Click to View

Part 6: Conclusions We Must Draw On Islam 

Back To Main Index
Back To Part 6 Index


There is no need for us to be repetitive about the fact that Islam does not possess a 'revelation'. That should be obvious to anyone with eyes. However, there is much to understand concerning why this is so.

"There Was No Revelation, Bani Hashim Made A Play For The Kingship" 

The followers of Islam know that the history they claim going back before Muhammad tells of a kingship in Mecca, one claimed to go all the way back to Ishmael's sons. It also tells of a striving between Bani Hashim and Bani Umayyah over it, a clannish striving which continued after Muhammad's death - but then for the caliphate. 

What follows is a portion of the early contention from what Ibn Ishaq recorded:

(Suhuf 71) "The story of Juhum... According to what Ziyad b. `Abdullah al-Bakkai told me on the authority of Muhammad b. Ishaq al-Muttalibi is that when Ishmael the son of Abraham died, his son Nabit was in charge of the temple as long as God willed, then it was in charge of Mudah b. `Amr al-Jurhumi. The sons of Ishmael and the sons of Nabit were with their maternal uncles of Jurhum - Jurhum and Qatura who were cousins being at the same the people of Mecca. They had come forth from Yaman and travelled together... (Suhuf 72) When they came to Mecca they saw a town blessed with water and trees; delighted with it they settled there Mudad b. `Amr with the men of Jurhum settled in the upper part of Mecca in Qu`ayqi`an and went no further. Samayda' with Qatura settled in the lower part of Mecca in Ajyad the lower part of Mecca and went no farther. Mudad used to take a tithe from those who entered Mecca from above, while Samayda` did the same to those who entered from below. Each kept to his own territory, neither entering the other's territory. 
Then Jurhum and Qatina quarrelled and contended for supremacy in Mecca; at that time Mudad had with him the sons of Ishmael and Nabit, and he had oversight of the temple... 
Then God multiplied the offspring of Ishmael in Mecca and their uncles from Jurhum were rulers of the temple and judges in Mecca. 
(Suhuf 73) Afterwards Jurhum behaved high-handedly in Mecca and made lawful that which was taboo...[he was forced to go away]. When B. Gakr b `Abdu Manat b. Kanana and `Amr b. al-Harith b. Mudad al-Jurhami brought out the two gazelles of the Ka'ba and the corner-stone and buried them in the well ZamZam, going away with the men of Jurhum to Yaman. They were bitterly grieved at losing the kingship..." 
(Suhuf 80) Thus Qusayy gained authority over the temple and Mecca and brought in his people from their dwellings to Mecca. He behaved as a king over his tribe and the people of Mecca, and so they made him king; ...Qu
Back To Top


Part 6: Conclusions We Must Draw On Islam 

Back To Part 6 Index

sayy was the first of B. Ka`b b. Lu'ayy to assume kingship and to be obeyed by his people as king. He held the keys of the temple, the right to water the pilgrims from the well of ZamZam, to feed the pilgrims, to preside at assemblies, and to hand out the war banners. In his hands lay all the dignities of Mecca; he divided the town into quarters among his people and settled all the Quraish into their houses in Mecca which they held.
(Suhuf 84) After the death of Qusayy his sons assumed his authority over the people and marked out Mecca in quarters...Then the sons of `Abdu Manaf - `Abdu Shams and Hashim and al-Muttalib and Naufal - agreed to seize the rights that the sons of `Abdu'l Dar possessed which Qusayy had given to `Abdu'l Dar himself, namely those mentioned above. They considered that they had a better right to them because of their superiority and their position among the people. This caused dissension among Quraysh, one section siding with B. `Abdu Manaf, and the other with B. `Abdu'l Dar. The former held that the new claimants were right... [the sons came near to war]...
(Suhuf 85) The B. `Abdu Manaf brought out a bowl full of scent... and they put it for their allies in the mosque beside the Ka'ba; then they dipped their hands into it and they and their allies took a solemn oath. Then they rubbed their hands on the side of the Ka'ba strengthening the solemnity of the oath. For this reason they were called the Scented Ones. 
The other side took a similar oath at the Ka'ba and they were called the Confederates.... 
When the people had thus decided on war, suddenly they demanded peace on the condition that B. `Abdu Manaf should be given the rights of watering the pilgrims and collecting the tax; and that access to the Ka'ba, the standard of war, and the assembly house, should belong to the B. `Abdu'l Dar as before. The arrangement commended itself to both sides and was carried out, and so war was prevented. This was the state of affairs until God brought Islam, when the apostle of God said, 'Whatever alliance there was in the days of ignorance Islam strengthens it.""
(Sirah of Ibn Ishaq, Guillaume, p. 47-57) 
The whole story embodies a very distinct kingship in Mecca, with the line of descent from Qusayy to Muhammad being Muhammad (b. 570 A.D.)/ Abdullah/ Abdul Muttalib/ Hashimi (b. 442 A.D.)/ Abdu Manaf/ Qusayy. We can see that Muhammad was the great-great-great grandson of Qusayy, the king of Mecca. 

He was also the great grandson of Hashim, who, with the other sons of `Abdu Manaf wanted to strip the rest of the 'kingship' away from their uncle's (`Abdu'l Dar's) descendants. WAR was only just averted.

After this, Muhammad's clan held "the rights of watering the pilgrims and collecting the tax". 

The date of Qusayy's birth1 means that within 100 years of Muhammad's birth (570 A.D.), strife had broken out, and war over who should hold the entire authority in Mecca was only just averted.

Back To Top


Part: Conclusions We Must Draw On Islam 

Back To Part 6 Index

Thus there was a 'kingship' present and all were well aware of it, as all of Islam knows. 

Although it is said that when Muhammad assumed control he 'strengthened' the existing agreement (i.e. as to the dividing of the authority of Mecca), we must also face the fact that Muhammad is seen in all the literature as being in charge of the standard of war, something that was not allotted at the time that war was averted. How did this come into Muhammd's hands if he did not possess the kingship? 

Furthermore, it is declared that ruling authority was accepted by Muhammad in Medinah where he dwelt before he marched on Mecca. Bilal Philips states:

"Islam spread rapidly through the clans of Yathrib and within a year Muslims became the city's majority. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was then made the ruler and the name of the city was changed to Madinah." ('19', p. 62)  It is not surprising that Abu Sufyan (the despised), upon seeing Muhammad and his force just before it marched on Mecca, is reported to have said: "Abbas! Verily your nephew has acquired quite a kingship." (Imamat, Rizvi, p. 4). The response was: "Woe unto thee! This is not Kingship, it is the Prophethood." Of course, one must also consider more closely the testimony of Yazid ibn Muawiyyah when he declared, "There was no revelation. Bani Hashim made a play for the kingship!"

While it is acknowledged he was not from amongst the 'rightly guided' caliphs - in fact he was utterly revolting in his behaviour - the condition of Islam 1400 years later seems to be 'Proof' enough that his assertion was correct. 

We note too that the Islamic 'histories' have busied themselves trying to hide this 'Kingship' from view so that it does not slur Muhammad's name as being "the pure and truthful one" among Quraish. 

For example, they report a conversation between Heraclius and Abu Sufyan, in which Heraclius asks: "Has there been any king in this family?" And the response is "NO!".

In the same publication is recorded:

"Heraclius then summed up the conversation thus: "You say that this man belongs to a noble family; Prophets always come of noble families. You say that no one else in the family never claimed Prophethood . Had it been so, Back To Top


Part 6: Conclusions We Must Draw On Islam 

Back To Part 6 Index

I would have thought that he was influenced by family tradition. You say that none of his ancestors was a king; Had it been so I would have thought he was aspiring to kingship. You admit that he never tells lies; a person who does not tell a lie to a man cannot lie about God." Yet this is an obvious lie. To what are we to attribute it?

We find that when `Uthman [an Umayyid] assumed the caliphate, Abu Sufyan showed his true colours, not only as an Umayyid, but as one who had only been 'playing the game' all along, staying alive by acting out what was needful to stay alive - pretend to be 'a follower of Islam'. He declared:

"O children of Umayya! Now that this kingdom has come to you, play with it as the children lay with a ball and pass it from one to another of your clan. This kingdom is a reality; and we do not know whether there is any paradise and hell or not." It is reported that Abu Sufyan also went to Hamza's grave at Uhud, kicked it, and declared: "O Abu Yali! See that the Kingdom for which you were fighting us has at last come to us." This was a man who was 'converted' by the threat of the sword by Abbas, as all accounts show. He was obviously lying when he went to Heraclius. All in Islam recognise that he despised the religion of Islam, yet they gladly 'use' this purported testimony to create a good character for Muhammad. 

But, on how many of the other points was he also lying ('outwitting')? If he didn't accept Muhammad's word on the religion he brought, then certainly he must have considered Muhammad to have been 'outwitting' everyone, and so his testimony that Muhammad "never told lies" was also false.

This means that though it is repugnant to the ears of every true follower of Islam, it must be admitted that the evidence points to the perpetrating, by Muhammad, of an 'outwitting' on the Quraysh. This should not be surprising since these 'permissible lies' are the Sunnah of Muhammad, and one would expect him to be implementing them.

We note that many in Islam today have busied themselves with its defense using lies. How much of Islam has been fashioned in this fashion over the centuries?

'The Vice-Regency' or 'The Kingship'

Muhammad taught that Adam was made the vice-regent of the earth. He also seems to have taught that this vice-regency passes from Ummah to Ummah. Since the followers of Islam consider themselves to be the last

Back To Top


Part 6: Conclusions We Must Draw On Islam 

Back To Part 6 Index

Ummah, they believe that this vice-regency falls to them, and that is why they think the world should fall to them. 

While today the Hizb ut-Tahrir, and many others, cling tenaciously to the belief that Islam has become the inheritor of a 'vice-regency, with the fall of the Qur'an and Islam certain facts in this matter have to be faced.

Since Islam is now seen to be false, sincere followers of Islam must now give up their chasing after the 'vice-regency'. If they do not, then it will merely be evidence that they too are really after the 'kingship'. Their motive will thus be seen to be power, not religious truth. 

Bilal Philips in his refutation of the 'miraculous #19 theory' about the Qur'an declared concerning those who had believed that theory:

"All those sincere Muslims who have publicly propagated this theory in ignorance are Islamically obliged to publicly disown and discredit it , and immediately cease publication, distribution and sale of books and tapes which support it" ('19'..., p. 66) Shall the true God expect anything less of those who sincerely propagated Islam but now find it false? Shall they continue to assert that there is a 'vice-regency' when there is not? Or that Muhammad held a 'prophethood' when he did not? This would only be one more lie.


1/ We also read of Qusayy: 

"In the fifth century A.D. a man named Qusai was born in Fehr's line." This 'line of descent' referred to spans the 7 generations of Fihr/ Ghaalib/ Luwayy/ Kaa'b/ Murra/ Kilaab/ Qusayy. Islam claims that it was either Fihr or Qusayy who was called by the name 'Quraysh', the name held by Muhammad's tribe, and the dialect in which the Hadith says the Qur'an was revealed. 

Back To Part 6 Index
Back To Top



Click to View