Abu Ja’far Naqeeb had told about the deep influence of pious-looking politicians...

Abu Ja’far Naqeeb had told about the deep influence of pious-looking politicians: “The style that Abu Bakr and Umar had adopted in their political life attracted peoples’ general admiration because they distanced themselves from worldly riches and adopted piety, though a feign one. [1] They eschewed worldly decorations and greatness. They showed as if they are at a distance from worldly gains. They sufficed with a little of it. For food, they sufficed on very simple food.

In clothes, they chose very coarse cloth. Whenever they got any worldly profit they divided it among the people. They did not corrupt themselves with worldly riches. This issue played a great part in attracting peoples’ hearts towards them. Caliphs remained always in good books of people and in their good will. Those who had a little doubt in their hearts said to themselves: Had they been opponents of Prophet’s orders it would have been for their personal benefit.

Some or other attachment to world could have been seen in them. How they opposed the Prophet’s command and [at the same time] eschewed worldly pleasures; so they spoiled for themselves both the worlds. Would a man with a little sense do it? It was this issue that left no doubt in anyone with regard to their actions; [2] they trusted their rulership and approved their character. But people neglected one point in their calculations that is the pleasure of being in power.

Being at the helm of affairs and ruling people and steering the government is itself a great luxury and a great gain. [3] For this, everything is sacrificed. Food and other things are of no importance for those who are after greater aims. Thus the poet says: Some ignored the pleasure of riches. But they did not ignore the pleasure of commanding and prohibition. Abu Ja’far Naqeeb says: The difference of the two Caliphs with the third was the cause that the third was killed that way.

People had deposed him. Uthman thought that he and his family has a share in the public [1] [To leave] [2] [It means the opposition of those two and their associates to the customs of Prophet and laws of Shariah] [3] [This quality in the Caliphs was like cunning that is associated with Amr Aas.] belongings. Whatever does not belong to him and his family, he thought that it should belong to him. When it belongs to him, it belongs to his family too.

If Uthman also had followed the system of his predecessors and kept his family away from public treasury, people would have been at his side.