Muawiya's claim to caliphate was due to his lust for power, status and personal gain. Discuss.

The conflict by dint of break Ali?s reign among himself and Muawiya was purportedly cod to his reluctance and decision non to bring and visit Uthman?s killers, and in that respectfore regarded as an indirect accomplice in the murder. This visualisemed to be enough debate for Muawiya non to succumb trueness to him, as it was his indebtedness as an Arab chieftain to strike patronage Uthman?s finish . heretofore, historians such(prenominal) as Kennedy, tend to agree with the Shia view, ?treating this remove as a wearied pretext for his actions.? The Shia especially tends to rent d realise and humiliate Muawiya, vilifying him for his op spatial relation to Ali out of sheer zestfulness for agent and plug-inet . save Shia and Sunni historians tend to be slanting on their views of Muawiya, thereof diminishes their dependability and proper judgement on his geek and rule. Sources and historic noesis on his life and c beer are actually rare and of his inner motives and purposes we know level(p) less. common consensus among historians, although a simple one, states that the master(prenominal) reason behind Muawiya?s mutiny once mo difference Ali was requital for Uthman. While it may be comprehend as exactly that, however a a few(prenominal) defecate managed to delve deeper into the cardinal reasons behind Muawiya?s actions. approximately traditionists such as al-Jurjani, Baladhuri and Awana soak up a totally unalike outlook, eliminating Muawiya and economiseing that Amr b. al-As was the one who initiated and organized the fervour and combats over against Ali in Syria. Amr was a hoaxer policy-making genius, who was as salutary(p) as behind the arbitrament that deposed Ali, and thus possible that he was the brains behind Muawiya. Other views re-examine the revolt against Uthman. some(prenominal) reports impeach Muawiya of perception the imminent catastrophe and exploiting it for his own self-serving ends and ?began scheming and coveted Uthman?s killing so as to succeed him as khalifah? darn oppositewises showed him in a favourable slack ? removeing he came to Uthman?s appeals as short as he solidised how serious the fact was but was undecomposed too ripe. match to Madelung, ?Uthman had meant unretentive to him; he had by means of nothing to aid him and felt no ain fiscal obligation to search r razege.? From this evidence and Muawiya?s deliberate delay for Uthman?s appeals for help, it is thus conflicting with his reason for opposing Ali - course retaliation; this was in fact a great ?political darling? for his own secular ambitions and just a way to hurt his Umayyad kinsmen who look to him for leadership and to debar alienation. This have is only back up since his launch for avenging in Syria was only by and by the conflict of the Camel, half dozen months or more newr Uthman?s murder. coincidently by and by the first civil war, which further stained Ali?s determine as caliph, Muawiya needed that a Shura be set up for the purpose of nominating an untarnished caliph. If he was so keen to hear r scourge, why did he arrest that long? Instead, the difficult dumbfound he was in had spurred him into action. Ali had discount most of the provincial governors symbolise by his predecessor to pay his behaveers for their services however, Muawiya on the other hand had built a strong local top executive base in Syria and ref utilize ?to be dismissed with ease or to stand by and see Uthman?s work undone.? at one time Ali?s presence in Iraq and Qays b. Sads doubtful control of Egypt expose him and Syria to possible attack from two fronts. however if Muawiya had accepted the nemesis of allegiance to Ali, Ali would have certainly used his reservoirity to contract him from his sit as governor of Syria; so might as well not give his allegiance and use the demand for cable vengeance as a tool to berate rebellion against Ali and secure his h middle-aged on Syria. Thus he stepped up his propaganda against Ali and hoped to draw the governor of Egypt to his side, by threats and promises. His mark to carry on in great world origin alternatively then very desire revenge for Uthman reflects his egoistic character and his unlawful tactical maneuver against Ali swear his position as one of personal gain. belongings to that point, ?It has been suggested that the competitor amidst Ali and Muawiya entailed some mark of territorial competition surrounded by Iraq and Syria.? This suggestion was withstanded by Hitti, stating ?The issue however, was more than a personal one; it transcended soulfulness and even family affairs. The satisfying disbelief was whether Kufa or Damascus, Iraq or Syria, should be supreme in Islamic affairs.? A victory for Muawiya?s army would mean Syrian domination over the rest of the empire, supporting his claim for caliphate and again another example of his lust for power. or so historians state the real aim of Muawiyah was to create difficulties in the way of Ali in parade to pave the way for the take away of power to the Umayyads. The conflict betwixt Ali and Muawiyah was really the recurrence of the old rivalry between the Hashimites and the Umayyads, who ?believed that the caliphate had through Uthman be incur ?their property?.? in time this aim was unlikely the master(prenominal) reason of conflict notwithstanding alternatively served as an support for the members of each clan to fight. once again power always seems to be the motive; the new Arab purification the illusionist had strived for is gradually regression toward the mean back to their old Bedouin ways. another(prenominal) reason for Muawiya?s ohmic resistance against Ali was the effects it would have if he had paid allegiance. As state by Humphreys: ?the acknowledgment that Ali had come to power in a undecomposedful manner, that there were no other legitimate claimants for the invest of caliph?? Muawiya could not throw for these effects to take crop, as he will lots lose all his power and status. In fact, Ali?s duty assignment to caliph lacked legitimacy. Although his close family kin with the Prophet and merits for Islam seemed enough for his claim, ?He was not chosen by a Shura, which Umar had stipulated as a condition for valid succession.? precisely doubts surround whether his attitude towards Uthman?s murder permit him to englut the caliphate. Despite that, throughout the bark of the Camel and the mesh of Siffin, Muawiya had ?make no claims of his own? until later on, concentrating world-class on his position as governor of Syria and waiting until Ali compromised himself by his conduct before arbitrate in the course of events . Muawiya had no claim or the support needed to aspire for the caliphate and his status as a late and ?convenient? convert without proterozoic merit in Islam did not help him. The disintegration of Ali?s caliphate was then ascribed to ?Kharijite opposition kind of to his activities, which was sacredly unlawful? although he was the one who started the chain reception which led to these events. His vengeance for Uthman and determination to go forward his governorship led to the Battle of Siffin, which led to the arbitration, which adynamicened Ali?s position and then Muawiya ?openly asserted his claims to the caliphate.? All the in effect(p) pieces had suitably fell into tail end to strengthen his claim to the caliphate and congratulations has to be given to him for his political shrewdness, moderation and self-control. There is little historical evidence to connect Muawiya with the endings of Hassan and Husayn. Although Muawiya had make a financial agreement with Hassan not to claim his caliphate, people today, mainly Shia, passive implicate him with his death, claiming that he was ? perchance acerbateed because of some harem intrigue.? Some early Arab historians believe that Muawiya made umteen plans and arrangements to kill Hassan . It was verbalize that he secretly contacted Hassan?s wife Ja?da bint al-Ash?arh ibn Qays and instigated her to poison her husband, promising gold and conjugation to Yazid in return . However it is unlikely that Muawiya would benefit in any way by killing Hassan. Hassan proved to be no threat to his caliphate and had no political involvement at all. Because of the lack of substantial evidence, it is in effect(p) to conclude that Hassan?s death was not connected to Muawiya?s personal motives against Ali. The same could be said for Husayn?s death; Muawiya had already passed lacking(p) and the focus has shifted to his son, Yazid I. Some weak sources claim that Muawiya had promised Husayn the Caliphate after his death.

Here, it can only be assumed that he hold dear to keep the power in his family and the Umayyads, and it?s possible that there might still be some personal blood feud against Ali, thus he went back on his newsworthiness and set up the portal of his son, Yazid I and indirectly contend a give out in Husayn?s death. Muawiya?s nomination of Yazid caused a stir in the Muslim comm harmony, those opposing the plan, quickly ? criminate Muawiya of attempting to set up a hereditary monarchy.? It also brought approximative speculation of Muawiya?s Islamic dedicate and its ideals. However, he in all probability realised the flaws of a pop caliphate and sensed that a monarchy would be the best way fore for the Muslims, considering the fact that the Arabs supported the momentum during the issue of succession of the Prophet in the case of Ali. Armstrong though states that he ?de pause from Arab traditions in identify to secure the succession.? Weiss and guanine rebuke this statement, believing that ?even in this matter Muawiya showed view to Arab sensitivities. Rather than imposing the dynastic principle upon tribal leaders, he secured from them an oath of allegiance for his son, thus basing the succession upon their consent or else than upon any legitimate right of his household.? The principle of succession by election was thereby honored, while the caliphate actually passed from father to son. Muawiya had chime in a loophole though this placement and consequently created a means for a de facto dynasty. But considering Yazid?s character, ?an absolute playboy? , the sacred quality of the caliph has interpreted a back cigarette to the politics, therefore also reflecting Muawiya?s religious grounding and proves that his intentions were to keep the Umayyads in power. Muawiya?s actions throughout his career demonstrate that ?his virtues were those of the prideful politician, not of the brilliant world-wide or the religious leader.? well-nigh historians, such as Kennedy, Armstrong, and Peterson etcetera agree that Muawiya was problematic in religious context, stating that he is outlying(prenominal) from ideal and ? scrupulously humiliated? . According to Humphreys, ?In starchy piety and personal conduct, he was acceptable enough (at least he provoked no public scandal) but he was never regarded as religiously learned or even thoughtful and engaged, beyond a superficial level. He believed in God and was publicly coiffure in his observances but no more.? His lack of Islamic work out could be confirmed in his actions and decisions. Religiously unlawful activities and knock against methods of gaining power and status against Ali contribute his disregard and failure to hold in to simple Islamic principles, ideals, the volume and Hadith. In conclusion, although Muawiya was a anatomy of the conflicts and anxieties that afflicted the Ummah, he is crucial political figure in the history of Islam. Muawiya was ?literally the only man with political and soldiers resources available to restore unity? , despite lacking a religious moral ground. flat though he restored peace, he had deliberately provoked and been a major protagonist in the civil war that disunite them in the first place. Whilst historical evidence on his personal thoughts and intentions are not solid, it is unpatterned though that his ascension to caliph and power was ultimately part due to his own machinations. Bibliography:1.Armstrong, Karen, Islam: A Short muniment, Phoenix Press, London, 20022.Hawting, G. R., The bill of al-Tabari Volume XVII The branch Civil War, New York Press, USA, 19963.Hitti, Phillip K., taradiddle of the Arabs, Macmillan, New York, 20024.Humphreys, Stephen R., Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan ? From Arabia to Empire, Oneworld Pubns Ltd, 20065.Kennedy, Hugh, The Prophet and the long time of the Caliphates, Pearson Education Limited, Great Britain, 20046.Madelung, Wilferd, The fetching over to Muhammad ? A correction of proterozoic Caliphate7.Petersen, Erling Ladewig, Ali and Muawiya in Early Arabic Tradition, Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 19648.Weiss, Bernard G. and Green, Arnold H., A vignette of Arab history, Cairo, Cairo Press, Amer. Univ., 1990 i must say, this stress is very good overall. Has many sources to back up the author and also has looked at the situation from both sides. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper