Table of Contents

Chapter 3: The Antagonists

Before the advent of Islam, Mecca was an international trade center populated by Jews, Christians, Idol worshippers, atheists, and a motley crowd professing several other philosophies and religions. When the Prophet (S) propagated the concept and ideology of Islam, the immediate opposition was to the concept of One Unique God. Barring atheists, most Meccans were willing to accept Muhammad (S) as the Messenger or Representative of God or even as an incarnation of God, for they had inherited such beliefs from their ancestors. What they were unable to digest were the concepts of One Unique God, a life after death, and accountability for one’s deeds in an eternal afterlife.1

Until the advent of Islam, most of the Arabs were idolaters, having a pantheon of three hundred and sixty deities. They could not comprehend the Islamic philosophy of One Unique God. They assumed that by teaching a new philosophy the Prophet (S) was obliquely hankering after worldly power and glory. They offered to make him their leader with as much wealth as he wished in addition to proposals of arranging his marriage with the most beautiful girl of his choice, provided he gave up his Mission. The Prophet (S) refused, saying, “Even if you put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left hand, I will not give up the Mission to which I am commanded.”2 Then the Meccans enforced a social boycott and later put him to mental and physical torture.

Justice Murtaza Hussain in the footnote to his English translation of Ali Naqi’s book, ‘The History of Islam’ writes, “The Prophet’s message is Islam - submission to the Will of God. Its distinctive features are two:[1] A harmonious equilibrium between the temporal and spiritual [the body and soul], permitting a full enjoyment of all the good that God has created [Qur’an 7:32], enjoining at the same time on everybody duties towards God, such as worship, fasting, charity… etc. Islam was to be the religion of the masses and not merely of the elite. [2] A universality of the call - all the believers becoming brothers and equals without any distinction of class or race or language. ‘The only superiority which Islam recognizes is a personal one, based on greater fear of God and greater piety’ [Qur’an 49:13].” 3

Among the Meccans, it was the Banu4 Umayya (the Umayyads) who bore utmost personal enmity against the Prophet (S), followed by the Banu al-Mughira, and the Banu Makhzum.5 Maulana Shibli, a Sunni scholar writes, “The Prophethood of Muhammad (S) was considered by the family of Bani Umayya as the victory of its opponents, Bani Hashim, and on that account they opposed the Prophet (S) to the maximum.” 6

Since the Prophet (S) first preached Islam to the Arabs, they were the first to take a leading part in opposing him and his Message - Islam. Quraish, the Prophet’s own tribesmen, took active part in his persecution as they found that Islam was contrary not only to their pagan beliefs but also that it put restrictions upon their vagrant ways of life.


The Prophet (S) had, during the course of about forty years of his life in Mecca, earned the reputation, in the entire community of the Meccans without exception, of being truthful (Sadiq), honest and trustworthy (Amin). In spite of their opposition to his Message, the Prophet (S) was considered the most trustworthy. As a result, they entrusted not only their valuables but also their affairs to the Prophet (S). The fact that the Meccans offered to give unlimited resources and offered to get him married to the wealthiest and most beautiful girl of his choice7 shows that, for the Meccans, the Prophet (S) was a noble and venerable person. However, what the Meccans abhorred was not the Messengership of Prophet Muhammad (S), but the Message he propagated.

The Prophet (S) along with those who had accepted Islam endured severe torture, for over ten years, at the hands of the infidels of Mecca. During this period, the persecution and hardened attitude of the Meccans, made it difficult to peacefully spread Islam. The Prophet (S) then received the Divine Commandment directing that the oppressed Muslims should migrate to safer places.8 Thereupon, some Muslims migrated to Abyssinia. According to Baqir al Majlisi, the number of those who migrated at that time, was either seventy-two or eighty-two men besides women and children.9 The pious and peaceful way of Islamic life practiced by the Migrants not only endeared them to the Abyssinians but also brought quite a few converts. This was the first migration in Islam. A group of infidels from Mecca met the Abyssinian King and tried to persuade him to hand over the migrants. However, Ja'far, the Prophet’s cousin, put forth a convincing argument against deportation, which earned the appreciation of the King.10 Negus (the king of Abyssinia) refused to hand over the Muslims to the Meccans. The infidels returned disappointed. However, since Abyssinia was far away, the migration did not cause much concern to the infidels of Mecca.

When one is faced with oppression, the Qur’an makes migration obligatory upon man. The Qur’an reveals, “Unto those whom the angels cause to die, having been unjust to themselves, the angels will ask:‘In what state were you (on earth) ?’ They will reply, ‘We were oppressed in our land’. The angels will say, ‘Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to find refuge [from oppression] ?’ Hell shall be their home; an evil refuge. Excepted are those such as infirm men, helpless women, and children who have neither the strength nor the means to escape. [Such are] Those [whom] Allah may pardon; He is Ever Pardoning, Forgiving.”11

Another verse assures, “Those that have embraced the faith and migrated from their homes and fought for the cause of Allah with their wealth and their persons are held in high esteem by Allah. They are the triumphant ones. Their Lord has promised them joy and mercy, and gardens of eternal bliss where they shall dwell forever.”12

Regarding the Muhajireen (migrants) and the Ansar (helpers), the Qur’an reveals, “Those that have embraced the faith and migrated from their homes and fought for the cause of Allah and those that have sheltered them and helped them – they are the true believers. They shall receive Mercy and a generous provision.”13

About those who die during migration the Qur’an reveals:“He who migrates from his homeland for the sake of Allah and His Prophet (S), and then encounters death, has his assured reward with Allah. Allah is most Forgiving and Merciful.”14

In yet another place the Qur’an reveals:“To those who migrated after they had been persecuted and were patient in their strife, your Lord is surely Forgiving and Merciful.”15

Thus, as a first step to protect humankind against oppression, migration is made obligatory, with a Divine promise of safety and abundance in this life and an assured reward in the life to come.

The people of Medina were literate and had already heard from their Jewish and Christian friends about the awaited Redeemer /Savior/Comforter. When news about the Holy Prophet’s unique Message reached them, they sought and met the Prophet (S) and were convinced that he was the awaited Redeemer. Not only did they accept Islam, but they also pledged their support to any Muslim who wished to migrate to Medina. The Muslims from Mecca who migrated to Medina are called the Muhajireen and the Muslims of Medina who pledged their support to the migrants are called the Ansar. The Prophet (S) directed the suffering Muslims to migrate to Medina. Soon, only a few Muslims were left in Mecca.

The infidels of Mecca soon realized that, not yielding to their pressures, the Prophet (S) was already in the process of establishing a center away from Mecca, conducive to the successful propagation of his Mission. They also noticed that several Muslims had already migrated to Medina. Since the Holy Prophet’s Mission was anathema to them, the infidels of Mecca collectively hatched a conspiracy to physically eliminate him and thus bring an end to his Mission. They were further emboldened by the sad demise of the Prophet’s guardian, guide, and paternal uncle Abu Talib (a.s.), who was the only obstacle in their way of harming the Prophet (S). Within three days of Abu Talib’s demise, the Prophet (S) suffered another serious blow in the sad demise of his wife Khadija (a.s.).16 The Prophet (S) declared the year as ‘The Year of Mourning’. The Prophet (S) received the revelation about the plot hatched by the infidels17 and the Divine Command to migrate. He appointed Imam Ali (a.s.) as his vicegerent and deputy, handed over all the articles entrusted to him by the Meccans, and instructed him to sleep in his place and in the morning to discharge his trust. The infidels surrounded the Prophet’s house during night and assumed that it was the Prophet (S) who was sleeping. In the morning, they were surprised to find Imam Ali (a.s.) in the bed instead of the Prophet (S).18

One of the bodily miracles of the Prophet (S) was that when he walked on soft soil, no footprints were left, while on hard stones his footprints appeared prominently. On his way, the Prophet (S) did not leave any footprints. Thus, the infidels could not have traced the route taken by the Prophet (S). However, Abu Bakr who accompanied the Prophet (S) left his footprints. The Arabs, who were expert trackers, traced the single track of Abu Bakr’s footprints to the mouth of a deserted cave. The attempts of the infidels to apprehend the Prophet (S) would have succeeded, but for Divine intervention in which, miraculously, the cave came to be covered with thick cobwebs and a pair of doves sat hatching their eggs in their nest.

There is a general misconception that the plot to kill Muhammad (S) was the cause for his migration. This implies that the Prophet (S) was more concerned with his personal safety than that of his congregation, which is a slur on the Prophet (S). As a result of this misconception, western writers term the Holy Prophet’s migration as ‘Muhammad’s flight to Medina’. Some writers use the words ‘Muhammad’s escape to Medina’.

The term ‘hijra’, which is used in the Qur’an, is mistranslated as ‘flight’ or ‘escape’. The Arabic word for ‘flight’ or ‘escape’ is ‘firar’ and not ‘hijra’. The misinterpretation is wanton and mischievous. The implication in the mistranslation is that, fearing for his life the Prophet (S) fled to Medina. If the Prophet (S) were to leave Mecca for his personal safety, he should have been the first to migrate. On the other hand, the Prophet (S) was one of the last persons to leave Mecca, leaving behind Imam Ali (a.s.) and the members of his (the Prophet) family to follow him. By that time, on the instructions of the Prophet (S), all Muslims had already migrated to Medina or at least had left Mecca on their way to Medina.

Every prophet (S) faced with persecution migrated. In fact, the whole community along with Moses (a.s.) migrated. The large-scale migration is called exodus. Historical evidence regarding the Prophet’s Hijra (migration), completely disproves the notion that it was an impulsive act to save his life. The migration, as noted earlier, was planned long before the Prophet (S) himself migrated to Medina. In fact, it was Imam Ali (a.s.) and the family members of the Prophet (S) who were the last to migrate. From this, it is obvious that the Prophet (S) did not migrate for fear of his life, but it was a planned migration under Divine Command that was carried out systematically over a long period of time.19 Therefore, it is not an impulsive action on the part of the Prophet (S), for the Prophet (S), of his own accord, does not even speak, let alone act out of his personal desire [Qur’an 53:3 ].

Under the Divine Command, the Prophet (S) was among the last to migrate to Medina. Therefore, it is evident that the plot of the infidels to assassinate the Prophet (S) was the result of their realization that most Muslims had already migrated and the Prophet (S) himself was about to do so. To say that the Prophet (S) migrated because of the plot of the infidels of Mecca to kill him, is absolutely fallacious and a historical subversion of facts, introduced by later historians under the rule of Banu Umayya, Banu Abbas, and Banu Fatima. The falsehood is carried on till date, due to ignorance and slavish following of earlier misguided historians.

During that time, the Jewish tribes of Bani Quraydhah, Bani an-Nadheer, and Bani Qaynuqa’ in addition to some smaller ones, formed part of the population of Medina. They were aware that their sacred scriptures foretold the coming of the Comforter-Prophet. However, as they feared that their power would be lost or at least minimized, they chose not to openly accept Muhammad (S) as the awaited Prophet. Their skills at astrology warned them that the new religion would soon reach great heights. Therefore, the Jewish tribes of Medina preferred to enter into a peace treaty with the Prophet (S). The terms of the treaty were reduced into writing and many copies of the document were distributed between the parties.

According to the early Shia historian Ali bin Ibrahim bin Hashim, under the treaty it was mutually agreed that firstly, in the event of an attack by people from outside Medina, the Jews would not support the outsiders and secondly within Medina the Jews and Muslim would not interfere with the affairs of each other. Other historians state that there were as many as thirty-five covenants in the treaty. The infidels of Mecca learnt of the treaty and considered it a defeat for them and a great victory for Muslims. At Medina, Islam spread quickly. The Prophet (S) proclaimed a bond of brotherhood between Muslims, who formed a well-knit fraternity, pursuing a peaceful and God-fearing life.

The peace-treaty between Muslims and the Jews of Medina created an impotent rage among the infidels of Mecca. Historians unanimously record that Yazid’s grandfather Abu Sufyan, who was the chief among Banu Umayya, not being content with torturing Muslims at Mecca, consistently incited the people of Mecca to wage war against the Prophet (S). He was at the head of every skirmish and battle that the Prophet (S) had to face repeatedly. As an antagonist of Islam, Abu Sufyan commanded the infidels in the battle of Badr, Uhud, al-Khandaq, and other smaller confrontations like the one at Hudaibiya…etc., at regular intervals.

Abu Sufyan incited the Jews of Medina into flouting the peace treaty. He incited the Jews to attack Muslims from within Medina, while Abu Sufyan himself with his army planned to attack the Muslims from outside Medina. The Prophet (S) through Divine Revelations learnt about the conspiracy and warned the Jews, a majority of whom voluntarily left Medina and went to their ancestral forts cumulatively known as Khaibar. Those Jews who chose to remain in Medina initially desisted from helping Abu Sufyan, but later attacked the Muslims on the incitement of Abu Sufyan.

In subsequent wars, the womenfolk of the infidels of Mecca were barbaric and equally inimical towards the Prophet (S) and the philosophy of Islam. The animosity and barbarism of Abu Sufyan and his family is recorded in History when Abu Sufiyan’s wife and Mu’awiya’s mother Hind, plucked out and chewed the raw liver of the Prophet’s uncle, the martyr Hamza in the battlefield of Uhud.20 Abu Sufyan’s incitement of the Jews had its effect and led to the famous battle of Khaibar. In all the battles, Imam Ali (a.s.) stood as the sole protector, shielding against the onslaught of the enemy and defending Islam and on the person of the Prophet (S).

Having tasted defeat and unable to stop the steady progress of Islam, the infidels of Mecca tried to prevent the Muslims from performing their annual pilgrimage at Mecca. Even from ancient times, bloodshed at the precinct of Mecca was prohibited. The Muslims proceeded towards Mecca to perform the Haj. They did not carry any weapons, but had about seven hundred camels for sacrifice. The Muslims were purely motivated by religious zeal and had no thought whatsoever of any war.

Seeing the Muslims coming from Medina in large numbers, Abu Sufyan misled the infidels of Mecca to assume that war was imminent. They sent Khalid bin al-Waleed with a huge army, to intercept the Muslims. When al-Waleed’s army appeared, Muslims felt offended and being fresh from various victories and impelled by religious fervor, they wanted to fight al-Waleed’s army. The Prophet (S) restrained them and wanted a peaceful settlement. Several people, like Umar, owing to their shortsightedness and lack of wisdom, doubted the Prophet’s wisdom in agreeing to a peaceful settlement in the Treaty of Hudaibiya.

Reaching Hudaibiya, the Prophet (S) sent his emissary to impress upon the infidels that he and his companions only wished to perform the Hajj and did not intend to fight. Thereupon, the Meccans sent Suhail bin Amr as their representative. Though he could have easily captured Mecca at that time, the Prophet (S) preferred a peaceful solution and gave several concessions in the well-known terms of the treaty of Hudaibiya, between the Muslims and the Meccans, which was written down.

In the treaty, it was agreed that the Muslims should return back to Medina without performing the Hajj that year, and that from the next year onwards the infidels would vacate Mecca for three days and allow Muslims to perform the Hajj peacefully. Another term of the treaty was that those Muslims, who wished, should be allowed to live peacefully in Mecca, without any interference from the non-Muslims.

In Mecca, there were two tribes; the Bani Khuza’ah and the Bani Bakr, who were always at loggerheads with each other. The tribe of Khuza’ah chose to support the Prophet (S) and the tribe of Bani Bakr supported the infidels of Mecca. The Prophet (S) arranged for a ‘no war’ pact between the Bani Khuza’ah and Bani Bakr. In view of this, the Bani Khuza’ah disarmed themselves. On the other hand, Abu Sufyan incited and provided arms and men to the tribe of Bani Bakr and incited them to take advantage, attack, and kill the unarmed men of Bani Khuza’ah. This was against the ancient pre-Islamic tradition that there should be no bloodshed within the precinct of the Ka’aba.

Under Abu Sufyan’s evil advice and active support, the Bani Bakr attacked and killed some unarmed men belonging to the tribe of the Bani Khuza’ah when they were performing their religious act of circumambulating, within the precincts of the sacred Kaaba. The infidels of Mecca, in helping Bani Bakr, committed a flagrant violation of an important covenant of the treaty of Hudaibiya.

Amr bin Salim of the Bani Khuzza, escaped the massacre and reported the incident to the Prophet (S). The Prophet (S) did not rush to declare war, though he had a large following of men anxious to avenge the sacrilege. Instead, in order to find an amicable solution, he wrote to the infidels of Mecca offering two alternatives, namely, [1] to pay compensation for those who were killed by Bani Bakr, and stop helping Bani Bakr, or [2] to proclaim that the Meccans themselves have chosen to rescind and abandon the truce of Hudaibiya and thus declare a state of war.

It is said that, later, Abu Sufyan and Khalid bin al-Waleed and some others regretted their act of helping the Bani Bakr with arms and men. Such regrets are akin to the regret expressed by the drowning Pharaoh who said, “Now I believe in the God of Aaron and Moses.” He received the reply:“What now, at this hour?21 However, having committed the act, the Meccans were loath to acknowledge their shameful deed. They chose the second alternative and proclaimed that they had rescinded the terms of the treaty of Hudaibiya.

However, Abu Sufyan secretly sought to get the treaty renewed by going to Medina, where his daughter Umm Habiba, married to the Prophet (S) was living. He went with the great expectation that his daughter, out of love for her father, will not only accommodate him but also recommend him favorably to the Prophet (S). Reaching the Prophet’s house, he was about to sit on the rug of the Prophet (S), when Umm Habiba, quickly snatched away the rug, telling her father, contemptuously, that being an infidel, Abu Sufyan was unclean22 and therefore unfit to sit on the Prophet’s rug. Disheartened, Abu Sufyan returned to Mecca and informed its inhabitants that a military conflict with the Muslims was then inevitable and that they should immediately prepare to wage war against the Muslims.

Since the infidels of Mecca had rescinded the truce of Hudaybia and committed acts of aggression in killing the innocent Bani Khuza’ah, there was no option for the Muslims except to face the aggressors. Any inaction on the part of the Prophet (S) would have been construed as an infirmity.

When the Muslims reached and camped outside Mecca, Abu Sufyan with some of his companions went to reconnoiter the Muslim army. It was at that time, according to the Sunni source Sahih of al-Bukari, that Abu Sufyan and his companions were arrested by the Muslim troops and produced before the Prophet (S). Abu Sufyan, mortally scared for his life, offered to accept Islam by testifying that there is no God but Allah. He did not acknowledge Muhammad (S) as the Prophet (S) of God. Abbas, the Prophet’s uncle, told Abu Sufyan that unless he also acknowledged the Prophethood of Muhammad (S), the acceptance of the faith will be incomplete and that the Muslims will surely kill Abu Sufyan.23 Very reluctantly and only outwardly to save his skin, Abu Sufyan acknowledged Muhammad (S) as the prophet of God.

Abu Sufyan requested Abbas to show him the strength of the Muslim army. The words uttered by Abu Sufyan, on seeing the army, spoke eloquently about the quality of his Islam. The sight of such a large and devoted gathering, brought visions of presiding over a vast kingdom. Abu Sufyan exclaimed, “Indeed, my cousin has built up enormous military power!” To this, Abbas replied, “What you see is not a king’s army, for Muhammad (S) is not a king but the Messenger of God. It is the Message and Prophethood of Muhammad (S) which has attracted such huge numbers of sincere followers.” Abu Sufyan murmured, “I do not care by what name you call it -Kingship or Prophethood. The sight of such a grand army is indeed very pleasing.”24 He was indeed impressed by the military strength and craved for the chance of usurping power, if not by himself immediately, at least later by his progeny.

However, his subsequent conduct, throughout his life, is proof that Abu Sufyan continued to be the infidel and trouble-shooter that he really was, and that he never cared for Islamic tenets of a peaceful and pious life. Long after he ‘embraced Islam’, Abu Sufyan on seeing the Muslims defeated and running helter skelter, gleefully cried, “At last the spell of magic cast by Muhammad has waned. The fleeing Muslims will not stop till they reach the sea.”

Much is said and written about Abu Sufyan and his ilk of accepting Islam. The actual word used by the Prophet (S) while referring to them, is recorded in history. The Prophet (S) used the Arabic word ‘Tulaqa’ which means ‘emancipated’ or ‘freed from bondage’ and is used exclusively to refer to the enemy who has capitulated and begged to be spared in life.

Imam Ali (a.s.), an eminent and truthful eyewitness to the character of such people, said:“They did not accept Islam. They had simply capitulated [istaslama] before Islam, keeping their infidelity in their hearts.” 25 ‘Islam’ is defined as surrender of one’s self before God.26Istislam’ means capitulation in defeat, before men. The Prophet (S), faced with the ostensible declaration of faith by Abu Sufyan, did not immediately brand him a hypocrite, because the Prophet’s companions were incapable of understanding the real but hidden intent of Abu Sufyan.27 The Qur’an also commands that such people should be left free to do their own deeds.28

When his companions prevailed upon him to reveal the names of the hypocrites, so that they may be killed, the Prophet (S) said:“Don’t they claim to have accepted Islam? How can you kill them as long as they claim to be Muslims? Will not posterity blame us saying that they invited people towards Islam and when they accepted Islam, he got them killed!” The Prophet (S) left Abu Sufyan to justify the truthfulness of his declaration of faith by his deeds. Abu Sufyan himself, by his conduct proved that though ostensibly a Muslim, he was indeed a hypocrite.

Some people may argue that the use of the word ‘Tulaqa’ was used by the Prophet (S) only after he entered Mecca and that Abu Sufyan had become a Muslim shortly before that time and therefore the word does not apply to him. This will be a fallacious argument because, firstly, all Meccans who were inimical to the Prophet (S), including Abu Sofia, were known as the Tulaqa; Secondly Imam Ali (S) wrote to Mu’awiya, who was in fact a second generation Muslim, being the son of Abu Sufyan:“How can one who is a ‘Taleeq’ and the offspring of another ‘Taleeq’ claim superiority over a Muhajir?”

The Immaculate Fatima (a.s.) used the same epithet ‘Taleeq’ in her arguments with Abu Bakr over Fadak. The Immaculate Fatima’s daughter Zainab (a.s.) addressed Yazid in the same words when Yazid was sitting on his throne in his palace at Damascus.29 Neither Abu Sufyan and his progeny nor anyone in the annals of history ever dared to challenge the assertion that Abu Sufyan was a Taleeq, Mu’awiya was the son of a Taleeq, and Yazid was the grandson of a Taleeq. Later historians favorable to the Banu Umayya never made any effort to contest or altogether remove the appendage ‘Tulaqa’ while referring to Abu Sufyan and his progeny. That no such effort was ever made proves the meaning and authenticity of Abu Sufyan and his children being the Tulaqa. When, on the death of Uthman, Mu’awiya sent Abu Huraira and Abu ad-Darda to convey the message that Imam Ali (a.s.) should withdraw from the Caliphate, they met Abdurrahman bin Ghanam on the way. On hearing about their mission, Abdurrahman bin Ghanam told Abu Huraira and Abu ad-Darda:“What does Mu’awiya have to do with giving advice in the matter [of Caliphate] ? Mu’awiya is one among the Tulaqa who have no right to become the caliph. Secondly, Mu’awiya and his father were the chiefs of the infidels who fought in the battle of Ahzab against the Prophet (S).

We shall see, later, that when Abu Bakr became caliph, Abu Sufyan hypocritically suggested that Imam Ali (a.s.) should stake his claim to the Caliphate. Abu Sufyan disclosed his hidden desire when he told the third caliph:“Now, that the Caliphate has fallen into our [the Umayyads] hands, you should play around with it, toss it around like a ball and perpetuate it in the hands of the Umayyads.” 30

Regarding Mu’awiya, an authentic Sunni source, Musnad of Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal records the following incident related by Obeidillah Bin Buraida:“My father and myself went to Mu’awiya. We sat on a carpet. The table was laid. We shared a meal. Then intoxicants were brought in. Mu’awiya quaffed a cup and presented another to my father who refused saying, ‘Ever since the time the Prophet (S) prohibited the use of liquor, I have never tasted it.’ Upon this, Mu’awiya replied, ‘Nothing pleases me more than wine, milk and boisterous company of revelers.”

Another reputed Sunni author, Jalaluddin as-Suyooti writes, “It was Mu’awiya who was the first to ride on his steed between Safa and Marwa [which is prohibited in Islam] ; who drank Nabeez [liquor] ; ate soil and made others eat it. When he sat on the Holy Prophet’s pulpit and demanded fealty for his son Yazid, Aa’isha put out her head from her room and cried, ‘Stop Mu’awiya! Stop. Did the first two Caliphs appoint their sons as successors?’ ‘No’ replied Mu’awiya. Aa’isha asked, ‘Then whom do you follow in this audacious step’.”

Regarding Abu Sufyan, Mu’awiya, and his son Yazid, their oft-repeated couplet, recorded by both Sunni and Shia authentic sources, declares, “No Archangel ever appeared before Muhammad (S) nor was anything revealed. It is all a power-game played by the Banu Hashim.”

Yazid used to play with and make fun of Qur’anic verses. Once he quoted the first part of the verse beginning with ‘So, woe unto worshippers’, without completing it by reciting the remaining part–‘who are heedless of their prayer’. Then he added ‘Look! Allah curses the worshippers and not the drunkards’. We have cited these examples to show the nature and faith of Abu Sufyan and his progeny who grabbed the reins of power to create a violently aggressive empire in place of Islam–the religion of universal peace.

  • 1. Qur’an, 6:29, 8:31…
  • 2. Abul Fida’s Qasasul Ambiya, p. 391.
  • 3. History of Islam, by S. Ali Naqi Naqvi, Printed by Imamia Mission, [Hind] Aligarh, Translator’s Footnote No. 5 at p. 79.
  • 4. Banu or Bani means ‘the family or the tribe of’.
  • 5. As-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa, p. 144, quoted in History of Islam.
  • 6. Seeratun Nabi, Vol. I p. 158 quoted in History of Islam, p. 81.
  • 7. Al-Majlisi’s Hayatul Quloob, 186.
  • 8. Qur’an, 2:218, 3:195, 4:97-100, 8:74, 9:20-22.
  • 9. Hayatul Quloob, Eng. Tr. By Rev. James L. Merrick; Ch. 11 P. 208.
  • 10. Abul Fida’s Qasasul Ambiya, p. 393.
  • 11. Qur’an, 4:97-99.
  • 12. Qur’an, 4:100.
  • 13. Qur’an, 8:74.
  • 14. Qur’an, 9:20-22.
  • 15. Qur’an, 16:110.
  • 16. Tarikhul A’immah, P. 106.
  • 17. Qur’an, 8:30, Abdullah al-Khunayzi’s ‘Abu Talib, Mo’min Quraish’, p. 170.
  • 18. Al-Majlisi’s Hayatul Quloob, 225-226.
  • 19. Qur’an, 2:218, 3:195, 4:97-100, 8:74, 9:20-22.
  • 20. Tarikh at-Tabari, vol. 3, p. 22-23, Seeratun Nabi, vol. 1 p. 273, al-Istee’ab, vol. 2, p. 286.
  • 21. Qur’an, Yunus 10:90- 92.
  • 22. Qur’an, 9:95-96, Abul Fida’s Qasasul Ambiya, p. 410, Majlisi’s Hayatul Quloob, 289.
  • 23. Al-Majlisi’s Hayatul Quloob, 290.
  • 24. Al-Majlisi’s Hayatul Quloob, 291.
  • 25. Nahjul Balagha
  • 26. Qur’an, 2:208, ‘Al Islam Huwa Taslim’ Imam Ali in Nahjul Balagha.
  • 27. Qur’an, 2:204.
  • 28. Qur’an, 9:95-96.
  • 29. Seerat Fatimat az-Zehra, by Justice Sultan Mirza, p. 281.
  • 30. Nuqooshe Ismat.