Borrowing from the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah
- Details
- Category: Philosofaith
- Written by M. U. Ndagi
- Hits: 921
In the sixth year after the prophet’s migration (hijrah) from Makkah to Madinah, the holy prophet Muhammad (SAW) in company of about 1,400 followers were halted while on their way to Makkah to perform pilgrimage (hajj). They were stopped at a place called “Al-Hudaybiyah”, about fourteen kilometers outside Makkah by the non-Muslim Makkan Arabs who feared that the Muslims might attack their city at a time they were unprepared for war. The prophet (SAW) explained to the Makkan leaders that he had no other intention except to perform hajj. The Makkans felt uncomfortable inspite of the assurances given by the prophet (SAW). After exchange of series of messages between the Makkans and the prophet (SAW), a treaty was concluded between the two parties. This was the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, named after the place at which it was concluded.
The treaty provided that the prophet (SAW) and his followers were to postpone their planned pilgrimage and return to Madinah from Hudaybiyyah without entering Makkah. They were to come back the following year and stay in Makkah for only three days to perform the hajj. During this period, the Makkans were required by the treaty to vacate the city for Muslims who were not expected to come along with any weapons of war. It was also agreed in the treaty that the Muslims and the Makkans were to observe truce of ten years, without engaging in any hostility during the period. It was similarly part of the treaty that if a Muslim desired to leave the prophet’s camp to join the non-Muslim Makkan Quraysh, the prophet (SAW) was not to interfere in such a person’s affairs. However, if anyone from the Makkans joined the prophet’s camp without the express permission of his guardian from among the Quraysh, he was to be returned to his guardian. In essence, a Muslim who went over to the Makkans was not to be sent back to the prophet (SAW); a clause that did not go down well with most followers of the prophet (SAW).Superficially viewed, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah could be as an accord that was not actually in favour of Muslims. They were denied entry in to their native city and could not also perform the hajj in the year they planned. Nonetheless, a critical study of the implications of this treaty reveals that the prophet (SAW) and his followers had more to gain from the pact. At least, the treaty prompted the Makkans to, for the first time; recognize the political status of the prophet (SAW) and the state of Islam. The cessation of hostilities during the period of the truce was implicitly going to facilitate the peaceful spread of the then nascent religion of Islam to other parts of Arabia. The Muslims as a group could have rejected the terms of the treaty offered by the Makkan leaders and forced their entry in to their place of birth. But instead, they conceded against their pressing yearning to the demands of the Makkans. Hence, they patiently and tolerantly postponed their pilgrimage and chose to conclude a treaty, for the singular purpose of achieving a greater motive; the conquest of Makkah.
It is in the light of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah that this column desires to examine the deadlocked political alliance between two parties, the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC). We guess the opposition parties know it better that their collective failure to forge a united and common front would certainly become the strength with which their common political enemy will defeat them in the forthcoming general elections. The reactions of the Nigerian public to recent political events in the country illustrates the curiosity with which many Nigerians looked forward to the coming together of opposition parties to dislodge the ruling party from power, after its twelve years of misrule that settled Nigeria on the rough track of under-development. The breakdown of the alliance discussions indicates how each of these two political parties (ACN and CPC) was unwilling to sacrifice their respective ideologies for the benefit of their collective and common good. The failure of the alliance talks gives the impression that leaders of the two opposition parties are very much unlike the Muslims who in 628AD gave their instant desires to the terms of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, all for a higher cause.
The collapse of the alliance is giving the Nigerian electorate some concern. Their hope of getting the combined efforts of opposition parties to redeem them from the oppressive rule unleashed on them by the ruling party seems to have been dashed. Considering the electoral stage we have reached in our journey to the general elections, all the windows that could lead to a workable alliance appear to have been shut. However, we still encourage opposition parties to return to the discussion table and find ways of entering in to a feasible accord that would facilitate the defeat of their common political enemy. Nigerians believe it is not late for the opposition parties to contract a marriage, which many believe is necessary; otherwise they may consider themselves to be fighting a lost battle. The Nigerian electorate is ready to pay the dowry of this marriage, if eventually contracted, by their zeal to vote for credible leadership. May Allah (SWT) save Nigeria from the plots of those who vowed to rule Nigerians against their political choice, amin.
Articles
Borrowing from the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah
Category: Philosofaith Written by M. U. Ndagi Hits: 921
In the sixth year after the prophet’s migration (hijrah) from Makkah to Madinah, the holy prophet Muhammad (SAW) in company of about 1,400 followers were halted while on their way to Makkah to perform pilgrimage (hajj). They were stopped at a place called “Al-Hudaybiyah”, about fourteen kilometers outside Makkah by the non-Muslim Makkan Arabs who feared that the Muslims might attack their city at a time they were unprepared for war. The prophet (SAW) explained to the Makkan leaders that he had no other intention except to perform hajj. The Makkans felt uncomfortable inspite of the assurances given by the prophet (SAW). After exchange of series of messages between the Makkans and the prophet (SAW), a treaty was concluded between the two parties. This was the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, named after the place at which it was concluded.
The treaty provided that the prophet (SAW) and his followers were to postpone their planned pilgrimage and return to Madinah from Hudaybiyyah without entering Makkah. They were to come back the following year and stay in Makkah for only three days to perform the hajj. During this period, the Makkans were required by the treaty to vacate the city for Muslims who were not expected to come along with any weapons of war. It was also agreed in the treaty that the Muslims and the Makkans were to observe truce of ten years, without engaging in any hostility during the period. It was similarly part of the treaty that if a Muslim desired to leave the prophet’s camp to join the non-Muslim Makkan Quraysh, the prophet (SAW) was not to interfere in such a person’s affairs. However, if anyone from the Makkans joined the prophet’s camp without the express permission of his guardian from among the Quraysh, he was to be returned to his guardian. In essence, a Muslim who went over to the Makkans was not to be sent back to the prophet (SAW); a clause that did not go down well with most followers of the prophet (SAW).Superficially viewed, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah could be as an accord that was not actually in favour of Muslims. They were denied entry in to their native city and could not also perform the hajj in the year they planned. Nonetheless, a critical study of the implications of this treaty reveals that the prophet (SAW) and his followers had more to gain from the pact. At least, the treaty prompted the Makkans to, for the first time; recognize the political status of the prophet (SAW) and the state of Islam. The cessation of hostilities during the period of the truce was implicitly going to facilitate the peaceful spread of the then nascent religion of Islam to other parts of Arabia. The Muslims as a group could have rejected the terms of the treaty offered by the Makkan leaders and forced their entry in to their place of birth. But instead, they conceded against their pressing yearning to the demands of the Makkans. Hence, they patiently and tolerantly postponed their pilgrimage and chose to conclude a treaty, for the singular purpose of achieving a greater motive; the conquest of Makkah.
It is in the light of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah that this column desires to examine the deadlocked political alliance between two parties, the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC). We guess the opposition parties know it better that their collective failure to forge a united and common front would certainly become the strength with which their common political enemy will defeat them in the forthcoming general elections. The reactions of the Nigerian public to recent political events in the country illustrates the curiosity with which many Nigerians looked forward to the coming together of opposition parties to dislodge the ruling party from power, after its twelve years of misrule that settled Nigeria on the rough track of under-development. The breakdown of the alliance discussions indicates how each of these two political parties (ACN and CPC) was unwilling to sacrifice their respective ideologies for the benefit of their collective and common good. The failure of the alliance talks gives the impression that leaders of the two opposition parties are very much unlike the Muslims who in 628AD gave their instant desires to the terms of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, all for a higher cause.
The collapse of the alliance is giving the Nigerian electorate some concern. Their hope of getting the combined efforts of opposition parties to redeem them from the oppressive rule unleashed on them by the ruling party seems to have been dashed. Considering the electoral stage we have reached in our journey to the general elections, all the windows that could lead to a workable alliance appear to have been shut. However, we still encourage opposition parties to return to the discussion table and find ways of entering in to a feasible accord that would facilitate the defeat of their common political enemy. Nigerians believe it is not late for the opposition parties to contract a marriage, which many believe is necessary; otherwise they may consider themselves to be fighting a lost battle. The Nigerian electorate is ready to pay the dowry of this marriage, if eventually contracted, by their zeal to vote for credible leadership. May Allah (SWT) save Nigeria from the plots of those who vowed to rule Nigerians against their political choice, amin.