In the Name of Allah, the most Gracious, the most Merciful
THE FIRST FITNA (SEDITION) IN ISLAM
BY
Yasin T. al-Jibouri
This text is excerpted from the Glossary
to my book titled Mary and Jesus in Islam many editions of which have been
published in the U.K., U.S. and Iran.
Fitna
or Fitnah فتنه: sedition,
something which creates division, discord, disagreement, dispute, etc. among
people. Numerous references exist in the Holy Qur’an
about fitna, warning the believers about falling into its traps. One
such verse is this: الفتنة أشد من القتل Sedition is harder than killing (Qur’an, 2:191), a warning which apparently was not heeded even
when Islam was still in its infancy: Some "Muslims" went as far as
plotting to assassinate the Prophet of Islam 5 as he was returning from his last pilgrimage
known as Hijjat
al-Wada`, Farewell Pilgrimage, as he himself points out in his Ghadir
sermon, which is cited for you in this Glossary, when he refers to a saheefa
signed by the evil conspirators. The names of those conspirators were written
in that saheefa
which was buried at one of the walls of the Ka`ba in order to give it an air of
“sanctity”. Imagine some Muslims calling the killing of their Prophet as
something “sacred”! This is why they justified killing his saintly family
members, one by one, some with poison and some with the sword. And it is still
going on, my dear reader, some Muslims do, indeed, justify killing not only
non-Muslims but Muslims who do not subscribe to their rotten and deviated
beliefs. The Almighty informed the Prophet 5 of the plot, and the Prophet 5 was too
nice to expose the identity of those rogues whose lust for power justified for
them the killing of the very best of Allah’s creation, the Prophet 5 in whose Message they
hypocritically claimed they believed, calling themselves “Muslims” and imposing
their authority over all others.
During the lifetime of the Prophet 5, Muslims divided
themselves into two communities: one following Ali A whom they saw as the
embodiment of everything Islam stands for, and one followed a handful of very
affluent and influential companions of the Prophet 5 in order to benefit
from their money and prestige. As soon as the Prophet 5 passed away, this
latter division became much more evident: The first camp preferred to keep
their pledge, which was made to the Prophet on Dhul-Hijja 18, 10 A.H./March 19, 632 A.D., during the Ghadir
Declaration, to obey Ali A
as the Commander of the Faithful أمیر المؤمنین A,
since he was granted this title by the Prophet of Islam 5 himself who appointed
him on that day at Ghadir Khumm as his successor as ordered by the Almighty.
Details of this subject are recorded in this Glossary under the "Ghadir"
item below. That was one of the earliest fitnas that divided the Muslims
of the world into two major sects, and its effects can still be seen in our
time and will continue to be so till the end of time.
The fitna of the succession to the Prophet 5 almost led to Muslims
killing each other, but Ali A preferred to submit his will to the Almighty
rather than go out to demand the implementation of the Ghadir wasiyya
(will) of the Prophet 5.
Abu Bakr, Omer ibn al-Khattab
then Othman succeeded each other in ruling the Muslims, and during their
governments many innovations found their way into the Islamic creed. The
deliberate reluctance to follow the Prophet's will as delivered in his Ghadir
sermon below, in which he appointed Imam Ali A as his successor in
response to a command which he had received from the Almighty, was later
regretted, but it was too little, too late.
فهی مثالب بحق عمر یجنیها
|
|
مقالة لقردِ النیلِ یلقیها
|
على مقام النبی، فلا ینفیها
|
|
ما قال حافظ الا تجنیا
|
أکرِم بسامعها، أعظِم بملقیها)
|
|
(وقولة قالها عمر
|
أعظِم بسامعها وآخذُل مُلقیها
|
|
وقولة قالها عمر، أی ربِّ
|
وعجز عمرٍ لبیان تالیها
|
|
وقولة بیَّنت صبرَ الوصیِّ
|
على لسان حافظٍ حاکیها
|
|
فافصح التاریخ قباحة فعله
|
شُلَّت یَداکَ إن کنتَ مُلقیها
|
|
حرقتُ دارَ علی ولا أُبالی
|
کانَ محمدٌ للزهراءِ یَحمیها
|
|
حرقتُ دارَکَ یا علی وإنْ
|
إن لم تبایع، وبنت المصطفى فیها)
|
|
(حرقتُ دارَکَ لا
أُبقی علیک بها
|
سمعتَ الرسولَ یوصینا فیها
|
|
آذیت بضعةَ المختارِ وقد
|
دَقَّتْ أناملٌ للنبیِ علیها
|
|
کسرتَ البابَ الذی طالما
|
جراءة حتى محمدٌ لا یثنیها
|
|
و أفزعتَ ریحانتاه متعمدا
|
بورکت یآبنَ الخَطّابِ، ألقیها!
|
|
أضرمتَ ناراً والمنافقون حولَکَ:
|
دعانی لها الشیطانُ مفتیها
|
|
انا ما فعلتُ ذلک الا لبیعةٍ
|
بروحِ إبلیسَ، فلا أتَّقیها
|
|
کذلک الشیخُ الکبیرُ أیَّدَنی
|
أمامَ فارس عدنانَ وحامیها)
|
|
(ما کان غیر أبی
حفصٍ یفوهُ بها
|
تَجَرِّیاً على بِنْتِ أحمدٍ وبَنیها
|
|
فما کان لها غیر أبی حَفصٍ
|
سُنن سوءٍ فی الاسلام یُرسیها
|
|
وما کان غیر أبی حفص لها
|
لشقّها عصا المسلمین ودماءاً
تلیها
|
|
فتقهقر فارسُ عدنان أمامها
|
وأیُّ شجاعةٍ لابن الصهاک
تُفشیها؟!
|
|
فاین المناقبُ یا قِردَ النیلِ
بقولک؟
|
و أمراضَ قلبٍ بجوارِحِهِ یُخفیها
|
|
قد اثبتَّ مثالباً لإبنِ الصهاک
|
عهداً من الرسولِ: فِتَناً
تُلاقیها
|
|
وآسترجع فارسُ عدنانَ صابرا
|
أثبتَ أنَّ علیاً لا غیره حامیها!
|
|
فقردُ النیلِ، أعنی حافظاً،
|
قلنا: إذاً إبنُ الصهاک کان
فانیها
|
|
فإن قلتَ: إن علیاً للاسلام حامیاً
|
أعاظماً أُلّهوا فی الکونِ تألیها)
|
|
فآذکرهما و تَرَحَّم کُلَّما
ذُکِروا
|
قولة لا تستقیمُ عند الرحمنِ
ناویها!
|
|
فترحم علیهما أینما ذُکِروا
|
فمجنیًّ عَلیهِ، وصاحبُکُم کان
جانیها
|
|
بَلْ صَلّوا على واحدٍ مِنهُما
|
عُمَراً، فَعَلیهِ قِرْدُ النیلِ یُصَلّیها
|
|
فصلّوا على علیٍّ وَحْدَهُ
وآترکوا
|
فیا ناثر
العنبر، جُزیتَ خیرا على ما فاح من عنبر قصیدتک، وثَبَّتَنا اللهُ وایّاکم على
مَحَبَّةِ الزهراء علیها السلام.
Abul-Salah (man of
righteousness), may Allah sanctify his soul, has said
in Taqreeb al-Ma`arif تقریب المعارف the following: "When Omer [ibn al-Khattab] was
stabbed, he gathered the descendants of Abdul-Muttalib
and said, 'O sons of Abdul-Muttalib!
Are you pleased with me?' A man from among his fellows said, 'Who would be
angry with you?' He (Omer) repeated his statement three times, getting the same
response from the same man whom Omer rebuked and to whom he said, 'We know best
how we made our hearts feel. We, by Allah, made our
hearts feel… what we plead to Allah to spare us its
evil. Allegiance to Abu Bakr was a slip [from the Right Path] the evil of which
we plead to Allah to spare us.'
"He (Omer) said to his son Abdullah,
who was helping his father recline on his chest, 'Woe on you! Put my head on
the ground.' He (Omer) was overtaken by a swoon. He (Abdullah son of Omer ibn al-Khattab)
said, 'I felt quite worried about it.' He (Omer) said, 'Woe on you! Put my head
on the ground.' He was again overtaken by a swoon. He (Abdullah ibn Omer) said, 'I felt quite worried about it.' He (Omer)
said [for the third time], 'Woe on you! Put my head on the ground.' He (Abdullah ibn Omer, a great reporter of hadith) said, 'I put his
head on the ground. Then he (Omer) said, 'Woe unto Omer, and woe unto his
mother if Allah does not forgive him.'
"He (Omer) also said at the time of his death: 'I repent
to Allah three things: my sending the slaves of Yemen
back, my abandonment of Usamah's army after the Messenger of Allah 5
had placed him in charge over us, and our agreement against Ahl al-Bayt G that if the Messenger
of Allah 5
died, we would not let any of them take charge.'"
Yet the most serious innovations, actually deviations from the
right path of Islam, were practices by the government during Othman's time, so
much so that Othman gradually lost all respect he had among the local Muslims
and throughout the Islamic world. Among those who resented him was Mother of
the Believers `A’isha daughter of Abu Bakr and wife of the Prophet 5.
On p. 794, Vol. 1/8 of the latest edition of Bihar al-Anwar,
we read the following:
علی بن محمد الکاتب، عن الزعفرانی، عن الثقفی، عن
الحسن بن الحسین الأنصاری، عن سفیان، عن فُضَیل بن الزبیر، عن فروة بن مجاشع، عن
أبی جعفر A قال: جاءت عائشة الى عثمان
فقالت له: اعطنی ما کان یعطینی أبی و عمر بن الخطاب. فقال: لم أجد لک موضعا فی
الکتاب و لا فی السنة، و انما کان أبوک و عمر بن الخطاب یعطیانک بطیبة من أنفسهما،
و أنا لا أفعل. قالت: فاعطنی میراثی من رسول الله 5. فقال لها: أو لم تحسبی أنت و مالک بن أوس النضری فشهدتما أن رسول
الله 5 لا یورث حتى منعتما فاطمه (بنت النبی) میراثها؟ أبطلتما حقها،
فکیف تطلبین الیوم میراثا من النبی 5؟ فترکته و انصرفت، و کان عثمان اذا خرج الى الصلاة أخذت هی قمیص
رسول الله 5
على قصبة فرفعته علیها، ثم قالت ان عثمان قد خالف صاحب هذا
القمیص و ترک سنته.
Ali ibn Muhammed
the scribe quotes az-Za`farani quoting ath-Thaqafi quoting al-Hassan ibn
al-Hussain
al-Ansari
quoting Sufyan quoting Fudayl
ibn az-Zubair quoting Farwah ibn Mujashi` from Imam
[al-Baqir] Abu Ja`far A
saying: "`A’isha went to Othman and said to him:
'Give me what my father [Abu Bakr] and Omer ibn al-Khattab used to give me.' Othman
said: 'I found no place for you in the Book of Allah
(Qur’an) or in the Sunnah [that you should get paid
from baytul-mal]. Rather, your father and Omer ibn al-Khattab used to
give you out of the goodness of their hearts, and I do not do that.' She said:
'Then give me my inheritance from the Messenger of Allah 5.'
Othman said to her: 'Did you not think about it when you and Malik ibn Aws
an-Nadari
testified saying that the Messenger of Allah 5
does not leave any inheritance, so much so that you prevented [through your
testimony] Fatima J (daughter of the
Prophet 5) from getting her
inheritance? You voided what was her legitimate right; so, how can you now
demand any inheritance from the Prophet 5?' So she left him. Whenever Othman went out
to pray, `A’isha used to hand the shirt of the
Messenger of Allah 5
on a reed and raise it high, then she would say: 'Othman has violated the owner
of this shirt and has abandoned his Sunna'."
And on the same page we also read the following:
روى فی کشف الغمة أن عائشة قالت لعثمان: یا نعثل یا
عدو الله، انما سماک رسول الله 5 باسم نعثل الیهودی الذی بالیمن، فلاعنته و لاعنها، و حلفت أن لا
تساکنه بمصر أبدا، خرجت الى مکة. ثم قال: قد نقل ابن أعثم صاحب الفتوح أنها
(عائشة) قالت: اقتلوا نعثلا، قتل الله نعثلا، فلقد أبلى سنة رسول الله 5: هذه ثیابه لم تبل، و خرجت الى مکة.
It has been narrated in Kashf al-Ghumma that `A’isha said to Othman, "O Na`thal! O enemy of Allah! The Messenger of Allah 5
called you 'Na`thal' نعثل after the Jew in Yemen.'
She cursed him and he cursed her, and she swore never to stay in the same city
where he was staying at all; she went out [of Medina] to Mecca."
The narrator went on to say: "Ibn A`tham, author of Al-Fituh
[conquests], has transmitted saying that she (`A’isha)
said, 'Kill Na`thal, may Allah kill Na`thal, for he
has worn out the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah 5:
Here are his clothes yet to wear out.' She went out for Mecca."
According to p. 79, Vol. 5 of Ibn al-Athir’s book An-Nihaya,
Na`thal was originally from Egypt,
a Jew with a long beard. “Na`thal” may also be an adjective, a misnomer, rather
than a first or last name because it means “the foolish sheikh” according to
Arabic lexicons, and surely Allah knows best.
In the 1426
A.H./2005 A.D. Arabic edition of تأریخ الأمم و الملوک (History of nations and kings) (a fairly
recent edition published by Al-Amira House for Printing, Publishing and
Distribution, Beirut, Lebanon; this is the edition which the author of this
book uses) by imam Abu Ja'far Muhammed ibn
Jarir at-Tabari,
which is more famous as Tabari's
Tarikh, Vol. 3, p. 135:
قال محمد بن عمر: و حدثنی محمد بن صالح، عن عبید الله
بن رافع بن نقاخة، عن عثمان بن الشرید، قال: مر عثمان على جبلة بن عمرو الساعدی و
هو بفناء داره و معه جامعة فقال: یا نعثل، و الله لأقتلنک، و لأحملنک على قلوص
جرباء، و لأخرجنک الى حرة النار، ثم جاءه مرة أخرى و عثمان على المنبر فأنزله عنه.
حدثنی محمد قال: حدثنی أبو بکر بن اسماعیل عن أبیه عن
عامر بن سعد قال: کان أول من اجترأ على عثمان بالمنطق السیء جبلة بن عمرو الساعدی،
مر به عثمان و هو جالس فی نادی قومه و فی ید جبلة بن عمرو جامعة، فلما مر عثمان
سلم، فرد القوم، فقال جبلة: لم تردون على رجل فعل کذا و کذا؟! قال: ثم أقبل على
عثمان فقال: و الله لأطرحن هذه الجامعة فی عنقک أو لتترکن بطانتک هذه. قال عثمان:
أی بطانة؟! فو الله انی لأتخیر الناس. فقال جبلة: مروان تخیرته؟! و معاویة
تخیرته؟! و عبد الله بن سعد تخیرته؟! منهم من نزل القرآن بدمه، و أباح رسول الله
دمه.
قال: فانصرف عثمان، فما زال الناس مجترئین علیه (یعنی
على عثمان) الى هذا الیوم.
Muhammed
ibn Omer has said: "Muhammed
ibn Salih
has narrated to me citing Ubaydullah ibn Rafi` ibn Naqakhah from Othman ibn
ash-Sharid who said: "Othman passed by Jiblah ibn `Amr as-Sa`idi as he was
in the courtyard of his home, and he had chains, so he said, 'O Na`thal! By Allah I shall kill you, and I shall carry you on a scabby
she-camel (not yet trained to carry anyone or anything), and I shall get you
out to the heat of the Fire.' Jiblah ibn `Amr as-Sa`idi also went once and saw
Othman on the pulpit (preaching), so he pulled him down it.
I [the author, at-Tabari, goes
on to add] have been told by Muhammed
who said: I have been told by Abu Bakr ibn Isma'eel who quotes his father
citing Amir ibn Sa`d saying: "The first person to verbally abuse Othman
was Jiblah ibn `Amr as-Sa`idi: Othman passed by him once as he was sitting in
his folk's meeting place. Jiblah ibn `Amr as-Sa`idi had a chain in his hand.
When Othman passed by, he greeted [those present at the meeting place]. The
folks responded [to the greeting], whereupon Jiblah said: 'Why do you respond
to a man who has done such and such?!' Then he went to Othman and said: 'By Allah, I shall place this chain round your neck unless you
abandon your train.' Othman said, 'What train?! By Allah,
I choose from among people [for my close companions].' Jiblah said: 'You chose
Marwan [ibn al-Hakam,
Othman's young cousin and bearer of his seal]! And you chose Mu`awiyah! And you
chose Abdullah ibn Sa`d! Some of these have been
condemned to death by the Qur’an, and some of them
were condemned to die by the Messenger of Allah 5!'
He went on to say: 'Othman left, and people kept verbally Abusing Othman till
this day.’"
Why did the third caliph cause matters to deteriorate so
badly? There is no room here to provide you with the detailed answer to this
question, but we can refer you to a book written by one of Egypt's best
intellectuals and scholars of the century, namely Dr. Taha Hussein, who worte الفتنة الکبرى The Greater
Sedition. In it, you will find out that one of Othman's serious mistakes
was giving his seal to his young and reckless cousin Marwan ibn al-Hakam, as
you will read under the item "Hadi, al-" below, who greatly abused
the power that seal gave him. Taha Hussein details how the public funds
deposited at the State Treasury known then as baytul-mal بیت المال were plundered and distributed among Othman's
family, relatives and supporters, so much so that Othman had three mansions
built for him each of each cost more than three million dinars. Arabs do not
have the word "million" in their language; instead, they use the term
"a thousand thousands" to describe the gold dinars and the silver
dirhams spent on building mansions for Othman and for his wife, Na’ila daughter
of al-Qarafisa, who had so much jewelry, their jingle could be heard from a
distance…
Another fitna was the falsification of ahadith أحادیث, traditions, which make up one of the main
sources of the Sunnah which every Muslim must follow, the other being the Holy
Qur’an. Abu Bakr prohibited the writing of hadith
and most traditions were collected and burnt, so very few survived. Later, the
Umayyad dynasty that ruled the Islamic world from 655 to 1031 A.D. was characterized
by the flourishing of manufactures for making custom-designed traditions
tailored to please various Umayyad rulers the first of whom was Mu`awiyah ibn
Abu Sufyan ibn Harb.
On pp. 332-3 of the 1426 A.H./2005
A.D. edition of تأریخ الأمم و الملوک
(History of nations and kings) by imam Abu Ja'far Muhammed ibn
Jarir at-Tabari,
which is more famous as at-Tabari's Tarikh,
we read the following:
و کانوا یعدون دهاة الناس حین ثارت الفتنة خمسة رهط،
فقالوا: ذوو رأی العرب و مکیدتهم: معاویة بن أبی سفیان، و عمرو بن العاص، و
المغیرة بن شعبة، و قیس بن سعد، و من المهاجرین عبد الله بن بدیل الخزاعی.
Five men used to be regarded as the most cunning of all people
when sedition erupted. People said that they were people of opinions and of
scheming, and these are: Mu`awiyah ibn Abu Sufyan, `Amr ibn al-Aas, al-Mughirah
ibn Shu'bah and Qais ibn Sa`d, all from the Ansar,
in addition to Abdullah ibn Budayl al-Khuza`i from
among the Muhajirun.
Who is this man, Mu`awiyah ibn Abu Sufyan ibn Harb?
On the 10th
of Hijra/630 A.D., the date of the Conquest of Mecca, Abu Sufyan, father of
this Mu`awiyah, had to choose either to accept Islam or be beheaded, so he
pretended to accept Islam while all his actions and those of his family members
proved that they never really did. Abu Sufyan was a wealthy and influential man
who belonged to the Banu Umayyah clan of the once pagan tribe of Quraish of
Mecca, Hijaz,
that fought the spread of Islam relentlessly during the time of the Prophet of
Islam 5. He was contemporary
to the Prophet of Islam 5
whom he fought ferociously. His date of birth is unknown, but he died in 31 A.H./652 A.D. “Abu Sufyan”
is his kunya, surname; his name is Sakhr ibn Harb ibn Umayyah. He is father
of Mu`awiyah and grandfather of Yazid.
Abu Sufyan
led pagan Quraish in its many wars against Prophet Muhammed 5 and his small band of
supporters, making alliances with other pagan tribes and with the Jews of Medina
against the new rising power of Islam. He kept leading one battle after another
till the fall of Mecca
to the Muslims in 630 A.D.
It was then that he had to either accept the Islamic faith or face a sure death
for all the mischief he had committed against the Muslims, so he preferred to
live in hypocrisy as a "Muslim," though only in name, rather than
accept death. He was the most cunning man in all of Arabia
and one of its aristocrats and men of might and means. He saw Islam as the
harbinger of the waning of his own personal power and prestige and those of his
tribe, Quraish, not to mention the decline of his faith, paganism, and the
pre-Islamic way of life to which he and his likes were very much accustomed,
the life of promiscuity, lewdness and debauchery, with all the wine, women and
wealth aristocrats like him very much enjoyed. His likes are present throughout
the Islamic lands in our time and in every time and clime... This has always
been so, and it shall unfortunately remain so...
Mu`awiyah son
of Abu Sufyan was born out of wedlock in 602 A.D. during the jahiliyya, the time
of ignorance, the period that preceded Islam. His mother, Maysun, was one of
his father’s slave-girls. Maysun had a sexual intercourse with one of Mu`awiyah’s
slaves and conceived Yazid by him. Mu`awiyah, in total disregard for Islamic or
Arab traditions, claimed Yazid as his son. A testimony to this fact is the
well-documented tradition of the Prophet 6
wherein he said, “The murderer of my [grand]son al-Hussain is a bastard.” This
tradition is quoted on p. 156, Vol. 1, of Kanz al-`Ummal of al-Muttaqi
al-Hindi. The stigma of being a bastard applies actually not only to Yazid but
also to both Shimr ibn Dhul-Jawshan and `Ubaydullah ibn Sa`d, the accomplices
about whom the reader can read a great deal in my book titled Kerbala and
Beyond: An Epic of Immortal Heroism.
One glaring
proof about the fact that Mu`awiyah never really accepted Islam is the
following famous verse of poetry which Mu`awiyah composed:
جزع الخزرج من وقع الأسل
|
|
لیت أشیاخی
ببدر شهدوا
|
ثم
قالوا: یا یزیدُ
لا تشل
|
|
لأهلوا
و استهلوا فرحاً
|
و عدلناهُ ببدرٍ، فاعتدل
|
|
قد قتلنا القرم من ساداتهم
|
خبر جاء
و لا وحی نزل
|
|
لعبت
هاشم بالملک فلا
|
من
بنی أحمد ما کان
فعل
|
|
لست من
خندف ان لم أنتقم
|
I wish my
ancestors at Badr witnessed
Anxiety of
the Khazraj as spears clamped
They would
have made tahleel in elation,
Then they
would have said:
May your
hand, O Yazid, never be paralyzed!
We killed
the mountain peaks of their masters,
Then we
compared it with Badr,
And it
surely was straight like Badr!
Hashim
(clan) played with power:
Neither
news came nor revelation descended.
I do not
belong to Khandaf if I do not
Seek
revenge on Ahmed’s progeny
For what
he had done to me.
Examine these
verses of poetry and see how Yazid refers to the Battle of Badr when many of
his apostate ancestors, for whom he still longs, were killed at the hands of “Ahmed’s
progeny,” a reference to Imam Ali A, Hussain’s
father. Notice how he now feels that the record has been set straight by
avenging the killing of those rotten ancestors of his, the Kafir that
they all were, with the killing of Hussain
A and his family
members and supporters. Indeed, neither Yazid, nor his father Mu`awiyah nor his
grandfather Sufyan ever accepted Islam truly. They only pretended to have done
so in order to “go with the tide” and escape the penalty for apostasy. Their
actions, all of them, testify to this fact. Yet you can find among the
“Muslims” of our times and other times those who defend these Umayyads and
justify the crimes which they had committed as well as the distortion of the
true Sunna. May these defenders be lodged on the Day of Judgment in the company
of Yazid and his ancestors and offspring, all of them, and may He lodge us,
followers of Ahl al-Bayt G
in the company of the Prophet 5 and his holy Ahl al-Bayt G, Allahomma Ameen اللهم آمین. Those whose only weapon is to cast doubt
about how un-Islamic and anti-Islamic the Umayyads were should read the verses
cited above in their own original text as reported in the following list of
references: Al-Luhoof fi Qatla al-Tufoof,
p. 105; Ibn A`tham, Al-Fitooh,
Vol. 5, pp. 150-51; al-Khawarizmi, Maqtal al-Hussain, Vol. 2, pp. 66-67;
Tathkirat al-Khawass,
p. 261; Yanabi` al-Mawadda, Vol. 3, p. 32; Al-Nasa’ih al-Kafiya,
p. 263; Al-Bidaya wan-Nihaya, Vol. 8, p. 209 in the events of the year
61 A.H. as well as in other references which all are in Arabic.
Mu`awiyah
played a major role in distorting the Islamic creed by paying writers to tailor
design "traditions" to serve his interests and support his deviated
views. He installed himself as ruler of Syria in 40 A.H./661 A.D. and ruled for
twenty long years till his death at the age of seventy-eight. Shortly before
his death, which took place in the month of Rajab of 60 A.H./May of 680 A.D., he managed to
secure the oath of allegiance to his corrupt and immoral son Yazid as his
successor. He did so by intimidation once and once by buying loyalty and
favors, spending in the process huge sums of money that belonged to the
Muslims. The weak-minded majority of the Muslims of his time swore allegiance
to him. This proves that the majority does not necessarily have to be right. Imam al-Hussain
A, together with a
small band of devotees to the cause of truth, refused to bow their heads to the
oppressive forces, hence this tale of heroism.
Mu`awiyah
declared himself "caliph" in Syria when he was 59 years old and
assumed authority by sheer force. He was not elected, nor was he requested to
take charge. He did not hide this fact; rather, he bragged about it once when
he addressed the Kufians saying, "O people of Kufa! Do you think that I
fought you in order that you may establish prayers or give zakat or
perform the pilgrimage?! I know that you do pray, pay zakat and perform
the pilgrimage. Indeed, I fought you in order to take command over you with
contempt, and Allah has given me that against your
wishes. Rest assured that whoever killed any of us will himself be killed. And
the treaty between us of amnesty is under my feet."
Mu`awiyah’s
rule was terror in the whole Muslim land. Such terrorism was spread by many
convoys sent to various regions. Historians have narrated that Mu`awiyh
summoned Sufyan ibn `Awf al-Ghamidi, one of the commanders of his army, and said
to him, "This army is under your command. Proceed along the Euphrates River till you reach Heet. Any
resistance you meet on your way should be crushed, and then you should proceed
to invade Anbar. After that, penetrate deeply into Mada’in. O Sufyan! These
invasions will frighten the Iraqis and please those who like us. Such campaigns
will attract frightened people to our side. Kill whoever holds different views
from ours; loot their villages and demolish their homes. Indeed, fighting them
against their livelihood and taking their wealth away is similar to killing
them but is more painful to their hearts."
Another of
his commanders, namely Bishr ibn Arta’ah,
was summoned and ordered to proceed to Hijaz
and Yemen
with these instructions issued by Mu`awiyah: "Proceed to Medina and expel
its people. Meanwhile, people in your way, who are not from our camp, should be
terrorized. When you enter Medina, let it appear as if you are going to kill
them. Make it appear that your aim is to exterminate them. Then pardon them.
Terrorize the people around Mecca
and Medina and scatter them around."
During Mu`awiyah’s
reign, basic human rights were denied, not simply violated. No one was free to
express his views. Government spies were paid to terrorize the public, assisting
the army and the police in sparing no opportunity to crush the people and to
silence their dissent. There are some documents which reveal Mu`awiyah’s
instructions to his governors to do just that. For instance, the following
letter was addressed to all judges: "Do not accept the testimony of Ali’s
followers (Shi`ites) or of his descendants in (your)
courts." Another letter stated: "If you have evidence that someone
likes `Ali and his family, omit his name from the recipients of rations
stipulated from the zakat funds." Another letter said,
"Punish whoever is suspected of following `Ali and demolish his
house." Such was the situation during the government of Mu`awiyah, Yazid’s
infamous father. Historians who were recording these waves of terror described them
as unprecedented in history. People were so frightened, they did not mind being
called atheists, thieves, etc., but not followers of Imam
`Ali ibn Abu Talib
A, the right hand of
Prophet Muhammed
5, confidant and
son-in-law.
Another
aspect of the government of Mu`awiyah was the racist discrimination between
Arabs and non-Arabs. Although they were supposed to have embraced Islam which
tolerates no racism in its teachings, non-Arabs were forced to pay khiraj
and jizya taxes that are levied from non-Muslims living under the
protection of Muslims and enjoying certain privileges, including the exemption
from the military service. A non-Arab soldier fighting in the state’s army used
to receive bare subsistence from the rations. Once, a dispute flared up between
an Arab and a non-Arab and both were brought to court. The judge, namely Abdullah ibn `Amir, heard the non-Arab
saying to his Arab opponent, "May Allah not
permit people of your kind (i.e. Arabs) to multiply." The Arab answered
him by saying, "O Allah! I invoke You to multiply
their (non-Arabs’) population among us!" People present there and then
were bewildered to hear such a plea, so they asked him, "How do you pray
for this man’s people to multiply while he prays for yours to be
diminished?!" The Arab opponent said, "Yes, indeed, I do so! They
clean our streets and make shoes for our animals, and they weave our
clothes!"
Imam al-Hussain’s older brother, Imam al-Hassan
A, was elected in Medina
on the 21st of the month of Ramadan, 40 A.H./January 28, 661 A.D. as the caliph, but
his caliphate did not last long due to the terrorism promoted by Mu`awiyah who
either intimidated, killed, or bribed the most distinguished men upon whom Imam al-Hassan
A depended to run the
affairs of the government. Finally, Mu`awiyah pushed Imam
al-Hassan A out of power after signing a treaty with him
the terms of which were, indeed, honorable and fair, had they only been
implemented. Finding his men too weak or too reluctant to fight Mu`awiyah, Imam al-Hassan
A had no alternative
except to sign the said treaty with a man whom he knew very well to be the most
hypocritical of all and the most untrustworthy.
This is the father. The mother is Maysun, a slave girl
conceived by another slave and gave birth to him. Having seen how his father,
Abu Sufyan, became a "Muslim"—but never a Mu’min—, Mu`awiyah fled
away to Bahrain
where he sent his father a very nasty letter reprimanding him for accepting
Islam...
Mu`awiyah “son” of Abu Sufyan was born out of wedlock in 602 A.D. during the jahiliyya,
the time of ignorance, the period that preceded Islam. His mother, Maysun, was
one of his father’s slave-girls. Maysun had a sexual intercourse with one of
Mu`awiyah’s slaves, conceiving Yazid by him. Mu`awiyah, in total disregard for
Islamic or conventional Arab traditions, claimed Yazid as his son, the same Yazid
who fought and killed Imam Hussain
A. A testimony to this
fact is the well-documented tradition of the Prophet 5 wherein he said, “The murderer of my
[grand]son al-Hussain
is a bastard.” This tradition is quoted on p. 156, Vol. 1, of Kanz al-`Ummal
of al-Muttaqi al-Hindi. The stigma of being a bastard applies actually not only
to Yazid but also to both Shimr ibn Dhul-Jawshan and `Ubaydullah ibn Sa`d, the
accomplices about whom the reader can read a good deal in my other book titled Kerbala
and Beyond: An Epic of Immortal Heroism. All of these men were born out of
wedlock.
Mu`awiyah
played a major role in distorting the Islamic creed. He installed himself as
ruler of Syria
in 40 A.H./661
A.D. and ruled for twenty long years till his death at the age of
seventy-eight. Shortly before his death, which took place in the month of Rajab
of 60 A.H./May
of 680 A.D.,
he managed to secure the oath of allegiance to his corrupt and immoral son Yazid
as his successor. He did so by intimidation once and once by buying loyalty and
favors, spending in the process huge sums of money that belonged to the
Muslims. The weak-minded majority of the Muslims of his time swore allegiance
to him. This proves that the majority does not necessarily have to be right. Imam al-Hussain
A, together with a small band of devotees to
the cause of truth, refused to bow their heads to the oppressive forces, hence
this tale of heroism.
The greatest damage Mu`awiyah caused to the Islamic creed is
through falsification, fabrication and manufacturing of hadith.
He found in Abu Hurayra al-Dawsi his best tool to achieve this goal. Who is
this Abu Hurayra, and why did he manufacture as many as three thousand
traditions during the three-year period when he was in the Suffa, a
shelter for indigent Muslims, close to the Prophet's Mosque in Medina?
In the year 7 A.H./629 A.D., a young and
very poor man from the Daws tribe of southern Arabia (Yemen), met the Prophet immediately
after the battle of Khaybar and embraced Islam. He is well known in history as
“Abu Hurayra,” the fellow of the kitten, after a kitten to which he was very
much attached, reportedly carrying it wherever he went. His name shone neither
during the lifetime of the Prophet nor of the four “righteous caliphs” but
during the un-Islamic Umayyad reign of terror which lasted from 655, when Mu`awiyah
seized power in Damascus, to 750 A.D., when Marwan II, the
last Umayyad ruler in Damascus,
died. It was during that period that the Islamic world witnessed an
astronomical number of “traditions” which were attributed, through this same Abu
Hurayra, to the Prophet of Islam 6. Since these traditions, known collectively
as hadith, constitute one of the two sources of the
Islamic legislative system, the Shari`a, it is very important to shed a light
on the life and character of this man even if some readers may consider this
chapter as a digression from the main topic. At the same time, we must state a
word of caution here: It is quite possible the Umayyads paid other
“traditionists” to fabricate traditions and attribute them to Abu Hurayra with
or without his knowledge. Another possibility is that the machine that produced
so many false “traditions” kept working years after Abu Hurayra had already
died. The blame must not be placed entirely on Abu Hurayra but on the Umayyads
many of whose followers still live among us…
It is of utmost importance to expose the
facts relevant to Abu Hurayra so that Muslims may be cautious whenever they
come across a tradition narrated by him or attributed to him which, all in all,
reached the astronomical figure of 5,374 “traditions,” although he spent no
more than three years in the company of the Prophet, a fact supported by the
renown compiler al-Bukhari, whenever such company did not involve any danger to
his life, and despite the fact that Abu Hurayra did not know how to read and
write... The reader can easily conclude that this figure is unrealistic when he
comes to know that Abu Bakr, friend of the Prophet and one of the earliest
converts to Islam, narrated no more than 142 traditions. Omer ibn al-Khattab, the story of whose conversion to Islam
is narrated earlier in this book, narrated no more than 537 traditions. Othman
ibn `Affan narrated no more than 146 traditions. And Ali, the man who was
raised by the Prophet and who was always with him, following him like his
shadow, and whose memory and integrity nobody at all can question, narrated no
more than 586 traditions. All these men, especially Ali and Abu Bakr, spent
many years of their lives in the company of the Prophet and did not hide when
their lives were in jeopardy, as is the case with Abu Hurayrah, yet they did
not narrate except a tiny fraction of the number of “traditions,” many of which
cannot be accepted by logic and commonsense, narrated by or attributed to Abu
Hurayra. This is why it is so important to discuss this man and expose the
factories of falsification of hadith established by his benefactors, the
Umayyads, descendants and supporters of Abu Sufyan, then his son Mu`awiyah,
then his son Yazid, all of whom were outright hypocrites and had absolutely
nothing to do with Islam.
Abu Hurayra's name is said to be `Omayr ibn
`Amir ibn
`Abd Thish-Shari ibn Tareef, of the Yemenite tribe of Daws ibn
`AdnanFF.
His mother's name is Umaima daughter of Safeeh ibn al-Harith ibn Shabi ibn Abu Sa`b, also of the
Daws tribe. His date of birth is unknown, but he is said to have died in 57,
58, or 59 A.H.,
and that he had lived to be 78. This would put the date of his birth at 677,
678 or 679 A.D.
When he came to the Prophet 6, he was young and healthy and, hence,
capable of enlisting in the Prophet's army. But he preferred to be lodged
together with destitute Muslims at the Suffa referred to above. Most of the time
which Abu Hurayra spent with the Prophet was during the lunches or dinners the
Prophet hosted for those destitute. Abu Hurayra himself admitted more than once
that he remained close to the Prophet so that he could get a meal to eat.
Another person who used to shower the destitute of the Suffa with his generosity was Ja`far ibn Abu Talib (588 - 629 A.D.), the Prophet's
cousin and a brother of Ali ibn Abu Talib. He was, for this reason, called “Abul
Masakeen,” father of the destitute. This is why, Abu Hurayra used to regard
Ja`far as the most generous person next only to the Prophet. When the Prophet
mandated military service for all able men in the Mu'ta expedition, Ja`far ibn
Abu Talib
did not hesitate from responding to the Prophet's call, but Abu Hurayra, who
considered Ja`far as his patron, preferred not to participate, thus violating
the order of the Prophet. History records the names of those who did likewise.
In 21 A.H./642 A.D., during the caliphate of Omer
ibn al-Khattab, Abu Hurayra was made governor of Bahrain.
After two years, he was deposed because of a scandal. The details of that
scandal are recorded in the books of Ibn `Abd Rabbih, the Mu`tazilite writer,
and in Ibn al-Athir's famous classic book Al-`Iqd al-Fareed. A
summary of that incident runs as follows:
When Abu Hurayra was brought to him, Omer
said to him: “I have come to know that when I made you governor of Bahrain,
you did not even have shoes to wear, but I am now told that you have purchased
horses for one thousand and six hundred dinars.” Abu Hurayra said, “I had
horses which have multiplied, and I received some as gifts.” Omer then said, “I
would give you only your salary. This (amount) is a lot more than that (more
than your salary for both years). Pay the balance back (to baytul-mal, the Muslim state treasury)!” Abu Hurayra said, “This money is not
yours.” Omer said, “By Allah! I would bruise your back!” Saying this, Omer whipped
Abu Hurayra till he bled. Then he thundered: “Now bring the money back!” Abu
Hurayra replied: “I am to account for it before Allah.” Omer said, “This could be so only if
you had taken it rightfully and had paid it back obediently. I shall throw you
back to your mother as though you were dung so that she would use you to graze
donkeys.”
According to the sequence employed by Ibn
Sa`d in his Tabaqat, Abu Hurayra ranks in the ninth or tenth class. He came to the
Messenger of Allah 5 near the end of the seventh Hijri year.
Hence, historians say that he accompanied the Prophet no more than three yearsFF according to the best estimates, while
other historians say it was no more than two years if we take into
consideration the fact that the Prophet sent him to accompany Ibn al-Hadrami to Bahrain, then the Messenger of Allah 5 died while he was still in Bahrain.
This
paragraph and the ones that follow it are excerpted from my translation of Dr.
Muhammed
at-Tijani as-Samawi's book Shi`as are the [real or true] Ahl
as-Sunnah (New York: Vantage Press, 1996), pp. 207-215.
Abu Hurayra was not known for his jihad or valor, nor was he among those who were regarded as brilliant
thinkers, nor among the jurists who knew the Qur’an by heart, nor did he even know how to
read and write... He came to the Messenger of Allah 5 in order to satisfy his hunger as he himself
said, and as the Prophet came to understand from him, so he lodged him among
the people of the Suffa to whom the Prophet used to send some food.
Yet he became famous for the abundance of ahadith أحادیث which he used to narrate about the Messenger of Allah 5.
This fact attracted the attention of verifiers of hadith especially since he had not remained in the
company of the Prophet for any length of time and to the fact that he narrated
traditions regarding battles which he had never attended.
Some critics and verifiers of hadith gathered all what was narrated by the
“righteous caliphs” as well as by the ten men given the glad tidings of going
to Paradise in addition to what the mothers of the faithful and the purified
Ahl al-Bayt, and they did not total one tenth of what Abu Hurayra had narrated
all alone. This came despite the fact that among the latter was Ali ibn Abu Talib who remained in
the company of the Prophet for thirty years.
Then fingers were pointed to Abu Hurayra
charging him with telling lies and with fabricating and forging hadith. Some went as far as labeling him as the
first narrator in the history of Islam thus charged. Yet some Muslims the
extent of whose knowledge is apparently quite limited call him “Islam's
narrator”, so he is surrounded with a halo, a great deal of respect. They
totally rely on him and even go as far as saying “Radiya Allahu `anhu,” Allah be pleased with him, whenever they
mention his name. Some of them may even regard him as being more knowledgeable
than Imam
Ali ibn Abu Talib
A, who never parted with the Prophet 5 and grew up in his lap, due to one
particular tradition which he narrates about himself and in which he says, “I
said, `O Messenger of Allah! I hear a great deal of your hadith which I have been forgetting!' He said,
`Stretch your mantle,' so I stretched it, whereupon he made a handful then
said, ‘Close upon it,’ whereupon I closed upon it and never forgot of it a
thing ever since,” as we read on p. 38, Vol. 1, of al-Bukhari’s Sahih where the author dedicates a chapter on
acquiring knowledge.
Abu Hurayra kept narrating so many ahadith that Omer ibn al-Khattab beat him with his cane and said to him,
“You have quoted too many ahadith, and it seems that you have been telling lies about the Messenger of
Allah 5.” This was due to one particular narration
which Abu Hurayra reported and in which he quoted the Prophet supposedly saying
that Allah
had created the heavens, the earth and all creation in seven days. When Omer
heard about it, he called him in and asked him to repeat that hadith. Having heard him repeating it, Omer struck
him and said to him, “How so when Allah Himself says it was done in six days, while you
yourself now say it was done in seven?!” Abu Hurayra said, “Maybe I heard it
from Ka`b al-Ahbar...” Omer said, “Since you cannot distinguish between the
Prophet's ahadith and what Ka`b al-Ahbar says, you must not narrate anything at
all.”F
It is also narrated that Ali ibn Abu Talib has said, “Among
all the living, the person who has told the most lies about the Messenger of
Allah 5 is Abu Hurayra al-Dawsi,” as we read on p.
28, Vol. 4 of Ibn Abul-Hadeed's work Sharh Nahjul-Balagha.
Mother of the faithful `A’isha, too,
testified to his being a liar several times in reference to many ahadith which he used to attribute to the Messenger of Allah 5. For example, she resented something which
he had once said so she asked him, “When did you hear the Messenger of Allah 5 say so?” He said to her, “The mirror, the
kohl, and the dyestuff have all diverted you from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah 5,”
but when she insisted that he was lying and scandalized him, Marwan ibn al-Hakam interfered and took upon himself to
verify the authenticity of the hadith in question. It was then that Abu Hurayra
admitted, “I did not hear it from the Messenger of Allah 5;
rather, I heard it from al-Fadl ibn al-`Abbas,” according to al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 2, p. 232, in a chapter dealing with a fasting person
who wakes up finding himself in the state of janaba, and Malik, Mawta', Vol. 1,
p. 272. It is because of this
particular narration that Ibn Qutaybah charged him with lying saying, “Abu
Hurayra claimed that al-Fadl ibn al-`Abbas, who had by then died, testified to the
authenticity of that tradition which he attributed to him in order to mislead
people into thinking that he had heard it from him, according to al-Dhahbi's book Siyar A`lam an-Nubala’. In his book Ta'weel al-Ahadith تأویل الأحادیث, Ibn Qutaybah says, “Abu Hurayra used to
say: `The Messenger of Allah 5 said such-and-such, but I heard it from
someone else.” In his book A`lam an-Nubala’, al-Dhahbi says that Yazid ibn Ibrahim
once cited Shu`bah ibn al-Hajjaj saying that Abu Hurayra used to commit
forgery.
In his book Al-Bidaya wan-Nihaya البدایة و النهایة, Ibn Kathir states that Yazid ibn Haroun heard Shu`bah ibn al-Hajjaj accusing him of the same, that is,
that he forges hadith, and that he used to narrate what he used to
hear from Ka`b al-Ahbar as well as from the Messenger of Allah 5 without distinguishing one from the other.
Ja`far al-Iskafi has said, “Abu Hurayra is
doubted by our mentors; his narrations are not acceptable,” as we read on p.
68, Vol. 4, of Ibn Abul-Hadeed’s book Sharh Nahjul-Balagha.
During his lifetime, Abu Hurayra was famous
among the sahaba of lying and forgery and of narrating too many fabricated ahadith to the extent that some of the sahaba used to deride him and ask him to fabricate ahadith agreeable with their own taste.
For example, a man belonging to Quraish put
on once a new jubba (a long outer garment) and started showing off. He passed
by Abu Hurayra and [sarcastically] said to him, “O Abu Hurayra! You narrate
quite a few traditions about the Messenger of Allah 5; so, did you hear him say anything about my
jubba?!” Abu Hurayra said, “I have heard the father of al-Qasim saying, `A man
before your time was showing off his outfit when Allah caused the earth to cave in over him; so
he has been rattling in it and will continue to do so till the Hour.' By Allah! I do not know
whether he was one of your people or not,” as we read in Ibn Kathir's
book Al-Bidaya wan-Nihaya, Vol. 8, p. 108.
How can people help doubting Abu Hurayra's
traditions since they are so self-contradictory? He narrates one “hadith” then he
narrates its antithesis, and if he is opposed or his previously narrated
traditions are used against him, he becomes angry or starts babbling in the
Ethiopian tongue.F
How could they help accusing him of telling
lies and of forgery after he himself had admitted that he got traditions out of
his own pouch then attributed them to the Prophet?
Al-Bukhari, in his Sahih, states the following:
“Abu Hurayra said once, ‘The Prophet said,
`The best charity is willingly given; the higher hand is better than the lower
one, and start with your own dependents. A woman says: `Either feed me or
divorce me.' A slave says, `Feed me and use me.' A son says, `Feed me for the
woman who will forsake me.'” He was asked, “O Abu Hurayra! Did you really hear
the Messenger of Allah 5 say so?” He said, “No, this one is from Abu
Hurayra's pouch,’” as we read in Bukhari, Sahih,
Vol. 6, p. 190, in
a chapter dealing with spending on the wife and children.
Notice how he starts this “tradition” by
saying, “The Prophet said,” then when they refuse to believe what he tells
them, he admits by saying, “... This one is from Abu Hurayra's pouch”! So
congratula-tions to Abu Hurayra for possessing this pouch which is full of lies
and myths, and for which Mu`awiyah and Banu Umayyah provided a great deal of
publicity, and because of which he acquired position, authority, wealth, and
mansions. Mu`awiyah made him the governor of Medina and built him the Aqeeq
mansion then married him off to a woman of honorable descent for whom he used
to work as a servant...
Since Abu Hurayra was the close vizier of
Mu`awiyah, it is not due to his own merits, honor, or knowledge; rather, it is
because Abu Hurayra used to provide him with whatever traditions he needed to
circulate. If some sahaba used to hesitate in cursing “Abu Turab,” finding doing that
embarrassing, Abu Hurayra cursed Ali in his own house and as his Shi`ites heard:
Ibn Abul-Hadeed says, “When Abu Hurayra came to Iraq in the company of Mu`awiyah in
the Year of the Jama`a, he came to Kufa's mosque. Having seen the huge number
of those who welcomed him, he knelt down then beat his bald head and said, “O
people of Iraq!
Do you claim that I tell lies about the Messenger of Allah 5 and thus burn myself in the fire?! By Allah! I heard the
Messenger of Allah 5 saying, `Each prophet has a sanctuary, and
my sanctuary is in Medina from Eer [area] to [the mountain of] Thawr; so,
anyone who makes it unclean will be cursed by Allah, the angels, and all people, and I bear
witness that Ali had done so.” When Mu`awiyah came to hear this statement, he
gave him a present, showered him with his generosity, and made him the governor
of Medina.”F
Suffices us to point out to the fact that Abu
Hurayra was made governor of Medina by none other than Mu`awiyah. There is no
doubt that verifiers and researchers, who are free of prejudice, will doubt
anyone who befriended the enemy of Allah and His Messenger and who was antagonistic towards the
friends of Allah
and of His Messenger... would reward Abu Hurayra for nothing.
There is no doubt that Abu Hurayra did not
reach that lofty position of authority, namely Governor of Medina, then capital
of the Islamic world, except by virtue of the services which he had rendered to
Mu`awiyah and other authoritative Umayyads. Praise to the One Who changes the
conditions! Abu Hurayra had come to Medina with nothing to cover his private
parts other than a tiny striped piece of cloth, begging passers-by to feed him.
Then he suddenly became ruler of the sacred precincts of Medina, residing in
the Aqeeq Mansion, enjoying wealth, servants and
slaves, and nobody could say a word without his permission. All of this was
from the blessings of his “pouch”!
Do not forget, nor should you be amazed,
dear reader, that nowadays we see the same stage plays being reenacted, and
history certainly repeats itself. How many ignorant indigent persons sought
nearness to a ruler and joined his party till they became feared masters who do
and undo, issuing orders as they please, having a direct access to wealth
without being accounted for it, riding in automobiles without being watched,
consuming foods not sold on the market...? One such person may not even know
how to speak his own language, nor does he know a meaning for life except
satisfying his stomach and sexual appetite. The whole matter is simply his
having a “pouch” like the one Abu Hurayra used to have with some exception, of
course, yet the aim is one and the same: pleasing the ruler and publicizing for
him in order to strengthen his authority, firm his throne, and eliminate his
critics.
Abu Hurayra loved the Umayyads and they
loved him since the days of Othman ibn Affan, their leader. His view with
regard to Othman was contrary to that of all sahaba who belonged to the Muhajirun and the Ansar; he regarded all the sahaba who participated in or encouraged the killing of Othman as being
“apostates”.
Undoubtedly, Abu Hurayra used to accuse Ali
ibn Abu Talib
A of killing Othman. We can derive this
conclusion from the statement which he made at Kufa's Grand Mosque that Ali
made Medina unclean and that he, therefore, was cursed by the Prophet, the
angels, and everyone else. For this reason, Ibn Sa`d indicates in his Tabaqat
that when Abu Hurayra died in 59 A.H./679 A.D., Othman's
descendants carried his coffin and brought it to the Baqee` to bury it as an
expression of their appreciation of his having had high regards for Othman.F
Surely Allah has his own wisdom in faring with His
creation. Othman ibn Affan, the master of Quraish and their greatest, was
killed although he was the Muslims' caliph bearing the title of “Dhul-Noorayn”,
the man with two lights, and of whom, according to their claim, the angels feel
shy. His corpse did not receive the ceremonial burial bath nor was it shrouded;
moreover, it was not buried for full three days after which it was buried at
Medina's then Jewish cemetery.
قال ابن عبد البر فی الاستیعاب: لما قُتِلَ
عثمان أُلقی على المزبلة ثلاثةَ أیام
On p. 80, Vol. 3, of Al-Isti`ab الاستیعاب (original Arabic text) by Ibn Abd al-Birr,
we read the following: “When Othman was killed, his body was thrown on a pile
of garbage for three days. When it was nighttime, twelve men went to his
corpse. Among them were: Huwaitib ibn Abd al-Uzza, Hakeem ibn Hizam, Abdullah
ibn az-Zubair, Muhammed ibn Hatib and Marwan ibn al-Hakam. When they went to the cemetery to bury
him, some people from Banu Mazin shouted at them saying, ‘By Allah! If you bury
him here, we will tell people about it tomorrow [so they may dig the corpse up
and remove it].’ They had to carry his corpse till they reached Hash Kawkab, a wall in Medina, where they dug
up a grave for him. `A’isha daughter of Othman [not to be confused with `A’isha daughter of Abu
Bakr] was carrying a lantern. When the men took him out to bury him, `A’isha wailed,
whereupon Abdullah
ibn az-Zubair said to her, ‘By Allah! If you do not remain silent, I will hit you on the
head.’ She stopped wailing, and he (Othman) was buried.”
Ibn Abul-Hadeed quotes at-Tabari saying that Othman’s corpse was kept for
three days unburied. The author of this book has a copy of the 2005 A.H.
edition of at-Tabari’s voluminous Tarikh published by Al-Amira
house for publication and distribution of Beirut,
Lebanon. He
would like to quote ver batim what pp. 160-61 of Vol. 3 of this edition
states with regard to Othman’s burial:
نبذ عثمان ثلاثة أیام لا یدفن، ثم ان حکیم بن
حزام القرشی ثم أحد بنی أسد بن عبد العزى، و جبیر بن مطعم بن عدی بن نوفل بن عبد
مناف، کلما علیا فی دفنه، و طلبا الیه أن یأذن لأهله فی ذلک، ففعل، و أذن لهم علی،
فلما سمع بذلک قعدوا له فی الطریق بالحجارة، و خرج به ناس من أهله، و هم یریدون به
حائطا بالمدینة، یقال له حش کوکب، کانت الیهود تدفن فیه موتاهم، فلما خرج به على
الناس رجموا سریره، و هموا بطرحه، فبلغ ذلک علیا، فأرسل الى الناس یعزم علیه لیکفن
عنه، ففعلوا، فانطلق حتى دفن فی حش کوکب، فلما ظهر معاویة بن أبی سفیان على الناس
أمر بهدم ذلک الحائط حتى أفضى به الى البقیع، و أمر الناس أن یدفنوا موتاهم حول
قبره حتى اتصل ذلک بمقابر المسلمین.
“[The corpse of] Othman remained for three
days without being buried. Then Hakeem ibn Hizam al-Qarashi (from the Quraish tribe) and one of the offspring of
Banu Asad ibn Abd al-`Uzza, as well as Jubayr ibn Mut`im ibn `Adiyy ibn Nawfal ibn Abd Manaf,
spoke with [then caliph] Ali A
about burying him, requesting him to permit his [Othman’s] family to bury him,
which he did. Ali A permitted them. When people heard about it,
they lurked in the streets with rocks in their hands. Some people from among
Othman’s family came out with his corpse and wanted to go to a wall in Medina
called Hash Kawkab where the Jews used to bury their
dead. When people saw it [Othman’s coffin], they pelted his coffin and were
about to throw the body down. Ali A
came to know about it, so he sent a message to people to leave the corpse alone
and not expose it to their harm, which they did. It was taken out till it was
buried at Hash Kawkab. When Mu`awiyah ascended to
power, he ordered that wall to be demolished, joining its area with that of the
Baqee`. He ordered people to bury their dead around his [Othman’s] grave till
the graves connected with the Muslims’ graves.”
These details and more are also narrated in
Ibn al-Athir’s Al-Kamil and in Ibn al-A`tham’s Tarikh, in addition to the Isti`ab of Ibn Abd al-Birr. On the same page of the
latter reference (p. 80, Vol. 3), the author indicates that Othman’s body did
not receive the ceremonial bathing and that he was shrouded in the same clothes
which he was wearing when he was killed. Perhaps this much suffices to give the
reader an idea about how angry people were with Othman and with the men whom he
chose to run their affairs, plunder the state treasury and spread iniquity
throughout the Muslim world.
Anyway, let us go back to Abu Hurayra who
died after having enjoyed pomp and power. He was an indigent man whose lineage
and tribal origins were not known to anybody. He had no kinship to Quraish.
Despite all of this, the caliph's sons, who were in charge of running the
affairs during Mu`awiyah's reign, took to bearing his corpse and to burying it
at the Baqee`...! Let us now examine Abu Hurayra’s attitude towards the
Prophet's Sunna.
In his Sahih, al-Bukhari quotes Abu Hurayra saying, “I learned
the fill of two receptacles [of ahadith] from the Messenger of Allah 5: I have disseminated only one of them; as
for the other, if I disseminate it, this throat will be slit,” as we read on p.
38, Vol. 1, of al-Bukhari’s Sahih in a chapter dealing with learning
Here is Abu Hurayra revealing what erstwhile
is hidden, admitting that the only traditions he quoted were the ones that
pleased the ruling authorities. Building upon this premise, Abu Hurayra used to
have two pouches, or two receptacles, as he called them. He used to disseminate
the contents of one of them, the one which we have discussed here that contains
whatever the rulers desired. As for the other, which Abu Hurayra kept to
himself and whose ahadith he did not narrate for fear his throat would be slit, it is the one
containing the authentic traditions of the Prophet. Had Abu Hurayra been a
reliable authority, he would have never hidden true ahadith while disseminating illusions and lies only to support the oppressor,
knowing that Allah
curses whoever hides the clear evidence.
Al-Bukhari quotes him saying once, “People say that Abu Hurayra
narrates too many ahadith. Had it not been for two [particular] verses in the Book of Allah, I would not
have narrated a single hadith: `Those who conceal what We have revealed of
clear proofs and the guidance, after Our having clarified [everything] for
people in the Book, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them, too'
(Qur’an,
2:159). Our brethren from the Muhajirun used to be busy consigning transactions
at the market-place, while our brethren from the Ansar used to be busy doing
business with their own money, while Abu Hurayra kept in the shadow of the
Prophet in order to satisfy his hunger, attending what they did not attend,
learning what they did not learn.”F
How can Abu Hurayra say that had it not been
for a couple of verses in the Book of Allah, he would not have narrated a single hadith, then he says, “I learned two receptacles
[of ahadith] from the Messenger of Allah 5: I have disseminated one of them; as for
the other, if I disseminate it, this throat will be slit”?! Is this not his
admission of having concealed the truth despite both verses in the Book of Allah?!
Had the Prophet not said to his companions,
“Go back to your people and teach them”? as we read in al-Bukhari’s Sahih,
Vol. 1, p. 30. Had he not also said,
“One who conveys is more aware than one who hears”? Al-Bukhari states that
the Prophet urged the deputation of `Abd Qays to learn belief and scholarship
“... then convey what you learn to those whom you have left behind,” as we read
in the same reference. Can we help wondering: Why should the throat of a sahabi be slit if he quotes the Prophet 6?! There must be a secret here which the
caliphs do not wish others to know. Here, we would like to briefly say that
“the people of the remembrance” was [a phrase in] a Qur’anic verse revealed to refer to Ali's
succession to the Prophet.
Abu Hurayra is not to blame; he knew his own
worth and testified against his own soul that Allah cursed him, and so did those who curse,
for having hidden the Prophet's hadith. But the blame is on those who call Abu
Hurayra the narrator of the Sunnah while he himself testifies that he hid it
then testifies that he fabricated it and told lies in its regard, then he
further goes on to testify that it became confused for him, so he could not
tell which one was the statement of the Prophet and which one was made by
others. All of these ahadith and correct admissions are recorded in al-Bukhari's Sahih and in other authentic books of hadith.
How can anyone feel comfortable about a man
whose justice was doubted by the Commander of the Faithful Ali ibn Abu Talib who charged him
with lying, saying that among the living, nobody told more lies about the Prophet
than Abu Hurayra?! Omer ibn al-Khattab, too, charged him of the same; he beat
him and threatened to expel him. `A’isha doubted his integrity and many times called him a liar,
and many other sahaba cast doubts about his accuracy and rejected his contradictory ahadith, so he would once admit his error and would sometimes prattle in
Ethiopian.FF A
large number of Muslim scholars refuted his traditions and charged him with
lying, fabricating, and throwing himself at Mu`awiyah's dinner tables, at his coffers
of gold and silver.
Is it right, then, for Abu Hurayra to become
“Islam's narrator” from whom the religion's injunctions are learned?
Judaica and Jewish doctrines have filled the
books of hadith. Ka`b al-Ahbar, a Jew, may have succeeded in getting
such doctrines and beliefs included into the books of hadith, hence we find traditions likening or
personifying Allah,
as well as the theory of incarnation, in addition to many abominable statements
about the prophets and messengers of Allah: all of these are cited through Abu Hurayra.
A word of caution must be stated here, and I
implore the Almighty to testify that I have made it so I may not bear the
burden of speaking ill of one of His servants, namely Abu Hurayra, while
pleading to my Sunni and Shi`ite brothers everywhere, now and till the end of
time, to bear witness to it and not be blinded by prejudice:
There is a very strong likelihood that
throughout their history, which is detailed in another place in this book, the
Umayyads paid recorders of hadith to fabricate traditions and attribute them to Abu Hurayra even after
the latter had already died. Hence, the man may be innocent of a good deal of
what is attributed to him, and Allah will judge him just as He will judge those
who fabricated traditions of His Prophet 6 then claimed that Abu Hurayra quoted them.
Moreover, not all traditions narrated by Abu Hurayra must be discarded.
Discarding them would be a big blow to the sacred Sunnah of the Prophet of
Islam, a huge blow to the fiqh and Shari`a. As a matter of
fact, many traditions quoted by Abu Hurayra already exist in major works by
prominent Shi`ite scholars throughout the entire Islamic history. The only
requirement needed here is caution and research. Commonsense must be applied,
too, to judge some traditions. Sunnis must not feel offended when this man is
criticized, and Shi’ites must not be blinded by prejudice to reject all
traditions narrated, whether authentically or not, by Abu Hurayra. Muslims have
to weigh these traditions and compare them with common-sense, for Islam is the
religion of commonsense.
Mu`awiyah was succeeded by his corrupt and equally sinner Yazid
who is famous for staging the Kerbala massacre of the immediate family,
relatives and some supporters of Imam
Hussain
son of Ali son of Abu Talib,
peace be with them all. The Imam felt obligated to
rise against Yazid due to the depths to which the Islamic faith was driven at
the hands of Yazid and his father Mu`awiyah, preferring to be martyred rather
than endorse Yazid's illegitimate appointment as the "commander of the
faithful" imposed on the Muslims. Full details can be found in my book
titled Kerbala and Beyond: An Epic of Immortal Heroism and in many other
books written on the Kerbala epic of heroism to which I would like to refer the
seeker of the truth. In order to demonstrate to the reader how hostile Yazid
was not only to Imam
Hussain
but also to his father and grandfather, the Prophet of Islam 6, I would like to quote here verses of poetry
which demonstrate this hostility:
کان یزید جالسا فی منظرة على "جیرون"، و لما
رأى السبایا و الرؤوس على أطراف الرماح و قد أشرفوا على ثنیة جیرون نعب غراب فأنشأ
یزید یقول:
تلک الرؤوسُ على شفا جیرونِ
|
|
لما بدت تلک الحمول و أشرقت
|
فقد اقتضیتُ من الرسولِ دیونی
|
|
نعب الغرابُ فقلتُ: قُل أو لا
تقُل
|
Yazid was sitting at a surveillance outpost overlooking Jerun Mountain
when he saw the captives with the severed heads planted atop spears as their
throng came close and a crow croaked, so he composed these lines of poetry:
When those conveyances drew nigh
And the heads on the edge of Jerun,
The crow croaked, so said I:
“Say whatever you wish to say
“Or say nothing at all,
“From the Messenger have I today
“What he owed me he did repay.”
Notice the last couple of verses and how Yazid
considered the Prophet 6 as owing him, and how
what he did to Imam Hussain A was the "repayment" of that debt!
An in-depth study of what Yazid had in mind will take the reader back to the
Battle of Badr in which many relatives of Mu`awiyah were killed, so the
Umayyads were hostile to Islam and Muslims, including the Prophet 6 himself, since then, and their actions prove
that they really never accepted Islam wholeheartedly, and their offspring, who
exist among us, in our time never will.
According to Al-Munjid fil lugha wal a`lam المُنجِد فی
اللغة و الأعلام, however, Abu Hurayra's name is recorded as `Abd ar-Rahmān ibn Sakhr al-Azdi, and that he died in 59 A.H./678 A.D. The same
reference indicates that this man spent “a long time in the company of the
Prophet,” which is not true at all; he accompanied the Prophet from time to
time for only 3 years. The Publisher of this Munjid, namely Dar
al-Mashriq of Beirut, Lebanon, is sponsored by the
Catholic Press of Beirut. Undoubtedly, the information about Abu Hurayra in
this Arabic-Arabic dictionary must have been furnished by some Sunnis who try
their best to elevate the status of Abu Hurayra even at the risk of sacrificing
historical facts and data, thus jeopardizing the integrity of the Islamic faith
itself.
Al-Bukhāri, Sahih, Vol. 4, p. 175, where the author quotes Abu Hurayra
talking about himself in a chapter dealing with the characteristics of
Prophethood.
Refer
to the book titled Abu Hurayra by the Egyptian author Mahmud Abu Rayyah.
Al-Bukhāri, Sahih, Vol. 7, p. 31.
Ibn
Abul-µadeed, Sharh Nahjul-Balāgha,
Vol. 4, p. 67.
Ibn Sa`d, ±abaqāt,
Vol. 2, p. 63.
Abu
Hurayra was bilingual. He spoke Arabic (his mother tongue) and Amharic.
Historically speaking, during Abu Hurayra's time, Amheric was the language of
“aristocrats” due to the fact that the Ethiopians had for many years colonized
Yemen till they were kicked out of it at the hands of Sayf ibn Thi Yazun (or
Yazin), Himyar's king who died in 574
A.D.