An Introduction To the Political Upheaval At Medina

Supplement 3

Let us mention the directions under which the books of history and hadith were compiled. Mu'awiyah issued three series of orders in this connection. They are fully detailed with re- ference in the Book. He ordered that:-

i) The virtues of `Ali and the sayings of the Holy Prophet showing 'Ali's superiority over all others should be suppressed;

ii) Anyone narrating those virtues and those sayings should be severely punished, his subsidies and allowances should be suppressed, he should not be employed in State Service, social relations with him should be cut off, his houses and properties should be forfeited, and eventually, if he did not desist from this practice, he should be killed.

iii) On the other hand, all imaginable virtues should be attributed to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman; people should be encouraged, by means of rewards in money and lands, to coin sayings extolling the virtues of these personages and ascribe those sayings to the Prophet.

Such persons should be reported to the Caliph of Damascus who would fix subsidies for them, admit them to his royal court, and honour them by other means.

Details and references to authorities are given in the Book. History thus shaped and hadith thus moulded have reached us and have been circulated in the whole of the World. And this is the history which European authors and writers have made the basis and source of their works on Islam.

It must be crystal clear to all by now that Islamic History has been written by the party who won the throne on the death of the Prophet, and that there was another party who claimed that the Prophet had designated `Ali as his successor.

The next question for determination is:

whether, apart from the usual political needs and natural temptings which induce a con- querring party to give a particular shape to the events which they wish the world to know and the posterity to receive, the party which won the throne on the death of the Prophet was under any pressing need to mould the events and formulate any particular theories to justify the coup d'etat carried out by them at the Saqifah.

The need is obvious; their very existence depended on it. Cogent evidence culled from the books of this party has been furnished by the book to show that the Prophet had designated `Ali as his successor.

As Muslims, they could not disobey any order of the Prophet. The only course open to them was to deny that the Prophet had designated `Ali or anyone else as his successor.

Once they admitted that the prophet has designated anyone as his successor, all their doings and proceedings at Saqifah were to become null and void. If they were to remain on die throne, they had to make the people believe that the Prophet had not nominated or selected anyone as his successor.

It is quite simple to understand that if they had accepted the position. that the Holy Prophet had appoint- ed his own successor; their meeting at Sagifah and the subsequent election or selection of Abu Bakr would have lost all validity, and in fact the election would have been a nullity.

Their trumph-card was the denial of the Holy Pro- phet's mandate of having appointed `Ali as his successor, and it was only on this glaring denial could they hoodwink the public and cling to their power.

For their existence they must coin the theory and stick to it that the Prophet did not designate anyone as his successor. This was the soul of their Saqifah Coup.

They, therefore, used all the means in their power to give currency to this view of theirs, to propagate it by means of propaganda, rewards and threats.

In fact, every allurement that royal power could hold out, every means that the man on the throne could have in his power were used and employed to instil this theory into the minds of the people and keep it alive and going on from generation to generation. We have the authority of a great Sunni divine and historian, Shibli, to prove the fact that all histories have been written by Sunni authors.

In fact, this was in keeping with the whole trend of their dip- loiacy. No one holding a contrary view could be allowed to write a history that would not fit in with the policy of the ruling party.

When this was the state of things, how could one expect the contrary view to find a place in the histories that were compiled and circulated under the direct supervision of the Government. Naturally the foreign countries adopted the view that was found in all the books of history written by the Muslims themselves.

It requires great courage and erudition in a foreignor to differ with the unanimous view held by almost all the native historians whose books are the only source of information to him.

I am sure that for various reasons which need not be detailed here the foreign writers of Islamic history have not bestowed that attention and care on the ques- tion of the Prophet's succession which its i mportance deserves.

It is obvious that no intelligent human being whom nature has pro- vided with faculties of discernment, discrimi- nation and judgment would accept the theory that the Prophet did not designate his successor, as foreign writers appear to have done.

To us the acceptance of this theory on non-appointment by foreign writers is as much of a problem as the most difficult question in Law or politics can be.

Why should this have happened has been considered at length in the book and cogent reasons have been given as to why this theory prof ounded by the Government party has found a ready acceptance in Europe in spite of its being entirely against facts and throughly opposed to reason.

In the name of Truth, Justice and Decency an appeal is made to the reader to survey the whole situation, weigh and judge the facts and then give his final and considered judgment. This is the only thing that is required of him who cares to go through this Book.

Established opinions and long accepted theories create a sort of prejudice in the mind against everything that appears to disturb them. But truth stands on a much higher level than Prejudice.

This book has been written pri- marily for European scholars of history, and the author will consider himself amply re- warded if they read this book from cover to cover even though as hostile critics.

It is certain in the end they will find themselves supporting the view which they had begun by criticising. The author has taken it upon himself to give authorities for every contested point and that too from the accredited works of the opposite party.

The value of this Book lies in its three characteristics, viz:- i) Sound Logic; ii) Appeal to Reason; and iii) Correct and apt references to reliable authorities.

THE END