A Probe Into the History of Ashura

A Probe Into the History of Ashura23%

A Probe Into the History of Ashura Author:
Publisher: Islamic Seminary Publications
Category: Imam Hussein

A Probe Into the History of Ashura
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 61 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 20827 / Download: 5024
Size Size Size
A Probe Into the History of Ashura

A Probe Into the History of Ashura

Author:
Publisher: Islamic Seminary Publications
English

Preface

The tragedy of Karbala is an unparalleled event of the history of mankind. The great sacrifice made by Imam Husayn, the grandson of the Holy Prophet, on Ashura (the l0th of Muharram 61 A.H.) and the steadfastness shown by him is a beacon of light for everyone who has faith in his mission and is keen for its success.

When one studies the bewildering events of this incident, a number of questions arise in one's mind such as: What was the purpose of Imam Husayn's rising? Did he want to avoid taking oath of allegiance to Yazid or did he take this step in response to the invitation received from the people of Kufa? Did he wish, in the current terminology, to bring about a revolution?

Did he know that he would be killed or was he under the impression that his life would be spared? Did he act according to a predetermined plan or took decisions in the light of every new development?

When he received the news of the martyrdom of Muslim bin Aqil while he (Imam Husayn) was on his way to Kufa why did he suggest to his companions to go away and leave him alone, and thereafter why did he approach various persons to assist him?

Why did he ask all his companions during the night of Ashura to go away but also sent Habib bin Mazahir to the tribe of Bani Asad to seek their help? Why did he seek help from Ubaydullah bin Hurr Juafi in the palace of Bani Maqatil and why did he say to the sons of Aqil during the night of Ashura: "You should go away. It is sufficient that from amongst you Muslim bin Aqil has been killed?"

Why did he seek help from Zahhak ibn Abdullah Mashriqi and his friend and Zuhayr bin Qayn, in spite of their strong refusal, and insisted and even expressed willingness that Zahhak ibn Abdullah should help him till the last moment and then go away? Does all this not show that Imam Husayn was not aware of the final result and had no definite plan in mind?

Does the step taken by him not amount to endangering his life? Does a person, who knows that he would be killed, proceed towards death along with his kith and kin including the suckling?

Many baseless answers and incorrect explanations have been given to these questions. Some have said that as the Imam was not prepared to take oath of allegiance to a person like Yazid and to recognize his unlawful government, he was obliged to leave Madina in a state of fear and reached Makkah. He considered Makkah to be a haven and intended to stay there, but the Kufians invited him and assured him of their assistance.

The Imam himself, too, was afraid lest he should be assassinated in Makkah and thereby the sanctity of the Ka'bah should suffer. He, therefore, accepted the invitation of the Kufians and went towards Karbala. Consequently he and his dear ones and companions were killed and the other members of his family were made captives.

Some have narrated that the Imam did not think that he would be killed; otherwise he would not have taken such a bold step.

Still others say that the Imam rose because he was under the impression that on account of his relationship with the Holy Prophet he would certainly not be killed, or he was fully convinced that even if he did not rise he would

be killed disgracefully at the hands of Ibn Ziyad or someone else. He, therefore, preferred being killed while performing jihad (the Holy war) to dying a disgraceful death.

Some say that the step taken by the Imam amounted to endangering his life, but as the Almighty Lord had given orders in this behalf he was obliged to obey the same.

Some opponents, and those, who consider that everyone wishes to be a sovereign, also, say that love for rulership placed Imam Husayn in this perilous situation, but it was not proper to kill him in such a tragic manner. It would have been better to control and dissuade him by means of threats and allurements.

The correct answer to all these questions is that the factors for such a movement had commenced from the very beginning of the rule of Mu'awiya and were becoming stronger day after day. At last the matters had taken such a turn that if Imam Husayn bin Ali had not taken this step all the traces of Islam would have been obliterated and the pains taken by the Holy Prophet would have been wasted, neither the Qur'an nor Islam would have survived.

The root cause of all these events was the drama that was staged at Saqifa Bani Saida immediately after the demise of the Holy Prophet. The most important development was the unprecedented method that was adopted for the selection of the Caliph. In violation of the Peace Treaty that Mu'awiya had concluded with Imam Hasan and according to which the Muslims were to choose the Caliph after him, he began obtaining the oath of allegiance for Yazid.

Furthermore, he sent a circular letter to the governors and agents in the provinces saying: "Note carefully that in all the departments of the army and the State if it is proved that someone is a Shi'ah (supporter) of Ali or Ahlul Bayt (the progeny of the Prophet), you should withdraw his grant, cross out his name and violate his rights".1

Then Mu'awiya sent another circular letter saying: "If any person is suspected of being a supporter of Ahlul Bayt he should be subjected to torture and his house should be demolished". This order was implemented so strictly that as written by Ibn Abil Hadid, the Shi'ah took refuge in the houses of their relatives and friends. Even then they were afraid of their slaves and slave-girls lest they should divulge the secret, because if anyone was not on good terms with another he reported to the authorities that such and such person was a supporter of Ahlul Bayt. The people were, therefore, arrested on mere accusation and suspicion and were tormented and made homeless.

This persecution was more severe in Iraq during the rule of Ziyad bin Sumayya as compared with other places. In spite of Imam Ali's brilliant past record and the honor enjoyed by him in Islam it was made necessary that, in all the Islamic countries and the areas, which formed part of the territories of Islam, he should be abused and cursed in the sermons of Friday prayers and also at other times, and Mu'awiya and Yazid should be honored and praised. Mu'awiya wrote officially to Ziyad bin Sumayya, the Governor of Iraq, that the evidence given in any matter by a person, who was known to be a

Shi'ah, should not be accepted, and those, who provided him shelter should also not be treated to be honorable.

Hujr bin Adi, Rashid Hujari and their eleven companions were subjected to the severest persecution and torture, so much so that Mu'awiya killed six of them who were at that time the best persons. There were many, whose hands and feet were amputated and pins reddened in fire were thrust into their eyes, and some others were buried alive.

The evil propaganda of Mu'awiya and his agents in Syria and other Islamic territories misled the people. Whosoever uttered a word against Mu'awiya was treated to be a murderer of Uthman and shedding his blood was considered lawful. Credulous persons, who are numerous in all ages, and are easily impressed by evil propaganda, came to believe that Uthman's blood was shed without any justification, and those, who were satisfied with this act deserved to be punished.

This was how Mu'awiya and his agents poisoned the public mind. The Khawarij, too, who were inimical towards both Mu'awiya and Imam Ali kept quiet with regard to Mu'awiya on account of fear, but abused the Commander of the Faithful openly and treated him to be an infidel. This thing in itself rendered great help to Mu'awiya and created a grudge in the hearts of the people against Imam Ali and his followers, so much so that when on the day of Ashura Imam Husayn mentioned the reason for his coming towards Kufa and then asked his opponents as to why they had gathered to kill him they replied: "It is due to the grudge which we have against your father".

The only tragedy was not that the newly-converted ignorant Muslims, who constituted the majority of the society of that time, hated Ali owing to the evil propaganda of Mu'awiya. A tragedy many times greater than this was that they did not know Mu'awiya properly and considered him to be a distinguished companion of the Holy Prophet and scribe of the revelations! This belief about Mu'awiya was not new.

During the time of the Commander of the Faithful also (i.e. in the 37th and 38th year A.H.) most of the ignorant sanctimonious persons and those, who were more harmful to Islam than anything else, considered Mu'awiya to be honorable, a true Muslim, pious and a mujtahid or at least hesitated in believing him to be a hypocrite. Hence, they desisted from fighting against him in the Battle of Siffin and also obliged Imam Hasan to make peace with Mu'awiya.

In Kitab-e Siffin, Nasr bin Muzahim quotes on his own authority from Asma bin Hakam Fazari to have said: "In the Battle of Siffin we belonged to the battalion of Ammar Yasir and were serving under his command. One day while it was noon we had taken shelter from the heat of the sun under a sheet of a red cloth, which we had fixed on our spears. Suddenly we saw a man, making his way through the ranks of the army, coming towards us. Approaching us he enquired about Ammar. Ammar introduced himself.

The man said "O Aba Yaqzan!2 I wish to enquire about something. Should I mention it openly or in private?" Ammar said: "As you like". The man said: "It will be better to enquire about it openly". Then he said: "I left my house with perfect perspicacity and faith in my rightfulness and had no

doubt about the fact that these people i.e. Mu'awiya and his followers were misled. I held this belief till I reached here and saw that our mu'azzin says: 'I testify that there is no deity but Allah and that Prophet Muhammad is His Prophet' and their mu'azzin also utters the same words. We believe in offering prayers and they also offer prayers like us. Similarly we make supplications and they also make supplications like us. Our Book is the Qur'an and their Book, too, is the Qur'an. Their Prophet and our Prophet is the same.

Having seen this I fell into suspicion and Allah knows how uneasy I became. I approached Imam Ali, the Commander of the Faithful in the morning and placed the matter before him. He asked me: "Have you met Ammar Yasir?" I replied in the negative. Thereupon he said: "You must see him and accept whatever he says". Now I have come to you to find out what you have to say.

Ammar Yasir said: "Do you know who is holding that black standard, which is before us? He is Amr bin As. I, who am Ammar Yasir, have fought against that very standard thrice in the company of the Holy Prophet of Allah at Badr, Uhud and Hunayn. It is now for the fourth time that I am fighting against it and as compared with the previous three occasions it has not become better but has become worse". Then he said: "Have you or your father witnessed those battles?" The man replied: "No". Thereupon Ammar said: "You must know that the centers of our standard are the very centers of the standard of the Holy Prophet at the time of Badr, Uhud and Hunayn, and their standard, too, is at the place of the standard of the polytheists.3

Nasr also says that while Imam Ali was on his way to Siffin some companions of Abdullah bin Mas'ud including Ubayda Salmani and others met him and said: "We are prepared to accompany you to Siffin, but we shall not join your army until we are satisfied as to which group is on the right, and which is on the wrong, so that we may fight against the wrong". Likewise he mentions some others, who were not willing to cooperate with Imam Ali, and said: "We have become suspicious about this fighting".

All these things go to prove that most of the Muslims had not yet realized the hypocrisy of Mu'awiya and considered him to be one of the distinguished companions of the Holy Prophet. They were not, therefore, prepared to fight against him in support of Imam Ali or Imam Hasan. Now that a period of twenty years and even more had passed since the event of Siffin, and Mu'awiya had propagated as much as he could in his own favor and against Bani Hashim and especially Imam Ali, and most of the companions, who had heard about the merits of Imam Ali from the Holy Prophet had departed from the world, and the belief that Mu'awiya was one of the companions of the Holy Prophet, a scribe of the revelations and the maternal uncle of the Muslims, definitely became more firm and gained currency.

Thus if the matters had made their way in the same manner a day would have come when Muslims would not have recognized real Islam except that introduced by Mu'awiya and all the troubles taken by the Holy Prophet during the period of twenty three years would have ended to the benefit of the descendants of Abu Sufyan, the sworn enemy of Islam.

Abu Sufyan and Mu'awiya, who fought against the Holy Prophet for twenty years and did all they could to exterminate Islam by all possible means, and professed Islam at the time of the conquest of Makkah, which took place in the seventh year of migration, were recognized by the people as the foremost persons of Islam and Imam Ali, who, according to the narrations of both the sects, was the first to embrace Islam, was now ( God forbid! ) treated by the people to be accursed, and cursing him was considered to be one of the greatest articles of Islamic worship. There were persons, who considered it obligatory for themselves to make amends for the lapse of this 'worship' if they forgot on any day to perform it.

Although the Holy Prophet used to say: 'When heresies appear, and those, who have embraced Islam later, curse the early Muslims i.e. those, who expressed faith in the Prophet at the very outset, and one knows and does not manifest. One’s knowledge is like one who conceals the Divine faith. A person who can distinguish between the Sunnah (The path of the Holy Prophet of Islam) and heresy should rise and save the people from deviation otherwise he will become subjected to Divine wrath.4

According to this very authentic Hadith (tradition) Imam Husayn considered himself to be responsible, and did not deem it permissible for him to be negligent. He considered himself commissioned by Allah to defend Islam and the Muslim ummah from the danger of annihilation. During the ten years of his actual Imamate, therefore, he was not sitting at ease, and, as far as possible, did not remain silent. Letters were exchanged between him and Mu'awiya and he used to criticize Mu'awiya severely.

The subject matter of the letters, which he wrote to Mu'awiya, was publicized in Madina or in Makkah at the time of Hajj and almost prepared the ground for his rising, so much so that once when some wealth was being taken from Yemen to Syria via Madina for Mu'awiya, Imam Husayn confiscated it and distributed it amongst Bani Hashim. Later he sent its receipt to Mu'awiya along with a letter of reproof5 . These things themselves indicate that the Imam was thinking of revolution, for otherwise such an act would not have behooved the Imam.

All this was done by him to discharge his responsibility, and to prepare ground for his rising when it was necessary. He, therefore, performed this duty by means of letters, addresses and preaching. So much so that in reply to a letter of Mu'awiya, expressive of complaint, he wrote: "O Mu'awiya! I consider it a fault to give up campaign against you and deem myself responsible before Allah if I remain quiet and do not rise against you".

Until the time for formal movement and rising arrived, he acted according to the duty entrusted to him by Allah and the Holy Prophet in the form of ordering to do good and restraining from evil.

As regards his being commissioned by Allah it may be said that this claim is supported by a hadith (tradition), which has been quoted by Ya'qub Kulayni on a very reliable authority from Zurayr Kanasi, who says: "Hamran bin A'yun Shaybani said to Imam Baqir: "Have you observed what events took place during the period of Imam Ali and Husayn? They performed jihad but were defeated and were eventually killed at the hands of the tyrants".

The Imam replied: "Whatever happened had, of course, been ordained for them by Allah. He Himself ordered it, made it inevitable and then put it into force. The jihad performed by Imam Ali, Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (Peace be upon them) was according to the previous knowledge and instructions, which they had received from the Holy Prophet, and every Imam who remained quiet also did so according to the same previous knowledge and instructions".

This tradition goes to show that the Holy Prophet had prescribed the duties of every Imam in advance, in accordance with the Divine Command, and each one of them carried out the Divine assignment during his own time.

It is possible that someone may doubt the correctness of such traditions or may be hesitant about their true meaning. Even then he cannot entertain any doubt about the rational fact that the leader of the Muslims must be loyal to Islam. It is also obvious that if the Islamic Government falls in the hands of the enemies of Islam and they gain strength, they will uproot it. And Yazid, whose father Mu'awiya obtained oath of allegiance for him from all, during the period of his power and domination, was the very person, who made it a point to violate the Islamic commands. His corruption, deviation and blasphemies as contained in the verses composed by him before he attained to the caliphate are well-known and have been quoted by both the Sunni and the Shi'ah scholars.

Yaqubi and other historians have recorded that when Mu'awiya sent Yazid at the head of an army to conquer the Roman territories, the Muslim army camped at Ghazqazuna, where there was a convent named Murran. In this convent Yazid had an illegal sexual alliance with a woman named Umme Kulsum. In the meantime fever and small-pox broke out in the Muslim army with such severity that the soldiers began dying and falling like autumn leaves. They insisted upon Yazid leaving the place as early as possible, but he did not pay any heed to their suggestion and composed the verses as translated below: "What do I care if the entire army of Islam dies of fever and small-pox. I am resting on a soft pillow and am embracing Umme Kulsum".

There are also some verses composed by him, wherein he has praised wine, and which show his mentality. In these verses he says inter-alia: "If wine is unlawful in the religion of Ahmad (Islam), you should take it in accordance with the religion of Jesus son of Mary".

Yazid led an extremely voluptuous life and cared for nothing except revelry and merry-making. He spent most of his time in the convents of the Christians which constituted the fifth column at that time, and indulged in debauchery and amusements, so much so that even his father Mu'awiya wrote letters to him and admonished him.

Qalqashandi has quoted6 that when it was reported to Mu'awiya time and again that Yazid was leading a voluptuous life, he wrote a letter to him saying: "I am greatly concerned regarding the reports which I have received about you. They have pained me and destroyed the hope of my affinity to you". He added: "O Yazid! You have thrown yourself into destruction and entrusted your soul to indecency and reproach, and have chosen for

yourself, destruction, disgrace and unlawful conduct instead of sublime deeds, virtues and noble acts. O Yazid! I wish that you had died at the very moment you were born. You made me happy and hopeful in your early youth. Having grown up, however, you have pained me and made me weep. Alas! Alas!"

These are the specimens of the personality of Yazid! Now Mu'awiya introduced to the Muslims as the successor of the Holy Prophet of Islam such an element, in whose person all the impurities were centered, and who was an embodiment of corruption and wickedness (as became very clear later) and completely ignorant of Islamic tenets. He made him dominate those on account of whose swords the father and grandfather of Yazid had adopted Islam, although not more than forty years had passed since the demise of the Holy Prophet, and his companions and even some of his wives were still alive.

It is, of course, evident that when rulership goes to a person, who does not believe in Allah and the Holy Prophet, does not offer prayers, drinks wine as if it were water, and insults all that is sacred according to religion, one should say goodbye to Islam and the Qur'an. In the circumstances was it possible that a godly person like Imam Husayn, the grandson of the Holy Prophet should be prepared to witness these crimes and see the religion of Allah a plaything in the hands of degraded persons, and endorse all this silently, or take the oath of allegiance to such a ruler? Certainly not!

Furthermore, it was not only Imam Husayn who refused to take the oath of Yazid. No Muslim who was acquainted with the Qur'an and recognized Allah could agree to bear this insult, just as a number of the inhabitants of Kufa and Basra, and all those belonging to Madina, opposed Yazid from the very first day.

Imam Husayn knew well that the descendants of Abu Sufyan were basically hostile to Islam. They had tried their best to exterminate Islam and were not at all prepared to tolerate that the name of the Holy Prophet should continue to exist. Therefore, the Caliphate remained with the descendants of Abu Sufyan so that no trace of Islam could remain.

Mas'udi, the renowned historian has quoted the following event: Mutarraf bin Mughira said, "My father and I were the guests of Mu'awiya in Syria. My father visited the court of Mu'awiya very often and praised him. One night when my father returned after meeting Mu'awiya, he was very sad and disturbed. I enquired from him the reason. He replied: 'This man i.e. Mu'awiya is a vicious person, rather the most abominable person of the age'. I said: 'But what has happened?'

He replied, 'I suggested to Mu'awiya: 'Now that you have achieved your object, and attained to the Islamic Caliphate, it will be better that you should behave justly towards the people, and should not misbehave towards Bani Hashim so much, because, after all, they are your relatives and nothing is now left with them on account of which you may fear that they will rise against you'.

Mu'awiya said: 'Alas! Alas! Abu Bakr became Caliph and administered justice, and nothing more than this happened that he died and his name, too, was eliminated. Umar and Uthman also died and although they behaved

well towards the people, nothing except their names survived and they perished. As regards the Hashimi brother (i.e. the Holy Prophet), however, his name is pronounced in the world of Islam loudly five times a day and it is said: 'I testify that Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah'. What remains to be done when the names of the three Caliphs die and the name of Muhammad remains alive except that his name too should be buried and eliminated".7

Mas'udi has cited this event from the book Muwaffaqiyyat by Zubayr bin Bakar which is one of the reliable documents. He says, "In the circumstances, could Husayn bin Ali sit and remain patient, and quietly observe those people fighting against Islam and the Qur'an, and endeavoring to eliminate them? Certainly not"!

During those days the Islamic Caliphate had assumed the shape of the kingdoms of Kisra and Caesar. Mu'awiya, according to his corrupt thinking, decided to leave it as inheritance in his own family and there were two great impediments that hindered the achievement of this object. One of these impediments was the incapability of Yazid, who was known to the nobles of that time and the dignitaries of the Islamic territories, as a frivolous, incapable, shameless and wicked person, and the chiefs of the Islamic country had no regard for him. The other impediment was Imam Hasan with whom Mu'awiya had agreed in a peace treaty that after him, he (i.e. Mu'awiya) would not introduce anyone as the prospective Caliph.

As regards the first impediment, Mu'awiya found the remedy for it by suppressing the religious sentiments of the people with gifts, grants and big awards, and, if the object could not be achieved by these means, he would silence them with threats, cancellation of grants and dismissal from employment. He accomplished this task as quickly as possible.

In order to remove the second impediment he took steps to kill Imam Hasan and eventually poisoned him with a strange deceit through Ju'dah daughter of Ash'ath bin Qays. He then thought that the way was now clear and did not believe that any other impediment could exist after the death of Imam Hasan.

Later he realized that in the presence of a person like Imam Husayn in Madina, which was more important than all other Islamic territories. Its inhabitants would not at all take the oath of allegiance to Yazid. He was, therefore, obliged to resort to another deceit. The historians have written thus in this behalf: After the death of Imam Hasan, Mu'awiya resolved to obtain allegiance from the people for Yazid, whom he wanted to appoint as his successor.

He, therefore, wrote letters to all the governors of Islamic provinces including Sa'id bin As Umavi, the Governor of Madina, whom he wrote: "Obtain oath of allegiance for Yazid from all the Muhajirs and Ansar and their descendants. Show harshness and severity in the matter, and do not be lax and negligent. However, do not exert pressure on a few persons, but leave them alone, like Abdur Rahman bin Abi Bakr and Husayn bin Ali."

When Sa'id bin As received Mu'awiya's letter he invited the people of Madina to take oath of allegiance to Yazid. However, all of them declined to do so and said that they would take the oath when the above persons also

had done it otherwise they would not. Sa'id wrote a letter to Mu'awiya telling him that all the people of Madina followed those few persons, and so long as they did not take the oath of allegiance, it would not be possible to obtain it from others even through harshness. Mu'awiya wrote in reply: "It does not matter. Do not disturb anyone till I have thought over the matter".

In the same year he decided to perform Hajj and came to Madina and brought a large number of Syrians along with him. Then he met those few persons in Madina and expressed his displeasure. When they observed that they had been insulted, they left Madina for Makkah to perform Umra individually. However, Mu'awiya stayed in Madina till the Hajj season. During that period he bestowed abundant presents on the people of Madina in order to soften their hearts and win them over.

Later he proceeded to Makkah. When the people came to see him on his arrival, he met Abdullah bin Umar, Abdullah bin Zubayr, Abdur Rahman and Imam Husayn. He showed them great respect, spoke affably to them, and ordered that an animal of riding might be brought for each one of them. He addressed each of them according to their status. He called Imam Husayn, the chief of the Muslim youth, Abdullah bin Zubayr, the cousin of the Holy Prophet, Abdur Rahman, the chief and master of Quraysh and so on.

After performing Hajj he summoned them. Imam Husayn was asked by others to have a talk with Mu'awiya but he declined. They made the same suggestion to Abdullah bin Zubayr and he accepted it. They met Mu'awiya, who showed them due respect and said: "You have seen yourselves how kind I am to you. You are my kith and kin and I have great affection for you. As regards Yazid he is your brother and cousin. What I desire is that he should hold the title of Caliph whereas all the affairs of the State should be in your hands and you should exercise authority in all matters".

All of them kept silent. Mu'awiya asked them to give a reply but they said nothing. Mu'awiya repeated his words for the third time and turning to Ibn Zubayr he asked him to speak. Abdullah bin Zubayr said: "O Mu'awiya! You can do one of these three things, either, as it is said that the Holy Prophet departed from the world without nominating any successor, you should act in the same way and leave the selection of the caliph to the people, or you should nominate a person who is not related to you and is fit to hold that office, as was done by Abu Bakr, or you should leave the matter to a consultative council, as was done by Umar". Mu'awiya asked: "Is there no way other than these three courses?" Abdullah replied in the negative.

Mu'awiya then turned to the others and said: "What is your view?" They replied: "Our view is the same as put forward by Abdullah bin Zubayr". Mu'awiya said: "All right. I shall be talking about it tomorrow and none shall have the right to object to what I say. If I speak the truth it shall be beneficial for myself, and if I tell a lie I myself shall suffer for it, but if anyone opposes me he shall lose his life".

On the following day a general meeting was called by Mu'awiya. It was attended by all those persons, who had come from different parts of the Islamic territories to perform Haj. Those few persons were also summoned

and two armed men were stationed beside each one of them. Mu'awiya mounted the pulpit and the Syrians gathered round him.

He delivered a speech in which he said: "I have seen that people say many baseless things. They say that Husayn bin Ali, Abd ur Rahman bin Abi Bakr, Abdullah bin Zubayr and Abdullah bin Umar have not taken the oath of allegiance to Yazid. They are the best and the most distinguished persons among the Muslims. No task can be firm and permanent without them and nothing can be done without consulting them. I myself talked with them about the matter and found them submissive. All of them took the oath of allegiance to Yazid without raising any objection".

At this stage, as had already been settled, the Syrians shouted: "These few persons don't matter much. If they don't agree, you should permit us to chop off their heads".

Mu'awiya said; "How strange it is that people have become so hostile to Quraysh, and they don't want anything except shedding their blood. Keep quiet and don't repeat these words". Having said this he came down from the pulpit and his agents began taking the oath of allegiance from the people, whereas he himself mounted his animal and left Makkah.

After Mu'awiya's departure the people rushed towards Imam Husayn and others, and began criticizing them. They asked them: "How is it that you agreed to take the allegiance when you had been saying that you wouldn't do so?" Although they said that they had not taken the oath of allegiance and Mu'awiya had told a lie, and had deceived them, the people did not accept their words. They said: "You are lying. If it was as you say, why did you not repudiate his allegation in the meeting?" When they replied that if they had done so they would have been killed, but their saying all this was of no use.8

Ya'qubi has quoted the words of Abdullah bin Umar and Abdullah bin Zubayr which they uttered when Sa'id bin As Umavi, the Governor of Madina, suggested to them to take the allegiance. He says: "When Sa'id bin As asked them to take the oath of allegiance to Yazid they declined and said: "What excuse shall we have before Allah if we take the oath of allegiance to one who plays with monkeys and dogs and drinks wine and is a confirmed licentious man. Can we cooperate with him and approve his actions?"

Ibn Jauzi says: “A group of persons went from Madina to Syria to observe the ways and conduct of Yazid. On their return they said: "We have come after seeing a man who doesn't at all have any religion. He drinks wine, plays on musical instruments and also plays with dogs. Abdullah bin Hanzala, Ghasilul Malhika used to say: "Yazid is a man, who doesn't spare even his mother, daughter and sister. He drinks wine and doesn't offer prayers".

Mas'udi says in Murujuz Zahab: "Yazid was notorious as a habitual drunkard. In the circumstances it was the duty of all Muslims not to agree to take the oath of allegiance to him, because such an oath meant approval of all his actions and an acknowledgement to assist him in whatever he did, and Islam does not permit the Muslims to remain quiet and observe patience, if Islam is being destroyed, the Qur'an is being trampled upon and

the Divine religion becomes a plaything in the hands of idiots and bullies. Silence at such a stage is like the silence of the mean sufi, quoted by Syed Murtaza Dai Razi in Tabsaratul Awam.9

Imam Husayn considered silence in such circumstances to be unlawful and one of the points of the tradition of his grandfather, the Holy Prophet, which he quoted before the army of Hurr while he was on his way to Kufa is this: ''. If a person observes such affairs and does not oppose them and keeps quiet, Allah will be entitled to include him with the oppressor and tyrant and subject them both to similar torture".10

During the last years of the life of Mu'awiya, therefore, Imam Husayn invited all those persons, who had seen the Holy Prophet and had the honor of being his companions, as well as their descendants, scattered in all Islamic regions, and wrote letters to all of them. About 1000 companions and Tabi'in gathered together in Mina and he addressed them in these words: "You can see how this bully treats us and our supporters. You should narrate to your fellow countrymen in your cities whatever is said in this meeting". Then he narrated one by one the virtues and merits of his father, Imam Ali, and exhorted them to enjoin others to do good and to restrain them from evil.

As is evident from the wording and sentences of the sermon11 delivered before this gathering, it was there that the Imam commenced his mission of revolution.

We reproduce here, by way of specimen, a few sentences from that sermon so that the matter may become clear. After reciting the Qur'anic verses about the necessity of enjoining to do good and restraining from evil, he said: "O brave persons! You are well-known for your wisdom, virtue and benevolence and have created respect for you in the hearts of others through Allah. The noble persons honor you and the weak ones accord you respect. And those, who are your equals and are under no obligation to you, consider you to be superior to them".

Thereafter he said: "I am afraid lest you should get involved in difficulties, because you have attained a position of respectability which is not held by others, and you enjoy superiority over the people. Good persons aren't being respected and you are honorable among the people for the sake of Allah. You see with your own eyes that the covenants of Allah are being violated and His laws are being opposed, and you are not alarmed, although you are worried and alarmed when the covenants made with your ancestors are broken.

The covenants made with the Holy Prophet have been broken and have become worthless, and are being held in contempt and you do not attach any importance to this fact. The blind, the dumb and the cripples in all the regions are without guardians and are not pitied. You don't discharge your responsibilities, and do not work according to your ability. You do not also pay attention to one, who performs his duty in this behalf, and do not show humility. You keep yourselves relieved by indulgence and collusion with the oppressors.

"All this is due to the fact that while Allah has ordered prevention of unlawful acts, and restraining the people from committing them but you

have neglected this duty, because you have been slack in protecting the honor and respect of your scholars and have not been able to preserve their status and have made others prevail over that rank. I wish you had realized this or had made an effort in that behalf."

He added: "The reins of administration should be in the hands of those who are well-versed with the Commands of Allah i.e. lawful and unlawful things. It was you, who occupied this position, but you were deprived of it owing to your separation from truth and your differences about the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet in spite of clear proofs, if you had been patient and steadfast and had shown forbearance in the path of Allah, you would have assumed the reins of administration once again. However, you vacated your seat for the oppressors and handed over the Divine government to them, so that they might act in a dubious manner and pursue their carnal desires.

"It was your disregard for death and taking delight in this transient life which made the weak their subjects so that they might enslave and subdue some of them and deprive others of even a morsel of food. They ransack the Islamic territories for their personal benefit, and their cardinal desires bring disgrace to them. They follow the wicked person and have no fear of the Almighty Allah. In every city they make a preacher of their own mount, the pulpit and all the Islamic territories are under their control. They do whatever they like and the people are their slaves. They cannot defend themselves against any maltreatment meted out to them. Tyrants and obstinate persons oppress the weak.

"There are some rulers who do not believe in Allah and in the Day of Judgment. How astonishing this situation is! And why should I not be astonished when the land is possessed by either a deceitful person and a tyrant, or a wicked tax-collector, or a ruler, who is so cruel to the believers? Now it is Allah who can decide matters between us12 "

It is learnt from what has been stated that the Imam was thinking of bringing about a revolution before the question of taking oath of allegiance to Yazid arose, and he was waiting for an appropriate opportunity. Hence his movement should be treated to have commenced from the invitation which he extended to the companions and the Tabi'in in Mina.

Keeping in view the conditions of the Muslims in those days it was not an easy task to awaken the people and invite them to truth and this task could not be accomplished by means of correspondence and addresses and by sending messages. The Imam therefore, decided to bring about a revolution by means of which the inhabitants of all the Islamic regions might realize that if Yazid came into power Islam would be uprooted and no trace of it would be found anywhere.

The persons whose ancestors had considered Mu'awiya more than twenty years earlier to be a distinguished companion of the Holy Prophet, or at least doubted his falsehood and hypocrisy, could not be awakened with messages and addresses and could not be made to understand what a true Islamic Government should be. Moreover, Mu'awiya's agents were busy propagating in every town and region and making the people deviate from the right path.

Persons like Hujr bin Adi and Rashid Hujari and his friends and Amr bin Humuq Khuzai were being killed and none could pick up courage to protest, rather they were usually considered to be guilty. It was, therefore, necessary to start a sudden movement and bring about a revolution in the Islamic territories. It should thus influence all the regions, and its effects should continue for a very long period and should not cease till the matters were reformed, and the intentions of Bani Umayya in general and of the descendants of Abu Sufyan (who always wished that the people should cease to utter the name of the Holy Prophet and should no longer understand Islam were known to the people. The people should consequently recognize them (Bani Umayyah) and join their opponents, and the campaign should start. In this their rulership should come to an end. Hence the Imam started his movement with the purpose of enjoining to do good and restraining from evil.

In the testament which Imam Husayn wrote and handed over to Muhammad bin Hanafiya, while leaving Madina, he said after expressing his belief in Allah, in the Prophethood of his grandfather Muhammad bin Abdullah, in the Day of Judgment, and in Paradise and Hell:

"I have not come out with the intention of violence and rebellion or in obedience to my passions, and it is not my object to create mischief on the earth or to oppress anyone. My only object is to reform the affairs of the Muslim nation and to act according to the conduct of my father and grandfather".

When he decided to depart from Madina he went to his grandfather's grave many times at night and said: "O Allah! I love good deeds and hate bad deeds".

Imam Husayn commenced jihad knowing fully well that he would be martyred and his men and women would be made captives, but Islam and its commands would survive and the opposing powers would be annihilated; Yazid, whom his father had nominated his successor during his own lifetime, contrary to the practice followed by the previous Caliphs, and made him dominate the Muslims, would not be able to repeat this act; Mu'awiya bin Yazid would not be at the helm of the State; Mu'awiya's scheme would come to nought; all the people would wake up from slumber with the assistance of the organization itself and distinguish between: real and artificial Islam. Consequently Bani Umayya would be disgraced and their dead bodies would always serve as an eye opener denouncing cruelty and oppression.

It is possible that an objection may be raised at this stage as Allah says:

Do not subject your lives to destruction with your own hands (Surah al-Baqarah, 2:195)

and discharging the responsibility of enjoining to do good and restraining from evil is itself subject to certain conditions. It may be said in reply that Imam knows better than all others the conditions pertaining to enjoining to do good and restraining from evil and his action is in itself the best authority.

It is, of course, true that it is not permissible to subject oneself to destruction, but the jihad performed by Imam Husayn did not amount to

this. If a person considers being killed for the sake of Allah to be subjecting oneself to destruction, he must also place most of the battles fought by the Holy Prophet under the same category. He must also consider whether confronting of twenty Muslim warriors with two hundred enemies in the early battles of Islam, when the Muslims were not numerically strong enough, amounted to subjecting themselves to destruction! But the Muslims unanimously agree that this viewpoint is not correct.

Furthermore, the Qur'anic verse does not mean that the Muslims should not perform jihad, because in the event of their being killed they have subjected themselves to destruction with their own hands. In fact this verse was revealed when the Muslims had been ordered that in the event of war every one of them should provide equipment, arms, foodstuffs and animals of riding according to his capacity. Apparently some persons were making excuses in the matter and were not prepared to make necessary contributions.

It was then that this verse was revealed saying:

Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah and do not subject yourselves to destruction with your own hands (on account of negligence or stinginess). (Surah al-Baqarah, 2: 195)

This meaning is confirmed by the narration of Huzayfa bin Yaman, a distinguished companion of the Holy Prophet, who has been reported to have said that this verse was revealed in connection with expenditure. This narration has been quoted by Ibn Ali Hatim and Bukhari from Huzayfa and A'mash, and by Suyuti from Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Ikrima, Sa'id bin Jabir, Ata, Zahhak, Hasan Basri, Qatada, Saddi and Maqatil bin Hayyan. All of them were companions or Tabi'in.

In another narration, Aslam bin Yazid Abu Imran says: "During the siege of Constantinople one of our soldiers attacked the enemy and split their rows. Some of our men said: "This man has subjected himself to destruction". Abu Ayyub Ansari was with us. He said: "We know the meaning of this verse better and you only guess. This verse was revealed about us, the Ansar, who had the honor of receiving the Prophet and becoming his companions.

When Islam flourished, we became negligent in assisting the Holy Prophet and said to ourselves: "Now that Islam has gained popularity and become powerful, we should take care of our families. We, therefore, paid no attention towards helping the Holy Prophet.

Thereupon this verse was revealed: Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah and do not subject yourselves to destruction with your own hands. Destruction was involved in spending on one's wife and children and in abandoning jihad. Hence, one subjects oneself to destruction by abandoning jihad and not by performing it.

This narration has been quoted by Abu Daud Sijistani, Tirmizy, Nisai, Abd bin Hamid, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Jurayr Tabari, Ibn Marduya, Abu Yala and Ibn Habban in Sahih and Hakim Nishapuri in 'Mustadrak'. All of them have quoted it from the tradition of Yazid bin Abi Habib through Aslam. Tirmizy declares that this tradition is authentic.

In another narration Abi Ishaq Sabi'i has been quoted as saying: A man said to Bara bin Azib. "If, during a battle, I attack the enemy alone and am killed, will it amount to my subjecting myself to destruction with my own hands?" Bara replied: "No, because Allah says to His Prophet:

So fight in the way of Allah. You are not responsible except for yourself." (Surah al-Nisa, 4:84)

Then Bara added: "This verse relates to spending money at the time of war. This narration has been quoted by Ibn Marduwayh and by Hakim in Mustadrak. Hakim says that this tradition fulfils the conditions laid down by the two shaykhs {Bukhari and Muslim).

A similar remark of Huzayfa bin al-Yaman has also been quoted in Tafsir-e 'Ayyashi and reproduced in Tafsir-e Burhan. In Luhuf Sayyid bin Tawus has also given the same meaning to this verse on the authority of these very narrations.

Furthermore, the verse relating to destruction occurs in the context of defensive jihad and a reference to the context makes the position clear.

The basic thing is that, in the terminology of Islam, being killed for the cause of Allah is not taken to mean destruction. The Holy Qur'an says about the martyrs of Islam thus:

Think not of those who are slain in the way of Allah, as dead. They are alive with their Lord and receive sustenance from Him. (Surah Ale Imran, 3:169)

In one of his sermons13 Imam Ali said to his companions at the time of the Battle of Siffin: "Your death and destruction lies in your being subdued and your life consists of death when you are predominant. The life which makes one submit to every worthless person is worse than dying and being destroyed a thousand times".

However, at this stage, Imam Husayn was not prepared to be martyred like his father and brother, because such martyrdom could not produce the desired results. It was possible that none might have paid any heed to such martyrdom and the Imam's blood might have been shed in vain.

Those who think that the Imam was not aware of the consequences of the step taken by him are gravely mistaken, because apart from the traditions saying that the Imam, who does not know what he is going to face is not the vicegerent of Allah, and the Imams were also aware when they would die, and they had an option in the matter.

The question of the martyrdom of Imam Husayn was basically well-known in the family of Bani Hashim and especially in the household of Imam Ali. Umme Salama, Umme Ayman and others had all heard from the Holy Prophet (S) that Husayn would be martyred in Karbala.

Besides this in the sermon, which he delivered in the sanctuary of the Holy Ka'bah before his departure, the Imam said: "Man is destined to die". It is quite clear that the Imam knew that he would be martyred, or else he would not have I said: "I can see as if the desert wolves are piercing my body between Nawawis and Karbala". Similarly it becomes clear from what he said on other occasion that he was fully aware of the consequences and to deny this is nothing except baseless contention.

Muhammad bin Hasan bin Farrukh Saffar says in the beginning of Basairud Darajat and similarly Kulayni says in Kafi, that a man belonging to Kufah met the Imam in Thalabiya (and apparently dissuaded him from going to Kufah and warned him that he would be killed). Imam Husayn replied to him: "If I had met you in Madina I would have shown you in my house the signs of Jibril bringing revelations to my grandfather. O brother Kufi! How can it be that the source of knowledge of the people should be with us, and they may know whereas we may be ignorant".

Furthermore, at the time of his departure from Madina he said: "Whoever accompanies me will be martyred and whoever lags behind will not share the victory".

If anyone says that Sayyid Murtaza has been quoted as having said that Imam Husayn did not know that he would be killed, we say in reply that Imam Baqir and Imam Sadiq have been quoted as saying that he was aware that he would be killed. And if an objection is raised that when he knew that he would be killed why did he take his women and children along with him, which resulted in their being made captives, our reply is the same as given earlier.

It was not his intention merely to be killed along with his companions. What he aimed at was to draw the attention of the people to the malpractices of Bani Umayya and to the fact that their rule was not an Islamic rule, and their aim was to efface and destroy Islam and especially the name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

Hence, he acted according to a correct plan and proved to the world that they were not prepared to let any member of the family of Bani Hashim live, and would make even a suckling the target of their arrows. He also proved that they treated the members of the Holy Prophet's family more harshly than they treated the polytheist captives of Turkey and Dailam, and they had no intention except that of effacing Islam and the traditions of the Holy Prophet and ruling unjustly over the people. We have said earlier that the people had not recognized Bani Umayya correctly.

They were mostly mistaken and they honored them. Mu'awiya, who had been an infidel and a polytheist during the larger part of his life and was obliged to embrace Islam at the time of the conquest of Makkah, was considered by them to be a peer of Ammar Yasir and Zush-Shahadatain and Ibn Tayyahan and even Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib.

Rabi bin Khuthaym who was one of the distinguished Tabi'in and was considered to be a great ascetic, came to Imam Ali at the time of the Battle of Siffin and said: "O commander of the Faithful! Though we are aware of your rank and position, we are doubtful as to whether this battle is justified or not."

There were many other persons also upon whom the people depended for guidance. Public opinion had been completely perverted and this was especially the case with the Syrians and those, who had been under Mu'awiya's influence from the very beginning.

Nasr bin Muzahim says: "Hashim Marqal, along with a group of the reciters of the Holy Qur'an of Kufa, was busy fighting against the enemy. In the meantime a Ghassanian came in the field and began reciting epic verses

and abusing Ali and insisted on cursing and vilifying him. Hashim Marqal said to him: "Young man! There is a time when one has to account for whatever he says. You should fear Allah to whom you have to return, because he will question you about your stand and your aim". The man turned and said: "I am fighting against you, because I have been told that your chief does not offer prayers and the same is the case with you people". Hashim then admonished him and removed the misunderstanding which had been created in his mind and he went back.14

What we mean to say is that more than twenty years before the rising of Imam Husayn the people of Syria did not know Imam Ali in spite of all his virtues quoted from the Holy Prophet and the matters had turned much worse during Mu'awiya's twenty years rule. During this period he carried out intensive and extensive propaganda to distort the Islamic realities. His agents were putting his orders into practice in all Islamic regions and the foundation of Islam had terribly shaken. Lawful things had become unlawful and vice versa. And during the rule of Yazid bin Mu'awiya the Islamic traditions would have been eliminated further and the position would have been what was assessed by Imam Husayn himself who said: "If the Muslim ummah becomes subjected to the rulership of a person like Yazid one should say goodbye to Islam and abandon it".

There are some, who say that the Imam was invited by the Kufians and as he was afraid lest his blood should be shed in Makkah and the sanctity of the sanctuary violated, he accepted the invitation of the Kufians and started his movement from that time, and in case they had not invited him he might not have possibly taken this step. They mean to say that in fact there was no movement at all, and the Imam took the decision, because he was compelled by the circumstances to do so.

In reply we ask: "When he came to know that Muslim bin Aqil had been martyred and became sure that the Kufians were not faithful and no assistance could be expected from them, why did he not return from that very place and did he not hide himself in the desert especially when Hurr's army had not yet arrived?" And he could return even after encountering Hurr's army i.e. he could fight against them. Furthermore, why did he deliver the wonderful fiery sermon which has been quoted by Tabari etc. and in which he said: "Whoever sees the cruel ruler making the unlawful things lawful and breaking Allah's pledge...."

If the question was of accepting the invitation of the Kufians why did he write letters from Makkah to the five chiefs of Basra namely Yazid bin Mas'ud Nahshali, Malik bin Musma, Ahnaf bin Qays, Munzir bin Jarud and Mas'ud bin Amr and sought assistance from them?

Certainly Imam Husayn wanted to bring about a revolution, and its voice should be heard in all Islamic territories and the victorious enemy, intoxicated with his power, should himself drag the family of the Holy Prophet to various cities and regions so that the people should see them from close view and learn that Bani Umayya did not believe in Allah and in the Holy Prophet and the fact of his being oppressed should become known universally, so that Bani Umayya might be uprooted. Otherwise, how could

the people who heard Imam Ali being cursed from the pulpits for more than twenty years, distinguish between truth and falsehood?

How could the Syrians, who had never perhaps heard the names of Hasan and Husayn being uttered with honor (and did not possibly know about one out of thousands of the merits of Bani Hashim) be made aware of truth and awakened from slumber?

This could be done only by Imam Ali ibn Husayn (Imam Sajjad) mounting, in the center of Yazid's regime, the same pulpit from which propaganda had been carried on against Imam Ali and telling the Syrians about his virtues disgracing Yazid and Mu'awiya and causing the Syrians to revolt against Yazid, so that the tragedy of the martyrdom of his father and brothers in Karbala should be discussed by the Syrians for a long time in their assemblies, and the inauspicious effects of Mu'awiya's propaganda should be totally eliminated so that notwithstanding all his despotism, he should not be able to distort the facts.

Imam Ali was martyred while he was praying in the arch of the Kufa Mosque. The Syrians wondered at this event and said: "Did Ali also offer prayers that he came to the mosque and was killed in the arch?”

It is possible that someone may raise an objection and say: If Imam Husayn intended to rise, why did he say on the day of Ashura: "Let me go. I shall proceed to a safe place." We say in reply: It is true that such a statement of the Holy Imam has been quoted by Tabari in different words but this does not prove that the Imam said: 'I am prepared to return and abandon my mission and shall no longer enjoin others to do good or restrain them from evil'. No, not at all. Of course, the Kufians had invited him and then went back on their words whereupon he said: "Now that you are regretful for what you said and wrote, it doesn't matter, and I am prepared to return". He did not say that he wanted to abandon his mission.

As regards his seeking assistance from various persons it was because they were usually those Iraqis, who wielded influence in their regions. Now whether they responded to his call like Zuhayr bin Qayn, Zahhak etc. or not, all of them played their part sincerely in supporting the revolution.

Let us take the case of Zahhak Mashriqi15 . He observed all the happenings of Ashura with his own eyes and later mentioned the same to everyone in Kufa. Most of the events of Ashura have been quoted from him. He thus proved to be a true recorder of the events and proclaimer appointed by the Imam. Or else what benefit can one derive from the company of such a person for a few hours when he is sure that he is going to be killed?

Another person was Ubaydullah bin Hurr Juafi, who served under Mu'awiya in the Battle of Siffin, and was one of those, who claimed to be the avengers of the murder of Uthman. Although he did not come to the Imam's help and excused him- self, but when the Ahlul Bayt (the family of the Holy Prophet) proceeded from Kufa to Syria, Ibn Ziyad summoned the nobles of the city one by one and made enquiries about them, but could not see Ubaydullah bin Hurr amongst them.

After a few days Ubaydullah bin Hurr arrived in Kufa and went to see Ibn Ziyad, who asked him: "Where have you been and why did you not assist us?" He replied: "I have been sick." Ibn Ziyad said: "Was it your heart

that was sick or your body?" Ubaydullah bin Hurr replied: "My heart was not at all sick. I was not feeling well for a few days and Allah has cured me." Ibn Ziyad said: "You are lying. You were with our enemy". He replied: "If I had been with your enemy this would have been evident and could not remain hidden from you."

The narrator says: Ibn Ziyad being inattentive, Ubaydullah bin Hurr suddenly went away from there and mounted his horse. In the meantime Ibn Ziyad became conscious of this and said: "Where is Ubaydullah? Bring him". The guards ran out and said to him: "The emir has summoned you and you must respond". He spurred his horse and said: "Tell him that I swear by Allah that I shall never come to him voluntarily". He then left and dismounted at the house of Ahmar bin Ziyad Tai. His friends and companions gathered round him there, and all of them went to Karbala. He was very much grieved on seeing the graves of the martyrs and composed some verses lamenting the death of the Imam. Possibly he was the first person who visited the grave of the Imam and composed an elegy for him.

Later Hurr rose in company with Mukhtar to avenge the murder of Imam and opposed the government of the time and continued harassing it till the end of his life. In his well-known book, Najjashi, the biographer of muhaddithin (traditionalists) has included him among the pious predecessors and says that he compiled a book consisting of the sermons of Imam Ali.

Another person from whom the Imam sought help was Zuhayr bin Qayn. He was one of the notables of Kufa and wielded great influence over his tribe named Bujayla. At the time of the Battle of Siffin he was one of those, who claimed to avenge the murder of Uthman and later on supported the government of Kufa. Now that he joined the Imam this had a very good effect on others.

Furthermore, his being killed grieved the tribes of Kufa, and, consequently, they refrained from cooperating with the government and were always awaiting an opportunity to take vengeance. And it was not Zuhayr alone whose martyrdom became the source of indignation and rancour among the tribe of Bujayla but other tribes also associated with them against the government. The martyrdom of all those belonging to Basra and Kufa, who lost their lives along with the Imam, wounded the hearts of most of the tribes, because all of them were the nobles and dignitaries of these two cities, and most of the tribes residing there mourned their death. The government had to pay dearly for their bloodshed.

From the very early days the Shi'ah of Kufa became active and formed a secret party. Every night they used to gather in the house of one of them, mourned the martyrs, and secretly put the people on their oath that they would oppose the government and avenge the blood of Imam Husayn. Their number increased gradually and the political conditions of Iraq became more dangerous day after day. After three years and a few months when Yazid died they formally made their call public and arrested Amr bin Hurayth, the Governor of Kufa and expelled him from the city.

They gathered in the Masjid of Kufa and all the chiefs of the tribes also attended the meeting. Names of a few persons were recommended for the

interim government, one of them was Amr bin Sa'id16 according to Tabari, and Umar bin Sa'd as stated by Haj Farhad Mirza in his book entitled Qumqam. On hearing this, the women of Hamdan tribe poured out of their houses and began lamenting. Later the women of Nakha Rabia and Kehlan tribes also joined them. Their men, armed with swords, guarded them on all sides, and the women gathered round the pulpit, lamented and cried and said: "Is it not sufficient for Umar bin Sa'd that he has killed the son of Fatima? Now he wants to govern us and to become the ruler of Kufa!" They reminded themselves of the tragedy of Imam Husayn. Till that day formal mourning for the martyrs of Karbala had not taken place in the central Masjid of Kufa.

Disturbance also took place in Basra as in Kufa. Ibn Ziyad began to be opposed from all sides and he had to flee Basra to Syria in disguise. In Makkah Abdullah bin Zubayr took the oath of allegiance from the people for himself, and in Syria also a strange revolution took place which culminated, after Yazid's three or four years hideous rule, in the extinction of the caliphate for which Mu'awiya had been strenuously trying for four years. Thereafter none of the descendants of Abu Sufyan attained to the caliphate.

As regards the Imam's permitting his companions to leave and insisting upon it, it was evident because he did not wish to keep in the dark anyone, who might have joined him for worldly gains. It was necessary that his steps as well as those of others, who were going to be martyred along with him should have been identical. They should not have acted blindly but with perfect cognition, and no coercion should have been involved. This in itself is one of the distinctions of Islam that all its soldiers are vigilant and intelligent and know what they are doing and this shows the difference between truth and falsehood.

The pretenders who recruit soldiers for themselves are not at all prepared to lose even one of their devotees easily. However, the godly persons are not like this. They leave the people free to choose their path with their own will and only point out to them the right path.

Imam Husayn had not undertaken this journey with the object of acquiring a kingdom so that he should have kept with him by all possible means those, who had accompanied him, and should not have allowed them to go away. On the contrary he said in very clear terms: "I think that a battle will take place with these people. I release you from the oath of allegiance taken by you. Now that it is night time and it has enveloped you in its darkness, you should avail of the opportunity and go away".

However, his companions and Bani Hashim gave a pertinent reply. They said unanimously: "Praised be Allah, who has honored us with martyrdom in your company. Even if it be supposed that this world had been eternal and we had to live in it for ever, we would certainly have preferred to be killed along j with you to living in this world".

Furthermore, the Imam wanted to put them to test and granted them full freedom, so that those, who were cooperating with him willingly, might be distinguished from those, who I were reluctant, and none of them should regret his action later, and say that he had become involved in difficulty and

had no way out, or show weakness before the spiteful enemy, so that it might be said that Husayn bin Ali duped the people for the sake of rulership and worldly gains. He, therefore, said in very clear words: "You should disperse and go to your homes, because these people are after me only and if they succeed in subduing me they will have nothing to do with anyone else". He said this so that they should select the right or wrong path after careful consideration.

In short Imam Husayn did such a job that his martyred body became the symbol of Islam till eternity, and his memorial continues to be a permanent threat to the oppressive regime and will always be combating against the enemies of Islam..

Bani Umayya and Bani Abbas always restrained the people from visiting the grave of Imam Husayn. To achieve this end they constructed watch towers and forts around his grave and posted a large number of soldiers there for the purpose of observation. The supervision was so strict that a pilgrim could hardly escape. Usually they had to face torture and death. As persecution by the caliphs increased insistence by the people on visiting the grave of the Imam grew more intense and as the resistance gained strength the administration became more worried and took serious measures in the matter. Consequently many hands were amputated, many heads were chopped off, and many limbs were cut into pieces. However, all these actions were absolutely ineffective.

During the days of Bani Abbas the grave of Imam Husayn was repeatedly demolished. However, as soon as the people felt that the government was inattentive they prepared it immediately. Hence, when one studies the history of the grave of the Imam, it becomes obvious as to when and by whom it was demolished, and who ordered its demolition, but it is not usually clear as to who repaired it, and who bore the expenses of its construction and repairs. This in itself shows the devotion and sincerity of the people in the matter.

What could be the reason for restraining the people from visiting the grave of Imam Husayn except that the oppressive regimes of the time considered the enthusiasm of the pilgrims and their assembling there to be a threat to their very existence. The pilgrims of Imam Husyan knew well that he was martyred, because of his upholding justice. He laid down his life to check oppression and to maintain the principle of enjoining virtue and restraining the people from vice. He made the supreme sacrifice, but did not submit to the tyrannical, despotic and oppressive regime and opposed it valiantly. Hence, none of the rulers could bear the devotees of Imam Husayn and their being ready to lay down their lives for the sake of pilgrimage of his grave and mourning for him.

Although the sentry posts and guards of the regime were constantly vigilant, the people reached the grave of Imam Husayn, taking advantage of the darkness of night, and took refuge before sunrise to places like Ghaziriya and Naynava which are situated near Karbala. This statement is confirmed by the following incident:

Abul Faraj Isfahani has quoted in Maqatilul Talibiyin Muhammad bin Husayn Ashnani as saying: "On account of fear I had not visited the grave

of Imam Husayn for a very long time. At last I said to myself: "Come, whatever may be the consequences, I must go and pay homage to the sacred grave of the Imam". Accompanied by a perfumer I left for Karbala. We used to hide ourselves during daytime and traveled at night till we reached Ghazariya.

We left Ghazariya at mid-night and, passing through the watchmen, who were asleep, slowly approached the sacred grave of Imam Husayn. However as the grave had been demolished, its exact location could not be easily found. We found it after great difficulty. A box that covered the grave had been thrown aside and was half-burnt. The grave had been watered and consequently the earth had caved in and assumed the shape of a ditch. We paid homage to the sacred grave. The place was giving a pleasant smell. I asked my companion who was himself a perfumer as to what smell it was. He replied: "I swear by Allah that I have never smelt such a sweet smell so far." We then departed from the grave and left certain signs at some places. After Mutawakkil was killed we visited the grave with some of the descendants of Abu Talib and restored it to its original shape with mutual assistance."

This incident shows the interest which the people took in the matter. Imam Husayn was recognized to be the criterion of truth. Whoever opposed Husayn in any manner, even though the opposition consisted of restraining from mourning his martyrdom or visiting his grave, was considered to be false and was opposed.

Of course, it should not be forgotten that the Holy Imams who succeeded Imam Husayn encouraged the people to perform the pilgrimage to his grave. It is learnt from the narrations that the Holy Imams considered the pilgrimage of the grave of the Chief of the martyrs to be a vital matter for Islam. In the case of the pilgrimage of the grave of Imam Husayn, however, the Holy Imams have said that as the danger from and prevention by the enemy increases, the spiritual reward for the pilgrimage also increases.

Now how can it be that the performance of the ceremony of Haj, in spite of all its importance, should not be permissible if there is danger for life, whereas pilgrimage to Karbala should be recommended emphatically although there was ninety per cent possibility of one's being killed17 . Its only reason can be that in those days the Holy Imams considered the continuance of the ceremony of Haj and the pilgrimage of the House of Allah to be dependent upon the pilgrimage of the grave of Imam Husayn. Otherwise there can be no occasion for such narrations.

There is a well-known tradition of the Holy Prophet in which he has been reported to have said: "Husayn is from me and I am from Husayn". By this sentence the Holy Prophet did not mean to say only that Husayn was a part of his body, because every child is a part of the body of his father and grandfather and there is nothing particular about it. Supposing that we take this meaning of the first part of the sentence what will be meaning of its second part i.e. "I am from Husayn?" The correct meaning of the tradition, therefore, is that the Holy Prophet said: "Husayn has acquired his existence through me and is the means of the survival of my religion".

During most of the risings of the Alavis against Bani Umayya and Bani Abbas after the martyrdom of Imam Husayn their slogan was vengeance for the blood of Husayn and they usually took the oath of allegiance from one another by the side of his sacred grave. Hence the rulers were afraid of the grave of the Holy Imam as their very rulership was in a state of instability. Otherwise what reason could there be for their preventing the people from the pilgrimage to his grave? Bani Umayya remained at the helm of affairs after his martyrdom for seventy years, and their agents regularly obstructed the people from reaching there.

It may also be said that they were justified in doing so, because Husayn had been killed by the Umayyad administration and it was a matter of shame for them that the people should go to perform pilgrimage to his grave. But the question arises as to why Bani Abbas, who were not the culprits themselves, opposed the pilgrimage to his grave so much? In fact it was Bani Abbas, who were harsher and who cut off the hands and heads of the people, who wanted to go to perform the pilgrimage of the sacred grave of Imam Husayn.

However, Bani Umayya did not destroy the grave of the Imam for seventy years, but Bani Abbas demolished, watered and ploughed it. Why did they do all this? Evidently it was because they were afraid of even the martyred body of Imam Husayn, because they knew very well that the dust of the Martyrs of Ashura always tells the intelligent pilgrims expressly: O passerby! Tell our supporters that our bodies were cut to pieces because we opposed the oppressive government. It made us welter in our blood.

We endeavored to restrain the rulers of the time from their wicked deeds and they butchered us. Our bodies were torn to pieces and crushed under the hooves of the horses of the tyrants, because we supported Islam. However, we did not give up struggle and endeavored to disgrace the spiteful enemy in the eyes of mankind. With our devotion and self-sacrifice for the protection of Islam we opened an institution for the maintenance of Islamic law for the inhabitants of the world.

Now O you, the future comers! Recognize the worth of your religion and do not sell it for petty gains, because the blood of millions like us has been shed to support and protect it. Honor the blood of the martyrs, believe in the worth of your religion, and do not be negligent in the matter of piety. The meaning of pilgrimage coupled with sincerity is that the pilgrim should know whose pilgrimage he is undertaking, what his real message is, what his position is, and why he has attained to this position?

Ali Akbar Ghifari

Second Sermon: 'Ashura - History and Popular Legend

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

All Praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds and the Maker of all creation, and may Peace and benedictions be upon His servant and messenger, His beloved and elect, our master, our prophet, and our sire, Abu al-Qasim Muhammad, may Allah bless him and his pure, immaculate, and infallible Progeny.

I seek the refuge of Allah from the accursed Satan:

“So for their breaking their compact We cursed them and made their hearts hard; they would pervert the words from their meanings, and they forgot a portion of what they were reminded of.” (5:13)

We said that the event of 'Ashura' has been subject to tahrif and it has occurred both in its outward form as well as its inner content. A consequence of these distortions has been that this great historic document and this great educative source has become ineffectual or less potent, in our lives, leaving, at times, even an opposite effect.

All of us have the duty to purge it of the distortions that have polluted this sacred document. Tonight we will discuss the general factors responsible for tahrif. Thereafter our discussion will focus on tahrif in the content and significance of this event.

The Factors of Tahrif

These factors are of two kinds, one of which is of a general nature. That is, there are in general certain factors that lead to the corruption of histories and these are not limited to the event of 'Ashura' alone. For instance, the enemy's motives are themselves a factor that distort an event. In order to achieve their purposes, the enemies bring about alterations in historical texts or misinterpret them. There are many examples of it which I do not wish to mention here.

All that I would say is that this kind of tahrif did play a role in distorting the facts of Karbala', and the enemies did take resort in misrepresenting the uprising of Imam Husayn. As usually happens, the enemies accuse sacred movements of causing conflict and division and of disrupting social harmony and peace. The Umayyad regime also made much effort to give such a hue to the Husayni uprising.

Such propaganda began from the very first day. When Muslim arrived in Kufah, Yazid, while sending an order appointing Ibn Ziyad to the governership of Kufah, wrote: “Muslim, son of 'Aqil, has gone to Kufah and his aim is to disrupt peace and to create social discord and disunity in the Muslim community. Go and suppress him.”

When Muslim was captured and brought to the dar al-imarah, the governor's residency, Ibn Ziyad said to Muslim: “Son of 'Aqil! What was it that brought you to this city? The people here lived in satisfaction and peace.

You came and disrupted their peace, causing disunity and conflict amongst Muslims.” Muslim answered in a manly manner and said: “Firstly, I did not come to this city on my own account. It was the people of this city who invited us.

They wrote a great number of letters, which are in our possession. In those letters they wrote that your father, Ziyad, who ruled this city for years, had killed its virtuous men and imposed its scoundrels over the virtuous, subjecting them to various forms of tyranny and injustice. They appealed to us to help them establish justice. We have come to establish justice!”

The Umayyad regime did wage much propaganda of this kind, but their misrepresentations did not affect the history of Islam. You will not find a single competent historian in the world who might have said that Husayn ibn 'Ali, naudhubillah, made an unlawful uprising that he rose to cause conflict and disunity among the people. No.

The enemy could not bring about any misrepresentation in [the history of] the event of Karbala'. Most regrettably, whatever tahrif has occurred in the event of Karbala' has been at the hands of the friends.

The Second Factor

The second factor is the human tendency towards myth-making and for turning facts into legends. This tendency has been at work in all the world's historical traditions. There is a tendency in men for hero worship which induces the people to fabricate myths and legends about national and religious heroes.1

The best evidence of it are the legends that the people have invented around the figures of some geniuses such as Ibn Sina and Shaykh Baha'i. Ibn Sina, undoubtedly, was a genius and was gifted with extraordinary physical and intellectual powers. But these very gifts have led the people to weave out legends about him.

For instance, it is said that once Ibn Sina saw a man from a distance of one parasang and remarked that the man was eating bread made with oil. They asked him how he could know that the man was eating bread and that it was made with oil.

He replied that he saw flies circling the bread, which had made him conclude that there was oil in the bread. Obviously, this is a legend. Someone who can see flies from the distance of one parasang will see bread made with oil much sooner than he would see flies!

Or it is said that once during the time that Ibn Sina was studying at Isfahan he complained that when he gets up in the middle of the night to study, he was disturbed by the noise of the hammering of the coppersmiths of Kashan.

They went and made a test. One night they told the coppersmiths of Kashan not to use their hammers. That night, said Ibn Sina, he had slept peacefully and was undisturbed in his study. Obviously this is a legend.

Many such legends have been made about Shaykh Bahi'i as well. Such things are not confined to the event of 'Ashura. However, let the people say what they would about Ibn Sina. What harm does it do?

None! But in respect of individuals who are guides of mankind and whose words and deeds and whose stands and uprisings serve as a model and authority, there should not be any tahrif whatsoever in their statements, in their personality, and history.

How many legends have been fabricated by us Shi'is about Amir al Mu'minin 'Ali, many Peace be upon him! There is no doubt that 'Ali ('a) was an extraordinary man. No one has doubts about 'Ali's courage which was superior to that of any ordinary human being. 'Ali did not encounter any contestant in battle without felling him to the ground.

But does that satisfy the myth makers? Never! For instance, there is the legend about 'Ali's encounter with Marhab in the battle of Khaybar with all the curious details about the physique of Marhab. The historians have also written that 'Ali's sword cut him into two from the middle (I don't know whether the two halves were perfectly equal!).

But here they found the opportunity to weave out fables which are harmful for the faith. It is said that God commanded Gabriel to go immediately to the earth lest 'Ali's sword when it comes down on Marhab should cut the earth into two halves, reaching right down to the Cow and the Fish.

Gabriel was told to shield the blow with his wings. Gabriel went and when 'Ali struck the blow with his sword, it slashed Marhab into two halves which had they been put in a balance would have turned out to be exactly equal.

However, one of Gabriel's wings suffered injury and he could not ascend to the heaven for forty days. When at last he arrived in heaven, God asked him as to where he had been all these days. He replied, “O Lord! I was on the earth. You had given me an assignment to go there.” He was asked why he had taken so much time to return.

Gabriel said, “O God, the blow of 'Ali's sword wounded my wings and I was busy bandaging and healing them all these forty days!” According to another legend 'Ali's sword flew so swiftly and slickly through Marhab's forehead cutting all the way to the saddle that when 'Ali pulled away his sword Marhab himself did not know what had happened (he thought the blow had gone amiss).

He jeered at 'Ali, “Was that all of your swordsmanship?!” 'Ali' said to him, “Just move yourself a bit and see.” As soon as Marhab made a movement, one half of his body fell on one side of the horse and the other on the other side!

Hajji Nuri, this great man, in his book Lu'lu wa marjan, while condemning the practice of fabricating of such legends, writes about legends that some people have put into circulation concerning the valor of Hadrat Abu al-Fadl al-'Abbas.

According to one of them, in the Battle of Siffin (in which, basically, it is not known whether he had participated, and even if he did he must have been a boy of fifteen years) he threw a man into the air, then another, and so on up to eighty men, and by the time the last one was thrown up the first one had not yet reached the ground. Then when the first one came down, he cut him into two halves, then the second and so on to the last man!

A part of the interpolations in the narratives of the event of Karbala have resulted from the myth-making tendency. The Europeans assert that one finds many exaggerations in accounts pertaining to the history of the East, and there is some truth in what they say.

Mulla Darbandi writes in his book Asrar al-shahadah that the cavalry of the army of 'Umar ibn Sa'd consisted of six hundred thousand horsemen and twenty million infantrymen - in all a force of one million and six hundred thousand plus all the people of Kufah! Now how large was Kufah?

Kufah was a recently founded city and not more than thirty-five years old, as it was built during the time of 'Umar ibn Khattab. It was built at 'Umar's orders as a military outpost for Muslim warriors near the borders of Iran. It is not certain whether the entire population of Kufah during that time was even a hundred thousand.

That a force of one million and six hundred thousand could have been assembled on that day and that Husayn ibn 'Ali' should have killed three hundred thousand of them is not at all reasonable. Such figures cast a shadow on the whole event.

It is said that someone once made exaggerated claims about the largeness of the city of Herat in former days. He said, 'Herat was a very big city at one time.' 'How big? he was asked. He said, 'At one time there were in Herat twenty thousand one-eyed cooks named Ahmad selling head and totters stew. Now imagine how many men there must be in a city, and how many named Ahmad, and how many one-eyed Ahmads, to have twenty-one thousand one-eyed Ahmads selling head and totters stew!

This myth-making tendency has always been very active; but we must not leave a sacred document to the mercy of myth-makers.

There is amongst us, the Ahl al-Bayt, in every generation reformers who purge the faith of the perversions of the extremists, of the false beliefs of the falsifiers, and of the misinterpretations of the ignorant.2

We have a duty here. Now let anyone say anything he likes about Herat. But is it right that such legends as these should find way into the history of the event of Ashura', an event concerning which our duty is to keep it alive and revive its memory every year?

The Third Factor

The third factor is of a particular nature. The two factors that we have discussed above, that is, the hostile ends of the enemies and the human tendency for conjuring legends and myths, apply to all histories of the world, but there is also a factor which is specific to the event of Ashura' that has led to fabrication of stories.

The leaders of the faith, from the time of the Noble Messenger and the Pure Imams, have commanded in clear and emphatic terms that the memory of Husayn ibn 'Ali must be kept alive and that his martyrdom and ordeals should be commemorated every year. Why? What is the reason underlying this Islamic ordinance? Why is there so much encouragement for and emphasis on visiting the shrine of Husayn ibn 'Ali?

We should reflect over these questions. Some might say that it is for the sake of condoling with Hadrat Zahra' and offering her consolation! But is it not ridiculous to imagine that Hadrat Zahra' should still need consolation after fourteen hundred years, whereas, in accordance with the explicit statements of Imam Husayn and according to our creed, since his martyrdom Imam Husayn and Hadrat Zahra have been together in heaven?

What a thing to say! Is it correct to think of Hadrat Zahra as a little child that goes on weeping, even after fourteen centuries, and whom we have to go and console? Such kind of belief is destructive for religion. Imam Husayn ('a) established the practical ideology of Islam and he is the practical model for Islamic movements.

They (that is the Prophet and Imams) wanted Imam Husayn's ideology to be kept alive. They wanted Husayn should reappear every year with those sweet, sublime and heroic summons of his and declare”

Don't you see that what is right and true is not acted upon, and what is wrong and false is not forbidden? [In such conditions] the man of faith should long to meet his true Lord!3

They wanted the words:

Death is better than a life saddled with indignity,4

To be kept alive forever, and so also the words:

To me death is nothing but felicity, and life with oppressors is nothing but disgrace,5

They wanted such other saying of Imam Husayn to be kept alive:

The children of Adam carry the mark of death like necklaces that adorn the neck of damsels!6

Far from us is disgrace and indignity!7

They wanted to keep alive the memory of such scenes as that of Imam Husayn's confronting a force of thirty thousand men, in a state when he and his family are faced with a great ordeal and declaring in a manly manner - and the world has never seen such a manly personage!

Indeed, that baseborn son of a baseborn father has left me only two alternatives to choose from: the sword or disgrace. And far from us is disgrace! It is disdainful to God, His Messenger and the faithful that we should yield to anything of that kind, and those born of chaste mothers and high-minded fathers and possessing a lofty sense of honor disdain that submission to vile men should be preferred to honorable death!8

They wanted to keep alive the formative school of Imam Husayn so that the rays of the Husayni spirit may breathe life into this community. Its objective is quite clear.

Do not allow the event of 'Ashura' to be consigned to oblivion! Your life, your humanity, and your dignity depend on this event!

You can keep Islam alive only by its means! That is why they have encouraged us to keep alive the tradition of mourning Imam Husayn, and very rightly! The institution of mourning Husayn ibn 'Ali has a correct philosophy underlying it, a philosophy which is also extremely sublime.

It is fitting that we should do all that we can to endeavor for the sake of this cause, provided we understand its purpose and goal. Unfortunately some people have not understood it.

Without making the people understand the philosophy of Imam Husayn's uprising and without making them understand the station of Imam Husayn, they imagine that if they just came and sat in mourning assemblies and shed tears, without knowledge and understanding, it would atone their sins.

Marhum Hajji Nuri mentions a point in the book, Lu'lu' wa marjan. That point is the belief of some people that the reward (thawab) for mourning Imam Husayn is so great that it is justifiable to employ any means whatsoever for this end. Nowadays a group which subscribes to the views of Machiavilli in political thought says that ends justify the means. If the end is a good one, it does not matter what means are used to achieve it.

Now these people also say that we have a sacred and exalted goal, which is mourning Imam Husayn and it does not matter what means are used for this end. As the end is a sacred one, it does not matter what the means are: Is it correct to perform ta'ziyahs - even ta'ziyahs which are vulgar - for this purpose? They ask, 'Do they make the people cry?

If they do, there is so problem with such ta'ziyahs.' So also there is no problem if we blow trumpets, beat drums, commit sinful acts, make men dress as women, conjure a wedding for Qasim, or fabricate and forge episodes. Such things do not matter in the tradition of mourning Imam Husayn, which is something exclusive.

Here lying is forgiven, forgery and fabrication are forgivable, making pictures, and dressing men as women is pardonable. Here any kind of sinful conduct is forgivable as the end is most sacred! As a consequence of such thinking, some persons have resorted to such tahrif and misrepresentation that are stunning.

About ten or fifteen years ago when I was on a visit to Isfahan, I met a great man, marhum Hajj Shaykh Muhammad Hasan Najafabadi, may God elevate his station. I recounted to him a rawdah that I had heard recently somewhere. It was something which I had never heard until that time. Incidentally, this man who had delivered that rawdah, an opium addict, had made the people weep profusely with that rawdah of his.

In it he recounted the story of an old woman during the reign of Mutawakkil (the 'Abbasid caliph who persecuted the Shi'ah). The woman had set out with the purpose of making a pilgrimage to the tomb of Imam Husayn, which was forbidden at that time and they would cut off the hands of the pilgrims. He went on with the narrative until the point when the old woman is taken and thrown into the river. In that state she cries out for help, calling out, “O Abu al-Fadl al-'Abbas!”

As she is about to drown a horseman appears and tells her to catch hold of his stirrup. The woman takes hold of the stirrups but she says, “Why don't you give me your hand?' The horseman says, “I haven't any hands!” At this point the people wept a lot.

Marhum Hajj Shaykh Muhammad Hasan recounted for me the history of this legend. In a place near the bazaar, in the near abouts of Madrasah Sadr, there used to be held a majlis which was one of the major majalis of Isfahan and which even the marhum Hajj Mulla Isma'il Khwaju'i used to attend. One day there had occurred there an incident.

(It had taken place earlier and he had heard its account from reliable persons.) It involved a well-known wa'iz; who himself had recounted it in these words: “One day mine was the last turn to speak from the minbar.

Other speakers had come and each one of them had exerted his skills to make the people weep. Everyone that came would try to surpass his predecessor and having delivered his rawdah would descend from the minbar to sit among the audience and watch the art of the succeeding rawdeh-khwan. This continued until the time of noon.

I saw that everyone had tried his prowess and together they had drawn out all the tears that the people could shed. What should I do? I thought for a while, and then and there I made up this story.

When my turn came, I went up and related the story, leaving all of them behind. In the afternoon, the same day, while attending another majlis in the Char-suq locality, I saw that the one who took to the minbar before me related this same story. Gradually it came to be written in books and appeared in print.”

The false and wrong notion that the tradition of mourning Imam Husayn is an exception to all norms, that it is justified to use any means to make the people weep, has been a major factor leading to fabrication of legends and tahrif.

Marhum Hajji Nuri, that saintly man and teacher of marhum Hajj Shaykh 'Abbas Qummi, who as confessed by Hajj Shaykh 'Abbas himself as well as others was superior to his pupils, was an extraordinarily learned and pious man. In his book he makes the point that if it is a correct notion that the end justifies the means, then one may also justify the following line of reasoning.

One of the Islamic precepts is that bringing delight to the heart of a believer and to do something to make him happy is a greatly commendable act. Such being the case, according to this reasoning, it is justifiable to do backbiting in his presence, as he loves listening to backbiting. And should someone say that it is sinful to do so, the answer will be,” No! The purpose is a sacred one and the backbiting is being done to make a believer pleased and happy!”

Marhum Hajji Nuri gives another example. A man embraces a non-mahram woman, which is an unlawful act. We ask him why did you do that?He replies, “I have done it for a believer's delight.” The same reasoning can be applied to such unlawful acts as adultery, drinking wine, and sodomy. Isn't this an absurd reasoning?

Wouldn't such a notion destroy the Shari'ah? By God, to think that it is permissible to use any kind of means for making people cry in mourning Imam Husayn is a notion that contradicts everything that Imam Husayn stands for. Imam Husayn was martyred to uplift Islam, as we confess while reciting his ziyarah:

I bear witness that you established the prayer, gave zakat commanded what is right and forbade what is wrong, and did such jihad in the way of God as ought to be done.9

Imam Husayn was killed in order to revive Islamic traditions, Islamic laws and regulations, not in order to create an excuse for the violation of Islamic norms. Na'udhubillah, we have changed Imam Husayn into a destroyer of Islam: the Imam Husayn that we have conjured in our imagination is a destroyer of Islam.

In his book Hajji Nuri mentions a story that was related to him by one of the students in Najaf, who originally came from Yazd. “One day,” he said, “in my youth I made a journey on foot to Khorasan, going by the road that passes through the desert (kawr). In one of the villages of Nayshabur I went to a mosque, as I did not have any place to stay.

The imam of the mosque came and led the prayers. Afterwards he went on the minbar to make a rawdah I was amazed to see the mosque attendant bring a pile of stones which he handed over to the imam. When the rawdah started, he ordered the lamps to be put out. When the lamps had been put out, he pelted the stones at the audience and there arose cries from the people. When the lamps were lighted, I saw bleeding heads.

Their eyes were tearful as they walked out of the mosque. I approached the imam and asked him why he had done such a thing. He said, 'I have tested these people. There is no rawdah in the world that will make them weep. As weeping for the sake of Imam Husayn has a great reward and thawab, I have found that the only way to make them cry is to throw stones on their heads.

This is how I make them weep.' “ He believed that the end justifies the means. The end was to mourn Imam Husayn though it should involve emptying a pile of stones on the people's heads.

Accordingly, this is a particular factor which is specific to this historic event and it has led to much fabrication and tahrif.

When one studies history one finds what they have done to this event. By God, Hajji Nuri is right when he says that if we were to weep for Imam Husayn today, we should mourn for him on account of these falsehoods, fabrications and tahrif!

There is a well-known book called Rawdat al-shuhada'. whose author was Mulla Husayn Kashifi. According to Hajji Nuri, he was the first to write in his book the stories of Za'far the Jinn and the one about Qasim's wedding. I have read this book.

I used to imagine that it contained only one or two of such cases. But afterwards when I read it I saw that the matter was very much different. This book, which is in Persian, was compiled about five-hundred years ago.

Mulla Husayn Kashifi was a scholar and learned man. He has authored several books including the Anwar suhayli. His biographical accounts do not indicate whether he was a Shi'i or a Sunni. Basically he was a Chameleon: among the Shi'ah he would pose as an outright Shi'i, while amongst the Sunnis he would pass as a Hanafi.

He was a native of Sabzawar, a Shi'i centre whose people were staunch Shi'is. In Sabzawar he would act as an out and out Shi'i, and at times when he would go to Herat ('Abd al-Rahman Jami was the husband of his sister or sister-in-law) he would give sermons for the Sunnis in the Sunni style. But in Sabzawar he narrated the tragedies of Karbala'.

His death occurred around 910/1504, that is, either at the end of the 9th or the beginning of the 10th century. This was the first book, compiled about five hundred years ago, to be written as an elegiac narrative (marthiyah).

Earlier the people used to refer to the primary sources. Shaykh Mufid, may God be pleased with him, wrote the Irshad and how sound is his narration! If we were to refer to the Irshad of Shaykh Mufid we would not stand in need of any other source.

Tabari, among Sunni authors, has also written about it. Ya'qubi, Ibn 'Asakir and Khwarazmi have also written. I don't know what this unjust man has done! When I read this book I saw that even the names are spurious. He mentions names among Imam Husayn's companions that never existed. He mentions names of the enemy's men which are also spurious. He has turned the factual accounts of the event into fables.

As this was the first book to be written in Persian, the orators in mourning assemblies, who were mostly illiterate and could not use the Arabic texts, would take this book and read from it in the mourning sessions.

That is why the gatherings that are held nowadays to mourn Imam Husayn are called rawdeh-khwani. Rawdeh-khwani was not in vogue during the time of Imam Sadiq or Imam Hasan 'Askari, nor it was prevalent during the times of Sayyid Murtada [d 436/1044] or even Khwajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi [d. 672/1273].

Rawdeh-khwani came into vogue since the last five hundred years and it came to be called as such. Rawdeh-khwani meant reading from the book Rawdat al-shuhada', a pack of lies. From the time that this book fell into the hands of the people, no one has bothered to study the actual history of Imam Husayn.

Then, about sixty or seventy years ago, there appeared another man, the marhum Mulla Darbandi. He took all the contents of the Rawdat al-shahuda' and compiled them together with other material, collecting it all in a book called Asrar al-shahadah. The contents of this book make one lament for the fate of Islam.

Hajji Nuri writes, “We used to attend the lectures of Hajj Shaykh 'Abd al-Husayn Tehrani (who was a very saintly man) and benefited from his teaching. A sayyid from Hillah, who was a rawdeh-khwan, came to meet him and he showed him a book written about the events of Imam Husayn's martyrdom (maqtal, plural: maqatil) to see whether its contents were reliable.

This book did not have any beginning or end. Only at one place in it was mentioned the name of a certain mulla of Jabl al-'Amil who was among the pupils of the author of the Ma'alim al-usul. Marhum Hajj Shaykh 'Abd al-Husayn took the book to examine it.

First he studied the biographical accounts of that scholar and found that such a book had not been attributed to him. Then he read the book itself and found it to be full of falsehoods. He said to that sayyid, 'This book is a pack of lies.

Don't circulate this book and don't quote anything from it, for it is unlawful to do so. Basically this book has not been written by that scholar and its contents are spurious.' “ Hajji Nuri says that the same book fell into the hands of the author of Asrar al-shahadah and he copied all its contents into his book, from the beginning to the end!”

Hajji Nuri relates another episode, which is rather touching. Once a man came to author of the Maqami'10 and said to him, “Last night I saw a horrible dream.” “What was it?” he asked him. He said, “I saw that I am biting away flesh from the body of Imam Husayn.” The scholar trembled on hearing these words.

He lowered his head and thought for a while. Then he said, “Perhaps you are a marthiyeh-khwan?”. “Yes, I am,” he replied. He said, “Hereafter, either abandon marthiyeh-khwani altogether or draw your material from reliable books. You are tearing away the flesh Imam Husayn, with these lies of yours. It was God's grace that He showed this to you in a dream.”

If one studies the history of 'Ashura' one will find that it is the most vivid and well-documented of histories with plenty of sources. The marhum Akhund Khurasani used to say, “Those who are ever after 'new' rawdahs should go and read the true accounts, for no one has ever heard them”

One should study the addresses of Imam Husayn ('a) delivered in Makkah - in the Hijaz as a whole - at Karbala', during his journey, as well as the sermons addressed to his companions, the questions and answers that took place between him and others, the letters that were exchanged between him and other people, the letters that were exchanged between the enemies themselves, in addition to the accounts of those (from among the friends as well the enemies) who were present on the occasion of 'Ashura'.

There were three or four persons from among Imam Husayn's companions who survived, including a slave named 'Uqbah ibn Sam'an, who had accompanied the Imam from Makkah and lived to write the accounts pertaining to the Imam's troops.

He was captured on the day of 'Ashura' but was released when he told them that he was a slave. Humayd ibn Muslim was another chronicler who accompanied the army of 'Umar ibn Sa'd. Of those present on the occasion was Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a) himself who has recounted all the events. There is no blind spot in the history of Imam Husayn ('a).

Hajji Nuri refers to a spurious story that relates to Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a). According to it when there remained no companion with Hadrat Abu 'Abd Allah ('a), the Hadrat went into the tent of Imam Zayn al- 'Abidin ('a) to bid him good-bye. Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a) asked him, “Father! How did things come about between you and these people? (that is, Imam Zayn al-'Abidin was unaware of what was happening until that time).

The Imam said to him, “Son, this matter has ultimately led to a battle.” 'What happened to Habib ibn Mazahir?, asked Imam Zayn al-'Abidin. “He was killed,” replied the Imam. “How about Zuhayr ibn Qayn?”

“He was also killed,” replied the Imam. “What happened to Burayr ibn Hudayr?” “He was killed,” said Imam Husayn ('a). Imam Zayn al-'Abidin continued naming each of his father's companions one after another and the Imam's reply was the same.

Then he asked concerning the men of Banu Hashim. “What happened to Qasim ibn Hasan?” What happened to my brother 'Ali Akbar?” “What happened to my uncle Abu al-Fadl The answer was the same: “He has been killed.” This is a fabrication and a lie. Imam Zayn al-'Abidin, na'udhubillah, was not so sick and unconscious as not to know what was going on.

Historians have written that even in that state of illness he rose from his bed and said to Zaynab, “Aunt, bring me my staff and give me a sword.” In any case, Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a) was one of those who were present on the scene and related the accounts of events.

Truly, we should be penitent for these crimes and treacheries that we are guilty of in respect of Abu 'Abd Allah al-Husayn ('a), his companions, comrades and members of his family, and for effacing all their achievements. He should do penance and then make effort to derive benefit from this most educative source.

Is there any inadequacy in the life of 'Abbas ibn 'Ali as recounted in the reliable maqatil (accounts of martyrdom)? The single point that there was no danger to his own life is enough to be a matter of pride for him. Imam Husayn had also told him, “They are only after me, and if they kill me, they will not have anything again anyone else.”

At Kufah, when Shimr ibn Dhi al-Jawshan was departing for Karbala', one of those who were present said to Ibn Ziyad that some of his relatives on the mother's side were with Husayn ibn 'Ali. He requested Ibn Ziyad to write a letter granting them amnesty, and Ibn Ziyad wrote it. Shimr belonged to a clan that had remote ties with the tribe of Umm al-Banin (the mother of Abu al-Fadl). Shimr personally brought this letter of amnesty on the night following the ninth day of Muharram.

This wretch approached the camp of Husayn ibn 'Ali and shouted, “Where are my nephews!” (ayna banu ukhtina?!).11 Abu al-Fadl, along with his full brothers, was sitting with Hadrat Abu 'Abd Allah ('a). He remained silent and did not reply, until the Imam said to him, “Answer him, though he be an evil man (ajibuhu in kana fasiqa). At the Imam's leave, he answered Shimr, saying, “What do you want?” (Ma taqul?). Shimr said, “I have come with some good news for you.

I have brought a letter of amnesty for you from the emir, 'Ubayd Allah. You are now free, and you will be safe if you leave now.” Abu al-Fadl said to him, “May God damn you and your emir, as well as the letter that you bring. Do you think we will abandon our Imam and brother for the sake of our own safety?”

On the night of 'Ashura', the first person to declare his loyalty towards Abu 'Abd Allah was his brother Abu al-Fadl. Aside from the foolish exaggerations that are often made, that which is confirmed by history is that Abu al-Fadl was a very wise person, valiant and courageous, tall and most handsome. He had been nicknamed 'The Moon of the Hashimis.'12 These things are true. To be sure, he had inherited Ali's courage.

The story is also true regarding his mother, that Ali' had asked 'Aqil, his brother, to propose a woman born of a heroic descent (waladatha al-fuhulah)13 who might give birth to son who would be a warrior and man of valour (li-talidani farisan shuja'ah).14 'Aqil had suggested Umm al-Banin. So much of it is true. 'Ali's wish was fulfilled in Abu al-Fadl.

According to one of two reports, on the day of 'Ashura' Abu al-Fadl came to the Imam and said, “Dear brother, now give me the permission. This breast of mine is suffocated and I can bear it no more. I want to sacrifice my life for your sake.”

I don't know the reason why Imam responded to Hadrat Abu al-Fadl's request in the manner that he did. Abu 'Abd Allah himself knows better. He said, “Brother, now that you want to leave, try to get some water for these children.”

Hadrat Abu al-Fadl had already come to receive the nickname Saqqa (water carrier), as earlier, on one or two occasions, at nights he had been able to pass through the enemy's ranks to fetch water for the children in Abu 'Abd Allah's camp. It was not the case that they had not drunk any water for three days and nights.

Access to water had been closed for three days and nights, but during this time they had been able to get some water on one or two occasions, including the night of 'Ashura', when they had taken bath and washed their bodies. Abu al-Fadl consented.

Now note this majestic scene! What greatness! What valour! What a spirit of understanding and self-sacrifice! A lone warrior, alone by himself, advances against a host. The number of men who guarded the river bank was four thousand. He descends along the river bank and leads his horse into the water (all historians have written this).

First, he fills the waterskin that he has brought and lays it on his shoulder. He is thirsty. The air is hot and has been fighting. But as he sits on the back of his horse and the horse stands in water reaching up to its belly, he lowers his hands into water, takes water into them and raises them somewhat towards his sacred lips.

Those who were watching from a distance report that he hesitated for a while. Then they saw that he threw the water back and came out of the river without drinking any. No one knew why Abu Al-Fadl did not drink water there. But when he came out he recited rajaz verses which were addressed to himself. Now from these verses they understood why he had not drunk water:

O soul of Abu al-Fadl!

My wish is that you live not after Husayn!

Will you have a drink of cold water,

While there stands Husayn, thirsty, near the tents,

And about to drink the cup of death!?

Such is not the way of my faith,

Nor that of one who abides in conviction and truth!15

What would become of manliness? Of honour? Of caring love? And of sharing in the hardship of one's dear ones? Isn't Husayn your Imam, and you his follower?

While Husayn is about to drink the cup of death,

Will you have a drink of cold water?

Never! My faith does not permit me to do that! My loyalty does not allow me to do such a thing! Abu al-Fadl changed his route while returning and now he came through the palm groves. Earlier, he had come by the direct way, but he knew that he now carried a precious trust with him.

So he changed his route and all his concern now was to get the water safely to the camp, for it was possible that a single arrow may pierce the waterskin and fail his task of bringing the water to its destination. In the mean while they heard that Abu al-Fadl had changed his rajaz. It appeared that something had happened. Now he cried out:

By God!

Even if you sever my right arm,

I will persist in defending my faith,

And the Imam, who is the true one, for certain,

the Prophet's grandson, pure and trustworthy!16

That is, by God even if you cut my right arm I will not flinch from defending Husayn. Not much time passed when his rajaz changed again:

O my soul, fear not the faithless,

And receive the good news of Almighty's mercy,

In the company of the Prophet, the Master and the Elect,

Though, insolently, they should slash my left arm!17

These rajaz verses signaled that his left arm too had been severed. They write that with characteristic dexterity he somehow turned the water-skin and bent himself over it. I will not say what happened thereafter as it is most heart rending.

It is a custom to recount the account of the ordeals of this great human being on the night of Tasu'ah (9th Muharram). Let me add that Umm al-Banin, the mother of Hadrat Abu al-Fadl was alive at the time of the event of Karbala', though she was in Madinah at the time. She was given the news that all her four sons were martyred at Karbala'.

This saintly woman would go to the Baqi' cemetery and mourn over her sons. They write that her elegies were so full of pathos that they brought tears to everyone who heard them, even Marwan ibn Hakam, who was the staunchest of the enemies of the Prophet's family.

Sometimes she would remember all her sons and, at times, especially Abu al-Fadl, the eldest of them, who was senior most of the brothers, both in respect of age as well as in respect of spiritual and bodily merits.

I remember one of her two elegies and I will recite them for you. These are the elegiac verses that this grieved mother recited in mourning for her sons (in general, the Arabs recite elegiac verses in a very touching style):

You, who have seen 'Abbas make repeated forays against the base hosts,

And following him were the Lion's sons, each a mighty lion!

I have been told, my son's head was struck when his arms were cut,

Alas for my Lion's cub! Did a club fall on his head?

O 'Abbas! None would have dared to approach it,

Were your sword in your hand!18

That is, 'O observant eye, tell me, you who have been in Karbala' and watched its scenes and observed the moment when Abu al-Fadl, my son of a lion, with my other lion's cubs following him, attacked that cowardly crowd - tell me is it true what I have been told?

They say that when they had cut my son's arms an iron club fell on my dear one's head. Is that true?' Then she says, “Abu al-Fadl! My dear! I know that if you had arms there wasn't a man in the whole world to have the guts to face you! They had the temerity to do that because your arms had been severed from your body.

Notes

1. During the nights of the 'id of Ghadir, Dr. Shari'ati delivered an excellent lecture on this general human tendency for hero-worship and making of myths and legends, turning historic figures into legendary heroes with extraordinary and superhuman characteristics.

2. Al-Kulayni, Usul al-Kafi, “kitab fadl al-'ilm”, p. 32; al-Saffar, Basa'ir al-darajat, p.10

3. Bihar al-anwar, vol. 44, p. 381; Tuhaf al-'uqul, p. 176; al-Luhuf, 33; al-Khwarazmi's Maqtal al-Husayn, ii, p. 5.

4. Ibn Shahr Ashub, al-Manaqib, iv, p. 110; al-Luhuf, p. 50, Bihar al-anwar, vol. 45, p. 50; al-Irbili, Kashf al-ghummah, ii, p. 32.

5. Bihar al-anwar, vol. 44, p. 381; Tuhaf al-'uqul, p. 176; al-Luhuf, 33.

6. Bihar al-anwar, vol. 44, p. 366; al-Luhuf, p. 25.

7. Al-Luhuf, p. 41; Khwarazmi's Maqtal al-Husayn, ii, p. 7; Ibn 'Asakir, Ta'rikh al-Sham, iv, p. 333; al-Muqarrim's Maqtal al-Husayn, p. 287; al-Harrani, Tuhaf al-'uqul, p. 176; Shaykh 'Abbas al-Qummi, Nafs al-mahmum, p. 149, Mulhaqat Ihqaq al-haqq, xi, pp. 624-625.

8. Ibid.

9. Mafatih al-janan, the ziyarah of Imam Husayn ('a) for the nights of 'Id al-Fitr and 'Id al-Adha.

10. Marhum Aqa Muhammad Ali was the son of marhum Wahid Behbahani and both of them were great men. Marhum Aqa Muhammad Ali migrated to Kirmanshah where he wielded great influence.

11. al-Muqarrim's Maqtal al Husayn, p. 252, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 44, p. 391, al-Luhuf, p. 37

12. al-Muqarrim's al-Abbas, p. 81; Ibn Shahr Ashub, al-Manaqib, iv, p. 108

13. al-Muqarrim's al-Abbas, p. 69

14. Ibsar al-ayn fi ansar al-Husayn alayh al-salam, p. 26

15. Yanabi al-mawaddah, ii, p. 165; Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 45, p. 41

16. Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 45, p. 40

17. Ibid.

18. Muntaha al-amal, I, p. 386.

'Ashura - Misrepresentations and Distortions part 2

Authors(s): Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari

Translator(s): Ali Quli Qara'i

Publisher(s): al-Tawhid Islamic Journal

Journal: Vol.13, No.4

Second Sermon: 'Ashura - History and Popular Legend

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

All Praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds and the Maker of all creation, and may Peace and benedictions be upon His servant and messenger, His beloved and elect, our master, our prophet, and our sire, Abu al-Qasim Muhammad, may Allah bless him and his pure, immaculate, and infallible Progeny.

I seek the refuge of Allah from the accursed Satan:

“So for their breaking their compact We cursed them and made their hearts hard; they would pervert the words from their meanings, and they forgot a portion of what they were reminded of.” (5:13)

We said that the event of 'Ashura' has been subject to tahrif and it has occurred both in its outward form as well as its inner content. A consequence of these distortions has been that this great historic document and this great educative source has become ineffectual or less potent, in our lives, leaving, at times, even an opposite effect.

All of us have the duty to purge it of the distortions that have polluted this sacred document. Tonight we will discuss the general factors responsible for tahrif. Thereafter our discussion will focus on tahrif in the content and significance of this event.

The Factors of Tahrif

These factors are of two kinds, one of which is of a general nature. That is, there are in general certain factors that lead to the corruption of histories and these are not limited to the event of 'Ashura' alone. For instance, the enemy's motives are themselves a factor that distort an event. In order to achieve their purposes, the enemies bring about alterations in historical texts or misinterpret them. There are many examples of it which I do not wish to mention here.

All that I would say is that this kind of tahrif did play a role in distorting the facts of Karbala', and the enemies did take resort in misrepresenting the uprising of Imam Husayn. As usually happens, the enemies accuse sacred movements of causing conflict and division and of disrupting social harmony and peace. The Umayyad regime also made much effort to give such a hue to the Husayni uprising.

Such propaganda began from the very first day. When Muslim arrived in Kufah, Yazid, while sending an order appointing Ibn Ziyad to the governership of Kufah, wrote: “Muslim, son of 'Aqil, has gone to Kufah and his aim is to disrupt peace and to create social discord and disunity in the Muslim community. Go and suppress him.”

When Muslim was captured and brought to the dar al-imarah, the governor's residency, Ibn Ziyad said to Muslim: “Son of 'Aqil! What was it that brought you to this city? The people here lived in satisfaction and peace.

You came and disrupted their peace, causing disunity and conflict amongst Muslims.” Muslim answered in a manly manner and said: “Firstly, I did not come to this city on my own account. It was the people of this city who invited us.

They wrote a great number of letters, which are in our possession. In those letters they wrote that your father, Ziyad, who ruled this city for years, had killed its virtuous men and imposed its scoundrels over the virtuous, subjecting them to various forms of tyranny and injustice. They appealed to us to help them establish justice. We have come to establish justice!”

The Umayyad regime did wage much propaganda of this kind, but their misrepresentations did not affect the history of Islam. You will not find a single competent historian in the world who might have said that Husayn ibn 'Ali, naudhubillah, made an unlawful uprising that he rose to cause conflict and disunity among the people. No.

The enemy could not bring about any misrepresentation in [the history of] the event of Karbala'. Most regrettably, whatever tahrif has occurred in the event of Karbala' has been at the hands of the friends.

The Second Factor

The second factor is the human tendency towards myth-making and for turning facts into legends. This tendency has been at work in all the world's historical traditions. There is a tendency in men for hero worship which induces the people to fabricate myths and legends about national and religious heroes.1

The best evidence of it are the legends that the people have invented around the figures of some geniuses such as Ibn Sina and Shaykh Baha'i. Ibn Sina, undoubtedly, was a genius and was gifted with extraordinary physical and intellectual powers. But these very gifts have led the people to weave out legends about him.

For instance, it is said that once Ibn Sina saw a man from a distance of one parasang and remarked that the man was eating bread made with oil. They asked him how he could know that the man was eating bread and that it was made with oil.

He replied that he saw flies circling the bread, which had made him conclude that there was oil in the bread. Obviously, this is a legend. Someone who can see flies from the distance of one parasang will see bread made with oil much sooner than he would see flies!

Or it is said that once during the time that Ibn Sina was studying at Isfahan he complained that when he gets up in the middle of the night to study, he was disturbed by the noise of the hammering of the coppersmiths of Kashan.

They went and made a test. One night they told the coppersmiths of Kashan not to use their hammers. That night, said Ibn Sina, he had slept peacefully and was undisturbed in his study. Obviously this is a legend.

Many such legends have been made about Shaykh Bahi'i as well. Such things are not confined to the event of 'Ashura. However, let the people say what they would about Ibn Sina. What harm does it do?

None! But in respect of individuals who are guides of mankind and whose words and deeds and whose stands and uprisings serve as a model and authority, there should not be any tahrif whatsoever in their statements, in their personality, and history.

How many legends have been fabricated by us Shi'is about Amir al Mu'minin 'Ali, many Peace be upon him! There is no doubt that 'Ali ('a) was an extraordinary man. No one has doubts about 'Ali's courage which was superior to that of any ordinary human being. 'Ali did not encounter any contestant in battle without felling him to the ground.

But does that satisfy the myth makers? Never! For instance, there is the legend about 'Ali's encounter with Marhab in the battle of Khaybar with all the curious details about the physique of Marhab. The historians have also written that 'Ali's sword cut him into two from the middle (I don't know whether the two halves were perfectly equal!).

But here they found the opportunity to weave out fables which are harmful for the faith. It is said that God commanded Gabriel to go immediately to the earth lest 'Ali's sword when it comes down on Marhab should cut the earth into two halves, reaching right down to the Cow and the Fish.

Gabriel was told to shield the blow with his wings. Gabriel went and when 'Ali struck the blow with his sword, it slashed Marhab into two halves which had they been put in a balance would have turned out to be exactly equal.

However, one of Gabriel's wings suffered injury and he could not ascend to the heaven for forty days. When at last he arrived in heaven, God asked him as to where he had been all these days. He replied, “O Lord! I was on the earth. You had given me an assignment to go there.” He was asked why he had taken so much time to return.

Gabriel said, “O God, the blow of 'Ali's sword wounded my wings and I was busy bandaging and healing them all these forty days!” According to another legend 'Ali's sword flew so swiftly and slickly through Marhab's forehead cutting all the way to the saddle that when 'Ali pulled away his sword Marhab himself did not know what had happened (he thought the blow had gone amiss).

He jeered at 'Ali, “Was that all of your swordsmanship?!” 'Ali' said to him, “Just move yourself a bit and see.” As soon as Marhab made a movement, one half of his body fell on one side of the horse and the other on the other side!

Hajji Nuri, this great man, in his book Lu'lu wa marjan, while condemning the practice of fabricating of such legends, writes about legends that some people have put into circulation concerning the valor of Hadrat Abu al-Fadl al-'Abbas.

According to one of them, in the Battle of Siffin (in which, basically, it is not known whether he had participated, and even if he did he must have been a boy of fifteen years) he threw a man into the air, then another, and so on up to eighty men, and by the time the last one was thrown up the first one had not yet reached the ground. Then when the first one came down, he cut him into two halves, then the second and so on to the last man!

A part of the interpolations in the narratives of the event of Karbala have resulted from the myth-making tendency. The Europeans assert that one finds many exaggerations in accounts pertaining to the history of the East, and there is some truth in what they say.

Mulla Darbandi writes in his book Asrar al-shahadah that the cavalry of the army of 'Umar ibn Sa'd consisted of six hundred thousand horsemen and twenty million infantrymen - in all a force of one million and six hundred thousand plus all the people of Kufah! Now how large was Kufah?

Kufah was a recently founded city and not more than thirty-five years old, as it was built during the time of 'Umar ibn Khattab. It was built at 'Umar's orders as a military outpost for Muslim warriors near the borders of Iran. It is not certain whether the entire population of Kufah during that time was even a hundred thousand.

That a force of one million and six hundred thousand could have been assembled on that day and that Husayn ibn 'Ali' should have killed three hundred thousand of them is not at all reasonable. Such figures cast a shadow on the whole event.

It is said that someone once made exaggerated claims about the largeness of the city of Herat in former days. He said, 'Herat was a very big city at one time.' 'How big? he was asked. He said, 'At one time there were in Herat twenty thousand one-eyed cooks named Ahmad selling head and totters stew. Now imagine how many men there must be in a city, and how many named Ahmad, and how many one-eyed Ahmads, to have twenty-one thousand one-eyed Ahmads selling head and totters stew!

This myth-making tendency has always been very active; but we must not leave a sacred document to the mercy of myth-makers.

There is amongst us, the Ahl al-Bayt, in every generation reformers who purge the faith of the perversions of the extremists, of the false beliefs of the falsifiers, and of the misinterpretations of the ignorant.2

We have a duty here. Now let anyone say anything he likes about Herat. But is it right that such legends as these should find way into the history of the event of Ashura', an event concerning which our duty is to keep it alive and revive its memory every year?

The Third Factor

The third factor is of a particular nature. The two factors that we have discussed above, that is, the hostile ends of the enemies and the human tendency for conjuring legends and myths, apply to all histories of the world, but there is also a factor which is specific to the event of Ashura' that has led to fabrication of stories.

The leaders of the faith, from the time of the Noble Messenger and the Pure Imams, have commanded in clear and emphatic terms that the memory of Husayn ibn 'Ali must be kept alive and that his martyrdom and ordeals should be commemorated every year. Why? What is the reason underlying this Islamic ordinance? Why is there so much encouragement for and emphasis on visiting the shrine of Husayn ibn 'Ali?

We should reflect over these questions. Some might say that it is for the sake of condoling with Hadrat Zahra' and offering her consolation! But is it not ridiculous to imagine that Hadrat Zahra' should still need consolation after fourteen hundred years, whereas, in accordance with the explicit statements of Imam Husayn and according to our creed, since his martyrdom Imam Husayn and Hadrat Zahra have been together in heaven?

What a thing to say! Is it correct to think of Hadrat Zahra as a little child that goes on weeping, even after fourteen centuries, and whom we have to go and console? Such kind of belief is destructive for religion. Imam Husayn ('a) established the practical ideology of Islam and he is the practical model for Islamic movements.

They (that is the Prophet and Imams) wanted Imam Husayn's ideology to be kept alive. They wanted Husayn should reappear every year with those sweet, sublime and heroic summons of his and declare”

Don't you see that what is right and true is not acted upon, and what is wrong and false is not forbidden? [In such conditions] the man of faith should long to meet his true Lord!3

They wanted the words:

Death is better than a life saddled with indignity,4

To be kept alive forever, and so also the words:

To me death is nothing but felicity, and life with oppressors is nothing but disgrace,5

They wanted such other saying of Imam Husayn to be kept alive:

The children of Adam carry the mark of death like necklaces that adorn the neck of damsels!6

Far from us is disgrace and indignity!7

They wanted to keep alive the memory of such scenes as that of Imam Husayn's confronting a force of thirty thousand men, in a state when he and his family are faced with a great ordeal and declaring in a manly manner - and the world has never seen such a manly personage!

Indeed, that baseborn son of a baseborn father has left me only two alternatives to choose from: the sword or disgrace. And far from us is disgrace! It is disdainful to God, His Messenger and the faithful that we should yield to anything of that kind, and those born of chaste mothers and high-minded fathers and possessing a lofty sense of honor disdain that submission to vile men should be preferred to honorable death!8

They wanted to keep alive the formative school of Imam Husayn so that the rays of the Husayni spirit may breathe life into this community. Its objective is quite clear.

Do not allow the event of 'Ashura' to be consigned to oblivion! Your life, your humanity, and your dignity depend on this event!

You can keep Islam alive only by its means! That is why they have encouraged us to keep alive the tradition of mourning Imam Husayn, and very rightly! The institution of mourning Husayn ibn 'Ali has a correct philosophy underlying it, a philosophy which is also extremely sublime.

It is fitting that we should do all that we can to endeavor for the sake of this cause, provided we understand its purpose and goal. Unfortunately some people have not understood it.

Without making the people understand the philosophy of Imam Husayn's uprising and without making them understand the station of Imam Husayn, they imagine that if they just came and sat in mourning assemblies and shed tears, without knowledge and understanding, it would atone their sins.

Marhum Hajji Nuri mentions a point in the book, Lu'lu' wa marjan. That point is the belief of some people that the reward (thawab) for mourning Imam Husayn is so great that it is justifiable to employ any means whatsoever for this end. Nowadays a group which subscribes to the views of Machiavilli in political thought says that ends justify the means. If the end is a good one, it does not matter what means are used to achieve it.

Now these people also say that we have a sacred and exalted goal, which is mourning Imam Husayn and it does not matter what means are used for this end. As the end is a sacred one, it does not matter what the means are: Is it correct to perform ta'ziyahs - even ta'ziyahs which are vulgar - for this purpose? They ask, 'Do they make the people cry?

If they do, there is so problem with such ta'ziyahs.' So also there is no problem if we blow trumpets, beat drums, commit sinful acts, make men dress as women, conjure a wedding for Qasim, or fabricate and forge episodes. Such things do not matter in the tradition of mourning Imam Husayn, which is something exclusive.

Here lying is forgiven, forgery and fabrication are forgivable, making pictures, and dressing men as women is pardonable. Here any kind of sinful conduct is forgivable as the end is most sacred! As a consequence of such thinking, some persons have resorted to such tahrif and misrepresentation that are stunning.

About ten or fifteen years ago when I was on a visit to Isfahan, I met a great man, marhum Hajj Shaykh Muhammad Hasan Najafabadi, may God elevate his station. I recounted to him a rawdah that I had heard recently somewhere. It was something which I had never heard until that time. Incidentally, this man who had delivered that rawdah, an opium addict, had made the people weep profusely with that rawdah of his.

In it he recounted the story of an old woman during the reign of Mutawakkil (the 'Abbasid caliph who persecuted the Shi'ah). The woman had set out with the purpose of making a pilgrimage to the tomb of Imam Husayn, which was forbidden at that time and they would cut off the hands of the pilgrims. He went on with the narrative until the point when the old woman is taken and thrown into the river. In that state she cries out for help, calling out, “O Abu al-Fadl al-'Abbas!”

As she is about to drown a horseman appears and tells her to catch hold of his stirrup. The woman takes hold of the stirrups but she says, “Why don't you give me your hand?' The horseman says, “I haven't any hands!” At this point the people wept a lot.

Marhum Hajj Shaykh Muhammad Hasan recounted for me the history of this legend. In a place near the bazaar, in the near abouts of Madrasah Sadr, there used to be held a majlis which was one of the major majalis of Isfahan and which even the marhum Hajj Mulla Isma'il Khwaju'i used to attend. One day there had occurred there an incident.

(It had taken place earlier and he had heard its account from reliable persons.) It involved a well-known wa'iz; who himself had recounted it in these words: “One day mine was the last turn to speak from the minbar.

Other speakers had come and each one of them had exerted his skills to make the people weep. Everyone that came would try to surpass his predecessor and having delivered his rawdah would descend from the minbar to sit among the audience and watch the art of the succeeding rawdeh-khwan. This continued until the time of noon.

I saw that everyone had tried his prowess and together they had drawn out all the tears that the people could shed. What should I do? I thought for a while, and then and there I made up this story.

When my turn came, I went up and related the story, leaving all of them behind. In the afternoon, the same day, while attending another majlis in the Char-suq locality, I saw that the one who took to the minbar before me related this same story. Gradually it came to be written in books and appeared in print.”

The false and wrong notion that the tradition of mourning Imam Husayn is an exception to all norms, that it is justified to use any means to make the people weep, has been a major factor leading to fabrication of legends and tahrif.

Marhum Hajji Nuri, that saintly man and teacher of marhum Hajj Shaykh 'Abbas Qummi, who as confessed by Hajj Shaykh 'Abbas himself as well as others was superior to his pupils, was an extraordinarily learned and pious man. In his book he makes the point that if it is a correct notion that the end justifies the means, then one may also justify the following line of reasoning.

One of the Islamic precepts is that bringing delight to the heart of a believer and to do something to make him happy is a greatly commendable act. Such being the case, according to this reasoning, it is justifiable to do backbiting in his presence, as he loves listening to backbiting. And should someone say that it is sinful to do so, the answer will be,” No! The purpose is a sacred one and the backbiting is being done to make a believer pleased and happy!”

Marhum Hajji Nuri gives another example. A man embraces a non-mahram woman, which is an unlawful act. We ask him why did you do that?He replies, “I have done it for a believer's delight.” The same reasoning can be applied to such unlawful acts as adultery, drinking wine, and sodomy. Isn't this an absurd reasoning?

Wouldn't such a notion destroy the Shari'ah? By God, to think that it is permissible to use any kind of means for making people cry in mourning Imam Husayn is a notion that contradicts everything that Imam Husayn stands for. Imam Husayn was martyred to uplift Islam, as we confess while reciting his ziyarah:

I bear witness that you established the prayer, gave zakat commanded what is right and forbade what is wrong, and did such jihad in the way of God as ought to be done.9

Imam Husayn was killed in order to revive Islamic traditions, Islamic laws and regulations, not in order to create an excuse for the violation of Islamic norms. Na'udhubillah, we have changed Imam Husayn into a destroyer of Islam: the Imam Husayn that we have conjured in our imagination is a destroyer of Islam.

In his book Hajji Nuri mentions a story that was related to him by one of the students in Najaf, who originally came from Yazd. “One day,” he said, “in my youth I made a journey on foot to Khorasan, going by the road that passes through the desert (kawr). In one of the villages of Nayshabur I went to a mosque, as I did not have any place to stay.

The imam of the mosque came and led the prayers. Afterwards he went on the minbar to make a rawdah I was amazed to see the mosque attendant bring a pile of stones which he handed over to the imam. When the rawdah started, he ordered the lamps to be put out. When the lamps had been put out, he pelted the stones at the audience and there arose cries from the people. When the lamps were lighted, I saw bleeding heads.

Their eyes were tearful as they walked out of the mosque. I approached the imam and asked him why he had done such a thing. He said, 'I have tested these people. There is no rawdah in the world that will make them weep. As weeping for the sake of Imam Husayn has a great reward and thawab, I have found that the only way to make them cry is to throw stones on their heads.

This is how I make them weep.' “ He believed that the end justifies the means. The end was to mourn Imam Husayn though it should involve emptying a pile of stones on the people's heads.

Accordingly, this is a particular factor which is specific to this historic event and it has led to much fabrication and tahrif.

When one studies history one finds what they have done to this event. By God, Hajji Nuri is right when he says that if we were to weep for Imam Husayn today, we should mourn for him on account of these falsehoods, fabrications and tahrif!

There is a well-known book called Rawdat al-shuhada'. whose author was Mulla Husayn Kashifi. According to Hajji Nuri, he was the first to write in his book the stories of Za'far the Jinn and the one about Qasim's wedding. I have read this book.

I used to imagine that it contained only one or two of such cases. But afterwards when I read it I saw that the matter was very much different. This book, which is in Persian, was compiled about five-hundred years ago.

Mulla Husayn Kashifi was a scholar and learned man. He has authored several books including the Anwar suhayli. His biographical accounts do not indicate whether he was a Shi'i or a Sunni. Basically he was a Chameleon: among the Shi'ah he would pose as an outright Shi'i, while amongst the Sunnis he would pass as a Hanafi.

He was a native of Sabzawar, a Shi'i centre whose people were staunch Shi'is. In Sabzawar he would act as an out and out Shi'i, and at times when he would go to Herat ('Abd al-Rahman Jami was the husband of his sister or sister-in-law) he would give sermons for the Sunnis in the Sunni style. But in Sabzawar he narrated the tragedies of Karbala'.

His death occurred around 910/1504, that is, either at the end of the 9th or the beginning of the 10th century. This was the first book, compiled about five hundred years ago, to be written as an elegiac narrative (marthiyah).

Earlier the people used to refer to the primary sources. Shaykh Mufid, may God be pleased with him, wrote the Irshad and how sound is his narration! If we were to refer to the Irshad of Shaykh Mufid we would not stand in need of any other source.

Tabari, among Sunni authors, has also written about it. Ya'qubi, Ibn 'Asakir and Khwarazmi have also written. I don't know what this unjust man has done! When I read this book I saw that even the names are spurious. He mentions names among Imam Husayn's companions that never existed. He mentions names of the enemy's men which are also spurious. He has turned the factual accounts of the event into fables.

As this was the first book to be written in Persian, the orators in mourning assemblies, who were mostly illiterate and could not use the Arabic texts, would take this book and read from it in the mourning sessions.

That is why the gatherings that are held nowadays to mourn Imam Husayn are called rawdeh-khwani. Rawdeh-khwani was not in vogue during the time of Imam Sadiq or Imam Hasan 'Askari, nor it was prevalent during the times of Sayyid Murtada [d 436/1044] or even Khwajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi [d. 672/1273].

Rawdeh-khwani came into vogue since the last five hundred years and it came to be called as such. Rawdeh-khwani meant reading from the book Rawdat al-shuhada', a pack of lies. From the time that this book fell into the hands of the people, no one has bothered to study the actual history of Imam Husayn.

Then, about sixty or seventy years ago, there appeared another man, the marhum Mulla Darbandi. He took all the contents of the Rawdat al-shahuda' and compiled them together with other material, collecting it all in a book called Asrar al-shahadah. The contents of this book make one lament for the fate of Islam.

Hajji Nuri writes, “We used to attend the lectures of Hajj Shaykh 'Abd al-Husayn Tehrani (who was a very saintly man) and benefited from his teaching. A sayyid from Hillah, who was a rawdeh-khwan, came to meet him and he showed him a book written about the events of Imam Husayn's martyrdom (maqtal, plural: maqatil) to see whether its contents were reliable.

This book did not have any beginning or end. Only at one place in it was mentioned the name of a certain mulla of Jabl al-'Amil who was among the pupils of the author of the Ma'alim al-usul. Marhum Hajj Shaykh 'Abd al-Husayn took the book to examine it.

First he studied the biographical accounts of that scholar and found that such a book had not been attributed to him. Then he read the book itself and found it to be full of falsehoods. He said to that sayyid, 'This book is a pack of lies.

Don't circulate this book and don't quote anything from it, for it is unlawful to do so. Basically this book has not been written by that scholar and its contents are spurious.' “ Hajji Nuri says that the same book fell into the hands of the author of Asrar al-shahadah and he copied all its contents into his book, from the beginning to the end!”

Hajji Nuri relates another episode, which is rather touching. Once a man came to author of the Maqami'10 and said to him, “Last night I saw a horrible dream.” “What was it?” he asked him. He said, “I saw that I am biting away flesh from the body of Imam Husayn.” The scholar trembled on hearing these words.

He lowered his head and thought for a while. Then he said, “Perhaps you are a marthiyeh-khwan?”. “Yes, I am,” he replied. He said, “Hereafter, either abandon marthiyeh-khwani altogether or draw your material from reliable books. You are tearing away the flesh Imam Husayn, with these lies of yours. It was God's grace that He showed this to you in a dream.”

If one studies the history of 'Ashura' one will find that it is the most vivid and well-documented of histories with plenty of sources. The marhum Akhund Khurasani used to say, “Those who are ever after 'new' rawdahs should go and read the true accounts, for no one has ever heard them”

One should study the addresses of Imam Husayn ('a) delivered in Makkah - in the Hijaz as a whole - at Karbala', during his journey, as well as the sermons addressed to his companions, the questions and answers that took place between him and others, the letters that were exchanged between him and other people, the letters that were exchanged between the enemies themselves, in addition to the accounts of those (from among the friends as well the enemies) who were present on the occasion of 'Ashura'.

There were three or four persons from among Imam Husayn's companions who survived, including a slave named 'Uqbah ibn Sam'an, who had accompanied the Imam from Makkah and lived to write the accounts pertaining to the Imam's troops.

He was captured on the day of 'Ashura' but was released when he told them that he was a slave. Humayd ibn Muslim was another chronicler who accompanied the army of 'Umar ibn Sa'd. Of those present on the occasion was Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a) himself who has recounted all the events. There is no blind spot in the history of Imam Husayn ('a).

Hajji Nuri refers to a spurious story that relates to Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a). According to it when there remained no companion with Hadrat Abu 'Abd Allah ('a), the Hadrat went into the tent of Imam Zayn al- 'Abidin ('a) to bid him good-bye. Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a) asked him, “Father! How did things come about between you and these people? (that is, Imam Zayn al-'Abidin was unaware of what was happening until that time).

The Imam said to him, “Son, this matter has ultimately led to a battle.” 'What happened to Habib ibn Mazahir?, asked Imam Zayn al-'Abidin. “He was killed,” replied the Imam. “How about Zuhayr ibn Qayn?”

“He was also killed,” replied the Imam. “What happened to Burayr ibn Hudayr?” “He was killed,” said Imam Husayn ('a). Imam Zayn al-'Abidin continued naming each of his father's companions one after another and the Imam's reply was the same.

Then he asked concerning the men of Banu Hashim. “What happened to Qasim ibn Hasan?” What happened to my brother 'Ali Akbar?” “What happened to my uncle Abu al-Fadl The answer was the same: “He has been killed.” This is a fabrication and a lie. Imam Zayn al-'Abidin, na'udhubillah, was not so sick and unconscious as not to know what was going on.

Historians have written that even in that state of illness he rose from his bed and said to Zaynab, “Aunt, bring me my staff and give me a sword.” In any case, Imam Zayn al-'Abidin ('a) was one of those who were present on the scene and related the accounts of events.

Truly, we should be penitent for these crimes and treacheries that we are guilty of in respect of Abu 'Abd Allah al-Husayn ('a), his companions, comrades and members of his family, and for effacing all their achievements. He should do penance and then make effort to derive benefit from this most educative source.

Is there any inadequacy in the life of 'Abbas ibn 'Ali as recounted in the reliable maqatil (accounts of martyrdom)? The single point that there was no danger to his own life is enough to be a matter of pride for him. Imam Husayn had also told him, “They are only after me, and if they kill me, they will not have anything again anyone else.”

At Kufah, when Shimr ibn Dhi al-Jawshan was departing for Karbala', one of those who were present said to Ibn Ziyad that some of his relatives on the mother's side were with Husayn ibn 'Ali. He requested Ibn Ziyad to write a letter granting them amnesty, and Ibn Ziyad wrote it. Shimr belonged to a clan that had remote ties with the tribe of Umm al-Banin (the mother of Abu al-Fadl). Shimr personally brought this letter of amnesty on the night following the ninth day of Muharram.

This wretch approached the camp of Husayn ibn 'Ali and shouted, “Where are my nephews!” (ayna banu ukhtina?!).11 Abu al-Fadl, along with his full brothers, was sitting with Hadrat Abu 'Abd Allah ('a). He remained silent and did not reply, until the Imam said to him, “Answer him, though he be an evil man (ajibuhu in kana fasiqa). At the Imam's leave, he answered Shimr, saying, “What do you want?” (Ma taqul?). Shimr said, “I have come with some good news for you.

I have brought a letter of amnesty for you from the emir, 'Ubayd Allah. You are now free, and you will be safe if you leave now.” Abu al-Fadl said to him, “May God damn you and your emir, as well as the letter that you bring. Do you think we will abandon our Imam and brother for the sake of our own safety?”

On the night of 'Ashura', the first person to declare his loyalty towards Abu 'Abd Allah was his brother Abu al-Fadl. Aside from the foolish exaggerations that are often made, that which is confirmed by history is that Abu al-Fadl was a very wise person, valiant and courageous, tall and most handsome. He had been nicknamed 'The Moon of the Hashimis.'12 These things are true. To be sure, he had inherited Ali's courage.

The story is also true regarding his mother, that Ali' had asked 'Aqil, his brother, to propose a woman born of a heroic descent (waladatha al-fuhulah)13 who might give birth to son who would be a warrior and man of valour (li-talidani farisan shuja'ah).14 'Aqil had suggested Umm al-Banin. So much of it is true. 'Ali's wish was fulfilled in Abu al-Fadl.

According to one of two reports, on the day of 'Ashura' Abu al-Fadl came to the Imam and said, “Dear brother, now give me the permission. This breast of mine is suffocated and I can bear it no more. I want to sacrifice my life for your sake.”

I don't know the reason why Imam responded to Hadrat Abu al-Fadl's request in the manner that he did. Abu 'Abd Allah himself knows better. He said, “Brother, now that you want to leave, try to get some water for these children.”

Hadrat Abu al-Fadl had already come to receive the nickname Saqqa (water carrier), as earlier, on one or two occasions, at nights he had been able to pass through the enemy's ranks to fetch water for the children in Abu 'Abd Allah's camp. It was not the case that they had not drunk any water for three days and nights.

Access to water had been closed for three days and nights, but during this time they had been able to get some water on one or two occasions, including the night of 'Ashura', when they had taken bath and washed their bodies. Abu al-Fadl consented.

Now note this majestic scene! What greatness! What valour! What a spirit of understanding and self-sacrifice! A lone warrior, alone by himself, advances against a host. The number of men who guarded the river bank was four thousand. He descends along the river bank and leads his horse into the water (all historians have written this).

First, he fills the waterskin that he has brought and lays it on his shoulder. He is thirsty. The air is hot and has been fighting. But as he sits on the back of his horse and the horse stands in water reaching up to its belly, he lowers his hands into water, takes water into them and raises them somewhat towards his sacred lips.

Those who were watching from a distance report that he hesitated for a while. Then they saw that he threw the water back and came out of the river without drinking any. No one knew why Abu Al-Fadl did not drink water there. But when he came out he recited rajaz verses which were addressed to himself. Now from these verses they understood why he had not drunk water:

O soul of Abu al-Fadl!

My wish is that you live not after Husayn!

Will you have a drink of cold water,

While there stands Husayn, thirsty, near the tents,

And about to drink the cup of death!?

Such is not the way of my faith,

Nor that of one who abides in conviction and truth!15

What would become of manliness? Of honour? Of caring love? And of sharing in the hardship of one's dear ones? Isn't Husayn your Imam, and you his follower?

While Husayn is about to drink the cup of death,

Will you have a drink of cold water?

Never! My faith does not permit me to do that! My loyalty does not allow me to do such a thing! Abu al-Fadl changed his route while returning and now he came through the palm groves. Earlier, he had come by the direct way, but he knew that he now carried a precious trust with him.

So he changed his route and all his concern now was to get the water safely to the camp, for it was possible that a single arrow may pierce the waterskin and fail his task of bringing the water to its destination. In the mean while they heard that Abu al-Fadl had changed his rajaz. It appeared that something had happened. Now he cried out:

By God!

Even if you sever my right arm,

I will persist in defending my faith,

And the Imam, who is the true one, for certain,

the Prophet's grandson, pure and trustworthy!16

That is, by God even if you cut my right arm I will not flinch from defending Husayn. Not much time passed when his rajaz changed again:

O my soul, fear not the faithless,

And receive the good news of Almighty's mercy,

In the company of the Prophet, the Master and the Elect,

Though, insolently, they should slash my left arm!17

These rajaz verses signaled that his left arm too had been severed. They write that with characteristic dexterity he somehow turned the water-skin and bent himself over it. I will not say what happened thereafter as it is most heart rending.

It is a custom to recount the account of the ordeals of this great human being on the night of Tasu'ah (9th Muharram). Let me add that Umm al-Banin, the mother of Hadrat Abu al-Fadl was alive at the time of the event of Karbala', though she was in Madinah at the time. She was given the news that all her four sons were martyred at Karbala'.

This saintly woman would go to the Baqi' cemetery and mourn over her sons. They write that her elegies were so full of pathos that they brought tears to everyone who heard them, even Marwan ibn Hakam, who was the staunchest of the enemies of the Prophet's family.

Sometimes she would remember all her sons and, at times, especially Abu al-Fadl, the eldest of them, who was senior most of the brothers, both in respect of age as well as in respect of spiritual and bodily merits.

I remember one of her two elegies and I will recite them for you. These are the elegiac verses that this grieved mother recited in mourning for her sons (in general, the Arabs recite elegiac verses in a very touching style):

You, who have seen 'Abbas make repeated forays against the base hosts,

And following him were the Lion's sons, each a mighty lion!

I have been told, my son's head was struck when his arms were cut,

Alas for my Lion's cub! Did a club fall on his head?

O 'Abbas! None would have dared to approach it,

Were your sword in your hand!18

That is, 'O observant eye, tell me, you who have been in Karbala' and watched its scenes and observed the moment when Abu al-Fadl, my son of a lion, with my other lion's cubs following him, attacked that cowardly crowd - tell me is it true what I have been told?

They say that when they had cut my son's arms an iron club fell on my dear one's head. Is that true?' Then she says, “Abu al-Fadl! My dear! I know that if you had arms there wasn't a man in the whole world to have the guts to face you! They had the temerity to do that because your arms had been severed from your body.

Notes

1. During the nights of the 'id of Ghadir, Dr. Shari'ati delivered an excellent lecture on this general human tendency for hero-worship and making of myths and legends, turning historic figures into legendary heroes with extraordinary and superhuman characteristics.

2. Al-Kulayni, Usul al-Kafi, “kitab fadl al-'ilm”, p. 32; al-Saffar, Basa'ir al-darajat, p.10

3. Bihar al-anwar, vol. 44, p. 381; Tuhaf al-'uqul, p. 176; al-Luhuf, 33; al-Khwarazmi's Maqtal al-Husayn, ii, p. 5.

4. Ibn Shahr Ashub, al-Manaqib, iv, p. 110; al-Luhuf, p. 50, Bihar al-anwar, vol. 45, p. 50; al-Irbili, Kashf al-ghummah, ii, p. 32.

5. Bihar al-anwar, vol. 44, p. 381; Tuhaf al-'uqul, p. 176; al-Luhuf, 33.

6. Bihar al-anwar, vol. 44, p. 366; al-Luhuf, p. 25.

7. Al-Luhuf, p. 41; Khwarazmi's Maqtal al-Husayn, ii, p. 7; Ibn 'Asakir, Ta'rikh al-Sham, iv, p. 333; al-Muqarrim's Maqtal al-Husayn, p. 287; al-Harrani, Tuhaf al-'uqul, p. 176; Shaykh 'Abbas al-Qummi, Nafs al-mahmum, p. 149, Mulhaqat Ihqaq al-haqq, xi, pp. 624-625.

8. Ibid.

9. Mafatih al-janan, the ziyarah of Imam Husayn ('a) for the nights of 'Id al-Fitr and 'Id al-Adha.

10. Marhum Aqa Muhammad Ali was the son of marhum Wahid Behbahani and both of them were great men. Marhum Aqa Muhammad Ali migrated to Kirmanshah where he wielded great influence.

11. al-Muqarrim's Maqtal al Husayn, p. 252, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 44, p. 391, al-Luhuf, p. 37

12. al-Muqarrim's al-Abbas, p. 81; Ibn Shahr Ashub, al-Manaqib, iv, p. 108

13. al-Muqarrim's al-Abbas, p. 69

14. Ibsar al-ayn fi ansar al-Husayn alayh al-salam, p. 26

15. Yanabi al-mawaddah, ii, p. 165; Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 45, p. 41

16. Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 45, p. 40

17. Ibid.

18. Muntaha al-amal, I, p. 386.

'Ashura - Misrepresentations and Distortions part 2

Authors(s): Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari

Translator(s): Ali Quli Qara'i

Publisher(s): al-Tawhid Islamic Journal

Journal: Vol.13, No.4


4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13