Читать книгу The Prophet Muhammad - Muhammad Yasin Mazhar Siddiqi - Страница 8
ОглавлениеMakkah is generally taken as the seat of a single faith, inhabited by several families of the Quraysh tribe. This is not a sound view. The Quraysh, no doubt, enjoyed a majority in Makkah. They were at the helm of its affairs and dominated its business and trade. They had a leading role in its political system and economy. They were ranked high in its social life. Yet they were not the only notable tribe in Makkah. Besides them, there were social classes, tribes and groups who enjoyed an influential position in Makkah. The latter would often take decisive steps, changing the course of events.
Even the Quraysh families professed two different sets of social values. In opposition to other Arab tribes they displayed unity at political and military levels. However, they were divided among themselves into numerous political, social, economic, religious and cultural and economic groups beset with rivalry. Their elite had mutual differences, animosity and jealousy. Their social relations, economic ties, trade links and political and cultural alliances were subject to change almost every day. These differences often caused social unrest, economic chaos, religious friction, clash of cultures and commercial and economic tussles.
In their religious life too, there were marked differences and variety. The Quraysh families were essentially the adherents of Abrahamic faith. However, their faith had been vitiated by accretions. They had incorporated many innovations in their original faith. They had deviated much from the original path. Polytheism had become the main article of their faith. Their practices too, had grown intensely polytheistic. Their affiliation with a host of idols had divided them into groups and sub-groups. There was a reform movement against the ancestral faith. Atheism had been entrenched deeply there. Some persons and groups had severed all links with faith. They were under the evil influence of the neighbouring Jews, Christians and Magians. Some had turned into Jews, others into Christians and Magians. Many were influenced in varying degrees by these faiths. By the time of the Prophet Muḥammad’s advent Makkah was a truly pluralistic and multi-faith society.
TRIBAL DIVISIONS IN MAKKAH
The Makkan Quraysh
In the tribal hierarchy and in terms of social status the Quraysh families had different rankings. Quṣayy ibn Kilāb had reorganized the town of Makkah. At the time he settled some leading Quraysh families in the vicinity of the Kaʿbah. They came to be known as ‘Quraysh al-Baṭā’iḥ’. This stratification was based on social standing, rank of the family and the distinctions it enjoyed. Even among the Quraysh al-Baṭā’iḥthere were class divisions. The more honourable among them were housed next to the Kaʿbah. The pride of place was annexed by Quṣayy ibn Kilāb, for this family was the custodian of the Kaʿbah and was held in great esteem for its political and social standing. Next to them were Banū Makhzūm, Banū Sahm, BanūʿAdiyy, Banū Taym and Banū Jumaḥetc, who were also settled around the Kaʿbah. The settlement was done on all sides of the Kaʿbah. The inner circle was occupied by the Quraysh al-Baṭā’iḥ. Those in the outer circle were regarded as less privileged ones and came to be known as Quraysh al-Ẓawāhir. They were granted land at some distance from the Kaʿbah. Among them were the less powerful families such as of Banū Lu’ayy and Banū Fihr etc.1
The Quraysh families held important positions in Makkan political order and administrative set up in relation to their ranking in social life and their financial status. Each family thus occupied some major position while the highest office went to the most distinguished family. The head of the Banū Quṣayy family enjoyed about half of the twelve most important positions, including the provisions for water, flag, hospitality and other offices. These offices were held at a later date by their sons and successors as a hereditary privilege. Anyone outside the Quṣayy family was never granted any of these offices. However, the families belonging to the Quraysh al-Baṭā’iḥheld one or two of these positions. Some of these went to Banū Makhzūm, Banū Taym, BanūʿAdiyy and Banū Jumaḥ. The Kaʿbah possessions were in the charge of Banū Sahm. None of these positions were ever enjoyed by the Quraysh al-Ẓawāhir.2
Around the time of the Prophet Muḥammad’s advent, the twelve leading families of the Quraysh al-Baṭā’iḥdominated the political order, economy and administrative machinery of Makkah. In about two centuries the family of Banū Quṣayy had branched out into five leading families, with each of these controlling some office on hereditary basis. ʿAbd al-Dār, the eldest son of Quṣayy had three positions while the other son ʿAbd Manāf maintained his control over the other three departments. These were later transferred to the three main branches of this family i.e. Banū Hāshim, Banū Nawfal and BanūʿAbd Shams/Banū Umayyah: Although ʿAbd Manāf’s family was divided into four distinct branches they were led by a single head of the family in the encounters with others. The three offices held by BanūʿAbd al-Dār were assumed by the branches of their family while other positions were retained by successors on a hereditary basis.3
Although wealth did not play any major role in the tribal affairs and administrative acumen, its impact was not negligible either. It did have its bearing on retaining or abdicating some positions. As Banū Nawfal belonging to BanūʿAbd Manāf turned financially weak, their office of providing nursing was bought by another Quraysh family, Banū Asad, who had been earlier entitled only to join consultative meetings. The affluent tradesman Ḥakīm ibn Ḥizām of Banū Asad was able to gain the custodianship of the tribal and community assembly Dār al-Nadwah by dint of his wealth. BanūʿAbd al-Dār who earlier held this position had to forego it on account of their adverse financial status. The same happened in the case of the leaders of two Banū Hāshim families. In view of his failing financial condition the privilege of offering water to pilgrims passed on from Abū Ṭālib al-Hāshimī to his wealthy younger brother al-ʿAbbās al-Hāshimī and was retained in future by the latter. Wealth and financial condition often played a key role in determining the social status and political power of a tribe and family. The neo-rich aspired for political and social status and this often resulted in mutual hostilities, social disorder, rivalry and jealousy, family feuds, trade war and psychological tension. It often changed the course of events.4
Numerical strength, economic resources and social status, it goes without saying, were intertwined. These factors impelled groups and families to lay claim to privileges and rights. Often did two branches of the same family stand against each other, pressing their respective claims for position and office. According to oft-quoted reports, two sub-branches of the Banū Quṣayy family – BanūʿAbd Manāf and BanūʿAbd al-Dār turned into foes. Their rivalry could have led to the break out of war. The issue was, however, resolved amicably by dividing power and sharing office.
As the Quraysh families differed on social, community and tribal issues, they were divided into groups and sub-groups. The same social and economic forces accounted for the division of the Quraysh into the two major groups of al-Aḥlāf and al-Muṭayyabūn. It is on record that the Quraysh tribes were in two opposing camps on the issue of the division of offices among BanūʿAbd Manāf and BanūʿAbd al-Dār. Al-Muṭayyabūn sided with BanūʿAbd Manāf. Among them were Banū Taym, Banū Zuhrah, Banū Asad, Banūal-Ḥārith ibn Fihr. As opposed to it, among al-Aḥlāf were BanūʿAbd al-Dār and their supporters such as Banū Makhzūm, Banū Jumaḥ, Banū Sahm and BanūʿAdiyy ibn Kaʿb. Then there was another camp of ʿĀmīr ibn Lu’ayy and Muḥārib ibn Fihr, which was not allied with either of the two and acted neutrally all along.5
The agreement known as ḥilf al-Fuḍūl, which was contracted for defending the interests of weaker sections and foreigners too, had divided Quraysh families into two main camps. Those who stood for this agreement comprised Banū Hāshim, Banū Muṭṭalib, Banū Taym, Banū Zuhrah and Banū Asad. Even the united family of BanūʿAbd Manāf was divided on this issue. Among those who kept away from this agreement were Banū Umayyah, Banū Nawfal, Banū Makhzūm, Banū Jumaḥand Banū Sahm etc. While Banū Hāshim and Banū Muṭṭalib supported the agreement, Banū Nawfal and Banū Umayyah kept aloof from it. Several social, economic and political considerations were at work behind these divisions. This had dealt a severe blow to the ideal of a unified family and united tribe. The same was re-echoed later when Banū Hāshim and Banū Muṭṭalib reacted differently to the social boycott of Muslims. They helped and defended Muslims whereas the two other families of BanūʿAbd Manāf – Banū Umayyah and Banū Nawfal did support the Quraysh.6 The Qurayshī stance was dictated by their political and economic interests. In contrast, Banū Hāshim and Banū Muṭṭalib abided by the tribal tradition of protecting their own folk. As a consequence, the leading united family of BanūʿAbd Manāf was divided.
Other social, economic and political factors too, had sown discord among the Quraysh, dividing them into numerous units at war with one another. These differences existed among families as well. For example, Banū Makhzūm thought of themselves as superior to everyone, especially to BanūʿAbd Manāf. It caused constant friction among the two. BanūʿAdiyy was Banū Zuhrah’s foe. They were hostile to Banū Taym as well. Many families had strained relations. Often did it surface at the level of the leading families. An instance in point is the serious rift between Banū Hāshim and Banū Umayyah, though they were part of the larger family of BanūʿAbd Manāf. Essentially it was a clash of interests, without any root in family feuds. Such differences and hostilities were common among the Quraysh.
At the level of individuals too, the issues of property, wealth, politics, business and trade and social relations created tension in tribes. At times, members of the same family with strong blood ties clashed with one another, prompted by their self interest. For example, the chief of BanūʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib, ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib al-Hāshimī was hostile to Ḥarb ibn Umayyah, the leader of Banū Umayyah. The former had differences with members of other families. The hostility between Hāshim and Umayyah signified the rift between the uncle and the nephew who were impelled by their economic or social interests.
Apart from the Quraysh, some other Arab tribes were also settled in Makkah. Their details follow in this work. Some leading members of the Quraysh had serious differences with chiefs of the non-Quraysh Arab tribes. ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib al-Hāshimi differed sharply with several Quraysh and non-Quraysh leaders. This animosity did not rest on any tribal consideration. Rather, he was guided by his economic interests. Muḥammad Ibn Ḥabīb al-Baghdādī has reported at length such hostilities.7 The Makhzūm chief al-Fakīh ibn Mughīrah developed differences with the chief of BanūʿAbd Shams, ʿUtbah ibn Rabīʿah. Such hostilities were natural in a multi-tribal and pluralistic polity such as of Makkah. It must be said to the credit of the forbearing Quraysh that they did not let these conflicts flare up into open war and bloodshed. It did not turn them into enemies forever either.8
Other Arab Tribes of Makkah
The Quraysh did not always constitute a majority in Makkah. Nor did they ever hold its leadership. In ancient days Banū Jurhum held this position and enjoyed the custodianship of the Kaʿbah. For they were the kin of Prophet Ishmael (peace be upon him) the founder of both Makkah and the Kaʿbah. Banū Khuzāʿah snatched this position from Banū Jurhum: At a later date, it was annexed by the Quraysh chief, Quṣayy ibn Kilāb. In the intervening period some other Arab tribes had their ascendancy. They were however, trounced by some other Arab tribes. Often did the losing tribe leave Makkah. In some cases, however, some of their families managed to settle down in the vicinity of Makkah.9
Both Makkan tribes and their opponents secured military and political help from other tribes and with the latter’s active support they managed to drive away the enemy. For expelling Banū Khuzāʿah, Quṣayy ibn Kilāb had drawn upon the military strength of Banū Kinānah. Likewise, for putting an end to the interference of the Arab tribe Ṣaufah in the affairs of Makkah, they had sought help from Banū Kinānah and their ancestor Quḍāʿah.10
Hāshim ibn ʿAbd Manāf and his illustrious son ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib of the Quraysh had taken military and financial support from these tribes – Saʿd, Hudhaym and ʿAzrā. This alone had helped them entrench deep into Makkan polity. Muḥammad ibn Ḥabīb al-Baghdādī has recounted at length the agreements carried out by several tribes, families and individuals related to Muṭayyabūn, Aḥlāf, ʿAdiyy, Banū Sahm, Khuzāʿah and other contracts.11
There are bits of evidence indicating that at times help was taken from other tribes and foreign rulers. This help was secured for expelling non-local groups from Makkah and for establishing their political power locally. Sources speak of the help taken from the Lakhmī ruler of Iraq, King Mundhir, Yemenī King Zuwayzan and other heads of state by Makkan chiefs.
Besides such help from without, some Arab Bedouin tribes had settled permanently in Makkah. Such non-local elements turned to Makkah in view of the adverse circumstances faced by them. On reaching Makkah they entered into alliance with a Quraysh family which enabled them to settle down in Makkah. Then they formed marital kinship with the same family or its allies. It cemented their position. In the Arab tribal norms both of these relationships were very strong. It was obligatory on a tribe to render help to its son-in-law. It was regarded as sacred as the blood tie. Many Arab tribes moved to Makkah for economic reasons, for being the trade centre it offered them many opportunities and improved their financial conditions. It was common place that these tribes gained wealth and social status in Makkah, which helped them secure political power as well.
A branch of some influential Arab tribe of Makkah was settled there, with some small families living there. They had alliance with some Quraysh family or individual and were reckoned members of their sponsors. The list of the senior most Makkan Muslims, as provided by Ibn Hishām and other classical writers of sīrah, includes the names of these allies. Among the allies of Banū Umayyah were Banū Ghanam, Banū Dudan, and around forty members of Asad Khuzaymah. Men, women and children were part of it. A small group of Banū Ghanī was Banū Hishām’s ally. The former had close ties with the latter. Among the allies of Banū Zuhrah were influential members of Banū Hudhayl, Kindah and Tamīm tribes. Prominent among them were ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd al-Hudhalī, al-Miqdād ibn ʿAmr al-Kindī, Shuraḥbīl ibn Ḥasanah al-Kindī and his two or three brothers. Their females feature among the earliest Muslims. The same holds true for their children. Among BanūʿAdiyy’s allies were many members of Banū Bukayr of the Layth tribe. They were more than twenty in number. Among the allies of Banū Sahm were ʿAlī Yāsir, Madhḥij and others. Besides these early Muslims of Arab tribes, there were other allies of the Quraysh who embraced Islam at a later date.12
The non-Muslim allies of the Quraysh of various Arab tribes outnumbered the Muslim allies. This non-Muslim segment was of much importance in the socio-cultural and economic life of Makkah. Many of them had acquired a status equal to the one enjoyed by the Quraysh elites. By dint of their social standing they influenced Makkan politics, economy and polity. Of them, special mention should be made of the leaders of Banū Thaqīf of Ṭā’if, who lived close to Makkah in Ṭā’if, which was its rival politically and financially. Al-Akhnas ibn Shurayq al-Thaqafī was considered as a peer to the Makkan chiefs such as Abū Jahl al-Makhzūmī and Abū Sufyān. The former played a leading role in Makkan society and politics, especially in the Makkan phase of the Prophet’s career. He was merely an ally of Banū Zuhrah yet he was instrumental in important matters. Once along with Abū Sufyān he had tried to oppose the Quraysh hostility against the Prophet (peace be upon him). His move was, however, turned down by the bitterly hostile Quraysh chiefs. It was at his behest that members of the Banū Zuhrah tribe refused to join the battle of Badr. Again, it was he who had urged his tribesmen to insist on the safe return of the Quraysh trade caravan.13 Ibn Isḥāq speaks of him as one of the elites who had a powerful voice.14 He was also a member of the delegation comprising Quraysh chiefs that had called on Abū Ṭālib for putting an end to the Prophet’s message.15 Among the Makkan chiefs who had extended protection to the emigrants from Abyssinia, he featured as well. He had extended this privilege to Abū Ṣabrah ibn Abī Ruḥm. According to a variant report, it was done by Suhayl ibn ʿAmr al-ʿĀmirī. Both of them had, however, refused to extend hospitality to the Prophet (peace be upon him) on his return from Ṭā’if.16 That he occupied an important position is evident from the fact that after his return from Ṭā’if and being deprived of the protection of his own family Banū Hāshim, when the Prophet (peace be upon him) sought help from three Makkan chiefs, al-Akhnas was one of them. However, he excused himself, pleading that he was only an ally. Notwithstanding, being an ally of the Quraysh Abū al-Daghnah, however, provided protection to Abū Bakr and it was recognized by the Quraysh. Ibn Ḥajar correctly states that al-Akhnas was not prepared to do so whereas Abū al-Daghnah was willing.17 According to Balādhurī, the Prophet (peace be upon him) had sought help from Suhayl ibn ʿAmr al-ʿĀmirī and Muṭʿīm ibn ʿAdiyy al-Nawfalī, the Quraysh chiefs and the latter had obliged him while the former refused it.18 Balādhurī reports also that Akhnas had written to the Prophet (peace be upon him) for returning Abū Baṣīr who had escaped from Makkah and taken refuge in Madinah. In accordance with the clause of the Ḥudaybīyah treaty the Prophet (peace be upon him) made Abū Baṣīr return to Makkah.19
According to Ibn Isḥāq, Ḥakīm ibn Umayyah Sulmā, chief of an Arab tribe that was Banū Umayyah’s ally, succeeded tried to dissuade his people from opposing the Prophet. He resorted to poetry for the same end. He was a gentleman who was obeyed by his people.20
That Ibn al-Daghnah extended protection to Abū Bakr Ṣiddīq is common knowledge. He belonged to Aḥābīsh, the alliance of the following Arab tribes – Banūal-Ḥārith ibn ʿAbd Manāt ibn Kinānah, Banūal-Hawan ibn Khuzaymah ibn Mudrikah and Banū al-Muṣṭaliq/Khuzāʿah. It was named so because the alliance agreement was concluded in the lower valley of Makkah called al-Aḥābīsh. Ibn al-Daghnah was known as being the son of a lady named al-Daghnah while Mālik was his real name. According to Imām Bukhārī, he was a member of Qurrah and according to other chroniclers he hailed from Banūal-Ḥārith/Kinānah tribe and was the chief of al-Aḥābīsh in his day. Abū Bakr’s own Quraysh family, Banū Taym had acted cowardly in defending him. Therefore, al-Daghnah, in opposition to the Quraysh chiefs and tribes, extended protection to him. It was recognized by the Quraysh. The latter acted against Abū Bakr only at the expiry of this agreement. Otherwise, they would have to bear the brunt of Aḥābīsh. During the tenure, however, they could not do anything against Abū Bakr.21
For Shiblī the only motive which moved the Quraysh army in the battle of Badr was the killing of ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥadramī at Nakhlah at the hands of Wāqib ibn ʿAbdullāh al-Taymī, an associate of ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaḥsh al-Asadī. The Quraysh chiefs took the risk of waging war for avenging the killing of a Kindī ally chief. In contrast, Muslims of Madīnah exulted in the act of their Taymī ally and defended him at every cost. Ibn Isḥāq and others state that the killing of this Quraysh ally had caused the war.22 Although modern scholars have contested Shiblī’s stance, it is nonetheless true that the killing of an Arab ally did play a role in the break out of war.
As opposed to it, an incident of an earlier date underscores the role of the ally in peace. It is indeed a significant event. It was Surāqah ibn Mālik who had pursued the emigrating Prophet (peace be upon him) in order to get the reward money. He was an ally of the Quraysh i.e. Banū Mudlij/Kinānah. According to Suhaylī, he was one of Banū Kinānah elite. The Quraysh and Kinānah had an alliance which was political, military and social. Surāqah came to know of the Prophet’s emigration in a meeting of his tribe and he resolved to pursue him tactically. It is reported that Satan had appeared in his guise prior to the battle of Badr.23 The Prophet’s guide during his journey to Madinah was ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUrayqāt al-Wā’ilī, whose mother came from Banū Sahm, a Quraysh family and he was a resident of Makkah.24
The participation of the Quraysh allies in the battles of Uḥud and the Trench is a significant historical event. Some Quraysh allies were influential in concluding the Ḥudaybīyah treaty. Of them, mention must be made of Budayl ibn Waraqah al-Khuzāʿī, Ḥulays ibn ʿAlqamah al-Ḥārithī al-Kinānī, Sayyid al-Aḥābīsh, ʿUrwah ibn Masʿūd al-Thaqafī, whom the Quraysh had deputed as their representative for the negotiations. The Aḥābīsh chief dissuaded the Quraysh from killing the Prophet’s emissary, Khirāsh ibn Umayyah al-Khuzāʿī and ensured his safe return to the Prophet (peace be upon him). The treaty was concluded eventually by a Quraysh emissary while these non-Quraysh representatives had paved the way for it. Their role in such a decisive matter for the Quraysh brings out their important social rank.25
The above topic may be covered in another independent work. The above brief account points to the presence and role of these Arab tribes in the Makkan society.
Non-Arab Elements in Makkah
Much before the Prophet’s advent non-Arabs had made their way into Makkah. They were integrated with Makkan polity. All this was accomplished with reference to the Arab tribal norm of protection and amnesty. Slavery too, played its role in it. Makkah enjoyed greater fame as a place of worship than as a centre of trade and business. Non-Arabs particularly Persians, Abyssinians, Iraqis and Syrians did visit Makkah for pilgrimage. Some of them had settled down there. Some were enslaved and thus became part of its society. As compared to non-Quraysh Arab tribes they were limited in number and position. Yet they lent a special colour to the pluralistic society of Makkah.
In comparison to others, Abyssinians were more in number in Makkah as settlers. Most of them were slaves. Of them, the most prominent is the Prophet’s earliest follower, Bilāl ibn Rabāḥ, whose illustrious personality is held dear by every Muslim. His father Rabāḥ and his mother Ḥamāmah were brought to Makkah as slaves. Bilāl and some of his brothers and one sister were born there. They were thus included among Banū Jumaḥ. We would discuss later some other Makkans of Abyssinian descent.26
Among early Muslims Ṣuhayb in referred to as a Roman. Some reports suggest that he was an Arab.27 The Prophet’s comment on his Roman descent is significant. ʿAddās was the slave of the Quraysh chiefs – ʿUtbah and Shaybah and hailed from Ninevah. He was settled in Makkah as a slave and was integrated well with Makkans.28 The Quraysh alleged that someone composed the Qur’ān for the Prophet (peace be upon him). According to the Qur’ān, they gave credit for this to some non-Arabs. Exegetes have identified many on this count such as Yāsir, the slave of al-ʿAlā’ ibn al-Ḥadramī, Jābir, the slave of ʿĀmir ibn Rabīʿah and ʿAddās, the slave of ʿUtbah and Shaybah. All three were non-Arabs.29 There were other non-Arabs in Makkan society. Although they were few and unimportant, their presence did have its bearing on the local traditions, culture and religious life.
Multiplicity of Faith in Makkan Society
The traditional historians and biographers of the Prophet (peace be upon him) merely state that the religious life in Makkah was synonymous with idolatry. Some make the additional observations that the Arab polytheists, especially the Makkan Quraysh were adherents of Abrahamic faith, which they had corrupted beyond recognition owing to their innovations, accretion and deviation. In terms of ideology, faith, rituals and practices they had nothing in common with the original faith. Their thought had degenerated into sheer polytheism. Yet these writers do not analyze their faith and practices. As to the presence of other faiths in Makkah, they pass in silence over it.
Polytheism, unlike monotheism, is not a monolithic, single-dimensional entity. It has numerous varieties. It divides polytheists into several religious groups. With polytheism as the faith a society cannot achieve integration or unity. Along with its divisions and sub-divisions it disintegrates into numerous blocks. Idolatry was the main faith of Arabs and of Makkans. However, they worshipped different idols. Each tribe and family had its own idol and these idols were one another’s rivals. All members of a tribe or family were not obliged to worship a single deity. They could turn to any idol. Rather, it was their practice. This pantheon of idols had affected Makkan society and generated many reactions.30
Jews and Christians lived in the vicinity of the Quraysh and Makkans held them in awe. Jewish and Christian thought had crept into their faith, rather influenced it. Arabs believed in their superiority in matters of faith. The Arab proximity with Persia had made them thoroughly familiar with Magian thought and practices, though this influence was not wide-spread in Makkah. More importantly, atheism featured in Makkah.31
Idolatry in Makkah – A Manifestation of Polytheism
Hubal was the national idol installed at the roof of the Kaʿbah. Around it, however, there were three hundred and sixty idols. Each of these was worshipped on a day of the year. Then there were pictures on the walls of the Kaʿbah. As a result of this abundance of idols and pictures, polytheism was rooted deep in Makkah. Non-Quraysh Arabs who lived in Makkah had their own national idols. Owing to their stay in Makkah, however, they had developed attachment to the Quraysh idols, which had become part of their psyche. Idols of the adjoining area too had their influence on them. Of them, the most important ones were al-Lāt, Manāt and al-ʿUzzā, which are mentioned in the Qur’ān with reference to the socio-religious life of Makkah and Quraysh. Asāf and Nā’ilah were the idols of Banū Jurhum and al-Lāt of the Thaqīf of Ṭā’if. Al-ʿUzzā, the common idol of the Quraysh and Kinānah was installed at Nakhlah. Manāt was worshipped by the Arab tribes – al-Aws and al-Khazraj. Such devotion to a large number of idols had corrupted their religious outlook.32
All this had its impact on their religious thought pattern. They had turned into idolaters when ʿAmr ibn Luḥayy Khuzāʿī had imported idols for them. As and when they came across a beautiful stone, they would start worshipping it. By the same token, they would throw away these when they felt tired of these. Reports indicate that they had grown so non-serious on this count that during a journey they carried idols made of flour for being light to carry. They would even devour these when they grew hungry. For them these were without any substance. At most they regarded these as the means to get closer to God. Or they looked upon these as the agents to help them in need, as for example, for rainfall and other needs. ʿAmr ibn Luḥayy had brought for them from Syria the idol Hubal. Visitors to Makkah carried stones of the town for using these as idols back home. Idolatry was, no doubt, their ritual yet it had not crept into their thought pattern or national psyche.33
Their non-serious attitude towards idolatry stemmed from their allegiance to the Abrahamic faith. Notwithstanding the corruption in their faith, the spirit of their original faith sustained them. Its remnants were still there in their beliefs and practices. They were, no doubt, polytheists who invoked idols yet they entertained the notion of God being the Lord of the worlds. They did believe in One God but they were guilty of associating others with Him. The Qur’ān cites many instances of this corruption in their faith. These stand out as incontrovertible historical facts.34
The Makkans believed in some articles of the Abrahamic faith and practised the same, though their innovations had changed the faith altogether. They had the concept of prayer and offered the same once or twice a day, though in a totally changed form. According to Balādhurī, the Prophet (peace be upon him) used to visit the Kaʿbah early in the day and offered ḍuḥā (mid-morning) prayer there. The Quraysh did not dismiss this prayer.35 It appears from the Qur’ān and other bits of evidence that their prayer comprised postures such as standing, bowing and prostrating.36 They believed also in the obligation of fasting and observed it as well. The Makkans and the Quraysh fasted on the 10th of Muḥarram, for it constituted thanksgiving for the beginning of creation by God. They fasted as a token of gratitude for the advent of Prophet Adam and for divine bounties.37 Spending in God’s way, the underlying spirit of charity and zakāh was the trait of Arabs in general and of Makkans in particular. It was a synonym for generosity. The Makkans were fully familiar with the practices of pilgrimage and lesser pilgrimage and practised the same. Throughout the year they would perform ʿumrah and pilgrimage only on the appointed days. Amid other norms of the Abrahamic faith they were aware of the regard for the Kaʿbah and considered its custodianship as a privilege. Their association with pilgrimage, its rituals and the places linked with it was emotional, ideological, religious, psychological and spiritual. Both the Quraysh and Kinānah chanted the Oneness of God, affirming that He is without any partner. They had, no doubt, introduced some practices in pilgrimage which betrayed their national pride and honour. The alliance of the Quraysh, Kinānah and Khuzāʿah was known as Ḥims. They went around the Kaʿbah in a naked state and did not stay at ʿArafāt, dismissing it as the practice of the commoners.38
The Qurayshī reaction to their ancestral faith
The point that features in Arab traditions and poetry and which merits the attention of analysts, is that it was a Makkan who had distorted the Abrahamic faith. He was a Khuzāʿī by descent and hence a non-Quraysh. After the expulsion of Banū Khuzāʿah from Makkah, a reaction against their faith was inevitable. The Quraysh Arabs and Makkans were, no doubt, practitioners of idolatry yet they had not drifted completely from their ancestral faith. Idolatry was common. So was the attachment to idols. Yet the community leaders were aware of the roots of polytheism. They were swayed by customs of the day. Their sound psyche and conscience directed them to the Abrahamic faith and caused revulsion against the conventional faith. This spiritual longing, intellectual yearning and emotional urge impelled them to revert to their original faith. This was not restricted to a particular era; in each age this trend was noticeable. However, in the period coinciding with the Prophet’s advent this grew into a dynamic movement.
Reports indicate that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was known also as Abū Kabshah. For Abū Kabshah Wajz ibn Ghālib Khuzāʿī had abandoned idolatry and criticized those given to it. He reproached idolaters. While equating the Prophet’s denunciation of idolatry with Abū Kabshah’s earlier criticism, the Quraysh drew a parallel between the two. Abū Kabshah, it is worth-noting, was the maternal grandfather of the Prophet’s maternal grandfather. Some other reports state otherwise. However, the above account is authentic.39 According to Baghadādī, many persons of the day were known as Abū Kabshah.
It was the Ḥanīf movement, practised by the followers of the Ḥanīf faith who owed their allegiance to their progenitor, Prophet Abraham, in that he was a Muslim and Ḥanīf.40 According to Ibn Isḥāq, the Quraysh celebrated their annual religious festival near some idol, which they venerated. They would prostrate before it, go around it and offer animal sacrifice to it. Once as the Quraysh assembled for the same purpose, four persons dissociated themselves from them and after mutual consultation declared that their community had turned irreligious for having deserted the Abrahamic faith. The idols were lifeless objects, unable to hear or to see and could not benefit or harm anyone. They resolved to make the quest for true faith. They moved to different places for this purpose of ascertaining the Abrahamic faith. Baghdādī has provided their brief account, stating that they used to keep away from jāhiliyyah practices.41 Some reports put their number at six. It is not, however, confirmed. What is, nonetheless, certain is that a reaction was in the offing against the distorted faith of the day. It manifested their sound beliefs, which were cherished by the Makkans and Quraysh. By the time of the Prophet’s advent, the movement had grown strong. There were critics of idolatry in every age. Of them, Abū Kabshah was the most prominent among them. Those opposing idolatry were given the same title. The appellation of the same title on the Prophet (peace be upon him) adduces the point.
Ibn Isḥāq identifies the following allies of the Quraysh and others who made the quest for truth: i) Waraqah ibn Nawfal, ii) ʿUbaidullāh ibn al-Jaḥsh al-Asdī al-Qurashī iii) ʿUthmān Asadī Qurayshī and iv) Zayd ibn ʿAmr ibn Nufayl. Ibn Qutaybah has identified six such persons.
It emerges from the works of Ibn Saʿd and others that some Arab tribes felt uneasy about their ancestral faith. Prior to accepting Islam and during the jāhiliyyah period Abū Dharr al-Ghifārī had turned into a monotheist. He did not indulge in idolatry.42 The early Muslims belonging to Arab tribes abandoned their ancestral faith. On his acceptance of Islam, ʿAmr ibn ʿAbasah of Banū Salīm said that even during his jāhiliyyah phase he regarded others as in error and idolatry as something vain.43 Another report relates at length his disillusion with his earlier faith, affirming as it does his quest for truth. The same had prompted him to draw closer to the Prophet.44
In their quest for truth some followed the Abrahamic faith while others opted for other faiths. The Quraysh Ḥunafā’ followed the best practices of the Abrahamic faith and adhered firmly to monotheism. Their knowledge about other aspects of faith was little. They acted on their conscience. For example, they meditated, focussed on worship and retired to caves. The significant part, however, of their quest was their abandoning their ancestral faith, particularly idolatry. As Ibn Isḥāq reports, among the four Aḥnāf only Zayd ibn ʿAmr ibn Nufayl stuck to his original faith and died a little before the Prophet’s advent. The Prophet (peace be upon him) spoke of him as a community unto himself, for he believed in monotheism, resented dead meat, blood and offerings to idols, opposed child sacrifice and worshipped the Lord of Prophet Abraham.45 Influenced by his father, Saʿīd ibn Zayd was among the first to embrace Islam.
The other three, namely, Waraqah ibn Nawfal, ʿUthmān ibn Ḥuwayrith and ʿUbaydullāh ibn Jaḥsh opted for Christianity. They found it closer to the truth than their ancestral faith. ʿUthmān settled in the Caesar’s court and died there. He wad held in esteem by the Caesar, particularly on account of his Christian faith. The other two accepted Islam later. Waraqah ibn Nawfal turned into a Christian scholar well versed in the Scriptures who wrote books in the Hebrew language. He was familiar with the Bible hence he turned into a supporter of the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him). In view of his endorsement of his Messengership and his pledge to help the cause of Islam, the Prophet (peace be upon him) branded him as a Muslim and monotheist. ʿUbaydullāh accepted Islam. However, on going to Abyssinia he reverted to Christianity and died in the same faith, which was regrettable.46
Christianity in Makkah
Apart from the Ḥunafā’ and adherents of ancestral faith there were Christians too, in Makkah, though few in number. Their presence lent pluralism to local life and society. Some were Christians by birth and followed the same as the faith of their forefathers while some had accepted it as a result of their quest for truth. The latter comprised several members of various Arab tribes and Quraysh families. Among Arab Christians, mention is already made of Waraqah ibn Nawfal, ʿUthmān ibn Ḥuwayrith and ʿUbaydullāh ibn Jaḥsh. Many Abyssinians have also been referred to above.47
Little mention was made in Makkah of Christian dogma. Regarding Waraqah ibn Nawfal there is the oft-quoted report that he identified the revelation sent down to the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him) as the one with which Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) was blessed earlier. He affirmed that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was a genuine Messenger on the ground that his advent is foretold in the Gospels and the Torah. He mentioned in particular the two signs: i) The Prophet (peace be upon him), like every other Messenger, would be forced into emigrating by his own people and ii) as the last resort and by Allah’s leave he would have to wage jihād. Bukhārī has cited the above points on the authority of Waraqah ibn Nawfal.48Both of these prophecies were very significant. For emigration coupled with jihād and fighting signified the spread of Islam and extirpation of the Quraysh. Balādhurī’s report clarifies that Waraqah had stated that the Prophet’s advent was foretold by Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him). He was mentioned pointedly in the Gospels. Waraqah had affirmed also that the Prophet (peace be upon him) would be blessed with Sūrah al-Fātiḥah.
The report about ʿAddās mentions the Prophet Jonah as the Messenger of God. ʿAddās added that at the time of his departure from Ninevah few people recognized the Prophet Jonah. The Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him), however, knew him thanks to the divine revelation to him. He therefore equated the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him) with the Prophet Jonah (peace be upon him) as a genuine Messenger of God who must be obeyed. The above explains why ʿAddās had readily recognized the Prophet as a Messenger of God and professed faith in him.49
Balādhurī recounts a report on the Christian dogma about Gabriel that after Gabriel’s visit to the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him) Khadījah enquired two Christian scholars in Makkah. Waraqah ibn Nawfal readily affirmed that Gabriel is God’s angel who calls on the Messengers. If he had visited the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him), the latter should be taken as God’s Messenger. He expressed his wish to serve the Prophet (peace be upon him). When Khadījah asked ʿAddās about Gabriel, he was astonished. For in a town reeling under idolatry none discussed Gabriel, God’s angel who visited only the Messengers.50 The above report is endorsed also by the report which states that Waraqah had drawn a parallelism between the angel visiting him and the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him).51
The popular Christian belief about the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) is that he is, God forbid, the son of God. However, genuine Christians regarded him no more than as the word of God and His spirit, as is borne out by the debate on this issue in Negus’s court.
According to Imām Bukhārī’s report, Umm Ḥabībah and Umm Salamah had seen a church with images during their stay in Abyssinia. When they recounted it to the Prophet (peace be upon him), he explained that when a pious Christian died, they erected the place of worship at his grave and engraved his image. Such would be reckoned as Allah’s worst creatures on the Day of Reckoning.52 The above clarifies the beginning of idolatry in Christianity, which culminated later in the worship of Mary and the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him). It distorted their monotheistic doctrine and gave rise to the notion of sonship and divinity of the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him).
Reference to some Christian teachings and rituals appears also in Salmān al-Fārsī’s quest for truth. He was drawn to Christianity on observing them in prayer in a church. Gradually he was persuaded of the truth and superiority of this faith. About a practising Christian scholar of Syria he reports: ‘I did not come across anyone more punctual in prayers, concerned about the Hereafter, indifferent to this world and devoted to worship than him.’ He was critical of popular Christianity which was removed far away from the original faith. His mentors practised true Christianity.53
About the Christian mode of worship there appears an interesting report in the context of the Christian delegation of Najrān that had called on the Prophet (peace be upon him). After ʿAṣr prayer they performed their prayer at the Prophet’s mosque, facing eastwards. As the Kaʿbah was declared the Muslims’ qiblah, they faced southwards. The Prophet allowed Christians to pray facing their own qiblah.54 A degenerated Christian scholar of Syria was notorious for usurping others’ belongings, especially charity money. This points to the concept and practice of charity among Christians.
Notions about the Superiority of Christianity and Judaism:
The Makkan Quraysh and their chiefs held the two major faiths – Christianity and Judaism in awe, and regarded these as superior to their own faith. They acknowledged their truth and exalted status. What accounted for it was the Quraysh’s ignorance of and deprivation from the Scripture and divine faith. They were overwhelmed by the religious knowledge possessed by the Christians and Jews and the latter’s conviction that these were the best faiths. Accordingly the Quraysh turned to them in all religious affairs and trusted their opinion. In view of the same impression many Arab seekers of truth had abandoned their ancestral faith and converted to Christianity or Judaism. This is borne out by the account of the three Ḥunafā’. One had even preferred Christianity to Islam. It emerges from the event related to ʿAddās that his Qurayshī masters, ʿUtbah and Shaybah regarded his faith superior to Islam, even when ʿAddās bore out the truth of the Prophet’s message and kissed his hands and feet.55
Several Qur’ānic verses and reports of the day point to the Quraysh’s belief in the superiority of Christianity and Judaism in Makkah.
The same point comes out in Salmān’s quest for truth. He was originally a Magian of Iṣṭakhr and was impressed by Christian worship in a church. He regarded it as superior to his faith. According to another report, he turned into a Christian, as he was deeply moved by the conduct of a monk. He visited Syria in his quest for truth and gained insights into Christianity as he lived in the company of a Church father there. After his death he stayed with other Christian scholars in Syria, Ninevah, Nuṣaybīn and ʿAmūriyyah. At the latter’s directive he came to Arabia to call on the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him). Because of the treachery of his companions he was enslaved and arrived as a slave in Madīnah. After meeting the Prophet (peace be upon him) he embraced Islam.56
Judaism, Christianity and Islam as Perceived by the Quraysh:
After the Prophet’s advent the religious scene of Makkah was changed altogether. It affected the social life greatly with far-reaching ramifications. Although the Makkans believed in the superiority of the People of the Book, their faith and their knowledge, it did not disturb their social life in the least. Their religious institutions and thought were not influenced by it. Judaism did not have any bearing on the Makkan social life. For there was not any sizeable Jewish presence there before or after the Prophet’s advent. The few Jews there were absorbed in the wider community. This is evident from the affair of Adina, the Jewish neighbour of ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib al-Hāshimī. This was an isolated incident without any implication for the local society.57 Christians were more in number. However, most of them were slaves and did not influence the course of events. However, when Ḥunafā’ accepted Christianity, it made some ripples which died down soon. For two Christians left Makkah and one turned to Islam. The Ḥanīf faith did make some sections of Makkah and many individuals weary of the conventional religion of the Quraysh, provoking them into looking for a sound faith.
It was in this social setting that the preaching of Islam commenced, encompassing almost every family and member of the Quraysh. According to Ibn Isḥāq, Islam had made its way into almost every Quraysh household. Not only isolated individuals, entire families or most of their members had embraced the new faith. What hurt the Quraysh and Makkan chiefs most was: i) Their youth had accepted Islam which hurt their interest. It constituted a sort of rebellion on the part of the youth against the elders, especially their supremacy and ii) All the Qurayshī families stood divided, with some as Muslims and others clinging to the ancestral faith. The latter hit them harder for it dented their family and social life.
Islam posed a serious threat to their faith. Such a danger was not faced by them from Christianity or Judaism. The major articles of Islamic faith – monotheism, afterlife and messengership – had changed their religious outlook which had its deep bearings on their society. These beliefs, together with other Islamic teachings sounded a death knell for idolatry and polytheism in Makkah. The Islamic code of conduct had pitted Muslims in real life as a formidable rival to the polytheistic Quraysh. The Quraysh chiefs realized it well that the success of Islam would deal a deadly blow to their political, religious and social order. They feared obliteration and it was a justified apprehension.58
The irony was that the Quraysh chiefs and Makkan opponents of the Prophet (peace be upon him) recognized that Islam is a genuine faith which spelled out a sound, correct way of life. They acknowledged the veracity of Islam and the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him) yet they could not affirm it publicly or verbally. The language and style of the Qur’ān, its message and teachings and the pious conduct of its bearer, spread over forty years, compelled them to uphold the soundness of Islam yet they were prevented by their interests to do so. It spelled their death politically. As a result of this conflict they suffered from psychological problems. They therefore resorted to a variety of pretexts and tricks for opposing Islam which weakened their own faith further. They took to hurling baseless charges against the Qur’ān, the Messenger of Islam and the Islamic faith. They knew well the falseness of their allegations. They sought help from Jewish scholars for discrediting Islam and for leveling a host of charges. All this, however, brought into sharper relief the truth of Islam which convinced even them. The only resort open to them was to assassinate the Prophet (peace be upon him) for putting an end to Islam. This nefarious practice has been followed all along by the forces of falsehood. In contrast, true faith always seeks to win over the heart and mind of people, ensuring them the best in both the worlds. This conflict between truth and falsehood always gives rise to such responses. Falsehood tries to banish truth. The bearers of truth are forced to emigrate. In line with the same, Muslims had to leave Makkah and take refuge elsewhere.
