Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

The Itinerary of the Syrian Army

Historians have recorded their itinerary stage by stage, although there are minor differences between various sources.

Istakhrī has noted the distance between Syria and Medina to be twenty stages (manzil ),[79] without recording the names of the stages; but Ibn Rusta has named some of the stages and regarded them to be twelve.[80]

Ibn Battūta has named seventeen stages between Syria and Medina,[81] but since Ibn Batūta has written his book in 779 A.H. (1377 C.E.), and Ibn Rusta wrote his in 290 A.H. (902 C.E.), Ibn Rusta's view seems to be more authentic in terms of its chronological proximity to the time of the incidence. He has not pointed out to all the names, though.

Ibn Khurdādhbih has also considered the itinerary to be the same as what Ibn Rusta noted.[82] Due to the long period between these two sources, we will proceed to give a brief list of the stages between Syria and Medina as follows: 1. Kuswa (the first township which was at a 12 mile[83] distance from Damascus), 2. Jāsim (24 miles from Damascus), 3. Fīq (or Afīq, 24 miles from Jāsim), 4. Sanamayn (12 miles from Fīq), 5. Zar‘a (15 or 18 miles from Sanamayn), 6. Busrī (4 stages from Damascus and the same place where the Prophet (s), before his mission and during his business travel to Syria, met the Christian Monk and the latter recognized on his features, the signs of prophethood),[84] 7. Karak, 8. Ma‘ān, 9. Hismī, 10. Dhāt al-Manār (the beginning of Syrian territory from Medina), 11. Lajūn, 12. Saragh (a village near Tabūk), 13. Dhāt Haj, 14. Taymā’ (name of a river north of Tabūk), 15. Hajar, 16. Wādī al-Qurā, 17. ‘Ulmā, 18. Junayna, 19. Janāb, 20. Ruhba, 21. Dhī al-Marwa, 22. Marr, 23. Jurf, 24. Suwaydā, 25 Hudayya, 26. Dhī Khushub.

Obviously, the above-mentioned stages are the known villages and townships on the way between Syria and Medina and it does not mean that the distance between each one of them is a day's journey.

However, when the Syrian army reached Wādī al-Qurā, they met with the Umayyids who were expelled or had escaped from Medina.

Muslim b. ‘Uqba first inquired about the military preparedness and spiritual conditions of the people of Medina and the number of their fighters in order to plan how to penetrate into Medina and triumph over the people.

Muslim b. ‘Uqba asked Marwān b. Hakam how to triumph over the people of Medina. Marwān answered: "The number of Madīnans is more than your troops, but not all of them have enough arms. On the other hand, they lack enough motivation, purpose, and goal and are unable to withstand the swords.”

Marwān b. Hakam said to Muslim b. ‘Uqba: “Your biggest problem is the trench they have dug around Medina to block your way and in order to guard them they have assigned their resolute men who will not easily leave the trench. I know how to break up this blockade but I will reveal it to you in due course.[85]

Muslim b. ‘Uqba did not content himself with Marwān's statements and tried to obtain more accurate information about Medina from the Umayyids, but they refused to give more information with the pretext that "we have taken an oath to the people of Medina not to give you any information, but ‘Abd al-Malik, son of Marwān, has not taken any oath of secrecy and you can acquire more information from him.”[86]

The Umayyids were apparently afraid that Yazīd's army will not be able to conquer Medina, so they did not wish to endanger the prospects of their stay as well as their property and lands in Medina; otherwise, the Umayyids were not such people as to keep their oath.

As recommended by the Umayyids, Muslim b. ‘Uqba consulted the young and inexperienced ‘Abd al-Malik in a private session, and asked him about the people of Medina, their insurgency, and how to confront them. Declaring his readiness for any cooperation, ‘Abd al-Malik said:

"In my opinion, you must advance to the palm groves near Medina and do not hasten to enter the city. Settle the army next to the palm groves and order the troops to rest and enjoy the date palms and other facilities available there. After a one day rest, move toward Medina. You should not enter the city from the west; rather, you should choose an entrance in which Medina may lie on your left. This necessitates that you enter the battle with the people of Medina through Harrah which is on the eastern side of Medina, for if you fight with those people during the first half of the day, the sun will be behind you, and hurt the eyes of the Medinan fighters and block their visibility. This way, you will see them well, but they will be dazzled by the glittering of your swords, lances, and helmets."

Muslim b. ‘Uqba welcomed and admired ‘Abd al-Malik's advice.[87]

For the itinerary of Syrian army from Damascus to Medina, see the following map.

The Syrian Army Camps near Medina

Muslim b. ‘Uqba and his troops left Wādi al-Qurā’ for Medina and camped his army at a place called "Jurf" at a distance of three miles from Medina.[88]

On the other hand, it was long since the people of Medina had been informed about the departure of Syrian army and were prepared for confrontation and defense. They reconstructed the same trench that the Muslims had dug to defend Medina in the battle of Ahzāb (Khandaq ), which over time had partly ruined. They also erected high walls to protect some parts of Medina.[89]

Reconstruction of the old trench and construction of new trenches took fifteen days in all.[90] For these tasks, the Quraysh had undertaken the distance between Rātij[91] and Ahzāb Mosque and theAnsār , the distance between Ahzāb Mosque and the Banī Salama and Mawālī neighborhood to carry out the digging and reconstructing the trench from Rātij to the Banī ‘Abd al-Ashhal.[92]

The trench had been dug on the west side of Medina, so Muslim b. ‘Uqba was determined, after consultations he had or because of the trench that was an impenetrable barrier to his troops, to launch the attack from the east of Medina which was a rocky land called Harrah.[93]

The setting up of Syrian army camp near Medina made the people of Medina take the war more seriously and plan and carry out extra measures to defend the town. For the sake of integration of defense and battle, they also had to choose someone as their commander-in-chief.

‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala, Commander of Medinan Forces

‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala played a pivotal role in the battle of Harrah. Having been influential in provoking people for battle against Yazīd and the Umayyid rule, he now undertook the high command of the combatant forces in the defense of Medina.

In fact, the role that Ibn Zubayr had undertaken in Mecca was played by ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala in Medina.

With the Syrian army approaching Medina, ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala called people to the Prophet's (s) Pulpit in Masjid al-Nabī and asked all those who accompanied him, to swear allegiance to him until the end of their lives.

The people of Medina swore an enduring allegiance to him and said that they would be with him to the last of their lives. ‘Abd Allāh mounted the pulpit and after praising God said:

"O people! You have revolted for the sake of religion, so try to successfully come out of this trial and be graced with God's forgiveness, and may you enjoy the Paradise!

Be ready to fight with all your strength and power!

Let me inform you that the Syrians have halted and camped near Medina and that Marwān b. Hakam and the Umayyids are also with them. If God wishes, He will punish him for breaking the pledge he had made at the Prophet's (s) tomb!" The people then began to curse and swear out loud together at Marwān and the Umayyids and called Marwān a frog son of a frog![94]

‘Abd Allāh then called people to silence and peace, saying: "Swearing does not solve any problem; so, prepare for battle, since, by God, no people have ever proceeded with truthfulness except that they triumphed by Divine assistance."

Then, ‘Abd Allāh raised his hands to the sky and said: "O Lord! We trust You and have faith in You and rely on you, ask You to help us triumph."[95]

The historians have elsewhere reported that ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala also said:

"O People of Medina! We did not revolt except for the reason that Yazīd is an adulterous, drunkard, and prayerless (denouncer of Salāt) man; and tolerating his rule will cause descent of Divine punishment. If I would be left alone and no one would help me, still I won't give up revolting against Yazīd."[96]

Meanwhile, Muslim b. ‘Uqba, who was seeking to find a way to penetrate into and dominate over Medina, got the chance to address the people of Medina by sending them the following message:

"Amīr al-Mu’minīn [Yazīd] sends his regards to you and says that you are his clan and kinsmen. Fear God! Listen to my words and obey. There are two bounties for you with me in my covenant to God: one in summer and the other one in winter. I have made a covenant to God to keep the price of wheat for you at the same rate as it is for us, which was one dirham for everysā‘ (3 kg.). As for the bounty that ‘Amr b. Sa‘īd Ashdaq has taken away from you, it is upon me to return it to you."[97]

This message had no impact on the people of Medina, because, although there were some people among them whose religious motivations were overshadowed by their material, tribal, and emotional motives, a large number of the pioneers of this uprising were decisive and purposeful people who were mainly motivated to overthrow the Umayyid rule and to fight against Yazīd as a person notorious for his incompetence and irreligiousness.

Thus, in response to Muslim b. ‘Uqba, they said: "We have removed Yazīd from Caliphate just like a shoe that we remove from out feet."[98]

Nevertheless, Muslim b. ‘Aqaba gave the Madīnans three days' time to finally make up their mind.[99]

Suffering from illness, Muslim b. ‘Uqba avoided attacking Medina for three days, and then since he did not receive a favorable answer from the Madīnans, finally decided to overcome them by force and violence and subdue them to Yazīd.

Evidence shows that Muslim b. ‘Uqba's hesitation for fighting the Madīnans was not merely for avoiding slaughtering, rather, he was commissioned to go to Mecca after suppressing the Madīnans' revolt in order to suppress b. Zubayr's revolt as well. Muslim b. ‘Uqba seemed to fear that if the battle with the Madīnans would become difficult and lengthy, the fighting energy of Syrian forces would get exhausted and then he would not be able to confront b. Zubayr and gain victory over him. That was because fighting with Ibn Zubayr in Mecca was in many aspects more difficult and risky than fighting with the people of Medina. First of all Mecca was a Divine Sanctuary on which invasion and launching a military campaign would cost the invaders dearly; and secondly, the distance between Mecca and Medina and its scorching and dry desert would severely wear out Syrian forces. That was why Muslim b. ‘Uqba in his last talk to the people of Medina said: "If you give up revolting and disobedience, I will get the chance to use all the Syrian forces against Ibn Zubayr, who is an impious and rebellious man!

However, he was unaware of the fact that they not only approved of Ibn Zubayr but did not allow the Syrian army to make any attempt to invade the Divine Sanctuary and attack that Holy Land![100]

Confrontation of the Syrian Army and the Medinan Forces

Combatants and defenders of Medina had, as mentioned above, reconstructed the trench and created a defensive and safety barrier blocking the enemy on the western side of the city that consisted of flat lands and seemed easy for the enemy to pass. They ruled out the possibility that the Syrian army can launch their assault from the rocky and rough side of the east of Medina or even if they did launch it from there, they can barely make headway.

The prediction of the Medinan combatants came true, as the Syrian army was never able to pass the Western side of the city and cross the trench, and thus was forced to move to the rocky eastern side to invade the city.

First the Syrian archers entered the battle. Ibn Hanzala told his troops: "We are now targeted by arrows; whoever wishes to enter paradise should sacrifice his life around this banner - the banner of Madīnans!"

Upon Ibn Hanzala's speech, the self-sacrificing combatants accompanied him and got into a fierce battle against the Syrian army and an unprecedented war broke out in that land.[101]

‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala told his companions: "It is true that your enemy has found the way to fight, but I do not think they will be able to resist more than one hour. You are theMuhājirin and the companions of the Prophet (s); I do not think God is more pleased with any other people than you! Death is the indispensable destiny of all human beings, but no death is superior to martyrdom; martyrdom is in front of you, take advantage of it![102]

The Syrian's Defeat during the Early Stages

After ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala's sermon, the Medina forces got ready for another attack. Ibn Hanzala reorganized his troops and made Fadl b. ‘Abbās the head of the defending army and entrusted the banner to him.

The Quraishī troops were put under the command of ‘Abd Allāh b. Mutī‘ ‘Adawī[103] , theMuhājirin under the command of Ma‘qal, and theAnsār were commanded by Ibn Hanzala himself. The voluntary public forces that undertook the guarding of the trench were put under the command of ‘Abd al-Rahmān b. Zahīr.[104]

Fadl b. ‘Abbās's fight along with the experienced cavalries was very effective in dispersing the Syrian forces. The Syrians escaped and the Fadl's riders approached near the Syrian army tents.

Fadl b. ‘Abbās encouraged his riders and companions and called them to resistance, galloping onwards until he reached the standard-bearer - Muslim b. ‘Uqba - and attacked him, cutting through his helmet and killing him with a single stroke of his sword.

Fadl imagined he had killed Muslim b. ‘Uqba, whereas the standard bearer had been a brave Roman slave.[105]

Anyhow, the Syrian army was apprehended by this gallant attack launched by the Medinan cavalries and failed to advance. Muslim b. ‘Uqba encouraged them to fight and when noticed their infirmity, he cursed them and threatened for their fear and retreat, and said:

"I swear by God! Whoever of you that flees, will be killed byAmīr al-Mu’minīn [Yazīd] in a most cruel way or at least the shame of it will remain with him for the rest of his life. If you do not fight and advance seriously enough, do not disperse or separate from each other."[106]

Whatever region around Medina that the Syrians attacked, the presence of the Medinan defenders would force them back to Muslim b. ‘Uqba![107]

The battle lasted till noon. ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala asked one of his slaves to safeguard him in the rear so that he could say his prayers. ‘Abd Allāh performed his prayer[108] and went on to fight against the Syrians.

Marwān b. Hakam's Role in Penetration of Syrian Army into Medina

Medina, like a stronghold, was resisting against the Syrian army and breaking through the Medinan troops seemed not very easy.[109]

Having become worried, Muslim b. ‘Uqba turned to Marwān and said: "You claimed earlier in Wādī al-Qurā that you have devised a plan for penetrating into Medina that you will carry out in its due time; is it not the right time to carry it out?!

Marwān b. Hakam set out toward Medina until he arrived near Banī Hāritha tribe. He summoned one of the tribe's men whom he had already identified and in a secret conversation promised to heavily reward him and do good to him for showing a way to penetrate into Medina. The man was taken in.[110] He showed Marwān a way to Medina from the neighborhood of Banī ‘Abd al-Ashhal and the Syrian troops penetrated into Medina from that same way.[111]

A considerable number of troops managed to reach behind the front lines of the Medinan combatants, clashed with them, and killed a great number of them.[112]

It so happened that the front line combatants and defenders heard thetakbīr and wailing from inside Medina[113] and after a very short while noticed the onslaught of the Syrian army prompting them to leave the battle and rush back to Medina to defend their women and children![114]

The news of the Syrians invasion of Medina quickly spread all over the Medina’s resistant front and overwhelmingly alarmed the people of Medina. A group of them returned to Medina and another group clashed with the Syrians, while a third group were rolled down into the trench in their hit-and-run fighting and skirmishes that resulted in the number of the people killed in the trench outnumbering those who were killed in the battle field.[115]

From this stage on, the Medinan defending forces dispersed and gradually weakened, not showing much resistance in the battle field.

Muslim b. ‘Uqba pointed to the standard-bearer of the Medinan forces [Fadl b. ‘Abbās] and instigated his soldeirs to carry out a targetted and harmonized attack on him. A heavy fighting broke out in which Fadl b. ‘Abbās was killed, while being at a distance of ten cubits [about five meters] away from Muslim b. ‘Uqba.[116]

In this attack, Zayd b. ‘Abd al-Rahmān b. ‘Awf also lost his life along with Fadl b. ‘Abbās.[117]

Wearing out of Medinan Forces before the Syrian Army

Following the prolongation of hit-and-run fighting and the expansion of battle front and the treachery of Marwān b. Hakam and Banī Hāritha, the early resistance of the leading fighting troops of Medina little by little began to slacken. In addition, with a part of the forces being killed and wounded, their women and children burst into wailing and crying and the non-military men, who were wearing armor, rapidly lost their morale. The fighting combatants whose number barely exceeded a thousand[118] , gradually began to feel weak and unsupported before the massive army of the enemy who were armed to the teeth and unworried of their women, children, property, and lives contrary to the people of Medina - and who would take to the open desert behind them in case of retreating.

The standard bearer of the Medinan troops was killed and the number of their fighters was significantly reduced in a short time. To provoke the people, ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala took off his armor, unsheathed his sword and called people to resistance and defense; but the Syrian troops kept moving onward, until they killed ‘Abd Allāh's three sons before his very eyes.[119]

Muslim b. ‘Uqba, who was viewing the movement of the his mounted Syrian forces on the stony ground as difficult, in order to encourage the infantry men of his army, ordered them to dismount from their horses and move on foot. He said: "O People of Syria! Fighting on foot is not exclusive to a particular group. O Husayn b. Numayr and O ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Idāt Ash‘arī! Dismount your horses along with your army!

They all dismounted their horses and advanced on food.

The Syrians were attacking from all directions and killing the people of Medina. The battle was going on to the advantage of the Syrians, overshadowing the vigorous resistance of the defenders of Medina.

‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala was striking his sword and reciting following couplets:

Far from those who seek corruption and rebellion and turn away from the truth and the signs of guidance;

The Merciful God will not keep anyone away from His Mercy except the disobedient.[120]

Normally, a combatant at that time in history would brag with such utterances in the battle field when he wants to express his goal of offence or defense. ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala was seeking to encourage the people of Medina to resist on the one hand and to remind the Syrians of his motive and to resist the Umayyid distorters of religion, on the other.

Muslim b. ‘Uqba ordered ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Idāt Ash‘arī to move towards ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala and his companions with fifteen archers and when they were close enough, start shooting arrows at them.[121]

Thus, finally, ‘Abd Allāh b. Hanzala fell on the ground and was killed by Syrian troops and with his death the remaining resisting defenders of Medina broke up. The Syrian army chased the Madīnans and killed several people in this way.[122]

The sun was setting while the dark shadow of the avaricious and revengeful army of Syria was weighing down on the defenseless people of Medina and setting the monster of death, horror, and plunder over their women, children, and life!

The Syrian Army’s Savage Invasion of Medinan Houses

As to the exact date of the Harrah event, some of the historians have reported it to be the year 62 A.H. (682 C.E.)[123] and some 63 A.H. (683 C.E.)[124] ; of which, of course, the majority of the historians have taken the latter as more accurate and asserted the abominable day to be Wednesday 27th or 28th of Dhū'l Hijja 63 A.H.[125] which is according to solar calendar to be August 27, 683 C.E.[126]

Referring to the historical sources and adding up and analyzing the various views will strengthen the notion that the Syrian army actually entered the battle region at the outskirts of Medina - i.e. Harrah - on Monday 24 th of Dhū'l Hijja 63 A.H. (August 23, 683 C.E.)[127] , and after three days respite, the Syrian army’s invasion of Medina started from Harrah region at dawn on 27th of Dhū'l Hijja, and later, on the same day, the defenders of Medina were killed at the end of the same day, and the Syrian army seized the city of Medina overnight.

Narration of all the aspects of the battle of Harrah must be considered on one side and this tragic part (the crimes of the Syrian army in Medina) of the history of Yazīd's Caliphate, as the heaviest and the most heinous of all the dreadful events that took place in this battle, on the other.

Ibn Qutayba Dīnawarī puts it this way:

"Entrance of Syrian army into Medina took place on 27th of Dhū'l Hijja 63 A.H. and Medina was in the clutches of Syrian army until the rise of new crescent of Muhrram."[128]

As Yazīd b. Mu‘āwiyah had advised, Muslim b. ‘Uqba ordered the Syrian army after conquering Medina: "Your hands are open! Do whatever you wish! Plunder Medina for three days."[129]

This way, the city of Medina was allowed as permissible to the Syrian troops to exploit and plunder in whatever way they wished, leaving no man or woman on their way secure from their carnage, killing the people, and pillaging their properties.[130]

More grievous than the Syrian's plundering and slaying the people of Medina and the remaining generation of the companions of Prophet (s) as well as theMuhājirin andAnsār , was the rash and avaricious Syrians troops’ assault upon the chastity of the women of Medina!

If we accept that the Syrian army was consisted of 27 thousand armed men[131] aged between 20 to 50 years old, we will find out how disastrous could the invasion of this number of troops have been on a town surrounded by numerous trenches and rugged lands. And if we agree with a number of historians who have estimated the Syrian army in the battle of Harrah to be the least of 10 thousand fighting men, still we can guess the extension of this catastrophe that took place in Medina.

The ten thousand young fighting men, who have for several days traversed the long distance between Syria and Medina with much hardship, overwhelmed the enemy in a single day of aggressive and severely harsh hit-and-fighting, and given full permission by their commander and central government for any action they wished to do, now at the end of the day stepped into houses whose men are either killed or escaped or have raised their hands up as a sign of surrender to be taken as captives.

How would have such ravenous and rash men treated the helpless and unprotected women, girls and children?!

We do not need to merely guess and imagine the extension of the tragedy; because the historians have explicitly recorded what had taken place:

"Thousands of women were assaulted in the invasion of the Syrians into Madīnat al-Nabī (s), and months after the battle of Harrah, thousands of babies were born whose fathers were unknown, hence were named "children of Harrah"! The sinister aftermaths of this ethico-human diaster left its ominous impact on families and the marriages of their daughters, bringing in many individual and social problems that are too heavy to be expressed by any pen."[132]

Streets of Medina were filled with the bodies of the killed, blood stains covered the way up to the Prophet's (s) Mosque[133] , children were killed in their mothers' laps[134] , and the old companions of the Apostle of Allah (s) were persecuted and disgraced.[135]

Crimes committed in the Prophet’s Holy Srhine and Mosque (Masjid al-Nabi)

It was natural that a group of Madīnans took refuge out of despair in the Apostle of Allah (s)'s mosque (Masjid al-Nabi) and Holy mausoleum thinking it to be secured against the Syrian army's invasion. But did the newly converted Syrian Muslims and those trained and reared by the Umayyids show any respect for the Prophet (s) and his mosque? Or like their commander Yazīd, they would say in their intoxication of victory and arrogance: "Hāshim (Prophet’s great grand father and leader of Bani Hashim) has played to acquire the rule (hukūmat ); there has been no divine revelation (upon Prophet of God), nor any news descended from heaven!"

History has mournfully recorded that the Syrain troops didn’t show any respect for the Holy Shrine, House and the Mosque of the Prophet (s). Even the refugees in the Mosque of the Prophet (s) were not secure against the invaders. The Syrian troops mercilessly killed those who took refuge in the mosque of the Prophet (s) and near the Holy grave of Prophet (s). The spilled blood of the innocent covered the mosque floor and reached the Holy grave of Prophet (s). Until the Syrian troops remained in Medina, nobody dared to enter the mosque of Prophet (s). The mosque was empty of people[136] and Yazīd'a horsemen tied their horses to the pillars in the mosque. Only animals including dogs enetered the mosque of Prophet (s) and urinated and defacated on the pulpit (minber ) of the Prophet (s)![137] This was the most heinous aspect of the Syrain invasion that no sane Muslim can accept and tolerate. It showed that how Umayyids had hidden their enemity against Islam and the Prophet (s) and were planning for a long time to take their revenge from Prophet (s), Islam and the Muslims. Abū Sa‘īd Khudrī, the famous companion of the Prophet (s) said: ‘By God, for three days when Syrains were busy in plundering, we didn’t hear any call for prayers (azan ) in Medina, except from the grave of Prophet (s)!’[138]

One of the Meccan poets wrote an elegy about the tragedy of Harrah as follows:

Yazīd targeted us by Muslim b. ‘Uqba, leaving none of our youth alive!

He dispatched a massive army, roaring like a torrential sea, to Medina.

They killed residents of Medina with uttermost wrath and violence; leaving the night behind while dead bodies lay scattered around.

The Ansār bitterly wept for the hideous bloodshed in Medina, and the Ashja‘ tribe for Ma‘qal b. Sanān.[139]

‘Abd al-Rahmān b. Sa‘īd b. Zayd b. Nufayl, a talented poet of the time, put it as follows:

If you are determined to kill us on the day of Harrahtu Wāqim, we have no fear; for we are among the first to lose our life in the way Islam.

It was we who humiliated you in the battle of Badr and made you helpless and miserable.[140]

The battle of Harrah and the occupation of Medina, the city of Prophet (s), and the alughter and plunder of the people of Medina ended after three days, with the Yazīd's army commanded by Muslim b. ‘Uqba set out to Mecca to create another tragedy in the Land of Divine Revelation!

However, the painful impacts of the Harrah tragedy remained in the souls, minds, and lives of the inhabitants of Medina for a very long time.

The intensity of the massacre and crimes was to such an extent that from then on people called Muslim b. ‘Uqba as Musrif (squanderer) b. ‘Uqba for his going to extremes in killing the people. After that, the people wore black clothes and for a whole year their wailing and weeping was heard from their houses.[141]

The sanctity of religion and the mosque and the grave of the Prophet (s) was violated, theMuhājirin and theAnsār and theitr families were humiliated. One of the unfortunate consequences of this horrific tragedy was that the people of Medina slowly moved away from religious values and indulged in moral corruption. Perhaps, in order to forget and subdue the tragic memories of the event of Harrah, the rich among them started drinking wine and used to invite singers and dancers. The views of the subsequent generations too about religion and its commandmants were distorted, and dance and singing began to prevail among them.[142] The tragedy of Harrah was an event that had left its deleterious psychological and socio-cultural effects that prevailed over a very long time and outlasted generations.

Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn’s (a) Stance in the Uprising of Madīnans

Considering the high status of the household of the Prophet (s) and the position of Alavids [adherents of Imam Ali (‘a) and the household of the Prophet (s)] in Medina, it is necessary to shed light on their stance as well as their role during the course of Madīnans uprising and their revolt against the Umayyid rule.

The importance of this issue is obvious to any researcher of the history of Islam who has studied and analyzed the tragedy of Harrah, or is going to do so. Particular reference to the time of this event from a trans-historical and religious aspect should be kept in mind.

The tragedy of Harrah and Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn’s (‘a) stance toward it is significantly beyond just a historical research for the followers and adherents of the Prophet (s) and HisAhl al-Bayt (‘a), as the Imam's negative or positive or even indifference reaction towards such affairs would on one hand be a religious frame of reference to them, and on the other hand, can be used as a basis for political and legal opinions in their religious and social life.

What we have said so far about the regretful tragedy of Harrah is a documented historical look at the authentic reports that the historians have recorded. However, a study of the role and position of Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) in the protest rallies of the people of Medina against the Umayyid's rule is possible from two different aspects.

A merely historical outlook

A religious and ideological view

A. Historical Glance at Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn’s (‘a) Position

If historical accounts about a personality or event merely narrate a report without special analysis and evidence based-judgment, it can take the form of short and scattered remarks about the past and ignore the peripheral issues and the specific conditions relating to time and location. However, if alongside, it also makes judgments and assessments, it would require mentioning of the relevant past records and their backgrounds.

What is recorded in the historical sources in the form of brief narrations reveals that Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) did not have an active and encouraging presence in Madīnans' uprising and revolt. Rather, he had left Medina in order not to witness the imminent tragedy there.

The fact that in the historical and traditional sources there is no statement by Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) that implies the encouragement of Madīnans to resist against the Syrian army or preventing them from revolt indicates that the Imam (‘a) had not been able or had regarded as advisable to interfere in this event. But why indeed?

Did Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) not hold the required social position, after the tragedy of Karbala and the killing of majority of adherents of Imam Ali (‘a) and the followers ofAhl al-Bayt (‘a), to involve in the incident and viewed as futile to command the people of Medina to guide them to good and prohibit them from evil?

Was the revolt of the inhabitants of Medina only religiously motivated or was it considered as a combination of religious, political, tribal, and economical motivations? Or, Why could not the interference of such spiritual figure as Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) in such complicated and multifaceted event be crucial and effective enough to be accepted and welcomed by the major trends of the time?

Was now Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) taking upon himself as his legal and social obligation to help out or prevent theMuhājirin and theAnsār , the reciters of Qur'an, the narrators ofhadīth , and the companions of the Prophet (s) from the battle, that is those who, as he witnessed at close quarters to himself, with all their high status and position never assisted his grandfather ‘Alī, his uncle Hasan b. ‘Alī (‘a), or his father Imam Husayn b. ‘Alī (‘a) and depended on their own understanding and knowledge in ups and downs of the incidents rather than on theAhl al-Bayt (‘a)? Or else, he did not feel obliged to accompany them due to the weakness of this movement, or did not prevent them because of their inadvisablity?

Was Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) entangled in a political and social seclusion and pursuing monasticism? Or did he not have the morale for getting up again into conflict with the Umayyid ruling system? Or did he firmly decide not to fight against the corruption of the rulers and their tyranny like the manner and lifestyle (sīra ) of his grandfather ‘Alī b. Abī Tālib (‘a), his uncle Hasan b. ‘Alī (‘a), and his father Husayn b. ‘Alī (‘a)?!

Once the historian wants to step into research and analysis and then make a judgment about the interference and non-interference of Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) in the tragedy of Harrah, he would be facing all the above questions and should have answers to all of them, presenting authentic reasons for every view he adopts.

The simplest analysis is to regard the Imam’s (‘a) silence as his impartiality in this event and view that impartiality as a result of his abandoning duty and path of martyrdom and resistance, and his compromise with the rules in order to survive. But such an analysis would be made by an ignorant and biased person, as the past personality traits of Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) does not validate such an analysis. Despite his exhausted body due to the wounds from the heavy chains fastened to his body and although being surrounded by Yazīd's troops and supporters and in a land where ‘Alī (‘a) has always been cursed, he stood up before the arrogant Umayyid ruler and cried out:

"O Yazīd! Are you threatening me to murder?! Have you not learned the fact that being killed in the way of the Truth is an eternal success and a tradition among us and martyrdom a dignity for us?!"

Did the Imam (‘a) not utter these words after the tragedy of Karbalā; was he not carrying the deep wounds of the memory of ‘Ashūrā on his body and soul when he expressed himself so courageously?!

Was it by any means possible that such a free-spirited, brave, and noble figure would give up all those highly influencing and chrished memories within several months and come to compromise and lip-service with the murderers of his father and their accomplices and become indifferent to their defeat and destruction?!

Was it not the case that whenever the eyes of his holiness were cast on fresh water, he would weep to keep alive the memory of the severe thirst of the martyrs of Karbalā and the tyrannies they suffered and the gravity of the crimes committed by the Umayyids, leaving deep impact on the souls and emotions?

Was he not the one who in his supplications would breathe the love of the Prophet’s (s) descendents into the souls and hearts of the monotheists, and this way would trouble the Umayyid's slumber? Was he not the one whose brilliant thoughts and steadfast personality inspired such great warriors as Zayd b. ‘Alī b. al-Husayn and Yahyā b. Zayd who bravely fought against Umayyid injustice and oppression? And from among his progeny such Imams and leaders were born who never compromised with the oppressive powers, used every opportunity to expose the real face of the tyrants, and were all killed as martyrs?

If the historians and analyzers of this historical event take into consideration all these facts together in an integrated way and all the aspects, they will not accept the naïve statements and the opportunistic reports of those unfamiliar with the school of divine leadership (Wilāyat ).

Thus, if Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) did not go along with the uprising of Medina, it has been because:

Firstly, he had identified various goals and motives among the people of Medina all of which were not religious.

Secondly, the Imam (‘a) did not see the condition as appropriate for confronting the Umayyid government and considered the revolt of the people of Medina as paving the way for massive bloodshed and transgression upon the chastity of Muslim women. This was in the same way as his noble father, Husayn (‘a), left Medina during the night, it was because he did not want his blood to be shed in the Sanctuary of the Holy Prophet (s) and so his martyrdom took place in a situation that would the everlasting message to the subsequent generation.

Thirdly, if he prevented people from uprising honestly and outrightly, it would so happen that the people would take the Imam's words as a result of his past disappointment of fighting against Yazīd! Nevertheless, Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) practically showed the people of Medina and those who were mindful of the Imam's viewpoints and obedient to him that they should not get involved in this course of events.

Fourthly, the method of fighting adopted by the inhabitants of Medina against the Syrian army was predicted to be inefficient; for, although in the battle of Ahzāb, the Muslims utilized a similar method and triumphed in the early stage, the circumstances had changed over time. In the tragedy of Harrah, the people of Medina neither enjoyed the empathy and coordination of the Prophet's (s) time, nor had a leader like the Prophet (s).

In addition to the above, the presence of the women and children in Medina had a very important impact leading to the defeat of their uprising, as the combatants had to abandon the battlefront and go back to town for the fear of the Syrians' invasion of their houses.

Thus, Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) had practically warned against this critical event and demonstrated to the inhabitants by having his family and relatives taken away from Medina and transferred to the region of Yanbu‘[143] .

In conclusion, the position that Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) practically adopted was very well calculated and in the light of the above-mentioned considerations, the most logical one, since, in a short while, this reality was to be revealed to the inhabitants of Medina.

B. An Ideological Glance at Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn’s (‘a) Position

What we said so far was merely a historical look based on human calculations that could be noticed by any researcher and thinker; whereas, the interference or non-interference of Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) in the process of Madīnans' uprising has a religious perspective, too, which is significant to the Shias and the believers in the spiritual status of the Imams and the infallibility of theAhl al-Bayt (‘a).

In this view, the Imam is not a simple decision maker who takes actions according to his personal information and experiences. Rather, he is committed to an obligation that God has explicitly appointed him for and other people have to obey him, take his words and actions as criteria for their beliefs and behavior, and do not seek precedence over him in thought and practice.

From this perspective, Imam Zayn al-‘Abidīn (‘a) had acted according to a superhuman obligation, and those of the Madīnans, who due to their lack of belief in Wilāyat and Imamate (divine leadership of the Imams among Ahl al-Bayt - ‘a) or for any other reasons stepped into this uprising, suffered great loss.

Here, the question arises that whether the Madīnans' uprising was rightful and their killed ones can be regarded as martyrs, or their uprising had been a rebellion and revolt against an Islamic ruler?