Ibadhism, The Cinderella of Islam (Epilogue)

EPILOGUE

          In this brief survey of the history of Ibadhism, we have seen how a crack in the unity of Islam started to appear during the tenure of the third Caliph, Uthman b. Affan. The crack developed into a serious and permanent split after Seyyidna Ali took over as his successor. Muslim scholars who reported the tragic events, which occurred during that period, were very apologetic in their commentaries on the circumstances that led to those events. In their views Seyyidna Uthman had not done anything wrong in his administration, nor those who murdered him!! Similarly, Seyyidna Ali was not to be blamed for failing to punish the culprits. Likewise, Muawiya was not to be censured for refusing to pledge allegiance to the rightful Caliph (Seyyidna Ali) and for revolting against him, resulting in considerable bloodshed and loss of hundreds of lives of Muslims. Seyyidna Ali’s army was to be commended for attacking the people of Nahrawan, in which several thousand innocent people were killed. Nevertheless, the “learned scholars” were at last able to identify the group that was responsible, in their view, for all the tragedy that happened. They called this group the Khawarij. Why? Because it refused to participate in any further bloodshed on realizing that the conflict was not a jihad but a struggle for political power. However, the people of Kufa who lived with the events were better judges of the situation and so also refused to embark on any further bloody adventures to fight Muawiyah’s forces, and hence the march to Syria was abandoned. In other words, the people of Kufa were sympathetic with the so-called Khawarij who had refused to continue fighting.

          Sharastani, a Shafi’ scholar who lived 479 - 548H and author of الملل والنحل defines a Kharijee on p. 91 as follows:-

’كل من خرج على الإمام الحق الذي اتفقت عليه الجماعة يسمى خارجيا,‘

‘Everyone who rebels against a rightful Imam agreed upon by the community is called a Kharzjee ’

          Anyone who has studied objectively the events surrounding the rightful Imam Ali will not fail to recognize that the people who refused allegiance to, and organized aimed resistance against, him (خرجوا عليه) were Muawiya and his followers, the Uthmaniyyun, whereas the so-called Khawarij pledged their allegiance to him as the lawful Imam or Khalifa, fought on his side twice, at the battle of the Camel and at Siffin. But when the fighting was stopped on the suggestion of the enemy when he felt he would be defeated, as he had been defeated before, and when arbitration was proposed and accepted, a section of Seyyidna Ali’s army withdrew or seceded from him (خرجوا عنه) because they believed that fighting must continue until the enemy was defeated. Bearing in mind Shaharastani’s definition of a Kharijee, then who is the Kharijee between the two groups – Muawiya and the Uthmaniyyun who rebelled against Seyyidna Ali or the section of the army that seceded and rejected arbitration? The answer is obvious. But nobody dared declare Muawiya a Kharijee, because for the next 90 years he and his family ruled the Islamic State, and their iron-handed Governors, like Al Hajjaj and Ibn Ziyad, were there to see that everybody toed the line and submitted to their authority.

          Nevertheless, the Ali/Muawiya conflict for the office of Khalifa was not the only one in the history of Islam. There was another armed struggle between Abdullah ibn Az-Zubair and Yazeed in 64H. (683 CE) for the same office. Yazeed had been nominated by his father Muawiyah to succeed him and declarations of allegiance must have been obtained by force from different parts of the State through the regional governors. But when Yazeed forces killed Seyyidna Hussein people withdrew their allegiances and transferred it to Abdullah ibn Az-Zubair who came to receive the support of the people of Iraq, Hejaz and Yemen. The question arose who was the rightful Imam between the two contenders? If Yazeed was entitled to the office, then according to Shaharastani, Abdullah ibn A2-Zubair and his followers were the Khawarij. But the latter was killed in a battle for the defence of Mecca by the forces of Abdul Malik ibn Mam/an in 692 CE. Ibn Az-Zubair’s followers surrendered to the Umayyad rule and so they ceased to be a threat to them. For this reason they were not considered Khawarij unlike those who withdrew their support from Seyyidna Ali.

          On the other hand if the so-called Khawarij had surrendered to Muawiya and his successors, the epithet Khawarij would not have been stuck to them permanently. On the contrary, throughout Islamic history, they were in continuous armed conflict with the ruling regimes from Muawiya’s onwards and became a serious threat to them. For this reason they had to be isolated from the rest of the Islamic community by telling people that “the Khawarij are heretics who have deviated from Islam and so they must be killed”. In this way the Umayyads and their successors the Abbasids were able to harness general support and the support of the Islamic scholars and so maintain their position. Besides they were able to divert attention from their own mismanagement of the affairs of State. But as Al-Ma’soomi says (p.68):-

“Sectarian following brings nothing but destruction, and it is an innovation in religion. This heresy was introduced by kings and rulers to attain their political ends and save themselves and their empires”.

The Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) said:-

إن أول دينكم بدأ نبوة ورحمة

ثم يكون خلافة ورحمة

ثم يكون ملكا وجبرية,

‘Verily the beginning of your religion is Prophethood and mercy.

Then there will be Caliphate and mercy.

Then there will be kingship and coercion’.

Seyyidna Ali was the last Caliph and mercy. After him there was kingship and coercion. Muawiya rebelled against him and usurped the office of Khalifa, and his son Yazeed succeeded by inheritance which was an innovation (بدعة). The so-called Khawarij were therefore right in rebelling against them and their successors because they were not rightful Imams. Shahrastani’s definition does not apply to the so-called Khawarij but it applies to their opponents.

          This somewhat short exposition of the history of the crisis which occurred during Seyyidna Ali’s Caliphate should not have been necessary because the ruling system of government ofthe Islamic Ummah by Khalifas has long ceased to exist, and it is very unlikely that it would be restored in the foreseeable future because of the separatist tendencies and domineering attitude of some Islamic sects. But it has been reviewed here because there is still a small section of Muslims, which keeps on reviving old conflicts in order to perpetuate disunity, and they exploit the ignorance and incredulity of their followers. Whatever facts they happen to know about the crises comprise a distorted biased picture presented to them in order to promote sectarian prejudices against this or that madh-hab.

          It is also worth recalling that during the Islamic history spanning a period of more than 1420 years, the Muhakkimah patty or the Kliawarij existed for a very short period of about only 27 years from 38 – 65H. (658 –685 CE). During this time, the party was a political movement lighting the ruling regimes against their corruption and un-Islamic practices. From 65H onwards, the movement split up into separate factions, each developing its own independent doctrine. It is generally recognized, even by its enemies, that the Ibadhi faction adopted a moderate doctrine towards its opponents and was opposed to the extremist policies of the other groups. The split-up of the movement into factions was the end of the Khawarij, and eventually all the factions, except the Ibadhi, became extinct. So to group them together from this point in time was wrong, and those who did so were the mouthpieces of the Khalifas because each splinter group continued independently its campaign against the succeeding regimes. The Ibadhis too were at loggerheads from time to time with different Caliphs and their armies. The purpose of these counter military campaigns by the Ibadhis was to establish Islamic justice which was conspicuously absent then.

          With regard to interpretation of the Qur'an, as we have seen in chapter 6, scholars of different sects or even of the same group of sects differ in their understanding of the true meanings of some verses although they generally agree on the meanings of the major portion of the Qur'an. But interpretations of those verses have been the subject of controversy since the first century of Islam. But as long as scholars are sincere and honest in their interpretation of the Holy Qur’an, then there should be no cause for contention. As Ustadh Abdullah Yusuf Ali has commented in a footnote to verse 10 of chapter 42 of his Translation of the Holy Qur’an.

“If their differences arise from sincere but mistaken notions, their proper course is not to form divisions and sects, or to increase contention and hatred among men, but to leave all things to Allah, trusting in Him and turning to Him in all difficulties. The final decision in all things is with Him”.

And in this connection, Allah has said in the same verse cited above:

وما اختلفتم فيه من شيء فحكمه على الله

Whatever it be wherein ye differ the decision thereof is with Allah (Abdullah Yusuf Ali)

          But in spite of Allah’s admonition, sectarian fanatics, whenever they disagree with scholars of other sects in the interpretation of the Qur'an, they jump to the conclusion that their opponents are heretics or apostates (مارقون) forgetting that all Imams and several religious scholars were once in their lifetimes harassed or imprisoned by the Caliphs for alleged heresy (see Appendix). Even some of the Caliphs themselves were accused of heresy as we shall see below. So the charge of heresy or apostasy should not be taken seriously, as it is a personal opinion and is common in all religions. Servetus, a Spaniard, who lived in Switzerland, was burnt alive in 1553 CE after a conviction for heresy because he believed in one God and rejected the Trinity Doctrine!! He belonged to a small Christian sect of Unitarianism. All this is the result of fanaticism which in turn is due to ignorance. Fortunately with the spread of general education, religious as well as secular, and public discussion of religious issues in the media, fanatism is on the retreat and sectarian tolerance is on the rise.

          Al-Maamun, the Abbasid Khalifa who ruled 813 – 832 CE adopted the Mu’tazila doctrine and declared it to be the State creed, which retained its official status until 847CE. However when Mutawakkil took over as Khalifa in that year, he abolished it. Mu’tazilism is regarded by some sects as a heretic doctrine which has deviated from the mainstream of Islam. If that is so it means that during the period when it was an official creed, the Islamic Ummah was ruled by three “heretic” Caliphs – Al-Maamun, Al-Musta’sim and Al-Wathiq.

          Lastly, another charge which is hurled against the Ibadhis and some other sects is that they have adopted theological ideas from other cultures or religions. This is not true because as we have seen in Chapter 6 on Allah’s Attributes, our beliefs are based on the Qur'an. The only problem is that we differ in the interpretations of the relevant Qur’anic verses. However we have presented a convincing case to support our beliefs. With regard to foreign influence, this is true of all Islamic sects because today, more than at any other time, we live on this planet increasingly as one society, culturally and economically.

          Thus in India and probably Pakistan, Muslim parents of brides pay dowries to bridegrooms in accordance with Hindu custom which is the dominant culture there, while in Islam, it is the other way round – the bridegroom pays the dowry in accordance with Qur’anic instruction in verse 4 of Suratu-Nnisaa (4):-

وءاتوا النساء صدقاتهن نحلة *

And give the woman (on marriage) their dower as an obligation   (Abdullah Yusuf Ali).

In Turkey and Tunisia it is prohibited for women to wear ‘hijab’ (veil). The prohibition contravenes verse 59 of chapter 33 (Suratul Ahzab):-

يأيها النبي قل لأزواجك وبناتك ونساء المؤمنين يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن

O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies

(Dr. Al Hilali & Dr. Khan).

Allah’s Command to wear veils has been repeated in Suratu-Nnur (24) verse 31

وليضربن بخمورهن على جيوبهن

And they should draw their veils over their bosoms

                                                             (Abdullah Yusuf Ali).

In practically all Muslim countries the sale of liquor is allowed in hotels as a way of promoting tourism in contravention of Allah’s injunction laid down in chapter 5 (Suratul Maidah), verse 90:-

يأيها الذين آمنوا إنما الخمر........... رجس من عمل الشيطان فاجتنبوه لعلكم تفلحون

O you who believe! Intoxicants...are an abomination of Satan’s handiwork, so avoid it in order that you may prosper.

                                                                            (Abdullah Yusuf Ali)

          In Muslim countries, banks charge as well as pay interests on loans to, and deposits from, customers in flagrant violation of Qur'anic injunction prescribed in verse 130 of chapter 3 (Al’Imran):-

يآيها الذين آمنوا لا تأكلوا الربا اضعافا مضاعفة

O you who believe! Eat not usury doubled and multiplied.

                                                   (Dr. Al Hilali & Dr. Khan).

          Some Muslim countries today have adopted the Western system of divorce law. They no longer accept as valid unilateral declarations of divorce by men. Divorce cases are decided by courts of law because they are not just private matters between two individuals, there are children involved, so their rights must be protected and guaranteed, and this cannot be achieved if it is left to the whims of man who is craving to get married to another young girl. Besides the old wife needs shelter and so the court generally decides that she shall remain in the matrimonial home and the husband shall vacate it.

          Besides, for certain sins like adultery and stealing there are punishments prescribed for them in the Qur'an but these are nowhere implemented in the Muslim world except in one or two countries. But these are exceptions to the rule; the general picture is one of non-compliance. For example, the Qur'an enjoins us in verse 38 of suratul Maidah (5) as follows:

"والسارق والسارقة فاقطعوا أيديهما جزاء بما كسبا نكالا من الله"

“And as for the male and the female thief cur off his or her hands as a retribution for their deed and exemplary punishment from Allah”.     (Abdullah Yusuf Ali).

This Divine Commandment is nowhere implemented except in one or two countries, and there it is applied only to those who steal a few hundreds but seldom, if ever, applied to those who steal millions. The punishments meted out in most Islamic countries is imprisonment.

          Finally some sects use some Hebrew or Jewish words in their prayers. All these examples provide ample evidence of how foreign systems and cultures have crept into Islamic societies especially during the period when they were under colonial domination. And in the majority of those societies, the Ibadhis, the Mutazila or the Khawarij do not even exist let alone occupy a dominant position. So to accuse them alone of having adopted alien cultures or beliefs is to fail to recognize the world-wide social and economic changes that have permeated through the fabric of the Islamic Ummah, not just this or that sect, and the trend continues with no sign of abating. Islam cannot live in an island of isolation. Being born in the Middle East, the cradle of monotheistic religions and the crossroad of world cultures, Islam has influenced, and been influenced by others, as much as, if not more than, any other religion. It must, however, choose what is beneficial for, and reject what is harmful to, itself.

          In conclusion there is no better way of bringing this discussion to an end than by quoting from our legendary learned Ibadhi scholar, the late

Sheikh Abdullah bin Humeid Al-Salmy the following lines:-

لو كــان مبغــض لنـــــــا أتــــــاه	فنأخـذ الحـق متى نـراه
ولو آتى به الخل الذي له اصطفوا	والباطل المردود عندنـا
لرجل خالف الحـق ولو كـان علي	فلا احــــترام عنــــدنــا

We take the truth even from a man of hatred

And we reject falsehood even from a chosen friend

We have no respect for a man, however exalted

If from the truth he has deflected

                                                       (Translation by the Author)

These poetic verses express Ibadhi’s relation with foreign cultures and ideas.

          Despite all the criticisms leveled at it, Ibadhism has remained an impeccable madh-hab. However, its name was tarnished by the malicious propaganda of the self-styled Caliphs and their sectarian scholars for about 600 years from the time Muawiya usurped the office of Khalifa to the end of the Abbasid era, because the sect refused to recognize their authority by establishing its own independent Imamate. It is still a victim of a wave of vicious campaigns which is trying to isolate it from the mainstream of Islam, a policy which is again prompted by political motives, because Ibadhis refuse to submit to any but Divine Authority. The Islamic Ummah, at last, however, has begun to realize the fallacy of those campaigns and have therefore ignored and rejected them, because today, unlike any other time, people do not accept blindly everything that is preached to them by sectarian fanatics. They study controversial issues objectively before making a decision, one way or the other, and this, again, is due to the rising level of general education and awareness of the Muslim Ummah.

          One last word of this epilogue. History bears witness that Ibadhisim is an Islamic sect of moderation. Wherever they rule, there is a general atmosphere of religious as well as sectarian tolerance and understanding. That is why Ibadhism has survived for more than 1350 years as one of the two oldest madh-habs in Islam against overwhelming odds. They do not employ people, as some of their opponents actively do, to disseminate abroad religious fanaticism, social discord and friction among people of different religions and sects. And so, regrettably, Islam today finds itself in the quagmire in its international relations as a result of aggressive activities of its sectarian fanatics.

______________________________

^*See also V.24 and 25 of Chap. 4 (النساء)

Reference:

Ibadhism, The Cinderella of Islam, by Soud H. Al Ma'awaly, 
pg: 157-165