The following presentation is an extract from a 3 Hour Module as part of the Umayyad Kingdom course. The complete program is accessible exclusively via our official App and private learning platform. For more information visit our website or directly register via Patreon ➤ Website www.historyun.com/ ➤ Patreon (Register) www.patreon.com/historyun/membership
It depends. Abdul-Malik's achievements are definitely more momentous, he also had 20 years to realise his plans unlike Umar II was was killed after only 3 years.
I know that this is only an excerpts from a longer lecture, but it would be greatly informative if during presentation of a particular legacy of a caliph, that their name is included somewhere constantly so that the audiences is always conscious which particular caliph is being talked about, alongside with their period of reign. Thank you for this great lecture!
As a lover of Imam Ali AS, I love your contribution to our historical knowledge. I would not go as far as saying Radiallah Anhum after Muawiyah’s name but as a Sunni, that’s your right. As for my Shia brothers, please note that he is not raising the level of Umayyads through this video. He’s just stating historical facts. You’re welcome to counter them with your own historical facts but being angry won’t convince anyone. As with any other dynasty, there were good Umayyads and horrible Umayyads. Humans are not plain evil or good. There’s always a mix of both.
Very well articulated I do believe that Muyawiya was Pius because of the endorsement he received from Hassan but good to see people can fact check history and remove emotions May Allah guide and forgive all of us 🤲🏾
@@idrisanimagac.4086 he said in another comment said the Sahabah hated and killed each other just follow the Quran.Muwiwiyah was Mujtahid you do become that without immersing yourself in Quran and hafith
@@jmurdock8303 I’ll follow the Sahaba praudly including Muawiya who was honor by the messenger of Allah as one of the scribes of the Quran Peace and blessings of Allah be opón them 🤲🏾
I’m lucky to stumble upon your channel. I’m one of the pro Umayyads especially the characters of many of the rulers but also I have great respect for the character of early Ubbasids caliphs
Let’s get something clear: Islam is about unity, not fanning the flames of sectarianism. Some of you are so deep in your echo chambers that you've forgotten the bigger picture. Ali belongs to all Muslims, not just those who twist his words to push divisive narratives. Throwing around accusations like ‘Nasibi’ is lazy and shows you have no real arguments. Quoting hadiths selectively while ignoring broader history doesn't make you right it just exposes your bias. If you actually care about the Deen, focus on what unites us, not what divides us. Enough with the venom and chaos if you can't handle engaging with truth and unity, maybe it's time you rethink your priorities. Sectarianism is a disgrace, and Islam is bigger than your narrow agenda.
@@EM-tx3ly so islam is not what the najdi are on. Because the sahaba didn’t call themselves that either, and sahaba such as Ibn Abbas went against your aqeedah. (Even shamsi agrees on this)
@@EM-tx3lyThe Sahabas hated each other brother. They fought wars against each other. Tens of thousands of Muslims were killed in those wars that the Sahaba led. Don’t base your Islam on fallible men. Just follow the Quran, show your loyalty to Allah and not humans.
Watched the whole video السلام عليكم Abu Zakariya did an excellent job highlighting the incredible legacy of the Umayyads. Their contributions to the expansion of the Islamic faith and the establishment of a unified, powerful Empire cannot be overstated. the Umayyads played a key role in shaping the Arabian National identity and the course of Islamic history. It's great to see their achievements being recognized and appreciated in this way, Thank you Historyun. I totally agree with the striking resemblance between the Umayyads and the Al Saud dynasties. Many Saudi historians have pointed out the parallels, especially between certain figures, and it’s very interesting to see those connections. Now, let’s address the haters of the Umayyads all of whom criticize them for purely sectarian reasons. The reality is, their legacy is undeniable, and reducing it to these narrow lenses is both lazy and dishonest. The Umayyads were empire builders who spread Islam far beyond what anyone else had achieved before or after. If you’re going to attack them, at least have the decency to recognize their monumental contributions to Islamic civilization instead of parroting tired sectarian rhetoric.
Wa Aleikum Salam Dr 😉 Got your email. Barakallahu Feekum, will be in touch soon. JazakallAhu Khayran for your time and consideration. And yes, simply ruling the Umayyads out based on prejudice and bias is very shortsighted and dismissive. Only those interested in genuine knowledge will be open to hearing the other side of the story.
Salam Alaikum brother. I'm going to buy your course. Would you recommend your website or the patreon? I plan on learning more in depth. I'm a student of history:)
Wa Aleikum Salam Patreon is easier if you are already registered there, alternatively the website is more direct and a smoother set-up process for instant access (Patreon takes up to 24 hours to activate and assign your student account)
@@Historyun JazakAllah all done..keep up the work. And would encourage others to subscribe too if they haven't already:) good to keep up with accurate history rather than get surprised later
Salam Alaykum Ustadh. I have a question regarding Ibn Khaldun's writings. He mentions in one of his books that the early Muslim expansion that was done by the Arabs as very "destructive" and that they destroyed everything they conquered and the فتوحات were negative. He also mentions a lot of negative things about Arabs and how they destroy civilizations. He also has a very negative view of Africans. Was he unaware of history? Would love to see you address his work regarding this issue.
Wa Aleikum Salam Great questions. The second question is addressed in the Muqaddimah series on Telegram (Adab Book Club). As for the comments on the Arabs, he mentioned the Bedouins (A'raab) and specified certain clans. He does comment on Arabs in general not being great at construction etc but it's not in the context of conquest and destruction. We will come to that commentary later on in the series. You are welcome to join the Telegram channel for all previous episodes on the Muqaddimah
In my humble opinion, the most successful caliphs from each era are: Omar ibn al khattab ra from the rashidun then Abd al malik ibn marwan for the Umayyads then Abu Jaafar al mansur for the Abbasids.
Ar-Rashid litteraly spent his life raiding the byzantines, going to Hajj, financing artists, scientists and theologians, and raiding the Byzantines again. Ar-Rashid >>>> Al-Mansur who wasnt even the greatest muslim leader of his own time, it was Ad-Dakhil. Al-Mansur himself said that Saqr Quraish was Ad-Dakhil and not himself.
Genealogy of Banu Umayyah Abd Shams and Amr (Hashim) were the twin sons of Abd Manaf, the ruler of Makkah. Manaf belonged to the Quraish tribe and was a descendant of Hazrat Ibrahim bin Hazrat Ismail. Abd Shams was a self-centered and enterprising man while Amr was a public figure and was called Hashim because of his generosity. Hashim became the Chief of Makkah after the death of his father Manaf. Hashim lived long and after his death Mutlib younger brother of Hashim took over because Shiba son of Hashim was too young to shoulder the responsibilities as Chief. Later, Mutlib handedover the charge of chief of Kaaba to Shiba who is known as Abd Muttalib. Abd Shams had no children and he bought and adopted a slave child Umayyah. Umayyah's son Sukhar kept a stray woman Fakhta in his house and from her Harb (Abu Sufyan) and Umm Jameel were born. Umm Jameel. was married to Al-Uzza (Abu Lahab) and both of them were condenmed by Allah in Surah Lahab due to their hostility towards Prophet Muhammad (SW). As such, the genealogy of Umayyads is connected with the slave Umayya who remained the enemy of Hashem and this enimety continued in his descendant. Umayyads were called descendants of a Slave on three occasions: 1- On the occasion of the conquest of Makkah, the Holy Prophet said to Abu Sufyan and his followers, "Go away you the descendant of a freed slave, I have forgiven you. 2- In the letter written to Muawiya, Mawla Ali (ES) wrote, "Descendant of a freed slave how can you compare yourself with the emigrants?" (Nahj al-Balagha: Letters to Muawiyah) 3- In Yazid's court, Bibi Zainab(SE) addressing him said, "O child of a freed slave, how dare you tallk to us...."
Umayya was not a slave, he was the nephew of Hashim (Amr) and the grandson of Qussay Ibn Kilab. This is very well known and widely reported by the Arab genealogists. The Quraish as a tribe are literal descendents of Sayyida Hagar, a slave from Pharaoh's court, so there is absolutely nothing wrong with descending from a slave.
@@Historyun Umayyads were called descendants of a Slave on three occasions: 1- On the occasion of the conquest of Makkah, the Holy Prophet said to Abu Sufyan and his followers, "Go away you the descendant of a freed slave, I have forgiven you. 2- In the letter written to Muawiya, Mawla Ali (ES) wrote, "Descendant of a freed slave how can you compare yourself with the emigrants?" (Nahj al-Balagha: Letters to Muawiyah) 3- In Yazid's court, Bibi Zainab(SE) addressing him said, "O child of a freed slave, how dare you tallk to us...."
Wa Aleikum Salam brother, Al Waleed Ibn Abdul Malik was indeed a great philanthropist and is often identified as the first Umayyad to have establish major social welfare programs for the disabled and elderly in particular (this being before Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz). As for Al Walid Ibn Yazeed, he reputable figure and was only reported to have given money away as a means of drawing supporters (who went on to betray and abandon him in his palace hideaway when his time was up). It's easy to mix the two men, however there is no confusion concerning the first Waleed and the second one when it comes to philanthropic enterprise and projects. Barakallahu Feekum
@@Historyun @Historyun JazakAllahu khayr for the response brother. On that, sure, was not discounting the philanthropy of Walid I overall. More pointing to the mention of support for the disabled specifically, as this is something Walid II was particular noted for upon his ascension, as contrasted (and, perhaps, to be seen to be contrasted) against some reportedly frugal policies of his predecessor. In case of interest, i discuss Walid II somewhat in a video, "The Munharif Multiverse. Part 1: The Death of Unity." BarakAllahu feek.
Unfortunately, many people believe that the Golden Age came from the Abbasid Caliphate based on the Western narrative, but the Arab narrative says the exact opposite. The Golden Age began with the Umayyad Caliphate, whether in architecture, science, or libraries, especially during the reign of Abd al-Malik, whom Ibn Khaldun considers one of the greatest Arab kings. Unfortunately, most Muslims take the Western narrative while ignoring the Arab narrative. The Golden Age was not just a birth of moments, but rather a long, continuous process, the foundation of which was laid by the Rashidun Caliphate during the reign of Omar, then the Umayyads, especially during the reign of Muawiyah and Abd al-Malik, and it continued for 800 years in Spain!! Most narratives ignore the hundreds of years before the Abbasid Caliphate, which laid the foundation for the Golden Age.
@@nosoblaze5765 Best Arab Islamic Empire though with the largest areas conquered not surpassed by the following empires The Ummayeds in Andalus will be the best evidence of that look what they left behind even the Western orientalists commend them for it
@nosoblaze5765 Where do you get the Abbasid history and the Rightly Guided Caliphate from?? From Mars!!! You certainly get it from the Arabs, but the objection is that the Western narrative omits hundreds of years of history to reach the Abbasid period, and this is not fair from an objective and scientific point of view.
I believe that Muslims have now entered their THIRD Renaissance. I know the current Palestine situation looks so bleak. But it's nothing compared to the pre-conditions of the previous two Renaissance for Islam.
I have found original arab to be darker in skin to for example Arabs from Syria or Lebanon Im Somali and know Arabs from Yemen many for them look like me also those from oman but I found Arabs to be like Indians in their attitudes towards darks which I have realized has nothing to do with colonialism but instead it’s just anti darkness.
Because that is a separate lecture covered exclusively on its own, this one was focusing on the reign of Abdul-Malik and his sons. Muawiyah's reign and establishment will be uploaded separately insha'Allah
It was prophesied that the Rashidun would be around for 30 years then a Kingdom would emerge there on where the first kingdom Ummayeds were the best and the dynasties that followed couldn’t be on their level In terms of the largest area ruled under Islam the Ummayeds were the number one and no empire afterwards could reach that not even the Ottomans!!!
@@Historyunonly Allah knows best as to what would become today, it is only through the Will, Wisdom and Knowledge of Allah Azza Wa Jal as to what happens
Not true. There were several very righteous Umayyads including • Mu'awiyyah Ibn Yazeed • Al-Waleed • Soleiman • Hisham The of deeper study on this topic is what results in gross generalisations and fixation only on Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz. There were numerous righteous Caliphs under the Umayyads
@@Historyun muyawia 2 was rightous but didn’t suleiman torture the nephew of el hajaj(not that hajaj was righous but i don’t think torture is halal) as for hisham in his rule there was twrat zyd bin ali
Soleiman was a patron of Yazeed Ibn Muhallab who was himself tortured by Hajjaj during the reign of Al Waleed. When Soleiman took power, Hajjaj was no longer in the position to continue persecuting the Muhallabids and the tables turned on him and his supporters. It's just the way things are, they settled the scores. Look into what Hajjaj did to the Banu Muhallab (Yazeed Ibn Muhallab especially)
@@Historyun yeah i know hajaj was a horrendus person but i don’t know about his nephew, but anyways i hope one day we would have muslim rulers that at least try to follow the morals of religion
الرواية المكذوبة على الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام أنه سمح لنصارى نجران بأداء صلاتهم الكفرية في مسجده لا تصح. وغاية ما في الأمر أن هناك رواية مرسلة ذكرها ابن كثير وفيها ابن اسحاق وهو مدلس. فضلا عن أن مضمونها يخالف الأصول وهو أن الرسول صلى الله عليه ويسلم لا يعين الكفار على أداء شعائرهم في مسجده. ويكفي في القدح في هذه الرواية أنها لم تشتهر مع أنها كانت في المسجد ومع وجود جمع كبير من الصحابة فكان من حقها أن تشتهر ولم يحصل ذلك فلم ترد عن صحابي.... وَتَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْبِرِّ وَالتَّقْوَىٰ ۖ وَلَا تَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْإِثْمِ وَالْعُدْوَانِ
As a historian, I cite historical sources and Ibn Kathir is one such source. If I were a Muhaddith then what you are presenting would be of concern to me and my audience. Do not complicate matters beyond what is necessary. Hadith and History are two different fields of study. If you want to apply the standards of Hadith onto Seerah then be prepared to discard of 90% of what has come to us through the works of Ibn Ishaq, Tabari and several other classical historiographers. Barakallahu Feekum
@Historyun whilst it is well-known that seerah and historical works are not as rigorous in the authentication of reports, the practicing Muslim has to at least make known when a report that he utilizes is in conflict with principles of the religion. For the Prophet to encourage or allow the Christian delegation to perform their blasphemous prayers in his Masjid is not in accordance with the Sharia. The acceptance of kufr is kufr and the Prophet would never accept that. By the way many people present this story, the audience that doesn't know any better would believe that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم actually did this action and they may also seek to emulate it and thus do commit kufr without knowing. Many people these days are not focused on the obligatory Knowledge and fall into all kinds of things. I placed it there not to be a nuisance but as a help and to protect people from believing that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did such an action. May Allāh ta'ala protect us and guide us to a good end.
@@hymnisphear thank you for your perspective however this is not how Historiography works. The account given is derived from a primary source, there is nothing to disclose other than the source reference. My personal level of 'practicing Islam' has absolutely nothing to do with it. This is why the wider audience doesn't respect or trust History as reported by Muslims to begin with
@@Historyun I'm confused. Forgive me for my ignorance. Are you saying the wider audience doesn't respect or trust muslim history because of the stringency of the hadith method? If so, how can that be?
i'm thinking of joining your "Umayyad Kingdom" course. can you guys please provide some more details? if i pay, do i immediately get access to all lectures? are there any live sessions or just recordings? will we go through all the umayyad caliphs?
Wa Aleikum Salam. All past lectures are available for replay at your convenience, we have currently got a back catalog of over 30 hours with 10 hours left before the end of the program. The video is taken from a monthly live event for registered and active students to participate in, typically lasts between 3-5 hours per unit. Subscription via Patreon or the Historyun app is $10 and grants access to all program courses (current 6 and growing), not only the Umayyad Kingdom
Ummayyads: mean, shrewd, materalistic Duniya loving typical politicians and rulers and were very inseure by the Ahlal bayt’s presences, piety, love in the hearts of the general population of the time. Hence they did lot of damage to the Ahlal Bayt and to the islamic literature to be in the power. Two Parties: Ahlul Bayt and Ummayyads one for purely duniya and Ahlul bayt both for Duniya and Akhirah.
Personally I'm pro ahlul bayt but like the professor said a lot of good has been done during their reign and to be honest the Umayyads didn't do half the damage to ahlal bayt that the Abbasids will eventually do.
the greatest harm to the Muslim Ummah of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam was started by predecessors of the shia majoosi rafidhi zoroastrian fire worshippers which continues even in this age more than the zionazis of today and both of them are from the same ideology
Sunnis please develop love for Ahlal Bayt and learn their teachings instead of non Ahlal bayts teachings. Sunni Jamaat don’t narrate hadiths of Ahlul Bayt.. thanks to technology, I am watching shia scholars and learning a ot about Ahlul bayt and Imam Jafar’s hadiths.
@mustikhan7512 Alhamdulillah, Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamaah love the progeny of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam the most unlike the shia majoosi rafidhi zoroastrian fire worshippers who betrayed them
Asalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah dear brother, I have seen many of your videos and enjoyed them but frankly speaking I’m a bit puzzled and disturbed with some of what you are saying in this video. Judging from what you have said in some of your previous videos you are fully aware of some of the heinous crimes committed against the Ahlul Bait and the Sahabah such as of course Karbala and others such as the incident of Harra. How could you be “pro-Umayyad” in light of this? I understand that if you wanted to correctly point out that the matter is not so black and white and there were of course both righteous (Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz being an obvious example) and not so righteous amongst them. But you seem to have acknowledged fully that Abdul Malik bin Marwan ordered for the killing of Abdullah Bin Zubair Radhiallahu Anhu and then proceeded to praise him for some of his later policies. Those who defend yazeed usually do it because they feel that he didn’t have any role in the incident of Karbala and are painstakingly unaware and of his other crimes such as the incident of Harrah and his attack on the Haram. Similarly many defenders of Hajjaj do it because they feel that more or less everything related to his tyranny is an exaggeration or a fabrication. But what can be said when we know that the individual was involved in something so heinous and there was indeed a culture of hatred for the Ahl Al-Bayt? If we know this is the case I don’t think that any good that certain individuals may have done can absolve them of their crimes to the extent that we start praising them. Indeed let us point out that there were in fact righteous amongst these people as well but I don’t see how that can push anyone to be “pro-Umayyad”. We should be aware of all this whether talking about the Umayyads, Abbasids, or the Osmanids. Our real aspiration should be the Sunnah of Our Prophet Sallallahu Alaihe Wa Sallam and that of the Khulafa Al-Rashidun. May Allah keep us all upon his guidance. Ameen.
@@rvrv7021 Ironically true Andalus produced Spain and Portugal In fact as soon as Andalus fell both Spain and Portugal became sea faring empires Coincidence !!! A lot of books were burned but many were kept in the Escorial especially books of astronomy navigation seafaring geography…… Oops too much for the Iberian Catholic powers to ignore!!!
@@aldenpadilla1773 what disgusting Nasibi statement 'Ali said: By the One Who split the seed and created the soul, the [unlettered] Prophet ﷺ, affirmed to me: "No one loves me except a believer and no one hates me except a hypocrite."
They may have been statement and brought into being a huge kingdom for them over blood of Muslims and Non Muslims both inside and outside. Arabia but they destroyed the concept of Islam as a message of peace among human beings divine and revealed by. Allaha to the extent that today Islam is treated as a religion of oppression and cruelty and we fail to convince in arguements particularly.those from divine. Ibrahmic religions of divine books unfortunately you are defending them and still saying Islam a religion of peace
Banu Ummaya had their faults mistakes and etc etc etc But as an empire and first Islamic kings they were the best especially if you compare them to those afterwards
These statements go against what historical records prove. The Umayyads did not change Islaam, they did perpetuate cruel and even un-Islamic policies (that cannot be denied) but there is no evidence of changing Islam. You must substantiate your claims
If a cruel man who unjustly acquires power plunders others and forcibly subjugates them and then declares himself righteous and rightful ruler does not mean that he changed the very spirit of Islam the message of peace by. Allaha then there is nothing left to be discussed. Alexander and. Mongol khan too conquered territory from east to west on bloodshed but that never makes them righteous and. God sent. Contrary to this. Jesus a s lived short peacefully delivering message of. Allaha and got crucified but today he owns the most part of earth and people living on it. Had these. Umayads or. Abasids not taken Islam and Muslims as hostages for their political lust and power the influence of. Muhammad s a w would be on area and hearts of more people and areas than it is. The result of umayids and. Abasids rule in Europe and western part of middle. East we are reaping today Loot of wealth and women as war returns was their prime motive. Anyway I don’t feel any pride in defending spreading of my faith that way by them. I feel great pleasure and high pride while arguing that for my faith. My lord Allaha chose an orphan to reveal it through him who brought social economic cultural and cross civilisational harmoney within 23 years without seeking any kingdom for himself
@@aldenpadilla1773 Astagfirullah, are you criticizing Hazrat Ali R.A ? It's been narrated from Muhammad S.A.W (a loose interpretation) that anyone who says bad about the Sahaba does not belong to this deen.
@@aldenpadilla1773Brother you speak on a subject you have no proper understanding, please read the comments early Sunni scholars have made regarding the era of fitnah. Not a single one of them speak ill against Ali RA. Infact many of them say if it wasn't for his wise choices the empire would have been torn into many rival little kingdoms. This is the cousin of the prophet sws raised in his household extreme wise and well versed in the religion. He was put in a very difficult position and handled it the best way he could whilst preventing mass bloodshed. You need to look further into how things unfolded and refrain from criticism of ahlul-bait. Remember we are not the Shia Rafidah whose entire aqeeda is built on cursing the prophets nearest and dearest
Ali RA was hijacked by the Raafida and the deviants just as Eesa Ibn Maryam AS got hijacked by Saul and Trinitarians !!! An Iraqi man once asked Caliph Ali RA on why during the reigns of first two caliphs Abu Bakr RA and Umar RA things were great but under Ali RA it was bad Caliph Ali RA simply answered that during the first two caliphs they had men like me to rule upon but now I have the likes of you to rule upon !!! Iraq was and will always be a land of tribulations trails schisms deviance and unrest
Believe it or not, and perhaps you may do the research, the Abbasids were the proxy that The Catholic Church did use to destroy the beacon of knowledge light that the Umayyad were.
That is a strong claim and I don’t think it holds true. Since that the Abbasid’s kept doing the same thing the Umayyads did which was basically expanding the empire but this time they were able to take Catholic lands in Italy and other countries.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
The following presentation is an extract from a 3 Hour Module as part of the Umayyad Kingdom course. The complete program is accessible exclusively via our official App and private learning platform.
For more information visit our website or directly register via Patreon
➤ Website www.historyun.com/
➤ Patreon (Register) www.patreon.com/historyun/membership
May Allah bless you with more knowledge and success in delivering true authentic knowledge to the Ummah, Brother AZ.
Ameen. Barakallahu Feekum 💎
I believe the real Umayyad golden age was during the reign of Umar ibn Abdul Azziz.
It depends. Abdul-Malik's achievements are definitely more momentous, he also had 20 years to realise his plans unlike Umar II was was killed after only 3 years.
@@Historyun the only period there was peace. Sounds like gold to me.
Each one of Abdal Malik's successors believed that he was the promised Mahdi and that's why they behaved the way they did
@@srebalanandasivam9563 I like to see some evidence of that . I think you confused him the Abassid Khalifa Mehdi who they thought was the Mehdi😂😂 😂😂😂
@42:36. Couldn't agree more. May Allah bless us all to reach such a level of faith and purity.
I know that this is only an excerpts from a longer lecture, but it would be greatly informative if during presentation of a particular legacy of a caliph, that their name is included somewhere constantly so that the audiences is always conscious which particular caliph is being talked about, alongside with their period of reign. Thank you for this great lecture!
Thank you for the insightful feedback. Will be sure to keep this in mind for future uploads on this series
The Golden period is yet to come.
You mean the rule of Mahdi
As a lover of Imam Ali AS, I love your contribution to our historical knowledge. I would not go as far as saying Radiallah Anhum after Muawiyah’s name but as a Sunni, that’s your right. As for my Shia brothers, please note that he is not raising the level of Umayyads through this video. He’s just stating historical facts. You’re welcome to counter them with your own historical facts but being angry won’t convince anyone. As with any other dynasty, there were good Umayyads and horrible Umayyads. Humans are not plain evil or good. There’s always a mix of both.
Well articulated
@@saadraees09 you called the Sahabah killers and hated each other do clean up here.
Very well articulated I do believe that Muyawiya was Pius because of the endorsement he received from Hassan but good to see people can fact check history and remove emotions May Allah guide and forgive all of us 🤲🏾
@@idrisanimagac.4086 he said in another comment said the Sahabah hated and killed each other just follow the Quran.Muwiwiyah was Mujtahid you do become that without immersing yourself in Quran and hafith
@@jmurdock8303 I’ll follow the Sahaba praudly including Muawiya who was honor by the messenger of Allah as one of the scribes of the Quran Peace and blessings of Allah be opón them 🤲🏾
I’m lucky to stumble upon your channel.
I’m one of the pro Umayyads especially the characters of many of the rulers but also I have great respect for the character of early Ubbasids caliphs
Outstanding lesson!
Let’s get something clear: Islam is about unity, not fanning the flames of sectarianism. Some of you are so deep in your echo chambers that you've forgotten the bigger picture. Ali belongs to all Muslims, not just those who twist his words to push divisive narratives. Throwing around accusations like ‘Nasibi’ is lazy and shows you have no real arguments. Quoting hadiths selectively while ignoring broader history doesn't make you right it just exposes your bias. If you actually care about the Deen, focus on what unites us, not what divides us. Enough with the venom and chaos if you can't handle engaging with truth and unity, maybe it's time you rethink your priorities. Sectarianism is a disgrace, and Islam is bigger than your narrow agenda.
Islam is what the Sahaba were upon
Not Khariji
Not Raafidi
Not Sho’oubi
Not Qawmaji
Not Hizbi
Not ikhwani
@@EM-tx3ly
Very well said brother
It was non of those things, it was simply ISLAM
The submission to the Almighty.
This comment 💎💯
@@EM-tx3ly so islam is not what the najdi are on. Because the sahaba didn’t call themselves that either, and sahaba such as Ibn Abbas went against your aqeedah. (Even shamsi agrees on this)
@@EM-tx3lyThe Sahabas hated each other brother. They fought wars against each other. Tens of thousands of Muslims were killed in those wars that the Sahaba led. Don’t base your Islam on fallible men. Just follow the Quran, show your loyalty to Allah and not humans.
Watched the whole video السلام عليكم
Abu Zakariya did an excellent job highlighting the incredible legacy of the Umayyads.
Their contributions to the expansion of the Islamic faith and the establishment of a unified, powerful Empire cannot be overstated.
the Umayyads played a key role in shaping the Arabian National identity and the course of Islamic history.
It's great to see their achievements being recognized and appreciated in this way, Thank you Historyun.
I totally agree with the striking resemblance between the Umayyads and the Al Saud dynasties.
Many Saudi historians have pointed out the parallels, especially between certain figures, and it’s very interesting to see those connections.
Now, let’s address the haters of the Umayyads all of whom criticize them for purely sectarian reasons. The reality is, their legacy is undeniable, and reducing it to these narrow lenses is both lazy and dishonest.
The Umayyads were empire builders who spread Islam far beyond what anyone else had achieved before or after.
If you’re going to attack them, at least have the decency to recognize their monumental contributions to Islamic civilization instead of parroting tired sectarian rhetoric.
Wa Aleikum Salam Dr 😉
Got your email. Barakallahu Feekum, will be in touch soon.
JazakallAhu Khayran for your time and consideration.
And yes, simply ruling the Umayyads out based on prejudice and bias is very shortsighted and dismissive. Only those interested in genuine knowledge will be open to hearing the other side of the story.
To put it simply
They were the best kings of Islam
No Empire afterwards could conquer that expansion as the Ummayeds have done
Not even the Ottomans
@@Historyun
بارك الله فيك
يسعدني جدا ان رسالتي قد وصلت لكم
وشاكر و مقدر لك على جهودك لنشر الوعي
الله يرزقك طاعته وتوفيقه
@@ABN_RUclips look into what scholar from Ahlul Sunnah say about the lines of them.
@@ABN_RUclips I am talking about scholar opinion. I forgot you know everything in everyone's hearts. You are an arrogant piece of crap
Nicceeee vid. Will be watching later😊
Thank you for sharing
Thank you for watching
So he(Abdul Malik) is First Arab King Who ruled like Cyrus The Great persian Ruler.
Salam Alaikum brother. I'm going to buy your course. Would you recommend your website or the patreon? I plan on learning more in depth. I'm a student of history:)
Wa Aleikum Salam
Patreon is easier if you are already registered there, alternatively the website is more direct and a smoother set-up process for instant access (Patreon takes up to 24 hours to activate and assign your student account)
@@Historyun JazakAllah all done..keep up the work. And would encourage others to subscribe too if they haven't already:) good to keep up with accurate history rather than get surprised later
Salam Alaykum Ustadh.
I have a question regarding Ibn Khaldun's writings. He mentions in one of his books that the early Muslim expansion that was done by the Arabs as very "destructive" and that they destroyed everything they conquered and the فتوحات were negative. He also mentions a lot of negative things about Arabs and how they destroy civilizations. He also has a very negative view of Africans. Was he unaware of history?
Would love to see you address his work regarding this issue.
Wa Aleikum Salam
Great questions. The second question is addressed in the Muqaddimah series on Telegram (Adab Book Club). As for the comments on the Arabs, he mentioned the Bedouins (A'raab) and specified certain clans. He does comment on Arabs in general not being great at construction etc but it's not in the context of conquest and destruction. We will come to that commentary later on in the series. You are welcome to join the Telegram channel for all previous episodes on the Muqaddimah
Very interesting
Thanks
You are most welcome
In my humble opinion, the most successful caliphs from each era are: Omar ibn al khattab ra from the rashidun then Abd al malik ibn marwan for the Umayyads then Abu Jaafar al mansur for the Abbasids.
Hard to disagree with that lineup
@@abdousalem3079 depends on definition of success
For the Abbasids, I feel Harun ar Rashid and Al Mamun were the most successful
@@srebalanandasivam9563 Al Mamun enforced heretic beliefs
Ar-Rashid litteraly spent his life raiding the byzantines, going to Hajj, financing artists, scientists and theologians, and raiding the Byzantines again. Ar-Rashid >>>> Al-Mansur who wasnt even the greatest muslim leader of his own time, it was Ad-Dakhil. Al-Mansur himself said that Saqr Quraish was Ad-Dakhil and not himself.
Genealogy of Banu Umayyah
Abd Shams and Amr (Hashim) were the twin sons of Abd Manaf, the ruler of Makkah. Manaf belonged to the Quraish tribe and was a descendant of Hazrat Ibrahim bin Hazrat Ismail. Abd Shams was a self-centered and enterprising man while Amr was a public figure and was called Hashim because of his generosity. Hashim became the Chief of Makkah after the death of his father Manaf. Hashim lived long and after his death Mutlib younger brother of Hashim took over because Shiba son of Hashim was too young to shoulder the responsibilities as Chief. Later, Mutlib handedover the charge of chief of Kaaba to Shiba who is known as Abd Muttalib.
Abd Shams had no children and he bought and adopted a slave child Umayyah. Umayyah's son Sukhar kept a stray woman Fakhta in his house and from her Harb (Abu Sufyan) and Umm Jameel were born. Umm Jameel. was married to Al-Uzza (Abu Lahab) and both of them were condenmed by Allah in Surah Lahab due to their hostility towards Prophet Muhammad (SW). As such, the genealogy of Umayyads is connected with the slave Umayya who remained the enemy of Hashem and this enimety continued in his descendant.
Umayyads were called descendants of a Slave on three occasions:
1- On the occasion of the conquest of Makkah, the Holy Prophet said to Abu Sufyan and his followers, "Go away you the descendant of a freed slave, I have forgiven you.
2- In the letter written to Muawiya, Mawla Ali (ES) wrote, "Descendant of a freed slave how can you compare yourself with the emigrants?" (Nahj al-Balagha: Letters to Muawiyah)
3- In Yazid's court, Bibi Zainab(SE) addressing him said, "O child of a freed slave, how dare you tallk to us...."
Umayya was not a slave, he was the nephew of Hashim (Amr) and the grandson of Qussay Ibn Kilab. This is very well known and widely reported by the Arab genealogists.
The Quraish as a tribe are literal descendents of Sayyida Hagar, a slave from Pharaoh's court, so there is absolutely nothing wrong with descending from a slave.
@@Historyun Umayyads were called descendants of a Slave on three occasions:
1- On the occasion of the conquest of Makkah, the Holy Prophet said to Abu Sufyan and his followers, "Go away you the descendant of a freed slave, I have forgiven you.
2- In the letter written to Muawiya, Mawla Ali (ES) wrote, "Descendant of a freed slave how can you compare yourself with the emigrants?" (Nahj al-Balagha: Letters to Muawiyah)
3- In Yazid's court, Bibi Zainab(SE) addressing him said, "O child of a freed slave, how dare you tallk to us...."
Some say that the Umayyads were the result of adultery
Illegitimate child
Assalam alaykum.
In mentioning Walid I's philanthropy with the disabled and the blind, am wondering if this isn't being confused for Walid II?
Wa Aleikum Salam brother,
Al Waleed Ibn Abdul Malik was indeed a great philanthropist and is often identified as the first Umayyad to have establish major social welfare programs for the disabled and elderly in particular (this being before Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz).
As for Al Walid Ibn Yazeed, he reputable figure and was only reported to have given money away as a means of drawing supporters (who went on to betray and abandon him in his palace hideaway when his time was up).
It's easy to mix the two men, however there is no confusion concerning the first Waleed and the second one when it comes to philanthropic enterprise and projects.
Barakallahu Feekum
@@Historyun @Historyun JazakAllahu khayr for the response brother.
On that, sure, was not discounting the philanthropy of Walid I overall. More pointing to the mention of support for the disabled specifically, as this is something Walid II was particular noted for upon his ascension, as contrasted (and, perhaps, to be seen to be contrasted) against some reportedly frugal policies of his predecessor.
In case of interest, i discuss Walid II somewhat in a video, "The Munharif Multiverse. Part 1: The Death of Unity."
BarakAllahu feek.
@@KnowledgeNorth JazakallAhu Khayran
@@Historyun Wa iyyak. BarakAllahu feek
@@KnowledgeNorth It would be beneficial to have you on the platform for a dialogue on the Umayyads at some point
I believe the one who made the treaty was the trustworthy of the ummah abu ubaydah radiallahuanhu
Unfortunately, many people believe that the Golden Age came from the Abbasid Caliphate based on the Western narrative, but the Arab narrative says the exact opposite. The Golden Age began with the Umayyad Caliphate, whether in architecture, science, or libraries, especially during the reign of Abd al-Malik, whom Ibn Khaldun considers one of the greatest Arab kings. Unfortunately, most Muslims take the Western narrative while ignoring the Arab narrative. The Golden Age was not just a birth of moments, but rather a long, continuous process, the foundation of which was laid by the Rashidun Caliphate during the reign of Omar, then the Umayyads, especially during the reign of Muawiyah and Abd al-Malik, and it continued for 800 years in Spain!! Most narratives ignore the hundreds of years before the Abbasid Caliphate, which laid the foundation for the Golden Age.
@@sama-np8xw thats because the Umayyads were racist arab supremicists.
@@sama-np8xw thats because the Umayyads were racist arab supremicists, thats why they are loved by the arab supremicists of today.
@@nosoblaze5765
Best Arab Islamic Empire though with the largest areas conquered not surpassed by the following empires
The Ummayeds in Andalus will be the best evidence of that look what they left behind even the Western orientalists commend them for it
@nosoblaze5765
Where do you get the Abbasid history and the Rightly Guided Caliphate from?? From Mars!!! You certainly get it from the Arabs, but the objection is that the Western narrative omits hundreds of years of history to reach the Abbasid period, and this is not fair from an objective and scientific point of view.
The real umayid golden age was of Khalifa Omar ibn Abdul Aziz he was almost like the Rashidun
May Allah forgive and reward Abdullah ibn zubair
Ameen.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge
Thank you for sharing your time
I believe that Muslims have now entered their THIRD Renaissance. I know the current Palestine situation looks so bleak. But it's nothing compared to the pre-conditions of the previous two Renaissance for Islam.
@@ADAM_sigma what was the first and second?
I have found original arab to be darker in skin to for example Arabs from Syria or Lebanon Im Somali and know Arabs from Yemen many for them look like me also those from oman but I found Arabs to be like Indians in their attitudes towards darks which I have realized has nothing to do with colonialism but instead it’s just anti darkness.
Bro, why did you miss to mention the righteousness and poety of Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan?
Because that is a separate lecture covered exclusively on its own, this one was focusing on the reign of Abdul-Malik and his sons.
Muawiyah's reign and establishment will be uploaded separately insha'Allah
@Historyun Ahh alright 👍
It was prophesied that the Rashidun would be around for 30 years then a Kingdom would emerge there on where the first kingdom Ummayeds were the best and the dynasties that followed couldn’t be on their level
In terms of the largest area ruled under Islam the Ummayeds were the number one and no empire afterwards could reach that not even the Ottomans!!!
And they only ruled for 90 years despite having achieved so much. What if they had ruled for 500 years!
@@Historyun
Well in Andalus they ruled for 300 years the best days Al Andalus have ever had !!!
@@Historyunonly Allah knows best as to what would become today, it is only through the Will, Wisdom and Knowledge of Allah Azza Wa Jal as to what happens
The umayyads except umar ibn abd aziz were quite unislamic in actions but were civilized
Not true. There were several very righteous Umayyads including
• Mu'awiyyah Ibn Yazeed
• Al-Waleed
• Soleiman
• Hisham
The of deeper study on this topic is what results in gross generalisations and fixation only on Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz. There were numerous righteous Caliphs under the Umayyads
@@Historyun muyawia 2 was rightous but didn’t suleiman torture the nephew of el hajaj(not that hajaj was righous but i don’t think torture is halal) as for hisham in his rule there was twrat zyd bin ali
@@Historyun this true
Soleiman was a patron of Yazeed Ibn Muhallab who was himself tortured by Hajjaj during the reign of Al Waleed. When Soleiman took power, Hajjaj was no longer in the position to continue persecuting the Muhallabids and the tables turned on him and his supporters.
It's just the way things are, they settled the scores.
Look into what Hajjaj did to the Banu Muhallab (Yazeed Ibn Muhallab especially)
@@Historyun yeah i know hajaj was a horrendus person but i don’t know about his nephew, but anyways i hope one day we would have muslim rulers that at least try to follow the morals of religion
Umayyads - more mabaani less maani
الرواية المكذوبة على الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام أنه سمح لنصارى نجران بأداء صلاتهم الكفرية في مسجده لا تصح. وغاية ما في الأمر أن هناك رواية مرسلة ذكرها ابن كثير وفيها ابن اسحاق وهو مدلس. فضلا عن أن مضمونها يخالف الأصول وهو أن الرسول صلى الله عليه ويسلم لا يعين الكفار على أداء شعائرهم في مسجده.
ويكفي في القدح في هذه الرواية أنها لم تشتهر مع أنها كانت في المسجد ومع وجود جمع كبير من الصحابة فكان من حقها أن تشتهر ولم يحصل ذلك فلم ترد عن صحابي....
وَتَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْبِرِّ وَالتَّقْوَىٰ ۖ وَلَا تَعَاوَنُوا عَلَى الْإِثْمِ وَالْعُدْوَانِ
As a historian, I cite historical sources and Ibn Kathir is one such source. If I were a Muhaddith then what you are presenting would be of concern to me and my audience.
Do not complicate matters beyond what is necessary. Hadith and History are two different fields of study.
If you want to apply the standards of Hadith onto Seerah then be prepared to discard of 90% of what has come to us through the works of Ibn Ishaq, Tabari and several other classical historiographers.
Barakallahu Feekum
@Historyun whilst it is well-known that seerah and historical works are not as rigorous in the authentication of reports, the practicing Muslim has to at least make known when a report that he utilizes is in conflict with principles of the religion. For the Prophet to encourage or allow the Christian delegation to perform their blasphemous prayers in his Masjid is not in accordance with the Sharia. The acceptance of kufr is kufr and the Prophet would never accept that. By the way many people present this story, the audience that doesn't know any better would believe that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم actually did this action and they may also seek to emulate it and thus do commit kufr without knowing. Many people these days are not focused on the obligatory Knowledge and fall into all kinds of things. I placed it there not to be a nuisance but as a help and to protect people from believing that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did such an action. May Allāh ta'ala protect us and guide us to a good end.
@@hymnisphear thank you for your perspective however this is not how Historiography works. The account given is derived from a primary source, there is nothing to disclose other than the source reference. My personal level of 'practicing Islam' has absolutely nothing to do with it.
This is why the wider audience doesn't respect or trust History as reported by Muslims to begin with
@@Historyun I'm confused. Forgive me for my ignorance. Are you saying the wider audience doesn't respect or trust muslim history because of the stringency of the hadith method? If so, how can that be?
i'm thinking of joining your "Umayyad Kingdom" course. can you guys please provide some more details? if i pay, do i immediately get access to all lectures? are there any live sessions or just recordings? will we go through all the umayyad caliphs?
Wa Aleikum Salam. All past lectures are available for replay at your convenience, we have currently got a back catalog of over 30 hours with 10 hours left before the end of the program.
The video is taken from a monthly live event for registered and active students to participate in, typically lasts between 3-5 hours per unit.
Subscription via Patreon or the Historyun app is $10 and grants access to all program courses (current 6 and growing), not only the Umayyad Kingdom
Ummayyads: mean, shrewd, materalistic Duniya loving typical politicians and rulers and were very inseure by the Ahlal bayt’s presences, piety, love in the hearts of the general population of the time. Hence they did lot of damage to the Ahlal Bayt and to the islamic literature to be in the power.
Two Parties: Ahlul Bayt and Ummayyads
one for purely duniya and Ahlul bayt both for Duniya and Akhirah.
Personally I'm pro ahlul bayt but like the professor said a lot of good has been done during their reign and to be honest the Umayyads didn't do half the damage to ahlal bayt that the Abbasids will eventually do.
the greatest harm to the Muslim Ummah of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam was started by predecessors of the shia majoosi rafidhi zoroastrian fire worshippers which continues even in this age more than the zionazis of today and both of them are from the same ideology
Sunnis please develop love for Ahlal Bayt and learn their teachings instead of non Ahlal bayts teachings. Sunni Jamaat don’t narrate hadiths of Ahlul Bayt.. thanks to technology, I am watching shia scholars and learning a ot about Ahlul bayt and Imam Jafar’s hadiths.
Historyun may be madhkhalis
@mustikhan7512 Alhamdulillah, Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamaah love the progeny of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam the most unlike the shia majoosi rafidhi zoroastrian fire worshippers who betrayed them
Asalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah dear brother, I have seen many of your videos and enjoyed them but frankly speaking I’m a bit puzzled and disturbed with some of what you are saying in this video. Judging from what you have said in some of your previous videos you are fully aware of some of the heinous crimes committed against the Ahlul Bait and the Sahabah such as of course Karbala and others such as the incident of Harra. How could you be “pro-Umayyad” in light of this? I understand that if you wanted to correctly point out that the matter is not so black and white and there were of course both righteous (Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz being an obvious example) and not so righteous amongst them. But you seem to have acknowledged fully that Abdul Malik bin Marwan ordered for the killing of Abdullah Bin Zubair Radhiallahu Anhu and then proceeded to praise him for some of his later policies. Those who defend yazeed usually do it because they feel that he didn’t have any role in the incident of Karbala and are painstakingly unaware and of his other crimes such as the incident of Harrah and his attack on the Haram. Similarly many defenders of Hajjaj do it because they feel that more or less everything related to his tyranny is an exaggeration or a fabrication. But what can be said when we know that the individual was involved in something so heinous and there was indeed a culture of hatred for the Ahl Al-Bayt? If we know this is the case I don’t think that any good that certain individuals may have done can absolve them of their crimes to the extent that we start praising them. Indeed let us point out that there were in fact righteous amongst these people as well but I don’t see how that can push anyone to be “pro-Umayyad”.
We should be aware of all this whether talking about the Umayyads, Abbasids, or the Osmanids. Our real aspiration should be the Sunnah of Our Prophet Sallallahu Alaihe Wa Sallam and that of the Khulafa Al-Rashidun.
May Allah keep us all upon his guidance. Ameen.
Wa Aleikum Salam brother
This is simply a balancing narrative. It's too easy to discuss the Umayyads from a hostile angle, everyone else does it.
Is AbdulMalik the one who built the golden dome mosque (Dome of the Rock) in Jerusalem?
Yes
in the Quran it says we can shorten the prayer but ask sunnis they'll tell you YOU CANT 😭
Portugal caralho!!!
No alandaluz no Portugal, no Spain...
@@rvrv7021
Ironically true
Andalus produced Spain and Portugal
In fact as soon as Andalus fell both Spain and Portugal became sea faring empires
Coincidence !!!
A lot of books were burned but many were kept in the Escorial especially books of astronomy navigation seafaring geography……
Oops too much for the Iberian Catholic powers to ignore!!!
Controversial but highly effective dynasty. Historically we can study them no problem but from Islamic point of view, they dont have our respect.
Muqammidah? 😢
Continuing on Telegram from this weekend InshaaAllah
You really did video about one of the murderers of Sahabah Abdullah Ibn Zubayr ?
@@aldenpadilla1773May Allah hold you accountable for this statement if you don't seek knowledge and repent, Jahil.
Why are you talking shit? That’s too both of you!
@@aldenpadilla1773 you are ignorant of Hadith and Islamic history with. This comment alone.
@@user-lx2hn6qk9r because this isn't something very trivial this the history of Deen.
@@aldenpadilla1773 what disgusting Nasibi statement 'Ali said: By the One Who split the seed and created the soul, the [unlettered] Prophet ﷺ, affirmed to me: "No one loves me except a believer and no one hates me except a hypocrite."
They may have been statement and brought into being a huge kingdom for them over blood of Muslims and Non Muslims both inside and outside. Arabia but they destroyed the concept of Islam as a message of peace among human beings divine and revealed by. Allaha to the extent that today Islam is treated as a religion of oppression and cruelty and we fail to convince in arguements particularly.those from divine. Ibrahmic religions of divine books unfortunately you are defending them and still saying Islam a religion of peace
Banu Ummaya had their faults mistakes and etc etc etc
But as an empire and first Islamic kings they were the best especially if you compare them to those afterwards
These statements go against what historical records prove. The Umayyads did not change Islaam, they did perpetuate cruel and even un-Islamic policies (that cannot be denied) but there is no evidence of changing Islam. You must substantiate your claims
If a cruel man who unjustly acquires power plunders others and forcibly subjugates them and then declares himself righteous and rightful ruler does not mean that he changed the very spirit of Islam the message of peace by. Allaha then there is nothing left to be discussed. Alexander and. Mongol khan too conquered territory from east to west on bloodshed but that never makes them righteous and. God sent. Contrary to this. Jesus a s lived short peacefully delivering message of. Allaha and got crucified but today he owns the most part of earth and people living on it. Had these. Umayads or. Abasids not taken Islam and Muslims as hostages for their political lust and power the influence of. Muhammad s a w would be on area and hearts of more people and areas than it is. The result of umayids and. Abasids rule in Europe and western part of middle. East we are reaping today Loot of wealth and women as war returns was their prime motive. Anyway I don’t feel any pride in defending spreading of my faith that way by them. I feel great pleasure and high pride while arguing that for my faith. My lord Allaha chose an orphan to reveal it through him who brought social economic cultural and cross civilisational harmoney within 23 years without seeking any kingdom for himself
Why pro Ummayyad when they did so much damage to Ahl Al Bayt and thus a very negative effect on the religion to this day!
@@aldenpadilla1773 Astagfirullah, are you criticizing Hazrat Ali R.A ?
It's been narrated from Muhammad S.A.W (a loose interpretation) that anyone who says bad about the Sahaba does not belong to this deen.
@@aldenpadilla1773 How dare you talk about Ali r.a. this way? You're not from the AhlusSunnah.
@technicious-dev you guys should just be refuting him or is he actually not lying?
@@aldenpadilla1773Brother you speak on a subject you have no proper understanding, please read the comments early Sunni scholars have made regarding the era of fitnah. Not a single one of them speak ill against Ali RA. Infact many of them say if it wasn't for his wise choices the empire would have been torn into many rival little kingdoms. This is the cousin of the prophet sws raised in his household extreme wise and well versed in the religion. He was put in a very difficult position and handled it the best way he could whilst preventing mass bloodshed. You need to look further into how things unfolded and refrain from criticism of ahlul-bait. Remember we are not the Shia Rafidah whose entire aqeeda is built on cursing the prophets nearest and dearest
Ali RA was hijacked by the Raafida and the deviants just as Eesa Ibn Maryam AS got hijacked by Saul and Trinitarians !!!
An Iraqi man once asked Caliph Ali RA on why during the reigns of first two caliphs Abu Bakr RA and Umar RA things were great but under Ali RA it was bad
Caliph Ali RA simply answered that during the first two caliphs they had men like me to rule upon but now I have the likes of you to rule upon !!!
Iraq was and will always be a land of tribulations trails schisms deviance and unrest
Believe it or not, and perhaps you may do the research, the Abbasids were the proxy that The Catholic Church did use to destroy the beacon of knowledge light that the Umayyad were.
@@VirgilJJacks can you guide me to some sources?
You got sources for that? That's quite the claim.
That is a strong claim and I don’t think it holds true. Since that the Abbasid’s kept doing the same thing the Umayyads did which was basically expanding the empire but this time they were able to take Catholic lands in Italy and other countries.
@@turki1258 he wont be providing any source