Yazid’s Caliphate: The Embodiment of the Theory of Election
Author: Hamed Sarem
History can illuminate many truths for the present. Some of these truths have no doctrinal value, because their historical outcome does not challenge the important and fundamental beliefs of a religion or school, nor does it become a basis for religious belief. Historical reports that are not intertwined with doctrinal teachings have no theological or doctrinal value; conversely, teachings that are interwoven with our beliefs, or that serve as a basis for accepting a belief, possess great value.
The Difference Between the Shiite Theory of Caliphate and Rival Theories
The Shiite theory, derived from the Book of God and the definitive narrations of the Messenger of God, holds that the caliphate is based on explicit designation from the Lord. But the rival group, which rejected this theory from the ground up, in practice has no theory about the caliphate and suffers from a complete vacuum in this field, except that, in opposition to the theory of appointment by God upon which the Shiites insist, the opponents advanced the theory of election. Yet in practice, among the opponents there is no theory called election; there is only an insistence on choice in the sense of rejecting the theory of appointment by God, and nothing more. Therefore one may say that the opponents of Shiism have never had, and still do not have, any theory about the most important question of religion and denomination. This matter is important in several respects, including:
- Creating a propaganda atmosphere against Shiism and claiming that the opponents of Shiism administered the religious community from the beginning on the basis of democracy, and claiming that what occurred at Saqifa was nothing other than vote-centered rule, which today is called democracy.
Given that the greatest bloodshed and warfare in Islam after the Prophet concerned the issue of caliphate, and that the sole continuing cause of division among Muslims remains the issue of succession after the Prophet, the absence of a clear theory and obligation on the part of the opponents of Shiism shows the lack of a doctrinal system in the denominations opposed to Shiism.
History Judges the Rival Theories
A historical examination of the caliphates makes this point clearer; and when this important historical point becomes evident, the intellectual foundation of the opponents of Shiism, who have disputed this issue with the rightful Shiite school for centuries, will collapse. In truth, it must be said that theology among them is a science for the religious justification of what has already occurred. That is, whatever in the external world caused a person to attain the caliphate is clothed in religious garb, and then, on the basis of that very thing to which a religious form has been given, the caliphate of the intended caliph is declared legitimate. The opponents of Shiism have always lived within this vicious circle.
The Rule of Muawiya and Yazid: Evidence of an Intellectual Vacuum in Wahhabi Teachings
The manner in which Yazid ibn Muawiya attained the caliphate is a good example of the political theory of the opponents of Shiism. Since part of the opposing body, especially Wahhabism, emphasizes Yazid’s caliphate, examining the manner of Yazid ibn Muawiya’s caliphate further exposes this vacuum within the Wahhabi intellectual system.
According to the famous and well-known theory, the caliphate must be based on consensus: either the consensus of the people of resolution and binding authority, or of the Companions, or otherwise. Although non-Imami theologians have never provided a proper definition of consensus, they have always beaten the drum of consensus and advanced the theory of election. Now this question must be put seriously to Wahhabism: Did Yazid become caliph on the basis of consensus? Did Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan attach any value to the consensus of the Muslims?
Muawiya’s Major Sedition: Yazid’s Caliphate
The beginning of the sedition of Yazid’s caliphate started with Mughira. Muawiya wanted to remove him from the governorship of Kufa. Mughira, who was a cunning man, realized Muawiya’s intent and will. He came to Syria late. Muawiya asked the reason for the delay. He said: I was taking allegiance from the people for Yazid. Therefore, out of intense joy at this news, Muawiya kept him in the governorship of Kufa. But Mughira’s retention came with an important new mission: Mughira was tasked with preparing the people of Kufa to pledge allegiance to Yazid, and in the end he became governor of Kufa with this mission.
Auctioning Religion for Less Than Muawiya Imagined
Then Mughira sent his son, along with forty men, to Syria. The request of these forty men from Muawiya was that Yazid should succeed Muawiya after him. Muawiya asked: Are you satisfied with Yazid? They said: Yes. Muawiya pulled Urwa, the son of Mughira, aside and asked: “For how much did your father buy these people’s religion?” Urwa replied: Four hundred dinars. Muawiya said: “He found their religion cheap.” Muawiya sent large sums of money to individuals, including Abdullah ibn Umar, to win their agreement to Yazid’s caliphate.
You Are the Master of Orators!
In the year fifty-five, Muawiya sent letters to all Islamic cities instructing them to send representatives to Syria for a meeting. Thus representatives were mobilized from every city and came to Syria. He sat among his companions, summoned the representatives, and had already instructed his companions to speak about Yazid. First Dahhak ibn Qays spoke; he praised Yazid at length and designated him for succession. After him, Amr ibn Sa'id spoke, and he too, like Dahhak, praised and designated him; Muawiya commended him. Then Yazid ibn Muqaffa stood and said: This, meaning Muawiya, is the Commander of the Faithful; if he perishes, then this, meaning Yazid; and if anyone refuses, then this, meaning his own sword. Muawiya said: Sit down, for you are indeed the master of orators!
The Elders of Medina Do Not Pledge Allegiance
After taking allegiance from the people of Syria and Iraq, Muawiya wrote to Marwan and asked him to take allegiance from the people of Medina for Yazid. A group of Medina’s elders strongly opposed this allegiance. Among the opponents of allegiance to Yazid one may name His Eminence Aba Abdillah al-Husayn the Martyr. After him, Abdullah ibn Zubayr, the son of Abu Bakr, and the son of Umar were among the opponents of allegiance to Yazid. This group resisted allegiance to Yazid fiercely. Among them, the son of Abu Bakr said to Marwan: “O Marwan, by God, you lied, and Muawiya lied as well. The elites of the community did not choose you for the community; rather, you want the rule to be Heraclian, a Heraclius after another Heraclius.”
After Muawiya had taken allegiance from the people of Iraq and the people of Syria in this manner, he set out for the Hijaz with one thousand Syrian horsemen and went toward Medina. When he arrived in Medina, in the first meeting he treated His Eminence Aba Abdillah al-Husayn, peace be upon him, despotically and used improper words toward him. He repeated the same harsh treatment with Abdullah ibn Zubayr, Abdullah ibn Umar, and the son of Abu Bakr.
In Medina he did not admit them to his court. They were forced to go to Mecca. Muawiya delivered a sermon in Medina in which he praised Yazid and said, in substance: “Who is more worthy of the caliphate than Yazid in merit, intellect, and rank? And I see that some people will not accept until what uproots and destroys them reaches them. I have indeed said what I had to say, and I fear that this counsel and admonition will have no effect.”
Allegiance by the Force of the Sword
In Mecca, his behavior toward this group was at first very respectful and gentle. After performing the rites of Hajj, he ordered that a pulpit be placed, approached the Kaaba, and sent for Husayn ibn Ali, Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr, Ibn Umar, and Ibn Zubayr to be brought to him. They gathered together and agreed that Ibn Zubayr would speak with Muawiya.
After a deceitful welcome and display of honor, Muawiya asked them to pledge allegiance, but this group refused. The son of Zubayr said: Either choose someone other than your son, or choose the caliph according to Umar’s method, or leave the community to choose someone themselves. Muawiya said: Is there any word or path other than this? He said: No. He asked the others the same. They said: The word is as Ibn Zubayr said.
Then Muawiya said: “I tell you beforehand so that I may be excused and you may have no pretext. I will say something, and by God, if any one of you says one word in refutation of me about this matter, his head will be severed from his body before his speech is completed...”
After that he rose from that place, took them with him, ascended the pulpit, and the Syrians surrounded them while the people also gathered.
When he had offered praise and glorification, he said: The statements of the people are scattered and false. People have said that Husayn, the son of Abu Bakr, the son of Umar, and the son of Zubayr have not pledged allegiance to Yazid; yet these are the elders and leaders of the Muslims, and we do not arrange any matter apart from them, nor do we begin or complete any matter without consulting them. I summoned them and found them hearing and obedient; they submitted, entered into obedience, and pledged allegiance! At that moment the Syrian troops shouted: What greatness or rank do these people have? Command that their necks be struck; until they pledge allegiance openly, we will not be satisfied.
Muawiya said: Glory be to God! How eager people are to bring harm to Quraysh, and how sweet their blood is to people! Be silent; let me not hear such words from anyone again. Then he called the people to allegiance, took allegiance, mounted from there, and returned to Syria.
The Oppressed Martyrdom of Imam Hasan, Peace Be Upon Him
Muawiya shed much blood in order to consolidate allegiance to Yazid. Before the year 55, he martyred many of the lovers of the Commander of the Faithful on the charge of loving His Eminence Ali, peace be upon him. In his peace treaty with Imam Hasan, one of the conditions to which he had committed himself was that the caliphate after Muawiya would pass to Imam Hasan, peace be upon him, and according to that pact Muawiya had no right to choose a caliph. Therefore, in order to take allegiance for Yazid, he devised the assassination of Imam Hasan, peace be upon him, and martyred His Eminence Imam Hasan, peace be upon him.
Aisha Is Buried Alive in a Pit of Lime
Aisha, who was the old rival of the Umayyads over the issue of caliphate, was also killed by Muawiya. In truth, Muawiya buried Aisha alive in a pit of lime.(1) He also poisoned and killed the son of Khalid ibn Walid so that the people of Syria would pledge allegiance to Yazid.(2)
The Bequest to Massacre Medina
Muawiya, with complete brazenness, bequeathed the massacre of the people of Medina to Yazid. Muawiya foresaw Medina’s protest against Yazid. Therefore, to strengthen Yazid’s caliphate, he instructed him to place Muslim ibn Uqba over the people of Medina. Muslim, who because of the massacre of the people of Medina was nicknamed Musrif, massacred the people of Medina with the intention of avenging Uthman, declared the women’s honor lawful for his soldiers for three days, and many children of fornication were born in Medina after this event.
This event became known as the Event of Harra. Of course, these statistics regarding Muawiya’s killings to secure allegiance for Yazid are only what has reached us. Given the Umayyad news censorship over many years, the number of people Muawiya killed must presumably have been greater than these reports that have reached us.
Although the Event of Harra and the drenching in blood of the children of the Messenger of God and the Prophet’s grandson, His Eminence Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, in Karbala occurred at Yazid’s hands, we regard this crime first and foremost as attributable to Muawiya; for he organized the plan for the martyrdom of Aba Abdillah in Karbala in order to stabilize Yazid’s rule. In truth, Yazid was the executor of Muawiya’s plan after Muawiya went to perdition.
Yazid’s Throne Floating on a Sea of Blood
Thus Yazid, riding upon a sea of Muslim blood, leaned upon the seat of the caliphate, and to this day some opponents recognize his rule as legitimate. Today Wahhabism has a severe partisanship for Yazid’s caliphate and even calls him oppressed, because, since he was the caliph of the Muslims, no one had the right to rise against him. Therefore, with Imam Husayn’s uprising against Yazid, Yazid is the oppressed one.
Appointment or Election: Which Is Correct?
In opposition to the theory of divine appointment, according to which the caliphate must be from God and God communicates to the people, through the Messenger of God, the person who is supported by the Holy Spirit and possesses the station of infallibility, they advance the theory of election; and the reality of the theory of election is embodied in Yazid’s caliphate.
In truth, the essence of the theory of election is nothing other than the rule of clubs and force; for they regard someone like Yazid, who reaches power in this manner, as obligatory to obey and as one of the instances of those vested with authority. The quality of the rule of the caliphs before Yazid was also like Yazid’s. From the clubs raised at Saqifa so that people would pledge allegiance by force, to Umar’s formal council held under the encirclement of men with swords, and the rule of Muawiya, all of it rests upon force and many open and hidden killings.
From the massacre of the tribe of Malik ibn Nuwayra to the Event of Karbala, the massacre of the people of Medina and Mecca, and the crimes of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi, all these bitter events are the sole proof of the caliphate of these caliphs; and the theory of election, or what they today call democracy, is nothing other than these bloody events. Can the theory of election be called democracy?
Can Wahhabism be called a divine denomination attributed to the Messenger of God? What rational and fair-minded person can compare the theory of appointment by God, whose fruit is the justice of Ali, peace be upon him, with the so-called theory of election, whose result is at least a sea of Muslim blood?
Notes
All the historical reports in this writing are cited from: Adwar-e Feqh (Persian), Mahmoud al-Shahabi al-Khorasani, vol. 3, pp. 165-170.
1 and 2. Tashyid al-Mata'in li-Kashf al-Dagha'in, Sayyid Muhammad Quli Kanturi Lakhnawi, p. 530.
Author: Hamed Sarem
Related articles
Comments
No comments yet.