Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Chapter 1: Preamble

The battle at Karbala is a well-known tragedy in the human history. It is not fiction or legend, but a historical fact, chronicled by several historians who were present in the battlefield, of whom Abu Makhnaf an independent reporter and Hamid ibn Muslim, the imbedded reporter of Yazid’s army, are the best known.

The battle at Karbala is unique in several respects. At Karbala, Imam Husayn (a.s.) changed the very meaning and connotation of the terms ‘victory’ and ‘defeat’, ‘life’ and ‘death’. He and his small group of his companions redefined human nature itself. They redefined the limits of human endurance of sufferings for a noble cause. In sacrificing their lives, they set an example to those who fight against anarchy and materialism to protect the freedom and independence of mankind. At Karbala, the conqueror became the loser and the vanquished became the victor. By sacrificing their lives, the martyrs of Karbala became immortal, while Yazid by killing them was erased out of the good books of history.

Imam Husayn (a.s.) showed that numbers and odds do not matter. What really matters, is the propriety, nobility and nature of the cause itself. Imam Husayn (a.s.) showed that truth and righteousness are ineffaceable and that the killing of a few persons, does not and cannot obliterate the truthfulness and nobility of their cause.

Before Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his companions sacrificed their lives in the battle at Karbala, a victorious person was the one who stood with a fluttering banner in his hand, while the vanquished lay slain on the ground, his flag lying limp beside him. The victor assumed the mantle of a successful mission, while the loser was clothed with the infamy of defeat and his unjust cause. Success in the battle was proof of victory of justice over anarchy and oppression. Victory was synonymous with a just and popular cause and the victor commanded the love, adoration and respect of the public. The victorious and their cause became immortal. The vanquished was buried in history, only to be remembered as a lesson to posterity, his defeat considered the defeat of his unjust cause.

Mothers loved to name their children after the victor and shunned the name of the vanquished. The victorious became heroes and the vanquished were treated as villains in the everlasting memory of a nation, country, tribe or culture. The epics, Iliad, Maha Bharatha, and Ramayana are some examples, depicting truth and justice as personified in the triumphant hero.

All these concepts were changed by Imam Husayn (a.s.). For the first and perhaps the last time in history, the battle of Karbala established that the vanquished might also be the victorious in his cause. The triumphant were the ones who lay beheaded in the battlefield, their lifeless bodies, proclaiming the victory of a living cause of immortal truth.

Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his small group of companions redefined human nature itself. Generally, power and wealth attract people anxious to pick up the crumbs. Those who lose power or wealth, find only deserters. Karbala reversed this notion. None from the small group of Imam Husayn’s companions deserted him, though they knew that at the end of the day only death and no worldly gain awaited them. On the other hand, even at the last moment before the battle commenced, several warriors from Yazid’s huge army, crossed over to Imam Husayn’s camp, despite knowing fully well that only death awaited them though worldly gain in the form of the spoils of war would have been within their easy reach, at the end of the day.

It is natural for every person facing immediate and imminent threat to his life, to seek and gather people for his support and assistance. It is more so where a war is planned and the leader gathers as many men as he could find to form an army capable of facing the threat.

Quite contrary to this human nature, Imam Husayn (a.s.) at every stage of his journey from Medina to Karbala, dissuaded people from joining him, saying that what Yazid sought was only his blood.

It is obvious that, firstly, Imam Husayn (a.s.) was convinced of the threat to his life and yet dissuaded people from joining him to form an army; secondly, he had no intention of waging a war; thirdly, he wanted to avoid bloodshed or at least to mitigate the loss of life; lastly, by taking ladies, children, his close relatives, a few aged companions, and the least number of able bodied youth, Imam Husayn (a.s.) wanted to show that though the small band of people held no threat to his empire, the cruel, atrocious, unjust and evil nature of Yazid and his huge army would certainly commit the most horrendous murder and atrocities without any excuse..

Imam Husayn (a.s.) showed that truth and justice do not always lie on the side of the victorious majority. He showed that numbers do not count and a handful of persons, standing up to oppression at the cost of their lives, do in fact represent truth, justice, independence, and freedom. He showed that truth is irrepressible, eternal, and would manifest itself even from the trampled and lifeless bodies of the martyr. Their death is not defeat but is in fact the victory of truth, righteousness, justice, and the very spirit of freedom of mankind.

In as much as its other aspects, the uniqueness of Karbala extends even to its pathos. There is not a single human relationship that was left out from the list of martyrs. The relationship of the patriarch and his family, between the leader and his followers, parent and child, newly wedded husband and wife, between siblings, between cousins and children of cousins, bond between friends, master and servant, rider and steed etc., were all successfully put to test.

Historians, normally, are patronized by the winning party that assumes power and write the chronicles of the victorious. History may also record a few instances of individual valor of some opponent, but popular Historians never espouse the cause of the vanquished. Karbala is unique in this respect also. Without exception, every chronicler records the justness of Imam Husayn’s cause, the cruel and unjust abuse of his dead body and the torment that the remaining members of his family and friends, particularly the widows and orphans suffered after the tragedy.

Any historian attempting to eulogize the cause of the defeated forces would be branded a traitor. Such historians and their records would be, mercilessly burnt and put out of circulation. However, at and after Karbala, the atrocities were so open and rampant that Yazid and his evil advisors, despite their tyrannical suppression and torture had no means or courage to prevent the tragedy of Karbala being related, recorded, repeated, and passed on to posterity.

In his speeches, letters, and discussions Imam Husayn (a.s.) made it clear that he was leaving Medina only in response to the call of the Kufians who had written thousands of letters and sent hundreds of emissaries complaining that they had no Imam to guide them in matters of faith and that, as the Imam, it was incumbent upon Husayn (a.s.) to hurry to their guidance. Their complaint against Mu’awiya first, and later against Yazid, was not so much regarding the physical or monetary suffering but against the willful distortion of the principles of Islam. Therefore, it became obligatory for Imam Husayn (a.s.) to leave Medina and go to rescue the faith from being mutilated and corrupted by Mu’awiya and his son Yazid. There was absolutely no political motive in this.

Later, when al-Hurr’s cavalry surrounded Imam Husayn’s caravan, sealing off all roads except the one leading to Kufa, a false propaganda was made by Yazid that Imam Husayn’s journey was an affront to the political power of Yazid. Imam Husayn (a.s.) made it clear that he was invited by the people of Kufa for religious guidance and that he had no political aspirations, and said that he would move out to any far-off land beyond the domain of Yazid’s rule. This demand to be permitted to go out of Yazid’s dominion was repeatedly made by Imam Husayn (a.s.) till his last moments, signifying that he had no political aspirations and that his only intent was to preserve and propagate the faith in its true form, as revealed by his grandfather the Prophet (S).1

For those who believe in miracles, numerous instances of the Divinely inspired foresight of Imam Husayn (a.s.) and several miracles performed by him are found in Karbala. Collecting water, in advance for al-Hurr and his army, long before they arrived thirsty; the sudden shying of the horse and throwing the taunting enemy soldier into the burning ditch; the fountain of water which gushed when Imam Husayn (a.s.) struck his toe on the ground to show his daughter Sakina (a.s.) that he had the supernatural power to procure water; the intense and valiant fight by Imam Husayn (a.s.), a man fifty-eight years old, before whose eyes his friends and children were slain; the reciting of Qur’an by the severed head of Imam Husayn (a.s.) throughout its long journey from Karbala to Kufa to Damascus and back; the radiant light that was witnessed by hundreds, which emanated from the niche wherever the severed head of Imam Husayn (a.s.) was kept during night and many more such instances of supernatural events are recorded in history. The recitation of the Qur’an by the severed heads carried on lances or slung in the necks of horses and camels provide the only proof of the Qur’anic verse that declares that those who are martyred in the way of God, are not to be counted among the dead, but that they are very much alive and are sustained by God.2

Even today, one can witness Husayn’s miracle, when mourners inflict themselves with blades, pieces of broken glass bottles picked up from the ground, chains and swords, and exchange those articles without even cleaning before using them in the Muharram processions. Their wounds are cured without recourse to medicine. Another unique and miraculous feature is that, even to this day, the processions consist of heart patients, diabetic patients, and those who suffer from severe hypertension. None of them is known to have died from the self-inflicted injuries or breast beating in the religious processions during the commemoration of Imam Husayn’s martyrdom, anywhere in the world. All these are signs of Imam Husayn’s continuing miracles. While self-flagellation is considered in Christianity as a means of expiating for sins, it is practiced only by highly revered priests. Among the Shias, it is a common practice during Muharram.

Curiously, it is called a ‘battle’, but there were no two armies waging war at Karbala. On one side was Imam Husayn (a.s.) with a few tens of persons, including an infant six months old and several teenagers. Opposing this small group was a huge army of infantry, cavalry, and other regiments. The nobility and intensity of purpose and the vigour and valour with which the small band of people fought a huge army, gave it the shape of an unforgettable epic battle. Today, Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his small band of supporters are universally acknowledged as innocent martyrs, while Yazid and his huge army are disgraced for their abominable acts of large-scale massacre and torture of men, women and children.

Yet, Imam Husayn’s battle at Karbala is often distorted by prejudices created over centuries of adverse propaganda carried on by suppressive regimes. The consequent mutilation of real facts led to the dilution of knowledge of the historic events, resulting in an unfounded belief that it was a battle between two powers for succession fought between the Umayyads represented by Yazid son of Mu’awiya, and the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) represented by Imam Husayn (a.s.).

The Shrine of Imam Husayn (a.s.) was razed to the ground at least on eight occasions. Even the lote tree that marked the grave was cut down and the soil tilled, so the people may not be able to identify the spot. Yet after every demolition, a new and more elaborate structure came up. How did people identify the spot in the absence of any trace? It is reported that the aroma and fragrance emanating from the spot lert people identify the spot. In the famous Hadith of al-Kisa, Imam Ali, Imam Hasan, and Imam Husayn (a.s.) detected the presence of the Prophet (S) from the aroma and fragrance that emanated from the body of the Prophet (S). On another occasion, the Noble Lady Fatima (a.s.) wanted to give a present to one of her friends who was getting married. The Prophet (S) took out a few drops of his sweat that was applied to the bride. Not only the bride but also seven generations among her children carried the incense of the Prophet’s sweat. Jabir ibn Abdullh al-Ansari was blind when he visited the shrine at Karbala soon after Ashura. He identified the grave by the aroma and fragrance that emanated from it.

Among the Twelver Shia, their Majlises [meetings], are veritable universities of their theology, where the basic Shiite tenets, conceptual and philosophical teachings of the twelve Imams (a.s.) in addition to scientific and historical facts revealed by the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) are taught and orally transmitted. An early effort in English, in the detailed study of the life of Imam Husayn (a.s.) and the battle of Karbala, available perhaps only in some libraries, was the pioneering work of my mentor, master and guide, the late Al-haj Moulvi Mirza Ghulam Abbas Ali Sahib of Madras. He was a lecturer of the then Government Muhammadan College [Govt. Arts College], Madras. He was well versed in Arabic, Persian, and English. He was also a great orator among the Twelver Shia of South India.

In the preface to his book ‘Life of Husayn the Saviour’ Alhaj Moulvi Mirza Ghulam Abbas Ali wrote: “Several authors have attempted to give vivid pictures of stories, whose chronology is not yet traceable and whose antiquity has led many to doubt the reality and genuineness of the stories themselves and to suspect them as of the production of intelligent heads for the inculcation of high moral and ethical principles to the common folk in the most appealing and dramatic fashion. But eye witness facts, as true as the day, occurred a thousand years ago among the so called ‘most intelligent people of the middle ages’, recorded in history by authors of the age, are relegated to darkness and are not compiled to form a readable volume in English literature.”

S. V. Mir Ahmed Ali Sahib Vafakhani is another great luminary from Madras, which fortunately is also my place of birth. S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali Sahib joined clerical service in the Government Muhammadan College Madras and later obtained his Bachelor’s Degree in Oriental languages and also his M.Ed in Psychology. Mir Ahmed Ali Sahib’s English translation with commentary of the Holy Qur’an printed by Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an from New York in 2002, is quite popular, especially with reference to the Holy Bible. He was a contemporary of Mirza Ghulam Abbas Ali Sahib. At page 11[a] of his Introduction to the Translation of the Holy Qur’an, S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali Sahib mentions several contemporary leading Shia scholars of Madras and refers to Alhaj Mirza Ghulam Abbas Ali Sahib and his book ‘Life of Husayn’, which was first printed in 1931.

It appears that S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali Sahib Vafakhani had first published in the year 1925, a booklet of 25 pages under the title ‘The King of Martyrs’ which was reprinted four times by the year 1964. Its popularity prompted him to write a second book ‘Husayn - the Savior of Islam’ which was first printed in 1964. Its second edition is printed by Ansariyan Publications, Qum, Iran in the year 2005. This book makes many references to the Bible and Christian dogma in regard to the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.).

Another book on the subject is the excellent work of Sheikh Abbas al Qummi, under the title ‘Nafasul Mahmoom’. It has been translated into Urdu. Aejaz Ali T. Bhujwala translated it into English. The best book in Urdu on the subject is ‘Akhbar-e-Matam’ published in Ramadan, 1947 A.D. It is available in the Salar Jung Library, Hyderabad. A very enlightening, popular and well-researched book on the subject in Urdu is Bilgirami’s ‘Zibhe Azeem’.

Ansariyan Publication, Qum, Iran has published in 2002 a very well documented and well-written book of Yasin T. al Jibouri. The book in English bears the title ‘Karbala and Beyond’ is very useful, particularly with reference to the incidents that took place after Ashura. Other books published by Ansariyan Publications are, the English translation of Ali Nazari Munfared’s book under the title ‘Imam Husayn (a.s.) and the Saga of Karbala’ and Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi’s book, translated into English by Sayyid Ather Husayn S.H. Rizvi under the title ‘Understanding Kerbala’.

The popular source for eyewitness accounts of the battle at Karbala are the ‘Maqaatil’3 of Abu Makhnaf, and Hamid ibn Muslim, the latter being a scribe embedded with the army of Yazid. They meticulously recorded not only the events but also the conversation, sermons and challenges in the battlefield called ‘Rajaz’.4 If anyone of these two chronicles omitted a particular event or a dialogue or sermon, found elsewhere, it may be due to the scribe’s absence from that place and time. But, over all, their records are authentic and have never been disputed as the coinage of a fertile imagination.

The chief source for the Twelver Shia are the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) - members of the Prophet’s family - who were present at Karbala in Imam Husayn’s camp and related the correct versions which was then passed on to successive generations by the Infallible and Immaculate Imams (a.s.). The present book is an attempt to understand the correct facts and philosophy behind the Battle of Karbala, in the Shiite perspective.

Notes

1. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 44 p. 329.

2. Qur’an, 2:154, 3:169, 3:195.

3. Maqtal literally means the ‘Manner (orand Place) of Massacre’.

4. Rajaz is the customary manner in which an Arab warrior addresses his opponent, in single combat, introducing himself, his lineage, his military exploits, combat acumen and success in earlier wars.

Chapter 2: Historical Background

One has to look beyond the canvas of the battlefield itself, into the early days of Islam, in order to understand the cause and the facts and circumstances, which led Imam Husayn (a.s.) to face an enormous army at Karbala and the reason and philosophy behind his refusal to submit to an apparently simple demand for allegiance to Yazid. From a reading of the following pages, the reader will understand that the seed for the battle of Karbala was sown long prior to the birth of Imam Husayn (a.s.) and later the battle was ultimately forced upon him. This is brought out by the repeated assertions of Yazid’s army that though Imam Husayn (a.s.) himself had done nothing against them or against Islam, they had gathered to seek revenge for their ancestors who were killed by his father Imam Ali (a.s.) in the battles of Badr, Uhud, al-Khandaq and Honain.

During the life of the Prophet (S) all disputes, whether they led to a fight or not, were between believers and non-believers or the opponents of Islam. Chief among the opponents of Muhammad (S) and the religion he preached, were the Banu Umayya (the Umayyads) headed by Abu Sufyan the father of Mu’awiya and grandfather of Yazid. Abu Sufyan’s wife Hind is the most infamous woman in the history of Islam, who plucked out and chewed the raw liver of the martyr Hamza in the battle of ‘Uhud’.1

History does not record any serious conflict, except petty jealousies, between the Banu Umayya and the Banu Hashim (the Hashemites), prior to the proclamation of Islam. The Banu Umayya never believed the Prophet (S) to be the Messenger of God. They suspected that under the cloak of religion, a mighty empire was in the making under their cousin Muhammad (S). The Banu Umayya only desired and planned to appropriate the leadership of the empire from Prophet Muhammad (S). They had nothing to do with Muhammad’s Message. Before ostensibly accepting Islam, when Abu Sufyan saw the zealous followers of the Prophet (S), he exclaimed, “Indeed our cousin has built a powerful army.”

The Prophet’s uncle Abbas rebuked Abu Sufyan saying that it was not an army but a small group of devout followers of the Message of Muhammad, the Prophet (S). Abu Sufyan replied, “Call it by whatever name you will, for me it is a mighty army with immense potential to create an empire.” Abu Sufyan’s attitude never changed throughout his life, though he claimed to have professed Islam and ingratiated himself among the companions of the Prophet (S). Years later, when Uthman became the third Caliph, Abu Sufyan jumped with joy seeing his dream come true in the shape of the leadership of Islam falling in the hands of his kin, Abu Sufyan gleefully advised Uthman:“Now that the Caliphate has fallen into your hands, toss it around like a ball and fearlessly perpetuate it among your own kin, the Banu Umayya, for there is neither paradise nor hell.”2

The real cause for the jealousy and blood feud between Banu Umayya and Banu Hashim is best set out in the words of Abu Sufyan’s son Mu’awiya. It is reported that Mutawwaf and his father al-Mughira visited Mu’awiya who was reclining on his couch, and advised him to be considerate and less harsh towards the Ahlul Bayt, now that he was in power. At that very moment, the mu’azzin (the caller who calls out the azan) shouted the call for prayers. Mu’awiya abruptly sat up and declared: “It is impossible that I take kindly to the Ahlul Bayt. What memory do I leave behind when I die? Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman ruled for long periods during their caliphates. After their death, does anybody remember them, except occasionally to say that they were the caliphs? Many people benefited from Uthman but they have forgotten his bounties and even what had happened to him. When I die, the same thing will happen and I will be completely forsaken. But, look what Hashim’s offspring has done - five times every day, till Doomsday the minarets of every mosque around the world will echo, twenty four hours every day, the proclamation ‘I bear witness that Muhammad is the prophet of God’. What difference does it make if I lead a pious or vicious life?.”3

A similar incident is reported with reference to Mu’awiya’s father Abu Sufyan. It is related that Abu Sufyan had grown old and blind. He was sitting in the mosque along with Abdullah ibn Abbas and several others. The Mu’azzin started calling for the prayers. When the Mu’azzin reached that part of the call testifying the Prophethood of Muhammad (S), Abu Sufyan said, “Look where my cousin Muhammad has placed his name.” Imam Ali (a.s.) who heard this retorted, “Muhammad placed his name not out of his own fancy but as commanded by God.”4 This rancor in the hearts of the Banu Umayya that Prophethood is only a pretense to worldly power persisted through out centuries and continues to do so till date.

Though Abu Sufyan, Mu’awiya, Yazid and their ilk spared no effort, they could not prevent the proclamation of the Prophet’s name and Mission, five times every day, all over the world in the Azan. Regarding this, the Qur’an reveals, “They desire to blow out [extinguish] the light of Allah, but Allah seeks to perfect His light, though the infidels abhor it.”5 Long after the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) had returned to Medina after the tragedy of Karbala, Ibrahim bin Talha bin Obeidillah asked the fourth Imam al-Sajjad (a.s.): “Who won the battle at Karbala?.” Imam al-Sajjad (a.s.) replied, “When the time for prayers comes and when the Azan and Eqama [the two calls before every prayer] are called out, you will know who the winner is.”6

Having failed to remove the Prophet’s name or substitute some other name in its place in the Azan, Mu’awiya invented a novel way of taking revenge against the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), particularly Imam Ali (a.s.). Mu’awiya made it obligatory, in all the provinces under his control, that five times every day, after prayers Ali (a.s.) should be abused and cursed from the pulpits [over seventy thousand pulpits according to some reckoning] by the leaders of the congregations. Inventors of stories demeaning Ali (a.s.) or coining false traditions in favour of the Banu Umayya were lavishly rewarded. Abu Huraira and Amr ibn al-Aass earned so much wealth by this process that Umar had to confiscate their huge unaccounted wealth.7

Some of the close companions doubted the wisdom and infallibility of the Prophet (S), for they considered him to be an ordinary mortal like themselves.8 Historians record the fact that in his last moments when the Prophet (S) demanded a pen and parchment to write down his last will and testament, Umar, one of the companions, not only refused to oblige but also even prevented others under threat from complying, stating that the Prophet (S) had become delirious in his death throes and that the Qur’an is sufficient for guidance of Muslims.

After the Prophet (S), serious dissensions were created as to succession. One party asserted that the Prophet (S) had clearly nominated his successor while the opposite party contended that the Prophet (S) did not nominate anyone and had left the matter of succession in the hands of the Muslims. The nomination of Imam Ali (a.s.) by the Prophet (S), which they had personally witnessed on numerous occasions, was very fresh in the minds of Muslims. They saw the Prophet (S) nominate Imam Ali (a.s.) from the very first day when he invited the tribe of Quraish to the ‘Feast of Youm ad-Dar (day of warning) ’.9 Again, for reciting before the non-Muslims of Mecca the Chapter ‘Bara'a’ which in effect sets out the policy in Islam, Ali (a.s.) was entrusted with the task while the Prophet (S) declared that God had ordained that such an important task could be carried out either by the Prophet (S) himself or by Ali (a.s.) ;10 during the confrontation with the Christians of Najran in what is called ‘Mubahala’; and on the occasion of his last pilgrimage at a place called Khum the Prophet (S) nominated Imam Ali (a.s.) as his successor and made obedience and love of Imam Ali (a.s.) obligatory on the entire Muslim Ummah.11

As the very first step towards nullifying the Prophet’s nomination of Ali (a.s.) as his successor, over the dead body of the Prophet (S), Umar unsheathed his sword and brandishing it, shouted that he would behead anyone who said that the Prophet (S) was dead. Umar declared that Muhammad could not die and that he had simply gone, like Moses before, to meet his Lord.12 Thus, very cleverly an impression was created that the question of succession to the Prophet (S) had not yet opened, since the Prophet (S) was not dead!

Shortly after the receipt of the news of the Prophet’s passing away, Abu Bakr returned to Medina, from Suk where he was living with his newly wedded wife. He proclaimed that Umar’s contention that the Prophet (S) could not die and that like Moses, he had simply gone to meet the Lord, is quite contrary to the Qur’anic verses which declare that one day, like any other person, Muhammad (S) was also destined to die.13

Even as the body of the Prophet (S) was being prepared by his family members for burial, Umar and Abu Bakr left for the place called ‘the Saqifa14 of Bani Sa’ida’ as they considered the matter of succession far pressing and urgent than the burial of the Prophet (S).15 At the Saqifa, Abu Bakr was declared by Umar as the leader [Caliph] of the Muslims.16 Later on when the group returned to the Prophet’s house, they found that he was already buried by Imam Ali (a.s.), his children, relatives, and close companions of the Prophet (S), who performed the funeral rites. The ever-scheming Abu Sufyan unsuccessfully tried to incite Imam Ali (a.s.) by saying that he would support Imam Ali (a.s.) and provide sufficient men and weapons so that Imam Ali (a.s.) might, with Abu Sufyan’s support, challenge Abu Bakr. Imam Ali (a.s.) asked Abu Sufyan to desist from his favorite and evil games of sowing sedition and discord among Muslims. Imam Ali (a.s.) said that Islam was still in its infant state and any precipitate action at that stage, even though justified, would still be harmful to Islam.

For those who aspired to succeed to the Prophet (S), it became necessary to stop repeating, if not completely obliterating from the memory of the public, the numerous occasions when the Prophet (S) nominated Imam Ali (a.s.), openly and publicly as his successor. One of the first orders issued by Abu Bakr on becoming the Caliph was that traditions should neither be related, recorded, nor propagated, on the ground that the Hadiths, if related, were likely to confuse and disillusion the public. Umar continued this edict and went to the extent of threatening to behead not only those who tried to relate traditions, but also those who listened to them. In fact, Umar imprisoned ibn Mas’ud, Abud Darda, and Abu Mas’ud for relating Hadith in defiance of his orders.17 When Uthman succeeded Umar, he followed the earlier caliphs and continued the embargo on relating, collecting, or publishing Hadith.18

Mu’awiya, during his tyrannical tenure, went one-step further. He not only prohibited relating of any hadith extolling the virtues of the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), but also encouraged invention and propagation false and fictitious tales about the Prophet (S) and his progeny (a.s.). Imam Ali (a.s.) was made a special target by bribing people to openly defame and abuse him five times a day from every pulpit. The Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) were portrayed as anti-Islamic mutineers (baghi). In addition to this, absurd traditions were invented, intending to extol the virtues of the three caliphs, which in fact were derogatory of the Prophet (S). For example, it was said that Umar asked the Prophet (S) to see that his wives were veiled but the Prophet (S) did not listen to him until the commandment for hijab was revealed, in support of Umar.19 Another tradition related that Satan was not afraid of the Prophet (S), but was mortally scared of Umar.20 Some of the invented traditions were outright slanderous and brought down the honor and dignity of the Prophet (S), so much so that the Prophet (S) came to be portrayed as a sexual pervert.21

Mu’awiya, during his long regime, pretended that he was the only surviving relative of the Prophet (S). To some extent, he succeeded in obliterating from the public mind, the existence of the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) in Syria, Iraq, and the newly conquered Spain and Rome. The malicious and false propaganda by Mu’awiya was so intense that when the people of Syria learnt that Imam Ali (a.s.) was martyred while leading the Morning Prayer in the Mosque in Kufa, they exclaimed ‘What was Ali, who never prayed, doing in the Mosque!’ As a result of the calumny, in a short span of time people failed to recognize Imam Husayn (a.s.) the beloved grandson of the Prophet (S). Therefore, in every sermon or discussion Imam Husayn (a.s.) made it a point to introduce himself as the Prophet’s grandson and the surviving heir of the Prophet (S).

Abu Sufyan, Mu’awiya, and Yazid changed the philosophy and teachings of Islam. They openly permitted what was prohibited and neglected what was enjoined. Corruption and debauchery in high offices and oppression of the pious and the poor became the order of the day. It is in this context and situation where the hypocrites and opponents of Islam sowed and nurtured the seeds of distortion of Islam, that the Battle of Karbala becomes a milestone in the history of Islam. It is another story that Abu Sufyan, Mu’awiya, and Yazid could not succeed in removing the name of Husayn’s grandfather, the Prophet (S), from being proclaimed five times every day. Just as anticipated by Mu’awiya himself, today he is forgotten and if at all remembered, his name is linked only to hypocrisy, cunning, evil, and irreligion. Today, mothers shun naming their children after Mu’awiya or Yazid. It is interesting to note that the word ‘Mu’awiya’ though used for a male - the son of Abu Sufyan, literally means ‘a bitch’22 .

Notes

1. Tareekh at-Tabari, vol. 3, p. 22 &23 [s] Egypt, Seeratun Nabi, vol. 1 p. 273, al-Istee’ab, vol. 2 p. 286, al-Majlisi’s Hayatul Quloob, 253.

2. Tarikh at-Tabari, vol. 11, p. 357, al-Mas’udi’s Muruj ath-Thahab vol. 1 p. 440, Tarikh al-Khamees, Vol. 2 p. 97, Ask Those who Know, p. 42.

3. Al-Muwafaqiyyat, p. 576, al-Mas’udi’s Muruj ath-Thahab vol. 2, p. 341, Ibn Abil Hadid, vol. 5, p 130, al-Ghadir, vol. 10, p. 283, Ask Those Who Know, p.43-44.

4. Al-Mas’udi’s Muruj ath-Thahab, vol. 6, quoted in Mufti Jafer Husayn’s preface to the English translation of Nahjul Balagha, p67.

5. Qur’an, 9:32.

6. Al-Amali of Sheikh at-Tusi, p.66, al-Jibouri’s Kerbala & Beyond, p.131.

7. K. Ali, A Study of Islamic History, page 144.

8. Al-Bukhari, vol. 2 p.14, Tareekh al-Khamis by Dayar Bakhti – vol 2 p. 32, Madarijun Nubuwwa, vol. 2 p. 286-287, History of Islam p.357, 358.

9. Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal vol. 1 p.331, Abul Fida, Part 1, p.116, at-Tabari, vol. 2 p. 217, ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, p.22, Mustadrak of al-Hakim, vol. 2 p. 133, Habib Al-Sayyar, vol. 2, Part 3, p.160, ibn Kathir’s Tarikh, vol. 3, p. 40, Kanzul Ummal, vol. 6 p. 392, 397, 401 and 408, Rawdatus Safa, vol. 2 p. 278 and 279, Ibn Taimiya’s Minhajus Sunna vol. 4, p. 80, al-Mohibbuddin at-Tabari’s ar-Riyadul Nadira, Part 2 chap. 4 Section 6 p. 168, 202, 203.

10. Al-Bukhari, Kitab as-Salaat, p. 238, at-Tabari, vol. 3 p. 154, ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol. 2, Part 1 p. 121, Abul Fida, vol. 1 p.150, Habibus Sayyar, vol. 1, part 3 p. 72, Tarikh al-Khamis, vol. 2, p.156, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s Fat~h al- Bari, vol. 8, p.241, Madarijun Nubuwwa, vol. 2, p.492, ibn Khaldun, vol. 3, p. 222-225, Tarikh of ibn Kathir, vol. 7, p. 337, 357, ibn al-Athir, vol. 2 p.111, The Caliphate, p. 58.

11. Sahih of Muslim, vol. 7, p. 122-123, Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal vol. 3, p. 14,17, 26, and vol. 4, p. 367, 371, vol. 5 p.182, 189, Jalaluddin al-Suyuti’s al-Jami’ul Kabir, Kanzul Ummal vol. 6, p.390 and vol. 3 p. 61, Musnad of Abu Dawud p.23 tradition No.154, Amir Ali’s Spirit of Islam, Part 2, Ch 8, p. 292-293, The Caliphate, p 178-185.

12. Al-Bukhari, chap., Ashabun Nabi, vol. 2, p. 193, Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal vol. 1, p. 334, Tabaqat of ibn Sa’d, vol. 2 Part 2, p.55, Shibli’s Al-Faruq, vol. 1, p.65, Ibn Khaldun vol. 2, Supp. P.63, ibn Hisham, vol. 4, p.334, Abul Fida’s Qasasul Ambiya, p. 418.

13. Ibn Hajar al-Makki’s as-Sawa’iq, p.5, ibn Hisham, vol. 6, p.5.

14. A shed; a covered communal place appropriate for conversation and discussion.

15. Shibli’s al-Faruq, vol. 1, p.66 quoting at-Tabari, vol. 3, p.208; Abul Fida’s Qasas, p. 417.

16. At-Tabari, Vol. 3, p.200-210, al-Bukhari, Bab Rajm al Hubla, Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal vol. 1, p. 55, Ibn Hajar al-Makki’s as-Sawaiq chap. 1 Section 1, p. 5, al-Kamil of ibn al-Athir, vol. 2 p. 124, Tarikh ibn Kathir vol. 5, p.245, al-Mohib at-Tabari’s ar-Riyadun Nadira, Part 2, Section 3, p. 164. ibn Hisham, vol. 4, p. 338, Tadhkiratul Huffaz by ath-Thahabi – vol. 1 p.2, 3, 5 and 7, Sunan of ibn Maja, vol. 1 p. 12, Sunan of ad-Darimi, vol. 1 p. 85. Shibli’s al-Faruk, Part 2, p. 223, 225, Agha Muhammad Sultan Mirza’s The Caliphate p. 58.

17. Abdul Salaam al-Nadwi’s Tarikh al-Fiqh al-Islami, p. 161-162, ath-Thahabi’s Tathkirat al-Huffadh Vol. 1 p. 7.

18. Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal vol. 4, p. 64.

19. Al-Bukhari, vol. 1 p. 46.

20. Al-Bukhari, vol. 4 p.96, vol. 8 p. 161.

21. Sahih of Muslim, vol. 2, p.157, Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol. 1 44, 171, 123, vol. 2 p. 65, 71, 232 and 234, & vol. 4, p.68, vol. 7 p. 29, quoted in Ask Those Who Know, p. 67-68.

22. Cf. Al-Munjid, p. 694.