YAZID’S APPOINTMENT AS CROWN PRINCE
The decision of Mu‘awiya ibn Abi Sufyan to appoint his son, Yazid, as crown prince has always been a deeply controversial issue. There is no doubt that this step only added to the tragedies of Islamic history. Still, many careful observers believe Mu‘awiya acted with sincere intentions. He genuinely thought that Yazid was the most capable person in the Muslim world to hold the caliphate. According to Ibn Khaldun, “The reason Mu‘awiya was moved to appoint his son Yazid, instead of another, was to preserve the unity of the community.” When Abdullah ibn Umar objected to the appointment, Mu‘awiya replied: “I feared that after me the people would scatter like sheep without a shepherd.” (al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, Ibn Kathir, vol. 11, p. 308)
Several such reports suggest that Mu‘awiya was sincere in his choice. It is even related that, while standing on the pulpit during the Friday sermon, he prayed:
“O God, if I have appointed Yazid because of the virtues I saw in him, then grant him the position I hoped for and support him. But if I did so only out of a father’s love for his son, then take his soul before he reaches that position.” (Al-Dhahabi, Tarikh al-Islam, Vol. 4, p. 169)
Yet the question remains: how could Mu‘awiya be satisfied to nominate for the caliphate a man who had the support of only one senior Companion of the Prophet (Mughira ibn Shu‘ba), while thousands of other Companions then alive were either opposed to the appointment or remained silent only to avoid division in the community? Moreover, Mu‘awiya himself was known as an extremely far-sighted statesman. Umar ibn al-Khattab once described him as “a man who could smile even when angry.” (Al-Istiab by Ibn Abd al-Barr, Vol. 3, p. 450) He possessed a remarkable ability to make decisions with a cool and level mind. How, then, could such a statesman place confidence in a decision which later history proved to be mistaken?
Another point deserves consideration. In 41 AH, Hasan ibn Ali brought a major political conflict to an end by relinquishing the Caliphate in favour of Mu‘awiyah. Although Imam Hasan had not made this a condition, Mu‘awiyah, of his own accord, gave a verbal assurance in the presence of Abdullah ibn Amir that Imam Hasan would succeed him as Caliph. Ibn Kathir writes:
“When Mu‘awiya made peace with Hasan, he agreed that Hasan would succeed him. But when Hasan passed away, Mu‘awiya’s inclination toward Yazid grew stronger, and he came to believe Yazid was deserving of the caliphate.” (Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, vol. 11, p. 308)
After Hasan ibn Ali had made such an extraordinary sacrifice by giving up the caliphate in favor of Mu‘awiya, the least Mu‘awiya could have done in return was to honor his promise by nominating Hasan’s capable brother, Husayn ibn Ali. But this thought never took hold in his mind. Instead, he pressed ahead with full determination, nominating his son Yazid and securing the people’s pledge of allegiance for him.
As for Yazid’s incapabilities, it is enough to point to one fact: Husayn ibn Ali was killed during his reign. This was not only an act of cruelty, but also, from a political perspective, an utterly reckless decision. As head of a great empire, Yazid should have known that killing the Prophet’s grandson would inevitably provoke outrage. And that is exactly what happened. To deal with the fallout, he was forced to attack Makkah and Madinah, during which nearly two thousand Muslims were killed in the two holy cities.
Another point Yazid completely failed to grasp was that reconciliation with a noble man is always possible until the very last moment. History shows that although Husayn ignored the advice of elders and friends when he left Makkah, determined not to accept anything less than holding Yazid to account, once he reached Karbala and realized that the promises from the people of Kufa—on which he had relied so much that he even brought his family—were nothing but lies, he resolved to withdraw from politics and lead a life away from public affairs. In other words, at its final stage, the conflict between Yazid and Husayn had reached the same point as the earlier conflict between Mu‘awiya and Hasan. But Mu‘awiya, being a seasoned statesman, had simply signed a blank page and sent it to Hasan, telling him to write whatever peace terms he wished. By contrast, when Husayn offered a similar proposal, Yazid’s men killed him. Although Yazid was not present on the battlefield, when he saw Husayn’s severed head he reacted with shock and grief. Yet he cannot be absolved of responsibility, because the atmosphere a ruler creates is precisely what his subordinates act upon.
The story of Yazid’s nomination shows how even with sincerity and good intentions, a person can make a colossal mistake. Human beings are often overwhelmed by their own likes and dislikes. Their immediate circumstances shape their mindset, and they begin to think only within those limits. Their thinking becomes conditioned. They may act with good intentions, yet still make wrong decisions. That is why Islam places such great emphasis on consultation. Through consultation, one person’s mistake is corrected by another’s perspective. In collective affairs, consultation is as necessary as congregation is for the Friday prayer. Mu‘awiya was undoubtedly sincere. But his decision was the product of a conditioned mind—one that failed to take account of the stark realities that lay plainly outside his own outlook.
It is said that when Amir Mu‘awiya fell seriously ill near the time of his death, he called Yazid and gave him some advice. He said:
“My son, I have spared you the hardship of saddling horses and making long journeys. I have turned difficulties into ease, subdued your enemies, and brought the proud Arabs under obedience. I have provided for you things that no one before me ever provided.” (Tarikh al-Tabari, Vol. 5, p. 322)
When a single idea takes hold of a person’s mind, he often becomes blind to the realities that go against it. This is exactly what happened with Amir Mu‘awiya. He overlooked two very serious truths. The first was that in Islam, the choice of caliph lies with the shura (council of consultation). For a ruler to appoint his son as caliph was against the spirit of Islam, and such an action was bound to provoke a reaction. This gave his rivals, the Banu Hashim, an ideological basis to revive their movement against Umayyad rule. And this is exactly what happened. As soon as Amir Mu‘awiya passed away, uprisings against Yazid broke out across the Muslim world. Not for a single day of his rule did Yazid live in peace as caliph.
The second truth that Amir Mu‘awiya forgot was that the death before which he was advising his son would soon come to his son as well. History tells us that Yazid ruled for barely three and a half years before he died. After him, Amir Mu‘awiya’s grandson, Mu‘awiya bin Yazid bin Mu‘awiya (39–64 AH), took the throne, but he too died after only three months. Thus, within less than four years of Amir Mu‘awiya’s death, the caliphate passed out of the hands of his sons and grandsons, and into the family of Marwan bin Hakam bin Abi al-‘As bin Umayyah (2–65 AH). If Mu‘awiya had reflected on the uncertainty of human destiny, he might not have taken the step that led historians to write that Mu‘awiya was the first person to introduce into Islam the tradition of Caesar and Chosroes. (Tarikh al-Khulafa by Al-Suyuti, p. 362)
On the other hand, for those who raise the banner to depose corrupt rulers, this event also holds a great lesson. If a person chooses patience and limits his reform efforts to what lies within his reach, he will soon realize that the Master of the universe is bringing about the same event in a far better and more successful way—something that, because of our impatience, we often try to bring about in a failed manner.
______________________
This article is based on a lecture delivered on 8 January 1978 in Burhanpur (Madhya Pradesh), at a gathering organized by the Halqa Nairang-e-Khayal.
