The first FITNA (sedition) in Islam / Article

The first FITNA (sedition) in Islam / Article
(Tuesday, July 21, 2015) 11:17



In the Name of Allah, the most Gracious, the most Merciful





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 `AdnanF1F. 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 yearsF1F 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.”F1


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.F1


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.”F1


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.F1


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.”F1


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.F1F 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.






 1According 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.

 1Al-Bukhāri, Sahih, Vol. 4, p. 175, where the author quotes Abu Hurayra talking about himself in a chapter dealing with the characteristics of Prophethood.

 1Refer to the book titled Abu Hurayra by the Egyptian author Mahmud Abu Rayyah.

 1Al-Bukhāri, Sahih, Vol. 7, p. 31.

 1Ibn Abul-µadeed, Sharh Nahjul-Balāgha, Vol. 4, p. 67.

 1Ibn Sa`d, ±abaqāt, Vol. 2, p. 63.

 1Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 37.

 1Abu 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.
Email is required
Characters left: 500
Comment is required