تويت
Imam al‑Hasan’s (peace be upon him) Clauses of Non‑violence and Peace
From the position of the strong and capable, there
s the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in the sixth year of Hijrah. The Prophet’s (peace be upon him and his family) march to Mecca in that year s not so much for r or drawing the sword against the polytheists, as it s a divine call which the Prophet answered: to visit his Lord in the Ancient House. But he preferred to return to Medina after making his famous treaty with the polytheists of Mecca, in order to preserve the lives of his companions and of his people, to return with his companions to where they had come from, and to leave a decisive proof against his opponents — and then would come the f
its in the auspicious conquest of Mecca without shedding blood.That resounding victory burned the pride of the polytheists at that time, and recoiled into the souls, fanning hatred and envy for those triumphs which this religion achieved. Those resentments lay sleeping relatively long within large segments of the early Muslim community, to re‑emerge publicly again under an Islamic guise during the famous arbitration incident in the Battle of Siffin under the leadership of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him).
The Islamic society
s the same, though slightly changed: the polytheists of Mecca and the hypocrites during the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, and the Muslims of Siffin — the name without the meaning — were mostly the same. A small number preferred the line of the faithful Imam, rejecting the farce of arbitration.And the repercussions of that arbitration appeared: the army of Kufa divided into two sides: one that called for fighting and for breaking the pledges they had defended ratifying, after accusing the Imam of “apostasy” (as they claimed), and another side calling for peace and for returning to Kufa. And so came the sedition of the Kharijites, eliminating many of them (in number, not thought) in the Battle of Nahra
n.These repercussions intensified when the people of Kufa slackened and faltered in answering the Imam’s call to defend their positions that Muawiyah’s forces were envious of, violating lives and property.
The Imam (peace be upon him) addressed his army:
“I praise Allah for what has been decreed of affairs, and ordained of acts. O you who when ordered do not obey, and when called do not respond! If you are neglected you fall into mischief, and if
r is ged upon you you collapse. If people gather around an Imam you stab him, and if called tord hardship you retreat. No father but yours (i.e. no one but you to blame)! What are you iting for with your victory and striving in its tth? Death or humiliation for you. By God, if my day has come and it comes to me, it will separate between me and you. I have endured being with you, but you are many in number and I am weary.”“O you to whom I once turned: Is there no religion that binds you, no sense of honor to spur you? Is it not strange that Muawiyah invites the harsh and the ignorant, and they follow him without help or favor, while I invite you — you who are the remnant of Islam and the rest of the people — to help, or part of
ard, and you disperse from me and dispute among yourselves.” The Heavy Legacy
After the killing of the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) and the pledge of allegiance to Imam al‑Hasan (peace be upon him) as Caliph, he inherited that heavy legacy, represented by this strange admixture: a combatant force in which multiple opposing currents and contradictory elements were gathered. They can be classified into groups:
- The Kharijites: those who broke ay from obedience to Imam Ali (peace be upon him), fought and opposed him, and made him an enemy. They found in Imam al‑Hasan a middle path against Muawiyah. This group is stirred by even the faintest doubt and hastily passes judgment.
- The pro‑Umayyad group, in two sub‑types:
- Those who did not find in the government of Kufa what would satisfy their hunger or quench their thirst for the ambitions they harbored, so they secretly gave their loyalty to Damascus (Syria), iting for the opportunity to seize power and hand the matter over to Muawiyah.
- Those who bore rancor against the government of Kufa because of grievances in their souls inherited from past covenants, or because of personal calculations.
- Those who did not find in the government of Kufa what would satisfy their hunger or quench their thirst for the ambitions they harbored, so they secretly gave their loyalty to Damascus (Syria),
- The undecided/labile faction: it has no fixed path or independent special mission; rather, its goal is to ensure safety and perhaps some benefits from the side that seems to win. It tches closely to see tord which side the balance of power will incline, to incline with it.
- The rabble/unguided mass: those whose stance is without foundation; they are followers of every loud voice, shifting with every wind.
- The sincere faithful: the good few, whose voice melts into the crowd of opposing voices.
How Imam al‑Hasan (peace be upon him) Viewed That Contradictory Human Map
Ibn Tawus mentions in his book Al‑Malahim
l‑Fitan words of Imam al‑Hasan (peace be upon him) that express his weak confidence in his army. Among the most powerful he said in this regard, in his speech to his army in Al‑Madain, he said:“You were on your march to Siffin, and your religion before your worldly affairs; and today your world and your desires are before your religion. And you are between two slain: one slain at Siffin whom you weep for, and one slain at Nahra
n for whose revenge you seek, and the rest are laggards; and the weepers are insurgent.” Facilitations / Preconditions of the Treaty
Faced with this strange and discordant mixture, Muawiyah did not stand idle — he had already known the weak points by which Imam al‑Hasan’s army
s afflicted — and his intrigues began splitting their y into the Imam’s camp at Maskan, where the first signs of sedition began to appear clearly. Those intrigues found a fertile field in the presence of hypocrites and those who preferred safety. A mor spread: “That al‑Hasan is writing to Muawiyah for a treaty; then you will have sted your lives.”Al‑Saduq narrated in Al‑‘Ilal that Muawiyah induced (‘planted the suggestion’ in) Amr ibn Harith, Al‑Ash‘ath ibn Qais, Hijar ibn Abjar, Shubth ibn Rubi‘ — whispering intrigues to each through one of his spies: “If you kill al‑Hasan, you will have one hundred thousand dirhams, military posts in the armies of Syria, and a daughter of mine.” When Imam al‑Hasan learned of this, Ubaydullah ibn Abbas, commander of al‑Hasan’s army, surrendered to his enemy Muawiyah, dragging with him a large number of chiefs, leaders and soldiers. The number of those who fled or surrendered reached eight thousand out of an army whose total
s twenty thousand, compared with sixty thousand in the Army of Syria.The Imam (peace be upon him) stood before these sequential calamities and trials, composed, examining his own course and considering where this path
s going to lead him.A delegation from Syria came, composed of Al‑Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah, Abdullah ibn Kariz, and Abdulrahman ibn al‑Hakam. They brought letters from the people of Iraq for al‑Hasan to see what
s hidden within his companions — those who harbored evil, who had volunteered in his ranks to kindle the flame of sedition when its aited time came.The treaty
s offered to the Imam with terms that Muawiyah considered suitable, but the Imam did not wish to give them anything from himself that would satisfy Muawiyah’s ambition. He s careful in his response so that he did not let them sense acceptance or anything pointing to that. He did not fix a given stance for himself before testing his soldiers, to make sure how far his army would stand with him in moments of violence, so that he might clearly uncover the dark, sullen reality of his army. He went out and delivered a speech to the people, saying:“Verily, Muawiyah has called us to a matter that holds neither dignity nor justice. If you
nt death, we will return it to him, and judge it to Allah Most High by the sharpened swords. If you wish life, we accept it first, taking for you what pleases you.”And Muawiyah sent a sealed draft to Imam al‑Hasan (peace be upon him) to stipulate whatever he wished for himself, his family, and his followers. The Imam wrote down the conditions and extracted from Muawiyah the pledge and covenant to fulfill them, though in
rdly Muawiyah intended concealment and breach. Clauses of the Treaty
The treaty’s written clauses were:
- Transfer of authority to Muawiyah on condition that he implements the Book of God, the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace be upon him and his family), and follows the example of the Rightly‑Guided Caliphs.
- That authority (of leadership) be for al‑Hasan after him; if something happens to him, then it goes to his brother al‑Husayn; and Muawiyah shall not entst it to anyone else.
- That the insults of Amir al‑Mu’minin (Ali) be abandoned, and that in supplication in prayer he be not cursed, and that Ali be mentioned only in good.
- Excluding what is in the treasury (Bayt al‑Mal) of Kufa, which is five thousand thousand [i.e. five million] (dirhams?), so that it is not included in the transfer of authority; and that Muawiyah pays to al‑Husayn two thousand thousand dirhams; and that Banu Hashim be preferred in giving and favour over Banu Abd‑Shams; and that a million dirhams be distributed among the children of those killed with Ali at the Battle of the Camel and those killed with him at Siffin; and that this be taken from the land revenue of the estate (Kharaaj) of Dar Abjar.
- That people are secure wherever they are in the land of God — in their Syria, Iraq, Hejaz, Yemen — and that both the black and the red (metaphorically all people, all colors) be safe; that Muawiyah endures whatever mistakes of them occur, and that no one be held to account for what has passed, nor should people of Iraq be held with hostility, and that the followers of Ali in wherever they may be, be secure in their persons, their wealth, their women, and their children; that no harm follow them, nor should any among them suffer mischief; and that everyone who has a right obtains his right; and concerning what befell the companions of Ali wherever they were.
Also that no plot (treachery) be plotted against al‑Hasan son of Ali nor against his brother al‑Husayn nor any of the household of the Messenger of Allah, secretly or openly; and that no one of them be frightened in any horizon of horizons.
A Contemporary Reading
Returning to the treaty’s clauses, we attempt to unpack what is found in each clause, its words and their meanings, so we may extract manifestations of non‑violence in those clauses.
In the first clause, we find the word transfer (taslim), which in its root is “salām / salam” — peace. One cannot hand over something except in a friendly, calm manner that carries all meanings of peace between two or more.
And the condition of the transfer is to act in accordance with the Book of God, which contains only calls to love and harmony, forgiveness and rejecting severance, combat, and violence — and likewise the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).
So the transfer only takes place, then, under the fixed Qur’anic principle, which does not change with changing circumstances, of respecting the humanity of others and refraining from threatening it in any form, by word or deed.
In the third clause: that insults to
rd the Commander of the Faithful be abandoned, and that in prayer he not be cursed, and that Ali be mentioned only in good — all of which implies refraining from violence aimed at others — spirituality of harm, and demeaning a figure whom they venerate and sanctify — what in modern terms is termed symbolic or moral violence (harm inflicted psychologically, on feelings of dignity, honor, self‑worth, identity, and emotional stability).(For there is no act, whether negative — such as refusing assistance — or positive, such as mockery — that is symbolic, or an actual act, which cannot by its nature activate aggressive behavior.)
In the fourth clause: to differentiate among the children of those killed — the meaning is clear — to compensate these children for what befell them of psychological, social, and economic harm due to the killing of their fathers, who were their providers and in whose arms they were raised. It is compensation — even if not sufficient — for the bitterness of orphanhood, for the shock and sorrow which st
ck those children. This is what modern courts take into account in contemporary laws, when a person psychologically harmed sues the one who caused him harm, seeking monetary compensation for what he has suffered.In the fifth clause: it contains fourteen sub‑articles rejecting violence in all its forms:
- People are secure; and such security is only achieved in the absence of that which causes fear and unrest.
- And that the security be inclusive of all races and colors; there is no difference between black and red, for people are equal in feeling fear and in feeling safety.
- Toleration of their errors indicates forgiveness of whatever mistakes others have committed; so that one does not persist in fear of past deeds, spreading terror in hearts.
- And not to hold anyone to account for what has already passed of prior wrong or error, so that the erring person feels forgiveness for what he committed, and so there remains a chance of not returning to error again.
- And that the people of Iraq are not treated with bitterness — meaning hatred or anger because they fought against him.
- And that the companions of those who led the fight against him are granted security; they are safe in themselves, in their wealth, their women, their children, to the end of what is expressed in this clause.
- All of which stress the principle of security, tranquility, absence of fear, non‑harm, not preventing people from what they are used to enjoying.
tal form which Muawiyah practiced, whether before the treaty or after it.If the goal of politics and political practice is “achieving interest, whether individual or collective, developing it, and defending it” — which is what Imam al‑Hasan (peace be upon him) worked on — the other face of politics, which is “a conflictual process stripped of every human value and of every moral principle caring for others’ interests or respecting their rights, or even their humanity in some cases,”
s what Muawiyah engaged in, through a domineering and violent bias which leads to exclusion of any opponent by organized oppression or by random suppression.Such oppression, when one shines a light upon it, reveals an aggressiveness latent in Muawiyah’s psychology — one can view his aggression (as a behavior driven by anger, hatred, or excessive competition, directed to
rd harming, destroying or defeating others). Conclusion
I cannot claim that I have presented a completely clear interpretation of the principle of non‑violence encapsulated in the clauses of the treaty in this brief haste, and suffice it for me that I have kindled a small candle to enlighten those who care to read events of history with contemporary eyes, linking what transpired with our reality and present, so as to derive a lesson for our future and the future of coming generations.
مصدر المقال بالعربية
مركز الامام الحسن عليه السلام للدراسات التخصصية
ترجمة
cahtgpt
تعليق