A Critical Response to “The Umayyad Caliphate (661–750 CE): From Prophetic Legacy to Imperial Power”

Deconstructing the Myth:

The article in question promotes a sanitized narrative in which the Umayyad Caliphate is cast as a seamless continuation of the Islamic prophetic mission—a benevolent successor that expanded Islam’s reach. This narrative is not just misleading; it is intellectually dishonest and historically incoherent. The reality of the Umayyad Caliphate—based on Islamic sources, early historical accounts, and Qur’anic principles—is a radical departure from the spirit of Islam as founded by the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.

Let us dismantle the myth piece by piece.

1. From Prophetic Leadership to Hereditary Despotism

The article opens with the premise that the Umayyads inherited the “Prophetic legacy.” That assertion collapses under the weight of both revelation and reason.

  • Muhammad’s Model Was Anti-Monarchical
    The Prophet explicitly warned against hereditary kingship:

    “The Caliphate after me will last for thirty years; then there will be kingship.”
    — Sunan Abu Dawud 4646

    The Umayyads turned khilāfah into mulk—monarchy—beginning with Muʿāwiyah’s installation of his son Yazīd. This act was not merely un-Islamic—it was a direct violation of the Prophet’s warning. Islam’s spiritual leadership was reduced to dynastic politics, where power was inherited, not earned through piety or consultation.

  • The Qur’an Mandates Shūrā (Consultation), Not Inheritance

    “…consult them in affairs…” (Qur’an 3:159)
    “…those who conduct their affairs by mutual consultation…” (Qur’an 42:38)

    The Umayyads abolished shūrā and replaced it with autocracy, undermining a fundamental Qur’anic principle. Their rule was not an Islamic caliphate—it was a tribal dictatorship baptized in religious language.

  • Muʿāwiyah’s Rule Originated in Civil War, Not Consensus
    The caliphate passed to the Umayyads only after a bloody civil war (the First Fitnah) and the assassination of ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib. The transfer of power occurred not through shūrā or bayʿah, but by the sword, through brute coercion and assassination—not divine appointment or communal consent.

2. Conquest, Not Daʿwah: The Weaponization of Jihad

The article celebrates the Umayyad conquests as the expansion of Islam. But what really expanded was the territorial ambition of a militarized Arab elite—not the message of the Qur’an.

  • Selective Use of Qur’anic Verses
    The invocation of Qur’an 9:5 and 9:29 to justify global conquest is a common apologetic distortion. These verses addressed specific historical betrayals, not an open-ended license to dominate the world. The Qur’an forbids transgression in warfare (2:190), mandates protection of non-combatants, and explicitly upholds freedom of religion (2:256).

  • What the Umayyads Actually Did:

    • Enslaved civilian populations

    • Imposed jizya even on Muslim converts

    • Forced people into Islam in clear violation of Qur’an 2:256

    • Pillaged lands from Spain to Central Asia not for faith, but for tribute

    This is not jihad fī sabīl Allāh. This is imperialism wrapped in sacred rhetoric.

  • Qur’anic Condemnation of Greed and Oppression

    “Woe to every slanderer and backbiter, who amasses wealth and counts it…”
    — Qur’an 104:1–2

    The gold-plated palaces of Damascus, the Umayyads’ accumulation of war spoils, and the exploitation of the weak stand as blatant violations of Qur’anic morality.

3. The Racism of the “Islamic” Empire: Betraying the Ummah

The article’s casual mention of non-Arab Muslims (mawālī) being “treated unequally” masks one of the most obscene hypocrisies in Islamic history.

  • The Umayyads Institutionalized Ethnic Apartheid
    The Qur’an proclaims:

    “O mankind, We have created you… and made you into nations and tribes that you may know one another. The most noble of you is the most righteous…”
    — Qur’an 49:13

    Yet under Umayyad policy, a Persian convert to Islam was inferior to an Arab born a pagan. Islam was meant to transcend tribalism; the Umayyads revived it.

  • Double Taxation for Non-Arab Muslims
    Converts from non-Arab backgrounds were often forced to continue paying jizya, despite having embraced Islam. This turned the religion’s ethical foundation into a taxation racket, where conversion meant little unless it enriched the ruling class.

  • No Equality in Worship or Administration
    Arabs dominated mosques, military commands, and judiciary posts. Mawālī were often barred from key roles. The Umayyads replaced Islam’s universalism with Arab supremacy.

This was not the global brotherhood of the Qur’an. It was tribal aristocracy masquerading as religion.

4. Political Propaganda as Hadith: Manufacturing Obedience

The article suggests the Umayyads helped systematize Islam’s sacred traditions. In reality, they weaponized religion to secure obedience, justify injustice, and de-legitimize opposition.

  • Hadiths Supporting Tyranny Proliferated Under Their Rule
    The explosion of hadiths promoting absolute obedience to rulers, even tyrants, cannot be disconnected from the political needs of Umayyad caliphs. Consider:

    “You must listen and obey, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth.”
    — Often attributed to the Prophet in Sahih Muslim

    Such hadiths conflict with the Qur’anic command to oppose injustice (Qur’an 4:135) and likely emerged in a climate where disobedience equaled sedition.

  • Religious Scholars Were Bought or Executed
    Independent voices were silenced. Some scholars were killed; others co-opted. This laid the groundwork for centuries of religious quietism and despotism.

  • Husayn’s Murder at Karbala:
    The grandson of the Prophet ﷺ was slaughtered along with his family for daring to challenge Umayyad legitimacy. The murder of Ahl al-Bayt by a so-called Islamic caliphate is not a side note—it is an existential indictment of the regime.

5. The Abbasids: False Redeemers of a Corrupted Inheritance

The article ends with a vague note that sectarian divisions continued under Abbasid rule—as if to suggest continuity. But in truth, the Abbasid Revolution was less about restoring prophetic ideals and more about replacing one corrupt dynasty with another.

  • The Abbasids Rode to Power on the Back of Shi‘a Rhetoric… Then Betrayed It
    They claimed to represent Ahl al-Bayt, but once in power, persecuted the descendants of the Prophet as ruthlessly as the Umayyads did.

  • The Umayyads Were Not Replaced by Justice, but by Another Dynasty
    If anything, the Abbasids perfected the machinery of state violence, religious control, and bureaucratic domination. The ideals of the Prophet died long before the Abbasids arrived.

Conclusion: The Umayyads as a Theological Catastrophe

The Umayyad Caliphate did not continue the prophetic mission—it buried it. Their rise marked a transformation of Islam:

  • From revelation to empire

  • From righteousness to race

  • From consultation to coercion

  • From morality to monarchy

They hijacked Islam’s spiritual message, converted it into state ideology, and enforced it through propaganda and the sword. What emerged from Damascus was not a radiant continuation of Islam—but its imperial domestication.

If anything, the Umayyad Caliphate stands as the first great corruption of Islam’s mission. Its legacy is not one of piety or legitimacy—it is a scar on the very soul of Islamic history.

🧭 To the Reader:

If you believe this critique misrepresents Islamic sources or history, you are invited—indeed, challenged—to respond. But bring forth Qur’anic evidence, authentic hadith, and historical documentation. Mere sentiment, apologetics, or romanticism will not do. Truth can withstand examination—can your convictions? 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Problematic Elevation of Hadith Over the Qur’an: A Critical Polemic Response to “Why Do Islamic Scholars Sometimes Prioritize Hadith Over Qur’anic Verses?” Introduction: The Qur’an or the Hadith — Which Truly Commands Authority? Islamic scholarship claims the Qur’an is the ultimate, unaltered word of God. Yet, the very same scholars often insist that hadith—the human-recorded sayings and actions of Muhammad—sometimes override or clarify the Qur’an itself. This contradictory stance raises serious questions about textual integrity, theological consistency, and the real source of Islamic law and morality. If the Qur’an is “the Book about which there is no doubt” (Qur’an 2:2), why do we find thousands of rulings and laws being sourced primarily from hadith, often at the expense of clear Qur’anic principles? This post critically examines the logic, consequences, and hidden assumptions behind this practice. 1. The Qur’an’s Primacy Is Undermined by Overreliance on Hadith While t...
Read more
The Line of Prophets – A Continuation of the Message Isa (Jesus) – The Honored Messiah and Servant of Allah In the Islamic tradition, few prophets occupy as revered and central a place as ʿĪsā ibn Maryam (Jesus, son of Mary) . He is one of the five Ulū al-ʿAzm — the elite messengers distinguished for their endurance and unwavering resolve — along with Nūḥ, Ibrāhīm, Mūsā, and Muḥammad (peace be upon them all). His life, miracles, and eschatological role are discussed across over ninety verses in fifteen different surahs of the Qur’an, and he is referred to by name twenty-five times. Islam presents ʿĪsā not as divine, nor as the Son of God, but as a messenger of Allah , a spirit from Him (rūḥ minhu) , and His word cast upon Mary (kalimatuhu alqāhā ilā Maryam) . He was sent specifically to Banī Isrāʾīl (the Children of Israel) to revive the message of pure tawḥīd (monotheism), to confirm the Torah, and to deliver the Injīl , a scripture filled with light and guidance. A Miraculo...
Read more
  Before Islam: Decoding the Earliest Sources on Muhammad’s Movement Islamic tradition paints a vivid picture: in 610 CE, Muhammad received divine revelations in a Meccan cave, birthing Islam—a fully formed monotheistic faith with scripture, rituals, and law. Yet, the earliest non-Muslim records—Syriac, Greek, and Armenian chronicles from the 7th century—tell a starkly different story. They mention no “Islam,” no “Qur’an,” and no prophet preaching a new creed. Instead, Muhammad’s followers appear as “Hagarenes,” “Ishmaelites,” or “Saracens”—vague monotheists or tribal raiders acting under divine sanction. This evidence challenges the claim of a coherent religion descending from heaven, suggesting a fluid insurgency later mythologized into divine revelation by Abbasid scholars. This post dives into these sources, their context, and their implications, testing Islam’s narrative against the Qur’an’s own standards—proof ( Surah 2:111 ) and consistency ( Surah 4:82 ). The Islamic Narrat...
Read more