CHAPTER XXIV: ‘PROPHETHOOD’ OR ‘KINGSHIP’?
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:
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
(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)
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.
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:
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:
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:
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
‘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
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:
1/ We also read of Qusayy: