There are many doubts and sayings about the peace Imam al-Hasan made with Mu’awiya. From them we can conclude two different decisions; indeed one of them is wrong and far from correctness, just like two different decisions.

The first decision is about justifying Imam al-Hasan’s attitude in respect of his making peace (with Mu’awiya) and his great success in it. The justifications for it are different. Some religious scholars and researchers have justified it with that al-Hasan is an Imam, the Imam is infallible; therefore, he makes no mistake. The Imam does nothing except good things that include all the community. At the end of the chapter we will mention those who maintain this viewpoint. Yet there is another justification for indicating the meaning of the first viewpoint and explaining its originality and its goodness. The justification depends on some material reasons that forced Imam al-Hasan to make peace such as the desertion of his Army, the corruption of his society, the treason of the leaders and the prominent persons from among his Shi’a, and the like from among the factors.

The second justification briefly indicates that Imam al-Hasan had a weak will, had no knowledge of the general political affairs, was feeble of managing the state, and did not set right the attitude through depending on some political methods even if they are religiously forbidden. If he had won a victory, it would have been good and well; otherwise he had to die a martyr for glory that was the Hashimites’ slogan and reformers’ objective. This viewpoint is based on some unreal justifications. That is because it has not been based on studying the conditions that surrounded Imam al-Hasan and understanding the inclinations of his people who suffered from bad manners and thoughts. Therefore, this viewpoint is surface and void of an inquiry and far from reality. As for those who have maintained this viewpoint, they are as follows:

Al-Safadi

Commenting on this poetry line of (the poem) Lamiyyat al-‘Ajam, al-Safadi has said:

The love for safety turns the determination of its owner away from high positions and incites one (to cling to) laziness.

Some chiefs and leading persons who were advanced in knowledge and office parted their positions and abdicated the thrones. Then he has mentioned some of those who were satisfied with laziness and abdicated the caliphate, saying: “And this is al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (peace be on him) said to Mu’awiya: ‘Most surely there is a debt against me. Pay my debt, and I will abdicate the caliphate. They paid his debt, and he abdicated the caliphate.’”1

Dr. Philip Hatty

Professor Philip Hatty has said: “Another movement arose at the beginning of Mu’awiya’s reign. The movement was of great importance among the following generations. I mean (when) the people of Iraq declared al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali as a legal caliph. Perhaps this foundation is logical, for al-Hasan was the eldest son of ‘Ali and Fatimah, the Prophet’s only daughter who survived after his death. However al-Hasan- who inclined to luxury and lavishness, and not to government and management-was not the man of the attitude. So he abdicated the caliphate and was satisfied with a yearly gift he (Mu’awiya) gave to him.”2

Al-Alaa’ili

Professor al-Alaa’ili has said: “But he (al-Hasan) was able to repeat the disbanded groups through consultation and enthusiasm. He spread (among them) the spirit of determination and will. He was like the iron leaders such as Napoleon, who undertook a people whom the long revolution exhausted just as it exhausted the Arabs, and whom he increased in exhaustion through the continuous, successive wars through which he took Europe. However the leader was covered by the wave of boredom that covered the people.”3

Lamans

This English person, who harbored malice against Islam, did not understand its values and reality, has said: “The pledge of allegiance was given to al-Hasan after the murder of ‘Ali. So his supporters tried to persuade him to return to fight against the people of Sham. This persistence from their side changed the anger of al-Hasan with the crippled determination. So he no longer thought (of anything) except reaching an agreement with Mu’awiya; likewise he led to a division between him and the people of Iraq. They reached a stage where they weakened their Imam, by word not by deed, by wounding him. So from that time al-Hasan was controlled by one thought, which was reaching an agreement with the Umayyads. Mu’awiya let him appoint what he requested as a reward for his abdicating the caliphate. Al-Hasan was not satisfied with the two million dirhams he requested as a livelihood for his brother al-Husayn; rather he asked for himself other five million dirhams and entered into a district of Persia throughout his lifetime. After that he opposed the people of Iraq in carrying out the last item of this agreement. But he was responded to with all that which he asked to the extent that the grandson of the Prophet dared to repent openly that he did not double his demand. And he left Iraq filled with the people’s displeasure with him, that he might keep to Medina.”4

R. M. Ronalds

R. M. Ronalds, an orientalist, has said: “Most surely the reports indicate that al-Hasan lacked morale strength and a mental ability that he might successfully lead his people.”5

Lamans

This English person, who harbored malice against Islam, did not understand its values and reality, has said: “The pledge of allegiance was given to al-Hasan after the murder of ‘Ali. So his supporters tried to persuade him to return to fight against the people of Sham. This persistence from their side changed the anger of al-Hasan with the crippled determination. So he no longer thought (of anything) except reaching an agreement with Mu’awiya; likewise he led to a division between him and the people of Iraq. They reached a stage where they weakened their Imam, by word not by deed, by wounding him. So from that time al-Hasan was controlled by one thought, which was reaching an agreement with the Umayyads. Mu’awiya let him appoint what he requested as a reward for his abdicating the caliphate. Al-Hasan was not satisfied with the two million dirhams he requested as a livelihood for his brother al-Husayn; rather he asked for himself other five million dirhams and entered into a district of Persia throughout his lifetime. After that he opposed the people of Iraq in carrying out the last item of this agreement. But he was responded to with all that which he asked to the extent that the grandson of the Prophet dared to repent openly that he did not double his demand. And he left Iraq filled with the people’s displeasure with him, that he might keep to Medina.”6

These people who have criticized al-Hasan for his making peace with Mu’awiya have harbored malice and enmity against Islam. Some of them have not yielded to the freedom of opinion. All of them have deviated from the reality and gone far from the truth in respect of what they have written from among the researches on Imam al-Hasan. They have not fully understood the severe factors that surrounded Imam al-Hasan to the extent that they forced him to make peace with his opponent Mu’awiya. It is incumbent on the writer who wants to give his opinion about this important subject matter to fully understand it from all sides that his opinion may be close to correctness and far from mistake.

As for us, we have understood some reasons and factors that forced Imam al-Hasan to make peace with his enemy. These reasons and factors are brief. We have concluded some of them from the previous researches. We have concluded the others from our studying Mu’awiya’s psyche, observing his governors, understanding the Imam’s high character, and acquiring knowledge of the policy of the Prophet’s Household, peace be on them, used for reaching government. It is worth mentioning that the Prophet’s household did not use the means that Islam has condemned. Before we deal with the reasons of the peacemaking, we would like to explain that we may repeat some examples of the previous subjects. We are forced to do that as proofs for what we maintain.

That is because the repetition is necessary and required by the research. Indeed talking in detail about this subject matter and understanding it is more important than others, as we think. We will draw the attention of readers to these reasons which are as follows.

The Army Is Divided

Most surely the most dangerous disaster a state faces in all its fields most likely results from the wickedness of the Army, its intense opposition, and its mutiny against its commanders-in-chief. The then Iraq Army was afflicted with mutiny and weakness where as Mu’awiya’s Army was not afflicted with that; it kept its obedience to its government; it was not stricken by such shocks and relapses.

As for the reasons that led to the division of the Iraqi Army, they are as follows.

The Party Opposition

If some parties in an army oppose each other -because they harbor malice against their standing government or because they have a relationship with a foreign state that inspires them with work and give them instructions to overthrow their government-then their government will face its inevitable end sooner or later. As for the then Iraqi Army, it was afflicted with two parties that showed no friendship to the Hashimite government, nor did they keep it; rather they spared no effort to put an end to it. The two parties are:

The Umayyad Party

The children of the prominent family and possessor of the aristocratic houses belonged to this party. They paid attention to nothing except the authority in this world and obtaining property. Some of them are ‘Umar Ibn Sa‘d, Qays Ibn al-Ash‘th, Amr Ibn Hurayth, Hajjar Ibn Abjar, Amr Ibn al-Hajjaj, and the like from among those void of virtue and dignity. They were the most dangerous elements among the Army. They promised to hand over Imam al-Hasan to Mu’awiya as a captive or to assassinate him. In the meantime they did things of great importance of which are:

A. They recorded all the aspects and movements of the army and sent them to Mu’awiya to have knowledge of them.

B. They were a link between Mu’awiya and the rest of the prominent persons.

C. They spread rumors and terrorism among the members of the Army through displaying Mu’awiya’s strength and al-Hasan’s weakness.

Theses destructive acts led to the collapse of the Army, shaking its entity, and the weakness of their morale in all the fields.

The Harawri Party

This party undertook the revolt against the then government and fighting against it in all means possible. Its principles were terribly spread among the Iraqi Army. That is because those who spread their beliefs were good at invading the hearts and the opinions and (they were) good at the means of propaganda. Ziyad Ibn Abeeh has described their ability in this respect, saying: “Most surely the speech of these people is quicker in reaching the hearts than the fire in reaching the reeds!” Al-Mughira Ibn Shu‘ba has described their intense influence on the people, saying: “When they resided in a country, they spoiled all those who associated with them.”7 They controlled the simple-minded from among the (Iraqi) Army through their slogan: “The government belongs to Allah!” With this they meant nothing except the government through the sword, as Flotin says8.

The crooked plans of the Harawriyya (Kharijites) made it incumbent on their followers to revolt against the ruler of the Muslims when he did not belong to them. This was religious jihad with them, and they had to sacrifice their lives for it. The Kharijites strongly revolted against the rulers to the extent that they were unable to resist them. They carried in their souls strong malice against the Hashimite government, for its members had killed their prominent persons and put an end to many of them at the Battle of al-Nahrawan. They killed Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, and left him thrown down in his mihrab as a sign of their taking a vengeance on him due to what he had done to them. They also tried to assassinate Imam al-Hasan (‘a) when they stabbed him in the thigh. Besides they accused him of unbelief. This group of people was numerous. Some books have mentioned that the majority of the Army were from them9.

These two parties dominated Iraq and spared no effort to spoil the Army, to sow disagreement and division among all its units to the extent that they suffered from troubles and disorders. Besides, a large group of them took a negative attitude towards the affair of Imam al-Hasan, peace be on him. That is because they did not understand the original objectives the Imam sought. Because of their narrow thinking they maintained that the Imam was every one who ascended the throne of government through any means possible; therefore al-Hasan and Mu’awiya were the same (for them), though al-Hasan fought against Mu’awiya for the religion, and Mu’awiya fought against al-Hasan for the world.

After that, none was ready to support the Hashimite government or to side with it except the Shi’a who maintained that the Alawids were worthy of the caliphate. Such Shi’ites were the leader Qays Ibn Sa‘d, Sa‘eed Ibn Qays, ‘Adi Ibn Hatam al-Taa’i, Hijr Ibn ‘Adi, Rashid al-Hajjri, Habeeb Ibn Muzahir, and the like from among the followers of Imam ‘Ali (‘a). However, they were few in number just as Allah, the Exalted, has said: “And they are few.” Accordingly, they were unable to save the Army from the dangers that surrounded it. If they had been many in the Army, Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, would not have been forced to accept the arbitration, and al-Hasan would not have resorted to the peacemaking.

Boredom Of War

The Kufans were tired of war, “and the tired has no opinion.” In addition to this psychological phenomenon for which they were famous, there are two reasons that brought about and doubled the boredom. They are as follows:

The Successive Battles

Among the reasons that brought about tiredness and boredom to the souls of the Iraqi army are the successive battles. That is because the state used to send the Army to make conquest and to defend it. The Battles of Siffin and al-Nahrawan increased the weakness of the nerves of its members and the collapse of their strength. During these two battles many people were killed to the extent that they hated battle and preferred tranquility and peace.

The Despair of Booties

The Iraqi Army won nothing of the weapon and property during the Battles of al-Jamal (the Camel), Siffin, and al-Nahrawan. That is because Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, did not regard the people who fought against him at these battles as unbelievers and did not divide their belongings among the Muslims. Rather he ordered them to be returned to their owners after the end of Basra Battle (the Battle of the Camel)10. The Army came to know that Imam al-Hasan would not change his father’s conduct and program. So they had no confidence in the property and the booty if they fought against Mu’awiya. Accordingly, they declared rebellion, showed mutiny and boredom of war.

Most surely that the Iraqi Army hated war and preferred peace to it, and this did not result from Maskan events; rather it resulted from raising copies of the Qur’an (at the Battle of Siffin) and from the Battle of al-Nahrawan. All the units of the Army inclined to peace. In the first part of the book we have mentioned some examples of the treacherous aggressions which Mu’awiya’s troops made through the Iraqi borders. We have also mentioned some examples of their invading the Iraqi cities, their terrifying and killing the innocent people, while they (the Iraqis) were too weak and laggard to resist them. The religious sentiments did not move them nor did human feelings shake them to repel the oppression and abasement. Imam ‘Ali (‘a) commanded them to perform jihad, but they did not obey him. He invited them to support him, but they did not respond to him. This attitude left in his soul bitter sorrow and permanent sadness. Accordingly, in many of his speeches, the Imam has disparaged and dispraised them. He (‘a) has said: “I am tired of admonishing you. Are you satisfied with this worldly life in place of the next life? Or disgrace in place of dignity? When I summon you to fight against your enemy, your eyes revolve as though you are in the clutches of death and in the senselessness of the last moments….”

Imam ‘Ali goes on rebuking and admonishing them. He shows his displeasure with their weakness and their turning away from war, saying: “Neither you are a support for me to lean upon…. By Allah, most surely, I think that if battle rages and death hovers around you, you will cut away from the son of Abi Talib like the severing of head from the trunk….”

In another speech he (‘a) describes their turning away from the jihad in the way of Allah, his terrible ordeal and tribulation in respect of them, saying: “I called them secretly as well as openly, again and again. Some of them unwillingly came; some of them affected illness; and some of them tarried and deserted. And I ask Allah to give me a quick relief from them! By Allah, were it not for my ambition for martyrdom during meeting my enemy (in battle), I would like that I would not remain with these people for one day and never meet with them!”11

In another speech he (‘a) says: “By Allah, deceived is one whom you have deceived while, by Allah, he who is successful with you receives only useless arrows. You are like broken arrows thrown over the enemy. By Allah, I am now in the position that I neither confirm your views nor hope for your support, nor challenge the enemy through you. What is the matter with you? What is your ailment? What is your cure?”12

Nahj al-Balagha contains a large group of Imam ‘Ali’s speeches in which he has expressed his displeasure with his Army and their turning away from supporting him. He has said that they filled his heart with pus, loaded his bosom with rage, and caused him griefs one after the other. They remained tired of war and hated jihad throughout the days of Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful. When Imam al-Hasan (‘a) became a caliph, they showed that in the worst manner. When he asked them about Mu’awiya’s summons to peacemaking, they said at the top of their voices: “The remainder! The remainder!”

This indicates that they were tired of war, they hated jihad, and would never been with Imam al-Hasan if he had opened a door to battle against Mu’awiya.

Missing The Aware Figures

Among the reasons for dividing the Iraqi Army is that it lost the aware forces from among the Muslim great figures who believed in the right of the Prophet’s Household, peace be on them, and regarded their excellence. All the military units respect them, for they were good Muslims, show extreme courage (at battles), played an important role in organizing the military movements, and guided the army to serve the Islamic objectives. Examples of them are ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir, a great companion (of the Prophet), Hashim al-Mirqal, an inspired leader, Thabit Ibn Qays, the one of two testimonies, and the like from among those who had precedence in Islam and faith.

Most of them were killed at the Battle of Siffin. Historians have counted the number of those who had taken part in the Battle of Badr, and it was sixty-three men (from among those who fought with Imam ‘Ali in). There is another group of the pious, good companions who died martyrs at the battles made by those ambitious and devious from Islam against Imam ‘Ali. Missing them left a large gap in the Iraqi Army, that lost the leading personalities and was afflicted with the hypocrites and the Kharijites who were like a woodworm boring in its entity. If Imam al-Hasan’s Army had had the like of those pious, the Imam would not make peace with his opponent.

The Summons To Peacemaking

Another reason for undermining the determinations and putting out the fire of the revolt in the souls of the Army is Mu’awiya’s summons to peacemaking and sparing blood. For this summons was very agreeable. That is because the simple-minded regarded it as good. However the overwhelming majority had not come to know Mu’awiya’s intentions and the evil he had schemed against them. So his summons to peacemaking deceived them just as the raising of copies of the Qur’an had deceived them. Besides, their leaders betrayed Imam al-Hasan and joined Mu’awiya’s camp.

Anyway the majority of the Army hailed the summons to peacemaking and preferred peace to war. As for Imam al-Hasan, he was unable to force them to fight against Mu’awiya and to resist him.

Ubaydillah’s Treason

The desertion of Ubaydillah Ibn al-Abbas is regarded as among the factors that divided and undermined the Army. Through his treason he deadly stabbed the Iraqi army, opened a door to treason and perfidy, and paved the way for people to join Mu’awiya. The men of he weak souls found a wide room to desert their Imam. They used Ubaydillah’s treason as means for that, for he was the Imam’s cousin and the closet of the people to him in kinship. In the past it was said:

If the closer (in kinship) to whose party you belong deserts you, then there is no wonder when those far desert you!

Ubaydillah’s treason created in the Imam’s soul strong sadness and a bitter sorrow. That is because he paid no attention to the religion, the revenge, the tribal links, the close relationships with Allah’s Apostle, and with his commander-in-chief. Nor did he pay attention to the pledge of allegiance he had made before Allah, for he was the first to summon the people to pledge allegiance to al-Hasan in Kufa Mosque. Nor did he pay attention to the fear of the people’s speech and the vengeance of history.

The Treason Of Rabee’a

Among the reasons for the collapse of the Army, the division of their bases, and their feebleness in resistance was the treason of (the tribe of) Rabee‘a, who were like a strong armor to the Imam. That was when Khalid Ibn Mu‘ammar, a brilliant leader among Rabee‘a, joined Mu’awiya and said to him: “I will pledge allegiance to you on behalf of Rabee‘a.” He paid homage to him on their behalf. The poet said in respect of him when he addressed Mu’awiya, saying:

O Mu’awiya, honor Khalid Ibn Mu‘ammar, for, most surely, were it not for Khalid, you would not be appointed as a commander!

When al-Hasan heard of that, his became very angry. He headed for the Iraqis and addressed them, saying: “O People of Iraq, it was you who forced my father to fight (against Mu’awiya) and (to accept) the arbitration. Then you disobeyed him. I have heard that the men of honor from among you have come to Mu’awiya and paid homage to him. Therefore sufficient unto me is that which (has issued) from you! Do not deceive me in respect of my religion and my soul!”

Uthman Ibn Shurhabeel, the chief of the the tribe of Tamim, secretly pledged allegiance to Mu’awiya. Accordingly, the treason spread over the military units13.

Mu’awiya’s Bribes

For money the protections of men are bought, homelands are sold, and thoughts are suppressed. A mouth waters for money! Indeed Mu’awiya deliberately spent money on the prominent persons, the noble, and the leaders. That is because he had come to know that he had no means to overcome the event except through spending money. Accordingly, the people betrayed Imam al-Hasan and slipped away in the night and in the daylight to join Mu’awiya’s camp. They paid no attention to shame, disgrace, and Allah’s punishment. Their treason led to the disorders of the army, division, and the declaration of rebellion and mutiny.

Most surely, the overwhelming majority of the Army had no noble objective; rather they wished for their profits and ambitions. One of them stated that at one of the battles, saying: “Whoever gives us a dirham, we will fight on his behalf!”

A poet dispraised a person who was killed at those battles. The poet said to his children:

Your father met his death not for the sake of Allah but for the sake of the dirhams.14

If the members of an army fight for material motives, they are not loyal to their defense, their mutiny is very possible, and their danger against their government is more than an external danger.

The then Iraqis were corrupt and greedy to get money from Mu’awiya. For example, after Imam al-Hasan had received a wound, he went to al-Mada’in for cure. There he stopped at the house of Sa‘d Ibn Mas‘ud al-Thaqafi15, who was appointed as a governor over al-Mada’in by Imam ‘Ali (‘a) and by Imam al-Hasan (‘a). Then his (Sa‘d) young nephew called al-Mukhtar came to him and said:

-O uncle, do you have (an objective) in riches and honor? -What is that? -Shackle al-Hasan and seek security from Mu’awiya through him.

-Allah’s curse be on you! Do I shackle the son of the daughter of the messenger of Allah? How a bad man you are!16

The treason included al-Mukhtar, if this narration was true, and the majority of the army who were with Imam al-Hasan, and they competed with each other for the worldly ambitions. That was not only during the time of Imam al-Hasan, peace be on him. It was also during the time of Imam ‘Ali (‘a). Imam Zayn al-‘Abidin (‘a) has said: “Mu’awiya fought ‘Ali through his gold!”17 Most surely Mu’awiya came to know the point of weakness in Imam al-Hasan’s army, so he showered it with bribes to the extent that it responded to him and abandoned the Prophet’s family and his trust among his community.

The False Rumors

Among the reasons for the division of the army are the false rumors which Mu’awiya’s hirelings spread in al-Mada’in. They rumored that Qays Ibn Sa‘d was killed. They also rumored that he made peace with Mu’awiya. The members of the Army believed these rumors, so they suffered from troubles and discords. The most dangerous of these rumors in tribulation and greatest of them in destruction was that which was spread by the delegation sent by Mu’awiya to Imam al-Hasan. When the members of the delegation left Imam al-Hasan, they rumored that he responded to peacemaking. When the members of the Army heard of that, they rushed like waves. They plundered Imam al-Hasan’s property and aggressed against him. If the leaders and the prominent figures had had a little bit of humanity and dignity, they would have protected the Imam and driven the mobs away from him till the affair would be clear to them. However they remained in their camps. They neither protected nor helped him.

With this topic we will end our speech about the factors that led to the division and destruction of the Army. Of course, military forces are the core of a state and the source of its protection. If such shocks and dangers strike them, can the commander-in-chief achieve his objectives or open a door to war against the enemy forces?

The Enemy’s Forces

The second factor that urged Imam al-Hasan to make peace (with Mu’awiya) was that his opponent had military forces and the like against whom the Imam was unable to fight, nor was he able to resist. With these forces Mu’awiya had fought against Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, before and forced Imam al-Hasan to make peace with him. We will give a brief outline on some of them as follows:

The Obedience Of The Army

Mu’awiya planted the love for him in the hearts of his Army. He dominated their feelings and sentiments. It was because he knew their inclinations and trends. So he complied with them to the extent that they loved him, and he loved them. They obeyed him and their opinion of him was fully developed because of his propaganda and his cheating through that he was the proof after the Caliphs, and that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, had no lawful inheritor other than the Umayyads. The historians have narrated: “When Abu al-Abbas al-Saffah18 conquered Sham, a group of leaders and prominent persons came to him. They swore by Allah that they had come to know that the Prophet had neither kinship nor household to inherit him except the Umayyads. They knew that when the Abbasids undertook the caliphate.” Concerning that, Ibrahim Ibn al-Muhajir al-Bajali19 says:

O people, listen to me so that I tell you something wonderful (and) has exceeded all wonderful things. I wonder at ‘Abd Shams; they have opened to the people doors to lying. They have inherited Ahmad (Muhammad) in what they have claimed excluding Abbas Ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib. They have told lies. By Allah, as far as we know that none obtains the inheritance except those near.20

The reason behind that were the narrations that the mercenary narrators fabricated and rumored among the people of Damascus. They told the people there that Mu’awiya was the inheritor of the Prophet and the nearest of the people to him. They ascribed to him and to the cursed tree of his family good qualities and noble descriptions, to the extent that they placed him in the first class from among the good reformers to whom obedience was one of the religious duties. The people of Sham believed in other things as to Mu’awiya and the Umayyads. Professor Fan Floten says: “The great majority thought that the Umayyad party was that of the religion and the regime.” He added:

“In the viewpoint of the Umayyad party Mu’awiya was the vicegerent of Allah just as his son Yazid was the Imam of the Muslims, ‘Abd al-Malik was the Imam of Islam and one entrusted by Allah.”21 The people of Sham loved and obeyed Mu’awiya to the extent that he made them walk on all the ways far and contrary to the religion, while they did not know that. Through them he could achieve all what he wanted. Because of their increasingly obedience to Mu’awiya, Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, had wished that Mu’awiya would have given him one of his companions and taken ten of the Iraqis who were famous for riot and mutiny.

Simplicity And Naiveté

The bad time helped Mu’awiya dominate the Army that was a model of simplicity and naiveté, for the great majority of it did not know which anecdote was the longest. History has mentioned many examples of their stupidity indicating their inactivity and lacking insight. The historians have mentioned that a man from Kufa came to Damascus on the back of a camel. That was when they went away from Siffin. A man from Damascus clung to him and said to him: “This is my she-camel! You took it from me at Siffin!” A quarrel took place between them. So they brought their case before Mu’awiya. The man from Damascus brought fifty men to bear witness that the she-camel belonged to him. Accordingly, Mu’awiya decided against the Kufan and commanded him to hand over the camel to the Syrian man immediately. So the Iraqi man turned to Mu’awiya and showed his astonishment at this judgement, saying: “May Allah set you right! It is a he-camel, and not a she-camel!”

“The decision is over!” exclaimed Mu’awiya.

When the people went away, Mu’awiya ordered the Iraqi to be brought before him. When he was before him, he asked him about the value of the he-camel. The Iraqi told Mu’awiya about its value, and Mu’awiya gave a double of its price to him. He was kind to him and said: “Say to ‘Ali that I will meet him (in battle) with one thousand men who do not distinguish the she-camel from the he-camel!”22

Most surely the overwhelming majority did not distinguish between a she-camel and a he-camel. Without doubt they did not distinguish truth from falsehood. They did not carefully consider the differences among the sensible things. They were mobs and rabbles. The clearest proof of their inattentiveness was the story of ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir, the great companion of the Prophet. When he obtained martyrdom, the Syrians differed over him because of the tradition of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family: “Most surely the oppressive group will kill Ibn Sumayya (i.e. ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir).” When Amr Ibn al-‘Aas saw that they differed, he said to them: “Most surely, he who brought him (Ammar) out has killed him!” So they believed his speech and returned to the obedience to Mu’awiya. Of course when a state has such an inattentive, obedient army, it will reach its purposes and achieve its objectives.

Mu’awiya made the people of Sham inattentive, ignorant, and wretched. He made them sink under the yoke of the Umayyad enslavement. He placed between them and the people an iron curtain. He did not allow the others to communicate with them nor did he allow them to communicate with the others lest they should come to know the truth and know Mu’awiya’s falsehood and his usurping the caliphate from its actual people. The politicians after Mu’awiya followed this policy. They deliberately made them lead a life of ignorance. They did not allow awareness to be spread among them.

The historians have narrated that Ayas disputed with an old man from among the people of Sham, and their case was brought before the judge. The judge said to him: “Do you not feel shame of that you disputed with an old man, while you are a young man?” “The truth is greater than him,” replied Ayas. So the judge rebuked him and commanded him to keep silent. As a result Ayas said to him: “Who will utter my proof?” So the Judge went to ‘Abd al-Malik and told him about Ayas’s case. ‘Abd al-Malik said to the judge: “Grant his need and bring him out of Sham lest he should spoil the people against us!”23

The historians have mentioned many examples of such cases showing the Umayyad policy aiming at deadening awareness and spreading ignorance.

The Unanimous Agreement

In the previous researches we have mentioned that the Iraqis were afflicted with disagreement and division. That is because the members of the parties spared no effort to shake the entity of the Hashimite government and to destroy its throne. But all the classes in Sham were not afflicted with such parties, nor were they stricken by the opinions hostile to the standing government. Peace, harmony, and tranquility prevailed over Damascus and all its districts. In the Army and the kingdom the Kharijites had neither place nor summoners to them or to other than them from among those who worked to overthrow the government. This unanimous agreement was the reason for Mu’awiya’s power, his wide range and influence.

The Huge Army

Mu’awiya spent all his spiritual and material efforts to set right his Army and to reinforce it. For example, when Sham was afflicted with the Romans’ danger, Mu’awiya hurried to conclude a timely truce with their Emperor and to give him important properties. He did not open a door to war against him lest the nerves of his Army should be weak. Besides he did not employ his Army during the conquests and the battles. He did not employ it at any battle except that of Siffin, so the Army kept its activity and strength.

In addition to his Army residing with him in Damascus, Mu’awiya wrote to his governors and his leaders in all the countries when he decided to war against Imam al-Hasan. He asked them for help and to be fully ready for fighting against the Prophet’s grandson (Imam al-Hasan). Shortly after that, huge military forces joined him. So he added them to those of Sham and set off towards Iraq along with a huge Army full in number, good in appearance, abundant in strength, and obedient to his commands. Accordingly, Imam al-Hasan understood that he had no ability to meet him (in battle) and to fight against him with his weak Army among which treason and perfidy spread.

His Entourage

In addition to the military forces Mu’awiya enjoined, he had other forces with effective influence on reinforcing his front, directing him, and managing his affairs. That was when the experienced and the politicians joined him because they craved after his property and his world. An example of these persons was al-Mughira Ibn Shu‘ba about whose trick and cunning it has been said: “If al-Mughira was in a city with eight gates and none could pass through them except through trick and deception, he would pass through all its gates!” And it was said concerning his great cunning: “When an affair happened to al-Mughira, he found an outlet to it. When two affairs became vague to him, he showed an opinion of one of them.”

Yet another example of such people is Amr Ibn al-‘Aas who was a castle of cunning and falsehood. In respect of describing him it was said: “I have never seen (a man) greater than Amr Ibn al-‘Aas in overcoming the men when they came together and in spending!” He was on top of those who raised the flag of the revolt against ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan, for the latter removed him from his office. He moved against him in spites of the people and urged those far and near to fight against him. In this respect he said: “By Allah, when I met a shepherd, I provoked him against ‘Uthman! Besides (I provoked against him) the heads and the prominent persons!”When he heard of the murder of ‘Uthman, he said: “I am Abu Abdullah.When I move an ulcer, I make it bleed!” He had deceived the Iraqi Army through raising copies of the Qur’an. He divided the Army into parts and made it different in desires.

Mu’awiya attracted these cunning people, who mixed poison with honey, clothed falsehood with the garment of truth, did not refrain from sin, and detested things for their evil tendencies. They had no objective except putting an end to the progeny of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, and those associated with them from among the righteous Muslims. That was because they wanted to put an end to Islam and to go too far in practicing dissoluteness wherever they wished. As for Imam al-Hasan (‘a) he took the decisive attitude that thinkers took. He protected the progeny of Allah’s Apostle (S) and spared the blood of the believers from among his followers. He thought that the sacrifice at that time would never give general interests to the Muslims, for the Umayyads would give to it various kinds of distortion and misguidance through which it would lose its morale and originality.

Enormous Properties

Mu’awiya had immense wealth in Sham prepared throughout his governing it. He did not spend it on the interests of the Muslims; rather he bought by it the consciences and the religions to clear the way for him to win the supreme authority and to control the Muslims.

Mu’awiya sent cruel tax collectors to take taxes from the Muslim peoples in the countries he had occupied, and they unjustly took the Muslims’ properties to the extent that they went too far in exhausting them and forcing them to pay taxes. He also imposed on them taxes Islam had not legislated such as al-Nawruz24 gifts. So his treasuries were full of properties, and he freely spent them on fighting Imam al-Hasan, the Prophet’s darling grandson, and overcoming him. As for the Prophet’s grandson (al-Hasan), he came to know that Mu’awiya, Hind’s son, became powerful. He thought that he would not be able to fight against him, that he would win no victory over him, and that the attitude required peacemaking, not war and fighting. He was sure that war would bring about to the community bad complications whose dangers none knew except Allah.

The Assassination Of Imam ‘Ali

Among the factors that urged Imam al-Hasan to make peace with Mu’awiya is the murder of his father through which he was terrified. This left in his soul permanent sadness and strong sorrow, because Imam ‘Ali was killed not for money he had taken nor for a sunna he had changed nor for a right with which he had singled himself out excluding them. Rather throughout his reign he led a life of the poor and the weak. In the meantime he spared no effort to make the community lead a life full of boons and blessings. He did his best to establish justice, deaden tyranny, support the oppressed, and to relieve the weak and the deprived. However the people denied this shining justice and deliberately assassinated him at the time when he was before Allah.

They paid no attention to his sacredness and to that of Allah’s Apostle (S). They committed this abominable crime, so Imam al-Hasan (‘a) thought that it was difficult for him to set them right or to return them to the way of the truth and rightness. He turned away from undertaking the authority over them and refrained from meeting with them. He wished that he had not known them just as his father had wished before. He (‘a) has mentioned this attitude, saying: “Your assassinating my father has made me refrain from you!”

Indeed the murder of Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, and the pioneer of the social justice, was among the most important reasons that made Imam al-Hasan refrain from those ignorant people who made troubles, had desires, and deviated from the straight path!

Sparing Of Blood

Among the reasons for the peacemaking is that Imam al-Hasan’s urgently wanted to spare and not to shed the Muslims’ blood. If he had opened a door to war against Mu’awiya, he would have sacrificed his followers and his household; and through that the torch of faith would have been put out and Islam would have been uprooted. He (‘a) has mentioned that in his answer to the reasons of his making peace (with Mu’awiya). He has said: “Most surely I was afraid that the Muslims would be uprooted from the surface of the earth. So I wanted someone to announce the religion!”

He (‘a) answered those from among his followers who harbored malice against him because of the peacemaking, saying: “Through my making peace with Mu’awiya I wanted (nothing) except keeping murder away from you.”25 In the speech he made in al-Mada’in, he expressed his great taking care of sparing the Muslims’ blood. In it he has mentioned: “O people, most surely the affair over which I and Mu’awiya have differed is a right (of mine). I am going to leave the right to set right the community’s affair and to spare its blood!”26 An example of his taking care of that is that he advised his brother al-Husayn when the inevitable moment of death came to him, saying: “I swear by Allah that you should not shed even a bit of blood in carrying out my command.”

Certainly the most lovable thing to Imam al-Hasan (‘a) was keeping the Muslims’ blood, spreading security and peace among them. He spared no effort to achieve that.

Mu’awiya’s Favour

Imam al-Hasan (‘a) came to know that if he had fought against Mu’awiya, then the Iraqi rogues would have handed him over to Mu’awiya as a prisoner of war. Most likely Mu’awiya would not kill him, rather he would release him and recorded for him a laudable deed and favour against all the Hashimites, that he might remove from him the shame due to the fact that he (Mu’awiya) and his father (Abu Sufyan) were prisoners of war. As for al-Hasan (‘a) he has mentioned that, saying: “If I fought against Mu’awiya, they would seize me by the neck and peacefully hand me over to him. By Allah, if I made peace with him while I was powerful, it would be better for me than that when he would kill me and I was a captive, or he would be kind to me, and it would be shame on the Hashimites for ever. Mu’awiya and his children would remind the living and the dead from among us of it.”

This reason was too remarkable, for the Imam wanted his opponent not to gain any favour or laudable deed through him.

Events Of Al-Mada’in

Among the reasons that prompted Imam al-Hasan to make peace with Mu’awiya is the severe events that he faced in al-Mada’in. We have mentioned that in detail. Yet it is important for us to summarize them as follows:

1. the treason of the leaders and prominent persons and their communication with Mu’awiya, 2. Accusing him of unbelief, 3. Assassinating him, and 4. Plundering his belongings.

These are some factors that moved Imam al-Hasan to make peace with Mu’awiya. As far as we know that they required him to make peace and not to open a door to war against Mu’awiya.

The Prophetic Traditions

The Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, predicted the events that would happen after him. He saw them in reality, not in pictures and forms. He saw that disasters would spread over his community, troubles and misfortunes would befall it. He saw that his community would reach the lowest level of deterioration and backwardness, and that saving them from the bitter condition would be through the hands of his elder grandson, Imam al-Hasan, peace be on him. So he has said his immortal statement: “Most surely, this (grand) son of mine is a master. Perhaps through him Allah will make peace between two great groups of the Muslims.”27

This tradition was impressed in Imam al-Hasan’s inner self from his early childhood. It appeared before him during that terrible attitude. Most surely he (al-Hasan) was sure of his grandfather’s tradition just as he was sure of the Qur’an. His grandfather said to him so. It was as if his holy voice sounded in his ear. He said to his pure mother. He said on his pulpit. He said among his companions and said on many occasions: “Most surely, this (grand) son of mine is a master. Perhaps through him Allah will make peace between two groups of the Muslims.”

This memory reacted strongly in his soul. In al-Mada’in he remembered what his grandfather, may Allah bless him and his family, suffered. That was when he saw two groups of the Muslims fighting against each other:

The first group included his followers (Shi’a) from among the good, righteous Muslims who understood the true objectives of Islam.

The second group was composed of the naïve, the simple-minded, and those who deviated from Islam. Although they were rebels and they revolted against the Imam of their time, they claimed that they were Muslims. If the war had broken out between them, it would have destroyed many of them, and through that the entity of Islam would have been weak and its forces would have been collapsed. Then who, from the Muslims, would stand against the enemy who was watching the events to attack them. I (the author) wonder who would take care of Islam and protect the Muslims other than the Prophet’s grandson and his inheritor. Accordingly, Imam al-Hasan preferred peace to war regardless of the hardships. Shams al-Deen al-Siqqli, died 565 A. H., maintained that the reason which moved al-Hasan to abdicate the caliphate was the tradition of the Prophet (S) concerning that28.

Narrators have claimed that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, talked to his companions about the period of the Islamic caliphate, saying to them: “Most surely the caliphate after me will continue for thirty years, and then it will be monarchy.” They noticed that al-Hasan made peace with Mu’awiya when the thirty years was over, as they said29.

Al-Hasan carefully considered the tradition of his grandfather (‘a) and came to know that there was no escape from that Mu’awiya would undertake the authority. Besides, his father had told him about that as Imam al-Hasan (‘a) himself narrated: “One day my father said to me: ‘O Hasan, how will you behave if the Umayyads undertake this authority? Their ruler will be wide-necked and big-bellied. He eats but he will not be satisfied. He will control the west and east. The people will follow him. His kingdom will last long. He will legislate heresies and misguidance. He will deaden the truth and the Sunna of Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. He will divide the property among the people of his and withhold it from those who are worthy of it. The believers will be abased in his kingdom, and the sinners will be powerful during his supreme authority. He will make his supporters succeed one another in respect of the property. He will regard Allah’s servants as slaves. During his reign the truth will be effaced, and falsehood will appear. He will kill those who oppose him for the truth.”30

Most surely the Prophet and his guardian Imam ‘Ali looked through the veil of the unseen and knew the ordeals and the tribulation with which the community were afflicted. That is because the members of the community turned away from supporting the truth and fighting against falsehood. For this reason, the freed prisoners of war and their children undertook the authority over them, treated them unjustly, possessed alone the wealth of Allah, and regarded people as salves.

As for Mu’awiya, he came to know that the authority would reach him during the time of Imam ‘Ali. That was when he made a premise through which he asked him about to whom the authority would pass. He sent to him some of his companions to Kufa to rumor that Mu’awiya had died. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, heard of that; and the people repeatedly talked about that rumor. So he (‘a) Said: “You have announced the death of Mu’awiya very much! By Allah, he has not died! He will not die until he will possess that which is under my feet!”31

When Mu’awiya heard of that, he believed it. For he had come to know that Imam ‘Ali was the Gate of the City of the Prophet’s knowledge, and the Store of his secrets, that his speech did not remain behind the reality and did not miss the truth.

Anyway the Muslims gave Imam al-Hasan (‘a) the name of the great reformer because of his making peace with Mu’awiya. It is worth mentioning that his grandfather the Apostle had given him this name before.

Infallibility

Some great religious scholars have mentioned the peacemaking of Imam al-Hasan, peace be on him. They have justified it through infallibility saying that the infallible Imam did not make any mistake and did nothing except that which brought about good and righteousness to the community. Perhaps the points we have mentioned have indicated the meaning of this speech and explained that it is good. That is because of the conditions that surrounded the Imam and forced him to make peace with Mu’awiya. Now we will mention some of those who have maintained this viewpoint. They are:

1. Al-Shareef Al-Murtadha

Al-Shareef al-Murtadha Alam al-Huda, may Allah have mercy on him, has said: “It has been established that he (al-Hasan) is infallible and strengthened with manifest proofs and strong signs32. Therefore, there is no escape form submission to his deeds though they have something whose meaning is not known in detail or has a surface from which people keep away.”33

2. Sayyid Ibn Tawus

In his will to his son, the genius of Islam, the great Sayyid Ibn Tawus34, may Allah rest him in peace, has justified Imam al-Hasan’s peacemaking trough infallibility and some of the reasons we have mentioned. He, may Allah have mercy on him, said to his son: “It is not strange that the people criticized your grandfather for his making peace with Mu’awiya while he did that according to the command of his grandfather. His grandfather (Muhammad) had made peace with the unbelievers, and his excuse in respect of that was the clearest of all excuses. When his brother al-Husayn rose to support the Iraqis, to respond to their request, and to leave making peace with Yazid, they were either a killer or a deserter. It is worth mentioning that we have not known that they became angry during the days of Yazid for that horrible murder. Nor did they revolt against him nor did they remove him from his authority; whereas they became angry for Abdullah Ibn al-Zubayr and helped him with his misguidance. So they were exposed out of this large contradictory attitude; their bad choice made the misfortune appear. Therefore is it regarded as unlikely the deviation of these people from the straight path while they reached this ill, ugly condition?”35

Sayyid Ibn Tawus, may Allah have mercy on him, has justified Imam al-Hasan’s peacemaking with (firstly) infallibility from mistakes. He compared his peacemaking with the peacemaking of his grandfather the Prophet (S) with the polytheists in the Peace Treaty of al-Hudaybiya. There is no doubt about the peacemaking of the Apostle and none can criticize it due to the existence of the interest. And so is that of al-Hasan with his opponent, for it was surrounded by the inclusive interest of Muslims in general. Secondly, he justified it with the tribulation and ordeal the Imam suffered from those devious people who paid no attention to virtue and did not understand any of the spiritual values.

Therefore, it was they who forced Imam al-Hasan to make peace. Sayyid ibn Tawus has offered reasons for the bad manners of those people and their going too far in practicing evil deeds. That was when they followed Yazid (son of Mu’awiya), who drank wine, and practiced dissoluteness openly. They also supported him and took part with him in the most horrible crime history has ever recorded, which was the murder of the master of the youths of the Garden, al-Husayn, peace be on him. They showed neither sorrow nor sadness at this crime. They did not revolt against Yazid nor did they remove him from his office. In the previous researches we have mentioned the reasons for these lowly manners of the Iraqi masses.

Showing The Umayyad Reality

Before he took the reins of government, Mu’awiya was apparently committed to the Islamic teachings. He affected taking care of the Muslims’ affairs. However, that was, without doubt, hypocrisy and a plot. He walked slowly to hunt the game as they say. He concealed unbelief and hypocrisy. He harbored evil and enmity against the Muslims. So through his making peace with him, Imam al-Hasan (‘a) wanted to show his reality and to show the people his defects and plot. He wanted to make those whom he deceived know that he was the most hostile to Islam. As a result he left the field and handed over the authority to him. However, suddenly the Khousrow of the Arabs, as they say, showed his hellish policy through opposing Allah’s Book, and the Sunna of His Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. He violated the Islamic teachings, destroyed the abilities of Islam, and ruined the knowledgeable forces. He showered them with various kinds of painful torture. He executed and severely punished whomever he wished. He forced the Muslims to disown the family of their Prophet, to curse them openly and to disparage them on the pulpits. Through that the hidden things of his soul appeared. The Muslims came to know this tyrant and what he schemed against them. If the peacemaking had had no benefit except showing that, it would have been sufficient, just as Imam Kashif al-‘Ghita’, may Allah have mercy on him, has said in his introduction to the book.

After Mu’awiya had taken the reins of government, he carried a destructive axe and began destroying all the Islamic foundations attempting to extinguish the light of Islam, to fold its standard, to efface and uproot it, and to return the pre-Islamic life. Before we deal with some of his offences and bad manners through which he had blackened the face of history, we have to mention what have been reported from his parents from among malice and enmity against Islam. We also have to mention what have been narrated from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, from among the traditions on disparaging and dispraising Mu’awiya. That is because we want to understand whether he was worthy of being entrusted with the authority, being imposed as a ruler over the Muslims, and of acting freely in respect of whatever he pleased without any reckon and supervision. We mention that to readers as follows:

Abu Sufyan And Hind

As for Abu Sufyan, he was the bitterest enemy to the Prophet (S). It was he who led the allies, helped the Jews, and supported all the forces hostile to Islam. His malice toward the Prophet (S) doubled when some of his family and seventy valiant Qurayshi polytheists were killed at the Battle of Badr. So his sinful soul was full of sadness at them. He went on fighting against the Apostle (S), and moved against him the spites. But Allah repelled his plot. That was when he gave victory to His Apostle, strengthened His religion, abased Abu Sufyan and his party. Accordingly, the Prophet (S), conquered Mecca and entered it successfully and victoriously. He destroyed and smashed the idols. As for Abu Sufyan, he reluctantly embraced Islam. He was low and defeated. Shame and disgrace followed him. Though he became a Muslim, he maintained his pre-Islamic beliefs. Islam changed nothing of his natures and manners. His house was a place of treason; and he was a cave of hypocrisy36.

When the Muslims suffered the loss of the Prophet (S) and when Abu Bakr usurped the caliphate, Abu Sufyan went to Imam ‘Ali (‘a). Abu Sufyan asked Imam ‘Ali (‘a) to revolt and to fight against Abu Bakr, that he might return the caliphate to him. He had no faith in the right of Imam ‘Ali (‘a); rather he through that wanted to find a gap through which he wanted to destroy and ruin Islam. However his wicked intentions were clear to the Imam, and he turned away from and rebuked him. After that Abu Sufyan kept to the corners of inactivity. The Muslims looked at him with the looking of suspicion and doubt about his faith. When ‘Uthman became a caliph and brought nigh the Umayyads and entrusted them with the Muslims’ affairs, Abu Sufyan appeared, his star went high, he showed his spites and enmity toward the Prophet. One day he stood by the grave of Hamza, the master of the martyrs, peace be on him. He looked at it through his hollow eyes. Then he moved his lips, saying: “O Abu Immarah, most surely, the affair for which we met in duel yesterday is in the hands of our boys; they are playing with it!”

Then he kicked the holy grave with his leg and went tranquilly and delighted. All these things happened before the very eyes of ‘Uthman but he neither blamed nor punished him. So we belong to Allah and to him we will return!

This is the reality of Abu Sufyan in his unbelief and his malice toward Islam. As for his wife Hind, she was not less than her husband in cruelty. She was more malicious than him toward Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. She moved the polytheists to fight against him. When the Battle of Badr was over and her polytheist family and relatives were killed, she did not show mourning and sadness at them37. That is because she wanted through that to provoke Quraysh to avenge their blood. The Qurayshi women came to her and said: “Why do you not lament for your father, bother, uncle, and your household?”

She angrily answered them, saying: “If I lament (for them), Muhammad and his companions will heard of that; they will gloat over us and the womenfolk of the Banu al-Khazrajj! No, by Allah, (I will not lament for them) until I take vengeance on Muhammad and His companions! It is forbidden for me to oil my head until we invade Muhammad! By Allah, if I came to know that sadness went away from my heart, I would weep! But nothing drives it away until I see with my own eye that my vengeance on those who killed my beloved ones is taken!”

Hind went on her condition. She did not show sadness. She did not approach Abu Sufyan’s bed and did not oil her hair until the Battle of Uhd happened38. She took vengeance on Hamza, the master of the martyrs. She maimed him and did to him that ugly deed. Then she showed delight and rejoicing. Then she composed poetry, saying:

I satisfied myself (for revenge) at (the Battle) of Uhd. That was when I split open his stomach (and cut off) his liver! That removed from me what I had found from among the agony of the followed intense sadness! The war overtopped you with a shower of hailstones! We came to you with the coming of a lion!

When Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, saw what Hind did to his uncle, he became angry and burnt with grief. Then he said: “No attitude made me angry as this one did!” He also said: “I have never been stricken by anything like by Hamza!”39

When the day of the conquest came and the Muslims entered Mecca, Abu Sufyan walked through the streets and lanes. He unwillingly called out: “Whoever lays down his weapon is safe! Whoever enters his house is safe! And whoever enters Abu Sufyan’s house is safe!” When Hind heard that from him, she scratched her face and unwillingly shouted: “Kill the wicked, dirty one! How ugly the head (chief) of the people is!”

Then she turned to the masses and provoked them. She enthusiastically said:

“Why did you not fight for your own city and defend yourselves?”

Through that she tried to move the anger of the people and to kindle the fire of the revolt among her people. However Allah repelled her plot and frustrated her effort. That was when Allah gave a victory to Islam and its men. These are Mu’awiya’s parents. According to the hereditary rule, I (the author) definitely think that what was settled in their souls from among malice, hatred, and hostility to Islam and Allah’s Apostle (S), passed to Mu’awiya. Besides, Allah’s Apostle met all the Umayyads with disdain and disrespect because of what he had met from them of tiredness and pain. He ordered them to be exiled from Yathrib (Medina) such as al-Hakam, his son Marwan, Sa‘eed Ibn al-‘Aas, and Waleed. He ordered the Muslims to avoid them and to call them the accursed tree. These things that Mu’awiya saw brought about in his soul malice against the Prophet (S) and his Household.

The Prophetic Traditions About Mu’awiya

Many authentic traditions have been narrated from the Prophet in respect of dispraising and disdaining Mu’awiya. Some traditions are as follows:

1. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, said: “A man will come out of this mountain pass. He will be mustered (in a manner) other than (that) of my community.” So Mu’awiya came out.40

2. Allah’s Apostle (S) saw Abu Sufyan riding a donkey, his son Mu’awiya leading the donkey, and his son Yazid driving it. He said: “May Allah curse the leader, the rider, and the driver.”41

3. Al-Barra’ Ibn ‘Aazib narrated: “Abu Sufyan came forward and Mu’awiya was with him, so Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, said: ‘O Allah, take al-Uqay‘is!’” Al-Barra’ asked his father about al-Uqay‘is, and he answered: “He is Mu’awiya.”42

4. A woman came to the Prophet (S) and consulted him in respect of marrying Mu’awiya. He prohibited her and said to her: “He (Mu’awiya) is low.”43

5. Abu Barzah al-Aslami44 has narrated: “We were with Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. We heard singing. A man rose and listened to it. That had been before the wine was prohibited. The man came to us and told us that Mu’awiya and Amr Ibn al-‘Aas answered each other through this verse of poetry:

‘…his bones appeared, turned the war away from him, that he may be killed and buried.

“When Allah’s Apostle heard of that, he raised his hands to supplicate, saying: ‘O Allah, throw them into sedotion! O Allah, drive them away to the fire with violence!”45 He said to Mu’awiya: “You will take, O Mu’awiya, the heresy as sunna (law) and the ugly as good!”46

Allah’s Apostle (S) looked through the unseen and came to know that Mu’awiya would undertake the affairs of the government. Accordingly, he warned the Muslims and ordered them to fight against him. He said to them: “When you see Mu’awiya make a speech from on my pulpit, then behead him!”47

When al-Hasan (‘a) narrated this tradition, he became displeased and said: “They did not do nor did they succeed!”48

In this manner during the lifetime of the Prophet (S), Mu’awiya was humiliated,, low, and abased. Shame and disgrace followed him. The Prophet (S) cursed him. The Muslims disdained and disparaged him. When ‘Umar became caliph, he turned away from what had been reported from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, in respect of Mu’awiya. He brought him nigh to him. He promoted him after lowliness and humiliation. He appointed him as a governor over Sham. He gave him wide authorities, entrusted to him the affair of judgeship, prayer, collecting taxes, and the like from among the affairs that required trustworthiness and justice. He loved and directed him so much that he reckoned his governors and looked into their acts every year except Mu’awiya.

He did not reckon him nor did he watch him. It was said to ‘Umar that Mu’awiya deviated from the straight path, wasted the wealth, and wore silk garments, but he paid no attention to that; rather he gave him the garment of pomp and glory, saying: “That (Mu’awiya) is the Khousrow of the Arabs!” When he distorted the rules of the Consultative Committee to remove the Household of the Prophet (S) from the government and to participate the Umayyads in the rule, he praised Mu’awiya and inspired into him the spirit of ambition. He was then at the last days of his life. He said to the members of the Consultative Committee: “If you envy each other, tarry one another, be hostile to each other, and hate one another, Mu’awiya will overcome you for this (authority). At that time he (Mu’awiya) was the governor of Sham.”49

‘Umar’s governors were many. Why did he praise Mu’awiya and exclude them? How was it possible for him to threaten the members of the Consultative Committee through his power while they had high positions near the Prophet (S) who died while he was pleased with them, as it was? If he had fear for them from Mu’awiya, then why did he reserve him in the government? Most surely these affairs make one ask questions and find them strange!

Anyway, ‘Umar preferred Mu’awiya to others, and Mu’awiya was the most beloved to ‘Umar. An example of his preferring him and showing love toward him was what Muslim Ibn Jundub narrated on the authority of Aslam, ‘Umar’s retainer, who said: “We went to Mu’awiya. He was the most tender-skinned and the most handsome. He performed the Hajj with ‘Umar. ‘Umar looked at him and admired him. He put his finger on his back and raised it as he raised it from the shoelace. Then he said: ‘Bravo! Bravo! Therefore, we are the best of the people if the good in the world and the hereafter is gathered for us!’”50 In this manner ‘Umar loved Mu’awiya.

When ‘Uthman became a caliph, he increased the area of Mu’awiya’s authority and reinforced his influence. We have explained that in the first part of the book. Accordingly, Mu’awiya did in Sham as if he wanted the domain and the supreme authority. When the Muslims killed ‘Uthman for his unwanted, heavy doings, Mu’awiya used his (Uthman) murder as means to achieve his purposes and objectives. So he rebelled against Imam ‘Ali (‘a) claiming that he was satisfied with the murder of ‘Uthman and gave a refuge to those who killed him. Misfortunes and ordeals with which Islam was afflicted followed that, and through which the unity of the Muslims was divided. So the sorrowful events brought about his victory, deserting Imam ‘Ali and his son Imam al-Hasan.

When Mu’awiya became a caliph after the peacemaking, he spared no effort to give life to the beliefs of those who lived before Islam, to put and end to the word of ‘Islam’, to destroy the Islamic foundations, and to abolish the Islamic texts. These deeds clearly issued from him when the affairs went well with him, and when he alone possessed the kingdom. He feared none and paid attention to none in respect of showing his intentions, his trend, and his enmity toward Islam and the Muslims. Thus through making peace with him, Imam al-Hasan made clear his reality and removed from him that thin cover he used in the name of Islam. We will mention to readers a brief account of Mu’awiya’s deeds.

His Hostility To The Prophet

Mu’awiya harbored strong malice toward the Prophet and his progeny. He spared no effort to put an end to ‘Islam’ and to efface it. He mentioned that through his talk with al-Mughira Ibn Shu‘ba. That was when his (al-Mughira) son narrated on his authority, saying: “My father, al-Mughira, and I visited Mu’awiya. My father went to him frequently and talked with him. Then he came and told me about Mu’awiya and his reason, and admired what he saw from him. One night he came and did not have dinner. He was very grieved. I waited for him for an hour and I thought that (he was grieved) for something happened to us or to our work. So I asked him:

-“Why do I see you grieved this night? -“O My little son, I have come from the most wicked of all people. -“And what is that? -“I was alone with Mu’awiya and said to him: ‘You have attained your wishes, O Commander of the Faithful. Therefore, if you show justice and spread good. You have become an old man. So take care of your brothers from among the Banu (the tribe of) Hashim and their relatives. By Allah, today, they have nothing of which you are afraid. And he said to me: ‘How far! How far! The brother of Taym (Abu Bakr) ruled and acted justly. He did what he did. But when he perished, his name perished except that a sayer says: ‘Abu Bakr!’ Then the brother of ‘Adi (‘Umar) ruled. He strove and undertook (the office of the caliphate) for ten years. But when he perished, his name perished except that a sayer says: ‘Umar!’ Then our brother Uthman ruled. He ruled as a man. None was like him in lineage. He did what he did, and (the people) did what they did to him. But when he perished, his name perished. What had been done toward him is mentioned. As for the brother of the Banu Hashim (Prophet Muhammad), he is mentioned five times a day (in the azan when it is said ‘I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah). So all deeds after this (azan), may your mother lose you, will be completely buried!’”51

This speech clearly indicates Mu’awiya’s unbelief, atheism, and strong malice toward the Prophet. He became displeased when he heard the Prophet’s name mentioned five times a day during the azan. If he had found a way to remove that, he would have done it. An example of his strong hatred toward the Prophet’s progeny is that he did not call down blessing upon the Prophet for forty Fridays. That was during the period of his reign. He was asked about that, and he answered: “Nothing prevents me from mentioning him (the Prophet) except that some men turn up their noses (at me)!”52

The historians have said: “He (Mu’awiya) heard the caller of azan say: ‘I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’. He said: ‘How great, O son of Abdullah! You have a high determination! You are not satisfied with anything except that you are compared to the Name of the Lord of the world!’”53

Abolishing The Prescribed Penalties

Mu’awiya paid no attention to the Islamic prescribed punishments and to administering them. That was when he pardoned those on whom the prescribed punishments had be to administered. Some thieves were brought before him. He ordered their hands to be cut off. Then he ordered a thief to be pardoned. The thief reciuted some verses of poetry that invaded Mu’awiya’s heart, and he said to him: “What shall I do to you? We have cut off the hands of your companions!”

The thief’s mother replied him: “O Commander of the Faithful, place it among your sins of which you will repent!”

Accordingly, Mu’awiya ordered the thief to be released. So this was the first punishment to be abolished in Islam.

Regarding Usury As Lawful

Islam has strongly prohibited usury and regarded it as among offences and major sins. It has cursed the one who gives usury, the taker, the mediator, and the witness. However Mu’awiya paid no attention to what Islam had prohibited. It has been reported on the authority of Atta’ Ibn Yasar that Mu’awiya sold a gold container for more than its weight. Abu al-Darda’54 said to him: “I have heard that Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, had prohibited that except tit for tat!”

Mu’awiya opposed him and showed him that he paid no attention to the things made prohibited and forbidden by Allah’s Apostle, saying: “I can see no harm in doing such a thing!”

As for Abu al-Darda’, he became displeased with Mu’awiya’s imprudence. He became angry and sorrowful. He said to him: “Who excuses me from Mu’awiya? I tell him about Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, but he tells me about his own viewpoint! May Allah do not make you live in the land where you are!”

Then he left Sham and went to the capital of the Prophet (Medina). He was excited and angry. He resigned his office55.

The Azan In The Eid Prayer

The Islamic Law has decided that the azan and the Iqama should be performed before the daily obligatory prayers. As for the azan and Iqama before the recommended prayers such as the superfluous or before the obligatory prayers such as those of the two eids or those of the signs (aayaat), they should be left according to the Islamic Law. In this respect Allah’s Apostle (S) has said: “There is neither azan nor Iqama in the two Eids Prayer56”57 The Caliphs after Allah’s Apostle followed this sunna58. However Mu’awiya did not pay attention to that. He innovated the azan and Iqamabefore the Eid Prayer59. In this manner he opposed Allah’s Apostle and turned away from what had been narrated from him. So he was innovator in his legislation.

The Sermon Before The Eid Prayer

The Islamic Sunna required the Imam to deliver a sermon after the ‘Id prayer. That is because the Prophet (S) performed the Eid ul-Fitr Prayer, and then he delivered the sermon before his companions. The Prophet’s deed is a sunna just as his word. It is obligatory to follow it. The Caliphs after him did as he had done60. However, Mu’awiya paid no attention to that. That was when he delivered the sermon before the Eid Prayer; then the Umayyads followed his deed61. In this manner he abandoned the Prophet’s Sunna.

Imposing Zakat On Gifts

Islam has imposed zakat on certain incomes that the religious jurists have mentioned. Zakat is not obligatory on other things. However Mu’awiya turned away from that. He imposed zakat on gifts while it was not legislated in this concern according to the unanimous agreement of the jurists. Mu’awiya did that because either he was ignorant of the religious precept or he deliberately did that to oppose the Sunna. The latter is more appropriate for his line of conduct62.

Perfuming Himself

It is incumbent on him who has entered the state of ritual consecration to refrain from perfuming himself as long as he is in this state. When he has finished his ihram63, it is permissible to him to perfume himself. However Mu’awiya opposed that and perfumed himself during the ihram64. He was either obstinate to Islam or ignorant of its teachings and duties.

Using Silver And Gold Wares

It is religiously forbidden to use silver and gold containers. Yet Mu’awiya intentionally opposed that. He used them for his eating and drinking. When the tradition of Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, in respect of making that forbidden was recited to him, he said: “I see no harm in that.”65

Wearing Silk Garments

Islam has made it forbidden for men to wear silk garments except during war. Nevertheless Mu’awiya turned away from that. He intentionally wore them66. He paid no attention to what Islam prohibited and forbade.

Seizing The People’s Properties As Lawful

Islam has made it forbidden to take the people’s properties unjustly. But Mu’awiya did not conform to that. He took the properties of people without any recompense67.

Buying The Religions

No vice in trade market is worse than buying the consciences of people and their religions. That shows the evil intention of the seller and the buyer. As for Mu’awiya, he was skillful in this trade. He openly did it without fear or caution. Narrators have mentioned that al-Ahnaf Ibn Qays, Jariya Ibn Qudama, al-John Ibn Qatada, and al-Hattat Ibn Yazid came to Mu’awiya. Mu’awiya gave one hundred thousand (dirhams) to each of them whereas he gave seventy thousand (dirhams) to al-Hattat. On their way home they mentioned their gifts. So al-Hattat angrily came back to Mu’awiya. Mu’awiya turned to him and asked him: “What has made you return?”

“You have exposed me among the Banu Tamim,” replied al-Hattat, “as for my lineage, it is correct. Am I not an old man? Am I not obeyed by my tribe?”

“Yes,” answered Mu’awiya.

“Then why have you excluded me from my people,” retorted al-Hattat, “You have given to those against you more than those with you?” He meant al-Ahnaf and Jariya who were with Imam ‘Ali at the Battle of al-Jamal (the camel), while he did not fight for him. Mu’awiya said to him without any shame: “I have bought the people’s religion (for money) and entrusted you with your religion!”

“Buy my religion from me!” retorted al-Hattat. So Mu’awiya ordered a gift to be given to him68.

His Dissoluteness And Impudence

Prostitution and impudence spread over the Islamic capital during the time of the Umayyads. That was when the poets celebrated in love poems and courted the women. Mu’awiya was the first to open a door to prostitution. They have narrated that Abdurrahman Ibn Hassaan Ibn Thabit69 celebrated in love poems with Mu’awiya’s daughter. Yazid (Mu’awiya’s son) heard of that and became angry. He came in to his father and sorrowfully said to him:

-O father, kill Abdurrahman Ibn Hassan! -Why? -He has wooed my sister! -What did he say? -He said: “My night has lengthened and I have become aggrieved. I have become tired of residing at Jayrun!” Mu’awiya sneeringly replied to him: -O my little son, his long night and his sadness do not concern us. May Allah send him far!

Yazid turned to his father and said to him:

-He said: “For this reason I have emigrated to Sham to the extent that my family had thought with much thinking!” -O my son, his family’s thinking does not concern us. -He said: “She is bright. She is like a pearl distinguished from hidden jewels!” -He is right, O my son, she is so! -He said: “If you trace back her lineage, you will not find her below the high rank of the noble traits!” -He is right, O my son. -He said: “Then I put my arm around her waist (and went with her) to the green dome! She was walking on marbles fashioned in shape!” -And not all of this, O my son!

Yazid went on mentioning what Abdurrahman had said in respect of courting his sister, while Mu’awiya defended him. He showed Abdurrahman as innocent and did not deserve punishment. The celebration of Abdurrahman in love poem spread; and Mu’awiya’s daughter was exposed. Some people went to Mu’awiya and criticized him for this impudence toward his daughter, saying: “Punish him!” But Mu’awiya refused to respond to them. He said to them: “No, but I will treat him in a way other than that.” It happened that Abdurrahman visited Mu’awiya, and he received him with the best reception and made him sit on his chair. He turned to him and said:

-My other daughter is admonishing you! -For what? -For that you have praised her sister and left her! -She has the right to admonish me; it is an act of noble deed to mention her!

Accordingly, Abdurrahman began wooing Mu’awiya’s other daughter. When people came to know that, they said: “Certainly we thought that Hassaan courted Mu’awiya’s daughter for a certain thing, but suddenly we have come to know that he follows Mu’awiya’s opinion and command!”70

This example indicates that Mu’awiya was dissolute and had bad manners. Through that he opened a door to corruption and enabled the dissolute to interfere with the Muslims’ daughters, to the extent that they extremely rushed upon pleasure during Mu’awiya’s reign and the reign of the other Umayyads.

Yet another example on that was that Abu Dahbal al-Jahmi71 wooed Mu’awiya’s daughter, but the latter gently treated the former. He linked and gave him72. The Umayyads followed this plan. They tried to change the world into a theatre of fun and dissolute. They made the people love debauchery and prostitution. They drove them to misguidance, falsehood, and corruption.

Another example of Mu’awiya’s dissoluteness is that he bought a beautiful, white slave girl. His retainer Khudayjj made the slave girl come in to him naked. Mu’awiya had a bar in his hand. He indicated with the bar to her enjoyment (lit. her private part). Then he said: “This is the enjoyment if I had an enjoyment!”73

Then he ordered her to be given to his son Yazid. Then he changed his mind and ordered her to be given to Abdullah Ibn Mas‘ada al-Fazari74. He said to him: “Take this Roman salve girl and whiten your children!”75

The historians have mentioned many examples of Mu’awiya’s dissoluteness and recklessness which indicate that he was void of all human values.

Fabricating Traditions

In His Holy Book, Allah, the most High, has said:

“Only they forge the lie who do not believe in Allah’s communications, and these are the liars” (Qur’an, 16:105).

Mu’awiya brought nigh those who forged lie against Allah and His Apostle, and did not believe in Allah and the afterlife. He brought them nigh to him and gave them enormous properties. He commanded them to fabricate traditions and ascribed them to Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. In these traditions he commanded them to mention his excellences, as well as of the Umayyads and the companions. In the meantime he commanded them to degrade the dignity of the pure family of the Prophet and to disparage them, especially as it concerns their master Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, peace be on him. He wrote a note concerning that to all his governors. In his note he has mentioned: “Search for those who are ‘Uthman’s followers who narrate his excellence and talk about his laudable deeds. Give generously to them and ennoble them. Write to me about what they narrate concerning him. Mention to me their names, their fathers’, and what they are.”

The governors yielded to Mu’awiya’s command. They brought nigh the mercenary narrators and lauded them. They gave them a lot of money. They wrote down what the narrators fabricated in respect of ‘Uthman’s excellence and sent it to Mu’awiya. When the people came to know that the government encouraged the fabricators, welcomed them heartily, and gave them a lot of money, others hurried to fabricate traditions and took compensation from the responsible authorities. They narrated many traditions about Mu’awiya’s excellence. Examples of their fabricated traditions were that the Prophet said: “O Allah, teach him (Mu’awiya) the Book and reckoning, protect him from the chastisement, and cause him to enter the Garden!” Al-Tirmidhi has narrated that the Prophet said to Mu’awiya: “O Allah, make him a guide and rightly-guided!”

Al-Harith Ibn Usama has narrated that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, said: “Abu Bakr is the gentlest of my community and the most merciful of them.” Then he mentioned the laudable deeds of the four Caliphs and of a group of other companions. Then he, may Allah bless him and his family, mentioned Mu’awiya saying: “And Mu’awiya Ibn Abi Sufyan is the most clement of my community and the most generous of them!”76

They narrated that the Prophet (S) praised the excellence of his companions, and then he said concerning Mu’awiya: “And Mu’awiya, the generous!”77

Al-Maqdisi has narrated that he was in Wasit Mosque and suddenly he saw a man surrounded by the people. He approached the man and heard him reporting traditions on the authority of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, who said: “On the Day of Judgment Allah will bring Mu’awiya close to him, make him sit beside Him, and cover him with His hand. Then he will drive him away like a bride.” So al-Maqdisi asked him: “For what?” The man said: “For fighting against ‘Ali!” So al-Maqdisi answered him: “You have told a lie, O you who are straying!” The man said: “Take this Rafidite!” So the people pushed each other to punish him, but a person who recognized him saved him from them.78

Al-Maqdisi also narrated that he was liable to killing when he criticized the person for his saying that “Mu’awiya was a sent prophet!”79

One of them narrated: “I have seen Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, (sitting) with Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, and Mu’awiya. Then a man came and ‘Umar said: ‘O Allah’s Apostle, this (man) disparages us.’ It was as if that Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, rebuked him (the man). So he (the man) said: ‘O Allah’s Apostle, I do not disparage them but (I disparage) this (Mu’awiya).’ The Prophet (S) said: ‘Woe unto you! Is he (Mu’awiya) not among my companions?’ He said that three times.

Then Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, took a sword and gave the sword to Mu’awiya and said to him strike him with it. Mu’awiya struck him with it. I went home and suddenly came to know that the man suffered from the stroke of the night and he died. The man was called Rasheed al-Kindi.”80

The naïve and simple-minded sided with Mu’awiya and went too far in respecting him because of these fabricated traditions and false rumors. The historians have mentioned that Abdurrahman al-Nisa’i entered Damascus and asked about Mu’awiya and what was narrated about his excellence. They have said that he said: “Is Mu’awiya not satisfied that he brings out a head for a head that he may be preferred?!” In another narration Abdurrahman said: “I have not come to know that Mu’awiya has an excellence except that (may Allah do not satisfy his stomach!).” So the people revolted against Abdurrahman and walked on him. Accordingly, he was carried to al-Ramlah, and he died because of that81. The people of Sham went too far in their fanaticism that they killed Muhammad Ibn Maslama al-Ansari when he refused to take part in Mu’awiya’s battles82.

Through these traditions issued by the Committees of Fabrication, Mu’awiya wanted to give himself a garment of sacredness and faith, that the community might grant him confidence and yield to him because of the thought. However he failed in that, for the Muslims had doubt about him and his Islam. That is because he belonged to the cursed tree in the Qur’an; his family fought against the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, and led the troops to battle against him. Besides he committed great incidents such as his fighting against the Prophet’s guardian, may Allah bless him and his family, and the Gate of the city of his knowledge (Imam ‘Ali). He killed many good people, pursued the righteous, and created innovations in Islam. Moreover he committed other major sins and offences through which he had blackened the face of history. Of course these rumors and lies could not efface from him the shame and disgrace.

Anyway the traditions the swindlers fabricated about Mu’awiya’s and ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan’s excellence were many. Mu’awiya feared that he would miss his purpose, his affair would be exposed, and he would not reach his own objective, which was rebellion against the pure family (of the Prophet), so he wrote a note to his governors. In the note he commanded them that the fabricators had to refrain from (fabricating traditions about him) and had to fabricate traditions on the excellence of the two Sheikhs (Abu Bakr and ‘Umar), for it was among the nearest ways and one of the most important means to fight against the progeny of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, and to degrade their importance. This is the text of what he wrote. “Most surely the traditions about me have become many and spread all over the countries and districts. If this letter of mine comes to you, then summon them (the fabricators) to narrate (traditions) about Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.

That is because their excellence and precedence are more lovable and delightful to me and more refuting to the proof of this house (the Prophet’s Family) and more intense to them than ‘Uthman’s laudable deeds and his excellence.” The judges and the commanders recited his letter to the people. Accordingly, the fabricators hurried to fabricate traditions about the laudable deeds of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. Then Mu’awiya ordered the traditions to be written down and to send copies of them to all the leaders and the governors to read them to the people from the pulpits and in the mosques. He also commanded them to send them to the teachers to adopt them as programs in their lessons and to force the children to memorize them. The local governments took great care of that. They forced children and the rest of classes to memorize those fabricated traditions to the extent that children, women, and servants memorized them83. Imam al-Baqir (‘a) mentioned and criticized the traditions during his talk with Aban. The latter asked the former: “May Allah set you right, mention to me some of that?”

The Imam (‘a) said: [They have narrated:]

“Most surely the two masters of the middle-aged of the Garden are Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.”84

“Most surely the angels talk with ‘Umar.”

“The angel teaches ‘Umar.”

“Most surely tranquility utters on ‘Umar’s tongue.”

“Most surely the angels are ashamed of ‘Uthman.”85

Then Imam al-Baqir went on mentioning the fabricated traditions to the extent that he mentioned more than a hundred traditions the people regarded as true86.

Then he (‘a) said: “All of them are untrue and false!”87

The traditionist Ibn ‘Arafa, better known as Naftawayh88, says: “Most surely most fabricated traditions about the excellence of the companions (of the Prophet) were innovated during the days of the Umayyads to seek nearness to them, for they thought that they would subdue the Hashimites.”89

Mu’awiya was not satisfied with the many traditions fabricated about the laudable deeds of the two Sheikhs (Abu Bakr and ‘Umar); rather he encouraged the fabricators to innovate traditions against the members of the House (Ahl al-Bayt), peace be on them. He spent a lot of money on them for that. He gave Samra Ibn Jundub, a criminal person, four hundred thousand (dirhams) provided that he should address the people of Sham and tell them that the following Holy Verses were revealed in connection with (Imam) ‘Ali. The verses are:

“And among the men is he whose speech about the life of this world causes you to wander, and calls on Allah to witness as to what is in his heart, yet he is the most violent of adversaries” (Qur’an, 2:204).

“And when he turns back, he runs along in the land that he may cause mischief in it and destroy the tilth and the stock, and Allah does not love mischief-making” (Qur’an, 2:205).

Samra narrated that to them90 and took money from the Muslims’ Public Treasury while Islam has made it incumbent on the ruler to spend the money in it on the Muslims’ interests. However Mu’awiya, son of Hind, spent it on fighting and plotting against Islam, and defaming the Muslim great figures who defended Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, during all the attitudes and battles, and forced Mu’awiya and his father to embrace Islam.

Anyhow the men of ambitions and the devious from Islam hurried to fabricate traditions to degrade the Prophet’s Household, that they might obtain money and wide wealth. Ibn al-‘Aas narrated to the people of Sham that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, said in respect of Abu Talib’s family: “Most surely Abu Talib’s family are not my friends; rather my friends are Allah and the good believers.”91

In this manner the fabrication committees innovated such traditions against the Household of the Prophet, whom Allah had kept away uncleanness from and thoroughly purified. Through that, they attempted to put out Allah’s Light, to turn the Muslims away from their real leaders whom the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, mentioned and appointed as successors after him over his community.

Imam al-Baqir (‘a) talked about those false traditions saying: “They narrate ugly things about (Imam) ‘Ali, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. Allah knows that they have narrated falsehood, lying, and untruth.”92

Ibn Abi al-Hadid has said: “And our Sheikh Abu Ja‘far al-Iskafi has mentioned that Mu’awiya appointed a group of the companions and a group of the second generation (successors)) to narrate ugly traditions about (Imam) ‘Ali (‘a) requiring defaming and renouncing him. He gave them money for that, and they innovated that which pleased him.

Some of them are Abu Hurayra, Amr Ibn al-‘Aas, and al-Mughira Ibn Shu‘ba. Among the second generation was ‘Urwa Ibn al-Zubayr.”93

Certainly these measures Mu’awiya took against the members of the the Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) have spread division among Muslims and opened a door to lying against Allah and His Apostle. The good companions (of the Prophet) turned away from such traditions and did not listen to those who narrated them. The narrators have reported: “Bashir al-‘Adawi94 came to Abdullah Ibn Abbas and narrated to him: ‘Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, has said.’ However Ibn Abbas did not permit him nor did he look at him. He made little of and disdained him. So Bashir hurried to ask: ‘Why do you not listen to my tradition? I am relating to you from Allah’s Apostle, while you do not listen!’

“So Ibn Abbas rebuked him saying: ‘When we heard a man saying that Allah’s Apostle says, we looked at him and listened to him. But when the people rode the disobedient and the obedient (she-camel), we take nothing from them except that which we have known.”95

Most surely the people rode the disobedient and obedient she-camel, as Ibn Abbas stated, and followed all ways that opposed the religion. They did not refrain from lying against Allah nor did they abstain from sin in connection with fabricating traditions and ascribing them to Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. Therefore, it is important for us to study the traditions carefully.

The greatest ordeal with which the Muslims were severely afflicted was that the traditions fabricated by the Fabrication Committees reached the trustworthy people and the memorizers (of the Qur’an), and they wrote them down in their books. Without doubt if they had come to know their reality, they would have abandoned them, disowned them, and would have not narrated them. Al-Mada’ini has mentioned that in his speech about the fabricators during the time of Mu’awiya. We will mention the text of his speech in respect of that. He has said: “Many fabricated traditions appeared and slander spread. The jurists, judges, and the governors followed that. The greatest of the people in that were the hypocrites from among the reciters (of the Qur’an) and those deemed weak who showed humbleness and worship. They innovated traditions, that they might seek nearness to their rulers, come near to their assemblies, to get through them money, country estates, and houses, to the extent that the traditions passed to the hands of the religious people who did not regard lying and slander as lawful. They accepted the traditions and narrated them. They thought that the traditions were true. If they had come to know that they were untrue, they would have not narrated them nor would have they followed them.”96

The books are full of such traditions and are filled with the Israeli fables (Isra’iliyat)97 and Abu Hurayra’s traditions. Without doubt these traditions damaged Islam, distorted its tolerant law, spoiled the Islamic beliefs, divided the Muslims and turned them into followers and parties.

Without doubt if the Caliphs had written down the traditions of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, they would have protected the community from difference and turned them away from the troubles and misfortunes. But they did not do that. Abu Bakr collected some traditions, and then he burnt them98. After him ‘Umar came and consulted the companions (of the Prophet) about writing down the traditions, and they all advised him to do that. He thought of the affair for a period of time but he gave up. He said to them: “Most surely I mentioned to you the writing down of the traditions, as you have come to know. Then I suddenly remembered that some people from among the people of the Book (Christians and Jews) before you wrote books along with Allah’s Book. They took care of them and left Allah’s Book. Most surely, by Allah, I will never mix Allah’s Book with anything.”99

The proof does not help this justification. That is because the tradition of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, does not deviate from Allah’s Book nor does it oppose it at all. Besides, writing down the traditions does not bring about abandoning the Holy Qur’an nor does it require turning away from it. Most likely they refused to write them down because most of the traditions concerned the excellence of the pure family (of the Prophet), made it obligatory to show love for them and to resort to them in all affairs. It was impossible to divide the traditions; that is to say that the Sunna had to be written and the traditions in respect of the rights of the members of the House (Ahl al-Bayt) had to be left. Of course, writing them opposes usurping their rights, their unanimous agreement on wronging them and removing them from their ranks in which Allah had placed them. They harbored great malice against them to the extent that when they felt that the Prophet wanted to entrust them with the authority and to write a document on that, they refused to do that while the Prophet (S) was in his last hours. They said to him: “Sufficient unto us is Allah’s Book!”

It was reported from them that they said: “The Prophethood and the caliphate should not come together in one house!” After this how was it possible for them to write down the traditions of the Prophet (S) concerning his Household?

Anyway the greatest disaster with which the Muslims were afflicted was the fabricated traditions Mu’awiya undertook for they brought about division and disagreements to the Muslims. Without doubt they were among the greatest sins of Mu’awiya, son of Hind!

Ascribing Ziyad To His (Mu’awiya) Father

Allah’s Apostle (S) has said: “The child belongs to bed; and the prostitute is to be stoned.”

Certainly Mu’awiya turned away from the speech of Allah’s Apostle (S) without fear and care. He openly opposed his speech and refused his decision to strengthen his domain and establish his authority. As a result, he added Ziyad Ibn Abeeh (the illegitimate) to himself (considered him as his brother from his father Abu Sufyan) according to the procedures before Islam.

Allah, the Most High, says:

“Is it then the judgement of [the times of] ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?” (Qur’an, 5:50).

Certainly Mu’awiya wanted the time of those who lived before Islam and enlivened their laws. That was when he added Ziyad Ibn Abeeh to himself, while Ziyad was the son of a prostitute. For surely Sumayya, Ziyad’s mother was among the women of flags (openly prostitute) in al-Ta’if. She gave tax to al-Harith Ibn Kildah100 from her prostitution. She went to the place where the prostitutes went outside al-Hadar, in a district called Harat al-Baghayaa (the district of the prostitutes)101. This was Ziyad’s mother in dirtiness and dissoluteness. As for Mu’awiya, he did not feel shame in joining this illegitimate to him.

The historians have mentioned the reasons of joining Ziyad, saying: “Imam ‘Ali (‘a) had appointed Ziyad (as a governor) over a district of Persia and chose him for himself. When the Imam (‘a) was martyred, Ziyad went on practicing his work. Mu’awiya was afraid of his side, came to know of the difficulty of his district, and feared his inclination to al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (‘a) so he wrote him this letter:

‘From the Commander of the Faithful Mu’awiya Ibn Abi Sufyan, to Ziyad Ibn ‘Ubayd. Now then, surely you are a salve; you have been ungrateful for the blessing and you called for the vengeance. Most certainly gratefulness is more appropriate for you than ungratefulness; surely the tree takes root and branches from its origin. You are motherless; rather you have no father. You have perished and destroyed (others). You have though that you can come out of my grip, and that my authority does not reaches you. How far! Not all the possessors of mind are correct in opinion, nor all the possessors of opinion are loyal in their advice. Yesterday you were a slave; and today you are the commander of a plan none like you has ever ascended, O son of Sumayya! When this letter of mine comes to you, then urge the people to obey and to pledge allegiance to me. Respond (to me) quickly! For surely if you did, you would spare your blood and set right yourself; otherwise I would kidnap you with the weakest feather and obtain you with the easiest effort! I have taken an oath that I will bring you among flutes and make you walk bare-footed from the land of Persia to Sham. I would show you in the marketplace, sell you as a salve, return you to where you were and bring you out of it! With Greetings.”

In his letter Mu’awiya has ascribed Ziyad to ‘Ubayd and acknowledged his slavery. He said that if he had captured him, he would have sold him in the marketplaces of Damascus and returned him to his origin. When this letter reached Ziyad, he became angry. He ordered the people to gather. He made speech before them. He praised and lauded Allah. Then he said: “ (Mu’awiya)-the son of the woman who ate (Hamza’s) liver and killed the lion of Allah (Hamza), the one who showed the difference, hid hypocrisy, the head of the allies and who spent his money on putting out Allah’s Light-has written (a letter) to me. He thundered and lightened from a waterless cloud; shortly the wind will change the cloud into rack. The thing that shows me his weakness is his threat before the power (over me). Is it an act of mercy on me that he warns and excuses (me)? No! But he has followed another way. He has clattered to one who grew up among Tuhama thunderbolts! How shall I fear him and there is between me and him (al-Hasan), the son of the daughter of Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. (There is between him and me) the cousin of his uncle with whom there are one hundred thousand (people) from among the Muhajirin and the Ansar. By Allah, if he (al-Hasan) permitted me in respect of him or summoned me to him, I would show him the stars during the daylight and make him snuff mustard water! The speech is before him today; the meeting is tomorrow; and the consultation is after that, Allah willing!”

Ziyad lightened, thundered, threatened, and promised. That is because he had no knowledge of that with which Imam al-Hasan’s army was afflicted with. He thought that the members of the army were still in their first condition, that they still had their activity and strength, and that they were one thousand (fighters) from among the Muhajirin and the Ansar. He did not know that they suffered from weakness and troubles that divided them and put an end to their activity. He also did not know that the great figures from among the Muhajirin and the Ansar were destroyed at the Battles of Siffin and al-Nahrawan, and that the army had few people from among those brave heroes. I (the author) swear by Allah that if Imam al-Hasan had summoned Ziyad, he would have betrayed him and would not have responded to him. The proof is that when he came to know about the weakness of the Imam’s army, he sided with Mu’awiya and deserted the Imam. How was he not deceived while he was among

the shaky consciences? Then the time showed his wickedness and his bad intention. He became one of the bitterest enemies to Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, his children, and his followers (Shi’a). That was after Mu’awiya had added him to himself.

Anyway after his speech, Ziyad wrote a letter to Mu’awiya. This is the text of the letter: “Your letter came to me, O Mu’awiya. I have understood what is there in it. I have come to know that you are like the drowned one covered with waves who catches the weeds and clings to the frogs’ legs as a sign of carving after life. The one who is ungrateful for the blessing is he who turns away from Allah and His Apostle, and makes mischief in the land. As for your cursing me, were it not for the clemency that withheld me from you and for that I called foolish, I would move against you disgraces no water would wash. As for your reviling me because of Sumayya, then you are the son of a group (of men)102.

As for your claiming that you can kidnap me with the weakest feather and capture me with the easiest effort, have you ever seen that a lark can terrify a falcon or have you ever heard that a lamb can eat a wolf? Now, carry out your plan and do your best, for I will not stop except at where you dislike, nor will I do my best except about that which displeases you! You will come to know who will yield to his companion! With Greetings.”

When Mu’awiya read Ziyad’s letter, he became terrified, so he summoned (al-Mughira Ibn Shu‘ba), the crafty person of the Arabs. He said to him: “O Mughira, I want to consult you about an affair that concerns me! Therefore, advise me in respect of the affair! Counsel me with the opinion of someone expert! Be for me, and I will be for you! I have singled you out with my own secrets and preferred you to my sons!”

Al-Mughira said to him: “What is that? By Allah, out of my obedience to you, you will find me stronger than the water (running) from a slope and the sword in the hand of a brave hero!”

When al-Mughira yielded and submitted to Mu’awiya, the latter presented his affair, saying: “O Mughira, surely Ziyad has resided in Persia and rattled to us as snakes do. He is a man with a shrewd opinion, a strong determination, and wandering thinking. When he shoots, he hits (his target). I have become afraid of him. I am not safe from him if his companion (Imam ‘Ali) was alive. I fear his inclination to al-Hasan. Therefore, how is the way to him? And what is the stratagem to set right his opinion?”

When the crafty person (al-Mughira) came to know Mu’awiya’s affair, he advised him to deceive Ziyad, make him desire, and to write to him a soft letter. His opinion was based on his studying Ziyad’s psyche and his knowledge of his trends and inclinations. Al-Mughira said to Mu’awiya: “Surely Ziyad likes honor, fame, and ascending pulpits. If you flattered him and wrote to him a soft letter, he would be lenient to you and have confidence in you. Therefore write (a letter) to him and I will be the messenger.”

Mu’awiya responded to al-Mughira’s advice. He wrote Ziyad a letter in which he displayed equivocation and deception. This is the text of the letter: “From the Commander of the Faithful, Mu’awiya Ibn Abi Sufyan, to Ziyad Ibn Abi Sufyan. Caprice may throw man into the places of destruction. You are the one who has been set as an example (for others). You have cut off the relations and linked the enemy. Your bad opinion of me and your detestation toward me have urged you to disobey the kinship to me, cut off the relationships with me, turn away from my lineage, and to deprive me (of you). It is as if that you are not my brother, Sakhr Ibn Harb (Abu Sufyan) is not your and my father. There is a great difference between you and me. I avenge the blood of Ibn Abi al-‘Aas while you are fighting against me. However, the weak race from women has reached you, and you have become “like that which has left its eggs in the open and covered with its wing the eggs of others.” I have seen that I have to sympathize with you and not to punish you because of your bad effort, to link your relations, and to seek a reward in respect of your affair.

O Abu al-Mughira, know that if you waded into the sea for the obedience to the people through striking with the sword until its back is cut off, you would increase nothing except farness from them. That is because the Banu Shams are more detestable to the Banu Hashim than the blade to the ox which has been tied for slaughtering. Therefore, return, may Allah have mercy on you, to your origin and link your people. Do not be likeal-mosool that flies with the feathers of other than it. Certainly you have become astray (because of losing your) lineage. By my life, nothing has done that to you except obstinacy; therefore, keep it away from you, for you have clearly understood your affair and your proof. If you liked my side and had confidence in me, then there would be an authority for an authority. And if you disliked my side and had no confidence in me, then there would be a good deed which was neither against you nor against me. With Greetings.”

Al-Mughira took the deceiving letter which Mu’awiya had written according to al-Mughira’s suggestion, and in which there was no ray of truthfulness. He left Damascus for Persia and came to Ziyad. When Ziyad saw him, he welcomed him and brought him nigh to his assembly. The crafty person (al-Mughira) talked with Ziyad through different ways and various styles, to the extent that he invaded his heart and dominated his feelings. So Ziyad responded to what he wanted.

After Ziyad had fallen into the snares of al-Mughira, he left Persia for Damascus. When he arrived in Damascus and was present before Mu’awiya, Mu’awiya welcomed him, brought him nigh, and ordered his sister Juwayriyah, daughter of Abu Sufyan, to invite him. When Ziyad was present before her, she uncovered her hair in his presence and said to him: “You are my brother. Abu Maryam has told me about that.” Then Mu’awiya took Ziyad to the mosque and ordered the people to come together, that he might declare before them that Ziyad was his brother. As for Abu Maryam al-Saluli, a vintner, he rose in front of the people and witnessed that Abu Sufyan had fornicated with Sumayya with a witness that disgraced Abu Sufyan and Mu’awiya, and inflicted shame on Ziyad. This is the text of the testimony: “I testify that Abu Sufyan came to us in al-Ta’if (at the time when) I was a vintner during the pre-Islamic period (al-Jahiliya). He said: ‘I want a prostitute.’ I came to him and said: ‘I have found (no prostitute) except al-Harth Ibn Kullidah’s slave girl called Sumayya.’ He said: ‘Bring her to me regardless of her stench and dirt.’” As for Ziyad, he became excited and interrupted Abu Maryam’s testimony saying to him with voice dripping anger: “Slowly Abu Maryam! You have been sent as a witness only! And you have not been sent as an abuser!”

So Abu Maryam said: “If you exempted me, then it would be more lovable to me! I only bear witness as to what I have seen!”

Then he went on explaining his testimony, saying: “By Allah, he took through you her breastplate. Then I closed the door for them. I sat down with astonishment. Shortly after that he came out to me rubbing his forehead, so I asked him: ‘What, O Abu Sufyan?’ ‘I had found none similar to her,’ he replied, ‘were it not for the flabbiness of her breasts and the stench of her mouth!”

This was Abu Maryam’s witness as to Sumayya’s dissoluteness. The face of mankind becomes moist because of its horribleness and disgrace. However Mu’awiya did not feel shame because of it. How did Mu’awiya (Hind’s son) feel shame of these bad deeds and scandals while he drew his tail on vices and deception, as he said103, to the extent that vice was one of his elements and among his basics?

Certainly Mu’awiya added Ziyad to him that he might get rid of his hostility and to seek help through him to achieve his objectives and to strengthen his supreme authority.

The Inclusive Displeasure

Mu’awiya’s adding Ziyad to himself created an inclusive displeasure in the Muslims’ souls, for they came to know that Mu’awiya intentionally opposed the Prophet (S) and abandoned his Sunna. They feared him for their religion. Accordingly, some free people and reformers hurried to declare their displeasure and their denial against him and Ziyad. We will mention some of those who denied and criticized him for his deed. They are as follows:

A. Imam Al-Hasan

Imam al-Hasan (‘a) sent a letter to Ziyad in which he explained the corruption of his adding to Mu’awiya. He explained to him that Islam did not acknowledge that at all. This is the text of the letter: “From al-Hasan Ibn Fatimah to Ziyad Ibn Sumayya. Surely Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, said: ‘The child belongs to the bed (is to be ascribed to the owner of the bed [the husband or the owner of the adulteress] where adultery is committed), and the prostitute is to be stoned.’”104

He (‘a) said to Ziyad in the presence of Mu’awiya, Amr Ibn al-‘Aas, and Marwan Ibn al-Hakam: “O Ziyad, what is the relationship between you and Quraysh? I do not know that you have with them a correct origin, a growing branch, constant oldness, or a noble source. Rather your mother was a prostitute whom the Qurayshi men and the dissolute Arabs alternated. When you were born, the Arabs did not come to know of your father. So this (Mu’awiya) claimed that you (were his brother) after the death of his father. You have no pride! Sufficient unto you is Sumayya, and sufficient unto us is Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family.”105

B. Imam Al-Husayn

When Imam al-Husayn (‘a) came to know that Mu’awiya carried the destructive axe to destroy all the Islamic foundations, he hurried to revolt against him and to send him a letter in which he mentioned to him all his offences and presented in it his adding Ziyad to himself. This is the text of what he wrote in connection with that: “Have you not claimed Ziyad Ibn Sumayya who was born on the bed of ‘Ubayd Thaqif? So you have claimed that he is the son of your father where as Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, said: ‘The child belongs to bed; and the prostitute is to be stoned.’ So you have intentionally left the Sunna of Allah’s Apostle and followed your mean desire without any guidance from Allah.”106

C. Yunus Ibn Ubayd

Yunus Ibn ‘Ubayd was among those who attended this tragedy and witnessed its stages. So he hurried to oppose Mu’awiya and criticize him for it, saying: “O Mu’awiya, Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, has decided that ‘the child belongs to bed; and the prostitute is to be stoned,’ while you have judged that ‘the child belongs to the prostitute.’ This is an opposition to the Book of Allah, the Most High, and turning away from the Sunna of Allah’s Apostle according to Abu Maryam’s witness concerning Abu Sufyan’s fornication.”

So Mu’awiya threatened him with killing, saying: “By Allah, you should stop or I will kill you!”

“In the way of Allah?” asked Yunus.

“Yes,” replied Mu’awiya.107

D. Abdurrahman Ibn Al-Hakam

Even the Umayyads were not satisfied with this ascription. They criticized Mu’awiya for that. Abdurrahman Ibn al-Hakam with a group of the Umayyads went to Mu’awiya. Abdurrahman said to him: “O Mu’awiya, if you had found (none) except the Negroes, you would regard them as too many against us.” He meant the Banu al-‘Aas, who were few in number and mean.

So Mu’awiya turned to Marwan and said to him: “Take this dissolute (person) away from us!”

“Yes, by Allah, he is dissolute! I cannot stand him!,” retorted Marwan.

Mu’awiya said: “Were it not for my clemency and tolerance, I would come to know that he was unbearable. Did his poetry about me and Ziyad not reach you?”

Marwan said: “What has he said?”

He says:

Oh! Inform Mu’awiya Ibn Harb that the hands have become narrow because of what he commits.

Do you get angry when it is said that your father is chaste and you are satisfied when it is said that your father is a fornicator?

I testify that your blood relationship with Ziyad is like the blood relationship between the elephant and the young of the female donkey.

I witness that Sumayya gave birth to Ziyad while Sakhr did not approach her!

Mu’awiya felt pain when he read this poetry and said: “By Allah, I will not be pleased with him unless he goes to Ziyad, pleases, and apologize to him!”

Mu’awiya became angry with Abdurrahman. So the latter went to Kufa and headed for Ziyad to apologize to him. He asked permission to come in to him, but Ziyad did not permit him. The Qurayshi great figures mediated in respect of his affair, and he permitted him to enter. When he came in to him, he turned away from him. Then he turned to him and asked him:

-Are you the sayer of what you said? -What did I say? -You said that which is not said! -May Allah set right the Commander. Surely he who admonishes has no crime but the pardon is for him who commits a sin. Therefore listen to what I say. -Give me what you have.

Abdurrahman said:

Abu al-Mughira, I have repented to you of what had happened in Sham because of the nonsense of the tongue. I made the Caliph angry in respect of you to the extent that his excessive anger moved him to satirize me. I said to him who abused me about my apologizing to you: Go away! Your affair is other than mine. I have come to know the truth after the misguidance of my opinion and after the error (that issued) from the deviation of the heart.

Ziyad is a branch of Abu Sufyan swinging freshly among the gardens. I see that you are a brother, an uncle, a cousin but I do not know the defect through which you see me. Surely an addition to Harb’s family is more lovable to me than my middle finger. Oh! Inform Mu’awiya Ibn Harb, for I have obtained what the hands bring.

Ziyad said: “I can see that you are foolish and a poet with skilful tongue. Your saliva is savory to you whether you are pleased or displeased. However, we have heard your poetry and accepted your apology; therefore tell me about your need!”

-Will you write to the Commander of the Faithful (Mu’awiya) that you are pleased with me? -Yes.

Then he summoned his secretary to write to him a letter about his pardon and pleasure. Abdurrahman took the letter and went to Mu’awiya. When the latter read the poetry lines, he said: “May Allah curse Ziyad! Why has he not paid attention to ‘the addition to Harb’s family’?”

Then he was pleased with Abdurrahman and returned him to his first state108.

E. Abu al-Aryan

Abu al-‘Aryan was a blind, old man of a sharp tongue. Ziyad passed by him in a procession, and he asked: “What about this noise?”

“It is the procession of Ziyad Ibn Abi Sufyan,” was the answer.

“By Allah, Abu Sufyan left (none) except Yazid, Mu’awiya, ‘Uttba, ‘Anbasa, Hanzalah, and Muhammad,” retorted Abu al-‘Aryan, “ so from where has come Ziyad?”

Adulators conveyed Abu al-‘Aryan’s speech to Ziyad. Some of his special associates advised him to gift him with money that he might withhold his tongue from him. He regarded their viewpoint as correct. Then he ordered two hundred dinars to be given to him. The messenger brought the money to him and said: “O Abu al-‘Aryan, your cousin Ziyad, the emir, has sent you two hundred dinars, that you may spend it.” When Abu al-‘Aryan heard of that, he became very happy. Then he said: “The link of the blood relationship! Yes, by Allah, he is really my cousin!”

On the following day Ziyad’s procession passed by him, and Ziyad greeted him. So Abu al-‘Aryan wept, and it was said to him: “What has made you weep?”

“I felt Abu Sufyan’s voice through that of Ziyad!”

In this manner money moved the dirty consciences in which the thought was not impressed. As for Abu al-‘Aryan, he was void of faith. He changed through this little gift. When Mu’awiya heard of his speech, he wrote to him:

Shortly after the dinars I sent, you have been changed into many colors, O Abu al-Aryan!

Ziyad’s origin was unknown to you but now the one whom you had denied has become known!

How good Ziyad is! If he had given it (the money) sooner, it would have been a sacrifice for him for what he had feared.

When these verses were recited to Abu al-Aryan, he answered:

You have created for us a link through which the people live while you O Ibn Abi Sufyan was about to forget us!

As for Ziyad, his lineage has become correct with me, so I do not seek slander in respect of the truth!

Whoever does good, he obtains it. When he does evil, he gets it wherever it is!109

F. Abu Bakra

Among those who criticized Mu’awiya for adding Ziyad to himself was Abu Bakra110, Ziyad’s brother. He strongly rebuked his brother. He boycotted him and did not communicate with him. When Ziyad intended to go to the Sacred House of Allah (the Kaaba), Abu Bakra came to him. When some bodyguards saw him, they quickly went to Ziyad and said to him: “O Emir! That is your brother Abu Bakra. He has entered the palace.”

-Woe unto you, have you seen him? -That is he. He has come forward.

Abu Bakra came and stopped beside Ziyad, who had embraced a boy of his. He addressed the boy and did not address Ziyad as a sign of pride and disrespect to him. He said to the boy: “O boy, surely your father has committed a great sin in Islam. He fornicated his mother and disowned his father. By Allah, I have never seen that Sumayya saw Abu Sufyan. Then your father wants to commit something greater than that. He wants to come to the season (of Hajj) tomorrow and to come to Umm Habiba, daughter of Abu Sufyan, who is among the mothers of the faithful. If he came to ask permission to enter her house, and she permitted him, then it was a fabricated lie to Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. If she prevented him, then it would be a great scandal against your father!”

Then he left him and went away. Ziyad said: “My brother, may Allah reward you with good for the advice, whether you are pleased or displeased!”111

G. Yazid Ibn Al-Mufarragh

This genius poet satirized Ziyad with two verses of poetry that were as disgrace and shame on him throughout generations and times.

Think! There is a lesson in that if you thought. Have you obtained a laudable deed but with being a commander?

Sumayya lived what she lived and did not come to know that her son was from Quraysh in the masses.

Ziyad became afraid and sad because of this satire. So he said: “No satire is severer against me than these two verses of poetry!”112

This unique poet did not confine himself to that. He composed the best of all kinds of poetry in bitterness, criticism, and satire against Ziyad and Mu’awiya because of their committing this crime through which the sacredness of Islam was violated. We will mention to you some of what his talent and his rich imagination did well:

I have borne witness that your mother, who wore the mask, did not sleep with Abu Sufyan. But it was an affair in which was confusion with strong caution and fear. When Mu’awiya was perished, then convey good news to your people of division.

He has also said:

Surely Ziyad, Nafi‘, and Abu Bakra are among the most wonderful wonder with me. They are three men created in a female’s womb; and all of them belong to one father. This is a Qurayshi, as you say. This is a retainer; and this is (the man) whose cousin is an Arab.

In his book Muruj al-Dhahab, al-Mas‘udi has mentioned that these poetry lines belonged to Khalid al-Najjari, and that he said them in satirizing Ziyad when he added ‘Abbad to himself:

O ‘Abbad, meanness is not removed from you. You have neither mother nor father from Quraysh. And say to Ubaydillah: You do not have a real father; and none knows how to trace back your ancestry.

Certainly Ziyad added ‘Abbad to himself as Mu’awiya had added Ziyad to himself. He opposed the Sunna of Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, who has said: “Whoever claims, in Islam, a father other than his own father, then it is forbidden for him (to enter) the Garden.” It was Mu’awiya who encouraged Ziyad to commit such a sin. It was he who opened a door to corruption. He opposed the Islamic percepts, teachings, and duties without any fear and caution.

H. Al-Hasan Al-Basri

Among those who criticized and rebuked Mu’awiya (for his adding Ziyad to himself) is al-Hasan al-Basri113. He regarded this adding as one of Mu’awiya’s serious offences and among his bad deeds. He said: “Mu’awiya had four qualities. If he had had only one of them, it would have been a grave sin. He controlled this community through the fools. So he usurped its affair (the caliphate) without asking people whether there were among them the remainder of the companions (of the Prophet) and the men of virtue. He appointed his son Yazid as a successor while he drank wine, wore silk (garments), and played the lutes. He claimed that Ziyad was his brother while Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, said: ‘The child belongs to bed; and the prostitute is to be stoned.’ Woe unto him from Hajar and his companions twice.”114

These four crimes, which are some of Mu’awiya’s grave sins, are regarded as among the greatest sins he had committed and for which he will be severely reckoned by Allah. That is because of the bad complications with which the Muslims have been afflicted.

I. Al-Saktwari

Allama al-Saktwari has said: “The first affair of those of Allah’s Apostle to be openly refused was that Mu’awiya claimed (that) Ziyad (was his brother). However Abu Sufyan had disowned him (Ziyad), claimed that he was not among his sons, and decided his ancestry to be cut off. However when Mu’awiya became a caliph, he brought him nigh and appointed him as a governor. So Ziyad Ibn Abeeh did what he did just out of tyranny and damage toward the Prophet’s Household.”115

These are some people who criticized and rebuked Mu’awiya for his adding Ziyad to himself. Without doubt they did that because of faith and zeal for Islam. They came to know that Mu’awiya deliberately gave life to the laws and heresies of the pre-Islamic era. In the meantime he tried to deaden the Islamic duties. He responded to his urgent sentiments in controlling the Muslims and to make the opposing forces yield to him with all means and styles.

Anyway Ziyad used all means to establish his ancestry that he might join the Umayyad race. An example on that is that he wrote a letter to ‘A’isha and started the letter with: “From Ziyad Ibn Abi Sufyan!” He thought that she would acknowledge his ancestry when he would use that as a proof on the his lineage. That was clear to ‘A’isha, so she wrote to him: “From ‘A’isha, mother of the faithful, to her son Ziyad.”116 Thus, his effort failed, and he got nothing except failure and disgrace. When he became a governor over Kufa, he said to its people:

-I have come to you for an affair! I have demanded the affair for none except for you! -Summon us to whatever you will. -You have to add my ancestry to Mu’awiya!

The free and the believers refused to respond to him, saying:

-No to the false witness!117

The Arabs refused to add this bastard (Ziyad) to them. However, the Umayyad authorities wrote down his name in the Qurayshi Divan. So he and his children remained so. When the Umayyad state came to an end and the state of the the Abbasids came, the Caliph al-Mahdi cancelled this adding and ordered Ziyad’s family to be omitted from the Qurayshi Divan and from the Arabs. That was in the year 159 A. H. Through that Ziyad’s family returned to their early grandfather ‘Ubayd al-Roomi (the Roman).

His Governors

During the days of Mu’awiya, the Muslim peoples suffered from terrible kinds of ordeal and misfortunes. The standing government was based on violence, tyranny, severe punishment, exhaustion, using up wealth, and refusing all the human values, to the extent that the society was full of oppression, tyranny, and dictatorship. So fear, terrorism, and disorder included all the Muslim countries.

Among the aspects of that social oppression is that Mu’awiya empowered on the Muslims some ignoble people from among the devious headsmen and blood-shedders. They went too far in shedding blood, intentionally plundered the wealth of the people, and arbitrarily ruled the country according to their mean desires and pleasures. Accordingly, the people witnessed neither welfare nor justice. The Kharijites described the severity, deviation, and tyranny of that government, saying: “Surely the Umayyads were a sect; their punishment was severe. They punished according to suspicion, decided according to caprice, and killed according to anger.”118

This is an exact description of the tyrannical Umayyad policy that followed a severe method in all fields. That is because the Umayyads did not believe in man’s rights, dignity, and his right to live. So they drove the citizens to massacres and prisons. They decided according to mean desires and pleasures. They did not depend on Allah’s Book and the Sunna of His Prophet in respect of their judgments. They killed according to rage and anger for the sake of their narrow interests and objectives.

Amr Ibn al-‘Aas, Mu’awiya’s minister and governor of Egypt, expressed what he harbored in his wicked soul from among recklessness and disdaining the Muslims’ rights, saying: “Al-Sawad (Iraq) is a garden belongs to Quraysh only!” Surely al-Sawad, which belonged to all the Muslims, and all the economic affairs, in his viewpoint, belonged to Quraysh. What right did they have in that, while they fought against the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, declared war against his objectives and teachings, strongly defended their pre-Islamic beliefs and their idols? So what right did they have in the Muslims’ properties? And what right did they have in controlling their rights?

Anyhow, Khousrow of the Arabs (Mu’awiya), as they say, enabled the criminals and the blood-shedders to control the Muslims. He entrusted them with an absolute government, and they freely acted in respect of the people’s lives of the countries. He accepted their tyranny and their oppression. He protected them, and they in return enslaved, abased, and exhausted the Muslims. We will give a brief account on the biographies of these blood-shedders along with an explanation to what issued from them from among the barbaric deeds. That is up to readers:

A. Samra Ibn Jundub

Among Mu’awiya’s hirelings and helpers in spreading oppression and tyranny was Samra Ibn Jundub, the sinful, cursed one. His crimes have blackened the face of history and pages of biographies. Before we talk about his line of conduct during the time of his authority by the Umayyad authority, we briefly have to mention his lifetime during the days of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family. This wicked man was famous for his hypocrisy and mutiny during the time of the Prophet. The narrators have mentioned that he bothered one of the Ansar concerning some date palms he had in the garden of that Ansari person. So the Ansari complained to the Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, of Samra. The Prophet summoned Samra and commanded him:

-Sell your date palm-trees to this man and take its price! -I will not do that. -Take some date palm-trees in place of yours! -I will not do that. -Buy the garden from him! -I will not do that. -Leave this for me, and you shall be in the Paradise! -I will not do that.

When Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, came to know Samra’s stubbornness, evil, wickedness, violence, and harm toward the Ansari, he became displeased with him. Then he turned to the Ansari and said to him: “Go and cut off his date palm-trees, for he has no right in them!”119

This story indicates that Samra went too far in practicing sin and error, that he was void of humanity and noble ideals. Muhammad, the Master of the prophets and noblest of creatures, asked him to put an end to the dispute and guaranteed him in place of some date palm-trees a place in Paradise, the place of the prophets and the righteous, that he might enjoy it. However he did not respond to the Prophet (S) and insisted on his mutiny and disobedience, so he deprived himself of happiness and was satisfied with unhappiness. Among Samra’s major sins and bad deeds was that he sold wine after Islam had forbidden it. ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab heard of that and said to him: “May Allah fight Samra. Surely, Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, has said: ‘Allah cursed the Jews. It was forbidden for them to sell fat, but they sold it.’”120 This is Samra’s condition in his rudeness, turning away, and his mutiny. When Mu’awiya became a caliph, Ziyad appointed Samra as a governor over Basra, and he went too far in killing the innocent people unjustly. Muhammad Ibn Saleem narrated: “I asked Anas Ibn Sireen121: ‘Has Samra killed anyone?’”

Anas hurried to say with anger: “Can those whom Samra killed be counted?” Ziyad appointed him as a governor over Basra, and he went to Kufa and killed eight thousand people. So he (Ziyad) said to him: “Are you afraid that you have killed anyone innocent?”

Samra, the sinful one, paid no attention to shedding the Muslims’ blood, saying: “If I killed the like of them, I would be not afraid!”122

Abu Sawar al-‘Adawi123 said: “In one morning, Samra killed forty-seven people from my people who gathered the Qur’an.”124 ‘Awf narrated about Samra’s crimes, saying: “Samra came to Medina. When he was near the houses of the Banu (family of tribe of) Asad, some man came out of one of the streets. The man suddenly met the vanguard of people. A man attacked him and stabbed him with his sword as a sign of play and insolence. Then the horses went away. Samra passed by the man while he was covered with his blood. He asked: ‘What is that?’ ‘The Emir’s first horses hit him,’ was the answer. Samra said with insolence and haughtiness: ‘If you heard that we rode our horses, then guard against our spear heads.’”125

This tyrannical person, who was thirsty to shedding blood, killed people because of suspicion and accusation. He was asked: “O Samra, what will you say to your Lord tomorrow? A person is brought to you. It is said to you that the person is from the Kharijites, and you ordered him to be killed. Then another person is brought to you and it is said to you: ‘The person you had killed was not from the Kharijites. Rather he was going to satisfy a need of his. We were confused. The Kharijite is this person.’ Nevertheless you order the second person to be killed.”

Samra answered through what his soul harbored of savageness and crime and what was in his nature of deviation and misguidance, saying: “And which harm results from that? If he (the killed person) was from the men of the Garden, he would go to the Garden! If he was from the men of the fire, he would go to the fire!”126

Al-Hasan al-Basri narrated: “A man from Khurasan came to Basra. The man paid the zakat on his property to the Public Treasury. He took a receipt, and then he came into the mosque and performed two ruk’as.Then Samra took him and accused him of being a Kharijite. He ordered him to be beheaded. They checked what was with him and found that he was innocent. He just had a book written by the director of the Public Treasury.

As a result, Abu Bakra hurried to rebuke him for that, saying: “O Samra, have you not heard Allah, the Exalted, say: He indeed shall be successful who purifies himself, and magnifies the name of his Lord and prays?

Samra said: “Your brother (Ziyad) commanded me to do that!”127

Samra went on accompanying Ziyad. When Ziyad died, Samra was at the service of the sinful one, Ubaydillah, Ziyad’s son. He was the commander of his policemen. He took part in the most horrible crime history has ever written-that was the murder of Imam al-Husayn, the best of blessings and peace be on him, the master of the youths of the Garden. He provoked the people to war against Imam al-Husayn (‘a)128. Yet another example of his crimes and grave sins is that some Muslims were brought to him, and he asked each of them: “What is your religion?” Each of them said: “I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and that I am innocent of (the opinion) of the Harawriyya (the Kharijites).” Nevertheless, he ordered them to be beheaded, to the extent that he killed over twenty Muslims during one assembly129. Samra did these serious offences for nothing but to please Mu’awiya. However he said after he deposed from the authority over Basra: “May Allah curse Mu’awiya! By Allah, if I had obeyed Allah as I obeyed Mu’awiya, He would never have chastised me!”130

Anyway these atrocities that issued from Samra indicate that his soul was void of humanity and mercy. He went too far in disobedience (to Allah), in committing crimes, and evil.

B. Bisr Ibn Arta’a

Among Mu’awiya’s governors and helpers in achieving oppression, tyranny, injustice, and terrorism was Bisr Ibn Arta’a, the sinful one, who did the abominable deeds. He killed old men and slew suckling babies, that he might strengthen Mu’awiya’s domain and authority. When Mu’awiya sent him along with his Army to Yemen, he did the abominable deeds the like of which history has never seen in horribleness and severity. Before this sinful person headed for his task, Mu’awiya had summoned him and supplied him with his teachings that contained terrifying and killing the Muslims. This is the text of his teachings: “Go and pass through Medina. Dismiss the people. Terrify those by whom you pass. Plunder the properties of all those you think that they have properties from among those who have not entered the obedience to us. When you enter Medina, show them that you want (to take) their souls. Tell them that they have neither innocence nor an excuse with you. When they come to know that you will kill them, then refrain from them. Then go and come into Mecca and do not interfere with anyone. Terrify the people between Medina and Mecca and make them homeless. Then go to San‘a and al-Jind because we have followers in them. Their letter has come to me.”131

This criminal person yielded to the teachings of Hind’s son (Mu’awiya). So he terrified the Muslims, made terror and fear enter their hearts. He spread murdering and corruption in the land. He took the women of Hamadan as prisoners of war. They were placed in the markets. The greatest of them in leg was sold. So they were the first Muslim women to be taken as captives132. He passed by some people standing beside a well. He threw them all with their boys into the well133. Then he left them and headed for Yathrib (Medina). He entered Medina without any war. He went up on the pulpit and expressed his arrogance and unbelief, saying: “By Allah, were it not for that with which Mu’awiya has entrusted me, I would not leave in it (Medina) even a boy.” He stayed in it for one month. He demolished the houses of its people. He reviewed the people.

When it was said to him that someone took part in killing ‘Uthman, he killed him. Then he took his Army and marched towards Yemen. There he killed many people from among the followers of Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, peace be on him. He demanded two children of Ubaydillah Ibn al-Abbas. When he found them, he ordered them to be killed. So a man from Kinana rose to him and asked: “Why have you killed these (two children), while they have no crime? If you are going to kill them, then kill me with them!” So he ordered the Kinani to be killed, and then he killed the two children. Then a woman from Kinana became so excited because of this horrible act. She opposed and said to him with words dripping pain and sadness. “Fellow, you have killed the men! So why have you killed these two (children)? By Allah, (the people) before Islam and in Islam did not kill (children). By Allah, O Ibn Abi Arta’a, the supreme authority that which stands on nothing except killing children, old men, mercilessness, disobedience to relatives is bad!”134

Yes, by Allah, Mu’awiya’s authority was bad, for it was based on oppression and tyranny; it was established on shedding blood, causing terror and fear to the souls of the innocent. The narrators have mentioned that this sinful person killed thirty thousand Muslims in addition to those whom he burnt with fire135.

C. Abu Hurayra

Sheikh al-Mudhira, Abu Hurayra al-Dousi, was mean and low. He loved a cat during his early childhood. He was fond of the cat to the extent that he was nicknamed by it136. He spent a great part of his lifetime poor and needy. He lived on begging. He became a servant in the houses. He hired himself to satisfy his stomach137. He was satisfied with meanness and humiliation. When the light of Islam appeared, Abu Hurayra embraced it as those who embraced it. He was in his first condition of poverty and misery. He included himself as one of the poor in al-Suffa138. He lived on the leftovers of the houses and the Muslims’ alms. He described his poverty and his bad condition, saying: “I was among the poor people of al-Suffa.”139 He communicated with Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, to satisfy his stomach and his defect140. In this manner he remained in his bitter condition for some years. He was hungry and naked. He had neither home nor money. When the caliphate reached ‘Umar, he did him a favour. He saved him from poverty and abject misery. He appointed him as a governor over Bahrain in the year 21 A. H. Then he removed him from the office in the year 23 A. H., for treason. Umar took back from him the property he had stolen from the Muslims’ properties. He said to him: “You came to know that I had appointed you as a governor over Bahrain while you had no sandals. Then I have heard that you sold some horses for a thousand and six hundred dinars.”

Abu Hurayra fearfully said: “O Commander of the Faithful, I had horses that reproduced and gifts followed one another!”

‘Umar angrily said to him: “I have fixed your livelihood and your provision. This is a surplus, so give it back!”

-This does not belong to you! -By Allah, I will hurt your back!

Then he rose and flogged him until he made him bleed. When Abu Hurayra suffered pain, he accepted to give back the money, and then he said: “I will bring it and sacrifice it in anticipation of Allah’s reward!”

‘Umar opposed him and refuted his claim about this anticipation, saying: “That is (right) if you had taken it from something lawful and willingly brought it back! You came from the remotest stone of al-Bahrain! The people collected (taxes) to you, neither to Allah nor to the Muslims. Umayma141 will bring you back to (no job) except grazing the sheep!”

Then ‘Umar took back the properties Abu Hurayra had stolen142. Abu Hurayra returned to his early condition. He kept to the corners of inactivity. He was disgraced by treason and embezzlement. When the caliphate reached ‘Uthman, Abu Hurayra joined him and became among his helpers. He fabricated traditions in respect of his excellence. He said: [Allah’s Apostle has said:] “Surely every prophet has a bosom friend from among his community; and my bosom friend is ‘Uthman.”143 “Every prophet has a comrade in the Garden; and my comrade in it is ‘Uthman.”144 There are other traditions he fabricated and ascribed to Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, in respect of ‘Uthman and the Umayyads. When the community revolted against ‘Uthman and killed him because of his bad conduct and management, and when the caliphate reached Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) Abu Hurayra returned to withering after the freshness. Then he left Medina for Damascus. There he joined Mu’awiya’s camp and flattered him and tried to please him with all means possible. He narrated to the people of Sham traditions from Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, saying: [Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, has said:] “Allah entrusted His revelation to three: I, Gabriel, and Mu’awiya!” He also said to them: “Surely the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, gave Mu’awiya an arrow and said to him: ‘Take this arrow until you meet me in the Garden!’”145

In this manner Abu Hurayra fabricated traditions one after another about Mu’awiya, the Umayyads, and the companions’ excellence. Through that he sought nearness to Mu’awiya that he might get something of his world. As a result Mu’awiya showered him with enormous money and raised his importance. He made him wear silk and flax garments146. When the Year of Unity came, Abu Hurayra and Mu’awiya went to Iraq. When he saw many people coming to receive him, he sat on his knees. Then he hit his hairless head several times and said: “O People of Iraq, do you claim that I tell lies against Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, and burn myself in the fire? By Allah, I have heard Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, say: ‘Every prophet has a sanctum, and my sanctum is Medina. Whoever brings about an event in it, then the curse of Allah, the angels, and of all people be on him! And I bear witness that ‘Ali brought about (an event) in it….’”

When Mu’awiya heard of that, he rewarded and honored him and appointed him as a governor over Medina147. Abu Hurayra deserved this great position because he fabricated a tradition against Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, peace be on him. Through that he sought nearness to Mu’awiya and tried to achieve his interests and ambitions.

Abu Hurayra terribly harmed Islam through his fabricated traditions. He distorted the Islamic Law, added to it fables and imaginations, added to the religion what the religion was free from, divided the unity of the Muslims, made them parties and sects different in the fundamentals and branches of the religion. In his immortal book Abu Hurayra, his Eminence, late Imam Sharafuddeen has made a research on the traditions fabricated by Abu Hurayra. In his book Sheikh al-Mudhira, his Eminence, the great ‘Allama Sheikh Mahmood Abu Riyya has also criticized Abu Hurayra. He has said that Abu Hurayra was on the top of those who fabricated traditions and distorted the Holy Islamic Law. The Muslims are in urgent need of such free researches that uncover such swindlers who spared no effort to scheme against Islam and plot against Muslims through the narrations they fabricated, and which have no reality and no share of truthfulness.

D. Ziyad Ibn Abeeh

Ziyad Ibn Abeeh is the most dangerous of Mu’awiya’s governors in tyranny and oppression. The narrators have mentioned that he was the first to strengthen the authority and make firm the dominion of Mu’awiya. He drew his sword, punished (the people) because of suspicion and doubt148. He was the first person before whom the bodyguards walked carrying Iron staffs. He was the first person in front of whom the people sat on chairs. He was the first to employ policemen and bodyguards149. Mu’awiya increased the area of his authority. He appointed him as a governor over Basra, Kufa, Sajistan, Persia, Sind, and India150.

These Islamic countries under his influence were afflicted with ordeals, tribulation, and unhappiness. Chaos dominated them, all freedoms were removed from them, the opinions of their people became disordered owing to the terror and fear of the tyrannical authorities that were void of mercy and compassion. The authorities punished the people on account of suspicion and accusation, cut off legs and hands, and knocked out eyes, to the extent that death spread everywhere. Ziyad’s name was a reason for moving terror in the Iraqis’ souls because he had spread oppression and tyranny, to the extent that there was no way to picture the severity and violence. Ziyad himself has expressed his blind policy in his al-battra’151 speech. In his speech he has mentioned: “And surely I swear by Allah that I will punish a friend because of a friend, the residing because of the departing, the coming because of the turning back, and the sound from among you because of the sick. So the man from among you meets his brother and says to him: “O Sa‘d, escape! For Sa‘eed has been perished!”

He added, saying: “We have decided that there is a punishment for each crime. So whoever drowns people, we will drown him! Whoever burns people, we will burn him! Who ever bores a house (to rob it), we will bore his heart! Whoever digs a grave, we will bury him alive!”

Then he said: “By Allah, I will kill many of you! Therefore each one of you should beware of that he is among those I will kill!”152

The meaning of this speech is that, in Ziyad’s viewpoint, the punishments prescribed by Allah and His Apostle were not enough to make the people of Basra and Kufa follow the straight path. That is because Islam does not drown him who drowns (people), does not burn him who burns (people), and does not bore the thief’s heart even if he bores houses (to rob them). Islam does not bury people alive in graves even if they dig the graves of the dead. Islam does not administer the punishment because of suspicion; rather it turns it away. This is the religious legislation. As for Ziyad’s serious offences, they are not few. Surely the Muslims did not know this abominable policy declared by Ziyad and were not familiar with it. This policy indicates that its owner was tyrannical and wanted to rule the people through aggression, to fill their hearts with terror and fear, and to usurp the obedience and yielding to him by force.

Through his crooked policy, Ziyad decided to punish the sound because of the crime of the sick and the coming because of the turning back. This decision is arbitrary, void of justice and mercy. When he had finished his severe speech, Abu Bilal Mirdas Ibn Adiya rose for him, whispered, and said to him: “Allah has informed us with something other than what you have said. Allah, the Great and Almighty, has said:

“And Ibrahim who fulfilled [the commandments]” (Qur’an, 53:37).

“That no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another” (Qur’an, 53:38).

“And that man shall have nothing but what he strives for” (Qur’an, 53:39).

Therefore Allah promised us (something) better than what you have promised us, O Ziyad.”

Ziyad opposed him with words dripping anger and vengeance, saying: “Surely we find no way to what you and your leader want unless you should wade into blood for it!”153

Ziyad followed this terrorist, tyrannical plan that had the signs of death and executing of all the free and thinkers, to the extent that he set the record of the oppressive authority. He was so criminal that he killed some people though he knew that they were innocent. They did not interfere and took no part in any of the political affairs. Once, his policemen arrested a Bedouin. The Bedouin was brought to him, and he asked him:

-Have you heard the call?

-No by Allah, I brought a cow. It got dark, so I was forced to go to a place to spend the night there till morning. I had no knowledge of what the Emir had decided. -By Allah, I think you are right! However murdering you sets the community right!

Then he ordered him to be beheaded154. The Bedouin was killed though he committed no crime.

In this manner Ziyad went too far in shedding the Muslims’ blood. He did not respect it, nor did he refrain from shedding it. This sinful man went too far in shedding the blood of the followers of the Prophet’s progeny (‘a). He declared a violent war against the Shi’a on the first day of his authority over Kufa. He did not permit them to meet each other in their houses. If they wanted to do that, they had to come together in the mosques, that they would be under his supervision155. He brought them together and forced them to disown Imam ‘Ali156. He killed seventy men from them, for they refused to curse Imam ‘Ali157. He went too far in exhausting and killing them everywhere. He cut off their hands and their legs, crucified them on the trunks of the date-palms, knocked out their eyes, and rendered them homeless158. Therefore that pure blood which was shed, the women who were widowed, and the children who were orphaned were sacrificed in anticipation of Allah’s reward!

These are some of Mu’awiya’s governors and headsmen whom he empowered over the Muslim community, and they killed Muslims’ children, employed their womenfolk as servants, plundered their wealth, and spread corruption among them.

The Inclusive Oppression

The governors of Mu’awiya intentionally spread tyranny and oppression all over the countries. So their offices were a source of upset and disorder, and one of the doors to tribulation against the people. When someone went to them, he or she was burnt by their fire. Describing them, ‘Abd al-Malik said: “The most comfortable of the people in life is he who has that which suffices him, a wife who pleases him, and does not know our wicked doors that hurts him!”159

The governors went too far in wronging and persecuting the people. They unjustly plundered their properties. They were strict in the affair of land tax, and forced the people to pay it with all cruel means. Fan Flotin has said: “In stead of that the Caliphs (the Umayyad kings) should take the procedures to punish the governors and prevent them from practicing oppression, we find that they shared with them in the interests of the properties they had collected through those cruel ways. This means that the caliphs were satisfied with the governors’ bad behaviors toward the people of the country. Besides, it is a proof showing that some of them, in the first place, took care of the interests of the central treasury.”160

Surely Mu’awiya and the rest of the Umayyad kings did not punish any of their governors, nor did they prevent them from practicing oppression and aggression against the people. ‘Aqaba Ibn Hubayra al-Asadi criticized Mu’awiya for the greediness of his governors and their extorting the subjects’ properties. He said to him:

O Mu’awiya, surely we are human beings; be gentle to us, for we are neither mountains nor iron. You have swallowed down our land and made it barren. So is there anything standing or as a crop? Suppose that we are a community of no avail, (but) Yazid and Yazid’s father are its commanders. Do you crave after the caliphate when we perish while neither you nor we have immortality? Leave the slaves of the caliphate, be righteous, and (leave) appointing the low and the slaves as commanders! Give us equality, for the soldiers followed by soldiers do not support you!

Al-Nimyari, a poet and shepherd, explained to Abd Al-Malik Ibn Marwan that his governors wronged and persecuted his people, to the extent that they became poor and they escaped to the desert, and that they had nothing except weak camels. The shepherd said to him:

O vicegerent of the Most Merciful One, surely we are true people who prostrate in the early morning and the late afternoon. Surely the governors disobeyed you on the day when you commanded them, and brought, if you knew, low misfortunes. They took the noble master standing and shackled, and cut off the middle of his chest with the whip.

When they left nothing of his flesh on his bones and nothing reasonable in his heart, they brought their title deed to a plump one whom the whips made cowardly and fearful. They took his camels, and he became sitting and cannot leave the house. He calls the Commander of the Faithful and in front of him is a wide desert through which the winds draw tails. He is like the hoopoes whose wings the shooters have broken and that coo in the middle of the road. O Vicegerent of the Most Merciful One, surely the livestock of my clan have become defeated groups. They (my clan) have taken care of Islam; they have not left paying Zakat, nor have they lost

saying: There is no god but Allah. They covered al-Yamama; they were driven away as if that they were people who hit oppressors with something. For two spring months their milk ewes have tasted nothing but bitter, salty, bad, and withered trees. Yehya have come to them and made firm a contract the Muslims regard as heavy. Letters have made their rich poor after the riches and made their poor emaciated. I have left my people. Shall they entrust their affairs to you or shall they wait for a short time?161

This poetry is full of sorrow and pain. In it the poet has pictured the tyranny and oppression the governors poured upon the people. The tyranny continued even at the time of ‘Umar Ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, who was the most just of the Umayyad kings, as they say. That is because his governors spared no effort to plunder the properties of the people and to loot their wealth. In this connection Ka‘b al-Ash‘ari, a poet, addressed him, saying:

If you protect what follows you, then the governors of your land are wolves in the country. They do not respond to that which you summon to unless you cut off heads with the sword. Through the hands of brave ones endowed with insight; in their striking there are restraints and punishment162.

While ‘Umar Ibn ‘Abd al-’Aziz was delivering a sermon on the pulpit, a man interrupted him, saying:

Surely those whom you have sent in the countries have left your letter and regarded as lawful the unlawful. Those whose clothes are dirty (are sitting) on the pulpits of our land; all of them tyrannize (the people) and all of (the people) complain (of them).

You want a just one from among them to undertake the trust. How far is the trustworthy Muslim!163

The Muslims were severely afflicted with those governors and were exhausted by the Umayyad government that intended to deaden the truth, battle against justice, and spread poverty and misery all over the countries.

Anyway these practices, which we have mentioned about Mu’awiya and the Umayyads, made the vengeance of the people upon them strong throughout the historical stages. The Umayyads have showed their pre-Islamic reality, which has no relation with the religious laws. This is the wonderful victory Imam al-Hasan (‘a) won during his making peace with Mu’awiya. The peacemaking has brought about defeat to the Umayyads, slandering and criticizing to Mu’awiya when dead and alive. It has also showed that the Umayyad government was an example of the tyrannical authority holding the slogan of oppression, dictatorship, and making light of the people’s rights. We are satisfied with this brief account of Mu’awiya’s serious offences that have blackened the face of history. Imam al-Hasan (‘a) has shown them through his making peace with Mu’awiya.

The Policy Of Ahl Al-Bayt

We are trying to explain the reasons for the peacemaking. So we have to deal with some sides of the policy of Ahl al-Bayt (the Prophet’s Household), peace be on them, to know the extent of the originality of their constructive policy and to understand the high objective they wanted to achieve through their government. That is because explaining these sides, as we think, gives us lights about Imam al-Hasan’s peacemaking with the tyrannical one of his time (Mu’awiya) and shows us the reasons that made the rebellious forces unite to fight against him as they had done to his father before. We will mention that to readers.

The Constructive Policy

Surely the policy that prevails all over the country, in the viewpoint of Ahl al-Bayt, should be constructive. It should guarantee the interests of society, find some sound means necessary for its progress, and reach its objectives and hopes. It should protect people from oppression and aggression, establish just equality in their areas, and find equal opportunities to their children to protect them from misery and deprivation.

Surely the policy of Ahl al-Bayt was based on pure justice and truth. It represented the Islamic viewpoint and objectives in the world of policy and government. That is because it is the most developed policy the people have ever known and the most meritorious (of all policies) in achieving political and social justice among people. That is because their policy seeks tranquility free from upset, security free from fear, and justice void of oppression. It, in all its aspects, differs from the Umayyad tyrannical policy, which raised the slogan of oppression and tyranny, used as means tricks and deception to bargain for the interests of the peoples, to strip them of their abilities and to overcome them.

Surely the original policy of Ahl al-Bayt is that which does not depend on cunning, equivocation, deception, propaganda, misguidance, and the like from among the ways that have no side of reality. Besides it should be frank and clear in all its objectives and principle features that it may establish justice in the countries. Because of their firm and strict policy in respect of the truth and justice, the opportunists and the devious revolted against them and demanded them to follow a way that did not oppose their interests and ambitions. If they had responded to them, the caliphate would not have reached other than them. However they, peace be on them, preferred Allah’s pleasure, followed the clear way, and were far from the crooked plans the religion did not accept.

Their Viewpoint Of The Caliphate

Surely the caliphate with them was the shadow of Allah in the earth, so it was obligatory that, in its shadow, exclusive justice should be established, welfare should spread, and security should spread over all the citizens. When authority was void of these goals, then they had neither ambitions nor aims in it. While Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) was mending his sandals at Dhi Qar, he asked Ibn Abbas about them:

-O son of Abbas, how much do you value them (the shoes)? -They have no value.

-By Allah, they are more beloved to me than these affairs of yours but for the fact that I must establish what is true and ward off what is false.

His shoes, which were made of coir, were more lovable to him than the authority through which what was true was not established and what was false was not warded off. For this reason he refrained from the oppressive authority that lost justice, gave life to tyranny, and deadened the truth. In some of his words, Imam ‘Ali (‘a) has disclosed the secret for his turning away from pledging allegiance to Abu Bakr. In this connection he has said: “O Allah, surely You know that that which issued from us was not for a competition for authority, nor was it for seeking anything of the remainder of the vanities, but that we may return the principle features of Your religion and show righteousness in Your earth, so the oppressed from among Your servants is safe, and the suspended one from among the punishments prescribed by You is put into effect.”164

For these firm reasons the Imam declared his displeasure with Abu Bakr and refrained from paying homage to him. He put before him a shower of proofs for his being worthier of the caliphate than him (Abu Bakr). However he did not fight against him. He came to know that it was incumbent on the community to yield to him as Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family had commanded. In respect of that Allah’s Apostle had ordered, saying to him: “O ‘Ali, you are of the same rank with the Kaaba; people come to you, but you do not go to them. So if these people came to you and handed it (the caliphate) over to you, then accept it from them. And if they did not come to you; therefore do not go to them until they come to you.”165

Surely it was incumbent on the Muslims to yield to the family of their Prophet and to resort to them, that they might judge among them with what Allah had revealed and to return them to the clear truth and to the straight path. However the world deceived the people, and the authority cheated them. So they followed their ambitions and their mean desires, and they turned away the authority from its men and placed it in a place other than its place, and that led to hard ordeals and black misfortunes with which the Muslims were afflicted throughout their ages.

The Ideals

As for the high objectives and ideals that Ahl al-Bayt raised and adopted in all the fields, they are as follows:

Justice

The Islamic policy in all its concepts has adopted justice, absolutely believed in it and focused on its lights in respect of all its aims. It has demanded the rulers and the governors to establish it on the arena of life, and that the decision that issues from them should not result from a mean desire and the rest of purposes that has nothing to do with justice. Allah, the Most High, has said:

“And that when you judge between people you judge with justice” (Qur’an, 4:58).

And

“O Dawud, surely we have made you a ruler in the land; so judge between men with justice and do not follow desire, lest it should lead you astray from the path of Allah” (Qur’an, 38:26).

The Muslims have unanimously agreed that if the judge deviated in respect of his judgement, it is incumbent on the ruler to remove him from the office. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, removed one of his governors when Soda, daughter of ‘Imarah al-Hamadaniya, told him that the judge was not just in his decision. The Imam wept and said: “O Allah, You bear witness as to me and as to them that I have not commanded them to wrong Your creatures or to leave Your right!” Then he immediately removed him166.

Imam al-Sadiq has said: “Fear Allah and be just, for you criticize the people for their being unjust.167”

Surely the happiness and progress of a community depend on the justice of their rulers. When the rulers turn away from justice and become unjust in their decisions, the country is liable to crises, chaos and trends spread over it. Islam takes great care of that the government should be in the hands of the righteous and the trustworthy. That is because government seduces people, and none escapes it except those with pure, noble souls, and such people are few. We have talked in details about the aspects of justice in our book al-Nizam al-Siyasi fi al-Islam (the Political System in Islam). So we think that there is no need to deal with these researches. We only want to say that the policy of Ahl al-Bayt, peace be on them, was based on inclusive justice and all its goals were built on it.

Equality

Islam has bestowed the blessing of equality on mankind in a peerless manner in the history of the world society. It has declared the just equality among individuals and communities and among races. Therefore, the white have no excellence over the black, and the Arabs have no excellence over the non-Arabs. So people are equal and like the teeth of a comb. Some of them have no excellence over some others except through fear of Allah and good deeds. Professor Jeep says: “Surely Islam is still the only religion that, through its power, wonderfully succeeds in uniting human different elements and races in one front whose foundation is equality. And if the disputes between the east and the west thoroughly studied, then there is no escape from resorting to Islam.”168

Imam ‘Ali, the commander of the faithful, inclusively put into effect the just equality during his reign. He commanded his governors to treat the people equally even if in glance and look. In one of his letters, he has mentioned: “And lower your wing in gentleness to the subjects. Have a cheerful face to them, and make them equal in glance and look, gesture and greeting, that the great may not crave after your injustice, and the weak may not despair of your justice.”169

This just policy moved spites and hatred against him, made the rebellious forces unite and fight against him. This has been mentioned by al-Mada’ini, who has said: “The most important reason for that the Arabs deserted ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (‘a) was his following the principle of equality among the people. He did not prefer the noble to the humble, nor did he prefer an Arab to non-Arab, nor did he flatter the chiefs of the tribes.”170

Most surely the Qurayshi tyrants and their followers from among the tyrannical Arabs did not understand the original objectives Islam brought such as generalizing equality, spreading justice, and putting an end to injustice. Surely they wanted distinctions, possessing alone the Muslims’ properties, and showing arrogance toward the poor and the weak. That was contrary to the behavior of Imam ‘Ali (‘a), the pioneer of social justice on earth. As for Imam al-Hasan, he followed his father’s way and behavior. He did not turn away from his method, and this was the reason of that the people harbored malice and hatred against him.

Freedom

Islam has adopted general freedom for all citizens and made it incumbent on the state to protect it and to put it into effect on the arena of life. It has adopted the freedom of thought, thinking, opinion, and the rest of the political fields. It has regarded freedom as among man’s natural and necessary rights. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, put into practice freedom in all its aspects during the time of his caliphate.

He did not force the people to pay homage to him or to obey him. Rather he left them with their affair to enjoy their freedom. He did not subject them to any harm and detested thing. Similarly, he treated the Kharijites. That was when he did not fight against them until he warned them and discussed with them to refute their vague errors. When they insisted on their thought, he released them. However, when they made mischief in the land and disturbed the peace, he battled against them. It was according to these words of Allah, the Exalted:

“And if two parties of the believers quarrel, make peace between them; but if one of them acts wrongfully toward the other, fight that which acts wrongfully until it returns to Allah’s command” (Qur’an, 49:9).

When he had finished the battle against them, there were many Iraqi people embracing their beliefs, but he did not subject them to any detested thing nor did he deprive them of booty (fayya’) nor did he prevent any of them to go out (to battle) if he wanted that. He granted them a complete freedom. So the authorities did not watch them nor did they follow them or punish any of them. He also gave a freedom to the Umayyad party. He did not interfere with them through any kind of harm or a detested thing, though he knew well that they were his opponent and enemy.

This wide freedom Imam ‘Ali gave to the opposing parties was the widest freedom history has ever known. His constructive policy required that the people should not be forced to show obedience to him and to do what they had disliked.

Frankness and Truthfulness

Surely the wise policy that Ahl al-Bayt had adopted was truthful and real. It did not depend on equivocation and hypocrisy. It did not seduce the people through false promises nor did it make them hope for honey wishes. Its was based on frankness and truthfulness.

The policy of Ahl al-Bayt was full of frankness in all fields. Deception and hypocrisy were not of its logic. Imam al-Husayn (‘a) was the grandson of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, and the representative of Islam. He frankly told the people who accompanied him from Mecca to Kufa about the murder of the great martyr Muslim Ibn ‘Aqeel (‘a) his messenger and representative to the Iraqis. He told them that Muslim had been killed, and the people of Kufa had deserted him and broken their promises and covenants. He also told them that he would head for the field of death. As a result, the ambitious and men of desires separated from him. During that terrible hour, he (‘a) told them about the fact, his plan and his objectives. He did so, that they might come to know their affairs and to act according to the commands of Islam, which required frankness and truthfulness, and did not regard as permissible all means of betrayal and deception.

Surely if all kinds of equivocation were permissible in Islam, Mu’awiya, the opponent of Islam, would not overcome Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, peace be on him. The Imam was able to bargain with Mu’awiya after the murder of ‘Uthman. He was able to let him remain as a governor over Damascus, and then he would remove him from the office and get rid of his evil and mutiny. However, Islam did not allow him to do that cheap bargain. So he refused to let him remain in the body of government even for a short time. Yet there is another affair that is more important in effect and further in the extent of the world of frankness than that. The affair is that Imam ‘Ali refused to respond to Abdurrahman Ibn ‘Awf, a member of the Consultative Committee nominated by the Second Caliph (‘Umar) to elect the new caliph after him. Abdurrahman strongly insisted on Imam ‘Ali to elect him and to pay homage to him for the Islamic great office of caliphate provided that he should follow the conduct line of the two Sheikhs (Abu Bakr and ‘Umar) and their policy. However, the Imam (‘a) refused to respond to this condition. He refused all things except following Allah’s Book and the Sunna of His Prophet in his policy, administrative works, and the like. He was able to accept this stipulation in the first place, and then he would be able to turn away from it and to follow his policy according to the objectives Islam had decided and to arrest all those who opposed him and his government, but he refused all things except frankness and truthfulness in word and act.

Surely Islam commands its followers to cling to truthfulness and it does not make it permissible for them to use crooked ways that have nothing to do with reality in making firm the government and strengthening authority. The Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, has said: “Stick to truthfulness, for truthfulness leads to kindness, and kindness leads to the Garden. Man still tells the truth and searches for truthfulness until he is written very truthful with Allah. Beware of lying, for sure lying leads to licentiousness, and licentiousness leads to the fire. Man still tells lies and look for lying until he is written a liar with Allah.”171

Surely Ahl al-Bayt built their policy on truthfulness and frankness. They avoided cunning and deception.

Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) has said: “Were it not for that cunning and deception lead to the fire, I would be the most cunning of the people.”

He (‘a) always sighed deeply because of the exhausting pain he met from his opponents and said: “Alas! They deceive me, and they know that I am knowledgeable of their deception and most knowledgeable of them in the kinds of cunning. However I have come to know that cunning and deception lead to the fire. Therefore, I am patient toward their cunning, and I do not commit the like of which they commit….”172

Concerning cunning he has also said: “Every perfidious has a standard through which he will be known on the Day of Resurrection.”173

Betrayal issues from the soul that does not believe in human ideals and religious values. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, has described the perfidious, saying: “He, who knows how the return is, does not betray. We have become in a time whose most men have adopted betrayal as courtesy. In respect of it, the men of ignorance have ascribed them to good stratagem. What is the matter with them? May Allah fight them! The one with a skillful heart may seek a way to stratagem. But before it there is a deterrent from Allah’s command and prohibition, so he leaves it with his own eyes after the power over it, and he who does not stick to the religion seizes the opportunity of it.”

The slaves of pleasures and offices during his reign said: “He (Imam ‘Ali) has no knowledge of political affairs. Mu’awiya is experienced in them and worthy of managing the government.”

The Imam (‘a) said: “By Allah, Mu’awiya is not craftier than I am, but he betrays and acts sinfully. Were it not for that betrayal is abominable, I would be the craftiest of all the people.174”

The policy of Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, and the rest of the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt, in all its affairs, has expressed all the good political values Islam declared. It does not accept desertion, cunning, and deception, nor does it believe in any of the means of social hypocrisy even if timely political success depends on it. That is because the Islamic caliphate is the most important of all the sensitive offices in Islam. Therefore, there is no escape from that it should be based on firm morals and deep faith in the rights of society and community.

As for Imam al-Hasan (‘a) he followed his father’s plans and decisions in the world of policy and government. He did not depend on any means the religion did not accept. He refrained from all the irregular ways that do not meet with the reality. If he had followed some of the ways Mu’awiya had followed, he (Mu’awiya) would not have overcome him. He (‘a) said to Sulayman Ibn Surad: “If I was resolute in respect of the affair of the world, acted and toiled for the world, Mu’awiya would not be braver or more powerful than I would. However my opinion is different from yours.”

This indicates that if he had worked for the world, then he would have been more powerful over it than his opponent, because overcoming events and obtaining government depend on using the means that did not agree with the religion, while he (‘a) was the greatest of Muslims in protecting Islam and taking care of it. He was the strongest of the people in piety and sticking to the affairs of the religion.

The Governors

Ahl al-Bayt, peace be on them, maintained that the officials of the body of government should be the best of men in merit, honesty, qualification, and ability to run the affairs of the country. They had to put before their eyes the general interest and to behave among the people with the behavior based on pure justice and truth. They had to be honest in what they collected from the people and what they spent on the public utilities, and they had to be, before everything, far from bribe and from that which was in the hand of the people, for bribe leads to the collapse of morals, spreading of falsehood and corruption in the earth. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) sent a letter to the commanders of his troops in which he said: “Those who were before you perished because they prevented the people from (getting) their right, and they bought it (for bribe), and because they treated them with falsehood...”175

Surely among the most important reasons that lead to the destruction and removal of a government is that when the citizens are veiled from their rights, and so they are forced to take them for bribe. Of course such a deed leads the society into disorder, and makes oppression and tyranny spread.

Indeed Ahl al-Bayt thought of something greater and deeper than that. They made it incumbent on their governors to be far from the people through all kinds of link even if it brought about affection and sentiment for fear that it might have an effect on the course of justice. For this reason Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) wrote a letter to Sahl Ibn Hunayf, his governor over Basra, when he was invited to a banquet, and he attended it. This is the text of what he wrote to him: “O Ibn Hunayf, I have come to know that a young man from Basra invited you to a feast, and you leapt towards it. Foods of different colors were served for you and big bowls were put before you. I never thought that you would accept the feast of a people who turn away the beggars and invite the rich. Look at the morsels you take, leave out that about which you are in doubt and take that about which you are sure that it has been secured lawfully.”176

Al-Ash‘ath Ibn Qays wanted to seek nearness to Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, and to communicate with him. He made him a good candy and offered the candy to him. Let him tell us about his attitude toward this affair. He says: “And more wonderful than that is a night visitor who came by night (and brought us) a wrapped up (candy) whose piece of meat was kneaded as it was kneaded with a snake’s saliva and vomit. So I said: ‘Is this a link, zakat, or alms?’ He said: ‘Neither this nor that, but it is a gift!’ So I said: ‘May your mother lose you! Have you come to me to deceive me through the religion of Allah? Are you mentally disordered, crazy, or delirious? By Allah, if I was given the seven regions and that which was under their orbits in order that I might disobey Allah through stripping an ant of a husk of grain of barely, I would not do. And surely your world with me is easier than a leaf in a locust’s mouth (and) it eats it. ‘Ali is far away from the bliss that perishes and the pleasure that does not last. We seek refuge in Allah from the sleep of reason and the ugly slip! We ask Him for help!”177

Through this constructive policy social justice is established, security and welfare spread, and all kinds of oppression and injustice come to an end.

Military Service

The policy of Ahl al-Bayt did not require forcing the people in respect of the military service. It has not been reported from them that they forced the people to go out for war; rather they summoned them to perform jihad as one of the religious duties imposed by Allah. So whoever wished to go out for jihad went out to perform the duty imposed on him, and whoever (refrained from going out for jihad) refrained and did not yield to that which Allah made obligatory on him with being liable to punishment, displeasure, and terrorism. This was the plan of Imam al-Hasan (‘a) when he wanted to battle against Mu’awiya. He did not force anyone to do that; rather he summoned them to jihad. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, had done that before at the Battles of al-Jamal (the Camel), Siffin, and al-Nahrawan. He wanted the people to go to jihad out of their thought and faith in that which Allah had made obligatory on them. As for the Umayyads, they were on the contrary to that.

They imposed severe punishments on those who refrained from war. History has told us about the behavior of Ubaydillah Ibn Ziyad when he went out to battle against Imam al-Husayn, the master of the youths of the Garden, peace be on him. He killed Shami because he was not among those who did not command the people to go out to the battle. He also killed al-Hajjaj Ibn Amr Ibn Daabi al-Barjami because he did not respond to joining the Army of al-Muhallab Ibn Abi Suffra. About that a poet says:

Choose, either you visit ‘Umayr Ibn Daabi or you visit al-Muhallab.

This terrorist plan forced the people to respond to them unwillingly. If Imam al-Hasan had forced his Army to obey him, severely punished the rebels, the weak, and other people because of suspicion and accusation, his Army would not have stricken by those shocks and defeats. However he, the peace of Allah be on him, followed the clear path in which there was neither complexity nor crookedness. He preferred Allah’s pleasure to all things.

Fiscal Policy

Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) followed a certain financial policy. They made it incumbent on the rulers to spend the money in the central treasury on general interests such as establishing foundations, finding vital projects through which life would be regulated and through which

the ghost of poverty and deprivation would come to an end. It was not permissible with them to spend even one dirham on things that did not bring about profit and interest to the community. They took great care of this affair. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, put out the candle in the public treasury when Talha and al-Zubayr came to him and discussed with him about their personal affairs. That is because the candle in the public treasury belonged to the Muslims, so it was not permissible to use it except for their interests.

This strict policy moved against him the Arabs’ spites and the hatred of Quraysh. A group of his companions came and asked him to change his policy. They said to him: “O Commander of the Faithful, give these properties, prefer these noble people from among the Arabs and Quraysh to the non-Arab Muslims and the non-Arabs, and attract the people of whose opposition you are afraid.”

This cheap speech hurt him, and he said to them: “Are you commanding me to seek victory through tyranny?”178

Surely preferring the Arabs to the non-Arab Muslims and giving properties to the great figures were regarded as tyranny and aggression in the viewpoint of Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, the pioneer of equality and justice in the earth.

Surely the Muslims’ properties should be spent on their interests and on satisfying their needy and deprived ones. The leader of the state has no right to choose anything of Muslims’ wealth for himself or to prefer his relatives to others. Doing so is treason to Allah and the Muslims. Imam ‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, put this policy into practice on the arena of life when he became the caliph. He had neither houses nor country estates. He did not amuse himself nor did he pay attention to his worn out garment. He did not eat delicious food nor did he enjoy any of the pleasures of life. Rather he led the life of the poor and the miserable. Harun narrated on the authority of his father ‘Antara, who said: “I came in to ‘Ali when he was at al-Khuwarnaq and wearing an old short garment. It was very cold. I said to him: ‘O Commander of the Faithful, surely Allah has appointed a share of this property to you and to your family, while you do this to yourself!”

The Imam (‘a) answered: “By Allah, I will not oppress you in anything. It is my old short garment I brought from Medina.”179

The Imam had no garment to protect him from cold except a worn out garment he brought from Medina. Of course he was able to wear embellished silk garments. However he refused to choose any of the Muslims’ properties. He also did not prefer anyone of his family and children to others. Abu Rafi‘180, who was the treasurer of the public treasury, said: “‘Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, came in to me. I had given his daughter a pearl from the properties in the public treasury. When he saw the pearl, he knew it. He turned pale and shook all over with fear. Then he asked: ‘From where has she taken it? By Allah, I am going to cut off her hand!’”

When Abu Raafi‘ came to know that the Imam was serious and determined to do that, he said to him: “By Allah, O Commander of the Faithful, it is I who have given it to her! It is a guaranteed, simple loan.”

So the Imam’s fear calmed down, and his anger abated. Then he said to him: “I married Fatimah and I did not have any bed except a skin of a ram. We slept on the skin by night and on it we gave food to our camel that was used for watering by day. I have no retainer other than her.”181

Surely his high ideals did not permit him to prefer his daughter to the Muslims’ daughters. This is the utmost justice none other than he established. Another example on his treating the Muslims with equality and on his taking great care of their properties was what ‘Aasim Ibn Kulayb182 narrated that his father had said: “A property came to me from Isbahan (Isfahan). He (Imam ‘Ali) divided the property into seven parts. Then he summoned the commanders of the one-seventh and made them choose by lot, that he might see who would be the first to be given.”183

Al-Hakam said: “I saw ‘Ali coming to a lane, summoning the orphans and saying to them: ‘Drive away (the flies) and lick.’ To the extent that I wished that I was an orphan.” He also said: “I saw ‘Ali bringing pomegranates. He divided them among the people. Our mosque got ten pomegranates.”184

Imam ‘Ali used to perform the prayer in the public treasury, and then he ordered it to be swept. He would say: “Praise belongs to Allah Who has taken me out of it as I had come into it.”185

The historians say: “Imam ‘Ali came into the public treasury and divided (the properties in) it. There was a small girl with him. The girl belonged either to al-Hasan or to al-Husayn. She took some of the properties. The Imam went after her and took it from her hand. So his companions said to him: ‘O Commander of the Faithful, surely she has a right in it.’

“He (‘a) said: ‘When her father gets something of it, then let him give her whatever he pleases.’”186

Surely this is the justice that people have not established in all the stages of history. Despite their experiences, progress, and creation in the techniques of government, they never form a political regime through which the greatest justice is established in a manner similar to that followed by Imam ‘Ali and his sons after him.

With this point we will end our speech on some high ideals sought by Ahl al-Bayt during their reign. Imam al-Hasan (‘a) did not deviate from these ideals nor did he follow during his policy the way of those who worked for the world. He did not follow the way of those who wanted domain and authority nor did he dodge and flatter. He did not spend money on things other than the lawful things. If he had done all these things, then the authority would not have come to (Mu’awiya) Hind’s son, who followed all the means to reach the government. However he (‘a) preferred protecting Islam, and keeping its fates and morale. Generally speaking, he followed the behavior of his grandfather and of his father, who did not accept all the ways opposing the religion.

Yet there is something mentioned by those who criticized Imam al-Hasan for his making peace with Mu’awiya. The thing is that Imam al-Hasan did not die a martyr as his brother Imam al-Husayn (‘a) died. We will mention the answer in detail when we speak about the attitude of Imam al-Husayn (‘a) toward the peacemaking.

• 1. Sharh Lamiyat al-‘Ajam, vol. 2, p. 27. Al-Safadi has said something at random. When did Imam al-Hasan sell the caliphate to his opponent for repaying his debt? We seek refuge with Allah from this accusation!
• 2. Al-‘Arab, p. 78.
• 3. Hayat al-Hasan, vol. 2, p. 283.
• 4. ‘Aqidat al-Shi’a translated by A. M. S. This orientalist has filled his book with lying, criticizing Islam and degrading the value of its brilliant, great figures. In al-Bayan bright Magazine, no. 35-39 (assigned to Imam al-Hasan, the master of martyrs), the second year, professor al-Sayyid ‘Abd al-Hadi al-Mukhtar has falsified his researches and displayed his lies.
• 5. ‘Aqidat al-Shi’a translated by A. M. S. This orientalist has filled his book with lying, criticizing Islam and degrading the value of its brilliant, great figures. In al-Bayan bright Magazine, no. 35-39 (assigned to Imam al-Hasan, the master of martyrs), the second year, professor al-Sayyid ‘Abd al-Hadi al-Mukhtar has falsified his researches and displayed his lies.
• 6. Daa’irat al-Ma’arif al-Islamiya, vol. 7, p. 400. This Daa’irat (encyclopedia) is nothing but an encyclopedia of lying and fabrications. It is full of defaming Islam and cursing its great figures, especially as it concerns Laamans’s researches on the Shi’a and their Imams. They are full of slanders and buffoonery against them. The reason for that is that the Christian missionary committees urged the like of these mercenary pens to distort Islam and to scheme against it. Besides the researches of the orientalists depended on a surface studying void of examination and inquiry. It is worth mentioning that an orientalist visited Tehran (Iran’s capital) after he had learned the Persian language in the Eastern Language Schools. He tried to write a history on Iran’s social and moral conditions as he saw them. He saw some porters carrying vessels and excellent necessities on their heads. There were tambourines and flutes in front of them. He asked about that, and it was said to him: “It was a bride’s trousseau!” Then he asked about the name of the bridegroom. One of the attendants said to him: “Madha yahumaka (i.e. What does concern you?)” In the evening this orientalist saw a man hitting a women in the street. He asked one of the attendants about the story, and he answered him: “The hitter is her husband, and she has unjustly abandoned him.” Then he asked him about the name of the husband, and he answered him: “Madha yahumaka?” As a result the orientalist thought that the name of the husband was Madha yahumaka, and that he was the bridegroom whose trousseau he saw in the morning. Accordingly, this orientalist wrote in his book the History of Iran that he saw in its capital a man marrying his bride in the morning and hitting her in the street in the evening and that his name was Madha yahumaka! This is the condition of the orientalists in respect of axiomatic, manifest affairs, just imagine how much more their condition in respect of difficult, obscure affairs is! This is if they do not depend on distortion, just imagine how much more it is if they depend on it! Unfortunately our young people have taken care of studying their books and depended on them in respect of their theses though they have no share of correctness and reality.
• 7. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 109.
• 8. Al-Siyada al-‘Arabiya, p. 69.
• 9. A’yan al-Shi’a, vol. 4, p. 42.
• 10. Dr. Taha Husayn, ‘Ali wa Banuh, p. 55.
• 11. Muhammad ‘Abda, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p. 67.
• 12. Muhammad ‘Abda, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 1, p. 70.
• 13. Ansab al-Ashraf, Q1/vol.1, p. 223.
• 14. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 2, p. 19.
• 15. Al-Bukhari has mentioned Sa‘d Ibn Mas‘ud al-Thaqafi (and regarded him as) among the companions (of the Prophet). Al-Tabarani has said: “He (Sa‘d Ibn Mas‘ud al-Thaqafi) had companionship (with the Prophet). (Imam ‘Ali ), the Commander of the Faithful, peace be on him, appointed him as a governor over one of his works. He took him with him to (the Battle of) Siffin. He (Sa‘d Ibn Mas‘ud al-Thaqafi) narrated the following tradition on the authority of the Imam, who said: “When Noah wore a garment, he thanked Allah. When he ate or drank, he thanked Allah. So he was called a grateful servant.” Al-Isaba, vol. 2, p. 34.
• 16. Al-Tabari, Tarikh. Al-Isaba. Some researchers have negated the correctness of the narration and regarded it as among the fabricated ones. That is possible, for al-Mukhtar was the best of the men in his conduct, his piety, and all his tendencies.
• 17. Al-Maqreezi, Khutat, vol. 2, p. 439.
• 18. Abu al-‘Abbas was the first ‘Abbasid caliph. He was at al-Hamiya, a district of al-Balqa’, in the year 108 A. H. He grew up at it. He was given the pledge of allegiance as a caliph in 3rd Rabee‘ al-Awwal, in the year 132. He hurried to shed blood. His governors in the east and west followed his examples. He died in the year 136. Al-Sayuti, Tarikh al-Khulafa’, p. 100.
• 19. Ibrahim Ibn al-Muhajir al-Bajali is Abu Ishaq al-Kufi. He narrated traditions on the authority of a group of the trustworthy, and others reported on his authority. (The traditionists) have differed over his narration. So it was said that he was trustworthy, and it was said that he was weak. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 1, p. 167.
• 20. Al-Mas‘udi Muruj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 167.
• 21. Al-Siyada al-‘Arabiya, p. 70.
• 22. Al-Mas‘udi Murujj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 332.
• 23. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 4, p. 133.
• 24. Al-Nawruz is the Persian New Year’s Day.
• 25. Al-Daynawari, p. 303.
• 26. A‘yan al-Shi’a, vol. 4, p. 42.
• 27. We have mentioned the sources of the tradition in the first part of the book, p. 81.
• 28. Anba’ Nujaba’ al-Abnaa’, p. 56.
• 29. Al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, vol. 8, p. 41. I (the author) think that this tradition is fabricated. That is because the caliphate became a biting king during the days of ‘Uthman, who changed its concept and preferred the Umayyads to others in respect of the properties and government. He prepared to them forces to make them ready to fight against the Commander of the Faithful (Imam ‘Ali ). The Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, talked about the form of the government after him, saying: “Most surely the beginning of your religion is prophethood and mercy, then it would be a king and fatalism.” (The tradition) has been narrated by al-Sayuti in his Tarikh al-Khulafa’, p. 6. His tradition became true. That is because the begging of the religion was prophethood and mercy, and then it changed during the time of the Umayyads into kingdom, tyranny, and fatalism.
• 30. Bihar al-Anwar.
• 31. Al-Mas‘udi Murujj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 295.
• 32. Al-Shareef al-Murtada, is ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn. His very clear lineage reaches the Imam of the Muslims, Musa Ibn Ja‘far, peace be on him. He was the head of al-Talibiyyin. He was given the nickname of al-Murtada and ‘Alam al-Huda (the Flag of Guidance). He was born in the year 355 A. H. and died in the year 436. He was older than his brother al-Shareef al-Radi. Abu Ja‘far al-Tusi has said: “ (Al-Shareef) al-Murtada was unique in many sciences. There is an unanimous agreement on his excellence and has given precedence in many sciences such as theology, jurisprudence, the fundamentals of jurisprudence, literature, and the like. He has a collection of poems containing more than ten thousand (poetry) lines. He has many books on various sciences.” This has been mentioned in (the book) Mu‘jam al-Udaba’, vol. 13, p. 146.
• 33. Tanzeeh al-Anbiya’, p. 69.
• 34. Ibn Tawus is a great, perfect Sayyid, a worshipper, and mujahid. (His full name is) Radi al-Deen Abu al-Qasim Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Musa Ibn Ja‘far Ibn Tawus al-Hasani, al-Husayni. He was given the nickname of al-Tawus because he was handsome and his legs were coarse. He lived in al-Hillah (a city in Iraq). He is among the magnified Sayyids and one of the heads. He has many books. All his good qualities and sciences have been collected by al-Hujjah al-Thabt Muhammad al-Khunsari in his Roudaat al-Jinaan, vol. 3, pp.43-47. In the book al-Kuna wa al-Al-Qaab it has been mentioned: “He (al-Sayyid Ibn Tawus) undertook the union of the Talibiyyin. He used to sit in a green dome and was visited by the people who dressed in green instead of black. That was after the Battle of Baghdad.” In respect of that ‘Ali Ibn Hamza has said: This is ‘Ali , the (grand) son of Musa Ibn Ja‘far the like of ‘Ali , the son of Musa Ibn Ja‘far. That was dressed in green for the Imamate, and this was dressed in green for the union. By that he meant Imam al-Rida, peace be on him, when he undertook the succession (after al-Ma’mun) and was dressed in green. Al- Sayyid Ibn Tawus died on Monday, 5th Dhi al-Qu‘da in the year 664 A. H.
• 35. Kashf al-Muhjah li Thamrat al-Muhjah, p. 46. It contains valuable commandments to his son.
• 36. Al-Isti‘abin
• 37. The people before Islam used to delay their lamentation over their killed until they took their vengeance. When it was taken, their womenfolk lamented for them. In this respect their poet say: Whoever is delighted at the murder of Malik, then let him come to our womenfolk in broad daylight! He will find our womenfolk bare (headed). They lament for him (and) scratch their hot cheeks in the early mornings! Subh al-A‘sha, vol. 1, p. 405.
• 38. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p. 342.
• 39. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p. 387.
• 40. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 11, p. 357. Nasr Ibn Muzahim has narrated in his Kitab Siffin, p. 247, that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, said: “A man will come to you from this mountain pass. When he dies, he dies in (a manner) other than my Sunna.”
• 41. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 11, p. 357. Imam al-Hasan, the Prophet grandson, peace be on him, narrated the tradition from his grandfather. Nasr Ibn Muzahim has mentioned it in his Kitab Siffin, p. 247.
• 42. Nasr Ibn Muzahim, Kitab Siffin, p. 244. Imam al-Hasan also narrated it.
• 43. Ibn Sa‘d, Tabaqat, vol. 8, 200. Asas al-Ghaba, vol. 5, p. 527. Tarikh al-Khamis, vol. 2, p. 29.
• 44. Abu Barzah al-Aslami is Naddlah Ibn ‘Ubayd. He was a companion of Allah’s Apostle. He narrated (traditions) from him and Abu Bakr. Some other traditionists reported (traditions) on his authority. Ibn Sa‘d has said: “He lived in Medina, and then he (lived) in Basrah. He invaded Khurasan.” Al-Khatib has said: “He witnessed (the Battle of al- Nahrawan). He fought against the Kharijites at (the Battle of) al-Nahrawan. After that he invaded Khurasan and died in it.” It was said that he died in Nisabur; it was said (that he died) in Basrah; other than that was said. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 10, p. 446.
• 45. Waqi‘at Siffin, p. 246. Ahmad, Musnad, vol. 4, p. 421.
• 46. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 4, p. 79.
• 47. The devious have narrated the tradition in another way. For example al-Khatib, in his Tarikh, has narrated on the authority of Jabir, who said: “Allah’s Apostle said: ‘If you see Mu‘awiya make speech from on my pulpit, then accept him, for he is faithful.” In his Tarikh al-Hakim has narrated on the authority of Ibn Mas‘ud who said: [Allah’s Apostle said:] “If you see Mu‘awiya on my pulpit, then accept him, for he is faithful and trustworthy.” When was the son of Hind (Mu‘awiya) faithful and trustworthy? Was that through his fighting against Allah’s Apostle? Or through his going too far in shedding the Muslims’ blood, killing the good and righteous people, and the like from among the heavy events that indicate that he had the beliefs of those lived before Islam, and that he paid no attention to the religion?
• 48. Waqi‘at Siffin.
• 49. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 1, p. 187.
• 50. Samt al-Nujoom al-‘Awali, vol. 3, p. 48.
• 51. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 2, p. 357.
• 52. Al-Nasa’i al-Kafiya, p. 97.
• 53. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 10, p. 101.
• 54. It has been differed over the name of Abu al-Darda’. It was said that his name was ‘Amir or ‘Uwaymir. It has also been differed over his father’s name. It was said that his name was ‘Amir or Malik or Abdullah. His lineage goes back to Ka‘b Ibn al-Khazrajj al-Ansari. Abu al-Darda’ became Muslim at the Battle of Badr. He took part in the Battle of Uhd. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, said in respect of him: “Abu al-Darda’ was the wise man of my community.” Abu al-Darda’ was a merchant before Islam. When he became a Muslims, he abandoned commerce. Mu‘awiya appointed him over Damascus judgeship during the caliphate of ‘Umar. He died two years before the end of ‘Uthman’s reign. It was said that he died in the year 32. It was said that he died at (the Battle of Siffin). This has been mentioned in (the book) al-Isaba. In (the book) al-Kuna wa al-Qaab, 72, it has been mentioned: “Most surely Abu al-Darda’ narrated from Allah’s Apostle that he said: ‘Most surely the heaviest thing in the scale of the believer’s moral traits is the good manner; and Allah detests the one who is obscene.”
• 55. Al-Nasa’i, p. 94.
• 56. The two ‘Ids are the Lesser Bairam (1st of Shawwal) and the Greater Bairam, Feast of Immolation.
• 57. Al-Sha‘rani, Kashif al-Ghumma, vol. 1, p. 123.
• 58. Abu Dawud, Sunan, vol. 1, p. 79.
• 59. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 1, p. 470.
• 60. Abu Dawud, Sunan, vol. 1, p. 178.
• 61. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p.470.
• 62. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, p. 207.
• 63. Ihram means the state of ritual consecration during the ‘umra (minor Hajj) and Hajj.
• 64. Al-Nasa’i, p. 100.
• 65. Al-Nasa’i, p. 101.
• 66. Al-Nasa’i, p. 101.
• 67. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, p. 207.
• 68. Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh, vol. 3, p. 185.
• 69. ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Hassan Ibn Thabit al-Ansari al-Khazraji was born during the time of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family. He was a poet and narrated few traditions. Ibn Ma‘een has regarded him as among the second generations in Medina. As for Ibn Hayyan, he has regarded him as among the trustworthy second generation. He (‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Hassan Ibn Thabit) died in the year 104. This viewpoint was abolished by Ibn ‘Asakir, who said: “It was said that he (‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Hassan Ibn Thabit) lived for forty-eight years. This means that he did not live to see his father, for he died at the age of fifty-four. It has been established that he was a grown-up during the time of his father. It has been established that his father said: So who will take care of rhymes after Hassan and his son? And who will take care of the oft-repeated (poetry lines) (al-Mathani) after Zayd Ibn Thabit?” I (the author) said that if he was born during the time of the Prophet and lived until the year 104 A.H., then he lived for 98 years. Perhaps the forty years is distorted. This has been mentioned in the (book) al-Isaba, vol. 3, p. 67. In his (book) al-Kashif, al-Zamakhshari has mentioned: “‘Abd al-Rahman composed a poem in respect of Mu‘awiya, saying: “Oh! Inform Mu‘awiya Ibn Harb, the Commander of the oppressive, of my speech. “May Allah curse Mu‘awiya son of Hind and Sakhr! He is a thief! “We suffered from death through your authority while the generous, sons of the generous passed away. “Abu al-Hasan, the Commander of the Faithful, split open your grandfather’s head with the sword. “We are patient and will respite you until the day of loss, gain, and dispute.”
• 70. Abu al-Faraj al-Isfahani, al-Aghani, vol. 13, p. 149.
• 71. His name is Wahab Ibn Zam‘a Ibn Usayd. He was a good poet. He was famous for praise. This has been mentioned in Mu‘jam al-Shu‘ra’, vol. 1, p. 117. A lot of his poetry has been mentioned in the British, Asian Magazine.
• 72. Abu al-Faraj al-Isfahani, al-Aghani, vol. 6, pp. 39-159.
• 73. Al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, vol. 8, p. 140.
• 74. Abdullah Ibn Mas‘ada Ibn Hikma al-Fazari was still young when he was taken as a prisoner of war. Allah’s Apostle (S) granted him to his daughter Fatim. She released him while still young. Then he was with (Imam) ‘Ali . Then he joined Mu‘awiya and was the most hostile of the people to (Imam) ‘Ali . He was (a commander) over Damascus troops after the Battle of al-Hirrah. He lived until the reign of Marwan. It was said that he invaded in the year 49. ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Khalid Ibn Waleed was (a commander) over the Army. When he died in the land of the Romans, Abdullahal-Fazari took his place. This was the first authority he undertook. The poet says in respect of him: O son of Mas‘ud, set up the straight spear just as Sufyan Ibn Awf set it up. When he (Abdullah Ibn Mas‘ud) came in to Mu‘awiya, the latter asked him about poetry, and he said to him: “The poet added me to the one to whom I am not equal, who is Sufyan Ibn ‘Awf.” This has been mentioned in (the book) al-Isaba, vol. 2, p. 359.
• 75. Al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, vol. 8, p. 140.
• 76. Tatheer al-Jinan and al-Lisan printed on the footnote of al-Sawa‘iq al-Muhriqa, p. 24.
• 77. Tatheer al-Jinan and al-Lisan, p. 26. Ibn Hajar has depended on the fabricated narrations about Mu‘awiya and regarded him as above the sins and offenses he had committed and as among the companions (of the Prophet) who conformed to their religion. Allah blinded Ibn Hajar’s inner sight and made him go astray from the straight path. So he lauded the enemies of Allah and the opponents of Islam, who are a page of shame and disgrace against the human community. The Muslims have been afflicted with such historians who do not look at the reality except through black Ibn oculars. They committed crimes against Islam and Muslims through their fabrications and lies.
• 78. Al-Maqdisi, p. 126.
• 79. Al-Muntazam, p. 60.
• 80. Al-Ghadir, vol. 10, p. 138.
• 81. Al-Sabaki, Tabaqat, vol. 2, p. 84. Wafayat al-A‘yan, vol. 1, p. 37.
• 82. Tahdhib al-Tahdhibin
• 83. Saleem Ibn Qays, p. 29. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p.15.
• 84. The mercenaries fabricated the tradition to oppose the authentic tradition narrated from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, concerning his two grandsons: “Al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the two masters of the youths of the Garden.” Imam al-Jawad was asked about the fabricated tradition, and he refuted it saying: “By Allah there are no middle-aged in the Garden; rather all of them are beardless young men.”
• 85. The sign of fabrication in this tradition is clear. Why were the angels ashamed of ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan? Did he pass by them and see them do ugly deeds and commit something abominable, and so they were ashamed of him? Or did he do that, and they were ashamed of him? I (the author) think that this claimed shame is meaningless!
• 86. In a narration: “To the extent that he mentioned more than two hundred traditions.”
• 87. Saleem Ibn Qays, p. 45.
• 88. His name is Ibrahim Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Arafa al-Azdi. He was born in Wasit in the year 244 A. H. He has good books. He was called Naftawayh because of his ugliness. He was likened to oil (naft). Some of his poetry are the following lines: My heart is kinder to you than your two cheeks; and my strength is weaker than the strength of your eyelids. Why do you not be gentle to him who unjustly tortures himself and makes his love sympathize with you? Abu Abdullah al-Wasiti satirized him saying: Whoever wants to be pleased not to see a dissolute one, let him do his best not to see Naftawayh! Allah has burnt him with the half of his name, and made the rest as crying over him! He (Naftawayh) died in the month of Safar, in the year 323 A. H. (This has been mentioned in the book) Wafayat al-A‘yan, vol. 1, p. 30.
• 89. Al-Nasa’i al-Kafiya, p. 74. Other sources have mentioned that.
• 90. Al-Nasa’i al-Kafiya, p. 253. Other sources have mentioned that.
• 91. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.3, p.15.
• 92. Saleem Ibn Qays, p. 45.
• 93. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.4, p.63. Printed by Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-‘Arabiya.
• 94. His full name is Bashir Ibn Ka‘b Ibn Abi al-Himyari al-‘Adawi. It was said that his nickname was al-‘Amiri. Ibn Sa‘d has mentioned him as among the second class from among the people of Basrah. He said that he was trustworthy, if Allah willed. Al-Nisa’i has said: “He (Bashir al-‘Adawi) is trustworthy.” (This has been mentioned in the book) Tahthib al-Tahthib, vol. 1, p.471. I (the author) do not know how he is trustworthy while Abdullahbin ‘Abbas turned away from his tradition!
• 95. Fajr al-Islam, p. 258. Other sources have mentioned that.
• 96. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p.16.
• 97. The Isra’iliyat are the fables made up by the hypocrites from among the Jews who became Muslims and affected Islam to put in it things of which it is innocent. Ka‘b al-Ahbar was on the top of those Jews who fabricated such fables.
• 98. Tadhkirat al-Huffaz, vol. 1, p. 5.
• 99. Taqyyid al-‘Ilim, p. 50. (A speech) similar to it (speech has been mentioned) in Ibn Sa‘d’s Tabaqat, 3\1, p. 206.
• 100. Al-Harith Ibn Kildah Ibn ‘Umar al-Thaqafi was a famous physician among the Arabs and he was a poet. This has been mentioned (in the book) Mu‘jam al-Shu‘ara’, p. 172.
• 101. Al-Mas‘udi, Murujj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 310.
• 102. He refers to that which history narrates that (his mother) Hind had become pregnant before she married Abu Sufyan. She married him to cover her crime. A group of the Bedouins were accused of that.
• 103. Al-Jahidh, al-Taj, p.103.
• 104. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.4, p.73.
• 105. Al-Bayqahi, al-Mahasin wa al-Masawi’, vol. 1, p. 58.
• 106. Al-Kashi, Rijal, p. 33.
• 107. al-Mas‘udi, Murujj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 311.
• 108. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.4, p.71. Al-Isti‘ab, vol. 1, pp. 552-554.
• 109. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 4, p.71.
• 110. Abu Bakra’s name is Nufay‘ Ibn al-Harith Ibn Kulidda. It was said that his father’s name was Masruh. He was al-Harith’s servant. So al-Harith added him, Ziyad’s brother, to himself. He was given the nickname of Abu Bakra because he descended from the stronghold of al-Ta’if to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, with a pulley. So he was called with this name. He and a group of his companions had committed a crime. So ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab whipped them. Then they repented, and ‘Umar accepted their witness after the repentance except Abu Bakra, for he did not regard his testimony as permissible. Ibn Sa‘d has said: “He (Abu Bakra) died in Basrah during the reign of Ziyad.” Al-Mada’ini has said: “Abu Bakra died in the Year 50 A. H.” It was said that he died in the year when al-Hasan, peace be on him, died. This has been mentioned in (the book) Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 10, p. 469. In (the book) al-Isti‘ab printed on the footnote of (the book) al-Isaba, vol. 3, p. 537, it has been mentioned that he told his children when he was about to die: “Surely, my father is Masruh al-Habashi.”
• 111. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.4, p.550. In Al-Isti‘ab, vol. 1, p. 550, it has been mentioned in a little difference.
• 112. Nihayat al-Irab fi Funun al-‘Arab, vol. 3, p. 281. In another narration: “I have never become sad at a thing severer than Ibn al-Mufarragh’s speech!”
• 113. Al-Hasan al-Basri’s father was Abu Yasar. He was the retainer of Zayd Ibn Thabit al-Ansari. His mother Khayyarah was the female servant of Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family. He was born in Medina two years before the end of the caliphate of ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattabin It was said that he was born as a slave. He was among the masters and the leading figures of the second generation. He died in Basrah at the beginning of the month of Rajab, in the year 110. The people overcrowded in a peerless way to escort him to his final resting -place. Hameed al-Taweel has said: “Al-Hasan died on Thursday evening. When we enter upon morning on Friday, we finished his affair. We carried him after Friday prayer and buried him. All the people followed his coffin and were busy with him, to the extent that the afternoon payer was not performed in the mosque. As far as I know that the prayer was not left from the advent of Islam to that day. That is because all of them followed his coffin. None was in mosque to perform the afternoon prayer. Ibn Sireen did not attend his funeral procession because there was a thing between them.” This has been mentioned in Wafayat al-A‘yan, vol. 4, p. 124. Al-Hasan (al-Basri) was among those who supported the Banu Marwan, to the extent that they said about him: “Were it not for al-Hasan’s tongue and al-Hajjajj’s sword, the Marwani state would be buried in its grave and was taken from its den.” Al-Hafiz has mentioned that al-Hasan was fraud in his (reporting) traditions.
• 114. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 157. Abu al-Fida’, Tarikh, vol. 1, p. 196.
• 115. Muhadarat al-Awaa’il, p. 136.
• 116. Al-Nasa’i, p. 58.
• 117. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 123.
• 118. Al-Bayan, vol. 1, p. 95.
• 119. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.363. In his book al-Faa’iq, al-Zamakhshari has said: “Surely, Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, said to Samra: ‘You are a harmful man. There is no harm and causing harm in Islam.” Zarara narrated on the authority of Abu Ja‘far, peace be on him, saying: “Surely, Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, said to the Ansari: ‘Go, uproot them (the date-palms), and throw them at him. That is because there is neither harm nor causing harm.’” In his book al-Idah, Chapter on Mortgage, Fakhr al-Muhaqiqeen claimed that the tradition is ensured by many lines of transmission. The said transmission is either general or abstract. As for the literal, it is incorrect because the words of narrating the tradition are different. I (the author) have in detail mentioned the rule in the Volume Three of my book Idah al-Kifaya.
• 120. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, vol. 1, p. 25. In his book al-Fa’iq, al-Zamakhshari has narrated: “Allah cursed the Jews. It was forbidden for them to sell fat. But they melt and sold it.”
• 121. Anas Ibn Sireen al-Ansari was born one or two years before the end of the caliphate of ‘Uthman. He narrated (traditions) on the authority of some companions of the Prophet, and a group of traditionists narrated on his authority. Ibn Ma‘een and the like said: “Surely he is trustworthy.” Ibn Sa‘d said: “He is trustworthy. He narrated few traditions.” Al-‘Ijjli said: “He belonged to the second generation. He is trustworthy.” He died in the year 118. A. H. It was said that he died in the year 120 A. H. This has been mentioned in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 1, p.374.
• 122. Al-Kamil, vol. 3, p. 183. Al-Tabari, vol. 6, p. 132.
• 123. It was said that the name of Sawar al-‘Adawi was Hassan Ibn Hurayth; and it was said that his name was Hurayth Ibn Hassan; and it was said that it was Munqidh. He narrated traditions from Imam ‘Ali , the Commander of the Faithful, peace be on him, and from Imam al-Hasan. Another group of traditionists narrated from him. Ibn Sa‘d has said: “He is trustworthy.” Abu Dawud has said: “He is among the reliable people.” In his book al-Kuna, al-Nisaa’i has said: “Abu Sawar, Hassan Ibn Hurayth al-‘Adawi is trustworthy.” This has been mentioned in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 12, p. 123.
• 124. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 132. Others than him have also mentioned that.
• 125. Al-Kamil, vol. 3, p. 183. Imam Sharaf al-Deen has mentioned it in his book al-Fusool al-Muhimma, p. 122.
• 126. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.363.
• 127. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.363.
• 128. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.363.
• 129. Al-Nasa’i, p. 54.
• 130. Al-Nasa’i, p. 54. It is strange that al-Bukhari depended on Samra’s speech and traditions in his Sahih, vol. 8, p. 138. According to these crimes mentioned by the traditionists, Samra is regarded as among those who renounced the religion. So none has the right to depend on his narrations and traditions. But may Allah fight fanaticism, for it has thrown the people into great evil and turned them away from the straight path!
• 131. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.117.
• 132. Al-Isti‘ab, vol. 1, p. 165. Al-‘Alam al-Shamikh, p. 570.
• 133. Al-Nasa’i, p. 54.
• 134. Al-Kamil, vol. 3, p. 194. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 80. In his book Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 1, p. 120, Ibn Abi al-Hadid has mentioned: “Surely Bisr turned to the womenfolk of Kinana and said to them: ‘By Allah, I have intended to put the sword into you.’ So one of them criticized him for his tyranny: ‘By Allah, it is more lovable to me to do that.’ Then this criminal person headed for San‘a’ and there he killed one hundred old men from among the people of Persia (Iran). That is because a woman called the daughter of Bazrajj from among them had hidden ‘Ubayd Allah’s children in her house.
• 135. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.120.
• 136. Al-Ma‘arif, vol. 1, p. 93. It has been mentioned in it: “Surely Abu Hurayra said: ‘I have been given the Kunya of Abu Hurayra (the father of the kitten) because of a small cat with which I used to play.” As he was so fond of the cat, he narrated a tradition from Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family: “Surely a woman entered the fire because of the cat she tied and did not leave it to eat of the things in the earth.” The tradition has been mentioned by al-Bukhari in his book al-Sahih, vol. 2, p. 149.
• 137. Al-Isaba, vol. 4, p. 207. This has been mentioned by: Abu Na‘eem in his book al-Hulya, and Ibn Sa‘d in his book al-Tabaqat.
• 138. Al-Sifa was a shady place of the Mosque of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family. The guests of Islam spent the night in it. This has been mentioned by al-Fayruzi in his al-Qamoos, entry al-Saf.
• 139. Al-Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 2, p. 1.
• 140. Al-Isaba, vol. 4, p. 204.
• 141. Abu Hurayra’s mother.
• 142. Al-‘Aqd al-Fareed, vol. 1, p. 25.
• 143. Al-Dhahabi has mentioned it in his Mizan al-I‘tidal, in the biography of Ishaq Ibn Nujayh. He has decided that the tradition is false.
• 144. Al-Dhahabi has mentioned it in his Mizan al-I‘tidal, in the biography of ‘Uthman Ibn Khalid. He has regarded the tradition as among the denied traditions.
• 145. Al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi has narrated the tradition in his book Tarikh. In his book Abu Hurayra, p. 27, His Eminence Imam Sharaf al-Deen has established that the tradition is among the fabricated ones.
• 146. Al-Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 1, p. 175.
• 147. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.358.
• 148. Al-Kamil, vol. 10, p. 183.
• 149. Subh al-A‘sha, vol. 1, p. 416.
• 150. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 416.
• 151. It has been called al-battra’ because he has not praised Allah in it.
• 152. Al-Kamil, vol. 3, p. 226.
• 153. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 135.
• 154. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6, p. 135.
• 155. Al-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 6 p. 132.
• 156. Al-Bayqahi, al-Mahasin wa al-Masawi’, vol. 1, p. 39.
• 157. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 1, p. 210.
• 158. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.3, p.15.
• 159. Al-Kamil, vol. 10, p. 183.
• 160. Al-Siyada al-‘Arabiya, p. 28.
• 161. Tabaqat Fuhool al-Shu‘ara, pp. 439-441. Jamharat Ash‘ar al-‘Arab, p. 341.
• 162. Al-Jahiz, al-Bayan wa al-Tabiyin, vol. 3, p. 358.
• 163. Al-Jahiz, al-Bayan wa al-Tabiyin, vol. 3, p. 359.
• 164. Muhammad ‘Abda, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 2, p. 18.
• 165. Usd al-Ghaba, vol. 4, p. 31.
• 166. Al-Iqd al-Fareed, vol. 1, p. 211.
• 167. Usool al-Kafi, vol. 2, p. 147.
• 168. Al-Nizam al-Siyasi fi al-Islam, p. 319.
• 169. Muhammad ‘Abda, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p. 85.
• 170. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 1, p.180.
• 171. It has been narrated by Muslim.
• 172. Jami‘ al-Sa‘dat, vol. 1, p. 202.
• 173. Nahj al-Balagha.
• 174. Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 2, p.206.
• 175. Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 1, p. 151.
• 176. Muhammad ‘Abda, Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, p. 78.
• 177. Muhammad ‘Abda, Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 2, p. 244.
• 178. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.182.
• 179. Al-Kamil, vol. 8, p. 173.
• 180. It was said that the name of Abu Raafi‘ was Ibrahim. It was said that it was Aslam. He was a Coptic. It was said that he was the retainer of al-‘Abbas, so he granted him to Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family. When al-‘Abbas became Muslim, Abu Raafi‘ gave good news to Allah’s Apostle about his being Muslim. So he released him. He (Abu Raafi‘) died during the caliphate of ‘Uthman. It was said that he died during the caliphate of Imam ‘Ali , the Commander of the Faithful. Al-Isti‘ab, vol. 4, p. 70.
• 181. Al-Kamil, vol. 8, p. 173.
• 182. ‘Aasim Ibn Kulayb Ibn Shahab al-Jarmi al-Kufi narrated (traditions) on the authority of a group of the leading companions (of the Prophet). Another group narrated on his authority. Ibn Ma‘een and al-Nisaa’i have said: “He is trustworthy.” Ibn Shahab has said: “He was among the worshippers and among those best of the people of Kufa. He was accused of al-Murji’a, and them he was regarded as far above that.” Ibn Hayyan has regarded him as among the trustworthy. He said: “Surely he is trustworthy and reliable. He died in the year 137 A. H.” Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 5, p.55.
• 183. Al-Kamil, vol. 8, p. 173.
• 184. Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. 1, Q1, p. 161.
• 185. Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. 1, Q1, p. 161.
• 186. Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. 1, p. 160.