Fadak- The Property of Bibi Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h)

"Qur’anic verses and historical documents reveal that the land of Fadak situated near the Fort of Khaibar, formerly belonging to the Jews, was the personal property of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h). It was neither a government property owned by the treasury nor was it war booty. The seventh verse of Surah Hashr, explains the point in detail:

“Whatever Allah has restored to His Apostle from the people of the towns, it is for Allah and for the Apostle, and for the near of kin and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you. . .” (59: 7)

Fadak was a piece of land that had come in possession of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) without waging a war. In the seventh century, the people of that place had handed it over to the Muslims fearing reprisal. As it was given voluntarily, this land automatically became the personal property of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), and had nothing to do with the government. The fact was accepted by many commentators and historians. For reference, we are quoting a few names: Bilazaris ‘Futuh al-Bildaan’; Shaykh Shahabudin Hamui in ‘Mojam al-Bildaan’ under the word ‘Fadak’; Mohammad Ibn Jurair Tabari in his ‘Tarikh al-Umam wal Molook’, vol.3, p. 14; Ibn Atheer in ‘Al-Kaamil’, vol.3, p.221; Ibn Abil Hadeed in ‘Sharh-e-Nahjul Balagha’, vol. 16, p.210

All the Sunni commentators while explaining the 28th verse of Surah Bani Israel state that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had gifted Fadak to Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h). Thus, automatically it becomes the personal property of Hazrat Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h). Just to prove our point, the following books may be referred to: Suyooti’s ‘Durrul Mansoor’, vol. 5, p.273; Hakim-e-Haskani’s ‘Shawaahed ut-Tanzeel’, vol. 1, p.240. Both these authors have quoted from Abu Saeed Khudri and Ibn Abbas. Also, the following learned men have explained and confessed that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) has gifted Fadak to Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h): Qazi Abdul Jabbar Motazali, Yaqoote Hammui, Ibn Abil Hadeed, Abdul Fattah Abdul Maqsood-e-Misri, etc…

After receiving Fadak from the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) had appointed her own employees there. Thus Fadak remained of the Prophet (p.b.u.h). The first Caliph could not bear to see Fadak in the hands of Fatima (p.b.u.h). So he sent his henchmen to Fadak to drive away the appointees of Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) and grabbed possession. Ameeral Mo’mineen Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) has penned a very meaningful sentence in his book Nahjul Balagha saying that “Under the sky what we were having was Fadak”, which proves that the due of Ahlul Bayt was not given. Whereas how many people have applied their charitable disposition and broad based outlook? Of course, God is an Excellent Arbiter. (Nahjul Balagha, Letter no. 45).

Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h), protesting against the step of the government went to the Mosque. There she sat behind the curtain and addressed the first Caliph in the presence of all the people. She questioned him and put up a claim for the return of Fadak, that was given to her by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) and that it had become her property. The first Caliph did not entertain her claim and refuted it by saying that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had not gifted it to her, and asked her to produce witnesses to the effect that Fadak was her property. Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) then produced six witnesses three males and three females, comprising Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h), Imam Hasan (p.b.u.h), Imam Husain (p.b.u.h), Ummul Mo’mineen Janabe Umme Salma, Umme Aiman, maid of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) and Asma Binte Umais, the wife of the first Caliph himself (may God be pleased with her). The first Caliph did not accept the testimony of these witnesses and continued his occupation of Fadak. Even after adopting this attitude the first Caliph could not gain much. First, because the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had himself given it to her. Second, because she (Fatima (p.b.u.h)), being the only daughter of the Prophet (p.b.u.h), it was her parental inheritance. She had to advance the plea of inheritance because her first plea was not accepted by the first Caliph. At this juncture, the Caliph recited a hadith on his own authority (without substantiating it from any source) saying that, “We prophets do not leave behind any property, and if at all something remains, it belongs to all Muslims.” Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) took exception to it, and contradicted the authenticity of this hadith and said it is against the spirit of the Qur’an. Qur’an on numerous places had said about the worldly property of the prophets. When Fatima (p.b.u.h) could no longer bear the Caliph’s obstinacy, she returned home displeased. After that incident, she never spoke with both first and second Caliphs. According to Ibn Qutaybah (’Al-Imamah wal-Siyaasah’), she cursed them after every prayer. And during her last days, she had requested Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) not to permit these persons to accompany her funeral. Keeping all this in mind, some questions would automatically arise in the minds of decent persons who believe in truth and justice. We therefore, would like to pose a few questions:

1. Regarding the claim of Fadak, the claim of Fatima (p.b.u.h) was enough because Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) is the main spirit of the verse of Tatheer. She would never talk or utter anything which is not true and correct. Under these circumstances, non-acceptance of her claim tantamounted to casting aspersions on Ayat Tatheer wherein God had certified the purity of the characters of the persons of the Cloak.

2. Why the witnesses of Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) and others were not accepted when the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had repeatedly said, “Wherever Ali (p.b.u.h) goes, Truth goes with him.” Ayat Tatheer was revealed in connection with Hazrat Imam Hasan and Imam Husain (p.b.u.h). Were not these two princes, the leaders of the youths of Paradise? Why the witness of Umme Salma, may God be pleased with her, and Umme Aiman, was not accepted even thought they were among those promised paradise by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h)? Whether the Qur’an for giving witness was not complete? No, because the witness of two men and one woman or two women and one man was enough to complete the Qur’an. Were the witnesses not the upholders of justice? Leave alone the question of being upholders of justice, their infallibility personified.

3. Before arriving at the decision, the wtinessess of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) were driven out. Why? Whther this act was not to be construed as tyrannical or that of high-handedness?

4. This is an undisputed act of Muslim Law that whoever is in possession of anything, be it a property or anything else, it belongs to the person who is possessing it. He would simply say under the oath that a certain property belongs to him. Moreover, witnesses are required by the party who is claiming and not by the one who is having the property in his possession. Under this law calling for witness does not conform with the requirements of Justice. Thus, calling for witnesses from Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) was not right. Her responsibility was to simply say an oath. Presenting witnesses was the duty of the first Caliph. Why then Islamic law was tampered with and circumvented?

5. On many occasions, the first Caliph had agreed to the problems presented by the companions of Prophet (p.b.u.h) without calling for witnesses. For instance, once Janab Jabir came to the Caliph saying that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had promised that he would pay him some amount.

The first Caliph paid him one thousand five hundred dirhams without calling for witnesses. Similarly, once Abu Basheer Maazani had said that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had promised to pray him some amount. The Caliph paid him 1400 dirhams (Sahih Bukhari).

Then what was the reason, that in these cases no witnesses were called for. In some cases only companionship of Prophet (p.b.u.h) was enough for consideration. But, in the case of the Prophet’s daughter why witnesses were required? There were the very persons about whom the verse of Tatheer was revealed.

6. When Fadak was not considered as a property of Fatima (p.b.u.h), why then on previous occasion the first Caliph had issued a certificate of property in her favour, when earlier she had represented in the matter? Why then the second Caliph seeing the certificate in the hands of Fatima (p.b.u.h) had torn it into pieces and had spat on it? (Sharh Nahjul Balagha, of Ibn Abil Hadeed vol. 16, p.174; Seera Halbiya, vol. 3, p.362)

When Fadak was not the property of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h), why was it given to her in the first instance? And if at all it was hers, why was it usurped?

7. If the first Caliph was right in the case of Fadak, then why did he repeatedly repent at the time of remembering Fadak? And why he himself was ashamed of his own act?

8. The hadith that was quoted by the first Caliph for not conceding Fadak was clearly against the spirit of the Qur’an. In Qur’an, there is reference to the property of Sulaiman, Dawood, ‘Aal-e-Yaqub, Zacharia and Yahya – all of them were prophets and property holders (Surah Naml, verse 16; Surah Mariam, verse 46).

Apart from the above, Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) was infallible, virtue and honest. Why then her statement was not taken as true? The hadith recited by the first Caliph was not conforming with Qur’anic spirit and teachings, and hence, cannot be accepted. Why then was Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) deprived and denied her own property?

9. If it is true, that the Messenger of Allah had not let any property and if at all there is any, it belongs to the government or to all Muslims, why then the wives of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) specially Abu Bakr’s daughter, Ayesha, were not told to vacate possession of their premises? This was also the property left by the Prophet (p.b.u.h). Whether the denial of the right of property was applicable only to Janabe Fatima Zahra(p.b.u.h)?

10. If the property left by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), does not belong to any particular person, then why did Abu Bakr seek permission only from his own daughter, Ayesha, for getting buried besides the Prophet (p.b.u.h)?

If at all the inheritance of property is considered, the wives are not entitled to get a share in it. At the most they can have residential rights. If the property rights are accepted, in the presence of children, a wife’s share is only 1/8th. And in this very 1/8th only, all wives would get equal share. If it is to be distributed among nine wives, the share of each wife would come to 1/72. In this way, Ummul Mo’mineen, Ayesha could give permission only upto her own share. Why other were not approached and consulted?

11. If it is accepted that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) did not gift Fadak to Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) and that there was no property belonging to the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), even then, why were the Ahlul Bayt deprived of the Khums of the Khaibar and the wars? Has Qur’an not ordained to pay Khums to all your relatives (Zul Qurba) (Surah Tawba: 41, Surah Isra: 28)? In regards to booty, the question of inheritance does not arise.

12. Had the argument and the stand of the Khilafat been right regarding Fadak, then why Omar II, Omar bin Abdul Aziz, Omavi, Saffah, Mehdi and Mamoon Abbasi, had made offers to return Fadak to the progeny of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h)?

If it was the property of all followers of Islam, then why the third Caliph gave it to Marwan? After that, Muavia distributed it amongst his son, Hakam’s son, the son of Osman?

Thereafter, why was it retaken into possession by Yazid bin Abdul Malik, Mansoor Dawaaneqi and Mutawakkil Abbasi? (Bukhari vol.5, p.3; Tarikh of Ibn Atheer vol.5, p.288, vol.9, p.200)

The truth is that Fadak belonged to Fatima (p.b.u.h) and was her right. But the government usurped it, most probably for the reason that the land was fertile and populated. Its income was quite good, and it was the base of the economic resources of Ahlul Bayt. Or it was a step towards weakening the economy of Ahlul Bayt and to ease them out from religion and political mainstream.

Anyway, those who possess absolute faith in Qur’an and obey its orders, taking it as their bounded duty and for those who take Fatima (p.b.u.h) as the meaning fo ‘Ayat Tatheer’ and who consider Mubahala as the evidence of her truthfulness and take Surah Hal ‘Ataa in the light of her exalted character and purity, they are sure that in respect of Fadak, Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) was absolutely right and that it was her due. In the words of Qur’an, “After truth, there is nothing but erring.”

“When they are told not to commit corruption in the land, they reply, “We are only reformers.” They are corrupt but do not realize it. When they are told to believe as everyone else does, they say, “Should we believe as fools do?” In fact, they are fools but they do not know it.” (Holy Qur’an)"

               

The concept of Caliph and Caliphate in Islam

The most deliberated discussion concerning the successors of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is the discussion of Caliphate. Different sects of Islam have interpreted the concept of ‘Caliphate’ which best suited them. In this treatise, we will try to unveil the mystery on the concept of ‘Caliphate’

Literary Meaning

Raagheb Isfahaani, the renowned littérateur writes, ‘Caliphate means representation of another, either due to the absence of the represented one or due to his death or due to his inability or due to the eminence of the representative. On account of the last mentioned meaning, Allah has made His friends as His representatives in the earth.’[1]

Therefore, a Caliph is the representative of the other, regardless of the represented person being absent, dead, unable or due to the esteemed and lofty position of the representative in the eyes of the represented person. Or the execution of some tasks, the implementation of the authority of the represented one and the manifestation of his position through the representative are appropriate as per the wisdom, aims, purposes, etc. of the represented one. It is irrelevant whether the representative and the represented one are Allah, the High, His Prophet (s.a.w.a.) or a group of His servants or some of them.

Hence, amongst all the literary applications, we cannot take the first three i.e. the absence, death and inability of the represented person as these cannot be applied for the Prophethood of a Prophet or the Imamat of an Imam. Therefore, the term ‘Caliph of Allah’ is truly applicable in its real sense on Hazrat Adam (a.s.), Hazrat Dawood (a.s.) and all other Prophets like Hazrat Nuh (a.s.), Hazrat Ibraheem (a.s.), Hazrat Moosa (a.s.), Hazrat Isaa (a.s.), their chief Hazrat Muhammad (s.a.w.a.) and the twelve Imams about whose caliphate the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) has given tidings to his nations.

Meaning in Quran and Traditions

The term ‘Caliph’, as used in the Holy Quran and the traditions, is not related to any added noun, displaying clearly that it implies only for the Caliph of Allah, the High. So, a Prophet or an Imam is a representative and heir of Allah, the High, and Prophethood and Imamat are from the affairs of Allah, the High. None has got the right to stake a claim to this status but with His permission.

Allah has used the word ‘Caliph’ in the Holy Quran, thus: إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً I am going to place in the earth a Caliph.[2]

And He, Mighty and Glorified be He declared, يَا دَاوُدُ إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاكَ خَلِيفَةً فِي الْأَرْضِ O Dawood! Surely We have made you a Caliph in the land [3] It has come in the traditions that he was the Caliph of Allah, the High. Then the caliphs are the representatives of Allah upon His servants and His deputies for His creatures.

As for the rulers, they are the chiefs regardless of them being Caliphs on earth. Consequently, every Caliph is a ruler and a chief, but every ruler and chief is not a Caliph.

The words ‘government’, ‘reign’ and ‘authority’ fall much short in comparison with the concept of a ‘caliph’. Caliphate as used by Allah or for that matter by the Prophet, covers all the aspects like majesty, beauty, holiness, governance on the foundations of goodness, justice and human values, handling the weak ones with kindness, etc., which no other term covers. For, the authority of a caliph is connected to the authority of Allah, the Wise, the Just, the Beneficent, the Merciful, the Overpowering, the Subduer, the Generous, the Holy, the Kind, the Forgiving and the Refuge. A caliph cannot be deprived of his status nor does he divert from the course that Allah has charted for him. He is not ordered but the establishment of justice, repelling falsehood, purification of the souls and acting upon the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. So, whoever digresses from this path and aim will not be a caliph, as opposed to an emir, a governor or a ruler.

Indeed, it’s clear now that caliphate is a divine position and Allah’s representation, which can neither be completed nor realized save through divine appointment and none partners Him in this regard.

Besides the rational argument that the appointment of Allah’s caliph in the earth necessitates that he should be appointed by Allah only, the verses of the Holy Quran: إنّى جاعِلٌ[4] and إنّا جَعَلناكَ[5] are also evidence enough of the aforementioned fact. For, these two verses clearly suggest that the appointment of a caliph is from the affairs of Allah, the High, and His special acts, in which none partners Him.

There are a number of traditions in both Shia and Sunni books implying that Caliph and Caliphate imply only Allah’s representation, the great divine appointment and nothing else.

For instance, the advice of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) to Huzaifah, “If there is for Allah a caliph in the earth, obey him even if he whips your back or takes away your wealth.”[6]

Kumail reports that Ameerul Momineen Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (a.s.) said, “They are the caliphs of Allah in His cities (in His earth).”[7]

While addressing those responsible for public trusts and wealth, Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) advises them to exercise utmost caution in establishing truth and following the principle of justice in all matters, big or small, significant or otherwise. Then he (a.s.) orders them to say to the people, “O servants of Allah! The friend of Allah and His caliph has sent me to you.”[8]

The great genius, the master in jurisprudence, tradition, literature and a number of other sciences, Shaikh Bahaauddin al-Aameli (a.r.), while deriving from the above traditions, has written poems titled ‘Waseelah al-Fauz wa al-Amaan fi madh Saaheb al-Asr wa al-Zamaan’. A couplet from it goes as follows:
خليفة ربِّ العالمين و ظلّه على ساكني الغيراء من كلّ ديار

“The caliph of the Lord of the worlds and His shade

On the inhabitants of the earth in every house”

Hence, nobody else has got any role whatsoever in the appointment of a caliph in the earth. ”

(Abridged from the English translation of the book ‘Muntakhab al-Asar’, vol. 1, (published by Naba Publications, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran) by Ayatollah Lotfollah Saafi Golpaygani (may Allah prolong his life))!

Sources:

[1] Al-Mufradaat fi Ghareeb al-Quran, p. 156.

[2] Surah Baqarah (2): Verse 30.

[3] Surah Suad (38): Verse 26.

[4] Surah Baqarah (2): Verse 30.

[5] Surah Suad (38): Verse 26.

[6] Sunan Abi Dawood, Kitaab al-Fetan, vol. 2, pg. 200. Musnad Ahmad, vol. 5, pg. 430

[7] Nahj al-Balagah, Saying No. 147; Tazkerah al-Huffaaz, vol. 1, pg. 11 & 12; Dastoor-o-Ma’alem al-Hekam, pg. 84; Al-Amaali al-Khamisiyyah, vol. 1, p. 66

[8] Nahj al-Balaaghah, Letter No. 25

               

Islamic History and Khilafat

INTRODUCTION
Islam, one of the three major world religions, along with Judaism and Christianity, that profess monotheism, or the belief in a single God.
In the Arabic language, the word Islam means ?surrender? or ?submission??submission to the will of God. A follower of Islam is called a Muslim, which in Arabic means ?one who surrenders to God.? The Arabic name for God, Allah, refers to the God worshiped by Jews and Christians. Islam?s central teaching is that there is only one all-powerful, all-knowing God, and this God created the universe. This rigorous monotheism, as well as the Islamic teaching that all Muslims are equal before God, provides the basis for a collective sense of loyalty to God that transcends class, race, nationality, and even differences in religious practice. Thus, all Muslims belong to one community, the umma, irrespective of their ethnic or national background.
Within two centuries after its rise in the 7th century, Islam spread from its original home in Arabia into Syria, Egypt, North Africa, and Spain to the west, and into Persia, India, and, by the end of the 10th century, beyond to the east. In the following centuries, Islam also spread into Anatolia and the Balkans to the north, and sub-Saharan Africa to the south. The Muslim community comprises about 1 billion followers on all five continents, and Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the world. The most populous Muslim country is Indonesia, followed by Pakistan and Bangladesh. Beyond the Middle East, large numbers of Muslims live in India, Nigeria, the former republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), and China.
One of the reasons for the growth of the Muslim community has been its openness to new members. Children born to Muslim parents are automatically considered Muslim. At any time, a non-Muslim can convert to Islam by declaring himself or herself to be a Muslim. A person?s declaration of faith is sufficient evidence of conversion to Islam and need not be confirmed by others or by religious authorities.
THE TEACHINGS OF MUHAMMAD
Around the year AD 570 Muhammad, the founding prophet of Islam, was born in Mecca, at the time the central city of the Arabian Peninsula. Some 40 years later Muhammad started preaching a new religion, Islam, which constituted a marked break from existing moral and social codes in Arabia. The new religion of Islam taught that there was one God, and that Muhammad was the last in a series of prophets and messengers. Through his messengers God had sent various codes, or systems of laws for living, culminating in the Qur?an (Koran), the holy book of Islam. These messengers were mortal men, and they included among many others Moses, the Hebrew prophet and lawgiver, and Jesus, whom Christians believe to be the son of God rather than a prophet.
Islam also taught that the Christian Bible (which includes the Hebrew Bible as the Old Testament and an additional 27 books referred to as the New Testament), and the Qur'an were all holy books. According to the Qur?an, the two earlier Scriptures had been altered over time from their original forms given by God, while the Qur'an would remain perfect, preserved by God from such distortion. In addition to distinguishing itself from the Hebrew and Christian traditions, the new religion taught that the God of Islam had provided humanity with the means to know good from evil, through the prophets and the Qur?an. Therefore, on the Day of Judgment people will be held accountable for their actions.
Muhammad?s teachings met with severe and hostile opposition, and in the year 622 he left Mecca and sought refuge in the city of Yathrib, as a number of his followers had already done. Upon Muhammad's arrival, the name Yathrib was changed to Medina (meaning ?the city?). The date of Muhammad's immigration was later set as the beginning of the 12-month lunar Islamic calendar.

Introduction of Caliphate (Khilafat)

Caliphate, office and realm of the caliph as supreme leader of the Muslim community and successor of the Prophet Muhammad. Under Muhammad the Muslim state was a theocracy, with the Sharia, the religious and moral principles of Islam, as the law of the land. The caliphs, Muhammad's successors, were both secular and religious leaders. They were not empowered, however, to promulgate dogma, because it was considered that the revelation of the faith had been completed by Muhammad.
The Sunnis (followers of the Sunna, the body of Islamic custom or the Way of the Prophet), who constitute a majority of Muslims, generally consider the period of the first four caliphs the golden age of Islam. Other sects, however, as they were formed, came to regard this period and subsequent caliphates differently, and as a result great hostility has frequently arisen between the Sunnis and other Muslims, such as the Shias, concerning the caliphate. During the course of Islamic history the issue of the caliphate probably has created more dissension than any other article of faith.
Based on the examples of the first four ?rightly guided? caliphs and companions of the Prophet, the Sunnis formulated the following requirements of the caliphate: the caliph should be an Arab of the Prophet Muhammad's tribe, the Quraysh; he should be elected to his office and approved by a council of elders representing the Muslim community; and he should be responsible for enforcing divine law and spreading Islam by whatever means necessary, including war. In the history of the caliphate, however, all these requirements were rarely met.
The Shias, in contrast, believing that the Prophet himself had designated his son-in-law, Ali, as both his temporal and spiritual successor, accepted only Ali's descendants (by Fatima, Muhammad's daughter) as legitimate claimants to the caliphate.
1.The Immediate Successor
Muhammad died in 632, leaving no instructions for the future government of the Muslim community. A group of Islamic leaders met in Medina (now in Saudi Arabia), the capital of the Muslim world at that time, and elected Abu Bakr, the Prophet's father-in-law and closest associate, to lead the community. Abu Bakr took for himself the title khalifat Rasul Allah (Arabic, ?successor to the Messenger of God?), from which the term caliph (Arabic, khalifah, ?successor?) is derived.
Umar I became the second caliph in 634. On his deathbed, Abu Bakr had designated Umar as his successor, and all the important members of the Muslim community immediately accepted Umar's succession. Under his leadership, the first great expansion of Islam outside of Arabia took place. Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the northern part of Mesopotamia became Islamic territories, and the armies of the Persian Empire were routed several times. Umar added the title amir-al-mum-inin (Arabic, ?commander of the believers?) to that of caliph.
After Umar's death in 644, Uthman ibn Affan, Muhammad's son-in-law and one of his first converts, was appointed the third caliph by a panel of six Meccan electors. Although an elderly man, he carried on Umar's policy of territorial expansion. Eventually, however, Uthman earned the enmity of many of his subjects, who felt he favored the Meccan aristocracy in political and commercial affairs. Uthman also antagonized the Islamic preachers by issuing an official text of the Qur'an (Koran), with an accompanying order to destroy all other versions. Rebellious Muslim troops from Al K?fah (Iraq) and Egypt besieged Uthman in Medina and assassinated him in 656.
Ali, a cousin and son-in-law of Muhammad, was acknowledged as the fourth caliph by the Medinians and the rebellious Muslim troops. The governor of Syria, Muawiyah, later Muawiyah I the first Umayyad caliph, refused to recognize Ali as caliph and called for vengeance for the death of Uthman (who was Muawiyah's kinsman). In 657 the rival parties met at Siffin, on a plain in northern Syria, near the site of the modern city of Ar Raqqah. There, after an inconclusive battle, they agreed to arbitrate the dispute. Ali found himself being considered as a mere candidate for the caliphate on equal grounds with Muawiyah. Angered by this indignity, and with Ali for submitting to it, a group of his followers, later known as the Kharijites, deserted and vowed to assassinate both Ali and Muawiyah. They succeeded in killing only Ali. Ali's son, Hasan, then claimed (661) the still disputed caliphate but abdicated within a few months under pressure from Muawiyah's supporters, who greatly outnumbered Ali's followers, the Shias.
3.THE UMAYYAD CALIPHS (661-750)
The Umayyad caliphs were descendants of aristocratic caravan merchants, the Umayya, to which Muawiyah, the first Umayyad caliph, belonged. During his reign, Muawiyah stabilized the Muslim community after Ali's assassination. He moved the capital of Islam from Medina to Damascus, bringing the Muslim rulers into contact with the more advanced cultural and administrative traditions of the Byzantine Empire. Muawiyah also dispensed with the practice of electing the caliph by designating his son Yazid as heir apparent. The principle of election was acknowledged formally, however, by having the council of elders pledge to support the designated heir. The practice of hereditary succession continued throughout the Umayyad dynasty and in subsequent dynasties as well. Many Muslims, however, later disapproved of it as a deviation from the essential nature of Islam.

Yazid I (reigned 680-83) succeeded his father but was faced immediately with two rebellions, each supporting a rival claimant to the caliphate. The Kufan Shias recognized Ali's second son (and the Prophet's grandson), Husayn, as caliph. Thus encouraged, Husayn left Medina for Al K?fah, despite warnings that Yazid's troops had quelled the Kufic uprising. On the plain of Karbal??, in Iraq, he and his small escort were intercepted and slaughtered. This event, more than any other, marks the true beginning of the Shia schism. A second rebellion by Meccans was finally quelled during the caliphate (685-705) of Abd al-Malik, Yazid's third successor.
Shia, Kharijites, and other groups of Muslims and non-Arabic converts (Arabic mawali) frequently revolted against the Umayyads. The mawali accused the Umayyads of religious laxity and of indifference to their demands for full brotherhood in the Muslim community. Umayyad caliphs, nevertheless, vastly enlarged the Muslim empire and created a bureaucracy capable of administering it. Under the Umayyads, Muslim armies swept eastward to the borders of India and China, westward across North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean, then northward through Spain and over the Pyrenees Mountains into France, where the Frankish infantry under the Carolingian ruler Charles Martel checked them near Poitiers in 732.
4.THE ABBASID CALIPHS (750-1258)
The Umayyads were overthrown by a combination of Shia, Iranian, and other Muslim and non-Muslim groups dissatisfied with the Umayyad regime. The rebels were led by the Abbasid family, descendants of the Prophet's uncle Abbas. From about 718 the Abbasids had plotted to take the caliphate, sending agents into various parts of the Muslim empire to spread propaganda against the Umayyads. By 747 they had secured enough support to organize a rebellion in northern Iran that led to the defeat of the Umayyad caliphate three years later. The Abbasids executed most of the Umayyad family, moved the capital of the empire to Baghd?d, and assimilated much of the pomp and ceremony of the former Persian monarchy into their own courts.
Beginning in 750 with Abu al-Abbas, the Abbasid caliphate lasted five centuries; it is the most durable and most famous Islamic dynasty. The Abbasids became patrons of learning and encouraged religious observance. They were the first Muslim rulers to become leaders of an Islamic civilization and protectors of the religion rather than merely an Arab aristocracy imposing an Arab civilization on conquered lands. Under their caliphate Baghd?d replaced Medina as the center of theological activity, industry and commerce developed greatly, and the Islamic empire reached a peak of material and intellectual achievement.

The 8th- and 9th-century caliphs Harun ar-Rashid and his son Abdullah al-Mamun are especially renowned for their encouragement of intellectual pursuits and for the splendor of their courts. During their reigns scholars were invited to the court to debate various topics, and translations were made from Greek, Persian, and Syriac works. Embassies also were exchanged with Charlemagne, emperor of the West.
In the late 9th century, the Abbasid caliphs increasingly began to delegate administrative responsibility to ministers of state and other government officials and to lose control over their Baghd?d guards. As they gradually gave up personal political power, the caliphs placed more and more emphasis on their role as protectors of the faith. One result of this change in emphasis was the increased persecution of heretics and non-Muslims. About the same time, several successful revolts in the eastern provinces led to the establishment of independent principalities, and independent caliphates were subsequently established in North Africa and in Spain. Eventually, the power of the Abbasids barely extended outside Baghd?d, and by the middle of the 10th century, the Abbasid caliphs had virtually no power, serving merely as figureheads at the mercy of the military commanders. The final defeat of the Abbasid dynasty came from outside the Muslim world, when al-Mustasim was put to death by the invading Mongols at the order of Hulagu, the grandson of Genghis Khan.
5.THE ABBASIDS IN CAIRO (1261-1517)
When the Mongols sacked Baghd?d in 1258, two members of the Abbasid family escaped to Egypt, where they took refuge with Baybars I, the Mamluk sultan. Each was named caliph, successively, by the sultan; but they were allowed to assume only religious duties, and the descendants of the second caliph remained politically powerless under the Mamluk sultans.
6.THE FATIMID DYNASTY AND THE UMAYYADS OF SPAIN
During the decline of Abbasid power, two rival caliphates were established, one in North Africa and another in Spain. The first, ruled by the Fatimid dynasty, was founded by Ubayd Allah, who proclaimed himself caliph in Tunisia in 909. The Fatimids were Shias, claiming descent from Fatima (thus the name Fatimid), Muhammad's daughter, and her husband Ali, the fourth caliph. At the height of its power, in the latter half of the 10th century, the Fatimid caliphate constituted a serious threat to the Abbasids in Baghd?d. The Fatimids ruled most of northern Africa from Egypt to present-day Algeria, as well as Sicily and Syria. In addition the Fatimids claimed the allegiance of other Shias, both within and outside their domain. They sent missionaries from their capital in Cairo to the rest of the Muslim world, proclaiming the Fatimid caliphs to be infallible and sinless and the bearers of divine illumination handed down directly from Ali. Their dynasty was overthrown in 1171 by Saladin, sultan of Egypt.
The second rival caliphate was established by Abd-ar-Rahman III, who proclaimed himself caliph in Spain in 929. He was the descendant of an Umayyad prince who fled the Abbasid massacre of his family and settled (755) in Spain. The Umayyad dynasty of Spain, responsible for a brilliant period in Spanish history, ruled from its capital in Córdoba until 1031, when the caliphate broke up into numerous petty states.
7.THE OTTOMANS AND THE MODERN PERIOD
From about the 13th century various monarchs throughout the Muslim world, particularly the Ottoman sultans, assumed the title caliph indiscriminately without regard to the prescribed requirements of the caliphate. The title held little significance for the Ottoman sultans until their empire began to decline. In the 19th century, with the advent of Christian powers in the Near East, the sultan began to emphasize his role as caliph in an effort to gain the support of Muslims living outside his realm. The Ottoman Empire collapsed during World War I (1914-1918). After the war, Turkish nationalists deposed the sultan, and the caliphate was finally abolished (March 1924) by the Turkish Grand National Assembly.
The abolition of the caliphate brought consternation to many sections of the Muslim world, and protests were directed against the action of the Turkish government. Subsequently, King Husein ibn Ali of Al ?ij?z (the Hejaz, now part of Saudi Arabia), laid claim to the title by virtue of his direct descent from the Prophet and his control of the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. His claim, however, received little attention outside of Palestine, Syria, and parts of Arabia. The conquest (1925) of Al-ij?z by Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, ruler of Najd, Arabia, made Husein's claim even less significant.
An international Muslim congress held in Cairo in 1926 to choose an acceptable successor to the caliphate proved abortive, resulting only in an appeal to the Muslims of the world to work together to reestablish a caliphate. Ever since World War II, however, the preoccupation of Muslim nations has been with national independence and economic problems, and the restoration of the caliphate may now be regarded as irrelevant.
By:
Jawad Nawaz
with the Help of Encart, Tareekh ul Khulfa , Sahih bukhari, Islam, Wars and History.