The Battle of al-Jamal (36 A.H)

The incident of Ma’rakat al-Jamal stemmed from the earlier assassination of the 3rd rightly guided Caliph Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him)[1].

To understand the importance of this assassination, we must first understand the person of Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him).

Virtue of Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him):

The 3rd rightly guided Caliph was highly revered by the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ), who said regarding him:

[For the sake of historical accuracy, I will present the chain of narration for every hadith I quote and mention its authenticity. The reason for this is because the outlandish anathematic claims made regarding this event is based on false or weak hadith.

History cannot be established on fabricated or very weak narrations. This is why the scholars created the science of hadith criticism. You cannot believe or trust anything and everything people say without adequate proof, but this requires the willingness to learn and knowledge on the topic]

حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ يَحْيَى، وَيَحْيَى بْنُ أَيُّوبَ، وَقُتَيْبَةُ، وَابْنُ، حُجْرٍ قَالَ يَحْيَى بْنُ يَحْيَى أَخْبَرَنَا وَقَالَ الآخَرُونَ، حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ، - يَعْنُونَ ابْنَ جَعْفَرٍ - عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَبِي حَرْمَلَةَ، عَنْ عَطَاءٍ، وَسُلَيْمَانَ، ابْنَىْ يَسَارٍ وَأَبِي سَلَمَةَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ أَنَّ عَائِشَةَ، قَالَتْ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مُضْطَجِعًا فِي بَيْتِي كَاشِفًا عَنْ فَخِذَيْهِ أَوْ سَاقَيْهِ فَاسْتَأْذَنَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ فَأَذِنَ لَهُ وَهُوَ عَلَى تِلْكَ الْحَالِ فَتَحَدَّثَ ثُمَّ اسْتَأْذَنَ عُمَرُ فَأَذِنَ لَهُ وَهُوَ كَذَلِكَ فَتَحَدَّثَ ثُمَّ اسْتَأْذَنَ عُثْمَانُ فَجَلَسَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَسَوَّى ثِيَابَهُ - قَالَ مُحَمَّدٌ وَلاَ أَقُولُ ذَلِكَ فِي يَوْمٍ وَاحِدٍ - فَدَخَلَ فَتَحَدَّثَ فَلَمَّا خَرَجَ قَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ دَخَلَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ فَلَمْ تَهْتَشَّ لَهُ وَلَمْ تُبَالِهِ ثُمَّ دَخَلَ عُمَرُ فَلَمْ تَهْتَشَّ لَهُ وَلَمْ تُبَالِهِ ثُمَّ دَخَلَ عُثْمَانُ فَجَلَسْتَ وَسَوَّيْتَ ثِيَابَكَ فَقَالَ ‏ "أَلاَ أَسْتَحِي مِنْ رَجُلٍ تَسْتَحِي مِنْهُ الْمَلاَئِكَةُ“‏

The Messenger (ﷺ) was lying in the bed in my house with his thigh uncovered and Abu Bakr sought permission to enter. It was given to him and he conversed in the same very state (the Prophet's thigh uncovered). Then Umar sought permission for entering and it was given to him and he conversed in that very state (same as before). Then Uthman sought permission to enter; the Messenger (ﷺ) sat down and he covered himself fully. Muhammad (one of the narrators) said: I do not say that it happened on the same day. He (Uthman) entered and conversed and as he went out, Aisha said: Abu Bakr entered and you did not stir and did not observe much care (in fully clothing yourself), then Umar entered and you did not stir, then Uthman (May God be Pleased with all of them) entered and you got up and covered yourself completely, so he (ﷺ) said: Should I not show modesty to one whom even the Angels show modesty.

This hadith is documented[2] and authenticated according to the criteria set out by the hadith master Muslim[3].

Another hadith mentioned that:

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى الْعَنَزِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي عَدِيٍّ، عَنْ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ غِيَاثٍ، عَنْ أَبِي عُثْمَانَ النَّهْدِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي مُوسَى الأَشْعَرِيِّ، قَالَ بَيْنَمَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي حَائِطٍ مِنْ حَائِطِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَهُوَ مُتَّكِئٌ يَرْكُزُ بِعُودٍ مَعَهُ بَيْنَ الْمَاءِ وَالطِّينِ إِذَا اسْتَفْتَحَ رَجُلٌ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ افْتَحْ وَبَشِّرْهُ بِالْجَنَّةِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَإِذَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ فَفَتَحْتُ لَهُ وَبَشَّرْتُهُ بِالْجَنَّةِ - قَالَ - ثُمَّ اسْتَفْتَحَ رَجُلٌ آخَرُ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ افْتَحْ وَبَشِّرْهُ بِالْجَنَّةِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَذَهَبْتُ فَإِذَا هُوَ عُمَرُ فَفَتَحْتُ لَهُ وَبَشَّرْتُهُ بِالْجَنَّةِ ثُمَّ اسْتَفْتَحَ رَجُلٌ آخَرُ - قَالَ - فَجَلَسَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ ‏"‏ افْتَحْ وَبَشِّرْهُ بِالْجَنَّةِ عَلَى بَلْوَى تَكُونُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَذَهَبْتُ فَإِذَا هُوَ عُثْمَانُ بْنُ عَفَّانَ - قَالَ - فَفَتَحْتُ وَبَشَّرْتُهُ بِالْجَنَّةِ - قَالَ - وَقُلْتُ الَّذِي قَالَ فَقَالَ اللَّهُمَّ صَبْرًا أَوِ اللَّهُ الْمُسْتَعَانُ

Abu Musa al-Ash'ari reported that while the Messenger (ﷺ) was in one of the gardens of Madinah, reclining against a pillow and fixing a stick in a mud, a person came asking for the gate to be opened, whereupon he (ﷺ) said: “Open it for him and give him glad tidings of Paradise” and lo it was Abu Bakr. I opened (the gate) for him and gave him the glad tidings of Paradise. Then another person asked for the door to be opened, whereupon he (ﷺ) said: “Open it and give him the glad tidings of Paradise”. He said: I went and opened it and (saw) it was Umar. I opened it for him and gave him the glad tidings of Paradise. Then another man asked for the door to be opened, and thereupon Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) said: “Open it and give him the glad tidings of Paradise after a trial would afflict him”. I went and (saw) that it was Uthman Ibn Affan. I opened the door and gave him the glad tidings of Paradise and informed him (of what the Prophet had said). Uthman then said: “O Allah, grant me steadfastness. Allah is one Whose help is to be sought”.

This hadith is documented[4] and authenticated according to the criteria set out by Muslim.

From the aforementioned hadith of the Prophet (ﷺ) it is clear that Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him) was no ordinary companion but one of the greatest and promised paradise.

Prelude to Jamal:

The second rightly guided caliph Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (May God be Pleased with Him) was known for his victory as a successful statesman and ruler and this allowed for the successful expansion of Islam. This led to his eventual assassination at the hands of a Persian slave and on his deathbed, he appointed a counsel of six people to decide on the next ruler for the Muslim State.

These six were:

1.      Uthman Ibn Affan

2.      Abdurrahman Ibn Awf

3.      Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas

4.      Talha Ibn Ubaydillah

5.      Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam

6.      Ali Ibn Abi Talib

One possible reason why he chose these six is because of their status in the sight of God almighty and the Messenger of God (ﷺ).

All six of these companions were promised paradise by the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) and Umar (May God be Pleased with Him) understood this (that they were pious) and chose them specifically.

The Prophet stated:

عن عبدالرحمن بن عوف عن النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - قال: أبو بكر في الجنة، وعمر في الجنة، وعثمان في الجنة وعلي في الجنة، وطلحة في الجنة، والزبير في الجنة، وعبد الرحمن بن عوف في الجنة، وسعد بن أبي وقاص في الجنة، وسعيد بن زيد في الجنة، وأبو عبيدة بن الجراح في الجنة

“Abu Bakr is in paradise, Umar is in paradise, Uthman is in paradise, Ali is in paradise, Talha is in paradise, Zubayr is in paradise, Abdurrahman Ibn Awf is in paradise, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas is in paradise, Sa’eed Ibn Zayd is in paradise and Abu Ubaydah Ibn Al-Jarrah is in paradise”[5]

This is a very famous hadith amongst learned people however there is another with a slight difference in the names of the people mentioned:

النَّبِيُّ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَعُمَرُ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَعُثْمَانُ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَعَلِيٌّ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَطَلْحَةُ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَالزُّبَيْرُ بْنُ الْعَوَّامِ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَسَعْدُ بْنُ مَالِكٍ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَعَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ عَوْفٍ فِي الْجَنَّةِ… ‏

“The Prophet is in paradise, Abu Bakr is in paradise, Umar is in paradise, Uthman is in paradise, Ali is in paradise, Talha is in paradise, Zubayr Ibn Al-Awwam is in paradise, Sa’d Ibn Malik (who is Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas), Abdurrahman Ibn Awf is in paradise…and Sa’id Ibn Zayd is in paradise”[6]

From this we understand the wisdom of Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (May God be Pleased with Him) in selecting such a committee and to keep the context as brief as possible the result ended in Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him) being appointed the successor to Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (May God be Pleased with Him).

Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him) rose to a high position within the State however there were calls for resignation due to alleged nepotism and unfair rule. This caused chaos within the State and led to the eventual assassination of Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him).

Earliest sources on Ma’rakat al-Jamal:

There are conflicting, contradicting narrations regarding the events of the Ma’rakat al-Jamal and for this reason I will present the earliest sources and assess them.

i.                    Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi al-Asadi al-Kufi (Narrator)

He is mainly used by the historian al-Tabari with regards to the battles of the later periods. He has been considered a weak narrator and many of his teachers are unknown and for this reason he cannot be trusted to establish narrations.

What does it mean that he is weak or reliable?

Hadith criticism standards have allowed people to be judged based on certain criteria (retention – i.e. how well did they retain information, memory – how strong was their memory, reliability – is the one narrating known for telling the truth or is he known for telling lies, meeting – did the narrator actually meet the person they claim to have heard from etc).

The job of assessing a narrator as weak (for example he is a known liar, has a bad memory or his teachers are unknown – if the source is unknown then the narrator cannot be trusted) or reliable is not an easy task and cannot be done by the average person.

This is why scholars have dedicated their lives to this encyclopaedia of people, a source for scholars to research and reference. 

Some of the students of Sayf Ibn Umar include[7]:

نضر بن حماد

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

نضر بن عبد الرحمن

متروك الحديث (Rejected)

سعد بن إبراهيم بن سعد بن إبراهيم بن عبد...

ثقة (Reliable)

عبد الله بن هاشم بن حيان

ثقة (Reliable)

محمد بن حميد بن حيان

متروك الحديث (Rejected)

يعقوب بن إبراهيم بن سعد بن إبراهيم بن عب...

ثقة (Reliable)

جعفر بن علي

مجهول (Unknown – Weak)

سري بن يحيى بن السري

ثقة (Reliable)

سعيد بن عبيد بن كثير بن عبيد

مجهول (Unknown – Weak)

شعيب بن إبراهيم

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

مسيب بن عبد الملك

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

نصر بن مزاحم

متروك الحديث (Rejected)

بلال بن حسان

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

عبيد بن إسحاق بن المبارك بن خلف

متروك الحديث (Rejected)

جعفر بن علي

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

Some of his teachers include:

أبان بن إسحاق

ثقة (Reliable)

أشعث بن سوار

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

إسماعيل بن مسلم

منكر الحديث (Rejected)

ضحاك بن مزاحم

ثقة (Reliable)

حريث بن عمرو

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

حفص بن ميسرة

ثقة (Reliable)

سعد بن طريف

متروك الحديث (Rejected)

سعيد بن الصلت بن عبد الله بن مخرمة بن عب...

مقبول (Reliable)

مجالد بن سعيد بن عمير بن بسطام بن ذي مرا...

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

محمد بن طلحة بن يزيد بن ركانة بن عبد يزي...

ثقة (Reliable)

محمد بن عبيد الله بن ميسرة

متروك الحديث (Rejected)

يحيى بن مسلم

مجهول (Unknown – Weak)

سهل بن يوسف بن سهل بن مالك بن عمرو بن ال...

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

عبد الله بن سعيد بن ثابت بن الجذع

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

مبشر بن الفضيل

مجهول (Unknown – Weak)

محمد بن نويرة

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

عطية بن يعلى

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

عمر بن عبد الله

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

حارث بن عبد الله بن فروخ

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

عمرو بن الزبان

ضعيف الحديث (Weak)

محرز

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

يزيد بن أسيد

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

مستنير بن يزيد

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

غصن بن القاسم

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

وليد بن كعب

مجهول الحال (Unknown – Weak)

What have the scholars said regarding him?

• Yahya Ibn Ma’een[8] = “He is weak in hadith” and from a narration by Abu Ja’far al-Hadrami who was asked regarding Sayf Ibn Umar, he said there is no good from him

• Daraqutni[9] = “He is weak and left by the scholars (i.e rejected). He is mentioned from amongst the weak and rejected (narrators)”.

• Abu Ahmed Ibn Adi al-Jurjani = “He is weak however a lot of his narrations are famous” (fables usually are good stories)

• Abu Hatim al-Razi[10] = “He is rejected in hadith, his narrations mimic the narrations of al-Waqidi”

• Abu Dawud[11] = “He is nothing”

He has been praised for his work in history but by a minute number of scholars and the majority have rejected him. So his narrations cannot be used to establish history without further proof from reliable sources.

ii.                  Abu Mikhnaf Lut Ibn Yahyah (Shi’a source)

He is a shi’a historian who is also rejected based on a lack of sound chains of narration. He is also weakened due to the fact that his reports contradict known historical facts.

iii.                Muhammad Ibn Umar al-Waqidi (Shi’a leaning)

The narration of al-Waqidi has been preserved in the books of the famous Shi’a theologian al-Mufid (d.1022 C.E).

Al-Waqidi is a liar according to most of the scholars and historians and cannot be trusted to establish history.

iv.                Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Shaybah (Most authentic)

The earliest and most authentic source is the work Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, written roughly 150 years after the events themselves. In it the author has an entire chapter dedicated to al-Jamal and this source will be used alongside other sources to portray the narrative.

The next ruler after Uthman Ibn Affan?

Uthman did not dictate a council like Umar (May God be Pleased with both of them) had done so and therefore a vacuum was left in leadership. People went to Abdullah Ibn Umar, Ali and others asking them to take the mantle of rulership.

The Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah mentioned that ‘Ali was not accused of killing Uthman until he accepted the Khilafah’.

The reason being the known killers of Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be Pleased with Him) were given high positions within the ranks of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (May God be Pleased with Him). 

Avenge the assassination of Uthman:

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah and Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam (May God be Pleased with Them) travel from Madinah al-Munawwarah to Makkah al-Mukarramah and consult with A’isha the wife of the Prophet (ﷺ). They all agree to get justice for Uthman and know that the killers are within the ranks of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (May God be Pleased with Him) so they decide to travel to the city of Basra.

Basra held the family of Uthman and they knew that they would support the cause in order to avenge the assassination of their tribesman.

Journey to Basra:

The Musannaf mentions that the trio travel to Basra to gather intelligence (and increase support) regarding the situation and on the journey they come to the wells of al-Haw’ab.

Abu Mikhnaf blatantly alters the narrative:

Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal mentions in his famous Musnad that:

لَمَّا بَلَغَتْ عَائِشَةُ بَعْضَ مِيَاهِ بَنِي عَامِرٍ لَيْلًا نَبَحَتِ الْكِلَابُ عَلَيْهَا ، فَقَالَتْ: أَيُّ مَاءٍ هَذَا؟ قَالُوا: مَاءُ الْحَوْأَبِ  فَوَقَفَتْ فَقَالَتْ: مَا أَظُنُّنِي إِلَّا رَاجِعَةً ، فَقَالَ لَهَا طَلْحَةُ، وَالزُّبَيْرُ: مَهْلًا رَحِمَكَ اللَّهُ ، بَلْ تَقْدَمِينَ ، فَيَرَاكَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ ، فَيُصْلِحُ اللَّهُ ذَاتَ بَيْنهِمْ ، قَالَتْ : مَا أَظُنُّنِي إِلَّا رَاجِعَةً ، إِنِّي سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ لَنَا ذَاتَ يَوْمٍ: كَيْفَ بِإِحْدَاكُنَّ تَنْبَحُ عَلَيْهَا كِلَابُ الْحَوْأَب

When A’isha (may God be Pleased with her) reached some wells of the Banu A’mir dogs barked at her. She asked “which water is this (i.e. well)”. They replied “The well of al-Haw’ab” and so she stopped and said “I think we should return” and Talha and Zubayr (May God be Pleased with them) said “May God have mercy on you (a common phrase at the time), you should proceed as the Muslims see you and perhaps Allah will bring peace amongst them (through you)” She replied “I think we should return, for I heard the messenger of God (Peace and blessings be upon him) say to us one day ‘How will you be on the day she (referring any them generally) is barked at by the dogs of al-Haw’ab’[12]

This hadith has been graded weak by the famous hadith scholar Yahya Ibn Sa’eed al-Qattan[13] because of the narrator Qays Ibn Hazam.

Imam Yahya Ibn Sa’eed stated that the hadith is Munkar (rejected) and that Qays is prone to lying (and embellishing the narrative). Al-Doori stated that Qays would narrate from so and so (the example he used was Bilal) and say ‘I heard from…’ but he never met him.

There were scholars who have defended him and stated that he was reliable in their scholarly opinion but because of the severity of the accusations against him, alongside the repute of scholars he is a weak narrator and cannot be trusted. (so we take his reports with a pinch of salt)

That being said, the hadith states that the Prophet (ﷺ) warned his wives regarding this journey and A’isha (May God be pleased with her) remembered this. That much is certain from these narrations.

Abu Mikhnaf on the other hand narrates the story but is altering key points within the narration (a common trend by him).

He states that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

“‘How will you be on the day she (referring any them generally) is barked at by the dogs of al-Haw’ab’, and the ones on her left and right will be slaughtered and all of them are in the hellfire”[14]

Logically, if this report were authentic and true then at that moment A’isha (May God be pleased with her) would have desisted and commanded everyone to return.

That did not happen because the Prophet (ﷺ) never uttered this addition by Abu Mikhnaf, rather his theological bias forced him to disparage the personality of A’isha (May God be pleased with her).

The Basrans were prepared to fight:

An eyewitness Kulayb al-Jarmi stated that the people of Basra mobilised an army during the time of Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be pleased with him) to defend him and repel the rebels.

But they had heard of the peace signed between Uthman (May God be pleased with him) and the rebels and did not march out. Shortly after they hear the news of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) being killed and arm up again and for this reason Talha, Zubayr and A’isha (May God be pleased with them) went to Basra (to keep things under control).

Basran chaos:

Talha is questioned regarding his motives and he admits that he was threatened if he did not pledge allegiance to Ali (May God be pleased with him). Ali on hearing this sent Abdullah Ibn Abbas (May God be pleased with him) to gather more information and check whether this is true. Ibn Abbas (May God be pleased with him) went to Basra and found Usama Ibn Zayd (May God be pleased with him) who affirmed that many (including Talha) were forced into pledging allegiance.

The killers of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) heard this and ambushed Usama (May God be pleased with him) and injured him (they could not kill another high-ranking Sahabi without drawing the attention of the Caliph or people).

This is proof that whilst villains were present there was no open animosity between the people of Kufa and the people of Basra. They travelled freely and without the fear of death (contrary to what some liars have claimed).

Fighting within Basra:

As stated earlier the city of Basra was in chaos over the assassination of Uthman  (May God be pleased with him) and political turmoil caused by Kufa. A fight broke out and the leadership (who were placed by the Kufan government) were overthrown.

A’isha, Talha and Zubayr (May God be pleased with them) take control of the city to stop it from falling apart or going on a massacre. They reiterate the virtues of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) and the teachings of the Prophet (ﷺ).

This battle within the city is known as the minor Jamal, in which Hukaym Ibn Jabalah was killed. He was one of the main killers of Uthman (May God be pleased with him).

Recap: Why did A’isha, Talha and Zubayr (May God be pleased with them) go to Basra?

·        Many in Basra were already gearing for war to defend Uthman (May God be pleased with him) against the rebels

·        One of the key rebels to kill Uthman (May God be pleased with him) came from Basra and this sparked a civil war within the city

·        A’isha, Talha and Zubayr (May God be pleased with them) travel to Basra to avenge the assassination of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) by killing Hukaym Ibn Jabalah (and others)

·        The situation spirals out of control so they establish command in an attempt to stabilise the city

Ali (May God be pleased with him) takes desperate action:

Ali (May God be pleased with him) hears of the loss of Basra by his government officials and sends messengers to Kufa to amass an army. This was not to fight as the Basran army were Muslim and the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

عَنْ أَبُو بَكْرَةَ عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ إِذَا تَوَاجَهَ الْمُسْلِمَانِ بِسَيْفَيْهِمَا فَالْقَاتِلُ وَالْمَقْتُولُ فِي النَّارِ قَالَ فَقُلْتُ أَوْ قِيلَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ هَذَا الْقَاتِلُ فَمَا بَالُ الْمَقْتُولِ قَالَ إِنَّهُ قَدْ أَرَادَ قَتْلَ صَاحِبِهِ

Abu Bakrah narrated from The Prophet (ﷺ) that “If two Muslims confront each other with swords, both the killer and the killed will be in Hell.” It was said, “O Messenger of Allah, we understand that the killer (will be in Hell), but why the one killed?” The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “Verily, he intended to kill his companion.”[15]

Ali (May God be pleased with him) did not amass an army to fight but rather to bring the entire situation under control. He faced struggles within his own government and supporters as many of the killers of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) were within his ranks [i.e. they killed Uthman for Ali (May God be pleased with them both) to become caliph].

Abu Musa al-Ash’ari (May God be pleased with him) refuses:

The governor of Kufa was Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, who was placed in Kufa by Uthman (May God be pleased with him).

When Ali (May God be pleased with him) gave the announcement of amassing an army Abu Musa (May God be pleased with him) refused and stated that “My allegiance was to the previous caliph and I will not arm you until the murders are apprehended”. Imam al-Tabari in his Tarikh adds that the one delivering the news Hashim Ibn Utbah informed Ali (May God be pleased with him) of the rejection of aid, so Ali (May God be pleased with him) sends his son al-Hasan and Ammar Ibn Yasir (May God be pleased with them) to rally troops within the city.[16]

Kulayb meets both sides:

Both parties meet Kulayb al-Jarmi and Ali is questioned by Kulayb regarding Uthman (May God be pleased with him). The people with Ali (May God be pleased with him) started cursing Uthman (May God be pleased with him) but Ali (May God be pleased with him) praised him.

Some Basrans join the army of Kufa whilst the army of A’isha (May God be pleased with her) is primarily Basran.

Abdullah Ibn Abbas questions Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam (May God be pleased with both of them) again regarding the motive of opposing Ali’s (May God be pleased with him) government and Zubayr (May God be pleased with him) replied that it was because Ali was scared and greedy. This was his point of view and not something one must accept but his reasoning was because of his greed to stay in power he (Ali (May God be pleased with him)) allowed the killers of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) to reign freely.

Proof that there was no animosity between Ali, A’isha, Talha or Zubayr (May God be pleased with them all):

Some radical heretics claim that Ali hated A’isha, Talha and Zubayr (May God be pleased with them all) or vice versa. They claim that they wanted the other to step down and take over as caliph. These nonsensical claims are propagated by modern Shi’a heretics.

al-Hasan Ibn Ali narrated that:

حَدَّثَنَا عَفَّانُ، حَدَّثَنَا مُبَارَكٌ، حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ، قَالَ جَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى الزُّبَيْرِ بْنِ الْعَوَّامِ فَقَالَ أَقْتُلُ لَكَ عَلِيًّا قَالَ لَا وَكَيْفَ تَقْتُلُهُ وَمَعَهُ الْجُنُودُ قَالَ أَلْحَقُ بِهِ فَأَفْتِكُ بِهِ قَالَ لَا إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ إِنَّ الْإِيمَانَ قَيْدُ الْفَتْكِ لَا يَفْتِكُ مُؤْمِنٌ حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ بْنُ هَارُونَ أَنْبَأَنَا مُبَارَكُ بْنُ فَضَالَةَ حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ قَالَ أَتَى رَجُلٌ الزُّبَيْرَ بْنَ الْعَوَّامِ فَقَالَ أَلَا أَقْتُلُ لَكَ عَلِيًّا قَالَ وَكَيْفَ تَسْتَطِيعُ قَتْلَهُ وَمَعَهُ النَّاسُ فَذَكَرَ مَعْنَاهُ

A man came to Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam (May God be pleased with him) and said: “Shall I kill Ali for you?” He said: “No, how can you kill him when he has the troops with him anyway?” He said: “I will catch up with him and assassinate him.” He said: “No. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: Faith prohibits assassination; no believer should resort to that.”

Another narration states that al-Hasan (May God be pleased with him said: A man came to Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam (May God be pleased with him) and said: “Shall I not kill Ali for you?” He said: “and how can you kill him when he has people with him?” (and he continued with a similar response to the previous narration.)[17]

Zubayr (May God be pleased with him) had a chance to end the war before the battle had begun, yet he refused because he did not want to kill Ali (May God be pleased with him) nor did he hold any animosity against him. He simply thought that Ali (May God be pleased with him) was incompetent and unable to rule the State.

This sentiment is shared today, you dislike a certain ruler and ally with the opposition party (i.e. in elections). This does not mean you hate the person but rather you dislike their methodology, what they stand for. And when a government is overthrown (a coup is launched) it is usually a politician or someone with influence who enacts it. That is the exact case here, there is no religious sentiment or beliefs here like many Shi’a claim today.

But more on this later, back to history.

The battle begins:

Kulayb al-Jarmi (an eyewitness) stated that the young boys from both camps came out and started cursing each other, throwing stones etc. Then the slaves starting quarrelling in the same manner, then the idiots (the books literally use the word Sufaha) joined in and by then everyone joined in.

Zayd Ibn Wahb was on the side of Ali (May God be pleased with him) and stated that the Basrans started the battle however Abd Khayr (who was also on the side of Ali (May God be pleased with him)) said that Ali (May God be pleased with him) himself started the battle.

The fact that there is no clear indication on who started the battle proves that the battle was unintentional to begin with:

Every battle in the early days fought by the Muslims contained the Mubarazah (duelling):

The battle of Badr:

Hamzah V Utbah

Abu Ubaydah V Shaybah

Ali v Waleed

These six names are all agreed upon by historians. Some differ in the groupings of opponents but these six took park in the duels. We know from history that Utbah Ibn al-Rabi’ah instigated the battle by coming out of the rank and challenging the Muslims.

None of this happened here, rather the leaders of both parties wanted to avoid conflict altogether. It was the youth, the idiots and the killers of Uthman (May God be pleased with him) who instigated the war (as they knew that if Ali (May God be pleased with him) stood down then they would be caught and killed).

Ali (May God be pleased with him) saw the battle had begun and stated that “There is no good in this” however he was shushed by al-Hasan (May God be pleased with him) who was fearful of his own army.

The Martydom of Talha Ibn Ubaydillah (May God be pleased with him):

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah (May God be pleased with him) was trying to hold the forces under his command and keep them away from the fight but he is mostly ignored until he is shot with an arrow by Marwan Ibn al-Hakam.

Marwan Ibn al-Hakam was allied with the Basrans and Talha (May God be pleased with him) but betrays him for not doing enough to protect Uthman (May God be pleased with him).

Some have argued that this narration is weak, but it is reported by many Ta’bieen (who were contemporaneous to the combatants) like Awf al-A’rabi, Muhammad Ibn Sireen, Qays Ibn Hazim and others (reliable and unreliable narrators mixed together).

Abdullah Ibn Abbas (May God be pleased with him) said to Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam “What would Safiyyah Bint Abd al-Muttalib (May God be pleased with her) say if she saw you fighting Ali Ibn Abi Talib (May God be pleased with him)”. This affected him greatly as Safiyyah (May God be pleased with her) was his mother and so he left the battlefield.    

He was eventually killed by Amr Ibn al-Jarmooz (according to Ibn Sa’d) and when Ali (May God be pleased with him) was informed of this he said “The killer of Zubayr (May God be pleased with him) is in the fire”.

The Martydom of Muhammad Ibn Talha (May God be pleased with him):

When the fighting became chaotic, he retreated back to the only leader remaining on the Basran side and asked for guidance. A’isha (May God be pleased with her) said to him “be like the best of the two sons of Adam”. After he heard this he dropped his sword and fought with his hands until he was martyred.

The finishing move:

Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr and Ammar Ibn Yasir (May God be pleased with both of them) went to the Howdaj (a tent on the camel, which was a mode of transportation for women in those times) and cut off the legs, eventually killing it.

This pretty much signalled the end of the battle as both leaders (Talha and Zubayr (May God be pleased with them both) were either dead or have left the battlefield and A’isha’s (who played no role in the battle) camel (which was seen symbolically as the final figurehead of the Basran army) was toppled.

The battle ended with this action and Ali (May God be pleased with him) announced that no booty will be gathered and no one will be taken captive and sent into slavery.

This puzzles many within his army who ask him “you let us take away their lives but not their wives?” and he replied “who wants to take the wife of the messenger of God (Peace and blessings be upon him)”.

The entire battle lasted a short time, with the Musannaf mentioning the beginning at Dhur and the end by Maghrib. The number of Basrans killed were approximately 2,500 (some theologically motivated historians have suggested exaggerated numbers like 10,000 – 30,000), whilst the Kufans had a similar number of casualties.

Why did the Kufans win the battle?

Shi’a would claim that Ali (May God be pleased with him) won because he was the rightful ruler of the caliphate. In reality the Kufan army only won because Talha Ibn Ubaydillah focused on trying to stop his portion of the army from fighting and was killed for doing so. Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam abandoned the entire fight when he was reminded of his mother and his relationship with Ali (May God be pleased with all of them). A’isha (May God be pleased with her) had no role in the battle, she did not instigate, fight or command anyone rather she was simply there to support her fellow comrades. With essentially no leaders the entire army lost cohesion and fell apart and the Kufans gained an easy victory.

Aftermath of the battle:

The Basran army returns back to its city and A’isha (May God be pleased with her) is escorted to her home in Madinah al-Munawwarah.

True colours are exposed:

Our key eyewitness Kulayb al-Jarmi had a relative, Malik al-Ashtar who fought on the side of Kufa. After the battle Kulayb asks al-Ashtar to recommend him when he speaks to the governor of Basra (hoping that he is selected as the new governor which al-Ashtar agreed to).

Shortly after the announcement is made that Ali (May God be pleased with him) chose Abdullah Ibn Abbas (May God be pleased with him) as the new governor of Basra.

Kulayb hears this and informs al-Ashtar, who does not believe it until more men agree with Kulayb.

Al-Ashtar famously states:

“On Yemen Ubaydullah Ibn Abbas (relative of Ali), on Hijaz Qutham Ibn Abbas (relative of Ali), on Basra Abdullah Ibn Abbas, on Kufa Ali (May God be pleased with them all), why did we kill the shaykh in Madinah (referring to Uthman Ibn Affan May God be pleased with him)”

The main reason Uthman was killed was because he was accused of nepotism and favouring his family for leadership. Now some of the killers of Uthman are baffled as the exact thing they worked so hard to remove is happening right in front of them (Ali (may God be pleased with him) is doing the exact same thing).

And this why one of the reasons why the situation escalated and led to the incident at Siffeen.

Ali got revenge on A’isha (May God be pleased with her) for ‘hating him and going against him’:

Many claim that A’isha & Co (May God be pleased with her) opposed Ali (May God be pleased with him) out of hatred, and that Ali (May God be pleased with him) hated them and for this reason we shall curse them until the day of judgement.

Whilst this is obviously untrue as explained earlier, these are narrations of the aftermath of the battle:

·        Ammar Ibn Yasir said to A’isha (May God be pleased with her) after the battle “O Mother of the believers…”[18]

·        Abu al-Bukhturi said:

“Ali was asked regarding the participants of al-Jamal (opposing him) ‘are they disbelievers’ and he replied ‘if they were disbelievers then they all would have fled[19]’. He was then asked ‘are they hypocrites’ and he replied ‘Indeed hypocrites do not mention Allah except momentarily’ and finally he was asked ‘so what are they’ and Ali replied ‘they are our brothers’”[20] 

·        Shaqeeq Ibn Salamah narrates that “Indeed Ali (May God be pleased with both of them) never cursed (the people) of al-Jamal nor did he kill the wounded (from the opposition)”[21]

·        Abd al-Khayr narrated:

“Ali (may God be pleased with him) never cursed (anyone) on the day of al-Jamal nor did he allow his army to take captives. They said ‘O Ameer al-Mu’mineen will you not allow us to take their wealth’ and Ali (may God be pleased with him) replied ‘Here is A’isha (the wife of your Prophet), take her as your captive (if you wish)’” and Abd al-Khayr then stated that they dropped the issue altogether[22].

Regrets are made:

Both Ali and A’isha (May God be pleased with them both) narrate their regrets regarding these incidents on their deathbeds.

A’isha (May God be pleased with her) mentioned how she requested to be buried with the wives of the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) instead of with the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) (as he was buried within her house) due to her regrets in participating in this incident.

Ali (May God be pleased with him) stated that “Woe to me, (if only) I had died 20 years before this day”[23]  

Conclusion:

The battle of al-Jamal was a tribulation sent by God almighty to test the companions of the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him). The conflict was a political issue and not theologically ordained issue like some have claimed. Political decisions were made, and consequences occurred and many had regrets because of this.

The ultimate cause was the assassination of Uthman Ibn Affan (May God be pleased with him) and the need for justice by the companions. Just because a companion opposed someone doesn’t make them any less good than someone else when the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) has already praised them.

After all, who knew better regarding the companions, the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) or you?

And Allah knows best

Appendix & Bibliography:

[1] Uthman the son of Affan, born in the 576 C.E and passed away on the 17th June 656 (approximately) was one of the earliest converts to Islam. He was a wealthy businessman and supported the Prophet (SAW) and the Muslims financially and militarily. He was blessed with the honour of marrying the Prophet (SAW)’s daughters Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthoom (R.A). He was a great companion of the Prophet (SAW) however his political decisions were not favourable and was accused of nepotism. This led to his assassination.

[2] Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim - Hadith 2401

[3] Abū al-Ḥusayn ‘Asākir ad-Dīn Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj ibn Muslim ibn Ward ibn Kawshādh al-Qushayrī an-Naysābūrī Famously known as ‘Imam Muslim’ (d.875 C.E / 261 A.H): He was a renowned expert on Hadith and the sciences of hadith and collated a corpus of prophetic traditions based on a set of authenticity criteria. He was a student of Imam Bukhārī. His date of birth is highly contested amongst historians however the date of death is slightly clearer, as it was said that he is buried in his hometown of Nishapur

[4] Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim – Hadith 2403a

[5] This hadith has been narrated in Tirmidhi (3747) and authenticated by Ibn Hajr alongside al-Albani who ranked it as saheeh. This was also narrated in the Musnad of Imam Ahmed (1/193 – 1675) and authenticated by Ahmed Shakir

[6] This hadith has been narrated in a variety of books, most commonly Sunan Abi Dawud (Hadith 4649) and authenticated (Ṣaḥīḥ) according to al-Albani. Others include Ibn Majah (Hadith 133) and the Musnad of Imam Ahmed (1/188) (1631) whose hadith has been authenticated also as Ṣaḥīḥ

[7] Hadith narrators online, accessed via: shorturl.at/fpqMX

[8] He is known as the Imam of Jarh & Ta’deel (an expert in the science of assessing whether a narrator is reliable or weak). This is a rare honour and only attainted after studying the sciences to a masterly level for a multitude of years. (b. 158)

[9] He is Abu Hasan Ali Ibn Umar Ibn Ahmed Ibn Mahdi al-Daraqutni, born in the year 306 A.H (918 C.E) and known as the Ameerul Mu’mineen in hadith and Imam of his time

[10] He is Muhammad Ibn Idrees Ibn al-Mundhir Ibn Dawud, famously known by his Kunyah Abu Hatim. Born in the year 195 A.H and passed away in the year 277 A.H he was a master in the science of hadith

[11] He is Sulayman Ibn al-Ash’ath Ibn Ishaq al-Azdi, famously known by his Kunyah Abu Dawud. Born in the year 202 A.H and passed away in the year 275 A.H he was a master in hadith criticism and authored his famous Sunan. He studied with the likes of Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal, Yahya Ibn Ma’een etc

[12] Narrated in the Musnad of Ahmed (24654), Ibn Hibban (6732), Mustadrak of al-Hakim (4613) and Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah (536/7)

[13] He was known as the Ameer al-Mu’mineen in hadith and a master hadith scholar. Imam Ahmed said that “I never saw someone (on the same level) as Yahyah Ibn Sa’eed”. The hadith scholar Abu Hatim al-Razi said “If Ibn al-Mubarack, Yahya Ibn Sa’eed and Ibn Uyaynah differed on a hadith, I accepted the hadith of Yahyah” [See Siyar al-A’lam al-Nubala]

[14] أخبار الجمل of Abu Mikhnaf Lut Ibn Yahya, explanation by Qays al-Attar, published in 2017, Page 45

[15] This hadith is Muttafaqun Alayhi according to al-Bukhārī (6672) and Muslim (2888)  

[16] Tarikh al-Rusul wal Muluk, Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn Jareer al-Tabari, Volume 4 Page 499, Dar al-Ma’arif Bi’misr Publishers (Cairo)

[17] Musnad of Imam Ahmed, Hadith 1426 & 1427. Graded as Sahih

[18] Tarikh al-Rusul wal Muluk, Ibn Jareer al-Tabari, Page 545, Volume 4, Dar al-Mara’rif Bi’misar Publications

[19] One might suggest that Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam is a disbeliever as he did flee but what Ali meant is that he would have fled and take his army with him (if he disbelieves then surely those under his command do). And this was also the opinion of Ali, who knew that Zubayr was promised paradise by the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) so it is obvious he was not referring to Zubayr Ibn al-Awwam (May God be pleased with them all)

[20] Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, Abdullah Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Abi Shaybah, Volume 13, See narrations 37550 – 38957, Page 409, al-Faruq al-Hadith Li’tiba’ah wa al-Nashr Publications

[21] Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, Abdullah Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Abi Shaybah, Volume 13, See narration 38778, Page 409, al-Faruq al-Hadith Li’tiba’ah wa al-Nashr Publications

[22] Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, Abdullah Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Abi Shaybah, Volume 13, See narration 38779, Page 409, al-Faruq al-Hadith Li’tiba’ah wa al-Nashr Publications

[23] Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, Abdullah Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Abi Shaybah, See 282/15

Follow our Socials!