How Should We Interpret the Political Discourses of Imam Ali (AS) and the Reality of the Hadith of Ghadir?

To enter the discussion, let us first quote here a saying of His Excellency with an interpretation by Ibn Abi al-Hadid:

Sharh Nahj al-Balagha by Ibn Abi al-Hadid; Vol. 7; p. 33 onwards

91 And among his words, peace be upon him, when the people wanted him to accept the pledge of allegiance after the killing of Uthman, may God be pleased with him

Leave me and seek another, for we are facing a matter with many faces and colors, for which hearts cannot stand firm, nor can minds remain steadfast upon it. Indeed, the horizons have become clouded, and the clear path has become obscured.

And know that if I answer you, I will lead you according to what I know, and I will not listen to the words of any speaker or the reproach of any reproacher. But if you leave me, then I am just like one of you, and perhaps I will be the most obedient and attentive among you to whomever you entrust your affairs. And for me to be a vizier for you is better for you than for me to be an amir.

...Our companions interpret this speech according to its apparent meaning and say that he, peace be upon him, was not designated for the Imamate by the Messenger, peace be upon him, even though he was the most deserving of the people for it and the most entitled to its station. For if he had been designated for the Imamate by the Messenger, peace be upon him, it would not have been permissible for him to say, "Leave me and seek another," nor to say, "And perhaps I will be the most obedient and attentive among you to whomever you entrust your affairs," nor to say, "And for me to be a vizier for you is better than for me to be an amir."

The Imamiyyah interpret it in another way. They say that those who wanted him to accept the pledge of allegiance were the same ones who had previously concluded the pledge of allegiance for the caliphs before him. Uthman had deprived them, or many of them, of their rightful share of the stipend, because the Umayyads had exhausted the wealth during Uthman's days. So when he was killed, they said to Ali, peace be upon him, "We will pledge allegiance to you on the condition that you govern among us according to the practice of Abu Bakr and Umar," because they did not monopolize wealth for themselves or their families. Thus, they sought Ali's pledge of allegiance on the condition that he distribute the treasuries among them as Abu Bakr and Umar had distributed them. He asked to be excused and requested that they seek another who would govern according to their practice. He spoke to them words with an underlying code, which is his saying: "We are facing a matter with many faces and colors, for which hearts cannot stand firm, nor can minds remain steadfast upon it. Indeed, the horizons have become clouded, and the clear path has become obscured." They say this speech of his has an inner meaning and profound depth, signifying a report of the unseen that he knows and they are ignorant of, namely a warning of Muslims fighting one another, the divergence of the word, and the emergence of discord. The meaning of his saying "with many faces and colors" is that it is a place of ambiguity and interpretation, so one speaker says Ali was right, and another says he was wrong. The same applies to the judgment regarding the righteousness or error of those who fought him from the people of the Camel, Siffin, and Nahrawan, for the doctrines concerning him and them have branched out and diverged greatly. The meaning of his saying "the horizons have become clouded and the clear path has become obscured" is that doubt has overwhelmed minds and hearts, and most people are ignorant of where the clear path of truth lies. "For me to be a vizier for you" from the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, issuing fatwas among you according to his Sharia and rulings, "is better for you than for me to be an amir," constrained and managed according to your management. For I know that I am unable to govern among you according to the practice of the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, among his companions, acting independently in management, due to the corruption of your conditions and the impossibility of your reform.

Some have interpreted his speech in another way, saying this is the speech of one seeking more, complaining about his companions. He says to them, "Leave me and seek another," in a manner of vexation with them, annoyance at them, and displeasure with their actions, because they had previously turned away from him and chosen others over him. So when they sought him afterward, he answered them with the answer of one who is displeased and reproachful.

A group among them interpreted the speech in yet another way, saying he expressed it in a manner of mockery and sarcasm, meaning, "For me to be a vizier for you is better than for me to be an amir" according to what you believe, just as the Almighty said: "Taste! Indeed, you are the mighty, the noble!" meaning you claim and believe that for yourself.

And know that what they have mentioned is not far-fetched to interpret the speech accordingly, if there were evidence indicating that. However, if there is no evidence for it, it is not permissible to divert the wording from its apparent meaning. We adhere to the apparent meaning unless a proof for their doctrine arises that prevents us from taking the wording at its apparent meaning. If it were permissible to divert words from their apparent meanings without compelling evidence that obstructs and prevents it, no trust would remain in the Word of God, the Mighty and Majestic, or the word of His Messenger (peace be upon him). We have previously mentioned the nature of the situation that existed after the killing of Uthman and how the pledge of allegiance to Ali came about.

Ibn Abi al-Hadid, in interpreting this speech here, transmits two opposing viewpoints: one from the Mu'tazila and the other from the Imamiyya. In explaining the Imamiyya viewpoint, he transmits three different opinions, but unfortunately, he does not introduce the transmitter of these statements. It is not unlikely that these statements are from Ibn Qiba al-Razi.

The viewpoint of the Mu'tazila, according to Ibn Abi al-Hadid's expression, is based on the apparent meaning of the Imam's words. Their interpretation was that, based on these statements, it becomes clear that the Commander of the Faithful was not designated by the Prophet, because if he had been designated, he would not have had the right to refuse the Imamate and Caliphate that had been entrusted to him and to decline its acceptance. Ibn Abi al-Hadid considers this viewpoint and interpretation acceptable and endorses it. In contrast, of course, as we read in his phrases, he transmits three different esoteric interpretations of the Imamiyya, who believe in the existence of a designation for the Imam's Imamate. The first interpretation, in my opinion, is more consistent with historical data. The explanation is that the pledge of allegiance to the Commander of the Faithful did not take place under normal circumstances. This pledge, as everyone knows, occurred after the outbreak of a sedition that ultimately led to the formation of a wrong tradition, namely the killing of the Caliph; something the Imam opposed. The Commander of the Faithful made every effort to ensure that the demands of Uthman's opponents and the protesters would end well through peaceful means, but the course of events unfolded in such a way that Uthman was killed. Under such circumstances, the protesters and opponents of Uthman offered the pledge of allegiance to the Commander of the Faithful. The Imam rightly knew the reason for their opposition and protests against Uthman and what demands they had of him. The Commander of the Faithful, according to historical documents and several statements from him available to us, tried as much as possible to organize the pledge of allegiance for his Caliphate within frameworks acceptable to the majority of the Islamic community and according to the traditions accepted up to that time. The Imam did not want the Caliphate under just any circumstances, and prudence also dictated that he not accept the Caliphate solely based on the conditions and demands of the opposing group and their endorsement and pledge. In any case, the Commander of the Faithful initially declined to accept this responsibility, and as we said, this was more consistent with political prudence and rationality in the crisis-stricken conditions after the killing of the third Caliph. The Imam was opposed to the killing of Uthman from the beginning and did not want his Caliphate to appear as arising from the sedition of Uthman's killing and without the necessary foresight. For this reason, he initially opposed accepting the Caliphate. On the other hand, the Imam knew that within the framework of the limited demands of the protesters, he could better fulfill their demands in the position of a "vizier" and advisor, and take action to improve the chaotic situation that led to Uthman's killing and to reform its consequences. Therefore, in the speech we quoted from the Imam, the issue of his political prudence is discussed, not the question of the basis of the Caliphate's legitimacy.

In the second step, in the face of the insistence of the people who demanded the pledge of allegiance to him, the Imam emphasized that the pledge must be based on the same principles that were considered acceptable before that time; that is, with the consent of the people of Medina (the Muhajirun and the Ansar), the people of Badr, and the "Shura" of the Muslims. It was natural that otherwise, the foundations of his Caliphate could very soon be subject to dispute. This conduct of the Commander of the Faithful indicates extraordinary intelligence.

What has been quoted from the Imam in the above speech pertains to the first point, and in my view, the initial response that Ibn Abi al-Hadid transmitted from the Imami scholars is entirely sound and correct. In reality, the Mu'tazilite interpretation is incompatible with the historical context of these statements. In these sayings, the discussion is not at all about the Imamate of the Imam from an independent standpoint. The Commander of the Faithful, although, as we see in the Sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah, considered himself more worthy than others in the matter of the caliphate and succession to the Prophet in the Medinan community after the Prophet, here reacts in a completely different, specific set of circumstances to a demand whose subject had entirely changed. Even when the Commander of the Faithful accepted the pledge of allegiance, he accepted it within the framework of a meaning and concept of the caliphate as it was understood in the Muslim community of the Hijaz and Iraq in the year 35 AH; the conditions of that time were not the conditions of the time of the Prophet and the passing of the Messenger of God. Islam and the Muslims were no longer confined to Medina or, at most, the Hijaz. Moreover, the religious community of the Prophet's time, which had been formed on the basis of faith, fraternal bonds of belief, as well as several tribal pacts and the relations between the Muhajirun and the Ansar, was no longer in its former state. The conquests and the formation of the "state" had changed everything and had given rise to a new meaning and concept for the administration of society. In truth, the Imamate that was based on the "wilayah" of the Prophet, and the "wilayah" of the one whom the Prophet designated as having the same relationship of wilayah with the believers as the Prophet himself had with the believers of the nascent Islamic community (the purport of the Hadith of Ghadir), had been replaced by a caliphate whose meaning, concept, and boundaries had been defined and delimited by the first three caliphs. Here, the Commander of the Faithful was confronted with another reality: accepting responsibility as a Muslim towards a community for whose preservation and for the preservation of the true legacy of the Prophet, we know that years before that date, he had forgone even his personal right to the caliphate and immediate succession to the Prophet, and in that path had even lost his dear wife, the unique daughter of the Prophet, and had pledged allegiance to the first caliphs. For the sake of preserving the "Ummah" and what the Prophet had called his Ummah to follow (i.e., the Quran, his Sunnah, and his progeny), he saw no alternative but to accept the pledge of allegiance and undertake the responsibility of the caliphate; a caliphate whose all conceptual and constituent elements had been determined over three decades and which had found its course and the conditions for its realization and continuity. Here, the Commander of the Faithful could only, insofar as the principle of responsibility was not corrupted, endeavor to reform some of its structures and present them as his conditions before accepting the pledge of allegiance. It goes without saying that throughout the five years of his caliphate, the Imam was in fact grappling with this very legacy of the caliphate and confronting its problems; a legacy that ultimately reconstructed itself in a new form, this time with the rule of "gold, force, and deceit" of Mu'awiya and the Umayyad caliphs. A Mu'awiya who could not even submit and remain loyal to the tradition of the Two Sheikhs... His thought was "Umayyad"...

Throughout the history of the Umayyad caliphate and even in the Abbasid era, the Shi'a, based on this very legacy, the recommendations, and the fundamental political principles of the Commander of the Faithful, and what they had at their disposal from the Imams al-Mujtaba and Sayyid al-Shuhada', which were founded upon the presence of the people and their consent in the formation of the legitimacy of any government, always emphasized the importance of the concepts of "shura" (consultation) and "al-rida min Al Muhammad" (the one accepted from the family of Muhammad) for determining governance, in opposition to the apparatus of Umayyad and Abbasid power and against the governments of "obedience," "the community," "a rash act," and "usurpation." The Shi'a did not think like the "Umayyads."

The stance of the Commander of the Faithful in this speech, contrary to the opinion of the Mu'tazilites that Ibn Abi al-Hadid transmits, has no connection to the establishment of the Prophet's "nass" (explicit designation) for the Commander of the Faithful or the correctness of the Shi'a belief regarding the purport of the Hadith of Ghadir concerning the right of immediate succession to the Messenger of God. Furthermore, the intent here is not the Imamate in its religious sense, which refers spiritual and religious guidance to the twelve religious leaders in the theological perspective of the Twelver Shi'a.

In this section, I will cite some words from the Imam, in addition to what has been quoted, all of which serve as evidence for what I have said:

1- "Indeed, the people who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman swore allegiance to me on the same basis upon which they swore allegiance to them. Thus, the one who was present has no right to choose, nor the one who was absent to reject. Consultation belongs only to the Muhajirun and the Ansar. If they gather upon a man and name him Imam, that would be pleasing to God. Then, if anyone deviates from their decision by way of objection or innovation, they should return him to what he has left. If he refuses, they should fight him for following a path other than that of the believers, and God will entrust him to what he has turned to. Indeed, Talha and Zubayr swore allegiance to me and then broke their pledge to me, and their breaking of it was like their apostasy, so I fought them for that until the truth came and God's command was manifest, though they were averse. So enter into that which the Muslims have entered."

2- "The people merely follow the Muhajirun and the Ansar, and they are the witnesses of the Muslims over their governance and the matter of their religion. They were pleased with me and swore allegiance to me, and I do not deem it lawful to leave the party of Mu'awiya to rule over the community, to subjugate them, and to split their unity."

3- From Ibn al-Hanafiyya: "I was with my father when Uthman was killed. He rose and entered his house. The Companions of the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family) came to him and said: 'This man has been killed, and the people must have an Imam. We find no one today more entitled to this matter than you, none with greater precedence or closer kinship to the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family).' He said: 'Do not do this, for I would be better as a vizier than as a commander.' They said: 'No, by God, we will not do so until we swear allegiance to you.' He said: 'Then let it be in the mosque, for my allegiance shall not be secret, nor shall it be except with the consent of the Muslims.'"

4- "O people, with full assembly and permission, this matter of yours belongs to no one except the one you appoint. We parted yesterday upon a matter, and I was averse to your decision, but you insisted that I be over you. Verily, I have nothing from you except the keys to your wealth, and I have no right to take a single dirham without your consent."

5- "The Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family) had entrusted a covenant to me, saying: 'O son of Abu Talib, you have the guardianship of my community. If they entrust you in well-being and unanimously consent to you, then undertake their affairs. But if they differ over you, then leave them and what they are engaged in.'"

6- "By my life, if the Imamate could not be established unless the general populace were present, that would be impossible. Rather, its people decide for those who are absent from it, and then the one present has no right to retract, nor the one absent to choose."

7- "The people merely follow the Muhajirun and the Ansar, and they are the witnesses of the Muslims over their governance and the matter of their religion. They were pleased with me and swore allegiance to me, and I do not deem it lawful to leave the party of Mu'awiya to rule over the community, to subjugate them, and to split their unity."

[They returned to Mu'awiya and informed him of this. He said: 'It is not as he says. What of the Muhajirun and the Ansar who are here, why did they not enter into the matter to consult him?' So they went back to Ali (peace be upon him) and told him that and informed him.] He (peace be upon him) said: "Woe to you! This applies to the veterans of Badr, not to all the Companions. There is no Badri on earth who has not sworn allegiance to me and is with me, or who has stayed behind and is content. So let not Mu'awiya deceive you regarding yourselves and your religion."

We see this same perspective regarding Imam al-Mujtaba as well:

1- "When Ali passed on his way... the Muslims entrusted me with the matter after him. So cease persisting in falsehood and enter into what the people have entered into by swearing allegiance to me, for you know that I am more entitled to this matter than you."

2- "He made peace with him on the condition that he surrender to him the governance of the Muslims' affairs, on the basis that he would act among them according to the Book of God, the Sunnah of the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family), and the conduct of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, and that Mu'awiya ibn Abi Sufyan shall not appoint anyone after him by covenant; rather, the matter after him shall be a consultation among the Muslims."

.

.

How Should We Interpret the Political Discourses of Imam Ali (AS) and the Reality of the Hadith of Ghadir?

Author: Hassan Ansari

Source: Kateban Circle – Historical Studies

.

.