Battle of Nahrawan: Ali's Conflict with the Kharijites

The Battle of Nahrawan, fought in July 658 CE (38 AH) near the Nahrawan Canal in Iraq, represents one of the most significant and tragic episodes of the First Fitna (Islamic civil war). This confrontation between Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Kharijites—a group of former supporters who had defected from his army after the arbitration at Siffin—marked the emergence of Islamic extremism and sectarian violence. The battle's aftermath, including the survival of Kharijite remnants who would later assassinate Ali, profoundly shaped Islamic political theology and established patterns of religious extremism that would persist throughout Islamic history.

The Emergence of the Kharijites

The Kharijite movement emerged directly from the controversial arbitration that ended the Battle of Siffin in 657 CE. When Ali ibn Abi Talib agreed to arbitration with Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan after Syrian forces raised copies of the Quran on their spears, a significant portion of his army was outraged. Approximately 12,000 of Ali's supporters rejected the arbitration agreement and withdrew from his camp, establishing themselves as a separate group. These dissidents became known as the Kharijites (Khawarij in Arabic, meaning "those who went out" or "seceders").

The Kharijites' opposition to the arbitration was based on a strict interpretation of Islamic principles. They adopted the slogan "La hukma illa lillah" (Judgment belongs to God alone), arguing that the Quran had already made clear who was right and who was wrong in the conflict between Ali and Muawiyah. They maintained that by agreeing to human arbitration, Ali had committed a grave sin, submitting God's judgment to fallible human beings. In their view, Ali should have continued fighting until he achieved victory or martyrdom, trusting in God's judgment rather than human arbitrators.

The Kharijites initially withdrew to the town of Harura near Kufa, where they organized themselves and developed their distinctive ideology. They elected their own leader, Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi, and began to articulate a political and theological position that would define the Kharijite movement. Their core beliefs included the principle that leadership should be based on piety and merit rather than tribal affiliation or family connection, that any Muslim could become caliph regardless of background, and that Muslims who committed major sins became apostates who could be legitimately killed.

Ali attempted to reason with the Kharijites, sending emissaries including the prominent companion Abdullah ibn Abbas to debate with them. Ali argued that the Quran itself prescribed arbitration in various contexts and that seeking a peaceful resolution was preferable to continued bloodshed. He pointed out that he had been forced to accept arbitration by his own army's insistence and that the arbitration was based on Quranic principles. However, the Kharijites were unmoved by these arguments. They demanded that Ali publicly repent for his "sin" of accepting arbitration and acknowledge that he had erred. Ali refused, maintaining that he had done nothing wrong.

Kharijite Ideology and Violence

The Kharijites developed a theological and political ideology that was characterized by extreme rigorism and a willingness to use violence against those they deemed to have deviated from true Islam. They believed that Muslims who committed major sins (kabair) became apostates (kuffar) and could be legitimately killed along with their families. This doctrine of takfir (declaring other Muslims to be unbelievers) would become one of the most controversial and dangerous aspects of Kharijite thought, as it provided religious justification for violence against fellow Muslims.

The Kharijites applied this doctrine not only to Ali and Muawiyah, whom they viewed as having sinned by accepting arbitration and rebelling against legitimate authority respectively, but also to ordinary Muslims who supported either leader or who failed to join the Kharijite cause. In their view, the Muslim community had become corrupted, and only the Kharijites themselves remained true believers. This exclusivist and extremist ideology led them to commit acts of violence against Muslims who disagreed with them, viewing such violence as religiously mandated.

The Kharijites' violence was not limited to military confrontations. They began attacking travelers and villages, killing Muslims they deemed to be apostates. One particularly notorious incident involved the murder of Abdullah ibn Khabbab, a companion of the Prophet, along with his pregnant wife. When confronted about this atrocity, the Kharijites justified it by claiming that Abdullah had supported Ali and was therefore an apostate deserving of death. Such acts of terrorism shocked the Muslim community and demonstrated the dangerous consequences of the Kharijites' extremist ideology.

The Kharijites' political philosophy was in some ways egalitarian and democratic. They rejected the principle of hereditary leadership and argued that any pious Muslim, regardless of tribal affiliation or family background, could become caliph. They emphasized the importance of consultation (shura) and the community's right to remove leaders who deviated from Islamic principles. However, these potentially progressive ideas were undermined by their extreme intolerance, their willingness to declare other Muslims apostates, and their use of violence against those who disagreed with them.

Ali's Dilemma and Attempts at Peace

Ali faced a difficult dilemma regarding the Kharijites. On one hand, they were former supporters who had fought alongside him at Siffin and who claimed to be upholding Islamic principles. Many of them were pious, sincere Muslims who were motivated by religious conviction rather than worldly ambition. On the other hand, their extremist ideology and their acts of violence against innocent Muslims could not be tolerated. Ali needed to deal with the Kharijite threat, but he was reluctant to fight fellow Muslims, especially those who had once been his supporters.

Ali initially adopted a policy of tolerance toward the Kharijites, allowing them to live peacefully in their settlements as long as they did not commit acts of violence. He hoped that with time and continued dialogue, they might be persuaded to abandon their extremist views and rejoin the Muslim community. He sent emissaries to debate with them and to explain why their position was wrong. He emphasized that he had not sinned by accepting arbitration and that their doctrine of takfir was a dangerous innovation that contradicted Islamic teachings.

However, as Kharijite violence escalated, Ali's policy of tolerance became increasingly untenable. The murder of Abdullah ibn Khabbab and other innocent Muslims created public pressure on Ali to take action against the Kharijites. His supporters argued that he could not allow such terrorism to continue and that his failure to act would be seen as weakness. Moreover, the Kharijites' presence in Iraq complicated Ali's position in his ongoing conflict with Muawiyah, as it divided his forces and undermined his authority.

Ali made one final attempt at peace before resorting to military action. He sent a message to the Kharijites demanding that they hand over those responsible for the murder of Abdullah ibn Khabbab and other innocent victims. He promised that if they did so and ceased their violence, he would not take action against them. However, the Kharijites refused, with their leaders declaring that they were all collectively responsible for the killings and that they would not surrender anyone. This refusal left Ali with no choice but to take military action.

The March to Nahrawan

In July 658 CE, Ali assembled his army and marched toward the Kharijite stronghold at Nahrawan, a location near a canal of the same name in Iraq, between Kufa and the Iranian border. His army numbered approximately 65,000 men, vastly outnumbering the Kharijite force of about 4,000 fighters. Despite this overwhelming numerical superiority, Ali was reluctant to fight, recognizing the tragedy of Muslims killing Muslims and hoping for a peaceful resolution even at this late stage.

As Ali's army approached Nahrawan, he made one final appeal to the Kharijites. He sent messengers offering amnesty to anyone who would leave the Kharijite camp and return to his side. He promised that those who departed would not be punished for their previous rebellion and that they would be welcomed back into the Muslim community. This offer was remarkably generous, given the Kharijites' acts of violence and their continued defiance of his authority.

The offer had a significant effect. Approximately half of the Kharijite force, perhaps 2,000 men, accepted Ali's amnesty and left the Kharijite camp. These men recognized the futility of fighting against Ali's vastly superior army and were persuaded by his promise of forgiveness. Their departure significantly weakened the Kharijite position and demonstrated that not all of those who had initially joined the movement were committed to its extremist ideology.

However, the hardcore Kharijites, numbering about 2,000 to 2,500 fighters, refused Ali's offer. They were led by Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi and other committed ideologues who believed that compromise with Ali was impossible and that they must fight to the death for their principles. These men were prepared to die as martyrs for their cause, viewing death in battle against what they saw as apostates as a path to Paradise. Their determination and willingness to sacrifice themselves made them dangerous opponents despite their small numbers.

The Battle

The Battle of Nahrawan began on July 17, 658 CE (9 Safar 38 AH). Despite their small numbers, the Kharijites fought with fanatical courage and determination. They believed they were fighting for God's cause against apostates and that death in battle would earn them Paradise. They charged Ali's forces repeatedly, inflicting casualties despite being vastly outnumbered. The battle was fierce but relatively brief, as the Kharijites' small numbers and lack of cavalry made it impossible for them to withstand Ali's army for long.

Ali's forces, though reluctant to kill fellow Muslims, fought effectively and professionally. They surrounded the Kharijite position and systematically destroyed the Kharijite force. The fighting was brutal, with little quarter given or asked. The Kharijites fought to the death, with very few attempting to surrender or flee. Their fanatical determination impressed even their enemies, though it also horrified them, as it demonstrated the dangerous power of extremist ideology to motivate violence.

The battle ended with the near-total destruction of the Kharijite force. According to the sources, fewer than ten Kharijites survived the battle, while Ali's forces suffered relatively light casualties, perhaps a few hundred men. The battlefield was littered with Kharijite bodies, a grim testament to their willingness to die for their beliefs. Among the dead was Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi, the Kharijite leader, whose body was identified after the battle.

After the battle, Ali reportedly walked among the dead, expressing sorrow at the necessity of killing fellow Muslims. According to some accounts, he wept as he looked at the bodies, recognizing some of the dead as men who had once fought alongside him at Siffin. He is reported to have said, "Woe to you! Who has deceived you?" expressing his view that the Kharijites had been misled by false ideology into throwing away their lives in a futile cause. This reaction demonstrated Ali's continued reluctance to fight Muslims and his recognition of the tragedy of the civil war.

The Survivors and Their Revenge

While the Battle of Nahrawan destroyed the Kharijite force as an organized military threat, it did not eliminate the Kharijite movement. A small number of Kharijites survived the battle, either by escaping during the fighting or by being away from Nahrawan when the battle occurred. These survivors would prove to be far more dangerous to Ali than the army he had just defeated.

Among the survivors were three men who would change the course of Islamic history: Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam, al-Burak ibn Abdullah, and Amr ibn Bakr al-Tamimi. These three men, embittered by their defeat and the deaths of their comrades, met and discussed how they could avenge themselves on those they held responsible for the civil war and the destruction of their movement. They decided to assassinate the three main leaders: Ali, Muawiyah, and Amr ibn al-As, believing that removing these leaders would end the civil war and allow the Muslim community to choose new, righteous leadership.

The three conspirators agreed to carry out their assassinations simultaneously on the same day, the 17th of Ramadan, 661 CE. They separated and traveled to the cities where their targets resided. Ibn Muljam went to Kufa to assassinate Ali, al-Burak went to Damascus to kill Muawiyah, and Amr ibn Bakr went to Egypt to kill Amr ibn al-As. The plan was ambitious and demonstrated the Kharijites' continued commitment to their cause despite their military defeat.

On the appointed day, the three assassins struck. In Damascus, al-Burak attacked Muawiyah as he entered the mosque for morning prayer, wounding him but not fatally. Muawiyah survived and eventually recovered from his wounds. In Egypt, Amr ibn al-As was ill and did not attend the mosque that day; the assassin killed the man who led the prayers in his place, mistaking him for Amr. Only in Kufa was the assassination successful. Ibn Muljam struck Ali with a poisoned sword as he entered the mosque for morning prayer, inflicting a mortal wound. Ali died two days later, on the 21st of Ramadan, 661 CE.

Ali's Assassination and Its Consequences

Ali's assassination by Ibn Muljam was the direct result of the Battle of Nahrawan and the Kharijite movement's extremist ideology. The assassination demonstrated that military victory over extremists does not necessarily eliminate the threat they pose. The surviving Kharijites, though few in number and lacking organized military power, were able to strike a devastating blow against Ali through terrorism and assassination.

Ali's death created a power vacuum and a succession crisis. His son Hassan ibn Ali was proclaimed caliph by Ali's supporters in Kufa, but he faced an impossible situation. His forces were demoralized and divided, he lacked his father's charisma and political skill, and he faced the powerful and united Syrian army under Muawiyah. Within months, Hassan negotiated a peace treaty with Muawiyah, abdicating his claim to the caliphate in exchange for financial compensation and guarantees of safety. This treaty ended the First Fitna and allowed Muawiyah to establish the Umayyad Caliphate.

The Kharijite movement, despite its military defeat at Nahrawan, survived and continued to be a significant force in Islamic history. Kharijite groups persisted in various parts of the Islamic world, particularly in Iraq, Arabia, and North Africa. They continued to rebel against what they saw as unjust rulers and to advocate for their distinctive theological and political positions. While they never achieved lasting political power, their ideas influenced Islamic political thought and their willingness to use violence against other Muslims established patterns that would recur throughout Islamic history.

The Battle of Nahrawan and its aftermath raised important questions about how to deal with extremism within the Muslim community. Ali's initial policy of tolerance had failed to prevent Kharijite violence, but his military action at Nahrawan, while successful in the short term, had not eliminated the threat and had arguably made it worse by creating martyrs and motivating revenge. This dilemma—how to deal with extremist movements that claim Islamic legitimacy while using violence against fellow Muslims—would continue to challenge Muslim rulers and scholars for centuries.

Legacy and Historical Significance

The Battle of Nahrawan has been remembered and interpreted differently by various Islamic communities and traditions. In Sunni tradition, the battle is generally viewed as a necessary action by Ali against extremists who had deviated from true Islam. The Kharijites are seen as misguided fanatics whose extremist ideology and violence against innocent Muslims justified military action against them. Ali's reluctance to fight and his attempts at peaceful resolution are emphasized, as is his sorrow at the necessity of killing fellow Muslims.

In Shia tradition, the battle is viewed as part of the broader tragedy of Ali's caliphate, when the rightful imam was forced to fight against various opponents and was ultimately martyred by extremists. The Kharijites are seen as particularly blameworthy for their role in Ali's assassination and for their extremist ideology that led them to declare the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law an apostate. The battle is commemorated as part of the narrative of Ali's struggles and sacrifices.

The Kharijites themselves, or rather their modern descendants and those influenced by their ideas, have a different perspective. They view the Battle of Nahrawan as a tragedy in which sincere Muslims who were trying to uphold Islamic principles were massacred by a leader who had compromised those principles. They see the Kharijites who died at Nahrawan as martyrs who sacrificed themselves for their beliefs. However, it should be noted that modern Kharijite communities, such as the Ibadis of Oman and North Africa, have generally rejected the extremist violence of the early Kharijites and have developed more moderate interpretations of Kharijite principles.

Modern historians and Islamic scholars have studied the Battle of Nahrawan and the Kharijite movement as important examples of religious extremism and its consequences. The Kharijites' doctrine of takfir, their willingness to kill other Muslims they deemed apostates, and their use of terrorism and assassination have been compared to modern extremist movements. The battle raises important questions about the roots of extremism, the relationship between religious ideology and violence, and the challenges of dealing with extremist movements within religious communities.

Conclusion

The Battle of Nahrawan stands as a tragic episode in early Islamic history, demonstrating the dangerous consequences of religious extremism and the challenges of maintaining unity within a diverse religious community. The battle was the direct result of the Kharijites' extremist ideology, which led them to declare other Muslims apostates and to use violence against those who disagreed with them. While Ali's military victory at Nahrawan destroyed the Kharijite force, it did not eliminate the Kharijite movement or prevent the assassination that would end his life.

The battle and its aftermath had lasting significance for Islamic history. The Kharijite movement, despite its military defeat, survived and continued to influence Islamic political and theological development. The questions raised by the Kharijites—about the nature of Islamic leadership, the limits of tolerance for dissent, and the proper response to extremism—remain relevant to Islamic thought and practice. The battle serves as a warning about the dangers of extremism and the importance of maintaining unity and moderation within the Muslim community.

Understanding the Battle of Nahrawan requires recognizing both its historical specificity and its broader significance. It was a conflict between particular groups in a particular time and place, shaped by the specific circumstances of the First Fitna and the arbitration controversy at Siffin. But it was also a moment when the Muslim community confronted fundamental questions about religious authority, the limits of tolerance, and the proper response to those who use violence in the name of religion. These questions continue to resonate in Islamic history and in contemporary discussions about extremism, terrorism, and religious violence.