Was Ali ibn Abi Talib a Socialist?

In one of his speeches, Professor Mustafa Öztürk states that he views the Meccan period of Islamic history as revolutionary and leftist, and the Medinan period as reformist. Ali ibn Abi Talib became a Muslim during this period; he was still a child in those days. Moreover, he experienced deprivation and poverty, so much so that due to financial hardship, he lived for a time in the house of the Prophet, who was also his cousin. He was one of the poor of that era, not one of its oligarchs. 

Perhaps as a reflection of this, as soon as he became caliph, he distributed the 300,000 dirhams accumulated in the treasury in Medina equally among all the people of Medina, without making any distinctions between Arabs and non-Arabs (Mawali), men and women, or free people and slaves. However, this situation disturbed the aristocratic circles, primarily the Umayyads, as well as figures like Talha and Zubayr. Upon this, Ali addressed them as follows: “…as for your objections regarding the equal distribution of wealth, that is a matter that I did not implement based on my personal opinion. On the contrary, we all saw that it was brought and implemented by the Prophet. I did not need your opinions on this matter, for which God has ordained the distribution and declared His judgment. By God, I will not accept any excuses from you or anyone else on this matter. May God guide our hearts and yours to the truth and grant us and you patience.”

The assessments made by Benedikt Koehler, a German economic historian, regarding Ali ibn Abi Talib are significant for our article. Koehler says: "Ali was always indifferent to accumulating wealth and never hid his disdain for viewing luxury as anything other than a temporary illusion. At a time when Umar was seeking advice on what to do with a magnificent carpet woven with gold threads and jewels—the most spectacular loot plundered from the palace of the Persian king in Ctesiphon—some suggested that this loot would present an impressive appearance in official duties. 

However, Ali clearly stated that a good Muslim should view all worldly goods as temporary and suggested that the carpet be cut up and sold piece by piece. The fact that Ali's suggestion prevailed is a sign of Ali's prestige at that time, and it can be inferred how wonderful a property the carpet was from the fact that the piece that fell to Ali's share from the carpet was sold for 20,000 dirhams. Ali applied his own unpretentious lifestyle to his family as well; Al-Fakhri narrates that Ali 'earned a large income from his property, which he spent entirely on the poor and the destitute, while he and his family were content with clothes made of coarse cotton fabric and barley bread.'"

In general, the poor, the oppressed, and the opposition movements of the era also rallied around Ali. For example, Abu Dharr, one of the dissenting voices of the time who paid the price for this by dying alone in the desert, was a loyal friend of Ali. When he was exiled to Al-Rabadha, Ali was by his side. Similarly, Ammar ibn Yasir, who is cited as one of the "revolutionary" figures of the period and stood out for his intense opposition to Uthman, was also a close friend of Ali. On the other hand, although they later fell out with Ali, the Kharijites, who were one of the important opposition movements of that day and, according to some, held "revolutionary rhetoric," initially took Ali's side and even participated in the Battle of Siffin on his side. In this respect, Ali was the voice of the opposition represented at the center.

So, what was reflected to us from Ali's voice? We can hear the answer to this question in the decree he sent to the governor of Egypt, Malik al-Ashtar. Ali had written the following to his governor, Ashtar:

O Malik! The group that constitutes the heaviest burden on the ruler is the men surrounding his inner circle, who are actually fair-weather friends. Not only do they provide almost no help in difficult times, but they also hinder the establishment of justice. They pressure the people more than anyone else to get what they want. They are not content with the opportunities given to them, and they do not understand gratitude… Whereas the masses are the main body of Islamic society, the people who protect the religion and take a stand against the enemies of the religion. Therefore, your heart and your love should be with the people.

Ali continues his words as follows: 

O Malik! Do not allow the people clustered in your inner circle to flatter you, to praise you to your face, or to stroke your ego by attributing good deeds to you that you did not do. Know that excessive praise leads a person to arrogance and makes them fall into negligence. Furthermore, you should not treat the one who does good and the one who commits evil equally. Because this equal treatment discourages good people from doing good and encourages bad people to become accustomed to evil… Rulers have certain special friends who act irresponsibly; they oppress the public and try to crush people mercilessly. To prevent this oppression, you should not give your friends and relatives who hover around your inner circle the right to benefit from state resources. Treating some people differently, even in small ways, can lead to a reaction from the entire public.

The following lines are a warning directly related to the poor: O Malik! You must prevent the oppression and pressure inflicted upon the poor and the weak by the assistants, officials, soldiers, and police you appoint. You must eliminate fear and violence and keep harshness and authoritarianism away from yourself so that people can speak with you face-to-face comfortably, without fear or hesitation…

Ultimately, Ali signs these striking lines regarding the reality of religion in that era and expresses the state of the religion that has been taken captive as follows: O Malik! You must pay close attention to the results of cases in the courts and the attitudes and behaviors of the judges. For this religion has become a captive in the hands of wicked people as an extension of the corrupt order. It is painful that these wicked people do whatever they want in the name of religion and find ways to accumulate worldly wealth by using religion.

These words that Ali ibn Abi Talib expressed regarding state administration, we can say, are related to the social structure he wanted to see. In other words, with whatever political orientation you approach the people, you will get those results. In this context, Ali's words are important. Another point that is important at this juncture emerges in his expressions regarding the accumulation of wealth. For according to reports, Ali clearly expressed the maximum level of wealth accumulation. Accordingly, that figure, that is, a person's wealth, can be at most 4,000 dirhams (11,900 or 12,500 grams of silver/1,250 grams of gold). If we adapt this to the present day, this ownership corresponds to a very limited asset. Moreover, Ali makes a very striking warning for those who possess wealth at that upper limit and says: “God has made it obligatory for the rich to give from their wealth to the extent that meets the needs of the poor. If the poor are hungry, unclothed, and in difficulty, the reason for this is that the rich do not give their wealth and instead hoard it. God has the right to hold those who do this to account and punish them.” 

Setting a limit on wealth for the sake of establishing justice and holding the rich responsible for the poverty experienced can be seen as a "revolutionary" discourse in itself, I think. Then let us return to the question in the title of our article: Was Ali ibn Abi Talib a socialist? Actually, Professor Mustafa Öztürk's assessment was the reason for this article. As we stated above, the professor had characterized the Meccan period as leftist and the Medinan period as reformist. In this case, could Ali ibn Abi Talib, who was also one of the leading figures of the Meccan period, have been a leftist and even a socialist?

Of course, the concept of every era is expressed within its own historicity and according to its own political-economic conditions. In this sense, we cannot fall into anachronism and tailor "political" outfits for Ali ibn Abi Talib. However, based on both his discourses and his actions, we can say where his heart and soul fell and whose side he spoke for. At this point, we tried to convey some of his views on Ali ibn Abi Talib's understanding of economy and society above. Based on these views, where you position Ali politically is up to you. However, if we proceed from Mustafa Öztürk's statements about the period, we can say that the "Meccan period" in Ali almost always influenced his life. For the political groupings surrounding him and the words attributed to him give us the right to say this fact.