Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

The Tragedy of Karbala’ Is the Natural Consequence of Some Unnatural Factors

We should know that the tragedy of Karbala’ is the natural consequence of some unnatural factors that the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) had to face from the last moments of the Holy Prophet (S). The writer has already shown in brief, what the tradition of Two Heavy things (Thaqalayn) demanded and why the change in this command distanced Bani Hashim from rulership, which caused their worldly leadership to be lost and finally their religious leadership was also gone.

This reduced their honor to such an extent that they began to be included among the common people. Thus, after such factors came into action, a tragedy of the magnitude of the Tragedy of Karbala’ was not entirely unexpected.

It is a decided matter that if after the Messenger of Allah (S), Ali (a.s.) had been accepted as the Caliph, the Tragedy of Karbala’ would never have occurred. Indeed, if he had become the Caliph, he would never have bestowed official positions and economic concessions to Bani Umayyah. This is what that seems apparent. Bani Umayyah would have remained in the basal position in which the Messenger of Allah (S) had left them.

Doubtlessly, if Ali (a.s.) had been accepted as the successor to the Holy Prophet (S), he was the one to have conformed to the style and method of the Holy Prophet (S). It was not possible that Ali (a.s.) would have deviated from the policy of the Holy Prophet (S). The first mistake was that the Muslims opposed Bani Hashim. And the second mistake committed by them was that this opposition made the Bani Umayyah very strong. Not only were Bani Hashim hurt by this, even the world of Islam had to bear untold damages, as will be shown by future discussions.

We have already described the process of the empowerment of Bani Umayyah in the first volume of our book Kashful Haqaiq. But here also, we shall mention in brief, the account of Bani Umayyah’s rise to power. We should know that immediately after the formation of Caliphate, Bani Umayyah were presented with excellent opportunities to gain power, which this tribe had never even dreamt of. From the beginning of the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, the Bani Umayyah began to become powerful and within two years, the Syrian area was populated by the people of this tribe. Each and every member of this clan shifted from Mecca and Medina to Syria, and they gained their worldly desires as much as they had craved.

When rulership of Syria was gifted to Abu Sufyan, he did not opt to go there himself. His son, Yazeed Ibn Abu Sufyan took over the position gained by his father and departed to Syria. This gentleman was the governor of Syria for four years: Two years during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and two years during the Caliphate of Umar. Yazeed bin Abu Sufyan was not a very capable person, so his brother Muawiyah used to assist him in administration.

After the death of Yazeed bin Abi Sufyan, Muawiyah succeeded him as the governor of Syria. He was very cunning and crafty. Though he had no sort of religious capability, he possessed extraordinary manipulative power from the worldly aspect. As soon as he became the governor, the atmosphere of this country was transformed. In a brief time, Syria became a powerful and superior part of the Islamic kingdom.

Although Syria was considered to be under the control of Caliphate, Muawiyah had a free hand to do as he wished. In spite of this, Muawiyah never acted in a rebellious manner with the Caliphate. Rather, Muawiyah used to accord great respect and regard to Umar, the second Caliph. And why shouldn’t he had been so polite, when all that Muawiyah had achieved was due to the kindness of Umar?

The period of Umar’s Caliphate is said to be ten years but actually it was twelve because the two-year Caliphate of Abu Bakr was only in name. During this period of twelve years, Bani Umayyah became rulers and when the Caliphate of Uthman arrived, even the Caliphate became the property of Bani Umayyah, because the third Caliph was also from Bani Umayyah. At this time, the whole Islamic world seemed to be only Bani Umayyah. The pomp and show of Bani Umayyah at this time was beyond imagination. The land of Shaam (Syria) was filled with Bani Umayyah. They held all official positions in government and they were preferred for every post. This was the position of Bani Umayyah.

Now let us see the condition of Bani Hashim, which denotes the family of the Prophet. The head of this family at this time was Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) and there did not remain any honor for Bani Hashim. They were completely out of power. A member of this clan did not even have a menial post in government. Bani Hashim had become distanced from public respect.

Their private economic conditions had also deteriorated due to the loss of Fadak. With the loss of their worldly position, there did not remain with them even religious leadership, as we have already explained in the foregoing pages. Apparently, there remained no sort of superiority for Bani Hashim and in the near future also there was no hope of any considerable change in their status. Yes, after the death of Uthman, somehow Ali (a.s.) was appointed to the Caliphate.

But the Caliphate of Ali (a.s.), which lasted for four years, was mostly spent in wars. First of all, due to the rebellion of Muawiyah, ‘A’ysha fought His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) at Jamal with Talha and Zubair. After this, Muawiyah continuously fought with the Caliph of the age. All these machinations of Muawiyah and his rebellious activities are considered ‘errors of judgment’. The writer has not understood till today, what this ‘error of judgment’ is? And if Allah wills, it shall never ever become clear to him, because a just mind cannot accept such a thing. This is beyond the comprehension of the writer, because neither this humble one has the same mentality as Muawiyah, nor has any sort of interest with his activities.

Anyway, after becoming the Caliph, His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) could not exalt Bani Umayyah, just as before this the Holy Prophet (S) had never allowed Bani Umayyah to gain supremacy. It could not be expected from Ali (a.s.) that he would allow Bani Umayyah to retain their undeserved power. The same Bani Umayyah, who were merely a tribe during the time of the Messenger of Allah (S) had now become the Sultans of Islamic dominions.

Anyhow, the brief Caliphate of Ali (a.s.) ended with his martyrdom. Bani Hashim could not achieve any official positions during his tenure. After him, Imam Hasan (a.s.) succeeded to the post of his father. Immediately after the appointment of Imam Hasan (a.s.) as the Caliph in Kufa, Muawiyah marched to Kufa with an army 60,000 strong. Imam Hasan (a.s.) abdicated the Caliphate and Muawiyah became the de facto Caliph. Due to this achievement of Caliphate, Muawiyah became one of the twelve Caliphs of Ahlul Sunnat. Thus, Muawiyah got the Caliphate by force and coercion and this method came to be accepted as a valid method of gaining Caliphate according to Ahlul Sunnat as is well-known among the educated people.

After abdication, Imam Hasan (a.s.) became a pensioner of Muawiyah and returned to Medina to live with his brother, Imam Husayn (a.s.) in a way that content people live. Although there remained no political value of Bani Hashim at this time, Muawiyah was not feeling safe from Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s.).

Somehow, Imam Hasan (a.s.) was removed from the scene by poison. It is well known that Muawiyah had got Imam Hasan (a.s.) poisoned. Abul Fida, the historian says: “Some say it was Muawiyah and some think it was Yazeed who had done this.” This writer believes it was Muawiyah who had Imam Hasan (a.s.) poisoned. His son was not capable enough to have Imam Hasan (a.s.) martyred while he himself sat in Damascus. Yazeed was a weak person having no determination.

Apart from this, due to his sensual habits, he had no intelligence and the fact is that he had inherited none of the craftiness and cunning of Muawiyah. If he had even the slightest awareness, he would not have forced Imam Husayn (a.s.) to such an extent to give the oath of allegiance.

Muawiyah would never have employed such forcible methods. He never demanded allegiance from Imam Husayn (a.s.). Muawiyah just needed the kingdom to rule and he was not interested in the allegiance of Imam Hasan (a.s.). If Muawiyah had insisted for allegiance, in spite of his magnanimity, Imam Hasan (a.s.) would have refused. And then Muawiyah would have needed the same forcible methods that later became necessary for his son, Yazeed, against Imam Husayn (a.s.).

Thus, when the news of the martyrdom of Imam Hasan (a.s.) reached Muawiyah, he was much relieved according to his own admission.1 But Imam Husayn (a.s.) was still alive. This was a great danger that lurked upon Muawiyah. He used to tell his son that he must not yet consider his kingdom safe. “Husayn Ibn Ali was yet living. He has the courage of his father. And till he is alive, you must not feel safe from his side.” Doubtlessly, these statements of Muawiyah show a great foresight. The son did not have any such foresight. Anyway, to strengthen the Caliphate of his son, initially Muawiyah used persuasive methods. And only after this, he began to take the oath of allegiance of Muslims in favor of his son.

Thousands of Muslims paid allegiance to Yazeed. Taking allegiance in Syria was not at all difficult. It was also taken from many people of Mecca and Medina, but the Ahlul Bayt of the Prophet remained aloof from all this. If Yazeed had any sort of understanding like his father, he would not have been so severe in obtaining allegiance from Bani Hashim and would have left them on their own. But this use of force finally led to the clear refusal of Imam Husayn (a.s.) to give allegiance, and as a result of which he had to face the tragedy of Karbala’, due to which Yazeed began to be remembered as an evil Satan even by some Ahlul Sunnat.

Before we discuss the events of Karbala’, we would like to show how this incident can be viewed from different points of view. According to our research, this event has only two aspects: One of its aspects is that Imam Husayn (a.s.) was on the right and that is why he was martyred unjustly.

The second view is that (we seek Allah’s refuge) Imam Husayn (a.s.) was a traitor and his killing was a lawful act on the part of Caliphate, because the Imam was neither oppressed nor killed a martyr. The sect which considers Imam Husayn (a.s.) as the oppressed one and a martyr, rather, it considers this martyrdom to be a part of faith, it is necessary for the sect to consider Caliphate to be a divinely ordained office. And it should believe in the infallibility of the successor of the Prophet. To have a belief opposite to this implies that Husayn (a.s.) was a traitor and hence his killing should not be considered martyrdom. Thus, from this aspect, it is only the Imamiyah sect that believes in the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.).

The non-Imamiyah have no right to consider Imam Husayn (a.s.) an oppressed one and a martyr. Some non-Imamiyah people in India, who are seen accepting the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.) and also some of them who even participate in Azadari (mourning ceremonies) are actually doing something against the basic principles of their faith, because according to their principle, Yazeed was a rightful Caliph and thus Imam Husayn (a.s.) becomes a traitor. That is why his refusal to give allegiance cannot make him a martyr.

Doubtlessly, it is only the right of Shias of the family of the Holy Prophet (S) that they consider Imam Husayn (a.s.) as the rightful successor of the Prophet, and a martyr. And it befits only them to mourn the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.). The just people should note that when infallibility was no longer considered a condition for Caliphate, then what doubt could there be in Yazeed’s Caliphate? Didn’t Yazeed get even two people from non-Bani Hashim to fulfill the condition of consensus? The condition of consensus was most appropriate for Yazeed. Leave alone two, Yazeed had obtained Caliphate by the consensus of two hundred thousand people.

Apart from this, the condition of forcible obtaining of Caliphate also applies to Yazeed. It was that, through which Muawiyah had obtained Caliphate from Imam Hasan (a.s.). The same condition was applicable to Yazeed. In addition to this, the condition of appointment by the predecessor was also in favor of Yazeed. Muawiyah had clearly appointed Yazeed as his successor.

As we have mentioned above, Muawiyah appointed Yazeed as his successor and made utmost efforts to obtain allegiance for him. He was also successful to a large extent. The condition of consultation committee (Shura) was also in favor of Yazeed. The Caliphate of Uthman was entrusted only to six people. The whole of Syria was the Shura committee for Yazeed. Without any doubt, those who do not believe infallibility to be a necessary condition for Caliphate, consider Yazeed the rightful Caliph.

The teacher of this writer, Maulavi Sayyid Muhammad Gul Sahab Jalalabadi had a firm belief in the rightfulness of Yazeed’s Caliphate and his view was most appropriate, due to which he did not consider the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.) to be a martyrdom. In the same way, some other scholars of the province had the same kind of belief and it is possible that they still do.

But in Afghanistan there are some Ahlul Sunnat who are very particular about this belief. In the view of the writer, such people do not deserve to be criticized, because when infallibility is not a condition of Caliphate and Yazeed had all the necessary conditions of Caliphate, then why shouldn’t he be considered a rightful Caliph? It is nothing but injustice that after having all the conditions of Caliphate, Yazeed shouldn’t be accepted as Caliph. Even when I did not believe in infallibility to be a necessary condition of Caliphate, I used to consider Yazeed a rightful Caliph, and without any doubt, I was right in having such a stand.

Every scholar that did not accept infallibility as the condition of Caliphate, considered Yazeed a rightful Caliph. In the view of the writer, such a stand is worth admiration, because these people are loyal to their own principles. It seems that Abdullah Ibn Umar also considered Yazeed a rightful Caliph. If it had not been so, he would neither have given his allegiance to Yazeed nor encouraged other people to give it. The son of such a great Caliph, and himself an intelligent man, cannot commit an evil act!

Indeed, he considered the Caliphate of Yazeed, a valid Caliphate. And why shouldn’t he have considered it so? When no excuse can be found in his Caliphate and it had all the necessary conditions. Abdullah indeed did not consider infallibility as the necessary condition of Caliphate. If he had thought so, he would have considered unlawful and false the Caliphate of the three Caliphs and Muawiyah.

However, Husayn Ibn Ali (a.s.) considered infallibility to be a necessary condition of Caliphate. That is why he did not accept Yazeed as the rightful Caliph and opposed him and he did not even hesitate to lay down his life.

Note

1. Ref. Tarikh Khamis

Yazeed’s Allegiance and the Tragedy of Karbala’

When Muawiyah died, there was no one in Syria and Hijaz who could oppose the succession of Yazeed to his father’s seat of Caliphate. Muawiyah had arranged the Caliphate of Yazeed in his own lifetime. Thus, Yazeed, at last, occupied the throne of Caliphate. Damascus, which is presently in Syria, was at that time the Capital of the Islamic Kingdom. After the Righteous Caliphs, Muawiyah had named it the seat of Government. It remained that seat of government for all Bani Umayyah rulers. All the offices from Medina were shifted to this city.

During the reign of the Abbasids, the same were transferred to Baghdad. After the rule of Bani Abbas, the Arab Kingdom itself was finished and even Baghdad became an ordinary city like Damascus and Medina from the political aspect. Anyway, Yazeed became the Caliph of the time and began to take allegiance from the masses. It was not a difficult matter in other cities of Syria. Thousands in Medina also paid allegiance at the hands of Yazeed, but he was not assured regarding Imam Husayn (a.s.), so he ordered Walid bin Uqba, the governor of Medina, to take allegiance from Imam Husayn (a.s.) on his behalf. Also, that if Imam Husayn (a.s.) refused, his head should be cut off and sent to Damascus.

Walid continued to shun this extreme step, but Marwan was always nagging him to execute Yazeed’s orders. This is the same Marwan, who was ordered by the Holy Prophet (S) to be externed from Islamic territories, he was also the son-in-law of Uthman and he belonged to Bani Umayyah. When Uthman became the Caliph, Marwan was recalled to Medina.1 The text is as follows: “Marwan Ibn Hakam was banned in Medina by the Holy Prophet (S) but Uthman recalled him and appointed him as his scribe.” The reason for his being recalled is that he was a close relative of Uthman and Uthman had called him to act on Quranic verses that exhort us to be kind to relatives and orphans.

Marwan was mischief personified and a perfect example of his clan. Now he came to Medina and became the close confidant and adviser to Uthman. But he gave such advices to the Caliph that at last he had to wash his hands off his life. When the crow is a leader of a people, it is very likely that they shall be doomed to perdition. In any case, Marwan resided in Medina during the Caliphate of Uthman and continued even after Uthman was killed. When the orders from Yazeed reached Imam Husayn (a.s.), Marwan always tried to see that the orders of the Caliph are carried out, but Walid did not like to cut off the head of Imam Husayn (a.s.) and Imam Husayn (a.s.) safely departed for Mecca. The going away of Imam Husayn (a.s.) to Mecca was not detrimental to him. He had at least escaped the mischievous hands of Marwan.

Imam Husayn (a.s.) went from Medina to Mecca on Friday night, 4th Shaban in 60 A.H., taking his family and children with him and he finally reached Mecca, where the people showed a lot of support for him. The governor of Mecca, Saad bin Aas saw this and ran away to Medina. On reaching Medina, he wrote a letter to Yazid: Imam Husayn (a.s.) has come to Mecca and the people of Mecca are supporting him. This letter was sent to the Caliph in Damascus. When the Caliph learnt of this, he deposed Walid from the governorship of Medina because he had failed to deal with Imam Husayn (a.s.) and in his place appointed Ibnul Ashdaq. Although the people of Mecca had shown their support to Imam Husayn (a.s.) initially, Mecca was not beyond the control of the Caliph.

The command to take allegiance for the Caliph reached here too. In case he didn’t give allegiance, it was commanded to cut off his head. Now his opponents began to taunt and tease and were ready to attack in any way they could. It was very likely that Mecca would become the battlefield of Karbala’. In such a condition, Imam Husayn (a.s.) did not consider it suitable to complete the rites of Hajj. He changed his Hajj into Umrah (lesser pilgrimage) and left Mecca as soon as possible. During this time, many letters had arrived from the people of Kufa. So Imam (a.s.) decided to head towards Kufa. But consultations were held and it was decided that first the Imam’s cousin, Muslim Ibn Aqeel, should go to Kufa and study the situation, only after this should the Imam (a.s.) himself proceed.

Muslim reached Kufa after a lot of difficulties with his two young sons. The people of Kufa welcomed Muslim and more than forty thousand people gave oath of allegiance to him. Seeing this, Muslim wrote a detailed letter to Imam Husayn (a.s.) that he could come to Kufa from Mecca. More than a hundred and fifty letters from the people of Kufa had already reached Imam Husayn (a.s.), so there was nothing, which should hold back Imam Husayn (a.s.) from Kufa.

Getting such a letter from Muslim, Imam Husayn (a.s.) packed the baggage for the journey and with relatives and family members left for Kufa on 9th Zilhajj, Tuesday, 60 A.H. All his family members and friends who had accompanied him in this journey were but a few people. And if there were more, they gradually left the company of Imam Husayn (a.s.).

Finally, on reaching Karbala’, very few people were left with the Imam. Then, on the day of martyrdom only seventy-two remained and if at all they were more, they could not have been more than eighty-two. When on his way, he reached Ramalah, he sent a letter to the people of Kufa through his foster brother. But Ibn Ziyad already knew that Imam (a.s.) was heading for Kufa. That is why he had already arranged to waylay him. The foster brother was arrested and Ibn Ziyad martyred him.

It should be clear that after Muslim wrote the letter to Imam Husayn (a.s.), calamities began to befall him. Ibn Ziyad wreaked strange cruelties on Muslim and his sons and from one aspect he did not do any wrong because after all he was following the ‘commands’ of the ‘Caliph’ of that time!

Anyway, according to the views of Shias, after facing torture, Muslim was martyred and both his sons also achieved martyrdom at the hands of a Kufaite. Although in the beginning, the Kufaites had welcomed Muslim, but when the severity of the Caliph’s officers weighed on them they could not support Muslim and that is why the affair did not come about as was expected. The government is all-powerful and the common people cannot confront the government. In brief, Muslim did not get a chance to inform Imam Husayn (a.s.) about the changed behavior of the Kufaites and the oppression of the rulers.

Thus, Imam Husayn (a.s.) gradually moved closer to Kufa. When he reached Thalebiya, Bakr Asadi who was coming from Kufa, informed Imam Husayn (a.s.) about the real situation and the havoc that Ibn Ziyad had wreaked. He broke the tragic news of Muslim and his sons. The martyrdom of Muslim was on the day when he had started from Mecca to Kufa. When Imam Husayn (a.s.) heard this tragic news, he was shocked. The companions advised that he should return to the hometown.

Now, first of all, what left for him in the home country? It was also under the rulership of Yazeed. Secondly, the relatives of Muslim asked what was there to live for, till they do not take revenge of Muslim from the Kufaites. Keeping this in mind, Imam Husayn (a.s.) again headed for Kufa. On the way, he came across Hurr Ibn Riyahi who was send by Ibn Ziyad to stop Imam (a.s.). He intercepted Imam Husayn (a.s.) but could not bring himself to arrest him; but since he was helpless before the command of Ibn Ziyad, he led Imam Husayn (a.s.) to Kufa. Hurr had told Imam Husayn (a.s.) that when the caravan halted for the night he should go away in any direction he liked. When it was night, Imam Husayn (a.s.) quietly moved away. But at daybreak he was forced to halt at the land of Karbala’.

The Imam pitched his tents there and to defend them dug a trench around them. Soon Ibn Ziyad’s army also arrived and camped at a distance from the tents of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). First there were talks of reconciliation between Imam (a.s.) and Ibn Ziyad. But without allegiance to Yazeed there was no possibility of peace and hence Imam (a.s.) prepared to lay down his life. When fighting ensued, one by one all, from the Imam’s side were martyred hungry and thirsty, except Imam Zainul Aabideen (a.s.). Imam Husayn (a.s.) bore every kind of atrocity but did not agree to pledge allegiance to Yazeed. Before his very eyes, his brother, Abbas, nephew, Qasim, his son, Ali Akbar, his nephews, Aun and Muhammad, Ali Asghar, his infant son, all of them were martyred. Hurr also repented and came to the side of Imam (a.s.) and finally attained martyrdom in the way of Allah.

Only Imam Zainul Aabideen (a.s.), who was ill at that time, survived. He accompanied the women and children and they were taken as prisoners to the Caliph at Damascus. This incident tells us of the extraordinary qualities of Imam Husayn (a.s.). It tells us that he had no attachment or expectation from the world and this life. There was nothing, which could equal his patience and steadfastness. Doubtlessly, he had all those qualities that are necessary in an infallible Imam and the successor of the Prophet. Let the enemies of the Progeny of Muhammad (S) say whatever they like, but the fact is that his praiseworthy qualities themselves tell us that he was a rightful successor of the Messenger of Allah (S).

Here, we call your attention to an incident with Hurr that shows the astounding perfection of the selflessness of Imam Husayn (a.s.). When Hurr stopped Imam (a.s.) from moving to Kufa, Hurr and his entourage were almost dying of thirst. Hurr requested Imam (a.s.) for water. Imam (a.s.) had sufficient stocks of water that was offered to Hurr and his entourage. After that, Imam (a.s.) said the horses of Hurr were also thirsty and they should also be watered. Some people from his group suggested they exercise restraint in using the stocks of water, because it was a scarce commodity and there might be shortage in near future. Imam (a.s.) said that it was not a right thing that human beings should drink water and animals remain thirty.

In brief, Imam (a.s.) gave plenty of water to the enemies and their beasts, and he did not deprive them in view of his future needs. O Allah! What an occasion that within a few days, the same Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his followers very subjected to sanction against water. Why shouldn’t it be so? He was an infallible Imam. Who other than an infallible can act in this way? The fact is that it behoved him to act in this manner and his enemies had to act in the opposing manner. The same situation had occurred with the father of Imam Husayn (a.s.), Ali al-Murtadha’ (a.s.). It is when Ali (a.s.) had to face Muawiyah in battle, a situation arose when the army of Ali (a.s.) had no access to water.

The Euphrates was under Muawiyah’s control. Ali (a.s.) tried to seek the permission of the enemies to draw water from Euphrates. Muawiyah who never knew to be kind to his opponent, rejected this request of Amirul Mo-mineen (a.s.). After this, Ali (a.s.) inflicted military defeat to Muawiyah’s army and gained the control of Euphrates. Then Muawiyah helplessly requested Ali (a.s.) for access to water. Amirul Mo-mineen (a.s.) at once issued the permission and said: “River is such a thing in which the beasts and birds all have the right to fulfill their needs. No one can be restrained from it.”

People of justice can very well conclude from this action of Ali (a.s.), how aloof he was from the material world. He had never confronted Muawiyah for gaining any material benefit. Doubtlessly, such an action could only be possible by an infallible person. Such situations that were encountered by Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his father do not have any equal in the world. And these are such situations that clearly present the infallibility of the Imams of the family of the Prophet.

O Allah! Bless Muhammad and the Progeny of Muhammad.

What a pity that Imam Husayn and Imam Ali (a.s.) acted so benevolently but an opposite stand was taken by their respective opponents, Yazeed and Muawiyah. These situations present the vast difference between an infallible and a non- infallible person. Thus, when Imam Husayn (a.s.) supplied water to the foe’s army, it is not surprising. He was following the example of his respected father. If he had not acted in this way, what else could he have done? Indeed, how can Bani Umayyah or other people compare with the Ahlul Bayt of the Prophet? They are exact opposites.

The Ahlul Bayt of Prophet performed such feats at every step, pondering on which we could realize that Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) are very much different from others. The difference between an infallible and fallible is at once obvious. In order to realize this difference, we need a clear heart. But those whose hearts are filled with animosity of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) could not discern this.

At this time, there are thousands of defective people whose eyes cannot perceive the merits of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). Each one to his own fortune. O Allah! What Providence! Hurr was also from this same group of oppressors. But when he realized the truth, he gave up all the material wealth and position and walked the path to martyrdom and salvation.

Yet Ibn Ziyad, Ibn Saad, Khuli and Hurmala continued to be blind to this reality. They fell into the chastisement of Hell like blind people. The fact is that a person can become a devotee of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) only when the Almighty bestows him with good sense (Taufeeq) of this devotion. The writer himself remembers his own time when during his student days, he considered Imam Husayn (a.s.) a traitor against the Caliphate.

And since Allah gave divine good sense to him, he began to believe in the Imamate of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) after considering them infallible. Allah gave this great divine sense (Taufeeq) to him in the same way as Hurr was given. The situation of the writer was more serious, because although he was a descendant of Bani Hashim and yet he harbored enmity with the Progeny of the Prophet. Curse be on such education, which does not allow one to realize the rights of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.).

Praise be to Allah and Praise once again that Allah gave us the good sense to research facts on the basis of which we were prevented from being counted among Bani Umayyah and their cohorts.

Indeed, the tragedy of Karbala’ was an astounding occurrence and Islam was very much in need of it. This incident has proved the veracity of Islam. It has shown how the Quranic teachings of patience and contentment could be transformed into actions. How we can be away from material greed that is criticized in the Quran. Many of the merits of the Holy Quran were unveiled by this incident. It has shown what is religiousness and how it is different from worldly matters. It has shown that religiousness is such a courage that cannot be in the share of a materialist. It has shown us that pulling out the sword in the way of Allah is different and arranging rows in greed for kingdom is different.

The same incident has shown how a man of the world can remain steadfast on the way of Allah. How he prefers the will of Allah and how he considers the life of this world worthless.

In brief, Imam (a.s.) has expounded the merits of the Holy Quran. Now if some evil-minded person has not realized it, it is his misfortune.

Note

1. Refer Tarikh Tabari

Justification Of The Martyrdoms Of Imams Hasan And Husayn

Scholars have written that the Almighty Allah had bestowed every type of excellence on the Holy Prophet (S), except for the position of martyrdom. This exception is explained in the way that if he had been martyred directly, it would have been somewhat disrespectful for his stature. Therefore, this martyrdom was saved for his sons. In the view of the writer, this is a defective opinion.

First of all, how can martyrdom be disrespectful to any prophet? Secondly, if martyrdom is in anyway related to respect, how is it possible that it should apply to the Prophet but not for his grandsons? If martyrdom was a cause of disrespect for the Prophet, it should in the same way for his grandsons. According to the writer, this is not a valid explanation of the martyrdoms of Imams Hasan and Husayn (a.s.). Because, the fact seems to be that the martyrdoms of the grandsons was intended by Allah to prove the veracity of the Holy Quran.

Thus, this martyrdom proved the truthfulness of the claim of the prophethood of the Holy Prophet (S). Imam Hasan (a.s.) showed to the whole world the beautiful patience that the Quran has prescribed and Imam Husayn (a.s.) practically showed all the teachings of the Holy Quran.

O Allah! Bless Muhammad and the Progeny of Muhammad.

Infallibility and Fallibility of Imam Husayn

It should be clear that the incident of Karbala’ is as explained above. Now you can see it from any point of view that you like. Only those people consider Imam Husayn (a.s.) as the martyr who consider him infallible and the rightful successor of the Holy Prophet (S). But those who do not consider him infallible and the rightful successor of the Holy Prophet (S) cannot believe that he was a martyr. In such a situation, they cannot believe that he was oppressed. Thus, to consider Imam Husayn (a.s.) as a martyr, it is must to believe in his infallibility and rightful successorship of the Prophet.

It is evident that when infallibility was not accepted as a condition of Caliphate, what doubt can there be that Yazeed was a rightful Caliph? In such a situation, what can Imam Husayn (a.s.) be considered, except a traitor of Caliphate? How can anyone support this traitor and how can his killing be martyrdom? We are very surprised on those who believe in the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.) but deny his infallibility. It is a sect that does not keep in view the final outcome. Their mourning the calamities of Imam Husayn (a.s.) is a meaningless act. Such people may weep at their own misfortune, but they have no right to weep on Imam Husayn (a.s.).

There are also some who consider the Holy Prophet (S), the twelve Imams and Lady Fatima (s.a.) to be infallible. And only Shias perfectly believe in the guardianship (Wilayat) of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), though Ahlul Sunnat believe only in the Caliphate. These people consider the three Caliphs to be rightful, but act according to the practical laws of Ahlul Sunnat faith. This is a strange sect, which is neither completely Shia nor Sunni.

They do not understand that if the infallibility of the fourteen Infallibles is a fact, the Caliphate of the three Caliphs becomes meaningless. In such a situation, Ali (a.s.) being infallible, becomes the immediate successor of the Holy Prophet (S). Since even Ahlul Sunnat did not regard the three Caliphs as infallible, their superiority cannot be valid in comparison to Ali (a.s.). It is apparent that an infallible cannot be inferior. Thus, when on the basis of infallibility, Ali (a.s.) was superior to the three Caliphs, how can the three be regarded as rightful Caliphs?

It is surprising that one should believe that Ali (a.s.) was infallible and the three were not, but that in the matter of Caliphate one prefers the three Caliphs to Ali (a.s.)! Preferring a fallible person to an infallible one is against reason. It seems to be a very irrational matter that the successor of an infallible person like the Messenger of Allah (S), should also be fallible. In this way, the superiority of Abu Bakr and Umar is completely disproved. Although none of Ahlul Sunnat oppose this belief of superiority.

Doubtlessly, the Sunni sect that accepts the infallibility of the fourteen infallibles is a very weak sect. Without any doubt, the acceptance of infallibility of the Imams entails invalidation of the three Caliphs. The belief of the infallibility propounded by Shias is incompatible with the belief of the Caliphate, as followed by Ahlul Sunnat.

The Sunni sect that confesses to the infallibility of the fourteen infallibles seems to be devoted to Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) but they hardly follow the beliefs or practical law of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). They do not follow even a single practical law of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), their followers or their scholars. It is indeed a strange thing, that this sect gives much importance to the guardianship (Wilayat) of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) but they have no regard even for namesake, to the beliefs or worship acts of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.).

This sect usually follows the Hanafite School of law but some people of this sect follow the Shafei School. It is well known that this sect has got nothing to do with the roots and branches of faith of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) even though they always chant their names and make noise on the atrocities inflicted upon them.

We should know that a Muslim can either be a Sunni or a Shia but he cannot follow a religion between the two. The principles of Ahlul Sunnat religion are distinct from those of Shia faith. Both are faithful to their principles. But this sect has a strange admixture of both. It believes in the infallibility of Fourteen Infallibles, but in the matter of Caliphate, believes like Ahlul Sunnat do. How can these opposite beliefs find a place in the mind of a single person? It is beyond the understanding of this writer.

The Absurd Belief Of Tafzeeliya Sect

The situation of these people is indeed surprising. Shias cannot call them Shias, and Sunnis seem disinclined to call them Sunnis. The Tafzeeliya sect considers Ali (a.s.) superior to Abu Bakr and Umar. These people, like Shias, also believe in the five holy beings (Panjetan Paak). Apparently, it is a very weak faith.

It is well known that Shia and Sunni sects are particular about the principles of their religion, but the Tafzeeliya sect does not seem to follow any particular faith. I would like to present an example of the absurdity of this sect. It is well-known that the Tafzeeliya sect has special faith in Abdul Qadir Jilani like Ahlul Sunnat people, whereas Shias believe in Ali (a.s.) as the remover of difficulties. Sunnis invoke Ghaus Paak1 (Pure Refuge) just as Shias invoke the name of Ali (a.s.) during difficulties. It seems that Sunnis believe that Pir Dastagir (Helper Saint) accompanied the Holy Prophet (S) to Ascension.

On this night, the Holy Prophet (S) stepped on his shoulders and said: “My foot is on your shoulders and your foot is on the shoulders of all the saints (Awliya).” Apparently, this proves his superiority even to Ali al-Murtadha’ (a.s.) because the Holy Prophet (S) had made Ali (a.s.) climb his shoulders to break the idols as Ali (a.s.) was incapable to bear the weight of Prophethood. But in Ascension, the Holy Prophet (S) stepped on the shoulder of Piranepir (saint of saints), which shows that he had the strength to bear the weight of Prophethood. Also in addition to this, it is related that Pir became the Buraaq on the night of Ascension.

Another proof of his superiority mentioned in writings, is that one night Imam Hasan (a.s.) saw in dream the progeny of his brother, Imam Husayn (a.s.) that nine of them were to be Imams, while in his own progeny there no sign of any Imam. He was saddened due to this, but the Almighty Allah told him that he must not be sad and that from his progeny will come a person who shall be superior to the nine Imams from the progeny of Imam Husayn (a.s.).

And this was the same Abdul Qadir Jilani. We should know that this Tafzeeliya sect accords great respect to Abdul Qadir Jilani. But in the matter of his commands, they completely oppose him. He says in Ghaniyatu Talibeen that Ahlul Sunnat should believe that the Ummah of the Holy Prophet (S) is the best of all Ummahs.

Then they are best who have seen the Holy Prophet (S) and believed in him, testified him and followed him and fought with him against the infidels and sacrificed their lives and properties for Islam. Among them the best are the people who pledged allegiance to the Prophet at Hudaibiya, which is known as the Allegiance of Rizwan. They were 1400 persons in all. From them the best are the people of Badr. They were 313 people equal to the companions of Talut. Of them come the best forty who are known as Ahlul Darul Khizran,2 which after including Umar, come to forty.

Then of them are the ten, whose salvation was foretold by the Holy Prophet (S). They are: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali (a.s.), Talha, Zubair, Abdul Rahman Ibn Auf, Saad, Saeed and Abu Ubaidah Jarrah. Of them the best are the four righteous Caliphs. The most superior of the four is Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Uthman and then Ali (a.s.). The writer has remained content with the translation rather than give the original Arabic quotation to maintain brevity. Those who wish to refer to the original text may see it on Page no. 86 of Ghaniyatu Talibeen.

It should be clear that this is the actual belief of Ahlul Sunnat and Pir Dastagir (Abdul Qadir Jilani) also believed in this. Now the Tafzeeliya should tell us how they could consider Ali (a.s.) superior to Abu Bakr? The writer can show thousands of such examples how the Tafzeeliya sect opposes the commands of Ghausul Aazam (Abdul Qadir Jilani). The fact is that there is no limit to absurdity of the Tafzeeliya sect. The limit is that when they are defeated in debates, they at last say that the book of Ghaniyatu Talibeen was not written by Ghaus.

But the proof that it was indeed written by him as mentioned in numerous Sunni books. Even though the Tafzeeliya may deny it was so, the authentic books of Ahlul Sunnat like Fathul Ghaib, Kashfuz Zunoon and Sharh Fiqhul Akbar mention it. We should also know that this book is of scholarly level and I have referred to it as a majestic book, because this book of Ghaus explains in detail, the principles of Sunni faith. That is why it is absolutely opposed to the beliefs of Tafzeeliya. In brief, this book is exactly as a scholarly book of Ahlul Sunnat should be.

Notes

1. Abdul Qadir Jilani, also called Piranepir

2. People of the bamboo house.