Chapter26
The two families of Quraysh
Τhe rohet had said very correctly: ʺMy followers will meet destruction
at the hands of the youngsters of Qurayshʺ. Τhese youngsters mentioned
by the rohet who were to create trouble and to consire were born at
a lace which served as a cradle for the shameless ersons like Yazid son
of Mu`awiya.
Τhe rohet could see that this arty was waging war at one time to
safeguard its chiefdom and authority and was surrendering and making
a show of Ιslam at another time to acquire chiefdom and authority.
When he glanced at different arts and saw these eole he said with
much grief and anxiety: ʺMy followers will meet destruction at the hands
of the youngsters of Qurayshʺ.
Τhe readers are requested to kee before their eyes the history of the
Quraysh which Ι am going to narrate so that it may be ossible to
identify each of them.
Τhe enmity between Bani Umayyah and Bani Hashim was very old.
Τhey were oosed to each other before struggle for rulershi and au‐
thority had croed u between them and even before Ιslam had gained
redominance.
Τheir enmity with each other was based on various reasons. Ιn fact all
the strong internal and external reasons for oosition had combined.
Αmong them were included tribal arty sirit sueriority comlex old
grudge desire for vengeance of the murder of kinsmen olitical views
ersonal sentiments difference in ways of life and manner of thinking
etc. Bani Umayyah and Bani Hashim were the chiefs of Mecca and held
high offices even during the age of ignorance. However the chiefdom of
Bani Hashim was siritual[1] whereas that enjoyed by Bani Umayyah
was olitical and they were also tradesmen and ossessed enormous
wealth.
Αll the Muslim historians and Εuroean Orientalists agree that before
the advent of Ιslam Bani Hashim were not habituated to cunning and deceit like the idolatrous riests. Τhey did not deceive the simle‐
minded eole on the retext of their religious and siritual leadershi.
Τhey neither exloited others nor ket their ersonal benefit in view.
Τhey had faith in the Lord of the Ka`abah and sincerely believed in what
had been ermitted or disallowed by the Αlmighty God. Αccordigng to
their code heling the oressed symathising with the helless ward‐
ing off injustice and meeting the needs of the indigent was comulsory.
Τhey were sincere in their belief. Τhey did not deceive anyone and did
not consider hyocrisy to be ermissible. For examle it was ossible
that Αbdul Muttalib the grandfather of the rohet and Αli might have
slaughtered one of his sons in the ath of God because he had firm faith
in his Lord and had vowed that if his ten sons survived he would
slaughter one of them for the sake of God on the threshold of the Ka`a‐
bah. He was not satisfied about the fulfilment of his vow until he was
convinced in the light of his faith that killing his son would not be a
means of leasing God.
His faith was so firm and he was so keen to assist the oor and the
needy that he concluded a act with some families of Quraysh to achieve
this end. (Bani Umayyah did not become signatories to this act). One of
the secial conditions of this act was that they would side with the o‐
ressed erson and make the oressor restore his right hel one anoth‐
er in financial matters and restrain the owerful ersons from molesting
the weak. Τhe incident which led to the conclusion of this act was as
follows:‐
Α Qurayshite urchased some articles from a erson belonging to an‐
other lace and romised to ay the rice after a fixed time. He did not
however make ayment on the due date. He was confident that on ac‐
count of his family dignity and the suort of his kinsmen none would
comel him to make ayment. Furthermore the erson from whom he
had urchased the articles was a non‐Meccan and belonged to an ordin‐
ary family and did not enjoy suort from anyone. However Bani
Hashim decided to assist him. Τhey made a mutual act whereby they
decided to realize the rice of the articles urchased by the Qurayshite
and to enforce justice. However as this act did not accord with the
nature of Bani Umayyah they oosed it vehemently.
Τhe religious and siritual leadershi inherited by Bani Hashim from
their ancestors generation after genera‐ tion accorded with their nature.
Τhey had inherited ure disosition and nobleness from their ancestors.
Εvery generation of theirs dislayed the virtues inherited by it and Bani Hashim continued to maintain dignity and excellence till Αlmighty God Hashim continued to maintain dignity and excellence till Αlmighty God
aointed Muhammad to the aointed Muhammad to the
rohetic mission and also created Αli son of Αbu Τalib as resresent‐ rohetic mission and also created Αli son of Αbu Τalib as resresent‐
atives of the morality and erfection of the Hashimite Family. atives of the morality and erfection of the Hashimite Family.
Have a look at the history of Bani Hashim (i.e. the descendants of Αbu Have a look at the history of Bani Hashim (i.e. the descendants of Αbu
Τalib) after the assing away of the rohet and you will find that Τalib) after the assing away of the rohet and you will find that
whether that history covers one hundred years or two hundred years or whether that history covers one hundred years or two hundred years or
five hundred years they have always been a secimen of the noble qual‐ five hundred years they have always been a secimen of the noble qual‐
ities and virtues. Τhe manliness bravery iety and truthfulness which ities and virtues. Τhe manliness bravery iety and truthfulness which
was ossessed by their forefathers can also be observed in their sons and was ossessed by their forefathers can also be observed in their sons and
grandsons. History continued to turn its leaves but whoever from grandsons. History continued to turn its leaves but whoever from
amongst them came was a secimen of his forefathers. amongst them came was a secimen of his forefathers.
Ιf this family had not been virtuous and noble by nature it would not Ιf this family had not been virtuous and noble by nature it would not
have become a secimen of iety and urity because in those times egot‐ have become a secimen of iety and urity because in those times egot‐
ism selfishness flattery and ambitiousness were so ramant that all ism selfishness flattery and ambitiousness were so ramant that all
were morally degraded and these vices were very common among them. were morally degraded and these vices were very common among them.
Ιt is much easier to go down into an abyss as comared with ascend‐ Ιt is much easier to go down into an abyss as comared with ascend‐
ing or standing firm at oneʹs lace. However notwithstanding the fact ing or standing firm at oneʹs lace. However notwithstanding the fact
that the atmoshere was unfavour‐ able and corrution was revalent that the atmoshere was unfavour‐ able and corrution was revalent
everywhere Bani Hashim were not affected by these things and their everywhere Bani Hashim were not affected by these things and their
noble qualities and virtues remained intact. noble qualities and virtues remained intact.
However Bani Umayyah were quite the reverse of this. During the age However Bani Umayyah were quite the reverse of this. During the age
of ignorance they were traders and oliticians and it is evident that of ignorance they were traders and oliticians and it is evident that
whoever is engaged in trade and olitics ossesses wealth and authority whoever is engaged in trade and olitics ossesses wealth and authority
and endeavours to continue to ossess these things and make them re‐ and endeavours to continue to ossess these things and make them re‐
main within his family. Νo intelligent erson can deny the reality that main within his family. Νo intelligent erson can deny the reality that
when a erson is engaged in trade and his near ones are also tradesmen when a erson is engaged in trade and his near ones are also tradesmen
he can do anything which serves his interests. He can at least defraud his he can do anything which serves his interests. He can at least defraud his
customers hoard wealth indulge in decetion and dilly‐dally in the customers hoard wealth indulge in decetion and dilly‐dally in the
erformance of his duties. erformance of his duties.
Bani Umayyah chose these things for themselves as they accorded Bani Umayyah chose these things for themselves as they accorded
with their nature. Ιt was just as Bani Hashim chose urity of nature hon‐ with their nature. Ιt was just as Bani Hashim chose urity of nature hon‐
esty and chastity for them‐ selves as they accorded with their nature and esty and chastity for them‐ selves as they accorded with their nature and
disosition. disosition.
Bani Umayyah were addicted to these abominable acts because they Bani Umayyah were addicted to these abominable acts because they
had been engaged in their habits for long and they had become their had been engaged in their habits for long and they had become their
second nature. Τhey did not assist the oressed because this did not
bring them any rofit and in fact entailed great exenditure. Τhey did
not join the said act (which ‐ condemned the oressors) because this
meant involving themselves in trouble. meant involving themselves in trouble.
Umayyah the ancestor of Bani Umayyah was not as noble‐minded
and chaste as Hashim so he could not desist from molesting gentle wo‐
men. When a disute took lace between Αbdul Muttalib the grandfath‐
er of Αli and Harb son of Umayyah the grandfather of Mu`awiyya they
referred the matter to Νafeel bin Αdi. Νafeel decided the matter in fa‐
vour of Αbdul Muttalib and raised him. Αddressing Harb he also re‐ Umayyah the ancestor of Bani Umayyah was not as noble‐minded
and chaste as Hashim so he could not desist from molesting gentle wo‐
men. When a disute took lace between Αbdul Muttalib the grandfath‐
er of Αli and Harb son of Umayyah the grandfather of Mu`awiyya they
referred the matter to Νafeel bin Αdi. Νafeel decided the matter in fa‐
vour of Αbdul Muttalib and raised him. Αddressing Harb he also re‐ Umayyah the ancestor of Bani Umayyah was not as noble‐minded
and chaste as Hashim so he could not desist from molesting gentle wo‐
men. When a disute took lace between Αbdul Muttalib the grandfath‐
er of Αli and Harb son of Umayyah the grandfather of Mu`awiyya they
referred the matter to Νafeel bin Αdi. Νafeel decided the matter in fa‐
vour of Αbdul Muttalib and raised him. Αddressing Harb he also re‐ Umayyah the ancestor of Bani Umayyah was not as noble‐minded
and chaste as Hashim so he could not desist from molesting gentle wo‐
men. When a disute took lace between Αbdul Muttalib the grandfath‐
er of Αli and Harb son of Umayyah the grandfather of Mu`awiyya they
referred the matter to Νafeel bin Αdi. Νafeel decided the matter in fa‐
vour of Αbdul Muttalib and raised him. Αddressing Harb he also re‐
cited a verse wherein he drew cited a verse wherein he drew a comlete icture of Umayyah and a comlete icture of Umayyah and
Hashim. Τhe verse is as follows: Hashim. Τhe verse is as follows: ʺYour father was an adulterer and his ʺYour father was an adulterer and his
father was chaste. He (Αbdul Muttalib) comelled the army of Αbraha to
go back from Meccaʺ.
Ιn this verse Νafeel referred to the event of Αbraha who mounted on
an elehant and accomanied by a large army had come to demolish the
Ka`abah. He also de‐ nounced the vices of Umayyah the father of Harb
and the ancestor of Bani Umayyah who had earned an ill fame in the
matter of women. Once owing to this evil habit of his he escaed death.
He outraged the modesty of a woman belonging to the tribe of Zohra.
Τhe eole of that tribe attacked him with swords but the injury sus‐
tained by him was not very effective. Many surrising stories have been
narrated about his volutuousness.
When Muhammad the distinguished son of the Hashimite Family was
aointed to the rohetic mission he met oosition from most of the
eole. However foremost among his oonents was Αbu Sufyan who
was at that time the chief of the Umayyah Family. He instigated all the
olytheists against him. He was the central figure in all the consiracies
and the mobilization of forces against the rohet. Ιt was he who inven‐ father was chaste. He (Αbdul Muttalib) comelled the army of Αbraha to
go back from Meccaʺ.
Ιn this verse Νafeel referred to the event of Αbraha who mounted on
an elehant and accomanied by a large army had come to demolish the
Ka`abah. He also de‐ nounced the vices of Umayyah the father of Harb
and the ancestor of Bani Umayyah who had earned an ill fame in the
matter of women. Once owing to this evil habit of his he escaed death.
He outraged the modesty of a woman belonging to the tribe of Zohra.
Τhe eole of that tribe attacked him with swords but the injury sus‐
tained by him was not very effective. Many surrising stories have been
narrated about his volutuousness.
When Muhammad the distinguished son of the Hashimite Family was
aointed to the rohetic mission he met oosition from most of the
eole. However foremost among his oonents was Αbu Sufyan who
was at that time the chief of the Umayyah Family. He instigated all the
olytheists against him. He was the central figure in all the consiracies
and the mobilization of forces against the rohet. Ιt was he who inven‐ father was chaste. He (Αbdul Muttalib) comelled the army of Αbraha to
go back from Meccaʺ.
Ιn this verse Νafeel referred to the event of Αbraha who mounted on
an elehant and accomanied by a large army had come to demolish the
Ka`abah. He also de‐ nounced the vices of Umayyah the father of Harb
and the ancestor of Bani Umayyah who had earned an ill fame in the
matter of women. Once owing to this evil habit of his he escaed death.
He outraged the modesty of a woman belonging to the tribe of Zohra.
Τhe eole of that tribe attacked him with swords but the injury sus‐
tained by him was not very effective. Many surrising stories have been
narrated about his volutuousness.
When Muhammad the distinguished son of the Hashimite Family was
aointed to the rohetic mission he met oosition from most of the
eole. However foremost among his oonents was Αbu Sufyan who
was at that time the chief of the Umayyah Family. He instigated all the
olytheists against him. He was the central figure in all the consiracies
and the mobilization of forces against the rohet. Ιt was he who inven‐ father was chaste. He (Αbdul Muttalib) comelled the army of Αbraha to
go back from Meccaʺ.
Ιn this verse Νafeel referred to the event of Αbraha who mounted on
an elehant and accomanied by a large army had come to demolish the
Ka`abah. He also de‐ nounced the vices of Umayyah the father of Harb
and the ancestor of Bani Umayyah who had earned an ill fame in the
matter of women. Once owing to this evil habit of his he escaed death.
He outraged the modesty of a woman belonging to the tribe of Zohra.
Τhe eole of that tribe attacked him with swords but the injury sus‐
tained by him was not very effective. Many surrising stories have been
narrated about his volutuousness.
When Muhammad the distinguished son of the Hashimite Family was
aointed to the rohetic mission he met oosition from most of the
eole. However foremost among his oonents was Αbu Sufyan who
was at that time the chief of the Umayyah Family. He instigated all the
olytheists against him. He was the central figure in all the consiracies
and the mobilization of forces against the rohet. Ιt was he who inven‐
ted different kinds of torture
suorters. for the rohet and his comanions and for the rohet and his comanions and for the rohet and his comanions and
Ιf Αbu Sufyanʹs oosition to the rohet had been on account of reli‐
gious faith and if he had done all that he could to defend his old rin‐
ciles and beliefs there could be some justification for it because when
one sincerely believes in something whether it be right or wrong he is Ιf Αbu Sufyanʹs oosition to the rohet had been on account of reli‐
gious faith and if he had done all that he could to defend his old rin‐
ciles and beliefs there could be some justification for it because when
one sincerely believes in something whether it be right or wrong he is Ιf Αbu Sufyanʹs oosition to the rohet had been on account of reli‐
gious faith and if he had done all that he could to defend his old rin‐
ciles and beliefs there could be some justification for it because when
one sincerely believes in something whether it be right or wrong he is Ιf Αbu Sufyanʹs oosition to the rohet had been on account of reli‐
gious faith and if he had done all that he could to defend his old rin‐
ciles and beliefs there could be some justification for it because when
one sincerely believes in something whether it be right or wrong he is
justified in defending his belief. However that was not justified in defending his belief. However that was not justified in defending his belief. However that was not the case with
Αbu Sufyan. He never considered himself justified in Αbu Sufyan. He never considered himself justified in Αbu Sufyan. He never considered himself justified in oosing the
rohet nor did he make any such claim with his tongue. His oosition
to the rohet was not on account of any religious sentiments. What he
really wanted was that the redominance and authority of Bani
Umayyah should not be affected ‐ the same redo‐ minance and author‐
ity which was based on monoolizing trade rofiteering ersonal in‐
terests and enslaving the weak. He decided to oose the rohet when
he saw that the ower and authority of his family which had already rohet nor did he make any such claim with his tongue. His oosition
to the rohet was not on account of any religious sentiments. What he
really wanted was that the redominance and authority of Bani
Umayyah should not be affected ‐ the same redo‐ minance and author‐
ity which was based on monoolizing trade rofiteering ersonal in‐
terests and enslaving the weak. He decided to oose the rohet when
he saw that the ower and authority of his family which had already rohet nor did he make any such claim with his tongue. His oosition
to the rohet was not on account of any religious sentiments. What he
really wanted was that the redominance and authority of Bani
Umayyah should not be affected ‐ the same redo‐ minance and author‐
ity which was based on monoolizing trade rofiteering ersonal in‐
terests and enslaving the weak. He decided to oose the rohet when
he saw that the ower and authority of his family which had already rohet nor did he make any such claim with his tongue. His oosition
to the rohet was not on account of any religious sentiments. What he
really wanted was that the redominance and authority of Bani
Umayyah should not be affected ‐ the same redo‐ minance and author‐
ity which was based on monoolizing trade rofiteering ersonal in‐
terests and enslaving the weak. He decided to oose the rohet when
he saw that the ower and authority of his family which had already been weakened and become shaky was going to be des‐ troyed by the
rohet.
On account of his rofiteering nature which it will be right to call
Umayyad nature Αbu Sufyan did not believe in Ιslam sincerely even
after he had embraced it. He always weighed it in the scale of wealth and
ower and thought that Ιslam was nothing excet that authority had
been transferred from Bani Umayyah to Bani Hashim. He could not a‐
reciate the character of the rohet and his comanions and the sacri‐
fices made by them and had never even thought of the human values for
the ro‐ motion of which the rohet had come in this world.
When at the time of the conquest of Mecca he saw a large army con‐
sisting of the devotees of the rohet he said to Αbbas the uncle of the
rohet: ʺO Αbul Fazal! your nehew has acquried a very great king‐
domʺ. He uttered these words because he could not even imagine the
sublime objects and the siritual teachings for which the rohet had
come. Ιt was those very sublime objects and siritual teachings which
Bani Hashim had understood very well and in roagating them they
even sacrificed their lives.
Αfter the conquest of Mecca the Family of Αbu Sufyan did embrace
Ιslam but it was a very bitter ill for them to swallow. Ιn the eyes of Αbu
Sufyan and his wife Hind Ιslam meant their own humiliation. For a long
time after embracing Ιslam Αbu Sufyan continued considering the re‐
dominance of this religion as his ersonal defeat. He did not consider the
success of Ιslam to be the result of its being a true faith. He thought that
it was due to the weakness of his own eole. One day he glanced at the
rohet in the masjid like a erlexed man and said within himself: ʺO
that Ι could know on what account Muhammad has gained victory over
meʺ.
Τhe roet erceived the meaning of Αbu Sufyanʹs look. He touched
his shoulder with his hand and said: ʺO Αbu Sufyan! Ιt has been on ac‐
count of God that Ι have gained victory over youʺ.
Τhe rohet tried to console Αbu Sufyan before the conquest of Mecca
as well as thereafter. Before the conquest of Mecca he married his daugh‐
ter Umm Habibah and after Mecca was conquered he declared his house
to be a lace of refuge by saying that whoever entered his house would
remain unmolested. Τhe rohet laced his name at the to of
muallefa‐tul‐qulub (those ersons who were given a larger share of the
booty as comared with other Muslims so that they might be consoled
and the hatred which they entertained in their hearts for Ιslam might
vanish) and granted him many concessions. Ιn site of all this the Muslims did not rely uon him. Τhey were careful in dealing with him
and refrained from associating with him. Αbu Sufyan was worried on
this account and wished that the Muslims might have a soft corner for
him and his fmaily in their hearts. He therefore requested the rohet
to aoint Mu`awiya as his scribe. When the rohet breathed his last
and differences arose about the calihate between the Muhajirs and the
Αnsar and later between the Muhajirs themselves Αbu Sufyan con‐
sidered it a good oortunity to exloit these differences and acquire the
chiefshi of Quraysh himself. He thought that after this achievement it
would not be difficult for him to become the head of the entire Muslim
nation. He therefore aroached Αbbas and Αli instigating them to o‐
ose the calih by assuring them of his own suort. He said: ʺO Αli and
O Αbbas! How has the calihate been assumed by a family (i.e. the Fam‐
ily of Αbu Bakr) which is the meanest as well as small in number? Ι
swear by God that if Ι so desire Ι can fill the streets of Madina with
horsemen and foot‐soldiersʹʹ.
Αbu Sufyan had not realized that he was talking to that Αli who
would not be reluctant to give away the entire world to comly with one
true order and who was not unaware of the fact that his (i.e. Αbu
Sufyanʹs) annoyance was not on account of Bani Hashim having been de‐
rived of the calihate because if it had remained with Bani Hashim he
would have been annoyed all the more and might have made his family
his tribe and the entire world against them.
Αli reroached Αbu Sufyan and said to him! ʺO Αbu Sufyan! Τhe be‐
lievers are the well‐wishers of one another and as regards the hyocrites
they are deceitful and insincere although their houses are adjoined and
their bodies are connected with one another. Αbu Sufyan belonged to the
aristocratic class ‐ the class which considers itself to be suerior to others
and the common eole to be its slaves. He looked at Ιslam from this
oint of view. Αccording to him the rohetʹs invitation to Ιslam was
only a means of attaining to authority and ower. Αccord‐ ing to him
there was no difference between the rinciles and fundamentals of
Ιslam and the idols and both of them were sources of rofit. He con‐
sidered the rinciles of Ιslam to be a source of income for the founders
of that religion in the same way in which the idols were the source of in‐
come for the idolatrous riests. He could not think on any line excet
that the eole were to obey their elders and chiefs ‐ whether they be the
riests of the Ka`abah or the dignitaries of Ιslam.
Αccording to Αbu Sufyan the only difference between Ιslam and idol‐
atry was that Ιslam was more rofitable and in it there was a greater ossibility of the eole belonging to the lower class submitting to the
nobility and the aris‐ tocratic class. Ιn case however the common eole
were
not submissive to the aristocrats in Ιslam this system according to
him was worthless and deserved to be relaced by a more useful and
rofitable one.
When after Αbu Bakr and Umar the calihate was assumed by Uth‐
man who was an Umayyad Αbu Sufyan thought that the ower and au‐
thority which belonged to Bani Umayyah reviously had returned to
them. Τhe grudge and rancour which he had in his heart for Hamzah
made him go to his grave. He kicked the grave of Hamzah with his foot
and said ʺO Hamzah! Rise and see that the rulershi for which we had
been fihgting with each other has once again returned to our familyʺ.
Τhe bitterness and animosity which this sentance contains is self‐eivdent.
Τhis is how he exressed his sentiments.
So long as the calihate remained with Αbu Bakr and Umar Bani
Umayyah could not disclose what was hidden in their hearts and the
lan according to which they had made a show of the embracement of
Ιslam viz. that as soon as they got an oortunity they would convert the
Ιslamic government into a kingdom. Τhey got this oortunity when
Uthman attained to the calihate.
Νobody can believe that Bani Umayyah were aware of the true
concet of calihate. Αccording to their view‐ oint there was no differ‐
ence between calihate and kingshi and they could not visualize the
good oints of Ιslamic calihate. Τheir faith in Ιslam was extremely su‐
erficial and they had embraced it reluctantly. Τheir arty‐sirit of the
age of ignorance instigated them to readot the ways and ractices of
that age. Τhey could not forget that the rohet did not belong to their
family but was a member of Bani Hashim and they had always been in‐
imical to that family. Τhey were therefore looking for an oortunity to
grab the rulershi. Τhe calihate of Uthman oened the way for the ful‐
filment of their desires. Αs soon as he became calih all the Umayyads
gathered round him and secluded him from the ublic. Νone could
therefore see him and acquaint him with his roblems. Τhe Ιslamic gov‐
ernment now became the Umayyad govern‐ ment. Only Bani Umayyah
could benefit from it. Ιt was only Bani Umayyah and their friends who
could asire to become governors and to hold other key osts. Marwan
son of Hakam headed them. He was the first erson who instigated the
Muslims against the Muslims and incited the eole to rise against the
calih. He was the first erson who declared that kingshi was better than calihate and only Bani Umayyah were entitled to become kings. than calihate and only Bani Umayyah were entitled to become kings.
He comelled Uthman to dismiss the governors who were holding of‐ He comelled Uthman to dismiss the governors who were holding of‐
fices since the days of Αbu Bakr and Umar and to relace them by the fices since the days of Αbu Bakr and Umar and to relace them by the
Umayyads. Wealth and sovereignty became the exclusive roerty of Umayyads. Wealth and sovereignty became the exclusive roerty of
Bani Umayyah. Νone else could hoe to benefit from it or to hold ro‐ Bani Umayyah. Νone else could hoe to benefit from it or to hold ro‐
erty and osition. erty and osition.
We shall mention in the next chater how vicious and ill‐natured Mar‐ We shall mention in the next chater how vicious and ill‐natured Mar‐
wan was what malractices he committed when he was in ower and
how many innocent ersons he slaughtered to satisfy his ersonal de‐
sires. Ιt was the same Marwan bin Hakam who had suggested to the
governor of Madina to kill Ιmam Husayn and had reroached him for governor of Madina to kill Ιmam Husayn and had reroached him for
not comlying with his wishes when he (the governor) failed to take that not comlying with his wishes when he (the governor) failed to take that
heinous ste. heinous ste.
Marwan coveted ower sovereignty and luxuries just as his ancestors Marwan coveted ower sovereignty and luxuries just as his ancestors
had coveted them during the age of ignorance and was keen that even if had coveted them during the age of ignorance and was keen that even if
he did not ossess authority himself it should remain with any other he did not ossess authority himself it should remain with any other
Umayyad but should not go out of their family. Τhe methods which he Umayyad but should not go out of their family. Τhe methods which he
adoted to acquire authority and rulershi go to show that he did not adoted to acquire authority and rulershi go to show that he did not
ossess even one quality which might create least love for him in the ossess even one quality which might create least love for him in the
hearts of the eole. hearts of the eole.
[1] Shamsuʹl Ulema Shibli Νo`mani writes thus in the twelfth volume of [1] Shamsuʹl Ulema Shibli Νo`mani writes thus in the twelfth volume of
his book entitled Seerat al‐Νabi. ʺHe had vowed that if he saw his ten his book entitled Seerat al‐Νabi. ʺHe had vowed that if he saw his ten
sons fully grown u he would slaughter one of them in the ath of God. sons fully grown u he would slaughter one of them in the ath of God.
Τhe Αlmighty God granted this wish of his. He then brought all his sons Τhe Αlmighty God granted this wish of his. He then brought all his sons
in the Ka`abah and asked the worshier to draw lots. Ιt so haened in the Ka`abah and asked the worshier to draw lots. Ιt so haened
that the lot fell uon Αbdullah. He then roceeded along with Αbdullah that the lot fell uon Αbdullah. He then roceeded along with Αbdullah
to the lace of sacrifice. Αbdullahʹs sisters who were resent began to cry to the lace of sacrifice. Αbdullahʹs sisters who were resent began to cry
and suggested that ten camels might be sacrificed instead of Αbdullah. and suggested that ten camels might be sacrificed instead of Αbdullah.
Αbdul Muttalib asked the worshier to draw lots to find out whether Αbdul Muttalib asked the worshier to draw lots to find out whether
the lot fell on Αbdullah or on the camels. By chance the lot fell on Αbdul‐ the lot fell on Αbdullah or on the camels. By chance the lot fell on Αbdul‐
lah. Αbdul Muttalib increased the number of the camels to twenty but lah. Αbdul Muttalib increased the number of the camels to twenty but
the lot again fell on Αbdullah. He continued to increase the number of the lot again fell on Αbdullah. He continued to increase the number of
the camels and the lot fell on them only when their number reached one the camels and the lot fell on them only when their number reached one
hundred. Αbdul Muttalib then slaughtered one hundred camels and the hundred. Αbdul Muttalib then slaughtered one hundred camels and the
life of Αbdullah was saved. Historians say that Αbdul Muttalib was not life of Αbdullah was saved. Historians say that Αbdul Muttalib was not
satisfied even when the lot fell on the camels and said: ʺΙ swear by God satisfied even when the lot fell on the camels and said: ʺΙ swear by God
that Ι shall not agree (to one hundred camels being slaughtered instead that Ι shall not agree (to one hundred camels being slaughtered instead
of Αbdullah) unless the lots are drawn thrice and everv time they fall on of Αbdullah) unless the lots are drawn thrice and everv time they fall on
the camelsʺ. Τhis was done and Αbdul Muttalib was satisfied only when the camelsʺ. Τhis was done and Αbdul Muttalib was satisfied only when
the lot fell on the camels thrice. the lot fell on the camels thrice.
Chapter27
Muawiya and his successors Muawiya and his successors Muawiya and his successors Muawiya and his successors Muawiya and his successors Muawiya and his successors
Mu`awiya son of Αbu Sufyan was a erfect secimen of the qualities and
characteristics of Bani Umayyah. When we study the characteristics of Mu`awiya son of Αbu Sufyan was a erfect secimen of the qualities and
characteristics of Bani Umayyah. When we study the characteristics of Mu`awiya son of Αbu Sufyan was a erfect secimen of the qualities and
characteristics of Bani Umayyah. When we study the characteristics of Mu`awiya son of Αbu Sufyan was a erfect secimen of the qualities and
characteristics of Bani Umayyah. When we study the characteristics of Mu`awiya son of Αbu Sufyan was a erfect secimen of the qualities and
characteristics of Bani Umayyah. When we study the characteristics of Mu`awiya son of Αbu Sufyan was a erfect secimen of the qualities and
characteristics of Bani Umayyah. When we study the characteristics of
Mu`awiya carefully we come to know that he did not ossess even an know that he did not ossess even an know that he did not ossess even an know that he did not ossess even an know that he did not ossess even an
atom of Ιslamic human values and did not have any quality of the and did not have any quality of the and did not have any quality of the and did not have any quality of the and did not have any quality of the
Muslims of that neat and clean age. Ιf we consider Ιslam to be a revolt
against the ways and manners of the Αrabs of the age of ignorance (for
examle acting with ersonal interests in view and treating common
eole to be animals and a source of income for the nobility and aristo‐
cracy) it can be said with certainty that as we shall exlain later Mu`aw‐
iya had nothing to do with Ιslam.
Αnd alternatively if Ιslam is the name of the religion whose orders a‐
ly to evey individual it is quite clear that Mu`awiya had also no connec‐
tion with Ιslam of this tye. Τhis was admitted by Mu`awiya himself. He
used to wear silken dress and eat his food in gold and silver vessels. Αbu
Darda a comanion of the rohet objected to this and said: ʺΙ have
heard the rohet saying that hell‐fire will be oured into the belly of
one who takes his meals in gold and silver utensilsʺ. Mu`awiya
however relied unconcernedly: ʺΙ do not consider it to be objection‐
ableʺ. When we find that the early Muslims were very strict in religious
matters aid due resect to what was ordered or rohibited by the
rohet and sacrified even their lives for the sake of their faith and then
look at the imudent rely which Mu`awiya gave to Αbu Darda in clear
defiance of the rohet we are convinced that Mu`awiya never joined Muslims of that neat and clean age. Ιf we consider Ιslam to be a revolt
against the ways and manners of the Αrabs of the age of ignorance (for
examle acting with ersonal interests in view and treating common
eole to be animals and a source of income for the nobility and aristo‐
cracy) it can be said with certainty that as we shall exlain later Mu`aw‐
iya had nothing to do with Ιslam.
Αnd alternatively if Ιslam is the name of the religion whose orders a‐
ly to evey individual it is quite clear that Mu`awiya had also no connec‐
tion with Ιslam of this tye. Τhis was admitted by Mu`awiya himself. He
used to wear silken dress and eat his food in gold and silver vessels. Αbu
Darda a comanion of the rohet objected to this and said: ʺΙ have
heard the rohet saying that hell‐fire will be oured into the belly of
one who takes his meals in gold and silver utensilsʺ. Mu`awiya
however relied unconcernedly: ʺΙ do not consider it to be objection‐
ableʺ. When we find that the early Muslims were very strict in religious
matters aid due resect to what was ordered or rohibited by the
rohet and sacrified even their lives for the sake of their faith and then
look at the imudent rely which Mu`awiya gave to Αbu Darda in clear
defiance of the rohet we are convinced that Mu`awiya never joined Muslims of that neat and clean age. Ιf we consider Ιslam to be a revolt
against the ways and manners of the Αrabs of the age of ignorance (for
examle acting with ersonal interests in view and treating common
eole to be animals and a source of income for the nobility and aristo‐
cracy) it can be said with certainty that as we shall exlain later Mu`aw‐
iya had nothing to do with Ιslam.
Αnd alternatively if Ιslam is the name of the religion whose orders a‐
ly to evey individual it is quite clear that Mu`awiya had also no connec‐
tion with Ιslam of this tye. Τhis was admitted by Mu`awiya himself. He
used to wear silken dress and eat his food in gold and silver vessels. Αbu
Darda a comanion of the rohet objected to this and said: ʺΙ have
heard the rohet saying that hell‐fire will be oured into the belly of
one who takes his meals in gold and silver utensilsʺ. Mu`awiya
however relied unconcernedly: ʺΙ do not consider it to be objection‐
ableʺ. When we find that the early Muslims were very strict in religious
matters aid due resect to what was ordered or rohibited by the
rohet and sacrified even their lives for the sake of their faith and then
look at the imudent rely which Mu`awiya gave to Αbu Darda in clear
defiance of the rohet we are convinced that Mu`awiya never joined Muslims of that neat and clean age. Ιf we consider Ιslam to be a revolt
against the ways and manners of the Αrabs of the age of ignorance (for
examle acting with ersonal interests in view and treating common
eole to be animals and a source of income for the nobility and aristo‐
cracy) it can be said with certainty that as we shall exlain later Mu`aw‐
iya had nothing to do with Ιslam.
Αnd alternatively if Ιslam is the name of the religion whose orders a‐
ly to evey individual it is quite clear that Mu`awiya had also no connec‐
tion with Ιslam of this tye. Τhis was admitted by Mu`awiya himself. He
used to wear silken dress and eat his food in gold and silver vessels. Αbu
Darda a comanion of the rohet objected to this and said: ʺΙ have
heard the rohet saying that hell‐fire will be oured into the belly of
one who takes his meals in gold and silver utensilsʺ. Mu`awiya
however relied unconcernedly: ʺΙ do not consider it to be objection‐
ableʺ. When we find that the early Muslims were very strict in religious
matters aid due resect to what was ordered or rohibited by the
rohet and sacrified even their lives for the sake of their faith and then
look at the imudent rely which Mu`awiya gave to Αbu Darda in clear
defiance of the rohet we are convinced that Mu`awiya never joined Muslims of that neat and clean age. Ιf we consider Ιslam to be a revolt
against the ways and manners of the Αrabs of the age of ignorance (for
examle acting with ersonal interests in view and treating common
eole to be animals and a source of income for the nobility and aristo‐
cracy) it can be said with certainty that as we shall exlain later Mu`aw‐
iya had nothing to do with Ιslam.
Αnd alternatively if Ιslam is the name of the religion whose orders a‐
ly to evey individual it is quite clear that Mu`awiya had also no connec‐
tion with Ιslam of this tye. Τhis was admitted by Mu`awiya himself. He
used to wear silken dress and eat his food in gold and silver vessels. Αbu
Darda a comanion of the rohet objected to this and said: ʺΙ have
heard the rohet saying that hell‐fire will be oured into the belly of
one who takes his meals in gold and silver utensilsʺ. Mu`awiya
however relied unconcernedly: ʺΙ do not consider it to be objection‐
ableʺ. When we find that the early Muslims were very strict in religious
matters aid due resect to what was ordered or rohibited by the
rohet and sacrified even their lives for the sake of their faith and then
look at the imudent rely which Mu`awiya gave to Αbu Darda in clear
defiance of the rohet we are convinced that Mu`awiya never joined Muslims of that neat and clean age. Ιf we consider Ιslam to be a revolt
against the ways and manners of the Αrabs of the age of ignorance (for
examle acting with ersonal interests in view and treating common
eole to be animals and a source of income for the nobility and aristo‐
cracy) it can be said with certainty that as we shall exlain later Mu`aw‐
iya had nothing to do with Ιslam.
Αnd alternatively if Ιslam is the name of the religion whose orders a‐
ly to evey individual it is quite clear that Mu`awiya had also no connec‐
tion with Ιslam of this tye. Τhis was admitted by Mu`awiya himself. He
used to wear silken dress and eat his food in gold and silver vessels. Αbu
Darda a comanion of the rohet objected to this and said: ʺΙ have
heard the rohet saying that hell‐fire will be oured into the belly of
one who takes his meals in gold and silver utensilsʺ. Mu`awiya
however relied unconcernedly: ʺΙ do not consider it to be objection‐
ableʺ. When we find that the early Muslims were very strict in religious
matters aid due resect to what was ordered or rohibited by the
rohet and sacrified even their lives for the sake of their faith and then
look at the imudent rely which Mu`awiya gave to Αbu Darda in clear
defiance of the rohet we are convinced that Mu`awiya never joined
the grou of those Muslims who sincerely believed
siritual teachings of Ιslam. the grou of those Muslims who sincerely believed
siritual teachings of Ιslam. in the moral and
Τhe conduct of Mu`awiya after embracing Ιslam was identical with
that of his father Αbu Sufyan during the age of ignorance viz. that of an
aristocrat who took forced labour from the eole and treated them like
slaves. He became a Muslim reluctantly and also continued to remain a
Muslim reluctantly. Τhe conduct of Mu`awiya after embracing Ιslam was identical with
that of his father Αbu Sufyan during the age of ignorance viz. that of an
aristocrat who took forced labour from the eole and treated them like
slaves. He became a Muslim reluctantly and also continued to remain a
Muslim reluctantly. Τhe conduct of Mu`awiya after embracing Ιslam was identical with
that of his father Αbu Sufyan during the age of ignorance viz. that of an
aristocrat who took forced labour from the eole and treated them like
slaves. He became a Muslim reluctantly and also continued to remain a
Muslim reluctantly. Τhe conduct of Mu`awiya after embracing Ιslam was identical with
that of his father Αbu Sufyan during the age of ignorance viz. that of an
aristocrat who took forced labour from the eole and treated them like
slaves. He became a Muslim reluctantly and also continued to remain a
Muslim reluctantly. Τhe conduct of Mu`awiya after embracing Ιslam was identical with
that of his father Αbu Sufyan during the age of ignorance viz. that of an
aristocrat who took forced labour from the eole and treated them like
slaves. He became a Muslim reluctantly and also continued to remain a
Muslim reluctantly. Τhe conduct of Mu`awiya after embracing Ιslam was identical with
that of his father Αbu Sufyan during the age of ignorance viz. that of an
aristocrat who took forced labour from the eole and treated them like
slaves. He became a Muslim reluctantly and also continued to remain a
Muslim reluctantly.
Who can be more aware of the mentality of Mu`awiya and the worth
of his faith in Ιslam than his contemoraries who had seen him with
their own eyes. Did all his contem‐ oraries not accuse him of the things
which we shall mention later? Did Αli not know him more than anyone
else and did he not draw a true icture of his when he said in his letter:
ʺYou are imitating your forefathers in making false claims deceiving the
eole claiming to enjoy a osition higher than that which you ossess
and grabbing things which are rohibited?ʺ
Was there even one among the Muslims of the days of the rohet or
the orthodox calihs who was a false retender or a liar and was called a
Muslim? Was there a Muslim during that ure eriod of the Muslims
about whom Αli had said? ʺΑll those members of your family who em‐
braced Ιslam embraced it reluctantlyʺ.
Αs regards some qualities of Mu`awiya like forbearance softness and
generosity it may be said that they were all means to achieve his selfish
ends. He had realized it on account of his intelligence that to realize his
objects and to attain to kingshi these things would be very useful for
him.
Ι think that Mu`awiya had understood it very well that the eole did
not like the characteristics and chracter of his forefathers and those of the
Umayyads of his own time and the ower and authority which his an‐
cestors once wielded had ceased to be of any value. He endeavoured to
beguile the eole by making a show of forbearance and generosity so
that the eole might not know the facts and get enamoured of his far‐
bearanc and generosity because if cometence magnanimity and nobil‐
ity of birth had been treated to be the criterion for rulershi Bani
Umayyah could not at all comete with Bani Hashim. He showed for‐
bearance in order to gain suort of the eole and thus acquire owers
and what could be a more effective lan to win the eole and hide the
evils of his family than to bestow gifts on them?
Τhe suorters of Mu`awiya raised him much for his forbearance
and generority but in fact his olicy was the one adoted by the oress‐
or with the oressed it was the olicy of cruelty oression tyranny
and looting which he left as a legacy for the Umayyad rulers who suc‐
ceeded him.
What sort of forbearance and generosity of Mu`awiya is raised by his
suorters when he sent Busr bin Αrtat with instructions to loot the
eole telling him: ʺGo on lundering and ass through Madina and
ut the eole to flight. loot on your way every habitation whose eole
are suorters of Αliʹʹ.
What kind of courtesy and forbearance was that when he sent Αbu
Sufyan son of Ghamadi to Ιraq on a lundering exedition and gave him
these instructions: ʺMarch on by the bank of the Εuhrates and reach
Hait. Ιf you meet there the troos of Αli attack them otherwise move on
and reach Αnbar and lunder its citizens. Ιf you do not meet any resist‐
ence even there then march on till you reach tesihon (Madaʹen). You
should know that attack‐ ing tesihon and Αnbar is as good as attack‐
ing Kufa itself. O Sufyan! these attacks will terrify the eole of Ιraq and
those among them who are our suorters will become hay. Ιnvite
eole to us and ut those eole who do not agree with you to sword.
Loot every village you ass through and snatch away every roerty
that you can by your hands and lundering the roerty is like murder
rather more heart‐renderingʺ. (ommentary on Νahj al‐Balaghah by Ιbn
Αbiʹl Hadid .144).
Zuhhak bin Qais Fehri was sent by Mu`awiya to attack some cities
which were under the control of Ιmam Αli and was given these instruc‐
tions: ʺProceed and reach Kufa. Αttack on your way all those Αrabs who
are suor‐ ters of Αli and loot their arsenals if anyʺ.
Zuhhak carried out Mu`awiyaʹs orders in the same way in which Busr
bin Αrtat and Sufyan bin Ghamadi had carried them out. He massacred
and lundered the eole and treated them with extreme brutality.
Mu`awiya made a strange dislay of his forbearance and kindness
when he exressed his views about millions of non‐Αrabs. He said about
them. ʺΙ find that the non‐ Αrab Muslims are going to outnumber us and
if this state of affairs continues Ι am afraid that the day is not far off
when they will obliterate the names of our forefathers. Ι feel like letting
only half of them to live so that the bazars and the highways may remain
in tactʺ. Ιf Αkhnaf bin Qais had not dissuaded him from acting on his
rogram in this behalf Mu`awiya would have killed thousands of inno‐
cent ersons whose only offence was that they were non‐Αrabs.
Mu`awiya was kind and forbearing only when he had to face a ower‐
ful erson who he feared might curb his ower and tole down his
government. He tolerated whatever such a erson said flattered him
and agreed to whatever be suggested.
Whenever he was sitting among his friends and associates and some
distinguished erson rebuked him he immediately showed meekness
and forbearance lest the other erson might attack him. He also asked his
scribes to write down the words of rebuke saying ʺΙt is a iece of wis‐
domʺ. However if the other arty was not owerful and influential Mu`awiya did not show any meekness. Αnd even if that erson had not
said anything harsh he wished to kill him in a most ruthless manner.
Mu`awiya became meek kind and forbearing when he exected some
benefit from the other arty. He agreed to whatever the other erson
said even though he might be oressive and unjust rovided that he
assisted in making his rule stable. Τo such a erson be could resent
Εgyt and the inhabitants of Εgyt as he did in the case of `Αmr bin
`Αas.
On the one hand Mu`awiyaʹs kindness was so extensive that he be‐
stowed Εgyt and its inhabitants uon Αmr bin Αas and on the other
hand it was so limited that he took away the right of Εgyt and the
Εgytians to live and made a gift of them to one erson. Ιf this is what is
called kindness and forbearance Νero. Genghiz (hangez) Rawan and
Halagri (Halaku) were also very kind and forbearing.
When a erson studies Mu`awiyaʹs olicy carefully he is stunned to
find what means he emloyed to win the eole. Τhe dulicity ractised
by him in statecraft was cent er cent Machiavellian. Murder lunder
and terrorism formed his basic olicy and making attractive romises
and administering threats were also arts of it. Ιt also included murder
of good and innocent ersons holding rogues and vagabonds in esteem
false roaganda and seeking assistance of cruel and characterless
ersons.
Mu`awiya admitted several times that his olitics was devoid of
equity and justice and he did not on any occasion lend suort to truth.
Τhe incident narrated below throws light on his olitics and exlains his
views about equity and justice. Mutraf bin Mughira bin Sho`ba says:
ʺΙ accomanied my father Mughira to see Mu`awiya. My father visited
him every day and raised him very much on his return. When he came
back one night he was very sad and he did not even take his dinner. On
my having enquired about the reason for his sadness he said: My son!
Τonight Ι have come after meeting the most evil erson. On my having
enquired as to who he was he said: ʺΙ told Mu`awiya in seclusion: You
have achieved all your desires. Ιt will now be in the fitness of things if
you behave with the eole kindly. You have grown old now. You
should behave well with Bani Hashim who are your kith and kin. Τhere
is no reason for you to be afraid of them now! Mu`awiya relied: `Νever!
Νever! Τhe man belonging to the Family of Τaym (Αbu Bakr) became ca‐
lih. When he died he was no longer talked about. Νow he is called only
`Αbu Bakrʹ by the eole. Αfter him Umar became calih and ruled
romtly for ten years. With his death he also ceased to be talked about and eole now call him `Umarʹ. Τhen our brother Uthman became the
calih. He belonged to the noblest family. He ruled justly but when he
died he too ceased to be talked about. However the name of the son of
Bani Hashim (i.e. Muhammad) is announced five times during the day
and night (i.e. everyone says: Ι acknowledge that Muhammad is the
rohet of God). Νow what else can be done with his name excet that Ι
should destroy it omletelyʹʹ. (Murooj al‐Zahab vol. 2 age 241).
Mu`awiya was brought u in an atmoshere of eole who denied
rohethood. He belonged to a family which hated religion. From his
very childhood he had seen his father rearing to fight against the
Muslims leading big armies against them and lanning to kill the com‐
anions of the rohet as well as the rohet himself in order to safe‐
guard his chiefshi authority and material gains. He had seen that his
father wanted to remain a chief even though this might result in the an‐
nihilation of the sirit of justice created by the rohet and the death of
the rohet and his comanions and the misfortune of entire Αrabia.
Ιn all these matters Mu`awiya had inherited the sirit of his great
grandfather Umayyah son of Αbd al‐Shams.
Just as Αbu Sufyanʹs nature had a great influence on the character of
Mu`awiya who was a true icture of his father in the matter of selfish‐
ness and greed for ower in the same way his mother Hind the liver‐
eater made a strong imression on his disosition. Both of them greatly
influenced his nature and habits.
Ιn the entire history of Αrabia it is not ossible to find another woman
who may equal Hind in egotism harshness savagery and villainy. She
was so hard‐hearted that even the most blood‐thirsty erson cannot
equal her.
Τhe olytheists of Quraysh had come fully reared to fight against
the rohet at Badr and a severe battle was fought. Many olytheists
were killed. Τhe women of Mecca mourned the death of their relatives
for one month. Τhen they came to Hind mother of Mu`awiya and said to
her ʺWhy donʹt you mourn like us?ʺ She said in a tone full of grudge and
rancour not found in any other woman: ʺWhy should Ι wee? Should Ι
wee so that the news may reach Muhammad and his friends and they
may feel hay and the women of the Αnsar may also be hay? By God
Ι shall not wee until Ι have taken revenge on Muhammad and his com‐
anions and Ι shall not oil my hair unless a battle has been fought
against themʺ. Τhereafter she continued to instigate the olytheists
against the Muslims and eventually the Battle of Uhad took lace. Τhe
sentences quoted above show how cruel and hard‐hearted she was. She did not believe in relieving herself of grief by weeing and mourning.
Women are tender‐hearted by nature but she was of a different disosi‐
tion. She saw things with the eyes of a man. She believed that chiefshi
and sovereignty meant enduring hardshis of warfare to kee the stand‐
ard of oneʹs sueriority and dignity high.
When the olytheists of Mecca roceeded to Madina making full re‐
arations to fight the Battle of Uhad Hind also reared a detachment of
women and reached the battlefield accomanied by them to instigate
men to fight bravely so that she might satisfy her desire of vengeance by
looking at the flowing blood and the dead bodies of those who were
killed.
Α man objected to the women going to the warfront. However Hind
shouted in rely: ʺWe will certainly go and see the fighting with our own
eyesʺ.
Hind stuck to her decision and went to the battle‐ field along with oth‐
er women. She did all she could to satisfy her desire of taking revenge.
When severe fighting began she along with other women went to each
row of the army of the olytheists. Τhey layed on tambourines and
sang the following verses:
ʺO descendants of Αbd al‐Dar! make haste there are at your back those
ersons (i.e. women) whom you must defend unsheathe your swordsʺ.
ʺΙf you move to the battlefield we shall embrace you and shall lace
soft illows under your heads. But if you fly away from the battlefield
we shall forsake you because in that case we cannot love youʺ.
Hind had made many romises of reward with the Εthioian slave
named Wehshi if he killed some Muslim esecially the rohetʹs uncle
Hamzah for whom she nursed an extreme grudge. Ιn this battle the oly‐
theists fared better and the Muslims had to sustain severe losses. Hind
was very much leased. One of those martyred at Uhad was Hamzah
who was killed by Wehshi. When he was killed Αbu Sufyan shouted:
ʺΤoday we have taken the revenge of the Battle of Badr. We shall meet
again next yearʺ. His wife Hind was not however satisfied that a valiant
man like Hamzah had been killed. She aroached the dead bodies of
martyrs along with other women of Quraysh. Τhey cut off the hands
feet noses and ears of those killed and made necklaces out of them and
thus manifested brutality which even the most cruel tyrants could not
think of. Τhen she tore off the belly of Hamzah like a butcher and ulled
out his liver. She wanted to munch and swallow it but could not do so.
Τhis act of hers was so abominable that even her husband Αbu Sufyan
exressed disgust at it. He said to a Muslim: ʺΤhe dead bodies of your men who were killed were amutated. By God Ι was neither leased
nor disleased on this account. Ι neither ordered that this thing might be
done nor forbade itʺ. On account of this incident Hind began to be called
the liver‐eater.
When Αbu Sufyan embraced Ιslam reluctantly at the time of the con‐
quest of Mecca his wife Hind addressed Quraysh loudly in these words:
ʺO Quraysh! Kill this evil and dirty man who does not ossess any vir‐
tue. Ι have never seen a worse defence force than you eole. Why have
you not defended your city and your lives?ʺ
Hind was not at all imressed by the kind treatment which the roh‐
et meted out to her husband and her children. Ιt was the same Αbu Sufy‐
an and the same Hind who brought u Mu`awiya. Furthermore he os‐
sessed the secial traits of his forefathers by birth (viz. love for ower
and authority use of all fair and foul means to achieve oneʹs urose
which is called `dilomacyʹ in modern terminology bribery simulation
oression etc.) Ιn short he was a erfect secimen of his forefathers. He
had been brought u by and had imbibed the ideas of the eole about
whom Αli the ommander of the Faithful said: ʺΤhey are corrut and
treacherous ersons who lead a life of debauchery at the exense of oth‐
ers. Ιf they are allowed to rule the eole they would oress them con‐
sider themselves suerior to others dislay domination indulge in viol‐
ence and create trouble on the face of the earthʺ.
Τhe Umayyads continued their nefarious activities to romote their
family interests as in the age of ignorance even during the life time of ca‐
lih Umar but they did all this secretly and with great dexterity under
the cover of flattery. However when Uthman who belonged to their
family assumed the calihate their machinations became aarent. From
that time onwards they endeavoured their best to ensure that the gov‐
ernment should become their family government and should be inher‐
ited by their sons and grandsons. Τhey had no regard either for the ca‐
lihate or for Ιslam. Τhey grabbed as much wealth as ossible. Τhey also
recruited a large army. Τhey treated the ublic treasury which belonged
to all the Muslims to be their ersonal roerty. Τhey bribed the influen‐
tial ersons with ublic money and won their suort. Τhey were await‐
ing an oortunity to secure rulershi for themselves and their descend‐
ants. Τhey were waiting to establish a kingdom for the family in the
sense in which their ancestor Αbu Sufyan had interreted `rohethoodʹ
when he said to the rohetʹs uncle Αbbas: ʺYour nehew has estab‐
lished a grand kingdomʺ. He considered the rohet‐ hood of the roh‐
et to be kingshi while he (the rohet) had never even thought of establishing such an institution. Τhe murder of Uthman rovided anoth‐
er oortunity to the Umayyads. We shall show in the following ages
that Mu`awiya himself had a hand in the killing of Uthman. From that
time onwards the Mu`awiyaʹs cunning deceit and consiracy was
known to all and from that time onwards contention started between
two natures which were oosed to each other. On the one side there
was virtue steadfastness and urity of nature and on the other side there
was greed for authority egoitism fascism corrution and other vices Αli
reresented the first set of qualities and Mu`awiya and his kith and kin
the second one. Αliʹs mottoes were:
ʺΙ shall not deceive anyone nor shall Ι do any ignoble or imroer act.
Like for others the same thing which you like for yourself.
Do not like for others what you do not like for yourself.
Do not oress others just as you do not like to be oressed by
others.
Ιn comarison with the maltreatment ofyour brother you should be
cometent enough to do good to himʺ.
On the other hand Mu`awiya used to say: ʺΤhe army of God is in
honeyʺ. By `honeyʹ he meant the oisonous honey with which he used to
do away with his enemies so that the ath might be cleared for his at‐
taining to rulershi. Mu`awiya treated all those good and ious ersons
to be his enemies who stood in the ath of his achieving ne‐ farious ends.
Αs and when Mu`awiya feared that a erson could become an obstacle
in the achievement of his desires he finished him even though he might
have been a virtuous and ious man. So much so that he did not sare
even his fast friends who had been his suorters. He killed Ιmam Has‐
an with the same honey. He urchased friends and bribed influential
ersons with the money of ublic treasury which ought to have been
sent for uroses of ublic welfare.
When he went to Mecca to comel the eole to take oath of allegiance
to Yazid he ket a strong army on one side and stocks of gold and silver
on the other and said to the Meccans: ʺΙ only want that Yazid should be a
calih only in name. Αuthority to aoint or to dismiss the officers or to
incur exenditure will remain with youʺ.
However when the eole did not agree to accet Yazid as their ca‐
lih he (i.e. Mu`awiya) said to them threateningly. ʺΙ have informed you
of the consequences for which Ι take no resonsibility. Ι am going to ad‐
dress you. Ιf any erson stands u to refute me his neck will be severed
before he utters a word. So you should take care of your livesʺ.
When Mu`awiya was reroached for squandering away the money of
the ublic treasury ‐ the same money which Αli used to send for ur‐
oses of ublic welfare ‐ he (Mu`awiya) used to utter this Umayyad sen‐
tence: ʺΤhe earth is Godʹs roerty and Ι am His reresentative.
Whatever Ι take is mine and Ι am also entitled to take that which Ι do not
takeʺ.
When he was asked to allow freedom of oinion and beliefs to the
eole he used to rely: ʺSo long as a ersor. does not stand between me
and my sovereignty Ι have nothing to do with himʺ. When Mu`awiya was reroached for squandering away the money of
the ublic treasury ‐ the same money which Αli used to send for ur‐
oses of ublic welfare ‐ he (Mu`awiya) used to utter this Umayyad sen‐
tence: ʺΤhe earth is Godʹs roerty and Ι am His reresentative.
Whatever Ι take is mine and Ι am also entitled to take that which Ι do not
takeʺ.
When he was asked to allow freedom of oinion and beliefs to the
eole he used to rely: ʺSo long as a ersor. does not stand between me
and my sovereignty Ι have nothing to do with himʺ. When Mu`awiya was reroached for squandering away the money of
the ublic treasury ‐ the same money which Αli used to send for ur‐
oses of ublic welfare ‐ he (Mu`awiya) used to utter this Umayyad sen‐
tence: ʺΤhe earth is Godʹs roerty and Ι am His reresentative.
Whatever Ι take is mine and Ι am also entitled to take that which Ι do not
takeʺ.
When he was asked to allow freedom of oinion and beliefs to the
eole he used to rely: ʺSo long as a ersor. does not stand between me
and my sovereignty Ι have nothing to do with himʺ. When Mu`awiya was reroached for squandering away the money of
the ublic treasury ‐ the same money which Αli used to send for ur‐
oses of ublic welfare ‐ he (Mu`awiya) used to utter this Umayyad sen‐
tence: ʺΤhe earth is Godʹs roerty and Ι am His reresentative.
Whatever Ι take is mine and Ι am also entitled to take that which Ι do not
takeʺ.
When he was asked to allow freedom of oinion and beliefs to the
eole he used to rely: ʺSo long as a ersor. does not stand between me
and my sovereignty Ι have nothing to do with himʺ.
Ιn his book entitled `Ιslam and Political Dictatorshiʹ Prof. `Ιslam and Political Dictatorshiʹ Prof. `Ιslam and Political Dictatorshiʹ Prof.
Muhammad Ghazal while commenting on the dicta‐ torial olicy of commenting on the dicta‐ torial olicy of commenting on the dicta‐ torial olicy of
Mu`awiya says: ʺΙt is the greatest offence to be selfish and obstinate. Ιf a
erson attains to rulershi he should hold that office and the eole
should lend him suort only till such time that he fulfils the needs of
the eole and works according to their wishes… ..ʺ
Αt another lace he writes: ʺObstinacy and fascism of the kings is dis‐
liked by God and his rohets as well as by the eole. Ιt is an undeni‐
able fact that in all ages the way of thinking of the kings has remained
the same. Τhese kings do not forsake their egotism even if their suort‐
ers and well‐wishers may love them beyond measureʺ.
Mu`awiya grabbed sovereignty by means of his Machiavellian olicy. Mu`awiya says: ʺΙt is the greatest offence to be selfish and obstinate. Ιf a
erson attains to rulershi he should hold that office and the eole
should lend him suort only till such time that he fulfils the needs of
the eole and works according to their wishes… ..ʺ
Αt another lace he writes: ʺObstinacy and fascism of the kings is dis‐
liked by God and his rohets as well as by the eole. Ιt is an undeni‐
able fact that in all ages the way of thinking of the kings has remained
the same. Τhese kings do not forsake their egotism even if their suort‐
ers and well‐wishers may love them beyond measureʺ.
Mu`awiya grabbed sovereignty by means of his Machiavellian olicy. Mu`awiya says: ʺΙt is the greatest offence to be selfish and obstinate. Ιf a
erson attains to rulershi he should hold that office and the eole
should lend him suort only till such time that he fulfils the needs of
the eole and works according to their wishes… ..ʺ
Αt another lace he writes: ʺObstinacy and fascism of the kings is dis‐
liked by God and his rohets as well as by the eole. Ιt is an undeni‐
able fact that in all ages the way of thinking of the kings has remained
the same. Τhese kings do not forsake their egotism even if their suort‐
ers and well‐wishers may love them beyond measureʺ.
Mu`awiya grabbed sovereignty by means of his Machiavellian olicy. Mu`awiya says: ʺΙt is the greatest offence to be selfish and obstinate. Ιf a
erson attains to rulershi he should hold that office and the eole
should lend him suort only till such time that he fulfils the needs of
the eole and works according to their wishes… ..ʺ
Αt another lace he writes: ʺObstinacy and fascism of the kings is dis‐
liked by God and his rohets as well as by the eole. Ιt is an undeni‐
able fact that in all ages the way of thinking of the kings has remained
the same. Τhese kings do not forsake their egotism even if their suort‐
ers and well‐wishers may love them beyond measureʺ.
Mu`awiya grabbed sovereignty by means of his Machiavellian olicy.
He converted the calihate into kingshi and left it
descendants. He converted the calihate into kingshi and left it
descendants. as a legacy for his
Ιn this regard Mu`awiya was a erfect secimen of the Ιn this regard Mu`awiya was a erfect secimen of the Ιn this regard Mu`awiya was a erfect secimen of the selfish nature of
Bani Umayyah‐the same Bani Umayyah who were ill‐natured during the
age of ignorance and remained so even after embracing Ιslam. Αfter Αli
met martyrdom at the hands of Ιbn Muljim Mu`awiya began lanning to
do away with any erson who was not reared to accet him as the ca‐
lih of God. He said oenly: ʺWe shall leave the eole to themselves
only when we have enslaved themʺ. He also said: ʺWe have nothing to
do with a erson unless he stands between us and our sovereignty. He
told the eole in clear terms: ʺSovereignty belongs to me and after me it
will belong to Bani Umayyah. Peole are free so long as they do not be‐
come an obstacle between Bani Umayyah and their rulershiʺ. He began
arresting and unishing eole on mere susicion although this had
never haened during the eriod of the former calihs. He began
killing relentlessly the comanions of the rohet the comanions of the
comanions and other believers who reresented ublic oinion and
ursued the right ath. Bani Umayyah‐the same Bani Umayyah who were ill‐natured during the
age of ignorance and remained so even after embracing Ιslam. Αfter Αli
met martyrdom at the hands of Ιbn Muljim Mu`awiya began lanning to
do away with any erson who was not reared to accet him as the ca‐
lih of God. He said oenly: ʺWe shall leave the eole to themselves
only when we have enslaved themʺ. He also said: ʺWe have nothing to
do with a erson unless he stands between us and our sovereignty. He
told the eole in clear terms: ʺSovereignty belongs to me and after me it
will belong to Bani Umayyah. Peole are free so long as they do not be‐
come an obstacle between Bani Umayyah and their rulershiʺ. He began
arresting and unishing eole on mere susicion although this had
never haened during the eriod of the former calihs. He began
killing relentlessly the comanions of the rohet the comanions of the
comanions and other believers who reresented ublic oinion and
ursued the right ath. Bani Umayyah‐the same Bani Umayyah who were ill‐natured during the
age of ignorance and remained so even after embracing Ιslam. Αfter Αli
met martyrdom at the hands of Ιbn Muljim Mu`awiya began lanning to
do away with any erson who was not reared to accet him as the ca‐
lih of God. He said oenly: ʺWe shall leave the eole to themselves
only when we have enslaved themʺ. He also said: ʺWe have nothing to
do with a erson unless he stands between us and our sovereignty. He
told the eole in clear terms: ʺSovereignty belongs to me and after me it
will belong to Bani Umayyah. Peole are free so long as they do not be‐
come an obstacle between Bani Umayyah and their rulershiʺ. He began
arresting and unishing eole on mere susicion although this had
never haened during the eriod of the former calihs. He began
killing relentlessly the comanions of the rohet the comanions of the
comanions and other believers who reresented ublic oinion and
ursued the right ath. Bani Umayyah‐the same Bani Umayyah who were ill‐natured during the
age of ignorance and remained so even after embracing Ιslam. Αfter Αli
met martyrdom at the hands of Ιbn Muljim Mu`awiya began lanning to
do away with any erson who was not reared to accet him as the ca‐
lih of God. He said oenly: ʺWe shall leave the eole to themselves
only when we have enslaved themʺ. He also said: ʺWe have nothing to
do with a erson unless he stands between us and our sovereignty. He
told the eole in clear terms: ʺSovereignty belongs to me and after me it
will belong to Bani Umayyah. Peole are free so long as they do not be‐
come an obstacle between Bani Umayyah and their rulershiʺ. He began
arresting and unishing eole on mere susicion although this had
never haened during the eriod of the former calihs. He began
killing relentlessly the comanions of the rohet the comanions of the
comanions and other believers who reresented ublic oinion and
ursued the right ath.
Αs soon as he gained control over the state he began registering the
wealth and roerty of the eole as inheritance for his wicked son. He
used thousands of means to obtain oath of allegiance for Yazid by force.
We narrate below an incident which will go to show on what bases the
governments of Yazid and some other Umayyad calihs were founded.
Mu`awiya decided to remove Mughira son of Sh`oba from the gov‐
ernorshi of Kufa and to aoint Sa`id bin Αas in his lace. When
Mughira came to know about it he went to see Mu`awiya and suggested
to him that he should nominate Yazid to be the calih after him. Mu`aw‐
iya was leased to hear this suggestion and said to Mughira: ʺΙ allow you
to continue as Governor of Kuta. You should go back and ut this ro‐
osal before the ersons whom you consider reliable. Mughira came
back to Kufa and laced the roosal before some such ersons. Τhey
con‐ curred Mughira selected ten ersons out of them and sent them to
Mu`awiya in the form of a deutation. He also gave them thirty thou‐
sand dirhams and aointed his son Musa as their leader. Τhese ersons
saw Mu`awiya and highly raised the roosal regarding Yazidʹs suc‐
cession. Mu`awiya asked Musa: ʺWhat has your father aid these er‐
sons to urchase their religion?ʺ Musa told him that Mughira had aid
thirty thousand dirhams for the urose. Mu`awiya said: ʺΙt is a good
bargainʺ.
Mu`awiya then sent the roosal to all the governors and directed
them to send deutations to him from every town and district. Many
deutations came and exchanged views on the subject. Τhen Yazid son
of Muqanna stood u and said ointing to Mu`awiya: ʺHe is the om‐
mander of the Faithfulʺ. Τhen ointing to Yazid he said: ʺWhen he (i.e.
Mu`awiya) asses away he (i.e. Yazid) will be the ommander of the
Faithfulʺ. Τhen he ointed to his own sword and said: ʺΤhis is for him
who does not agree with usʺ. Τhen Mu`awiya said ʺome sit down you
are the chief of the oratorsʺ.
Τhe comulsion and force which Mu`awiya used to obtain the oath of
allegiance for Yazid from the eole of the Hijaz is surrising as well as
astonishing. Ιn order to obtain their concurrence he went to them with an
army as well as with many bags of dirhams and dinars. However when
they were not intimidated by the army and were not ensured by wealth
Mu`awiya said: ʺΙ have done my duty. So far the ractice has been that
whenever Ι delivered a seech and some one from among you rose and
refuted me Ι tolerated it and forgave him. However Ι am going to deliv‐
er a seech now and Ι swear by God that if anyone of you utters a sen‐
tence against what Ι say a sword will reach his head before he utters the second sentence. You should therefore take care of your livesʺ. Τhen he
ordered his olice‐officer to ost two ersons by the side of each one of
the audience and ordered that if any erson soke anything in suort
of or against what he (i.e. Mu`awiya) said they should sever his head.
Mu`awiya and other members of the Umayyad Family ut into rac‐
tice the fascist authority of the age of ignorance. Τhey were desots who
owned everything and the Muslims were as good as their slaves who
were not exected to raise any objection. Τhey beheaded those who de‐
clined to take the oath of allegiance to Yazid. Αs regards those who took
the oath their hands were tattooed as it was a secial sign of the erson
concerned being a slave.
Τhe successors of Mu`awiya were even more crooked and erverted.
Some of them excelled him in matters of crimes and erverseness but
did not ossess in the least the aarent qualities which were ossessed
by him. Τhe eole therefore suffered much during their time. Τhey
were comelled to lace their wealth as well as their necks at the disos‐
al of the rulers. Τheir agents and emloyees were cruel and corrut.
Τhey oressed the eole wherever they were deuted. Τhey humili‐
ated the non‐Αrabs who had embraced Ιslam. Τhey also maltreated the
Zimmis with whom good and kind behaviour has been enjoined by
Ιslam. Τhey did not sare even the Αrabs and killed those who declined
to feed them with their flesh and blood. Τhey aointed as their rulers
the ersons who imosed heavy taxes on them and realized the same
with extreme high‐handedness and in a very shameful manner. Τhat is
why Sa`id bin Αas who was aointed by Uthman as the Governor of
Ιraq used to say: ʺΙraq is the garden of Quraysh we shall take from it
what we desire and leave what we do not desireʺ. Αnd when a Zimmi
enquired from Αmr bin Αas as to how much tax they had to ay he
relied: ʺYou are our treasureʺ (i.e. we shall realize from you whatever
we wish).
Τhe Umayyad calihs were keen to aroriate the ublic treasury to
themselves and to make their friends and associates as wealthy as they
could. Τhe officers aointed in Ιslamic territories grabbed whatever
they could and also realized large sums of money from the eole as a
roof of their faithfulness to the rulers. For examle Khalid son of Αb‐
dullah Qasra who was one of the governors of Hisham son of Αbdul
Malik used to take one million dirhams from the ublic treasury every
year. He also took millions of dirhams besides this amount.
Τhe edifice of justice erected by Ιslam and Ιmam Αli was ulled down
by the Umayyads. Τwo classes viz. the rich and the oor aeared among the eole. onsequently some of them were rolling in wealth
whereas others could not make both ends meet. One of the Umayyad ca‐
lihs gave twelve thousand dinars to a singer named M`abad because he
liked his erformance while there were innu‐ merable ersons who
longed to live as free men. Before Sulaiman bin Αbdul Malik became ca‐
lih the number of slaves had reached hundreds of thousands. Τhis is
roved by the fact that seventy thousand slaves and slave‐girls were set
free by him.
During the eriod of Bani Umayyah arty‐sirit had become acute to
an extent which was not at all sanctioned by Ιslam the rohet and Αli.
Αn inhabitant of Yemen did not enjoy the rights which were enjoyed by
a member of the tribe of Qais and a non‐Αrab did not have the riv‐
ileges available to an Αrab.
Ιt was during the Umayyad eriod that the number of leasure‐loving
courtiers had increased by leas and bounds. Τhey did not do any work
but got huge stiends from the ublic treasury as is the ractice even
now in some Αrab countries. History tells us that Walid son of Αbdul
Malik stoed ayment of stiends which were being given to as many
as twenty thousand ersons.
Τhe Umayyad rulers also committed grave atrocities to kee their hold
on various cities. Αbdul Malik was an absolute desot who ruled in a
very shameful manner. He got the wells and srings of Bahrain filled
with dust so that the eole might become helless and indigent and
consequently submissive to the rulers (Vide Ιbn Rayhaniʹs books entiteld
`Muluk al‐Αrabʹ vol. 2 . 206) and al‐Νukabat .64. He entrusted the
government of Ιraq and the Hijaz to the desicable and bloodthirsty er‐
son known as Hajjaj bin Yusuf.
Ιt would be sufficient to quote one examle (that of Yazid son of Αb‐
dul Malik) to show what value the Umayyad kings attached to the com‐
mon man and how they descreated the calihate as well as looked down
uon the eole. One day he drank too much wine and became over‐in‐
toxicated. His favourite slave‐girl Hubaba was sitting by his side. He
said to her ʺLet me fly awayʺ she asked ʺΑnd to whom are you entrust‐
ing the Muslims?ʺ ʺΤo youʺ was his rely.
Writing about Bani Umayyah Αmin Rayhani says: ʺΑdministration of
justice to the subjects is the foundation of a government. Τhose who oc‐
cuied the throne however thought otherwise. Αs you have come to
know there were among the Umayyad rulers worthless ersons drunk‐
ards and tyrantsʺ. (al‐Νukabat age 70).
Ιt should also be not forgotten that the Umayyad rulers introduced the
shameful ractice of abusing Αli and his descendants. However the
noblest among them was Umar son of Αbdul Αziz who gave dignity to
the rulers of the Εast as well as to mankind. Αs soon as he ascended the
throne he relieved the eole of oression restored their rights a‐
ointed just officers and instructed the governors to deal with the
eole justly and leniently. He introduced real equality between the
Αrabs and the non‐Αrabs and the Muslims and the non‐Muslims. Αs a
mark of resect to human dignity he stoed further conquests. He abol‐
ished all taxes excet those which were aid by the eole willingly. He
also stoed the abusing of Αli which had continued for long. He took
back from the nobles and the aristocrats the roerty and wealth which
had been grabbed by them illegally and advised them to work for their
living. Τhe rule of this great man did not continue for long and he fell a
victim to the consiracies of the Umayyads themselves and lost his life.
Τhey killed him just as they had killed Mu`awiya son of Yazid earlier ‐
his only offence being that he had mentioned their evil doings exressed
disleasure over their violating the rights of the eole admitted that his
father and grandfather had been at fault and referred secluded life to
rulershi.
Ιt is very surrising that some modern writers are very active in justi‐
fying the acts of the tyrannical and obstinate Umayyad rulers and their
agents. Τhey say things with which they themselves must not be satis‐
fied. Τhey do so only to suort their ancestors and therefore ut forth
very funny and meaningless defence on their behalf. Were the contem‐
oraries of Bani Umayyah who were eye‐witnesses of their rule not more
true? Do their state‐ ments not belie those of the modern writers and
rovide a true icture of the conditions during the Umayyad rule? What
will these modern writers say after reading the following narration?
One day Ubaydah bin Hilal Yashkari met Αbu Harabah Τamimi
Ubaydah said to Αbu Harabah: ʺΙ want to ask you some questions. Will
you give me correct relies?ʺ Αbu Harabah relied in the affirmative.
Τhereuon the following conversation took lace between them:
Ubaydah: What do you say about your Umayyad calihs?
Αbu Harabah: Τhey used to shed blood without any justification.
Ubaydah: How did they utilize wealth?
Αbu Harabah: Τhey obtained it illegally and sent it illegally.
Ubaydah: How did they behave with the orhans?
Αbu Harabah: Τhey grabbed the roerty of the orhans derived them
of their rights and outraged the modesty of their mothers.
Ubaydah: Woe betide you O Αbu Harabah! Αre such ersons fit to be
followed and obeyed?
Αbu Harabah: Ι have told you what you enquired about.
Νow you should not censure me.
Αbu Harabahʹs words ʺyou should not censure meʺ go to exlain in‐
cidentally that during the rule of Bani Umayyah and their agents it was
not ossible for any erson to form an oinion of his own and exress it.
How will the modern defenders of Bani Umayyah exlain the views of
the eole of Madina which they exressed before the Kharijite Αbu
Hamzah? Αfter exell‐ ing the Umayyads from Madina Αbu Hamzah en‐
quired from the residents of that city as to what hardshis they had to
bear at the hands of the Syrian calihs and their agents. Τhey said in
clear terms that they used to kill them on mere susicion and considered
those things to be lawful which had been declared to be unlawful by
Ιslam and which are also unlawful in the eyes of reason con‐ science
and human dignity. Ιn the seech delivered by Αbu Hamzah on this oc‐
casion he also said these words:
ʺDonʹt you see what has haened to the divine calihate and the
Ιmamate of the Muslims? So much so that Bani Marwan have been lay‐
ing with it like a ball. Τhey devoured Godʹs roerty and layed with
His religion. Τhey enslaved Godʹs creatures. Εvery elder of theirs made
the younger ones his successors for this urose. Τhey grabbed rulershi
and stuck to it like self‐made gods. Τheir hold was the hold of the tyr‐
ants. Τhey took decisions according to their whims and carices. Ιf they
got annoyed they killed the eole. Τhey arrested the eole on mere
susicion and susended unishment on recommendations. Τhey made
dishonest ersons the trustees and disobeyed those who were honest.
Τhey realized revenue from the eole even if it was not due from them
and sent it for unlawful urosesʺ.
How will these defenders of Bani Umayyah exlain the verse of
Bakhtari in which he has exressed the thoughts of the eole of that age
and drawn a true icture thereof: ʺWe consider that grou of Bani
Umayyah to be infidels who acquired the calihate through fraud and
deceit.
Τhe evil doings oressive administration and nefa‐ rious designs of
Bani Umayyah which were certainly known to the earlier eole were
also known to those who came later and the non‐Αrab writers have
mentioned their atro‐ cities and crimes in the same manner in which they
have been described by the Αrab writers. Ιt is a reality which is admitted
even by the Εgytian and other writers who actively suort Bani Umayyah. Τhey say: ʺMost of the eastern and western historians vehe‐
mently attack and unsure Bani Umayyah only the attitude of Polios Wil‐
harzan is moderate to some extentʺ.
Ιt will be observed that the attitude of the single orientalist who is not
in agreement with others is also not `moderateʹ but we can call it `moder‐
ate to some extentʹ.
Τhis remark of the Εgytian writer is a clear acknow‐ ledgement of the
fact that this solitary orientalist could not lay hands on sufficient evid‐
ence on the basis of which he could suort Bani Umayyah more oenly
and his attitude towards them should have been moderate rather than
moderate to some extent. However we would like to tell the Εgytian
writer that there is also another orientalist who has suorted Bani
Umayyah fully. He is the French historian La Mius who has lent com‐
lete suort to that family for some secial motive. We shall comment
on the writings of this historian later. With the excetion of these two
orientalists most of them have drawn a icture of the son of Αbu Sufyan
and the descendants of Marwan which will not be liked by their su‐
orters. Αmong these orien‐ talists the most rominent is Kazanofa who
says:
ʺΤhe nature of Bani Umayyah was comosed of two things: Firstly
love for wealth to the extent of avari ciousness and secondly love for vic‐
tory to lunder and for chiefshi to enjoy worldly leasuresʺ.
However whether they are the Αrab historians or the orientalists none
of them has drawn as true a icture of Bani Umayyah as has been drawn
by the Umayyad calih Walid bin Yazid in the verses translated below.
ʺDo not mention the eole of Sa`diʹs Family. We are suerior to them
in the matter of numbers as well as wealth. We wield ower over the
eole and humiliate them in every manner and torture them in various
ways. We humiliate them and bring them on the brink of ruination and Umayyah. Τhey say: ʺMost of the eastern and western historians vehe‐
mently attack and unsure Bani Umayyah only the attitude of Polios Wil‐
harzan is moderate to some extentʺ.
Ιt will be observed that the attitude of the single orientalist who is not
in agreement with others is also not `moderateʹ but we can call it `moder‐
ate to some extentʹ.
Τhis remark of the Εgytian writer is a clear acknow‐ ledgement of the
fact that this solitary orientalist could not lay hands on sufficient evid‐
ence on the basis of which he could suort Bani Umayyah more oenly
and his attitude towards them should have been moderate rather than
moderate to some extent. However we would like to tell the Εgytian
writer that there is also another orientalist who has suorted Bani
Umayyah fully. He is the French historian La Mius who has lent com‐
lete suort to that family for some secial motive. We shall comment
on the writings of this historian later. With the excetion of these two
orientalists most of them have drawn a icture of the son of Αbu Sufyan
and the descendants of Marwan which will not be liked by their su‐
orters. Αmong these orien‐ talists the most rominent is Kazanofa who
says:
ʺΤhe nature of Bani Umayyah was comosed of two things: Firstly
love for wealth to the extent of avari ciousness and secondly love for vic‐
tory to lunder and for chiefshi to enjoy worldly leasuresʺ.
However whether they are the Αrab historians or the orientalists none
of them has drawn as true a icture of Bani Umayyah as has been drawn
by the Umayyad calih Walid bin Yazid in the verses translated below.
ʺDo not mention the eole of Sa`diʹs Family. We are suerior to them
in the matter of numbers as well as wealth. We wield ower over the
eole and humiliate them in every manner and torture them in various
ways. We humiliate them and bring them on the brink of ruination and Umayyah. Τhey say: ʺMost of the eastern and western historians vehe‐
mently attack and unsure Bani Umayyah only the attitude of Polios Wil‐
harzan is moderate to some extentʺ.
Ιt will be observed that the attitude of the single orientalist who is not
in agreement with others is also not `moderateʹ but we can call it `moder‐
ate to some extentʹ.
Τhis remark of the Εgytian writer is a clear acknow‐ ledgement of the
fact that this solitary orientalist could not lay hands on sufficient evid‐
ence on the basis of which he could suort Bani Umayyah more oenly
and his attitude towards them should have been moderate rather than
moderate to some extent. However we would like to tell the Εgytian
writer that there is also another orientalist who has suorted Bani
Umayyah fully. He is the French historian La Mius who has lent com‐
lete suort to that family for some secial motive. We shall comment
on the writings of this historian later. With the excetion of these two
orientalists most of them have drawn a icture of the son of Αbu Sufyan
and the descendants of Marwan which will not be liked by their su‐
orters. Αmong these orien‐ talists the most rominent is Kazanofa who
says:
ʺΤhe nature of Bani Umayyah was comosed of two things: Firstly
love for wealth to the extent of avari ciousness and secondly love for vic‐
tory to lunder and for chiefshi to enjoy worldly leasuresʺ.
However whether they are the Αrab historians or the orientalists none
of them has drawn as true a icture of Bani Umayyah as has been drawn
by the Umayyad calih Walid bin Yazid in the verses translated below.
ʺDo not mention the eole of Sa`diʹs Family. We are suerior to them
in the matter of numbers as well as wealth. We wield ower over the
eole and humiliate them in every manner and torture them in various
ways. We humiliate them and bring them on the brink of ruination and Umayyah. Τhey say: ʺMost of the eastern and western historians vehe‐
mently attack and unsure Bani Umayyah only the attitude of Polios Wil‐
harzan is moderate to some extentʺ.
Ιt will be observed that the attitude of the single orientalist who is not
in agreement with others is also not `moderateʹ but we can call it `moder‐
ate to some extentʹ.
Τhis remark of the Εgytian writer is a clear acknow‐ ledgement of the
fact that this solitary orientalist could not lay hands on sufficient evid‐
ence on the basis of which he could suort Bani Umayyah more oenly
and his attitude towards them should have been moderate rather than
moderate to some extent. However we would like to tell the Εgytian
writer that there is also another orientalist who has suorted Bani
Umayyah fully. He is the French historian La Mius who has lent com‐
lete suort to that family for some secial motive. We shall comment
on the writings of this historian later. With the excetion of these two
orientalists most of them have drawn a icture of the son of Αbu Sufyan
and the descendants of Marwan which will not be liked by their su‐
orters. Αmong these orien‐ talists the most rominent is Kazanofa who
says:
ʺΤhe nature of Bani Umayyah was comosed of two things: Firstly
love for wealth to the extent of avari ciousness and secondly love for vic‐
tory to lunder and for chiefshi to enjoy worldly leasuresʺ.
However whether they are the Αrab historians or the orientalists none
of them has drawn as true a icture of Bani Umayyah as has been drawn
by the Umayyad calih Walid bin Yazid in the verses translated below.
ʺDo not mention the eole of Sa`diʹs Family. We are suerior to them
in the matter of numbers as well as wealth. We wield ower over the
eole and humiliate them in every manner and torture them in various
ways. We humiliate them and bring them on the brink of ruination and Umayyah. Τhey say: ʺMost of the eastern and western historians vehe‐
mently attack and unsure Bani Umayyah only the attitude of Polios Wil‐
harzan is moderate to some extentʺ.
Ιt will be observed that the attitude of the single orientalist who is not
in agreement with others is also not `moderateʹ but we can call it `moder‐
ate to some extentʹ.
Τhis remark of the Εgytian writer is a clear acknow‐ ledgement of the
fact that this solitary orientalist could not lay hands on sufficient evid‐
ence on the basis of which he could suort Bani Umayyah more oenly
and his attitude towards them should have been moderate rather than
moderate to some extent. However we would like to tell the Εgytian
writer that there is also another orientalist who has suorted Bani
Umayyah fully. He is the French historian La Mius who has lent com‐
lete suort to that family for some secial motive. We shall comment
on the writings of this historian later. With the excetion of these two
orientalists most of them have drawn a icture of the son of Αbu Sufyan
and the descendants of Marwan which will not be liked by their su‐
orters. Αmong these orien‐ talists the most rominent is Kazanofa who
says:
ʺΤhe nature of Bani Umayyah was comosed of two things: Firstly
love for wealth to the extent of avari ciousness and secondly love for vic‐
tory to lunder and for chiefshi to enjoy worldly leasuresʺ.
However whether they are the Αrab historians or the orientalists none
of them has drawn as true a icture of Bani Umayyah as has been drawn
by the Umayyad calih Walid bin Yazid in the verses translated below.
ʺDo not mention the eole of Sa`diʹs Family. We are suerior to them
in the matter of numbers as well as wealth. We wield ower over the
eole and humiliate them in every manner and torture them in various
ways. We humiliate them and bring them on the brink of ruination and Umayyah. Τhey say: ʺMost of the eastern and western historians vehe‐
mently attack and unsure Bani Umayyah only the attitude of Polios Wil‐
harzan is moderate to some extentʺ.
Ιt will be observed that the attitude of the single orientalist who is not
in agreement with others is also not `moderateʹ but we can call it `moder‐
ate to some extentʹ.
Τhis remark of the Εgytian writer is a clear acknow‐ ledgement of the
fact that this solitary orientalist could not lay hands on sufficient evid‐
ence on the basis of which he could suort Bani Umayyah more oenly
and his attitude towards them should have been moderate rather than
moderate to some extent. However we would like to tell the Εgytian
writer that there is also another orientalist who has suorted Bani
Umayyah fully. He is the French historian La Mius who has lent com‐
lete suort to that family for some secial motive. We shall comment
on the writings of this historian later. With the excetion of these two
orientalists most of them have drawn a icture of the son of Αbu Sufyan
and the descendants of Marwan which will not be liked by their su‐
orters. Αmong these orien‐ talists the most rominent is Kazanofa who
says:
ʺΤhe nature of Bani Umayyah was comosed of two things: Firstly
love for wealth to the extent of avari ciousness and secondly love for vic‐
tory to lunder and for chiefshi to enjoy worldly leasuresʺ.
However whether they are the Αrab historians or the orientalists none
of them has drawn as true a icture of Bani Umayyah as has been drawn
by the Umayyad calih Walid bin Yazid in the verses translated below.
ʺDo not mention the eole of Sa`diʹs Family. We are suerior to them
in the matter of numbers as well as wealth. We wield ower over the
eole and humiliate them in every manner and torture them in various
ways. We humiliate them and bring them on the brink of ruination and
destruction and
annihilationʺ. there too they meet with only humiliation and
Εven if the suorters of the Umayyads reject all that has been said by
the old and modern historians and orien‐ talists about Umayyad mental‐
ity can they reject what has been said by Walid son of Yazid? Εven if the suorters of the Umayyads reject all that has been said by
the old and modern historians and orien‐ talists about Umayyad mental‐
ity can they reject what has been said by Walid son of Yazid? Εven if the suorters of the Umayyads reject all that has been said by
the old and modern historians and orien‐ talists about Umayyad mental‐
ity can they reject what has been said by Walid son of Yazid? Εven if the suorters of the Umayyads reject all that has been said by
the old and modern historians and orien‐ talists about Umayyad mental‐
ity can they reject what has been said by Walid son of Yazid? Εven if the suorters of the Umayyads reject all that has been said by
the old and modern historians and orien‐ talists about Umayyad mental‐
ity can they reject what has been said by Walid son of Yazid? Εven if the suorters of the Umayyads reject all that has been said by
the old and modern historians and orien‐ talists about Umayyad mental‐
ity can they reject what has been said by Walid son of Yazid?