“Move towards the parties and enemies of the Prophet because the best people are 'Ali's followers.” [1290]
Qays Ibn Sa'd said, “Making Jihad with them is more obligatory than the one with the Turks and Romans.
Sahl Ibn Hunayf also declared Ansar's readiness for joining and obeying Imam (a). Among the people there, one person objected and said, “You want to dispatch us to kill our Damascus brethren as you took us, yesterday, to kill our Basran brothers!” People began to crack him down. The man ran away and the people after him leading to his murder in public turbulence in Bazar. [1291]
Malik Ashtar said, “You shouldn't be fretted with what this wretched traitor said. All people are your Shi'ite Muslims.” [1292]
Kufa environment was, at this time, so good that no one dared disagree or even express dissent. Among the people, one who raised such and idea was Hanzala Ibn Rabi'a. His tribesmen put him under so much pressure that he nightly fled and joined Mu'awiya though he seemed not to have taken part in the war. [1293]
However, even people who were fairly decent more or less remained in doubt. Abu Zubayb Ibn 'Awf asked Imam to officially testify that the way followed to cut off Wilayat's link to Damascus troops and replaced with enmity to them is a true one. Imam attested that. After Imam (a), 'Ammar attested that and he became assured of his way, relying on the two testimonies. [1294]
Some people from companions of 'Abd Allah Ibn Mas'ud - once in charge of Kufa's Bayt al-Mal - came to Imam and said, “We come with you but our division base will be independent. This is because we want to see who is after the credal error and embarks on rebellion.”
Imam approved of their idea. One group of four hundred people led by Rabi'a Ibn Khuthaym, expressing doubt about the war, asked Imam to send them to one of the borderlines. Imam sent them to Riy borderline and Bahila people who were displeased with Imam (a) and nor was Imam pleased with them were sent to Diylam frontier after he granted them their bounties. [1295]
'Abd Allah Ibn Badil while in his speech confirming Imam's position said to Imam, “Their opposition to you is because of your previous strikes against them.” He then said to people, “How should Mu'awiya pay allegiance to 'Ali while his brother, Hanzala, his uncle, Walid and his grandfather, 'Utba are all killed in one war?” [1296]
Hujr Ibn 'Adi and 'Amr Ibn Hamiq marched and began to curse Damascus people. Imam summoned them and said that he did not like them to be known after curses. Instead, they could ask God to stop bloodshed and make peace.
'Amr Ibn Hamiq stressed over hid friendship with Imam and Imam prayed for him. [1297] 'Amr stood on his pledge until he was martyred by Ibn Umm al-Hakam, Mu'awiya's ruler in Jazira.
Imam in a public sermon called all people to Jihad after he was assured of the fact that Mu'awiya receives nothing but force and on the other hand, lords of Kufa defend him in war with Damascus.
After him, Imam Hasan (a) began to speak, “God prepared for battling against your enemy, Mu'awiya and his troops because he is already in state of alert. Leave not your spirit of campaign that, if abandoned, casts off bonds of hearts and that careering of sword and spear assures assistance and prevention of defeat.”
After him, Imam Husayn (a) induced people, in a speech, to fight with Damascus people. [1298]
Imam wrote to Ibn 'Abbas to ask for Basrans' help. Many Basrans, after being called by Imam, joined Ibn 'Abbas to Kufa. Ibn 'Abbas put Abu l-Aswad Du'ali in his place in Basra. He wrote to Mikhnaf Ibn Salim to put somebody in his place in Isfahan and join Imam and he did so.
At this time, Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr was ruler of Egypt on behalf of Imam. Writing a detailed letter to Mu'awiya, he blamed Mu'awiya for countering with Imam.
Muhammad wrote as to Imam 'Ali's background: “Now I see that you talk about being his counterpart while you're you and he's he who beats all with his unique record of all alms and virtues. He is from the people of the first man who has embraced Islam, more reliable in faith, more purified in family, having an honorable wife who stands higher than all people and he is of the best people to his cousin.
Whilst you are damned of the cursed son. You and your father flamed seditions against religion of God and attempted to put out glow of Islam. You organized factions and parties, collected properties and for so doing, you held familiar company with anti-Islam tribes.
Your father died after this way and you substituted him and the evidence is that the remaining groups, opposition parties, hypocrite leaders who have taken refuge in you are against the Prophet (S) and you have supported them. And the evidence for 'Ali, in addition to his public superiority and his Islamic initiative, is his companions of Muhajirun and Ansar whose virtues are cited in Qur'an and left in memories and God praised them ….
Woe unto you! How do you parallel yourself to 'Ali whereas he is legatee of the Prophet (S) and his descendants and is the first man who obeyed him and stood up to his promise until his last days of life. The Messenger (S) kept him his confidant and his partner.”
Replying him, Mu'awiya wrote: “To one who reproaches his father. Your letter is received … You charged your father intemperately … We and your father were together in the lifetime of the Prophet. We know that we have to respect the right of son of Abu Talib and his supremacy over us is apparent, …
After the Prophet in that time, your father and his discriminator were the first people who disentitled 'Ali of his right and opposed him and they both unanimously allied with each other in this regard … They never let him in their works and never revealed their secrets to him as long as they passed away…
Therefore, if what we are up to is true, your father initiated it and if it is cruelty, your father again founded it. We are his partners and we followed his guidelines. In case your father had not covered this way before us, we would have never opposed son of Abu Talib and would have surrendered ourselves. But we observed what your father did and we too followed his foot-prints and modeled his manner.” [1299]
Kufa poised for battle with Damascus. Imam ordered the warriors in Nukhayla, a military camp in Kufa, to come together. Decorating pulpit of Kufa with the bloody garment of 'Uthman, while seventy thousand Shiykhs weeping around it, Mu'awiya was made to prepare Damascus people for battling Iraqi troops. [1300]
Imam's uprising from Nukhayla happened on 5th of Shawwal, 36 H. [1301] The first dispute raised in Imam's troops was conflict over headmanship of Yemeni tribes. Imam (a) deposed Ash'ath and posed Hassan Ibn Makhduj. This spurred conflict between Kinda and Rabi'a.
Upon hearing about this conflict, Mu'awiya compelled one of Kinda poets to stimulate Ash'ath against Imam but he obtained no luck in that time and this was finished by placing him over the left wing of Iraqi troops. [1302]
Unfortunately, the enfeebled, spoiled and opportunist spirit of Ash'ath caused him to stand against Imam. It has been said that he had been writing letters to Mu'awiya ever since Imam called him to Adharbayjan and ordered to have his properties appraised. [1303] Ya'qubi has mentioned his relationship with Mu'awiya when Qur'ans were raised up. [1304]
Imam (a) en route arrived in Ctesiphon and asked the citizens to join his troops. Behind Imam, eight hundred people along with Qays Ibn Sa'd and a short while later about four hundred people along with his son, Yazid, joined Imam's troops. Imam on the way turned down all gifts of Iranian headmen and bewared them of welcoming emirs in such a way. [1305]
Upon request of his companions, Imam wrote another letter to Mu'awiya and called him to Book of God, tradition of the Prophet (S) and prevention of bloodshed but Mu'awiya poetically responded him that there rules sword between them. [1306] On the way, Imam (a) demanded Raqqa 'Uthmani - religion people [1307] who were supporters of Mu'awiya to install a bridge over the river for the troops to pass.
Citizens refused to do so and they finally did it under the threat of Malik. Imam kept three thousand people with Malik until all the forces pass through. In the end, Malik was the last one who crossed the bridge. [1308] On passing through Iraq, when Imam reached Karbala, he reported about the horrendous event that would happen to Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet (S) in this land. [1309]
In northern Iraq and Syria, front troops at Roman border, by passing through Hit, Qirqisiya' and Raqqa faced front forces of Damascus led by Abu l-A'war Sulami.
Imam sent Malik forward to counter with them reaffirming to him that he, at any rate, should not initiate the war. Upon his arrival, Damascus troops launched fighting and the two sides were engaged in combat for some time. Afterwards, Damascus troops pulled back.
Concerning the time of Siffin war, there appear contradictory historical reports.
It seems that there exist two quotations. Baladhuri has cited Imam's arrival in Siffin to be on Dhi l-Hajja (36). [1310] He reports the war from Dhi l-Hajja (in the year of 36), referring to fightings in this month and after in Safar when major war took place. [1311]
Ya'qubi says water dilemma goes to Dhi l-Hajja, 36 H. and that war in the year of 37 H. lasted forty days. However, he says arbitration goes to Ramaďan, 38 H. [1312] he means that the arbitration happened in Safar, 37 H. about one and a half year after Siffin war! Based on this report, a treaty was put down in Safar and as prescribed it will be brought to an end by Ramaďan.
Ibn Athir began events of Siffin from Dhi l-Hajja, 36 H. and ended in Safar, 37 H., referring to arbitration within events of the same year. [1313]
According to Khalifa Ibn Khayyat, Siffin war intensely lasted from 7th to 10th of Safar, 37 H. [1314] It seems war exceeded those days.
According to another report by Nasr Ibn Muzahim, the first date specified is that when Imam (a) reached Siffin, he had correspondences with Damascus troops in the region of Siffin during months of Rabi'a al-Akhir to Jumadi al-Thani. [1315] Following this, Ibn Muzahim mentions events of Rajab. This condition continued up to Dhi l-Hajja during which forces from the two sides fought with each other.
After that, in Muharram, hostilities came to a cessation and the main war was waged in Safar. [1316] Naturally, months of Rabi' al-Awwal and the two months of Jumadi can not be said to relate to the year of 36H. because Imam had arrived in Kufa in Rajab of that year.
As Nasr said, Siffin war was launched from the second month of the year 37, lasting up to Safar of next year. In this way, Ibn Muzahim's mention of dates exceed one year beyond those of Baladhuri's and some other historians. Dinwari's dates are exactly what Nasr mentioned. [1317]
This is while Dinwari has set date of arbitration in Safar of the year 3786 despite his reference to Rabi'a al-Awwal and the two Jumadis and it can not be true according to his previous settings. As his book's proofreader said, Muharram of the year 37 H. is the month when war stopped. [1318] It is to be said that Ibn A'tham regards arrival of Imam's troops to be in Muharram of the year 38 H. [1319] That seems untrue.
If this statement that Kharijites selected 'Abd Allah Ibn Wahb their leader in Zayd Ibn Husayn's house in the late Shawwal, 37 H. and that Imam 'Ali's war with them happened in Safar of the year 38 H. is true [1320], it is inevitably to be accepted that what Nasr Ibn Muzahim said is not true. Overally, it is to be said that the majority agree on major fighting happening in Safar of the year 37 H.
The region of fighting was in Siffin after which the war was known. Siffin is a cramped village of Roman villages that stands at a rifle - shut of the Euphrates. Alongside the Euphrates, there rest trees around which water surround and in the wilderness of two Farsangs (leagues) and there was no passing way except the Euphrates that is restricted and paved. [1321]
When Iraqi troops approached Damascus troops, they noticed that they had stationed in the region having the paved route, passing through swamp, under their control. They had positioned bowmen and horsemen to prevent Iraqis from frequenting to the coast of the Euphrates.
Number of Damascus troops is said to be amounting to one hundred twenty thousand people. [1322]
Imam's troops moving out of Kufa also numbered eighty thousand people who were added by many of Ctesiphon people on the way. [1323] Imam (a) sent Sa'sa'a to Mu'awiya to tell him that his troops launched the war whereas Imam was up to talk to him again make an ultimatum.
“Now, Sa'sa'a said, you have barred us from water and Iraqi troops can not remain silent, with all this, Imam doesn't want to launch the war.”
Mu'awiya rejected what Sa'sa'a said. 'Amr Ibn 'As opposed Mu'awiya's decision. He spoke about 'Ali's valor and also said that, “You - that is Mu'awiya - and I have heard 'Ali when Fatima's house was inspected saying if he had forty men … [1324].”
But Mu'awiya could not admit that and fighting began. The story of banning the water, on one hand linked to that of the water not reaching 'Uthman [1325] and on the other hand it was associated with the event of Karbala.
Iraqi troops dominated the water through fighting with the courage of Malik [1326] and Imam ordered the troops not to ban Damascus forces from using water. By breaking out a news (through a spear on which there was a letter sent to Imam's troops but the sender was anonymous, perhaps it was from a friend
that Imam controlled region will be enundated, Mu'awiya displaced Iraqi troops.
Imam who opposed the displacement of troops yielded to Iraqi's decision and Iraqi troops could only control the water after re-fighting. What Ibn A'tham said about these events slightly differ from Nasr's report. [1327] In all these events, Malik played a pirotal role and strongly treated the Damascus troops. [1328]
Large numbers of forces had been killed in the fighting about which Nasr has given an account in the form of boastful speeches and wars. A number of Qur'an reciters from Iraq and Damascus mediated between the two armies, trying to resolve the dispute through talks. These mediatory attempts continued for a long time.
As referred, with Dhi l-Hajja coming to an end, Muharram came and war was supposed to come to a cessation. [1329]
Negotiations of Imam's envoys with Mu'awiya came to a deadlock. Murdering of people such as 'Ammar, 'Adi Ibn Hatim, Malik and those who, according to him, had a hand in murder of 'Uthman, was set by him as his condition. This was something unacceptable both by Imam and by Iraqi tribes. Imam (a) once in front of Abu Muslim Khawlani asked murderers of 'Uthman to be prepared. In that time, mosque became filled with crowds saying that they were the murderers of 'Uthman. [1330]
In Siffin, the same thing happened and about twenty thousand people of Iraqi troops stood away and said that they were 'Uthman's killers. [1331]
Mu'awiya's insistence on this condition was because he knew they would never accept that. He attempted to deceive those who had come as representatives and had been apt to be deceived. He said to Ziyad Ibn Hafsa, “I want you to join us with your family and I make a pledge, after victory, to dispose you with each one of the two cities you want.”
Ziyad said, “I have an axiom from my God for what He betowed me and I want not to be patron of wrongdoers.” [1332]
With the elapse of Muharram, month of illegals came to an end and Siffin war was launched between Malik and Habib Ibn Muslim in the first day of Safar, that as said, had been Wednesday! [1333] In the night of war being launched, Imam advised all his forces:
“Mu'awiya's waging war comes from his vengeance in Badr, Uhud and from his ignorant bigotry and it is because he wants to take revenge for 'Abd-e Shams.” [1375]
Another woman was Jurwa, daughter of Murra Ibn Ghalib Tamimi who was later brought by Mu'awiya to Damascus. When she was asked by Mu'awiya about Imam 'Ali (a), she said,
ÍÇÒ æÇááå ÇáÔÑÝ ÍÊì áÇ íæÕÝ ¡ æÛÇíÉ ÍÊì áÇ ÊÚÑÝ, “By God, he attained an indescribable nobility and reached a station beyond imagination.” [1376]
Mu'awiya tried to break apart Iraqi army in ways except war. Writing different letters to Abu Ayyub Ansari, 'Abd Allah Ibn 'Abbas and others under the pretext of stopping bloodshed and even of promising caliphate to Ibn 'Abbas [1377], he attempted to force them to oppose Imam (a). Besides, he changed the condition by frequently granting money to his troops,
áã íÈÞ ãä Ãåá ÇáÚÑÇÞ ÃÍÏ Ýì ÞáÈå ãÑÖ ÅáÇø ØãÚ Ýì ãÚÇæíÉ “There remained no one but the problematic Iraqis who joined Mu'awiya in his caprice and this was such that Imam was bothered.” [1378]
Mu'awiya also wrote to Imam asking him to leave Damascus to him without wanting to obey him. This was the same thing he had demanded before and as mentioned, he intended to establish an independent emirate in Damascus. Imam turned him down. [1379]
This time, Damascus people strongly spoke about severe bloodshed and publicized their aim of ending the war. Such a measure was taken just to hinder Damascus conquest, and probably to bring about a gap and discard in Iraq's army. This was what Mu'awiya failed to do repeatedly; yet as we shall wee later, he finally made it. In one of these days, one of the Damascus people came between the two armies and proposed that Iraq any return to Iraq and Damascus army to Damascus, so to avert a bloodshed.
Confirming his truthfulness, Imam said: “I know that you made this proposal out of benevolence and pity; however, I have considered well, contemplated carefully and assessed the dimensions of this deed haunting me, and I have found no way but submitting to was, or refuting what Allah has inspired the Prophet (S).
Indeed, Allah, the blessed and exalted, doesn't like His friends to remain reticent and submit while tyranny and mutiny are prevailing on the earth, and not to enjoin the good and forbid from the evil. That's why I realized that to me, the war (with all its hardship) is easier than enduring the hell with its chains.” [1380]
In one of the last war days, the battle became so intense that it started by the morning prayer and continued up to the mid-night. During all this period, Ashtar was busy provoking the army. This night was called “Layla al-Harir”, the night of clamor. Again the war started from the middle of that night and continued up to the noon of the next day.
“The enemy fought to its last grasp”, said Imam, in a sermon.
Mu'awiya and 'Amr thinking that everything was finished and feeling that they cannot be so hopeful of Damascus army, embarked on a trick. The next day after the night of clamor, when the war lasted to the moon of that day, [1381] 500 Qur'ans were raised above the spears of the Damascus people.
There were loud voices crying, “O group of Arabs! Think of your women and girls. If you'll be killed, who will stand up to Romans, Turks and Persians tomorrow?” [1382]
As a result of this measure, little by little, this proclamation was heard within the Iraqi army that the enemy has admitted the arbitration of Qur'an, and we don't have the right to fight them. Imam defined this remarks strongly and announced that this deed is nothing but a trick. Sa'sa'a said that Mu'awiya took this measure after he heard Ash'ath Ibn Qays reminding of the women and girls at the night of clamor, and that Arabs are collapsing. [1383]
Besides, Ash'ath was the first person opposing Imam on the continuation of the war. We've previously pointed out that the account of his correspondence with Mu'awiya, since his dismissal from Adharbayjan has been mentioned in historical records. Here, Ya'qubi as well clarified that Mu'awiya conciliating Ash'ath wrote to him and invited him there. [1384] Ash'ath's measure was supported by the Yemeni. [1385]
The minimum problem concerning Ash'ath was that he was apt to deviation from the outset, and was drawn to this path. In the thick of the clashes, we have in hand some of his remarks against Mu'awiya and with respect to instigating Iraq army. [1386] It ought to be known that tribal obstinacy played a crucial role and in all likelihood, Imam's true heed to Malik caused Ash'ath to take umbrage.
The escalation of the discrepancy amongst the army of Imam, has induced much more hardships for him. Imam felt that he is no more the commander, and the people have tied his hands, and turned out to be his emir.
Even so, Imam stood up and said, “I deserve to admit the arbitration of Allah's book more than the others; however, Mu'awiya and his companions are not the companions of religion and Qur'an. I know them better than you. I was with them since my childhood.”
At this moment, about 20000 of the Iraq army came to Imam, and without calling him “Amir al-Mu'minin”, asked him to accept the arbitration of Qur'an. Among these people were a group of Qur'an-reciters being contented with Qur'an recitation, and a number of whom joining the Kharijites's range. [1387]
At this time, Ashtar at the front line approached Mu'awiya division camp while fighting. War dissenters asked Imam to order Ashtar back. Imam sent Yazid Ibn Hani for him.
Ashtar sent a message that, “Now it is not the time for a return.” “You've prompted him to fight, if Ashtar doesn't return, we'll kill you.” Said the dissenters.
As a result of this statement, Ashtar returned and he was stopped. In a letter to Mu'awiya, Imam noting that we know you're not the follower of Qur'an, pointed out the acceptance of Qur'an arbitration. [1388]
Ash'ath went to Mu'awiya asking him regarding the way of executing Qur'an precept. He said that it's better that one of our people and one of yours sit together and express their opinion concerning Qur'an precept in this regard. He forwarded this opinion to Imam.
Afterwards, a group of Damascus and Iraq Qur'an-reciters came between the two armies and recited Qur'an for some time and agreed to revive what the Qur'an has revived. Thereafter, Damascus people appointed 'Amr Ibn 'As. Ash'ath and a number of those joining the Kharijites later, proposed Abu Musa Ash'ari.
Imam refused him on account of his opposition to him in Jamal battle, but they insisted in this regard. Imam's proposal was either Ibn 'Abbas or Ashtar, but they said that Ashtar believes in war, Ibn 'Abbas shouldn't be either, for 'Amr Ibn 'As is from Mudhar tribe, so the other side should be Yemeni. áÇ æÇááå áÇíÍßã ÝíåÇ ãÖÑíÇä ÍÊì ÊÞæã ÇáÓÇÚÉ [1389] “By Allah, two persons from Muďrids won't judge in that until the Day of Resurrection.”
Imam saw that insistence is out of place and said, “Do whatever you want.” [1390]
Later on Ibn 'Abbas said, “Had at that time some companions been patient, the victory would have been imminent.” [1391]
So it was agreed that a convention will be written. In this convention pointing to the appointment of these two persons by Damascus and Iraq people, it was mentioned that these two persons are due to comment on the matter of their disagreement: “Provided that these two abide by the divine covenant and pledge in the firmest and greatest manner which Allah has extracted promise from each of his creatures. And that during the duty on which they were dispatched, they put Qur'an before themselves, and do not exceed, I their judgment, what has been written in the Qur'an, and if they don't find, they will act on the basis of the comprehensive Sunna of the Prophet (S), and they should in no way, act in conformity with their desires, neither should they be entangled in suspicion.”
Besides, it was agreed that in case of the death of one of these two, before judgment, the commander of the aforesaid side would be able to appoint somebody else. During this span of time, if one of the two commanders passed away, the people of that area will appoint another just person instead of him.
Further, it was stated that: “it is compulsory for the judges to adhere to the divine treaty and pledge and not to offer an interpretative judgment of their own in opposition to the Qur'anic text, and not to oppress deliberately and not to be entangled in suspicion and not to overlook the order of Qur'an and Sunna of the Prophet (S) in their judgment. And if they don't do so, the people won't submit to their judgment, neither will they admit the treaty and the liability approved by those two.”
In the convention, the date of the arbitration was sset on the end of the next Ramaďan (to wit eight months from Safar to Ramaďan) and it was agreed that the issue will be resolves anyhow up to the pilgrimage season. “If they don't judge on the basis of the Qur'an and Prophet's (S) Sunna till the end of the season, the Muslims will remain at war as they were from the onset, and there is no condition between the two groups in this regard.” The aforesaid treaty was concluded on Wednesday (according th Abu Mikhnaf, on Friday) [1392], on Safar 17, 37 A.H. [1393]
In this convention, equal rights were been determined for Imam and Mu'awiya. In the first stage, Imam's name was accompanied by the title “Amir al-Mu'minin”, the Commander of the Faithful, but it was not acceptable for Mu'awiya.
Ash'ath insisted on the elimination of this title, Imam said, “Glory be to Allah, A Sunna like The Prophet's (S) one, where Suhayl Ibn 'Amr, the representative of polytheists, insisted on the ommition of “Rasul Allah”, the Messenger of Allah, in Hudaybiyyah peace pact.” [1394]
Anyhow, the convention was written, but among a group of Imam's companion, a riot broke out which paved the way for Kharijites incidents later. Some disagreed with the convention there except for those being truly among the Shi'ite Muslims of Imam, and bearing the arbitration course for Imam's sake.
Malik was among them, when Imam (a) was told that Malik is not satisfied with this convention, Imam (a) said, “When I will be satisfied, Malik will be so as well, and I'm satisfied. You said he has kept himself aloof from me, but I don't reckon that he'll do so. There are not two persons or even one person amongst you like him, who think so about their foe.” [1395]
Imam returned to Kufa along with the army on Rabi' al-Awwal 37 A.H. [1396] In Kufa, loud voices of cries and weeps were heard from each house, and Imam confirming the martyrdom of their martyrs, offered his condolence to them. Finally, Imam sent Abu Musa to the arbitration site.
Imam dispatched 400 persons along with Abu Musa Ash'ari, accompanied by Shurayh Ibn Hani as their commander, and 'Abd Allah Ibn 'Abbas as their congregational prayer leader. Additionally, Imam notified Abu Musa of the defiled nature of Mu'awiya and advised him tremendously. [1397]
At this time, 'Abd Allah Ibn 'Umar, Mughira Ibn Shu'ba, 'Abd Allah Ibn Zubayr had to come to Mu'awiya and were present at the meeting incident of 'Amr Ibn 'As and Abu Musa. [1398] 'Amr Ibn 'As, when meeting Abu Musa, spoke of the virtues! of Mu'awiya and noted that Mu'awiya is the blood-wit of 'Uthman, and Allah has put a “Sultan” for blood-wit.
Abu Musa relied on the revival of 'Umar tradition concerning the issue of council. Once he spoke of 'Abd Allah Ibn 'Umar, but 'Amr said that a weak person like him could not take the responsibility of such a deed. It was not only unclear under which principles this council being regarded as a pretext by the dissenters, ought to be shaped, but not obvious who should be the member of such a council. Once 'Umar relying on his own power has placed caliphate among six persons so that they will choose one out of them. What was the connection of this matter to leaving the work to the “Council among Muslims”, so to select one for themselves?
Abu Musa insisted on this matter and an account of that he was of the belief that firstly we ought to leave this belief aside that one of the two persons either Imam or Mu'awiya should be the caliph, so that thereupon we shall select some one. Hence, for Abu Musa's part, the declaration of these two commands' deposition of Imam's commentary on the pulpit, 'Amr Ibn 'As announced that he has just the right to depose 'Ali (a); however, I have the caliphate to Mu'awiya!
Abu Musa cried out in protest and insulted 'Amr Ibn 'As. Abu Musa called 'Amr a dog, and 'Amr called Abu Musa a donkey and the session turned out in chaos. So hereby, without speaking of the Qur'an and the Sunna of the Prophet (S), and merely under the pretext of 'Umar tradition, the arbitration course itself gave rise to another disagreement between Damascus and Iraq. [1399]
From that time on, the people of Damascus called Mu'awiya “Amir al-Mu'minin”, and this was the most significant outcome of the arbitration for the Damascus people. Abu Mikhnaf stated that when Iraqi people were going to Siffin, they were all amiable and kind towards each other. When they returned, however, they all had hostility and hatred towards each other.
The Kharijites said, “You were flaccid in implementing Allah's order”, and another group told them, “You disobeyed Imam and our group.” Imam became sorrowful on account of their remarks. [1400]
Notes:
[1243] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 3,5; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 349 It is to be said that the most comprehensive work on the event of Siffin is the valuable book “Waq‘at Siffin”, written by Nasr Ibn Muzahim, dead in 212 Ibn A‘tham has mainly used this book in reporting about Siffin and he has condensed the book Sources such as Tarikh at-Tabari and Baladhuri have quoted mainly from Abu Mikhnaf except a few sporadic reports
[1244] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 347
[1245] Ibid vol. II, pp 360-361
[1246] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 211-212
[1247] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 8
[1248] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 56; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 432; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 160
[1249] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 411
[1250] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 403
[1251] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 212
[1252] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 12-13
[1253] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 350
[1254] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 297
[1255] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 350; Waq‘at Siffin, p. 113; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 167
[1256] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 352
[1257] Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 156
[1258] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 21; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 370-371
[1259] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 27
[1260] ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Ghanm Azdi who was known as “Afqah ahl Sham”(Horizon of Damascus people) said to Shurahbil in Damascus, “Even if ‘Ali has murdered ‘Uthman, he would be caliph of Muslims since Muhajirun and Ansar have sworn allegiance to him and they are “superior to people” Waq‘at Siffin, p. 45
[1261] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 29; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 374-375; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 157
[1262] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 380
[1263] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 32
[1264] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 411, he was proud not because of being from Damascus but because he was a Yemeni
[1265] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 406-407; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 160
[1266] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 44-52; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 397-401; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 275-276 (footnote); Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 159
[1267] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 52; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 392
[1268] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 429-430
[1269] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 58; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 432
[1270] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 77
[1271] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 404
[1272] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 61
[1273] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 283
[1274] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 284; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 157
[1275] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 382
[1276] In Sunnites sources ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Amr Ibn ‘As, one of Sahaba hadith-writers, is defended while ‘Abd Allah was present in Siffin arm in arm with his father ‘Abd Allah commanded the left wing of Damascus troops Waq‘at Siffin, p. 206 It goes to say that when his father asked him to hold the banner, he first rejected and said, “I’ll never fight anyone who has not been even one moment an atheist ” His father obligated him to hold the banner, he took it and said, “If the Prophet had not said, “Obey your father”, “I would have never done this!!” al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 35
[1277] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 35; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 285; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 185
[1278] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 39; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 288; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 186 ‘Amr lived only until 43 H and was ruler of Egypt
[1279] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 37,44; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 386
[1280] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 441
[1281] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 294; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 161
[1282] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 82-83; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 413
[1283] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 63; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 416-417
[1284] Waq‘at Siffin, vol. 75; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 187; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 421
[1285] Nahj al-Balaghah, catchwords, No 18
[1286] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 418-419
[1287] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 86-91; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 277-282; Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, Ibn Abi l-Hadid, vol. 15, p. 73; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 474-475; Nahj As-Sa‘ada, vol. 4, p. 185
[1288] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 110-111; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 477-480
[1289] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 460
[1290] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 101; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 460
[1291] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 293; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 362; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 164 Imam paid his blood money out of public property
[1292] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 92-96
[1293] Ibid pp 98-99; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 444
[1294] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 101
[1295] Ibid p. 115; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 165, he seems to be the same Khajih Rabi‘ whose tombstone, in Mashhad is visited very much
[1296] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 102; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 447
[1297] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 103; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 448, Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 165
[1298] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 114-115
[1299] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 118-121; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 393-397 and in the footnote of Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, Ibn Abi l-Hadid, vol. III, p. 188; Muruj al-dhahab, vol. III, p. 10; SamT al-Nujum al-’Awali, vol. II, p. 465
[1300] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 127
[1301] Ibid p. 131
[1302] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 105-107
[1303] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 296-297
[1304] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, pp 188-189
[1305] Waq‘at Siffin, vol. II, p. 144; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 468
[1306] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 150-151; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 297
[1307] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 187
[1308] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 298; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 487-488
[1309] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 462-466; Waq‘at Siffin, pp 140-142
[1310] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 299
[1311] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 303
[1312] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, pp 188,190
[1313] al-Kamil fi l-Tarikh, vol. III, pp 293,321
[1314] Tarikh Khalifat Ibn Khayyat, p. 191
[1315] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 190
[1316] Ibid p. 196
[1317] Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 169-172
[1318] Ibid p. 171
[1319] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 495
[1320] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 362
[1321] Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 168
[1322] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 439
[1323] Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 166-167
[1324] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 163
[1325] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 298; al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 2
[1326] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 13
[1327] Ibid vol. III, p. 15
[1328] Nasr Ibn Muzahim says,
æßÇä ÇßËÑ ÇáÞæã ÍÑæÈÇð ÇáÇÔÊÑ Waq‘at Siffin, p. 195
[1329] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 196
[1330] Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 163
[1331] Ibid p. 170
[1332] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 199
[1333] Ibid p. 214; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 303
[1334] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 44-45
[1335] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 203-204
[1336] Despite mention of the date in several sources, 12th of Safar is regarded by Baladhuri (Ansab, vol. II, p. 323) to be on Friday that is inconsistent with this date But regarding the report by Nasr about the citation of arbitration agreement of Wednesday 17th of Safar, Baladhuri’s reference to Friday 12th of Safar is approved
[1337] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 303-305
[1338] Ibid vol. II, pp 305-306
[1339] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 230-232
[1340] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 447
[1341] Ibid p. 236; Ashtar in his speech said that roughly one hundred people from Badr stay with us Waq‘at Siffin, p. 238
[1342] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 188
[1343] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 180-181
[1344] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 215
[1345] Ibid p. 319
[1346] Concerning the sources, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 312-313 (footnote) in the following pages ‘Amr Ibn ‘As is quoted to have said the afore-mentioned hadith
[1347] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 131
[1348] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 239; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 124-125
[1349] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 311-313
[1350] Mukhtasar Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 5, p. 236
[1351] al-Muhabbar, p. 296
[1352] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 340; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 310
[1353] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 271
[1354] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 244
[1355] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 360
[1356] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 41; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 176
[1357] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 187
[1358] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 363
[1359] Ibid p. 274; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 176
[1360] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 407; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 330; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 177
[1361] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 173-174
[1362] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 293; al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 55
[1363] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 325; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 186
[1364] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 437; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 322; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 43 – 44
[1365] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 163
[1366] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 163
[1367] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 119-120
[1368] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 324; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 320 Baladhuri hesitates to report about martyrdom of Uwiys The proof reader mentions on pages 320-322 various sources in which this undeniable report is referred
[1369] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 451-460
[1370] He is reported in detail in Waq‘at Siffin including, pp 346-356
[1371] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 67
[1372] Ibid vol. II, p. 101
[1373] Ibid vol. III, p. 142
[1374] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 103
[1375] al-Wafidat min l-Nisa’ ‘ala Mu‘awiya, p. 29
[1376] Ibid p. 36
[1377] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 307
[1378] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 435; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 221-222
[1379] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 470-471
[1380] Ibid, p. 474; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 264-65
[1381] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 323
[1382] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 478
[1383] Ibid, p. 481
[1384] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, pp 188-89
[1385] Ibid, vol. II, p. 189
[1386] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 74
[1387] Waq‘at Siffin
[1388] Ibid, pp 490-494
[1389] Regrettably Muďri and Yemeni competition induced problem at Siffin battle
[1390] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 499-500
[1391] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 331
[1392] Ibid, vol. II, p. 337; see, p. 338
[1393] Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 194-196, Waq‘at Siffin, pp 504-570, see, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 334-335
[1394] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 508; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 189
[1395] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 521; see, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 236
[1396] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 237
[1397] Nathr ad-Durr, vol. I, p. 421
[1398] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 540-541
[1399] Waq‘at Siffin pp 545-546; Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 199-201; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 350-51
[1400] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 342