Pirouz Nahavandi
 |
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
|
Pirouz Nahavandi (or Piruzan) (also known as Abu-Lu'lu'ah al-Nahawandi Arabic: أبو لؤلؤة النهاوندي) was a Persian soldier who served under the commander Rostam Farrokhzad, but was captured in the Battle of al-Qādisiyyah in 636 CE when the Persians were defeated by the Arab-Muslim army of Caliph `Umar ibn al-Khattâb on the western bank of the Euphrates River. After he was brought to Arabia as a prisoner, he managed to assassinate Umar in the Muslim year 23 (644–645 CE).
His original name was Pīrūz (Arabicized: Fīrūz, "the victorious"; other transliterations of his name include Feroz, Firouz, Abu-Lo'lo'a, Abu Lulu, Abu Lolo, and Baba Shuja-e-din).
Contents |
[edit] Early life
Not much is known about Piruz, except that judging by his name, he was probably born in Nahavand, Iran, and was a Zoroastrian or Agnostic convert to Islam.[1]
[edit] Move to Medina
In addition to his superb military skills, Pirouz was a skilled workman, a carpenter and artisan, and his owner allowed him to live in his own household in the Islamic capital of Medina (although according to Ibn Sa'd, Mughira ibn Shu'ba, his owner who was also the governor of Basra, had written 'Umar from Kufa; and then 'Umar had given Mughira special permission to send Abu Lu'lu'ah to Medina—since captives were not permitted to live in Medina).
Some controversial stories (all stemming from one Arab source) say that Abu Lu'lu'ah hired himself out as a carpenter, and gave two dirhams a day to his owner in return for his limited freedom [while Ibn Shihab's account states that every month Mughira took 100 dirhams from his wages (although the account of Abu Huwayrith, also in Ibn Sa'd's Tabaqat, states 120 dirhams, four per day)]. He supported a wife and child on the rest of his earnings.
[edit] Umar's murder
One controversial story [which summarizes and is largely in agreement with the account (ultimately deriving from Ibn Shihab) included by Ibn Sa'd in his Tabaqat] goes thus: Abu Lu'lu'ah felt that he had to give too much of his wages to his owner. He approached Umar, the caliph, and begged for relief, saying (according to Abu Huwayrith's account in Ibn Sa'd's Tabaqat) "The taxes [Mughira] are levying on me are more than I can bear." Mughira (his owner), as a Muslim, was subject to Umar; surely Umar could enforce justice.
However, Umar, after questioning him about how much his income was in proportion to the tax that Mughira was demanding from him (according to Ábu Huwayrith), told Abu Lu'lu'ah that he was such a skilled workman that he was sure to make a good wages; there was no need to reduce his obligation to his owner. That did not satisfy Piroz, and he went away sulking. There were Persian children slaves in Madina. Seeing them, Piroz would say, "You have been enslaved at such a tender age. This Umar sees eaten my heart. I will take his heart out".
[Ibn Sa'd adds: So in his robe he wrapped his dagger, the grip of which was in the middle, and hid himself in a corner of the Medina mosque.
When Umar went to in the mosque for morning prayers, Abu Lu'lu'ah leaped upon him and stabbed Umar six times [three times, according to Ibn Sa'd]. He attempted to make his way out of the mosque, slashing at the bystanders [11 men besides 'Umar, according to Ibn Sa'd] as he fled.
[edit] Death
There are different narrations of how he died. Bukhari's Sahih states that he killed himself when he got caught minutes after murdering Umar. The Shia say he escaped and ended up in Kashan, where, seven years later, he was captured and killed.
[edit] Tomb
Pirouz Nahavandi's tomb "is located on the road from Kashan to Fins, constructed in an eleventh century distinctive Persian-Khwarezmian dynastic architectural style, consisted of a courtyard, porch and conical dome decorated with turquoise coloured tiles, and painted ceilings. The original date of its construction is unknown, but in second-half of fourteen century it was fully restored and a new tombstone was placed over his grave." from the website of the Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies (CAIS).
Controversy was caused recently when the International Union for Muslim Scholars called for the tomb to be destroyed, a request which was not well received by Iranians, even among those who support the Islamic Republic, according to the CAIS website, having being perceived as a specifically anti-Iranian act.
[edit] References
- ^ A socio-intellectual history of the Isnā ʼAsharī Shīʼīs in India, Volume 1, by Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, pg. 32
