Following battle of Al-Qadisiyyah during the reign of the second usurper Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, many Persians which included men, women and children were taken as captives by the army. These captives were sold as slaves, and from amongst them was Aboo-Lu'lu'ah. He was purchased by the well known companion Mughirah bin Shu'bah on account of his skills as a craftsman. Whilst serving for 'Mughirah,' Aboo Lu'lu'ah complained to Umar that he had become physically shattered through his labour and was hopeful that the matter may be resolved by either an increase in salary, or a reduction in his work hours. Thus, the case was not resolved which attracted the ire of Aboo-Lu'lu'ah who then decided to kill Umar Ibn Al-Khattab. Polemical studies indicate that the majority of those who detest the school of Ahlulbayt (a.s) justify their enmity by pointing to this character Aboo Lu'lu'ah. Their reasons for treating him as persona non grata are two fold, and that is, that he was:
1. The killer of Umar ibn Al-Khattab
2. Of Persian descent
As Aboo Lu'lu'ah was Persian, Nawasib propagandists have argued that the Shi'ee are the descendants of Aboo Lu'lu'ah as this was the faith ascribed to be the Safavids that propagated Shi'ism through their dominion. Their success in spreading the teachings of the Ahlulbayt (a.s) resulted in many Zoroastrians reverting to the path of the Ahlulbayt (a.s). It is for this very reason that the opponents of the school of the Ahlulbayt (a.s) like to tarnish their image by giving them derogative terms such as 'Majoosi' (Zoroastrians). Indeed, some of the most notable companions of the Prophet (saw) came from non Arab backgrounds, such as Bilal (r.a) who was Ethiopian and Salman Al-Farsi 'Muhammadi' (r.a) who was in fact Persian. We are in no doubt, had these shameless personalities been around during the era of the Prophet (saw) they too would have accused Salman (r.a), an ardent lover of the Ahlulbayt (a.s) of being a Majoosi!
Their attempts to draw such a nexus of Shi'ism being on a par with Zoroastrianism is the height of ignorance. If the Shi'ee are to be attacked on the premise that their past ancestors were of Zoroastrian descent, they should be reminded that this would be no different in comparing the Pagan Arabs who abandoned idolatry and eventually embraced Islam to the present day Arabs. Would it be fair to label all present day Arabs as being idol worshippers because of their heritage? Absolutely not!
Despite this fact, the sad nausea rant of the Nawasib is that the Shi'ee are the descendants of Aboo Lu'lu'ah the Zoroastrian, and this reality is sufficient to prove that their beliefs originate from Zoroastrianism. Whilst such absurd arguments have been refuted all over the internet, we have seen very little effort to actually ascertain the actual faith of Aboo Lu'lu'ah whose adherence to Zoroastrianism is accepted as the gospel truth, without anyone ever having challenge such a notion. In this article, we seek to evidence the fact that the allegation of Aboo Lu'lu'ah being a Zoroastrian is a lie and that generations of Bakris have been fed on as a staple diet.
Ahmad Ibn Alee b. Al-Muthanna narrated, Qutun Ibn Nasir Al-Ghabry narrated from Jaffar son of Suleiman Al-Deb’y narrated to us Thabit Al-Nanany narrating from Abi Rafi’ who said; Aboo Lu'lu'ah was a slave for Mughira ibn Shu'ba and he used to make millstones and Al-Mughira used to to manipulate his labour by giving him four dirhams every day. Then Aboo Lu'lu'ah met Umar ibn Al-Khattab (to complain about his exhaustion) and addressed him; 'O commander of the faithful, Al-Mughira made heavier the burden of my livelihood so ask him to ease me." Therefore Umar told him; 'Fear God and do good to your master.' Therefore the slave got angry and said; 'Your righteousness contained all other people [but not me!]' Therefore he made up his mind to kill him. He made a dagger with two heads and poisoned it and came to Al-Hormuzan (Persian King) and said; 'How do you see this?' Then he said; 'You do not hit anyone by it but you kill him!' He said [Abi Rafi’]; and Aboo Lu'lu'ah awaited for Umar, therefore he came to him at the fajr (morning prayers) until he stood behind him. And Umar, whenever the prayers commended, used to say; 'Establish your rows' and he said what he used to always say and when he said takbeer, Aboo Lu'lu'ah hit him in his shoulder and hit him in his side, then Umar fell down and he hit by his dagger thirteen men. Among them seven were killed and Umar was carried and took to his house and people shouted until the sun was about to rise, then Abdul-Rahman Ibn Awf said, 'O people! The prayer! The prayer!' He said [Abi Rafi’]; Then they [people] rushed to the prayer, then Abdul-Rahman ibn Awf took the lead and prayed leading them with the shortest two Surah's of the Qur'aan. And when he accomplished his prayer, they headed to Umar and he called for a drink to know the intensity of his wound. So wine was brought and he drank it, and it came out of his wound, and he did not know if it was wine or blood. Then he called for yoghurt, and he drank it and it came out of his wound then they said; 'O commander of the faithful, there is no harm [to you]!' He said; 'If being killed is a harm then I am killed."
Footnote: Narration is Saheeh (Authentic).
Aboo Abid Qatn Ibn Nasir Al-Ghabry narrated from Jaffar Ibn Suleiman narrated from Thabit Al-Benanai narrating Abi Rafi’ who said, "Aboo Lu'lu'ah was a slave for Mughira ibn Shu'ba and he used to make millstones and Mughira used to exploit him [his working power] everyday for four dirhams. Then Aboo Lu'lu'ah met Umar ibn Al-Khattab and addressed him; 'O commander of the faithful, Mughira made heavier the burden of my livelihood so ask him to ease me.' Therefore Umar told him; 'Fear God and do good to your master,' with Umar having in his will to meet Mughira and talk to him so that he eases (Aboo Lu'lu'ah case). The slave therefore got angry and said, 'Your righteousness contained all other people [but not me]!' Therefore he made up his mind to kill him and he made a dagger with two heads and poisoned it and came to Al-Hormuzan (Persian King) and said, 'How do you see this?' Then he said, 'You do not hit anyone by it but you kill him.' Aboo Lu'lu'ah awaited for Umar and he came at the fajr prayer (morning prayers)until he stood behind Umar. And whenever the prayer was established, Umar used to speak and say; 'Establish your rows' and he said what he used [always] to say and when he said takbeer, Aboo Lu'lu'ah hit him in his shoulder and hit him in his side, then Umar fell down and he hit by his dagger thirteen men. Among them seven died and six survived and Umar was carried and taken to his house and people shouted until the sun was about to rise. Then Abdul-rahman ibn Awf said, 'O people! The prayer! The prayer!' He said [Abi Rafi’]; And they [people] rushed to the prayer, then Abdul-Rahman ibn Awf took the lead and prayed, leading them, with the shortest two Surahs of the Qur'aan. And when he accomplished his prayer they headed to Umar, and he called for a drink to know the intensity of his wound, so wine was brought, and he drank it and it came out of his wound and he did not know whether it was wine or blood. Then he called for yoghurt, and he drank it and it came out of his wound, then they said; 'O commander of the faithful, there is no harm [to you]!' He said; 'If being killed had a harm aspect, then I am killed." Then people started to say compliments for him. They said; 'O commander of the faithful, may Allah reward you. The good, you were...' [many things]. Then they left, and other people came in and said compliments for him, then Umar said; 'I swear to God, instead of what you are saying, I would have preferred that I departed this world as a poor man, with nothing on my burden and nothing for my [property] and the companionship of the Messenger of Allah (saw) has been saved for me.'
Footnote: Narration is Saheeh (Authentic).
Source: Musnad Abi Yahla. Vol. 5, Pg. # 116 - 118, H. # 2731.
Footnote: Narration is Saheeh (Authentic).
Source: Majma Al-Zawa'id. Vol. 9, Pg. # 52, H. # 14464.
Aboo Rafi' said that Aboo Lu'lu'ah was a servant of Mughira Ibn Shu'ba and he used to make millstones. He said (narrator), Mughira used to exploit him every day for four dirhams. He said then Aboo Lu'lu'ah met Umar, so he said, 'O commander of the faithful, Mughira has burdened me, so speak to him so that he can ease me!' Umar said: 'Fear Allah and enjoin goodness to your Master.' He said: From the intention of Umar is to meet Mughira and speak to him about taking it easy [about Aboo Lu'lu'ah]. So he said: Aboo Lu'lu'ah became angry and said: 'His justice is vast enough to fill in everyone except me!' So he became angry and pre-planned to murder him [Umar]. He [narrator] said: So he constructed a dagger with two heads. He said: He unsheathed it and Umar prepared himself and Umar used to not make Takbeer if the prayers were established until he says, "establish your rows." He said: So he [Aboo Lu'lu'ah] stood on the first row with his shoes while Umar was in front of him.
Source: Tarikh Dimashq. Vol. 44, Pg. # 412.
Source: Saheeh Al-Bukhari. Pg. # 910 - 912, H. 3700.
One of the erroneous practise's among the sects within the so-called 'Ahl us Sunnah Wal Jammah' is their act of spreading their legs wide apart during obligatory Salaat (prayers). In the bid to touch the toes of the person standing adjacent to them, they disfigure their stance and ruin their composure with the mental preoccupation of touching the toes of the person standing on both sides in the line during congregational prayers. Even when performing Salaah alone, they adopt this ugly stance by stretching their legs hideously apart.
Narrated Al-Bara' ibn Azib: The Messenger of Allah (saw) used to pass through the row from one side to the other; he used to set out chests and shoulders in order, and say: Do not be irregular. And he would say: Allah and His angels bless those who are near the first rows.
Al-Nu’man b. Bashir said: The Prophet (saw) used to straighten us in the rows of prayer as the arrow is straightened, until he thought that we had learned it from him and understood it. One day he turned towards us, and shoulders in order, and say; Do not be irregular. And he would say: Allah and his Angels bless those who near the first rows.
Footnote: Narrations are Saheeh (Authentic).
Source: Saheeh Al-Bukhari. Pg. # 180, H. # 725.
In summary we have evidenced that when the companions would stand in congregational prayer they would do so in an upright standing position. Umar Ibn Al-Khattab would inspect the rows so as to ensure that no gaps existed between worshippers, and would only then lead the congregation in prayer. With this in mind, was the presence of a Zoroastrian not a gap for Umar and the Companions? Wouldn't anyone consider the presence of a Zoroastrian man in the ranks of worshippers as a defect in the congregational prayer? What is yet more perplexing is that Aboo Lu'lu'ah, a Zoroastrian came and stood within the ranks of the worshippers wearing his shoes whilst praying the dawn prayer. Would this not have attracted the ire of anyone? Or was it Sunnah for non Muslims to come inside the mosque wearing shoes? How was Aboo Lu'lu'ah able to place himself in the first line of prayers and read directly behind Umar without being challenged for it? Some may say that Aboo Lu'lu'ah entered the masjid in a clandestine manner, however, this would only be achieved had he entered with his face covered thus ensuring he was not recognisable. This however is completely implausible, any individual covering his face making his way towards the head of state would most likely arouse suspicion. Such a person would be challenged, searched or even arrested for the possibility of having been in possession of an offensive weapon. As a minimum, he would have been taken away from the scene.
Footnote: Narration Hasan (Reliable).
Source: Saheeh Sunan Aboo Dawood. Vol. 1, Pg. # 2, H. 643.
Source: Al-Muhalla. Vol. 11, Pg. # 97.
Source: Al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, Pg. # 214.
And therefore the person who killed Umar was an unbeliever, hating the religion of Islam. And he hated the Prophet (saw) and his nation and his religion. So he killed him (Umar) out of hate of the Prophet (saw) and his religion. And the one who killed Alee, used to pray, fast and recite the Qur'aan. And he killed him believing that Allah (swt) and his Prophet (saw) would love him to kill Alee. He did this, out of love for Allah (swt) and his Prophet (saw) according to him. Even though he was misguided (in this act) and a deviant.
Source: Minhaj Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiyyah. Vol. 7, Pg. # 153.
What form of Ijtihad was Ibn Muljam trying to implement by killing Imam Alee (a.s)?. According to Sheikh al Shatain Ibn Muljam was misguided in his actions though it would receive him good reward. The option of Tawil and Ijtihad are available to those who killed Imam ‘Alee (a.s) and fought against him. Yet Qu'raan and Hadeeth has declared such people in violation of Islam . Ibn Taymiyyah declared the murderer of Imam Alee (a.s) as “One of the best of mankind in worship, and one of the people of knowledge" based on what exactly?. How would any knowledgeable person not know Imam Alee (a.s) relationship to the Prophet Muhammad (saw)?. Is there anyone that can say the person who killed Umar Ibn Khataab was a disbelieving hypocrite, but the killer of Imam Alee was one of the most upright person in worship and knowledge?. Even the Kharjites never made such a bold claim. We challenge the opponents to produce a single evidence in which the Kharijies believed the actions of Ibn Muljam (May Allah Curse Him) was out of love to the Prophet (saw) and Allah (swt) how did Ibn Taymiyyah have the audacity to make such a claim?.
The apostates were the people of Al-Nahrawan (i.e. the Khawarij) due to the establishment of the authentic report about them that “They will apostasies from the religion as the arrow leaves the bow.”
Source: Talkhis Al-Habir fīiAhadith Raafi’i Al-Kabir. Vol. 4, Pg. # 44.
Source: Minhaj Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiyyah, Vol. 6, Pg. # 371.
“The most wretched of all the early times was the one who slaughtered the camel (of Allah in the Ummah of Prophet Shu’ayb) while the most wretched of all the later times is the one who will strike you, O Alee.”And he (the Prophet) indicated where he (‘Alee) would be struck.
Footnote: Narration is Saheeh 'Authentic'
Source: Silsilah Al-Ahadith Al-Sahihah. Vol. 3, Pg. # 78, H. # 1088.
A number of historians and hadeeth recorders reported that Aboo-Lu'lu'ah died while he was a Zoroastrian. After investigation one can conclude such false claims had been fabricated as a part of the smear campaign. Reports had been fabricated in order to convince people that the Murder of Umar was not a Muslim. There is no ambiguous evidence to establish whether or not he was a Muslim, Christian or even a Zoroastrian.
Muhamud bin Ahmad al-'Ayni:
That was because he (i.e. Umar) was killed by a non arab disbeliever whose name was Firooz and his title was Aboo Lu'lu'ah, he was slave of Mughira Ibn Sho'ba and he used to pretend to be a Muslim.
Source: Umdat al-Qari Sharh al-Bukhari. Vol.8 Pg. # 330.
Ibn 'Abd al-Barr:
Abd al-Barr: narrated from Khalf Bin Qasim told us Hassan bin Rasheeq told Dolaabi told Muhammad ibn Hameed told us Alee bin Mujahid who said, "We had difference in regards to the personality of Aboo Lu'lu'ah, some claimed: He was a Majoosi (Zoroastrian). Others said: He was a Christian, so Aboo Sanan reported us on the authority of Saeeb Ibn Sinan on the authority of Aboo Ishaq Al-Hamdani on the authority of Amr Ibn Maymun Al-Awdi, who said: "Aboo Lu'lu'ah was a Christian who stabbed Umar with a dagger with two heads (to the blade), once he injured Umar he stabbed another thirteen men (companions) in the Masjid until he was captured, once he was capture he committed suicide.
Source: Al-Istiab. Vol. 3, Pg. # 1155.
Source: Majma Al-Zawa'id. Vol. 9, Pg. # 49 - 51, H. # 14463.
Source: Saheeh Al-Bukhari. Pg. # 910 - 912, H. 3700.
Narrating al-muttalib ibn Abdullah ibn hantab he said; Alee told Ubaydullah bin Umar; 'What was the crime of the daughter of Aboo Lu’lu’ah when you killed her ?' He said; 'And the opinion of Alee, when Uthman consulted Him, and the opinion of the seniors among the companions of the messenger of Allah (saw) was to kill him!' But Amr ibn Al-'As spoke to Uthman so he left him [without killing him] and Alee used to say; 'If I could reach Ubaydullah bin Umar and I had authority, I would have reprimanded him [punish him]'....
Narrating Muhammed ibn Umar, narrated from Ibn Jurey told me that Uthman ibn Affan consulted muslims and they agreed about [paying] their blood money, and Ubaydullah bin Umar would not be killed for killing them, and they had converted to Islam, and Umar had imposed for them, and Alee ibn Aboo Talib ,when he was given allegiance, wanted to kill Ubaydullah bin Umar so he ran away from Him to Muawiyah ibn Aboo Sufyan and he remained with him until he was killed in Sifeen [the battle].
As for the Musawar al-Makhramah, we have a narration from him what was narrated to me by Aboo Saib who is Salim ibni Junada; he said, Sulaiman ibni Abdul-aziz ibnu Abi Thabit ibnu Abdul-aziz ibnu Abdul Rahman ibnu al-Awf, he said my father narrated to us from Abdullah bin Jaffar from his father from Musawar ibnu Makhramah; his mother was Aikah bint al-Awf, about the previous report on the issue of the murder of Umar ibnu al-Khattab; He said; they entered his grave (Umar ibnu al-Khattab) five people who were from the Shura: (cont).. then Uthman sat at the corner of the Masjid, and he called Ubaydullah bin Umar, he was detained in the house of Saad bin Abi Waqas, and he is the one who took the sword away from his hands after he had killed Jafina and Hormuzan and the daughter of Aboo Lu'lu'ah. He ( Ubaydullah) used to say “I will kill any one who had participated in the blood of my father!", he mentioned this before the Immigrants and the Helpers; but Saad stood up and took away his sword and pull his forehead hair until he made him sit on the ground and detained him until when Uthman called for him. And Uthman said to the group of Muhajiroun and Ansar, "Kindly show me a verdict on this one who has brought a scene in Islam what he has brought?", then Alee (a.s) said,' I see that you have to kill him", some Muhajirun said, 'Just yesterday Umar was killed and his son should be killed to day?!". Amr bin al-Aas said; 'O commander of the faithfull, surely Allah (swt) has forbear this incident for you!, and you have the power over Muslims and guardianship!. And this incident had occurred out side your power!". Uthman then said; "I am their Guardian, and I will pay the diyyah 'blood money and I will take it from my own wealth".
Source: Tarikh Al-Tabbari, Vol. 4, Pg. 234 / 239.
Al Zuhari narrated from Sa'eed ibn al-Maseeb that Abdul Rahman ibn Aboo Bakr and we have never caught a lie from him- he told us when Umar was murdered I reached al-Hormuzan and Jafina and Aboo lu'lu'a while they were having confidential talk and I came unexpectedly upon them therefore they became agitated, and a dagger with two heads fell from them, with its handle at its center, then Abdul Rahman said; 'Look at the by which Umar was killed, and they looked, and they found it a dagger with the description Abdul Rahman described, he said; 'Then Ubaydullah ibn Umar went out carrying a sword, until he reached al-Hormuzan, then he said; "Accompany me so that we look at a mare of mine", and al-Hormuzan was knowledgeable about horses, so he got out walking in front of him, then Ubaydullah rose his sword over him, and when he felt the heat of the sword [hit] he said; "'la ilaha illa llah 'There is no God but Allah'" , then he killed him, then he came to Jafina....
«... Jafina was a Christian from Al-Hirah, and he was the nurse of Saad bin Abi Waqqas who brought him to Medina due to the exigence between them. He used to teach the Scripture in Medina. Ubaydullah said: "When I raised the sword before him, he drew a cross between his eyes." Then Ubaydullah went forth and killed a small daughter of Aboo Lu'lu'ah who claimed to be Muslim. Ubaydullah wanted to not leave a single captive in Medina which he had not killed. The preliminary Muhajireen gathered and forbade him, then he said: "By Allah, I will kill them and others!". » then Ubaydullah went and killed the young daughter of Aboo lu'lu'a whom she claims Islam, and Ubaydullah wanted not to leave anyone [whom had been] captured in al-Madina without killing them, then the first immigrants [al-Muhajiroun] gathered around him and they prohibited him and threatened him, then he said; "By Allah I swear that I will kill them and others also!", and he aimed at some immigrants, and 'Amr ibn al-As kept after him till he gave him the sword, and when he gave him the sword , Sa'd ibn Abi Waqas came to him then each one of them held the head of the other trying to control each other's forepart of the head until they were held back, then Uthman came before being given allegiance during those nights until he caught Ubaydullah then they held each other's head trying to control each other's forepart of the head, and the land became dark to people the day Ubaydullah killed Jafina and al-Hurmuzan and the daughter of Aboo lu'lu'a, then there was restraint between him and Uthman, and when Uthman was given allegiance he called for al-Muhajiroun and al-Ansaar and said; "Consult me about killing this man who has violated the religious laws", and Muhajiroun agreed about one opinion supporting Uthman's opinion about killing him and most of the people supporting Ubaydullah telling Jafina and a-Hurmuzan (may Allah exclude them from his mercy); "Maybe you want to make Umar followed by his son?" [ i.e kill Ubaydullah] and there was big noise and disagreement about that then Amr ibn al-As said to Uthman; 'O commander of the faithful this whole issue was before you get any authority over people so turn away from them'. and people separated after Amr ibn al-As speech and Uthman reached him and the two men's and the girls's blood money was paid...
''Amr ibn al-As said to Uthman, 'It is enough that this has happen and you have power over all people and this incident occurred while you were unaware of it; kindly forgive him O commander of the faithfull'! He said, then all the people left and went to their businesses after the speech of Amru, and Uthman did see off the man and the female servant. Zuhri said; Hamza ibnu Abdullah bin Umar told me; Hafsah; she was the one who persuaded Ubaydullah ibnu Umar to kill Hurmuzan and Jafina Zuhri said, and Abdullah bin Thaalaba told me that or Ibnu Khaliqah al-Khuzai said; 'I saw Hormuzan raising his hands praying behind Umar, and Al-Muammar said, and others than Zuhri have said so and that Uthman said “I am the Guardian for Hurmuzan, Jafina and the female slave and that I am responsible for their diyyah 'blood money'”...
Source: Musunaf Abdul Razzaq,Vol.5, Pg. 478 - 480.
The thuggish nature of Ubaydullah bin Umar is there for all to see. Bereavement is not an easy state, particularly when the loved one has been snatched away through murder. It is natural that people will feel angered, shocked at what happened, and will no doubt seek retribution, but just look at what transpires here. The son of Umar ibn Khataab seeks to vent his frustration by taking the law into his own hands, and goes out on a killing rampage wherein he takes out his anger by killing three people! If it is argued that al-Hormuzan and Jafina were involved in the murder, on the mere basis of their speaking to Aboo Lu’lu’ah, then people should know that the entire reason for having an Islamic legal system is for the rule of law, so that grievances are legitimately heired via a due process, wherein a Judge reaches an outcome having heard the evidence presented before him. Islamic Law does not entitle you to take the law into you own hands by acting as a vigilante seeking brutal retribution, when Islamic law is being implemented. If the advocates of Ibn Umar offer some mitigation, suggesting he was overcome by anger that thus led to him killing those with an alleged hand in his father’s downfall, what mitigation can be offered for the killing of the young daughter of Aboo Lu’lu’ah who did nothing wrong other than being from the loins of his father’s killer! She even testified her faith as a Muslim, which raises further questions as to why was she not following the religion of Her father who supposed to be a Christian or a Zoroastrian?. It would only make logical sense she was been raised on the same religion as Her father who was in fact a Muslim himself. The Shari’ah does not allow the killing of women and children during Jihad, and here we see the son of Umar slaughtering an innocent girl. Alee (a.s) and senior companions opined that he should receive capital punishment for his offence, but Uthman (who had by that point taken up the reigns of power) having sought the counsel of Amr ibn al-'As digressed and pardoned Ubaydullah's crime and paid the surviving relatives blood money. What sort of Islam is this? When it comes to the offence of murder under Islamic Shariah a major focus is placed on the rights of surviving relatives, they have a say in how their aggressor should be dealt with, they can either opt for blood money (wherein the perpetrator pays money in exchange for a pardon) or demand the death penalty. At the heart of this is the right of the victim’s family they determine the fate of the individual that took away their loved one. Now look at the conduct of Uthman he offers no choice to the surviving relatives, he pays them blood money and pardons Ubaydullah at the same point? What Ijtihad did he exercise that entitled him to rule in a manner wherein the rights of the relatives are rendered otiose, where the Khalifah determines the outcome that he deems right, completely dispensing with the rules of Shariah in the process? What gave Uthman the right to act in this way? The main role of a Khalifah is to rule with justice, not to have a jaundiced view on any matter, yet look at the atrocious manner in which Uthman conducts himself here. Rather than rule in an impartial manner, his sympathy for the family of Umar overcomes him, and rather than uphold the rights of the victim that Shariah stipulates, he decides to completely remove them from the equation and act in a manner that spares his friend’s son from the cosh! Is the justice of the righty guides khalifas that the Bakris rant on about ad nausea? Imam Alee (a.s) was clear that Ibn Umar had to be executed for his triple homicide, and took the view that the intervention of Uthman had no basis in Shari’ah whatsoever, since he had not sought the view of the relatives when deciding to pardon Ubaydullah. Had their view been sought then there would have been no basis for Alee (a.s) to order that Ibn Umar be executed when he had taken power. There would have been no legitimate basis for issuing such an edict if the relatives of the three deceased had pardoned Ubaydullah, they had not which is why Alee (a.s) deemed it crucial that the matter be resurrected and Ubaudullah be executed accordingly. This despicable episode is further proof that the claims the all of the Sahaba were just is nothing but a myth, since Uthman’s allowing his bias to override the Shariah ruling for murder proves what an unjust, biased individual he was. It was left to Alee (a.s) the legitimate successor of the Prophet (s) to set out what was required of Uthman pursuant to the Shariah, a matter that that he remain steadfast on when he finally came to power.