The people are behind me and they have made me an ambassador between you and themselves; but by Allah, I do not know what to say to you. I know nothing (in this matter) which you do not know, nor can I lead you to any matter of which you are not aware. You certainly know what we know, we have not come to know anything before you which we could tell you; nor did we learn anything in secret which we should convey to you. You have seen as we have seen and you have heard as we have heard. You sat in the company of the Prophet of Allah as we did. (Abu Bakr) Ibn Abi Quhafah and (`Umar) ibn al-Khattab were no more responsible for acting righteously than you, since you are nearer than both of them to the Prophet of Allah through kinship, and you also hold relationship to him by marriage which they do not hold.
Then (fear) Allah, in your own self; for, by Allah, you are not being shown anything as if you are blind or being apprised of anything as if you are ignorant. The ways are clear while the banners of faith are fixed. You should know that among the creatures of Allah, the most distinguished person before Allah is the just Imam who has been guided (by Allah) and guides others. So, he stands by the recognised ways of the Prophet's behaviour and destroys unrecognised innovations. The (Prophet's) ways are clear and they have signs, while innovations are also clear and they too have signs. Certainly, the worst man before Allah is the oppressive Imam who has gone astray and through whom others go astray. He destroys the the accepted sunnah and revives abandoned innovations. I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "On the Day of Judgement the oppressive Imam will be brought without anyone to support him or anyone to advance excuses on his behalf, and then he will be thrown into Hell where he will rotate as the hand-mill rotates, then (eventually) he will be confined to its hollow."
I swear to you by Allah that you should not be that Imam of the people who will be killed because it has been said that, "An Imam of this people will be killed after which killing and fighting will be made open for them till the Day of Judgement, and he will confuse their matters and spread troubles over them. As a result, they will not discern truth from wrong. They will oscillate like waves and would be utterly misled." You should not behave as the carrying beast for Marwan so that he may drag you wherever he likes, despite (your) seniority of age and length of life.
Then `Uthman said to Amir al-mu'minin: "Speak to the people to give me time until I redress their grievances." Amir al-mu'minin then said: "So far as Medina is concerned here is no question of time. As for remoter areas you can have the time needed for your order to reach there."
(1). During the Caliphate of `Uthman when the
Muslims were
weary of the oppression of the Government and its officials collected
in Medina to complain to the senior companions of the Prophet,
they came to Amir al-mu'minin in a peaceful manner and requested
him to see `Uthman and advise him not to trample on the Muslims'
rights and to put an end to the troubles which were proving the
cause of the people's ruin, whereupon Amir al-mu'minin went to
him and uttered these words.
In order to make the bitterness of the admonition palatable Amir
al-mu'minin adopted that way of speech in the beginning which
would create a sense of responsibility in the addressee and direct
him towards his obligations. Thus, by mentioning his companionship
of the Prophet, his personal position, and his kinship to the
Prophet as against the two previous Caliphs, his intention was
to make him realise his duties; in any case, this was obviously
not an occasion for eulogising him, so that its later portion
can be disregarded and the whole speech be regarded as an eulogy
of his attainments, because from its very beginning it is evident
that whatever `Uthman did, he did it wilfully, that nothing was
done without his knowledge or his being informed, and that he
could not be held unaccountable for it because of his being unaware
of it. If the adoption of a line of action which made the whole
Islamic world raise hue and cry in spite of his having being a
companion of the Prophet, having heard his instructions, having
seen his behaviour and having been acquainted with the commandments
of Islam can be regarded as a distinction, then this taunt may
also be regarded as praise. If that is not a distinction then
this too cannot be called and eulogy. In fact, the words about
which it is argued that they are in praise are enough to prove
the seriousness of his crime, because a crime in ignorance and
unawareness is not so serious as the weight given to the seriousness
of the commission of a crime despite knowledge and awareness.
Consequently a person who is unaware of the rise and fall of a
road and stumbles in the dark night is excusable but a person
who is aware of the rise and fall of the road and stumbled in
broad day light is liable to be blamed. If on this occasion he
is told that he has eyes and is also aware of the rise and fall
of the way, it would not mean that his vastness of knowledge or
the brightness of his eye-sight is being praised, but the intention
would be that he did not notice the pitfalls despite his eyes,
and did not walk properly, and that therefore for him, having
or not having eyes is the same, and knowing or not knowing is
equal.
In this connection great stress in laid on his being a son-in-law,
namely that the Prophet married his two daughters Ruqayyah and
Umm Kulthum to him one after the other. Before taking this to
be a distinction, the real nature of `Uthman's son-in-lawship
should be seen. History shows that in this matter `Uthman did
not enjoy the distinction of being the first, but before him Ruqayyah
and Umm Kulthum had been married to two sons of Abu Lahab namely
`Utbah and `Utaybah, but despite their being sons-in-law, they
have not been included among people of position of pre-prophethood
period. How then can this be regarded as a source of position
without any personal merit, when there is no authority about the
importance of this relationship, nor was any importance attached
to this matter in such a way that there might have been some competition
between `Uthman and some other important personality in this regard
and that his selection for it might have given him prominence,
or that these two girls might have been shown to possess an important
position in history, tradition or biography as a result of which
this relationship could be given special importance and regarded
as a distinction for him? If the marriage of these two daughters
with `Utbah and `Utaybah in the pre-prophethood period is held
as lawful on the ground that marriage with unbelievers had not
till then been made unlawful, then in `Uthman's case also the
condition for lawfulness was his acceptance of Islam, there is
no doubt that he had pronounced the kalimah ash-shahadatayn
(there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger) and
had accepted Islam outwardly. As such this marriage can be held
a proof of his outward Islam, but no other honour can be proved
through it. Again, it is also not agreed that these two were the
real daughters of the Messenger of Allah, because there is one
group which denies them to be his real daughters, and regards
them as being the daughters of Khadijah's sister Halah, or the
daughters of her own previous husband. Thus, Abu'l-Qasim al-Kufi
(d. 352 A.H.) writes:
"When the Messenger of Allah married Khadijah, then some
time thereafter Halah died leaving two daughters, one named Zaynab
and the other named Ruqayyah and both of them were brought up
by the Prophet and Khadijah and they maintained them, and it was
the custom before Islam that a child was assigned to whoever brought
him up." (al-lstighathah, p. 69)
Ibn Hisham has written about the issues of Hadrat Khadijah as
follows:
"Before marriage with the Prophet she was married to Abi
Halah ibn Malik. She delivered for him Hind ibn Abi Halah and
Zaynab bint Abi Halah. Before marriage with Abi Halah she was
married to `Utayyiq ibn `Abid ibn `Abdillah ibn `Amr ibn Makhzum
and she delivered for him `Abdullah and a daughter." (as-Sirah
an-nabawiyyah, vol. 4, p. 293)
This shows that of Hadrat Khadijah had two daughters before being
married to the Prophet and according to all appearance they would
be called his daughters and those to whom they were married would
be called his sons-in-law, but the position of this relationship
would be the same as if those girls were his daughters. Therefore,
before putting it forth as a matter for pride the real status
of the daughters should be noted and a glance should be cast at
`Uthman's conduct. In this connection, al-Bukhari and other narrators
(of traditions) and historians record this tradition as follows:
Anas ibn Malik relates that: "We were present on the occasion
of the burial of the Prophet's daughter Umm Kulthum, while the
Prophet was sitting beside her grave. I saw his eyes shedding
tears. Then he said, 'Is there any one among you who has not committed
a sin last night?' Abu Talhah (Zayd ibn Sahl al-Ansari) said,
'I', then the Prophet said, 'Then you get into the grave,' consequently
he got down into the grave."
The commentators said about 'committed sin' that the Holy Prophet
meant to say 'one who had not had sexual intercourse.' On this
occasion the Holy Prophet unveiled the private life of `Uthman
and prevented him from getting down into the grave, although it
was a prominent merit of the Prophet's character that he did not
disgrace or belittle any one by making public his private life,
and despite of knowledge of others' shortcomings, ignored them;
but in this case the filth was such that it was deemed necessary
to disgrace him before the whole crowd.
Since `Uthman did not show any regard for the demise of his wife
(Umm Kulthum) nor was he moved or felt sorry (for this event),
and paid no heed to the cutting off his relationship with the
Holy Prophet (for being his son-in-law), he (`Uthman) had sexual
intercourse on the same night, therefore the Holy Prophet deprived
him of this right and honour. (al-Bukhari, as-Sahih, vol.
2, pp. 100-101, 114; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol.
3, pp. 126, 228, 229, 270; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, vol.
4, p. 47; al-Bayhaqi, as-Sunan al-kubra, vol. 4, p. 53;
Ibn Sa`d, at-Tabaqat al-kabir, vol. 8, p. 26; as-Suhayli,
ar-Rawd al-unuf, vol. 2, p. 107; Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah,
vol. 4, p. 489; Fath al-bari, vol. 3, p. 122; al-`Ayni,
`Umdah al-qari, vol. 4,p. 85; Ibn al-Athir, an-Nihayah,
vol. 3, p. 276; Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-`Arab, vol. 9, pp.
280-281; az-Zabidi, Taj al-`arus, vol. 6, p. 220).