‘Umar’s Murder

According to some quotations, especially what has been narrated by Tabarī, some people have claimed that ‘Umar was murdered with the plot of Ka‘b al-Ahbār. This news has been raised in different forms and it seems that anyone has changed it in a particular way. Historians and narrators of Sunnites hadiths brought this news in their books for centuries, but they believed so much in the predictions and reports of Ka‘b and people like him that they did not have the least suspicion about Ka‘b’s role in the caliph’s murder. Djāhi¨ who is a rationalist critic, has this opinion about what Ka‘b has narrated from the Torah (although there is no such thing in the Torah), I believe that many of these reports which have been quoted with phrases such as “We find them in the books” or “written in the Torah”, have in fact been taken from the “Book of prophets” and works from the books of Solomon and Isaiah, the prophet. If the stories quoted from him about the characteristics of ‘Umar, are from him (because he, himself, did not fabricate news), the problem cannot be solved unless with our justification.[1] Therefore, Djāhi¨ Mu‘tazilī, too, has not been able to have any doubts about Ka‘b al-Ahbār. At any rate, forecasting ‘Umar’s murder before the actual incident and the opinion that Ka‘b had seen the news in previous books did not attract the attention of the Prophet’s companions and other Muslims and it is only in recent years that something has been said in this regard.

In our opinion, there is doubt about the truthfulness of what has been said by Ka‘b. What has led to the linking of this fabricated news to Ka‘b was nothing but the interest of some simple-minded people in the point that the caliph’s martyrdom has been mentioned in the Torah or other books, especially that the title of “martyr” has been particularly emphasized. Moreover, many stories have been quoted in different sources saying that others had reported on ‘Umar’s murder. Some of them have been collected by Ibn Sa‘d and most of them have been related to “the invisible voice” or “genie”. They said, for example, a voice could be heard reading a poem and saying the news but no one could be seen.[2] What has come in certain texts is that Ka‘b had told the caliph before his murder that he had found him a just and martyred Imām in the Torah.

‘Umar had said, “How will he be martyred in Medina?” [3]

After ‘Umar received a deadly blow at the mosque, Ka‘b came to him and said, “Didn’t I tell you that you are a martyr?” [4]

If the news ended here, there would be no problem, but Ibn Sa‘d has another quotation from Sa‘d al-Djārī, ‘Umar’s freed slave, Umm Kulthūm told ‘Umar, “Ka‘b, the Jew, says, “‘Umar is standing at one of the doors of hell.” ‘Umar sent for Ka‘b. Ka‘b came to him and said, “I swear by God that Dhi l-Hadjdja will not pass unless you are in heaven.”

‘Umar said, “How is it that once I am standing at the gate of hell and the other time, I’m in heaven?”

Ka‘b said, “We have found in the Book of God that you are standing at the door of hell and do not let anyone in, but after you die, people will again go to hell!” [5]

We think what reveals the importance of the matter is a narration by Ibn Sa‘d. He has quoted Ka‘b as telling ‘Umar, “In the tribe of Israel, there was a king who reminds us of you when we think of him. There was a prophet at the time of the king.

Once he told the king, “Write down your will. You will die three days later.”

The king said, “God! If you see that I am doing justice in my rule and obey you in the affairs, increase my life until my son grows up and my Umma increases in number.”

God conveyed these words to his prophet and said, “I added fifteen years to his life.”

After ‘Umar was wounded, Ka‘b told him, “If you ask, God will keep you alive.”

The news reached ‘Umar but ‘Umar said, “God, take my life at a time when I am not blamed and disabled.” [6]

In our opinion, this news has been distorted and it seems as if three days before ‘Umar’s murder (which in fact was three days before ‘Umar’s death and after his being wounded), Ka‘b had told him, “You will die within three days, so ask God not to die.” Interestingly, it has been said that Ka‘b came on the second day and said, “One day is left.” This news seems to be right.

Now, let’s go to Tabarī’s report which is the distorted form of the original news and has been quoted from Miswar Ibn Makhrama. He says, “After Abū Lu’lu’’s negotiations with ‘Umar over his taxes and ‘Umar’s request from him for building a mill, Abū Lu’lu’ threatened him sarcastically.

The day after that, Ka‘b al-Ahbār went to the caliph and said, “Make your will; you will die three days from now.”

‘Umar asked, “Have you seen my name in the Torah?”

Ka‘b said, “No, but I’ve seen your description and that your life has come to its end.”

‘Umar did not feel any pain.

The next day, Ka‘b came and said, “One day of the three days has passed and two days remain.” Again, Ka‘b came the other day and said, “Two days are gone and one day and one day are left.” The next morning, Abū Lu’lu’ attacked ‘Umar at the mosque and dealt six blows on him.[7]

The above news is evident in that Ka‘b knew of ‘Umar’s murder beforehand, but when this news is compared with that of Ibn Sa‘d, we realize that the story was such, Having adopted the news of the Israelian king and the prophet of his time, Ka‘b came to ‘Umar after he had been wounded and told him that story from the Torah and the three days. Incidentally, ‘Umar passed away on the third day after being injured. However later, the news underwent some changes to sound unnatural. This could have been intentional to gain some credit for the caliph by relying on Muslims’ fascination with the divine news of the people of scriptures. The quotation that after ‘Umar’s injury, Ka‘b had told him if he called on God to delay his death, He would do so[8], is a proof to the comparison made by Ka‘b between ‘Umar and the Israelian king. Out of his interests in the caliph, Ka‘b advised him to ask God to delay his death so that he could live for fifteen more years.

As said earlier, despite the existence of quotations from Tabarī and others, historians did not have any suspicions about Ka‘b al-Ahbār. We believe that the true story was something else but the reason for the historian’s belief in Ka‘b was their real trust in him and the caliph’s virtues. Meanwhile, some of the new Sunnites researchers who are influenced by anti-Israelism have ignored ‘Umar’s trust in Ka‘b and have interpreted the above-mentioned news as a Jewish plot to murder ‘Umar.[9] One of these writers has named Ka‘b al-Ahbār as the mastermind of ‘Umar’s murder, saying he had instigated Abū Lu’lu’ to kill ‘Umar. His sources are the news of Tabarī and the quotation mentioned by Ibn Athīr from Tabarī.[10]

About the caliph’s murder, what has been clearly reported in history indicates that this issue was solely related to ‘Umar and Abū Lu’lu’ and the motive behind the act was, at least it appears so, that the murderer felt some injustice had been done to him and he had been overcharged. He complained to ‘Umar in this regard. But, the caliph said that the money taken from him was not so much compared to his abilities and skills and naturally, his income. Some time later, the assassination occurred and it could be natural that the incident was totally related to the argument which had taken place earlier between the murderer and the caliph.

Mas‘ūdī reports the incident as such, ‘Umar did not allow non-Arabs to arrive in Medina.[11]

Mughīra wrote to him, “I have a servant who has been a painter, blacksmith and carpenter and can be useful for the people of Medina. If you agree, I shall send him to you.” ‘Umar agreed and Abū Lu’lu’ came to Medina. Mughīra got two dhms from him per day. Once, Abū Lu’lu’ went to ‘Umar and complained about the heavy tax.

‘Umar said, “What works do you do?”

Abū Lu’lu’ explained his works as a painter, ironsmith and carpenter.

‘Umar said, “Considering the jobs you do, your tax is not so much.”

After a few days, ‘Umar asked Abū Lu’lu’ to build a windmill for him. Abū Lu’lu’ said he would build such a windmill for ‘Umar that all people would talk about it! ‘Umar smelled threat from these words but said nothing. It was after this encounter that Abū Lu’lu’ murdered ‘Umar at dawn in a mosque. He injured twelve others six of whom died later. Then, he killed himself with a sword.[12] Mas‘ūdī said Abū Lu’lu’ was a Jew but some sources have termed him as a Christian.[13] This story shows that the murder was personally motivated.[14]

Abū Lu’lu’ has been quoted as saying that apparently, after ‘Umar did not respond to his protest, he said, “How is it that the caliph’s justice covers everyone except me?”[15] Among his motives, one can also notice the point that Abū Lu’lu’ wanted to take revenge in this way because Iranians felt defeated at the hands of Muslims. However, there is no proof for this claim.

There are several possibilities about who had incited Abū Lu’lu’. One is ‘Ubayd Allāh, the son of ‘Umar. Claiming that Hurmuzān was Abū Lu’lu’ accomplice in the incident and he had seen them together the previous day, ‘Ubayd Allāh killed Hurmuzān as well as Abū Lu’lu’’s wife and daughter. He had no reason for this act and naturally, had to be killed as Qisās, retaliation for the murder of three people for whose blood there was no supporter but the government. Even Ya‘qubī says ‘Umar had recommended that ‘Ubayd Allāh receive the Qisās![16] But ‘Uthmān did not agree and said, “People will say, yesterday they killed the father and today, the son.[17]

The second guess coming from the caliph, himself, was that maybe some of the Muhādjirūn were involved in the murder. So, he sent Ibn ‘Abbās to them and asked, أعن ملأ منكم؟ “Did you order my murder?” And they said, معاذ الله! ما علمنا وما اطلعنا [18] “God forbid! We did not know and were not aware of it.”

The date of the caliph’s passing has been reported as the 26th or 27th of Dhi l-Hadjdja in the year 23 A.H whereas, he was only 55 years old.[19] Although elsewhere, Mu‘āwiya! has been quoted as saying that he was 63 years old.[20] This forging may have been done to show that he died at the same age of Prophet Muhammad (s).

In his last days when he had been wounded, ‘Umar seemed not be so satisfied with his worldly life. He repeatedly said, يا ليتني لم أك شيئاً، ليت لم تلدني أمي، ليتني كنت نسياً، يا ليتني كنت حائكاً اعيش من عمل يدي [21] “I wish I were nothing. I wish my mother had not given birth to me. I wish I had been forsaken. I wish I were a weaver and would earn my own living.”

[1] al-Hayawān, vol.IV, pp.202-203
[2] Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, pp.334-374, Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.III, pp.888-891
[3] Hilyat al-awlīyā’, vol.V, p.388, vol.VI, p.13; See the detailed form in, Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.III, p.392; Tārīkh al-khulafā’, p.133
[4] Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.342; Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.XII, p.191; al-Imāma wa l-siyāsa, vol.I, p.40
[5] Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.322; Tārīkh al-khulafā’, p.140; Hilyat al-awlīyā’, vol.VI, p.23
[6] Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.354; Tārīkh al-Khulafā’, p.154
[7] Tārīkh al-tabarī, vol.IV, p.191; al-Kāmil fi l-tārīkh, vol.III, p.26; Nihāyat al-’irab, vol.XIX, p.374.
The same report is quoted by Ibn Shabba with a little difference. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Ibn ‘Umar Ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmān Ibn ‘Awf
is the person commonly mentioned in Tārīkh al-tabarī’s and Ibn Shabba’s references.
Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.III, p.891
[8] Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.361; ‘Abd al-Razzāq, al-Musannaf, vol.X, p.225
[9] It seems Abūriyya, before everyone else, has mentioned this thanks to Tārīkh al-tabarī’s reports. ’Adwā’ ‘ala l-sunna al-Muhammadiyya, pp.153-155; Fi l-‘ubūr al-hidārī "Ka‘b al-Ahbār", pp.200-204
[10] Athar ahl al-kitāb fi l-fitan wa l-hurūb al-ahliyya, pp.237,240
[11] According to sources, ‘Umar never let mature Arabs enter Medina. As a matter of fact, the same man who was permitted to enter Medina, embraced on killing the caliph. Afterwards, ‘Umar reproached those who agreed on entering of these people into Medina and called them his murder.
Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.II, pp.889,903,904; al-Nihāya fī Gharīb al-hadīth, vol.III, p.286.
Those disagreeing with him said that Medina would be renewed just because of entry of the ‘Alwadj.
[12] Murūdj al-dhahab, vol.II, pp.320-321; Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.II, p.888; Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.345; Ibn Djūzī, Manāqib ‘Umar, p.210
[13] Tārīkh al-tabarī, vol.III, p.190
[14] Therefore, it seems unjust for any sect to defend him, although some traditionally knew him a Muslim, believing that his murder arises from religious differences. al-Bad’ wa l-tārīkh, vol.V, p.194
[15] Hayat al-hayawān, vol.I, p.51
[16] Tarīkh al-ya‘qūbī, vol.II, p.161
[17] Tārīkh Guzīdih, p.186
[18] Tārīkh Guzīdih, p.184; Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.348; ‘Abd al-Razzāq, al-Musannaf, vol.VI, p.52; Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.II, p.904
[19] Ibn Qutayba, al-Ma‘ārif, p.183; For other sources, Ma‘rifat al-sahāba, vol.I, from 194 on.
[20] Tārīkh khalīfat Ibn khayyat, p.53
[21] al-zuhd wa l-raqā’iq, pp.79-80,145,146; Bahdjat al-madjālis, vol.II, p.399; Hayāt al-sahaba, vol.II, p.115; Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, pp.360-361; Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.II, p.920; Shiykh Mufīd, al-Amālī, p.50
 

Categories: English