Yarmuk
with Qadsia constitutes what the legends are made of. Yarmuk sealed Syria and Qadsia delivered Iran. As the Byzantine
Emperor—Heracles decided to put all that he could muster to retain Syria,
Hazrat Abu Ubaidah (RA) too held the war council. The decisions taken were to
dispatch an emissary to apprise the Caliph of the developments and suggest the
strategic moves for Caliphate consideration and approval. The recommendations
entailed decampment at Hems and holding on to Damascus
and Jordan.
Decampment at Hems had a snag. ‘Jaziah’ the protection money had been
collected, lacs of dirhams. Just imagine the sense of justice in early Islam,
in a situation where Muslims needed men and material resources for the battle
ahead, Hazrat Abu Ubaidah (RA) had his treasury officer--Habib bin Maslamah pay
back the last penny of it, since they could no more be provided protection. The
citizens of Hems bade them a tearful adieu, exhorting them to get back. Jews
especially, so fairly had they been treated by Muslims.
Hazrat
Saifullah Khalid bin Walid (RA) in Damascus
was considered a source of logistic comfort. The great warrior could be
depended to hold open the lines of communication for troop re-enforcement. Damascus was
vital, the city being strategically located near the frontier with mainland Arabia. Amr ibn Aas [RA] was in command in Jordan.
With Damascus and Jordan secure, Muslims did hold
some logistic aces, there were snags though. The forces that Romans on Byzantine Empire were mustering were widening their
frontline and thickening their reserves. Muslim lines disproportionate to what
Romans could manage had however converted the apparent weakness into an
advantage. Several campaigns with Hazrat Saifullah Khalid [RA] in command had
made these columns nimble footed. Swift movement was their forte, negating the
advantage of dense enemy lines. They had another huge advantage…supreme command
of Caliph—Hazrat Omar Farooq [RA].
In
Medina-ul-Nabi, the capital city a war council was held, in the Islamic spirit
of Shoura-e-Bainahum [mutual consultation] Hazrat Abd-ur-Rehman bin Auf (RA)
called upon Hazrat Omar Farooq [RA] to take personal command. Others argued in
favour of the Caliph staying in the Capital city to arrange re-enforcements,
which could be promptly rushed to Syria. The view prevailed, the caliph
stayed back. However, it is recorded that a stream of messages by swift riders
stationed en-route from Madinat-ul-Nabi [pbuh] right up to the warfront kept
him apprised of details.
Hazrat
Omar Farooq [RA] one of the greatest leaders of men, world has ever seen was a
master of detail. He had a great sense of deciphering the detail and working
out the solution. Before taking the final call, he would hold counsel and get
the decision whetted after presenting his take, listen to what others proposed
and incorporate their take, in case the consensus would develop on the view
contrary to his own take. Only then was the decision formalized, as per the
Islamic norm. In case of tie-up in Shoura—the consultative body, general
council [Aam-tul-Muslimeen] would be called to take the final call. Democracy
thus had a free flow in Madinat-ul-Nabi [pbuh] as long as the rule of
Khulfa-e-Rashdeen lasted.
In
Constantinople, Caesar Heracles, on the
contrary was constrained to listen to the view of clergy. Many historians relate
that his instincts were basically sound; however clergy stood to confuse and
confound. With Emperor Constantine adopting Christianity as a state religion in
the 4th.century, the Pauline Christianity dogmatic in approach has
had an infrastructural build up over centuries. The priest had long assumed the
role of Brahmin. Just as an Indian Raja could hardly move a muscle without the
Brahmin, the Raj-guru sanctioning it, the priests in the cathedrals of
Constitanapole considered it their religious duty to advise Caesar and control
the political machinery. The simple and pure massage of Jesus Christ / Hazrat
Issa Messiah (AS) had sought to negate the dogmatism of the Jewish Rabbis at
the temple in Jerusalem.
However down the ages, his own religious
order was engulfed by the same brand of dogmatism, he had campaigned against.
Any contrary view, save that of church, even if sane was labeled as
heresy/blasphemy. Vengeance was wrought on Jews. Over emphatic clergy has been
the bane of many a religion, medieval Christianity was no exception. In such a
scenario, Islam came like a whiff of fresh air to masses worldover.
Yarmuk—the
battlefield is described by Ameer Ali in his ‘History of Saracens’ as an
obscure river, which rising in the high-lands of ‘Hauran’ falls into Jordan, a
few miles south of lake of ‘Tiberius’. Thirty miles down the fall, a vast plain
suited for encampment of a large army was occupied by Romans, unmindful of
semicircular loop on the northern side, at the neck of which is a ravine,
forming the entrance to the flat space inside. The spot called ‘Wakusa’ is
famous in Islamic history of, as the occupation of ravine gave Islamic forces
the control of ‘Chicken’s Neck’ the ideal stranglehold.
For
two months, the adversaries took measure of each other, there were several
peace parleys. Ultimately the Caliph Hazrat Omar Farooq (RA) ordered the
Islamic forces to fall upon the enemy like lions. A heroic battle ensued with a
commander named Bahan leading the Romans. Some touching oratorical notes in Arabic,
a language known for its oratory were heard exhorting the troops to march on,
including the one of Abu Sufian, who had the temerity to oppose the Prophet
(pbuh) in formative years of Islam. And here he was full of high pitched
flowery Arabic oratory talking of the glory, which Islam signifies. Islamic
forces had a level headed man endowed with many virtues, of many admirable
parts, with Hazrat Abu Ubaidah (RA) in command. The mighty warrior Hazrat
Saifullah Khalid (RA) was in lead, the deft politico-military mind of Amr ibn
Aas [RA] guarding flanks and above all the ‘Supreme Commander in Medina--Hazrat Omar (RA)
checking moves and counter moves. This battle Muslims could not have lost with
the generalship provided by Hazrat Saifullah [RA] backed by highly cultured
blending of forces by Hazrat Abu Obadiah [RA] they didn’t’. Islamic historians
Tabari and Azdi say 100,000 and another historian Baladhuri says 70,000 out of
a total of about 200,000 enemy troops were slain, a very high figure in
military terms. And out of 60,000 Muslims troops, the loss was just 3,000.
Aleppo and Antioch fell without much resistance. Jerusalem was taken later,
that however would take another column.
Yaar Zinda, Sohbat Baqi [Reunion
is subordinate to survival]
By Dr. Javid Iqbal
Feedback on: iqbal.javid46@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment