Ibn Taymiyyah here outlines the characteristics of the day of Ali's coronation:
Uthman's Political Legitimacy Surpasses Ali's: Ibn Taymiyyah contrasts the political legitimacy of Uthman and Ali, asserting that Uthman's rule held a stronger foundation due to the broader consensus and allegiance he received. He highlights the division among the Muslims during Ali's caliphate, with some supporting him, some opposing him, and a significant portion remaining neutral. This, he argues, suggests a fragmented political base and a lack of widespread acceptance.
Status of Ali's Supporters: Ibn Taymiyyah casts doubt on the religious and moral standing of those who supported Ali, suggesting that they were of lesser stature compared to those who backed his predecessors. This further undermines the legitimacy of Ali's caliphate.
Extraordinary and Unfavorable Circumstances: Ibn Taymiyyah underscores the exceptional and unfavorable conditions surrounding Ali's election. He emphasizes that the "Ahl al-Fitnah" ("أهل الفتنة"), those responsible for Uthman's assassination, had seized control of Medina and exerted undue influence on the selection process. This coercion and violence, he argues, cast a shadow over the legitimacy of Ali's caliphate.
Forced Allegiance and Lack of Deliberation: Ibn Taymiyyah contrasts the hasty and coerced allegiance to Ali with the deliberate and consensual process that preceded the selection of Uthman. He points out that Uthman's election allowed for three days of deliberation and peaceful decision-making, while Ali's appointment was dictated under duress and without due consideration.
Questioning the Role of "Ahl al-Fitnah": Ibn Taymiyyah raises the question of who forced Talhah, a prominent Companion, to pledge allegiance to Ali. He suggests that the "Ahl al-Fitnah" were responsible for this coercion, further implicating their influence in manipulating the selection process.
Tragic Consequences: Ibn Taymiyyah attributes the subsequent conflicts and bloodshed during Ali's caliphate to the flawed and illegitimate nature of his ascension to power. He argues that Ali's reliance on the "people of turmoil" for support sowed the seeds of division and instability.
Uthman's Political Legitimacy Surpasses Ali's: Ibn Taymiyyah contrasts the political legitimacy of Uthman and Ali, asserting that Uthman's rule held a stronger foundation due to the broader consensus and allegiance he received. He highlights the division among the Muslims during Ali's caliphate, with some supporting him, some opposing him, and a significant portion remaining neutral. This, he argues, suggests a fragmented political base and a lack of widespread acceptance.
Status of Ali's Supporters: Ibn Taymiyyah casts doubt on the religious and moral standing of those who supported Ali, suggesting that they were of lesser stature compared to those who backed his predecessors. This further undermines the legitimacy of Ali's caliphate.
Extraordinary and Unfavorable Circumstances: Ibn Taymiyyah underscores the exceptional and unfavorable conditions surrounding Ali's election. He emphasizes that the "Ahl al-Fitnah" ("أهل الفتنة"), those responsible for Uthman's assassination, had seized control of Medina and exerted undue influence on the selection process. This coercion and violence, he argues, cast a shadow over the legitimacy of Ali's caliphate.
Forced Allegiance and Lack of Deliberation: Ibn Taymiyyah contrasts the hasty and coerced allegiance to Ali with the deliberate and consensual process that preceded the selection of Uthman. He points out that Uthman's election allowed for three days of deliberation and peaceful decision-making, while Ali's appointment was dictated under duress and without due consideration.
Questioning the Role of "Ahl al-Fitnah": Ibn Taymiyyah raises the question of who forced Talhah, a prominent Companion, to pledge allegiance to Ali. He suggests that the "Ahl al-Fitnah" were responsible for this coercion, further implicating their influence in manipulating the selection process.
Tragic Consequences: Ibn Taymiyyah attributes the subsequent conflicts and bloodshed during Ali's caliphate to the flawed and illegitimate nature of his ascension to power. He argues that Ali's reliance on the "people of turmoil" for support sowed the seeds of division and instability.
