From time to time, there were revolts against Bani Umayyah. In the beginning of the Umayyad regime, these revolts were quickly suppressed as they were not widespread. But the revolt which Bani Umayyah were unable to quell was the one that took place during the days of Marwan Himar, the last Umayyad monarch.

On this occasion, people from various backgrounds rose against him. The army and the police force also disobeyed his orders, and even his friends deserted him. Eventually, Marwan's position became completely weak, and bribes and promises of government offices to various persons also failed to serve any purpose.

A large segment of the army rebelled against Marwan, and he was compelled to flee from one town to another. As and when he entered a town, the people behaved in the worst manner towards him. When he reached Mosul, the inhabitants raised slogans against him and closed the doors of the city. Then he went to Qansarin, and the people attacked his forces.

When he went to Hamat there was a great furore against him. Thus, he returned to Syria but was turned away from there as well. Then he proceeded to Palestine, but the Palestinians also became aloof from him. In short, this monarch could not find refuge in any city.

In all these cities, the army of Bani Abbas pursued Marwan Himar and he fled from one place to another, until he was eventually killed at the end of 132 A.H. in the city of Busir in Egypt. With his death, the caliphate of Bani Umayyah ended.

“So, the roots of the people who were unjust were cut off; and all praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the worlds” (6:45).

A Thousand Month Rule

Masoodi says: “The total duration of Umayyad rule, till the time when allegiance was taken for Abu al-Abbas Saffah, was a thousand months, because they ruled for ninety years, eleven months, and thirteen days.”

It is narrated in Tafsir ar-Razi that Qasim Ibn Fazl quotes Imam Hasan (‘a) as saying that the Holy Prophet saw in a dream that the Umayyads were jumping on his pulpit like monkeys. This made him very uneasy, so Allah revealed Surah al-Qadr and told His beloved prophet that this one night of Qadr (glory) is better than 1,000-month rule of Bani Umayyah. Qasim says: When we calculate, we find that Bani Umayyah rule lasted one thousand months.1

Bani Abbas Exploits The Situation

At that time, the world of Islam was in the grip of a general conflagration and discontent. All the people were fed up with Umayyad rule and their intellect and hearts were drawn towards the descendants of Imam Ali (‘a).

1. Revolt against Bani Umayyah took place under the name of religion and preservation of Islam. Descendants of the Prophet were the trustees of faith and the defenders of Islam. If they assumed the reins of government, they would act according to the sunnah of the prophet -establishing justice and protecting the rights of the people.

2. The Shi’as and the descendants of Imam Ali (‘a) were the first group that campaigned against the crimes and despotism of Bani Umayyah. They sacrificed their lives and wealth to achieve this object, and further demanded that whoever had suffered a loss must be compensated for it.

3. The descendants of Ali (‘a) and Shi’as of Ali (‘a) were a strong opposition group who campaigned against the rule of Bani Umayyah secretly and sacrificed their lives and property in this regard. And like the Holy Imams the noble- minded Shi'ah, too, faced out being killed or tortured. The best confirmation of our claim is provided by the following extract from Tarikh Kamil of Ibn Athir:

“The last day of the Umayyad rule was celebrated by the people as a day of thanksgiving. They were under the impression that now the descendants of the Holy Prophet will replace Bani Umayyah. Bani Abbas had risen in the name of martyrdom of Husayn, Zaid, and his son Yahya! Bani Abbas exploited the anger of the nation against Bani Umayyah and took maximum advantage of the dispute between the Shi’as and the Umayyad regime. But who could have known that they had a dagger up their sleeve?

In the beginning, Bani Abbas used to say: Our goal is to topple the Umayyad regime and save the people from oppression. When Umayyads are defeated, we shall reach a consensus and select a chief from amongst the descendants of the prophet. At the beginning of the campaign, Bani Abbas did not nominate anyone from among themselves or others as the chief. They mentioned only their first object viz the defeat of Bani Umayyah.

It was just like France and Britain saying - while they were at war with Turkey – that they were fighting to free the Arabs from cruelty and oppression and would - after achieving victory – free the Arabs, and hand over the government to them. But they betrayed the Arabs, and when Turkey was defeated, France occupied Syria and Lebanon, and Britain brought Iraq and Jordan under her control, and gifted Palestine to Israel.2

The famous orientalist Wellhaussen writes:

The famous orientalist Wellhaussen writes:

“Bani Abbas kept secret their intention to deprive Bani Fatimah of the government. To deceive the people, they used to say that they were fighting for the benefit of Bani Fatimah. ln Khorasan and other places, they said that they would avenge the blood of all martyrs from the children of Fatimah. On this basis, they wanted to benefit from the support of Shi’as and reach to the throne stepping on their shoulders. When the Shi’as mentioned about power sharing, they said: We would solve this matter through consensus. Bani Abbas acquired ascendancy in the name of the Alawis, who were carrying desperate campaigns against the Umayyad rule. However, when they obtained power, they paid no attention to the Alawis and manifested their hard-heartedness and cruelty.”

Before the crimes of Bani Abbas are recounted, it is necessary to understand their general position.

Who Were Bani Abbas?

In the matter of oppression, cruelty and licentiousness, Bani Abbas were the same as Bani Umayyah. There was no difference between the two in committing sins openly and expressing infidelity. It was so because they had no regard for religion or divinity. All that mattered to them was worldly riches; their carnal desires had no bounds. They beheaded people, put them

on gallows and demolished houses on those who were still alive inside.

Ibrahim3 and his brother Saffah were like Mu’awiyyah; Mansur and Haroon were like Hisham; and Mutawakkil was another form of Yazid Ibn Mu’awiyyah.

As far as we know, most rulers resort to bloodshed to safeguard their throne. Or, according to their own claims, create insecurity to ensure the survival of their rule. However, what has been mentioned about Bani Umayyah - and will be described later about Bani Abbas - shows that they did not kill to strengthen their government or to ensure security. Their only object was treachery and bloodshed.

Towards the end of the Umayyad rule, due to their evil character and because of their murderous ways, the revolt spread everywhere. Ibrahim, the brother of Saffah, sent Abu Muslim Khorasani to Khorasan and said to him: “Listen to my advice carefully. Take interest in the Yemeni group, honour them and associate with them, because Allah completes the caliphate through them. Defame the Rabiya tribe and say that the end of the Mudhir tribe is near. Kill those whom you suspect and liquidate the Arabs from Khorasan, if possible. Accuse every boy who is about one meter tall and kill him.

Ahmad Ibn Ali Maqrizi, after quoting the above incident in his book, An-Niza Wat-Takhasum Fi baina Bani Urnayyah wa Bani Hashim says:

“May Allah hold you dear! What connection has this recommendation with the recommendations made by the orthodox caliphs to their governors? By Allah, even if Abu Muslim had been dispatched to fight against the polytheists, such recommendation would not have been lawful, whereas in this case he was being sent to an Islamic territory to kill the children of the Muhajir’s, the Ansar’s - rather all the Arabs - to take away from them lands they had taken from the enemies and received from their ancestors. The Abbasids wanted to occupy the lands, enjoy the funds from public treasury and enslave the servants of Allah.

Abu Muslim acted according to the instructions of Ibrahim. Now the question is, what is the difference between the remark of Ibrahim who said: “Kill those you suspect” and that of Mu’awiyyah who wrote to his commanders: “Punish in the worst way every person that is accused of being a Shi’a of Ali and pull down his house”?

Abu al-Abbas Saffah appointed Muhammad Ibn Sa ul-as Governor of Mosul. The people of Mos ul-did not obey him, and he wrote to Saffah to send another governor in his place. Saffah sent his own brother. Yahya with an army of twelve thousand. Seeing such a huge army, the people of Mos ul-became afraid and sought amnesty. After granting them amnesty, Yahya resorted to unprecedented bloodshed, so much so that blood began to flow in the streets and one's feet are immersed in it while walking.

When night fell and Yahya heard the women wailing for their men who had been killed, he ordered that the women and children also be killed. This massacre continued for three days.”4

When we compare this incident with the recommendation of Ibrahim (to Abu Muslim), we conclude that when it involved persecution, the Abbasids were much ahead of the Umayyads. If we had held the belief in transmigration of soul, we might have said that the spirits of Mu’awiyyah and Hajjaj entered the bodies of Ibrahim and Yahya respectively.

Saffah, The Abbasid

Saffah's name was Abdullah, and his patronymic was Abu al-Abbas. He was the first ruler of Bani Abbas. He received pledge of allegiance in the year 132 A.H. and he died in 136 A.H. after having ruled for a little more than four years. The Abbasids had come to put an end to the persecution by Bani Umayyah. However, after securing power they left even the Umayyads behind. They searched and pursued every member of the Umayyad clan and put them to death in the most horrid manner.

So long as Saffah felt that there was the last breath of life in the body of Bani Umayyah he did not sit still. He went a step further and annihilated all those persons whose loyalty he doubted or from whom there was danger to the Abbasid regime, as he did in the case of Abi Salamah Khilal. His brother, Yahya in Mosul, his uncle in the Hijaz, his second uncle, Sulaiman in Basra, and Abu Muslim in Khorasan also took similar steps.

Shareek Ibn Shaykh Mahri quarrelled with Abu Muslim in Bukhara and said: You must act according to justice. We did not give allegiance to Bani Abbas so that they might resort to bloodshed.” Abu Muslim killed him and subjected his 30,000 followers to punishments.

Saffah was given this title (which mean shedder of blood) because he shed blood excessively. It is said that he invited 80 individuals of the Umayyad family to receive prizes and have dinner. When they arrived, he ordered them to be killed. Carpets were then spread on their half-dead bodies and Saffah began taking his meals. When the meals were over, he said: “I had never before had such delicious meal.”

Bani Umayyah deserved to be killed. However, to invite them to a feast and then to kill them, and to later take meal sitting on their bodies was such a meanness which even Bani Umayyah were not endowed with. Many persons, especially the poets, instigated Bani Abbas to shed the blood of Umayyads. It was only the descendants of Imam Ali (‘a) who forbade Bani Abbas from shedding Umayyad blood recklessly and found excuses for the safety of those of them who were alive.

Although the descendants of Ali (‘a) were the target of most of the crimes of Bani Umayyah, the former did not think in terms of revenge. It was so because they were the descendants of the one who spared Amr Ibn Aas in the Battle of Siffin, forgave Marwan in the Battle of Camel, and permitted water to Mu’awiyyah and his army after gaining control over it,5 and who said: “When you are victorious over your enemy, make forgiveness the thanksgiving for your victory.”

There was nothing new in the conduct of the descendants of Imam Ali (‘a) because they were the members of the family of justice and piety. Ibn Athir writes:

Dawood Ibn Urwah, a Governor of Bani Abbas decided to eliminate Bani Umayyah from Mecca and Medina. Abdullah Ibn Hasan Ibn Hasan said to him: If you kill Bani Umayyah, before whom will you display your strength? Is it not a sufficient torment for them that all the time they see you on the throne of authority and find themselves abject and humble? However, Dawood Ibn Urwah did not accept his advice and killed all of them.6

It was expected that Saffah would accord preferential treatment to the descendants and followers of Imam Ali (‘a), because the Alawis, Shi’as and Abbasids had jointly struggled to annihilate the Umayyads. Bani Abbas made use of the Alawis. Their political slogan was: 'We are supporters of AIi's descendants; because they knew that the people accorded more respect to the Alawis in comparison to the Abbasids, and that the people were more devoted to the former.

Poets And The Abbasids

Intoxication of power showed its evil; as soon as they secured the kingdom, the Abbasids became aloof from the Alawis and the Shi’as. Muhammad Ahmad Burraq writes on page 48 of his book, Abu al-Abbas Saffah:

“The foundation of the revolution was actually laid by the descendants of Ali because most of the people of Khorasan7 were devoted to the Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a)8 and were not interested in Bani Abbas. It was for this reason that Saffah and the later caliphs kept watchf ul-eyes on Khorasan so that the Shi’as there may not become organized against them.”

Bani Abbas commissioned the poets to versify their praises and rewarded them well for this. Hence the poets criticized the descendants of Ali (‘a) and declared them to be unworthy of caliphate, saying: Bani Fatimah are related to the Prophet through their mother, whereas Bani Abbas are related to him through their father.

Besides buying over the poets, Bani Abbas abandoned the religion of Ahl Al-Bayt and adopted the Ahl Sunnah faith. They did this to prevent the spread of Shi’a faith, and that rulership may not shift to the descendants of Ali after them. In this way, Bani Abbas continued the policy and objective of Bani Umayyah and became like them in their belief, policies, and actions.

Saffah did not kill any Shi’a and did not persecute any Shi’a like the later Abbasid Caliphs. But that was only because his attention was focused on eliminating the Umayyads and towards consolidating his power. Also, it was because Saffah and the Shi’as had until recently fought jointly against Bani Umayyah, and the Shi’as had assisted him in securing power. In addition to this, Saffah's seat of power was Kufa, where the residents were followers of Imam Ali (‘a) and he did not possess enough strength to fight them.

Whatever the situation might have been, during the last days of Bani Umayyah and the initial period of the Abbasids, Imam Muhammad al-Baqir and Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a) had a good opportunity to expound and spread the teachings of Ahl Al-Bayt. It is as a consequence of their efforts that Islamic libraries today are replete with books on traditions and various subjects like jurisprudence, philosophy, exegesis, ethics etc.

Mansur, The Abbasid

The second Abbasid caliph was called Abdullah, his patronymic was Abu Ja'far, and Mansur was his title. He was the son of Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn Abdullah Ibn Abbas. Abbas Ibn Abd ul-Muttalib was the paternal half-brother of Abdullah, the honourable father of the Holy Prophet. Oath of allegiance for Mansur was taken in 136 A.H. and he died in 158 A.H. after ruling for 22 years.

Historians write:

“Apparently Saffah, brother of Mansur, was the first Abbasid caliph. But the real founder of the Abbasid dynasty was Mansur. Saffah's rule lasted for only four years, and it was Mansur who gave stability and grandeur to the regime. Mansur's nature was a mixture of good and evil. He understood people and their temperaments. He developed contacts with the people and selected a group of influential religious scholars who might sincerely support and protect the government of Bani Abbas. He capitalized on their influence and contacts for its preservation. Mansur was the first person who created a rift between Bani Abbas and the descendants of Ali (‘a), whereas before that both formed a single group.”

The claims of the historians are correct, except for the part stating that his personality was a mi of good and evil. It is inaccurate to say that Mansur’s morals were composed of good and evil because he was intrinsically an evil-minded person. When he noticed the people’s attachment to religion and realized that religion had an influence on their nature, he adopted an approach using religion. He constituted a body of religious scholars who might introduce him to the people, and also paid homage to him.

Mansur made a show of piety, but at the same time committed oppression and sin. If it is said that he combined good and evil, it means that he had combined intrigue with piety and sanctity, and it was on this account that he was reckoned to be a specimen of good and evil. However, not even one proof can be put forward to show that Mansur liked goodness only on account of its being goodness, because whatever good he did, it was hypocrisy and deceit.

State Preacher

Ibn Abd Rabb Al-Andalusi has written9 in that one day a state preacher was sitting with Mansur when Mansur told his sepoys to summon a few people and behead them. When too much blood was shed and his own dress was stained with it, he turned to the preacher and said: “Please preach to me.” When the preacher reminded him of Allah, Mansur cast down his head like one very much aggrieved. He then ordered the sepoys to once again bring some people and behead them. Again, when too much blood was shed, he turned to the preacher and said: “Preach to me.”

Mansur's asking the preacher to give him counsel was to ridicule religion and the Qur’an, because the holy Qur’an is emphatic against shedding of innocent blood. It is also possible that he asked for counsel because the people had lost the power of reasoning and had become so stupid that he failed to distinguish between bad and good.

And the conditions were so uncertain that some modern authors have written that Mansur had a split personality. They say, as he was a true believer as he attended sermons, but he had to resort to bloodshed to keep his rule safe. However, it is an impure nature which is manifested in two ways, at times in the form of oppression and crime: and at times in the form of show-off, hypocrisy, and fraud.

When Mansur learnt that he was being called a God-fearing caliph and that people were pleased, and that their fondness for hearing sermons increased, he summoned preachers, heard their words, and gave them rewards so that they might propagate among the people that the caliph was not oblivious of Allah. Whenever the Judgment Day was mentioned, he would begin to weep. These preachers were not unaware of Mansur's aim. Hence, those who were pious and sincere left him, whereas those who had considered religion a source of income flocked around him.

Mansur also wrote to Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a) and invited him to attend his assembly, but the Imam did not agree to go there.

Mansur wrote in one of his letters: “Why don't you come to me like others do?” The Imam replied: “I have no material wealth on account of which I may fear you, and you have nothing in the hereafter that I may seek from you.”

One day Mansur saw Sufyan Thawri and said to him: “Give me some good counsel.” Sufyan said: “You have not acted on that which you know, and now you want me to tell you what you do not know.”

Mansur said: Why don't you come to my place?

Sufyan replied: I do not come to your residence in obedience of divine command. Allah says:

“…. And be not inordinate (O men!), surely, He sees what you do” (11:112).

“And do not incline to those who are unjust, lest the fire touches you….” (11:113).

Mansur said: “Tell me what you want.”

Sufyan replied: “Do not invite me to your assembly and don't give me any money till I ask for it.”

Mansur said: “I have hunted many religious scholars by means of wealth and captured them, but Sufyan has escaped; he tires me off.”

In this way Mansur has disclosed his aim in associating with ulama and revealed the fact that he has made religion a tool of hunting and made money a means of capturing the ulama.

Mansur And The Mysterious Preacher

It is said that one night, while Mansur was performing circumambulation of the Kaaba, he saw a stranger who was saying: “O God! Injustice and corruption have appeared, and separation is created between truth and its followers. And I complain to You regarding this and seek Your assistance in the matter.”

Mansur summoned the stranger and asked: What were you saying?

The stranger said: Do you vouchsafe for me safety if I say something?

Mansur assured him that he would remain safe.

The stranger said: You are the ruler of Muslims but have raised a wall between yourself and the people and do not permit people to contact you and tell you of their grievances. Your ministers and advisors are unjust, and your workers are pleasure-loving and sinful. They say: Mansur is deceiving the people and Allah, and we therefore have no alternative but to be deceptive with him. In this way the entire country has drowned in oppression and injustice. However, you believe in Allah, you are the son of the Prophet’s uncle, and you are very kind to the Muslims.

Mansur said: O Lord! Grant me tawfeeq (divine opportunity) to act upon what this man says.

This is actually a fabricated story that historians and scholars of ethics and preachers narrated from the pulpits. No one has objected to this story, and all consider it authentic. But in my view, it is merely a fiction. If it were not fabricated, the counsel-giver would not have been a stranger.

If it was Prophet Khizr, why did he appear for Mansur only and not preach to other tyrants too? It seems that through this story Mansur wanted to tell the people that he was made caliph as per Divine will, that he had faith in Allah, he was the son of the prophet's uncle and was kind to the people. He accomplished this plan by claiming that he met Prophet Khizr and thereby proved that Allah had shown kindness to him through Prophet Khizr.

Masoodi writes that one day Mansur entered his room and saw the following couplets written on the wall:

“O Abu Ja'far! Your death has drawn near. The Divine decree must come to pass. O Abu Ja’far! Fortune tellers and astrologers cannot ward off death. Don't be foolish.”

“Mansur summoned his minister, Fazl Ibn Rabi and said: Did 1 not order you to assure that none should enter the house and write on the walls?”

Fazl said: “What was written?”

Mansur replied: “Can't you see these verses?''

Fazl said: By Allah, there is nothing on the wall.”

This event resembles the activities of the agents of colonialism who condemn colonialism publicly, but secretly work in the interest of the colonialists.

In the above paragraphs we wanted to prove the falsehood of Mansur and expose his deceitful tactics. Our real object in discussing Mansur's beliefs was to throw light on his policy in relation to the descendants and Shi’as of Ali (‘a).

Mansur And Imam Ali's Descendants

Apart from Abdullah Ibn Abbas, the family of Bani Abbas was an obscure and unknown family. If not for their relationship with the prophet, they would not have been mentioned at all in history. On the contrary, Imam Ali's family, Bani Hashim, possessed perfect knowledge and faith in every age, and the hearts of the people were inclined towards them. All of them, from Imam Ali (‘a) all the way to Mahdi (‘a) possessed unparalleled greatness and virtue.

In order to acquire dignity, Bani Abbas thus linked themselves with Imam Ali (‘a), his descendants, and the Holy Prophet. They attended the assemblies of Imam Ali's descendants with great respect and acquired knowledge from them. When Muhammad Ibn Abdullah Ibn Hasan mounted a horse, Mansur held the stirrup and brushed his dress when he was seated on the horseback.

When the Umayyads were on the verge of defeat, the descendants of Ali (‘a) and Bani Abbas rallied around Muhammad Ibn Abdullah Ibn Hasan and gave allegiance to him. Ibrahim, Saffah and Mansur were among them, but Mansur showed greater zeal for allegiance to Muhammad. Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a) was also invited to this gathering and on his arrival, was asked to accept allegiance. He tapped Saffah's back and said: “This man will become the caliph.” Then he pointed to Mansur and said: “After him, the caliphate will come to this man.” Thereafter, turning to Abdullah Ibn Hasan, he said: “Your two sons, Muhammad and Ibrahim, will be killed at the hands of Mansur. Having said this, the Imam departed.” 10

After Saffah, when Mansur became the caliph, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah went into hiding. Mansur demanded him from his father and decided to eliminate him on account of the pledge of allegiance Muhammad ‘owed’ him to relieve himself of anxiety. He, therefore, engaged detectives to arrest Muhammad and his brother Ibrahim.

Eventually the two brothers felt that they had no alternative but to surrender to Mansur or wage a war against him. Hence Muhammad raised the standard of revolt in Medina and Ibrahim, in Basra. They fought, but they were finally killed along with a large number of descendants of Ansars and Muhajirs and the children of Ja'far Ibn Abu Talib and also the children of Imam Husayn (‘a). Husayn and Ali, two sons of Zaid Ibn Ali Ibn al-Husayn were also killed in the company of Muhammad, known as 'Nafs Zakiyyah'.

Masoodi writes that Mansur had a sweetmeat made of kernel and sugar prepared for him and ate it. He liked it very much. He remarked: “Ibrahim wished to prevent me from taking this and other similar foods!” It was as if it was nothing serious for Mansur and he killed the descendants of the prophet only for the sake of tasty foods!

Atrocities Of Mansur

It is mentioned in Murujuz Zahab11 and an-Niza wat Takhasum12 that Mansur gathered Imam Hasan's descendants and ordered them to be put into chains and iron-collars. They were made to mount litters without saddles and sent to pitch-dark dungeons, as was done by Yazid in the case of Imam Husayn’s family.

In such a situation they divided the Qur’an into five parts and before each daily prayer they recited one part of Qur’an. The prison they were kept in did not have toilets and they were obliged to empty their bowels at the place they resided. As a result, its foul odour caused their bodies to swell. This swelling commenced from their feet and reached their hearts. They departed from the world on account of serious illness, hunger, and thirst.

Maqrizi has quoted from Tarikh Kamil in an-Niza wat Takhasum, that Mansur summoned Muhammad Ibn Abdullah Ibn Uthman, a brother of Imam Hasan's descendants from their mother's side and ordered his dress to be torn till his private parts were visible. In that condition he was given 150 lashes. Once the whip struck his face and he said: 'Woe betide you! Spare my face at least.' Mansur ordered them to strike his head. Thirty lashes were, therefore, given on his head. One of those lashes struck his eyeball which came out and fell on his face. At last, he was put to death.

Ibn Athir writes that Mansur also summoned Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Hasan. Muhammad had such a delicate built that he was nicknamed 'brocade'. When he arrived Mansur asked him: So, you are the yellow brocade? I swear by Allah that I shall kill you in a manner none has been killed. Then by his order, Muhammad was buried alive in a pit and a pillar was constructed over his body.

Mu’awiyyah used to bury the people alive without allowing them to say anything, but Mansur buried them alive and built pillars on them. Thus was the difference between the Syrian regime and Iraqi kingdom, and this very policy distinguished Bani Umayyah from Bani Abbas.

We have not seen during the Umayyad rule that one of their governors imprisoned some individuals in a dungeon where all of them died one after the other under unbearably odious surroundings. Hence, a poet says:

“By Allah, the crimes of Bani Umayyah were not even one tenth of those of Bani Abbas.”

It is mentioned in an-Niza wat Takhasum13 that Qasim Ibn Ibrahim Tabatabai had an estate in Medina which was called Ar-Rass. When Mansur summoned him also, he left Medina and ran away with the intention of going to Sind. In his verses, Qasim says about Bani Abbas:

“Shedding our blood has not satiated Mansur and he is still pursuing us.”

“The fire of their malice can be extinguished only when none of the descendants of the Prophet’s daughter is left on earth.”

Qasim walked barefoot and his feet bled as he fled from one city to another. He says in a couplet:

“It is hoped that the bone-joiner will set the broken bones.14I have not lost hope in Allah. He will indeed help those who suffer hardships.”

It is mentioned in An-Niza wat Takhasum15:

Mansur entrusted a room to the wife of his son, Mahdi, and administered an oath that so long as he was alive, she would not open the room. When Mansur died, Mahdi opened the room and he saw that dead bodies of descendants of Abu Talib were lying in it. Their parentage was written on pieces of paper hanging from their ears and some children could also be seen amongst them.

Maqrizi writes:

What connection such crimes have with justice, with the religion of Muhammad and with the conduct of religious leaders? What link has this hard-heartedness with the kinship of the ‘mercy of the worlds’? By Allah, these actions have nothing to do with religion and faith.

On the other hand, these indecent actions are mentioned in Qur’an as follows:

“(O hypocrites!) But if you held command, you were sure to make mischief in the land and cut off the ties of kinship!” (47:22).

“Those it is whom Allah has cursed so He has made them deaf and blinded their eyes” (47:23).

Is this the conduct of one who claims that he has faith in Allah, the Judgment Day and the Qu’ran, and that he is the caliph of Allah and son of the uncle of Allah's messenger?

Imam Ja'far As-Sadiq And Mansur

Mansur gave the title of ‘as-Sadiq’ to the sixth Imam, because Imam Ja’far had earlier correctly predicted Mansur's rulership. He had also predicted that Muhammad and Ibrahim, the two sons of Abdullah Ibn Hasan, would be killed by Mansur.16

During Mansur's reign, Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a) advised his followers:

“You should obey and remain silent,17 because you are under the reign of a king whose deceit caused even the mountains to tumble down.”

However, Mansur was not satisfied with the silence of the Holy Imam and the obedience of his followers so long as the people considered Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq (‘a) to be the Imam and superior to Mansur and others.

Muhammad Asqanturi says: I went see Mansur and found him absorbed in deep thoughts. I enquired him why he was in such a pensive mood.

Mansur said: I have killed more than a thousand descendants of Fatimah, but I have not killed their leader so far.

I asked: Who is that?

Mansur replied: I know you consider him your Imam and believe that he is my imam, your Imam and Imam of the entire world.18 However, I shall decide about him now.

This narration shows that the Shi’a faith has flourished so much at that time that it even influenced Mansur's associates. It is said that even Rabi, Mansur's minister, was a Shi’a. Ibn Abd Rabb has writes:19

“When Mansur halted in Medina on his way to Mecca, he said to Rabi: 'Summon Ja'far Ibn Muhammad before me. May Allah kill me if I do not kill him.' Rabi delayed summoning the Imam but eventually called him up on Mansur's insistence. When Imam Ja’far (‘a) arrived in the court, his lips were moving slowly. He approached Mansur and greeted him. Mansur said: O enemy of Allah! May Allah destroy you! You are creating trouble in my territories. May Allah kill me if I don't kill you.”

“Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq said: Prophet Sulaiman got the Kingdom and thanked Allah. Prophet Ayyub bore much hardship, but with fortitude. Prophet Yusuf was oppressed, and he forgave the oppressor. You are their successor, and it is only proper that you follow their example.”

“Mansur lowered his head, then raised it again and said: Of all the tribes, you are closer to us and nearest in kin. He then embraced the imam, made him sit on his own seat, and began conversing with him. Thereafter he said: Bring the gift and dress for as-Sadiq immediately and see him off with honour.”

When the Holy Imam came out, Rabi followed him and said: “I have been defending you since the past three days and doing all I could to save you. When you approached Mansur, I saw that your lips were moving in a silent prayer and consequently he could not harm you. As I am a servant of the ruler, I stand in need of this supplication. Please teach it to me.”

The prayer that Imam Ja’far taught him is translated as follows:

“O Lord! Protect me with Your eye which never sleeps; guard me with Your Power which never becomes the target of calamity, so that I may not perish, for it is You on whom all my hopes are fixed. O Lord! Forgive me, for You have granted me abundant gifts for which I could not thank You. Even then You did not withdraw those gifts from me, and there were many misfortunes to which I was subjected by You, and I showed lack of patience. O Lord! Let me remain safe from his mischief with Your support and Power of defence and I seek Your refuge from his evil.”

Mualla Ibn Khunais was amongst the closest Shi’as of Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a). He administered secretarial and financial affairs of the Holy Imam. Mansur wrote to Da'wood Ibn Urwah, the Governor of Medina, to kill Mualla.

Dawood summoned Mualla and said: Write down the names of Shi’as or I will behead you.

Mualla said: ''Do you threaten me with death? I swear by Allah that even if the name of one Shi’a is under my foot, I shall not lift it.”

Dawood cut off Mualla's head and hanged him on the scaffold. When Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) received the news of Mualla's martyrdom he was extremely disturbed, and he cursed Dawood. His curse had not yet come to an end when the news of Dawood's death arrived.20

Abu Faraas has writes21 that Mansur wrote to his governor to set the house of Imam Sadiq (‘a) on fire and to poison him. Consequently, he was poisoned to death.22

As admitted by Mansur himself, he killed more than one thousand descendants of Fatimah. As regards the Shi’as killed by him, their number is unknown. Mansur invented new types of torture and enjoyed killing people in different ways. He whipped people on the eyes, blinding them. He pulled down houses on the heads of the inhabitants and placed them alive in the walls. He poisoned them etc. However, some ignorant persons say that Mansur had faith in Allah, was the representative of Allah on earth, and was related to the Holy Prophet.

A close study of the history of Muslim rulers leads us to conclude that if Mansur and those like him had not been there, Islam, with its sublime morals and teachings, would have spread in the East and West. Mankind would have professed Islam without being invited to it, and not a single non-Muslim would have been left.

Mahdi, The Abbasid

After Mansur, his son Mahdi,23 ruled from 158 A.H. to 169 A.H. Under the pretence of doing good and kindness, he removed all barriers to his reign and unleashed such murders and persecution that none of the descendants of Imam Ali was spared.

Only the following two persons escaped the rule of Mansur:

1. Ali Ibn Abbas Ibn Hasan Ibn Hasan Ibn Ali Ibn Abu Talib. Mahdi captured and imprisoned him, and later poisoned him. As a result, his body swelled, and his limbs disintegrated.

2. Isa Ibn Zaid Ibn Ali Ibn Husayn Ibn Ali Ibn Abu Talib. Abu al-Faraj writes in Maqatilut Talibiyyin:

   As regards faith, knowledge and piety, Isa was the most eminent among the descendants of Ali (‘a) and as to his indigence, he was the most helpless. As regards insight into general matters and his faith, he was the wisest of all, and in the narration of traditions and their research, he was most outstanding among Bani Hashim.

Fearing Mahdi, Isa fled and hid himself in the house of Ali Ibn Salih, a Shi’a of Ahl Al-Bayt. In order that he might not be a burden to anyone, he found himself obliged to do some work.

The people of Kufa brought water for their use from the Euphrates loading it on camels etc. Isa made an agreement with the owner of a camel that he would bring water by loading it on the camel, pay its charges and take the balance. Isa remained engaged in this work for a long time and none identified him. He married a girl belonging to a poor family and she and her people also did not know who he was.

Isa had a brother named Husayn and that brother had a son named Yahya. One day Yahya said to his father: O father, I am desirous of meeting my uncle because I have never seen him. Husayn said: Son, I fear this might put your uncle into trouble. Yahya insisted till his father agreed and said to him:

“Go to Kufa and inquire about the Bani Hayy locality. There is a street there with this name and a house with this sign. Sit down near that house.

In the evening you will see a tall old man coming, the marks of prostration are visible on his forehead. You will find him wearing woollen clothes and loading water on the back of a camel. He remembers Allah on every step and tears flow from his eyes. You should then stand up and salute him and put your arms around his neck. In the beginning, he will be afraid of you.

So, you should introduce yourself at once. That man is your uncle. He will narrate his own affairs and inquire about ours. Do not stay there for long, but take leave of him and return, because it is possible that you may not see him again. Carry out whatever instructions he gives you, because if you go to see him again, he will get afraid of you and will change his residence.

Yahya says:

I went to Kufa and acted according to the directions given by my father. When I tried to embrace my uncle, he became afraid of me just as wild animals fear human beings and run away. I told him that I was his nephew, Yahya. Thereupon he embraced me and wept. He made his camel sit, and himself sat down by the side of the road and began talking. He inquired about every member of the family, and I informed him in detail, and he wept.

Then he said:

Dear nephew! I bring water loading it on the back of this camel, pay the hiring charges and spend the rest of my earnings on my own needs. When I cannot bring water, I go to the desert and procure my food in the form of vegetables, which people throw away. O my nephew! I have married a woman who does not know who I am. Allah gave me a daughter and she did not know my position. Her mother said to me: Give your daughter in marriage to the son of such and such water carrier who is one of our neighbours because he is suitable for us and has asked for her hand. She insisted for a reply, but I could not tell her that her daughter is a descendant of the prophet. I, therefore, sought a remedy from Allah and He caused the girl to die. Although her death was hard for me it was not hard for me from another point of view, because she departed from the world and did not know her relationship with the Holy Prophet.

Yahya says: My uncle requested me in the Name of Allah to return and not to see him again. I, therefore, bade him farewell and returned.

The life history of people like Isa makes the conduct of the despotic rulers clear. Under their rule, the learned and the righteous suffered different kinds of hardships, whereas the mean ones lived in pleasure and enjoyed all amenities.

The pious scholar and faithful traditionist, Isa Ibn Zaid Ibn Imam Zayn Al-’Abidin, who was a descendant of Imam Ali and Lady Fatimah could not introduce himself in a city of Muslims although the ruler of the city was the chief of the Muslims. He did not make himself known and earned his livelihood through hard labour.

Isa was spending his time away from his home secretly in a state of exile and was suffering all these hardships because he was a learned and pious man, and knew what truth is, and acted accordingly. However, as for licentious men, loose women, and those who were immersed in crimes lived in luxury, they had all the luxuries of life. Masoodi says that the huge amount of tax that Mansur had collected from the people was distributed by his son, Mahdi, to his favourites.

A professor of Philosophy in Cairo University said to me: “Shi’as believe in Taqiyyah (dissimulation).”

I said:

“Professor, may Allah curse those who forced the Shi’as to observe Taqiyyah. Prophet Musa left Egypt secretly and said: “O Lord! Deliver me from the unjust people” (28:21). And our Holy Prophet said: “It is a matter of shame for a nation in which a true believer is obliged to perform his duties in Taqiyyah.”

You people are vociferous about the freedom of opinion and faith. However, when you see an oppressed person deprived of his right and not saying anything for fear of despotic rulers, you criticize him for observing Taqiyyah; but you ignore the crimes of the oppressors.”

Hadi, The Abbasid

Upon Mahdi's death, people gave allegiance to his son Musa, who assumed the title of Hadi.

Masoodi writes in Murujuz Zahab:

“Mahdi ruled for 15 months. He was a cruel and bad-mannered person.” During Hadi’s rule, the Governor of Medina was Abd ul-Aziz, a descendant of Umar. He used to persecute the descendants of Imam Ali (‘a). In today's terminology, he had put all of them on the exit control list. He had told them: You must report to the police station every day. Abd ul-Aziz used to accuse the descendants of Ali (‘a) of drinking wine; he lashed them and paraded them in the bazaars.

One day Abd ul-Aziz summoned Husayn Ibn Ali Ibn Husayn, used abusive language, threatened him with death, and spoke in such an unbecoming manner that Husayn was compelled to revolt against him. Abd ul-Aziz killed Husayn and some other descendants of Imam Ali who were with him at a place called Fakh, situated six miles from Mecca. For three days their dead bodies remained under the sky and wild animals and birds ate their flesh. Those who were captured were also tortured and then killed.”24

Although Hadi lived for a short time, he performed such dastardly acts and that his name entered the register of the murderers of Ali's descendants.

Abu al-Faraj Isfahani writes in Maqatilut Talibiyyin:

The mother of Husayn (Martyr of Fakh) was Zainab Ibnt Abdullah Ibn Hasan Ibn Hasan Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib. Mansur killed her father, brother, and uncle, as well as her husband, Ali Ibn Husayn. Mansur's grandson, Hadi killed her son, Husayn. Due to extreme grief, Zainab used to wear a dress made of hair, which was tight on her body. She passed away from the world in this condition.

Haroon Ar-Rashid, The Abbasid

Haroon ar-Rashid, the Abbasid25

After the death of his brother Hadi, Rashid occupied the seat of caliphate in 170 A.H. and passed away in 193 A.H. No one else from amongst Bani Abbas enjoyed the fame that fell to the share of Rashid and Ma’mun. Haroon became famous on account of his monarchy, greatness and advancement of learning, art, and culture during his regime. The stories of Arabian Nights played a prominent role in making Haroon famous in different ways.

Haroon's fame was due to his administration of state affairs. The construction of masjids, colleges, hospitals, houses, bridges, roads, and canals displayed the skill of the Barmecids, who managed important affairs of the state for seventeen years. But these very merits became the cause of their fall and destruction at the hands of Haroon ar-Rashid. Although the story of the love affair of Abbasa and Ja'far Barmaki, and Abbasa's becoming pregnant as a consequence of their secret meetings is also well-known, it has been invented only to serve as a cover for the crime of Haroon and to justify oppression and persecution by him.

Many historians have written that Haroon could not tolerate separation from his sister, Abbasa. He, therefore, married her to Ja'far, subject to the condition that they would not have sexual relations with each other and would meet only in Haroon's presence. However, Abbasa loved Ja'far, and they came together. As a result, she gave birth to a son. When Haroon came to know about it, he destroyed the Barmecids.

One who has forged this story has forgotten to add that Rashid was foolish and did not understand the consequences of this marriage!

Abu Faraas, author of Shafiya, quotes from Thamarat ul-Awraq thus: Rashid was the first caliph to play polo, backgammon, and chess.

Haroon's policy towards the descendants of Ali (‘a) was that not a single descendant of Imam Ali (‘a) should remain alive as will become clear from the examples below:

Sixty Martyrs

It is mentioned in Uyun ul-Akhbar ar-Ridha’ 26 that Hamid Ibn Qahtaba Tai Tusi said:

One night, Haroon summoned me; gave me a sword, and pointing to a servant said: “Act according to the instructions of this servant.” The servant brought me to a house that was closed. He opened the gate. There were three rooms and a well in that house. Each room contained 20 prisoners who were chained in the legs. He opened the first room and brought out 20 men with long and woven hair. This group included young persons as well as old. Haroon's servant said: “Kill these people. They are descendants of Ali and Fatimah.”

I killed them one after the other and the servant threw their bodies into the well (like agencies eliminate people today). Then he opened the second room. This room also contained 20 sadaat, and they were also dealt with in the same way. Thereafter the third room was opened, where there were also 20 sayyids who were put to death. In the end only an old man remained, who said to me:

“O wicked man! May Allah destroy you! What excuse will you put to our grandfather, the prophet, on Judgment Day?” My hands trembled and I felt nervous. However, the servant looked at me angrily and threatened me. I, therefore, killed the old man too, and the servant threw his body into the well.

Amidst The Pillars

Abu al-Faraj Isfahani quotes from Ibrahim Ibn Riyah in Maqatilut Talibiyyin that when Rashid captured Yahya Ibn Abdullah Ibn Hasan Ibn Hasan Ibn Ali Ibn Abu Talib, he got a pillar constructed on him while he was still alive. He had inherited this practice from his grandfather, Mansur. When Mansur was laying the foundation of Baghdad, he used to arrest the descendants of Ali (‘a) and placed them in the walls built of bricks and plaster.

One day Mansur caught a handsome young man with black hair from among the descendants of Imam Hasan (‘a) and ordered the mason to place him in the midst of a wall. He also appointed a watchman over the mason to ensure that he does not disobey the orders. When the mason was putting the young man in the wall, he felt pity for him and thus left a hole in the wall from which air could enter and told the man that he would free him at night.

At night, the mason took him out from the wall and said to him: “Do something so that my blood as well as that of my workers would not be shed. I brought you out so that on the Judgment Day I may not be answerable to your grandfather. You must go into hiding immediately.” The young man said: “I shall do so. However, you send a message to my mother that I have escaped death, but l cannot meet her.''

The mason says: I went to the address given by him, met his mother, related the entire story to her and delivered to her the hair that her son had given me for identification.

Yahya And Haroon Ar-Rashid

When persecution of Ali's descendants at the hands of Haroon ar-Rashid became severe, Yahya Ibn Abdullah Ibn Hasan revolted against him in Dailam.27

According to historians, Yahya remained in hiding for a long time and moved from one city to another for refuge till he reached Dailam. There, he disclosed his identity and became very popular. People from different cities took refuge with him. Haroon ar-Rashid sent Fazal Ibn Yahya with a strong army of 50,000 to confront Yahya.

Fazal wrote to Yahya suggesting a peace treaty. When Yahya saw that his companions had betrayed him and ran away, he agreed to conclude peace. However, he wrote to Fazal: “I shall make peace only when Haroon writes with his own hand a deed guaranteeing my safety, and the judges, jurists, and the elders of Bani Hashim attest it.” Haroon Rashid wrote a deed as desired by Yahya and the witnesses affixed their signatures on it. He prepared two copies of the deed, retained one and sent the other to Yahya.

When Yahya met Haroon, the latter honoured him and presented him 200,000 dinars, many robes, and other articles of gift to him. Despite this, grudge remained in Haroon's heart. One day, he asked Yahya: Which one of us is more closely related to the Holy Prophet? Yahya said: Please excuse me from answering this question. Haroon said: You must give a reply, I won't leave you. Then the following conversation took place between them:

Yahya: Supposing the prophet comes to life and seeks the hand of your daughter, will you give it?

Haroon: By Allah, I shall.

Yahya: Supposing the prophet comes to life and wants to marry my daughter, will that be permissible for me to give my daughter to him in marriage?

Haroon: No. It will not be permissible.

Yahya: This answers your question28

Haroon was very angry for his defeat and walked out of the gathering.29

Pseudo-Ulama

Haroon ar-Rashid decided to betray Yahya and nullify the deed of amnesty (that he had written with his own hand). However, he had no justification for this and therefore continued to tolerate the situation. At last, however, he lost patience and contacted Wahhab Ibn Wahhab Abu al-Bakhtari. Haroon knew that this scholar was corrupt. Abu al-Bakhtari tore up the amnesty deed and issued a fatwa that the document was void and it was lawful to shed Yahya's blood. In lieu of this service, Haroon paid him a huge amount and appointed him as a judge.30

On the basis of this fatwa, Haroon ordered Yahya to be given a hundred lashes. Yahya reminded him of his kinship with the prophet, but without any effect. Then he sent Yahya to prison. On the following day, he summoned Yahya again and gave 100 lashes. Thereafter Haroon imprisoned him and stopped food and water to him. As a result of this, Yahya passed away. According to another version he died in prison due to heart trouble. Whatever the circumstances may have been, it was a clear case of murder by strangulation.

Persons like Abu al-Bakhtari existed before Haroon, existed after him, and still continue to exist. Ibn Athir writes that forty pseudo ulamas issued verdict for Yazid Ibn Abu al-Malik that the caliphs are exonerated from accounting and punishment in the Hereafter.31

I am. aware of many such pseudo ulama who are lackeys of despots like Haroon and Yazid, who support their transgression and sinfulness, and issue statements against sincere religious scholars.

Haroon's Learning

A lady wrote to Haroon: May Allah accomplish your work, make you happy with what He has given you and grant you a high position.

Haroon said to his courtiers: “This woman has cursed me under the cover of du’a. When she says: May Allah accomplish your work, she refers to the words of a poet who says: When it is said that your work is accomplished, it means that you should await your annihilation. And when she says: May Allah make you happy with what He has given you, she refers to the words of Allah viz.:

“When they are happy with what they possess we take it away suddenly” (6:44).

And her saying that Allah may grant me high position has a reference to the words of a poet who says: “The fall of every bird is according to the proportion of the height it flies.”

Descendants Of Abu Talib

Abu al-Faraj Isfahani writes in Maqatilut Talibiyyin:

“Haroon regularly inquired from his agents about the circumstances in which Ali's descendants were living. He was informed that one of them named Abdullah Ibn Hasan Ibn Ali was residing at a particular place. He summoned Abdullah, who said to Haroon that he didn't have any connection with the revolutionaries of Bani Hashim. “I roam about in the wilderness and earn my livelihood by hunting. Fear Allah and don't shed my blood.” Haroon imprisoned Abdullah and later had one of his ministers put him to death. He also imprisoned Muhammad Ibn Yahya Ibn Abdullah Ibn Hasan Ibn Hasan, who breathed his last in the prison.

He flogged Husayn Ibn Abdullah Ibn Ismail Ibn Abdullah Ibn Ja'far Ibn Abi Talib so much that he died. Ishaq Ibn Husayn Ibn Zaid Ibn Hasan also passed away in Haroon's prison.

When Abbas Ibn Muhammad Ibn Abdullah Ibn Ali Ibn Husayn came before Haroon, the latter said: Son of loose woman!

Abbas retorted: She must be your mother.

Haroon was infuriated and ordered to split his head. Thus, he was struck with an iron rod and died.

Imam Musa Al-Kazim And Haroon Ar-Rashid

The Qur’an speaks of two categories of leaders, viz the leaders of truth and leaders of falsehood and deviation. Almighty Allah says:

“We appointed them as leaders to guide the people through our command and sent them revelation to strive for good deeds, worship their Lord, and pay Zakat” (21:73)

These attributes are especially found in Imam Ali (‘a) and the purified imams from his descendants. On another occasion Allah says:

“We made them imams (leaders) who would invite people to the fire and who would receive no help on the Judgment Day” (28:41).

These qualities were peculiar to Haroon ar-Rashid, Bani Umayyah, Bani Abbas, and those with the same thinking.

Keeping these facts in view, the dispute between Imam Musa al-Kazim and Haroon ar-Rashid was natural and a real conflict. One Imam invited people to Allah and paradise, and another invited them to Satan and hell. Is it possible for the two opposites to unite?32 If apparently there is nonchalance, smile and quiet, it is like a spark hidden under the ashes and so long as the heart is filled with enmity and hatred, this flame continues to remain alive.

The following event explains the implication of these remarks:

It is mentioned in Uyun ul-Akhbar 33 that Ma’mun said:

I always loved the Ahl Al-Bayt but displayed enmity against them, in order to win Haroon's favour. I accompanied him to Mecca once. On the way, when we halted in Medina, and Imam Musa al-Kazim came to see Haroon. Haroon accorded him great respect, embraced him, and inquired about the well-being of his family members. When the Imam was ready to leave, Haroon ar-Rashid stood up and bade him farewell respectfully.

When the Imam went away, I asked my father: Who was this man to whom you showed so much respect? My father said: He is Musa Ibn Ja'far, the inheritor of prophetic sciences. If you wish to acquire true knowledge, you can acquire it from him.

Haroon embraced the imam, honoured, and respected him and acknowledged that he had inherited the knowledge of the prophets. However, this acknowledgement and conferring of respect to the Imam could be of no use to Haroon because the Imam invited the people to Paradise whereas Haroon invited them to Hell.

When Haroon saw that people loved the Imam and had faith in him, he could not control his grudge. Even though he knew that the Imam was the inheritor of prophetic knowledge, he got innumerable descendants of the Holy Prophet killed.

When people love knowledge and those who possessed knowledge, and were interested in truth and its supporters, was that the fault of Imam Musa al-Kazim? Should he have become ignorant, and committed unlawful acts openly so that Haroon gets to be pleased with him, in the same way he was pleased with Makharaq and others like him? If one has an enemy who can be satisfied only with his death, should he commit suicide to please his enemy?

Imam Kazim (‘a) had not rebelled against the regime. He had not invited anyone to give allegiance to him. He had not instigated anyone against Haroon. His only fault was that he had inherited the knowledge of Prophets and was the Imam of truth and guidance.

Falsehood is hypocritical whereas the truth is without a partner Never accept a moderate partnership of truth and falsehood.

Imam In Detention

Haroon ar-Rashid sent his sepoys to Imam Musa al-Kazim. He was then performing prayers near the blessed grave of his grandfather. The sepoys arrested and handcuffed him and dispatched him to Basra. Isa Ibn Ja'far Ibn Mansur was the Governor of Basra at that time. He kept the Imam in prison for one year and then wrote to Haroon: If you do not remove Musa Ibn Ja'far from my custody, I shall release him because I have tried my best to find some evidence against him but could not get any.

Haroon imprisoned Imam Musa al-Kazim in Baghdad under the care of Fazl Ibn Rabi, and then transferred him to the prison of Yahya, and later to that of Sindi Ibn Shahik. Eventually Sindi poisoned him to death. According to another narration, he was wrapped in a carpet and the servants sat on him and he died of suffocation.

While discussing the persecutions by Bani Umayyah, it was mentioned that all these evils and crimes were due to grudge and inherent cruelty. However, when discussing the personality of Haroon ar-Rashid it came to my mind that after attaining rulership, the nature and morals of the ruler changed. When they saw that their position was established, they assessed everything from the perspective of the security of their position and strength. Faith, knowledge, and conscience were of no value to them.

If we do not consider rulership to be the cause of the change in mentality, how can we explain the behaviour of the weak persons, who become stone-hearted and bloodthirsty when they acquire a position? What I mean by position is not confined to governmental offices. It also includes even religious positions. It is so because a religious leader is also like a government leader. Both leaders protect their respective positions.

The only difference is that a religious leader considers his position holy and considers its protection to be an article of faith. He considers its protection necessary like other holy things and religious rites, and there is no doubt that interest in religious position entails greater danger and more harm. Only the people of the Holy Prophet's household and a few of their followers are immune from this danger.34

What has been stated above is a reality. Ayatullah Mohsin al-Hakim says in his book Mustamsak ul-Urwah 35:

“Truly speaking, it is difficult for a jurist to maintain righteousness, because change in righteousness takes place for everyone in every age. And when a person in a high position is no more righteous, he does not exercise much precaution, and does not call himself to account, quickly leading to the elimination of his righteousness. Being a Marja is to be in a dangerous position where even big personalities stumble.”

Imam Ridha’ And Haroon

Sayyid Mohsin Amin writes:36

“After the demise of Imam Musa al-Kazim (‘a), Haroon sent his Commander, Jaludi to Medina and ordered him to attack the houses of Abu Talib 's descendants and plunder all the clothes of their women, leaving only one dress for each. When Jaludi approached the house of Imam Ridha’ (‘a) the Imam gathered all the ladies in a room and sat down on the threshold. Jaludi said: “I must enter the house and take the women's clothes.” The Imam swore to Jaludi that he would bring the clothes and ornaments of the women, provided that he (Jaludi) remained outside the house. Owing to the kindness of the imam, he agreed to this. Imam Ridha’ entered the room, collected the ornaments, clothes and other belongings and handed these over to Jaludi. The latter took them away and presented them to Haroon.

When Ma’moon ascended the throne, he expressed his indignation against Jaludi and wanted to kill him. Imam Ridha’ (‘a) was also present in this gathering. He recommended to Ma’moon to forgive Jaludi. Jaludi remembered having wronged the imam, and he thought that the Imam was speaking against him.

He, therefore, turned to Ma’mun and said: “I ask you in the Name of Allah not to accept the words of this man about me.” Ma’moon said: “I swear by Allah that I am not going to accept what he says.” He then ordered Jaludi to be beheaded.

Haroon committed many atrocities on the descendants and followers of Imam Ali (‘a), but for the sake of brevity, we refrain from presenting a detailed account. What has been said above is sufficient to show Haroon's character and throws ample light on his nature and policies.

Amin, The Abbasid

Haroon ruled for more than 23 years and died in Tus in the year 193 A.H. after taking allegiance for his son, Amin. The period of the caliphate of Amin was a little more than four years. Abu al-Faraj Isfahani writes in Maqatilut Talibiyyin:

“The attitude of Amin towards Abu Talib's descendants was different from that of his predecessors. It was because he had spent his life in pleasure and luxuries. After that, a war ensued between him and Ma’moon in which Amin was eventually killed. During the reigns of Amin and Ma’moon, no incident of persecution of Abu Talib's descendants was recorded.

Ma’mun Ar-Rashid, The Abbasid

Ma’mun killed his brother Amin and ascended the throne. During the time of Haroon and Ma’mun, the Shi’a faith became firmly rooted and its impact appeared in the court of Ma’mun also. Ma’mun's vizier, Fazl Ibn Sahl Zur-Riyasatayn, was a Shi’a and so was Tahir Ibn al-Husayn Khuzai, the Commander of Ma’mun's army who conquered Baghdad for him and killed his brother Amin.

In short, there were many Shi’as in Ma’mun's administration and that was the reason he began to fear Fazl and Tahir. He, therefore, killed Fazl and dismissed Tahir from commandership of the army, and appointed him as the governor of Herat. Ibn Athir writes in Tarikh Kamil, in connection with the events of the year 250, that the entire tribe of Tahir was Shi’a.

It is an undeniable fact that the persecutions, murders, and tyrannies of despotic rulers on the Shi’as became the cause of further expansion of the Shi’a faith. The more injustice they committed the more people rallied around Ahl Al-Bayt and for every single person who was killed, thousands embraced the Shi’a faith. The following event will clarify this matter:

When Sindi Ibn Shahik poisoned Imam Musa al-Kazim, he took 80 desk scholars and community elders to his body and said: you can see that he was not tortured and has died a natural death. He invited the people to see that there was no wound, bruises or any other sign on his body which might show that he had been murdered.

Haroon did this because people suspected that he had died of poisoning and this suspicion was sufficient to cause the people to revolt against him. Then the imam's bier was placed on the Baghdad Bridge, as most Shi’as lived in that area. They made announcements: “Musa Ibn Ja'far has passed away: Come and see him for the last time.”

The Shi’as got agitated, but before a disturbance could develop, Sulaiman Ibn Ja'far, Haroon's uncle took the funeral bier from the custody of police and carried it barefooted along with a large crowd. He pretended that he was escorting the funeral procession as a mark of love for the Imam or for the sake of his kinship to him. However, the fact was that he was afraid of a revolt against his nephew, Haroon and thus wanted to calm down public sentiments.

Ma’mun came to know that a large number of Shi’as were inclined to Imam Ridha’ (‘a) and that they were displeased with his father, Haroon. Rather, they hated the former Abbasid rulers. He thus declared hypocritically and deceitfully that he was a Shi’a to win their sympathies and attract public opinion towards him. He began defending the caliphate of Imam Ali, affirmed his truthfulness, and acknowledged that he was superior to Abu Bakr and Umar.

In reality, he did all this to safeguard and strengthen his rule. It is surprising that most Shi’as also could not perceive the designs of Ma’mun and held a favourable opinion of him.

The fact is that Haroon and Ma’mun acted for an identical purpose, and that was to strengthen their regime. Their ways differed, but their real goal was same. Haroon poisoned Imam Kazim (‘a) and Ma’mun poisoned Imam Ridha’ (‘a). The only difference was that Ma’mun realized from Haroon’s mistakes that an open persecution of Ali's descendants would be equal to political suicide.

Imam Ridha’ (‘A) And Ma’mun

Imam Ali Ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ (‘a) was the best human being of his age and enjoyed the highest position in the view of Allah and the people. Historians say that when he passed through Nishapur,37 thousands flocked on the roads to welcome him. The scholars held the reins of the imam's mount and wanted to benefit from his knowledge and to hear from his blessed tongue the tradition of his ancestors.

Imam Ridha’s Eid Prayer And Ma’mun

Ma’mun requested Imam Ridha’ (‘a) to lead the Eid prayer. But the Imam (‘a) excused himself according to the terms agreed at the time of his appointment as heir apparent. When Ma’mun insisted further, the Imam agreed to his request, but said that he would go out to lead the prayer in the manner of the Holy Prophet (S). Ma’mun agreed to the terms of the imam.

People were waiting to see Imam Ridha’ (‘a) coming out with the same pomp and glory as the caliphs and rulers did. But all were shocked when they saw that him came out of his house bare foot, reciting takbir38 and walked towards the ground for Eid prayer. Government officials and members of the royalty came down from their horses and they also took off their shoes; and followed the Imam weeping and chanting.

The Imam (‘a) recited the takbir thrice at every step. It is mentioned in books that Fazl Ibn Sahl said to Ma’mun: “If Imam Ridha’ arrives to lead prayers in this condition, he will enchant the people. It is, therefore, my suggestion that you call him back.” Ma’mun sent someone to ask the Holy Imam to return and the Imam called for his shoes, put them on, mounted his horse and returned home.

Ma’mun decided to lower the prestige of the Imam in the view of people and to tell them that if the Imam hated the world, it was because he could not lay his hands on it, and if he could acquire rulership, he would accept it very gladly. He, therefore said to Imam Ali ar-Ridha’: “Son of Allah's Messenger, I want to abdicate and to hand over the rulership to you.” Thereupon the following conversation took place between them:

Imam Ridha’: If the caliphate is your right and Allah has specified it for you, you cannot forsake it and hand it over to someone else; and if it is not your right, you cannot lawfully present it to someone else.

Ma’mun: You must accept the caliphate.

Imam Ridha’: I take pride to be a servant of Allah, and by means of piety, I want to keep away from evils. By avoiding unlawful things and by means of meekness, I hope to acquire proximity to Allah.

Ma’mun: If you don't accept the crown, you must become my heir apparent.

Imam Ridha’: Allah knows that I am not pleased to accept this.

Ma’mun: Do You want to tell the people that you are an ascetic?

Imam Ridha’: By Allah, I have not told a lie throughout my life and never abandoned the truth for the sake of the world, and I know what your object is.

Ma’mun: What is my object?

Imam Ridha’: You want to tell the people that Imam Ridha’ is not inclined to material wealth because it is beyond his reach. As soon as he had an opportunity, he agreed to become the heir apparent.

Ma’mun became angry and said: By Allah, if you do not agree to become my heir apparent, I shall kill you.

Imam Ridha’ replied: “If it is such, I agree to it because Allah has forbidden me to put my life in danger. 1 will accept the heir apparent position on the condition that I shall not interfere in State

affairs, nor shall I appoint or dismiss anyone, or give any order, or give any judgment, or bring about change in any matter. I will only advise from a distance.”

Ma’mun accepted these conditions. The intention of Ma’mun was to tell the people that as a result of becoming the heir apparent, Imam Ridha’ had also become interested in the material world. However, the course adopted by the Holy Imam increased his dignity and honour. When Ma’mun got tired as the tricks adopted by him were not successful, he poisoned the Imam to death.

Ma’mun behaved towards Imam Ridha’ in the same manner as his father Haroon had behaved towards Imam Musa al-Kazim, and as Mansur had behaved towards Imam Ja'far Sadiq. He employed deceit in the same way as Mu’awiyyah Ibn Abu Sufyan had done in the case of Imam Hasan (‘a).

To protect their regimes, the despotic rulers did not exercise any restraint in shedding the blood of the saints of Allah. However, this sacrifice-giving attitude was natural in the view of noble

men and reformists in the path of truth. It is on this account that we love the reformers and despise the despotic rulers and do not accord them any religious standing.

Mu’tasim, The Abbasid

In the year 210 A.H. after the death of Ma’mun, allegiance was given to Mu’tasim. He ruled for a little more than 8 years. He was succeeded by Wathiq who ruled for 5 years.

Abu al-Faraj Isfahani, author of Maqatilut Talibiyyin writes:

Muhammad Ibn Qasim Ibn Umar Ibn Ali Ibn Abu Talib rebelled during the reign of Mu’tasim. He was defeated and imprisoned, but later he escaped. Abdullah Ibn Husayn Ibn Abdullah Ibn Ismail Ibn Abdullah Ibn Ja'far Ibn Abu Talib refrained from wearing a black dress (which was the colour adopted by Bani Abbas). Mu’tasim kept him imprisoned till he died.

Mutasim imprisoned Imam Muhammad Taqi (‘a). Later he released him and asked Umm ul-Fazl, the daughter of Ma’mun - who was the wife of Imam Taqi (‘a) - to poison him. She acted on the instructions of Mu’tasim and administered poison to the Holy Imam (‘a).

Sayyid Mohsin al-Amin writes: “Wathiq honoured Ali's descendants, behaved kindly towards them and also gave them wealth.”

Mutawakkil, The Abbasid

After Wathiq's death, his brother Mutawakkil became the caliph. He ruled for 14 years. Mutawakkil became notorious for his free living, immodesty, and alcoholism. Masoodi writes: “Mutawakkil was the first Abbasid caliph to participate in fun parties and merriment.”

Justice Sayyid Amir Ali writes:39

“During the time of Mutawakil there had appeared signs of disintegration of the Islamic empire. Corruption had found roots in all departments of the State, and orders were given that others should also imitate the evils. In the time of Mutawakkil, the broad-minded persons were deprived of their rights and as a result of this nonchalance, the Turks dominated the government and assumed charge of the affairs of the State.”

It is mentioned in Maqatilut Talibiyyin that Mutawakkil made severe attacks on Abu Talib's descendants and subjected them to great hardships. He bore them grudge and levelled various charges against them because he was suspicious of them.

Mutawakkil appointed Umar Ibn Faraj Rakhji as the Governor of Medina and Mecca. This ill-natured governor stopped the people from meeting Abu Talib's descendants and did not allow anyone to help them. Whoever rendered them the least assistance was punished severely and fined heavily. The economic condition of Abu Talib's descendants became so bad that one shirt circulated among a number of sayyid women to offer prayer one after another. When the shirt was worn out it was patched.

Mutawakkil desired that the womenfolk of Abu Talib's descendants should stay in their houses and a number of them should offer prayers using one patched shirt, whereas the loose women associated with the court displayed their gold ornaments and silken dresses!

Once, Haroon ar-Rashid had also sent Jaludi to take away the clothes of sayyid women leaving only one dress for each, but Mutawakkil persecuted them so much that they were obliged to live without clothes. That is how the ways and manners of Quraish - the children of the chiefs of Arabia - changed with the passage of time. Abu Talib's descendants got scattered during the time of Mutawakkil.

According to some historians, if Mutawakkil is called the Nero40 of the Arabs, it will not be wrong because many descendants of Abu Talib went away to unknown destinations and those like Ahmad Ibn Isa al-Husayni and Abdullah Ibn Musa al-Husayni died in hiding, whereas some others like Muhammad Ibn Salih and Muhammad Ibn Ja'far revolted against Mutawakkil on account of his oppression.

Mutawakkil did not content himself with persecution of the living. He even showed disrespect to the graves of the dead. He demolished the tomb of Imam Husayn and buildings around it and banned people from performing Ziyarat. His announced that if any person went to perform Ziyarat of Imam Husayn's tomb and was arrested he would be put into prison.41

A poet says about Mutawakkil:

“By Allah, if Bani Umayyah mercilessly killed the son of their prophet's daughter, Bani Abbas also acted in a similar way and demolished his grave. They regretted not participating in his murder, but after death when the bones had decayed, they went in their search.”

Ibn Abil Hadid has written42 that Mutawakkil had good relations with Ali Ibn Jaham because he also bore malice towards Imam Ali (‘a). He suffered from the habit of abusing the departed ones. One day Abu al-Ayna saw him abusing Imam Ali (‘a) and said to him: Do you abuse Ali because he killed both the active as well the passive partner of sodomy and you are also a passive homosexual?

Steadfastness Of Ibn Sikkit

Ibn Sikkit was a distinguished scholar and a literary personality of his time. Mutawakkil appointed him as the tutor for his son, Mu'taz.

One day Mutawakkil asked Ibn Sikkit: Whom do you think are better, Mu'taz and Mu'ayyad or Hasan and Husayn?

Ibn Sikkit looked in disdain and replied: By Allah, I consider Qambar, Imam Ali’s slave, to be better than you and your sons.

Mutawakkil ordered the Turk slaves to pull out his tongue from the back of his head. When his tongue was pulled out in this manner, Ibn Sikkit died and met the fate he had feared for in his following verses he says:

“A brave youth is killed owing to the slip of his tongue, but a man does not die if he hits the ground.”

Owing to this slip in his speech, the brave youth lost his head. But if the foot of a man stumbles, it gets healed in a few days.”

Mutawakkil had kept a court jester named Ubadah. He used to tie a pillow onto his belly and he danced before Mutawakkil while the singers sang: “The big-bellied caliph of the Muslims has arrived.” It was meant to ridicule Imam Ali (‘a). Mutawakkil enjoyed this scene, drank wine and laughed.

One day this scene was performed before Mutawakkil's son, Muntasir, who said to his father: “The person whom this clown is ridiculing and thus making the people laugh, was your cousin and a distinguished person of your family, and you should feel proud of him. In case you want to ridicule him, you should do so in solitude and should not leave this task to such dogs.” Mutawakkil then asked the singers to sing a very obscene verse that we dare not to translate.

Through this, Muntasir came to know that Mutawakkil even abused Lady Fatimah az-Zahra. He approached one of the ulama to give a decree on this matter. The scholar said: It is necessary to kill him, but the life of one who kills his father is shortened.

Muntasir said: If I kill him in obedience to the command of Allah, I do not worry if my life is shortened. He, therefore, killed his father and lived after him for only seven months.

Allah has made the love for the Ahl Al-Bayt obligatory in the holy Qur’an and treated it as the reward for the labour taken by the prophet to convey the divine message to the people. However, those who ruled over the people in the name of religion and considered themselves to be his near ones, shed the blood of his descendants and subjected them to countless persecutions and hardships.

Those who deny the prophethood of the Holy Prophet (S) did not cost Islam dearly. What is harmful for Islam is that persons like Mutawakkil should declare themselves to be Muslims but should oppose Islam and campaign against it like infidels and enemies of Islam. The incidents related to Bani Abbas, as narrated above, are sufficient evidence to form an idea about their ugly nature and inauspicious conduct.

Ibn Rumi

One of the principles of Shi’a faith is that the world can never remain without the righteous persons and divine guides, who invited people to good and restrain them from doing evil. Shi’a doctrines have always been preached from pulpits and through books, and the crimes of the mean persons have been rendered null by logical reasoning and proofs.

They do not forsake patience and steadfastness in the path of truth on account of persecutions and hardships, and campaign with great valour against evil and the forces of falsehood and perversion. Shi’as also believe that in every age there should be some followers of truth to fight, in the capacity of jurists, poets etc.

During the period of Bani Umayyah and Bani Abbas, there were some sincere believers who stood firmly against falsehood. They defended and supported truth and exposed themselves to danger. Among those fighters we can see many scholars, jurists, poets, and others.

History has recorded the names of many such poets. However, some of them did not disclose their names for fear of the despotic rulers, or the cancellation of their stipends, and did not reveal their Shi’a faith. Among those whose names historians have recorded is the poet Ibn Rumi. In his panegyric known as 'Qasida Jimiyah' he speaks about the misfortunes of Yahya Ibn Umar Ibn Husayn Ibn Zaid:

“O Bani Abbas! You continue to commit crimes due to your inherent meanness and by your miserliness go on hoarding wealth in the public treasury. Wait for the day when the right reaches the rightful ones, and you also suffer affliction like Abu Talib's descendants. It is possible that the revolutionary leader behind the curtain of occultation may arrive, and the dark night may turn into a bright day. Is it proper that Abu Talib's descendants remain deprived of rations whereas the bellies of your associates bulge out? And you proceed to your palaces proudly shaking your hips? And is it proper that the bones of Imam Ali’s descendants should become apparent owing to hunger, whereas the bones of your children become fat owing to the country air and their arms and legs should grow plump?”

Professor Mahmood Aqqad says in his book, Ibn Rumi: The poet composed these verses without any selfish interest. In fact, by composing these verses he exposed himself to danger.

Abu Faraas Hamadani

Abu Faraas wrote an elegy describing the virtues of Ali's descendants and the crimes of Bani Abbas. Some of his verses are quoted below:

“Truth has broken up and religion has been torn to pieces and the legacy of the prophet (caliphate) has been tarnished. O People of the world! Does Allah not help the people against the mischief of the oppressors and does Allah's religion not have an avenger? Imam Ali's descendants are indigent in their own land whereas the affairs of the State are in the hands of women and slaves. The heart of the prophet is offended on account of the lashes. Then why don't you respect the family of the Messenger? Despite spite their great crimes, the descendants of Abu Sufyan committed minor crimes as compared with yours. How much breach of trust you have committed with the religion and how much blood of the prophet's descendants you have shed! If a judgment is given in light of justice, Haroon is not like Imam Kazim and Ma’mun is not like Imam Ridha’. Write to Bani Abbas not to talk about the government, because the government is in the hands of ‘Ajam.43

Pride is especially meant for scholarly persons wise enough to solve all questions and remove all the difficulties of the people. You should not pride yourselves. When they are angry, it is not for the sake of anyone other than Allah and when they give a judgment, they do not ignore Allah's rights. Qur’an is recited constantly in the house of Imam Ali's descendants whereas in your houses there are music and songs. None of them manufactures wine in their houses. Their houses are not a refuge for crimes. There are no pretty children in their houses with whom they may live in pleasure, and they do not have any monkey that so many servants need to be employed for. The Rukn, the Ka’aba, Astaar, Zamzam, Safaa, Masjid ul-Khif and Haram are their halting places. May Allah's blessings be on them till the leaves of the trees touch one another as they are the refuge for the nation.”

These verses of Abu Faraas manifest the greatness of Ahl Al-Bayt and prove that they are entitled to the caliphate, and their right has been usurped.

These verses refer to the rule of Bani Abbas in the name of religion and it has been affirmed that they were the worst enemies of religion. In their lofty palaces there were wine, adultery and music, although Ali's descendants had to face oppression and persecution while in their houses Qur’an was recited, Allah was remembered and worshipped.

Such regimes wish to portray themselves as religious, but they shall be considered deviated and perverted so long as they are headed by the likes of Mansur, Rashid, Ma’mun and Mutawakkil. That is why Shi’as believe that a just and religious regime can be established only when the ruler is an infallible imam, or the administration is in the hands of a righteous religious scholar who seeks the pleasure of Allah and His prophet. If it is not so, the regime will be not religious and divine. Like contemporary regimes, it would be worldly.

All the persecutions that the Ahl Al-Bayt and Shi’as had to suffer were perpetrated by rulers who ruled in the name of religion, but they were far away from religion. For their deficiencies, the rulers took revenge on the learned and accomplished persons. They wanted to show that their acts were exactly according to religion. They, therefore, endeavoured to find out fake ulamas who might legitimize their acts.

It is mentioned in An-Niza wat Takhasum:44

Pride ruled the minds of Bani Abbas, and they became egoistic. They respected the views of non-Arabs and accorded them precedence over the orders of the prophet. They wrote new chapters of their hardheartedness and cruelty.

In the 'religious government' of Bani Abbas, the monarchs trampled upon the commands of the prophet and followed the polytheists.

Di’bil Khuza’i

Di’bil Khuza’i was the most courageous among the poets known to history. He suffered extreme hardships in connection with his campaign against falsehood and defence of truth. Among those he condemned were Haroon, Ma’mun, Mu’tasim, Wathiq, commanders of the army, ministers, and the sons of the caliphs.

He criticized them without any fear or anxiety. When Mu’tasim entrusted the command of the army to the Turks and gave them discretion over the lives, property, and honour of the people, Di’bil said:

“The Kingdom has slipped away from the hands of the people and fallen into the hands of boys and servants; and it is a great calamity.”

When Mu’tasim died and Wathiq succeeded him, Di’bil said:

“A Caliph died, who was not mourned by anyone, and another came in his place with whom no one is pleased, because he that has come is the leader of injustice and deviation, and the chief of hypocrisy and perversion like his predecessor, as the Qur’an says:

“Each group on entering Hell will curse the other dwellers until all of them are brought together therein” (7:38).

Di’bil described the dictatorship and despotism of Bani Abbas and their acts of killing, imprisoning, plundering, and exiling the people in the following verses:

“When I think about the crimes of Bani Abbas my hairs stand on their ends and my heart bursts with anger. They insulted the people and resorted to threats, murders plunder, arson, imprisonment, torture, and exile. If you happen to go to Tus, kiss the purified grave of the Imam and ask whatever you want from that honoured saint of Allah. There are two graves near to each other in Tus. One belongs to the one who is the best of creatures and the other of one who is the worst. It is edifying. Can that impure one derive any benefit from that purified one? Can the reputation of the pure one be affected by the filth of that impure one? Never! Neither Imam Ridha’ (‘a) suffers owing to the proximity with Haroon nor Rashid gains anything by being near him.”

Di’bil excuses Bani Umayyah for their crimes. He says:

“As soon as Bani Umayyah assumed the control of government, they openly declared their enmity and said that they were opposed to Ali and his descendants. However, while fighting against Bani Umayyah, Bani Abbas formed a common front with their cousins and their slogan was the restoration of the rights of the prophet's progeny. However, when the government fell into their hands, they became dictators.''

Di’bil further says:

“If it had been decided that time should laugh, we would have prayed that Allah might not give it the strength to laugh because the prophet's descendants have been subjected to cruelty and persecution. The prophet's descendants have been sent into exile from their homes and cities as if they had committed an unpardonable crime.”

The elegy of Di’bil known as ‘Qasida Taiya'45 is a verbal proof of the crimes of Bani Abbas. Qasida Taiya is a historical document which will last forever. This elegy depicts the dreadful killings by Bani Abbas.

We are not aware of anyone among the poets, revolutionaries, and elegy reciters who may have expressed enmity and hatred against the rulers in the manner done by Di’bil. His poetic verses were memorized by young and old and all recited and preserved them. They were so popular that even dacoits sang them. When Di’bil read Qasida Taiya before Imam Ridha’, the latter rewarded him with a large sum of money.

Di’bil said: Master, I want a piece of your garment which may serve as my shroud”. The Imam gave him a woollen shirt. Di’bil travelled from Merv to Baghdad with a caravan. On the way the robbers looted the woollen shirt and other property of the caravan and began to divide it among themselves. In the meantime, one of the robbers recited this verse.

“Their inheritance is distributed among other people, but their own hands are empty of their inheritance.”

Di’bil asked the robber: Whose verse is this?

He replied: It is the verse of Di’bil, the poet of Ahl Al-Bayt.

Di’bil said: I am Di’bil.

The robber was frightened and said: Are you Di’bil?

Dibil replied: Yes.

Thereupon the robbers returned everything they had looted.

When the people of Qom learned about this event, they offered to purchase the shirt from Di’bil, but he declined to sell it. The people, however, insisted and took it from him giving him in return a thousand dinars. When he lost all hope of retaining it, he requested them to give him only a piece of it. The people of Qom agreed to this.

Imam Ridha’ (‘A) Wept

When Imam Ridha’ heard the verses of Di’bil, his eyes filled with tears, and the women and children began to weep. Even today Shi’as recite these verses from the pulpits and weep. In this elegy, Di’bil talks of human rights, which should be defended. It is reflected in these verses that for the achievement of this, it is appropriate to lay down one's life.

These verses were composed more than 1,100 years ago they but enjoy more value and fame as compared with the verses of modern poets whose poetical works have filled libraries. The secret of the popularity of these verses is that they lay bare the hardships of the afflicted persons who are oppressed and persecuted and are involved in difficulties during all ages.

From the day these verses were published, the decline of Bani Abbas commenced. According to Bihar there are 80 verses of Di’bil about Imam Ridha’. Some of these verses are about Bani Umayyah and Bani Abbas. A few of them are quoted below:

“Curse Bani Abbas from the core of your heart, as the affairs of the religion became topsy-turvy because of them. Rule without a true Imam is unlawful. Giving a verdict without consultation is not permissible. Calamities fell on Islam owing to these ignoble tyrants. They distorted the religion and the law and let loose atrocities on the faithful. They made the world narrow in our eyes and made the horizon dark and gloomy. They made sweet water bitter like colocynth in the palate of the deprived and indigent nation. The source of this policy and this deceit was the bay’at of Abu Bakr. The foundation of injustice was strengthened by him, and the structure of the religion collapsed at that time. If that fraud and deceit had not been committed, the world would have acquired nothing but honour. The administration would have been in the hands of the Holy Prophet’s household and every place would have been replete with justice and kindness. I love the Aale Muhammad. My love for them knows no bounds. I shall not dissociate my heart from this family even though the enemy may make me the target of his arrows.

They are my life, my hope, my ambition, and my aspirations. I shall place my head on the dust of their street and shall not raise my head from their threshold. For that is the abode of kindness and piety and that is the place of love, hope and ambition. From there the sun of faith and morality throws its rays. From there blows the zephyr of justice and kindness which makes the garden of the so ul-beautiful and fresh. O Lord! Increase my fervour and fill my heart with love for them. How sad it is that instead of all their dignity and grandeur they got nothing from the mean people except treachery. These people snatched away their right unjustly from them. They plundered their property like thieves. How sad that those generous hands should be empty of riches and wealth. The rights of the holy family were destroyed, and they were subjected to much oppression. So long as the sun rises and the moon appears, my task is to weep and sigh for this grief.”

In his opposition to the Bani Abbas regime, Di’bil had no political motives, and he did not compose these verses for position or wealth. He recited these verses only on account of his religion and faith. He had put his life in danger for the sake of the prophet's progeny. Di’bil used to repeat the following words very often: “I have been carrying my gallows on my shoulder for the last 50 years.” Di’bil meant that he composed such verses for 50 years, and that any time he could have been executed for that.

Eventually a devilish person sat in ambush and attacked him with a poisoned stick after the Maghribain.46 He passed away because of the injury. These two great poets, Di’bil and Kumayt, who conducted similar campaigns to support Aale Muhammad, were martyred in a similar manner.

Providence had decreed both to be martyred in the same way.

Saadi, if you fall in love in adolescence.

The love of Muhammad and Aale Muhammad is sufficient.

Shi’a Literature

It will be appropriate to end this chapter with extracts from Sayyid Muhammad Gilani’s book Al-Jannat ul-Nashru Jamieen47

“The Shi’a literature reached its zenith when the Alawis were subjected to hardships. After Ali's martyrdom, his descendants were humiliated. They were arrested in groups. They were exiled and suffered hardships. They were killed after having been deprived of public rights and they spent their lives in a state of fear because their lives as well as the lives of their supporters were not safe. Supporters of Ali were killed in every city. They were often severely punished. Their hands and feet were cut off. Whoever uttered the name of Ali was imprisoned, his property was confiscated, his house was demolished ...”

“The lovers of Ahl Al-Bayt were buried alive, hanged, burned, and imprisoned; these were common treatments meted out to them, till they died of thirst and hunger.”

“The followers of Ali (‘a) were hanged on the gallows and were not removed from there till their bodies decomposed. They were then burned, and their ashes were scattered in the air. The people were prohibited from naming their sons Ali, Hasan, or Husayn.”

“The Bani Abbas regime was more inimical towards the descendants of Ali (‘a) than Bani Umayyah regime was. Hence, instances of killings and burning by them were also more frequent than those by the Bani Umayyah regime. They subjected Ali's descendants to unlimited persecution and torture.”

“Mansur ordered that Imam Ali's descendants be chained and brought before him from Medina. When they came to him, he ordered them to be imprisoned in a dark cell. In case any of them died, his dead body was not removed from there. Eventually, Mansur ordered the prison to be demolished on their heads. A Shi’a poet says in this regard: “By Allah, Bani Umayyah did not commit even one-tenth of the atrocities against Ali's descendants, as those committed by Bani Abbas.”

Abu Faraas says: “Though descendants of Harb committed serious crimes, they were less as compared with Bani Abbas.”

Sharif Razi says:

“Although the first group (Bani Umayyah) committed many crimes they were not as many, compared with those by the second group (Bani Abbas).”

“Haroon ar-Rashid did not fall short in putting the descendants of Imam Ali to torture. However, when the caliphate of Bani Abbas began to weaken and the government fell into the hands of the Turks, the Dailamis and Bani Hamadan, their fury decreased.”

All these crimes had a profound effect on the Shi’ite prose and poetry.

Factors For The Survival Of Shi’ism

The following question arises in the minds of the readers of this book: How did the Shi’as survive - despite such persecutions - whereas these bloody campaigns against them by their enemies commenced in the first century and continue till today? Shi’as survived even after crossing the river of blood and today millions of Shi’as live all over the world, although normally, in view of the hardships suffered by them, no trace of theirs should have been left in the world!

The Shi’as had no support - other than their faith - to face those difficulties. During hundreds of years of their campaigns they did not get to rule the state, and no one defended them.

Whenever Shi’as rebelled, they were defeated and had to flee.

To sum up, when the history of the Shi’as is about them being subjected to continuous persecutions and failed uprisings, what is the secret behind the resilience of Shi’ism?

Despite all the hardships and difficulties, the Shi’as not only survived, but their population also kept increasing. The secret of the survival of Shi’ism is love for Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) and the greatness of the teachings of Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a). If not for the excellence of their teachings, there would have been no trace of Shi’as today. Only the name of Shi’a faith would have been found in the books like those of various fabricated and man-made religions.

There is no doubt that the teachings of Ahl Al-Bayt consist of the explanation of the realities of Islam, the commands of the holy Qur’an and the objects of the Holy Prophet of Islam. These are in fact a set of rules and principles to distinguish between good and evil, and between truth and falsehood.

In the view of Ahl Al-Bayt, the truth possesses a reality that is independent in the minds and intellect of the people, and that the beliefs and opinions, likes and dislikes do not have any effect on it. If all or most of the people agree about a matter being false while it is actually true, or they all agree that a false thing as true, it will not change its nature.

In short, in the view of the Ahl Al-Bayt, truth does not depend on a large number of supporters. On other hand, according to them, individuals are recognized by means of truth. It is just as the Imam has said and the holy Qur’an has clarified:

“We brought you the truth but most of you disliked it” (43:78).

“….In fact, he (Muhammad) has brought to you the truth but most of you dislike it” (23:70).

The Holy Prophet (S) has said: “Ali is with Truth and Truth is with Ali.”48

It means that if all the people were on one side and Ali is on the other side, all others will be mistaken but Ali will not have erred in his belief, because what the Holy Prophet has said is affirmed by the words of Imam Ali, and the Holy Prophet does not say anything on account of his personal desire. Hence the words of the prophet are a conclusive proof for all, and none is permitted to argue against him.

On the other hand, experience has shown that truth is independent by itself and does not depend upon the thoughts and words of the people. For example, we may see that the Legislative Assembly enacts a law with a majority of the votes or unanimously. But, after its enforcement, it is found that the law is erroneous, and the necessity of its amendment or cancellation arises.

It is for this reason that the Twelver Shi’as believe that truth can be deduced from the Book and the Sunnah. Under the influence of people's opinion, or opinion of the majority, truth cannot be dispensed with, because opinions are expressed under the influence of personal motives. Truth cannot be recognized through opinion because if opinion is according to reality, it confirms the truth and if it is against reality, it errs.

Opinions are expressed under the influence of personal motives, nature, and training, and are at times put forward owing to one’s being impressed by the discourses of the philosophers and the thinking of the theologians. On some occasions those who express their opinions are ignorant and what they say is not based on learning, reason, or education. Hazrat Ali (‘a) said that Jama-at means a gathering of righteous ones, however few they might be. It does not denote a gathering of people of falsehood, however numerous they might be. That is why to recognize the truth, the Shi’as rely on divine revelation, and not on the statement of the majority, as we have seen in the verse of Surah Zukhruf.49

Second, favouring of the majority and the support given to it by the government means wastage and suppression of the rights of the minority, because the minority is deprived of governmental power. There is no one who may enforce its beliefs or may have liaison with the government that does not - according to its belief - recognize it officially. It is on this account that Shi’as believe that Allah has expressed laws on every subject and that the means of knowing these laws are two great authorities: the Book of Allah and Ahl Al-Bayt of the prophet.

The secret of the surviving devotion to Ahl Al-Bayt becomes evident from what has been stated. In other word, its secret lies in the survival of the Qur’an and ahadith (traditions), because the

holy Qur’an and the traditions are the first and last sources of Shi’a faith. As a result of the opposition by polytheists, the prophet had to face such hardships that were not faced by other prophets and the Shi’as were subjected to such persecutions as every righteous person is.

Hence, the holy Qur’an survives owing to its genuineness and truthfulness of the prophet, and Shi’ism which is a branch of the same root has survived for his Ahl Al-Bayt. The Shi’a faith, therefore, continues to exist along with Islam and the holy Qur’an.

Just as some distinguished Muhajirs and Ansars had dedicated their lives to the defence of the prophethood of the prophet, some chosen men and scholars trained in the school of Shi’ism; like Shaykh Mufid, Sayyid Murtaza Alam ul-Huda, Allamah Karachki and Allamah Majlisi etc. fought valiantly for the cause of Shi’a faith. They wrote detailed books to defend the Shi’a faith and refuted the false charges brought against the Shi’as, establishing their reasonings based on the Qur’an and Sunnah.

What is surprising is that although we are now living in the information age, there are still some people who repeat the calumnies of the early days of Islam word for word and say the same things that were said 1,400 years ago. They thus compel the Shi’as to quote the exact words of Ali Ibn Husayn Sayyid Murtaza Alam ul-Huda, Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Noman Shaykh Mufid, Allamah Majlisi, and Shamsuddin Muhammad Ibn Makki, Shaheed Awwal, in reply to these calumnies to defend the Shi’a faith.

It will suffice if we allude to two specimens of calumnies resorted to in modern times. One of them is from the magazine Akhirus Saa-a (The Last Hour) and the other is from the book Athar at-Tashayyo fil Adabil Arabi (Effects of Shi’a faith on Arabic Literature). l came across the second book recently in a library while I was collecting materials for writing the present book (Shi’as and the Despotic Rulers).

The Magazine Akhirus Saa-A

In the magazine Akhirus Saa-a Vol. XV Azar 1961, Tabaie has rejected the statement by Bintush Shati published in Al-Ahram magazine of Egypt.

Bintush Shati has said:

“As stated in Tafsir Zamakhshari and Tafsir Nishapuri, the Surah Hal-Ata50 and the verse “Wa Yut’imunat ta’am” (76:8) were revealed in respect of Imam Ali and Lady Fatimah.”

Tabaie writes about this remark in Akhirus Saa-a:

“This statement is not correct, and the commentaries of Zamakhshari and Nishapuri are collections of imaginary things. This statement is taken from books that are based on fantasy and falsehoods.”

The association of the Surah 'Hal Ata' with Imam Ali (‘a) and members of his family is not confined to Zamakhshari and Nishapuri, but other Sunni writers including al-Baidhawi, al-Baghawi, ath-Tha’labi, and Abu as-Sadat, who have also explained it in the same way. Suyuti has also written in al-Dhurrr al-Mansur that this Surah has been revealed about Imam Ali and Lady Fatimah. Fakhruddin ar-Razi has written that Wahidi, an Asha’ira scholar, has said in his book Al-Baseet, that the blessed Surah ad-Dahr was revealed about Imam Ali (‘a).

Despite all that these commentators have said, is it proper that we should say that they have told lies, and the surah has not been revealed in praise of Imam Ali (‘a) who fought battles on the side of the Holy Prophet against the polytheists and infidels for the pleasure of Allah? And to say that it was revealed about Mu’awiyyah, his mother Hind and his father Abu Sufyan who fought against Allah and His prophet in the battles of Badr, Uhud and Ahzab would be a correct explanation! Does Tabaie not know that it is not possible to spit at the moon?

The Book Of Atharut Tashayyo Fil Adabil Arabi

Saeed Gilani of Egypt has written in the above book that Shi’as have falsely imputed these lines to Yazid:

“Bani Hashim (the prophet and his family) has played a game to obtain temporal power. The fact is that neither an angel came to them, nor any revelation descended.

And I won't be eligible to be called the descendant of the fighters of the Ditch (Khandaq) if I had failed to take revenge from Muhammad and his relatives.”

Yes sir! If these two verses are false and have been forged by the Shi’as, is it also untrue that the Holy Prophet's grandson was killed? Is it also a lie that the daughters of Muhammad were carried on camels? Is it also a lie that the lips of the chief of the youth of Paradise were struck with a cane? Is it also untrue that the Battle of Mecca took place, and the Kaaba was attacked by means of catapults? Is it also wrong to say that the soldiers of Yazid were allowed to treat the people of Medina in any manner they liked? And is the story of Harrah also a concocted one?

What Tabaie and Gilani and others like them have written could only be due to their enmity towards Allah and His messenger; or because they want to create dissension and split among the Muslims.51

• 1. The tenure of Bani Umayyah rule was l,091 months and according to the list mentioned by Masoodi in Murujuz Zahab (Pg. 156) it comes to 1,325 months and 24 days. After deducting the period of Imam Hasan (‘a) and Ibn Zubair, which was 99 months and 13 days, it comes to 1,226 months and 13 days. Thus, there is difference of opinion among the scholars with regard to the rule of Bani Umayyah. So, the thousand­month rule of Bani Umayyah is not a historical reality that it should be taken as the only connotation of ‘Alfa-shahrin’ (thousand months) of Surah al-Qadr.
• 2. Morals are either absolute or relative. Regarding this, Ustad Murtaza Mutahhari says in his book Glimpse into the Life of the Prophet:
  “From the Holy Prophet to Imam Hasan al-Askari (‘a), all the religious leaders refuted the principles of false ethics because such principles have to be refuted under all circumstances.
  Those who say that ethics are relative, what is the value of ethics of deception for them? Practically all the politicians of the world resort to deception. For some politicians, all their politics is based on deception and fraud, whereas some politicians employ deception once in a while. They say that in politics, ethics are meaningless. A politician makes a promise or takes an oath, but he does not fulfil his promise or oath till there is some personal benefit for him. As soon as his goal is achieved, he breaks his promise. According to them, what is a promise, if it is fulfilled?
  I have seen some extracts from the book by Churchill, in which he has written about his views after the Second World War, and which were published in Iranian newspapers in parts. In that book, after the mention of the Allies’ attack on Iran, Churchill says, ‘We had made a promise to the Iranians, and according to that promise, we should not have done like this.’ Then he himself says:
  “These promises and their fulfilment are nice on a small scale. When two persons promise something to each other, they must fulfil this promise. But in politics, when it is the question of the interests of a nation, ethics are useless. From this aspect, I cannot ignore the interests of Great Britain and say that breaking a promise made to a country is against ethics. Such things are not right in a broader view.”
  This same deception is seen in the politics of Mu’awiyyah. The peculiarity that distinguishes Imam Ali (‘a) from other politicians is that he never resorted to deception even if he had to sacrifice the kingdom. Imam Ali (‘a) was faithful to the highest principles of morality. He used to say, “The aim of my government is to safeguard those principles.
  Safeguarding truth, trust, fulfilment of promises etc. and I have become a caliph for this only. How can I break those principles?”
• 3. Marwan Himar put Ibrahim in the prison. He was killed in this prison or poisoned to death.
• 4. Tarikh Kamil, Ibn Athir, Vol. 4, Pg.340.
• 5. Previously, when Muawiyah had gained control over the access to water, he had stopped the supply to Imam's forces.
• 6. Tarikh Kamil, Vol. 1, Pg.34
• 7. Khorasan is a word of Pahlavi language. It means the land of the East or the land where the Sun rises. In the ancient times, it was known as greater Khorasan. The boundaries of greater Khorasan included the modern Iranian cities of Nishapur, Tus, Mashad and the Afghan cities of Herat, Balkh, KAbu al-and Ghazni; cities of Merv and Sanjan, which are at present in Turkmenistan; Samarqand and Bukhara, which are presently in Uzbekistan; Khujand and Panjakent, which are presently in Tajikistan; and Iranian, Afghani and Pakistani Baluchistan.
  There were two small towns at the location of present Mashad Muqaddas. One was Sinbad, where Imam Ridha’ (‘a) is buried, and the other town was Nawghan which is still known as the locality of Nawghan and it is situated at the end of Mashad highway.
• 8. In the book Baluchi Hasab Nasab ki Nazm, which is the oldest source of Baluchi history, Justice Meer Khuda Bakhsh Marri says: “We are followers of Ali. Our religion and faith are safe and strong. We have come from Aleppo. We have always fought against the followers of Yazid. After the tragedy of Karbala, we migrated to Bampoor, Seestan and present Baluchistan.” (Justice Meer Khuda Bakhsh Marri, page 93, published by Nisad Traders, Quetta).
  Commenting on the above book, Aga Mir Nasir Ahmed Zai says: “These verses were written by the fifteen century Baluchi poets referring to the martyrdom of Imam Husayn. These verses prove that the Baluchis are followers of Ali and his descendants. (Tarikh-e-Baluch aur Baluchistan. Pg. 76-77)
  Khan of Qullat, Mir Ahmed Yaar Khan writes:
  “The original home of the Baluch was Aleppo in Syria. Due to their support for the Ahl Al-Bayt (‘a) in the battle of Karbala, the Baluch people became the target of hatred and enmity of the Umayyad rulers.” (Mir Ahmed Yaar Khan, Mukhtasir Tarikh-e-Baluch, published by Iwan-e-Qullat, Quetta).
• 9. Al-Iqd ul-Farid, Vol. I, Pg. 41.
• 10. Maqatilut Talibiyyin, Abu al-Faraj Ifsfahani, Pg. 206.
• 11. Vol. 3, Pg. 31 .
• 12. Pg. 74.
• 13. Pg. 74.
• 14. In Du’a Jaushan Kabeer Allah is called the ‘joiner of bones’.
• 15. Pg. 76.
• 16. Imam Ali Ibn Musa (‘a) was given the title of 'ar-Ridha' by Ma’moon when the former agreed to become the heir apparent. Even the Holy Prophet (S) was given the titles of 'Sadiq' and 'Ameen ' by the polytheists of Mecca.
• 17. As a result of the directives that Imam (‘a) had given to his Shi’as to remain quiet and not rebel against Bani Abbas like they had avoided revolting against Bani Umayyah, Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (‘a) had the opportunity to propagate the Shi’a faith. All those traditions came to public view, whose chain of narrators goes thus: I relate this tradition from my father Muhammad Ibn Ali (‘a) from his father, Ali Ibn al­Husayn (‘a) from his father Husayn Ibn Ali (‘a) from his father Ali Ibn Abi Talib (‘a) from the Messenger of Allah (S) from Jibraeel (‘a) who narrated it from Allah the Mighty and Sublime. Due to these efforts of Imam Ja'far Sadiq (‘a), the Shi’a faith became known as Ja'fari faith.
• 18. Abi Faraas, Sharh Shafiya, Pg. 171, (Excellences of the family of the Prophet and the defects of Bani Abbas).
• 19. Al-Iqd ul-Farid, Vol. 5, Pg. 159, 1953 Edition.
• 20. Bihar ul-Anwar, Vol. 11.
• 21. Sharh Shafiya, Pg. 559.
• 22. Tarikh-ush Shi’a, Pg. 46, quoted from Sawaiq ul-Muhriqa, Ibn Hajar al-Makki, Noor ul-Absaar and Isafur Raghibin of Shablanji.
• 23. Mahdi told Imam Musa al-Kazim (‘a) that the people say that wine is not prohibited by the Holy Qur’an. The Imam said that wine is declared to be an ithim (sin) in the following verse:
  “They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: In both of them there is a great sin …..” (2:219).
  And sin is prohibited in the following verse:
  “Say: My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without justice….” (7:33).
  (Author)
• 24. Mirrujuz Zahab, Vol. 3, Pg. 336
• 25. Just as America is oppressing the brave Muslims today, while at the same time working in the fields of science and research, in the same way during the time of Bani Umayyah and Bani Abbas, there were advances in cultural, scientific, and architectural fields. Since the present book is regarding the oppression on the Shi’as at the hands of Bani Umayyah and Bani Abbas, the venerable author has not mentioned the above subject (scientific and literary advancement). For the interest of the readers, we present below an extract from the book of Dr. Ali Akbar Velayati, The Encyclopaedia of Islam and Iran: Dynamics of Culture and the Living Civilization:
  “After the period of conquests and victories when the Islamic government became stable and Muslims completed the collection of Islamic sciences to a great extent, some Abbasid caliphs patronized various arts and sciences. Under their patronage, the Islamic society became gradually inclined to those sciences and arts which were practiced by non-Muslim civilizations. The source of this attention was Qur’an and traditions which encourage people to learn the different arts and sciences.
  The greatest impetus for this movement was that the Muslims had annexed the countries practicing these arts and sciences like Iran and Rome. These countries were already having their ancient civilizations. But since Alexander the Great had attacked these places one thousand years earlier, there was influence of Greek culture also upon them.
  Along with other civilizations, the experience of cultural exchange with the Greek civilization was a completely new experience. As a result of this cultural exchange, there was such an increase of interest in translation of books by the Muslim rulers and intellectuals that this period came to be known as ‘the age of translation'. Though translation began in the period of Bani Umayyah, its fruits were obtained in the period of Bani Abbas. During the Umayyad period, most of the translations were of books on military, politics, and economics.
  These translations served as a bridge of communication between the rulers and non-Arabs. The movement, which left behind a large number of translated books on history, sociology, and science, began in the Abbasid period.
  This intellectual movement continued for two hundred years. Especially in the period of Mansur, translations were made in two styles, literal and idiomatic. In the beginning, translation was carried out from Persian to Arabic. The translators of these books were Zoroastrians who had recently embraced Islam. Some books of literature like Kalila wa Dimna were translated by the Iranian writer, Abdullah Ibn Muqaffa (Ibn Muqaffa, died in 141 A.H.)
  In the later period, Muslim translators developed this skill to a high level. Based on their experience in this field, they also translated Greek and Syriac books into Arabic. During this period, the first great translator was the Nestorian physician, Hunain Ibn Ishaq who was an expert of Greek, Syriac, Arabic and Pahlavi languages. He was known as the Shaykh of translators. He constituted a group under which translation was carried out in a systematic and organized manner. His son, Ishaq and his nephew, Habish Ibn Asim were also present. Hunain compared the translations from the originals and made corrections etc.
  Depending on the interest of respective Abbasid caliphs and other factors there were variations in the number of translators and subject of translation from time to time, especially during the period of Haroon ar-Rashid, when the movement of translation could be summed up as follows:
  A. Period of Haroon ar-Rashid: all the translations of this period were centred on scientific books. Yahya Ibn Khalid Barmiki made special efforts to recruit competent translators. During the period of Haroon, whichever city was conquered by the Muslims, its whole library was transferred to Baghdad, for example, books on philosophy and experimental sciences of Greek. The book of Euclid, Al-Majest and books of Indian medicine were all translated into Arabic in this period.
  B. Period of Mamoon Rashid: during the period of Mamoon, on the basis of different interpretations of the Qur’an, debates and discussions on scholastic theology were at their zenith. During this period, many books of philosophy were translated into Arabic and published
  C. Period after Mamoon: during the period of Mutawakkil, the work of translation continued. For example, Hunain Ibn Ishaq remained busy in translation. But when Mu’tasim transferred his capital from Baghdad to Samarrah, there was a change on translation activities. The main reason for this change was the decrease in the importance of Bait ul-Hikmah, which at that time was the most important intellectual organization.
  D. End of the translation movement: after being successful for two hundred years, the translation movement of Baghdad began to decline. And in the beginning of the new Gregorian millennium, it ended completely. Although the end of the movement does not mean that people lost interest in the sciences that had already been translated or that there were less translators
  To some extent, the end of this movement was because of the lack of subjects in source languages. In other words, this movement had lost its social importance. Lack of subjects does not mean that other non-religious Greek books were not available, but it meant that there were no more books which were of interest to the intellectuals of this movement. Because most of the arts and sciences have already been dealt in the books which have already been published and they were better than the books of Greek.
  The translators who had founded this movement of translation, now instead of supervising the work of translation, began the work of compilation. Due to the stability of the Islamic government and the intellectual advancement of the Islamic society, there were established scientific societies. These societies performed an important role in the dissemination of sciences and arts. The first intellectual organization of this type was Bait ul-Hikmah in Baghdad. It was established under the patronage of the government and operated on the grant fixed by the government. It was the centre for researchers and translators; especially competent translators who can translate books of Greek philosophy into Arabic.
  Bait ul-Hikmah which was the first library of Muslims, was established by Haroon although the work of translation had begun in the age of Mansur.”
  During the Abbasid period, when the books of Greek philosophy were translated into Arabic, the world of Islamic beliefs fell into turmoil. Then to oppose those beliefs, scholastic theology was developed due to which the Islamic beliefs did not retain their original simplicity. Tawheed now was just a problem of scholastic theology, and also due to the interference in religion by people with political interest, the view proclaiming that “all the companions were just” came to the fore and if a defect or mistake of a companion was seen, it was justified to be a mistake of jurisprudence. (Al-Awasim minal Qawasim)
  In a letter dated 27 May 1937, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru wrote to his daughter, Indira Gandhi (These letters were published in book form under the title of Glimpses of World History):
  “The Abbasids were terrific lawmakers. According to common standards, their kingdom was very vast. Where was that old fervour of faith and practical enthusiasm that conquered the mountains and spread like Jungle fire to burn up everything? Neither simplicity survived nor that democratic system of governance, and the caliph was not much different from the Iranian emperors whom the Arabs had defeated earlier, or the kings of Constantinople. The Arabs of the period of the prophet possessed that strange power and life that even the armies of the kings could not face. During the world of their time, they were dignified and always ready to offer sacrifices. And when they rose like a storm and moved forward like hurricane, even the huge armies of the kings fled from their way.
  The common people were fed up with those rulers whereas the Arabs brought the message of social reform and public well-being, so they were welcome in every country they conquered. Now such circumstances existed no more. Now the dwellers of the desert enjoyed the luxuries of palace life and fed on the most delicious foods. When their life was a bed of roses why should they worry about social revolution and reform? They tried to excel the ancient kingdoms in opulence and extravagance. In this process they also became addicted to some of their bad habits. One of their such customs was to confine women to the homes.
  Now the capital was shifted from Damascus to Iraq. This change of the seat of government was in itself an important factor because Baghdad was the resting place of the Iranian kings. In addition to this, it was in comparison to Damascus more distant from Europe. As if the Abbasids were more attentive to Asia than they were to Europe. There remained the great struggle for Constantinople and many wars with the European nations. But all these wars were generally of defensive nature. The age of the conquests was not over. Therefore, the Abbasid caliphs desired to strengthen and firm up all that remained of their dominions. Also, without Spain and Africa, it was already a huge kingdom.
  You must have remembered well the name of Baghdad. That same Baghdad of Haroon ar-Rashid and Scheherazade, whose amazing stories are mentioned in Arabian Nights. The city that gained prominence during the Abbasid rule was this same city of Arabian Nights, Baghdad. It was a huge city consisting of palaces, government offices, schools and colleges, big malls, gardens, and parks etc. The traders of Baghdad carried out extensive trade with the countries of the east and the west. A large number of government officials kept a close watch on the happenings in even far off places.
  The system of governance was becoming more complex, and it comprised of many departments. There was a perfect postal system in practice which connected every comer of the kingdom to the seat of government. There were a large number of hospitals. People from all over the world visited Baghdad. It was especially of interest to scholars, students of various sciences and artisans because it was well known that the caliph accorded great importance to every intellectual and expert artist.
  The caliph himself led a life of luxury and opulence. A crowd of slaves surrounded him, and his harem was always full of women. From the aspect of apparent opulence and wealth, the Abbasid kingdom was at the peak during the rule of Haroon ar-Rashid from 786 to 809 A.D. Ambassadors from the Emperor of China and King Charles of the West, visited the court of Haroon ar-Rashid. In other words, Baghdad and the Abbasid kingdom was much ahead of all the countries of Europe in the art of governance, commerce, and intellectual advancement, except for Spain, which was also ruled by Arabs (Bani Umayyah).
  We are especially interested in the Abbasid period because it created a new awareness for scientific development. You know that in the modem world, science is a very important. We are too much in need of it and we are indebted to it to a great extent. Science does not sit idle and pray for the arrival of inventions. It is concerned with the investigation to find how these things have come into existence. It conducts experiment after experiments. It makes repeated efforts. Sometimes it fails and sometimes it is successful.
  In this way it goes on expanding the knowledge of man. This present age of ours is very much different from the ancient or the Medieval Age. All this happened because of science. In fact, the modern world is a creation of science.
  In the ancient age, science was not pursued so much, neither in Egypt nor in China or India. However, it was discussed to some extent in ancient Greece. After that not even its traces are found in Rome. But the spirit of investigation and experimentation was present in the Arabs. Therefore, it is very much true when we say that they were pioneers of modern science. In some subjects like medicine and mathematics, they learnt many things from India. A large number of Indian medics and mathematicians had reached Baghdad and many Arab students came to study in the Takshila University, which was still a great institution at that time, and was particularly famous for medical education.
  Sanskrit texts on medicine and other subjects were specially translated into Arabic. The Arabs learnt many techniques from China, like that of paper making. And they developed and perfected the techniques they learnt from others. They also invented many gadgets for the first time like the telescope and the magnetic compass etc. The Arab doctors were renowned in the whole Europe for their expertise in medical field.
  There is no doubt that Baghdad was the centre of all those intellectual movements. Another centre was Cordova, the capital of Arab Spain in the West. In addition to this, there were many other universities in the Arab world where the lamp of knowledge was alight; like Cairo, Basra, Kufa etc. But Baghdad was paramount among them regarding which an Arab historian writes that it was the capital of Islam, the favourite of Iraq, the seat of the government, a centre of beauty and elegance, civilization and culture, and the fine arts. It had a population of more than 2 million; that is almost twice that of our present Calcutta or Bombay.
  You will be surprised to know that the rulers of Baghdad were the first to start wearing socks. 'Moza' the Indian term for socks is derived from Arabic. In the same way, the French 'Shamees' is derived from Arabic 'Qamees' (shirt). Shirt and socks reached Constantinople from Arabia, and from there they were taken to Europe.
  The Arabs had always been great seamen. They always undertook long journeys by sea, and they established their colonies on the coasts of Africa, India, Malaysia and even China. One of their famous sea travellers was Al-Biruni, who visited India also. Like Huein Tsang, he wrote about his travels.
  The Arabs were also historians, and our books and histories inform us a great deal about them. We all know that they wrote very interesting novels and stories. (The novel of Ibn Saba is a creation of this period). Thousands of people must not even have heard the name of the Abbasid caliphs and their kingdom, but they must be knowing about Baghdad, the romantic city of the Arabian Nights. The world of fiction is more real and lasting than the world of real happenings.
  After the death of Haroon ar-Rashid, the Arab kingdom fell into trouble. There was discord and confusion everywhere. Many provinces became independent, and the provincial governors became autocrats. The caliph became weak day by day and a time arrived when the caliph had power only in the city of Baghdad and the surrounding villages. One caliph was even dragged out from the palace and killed by his sepoys.”
• 26. Pg. 109.
• 27. A mountainous region to the west of the City of Qazwin in the Gilan province of Iran.
• 28. Indirectly he was saying: That is because I am a descendant of the prophet, whereas you are not. Hence I am more closely related to him.
• 29. Tarikh Kamil, Ibn Athir, Vol. 5, Pg. 90; Maqatilut Talibiyyin, Abu al-Faraj Isfahani, Pg. 465
• 30. Such pseudo scholars are prepared to sell away even the holy relics.
• 31. Tarikh Kamil, Printed in 1357 A.H., Vol. 4, Pg. 191
• 32. It is mentioned in the circumstances of revelation of Surah Kafiroon that the Quraish represented by Walid Ibn Mughaira, Aas Ibn Wael, Aswad Ibn Matlab and Umayyah Ibn Khalaf approached the Messenger of Allah (S) and suggested that the Meccan infidels and Muslims may live on friendly terms by sharing each other's method of worship. They proposed that Muslims worship their god one year and the infidels worship God of the Muslims another year. However, the Holy Prophet (S) refused their proposal.
• 33. Pg. 93.
• 34. This belief of ours is certified by the Holy Qur’an through the following verse:
  “It is not meet for a mortal that Allah all should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah’s” (3:79).
  The next verse says that it is possible that because of his (perceived) power a person can claim divinity. Only those persons who are blessed with faith and piety can keep themselves safe from this deviation. (Author).
• 35. In the footnote to the 22nd Problem: “Ijtihaad and Taqlid”.
• 36. Ayan ash-Shi’a, Vol. 1. Pg. 60.
• 37. This event, which occurred in Nishapur, clearly indicates how much the general public - and especially the Iranian public - were devoted to the purified imams. Despite the activities of the Abbasid caliphs to reduce the respect for the imams, they could not succeed in weaning the people away from devotion to the imams. Although they had taken Imam Ridha’ with a great respect – just to gain public support – Mamoon issued secret orders that they must bring the Imam through the route that passes through the cities where no Shi’a population was present. Therefore, he was taken through the route that did not have Shi’a population and even such places where the people did not even know who he was.
  It is noteworthy that though Mamoon showed respect to Imam Ridha’ outwardly, he was always trying to undermine the status of the imam. That is why Imam Ridha’ was not taken through Qom, which was the centre of Shi’as. Also, he was not taken via Baghdad, which was the seat of caliphate and was not populated by only one sect. It was possible to bring Imam from there but there was danger that an atmosphere could have developed against Mamoon's caliphate.
  That is why he was not brought through Baghdad. In the same way, he was not taken through Kufa. They brought him through unknown routes and finally reached Nishapur. The caliph was not expecting such a reception for the Imam in a city like Nishapur and that people would leave their homes and come out to greet the imam. When the imam's caravan reached Nishapur, people surged out to welcome him. All the men and women, young and old were waiting to accord a grand welcome to Imam Ridha’. The scholars of that city also came out to extend a sincere welcome. The chief scholar of this place begged the Imam to allow him to hold the rein of the imam's camel and this honour was granted.
  The people requested the Imam to give them something which would remain as a memento so that after he goes away, it would remain with them forever and that memento could be nothing but a tradition, which they can write down from him directly. It is well-known that at that time, twelve thousand gold pen stands came out to note what the Imam was going to say. To say that this hadith is called chain of gold (Silsilat adh-Dhahab) because of this, is wrong. It is called chain of gold because all the narrators of this hadith are infallible imams. Since Nishapur was the centre of people who were attached to traditions, they requested the Imam to narrate a hadith to them.
  It is written that when Imam Ridha’ looked out from the camel saddle, the people saw his countenance and remarked: “Your face and appearance is just like that of the messenger of Allah.” Thus, there was increase in the excitement of the people. After that, the Imam addressed them and said: “I heard from my respected father who heard from his respected father... from Holy Prophet from Jibraeel from the Almighty Allah that He said, “The statement of 'there is no god except Allah is my fort.' Whoever enters this fort is safe from My chastisement.” (Ustad Shahid Mutahhari, Maqtal-e-Mutahhar, Matbua Jame Talimaat-e-Islami, Pakistan)
• 38. Saying ‘Allaahu Akbar’ meaning ‘God is the Greatest’.
• 39. In his book, A Story History of the Saracens.
• 40. Nero was the emperor of Rome in 54 A.D. His name is synonymous with brutality, viciousness and hedonism. He was very fond of poetry and jokes. He also sang and acted on the stage. In 64 A.D. he subjected Rome to arson and blamed the Christians for it. He either burned those Christians to death or threw them into lion cages as a public sport. It is said that when Rome was burning, he was playing the lute. In 67 A.D. after a military coup when the Senate sentenced him, Nero committed suicide.
• 41. Saddam had also imposed restriction on the ziarat of Imam Husayn (‘a). Now that Saddam is dead, it was seen that on Chehlum (Arba’in) (40th) Day on 2nd February 2008 the surging crowd of more than 7 million visitors were chanting: “O Zahra! We have not forgotten your Husayn.” The power that rules over the hearts of the people can never be destroyed. Indeed, love for Imam Husayn (‘a) is concealed in the hearts of the believers.
• 42. Sharh Nahj ul-Balagha Vol. 1, Pg. 363.
• 43. ‘Ajam means non-Arabs. During the time the State affairs were run by the Barmecids.
• 44. Pg. 73.
• 45. A contemporary man of letters has also referred to it as Qasida Zaia (well-known) and Naiha (mournful).
• 46. The evening and night prayers.
• 47. Pg 22.
• 48. Tirmidhi; Hakim; Ibn Hajar; Ibn Abil Hadid and Kanz ul-Ummal (quoted in Dalailus Sidq, Vol. 2, Pg. 303, 1953 Edition). Also, Tarikh Baghdad, Khatib Baghdadi, Vol. 14, Pg. 321, published by Sadat, Egypt; Tarikh Damishq, Ibn Asakir, Vol. 3, Pg. 119, Beirut; Al­ lmamah was Siyasah, Ibn Qutaibah Dinawari, Vol. 1, Pg. 73, published by Mustafa Muhammad, Egypt; Arjah ul-Matalib, Ubaidullah Hanafi, Pg. 598, Lahore.
• 49. The verse 43:78 quoted earlier.
• 50. Also known as Surah al-Insan or Surah ad-Dahr (surah no. 76) [Note by al-Islam.org].
• 51. Complicity between pseudo-ulama and imperialism is a part of history. It cannot be denied. The pseudo-ulama always issued verdicts favouring the rulers that only harmed Islam and Muslims. The rulers always resorted to the verdicts of such pseudo-ulama to restrict the views of Aale Muhammad.
  Abu Bakr Ibn Ibn Arabi's book, Al-Awasim Minal Qawasim, was written with only this aim. In this book the rulers are advised to forbid discussions on the objectionable deeds of the companions and one who criticizes a companion should be punished harshly. The Buwayhid rulers had persecuted Asha’ira but after their decline, the Seljuk’s patronized them in order to weaken the kingdom of Palestinians in Egypt. When the battle of religious beliefs ensued between the Abbasids and Palestinians, the pseudo-ulama supported Bani Abbas. Salahuddin al-Ayyubi also supported the Asha’ira.