Refutation of Shaikh Maududi’s accusations of nepotism on Hadhrat Uthman R.A.
[This is mostly taken from ‘Khilafat-o-Mulukiat, A critical study’ by Dr. Ghulam Nabi, Adam Publishers, India, 2006]
The chapter entitled “From Righteous Khilafah to Monarchy” is the main theme of Maududi’s highly controversial book Khilafat-o-Mulukiat discussing the changes and alterations that changed Khilafah into Monarchy.
First Stage: Beginning of Change.
The first accusation Maududi lays on Hadhrat Uthman R.A. himself. Mawdudi maintains that the winds of change began to take shape in the early years of the third Khalifah. He traces it to the appointment of the relatives of the third Khalifah on important government posts, which is generally dubbed as the policy of nepotism or favoritism.
The author discussing his theory of nepotism calls it a deviation from the policy of Uthman’s R.A. three great predecessors who never appointed their relatives to government posts.
His main charges against Uthman R.A. are :
-He allowed Marwan, his cousin to keep one fifth (khums) of the booty from Africa;
-He deposed Sad bin Abi Waqqas R.A. from the governorship of Kufah and appointed in his place Walid b. Uqbah, and later bestowed that important post upon another relative, named Sa’id b. al-Aas;
-He appointed Abdullah b. Amir as governor ofBasrah in place of Abu Musaal-Ashari ;
-He removed Amr b. Aas from governorship of Egypt and appointed in his place his foster-brother, Abdullah b. Sad b. Abi Sarah;
-He added to the governorship of Muawiyah some very vast regions such as Hims, Palestine, Jordan, who was in Umar’s period simply a governor of Damuscus region.
-He appointed Marwan b. Hakam R.A. as his personal secretary.
-As a result of the above actions, the whole of the Muslim empire came under his authority and influence. Hence all power and authority practically came to be concentrated in the hands of a single family i.e. Banu Umayyah.
Critical Evaluation
Mawdudi’s contention is actually an echo of the malicious propaganda launched against Uthman R.A. and his administration; and he has also accepted it without criticism and examination of historical facts.
A factual evaluation of historical material shows that Maududi’s contention that there was a deviation from the policy of Uthman’s R.A. three great predecessors who never appointed their relatives to government posts of Mawdudi is not correct. Of all the rulers of Islam none other than the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) appointed several of his relatives to high posts from among Banu Hashim, his own family: He appointed Hamzah b. Abdul Muttalib, Ali b. Abi Talib, Jafar b. Abi Talib as commanders of the Saraya (compaigns), besides Harith bin Nawfal as governor of Jeddah. Appointment of Zayd b. Harithah to different posts on several occasions and his son Usamah as the commanderof the last campaign of his life should also be credited to the account of Banu Hashim, as the mawali (clients) were regarded, according to the Arab Islamic customs as members of the clan or family (1).
Among other relatives of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) who received government posts are included three fathers-in-law namely, Abu Sufian b. Harab Umavi, Abu Bakr Siddiq Taymi and Umar b. alKhattab Adawi. As many as seven Umavis were given government posts particularly governorship of important places and they were also related to the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) in one way or the other.(2).
Abu Bakr, the first Khalifah of lslam, followed the footsteps of his great predecessor in appointing the governors and officers to important govermental posts, though he had not made appointments of his Kinsmen because the clan to which he belonged was very small as compared to Banu Hashim and Banu Umayyah. The detailed list of governors of various provinces during his regime is as under:
Makkah -Utba bin Usaid
Taif- Uthman b. al-Aas
San’ a – Muhajir bin Ummayah
Hadramaut – Zaid b. · Ubaid
Khaulan- Yala b.Ummayah (a partof Yeman)
South Yeman- Abu Musa al Ashari
Janad- Mu’adh bJabal (a part of Yeman)
Bahrain – Ala bin al-Hadrami
Dumatul-Jandal -Ayaz b. Ghanam (Iraq)
Iraq – Muthannab.Harithah
Najran – Jarir b. Abdullah
Likewise, according to ability he appointed other officers to other posts of the Khilafah : Umar Faruq was chief justice. Abu Ubaidah p. Jarrah was a treasury officer and Uthman b. Affan was secretary. The police officers were also appointed on the basis of ability. Most of the holders of these posts belonged to the Tulaqa i.e. who accepted Islam at the time of the conquest of Makkah:
Ikramah b. Abi Jahal was appointed an army officer to Syria, Walid b. Uqbah was also appointed an army officer to the same place besides being a tax collector; similarly some other companions were
appinted to Syria such as Yazid b. Abu Sufian, Muawiyah b. Abu Sufian, Dahhak b. Qais, Habib b. Maslamah etc (3).
These appointments show that Abu Bakr had appointed these officers because of their ability and character. What is more interesting is that most of the appointees were Umavis. Similarly new converts were also given important posts; they include Mathna b. Harith, Yala b. Ummayah, Yazid b. Abu Sufian and Abu Muslim Khaulani (4).
Like his two great predecessors the second Khalifah Umar also.followed the same policy of appointing young persons and new converts who include Adi b. Nawfal, governor of Hadramaut, who continued to enjoy this prestegious office till the end of the third Khalifah’s period; Hashim b. Utbah, the army officer of Qadisiyah
and Jalula. Among the relatives of Umar was included Qudama b. Maz’un who served as a governor of al-Bahrain; later this post was bestowed on Hakam b. Abi al-As, another later convert. Among
other new converts or tabi’un were included Abdullah b. Half Khuzai, Qunfuz b. Omair and several others (5).
So it appears that the majority of the officers appointed by Umar were Tulaqa. And not only this, he also made appointments from among the Tabiun in preference to the companions of Prophet (p.b.u.h.). This point becomes clear from the list of the governors in 23 A.H/ 644 A.D., the last year of Umar’s period (6).
So from the policies adopted by the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) and his first two successors it appears that the posts were bestowed on the basis of merit alone, whether they were relatives or later converts or Sahabah or Tabiun. So far as Umavis are concerned they received government posts because of their individual and collective merits and capabilities for the family or clan, was one of the greatest and numerous clans of Quraysh.
So far as Uthman’s policy is concerned, he faithfully followed in the footsteps of his great predecessors. There was no deviation from the policies of Prophet (p.b.u.h.), Abu Bakr and Umar regarding the apointment of governors and other officers. During the first year of his Khilafah he retained all the officers or ummals appointed by Umar (7).
Moreover, he did not depose any governor without political, administrative or other considerations, and only those were deposed, transferred or suspended whose continuation in office was not in the interest of the state, as was done by all his three great predecessors.
Those governors and officers who proved their ability and utility were retained throughout. Muawiyah was one of them; he remained governor of Syria throughout the last five or six years of Umar’s period and continued to do so in Uthman’s Khilafah.
| Nafi ‘b. Abu Harith | . | Makkah |
| . | ||
| Muawiyah b. Abu Sufian | . | Syria with Damuscus |
| . | ||
| Abu Musa al-Ashari | . | Iran with Basrah |
| Mughirah b.Shubah | . | Iraq with Kufah |
| . | ||
| Amrb.aI-As | . | Egypt with Fustat |
| . | ||
| Alqama b. Majaz | . | Palestine with Jerusalem |
| Umair b. Said | . | Jazirah with Hims |
Egypt:
The powers and functions of the governor were divided in Egypt by Umar b. Khattab. Amr b. al-As was the governor as well as commander-in-chief of the forces while Abdallah b.Sad b. Abi Sarah was incharge of the revenue. In 27 A.H./647 A.D. there arose a dispute between Amr and Abdullah b. Sad on the issue of increase of the revenues of the province. When the governor expressed his inability to muster more revenues, he was deposed and his powers were given to Abdallah b. Sad, who eventually succeeded in increasing the revenues and bringing prosperity to the province. Abdallah b. Sad’s elevation to the post of governor was actually conditioned by his administrative acumen, not by the considerations of caste, tribe or kinship (8).
Kufah:
The extent to which the third Khalifah followed the policy of his predecessors can be gauged by the fact that he reinstated in 25 A.H./645 A.D. S’ad b. Abi Waqqas as the governor of Kufah at the behest and will of Umar on his death-bed (9).
After sometime Sa’ad was replaced by Walid b. Uqbah simply because the governor of Kufah and treasury officer, Abdallah b. Masud, could not see eye to eye on financial matters.
So far as Walid is concerned, he had been the Tax Collector from the time of Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) till he was appointed as governor of al-Jazirah by Umar. He was simply transferred from al-Jazirah to Kufah; and did not receive a new appointment. Mawdudi’s contention that he was elevated to the great post of the governor of Kufah from that of petty region is not warranted by facts because al-Jazirah (Mesopotamia) was a very vast and important region, rather a big province (10).
So far as Walid’s character is concerned Mawdudi has relied on what can at best be said as a one sided version of the report.
Tabari provides two sets of versions; one brings the famous and popular charge against walid of drinking wine and performing salah in a drunken state and doing several immoral or indignified acts; the other absolves him of all those charges;.and establishes beyond any doubt that walid was not guilty; he was a victim of a conspiracy
hatched by three notables of Kufah who took revenge for the Capital punishment pronounced against their sons for murdering an old man of their locality. Further Tabari also remarks that Walid was very popular and loved by the common masses (al-Aammah) and despised and hated by the notables and the influential (al-Khassah) (11) .
However, after the dismissal of Walid bin Uqbah a new governor of Kufah was appointed on the request of the people of Kufah and he was none other, than an Umavi relative of the Khalifah i.e. Sa’id b. al-Aas who discharged his functions to the satisfaction of the people of Kufah. But again the rowdy elements of Kufah scored a considerable success against their governor. So he was replaced and in his place Abu Musa al-Ashari was appointed (l2).
Basrah:
Mawdudi has also criticized the third Khalifah for Abu Musa al-Ashari’s deposition from the office of the governorship of Basrah and appointing Abdullah b. Amir in his place. In fact this dismissal
and appointment were warranted by the circumstances (13), for the masses in general were not happy with Abu Musa for some of his policies, and they demanded the appointment of an energetic governor; and on their request and wish, Uthman appointed Abdullah b. Amir. He continued in his office throughout the period of the third Khalifah even during the turbulent days on the persistent demand of the people of Basrah on account of his great deeds (14).
So from the above discussion it is clear that only two relatives were initially appointed by Uthman and others were simply continued in their offices or transferred from one region to another.
So far as their performance and ability are concerned it is accepted by Mawdudi himself that they were all men of great capabilities and merits which brought great laurels to the Islamic state and society.
His main charge is against their character that they were not people of great Islamic traditions and compared adversely with the first class citizens or great Sahabah of the period.
But his charges against their character are not supported by the historical facts; instead they are proved to be otherwise. All the governors of the third Khalifah were men of great integrity as is warranted by the large number of Ahadith and historical traditions.
The following have been included among governors of Uthman in various provinces in his last year.
| Makkah | Abdallah b. Hadrami |
| Taif | Qasim b. Rabi ‘ah Thaqafi |
| Yeman | Ya’la b. Munnabah |
| Syria | Muawiyah b. Abi Sufian Umavi |
| Egypt | Abdallah b. Sad b. Abi Sarah Amri |
| Basrah | Abdallah b. Amir Umavi |
| Kufah | Abu Musaal- Ashari |
| Qansirin | Habibb. Maslamah Fahri |
The chief justice or the (Qazi) of Madinah was Zaid b. Thabit Khazraji while Uqbah b. Amir was the treasury officer (l5).
From the above list of the state functionaries ofUthman it is evident that this is not a comprehensive list of all the governors of Uthman; only the most prominent have found mention in this list or other traditions of history. But the fact is that there were a large number of governors during his Khilafah as we find references to them in several other traditions, reports and narrations of various authorities which are not directly concerned with the historical development of the period (l6).
If the number of the Umavi governors ofUthman is compared to the total number of office bearers in his period, the statistics would show that the Umavis were very few and non-Umavis
dominated the politics of the day.
Another fact which is of paramount importance is that many governors of the third Khalifah were senior Sahabah like. Sad b. Abi Waqqas, Abu Musa al-Ashari, Amr b. al-Aas, Muawiyah b. Abi Sufian etc.
Tulaqa as the Governors
Another point which Mawdudi emphasises so much is that all the officers who were bestowed with government posts were Tulaqa i.e. new converts on the day of conquest of Makkah. According to him they include; Muawiyah, Walid b. Uqbah, Marwan, Abdallah b. Sad b. Abi Sarah etc. Mawdudi’s claim is that these new converts had not received the required training and education from the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) which was necessary for character building.
But his contention is not confirmed, rather contradicted by the historical facts as well as by the policy of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.). Mawdudi has misinterpreted the word Tulaqa. Its application by the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) to the new converts ofMakkah does not indicate any doubt about the sincerity of their conversion or obedience to Islam; It simply means that all people of Makkah were free in .their chioce, having no responsibility for their previous actions, deeds or misdeeds before their conversion, for the dictum of Islam absolves all persons of their actions before Islam. So the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) himself did not cast any aspersions upon the Umavis or the Tulaqa.
Further, the previous discussion regarding the policies adopted by the Prophet (p. b. u. h.) and his two successors shows that the Tulaqa were appointed on governmental posts; interestingly enough soon after their conversion by the Prophet (p.b.u.h.), for instance,
1. Attab b. Asid was appointed as the governor of Makkah on the very day of his conversion (17).
2. Abdallah b. Abi Rabiah was appointed as Aamil of aI-Jund(18).
3. Abu Sufian as governor ofNajran (19).
4. Abdallah b. Arqam as the secretary (Katib) of the Prophet (p..b.u.h.)( 20).
5. Ikramah b. Abi Jahal as an Aamil to Hawazin (21).
6. Jarir b. Abdallah who accepted Islam in the last days of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) was apointed as an officer for Yeman (22).
7. Zabrqan b. Badr, accepted Islam in the 9th Hijrah year was also appointed as a Tax Collector of his people(23).
8. Malik b. Auf who became a Muslim after Hunain was appointed an Aamil as well a leader of his people (24).
9. Surd b. Abdallah Azdi who accepted Islam in the 10th year of Hijrah was appointed as an officer.
10. And a host of other Tulaqa or even the later converts were appointed by the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) soon after their conversion.
These facts establish that the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) never gave a thought to the period or time of the conversion while appointing his officers.
Now let us examine the policies of the first two Khulafa of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.).
Abu Bakr, retained almost all the governors and officers appointed by the Prophet (p.b.u.h.). A look at the appointment of Abu Bakr’s officers will bring the point home:
1. Muthana b. Harithah who accepted Islam in 9th Hijra year and according to one report after the death the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) was appointed as an army commander during the warfare in Iraq (26).
2. Yala b. Ummayah, one of the Tulaqa, was appointed as the governor of Hulwan (27).
3.Yazid b. Abi Sufian, another Tulaqa, was appointed as the governor of Damuscus (28).
Similarly Abu Muslim Khulani (29), Huzaifah (30) and Khalid b.Walid (31) were also new converts but enjoyed government posts soon after their conversion.
Umar also followed the policy of his two great predecessors in appointing the officers, for he too appointed:
- Adi b. Nawfal, one of Tulaqa, was appointed as the governor of Hadramaut (32) .
- Hashim b. Utbah was appointed as an army commander (33).
3. Hakam b. al-Aas, as a governor of Bahrain (34).
4. Qunfuz b. Omair as a governor ofMakkah (35).
5. Kab b. Thaur,a Tabi, as aQazi ofBasrah(36).
6. Shureeh b. Harith, another Tabi as a Qazi ofKufah(37).
7. Abdur Rahman b. Abdul Qari, another Tabi as an officer in charge of Baitul Mal (38).
8. Utbah b. Abi Sufi an, a Tabi, as a governor ofTaif (39).
Similarly a large number of persons, who had accepted Islam at a later period, were appointed on different posts by Umar.
So this proves that there was no dissatisfaction among the Sahabah so far as the appointment of these persons on government posts was concerned. The appointment and continuation of these
officers in the period of Abu Bakr and Umar clearly suggests that there was nothing wrong in the appointment of new converts. Therefore, the policy of the third Khalifah was in confonnity with those of his three illustrious predecessors.
Casting aspersions on the misdeeds or actions before Islam or apostasy is not allowed in Islam as Mawdudi has done in the case of Abdullah b. Sad, otherwise all officers of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) would be held guilty because most of them had opposed the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) (4o).
So the statement of the third Khalifah is correct that, “I followed the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) and Abu Bakr and Umar, in appointing the governors and officers” (41).
From the above discussion it is obvious that it is not necessary in Islam that only superior persons should be appointed on governmental posts because appointment is conditioned by the ability and the need of the time.
Muawiyah’s R.A. Continuation in office:
Another issue which Mawdudi raises is that Uthman retained Muawiyah as the governor of Syria where he established his power so strongly and firmly, that he could successfully challenge the authority of All when the latter came to power. Mawdudi also maintains that during Umar’s Khilafah Muawiyah was governor of Damuscus only but Uthman added the whole of Syria including palestine and Jordon to his governorship. Mawdudi also contends that Uthman should have not done so; instead he should have transferred or deposed Muawiyah so that he could not become a danger to the centre.
It is difficult to accept Mawdudi’s claim or contention because the great disciplinarian ‘Umar’ had allowed him to continue in his office of the governor of Syria throughout his period only because of his great abilities and despite certain differences of policies. It means that Muawiyah served as the governor of Syria mainly because his services were required by the Islamic state. It was not Uthman but Urnar who added some other regions to Muawiyah’s governorship (42).
Another contention of Mawdudi is that Muawiyah’s long spell of governorship posed a threat to and eventually a successful defiance of the Khalifah’s power at the centre, is also not warranted by
the facts. His defiance was not due to his long spell of rule but because, the Khalifah did not accede to the demand of many sections of the Muslim society for the punishment of the assassins of the third Khalifah. Prior to Muawiyah this demand was made by great Sahabah like Hazrat Aisha, Talhah and Zubair and a host of others and by several governors such as the governor ofBasrah, Makkah, Yeman etc. who later joined the Holy alliance of the three (43).
Therefore Mawdudi’s contention is negated by historical developments and facts of the period, because none of these Sahabah or governors were so powerful as Muawiyah is made out to be by Mawdudi.
Marwan’s Secretaryship:
Another point which Mawdudi mentions is the appointment of Marwan as the secretary of the third Khalifah which, in Mawdudi’s opinion, caused great havoc, because he was not only a very junior
person but also did many things without the permission of Uthman and threatened the great Sahabah, besides influencing the policies of the third Khalifah; not only that but his father Hakam b. al-Aas who
had been expelled from Madinah for his unsavory behaviour also exercised much influence on the government functions. The Khalifah’s gift of the Khums of Africa to Marwan also added to the unhappiness of the great Sahabah and whole Muslim society in general.
All these contentions of Mawdudi are not supported by the facts. Marwan’s appointment as the secretary was not an unusual thing; no secretary could possibily excercise undue influence over the Khalifah, nor did he have vast powers; he was simply a very petty subordinate to the Khalifah.
The story of the expulsion of his father and his own banishment from Madinah is not a fact, it has been fabricated by the biased reporters. Ibn Taimiyah writes that the majority of the Ulama regarded it as baseless. He says that Hakam himself settled in Taif, he was not expelled (44). On the other hand almost all the early writers
such as Ibn Sa’d assert that Marwan and his father both lived at Madinah after their migration from Makkah(45). Marwan was educated and brought up in Madinah by the great companions of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.). Not one of the recensions of Ibn Kathir’s book contains this report about the expulsion ofHakam(46).
It is very important from the religious and legal points of view that Hakam’s expulsion, if it was a fact, does not jeopardize and cast any aspersions on the integrity of Marwan; and Mawdudi’s charge that his father’s alleged sins had influenced him is against the Islamic spirit and dictum because children of non-Muslims, or even of great enemies ofIslam such as Ikramah, Khalid, Amr etc. were given important posts by the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) and first two Khulafa(47). This clinches the issue, there was nothing wrong in Uthman’s appointing Marwan as his secretary.
Moreover, Hakam b. al-Aas had been dead well before Marwan could become an influential secretary (48).
Another contention of Mawdudi i.e. giving the Khums of Africa in gift to Marwan is also not supported by facts. Ibn Khaldun holds that it was an accusation against Uthman levelled by his opponents( 49). One of most prominent mutazilis, Abu Ali al-Jubai, and great Muhadith Shah Abdul Aziz of Delhi agree with Ibn Khaldun’s
view, although in other words (50).
In fact, the said Khums was purchased by Marwan after paying the money to Baitul Maal (51). When some people objected to this, the Khalifah took back the Khums and deposited it in the public trea-
sury and returned his money. This fact is also supported by Uthman’s policy statement that “I have never given a kinsmen anything out of public funds except what was his due. But I do make gifts to my kinsmen out of my own pocket” (52).
The above discussion clearly shows that there was no such resentment against Marwan as shown by Mawdudi; as he was neither so powerful nor influential to do work without the permission of the Khalifah, nor could he use strong or rough words against the great Sahabah because he was a very cultured person and one of the great Aalim of the period (53).
———————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Notes And References
1. It is confirmed by a number of traditions in Ibn Hisham, Waqdi, Ibn Sad, Baladhuri, Tabari, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Athir, as cited by M.Y.M. Siddiqui in his book Organisation of Government under the Prophet (p. b. u. h.). Delhi 1987, pp. 139,372,378,382,480,486,504,520.
2. M.Y.M. Siddiqui also gives a list of the governors of the Umavi family appointed by the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.): Amr b. Sad Umavi was appointed governor of Wadi Qura: Yazid b. Abu Sufyan ofTayma; Abdullah b. Said of Qura Arabia; Attab b. Asid of Makkah, Aban b.Said of al-Bahrain; Khalid b. Said of Sana; Abu Sufyan b. Harab of Jurash. op.cit., pp. 245-47, 250, 252.
3. Talibul Hashmi, op.cit., pp. 481-84.
4. Ibid., pp. 482-83.
5. Shibli Numani, al-Faruq. Azamgarh, 1956, p.35; Salahuddin Yusuf op.cit., 268.
6. Majid Ali Khan, Pious Caliphs, Delhi, 1978, p. l01.
7. Cf. Salahuddin Yusuf, op.cit., p.240.
8. The man who created fiscal organization in Egypt was not the conqueror (Amr b. al-Aas), but his successor Abdallah b. Sa’ db. Abi Sarah, who established the diwan misr to which all the taxes of Egypt were paid, shortly after 26 A.H. and before 35 A.H. (D.C.Dennett, Conversion and Poll Tax in Early Islam, Cambridge, 1950, p. 74).
9. Ibn Kathir, op.cit., Vol. VII, p.149.
10. Yaqut Hamavi, Mujam al-Buldan. Beirut, 1956, VoI.II, pp. 134-35; also see Shibli, op.cit., p.158. The great plain of Mesopotamia through which the Euphrates and the Tigris take their course is divided by nature into two parts: The northern half and the southern half. The Arabs call the northern part as Mesopotamia(aI-Jazirah). The province (al-Jazirah) was generally divided into three districts called Diyar- i Rabiah, Diyar-iMudar and Diyar-iBakr respectively. (G.Le-starange, The lands of the Eastern Caliphate, Cambridge, 1905, pp. 26, 86.)
11. Tabari, op.cit., Vol. IV, pp. 271-76.
12. Ibn Kathir, op.cit., Vol. VII, p.167.
13. On one occasion when sending an army to suppress the re-
bellious kurds he (Abu Musa Ashari) preached before his
men the merits of going to jihad on foot. His opponents,
however, caught reins of his horse when he came out of
his mansion, followed by forty mules laden with his bag-
gage, and told him to come down and proceed on foot, as
he had directed them to do. Then they sent a deputation to
the KhaIifah demanding his recall. (Mumtaz Moin, Ummul-
Muminin Aisha Siddiqah, Delhi, 1982, pp. 90-91.)
14. Syed Ahmad, Uthman Dhu al-Nurain, Delhi, 1983, pp. 202-203. Abdallah b. Amir was a capable and energetic young man who was appointed on the request of the people of Basrah.
15. Tabari, op.cit., pp.421-22.
16. There was a large number of governors and officers ap-
pointed by Uthman to various provinces. (Ibid., pp. 421-22.)
17. Muhammad b. Ishaq, Sirat-i Rasullullah, Eng. tr., A.Guillaume,
Oxford. 1955, p.568; IbnAbd aI-Barr, Istiab. Egypt, N.D.,
Vol. III, p.1023.
18. Ibn Abd al-Barr op.cit. Vo1.III, p. 896.
19. Ibid., Vol. II, p.714.
20. Ibid., VoI.III, p.865.
21. Ibid., VoI.III, p.l 082.
22. Ibid., vol.1, p.237.
23. Ibid., VoI.II, pp 560-61.
24. Ibid., VoI.III,pp.1356-57.
25 Ibid., VoI.II, p.737.
26. Ibid., Vol..IV, p.1456.
27. Ibid., Vol. IV, pp.1585-87.
28. Ibid., Vol. IV, pp.1575.
29. Ibid., Vol. IV, pp.1757-58.
30. Ibid., Vol. II pp.428-29.
31. Ibid., Vol. I, p.336.
32. Ibid., VoI.III, p.l 061.
33. Ibid., Vol.IV, p.1546.
34. Ibid., Vol. I, p.358.
35. Ibid., VoI.III, p.1307.
36. Ibid., Vol.III, p.1318.
37. Ibid., Vol.II, p.701.
38. Ibid., Vol.II, p.839.
39. Ibid., Vol.III, p.1 025.
40.Actions before Islam had not been taken into account by the Prophet (p. b. u.h.) in the case of all Tulaqa.
41. Cf. Salahuddin Yusuf, op.cit., p.271.
42. Tirmidhi, Virtues of Muawivah; Ibn Abd al-Barr op.cit.,Vol.III, p.1416-17; Al-Dhahabi, Siyar Alam al-Nabala, al- Marif, Egypt, 1962, Vol.III, pp.83, 88.
43. The three governors of Basrah, Makkah and Yeman were Abdallah b. Amir Umavi, Abdallah b. Amir Hadrami and Yala b. Umayah respectively. (Tabari, op.cit., Vol.IV, pp.449-50.)
44. Minhaj al-Sunnah, Vol.III, pp.189, 196, 197 as cited by Salahuddin Yusuf, op.cit., p.274.
45. Ibn Sad, Tabaqat, Beirut, 1957, Vol. V., p.36.
46. M. Y.M. Siddiqui, “Hadrat Marwan b. Hakam Umavi Sirat wa Kirdar ka Do Rukh” Al-Tauiyah,NewDeIhi, Vol. IX, No.9, (January), 1995, pp.9-14.
47. Ibn Abd al-Barr, op.cit.,Vol. I, p.336, VoI.III, p.1082.
48. Ibn Sad, op.cit., p.36. Mawdudi says that Hakam died at the fag end of Uthman’s Khilafah, precisely in 32 A.H. /653A.D.
49. Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah Urdu tr. Hakim Ahmad Hussain,
Deoband, 1988, Vol. I, p431.
50. Shah Abdul Aziz, Tuhfah-i-IthnaAshariya, Urdu tr. Abdul Majeed Khan, Delhi, p.646; Sharah Nahaj al-Balaghah. Vol.III, p.34, as cited by Salahuddin Yusuf, op.cit., p.255.
51. See Tarikh al-Khamees. Vol. II , p. 297, as cited by Ishaq
Sandhalvi, Izhar i Haqiqat. Karachi, Vol. I pp. 306-307.
52. Tabari, Urdu tr. by Muhammad Ibrahim Nadvi, Delhi, 1984,
Vol. III, p418.
53. M. Y.M. Siddiqui, “Hadrat Marwan b.Hakam Umavi Sirat
WaKirdar KaDo Rukh”, op.cit.., pp. 12-14.
Criticism of Shaikh Maududi's writings by Ulama 
Posted on October 1, 2012
0