. Umar ordered Ibn al-Abbas to assemble the Muhajirun for consultation. When they disagreed among themselves as to whether to continue the voyage or not, Umar ordered the Ansar to be assembled. They, too, were divided in their opinion, and the caliph finally gathered the leaders of Quraysh converted after the conquest of Mecca (including the Umayyads). They unanimously recommended returning to Medina, and Umar followed their advice.

- The order in which Umar had conducted the shura also reflected his understanding of sabiqa. Usually he confined himself to consulting with the prominent early Meccan companions. Quraysh, after all, were now acknowledged as the “spine of men” (“can a man walk without a spine?”) according to traditions attributed to the Prophet. After them came the Ansar who, even though they had been eclipsed politically under Abu Bakr, nonetheless had religious merit as the next converts to Islam. Last of all came the Umayyads, whom he had always despised. At the time of the conquest of Mecca, he had wanted Abu Sufyan executed for leading the opposition to Islam, rather than granted amnesty.

- In instituting the diwan (army register) for distributing the revenue from the conquered territories among Muslims, Umar reversed the practice of Abu Bakr who is said to have given Muslims equal shares of all money delivered to Medina. Umar insisted that he could not put those who had fought together with the Prophet on the same level as those who had fought against him. The highest stipends were thus awarded to the Muslims who had fought in the battle of Badr.

- Umar moved to correct other policies of Abu Bakr that he found less consistent with Islamic ethics. He ordered the immediate release of Arab prisoners made during the ridda wars and lifted the restriction on ridda tribes participating in the Muslim campaigns of conquest. He also curbed the prominence of the old Meccan aristocracy in the Muslim armies, replacing them with early Meccan Companions like Saad b. Abi Waqqas in Iraq and Abu Ubayda in Syria. When Abu Ubayda died in the plague of 639, however, Umar had to appoint his deputy, Yazid son of Abu Sufyan, as governor. Yazid himself died of the plague soon after and was succeeded by his brother Muawiya. This was to have major consequences.

- With regard to the family of the Prophet, Umar opted for reconciliation. Al-Abbas, Muhammad’s closest surviving kinsman, was granted a pension more than double that of the other veterans of Badr, as were Muhammad’s widows. Umar also gave Ibn al-Abbas an important role in government. Both were not among the early Companions and so did not have the standing in sabiqa to pose a political threat. Ali, however, was treated like any of the other Companions and received the same stipend as other Badr veterans. Umar instead chose to placate his grievances by regularly consulting him together with the other Companions, and by marrying Ali’s daughter Umm Kulthum, a mere child at the time.

Arab Conquests
- Under Umar’s rule, Muslim armies conquered the Byzantine provinces of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, as well as most of the Persian Empire. This has earned him a reputation as the greatest statesman and leader of early Islam after Muhammad.

- Why was military conquest pursued under the banner of jihad if Islam is primarily peaceful and in favour of defensive war? Firstly, even a religious state has to engage in territorial and/or economic expansion in order to survive. In the case of the Arabs, expansion beyond the Hejaz desert, to secure the fertile lands of Egypt and Iraq, was crucial for the economic needs of a newly-organised state. Secondly, the conquests could be justified on religious grounds. Muhammad had once written to the Byzantine and Persian emperors urging them to convert to Islam. Both had rejected his call; this theoretically threatened the religious freedom of Muslims in their lands and warranted jihad. The Prophet is quoted in the hadith as saying that the first batch of Muslims to undertake a naval expedition would be rewarded with paradise, and that the first Muslim army to invade Constantinople would be forgiven their sins. (As it happened, the first Muslims to attack Constantinople were led by Muawiya and Busr b. Artah in 653; it is just as well they did not succeed, for as we shall see, their sins were many.)

- The privileged status of the Arabs in Arabia was institutionalised during Umar’s reign. Muhammad had been willing to accept the jizya (poll-tax) from all Jews and Christians (“People of the Book”) in Arabia, but not the non-Muslim Arabs, who must either convert or face war. However, in the latter part of Umar’s reign, the large Jewish and Christian communities in Khaybar and Najran respectively were summarily expelled from Arabia to the conquered territories, where they continued to be treated with relative tolerance. Why this sudden change?
1) Economic reasons: When the Prophet had conquered Khaybar, he could find no labourers to till the land, and thus left the land in the hands of the Jews on condition that they hand over half of the crops to the Muslims in Medina. By the time of Umar, the Muslims had labourers to carry out the agricultural work, so he expelled the Jews to Syria and divided the land among the Muslims.
2) Political reasons: Umar feared the increasing military strength of the Christians in Najran, and decided to expel them although they had been assured by the Prophet that they would be allowed to retain ownership of their lands.
3) Religious reasons: An injunction by the Prophet during his last illness, that “Two faiths will not live together in the land of the Arabs”, was told to Umar who had previously been unaware of it (neither had Abu Bakr). He then inquired about this utterance among the early Companions and ascertained it to be true. Thus Umar avoided the charge of committing a bid’a (bad innovation, a policy that contradicts the previous words or practices of the Prophet) in the expulsion.

- Umar also tried to prohibit non-Arab Muslims from entering Medina. This was part of his general policy of identifying Islam with the Arabs as a kind of national religion. The great conquests outside Arabia turned the Arabs, deprived of their former freedom by the ridda wars, into “a military caste sustained by a numerically much larger non-Arab and non-Muslim population”, “provided with generous stipends and pensions apart from their share in the booty gained in battle.” When the Christian Arab tribe of Iyad sought refuge in Byzantine territory, however, Umar wrote to the emperor demanding he expel them, and threatened to drive non-Arab Christians onto Byzantine land. Umar evidently considered all Arabs, Muslim or not, as his subjects.

- Umar’s pro-Arab policy may have contributed to his assassination by a Persian slave, Abu Lu’lu’a Fayruz (his owner al-Mughira b. Shuba had had to seek special permission for him to work in Medina). Abu Lu’lu’a seems to have been a Zoroastrian (some unreliable reports claim he was a Christian) captured in the decisive victory over Persia at Nihawand. Mortally wounded, Umar capped off his policy by ordering before his death that all Arab slaves held by the state be freed. His son Ubayd Allah carried out vengeance killings of a Persian military advisor and a Christian tutor, and threatened to kill all foreign captives in Medina before being apprehended.

Assessing Umar’s application of shura
- Modern Sunni Muslims often see Umar’s caliphate as embodying the ideal for that institution. Despite being rather coarse and rough in his manners, he was sincerely and deeply devoted to Islam, and had a strong sense of asabiyya (group solidarity) with both Quraysh and the Arabs. In particular his strict adherence to shura, and his efforts to base leadership in the community on religious merit and priority in serving Islam, are taken as a potential basis for restoring a proper democratic form of Islamic government. Yet the tragic fate of his successor shows that Umar’s attempt to Islamicize the caliphate was “doomed to failure almost immediately after his death”.

- Not until modern times have suggestions been made to institutionalise shura beyond its mere sentimental appeal. More seriously, the principle of merit in Islam was in latent conflict with the privileged status of Quraysh and the Arabs. The early Companions were now growing old, and in order to insitutionalise the principles of sabiqa and shura such that they could outlast the Qur’anic generation, Umar would have had to repeal the supreme status of Quraysh and set a clear precedent of choosing a non-Qurayshite for his regular consultative council, opening the ranks of the ruling elite to other Muslims. Umar was neither personally inclined nor in a strong enough political position to do so.

The Caliphate of Uthman (644-656)
The Succession
- Umar had vigorously opposed the concept of dynastic succession and championed the ideal of meritocracy within the Quraysh against the interests of both the Umayyads and Banu Hashim. He thus rejected suggestions of his own eldest son Abd Allah as successor, scoffing that he was not even strong enough to divorce his wife.

- Thus he had long resolved to leave the choice of successor to a shura among the most prominent early Companions. The council (all members of whom automatically gained candidacy) assembled upon Umar’s death from his mortal injuries included:
1) Abd al-Rahman b. Awf
2) Saad b. Abi Waqqas
3) Uthman
4) Ali
5) Al-Zubayr
6) Talha (then away from Medina and represented by Saad b. Abi Waqqas)

- Abd al-Rahman did not aspire to leadership and took himself out of the competition to act as arbitrator for the council’s decision. He was Uthman’s brother-in-law.

- Only Uthman and Ali pressed their claims. Besides interviewing each of the electors separately, Abd al-Rahman consulted with the leaders of Quraysh that night and received strong support for Uthman from both his clan, the Umayyads, and another powerful Qurayshite clan, the Makhzum. The Makhzumite leaders warned Abd al-Rahman: “If you pledge allegiance to Ali, we shall hear and disobey, but if you pledge allegiance to Uthman, we shall hear and obey. So fear God, Ibn Awf.”

- Even Ali’s maternal cousin al-Zubayr, who had backed him against Abu Bakr after the death of Muhammad, now switched his support to Uthman. Ali was isolated and pressured into pledging allegiance immediately when Abd al-Rahman chose to announce his decision publicly in the mosque. When Talha returned to Medina, however, he was displeased at his opinion having been dismissed by proxy, and only grudgingly gave his pledge of allegiance.

The Personality and Policies of Uthman
- Uthman was the son of a wealthy merchant in the Meccan aristocracy. As the only Umayyad Companion and one more closely related to Muhammad, he received special favour from Muhammad, including marriage to two of the Prophet’s daughters one after the other. Despite his total lack of military prowess, he generously supported the Community with a personal fortune from the caravan trade he had inherited.

- Uthman had at no time before his election displayed any qualities of public leadership or entertained any political ambitions. He was chosen mainly because he was the strongest alternative to Ali as the Prophet’s son-in-law twice over. The Umayyads hoped to escape the political wilderness after Umar by having one of their own in power. Aisha and her supporters would have anyone else but Ali. Makhzum, too, were wary of political authority going to the Banu Hashim.

- Uthman adopted the new official title of khalifat Allah (Vicegerent of God) that Abu Bakr had allegedly once rejected. The caliph now reigned by the grace of God, as His representative on earth – no longer as just the deputy of His Messenger. There could therefore be no possibility of resignation or abdication.

- He developed the conviction, sprung first from his overwhelming endorsement by Quraysh and then encouraged by his venal kinsmen, that the house of Umayya, as the core clan of Quraysh, was uniquely qualified to rule in the name of Islam. He thus distributed governorships among his close kin, with little regard to their personal incompetence or unpopularity:
1) Muawiya was already governor of Damascus in Syria. Three provinces were added to his jurisdiction, substantially increasing his military strength.
2) Amr b. al-As, who had led the conquest of Egypt, was dismissed as governor and replaced by Uthman’s foster-brother Abd Allah b. Saad b. Abi Sarh.
3) Saad b. Abi Waqqas was replaced as governor of Kufa by another half-brother, al-Walid b.Uqba b. Abi Muayt. Al-Walid’s father Uqba b. Abi Muayt had been killed fighting the Muslims at Badr, and Uthman’s father had then married his mother.
4) Uthman removed Abu Musa al-Ashari from the governorship of Basra and gave it to his cousin Abd Allah b. Amir b. Kurayz, descended from a brother of Umayya. He added substantially to Ibn Amr’s power by joining the governorships of Oman and al-Bahrayn to that of Basra.

- Thus by 650, all the major governorships were in the hands of the caliph’s relatives. Uthman systematically strengthened his ties with these favourites by giving them his daughters in marriage.

- However, Uthman’s nepotism did not provoke serious opposition from the prominent Companions during the first half of his reign. He was able to maintain good relations with them through generous grants of land in Iraq even though these conquered lands were, according to the rulings and practice of Muhammad, subject to division among the conquering Muslim warriors, with only one-fifth to be retained by the leader of the Community. Uthman viewed this land no longer as communal property but as “crown property” in the old royal tradition, to be used at the discretion of the caliph.

Dissatisfaction Grows
- From 650-51, however, unrest erupted throughout the Islamic Empire. In the provinces, the unjust rule of Uthman’s governors led to agitation and rebellion. In Medina, Uthman came to be dominated by the malevolent influence of his advisor and kinsman, Marwan b. al-Hakam, and to ignore the admonitions of the Companions in the shura. They grew ever more disillusioned with Uthman’s judgement. Aisha, too, had increasing cause for displeasure as she saw that the caliphate of Quraysh was quickly being turned into a hereditary kingship for the benefit of the Umayyads.

- During the pilgrimage to Mecca in 650, Uthman performed four bows in the ritual prayer instead of the traditional two – an unlawful innovation. Both Abd al-Rahman b. Awf and Ali reproached him for it. Abd al-Rahman grew deeply disappointed with Uthman’s conduct, which he felt had broken the commitments made to him at the time of the election. When he died in 652-53, he left instructions not to let Uthman lead his funeral prayer.

- In Syria the early Companion Abu Dharr al-Ghifari criticised Muawiya’s extravagant spending on his palace in Damascus. At Muawiya’s request, Uthman ordered him to be sent back to Medina. When he continued his agitation, he was exiled to the desert, where he died in 652.

- The Companion Abd Allah b. Masud was accused by al-Walid b. Uqba of formenting trouble in Kufa and deported to Medina, where Uthman abused him from the pulpit. Aisha shouted, “Uthman, do you say this to the Companion of the Messenger of God?” Shortly afterwards, four witnesses arrived from Kufa to charge al-Walid with drunkenness. Al-Walid was a vulgar drunkard who had once vomited on the pulpit at Kufa. Uthman threatened the witnesses, and they complained to Aisha, causing another angry exchange between her and the caliph. A group of Companions went to see Uthman, and he was forced to replace al-Walid with another Umayyad, Said b. al-As b. Abu Uhayha. Ali insisted on the administering of flogging on al-Walid for the offence of wine-drinking.

- The nonagenarian Companion Ammar b. Yasir joined a public protest by Ali in the mosque against Uthman’s arbitrary appropriation of conquered territory. The caliph, unable to punish Ali, had Ammar severely beaten, angering the clan of Makhzum to whom Ammar was related. Aisha took up his cause, bringing out a hair, a garment and a sandal of the Prophet in the mosque and exclaiming: “How quickly have you abandoned the Sunna of your Prophet when his hair, his dress, and his sandal have not yet decayed.” The crowd, egged on by Amr b. al-As, burst into turmoil over Uthman’s ill-treatment of the Companions.

- Amr b. al-As had, ever since his dismissal in Egypt, been openly criticising and insulting the caliph in Medina, accusing him of “bad innovations”. Talha, a man of strong personal ambitions, also became a sharp critic of Uthman’s conduct, despite Uthman’s special efforts to secure his backing by making him extravagant presents. Both he and Aisha wrote letters to the provinces inciting revolt.

- In 654-55 agitation against Uthman reached a peak as several Companions wrote to each other calling for jihad against the caliph. Ali was asked to speak to Uthman on behalf of the people, and he admonished Uthman for the appointment of his kin as governors and his lack of control over their actions. Uthman rejected the criticism and told Ali that if he were caliph he would have done the same. In a speech to the people in the mosque, he chided them for taking advantage of his leniency. Under Umar they had never spoken out only because of fear at Umar’s toughness, not because Umar’s policies were any different.

Outbreak of Revolt
- In Kufa, al-Walid’s replacement Said b. al-As himself attracted hostility by boasting that Iraq was the garden of Quraysh. A group of Qur’an readers, led by Malik al-Ashtar, rioted and were deported to Syria. Uthman summoned his four kinsman-governors to Medina to discuss the recent unrest, but the Kufans started a major revolt when they heard that he had decided to send Said back in spite of their complaints. Al-Ashtar returned and assumed leadership of the rebels.

- In Egypt, two prominent Qurayshites were agitating against the governor Abd Allah b. Saad, and against Uthman. One was Muhammad b. Abu Bakr, son of the first Caliph. Only a child at his father’s death, he had been brought up in Ali’s household since his mother remarried Ali, and had become a fierce supporter of Ali’s claim. The other was Muhammad b. Abu Hudhayfa, son of the early Companion Abu Hudhayfa b. Utba. After his father was killed in the ridda wars, he was brought up by Uthman, but resented his foster-father’s preference for Umayyad kinsmen. Uthman tried to appease Ibn Abu Hudhayfa with expensive presents, but the latter declared to the people that Uthman was trying to bribe him. Uthman now called for Ammar b. Yasir, apologised for his previous behaviour, and sent him to Egypt to put in a good word for the caliph. Once in Egypt, however, Ammar backed the rebels and called for a march on Medina. Muhammad b. Abu Bakr first travelled to Medina to size up the situation.

- In April 656, 400-700 Egyptians set out for Medina to press their demands before Uthman. When they arrived at Dhu Khushub, a night’s journey from Medina, Uthman asked Ali to meet them and persuade them to turn back. Uthman did not want to receive them as this would encourage others to try the same thing, and promised henceforth to follow Ali’s advice. Other prominent Muhajirun and Ansar were also included in the delegation. After a few days of negotiations, the rebels accepted that the caliph would repent, and turned back towards Egypt.

- Marwan, fearing that any concession would only be seen as weakness and encourage further mutiny, convinced Uthman to state in his next sermon that the Egyptians had left convinced that the charges against him were baseless. When Uthman did this, Amr b. al-As publicly berated him and demanded his repentance. Uthman scornfully retorted that he was acting out of a personal grudge, but when another voice was raised, the caliph lifted his hands facing Mecca and proclaimed his repentance. Ali now urged Uthman to make a clear public statement of repentance. Uthman, in his second sermon, confessed his wrongdoing, declared his repentance to God and invited the people to visit him and present their views. The people were moved to tears by his show of humility, but Uthman then confined himself to his house and was too ashamed to see the people. He made the terrible mistake of sending Marwan out to receive their advice; Marwan angrily addressed them: “You have come coveting to wrest our property (the caliphate) from our hands. Be off from us!” The people left, furious, and even Ali now swore never to visit Uthman again.

- Uthman’s third and last sermon was interrupted thrice by angry shouts of “Act in accordance with the Book of God”, and ended when he was hit by pebbles thrown by the crowd and knocked unconscious. By this time, the rebels had heard of Uthman’s denial of their grievances in his first sermon, and had returned enraged to Medina. They then laid siege to Uthman’s palace. In Egypt, Muhammad b Abu Hudhayfa seized control while Abd Allah b. Saad was on the way back from Medina; Abd Allah took refuge in Palestine.

- Soon, rebel forces from Kufa and Basra, led by al-Ashtar and Hukaym b. Jabala respectively, arrived in Medina. The siege was at first peaceful, as the rebels still hoped that Uthman would capitulate – they wanted his abdication, not his blood. Uthman, too, was conscious of the sanctity of Muslim life (as reflected in the Prophet’s hadith that the shedding of a Muslim’s blood was illicit except for apostasy, adultery and manslaughter) and wished neither to use force against the rebels nor to provoke them into violence. However, he was also determined not to “take off a garment with which God had clad him”. He sought the moral support of the Prophet’s widows (the “Mothers of the Faithful”) and thus tried vainly to persuade Aisha to cancel her pilgrimage to Mecca and stay in Medina.

- On 16 June, the peace was broken. One of the rebels, the aged Companion Niyar b. Iyad, lectured Uthman from below his balcony, demanding his abdication. A servant of Marwan dropped a rock on Niyar, killing him instantly. The Egyptian rebels demanded the surrender of the murderer, but Uthman again tried to shield Marwan. During the night, they assembled and lit fires around the palace. The next morning, they stormed it, burning the roof and doors. Several Qurayshite defenders were killed, and Marwan was wounded but saved by his wet-nurse. Uthman was with his wife Naila in her room, reading the Qur’an, when Muhammad b. Abu Bakr and three others burst in, grabbed him and killed him with their swords. He was in his 70s or 80s. The rebels denied him a burial next to the tomb of the Prophet, which his predecessors had been given.

- Uthman, the first caliph elected by shura, was destroyed by “his doting love for corrupt and rapacious kin”, in turn destroying the caliphate of Islamic meritocracy established by Umar. He remained faithful to the very end to his religious commitment not to spill Muslim blood, but those who swiftly used his death as a political tool had no such scruple.

The Caliphate of Ali (656-661)
The Succession
- The murder of Uthman left the rebels and their Medinan allies in control of the capital, with Talha and Ali as potential candidates for the succession. Talha had been the Companion most active in inciting the rebels to action, out of his own political ambitions rather than any personal grievance against Uthman. Ali, on the other hand, had tried to dissuade the rebels from confrontation and intervened to prevent them from cutting off the supply of water to the caliph’s palace.

- Ali was with his son Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya in the mosque on the final day of the siege. Saad b. Abi Waqqas, who sympathised with Uthman, came to urge Ali to intervene once and more and protect his beleaguered brother-in-law. At this point Muhammad b. Abu Bakr arrived and told Ali that he had just killed Uthman. Ali returned home and was visited by Companions pressing him to accept the pledge of allegiance. The Ansar and the Kufan and Basran rebels (in particular al-Ashtar) also firmly supported Ali. The Egyptians inclined towards Talha.

- Ali insisted that any pledge of allegiance should be given in public in the mosque. Thus on 18 June, the official ceremony took place in the mosque. Talha was brought to the scene by al-Ashtar, al-Zubayr was brought by Hukaym b. Jabala (the Basran rebel leader), and both were pressured into giving their pledge (al-Zubayr saw himself as also having some claim to the succession). Most of the Qurayshites, seeing that the Ansar and rebels had gained the upper hand, decided to accept Ali’s authority for now. Some Qurayshites and Ansar, however, either refused or abstained, and Ali did not force them. A few dissenters left for Mecca.

Succession Dispute
- Ali was not chosen by a shura of the most eminent Early Companions, which Umar had stipulated as a condition for valid succession. Nor had he the solid backing of the majority of Quraysh who, since Abu Bakr, had been recognised as the ruling class solely entitled to decide on the caliphate. Yet Ali himself was firmly convinced of the legitimacy of his own claim based on his close kinship with the Prophet, his association with Islam from the outset, and his merits in serving its cause. He had only given his pledge to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman for the sake of the unity of Islam. Now that a large part of the Community was turning to him, he saw it as his duty to take upon himself its leadership.

- Still, the irregular election of Ali left the Community divided into three factions. Besides Ali’s supporters, there were the Umayyads and their partisans who believed that the caliphate had become “their property” through Uthman, and those Qurayshites who opposed Ali and hoped to restore the caliphate along the principles laid down by Abu Bakr and Umar. As each party was prepared to fight for its presumed right, Islam became engulfed in a brutal internal war. “The evil of falta which Umar thought had been averted by God now erupted with a vengeance.”

- In Mecca, Aisha raised the flag of revenge for Uthman. She had earlier left Mecca after her pilgrimage, satisfied in the assumption that her ally Talha had succeded Uthman. When she heard of Ali’s succession, she immediately turned back, claiming that Uthman had already repented when Ali jumped upon him and murdered him. “A single finger of Uthman was better than the whole of Ali!” Talha and al-Zubayr, along with some other prominent Qurayshites, now broke their oaths and secretly left Medina to join Aisha.

- The Umayyads had been hiding in a granary belonging to Umm Habiba the daughter of Abu Sufyan, another of Muhammad’s widows. Marwan now led most of them to Mecca, while al-Walid b. Uqba went to join Muawiya in Syria. Marwan, too, declared that Ali was the mastermind behind Uthman’s murder. Al-Walid pinned the blame largely on Amr b. al-As (who had retired to Palestine).

- Ali recognised that retaining Uthman’s corrupt governors would be useful in securing their loyalty and restoring order in the short term, but he felt he was obliged to act according to what was morally right, and he would never re-appoint these people based on what he knew of their character. If they turned against him, he would “meet them with the sword”. His cousin Ibn al-Abbas urged him to retire to his estate and wait for all the Arabs to turn to him; if he were to assume the leadership now, this would invite opportunists to saddle him with the guilt for the death of Uthman. Ali refused and asked Ibn al-Abbas to go to Syria and replace Muawiya. Ibn al-Abbas objected that Muawiya would probably kill or imprison him, Ali should “write to Muawiya, appeal to his greed, and make promises to him.” Ali declared vehemently: “By God, I will never do that.”

- Ali was a deeply pious and courageous man, unwilling to compromise his principles for the sake of political expediency, and ready to fight against overwhelming odds. But this translated into political naivete and an inability to see through the motivations of the ambitious.

- At the beginning of his reign, Ali opened up the treasury and handed out the money to the common people, as he had promised, and he continued doing this throughout his caliphate even when the war was going badly. He adopted the designation Commander of the Faithful, but rejected the title of Caliph as this had been tarnished by Uthman’s pretentious claim to be the Vice-regent of God.

- Uthman’s governor Abd Allah b. Amir had left Basra for Mecca, and Ali appointed the Ansar Uthman b. Hunayf to replace him. For the governorship of Eygpt, Ali chose Qays b. Saad b. Ubada, son of the chief that the Muhajirun had trampled at the Hall of the Banu Saida. It was a symbolic act of reconciliation with his Ansar supporters. He did not appoint Muhammad b. Abu Hudhayfa since he wanted to avoid association with the Egyptian rebels who had killed Uthman, or re-appoint Amr b. al-As whom he regarded as an unscrupulous opportunist. In Kufa, Ali re-appointed Abu Musa al-Ashari (whom Uthman had deposed) on the recommendation of al-Ashtar, even though Ali did not trust him fully.

- In these three provinces, the governors received the people’s pledge of allegiance on Ali’s behalf. However, a group of pro-Uthman Egyptians had left for the village of Kharbita during the revolt, and now declined to give the pledge, wishing to wait until Uthman had been avenged. Qays b. Saad agreed not to force them as long as they paid the tax.

- The Meccans refused to swear allegiance to Ali, pinning the guilt for Uthman’s murder on Ali and calling for revenge. Their real aim was to force Ali from office and exclude him from any shura to be convened following that. As their first step, they decided to seize control of Basra, as Abd Allah b. Amir said he could still count on strong support there. Talha and al-Zubayr asked Aisha to join the campaign, not to fight but to “inform the people that Uthman has been wrongfully killed and summon them to restore a shura among the Muslims so that they will be in the same state as Umar left them”. Aisha was needed both for her prestige and for her moderating effect on the rivalry between Talha and al-Zubayr. She consented and was given as her mount a camel plated in armour.

Inter-Muslim War: The Battle of the Camel
- The Meccan rebels set out in October 656, their numbers swelling to 3,000 on the way to Basra. The tension between Talha and al-Zubayr was evident, although both claimed that they would accept the decision of a shura after Ali’s removal. When they arrived outside Basra, they announced that the murderers had robbed the Community of its self-determination by killing Uthman without any agreement or consultation, and that Uthman had repented and was thus wrongfully killed. The Basrans were divided over their response to this, and began fighting. The group that believed the Meccans joined Aisha. Ali’s governor Uthman b. Hunayf sent Hukaym b. Jabala to attack them, but after fierce but inconclusive fighting a truce was called to wait for Ali to arrive and settle the matter. But the Meccans soon broke the truce and captured Ibn Hunayf. Hukaym went to confront them, and in a fierce fight was killed along with 70 others.

- The Meccans were now in full control of Basra. Meanwhile Ali had left Medina with 700 Ansar. He called Abu Musa to lead the Kufans to his support, but he refused to take part in a fitna and threatened Ali’s envoy. Ali then deposed Abu Musa and sent his son al-Hasan, Ammar b. Yasir and al-Ashtar to remove him. They did so and were able to raise an army of 6-7,000 in Kufa to reinforce Ali.

- In Basra, some religious leaders were inclined to neutrality and abstention from fitna, but many others insisted on their duty to defend Aisha, the Mother of the Faithful. When Ali arrived, 3,000 Basrans went over to his side. The other Basrans were commanded by al-Zubayr, but Aisha insisted that he should only be appointed amir rather than caliph – a decision on the caliphate would be made only after their victory. Ali also sent messages to al-Zubayr revealing that Talha and Aisha, not Ali, were the real instigators of Uthman’s murder. Al-Zubayr, suspecting that he was merely a pawn for the ambitions of Aisha and Talha, began to contemplate withdrawing from the fight.

- The battle began on 8 December, lasting from noon to sunset. Ali first sent a man to raise a copy of the Qur’an between the battle lines and appeal for peace. This man was struck by arrows and killed; Ali then gave the order to fight. The Basrans used “revenge for Uthman” as their battle cry. Al-Zubayr deserted early in the battle and headed for the Hejaz; the Banu Saad clan of the Tamim tribe, who had opted for neutrality but remained around Basra, intercepted and killed him. Talha was hit in the knee by an arrow from behind, and eventually bled to death. The arrow was shot by his own ally Marwan, who had long planned to take revenge for Uthman’s murder against the real culprits on his own side. Just like fighting Ali, it was also a political move to remove the next strongest non-Umayyad candidate for the caliphate.

- With these developments, the Meccan-Basran army was doomed to defeat. However, Aisha’s army continued fighting to defend her carriage on the armoured camel. Huge numbers of men were killed, until Ali ordered them to cripple the camel. Aisha was captured and put in her place: “We are of his (the Prophet’s) flesh and blood, and you are merely one of nine stuffed beds which he left behind.” Remorseful at the carnage she had caused (at least 2,500 dead on her side and 4-500 on Ali’s), she finally went into retirement in Medina.

- This was the first regular battle between Muslim opponents in history. Ali could have treated his opponents as apostates (as Abu Bakr once did) and applied the common rules of warfare to them. But given the long-standing prestige of their leaders in Islam, this was not a viable option. He thus ordered that wounded or captured enemies should not be killed, those fleeing should not be pursued, and only captured weapons and animals were to be considered booty. No war prisoners, women or children should be enslaved, and the property of slain enemies was to go to their legal Muslim heirs. To compensate his men for their reduced booty, he paid them each a sum out of the Basran treasury. These rules were to become authoritative for warfare against Muslim rebels, much more of which was to come.



Muawiya steps in: The Battle of Siffin
- Ali received a renewed pledge of allegiance from the prisoners of war and the Basrans, upon which they were set free. Marwan, however, refused to pledge his allegiance. Ali naively pardoned him, sticking to the old rules of politics, and let him join Muawiya in Syria. “Surely neither Muawiya nor Marwan himself would have hesitated to do away with so dangerous and vicious an enemy”.

- Ali now transferred his headquarters to Kufa. Seven months into his reign, he had still not established relations with Muawiya. Ali had been unable to depose him from the governorship of Syria, but believed that a late convert without early merit in Islam would not think of challenging him for the caliphate as Talha had.

- In Damascus, al-Walid b. Uqba was urging Muawiya to take revenge on Amr b. al-As for instigating the Egyptian rebels. But Amr was widely believed to be the illegitimate son of Muawiya’s father Abu Sufyan, and Muawiya believed he would be useful in gaining control of Egypt. When Qays b. Saad rebuffed a letter from Muawiya asking for his surrender, Muawiya forged a letter from Qays declaring his allegiance. Ali was informed by his spies and decided to test Qays’ loyalty by ordering him to fight the pro-Uthman abstainers in Kharbita. When Qays protested that this would only drive them over to Muawiya’s side, Ali acted on his suspicions and deposed Qays, replacing him with Muhammad b. Abu Bakr.

- Ali sent an envoy to Muawiya, with a letter asking Muawiya for the pledge of allegiance, while making it clear that he would not accept him as a governor. He stated that the public pledge in Medina was binding on Muawiya in Syria, since it had been given by the same people who had pledged allegiance to the first three caliphs. When those present made a choice, it could not be rejected by those absent. The choice was pleasing to God, and anyone opposing it could be fought to make him follow the path of the faithful. Moreover, the right of shura belonged to the Muhajirun and the Ansar; Muawiya was a taliq and thus excluded from any say in the matter.

- Muawiya responded by making a speech to the Syrians in the mosque of Damascus, praising them for their traditional obedience to the caliphs as a model for the Community, and thus appealing to their regional patriotism. He went on to argue that “I am the next-of-kin of Uthman, who has been killed wrongfully. Yet God says: ‘If anyone is killed wrongfully, We give his next-of-kin authority, but let him not be extravagant in killing, surely he is being helped.” [Qur’an 17:33] The Syrians present pledged their allegiance to him on that basis, calling for revenge for Uthman. They did not foresee how extravagant he would be in killing.

- Muawiya then made a pact with Amr b. al-As. Amr swore allegiance on the condition that Muawiya would help him regain Egypt and give him lifetime possession of the place. Muawiya easily persuaded al-Walid to re-direct his propaganda against Ali, who after all had once caused him to be flogged. Muawiya again played on the pride of the Syrians by declaring that since the people of the Hejaz had compromised their honour by pledging allegiance to the instigator of Uthman’s murder, the right of shura now belonged to the people of Syria. He demanded that Ali surrender the killers of Uthman to him.

- Ali responded by challenging him to name a single member of Quraysh in Syria who could be accepted in a shura or was eligible for the caliphate. As for handing over the killers, what was he in relation to Uthman? The sons of Uthman were more entitled to that. Ali was not prepared to leave those accused of the murder, including loyal supporters like Muhammad b. Abu Bakr and al-Ashtar, to the mercy of the Umayyads, nor did he agree that Uthman was wrongfully killed.

- War was now inevitable. In Kufa, Ali called a counsel of the ruling elite, with Muhajirun and Ansar on an equal footing, and all urged him to lead them to jihad against the deceivers. Most of the religious class were also among Ali’s vigorous supporters, but some had misgivings and asked to remain neutral until they could judge who were the transgressors, against whom they would fight in accordance with the Qur’an. Ali praised their attitude as according with the religion.

- Muawiya prepared to concentrate his forces and invade Iraq, and thus concluded a truce with the Byzantine emperor, making gifts and paying tribute, so as to secure his borders to the north and west. He had less to fear from Egypt now because Muhammad b. Abu Bakr, while deeply loyal to Ali, had no political skills. A month after his arrival, he had antagonised the Kharbita party by demanding that they either swear allegiance or leave the country. They refused and prepared for armed resistance.

- Ali and Muawiya led their armies toward Siffin. Daily skirmishing continued throughout June and July 657, until all-out battle began on 26 July and lasted for 3-4 days. The balance seemed to be slowly tilting towards Ali’s favour, and Amr b. al-As advised Muawiya to adopt a devious stratagem. Some of the Syrians raised copies of the Qur’an tied to their lances and called out, “Let the Book of God judge between us and you.” This immediately caused confusion in Ali’s army. Ali exhorted them to continue fighting, that the Qur’an-raising was an act of deception and fraud. But the Qur’an readers on his side pressured him to accept the call to arbitrate the dispute on the basis of the Qur’an. Facing mutiny, Ali had to recall al-Ashtar, who had almost reached the Syrian camp and saw victory close at hand.

- A substantial minority of about 4,000 men dissented, believing that Muawiya was not sincerely submitting to the Qur’an but intended to cut a deal which would allow him to hold on to power. They demanded that Ali resume the war, and Ali was personally in favour of this. But those in favour of arbitration insisted that the proposal was only right, fair and just. Many opponents of arbitration left in anger. Ali himself decided that arbitration would fail anyway, and so accepted the proposal against his own inclinations. Qur’an readers from both sides met between the lines to discuss the procedure, agreeing to “revive what the Qur’an revived”. The Syrians proposed Amr b. al-As as their arbitrator, and the Iraqi Qur’an readers proposed Abu Musa al-Ashari. Ali objected that Abu Musa had opposed his cause and could not be trusted, but they insisted that they wanted just such a man who was neutral between Ali and Muawiya.

- The arbitration agreement was written and signed on 2 August. The two sides committed themselves to adhere to the Book of God. The two arbitrators were to follow strictly the rules of the Qur’an. Whatever they could not find a rule for in the Qur’an, they were to apply sunna acceptable to both sides. They were to make their judgement by Ramadan, 7 months later.

The Arbitration Fiasco and the Kharijites
- Accepting the arbitration proposal was a fatal lapse of leadership in Ali and a serious political blunder. He permitted the majority of his army to impose its will on him when he could have defused the situation by arranging a simple military truce or withdrawn from the battlefield without any agreement. It was obvious that Amr b.al-As was no impartial arbitrator but a stooge of Muawiya. The arbitration agreement undermined the conviction among Ali’s followers that they were clearly fighting for a righteous cause, while giving some moral credibility to Muawiya’s propaganda.

- “No judgement but God’s” became the rallying cry of the opponents to arbitration: the decision dishonoured God by appointing men to determine His will in a matter involving the shedding of Muslim blood, when judgement in such cases was reserved to God who would have granted a clear victory to the righteous side in battle. Right after the announcement of the agreement, two young brothers in Ali’s army raised the call in fury and charged into the Syrian lines, where they were killed. On the return journey to Kufa, the deep rift in Ali’s army became even more apparent as supporters and opponents of arbitration cursed and hit each other with their horsewhips. As he entered Kufa and dismissed his army, some 12,000 men left in protest, no longer recognising Ali as their imam (religious leader). They committed themselves to a shura after victory over whoever opposed them; until then their only oath of allegiance was to God.

- Ali finally went to the dissenters and assured them he had not agreed to the arbitration of men but to the arbitration of the Qur’an. The Qur’an, however, was in writing and did not speak by itself; it was thus for men to pronounce it. They returned to Kufa, but the more radical among them now claimed that Ali had repented and affirmed that the arbitration was an act of infidelity and a sinful error. Ali denied this; they then interrupted his sermons in the mosque with their cry “No judgment but God’s”. The Kharijite movement was born.

- Ali maintained that the Kharijites were to be fought only if they started fighting, in accordance with the Qur’an. Eventually, 4,000 of them left Kufa, crossing the Tigris to set up base at al-Nahrawan. Ali’s followers (the shi’a) offered him a renewed pledge of allegiance based on a new formula: they would be friends of those he befriended and enemies of those he took as enemies.

[Yun]

(cont.)

Ali revealed a new hadith to legitimise this: Muhammad was supposed to have said of Ali, “O God, be a friend of whomever he befriends and an enemy of whomever he takes as an enemy.” 12 or 13 Companions came forward to testify to this.

- At the meeting of the arbitrators in April 658, Amr b. al-As tricked Abu Musa into recognising that Uthman had been wrongfully killed. This was conceded without first investigating whether Niyar b. Iyad, whose murder had triggered the catastrophe, was wrongfully killed, and whether Uthman had done wrong in shielding the murderer and his master Marwan. The concession was a judicial misjudgement that became both political and religious dogma for Sunni Muslims. Soon after, the negotiations collapsed, mainly from deliberate provocation by Amr, without any further agreement. Abu Musa was disgraced and fled to Mecca. Amr and the Syrians, in contrast, returned triumphantly to Damascus and greeted Muawiya as Commander of the Faithful. That month, Muawiya received the general pledge of allegiance of the Syrians as caliph.

- Ali denounced the conduct of both arbitrators as failing to act in accordance with the sunna and Qur’an, and resumed his war with Muawiya. He wrote to the Kharijites at al-Nahrawan, inviting them to fight on his side again. The Kharijites retorted that he was standing up not for God but for himself. Only if he testified that he had committed an act of infidelity and repented would they stop opposing him. Ali soon received news that the Kharijites were interrogating innocent people and killing them for their political views. He sent an envoy to question them, and they killed the envoy too. His men urged him to fight the Kharijites before the Syrians, as they could not bear to leave their families behind at the mercy of such people.

- Ali led his army to al-Nahrawan and tried to reason with the Kharijites again, but they scoffed: “If we were to swear allegiance to you today, you would agree to arbitration tomorrow.” They declared that they would say no more and instead prepare to die and go to paradise. All but 1,500-1,800 of them did choose to withdraw from the battle, but the rest charged at Ali’s army although greatly outnumbered and were massacred. This battle was the most problematic event in Ali’s reign: the Kharijites, though rebels and fanatics, were also pious men in basic agreement with Ali regarding the rule of the Qur’an. Unfortunately, Ali could not agree to their demand that he repent, since he did not believe he had been at fault in submitting to the pressure of the majority at Siffin.

- Ali wanted to proceed immediately to attack the Syrians. But his men were demoralised, complaining that their weapons were worn out and urging a return to Kufa. Within days the army melted away and Ali had to cancel his campaign. Muawiya had sent offers of bribery to the tribal chiefs in Kufa to induce their reluctance to follow Ali, taking advantage of Ali’s own steadfast refusal to make financial concessions to them. He now seized the initiative, launching numerous raids into Ali’s territory. The raiders killed all whom they met and carried off their property, “marking a new low in the character of inter-Muslim warfare.”

- In Egypt, Muhammad b. Abu Bakr was in serious trouble. The Kharbita rebels were encouraged into open revolt by the events at Siffin. Muhammad sent two generals against them, and both were killed. Ali hastily sent al-Ashtar to take over from the young and politically inexperienced Muhammad. To avoid passing through Syrian territory, al-Ashtar sailed up the Red Sea coast, but Muawiya bribed a tax collector to serve him a poisoned drink. Upon the death of al-Ashtar, Amr b. al-As led 6,000 men into Egypt and was joined by the Kharbita rebels. Muhammad had only 2,000 men; his vanguard was surrounded and defeated, and the rest then deserted him. He was captured, killed and his body burnt. Aisha was grieved and outraged at the killing of her brother, and cursed Muawiya and Amr in her prayers. Ali had only managed to gather 2,000 reinforcements by the time he received the bad news; his support in Kufa was clearly weaknening.

- Muawiya, no great military commander, still did not dare to mount an all-out offensive relied on surprise attacks on the civilian population, killing those who would not swear allegiance to him as caliph and looting their lands. The purpose was to undermine Ali’s reign by terrorising his subjects. Meanwhile, Ali had to crush five Kharijite rebel groups one after the other, in which nearly all the rebels eagerly sought martyrdom and fought to the death.

- In January 661, Muawiya sent an expedition under the ruthless Busr b. Artah to the Hejaz and Yemen. Busr occupied Medina, then Mecca, then Sana, killing and looting along the way before returning through the desert to Syria. Among his thousands of victims were the two infant sons of Ubayd Allah b. al-Abbas, Ali’s cousin and governor of Sana. The outrages committed by Busr shocked the Kufan leaders, who blamed themselves for their past inaction and now urged Ali to lead an army against Muawiya. Just as Ali began raising this army, however, on 26 January an Egyptian Kharijite slashed him with a poisoned sword in the mosque, as vengeance for al-Nahrawan. Two days later, Ali died.

- In the memory of later generations, suffering under Umayyad tyranny, Ali became the ideal Commander of the Faithful. His “refusing to engage in the new game of political treachery, unscrupulous manoeuvring and clever opportunism that was then taking root in the government of Islam, deprived him of success in life, but also raised him in the eyes of his admirers into a paragon of the virtues of a pristine, uncorrupted Islam”.

The triumph of the Umayyads
- Al-Hasan, Ali’s eldest son, succeeded his father without any dispute. But al-Hasan was a pacifist by nature who had never agreed with his father’s militant pursuit of his cause. He did not doubt that the cause was just and Muawiya was a scoundrel, but could this justify the massive bloodshed and ever-deepening hatred within the Community? Instead of leading the assembling army against Muawiya, he merely wrote a letter urging him to submit. Muawiya countered with his own argument: he had been longer in office, and was more experienced, more skilled in statecraft, and older than al-Hasan, so he was worthier of the caliphate. If al-Hasan pledged allegiance to him, the caliphate would pass to him after Muawiya’s death.

- Al-Hasan did not reply, but Muawiya now understood that his new opponent had no fight in him. He set out with his full army of 60,000 towards Kufa; al-Hasan desperately summoned his army and sent out a vanguard under Ubayd Allah b. al-Abbas. Shortly after, he gave a sermon hinting that he was willing to capitulate, as what they hated under unity was still better than what they loved under division. Many of his followers were outraged and tried to beat him before his friends shielded him to safety. Ubayd Allah was offered a bribe and deserted to Muawiya. The latter denied that he had ordered Busr to kill Ubayd Allah’s sons, and claimed to have strongly disapproved of it. Busr was furious at this hypocrisy.

- After an exchange of envoys, Muawiya readily accepted al-Hasan’s terms for surrender, which included that he should not be entitled to appoint his successor but that there should be a shura. Al-Hasan had no personal interest in Muawiya’s promise that the reign would belong to al-Hasan after him; he wished only to reunite the Community and spare the blood of his followers. He addressed them: “You have pledged allegiance to me on the basis that you make peace with whomever I make peace. I have deemed it right to make peace with him and have pledged allegiance to him, since I considered whatever spares blood as better than whatever causes it to be shed.”

- Muawiya made his own speech to the Kufans: “God’s protection is dissolved from anyone who does not come forth and pledge allegiance. Surely, I have sought revenge for the blood of Uthman, may God kill his murderers, and have returned the reign to those to whom it belongs in spite of the rancour of some people. We grant respite of three nights. Whoever has not pledged allegiance by then will have no protection and no pardon.” The people hastily came from every direction to pledge allegiance.

The End of the Qur’anic State

- “The fitna, the Inter-Muslim War, was over, and the unity of the Community was restored. Yet it was not the old Community that was resurrected. The universal brotherhood of Islam, the respect for the sanctity of Muslim blood legislated by the Prophet, would not return. The schisms torn open in the war would not heal, but rather deepened and hardened. Umayyad government, whose legitimacy was… founded on the claim of revenge for the caliph Uthman, kept pitting Muslims against Muslims, inciting suspicion, mistrust, hatred and constant strife. Not until the caliphate of the pious Umar II (Umar b. Abdul Aziz) was a short-lived attempt made to bring about a broad reconciliation between the factions…

- The caliphate itself was transformed. Sunnite tradition recognised the profound change and attributed to the Prophet the prediction that the successor to prophethood would last after him for thirty years to be followed by ‘biting kingship.’… The true implications of Uthman’s adopted title Vice-regent of God, of being above rather than subject to Islam… were now fully realised by Muawiya and his sucessors. The caliph became counterpart and successor to the Roman-Byzantine emperor… He ruled Muslims as his subjects, absolute lord over their life and death… killing at discretion whomever he saw as a potential threat to his power.

- In a wider historical perspective, Islam was now taken over by the state. Just as three centuries earlier Roman-Byzantine despotism had appropriated Christianity, strangled its pacifist religious core, and turned it into a tool of imperial domination and repression, so it now appropriated Islam… The first step had, as noted, already been taken when Abu Bakr turned the religious obligation of giving alms into an assessable and enforceable tax. The final step was taken under Muawiya, when the duty to obey the Commander of the Faithful was made enforceable under pain of death, rather than imprisonment and deportation as it had been under the early caliphs.” (Madelung)

- Hadith attributed to Muhammad: “The closer you are to government, the further you are from God”; “When you see Muawiya on my pulpit, kill him!” By the time Muawiya died in 680, he had grown so fat that he could not even climb to the pulpit during prayers.

- Muawiya’s philosophy of government: “I apply not my lash where my tongue suffices, nor my sword where my whip is enough. And if there be one hair binding me to my fellow men, I let it not break. If they pull, I loosen and if they loosen I pull.”

Subsequent Events
- Al-Hasan retired permanently to Medina and stayed out of all political involvement. He died 8 years later in 669-70. Many reports claim that he was poisoned by his wife at the instigation of Muawiya.

- The capital of the Umayyad caliphate remained Damascus. There, Muawiya’s son Yazid was appointed crown prince in 676 without a shura of even the Syrians.

- Al-Hasan’s leadership of the Banu Hashim was succeeded by his brother al-Husayn. Muawiya advised Yazid to be gentle with him, but immediately upon his father’s death, Yazid sent an army under Ubayd Allah that surrounded al-Husayn, his family and companions at Karbala and killed them all. Al-Husayn’s surviving followers kept the Shi’a cause alive.

- Two revolts against Yazid’s brutality quickly broke out: al-Zubayr’s son Abd Allah (Ibn al-Zubayr) seized Medina, while the rebel al-Mukhtar backed Ali’s other son Muhammad b. al-Haniafiyya in Kufa. Ibn al-Zubayr defeated al-Mukhtar, but lost Medina to the Syrians and was finally killed in 692.

- Yazid died in 684 and was succeeded by his son Muawiya II, who also died soon after. Muawiya’s favourite Marwan now seized the chance he had long awaited. He usurped the caliphate and married Yazid’s widow, but died a year later. Some accounts say Marwan died of the plague, others are more colourful: he broke his promise to appoint Yazid’s other son Khalid as his successor and chose instead his own son Abd al-Malik. Utterly humiliated, Khalid and his mother conspired to murder him and suffocated him with a pillow while in her bed.

- Nonetheless, Abd al-Malik succeeded to the caliphate in 685, defeated Ibn al-Zubayr and established the Marwanids as the subsequent ruling line of the Umayyad Dynasty. Dynastic politics and Islam were never again separated until the abolition of the caliphate by the Turks in 1924.

[Gubook Janggoon]

Great stuff Yun!

[Hang Li Po]

very nice articles....


Thanks Gubook Janggoon & Yun

This post has been edited by Hang Li Po: 04 June 2007 - 11:46 AM

[Bilge]

Turks don't like Muawiyah(Muaviye) and Yazid (Yezid), and they don't use these names...