Urwa ibn Zubayr Burned His Hadith

Urwa ibn al-Zubayr (c. 643–712 CE) was an early Islamic scholar, historian, and one of the most influential figures in the transmission of Hadith. Born in Medina, he was the son of Zubayr ibn al-Awwam, a prominent companion of the Prophet Muhammad, and Asma bint Abi Bakr, the daughter of the first caliph, Abu Bakr, and sister of Aisha. Urwa was part of the Tabi’un (the generation following the Prophet’s companions) and is often cited as a key figure in the transmission of Hadith.

Abd Allah Ibn Zubayr

Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr (624–692 CE) was the elder brother of Urwa. Following the death of Mu’awiya I (r. 661–680 CE / 41–60 AH), the founder of the Umayyad Caliphate, and the succession of his son Yazid I (r. 680–683 CE / 60–64 AH), Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr emerged as one of Yazid’s fiercest opponents. Rejecting Yazid’s caliphate as illegitimate, Ibn al-Zubayr took refuge in Mecca and proclaimed himself caliph.

He quickly garnered significant support, particularly in the Hejaz (Mecca and Medina), and extended his influence to parts of Iraq, Egypt, and Yemen, leaving the Umayyads largely confined to their capital in Damascus, a city that remained predominantly Christian at the time. This power struggle set the stage for several bloody conflicts between the Umayyads and the Zubayrid forces, leading to some of the most tumultuous events in early Islamic history.

Battle of Harra

One of the most infamous events of this period was the Battle of Harra (683 CE / 64 AH). When the people of Medina renounced their allegiance to Yazid I, he sent a large army to subdue the city. The ensuing battle resulted in the brutal sacking of Medina, the death of many Companions of the Prophet, and widespread atrocities.

After Medina’s desecration, the Umayyad army marched toward Mecca to confront Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr. During the siege, war engines launched projectiles that set parts of the Kaaba ablaze. However, Yazid’s sudden death in late 683 CE (64 AH) interrupted the campaign, leaving the Umayyad forces leaderless and in disarray. The chaos within the Umayyad ranks allowed Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr to consolidate his position, though his reprieve was short-lived.

Al-Suyuti, in his book Tarikh al-Khulafa al-Umawiyyin (History of the Umayyad Caliphs), has the following to say regarding the Battle of al-Harra.

In year 63/683, it reached Yazı̄d that the people of Madina had revolted against him and renounced allegiance to him. He sent a large army with orders to attack them and then continue to Makka and fight Ibn az-Zubayr. They set out and the Battle of al-Ḥarra took place by the gate of Ṭayba. What can make you understand what the Battle of al- Ḥarra was? Al-Ḥ asan mentioned it once, saying, “By Allah, almost none of them survived.” A large number of Companions, among others, were killed in it. Madina was sacked and a thousand virgins were violated. We belong to Allah and to Him we will return...

When the army of al-Ḥarra marched towards Makka to attack Ibn az-Zubayr, the leader of the army died on the way and he appointed another general over them. They arrived at Makka and besieged Ibn az-Zubayr, fighting him and launching war engines against him, in Ṣafar 64/683. From the sparks of their fires, the covering of the Kaʿba took fire as well as its roof and the two horns of the ram by which Allah had ransomed Ismāʿı̄l and which were in the roof. Allah ended Yazı̄d’s life in the middle of the month of Rabı̄ʿ al-Awwal in this year.

The Slaying of Ibn Zubayr

The Umayyads regrouped under Marwan ibn al-Hakam (r. 684–685 CE / 64–65 AH), who reestablished their authority. His son, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan (r. 685–705 CE / 65–86 AH), decisively crushed Ibn al-Zubayr’s rebellion. With the help of his ruthless general Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, Abd al-Malik besieged Mecca in 692 CE (73 AH). The city fell, and Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr was killed and publicly crucified, marking the end of his caliphate and the restoration of Umayyad control over the Muslim world.

Urwa ibn al-Zubayr and the Battle of Harra

During the Battle of Harra, Urwa ibn al-Zubayr was residing in Medina. Despite the proximity of the conflict, there is no evidence that Urwa participated in the fighting. Known for his scholarly focus, he maintained a position of neutrality, refraining from openly supporting either the Umayyads or the Zubayrids, even though his brother Abd Allah was a central figure in the rebellion.

However, the chaos and destruction of the battle profoundly impacted Urwa, not only politically but also spiritually and intellectually. As Medina was desecrated and its inhabitants slaughtered, Urwa witnessed firsthand how religious principles were being manipulated to justify bloodshed. This realization likely deepened his disillusionment with the exploitation of religious knowledge during the Second Fitna.

Urwa Burns His Hadith

Historical accounts suggest that, on the day of the Battle of Harra, Urwa made the dramatic decision to burn his compilations of Hadith and fiqh. According to The Four Imams by Muhammad Abu Zahra:

“It is clear that ‘Urwa was concerned with recording the fiqh and hadith he learned, and it is related that he wrote books; but he was afraid that they might become books alongside the Book of Allah and so he destroyed them. His son Hisham related that he had books which he burned on the day of the Battle of Harra.” – p.47

The timing of this act suggests a direct connection between the political strife and Urwa’s drastic decision. During this period, Hadith were frequently weaponized by various factions to support their political agendas. The Umayyads, Zubayrids, and other factions sought to use these narrations to rally followers and justify their actions, including violence and rebellion.

The Weaponization of Hadith

The manipulation of Hadith was not uncommon during this time. As Hadith Literature, Its Origin, Development & Special Features by Muhammad Zubayr Siddiqi notes on page 33 that one of the main motivations for Hadith was to utilize such narrations for the support or refutation of political campaigns, which was a tactic used by both the Zubayrid and Umayyad factions.

We are told, for instance, that al-Muhallab (d. 83/702), the great general and adversary of the K͟hāwarij, confessed that he had forged traditions against them. ʿAwāna ibn al-Ḥakam (d. 158/774) and others who belonged to the Umayyad party concocted pro-Umayyad traditions. Abu’l-‘Aynā’ Muhammad ibn al-Qāsim, likewise, forged hadiths which supported the claims of the ʿAlid party. Al-Talqānī (d. 310/922), an important member of the Murji’ite sect, forged hadiths which justified his sect’s doctrines. Ghiyāth ibn Ibrāhīm, a courtier of al-Mahdī, made intentional changes in hadith to please the Caliph. Muqātil ibn Sulaymān (d. 150/767) expressed to the same caliph his readiness to invent some traditions eulogising al-ʿAbbās, the forefather of the caliph. Muhammad ibn al-Ḥasan concocted a number of traditions praising ʿĀʾisha and in favour of the Sunnīs. Most of the traditions which extol the virtues of certain individuals, tribes, provinces, districts or towns, or a sectarian leader, owe their origin to some of these deliberate forgers, and have been identified by the hadith scholars as mere inventions.

The devastation of Medina and the violent nature of the conflict likely underscored for Urwa how Hadith was being weaponized by opposing factions to justify their claims to power. This was not merely a political struggle but a battle for religious authority, where the ruler’s influence shaped not just governance but the very interpretation of Islam. As Ibn Khaldun noted in his Muqaddimah:

“[T]he customs of each race depend on the customs of its ruler. As the proverb says: ‘The common people follow the religion of the ruler.’”

Why Burn Hadith?

The Umayyads, Zubayrids, and other factions all had a vested interest in aligning religious traditions with their political goals. This misuse must have been profoundly unsettling for Urwa, a man deeply entrenched in Hadith. The Quran explicitly condemns killing believers without just cause, stating that the outcome of the individual would be Hell (4:93), and advocates for the non-aggression principle (2:190-193). However, the warring factions ignored these principles, justifying violence through selectively cited or fabricated Hadith. Urwa, who spent much of his life meticulously compiling religious traditions, likely realized that his own work was being co-opted to perpetuate this cycle of violence and division.

Urwa was making a powerful statement of defiance against the corruption he witnessed in burning his books. It was not just a fear of his work being treated as scripture alongside the Quran—it was a rejection of how Hadith was being weaponized to legitimize bloodshed and political ambition. Urwa’s neutrality in the battle, despite having such close ties with the factions, shows that he did not approve of what was transpiring. In Urwa’s eyes, the sanctity of the religion and the teachings of the Quran were being compromised by factions that placed power above principle. His later regret over the destruction of his books—expressed in his lament that he “would rather have them in my possession than my family and property twice over”—further underscores the internal conflict he faced.

Ultimately, Urwa’s decision to burn his compilations of Hadith represents a moment of profound disillusionment and moral clarity. It was not merely an act of piety or fear that his work might rival the Quran; it was a protest against the rampant misuse of Hadith during the Second Fitna and how various factions twisted and fabricated narrations to support their political agendas and rally individuals to bloodshed. Urwa likely recognized that the very traditions he had devoted his life to preserving were being weaponized to justify atrocities and deepen divisions within the Muslim community. By destroying his Hadith during the Battle of Harra, Urwa most likely sought to distance himself from this exploitation, absolving himself of complicity in the violence and making a powerful statement as a principled defector, rejecting the role his work had come to play in perpetuating such conflicts.