DHTML Menu / JavaScript Menu Powered by Milonic
Already a member? Sign In

Village Journals help
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.

Battle of Jamal (Camel)


Umm-ul Momeneen Ayesha (ra), the widow of the Holy Prophet (S), was in Makka for the pilgrimage when Uthman was killed. She had always expected either Talha or Zubayr to succeed him and when she heard of Imam Ali's (as) appointment as Caliph, she was very upset.

She managed to recruit the support of the powerful clan of Bani Umayyah, to whom Uthman had belonged. The ex-governors of Uthman, who had been replaced by Imam Ali (as), also joined her and the ex-governor of Yemen provided her with the means of financing her war by giving her the treasure he had stolen from Yemen when he was deposed. Talha and Zubayr also joined her, in spite of their oath of allegiance to Imam Ali (as). A large number of aimless drifters were also paid to enlist in the army.

The preparations of war having been completed, Ayesha's (ra) army proceeded to Basra. Before leaving, she had asked Umme Salma, a faithful widow of the Holy Prophet (S), to accompany her. Umme Salma (ra) had indignantly refused, reminding Ayesha that the Holy Prophet (S) had said that Imam Ali (as) was his successor and whoever disobeyed him, disobeyed the Holy Prophet (S) himself. She also reminded her of the time when he had addressed all his wives saying that the dogs of Hawab would bark at one of his wives, who would be part of a rebellious mob. She then warned Ayesha not to be fooled by the words of Talha and Zubayr who would only entangle her in wrong deeds. This advice had a sobering effect on Ayesha, who almost gave up her plan. However, her adopted son, Abdallah bin Zubayr, convinced her to go ahead.

On the morning of Friday, the 16th of Jamadi II, 36 A.H. (November 656 A.D.) Ayesha (ra) mounted on a litter on the camel al-Askar, and marched from Makka at the head of 1,000 men. On her right was Talha and on her left, Zubayr. On their way many more joined them, swelling their numbers to 3,000.

On the way to Basra, the rebel army received news that Imam Ali (as) had come out of Madina in their pursuit. They decided to leave the main road and proceed to Basra through a different route. When they passed through the valley of Hawab the dogs of the village surrounded Ayesha's (ra) camel, barking loudly. She was immediately worried and asked for the name of the place. When she was told it was Hawab, she was shocked and she despairingly cried, "Alas! Alas! I am the wretched woman of Hawab. The Prophet of Allah had already warned me against this."

She got off her camel and refused to go any further. Talha and Zubayr tried to convince her that the place was not Hawab and even brought 50 witnesses to testify to this lie, but in vain. Finally, they raised a cry that Imam Ali (as) was approaching, and Ayesha, struck with terror, quickly remounted and the march was resumed.

The army reached Basra and camped in the suburbs. Ayesha, Talha and Zubayr began talks with the leading citizens of Basra, trying to get their support for their cause. In this they failed and were subjected to ridicule.

Finally, some of them entered the city and during the congregational prayers, they treacherously captured Imam Ali's (as) governor, Uthman bin Huneif, after killing 40 of his guards. Fighting broke out in the city and many of Imam Ali's (as) supporters were killed before Ayesha gained control of Basra. The governor, Uthman, suffered the indignity of having his eyebrows, moustache and beard plucked out, hair by hair, before being turned out of the city.

Meanwhile, Imam Ali (as) had received information about Ayesha's plans from Umme Salma, and news of the disturbances in Makka and Basra also came through.

Imam Ali (as) made immediate plans to march towards Basra but could only raise 900 men with difficulty. This was because the people were reluctant to fight Ayesha, who was considered to be the Mother of the Faithful by virtue of being the widow of the Holy Prophet (S). Also, Muawiya had succeeded in making people think that Imam Ali (as) was somehow involved in the murder of Uthman.

In Kufa, Imam Hasan (as) (the eldest son of Imam Ali) raised 9,000 men, and other units arrived as well, all joining Imam Ali (as) at his camp at Zhi-Q'ar. Meanwhile, Uthman bin Huneif arrived with fresh news from Basra. Imam Ali (as) smiled and said to him that he had left them as an old man but had returned as a beardless youth.

Imam Ali (as) wrote letters to Ayesha, Talha and Zubayr, warning them against the unwise steps they had taken, but his words were ignored. Finally he marched to Basra at the head of 20,000 men.

Ayesha's (ra) forces numbered 30,000 but they were mostly raw recruits, while Imam Ali's army was full of battle veterans.

In Basra, the sight of Imam Ali's (as) men in battle formation filled Ayesha and her comrades with terror. Imam Ali (as) talked at length with Talha and Zubayr, negotiating for peace. He reminded them of the words of the Holy Prophet (S) regarding his authority, which they both admitted they had heard. Zubayr was ashamed of his deeds and left the scene but Talha remained doubtful. Ayesha was furious at the conduct of the two and ordered a raid at night time to end the chance of peace.

The next morning Ayesha mounted her camel al-Askar and urged her troops to prepare for battle. Thus began the unfortunate Battle of Jamal (Camel), where Muslims fought each other for the first time. Although outnumbered, Imam Ali (as) and his soldiers were too skilled to be defeated. Soon victory began to incline towards Imam Ali (as). Talha was wounded and later died. Ayesha's (as) camel was brought down and Imam Ali (as) ordered his adopted son Muhammad bin Abu Bakr to take care of Ayesha (ra) who was his half-sister.

After that, the battle was soon over, and Imam Ali (as) declared a general amnesty for all the rebels.

Ayesha's (ra) plans had come to nothing and 10,000 men lay dead as a result of her jealousy. In this battle Imam Ali (as) restrained his men from taking any war booty and all property found on the battle ground was gathered in the mosque of Basra, from where the owners could claim their possessions.
 

Add Comments

 
Add
 

  Comments on this journal

Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 2:03pm)
I will re-post a verse for you:

O ye who believe! save yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is Men and Stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who flinch not (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allah, but do (precisely) what they are commanded.

Now contrary to your claim that "it was out of HIS mercy that he chose not to divorce them, not because they didnt deserve it", here the Quran is clearly stating that one should not let excessive love prevent one from disciplining the family.

Re-read the first verse:

"O Prophet! Why holdest thou to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

So it was the excessive mercy that caused the Prophet (S) to make unlawful for himself something God had allowed. And here, the Almighty is correcting him (S).
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 1:59pm)
Actually, I would prefer we stick to one topic at a time.

Her condemnation by Allah in Surah Tahreem. The prophet (S) didnt divorce them because he was the mercy to mankind, and it was out of HIS mercy that he chose not to divorce them, not because they didnt deserve it.

1. This assumption stains the Prophet (S). When the verse itself states immediately afterwards:

O ye who believe! save yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is Men and Stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who flinch not (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allah, but do (precisely) what they are commanded.

Are you saying the Prophet (S) disobeyed the Quran and simply retained wives whom God had condemned?

2. What is the threat of divorce if it was never going to be carried out? Not only have you made a mockery of the Prophet, but the Book of God.

3. The verse nowhere states God has condemned the wives of the Prophet (S). Why do you think I references the verse preceded 5?

If ye two turn in repentance to Him, your hearts are indeed so inclined; But if ye back up each other against him, truly Allah is his Protector, and Gabriel, and (every) righteous one among those who believe,- and furthermore, the angels - will back (him) up.

So it is quite obvious that the condition of divorce was based on whether they repented or not...

Now once again for you, did the Prophet (S) divorce any of his wives?
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 12:54pm)
As salamua laykum Brother Khiladi.

To answer yoru question, I thought it was kind of obvious why we dont follow Ummul Momineen Ayesha, (a)her having enmity towards the family of the prophet(which was a sin)

, b)waging a war against Imam Ali, (which was also a sin and resulted in the murders of many Muslims, includng Talha and Zubayr)

c)stepping OUTSIDE Of her home against the orders of the prophet (saw) which stated ALL the wives were not to leave their homes after his death.

d)her condemnation by Allah in Surah Tahreem. The prophet 9saw didnt divorce them because he was the mercy to mankind, and it was out of HIS mercy that he chose not to divorce them, not because they didnt deserve it.

But I have another point to make to you.

Did the prophet (saw) command us to follow Ayesha? The answer is no. There is no authentic shia or sunni hadith that says we have to follow Ayesha or Hafsa or anythign from the Qu'ran that says we have to follow her.

The verses of the Qu'ran which state to follow the family, which you feel means to follow Ayesha couldl NOT be Ayesha because of the above and the below:

Interestingly enough, the prophet said "i am leaving behind the Qu'ran and Ahlul bayt".

And WHERE do we find this hadith?

In Sahih Muslim, not under any virtues or chapters of the Wives of the prophet, but rather under the virtues of teh sahaba under Imam Ali.

In fact, the hadith that is most often quoted by sunnis, The Qu'ran and Sunnah is NOT in any of the 6 major hadith books (bukhari, muslim, tirmidhi, nisai, ibn majah, dawud, etc.) But is in fact in the Muwatta of Imam Malik.

Can you answer us why the hadith we use, and is in your 6 authentic books, is never quoted by your ulema but the one that is found in teh Muwatta is more often quoted?

My advice to all my sunni brothers is the same advice Imam Ali (3as) gave to a person who was confused when deciding whether he should support Ayesha or Imam Ali.

Imam Ali (3as) said: "dont look at me as being the son in law or cousin of the prophet 9saw and dont look at Ayesha as the wife of the prophet (saw). LOOK AT THE ISSUES.

Unfortuantely, we dont look at the issues and instead we defend people blindly. This is a simple form of tribalism.

If my friend does something wrong, I dont blindly support him cause he's my friend, as Muslims we are supposed to support the truth.

The Sahaba and Wives of the prophet are not above the law, we shoudl remember that.

Fe amani Allah
Mansoor
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 12:33pm)
not that I am a fan of GFHaddad, but it is quite pertinent to quote him:

The actual person who struck the blow on Hazrat Uthman was none other than Muhammad bin Abu Bakr, The son of Hazrat Abu Bakr and the brother of Hazrat Ayesha.

No, he did not. The most reliable report on this is that of al-Zuhri, from Ibn al-Musayyab, mursal, in al-Dhahabi's Tarikh al-Islam that Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr led the group that burst in, then `Uthman mentioned his father to him and he drew back in shame. He later said: "I repented at that moment." But the others pounced on `Uthman and killed him - Allah be well-pleased with him. Na'ila the wife of `Uthman confirmed this to `Ali (ra), adding: "Nevertheless, he brought in those who killed him!" Rayta or Khansa' the Mawlat of Usama ibn Zayd was in the house and confirms this also. This can be found in Ibn Sa`d's Tabaqat, al-Tabari's Tarikh, al-Maliqi's Maqtal al-Shahid `Uthman, Ibn Kathir's al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya, and others.

The problem with al-Tabari's History is that it is not a critical history but an indiscriminate compilation that includes the chains for the experts to sift truth from nonsense. Certain professionals rely exclusively on the nonsense to puzzle the people of truth. It would be a great boon if a hadith expert compiled the names of all the forgers found in al-Tabari's chains in the Tarikh. One such forger is Sayf ibn `Umar, the author of Futuh al-Sham, who narrates the report that Ibn Abi Bakr supposedly stabbed `Uthman. A much more reliable history is al-Dhahabi's Tarikh al-Islam, in print in 52 volumes. This is a superb edition and monumental work by Dr. `Umar `Abd al-Salam Tadmuri. (Also: the Siras of al-Mizzi and Ibn Kathir; more recently, those of Dr. Muhammad Abu Shuhba and Dr. Muhammad Sadiq `Arjun.)

As for al-Balaadhiri i.e. Ahmad ibn Yahya ibn Jabir (d. 279) - upon whom rely certain people - he was a court genealogist and poet, not a hadith expert even if al-Dhahabi mentions him in Tadhkirat al-Huffaz because of his erudition. His masterpiece is Ansaab al-Ashraaf, which he did not complete. One might say he is the archetype of the Abbasid historian full of anti-Umayyad stories. He became insane in later life because of excessive consumption of memory-strengthening anacardium nuts (balaadhir). Imam al-Shafi`i and Ibn al-Jawzi also used them, the former died "early" at 54 of chronic hemorroids and the latter lost his beard, rahimahum Allah. It is strange how much some people rely on al-Balaadhuri for what suits their lusts then they reject him when he tells them that `Umar married Umm Kulthum the daughter of `Ali and Fatima, and she gave him a son and a daughter.

Imam al-Nawawi in Tahdhib al-Asma' wal-Lughat said that Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was 3.5 months old when the Prophet passed from this world. I.e. he was under 3 when Abu Bakr passed away. He was raised by `Ali since the latter married his mother - Asma' bint `Umays - after she was widowed of Abu Bakr. `Uthman said he was prone to anger. After the murder in 35, `Ali used him in various official functions, the last of them in the governorate of Egypt in 37, which shows he was satisfied he was responsible for the murder, together with fear of ordering the killing of a Sahabi . He fought with `Ali at the Camel and Siffin. After the Camel, `Ali deputized him to escort `A'isha back to Madina. Had Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr been responsible for the murder of `Uthman, `A'isha would never have forgiven him nor wept heavily over him when he was killed in Egypt in 38 - rahimahullah. Those who revile his memory today obviously side with his killers against `A'isha and `Ali!
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 12:29pm)
And how come you don't take your sunnah from her, when Allah states about the wives:

"And recite what is rehearsed to you in your homes, of the Signs of Allah and His Wisdom: for Allah understands the finest mysteries and is well-acquainted (with them)."
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 12:27pm)
So Masoom...

did the Prophet (S) end up divorcing those wives?
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 12:02pm)
As salamua laykum.

It is NOT true that Mohammad ibn Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) murdered uthman, in fact he was one of the persons who helped DEFEND Uthman.

Please get your history straight.

You have no problems defending Ayesha or her father Abu Bakr, but then you attack her brother, a brave and valiant commander who saw the truth and rather than taking tribal sides was on teh side of Imam Ali (3as) instead of his sister in the Battle of Jamal because he knew how to distunguish principles from people.

Are you aware of how this brave warrior died? He was murdered by the forces of Amr ibn Al As in Egypt and in fact his body was BURNED inside the cadeavor of a dead donkey. Ummul momineen Ayesha in fact CURSED Muawaiya and Amr ibn Al As for what they did to her broter.

I agree with all my Sunni brothers that we should nto be bashing Ayesha, but my point to them is we have differnces with her and thats why we prefer to use other sources of getting our sunna of the prophet 9saw instead of from her.

If you Read Surah Tahreem, look at the VERY first verses and you will see how Ayesha and Hafsa were crtitized by Allah. If Allah sees fit to criticize them, why do you insist that we have to follow her instead of who we see as ahlul bayt?

Verse 5 Surah Tahreem: Happily his Lord if he divorces you will give him in your place wives BETTER than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, repentant, prayerful, observers of fast, widows and virgins."

Ummul Momineen Ayesha didnt end her enmity with Imam Ali (3as.) When Imam Hasan, the precious grandson of the prophet (saw) was being led to be buried, her army, along with Marwan ibn Al Hakam, prevented the burial of Imam Hasan (3as) and replied "dont let those whom i dont love to be buried here" and if ti wasnt for the patience of Imam Hussein there would have been another battle between the family of the prophet and ayesha and the Umayyads.

These are teh reasons we have differnces with Ayesha, thats it.

We can agree to disagree amicably, but this is why we prefer not to take our source of the sunnah of the prophet (saw) from her.
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 9:19am)
it is primarily why the orientalists cannot make any grounds, and they simply cast aspersions on the WHOLE science of historical criticism developed by the hadeeth scholars...
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 9:18am)
You call this a "shia source". Get it through, when we argue with sunnis we dont present shia sources. This event has been recorded throughout sunni history books. the onus is on you to read them!

Actually, WE DO READ THEM... But we read them CRITICALLY, meaning the scholars VERIFY what they take and what they do not take... this is precisely why ibn Katheer's tafseer is essentially a revised version of Tabari's tafseer, with it's primary emphasis on VERIFYING the various narrations that Tabari quotes...

we've known the problem for over a thousand years... and this is why shia have never really made any grounds...
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 5:30am)
Thank you Khiladi, guess you're biased too (according to Mehnaz's theory).


Mehnaz, this is completely not about being biased. Any kind of common sense defies these made up sections of the stories. Forgive me but I get more upset when you guys slander and hurt the clean reputation of sahaba and the Prophet's wives with made up exaggerations than when SS makes up stories about shia or you make up stories about wahhabis.

The fact of the matter is, yes there is ALWAYS some truth to a historical story, be it little or large, but you can see the added fantasy thoughts of some sick people in the past who want to desperately try to hurt the reputations of sahaba for their own agendas. It's not hard to make out the parts which don't make sense, because anyone who does try to hurt their (may Allah be pleased with them) reputations, Allah will eventually make the fabricators and authors of there narrations look foolish.

Go figure it is right out of Tabbari, no wonder he said not to believe things from him without getting other sources. And please don't call Tabbari a sunni source, he is a historian and will report anything and everything, if you told him aliens came from mars and kidnapped you then invaded your house with a plate looking flying object, he will report it.
 
Login to find out (March 28, 2006 at 3:06am)
The keeper: very very very interesting. You never even once made that comment for any of silkyswords made up trash, you must be so biased. Yet this seems fabricated to you? You call this a "shia source". Get it through, when we argue with sunnis we dont present shia sources. This event has been recorded throughout sunni history books. the onus is on you to read them!
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:49pm)
the assassination of the leader of Yugoslavia led to a World War... wars happen when leaders are assassinated..

what do you expect?
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:47pm)
these narrations are nothing but GARBAGE... they are TRASH... they can't stand a single ounce of scrutiny, and you people believe them...

it's honestly quite ridiculous...
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:46pm)
why should we put this piece aside? It reflects the lengths people blatantly DISTORT the facts and LIE to further their agenda...

it's so ridiculous the nature of it, and when shown to you, you say, well let's put it aside... you people bring distorted accounts of FABRICATED narrations to try and prove your point...

not only does a fabricated narration that belies even basic common sense not suit them, authors such as the above have to distort it further...
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:43pm)
Demon Soul... everybody knows she fought against ALi (R)... what's your point?

Did Aisha (R), according to the Quran, the MOTHER of the believers, sleep with the Prophet (S)?
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:40pm)
I mean do you really want us to get into the totally fabricated nature of this alleged story?

For example, from the way of Mecca to Basra, the ancient historian Abul Faraj mentions 21 halts, and not a single one mentions is Hawab.. and this alleged story is found in Tabari, which proceeds Abul faraj...

1. EIther dogs don't bark in these 21 other places

should we mention narrators if it:

Ismaeel al-Farazi, who has been called according to ibn Adi, a staunch shia... Hafiz ibn Hajr states that although he is honest, he is accused of being a rafidhi... He makes mistakes in narratyions... he died in 244 AH...

Ali bin Aabis al-Arzaq... He is considered weak by ibn Hajre... Tirmidhi records som enarartions from him... He is a resident of Koofa... ibn Moeen states he is nothing./.. JauzJini, Nisai, and Azdi say he is weak... ibn Hibaan says he makes serious mstajkes, and is abandoned...

Abul Khattab al-Hajari is tyhe third narrator, and according to ibn Hajr, he is unknown... the fourth narrartor is Safwan bin Qabisi, who is unknown....

The last narrator is Urani... nobody knows this person.. this was the person who is alleged to have led the army...

in fact, none of the narrations say the dogs gathered aound Aisha, but simply the dogs started barking... the one who re-did this story exxagerated even more, and tried to say the dogs circled the camel of Aisha, which is a blatant lie off of Tabari's account, which is another fiction..

we don't even have to give a detailed account o the content to prove how absurd it is... what I've posted is enough to show it as a baseless LIE...
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:31pm)
this peice aside just tell me did she or she did not went to fight against imam ali?
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:26pm)
So the fight was over the 'appointment of Talhah or Zubayr', and not the death of Uthman (R)... wow, this history gets more and more interesting...
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:25pm)
so lets hear the "true" and sunni version of it shall we?
 
Login to find out (March 27, 2006 at 9:24pm)
Is there any more a more fabricated story than the valley of Hawab and the dogs.. without even getting into the fabricated nature of the narrative and it's ridiculous content, let us appeas these guys for a minute for the sake of argument and ask them....

which dogs wouldn't bark when seeing an army of thuosands???

i've passed by many dogs, and they always seem to bark...