Reply
(a) The right of retribution (Qisas) is among the many rights granted by Allah to the blood relatives. But it is not obligatory to avail and implement this right. The blood relatives can either choose to forgive the culprit or take blood money (diyat) instead. There are many people whose mothers, fathers, brothers and other relatives have been killed unjustly. Yet, they have chosen not to claim their right to Qisas. Maybe, they have done this for social harmony or had a greater aim before them. They have adopted the path of silence and have opted to forego their right.
Keeping in mind the noble character of H Ali (a.s) and the lofty training that he received from Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) in his childhood as well as due to his foresight, H. Ali (a.s) realised that the fledgling religion of Islam faced the threat of internal and external enemies. He knew that being silent (on the matter of Qisas) was the best option for the salvation of Islam. Hence, for the safety and welfare of Islam and for the sake of a noble and honorable cause, he (a.s) chose to restrain himself and remained silent. He has hinted to this in the famous sermon of “Shiqshiqayyah”. His remaining quite and patient on the Qisas of J Zahra (s.a) is the best evidence of his veracity.
(b) Another reason for H Ali (a.s) not taking the Qisas of the killing of J Zahra (s.a) was the lack of friends and supporters. He was all alone - without any helpers and adherents. This too has been hinted by him in the same sermon.
(c) For those who raise the objection of H. Ali (a.s) not avenging the killing of J Zahra (s.a), we should ask them, “Why has Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) not taken the Qisas of the barbaric killing of his uncle H. Hamza?” Why did Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) forgive those who plotted to scare and kill him on his return from Tabuk? Why did he not reprimand them and take Qisas? (From the traditions & explanations of the scholars of Ahle Sunnat, like Masnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, vol 5 pg 453, 454; Tafseer Quran Kareem of Ibn Kathir, vol 2 pg 386, 387; Tafseer Kashhaf of Zamakshari, vol 2 pg 282); Why did Muawiyah spare Mughairah bin Abi Aas? He was the one who had chopped off the nose of H. Hamza in the battle of Uhud and had trampled upon it. Muawiyah gave him three days to leave Madina else he would kill him.(Ansaabul Ashraaf, vol 1 pg 410)
Why did he not take Qisas?
Why did Abu Sufiyan, Muawiyah, Amr Aas not punish and take revenge from those polytheists who had harassed and troubled Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) in the early days of Islam? Why did they spare those polytheists who participated in the battles of Badr, Uhud, Khandaq and Khyber and were the cause of martyrdom of so many Muslims?
Why was Usman bin Affan spared after he had killed J Umme Kulsum – the daughter of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a)? 4 (The background of this episode is that Muawiyah bin Abi Aas had killed and brutally chopped the body of H. Hamza in the battle of Uhud. He fled from the battlefield and took refuge in the house of Usman (la) - since they were from the same tribe. Allah revealed the whereabouts of Muawiyah to Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a). However, Usman (la) suspected that J Umme Kulsum may have disclosed the hiding place of Muawiyah to her father. In a fit of rage, he lashed her so brutally that she was severely injured and died a few days later). Hence, if Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) has not taken “Qisas” of this murder, does it imply that it never occurred?
(d) If H. Ali (a.s) had intended to take the Qisas, to which court of law could he go? Where would he lodge his complaint and protest? History is witness that all power and influence was with the caliphs. They were the government and the rulers. It was easy and convenient for them to tamper with the facts and turn the case in their favour. The case of adultery by Mughairah bin Shobah and the rejection of the testimony of the witnesses and they being whipped by Umar 5; the incident of Khalid bin Walid – his killing of Malik bin Nuwairah and committing of adultery with his wife and the defense of Abu Bakr of Khalid and also justifying the action of Khalid 6; the killing of the Hormazan (a Persian king) by Ubaidullah bin Umar bin Khattab7 – are just a few examples of the cases that had come to the courts of the caliphs but were summarily rejected and justice was denied. In fact, this could be one of the primary reasons for Ameerul Momineen (a.s) not taking Qisas of the killing of J. Zahra (s.a). He (a.s) knew very well that his efforts would go in vain. Because those who were sitting on the place of judgments were the same people against whom the Qisas was to be taken.
