When Imam Ali (‘a) was martyred and Imam Hasan (‘a) became secluded, was it all right for Mu’awiyyah to oppress the weak and terrify them? Or should it be that he acted like other dictators, who, when they have gained control over their enemies and achieve their ends, gives assurances of clemency to those who were opposed to their policies, and ignore the past?

Needless to say, forgiving an enemy is one of the qualities of magnanimous persons and the prophets; and Mu’awiyyah did not belong to this group. Imam Ali (‘a) forgave Ayesha and Marwan Ibn Hakam in the Battle of Jamal. He also spared the lives of Amr Ibn Aas and Busr Ibn Artat in the Battle of Siffin and allowed Mu’awiyyah and his army free access to water. He did so because he was a magnanimous and kind person.

In return for the generosity of Imam Ali (‘a), Mu’awiyyah had him cursed from the pulpit1 after his martyrdom and subjected his followers to the worst atrocities.

Mu’awiyyah was not only a mean person; he was also completely bereft of good morals. He used to satisfy his urge for revenge by attacking righteous people. Mu’awiyyah often dispatched Busr Ibn Artat, Muslim Ibn Uqbah, Zahhak Ibn Qays etc. to the Imam's territories to kill people, plunder their properties, and then flee.

Mu’awiyyah thought that by creating all these hardships for Imam Ali (‘a), his descendants, and Shi’as, he would be able to achieve his object. As a result of the martyrdom of Imam Ali (‘a) and the treaty of Imam Hasan (‘a), Mu’awiyyah gained rulership over the people. But what excuse can he give for the massacres and plundering perpetrated by him against righteous people? Has he any excuse except enmity against truth and its followers, and against justice and its supporters?

According to tradition: “Giving thanks for every blessing is that you abstain from whatever Allah has prohibited, and a bounty which is not appreciated is like an unforgiven sin.”

When Mu’awiyyah entered Kufa, he mounted the pulpit and thanked Allah for his victory. Then, he addressed the people: “By Allah, I didn't fight you to make you pray, keep the fast, perform Hajj and pay Zakat, because you already perform these duties. If you think it is so, you are mistaken. 1was fighting you in order to rule over you and God gave me the power which you detest. You should know that I trample under my feet the promises that 1 made with Hasan Ibn Ali in the peace treaty. I am not bound to fulfil any of its conditions.”2

It is mentioned in traditions that a Muslim must not violate his oath, but Mu’awiyyah said: “I trample under my feet he promises I made with Hasan Ibn Ali.”

The following were the conditions of peace treaty proposed by Imam Hasan (‘a):

(1) Mu’awiyyah would act according to Qur’an and Sunnah.

(2) Mu’awiyyah would not give caliphate to anyone but leave it at the choice of the ummah.

(3) The life, property and honour of the people would remain secure.

(4) Cursing of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (‘a) would be stopped.

Mu’awiyyah had accepted all these conditions. But later on he practically trampled upon this treaty.

Cursing Of Imam Ali (‘A)

It is narrated that one day, Abu Sufyan was riding on a red camel. Utbah was walking ahead of him and Muawlyyah was driving the camel from the rear. When the Holy Prophet (S) saw them, he said: “May Allah curse the rider, the one going ahead and the one driving it.” Mu’awiyyah remembered this curse, and he was waiting for an opportunity to take revenge against the prophet.'3

He could not directly curse the Holy Prophet; so, when he became an absolute ruler, by having Imam Ali (‘a) cursed, he actually meant to curse the Holy Prophet, because the prophet had said:

“Whoever cursed Ali, cursed me and whoever cursed me, cursed Allah. And one who cursed Allah shall be thrown headlong into the Fire (of Hell) by Him.” 4

Muawiyah used to have Imam Ali (‘a) cursed. He wrote to his governors that Imam Ali (‘a) must be cursed from every pulpit during Friday sermons. Government preachers cursed Imam Ali (‘a) from the pulpits in all cities, expressed hatred against him and abused his family.5

For ninety years, imprecation of His Eminence, Ali (‘a) remained a part of the law of the country no one dared to question. Rituals could be missed, but no one ever missed the 'worship'. For a period of one hundred years, His Eminence, Ali's name was not even included in the list of caliphs. When the tradition of “It is obligatory for you to follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided caliphs' was fabricated”, Imam Ali (‘a) was made the fourth caliph.

While Imam Ali (‘a) was still alive, Mu’awiyyah was fearful and he resorted to deceit and treachery, transgression, oppression, killing and plundering. If someone asked as to why he was doing all those, he used to present the excuse that he was doing it to consolidate his rule. But what reply could he give after he had consolidated his rule?

Mu’awiyyah was once told: “You have achieved your object. It is, therefore, only proper that you cease cursing Ali (‘a).” He replied: “It is not possible. I wish that he should be cursed so much that even infants get habituated to it and they grow old with this habit.”

Mu’awiyyah wrote to his agents (governors) to let that practice continue as part of the act of worship. He cursed Imam Ali (‘a) in the presence of his children and relatives. He invited descendants of Imam Ali (‘a) to his house where his friends spoke ill of Imam Ali (‘a) in his (Mu’awiyyah’s) presence.

We have heard about a man who travelled with his enemy, and they slept on the same floor. He eventually committed treachery and killed his enemy. However, we have not heard of a man, who is invited as a guest and then treachery is committed against him. Such conduct is peculiar to Mu’awiyyah.

Imam Hasan (‘A) At The Residence Of Mu’awiyyah

At the time of the conquest of Mecca, the Holy Prophet (S) announced: “Whoever takes refuge in the house of Abu Sufyan shall be safe.” Mu’awiyyah wanted to recompense this kindness of the prophet. He invited Imam Hasan (‘a) to his house and the Imam accepted the invitation. When he entered, Amr Ibn Aas, Walid Ibn Utbah, Utbah Ibn Abu Sufyan and Mughaira Ibn Shu’ba were sitting there. Immediately on seeing him, they began to recite curses on him.

Imam Hasan (‘a) said:

“Mu’awiyyah! What they are uttering is in fact from you. It was you that began this, and this practice originated from your vain thinking and impure morality. Doubtlessly all these activities are because you people are inimical to the prophet and the Ahl Al-Bayt of the prophet.

Since you are abusing my father, tell me, did my father not pray facing two Qiblas while your father did not believe in either? He considered prayers to be a means of deviation, and on account of his ignorance, worshipped Laat and Uzza. Are you not aware that my father took two oaths of allegiance viz. the ‘Oath of Victory' and ‘Oath of 'Rizwan', whereas you did not believe in one of them and did not remain faithful to the other? Don't you know that my father was the first to believe in the prophet while you and your father were Muslims only by appearance and received a share from the funds reserved for ‘those who were to be consoled’?

Don't you know that the man you abused was the standard-bearer of the Holy Prophet in the Battle of Badr, whereas the standard of polytheists was in the hands of you and your father? And the position was the same in the Battles of Uhud and Khandaq. Are you not aware that the Holy Prophet cursed Abu Sufyan seven times?

First, when the Holy Prophet was proceeding to Taif, and Abu Sufyan abused and threatened him.

Second, during the Battle of Badr.

Third, in the Battle of Uhud when Abu Sufyan raised the slogan of: Long Live Hubal! The prophet cursed both Abu Sufyan and Hubal.

Fourth, in the Battle of the Ditch.

Fifth, at the Treaty of Hudaybiyya.

Sixth, at event of the Allegiance of Aqaba.

Seventh, the day Abu Sufyan rode a red camel.''

The statements of Imam Hasan (‘a) support our point of view. Mu’awiyyah’s object was not restricted to the acquisition of power. His final goal was to use this power to take revenge against the truth and the followers of truth.

Abdullah Bin Ja'far And Muawiyah

One day Abdullah Ibn Ja'far visited Muawiyah, and Amr Ibn Aas was sitting there. Abdullah had not yet taken his seat when Amr Ibn Aas started abusing Imam Ali (‘a). Both Abdullah and Mu’awiyyah heard what he said. Abdullah was infuriated and he began to tremble with rage. He got ready to fight and having pulled up his sleeves, said to Mu’awiyyah:

“How long should we get enraged at your hands? May Allah destroy you! Have you forgotten your dirty role in killing Muslims? Have you forgotten that you were fighting against the Commander of the Faithful?

You have been perverted for too long. Now you must return to truth. You are caught in the mire of injustice and sin and must be guided to the right path. If you do not change your ways, we shall publicize your evil deeds. You must refrain from this abusive language in our presence. When you are alone, you can do what you like. The Almighty Allah will punish you for that.”

Muawiyah wanted to extinguish the Divine light by cursing and vilification, but the light of Allah cannot be extinguished. It shines even though the polytheists may despise it. After Imam Ali's martyrdom, Mu’awiyyah did not discontinue cursing him. Times changed, and people placed the Imam in the category of prophets and saints. And some people like the Ghulat even raised him to the level of divinity, while the name of Mu’awiyyah was included among the murderous and barbaric persons of the world.

An Imam of Ahl Al-Sunna, Hasan Basri said:

“Mu’awiyyah committed four such acts that even one of them is sufficient to make him damned. First, he grabbed the caliphate without consultation even though the companions of the prophet were present at the time. Second, he made his son Yazid, his successor. Third, although the prophet has clearly stated that the child belongs to the husband of its mother, he made Ziyad his brother. And fourth, He killed Hujr6 and his companions. Woe be to him regarding Hujr and his companions.”

Imam Shafi’i says:

“Friends of His Eminence, Ali (‘a) concealed his virtues on account of fear, and his enemies conceal them because of envy and grudge. Despite this, his virtues have become so famous that they have enveloped the East and the West.”

Day by day Mu’awiyyah became aware of his own defects and realized that he did not possess any good quality. Hence, he adopted this policy that whenever one mentioned the virtues of Bani Hashim, he used to say: “Uthman was killed unjustly.”

One day Mu’awiyyah passed by a group of Quraish. All except Ibn Abbas stood up before him. Mu’awiyyah said: “O Ibn Abbas! Uthman was killed unjustly.” Ibn Abbas said: “Umar Ibn Khattab, too, was killed unjustly.” Mu’awiyyah said: “Umar was killed by a disbeliever.” Ibn Abbas asked: “Who killed Uthman?” Mu’awiyyah replied: “The Muslims.” Ibn Abbas said: “So your words carry no weight.”7

Persecution And Bloodshed

Faith is defined as follows: It is the certainty in the heart, acknowledgment with the tongue, and action with the limbs. Mu’awiyyah's enmity against the Holy Prophet and his family was also the same. Because his heart was filled with avarice, he cursed with his tongue and said: “Infants should grow up and the grown-ups should become old, cursing.” And as regards his actions, he did not even refrain from persecuting and shedding the blood of the family of the prophet.

Mu’awiyyah appointed Ziyad Ibn Sumayya as the Governor of Iraq. As Ziyad was previously a Shi’a,8 he knew all Shi’as. He, therefore, conducted a thorough search, and after having seized them from their hiding places, terrorized them, amputated their limbs, blinded them, and hanged them on date-palm branches, exiled them, and killed them. Eventually the distinguished Shi’as of Iraq were eliminated.

Mu’awiyyah wrote to his governors: “Do not accept the evidence given by a Shi’a and choose your representatives from amongst the supporters of Uthman. Attend the gatherings of those who narrate Uthman's virtues; communicate their narrations to me along with the names of the narrators and their fathers.

Mu’awiyyah spent a large sum of money on those narrators. Since it was a good means of earning money, fabricated narrations regarding Uthman's virtues became rampant. The narrators competed with one another in fabricating traditions to get more rewards.

Mu’awiyyah's Circular

Mu’awiyyah wrote to his governors:

“Traditions in praise of Uthman have spread in all cities. When you receive this letter, you should order people to discuss the companions of the prophet and the rulers. It should be ensured that against every tradition about the virtues of Ali, a similar tradition should be coined for the caliphs, because only such acts will make me happy.”

Mu’awiyyah killed the people, plundered their wealth and belongings, and destroyed their property; and attributed false things to Allah and His Messenger. For Mu’awiyyah, these things were better than enforcement of justice and being faithful to Allah and His prophet. There were two reasons for this policy of Mu’awiyyah:

First, he loved sin for the sake of sin, and liked falsehood because of its being falsehood.

Second, he harboured enmity towards the prophet on account of his prophethood, and he behaved in the worst manner with his purified progeny.

Disregarding the law, Mu’awiyyah issued circulars that advised murders, imprisonment, pillage, destruction of houses, and disgracing the people, directed at the followers of Imam Ali (‘a). Were these not just because these people (the Shi’as) were in possession of the wealth of faith?

Mu’awiyyah used to tell the supporters of Imam Ali (‘a): “You must announce aloofness from Ali and invoke curse upon him, and express devotion to Uthman.” Anyone who did so saved his life and those who continued to express their loyalty to the Imam were eliminated.9

Was Mu’awiyyah not aware that the faith of Ali (‘a) was the same as that of his cousin, His Eminence, Muhammad (S)? Why, then, did he persecute and kill these people? It was only because they loved the family of the prophethood. Among the people that Mu’awiyyah killed were Hujr Ibn Adi and his companions, Amr Ibn Himaq Khuzai, Rushaid Hujri etc. The number of those killed tells the truth.

Non-aligned countries of the East and West, which are members of the United Nations are united against apartheid America and South Africa.10 They claim that racial discrimination is incompatible with the freedom of man, although this discrimination is in respect of only a few minor matters such as the ban of marriage between blacks and whites, and restrictions of the blacks from entering assemblies, universities, clubs, and other public places.

Hujr Bin Adi

Hujr Ibn Adi was among the helpers of the Messenger of Allah (S) and a companion of Imam Ali and Imam Hasan (‘a). Hujr was a pious and religious person. The author of Mustadrak has written: Hujr was the monk among companions of Muhammad.11

Hujr was a brave warrior and a member of armies that conquered Syria and Qadasia and fought from the side of Imam Ali (‘a) in the Battles of Jamal, Siffin and Nahrawan. His only offence was that he was not prepared to abuse Imam Ali (‘a) or to curse him from the pulpit. All types of tortures were inflicted on Hujr and his companions.

The best six persons among them were killed. Some of them had their limbs cut off and were blinded. Many were buried alive. Saifi Ibn Faseel was one of the companions of Hujr. He was brought before Ziyad, and the following conversation took place between them:

Ziyad: “O enemy of Allah! What do you say about Abu Turab?”

Saifi: “I don't know who Abu Turab is.”

Ziyad: “To what extent do you know him?”

Saifi: “I don't know him at all.''

Ziyad: “Don't you know Ali Ibn Abi Talib?”

Saifi: “Why not?”

Ziyad: “The same Ali is Abu Turab.”

Saifi: “What you have said is incorrect. He is Abu al-Hasan and Abu al-Husayn (Father of Hasan and Husayn).”

Ziyad ordered his cane to be brought. Then he turned to Saifi and said: “What did you say?”

Saifi said: “What I said about a believing servant of God are the best words.”

Ziyad ordered him to be beaten so much that he should drop and not be able to get up again. After thrashing him continuously, Ziyad asked: What do you say about Ali?

Saifi replied: “By Allah, even though you skin me alive you shall not hear anything else from me.”

Ziyad said: “You must curse Ali, or I shall kill you.”

Saifi replied: “Kill me as early as possible, for I am not going to abuse Ali (‘a)”12

Dr. Taha Husayn writes:

Hujr was a righteous Muslim. He and his brother Hani joined a caravan that was coming to the prophet, and they had the honour of meeting the Messenger of Allah (S). Hujr participated in the Battle of Syria and suffered many hardships. It appears that he was in the vanguard of the army which entered Marj Azra, near Damascus. (Later he was killed in the same area by the order of Mu’awiyyah and was buried there.)

From this war expedition he went to Iraq, where he took part in the battles of Iran and suffered great hardships. In Kufa, he held a very high official post. Hujr was a kind person and completely sincere in religious matters. He enjoined people to do good and forbade them from evil. He liked just rulers and was displeased with oppressive ones. He criticized Bani Umayyah severely on account of their cursing Imam Ali (‘a) and did not easily bear this abominable act of theirs.

Ziyad Ibn Sumayya arrested him and sent him to Muawiyah along with his thirteen companions. Mu’awiyyah ordered them to be held at Marj Azra, near Damascus. When Hujr came to know that the village in which they were being kept was Marj, he said: By Allah, I was the first Muslim the dogs of this village barked at, and I was the first Muslim who pronounced takbeer 13 at this place. Hujr meant to say that he was the first Islamic warrior who arrived in that area and fought against the enemies of Islam.

Mu’awiyyah issued the following orders about Hujr and his associates: “They should dissociate themselves from Ali and curse him, and express regards for Uthman. Whoever does so should be set free, and whoever declines should be killed.”

Some individuals interceded with Mu’awiyyah on behalf of these men. When he accepted their intercession, they were eight in all, who were told to express aloofness from Imam Ali (‘a). Six of them refused to accept this condition, and the remaining two asked that they should be taken before Mu’awiyyah so that they may express their true attitude. Their request was granted.

As regards the said six persons, they were put to death and formed the first group that was tortured and killed. The remaining two persons were taken before Mu’awiyyah. One of them expressed dissociation from Imam Ali (‘a), but the other refused to do so. In the very presence of Mu’awiyyah, he said about him and Uthman whatever he wanted to say. Mu’awiyyah sent him back to Ziyad and directed him to kill him in the worst possible manner. Ziyad buried him alive.14

How distressing that the ruler of Muslims should shed the blood of those whose blood Allah has secured, and should order their execution without hearing what they have to say in their defence, or allowing them to justify their attitude?

There were many who wrote to Mu’awiyyah saying that they were faithful to his government and had no intention to betray him. What they said was, however, of no use.

The killing of Hujr had a deep impact on the people. When Rabi Ibn Ziyad heard the story of Hujr, he died of shock.

Abu Ishaq Sabi-i was asked: When were the people humiliated? He replied: When Imam Hasan (‘a) passed away, when Ziyad became Mu’awiyyah's brother and when Hujr Ibn Adi was killed.

Mu’awiyyah Ibn Khadij said: Don't you see that we fight for Quraish and sacrifice our lives to defend their kingdom, while they attack our cousins and kill them?

Ayesha said:

I heard the Holy Prophet said: Some persons will be killed in Azra, as a result of which Allah and the celestial beings will become angry. So, on account of the murder of Hujr, initially I decided to revolt, but was afraid lest the event of the Battle of Jamal should be repeated.

Dr.Taha Husayn says:

The murder of Hujr is the greatest tragic event of history. Contemporaries of Mu’awiyyah believed that he (Mu’awiyyah) was a headache for Islam. Mu’awiyyah himself knew it and used to feel proud of it.

Amr Bin Himaq Khuzai

Amr Ibn Himaq was a companion of the prophet, who embraced Islam before the conquest of Mecca. He was a close associate of the Holy Prophet. The Prophet prayed for him that he might enjoy his youth. Hence, even when he was eighty years of age his hair had not become grey. Amir Al-Mu’minin Imam Ali (‘a) prayed for him: “O Lord! Illuminate the heart of Amr on account of his piety and guide him to the right path.”

When Ziyad became the governor of Kufa, he summoned Amr, but Amr went into hiding. He was pursued and his wife, Amina Bint Shareed, was arrested. Eventually, the officials of Ziyad arrested Amr and beheaded him. For the first time in Islam, Ziyad exhibited Amr’s severed head at various places and sent it to Mu’awiyyah.

Mu’awiyyah displayed 'generosity' and 'sympathy' by sending Amr's head to his imprisoned wife and it was thrown in her lap. Amina placed her hand on the forehead of Amr, kissed his lips and said: “For quite a long time, you had kept him hidden from me and now you have brought his body to me as a present. Blessed be Amr who came to me as a present. He neither made me furious nor ever became furious because of me.”

There is no doubt that Yazid was like his father, Mu’awiyyah. Yazid cut off the head of Imam Husayn (‘a) and exhibited it in various cities before the very eyes of the Iman's wife and children so that it might be more painful for them. Mu’awiyyah sent the head of Amr to different cities, and then had it thrown into the lap of his imprisoned wife so that she might be further distressed.

Rushaid Hujri

Rushaid was a worthy disciple of Imam Ali (‘a). Ziyad told him to express dissociation from Imam Ali (‘a) and curse him. Upon his refusal, Ziyad cut off his limbs and crucified him.

Juwiriyah Bin Musahhar Abdi

Ziyad arrested Juwiriyah, cut off his limbs, and hanged him on the branch of a date palm till he finally died. These were a few examples of the atrocities and murders committed by Mu’awiyyah so that people know that all that the official narrators write is not correct.

Captives And Prisons

In addition to killing the Shi’a’s, cutting off their limbs, hanging them and burying them alive, Mu’awiyyah imprisoned so many Shi’a men and women that the prisons became full. He even used to meet these prisoners so that the fire of his grudge might extinguish, but the Shi’a prisoners said things that only added fuel to the fire of his wrath.

Masoodi writes:

“Mu’awiyyah had imprisoned Sa'sa Ibn Suhan, Abdullah Ibn Kawa, and some supporters of Imam Ali (‘a) as well as some elders of Quraish. One day he entered the prison and asked the prisoners: “What sort of caliph am I?” Ibn Kawa replied: “Your material world is vast but your hereafter is hard. You have changed darkness into light and light into darkness. What sort of a caliph would be he who rules over the people by force and becomes low in the eyes of the people owing to his pride, and gains domination over them by means of falsehood and deceit? By Allah, you were present on the battlefield at the Battle of Badr. You and your father were among the enemies of the prophet who were in the caravan and who ran away. Your grandfather and father were set free by the Holy Prophet. Is such a person fit for caliphate?”15

Muawiyah imprisoned the righteous servants of Allah, killed them, exiled them, amputated their limbs, and burnt them alive. He meted out this treatment to the friends of Imam Ali (‘a) after they had accepted his rulership. Despite this, there are people who say that Mu’awiyyah had a tender heart and was kind. George Jordac has replied to this remark in his book Al-Imam Ali, in the chapter of 'Mu’awiyyah and His Successors'. We reproduce below a portion of that book:

“On one hand Mu’awiyyah was so kind that he granted Egypt and its inhabitants to Amr Ibn Aas and on the other hand he was cruel that he even took away the right of Egypt and the Egyptians to live. If this could be called kindness, then every murder is kindness.

When a person studies Mu’awiyyah's policies carefully, he will be stunned to find what means he employed to persecute the people. Murder, plunder, and terrorism formed his basic policy, and making attractive promises and administering threats were also parts of it. It also includes the murder of good and innocent persons, holding rogues and criminals in esteem, false propaganda and seeking assistance from people of bad character.

Abu Sufyan's nature had a great influence on the character of Mu’awiyyah. In the same way his disposition had deep imprints of his mother, Hind. Thus, both played an important role in moulding his nature and habits.

Mu’awiyyah's Services To The Shi’a Faith

Building their arguments with Qur’anic verses and numerous sayings of the prophet, Shi’as believe that love and obedience to Ahl Al-Bayt of the prophet is obligatory and it is necessary to dissociate from their enemies. Shi’a scholars have written countless books about the virtues of this family. But the Qur’an, the traditions, and the books written for the propagation of Shi’a faith are not as effective as the policies of Mu’awiyyah, which became the cause of publicity and strengthening of Shi’a faith.

The crimes of Bani Umayyah were more effective than the thousands of books and proved more effective in proving the rightfulness of Amir Al-Mu’minin (‘a) than thousands of arguments.

In proving the facts, rational and scholarly writings are not as effective as historical events. It is because historical events are like experiments, whose results are undeniable. During the time of Mu’awiyyah, many events took place which proved he was a worldly-minded person while Imam Ali (‘a) was a religious personality. There is an old proverb saying that good can be better perceived by comparing it with evil.

Mu’awiyyah said: “I fought in order to rule over Kufa and to take over their wealth and it was not for prayer and fasting.” Compare this with the statement of Imam Ali (‘a) to see the manifest reality. The Imam once pointed to his shoe and told Ibn Abbas: “In my view, this shoe is better than rulership except that I should protect a right, deliver it to one who deserves it, and should restrain from falsehood.”

Mu’awiyyah decided to erase the name of Imam Ali (‘a) and his descendants from the minds of the people, and to invite them towards attachment to Uthman and alliance with Bani Umayyah. To achieve this, he killed and persecuted them and considered it to be his political acumen and expertise. However, this policy produced a result that was opposed to what he desired, and that era had passed. Today, the name of Bani Umayyah has become a symbol of injustice, corruption, treachery, murder, and pillage, whereas the name of Imam Ali (‘a) is the icon of guidance, truth, and protection of the oppressed.

Abdullah Ibn Urwah Ibn Zubair told his son: “Pay attention to faith, for whatever the world constructs is destroyed by faith, but when faith is made the foundation, the world cannot destroy it. Just look at Ali Ibn Abi Talib (‘a). Whatever Bani Umayyah said to vilify him caused him to become more popular.”

By Allah, the weeping of Bani Umayyah for their dead and the reciting of elegies by poets were nothing but mourning for decayed corpse.

Dr. Taha Husayn writes in Ali wa Banuhi:

“Nothing promotes the views of the opponents of despotism and prompts people to embrace their thinking as despotism itself does, because despotism automatically makes the people incline to the oppressed and makes them take up their cause. Views attract the people profoundly to themselves and acquire greater strength as against the crimes of the despots. (And in the end, the views come out victorious).”

In light of the above discussion, during the ten years of Mu’awiyyah's rule, Shi’as spread their religious beliefs all over the Islamic territories. When Mu’awiyyah died, all the inhabitants of Iraq and the majority of Muslims in general were inimical to Bani Umayyah and loyal to Ali and his descendants. Of course, the Shi’a faith consists of support for Ahl Al-Bayt and enmity against Bani Umayyah and its foundation was laid by Mu’awiyyah.

By employing means to annihilate the Shi’a faith, Mu’awiyyah himself helped the spread of the Shi’a faith all over the country. Mu’awiyyah left the world, but the Shi’a faith and family of Ali (‘a) continued to exist and inshaAllah will exist forever. If thankfulness for injustice were allowed, we would have been thankful for those crimes by Mu’awiyyah Ibn Hind that became the means of advancement of the Shi’a faith.

Who Is Responsible For Disunity Among Muslims?

Keeping in mind the policy of Muawiyah regarding the Shi’as, we ask: Who is responsible for disunity among Muslims? Who caused the Muslims to be divided into Shi’a and Sunni? Was it the Shi’as, or distinguished persons of Ahlul-Sunnah, or the unjust rulers, who suppressed the freedom of people, considered their bloodshed lawful and laid the foundation of oppression – for the despotic rulers coming after them – against the Ahl Al-Bayt and their followers?

Who started the cursing and slandering of the companions of the Holy Prophet from the pulpits? Whose policy was it that - being in power - prescribed the cursing of His Eminence, Ali (‘a) till the children grew up and till grown-ups became old? Who gave abundant rewards and wealth to those who used abusive language and curses? Who killed or exiled those who refused to curse? Who filled every portion of the earth with terror and fear? Did Shi’as commit all these crimes?

“...And let not hatred of a people incite you not to act equitably; act equitably, that is nearer to piety ...” (5:8).

It can be innocently said: We should not get involved in these conflicts and these discussions. Why should we discuss the deeds of the dead when even their bones have been reduced to dust? We discuss those who are alive and cooperate with one another.

We say in reply: True, we should let the dead remain buried and should become united and cooperate with one another. But the problem is that the traces of the crimes of the decayed bones is still present in the hearts of some people and manifest their effects, and arguments are adduced from what they said.

It is strange that those who follow these decayed bones talk about unity, cooperation, and brotherhood, only when they have no argument to put forward. However, when they get a chance to attack the Shi’as, they forget unity and cooperation. Cooperation and unity mean that people should work for the benefit of one another. However, if the intention is to safeguard one’s personal interests, it is not unity and cooperation; it is enmity and short-sightedness.

Yazid’s Actions

If Mu’awiyyah were alive during the three years of Yazid's rule, he would have praised his son’s achievements. During the first year, he killed Imam Husayn (‘a), the grandson of the Holy Prophet (S), severed the heads of his children and friends, and made his women prisoners.

During the second year, he permitted his soldiers to do in Medina whatever they liked. As a result, more than a thousand virgins were defiled and a thousand persons killed, including seven hundred companions of the prophet.

In the third year, he attacked the Kaaba with catapults. If Mu’awiyyah had been alive and seen these crimes of his son, he would have kissed his forehead and said: You are really my son.

Yazid did not stop at these crimes in Karbala, Medina, and Mecca.16 He appointed Ubaidullah Ibn Ziyad as Governor of Kufa so that he might repeat the atrocities committed by his father in respect of the Shi’as. Ibn Ziyad imprisoned, exiled, killed and hanged the people, or cut off their limbs. He said to Mitham, a disciple and friend of Imam Ali: “You must express hatred against Ali. If you don't, I shall cut off your hands and feet and crucify you. In reply to this threat, Mitham praised Imam Ali (‘a) and cursed Ibn Ziyad and Bani Umayyah. Ibn Ziyad cut off his hands, feet and tongue and hanged him to death.

What crime could be greater than that of Ibn Ziyad’s? He wrote to Ibn Saad in connection with the Battle of Karbala:

“Besiege Husayn so that you may kill him and his companions and cut up his body into pieces because he deserves to be killed. When you have killed Husayn, make the horses trample his body, because he is an oppressive person. I know that to make horses trample the body of a person after his death is of no use. However, I have vowed that if I kill him, I will treat him thus. If you carry out my orders you should know that I reward those who are obedient to me and if you cannot, hand over the command to Shimr Ibn Zil Jaushan. I have given him the necessary instructions.”

The instructions given by him to Shimr Ibn Zil Jaushan, included - in addition to killing Imam Husayn (‘a) - eliminating all his children, whether young or suckling. so that the progeny of Imam Ali (‘a) becomes extinct.

There was close similarity between Yazid and his father, Mu’awiyyah, and between Ibn Ziyad and Ziyad, because the source of their crimes was only one, and that was enmity against Allah and the Holy Prophet. Each of them expressed this enmity according to his capacity. These persons differed from one another only in their respective names. As regards their deeds, they were alike.

Yazid ruled for 3 years 7 months and 22 days. History has recorded such crimes and persecutions perpetrated by him, that his rule will remain a stigma on the history of the Muslims till the Day of Judgment.

Can we forget the blood of Husayn? Is it possible to forget the blood that boils and remains fresh during all ages? In the words of Shaykh Ubaydi, the Mufti of Mosul: “Husayn's martyrdom has joined up with the root of Islam and become unforgettable.”

Mughaira Ibn Shu’ba has suggested to Mu’awiyyah to take allegiance from the people for Yazid and make him his successor. Then he said: “I have placed the foot of Muawiyah in a stirrup which is harmful for Muslims, and I have created such a split between Muslims that can never be cured.”

Muawiyah II

Before his death, Yazid made people give allegiance to his son, Mu’awiyyah, and appointed him as heir apparent. But after his father's death, Mu’awiyyah Ibn Yazid renounced the caliphate.

Abu Mahasin writes in An-Nujoom Az-Zahira:17

Muawiyah Ibn Yazid mounted the pulpit and said, after praise and glorification of Allah: “O people! My grandfather fought with the people who were worthy of rulership on account of their proximity to the prophet, and usurped the right of Ali (‘a). As long as he lived, he did what you know till he left the world alone taking with him the burden of deeds. After my grandfather, my father usurped the caliphate though he was not fit for it. All his life he indulged in sensual desires till death overtook him and he was also buried in the grave alone with the burden of his sins.”

After that, he wept greatly and then said:

“My greatest difficulty is that 1 know that my father's end is bad. He killed the descendants of the Holy Prophet, made lawful for his soldiers to do in Medina what they liked, and damaged the Kaaba. I do not have the courage to do such indecent things. I transfer the authority to you. You may choose anyone you like as the caliph.”

His mother said: “I wish I had miscarried you.”18. Muawiyah II replied: “I wish I had been such, because being miscarried is better than being associated with Yazid, Mu’awiyyah and Abu Sufyan.”

After that, Muawiyah II did not live for long. Some say that since he did not carry out the bloodshed and persecution of the descendants and followers of Ali (‘a) like his father and other leaders of Bani Umayyah, he was poisoned to death.19

The grandson of Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan says: My grandfather fought with one who was the closest in kin to the Sun of Prophethood, the foremost Muslim, the respected one among the greatest of Muhajirs, owner of knowledge and excellence, cousin of the prophet and his son-in-law. Despite that, lackeys of Bani Umayyah call this rebellion a mistake of jurisprudence20.

In the words of Mirza Ghalib:

It is a queer jurisprudence that an enemy of religion comes to fight Ali (‘a) and they call it a mistake.

• 1. Maulana Shibli Nomani, in his book, Sirat an-Nabi (Vol. 1, Pg. 69, Lahore writes: The compilation of traditions took place during the period of Bani Umayyah, who carried out the vilification of the progeny Fatimah and cursed His Eminence, Ali (‘a) from the pulpits for ninety years, in Jami’ Masjids from Sind to Asia Minor and Andalusia. The Umayyads had hundreds of traditions fabricated about the virtues of Mu’awiyyah etc.
• 2. Sharh Nahj ul-Balagha, Vol. 4.
• 3. Masoodi says that Matraf Ibn Mughaira said: “My father and I were Mu’awiyyah's guests in Syria. My father used to visit Mu’awiyyah often. One night when he returned from meeting Mu’awiyyah, he was very much disturbed. When I asked him why he was so much distressed, he said: Mu’awiyyah is very bad, he is the vilest person in the world. I asked: What happened? My father replied: I told him: You have reached an age when it would have been better if you had acted justly and nicely, and looked at your brothers (i.e. Bani Hashim) with kindness and improved relations with them. By Allah! Today they have nothing that you may fear. Mu’awiyyah said: Alas! Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman managed the caliphate and behaved nicely with the people, but their names are now forgotten but the name of Bani Hashim's brother (the prophet) is called out five times a day in the world of Islam: ‘I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of God.’ Now after this, what remains except that the name of Muhammad should also be destroyed?”
  Masoodi has quoted this incident from Al- Maufiqyaat of Zubair Ibn Bukkar, which is a reliable primary source.
• 4. Dalailus Sidq, Vol. 3, Pg. 231, quoting from Mustadrak ul-Hakim; Noor ul-Absaar, Shablanji. Pg. 100, published by Saeediya; Yanabi ul-Mawaddah, Sulairnan Qunduzi Hanafi, Pg. 205, published in Istanbul.
• 5. Sharh Nahj ul-Balagha, Ibne Abi ‘l-Hadid, Vol. 3, Pg. 15.
• 6. Hujr Ibn ‘Adi was a companion of the Holy Prophet. He was sentenced to death for his objections against the Umayyad policy and practice of cursing Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (‘a). A brief history of him is given in this book. [Note of al-Islam]
• 7. As Muslims considered the killing Uthman permissible (whereas the killing of Umar was not), Uthman's killing was thus of lesser importance than Umar's.
• 8. In the beginning, Ziyad Ibn Sumayya was in support of Imam Ali (‘a). So was Busr Ibn Abi Artat, for some time. The Khawarij, who accused Imam Ali (‘a) of infidelity and that he was liable for execution, were also in the army of Imam Ali (‘a).
  When Ziyad Ibn Sumayya wanted to eliminate Saeed Ibn Sarah, the latter took refuge with Imam Hasan (‘a). Ziyad pulled down Saeed’s house, confiscated his belongings, and took his wife and brother in custody. Imam Hasan (‘a) wrote the following letter to Ziyad:
  “So, to say: You are in pursuit of the life of a Muslim. He has the same rights as others do, and enmity towards him is the same as enmity towards others. You pulled down his house, confiscated his belongings, and took his wife into custody. As soon as you receive my letter, rebuild his house, and return his belongings and his wife. He asked me to petition on his behalf and I have given him refuge.”
  Ziyad replied:
  “From Ziyad Ibn Abu Sufyan to Hasan Ibn Fatimah (‘a): So, to say: Received your letter. You began the letter with your name, while you are the supplicant. I am the ruler, and you are a subject. You ordered me like a king ordered his subject. You have accorded refuge to a transgressor and then wrote a letter to me. He made you do a wrong thing, and you did it readily. By Allah. you cannot save him from my hands, even though he might enter between your skin and your flesh.
  The flesh I would like to eat most would be your flesh. Therefore, surrender him to his neighbour, who is more eligible than you to keep him. Know that, even if I forgive his crime, it would not be because of your request, and if I kill him, it would be because of his devotion to your transgressor father.” (God forbid)
• 9. This policy was pursued despite that freedom of belief is a fundamental human right.
• 10. This book was written in 1962 when the racists were ruling South Africa and the African Americans were also deprived of many rights of citizenship due to racism.
• 11. Sulh al-Hasan, Shaykh Aale Yasin, Pg. 324.
• 12. Zakhahir ul-Darayayn, Page 30.
• 13. Expression meaning Allah is the Greatest.
• 14. Ziyad was the one who arrested Shi’as in Kufa and Basra, cut off their limbs, thrust iron rods into their eyes and hung them from doorways. (Abu Futuh, Vol. 4, Pg. 320; Sharh Nahj ul-Balagha, Ibn Abil Hadid, Vol. 11, Pg. 144) This wicked man initiated the practice of executing people after tying up their hands and legs and according to Ibn Khaldun and Ibn Athir, he buried alive Abdur Rahman Ibn Hisan due to his loyalty to Imam Ali (‘a). (Shifa as-Sudoor, Pg.315).
• 15. Murujuz Zahab, Vol. 3 (Pg.49, 1948 Edition).
• 16. After Karbala, the most tragic event was the attack on Medina, which occurred in 63 A.H. during the last days of Yazid. A brief account of this event is that the people of Medina rebelled against Yazid, as they considered him a transgressor, a sinner, and an oppressor. They expelled Yazid 's governor from the city and appointed Abdullah Ibn Hanzala as their leader. When Yazid was informed of this, he sent Muslim Ibn Uqbah al-Marri (whom the Muslim elders used to refer to as Musraf Ibn Uqbah) with a force of 12,000 men to attack Medina and ordered him to give the people of the city three days to surrender.
  If they were to disagree, they should be attacked and after they are defeated, the city of Medina should be left free for the soldiers to do whatever they liked. The army set out with these orders. A battle took place. Medina was conquered, and after that according to the directions of Yazid, the soldiers were permitted to do whatever they liked in Medina for three days.
  There were plunder and killings all over the city during these three days. The citizens were subjected to a massacre, in which according to the report of Imam Zuhri, 700 nobles and 10,000 commoners were killed, and the shameful fact is that soldiers entered the houses forcibly and defiled the women. (Khilafat-O-Mulookiyat, by Maulana Maudoodi, Pg. 182).
  Despite these atrocities, in a program on Peace TV (2nd December 2007), Dr. Zakir Naik was not ashamed to mention Yazid as Rahmatullah alaihi (Meaning: May Allah be merciful on him)!
  In the same way, the Egyptian, Shaykh Khaazri writes on page 517 of his book: Ummat ul-Islamiyyah:
  “Indeed, by rising in revolt against Yazid, Imam Husayn (‘a) committed a great mistake. He shook up the foundations of national unity, as a result of which the Ummah fell into such discord and differences that it has not been able to come out of them till today.”
  That is why this statement of Allamah Mughniya is not inappropriate when he says that the signs of the crimes of the decayed bones are still present in the hearts, and they display their effects and inform us who is in Husayn's camp and who is in the party of Yazid.
  There still remain some garlands of curse
  To be placed around the necks of all the Yazids.
  There would never be reconciliation between us and them
  Yazid is dead but his relatives are still there.
  (Urdu verses).
• 17. First Edition 1929.
• 18. This means that she wished that she had not have given birth to him.
• 19. After that, his tutor was also buried alive because the Umayyads thought that Muawiyah II had done all that under the influence of his tutor. Though his tutor must have also influenced him, it seems that a conversation of two maids was more the effective factor for this. Mu’awiyyah heard a maid remarked: “The rulers of the world are attracted by beauty. Since I am beautiful, I rule upon them.” Another maid replied: “What is the use of rulership? If the ruler is aggrieved by the condition of his subjects, he cannot remain happy even for a day, and he cannot even eat to his fill. If he is uncaring about his subjects, and is fully immersed in enjoyment, he would go to Hell. Thus, rulers either pay attention to the material world or exercise care about the Hereafter.” This statement so affected Mu’awiyyah that he announced his abdication. (Tatmat ul-Muntaha. Vol. I, Pg. 72).
• 20. The author most probably refers to the popular opinion among the Ahl As-Sunna ulama, who justify the actions of rebelling against Imam Ali, as simply wrong ijtihad, or a mistake in making decision related to jurisprudence (fiqh). [Note of al-Islam].