The Umayyad rule had experienced some issues of religious and political legitimacy from its foundation up until its collapse, and therefore it was constantly opposed by defiant groups. The Umayyad rule was up against stiff opposition from many opposing groups, the most powerful of these being the Ahl al-Bayt and their followers. This paper focuses on the case of Ahl al-Bayt, one of the opposing groups. It is important to pinpoint the rationale for the opposition mounted by this group, which was also influential during the collapse of the State, to accurately appreciate and evaluate the dynamics of the period in which the opposition emerged and those of the events that happened in the subsequent periods. This qualitative study is based on the fundamental works of Islamic History. It comparatively analyzed the events that took place in the period and evaluated them seeking cause-effect relationships. Recent studies about this issue were also used. The findings below were obtained in the study: First, under the leadership of such figures as Hadrat Husayn and Zayd b. ʿAlī, the members of Ahl al-Bayt claimed that the Umayyad government's actions were against religion and argued that this power could not be obeyed religiously. The members of Ahl al-Bayt cited some examples of non-religious policies of the Umayyads, such as their seizing power by force of arms and introducing the sultanate as the form of government, their using political customs rather than religion in their policies, some Umayyad caliphs’ leading a non-religious life, and the Umayyads’ adopting a policy of oppression and violence against such groups as Ahl al-Bayt and Mawālī. Second, the members of Ahl al-Bayt claimed that they better deserved the caliphate and therefore it was their right. Third, if the leaders of Ahl al-Bayt came to power, they would follow the Qur’ān and Sunnah, while abolishing the non-religious practices of the Umayyad rule. Fourth, Hadrat Husayn, a member of Ahl al-Bayt, which became stronger with a growing number of supporters and wanted to take over the political power, was killed in Karbala in 680 as a result of the rebellion he attempted. Similarly, Zayd b. ʿAlī was killed in the revolt he started in 740 in Kūfa to achieve the same objective. Fifth, the killing of these leaders led to a dramatic increase in opposition to the Umayyad rule in the Islamic world and eventually brought about its collapse. Sixth, the governmental power during the Umayyad period and opposition groups tried to solve administrative problems by using force or violence. This indicates that Muslims at the time hardly had an understanding that would enable them to solve their problems through negotiation. Seventh, it is possible to say that the problematic relationship between the government and the opposition in the Umayyad period is a bad example, from which the Muslim world can learn lessons. In order not to witness such bad examples again and to end conflicts, particularly in the political field, it is necessary to establish systems that not only include universal principles but also guarantee the rights of people from all sections of society and highlight negotiation, rather than conflict, as the ground for political struggle. This paper has been prepared to contribute to the studies in the field. * This study is based on the master's thesis titled “Opposition and Opposition Groups in the Umayyads” conducted under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Mustafa ÖZKAN.