Abu Dharr
Mu‘awiyah’s state within a state, gradually began to take the limelight from Khilafah central in al-Madinah. Mu‘awiyah was not sitting on his laurels in Damascus just tending to the affairs of his local and provincial deputies. His drive was to spread out and get bigger.
During ‘Umar’s khilafah, Mu‘awiyah’s push and urge were on a tight leash—thanks to ‘Umar’s diligence and rigorousness. It appears that Mu‘awiyah at one time tried to convince ‘Umar that a naval campaign would serve the overall Islamic strategy but the latter adamantly refused such action knowing Mu‘awiyah’s instincts and urges.
‘Umar even told him that if he speaks about any naval military operation again, ‘Umar will give him the boot. But when ‘Uthman became the khalifah, he gave Mu‘awiyah the go-ahead to embark on a naval undertaking provided that Mu‘awiyah himself would hand pick a voluntary crew. Mu‘awiyah lost no time and launched a naval venture consisting of 50 crew members or more.
This prompted the governor of Egypt ‘Abdullah ibn Sa‘d ibn Abi Sarh to replicate what Mu‘awiyah did. Some historians say that both naval military operations (Mu‘awiyah’s and Abdullah’s) connected in Cyprus.
Mu‘awiyah took advantage of his advantageous geographical location to push back the Byzantine forces, rout them and obtain the spoils of war which were channeled into military funds and the treasury.
Anyone who studies that particular time period carefully will realize that ‘Uthman made it possible for a future Mu‘awiyah to concentrate power within the Umayyad clan. ‘Uthman placed both the provinces of Palestine and Homs under Mu‘awiyah’s control. The combined larger Levant military might under Mu‘awiyah’s jurisdiction became the most formidable among the collective armed Islamic forces.
No longer was ‘Umar around to restrain and contain the acquisitiveness and geo-political appetite of Mu‘awiyah. When the resistance to this “power grab” by Mu‘awiyah finally mobilized (what became known as al-fitnah al-kubra) Mu‘awiyah was the senior among all the governors, the most prevailing among them, and very accepted by his immediate nationals/subjects.
Had ‘Uthman followed in the footsteps of ‘Umar, he would have confined Mu‘awiyah governorship to Damascus and Jordan only. Palestine and Homs should have reported directly to ‘Uthman in al-Madinah and not to Mu‘awiyah in Damascus. Had ‘Uthman done that he could have gone down in history as an augmentation to ‘Umar’s course of action.
The senior Sahabah, the younger generation and the other general population in the ummah were rapidly becoming mindful of this digression of ‘Uthman which resulted in anger that turned into antagonism and eventually turned into a revolt. ‘Uthman also was skimpy on the principle of Shura [popular participation in public policies]. Thus did Mu‘awiyah become a strongman who was able to employ the governor of Egypt who would thenceforth act independently of al-Madinah and then to position his underlings in al-Hijaz and Arabia to eventually make his move against Imam ‘Ali.
Moving away from Bilad al-Sham [Greater Syria] to Egypt, ‘Umar appointed ‘Amr ibn al-‘As as its governor. When ‘Uthman assumed the khilafah, he kept ‘Amr in this position. Initially, he kept other governors appointed by ‘Umar in their positions as well. After a year into his reign, ‘Uthman’s extended family started to obtain incremental control over the seat of power in al-Madinah. This was done in an opportunistic or unscrupulous way.
Their aspiration now turned to Egypt. There is much debate about the pros and cons of replacing ‘Amr ibn al-‘As with ‘Abdullah ibn Sa‘d ibn Abi Sarh as governor of Egypt. Some say that the people of Egypt complained to ‘Uthman about ‘Amr’s lapses and indiscretions. So ‘Uthman dismissed him.
Others say that ‘Uthman was grooming ‘Abdallah ibn Abi Sarh his brother [through breast-feeding] for a senior position. It had nothing to do with the way the Egyptians felt towards ‘Amr ibn al-‘As.
This played out when ‘Uthman inhibited ‘Amr from commanding a military force to liberate lands beyond Egypt and instead gave that responsibility to ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh. Here ‘Uthman countermanded ‘Amr and provided the opportunity to ‘Abdullah to publically “prove himself”, which he did and thereafter was assigned the governorate of Egypt with a bonus of one fifth of the fifth of the spoils of war.
As expected, ‘Amr was displeased with this turn of events. He knew that the other governors in al-Sham, al-Basrah and al-Kufah were in sync with ‘Uthman as they commanded their own armies and were not outflanked by the khalifah.
‘Uthman acclaimed the march of the Islamic forces beyond Egypt by assigning to ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh’s military contingent prominent personalities, among them companions of the Prophet (ﷺ), young persons from Quraish and a number of Ansaris. On orders from ‘Uthman, Ibn Abi Sarh was instructed to dispatch forces towards the Maghrib [Mediterranean northwest Africa] and if possible towards al-Andalus [Iberia].
Ibn Abi Sarh was able to liberate most of those territories. Obviously the spoils of war were very significant and were fairly distributed among the masses. He took for himself one fifth of the fifth of the spoils and the rest was sent to ‘Uthman in al-Madinah.
Some reports say that Marwan ibn al-Hakam was also in on this sharing of the spoils of war by purchasing some of it and being given other portions. There are reports that the troops were upset because ‘Uthman had allotted a portion of the spoils of war to ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh. They sent a delegation to the khalifah in al-Madinah to have him reconsider his decision.
‘Uthman told them: I did authorize him [Ibn Abi Sarh] to take that portion of the war proceeds. If you agree to it, then all is fine, but if you do not then the amount will be returned [to the treasury]. They answered that they were unhappy. So ‘Uthman replied that the amount is retracted.
They then asked ‘Uthman to dismiss Ibn Abi Sarh as things cannot return to normal with him as their commander. ‘Uthman acquiesced and wrote to Ibn Abi Sarh to return his allocated amount of the war spoils and to relinquish his extended official position in Northern Africa, excluding Egypt.
He [Ibn Abi Sarh] returned to Egypt in a state of dissatisfaction and frustration. After all he had managed to liberate a significant area west of Egypt. In these two rival positions: governor vs. commander, both communicated through their own channels with ‘Uthman that the other is interfering with his duties and responsibilities.
It probably would have behooved ‘Uthman to summon ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh to al-Madinah and leave ‘Amr as a self-directed governor of Egypt. During ‘Umar’s reign there did not appear to be any rift between ‘Umar and ‘Amr.
There should be no doubt in any objective observer’s mind that ‘Uthman’s relatives were angry that developments took such a course; i.e. Ibn Abi Sarh was sacked. Family peer pressure on ‘Uthman resulted in his handing over the levies of Egypt to Ibn Abi Sarh while ‘Amr would no longer have any official position.
There may have been behind the scenes jockeying for power between these two men: ‘Amr ibn al-‘As and ‘Abdullah ibn Sa‘d ibn Abi Sarh which resulted in a temporary demotion of Ibn Abi Sarh and a temporary retention of the governorate of Egypt by Ibn al-‘As. Had ‘Uthman been independent of his clan (Bani Umayyah) he would have sacked both of them and appointed a new governor and a new commander for Egypt and Africa respectively. Whether he was from Quraish or a non-Quraishi should not have mattered. By relieving ‘Amr of his position, ‘Uthman gained an enemy.
At one point when a significant amount of revenue from Egypt arrived in al-Madinah, ‘Amr went to see ‘Uthman. When ‘Uthman was taking possession of this revenue, ‘Amr approached him and ‘Uthman said to him: Are you aware that the udders [mammary glands] of Egypt have been flowing plentifully after you left Egypt? ‘Amr responded: at the expense of the young ones. ‘Uthman was insinuating that ‘Amr was misappropriating/pocketing a good amount of Egypt’s proceeds, while ‘Amr was implying that the surplus proceeds coming from Egypt were due to overtaxing the people there.
…for, verily, man’s inner self does incite [him] to impropriety… [Surat al-Yusuf, verse 53].
This is a look at that person that from the point of view of Shi’i Islam is the third from among the ma’sumin, the third of the presente...
1
Tackling the sensitive issue of succession of Muslim leadership after the Prophet (pbuh) joined heavenly company, Abu Dharr guides readers t...
In his regular column, Abu Dharr invites readers to rise above their sectarian prejudices and see the cordial interaction between Abu Bakr, ...
In his continuing series on the early history of the emergence of Islamic leadership after the Prophet (pbuh), Abu Dharr highlights the circ...
