Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Effect of Husayn’s Martyrdom on the Principle of Caliphate

In the past nations the appointment of the prophet’s caliph depended on divine will conveyed through divine text. At least this is what is proved from the stories and incidents of the Qur’an and other ancient books. Basically the same method should have been applicable for this nation also.

…the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah’s creation…1

And it is a fact. Thus the announcement:

Allah creates what He pleases; when He has decreed a matter…2

It limits the responsibilities of creation and selection to the Being of the Almighty. And as for the firm text:

And it behoves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Apostle, he surely strays off a manifest straying.3

It does not even permit the intellectuals to say anything about caliphate.

On the basis of this alone the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) in Ghadeer Khumm acting upon the command of:

O Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord…4

Appointed Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali bin Abi Talib (a.s) as his successor before thousands of people. And the unambiguous statement of: ‘Of whomsoever I am the master, this ‘Ali is also his master’ did not have any scope for doubt and uncertainty. Even those who had some ulterior plans for the future were compelled to say: “Congratulations to you, O ‘Ali, today you have become my master and the master of all the believing men and women.”

However, this expression of faith and confession during the lifetime of the Prophet very soon after his departure from the world was sacrificed at the altar of selfish motives. The time arrived to snatch the reins of power from the hands of the legatee of the Prophet so that their evil wishes may be fulfilled. On the other hand ‘Ali bin Abi Talib (a.s) was busy in the funeral arrangements while some people with vested interests assembled in Saqifah Bani Sa’dah to fight over the caliphate. After numerous bitter arguments and fights, the high handedness of Umar at last placed the crown of caliphate on the head of Abu Bakr. And in this way, in place of the ancient principle of “divine appointment” the self-made principle of “consensus” was forced upon the community.

Now the time of Abu Bakr’s demise approached. In consonance with the principle of:

Is the reward of goodness aught but goodness?5

Abu Bakr wanted to see Umar occupying his place after him. But…someone should not consider “divine appointment” and “testament of the previous caliph” as synonymous. Because the one who becomes a caliph on the basis of the testament of the previous caliph, his caliphate depends only on this testament. The previous caliph only by his command compels the community to submit before the caliph of his choice and in this way all the responsibility of appointing the caliph and all the choice come together in the being of the former caliph. God and His Prophet have no connection with it. On the contrary, even though the revealing of “divine appointment” is based on the statement of the Prophet or the previous Imam, the actual choices of appointment and actual responsibilities are confined to the Being of the Almighty, and the Prophet or the previous Imam is only having a position of mouthpiece or informant in this matter and this difference is sufficient for the superiority of these two.

The circumstances were such that nothing could be done about it.6

The problem was that due to the negative reputation of Umar it was very unlikely that the method of “consensus” would help him in obtaining caliphate. Therefore, after two years and some months, ignoring the same principle of “consensus”, the former caliph appointed Umar as his successor through bequest.

And now it began to be said that along with consensus, the testament of the previous caliph is also an acceptable and valid method of caliphate.

In any case, some time passed in this way. Until the time Umar was wounded and felt his death approaching fast. Like before, this time too the staging of consensus was not risk-free. Umar’s statement that: ‘Now, the allegiance of Abu Bakr was an accident and Allah saved the people from its mischief,’ conveys this same precaution. It should not happen that the claimant appointed by the Prophet should succeed. There were other contingencies also that only Umar understood, that he did not want to himself make a bequest for anyone in particular. That is why, “This time the caliphate took up a new form and a committee of six persons was formed. Though apparently ‘Ali was also included in it, the rulers were such that only the one who was having the same opinions as Umar, had any chance to succeed.”

This incident on one hand bestowed caliphate to Uthman and on the other provided the community with yet another principle of caliphal appointment. Now along with consensus and testament, the ‘Shura’ also became a valid method of appointing a caliph.

Since at the end of the third period, the Islamic community has thrown aside from its neck every illegal compulsion and influence and the slain caliph had not been able to make arrangement for the next caliph after him according to his wishes, all the Muslims unanimously submitted to the original caliph selected by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). However, in this long period, moods had changed and a caliphate based on justice and truth was problematic to people inclined towards falsehood, therefore, first of all Talha and Zubair instigated Ayesha to participate in the Battle of Jamal so that this caliphate may be exterminated. After that Muawiyah began to enact bloody dramas on the plains of Siffeen.

Those who considered Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali bin Abi Talib (a.s) as the Prophet’s successor according to “divine appointment”, for them everyone who forsook the legitimate caliph deserved the death penalty. But those who considered consensus as the basis of this caliphate, for them these battles were very patience-testing. Because it was harming their self-conceited beliefs of “all companions are just” and “My companions are like stars, you follow anyone and you shall achieve guidance.” Therefore in order to give legitimacy to this method, a supposed prophetic tradition was obtained that: “If allegiance is given to two claimants of caliphate at the same time, then war must be waged against the one whose allegiance is later.”7

Note this! Those battles provided yet another criterion of caliphate.

After the martyrdom of Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s), Imam Hasan (a.s) reached the position of Imamate according to “divine appointment.” The intrigues of Muawiyah compelled the military officials of Imam Hasan (a.s) to act as his agents and Imam Hasan (a.s) could not have any choice but sign the treaty with Muawiyah and abdicate. According to the rule of: “whatever happened is appropriate and legal”, Muawiyah who had become eligible for death penalty due to the rule of: “When two persons reach caliphate…”, now was the rightful caliph. In order to accord legitimacy to his caliphate, which was achieved through fraud and deceit, the fourth principle of “force and power” was added to the legal methods of attaining caliphate.

(2) The most significant aspect of the British Constitution is that there are many things in it such that no details are written about them. Whatever tradition has continued from the past governments has become a precedent for the future governments. So much so that there is no explanation even about the post of the Prime Minister and his duties and rights and the axis of the British kingdom rests only on tradition. That is why it is called the unwritten constitution and the scholars of civilization consider it a unique example of its kind. However, probably they do not know that 1300 years ago the Muslim majority also, in designing the principle of caliphate had presented such an example of not only “unwritten constitution”, but also an unsettled constitution that its equal has not been seen yet.

After getting deviated from the straight path the further you go the further you shall become from destination. From 11 A.H. to 41 A.H. the Muslim majority continued to wander like the Bani Israel of the valley of Tiyah, and remained ignorant of the path of salvation. People of a discerning mind would have noted that the events did not conform to principles, rather the principles were made to conform to the events. In this brief time period, from testament to consensus and until force and power, no principle remained but that it was put into practice and taken advantage of depending upon the existing circumstances and contingencies. In the present laws of governance, I also do not know of any method, which is beyond those principles. Consequently, today every Muslim ruler is eligible to call himself “caliph of the Prophet” and no acceptable reason could be presented to expel him from this circle. The result of this all-embracing nature of the principle of caliphate was that Yazid also became the “caliph of the Muslims” and he, in fact, has conformed most to the principles of caliphate.8

Of the four elements of caliphate, Muawiyah, under the pretext of Hajj undertook a journey to Hijaz and he deceived the people there with his golden diplomacy to fulfill the condition of consensus. “Testament” was something that is for the time of death. That was also fulfilled at the deathbed. Also in a prolonged struggle Yazid achieved such power and force that the Islamic history fails to show anything equal to it.

In this connection, the following statements of Muawiyah are worth noting:

“O my son! I have made the stiff necks to humble for you. I have made the towns firm on your caliphate, and this kingdom and whatever it contains, is made into a tasty morsel for you.”9

In brief, it could be said that the child of Saqifah consensus was bred in the lap of “Shura” with the support of Muawiyah’s bequest and reached the highest stages of “force and domination.” And in this way his person was a synthesis of all the ‘principles of caliphate’.

(3) All the caliphs that preceded Yazid could fulfill only one of the principles of caliphate. Abu Bakr hid behind “consensus”, Umar was made the caliph by testament, Uthman reached the venerable position with the help of “Shura” (consultative committee) and Muawiyah obtained caliphate through force and domination.

If the appointed successor of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) had expressed his aloofness from these principles and in order to prove their falsity taken practical steps and armed struggle against the above caliphs there would have been only two possibilities, martyrdom or victory. And both these would have created some very dangerous misunderstandings.

If Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) or Imam Hasan (a.s) had confronted a particular caliph and got themselves martyred, people would have thought that these gentlemen only considered that particular principle illegitimate, through which that person had become a caliph. And they would have considered other methods valid and correct. What else could be concluded from their silence in other methods and opposing one method?

Also if each of them had opposed one caliph and as a result laid down their lives to martyrdom, in addition to other drawbacks it would have given birth to the accusation that these people, generation after generation have made it a habit to rise up for rulership and their practical protest would have been labeled as “family tradition”, reducing its significance and, by giving it a political color, destroyed its religious and divine status.

And if in both cases, instead of martyrdom, they had achieved victory, and if these gentlemen had succeeded in taking over the administration and control of this apparent caliphate this would have been, in fact, the greatest failure because in that case the public would have considered their caliphate to be based on force and domination. They would have forgotten that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) has mentioned their “divine appointment.” They would have only considered the immediate cause. In this way, if a false principle was aimed to be destroyed, another one would have come into existence at their own hands and it would have been a great catastrophe.

That is why, in order to remove all misconceptions about their acceptance, they continued to protest verbally but they did not pay attention to any practical or military step in this regard.

The method of divine will towards falsehood is that no haste is exercised in taking revenge. Rather opportunities are created, respite is given, and restraint is exercised. Until the time falsehood reaches its pinnacle and a stage when there is no possibility of its return to truth. At that time it is given such a kick that all its foundations are demolished and it is made a lesson for all those who seek it:

And let not those who disbelieve think that Our granting them respite is better for their souls; We grant them respite only that they may add to their sins; and they shall have a disgraceful chastisement.10

The hidden wisdom is that, falsehood in its initial stages, resembles truth in such a way that a cursory glance cannot distinguish between the two. “Doubt is named doubt because it resembles truth.”11 And during this period its uprooting will not create any beneficial results. Therefore, Providence waits for a time when falsehood reaches such a high stage that it seems to be superior to truth:

That Allah might separate the impure from the good, and put the impure, some of it upon the other, and pile it up together, then cast it into hell…12

According to:

And you do not please except that Allah please…13

The caliphs appointed by the Messenger also followed this method. Abu Bakr and Umar etc. used to call themselves followers of Islam and to some extent acted upon its apparent rituals. In that period, falsehood had not completely separated from truth and Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) had to wait for that time when the deep veil is removed from the face of falsehood. Imam Hasan (a.s) also spent his life in truce, waiting for the same and Imam Husayn (a.s) also remained quiet for ten years due to the same reason. Until the time after Muawiyah’s death, when the seat of caliphate became soiled with the feet of Yazid. The time finally arrived for which the caliphs of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) had been waiting.

(4) If you glance at the battle of Karbala’ from the angle of the principles of caliphate you will see that on one side is Yazid behind whose back is the ferocious wolf of “consensus”, shielded by the excuse of “Shura”, having the support of bequest and the facade of “force and domination.”

On the other hand is Husayn (a.s) who is the claimant of Imamate but instead of being shielded by any self-concocted formula he has with him only the “appointment of the Messenger.” His companions have the collar of his allegiance but this allegiance is not like the principles of ‘consensus’ based on the “previous allegiance” so that it be said that it was given after the allegiance of Yazid.

Now let us see the features of both the parties in the mirror of reality.

You will see that even though Husayn (a.s) was unarmed of all those supposed proofs, but according to the sayings of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) his reputed personality was deserving of honor and respect of all the Muslims without any exception. The verse of purification is witness on the purity of his actions.

Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.14

The verse of Malediction has certified that he is the son of the Messenger.

Come let us call our sons and your sons…15

The verse of Devotion (Mawaddah) says that love and devotion towards him is obligatory on all.

Say: I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives…16

His expedients are expedients of the Messenger. “Husayn is from me and I am from Husayn.” He is a blossom (beloved) of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). “The two of them are blossoms.” He is the leader of the youths of Paradise. “Hasan and Husayn are the chiefs of the youths of Paradise.” And finally the following saying of the Prophet is a clear proof for his Imamate, “The two of them are Imams, be they sitting or standing.” On the other hand Yazid, though he was a caliph of Muslims conforming to the laid down ‘principles’, his evil deeds were known to all. Among his black handiworks, apart from destroying the Prophet’s family are numerous other deeds. Some of them are mentioned below for the readers: (1) He was a denier in the coming of angels and revelation. (2) He considered the prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) as a pretext to obtaining temporal power and kingdom. (3) He imbibed wine openly. (4) He was an ardent fan of chess and music. (5) He loved dance and lute. (6) He committed incest. (7) He played with dogs and monkeys. (9) He dishonored the sanctified Mecca. (10) He showered the Holy Ka’ba with burning missiles and its curtain was burnt down and its building suffered serious damage. (11) He defiled the sanctity of the tomb of the Prophet. (12) He converted the Prophet’s mosque into a stable. (13) He martyred hundreds of companions. (14) After his forces attacked Medina, one thousand illegitimate children were born due to the rapes committed by them on Medinite ladies.

All the above atrocities are recorded in the pages of Islamic history.

Husayn (a.s), with his magnificent personality, arrayed himself to confront Yazid. By this step he removed the veils from the eyes of unaware Muslims. Though ‘principles’ demanded that Yazid should be accorded a greater status than the first three caliphs, the fact was that, leave alone calling him a caliph, it was hardly right to call him a human being.

There is a tradition of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) accepted as authentic by both the sects (Shia and Sunni) that:

“One who dies without recognizing the Imam of the time, dies the death of ignorance.” If Husayn (a.s) who confronted Yazid while claiming Imamate and even after being martyred not only became eligible for Paradise, but he himself is the Chief of the youths of Paradise, it clearly implied that Yazid was definitely not the Imam of his time. And since the claim of Imamate and caliphate was limited to Husayn and Yazid, its absence in Yazid necessarily proves the Imamate of Husayn (a.s).

But the problem is that this matter does not end here. The caliphate of Yazid, as I have mentioned time and again, was a collection of consensus, Shura, testament and force and domination. While Husayn (a.s) considered his Imamate to have divine sanction. Therefore the success of Husayn (a.s) could not be said to be the personal victory of Husayn (a.s) alone. In fact it was the victory of ‘divine appointment’. Victory, against whom? Against ‘consensus’, against ‘Shura’, against ‘nomination’ and against ‘force and domination’. On the day of Ashura the martyrdom of Husayn (a.s) by defeating all those false deities clarified the rightfulness of Qur’anic principle of ‘divine appointment’.

The truth has come and the falsehood has vanished; surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing).17

The sycophants of Yazid’s time were another matter, today all the Islamic world is unanimous that by his sacrifice, Husayn (a.s) made fresh blood to flow in the dead veins of Islam; although Yazid had, by his words and deeds, left no stone unturned to bury it alive. Today the word ‘Yazid’ is considered an abusive epithet and the name of Husayn (a.s) with all its magnificence has covered the whole humanity. And along with this, the world is also compelled to submit to the principles that were saved by the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s).

This essay is throughout ‘scholastic’. Historical events are mentioned as backgrounds; therefore even the lengthiest narrations are condensed and presented in the briefest form. In this way the actual texts are disregarded. On the basis of historical popularity, most of the incidents are presented without providing references, however if anyone is interested he or she may refer to the books of history for complete details and they may also refer to the author’s book, Imamate.

Notes

1. Surah Rum 30:30

2. Surah Aale Imran 3:47

3. Surah Ahzab 33:36

4. Surah Maidah 5:67

5. Surah Rahman 55:60

6. Urdu couplet

7. Marratul Tahqeeq

8. For details refer to books of Islamic History like, Tarikh Ibne Khaldun, Tarikh Asim Kufi and Tarikh Tabari etc.

9. Amali, Saduq and all books of Islamic history

10. Surah Aale Imran 3:178

11. Nahjul Balagha

12. Surah Anfal 8:37

13. Surah Insan 76:30

14. Surah Ahzab 33:33

15. Surah Aale Imran 3:61

16. Surah Shura 42:23

17. Surah Bani Israel 17:81

Azadari and Innovation

On the day of Ashura the drums of victory were beating in the army of Yazid and wails arose from the camps of Husayn (a.s). But very soon the eyes of the world also saw that in spite of having used unlimited material means, Yazid failed miserably to vanquish Husayn (a.s). Neither could Yazidism take away the magnificent remembrance of Husayn (a.s) from the hearts, nor could it erase the sanctified mention from the tongues. Peace be on the slain one whose tomb lies in the hearts of his devotees. History testifies that from the time of Yazid until date, in every period and every century an organized propaganda is unleashed so that people do not continue to remember Husayn (a.s), but we see that day by day this name continues to become more and more illuminated, and the devotion towards Husayn (a.s) appeals to people of all faiths and communities.

They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouths, and Allah will not consent save to perfect His light, though the unbelievers are averse.1

Every dry and wet thing shall flow away in the flood of death. However the name of Husayn Ibn ‘Ali shall remain intact.2

For sometime the communal riots had silenced the flames of opposition to Azadari3 but recent news reports suggest that as soon as peace returned this spark is again ignited and blown by the selfish motives to demolish the structure of Islamic unity. Now vested interests have started calling the custom of Azadari to be a religious innovation.

These opponents of Azadari beguile the masses by saying that weeping is an innovation, Ta’ziyah4 is an innovation, Alam5 is an innovation, Majlis6 is an innovation, Ma’tam7 is an innovation, this is an innovation, that is an innovation. Thus for these people wearing the glasses of bigotry everything in the rituals of Azadari seems to be innovation and nothing else. And they are so much terrified of the furor of innovation that even before the commencement of Muharram these people depart for a tour of the countryside.

First of all I invite the people of taste to contemplate that even if Azadari is an innovation, how can it be expelled from the circle of honor and entered into the circle of prohibition?

What is innovation (Bid’ah)?

Innovation is generally defined as something new created after the completion of religion or it denotes the invention of new beliefs and rituals after the passing away of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w).8 In the same way Majmaul Bahrayn defines Bid’ah as:

“That which was not present in the period of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) is an innovation.”

Keeping these definitions in mind, not only Azadari but all the sciences and arts, which have safeguarded the survival of Islam, all of them seem to be wearing the label of ‘innovation’.

The present arrangement of the Holy Qur’an is innovation. The diacritics on the text of the Holy Qur’an are innovation. To transcribe it in the Naskh script is innovation. To bring out Qur’anic commentaries in book form is an innovation. Collecting traditions through new methods is an innovation. The science of narrators of traditions for determining their authenticity is an innovation. The study of sources to check the authenticity of traditional reports is an innovation. Compilation of jurisprudential works is innovation. Teaching and learning scholastic theology is innovation. Let us now move ahead… To select a caliph through consensus is innovation. Formation of a Shura consultative committee to select a caliph is innovation. The Tarawih9 Prayer is innovation. To derive the religious laws through analogy is innovation. To establish the public treasury is innovation. So much so, that even wearing the Sherwani10 is innovation. Conducting transactions through paper money is innovation. If you apply this criterion whatever was not present during the time of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) is all innovation and every innovation is prohibited.

If being an innovation, Azadari should be given up then we must say goodbye to the Hijri calendar and every type of religious education must be struck off. So much so, that even the recitation of Qur’an printed on paper must be avoided. And most important of all, the caliphate of the first three caliphs must also be weeded out from the garden of Sunnism.

…is as an evil tree pulled up from the earth’s surface; it has no stability.11

The source of all the sorrows and the root of all these evils is that Ahl al-Sunnah scholars have conditioned the minds of general public to regard all innovations as deviations and all the deviations lead to Hell fire. Although to consider every innovation and method to be prohibited is a mistaken notion. Both sects believe in fact that everything is permitted until its prohibition is not mentioned. Therefore the best thing would have been if they had pondered whether this innovation comes under prohibition or not, before labeling Azadari as innovation and misleading the general public. If it is possible to have it included among the prohibited deeds through a legal argument, then indeed to encourage people from refraining from it would be the greatest service to Islam.

But if you do (it) not and never shall you do (it), then be on your guard against the fire of which men and stones are the fuel; it is prepared for the unbelievers.12

Instead of getting oneself deviated by selfish motives and slaughtering the law of the Prophet it would have been better for them to commit suicide.

The great Ahl al-Sunnah scholar, Imam Asqalani says in Fathul Bari Sharh Sahih Bukhari to the effect that:

It is well-known among the majority that innovation, can be divided into all types of acts. The compilation of scholastic theology is an example of obligatory innovation. Recommended innovation is writing of scholarly books and establishment of religious schools. Permissible innovation includes new types of dishes. Detestable innovation is spending so much on food and clothes as does not reach the level of wasteful expenditure. And prohibited innovation, according to the people of truth is to rise up in revolt and everything opposed to the Shariah whose prohibition is proved.

Shia scholars have also explained this. Thus the Shahid Thani (Second Martyr) (a.r.) says in Sharh Lumah:

“It is said that all innovation is not prohibited. Rather some people have divided it into four types of actions.”

After these explanations what intelligent person can say that the circle ‘all innovation is deviation’ also includes things which are in the position of obligatory, recommended and permitted? Keeping the same things in view, the First Martyr, (Shahid Awwal) (r.a.) has said: “Matters that developed after the period of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) are of various types. In our opinion innovation is applicable only to those things that fall under the prohibited category.

It is thus clarified that the standard of permissibility and impermissibility is not whether it existed in the time of the Prophet (s.a.), rather we should check whether the particular act conforms to the divine will or not.

Azadari rituals conform to Divine Will

How do we explain the rituals of Azadari? It could be briefly explained as: To establish the remembrance of the immortal tragedy of Karbala’ and “to express ones grief and sorrow on this tragic event.” Now we should see if the remembrance of the events of the righteous predecessors conforms to divine will or not. What I feel is that, the Almighty Allah through the religious law, made us committed to always remember His proximate ones and keep their feats in our view. In the five-times daily prayers we utter at least ten times:

“Guide us on the right path. The path of those on whom You have bestowed favors.”13

The point worth noting is that until we do not honor and respect the feats of the proximate servants of God, and do not keep their sacrifices in our view, the actual purport of the above invocation cannot be realized.

Now lets move further and glance at the parts and method of another great pillar of Islam, viz. Hajj. You will see that in the rituals of Hajj from the beginning until the end, the complete episode of Prophet Ibrahim and Prophet Ismail (a.s) is sketched.

Why has ‘Sayy’ (jogging) between Mt. Safa and Mt. Marwah been made compulsory? It is only because Lady Hajrah had ran between these two hills with infant Ismail (a.s) in search of water. And that is the reason why the Holy Qur’an, ignoring the great peaks of the Himalayas and Pamirs, honored by calling these two small hillocks as ‘signs of Allah’.

Today the Zamzam water is considered the best gift from a Hajj pilgrim. Why is it so? Is not the cause of this greatness only and only that this water spring erupted at the command of Allah to quench the thirst of Ismail?

The 8th of Zilhajj is called the Day of Tarwiyah only because it was on the night preceding this day when Ibrahim (a.s) had seen the dream in which he was slaughtering his son and the whole of next day he spent in contemplation.

The 9th of Zilhajj is called the ‘Day of Arafah’ only because on that day he had received the realization (Irfan) of sacrificing his son. The rituals of both these days are promulgated in remembrance of those same incidents.

To perform the sacrifice at Mina on the 10th of Zilhajj is an important duty of Hajj. Pages of History tell us about the reason behind it.

On the same day at the same place, Prophet Ibrahim (a.s) had tried to sacrifice Ismail (a.s) with his own hands in the path of God. Though the scribes of the tablet of ‘erasing and rewriting’ selected a ram in place of Ismail (a.s), however, the Holy Qur’an has kept the memory of this sacrifice alive and called all the animals of sacrifice as ‘signs of Allah’.

…and whoever respects the signs of Allah, this surely is (the outcome) of the piety of hearts.14

These events prove that it is one of the ancient practices of Almighty Allah to keep the memory of past events alive and it is His continuing habit. Yes, the condition is that those events should be connected to His selected servants.

Now I would like to ask whether Husayn (a.s) was not among the proximate ones of the Almighty? Were his events not extremely significant? For the sake of Allah, act with justice! When the incomplete sacrifice of Ismail (a.s) is so much dear to Allah that He made it a pillar of Islam then would He not like the remembrance of the ‘great sacrifice’? Which is having such terrible aspects that the sacrifice of Ismail (a.s) is nowhere equal to it in anyway. If like other Muslim sects the Shias had also allowed modifications in the Islamic law after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) the rituals of Azadari are so important that they would have been also included among obligatory acts like Hajj etc. But still it cannot be denied that it conforms to the Divine will.

…the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah’s creation…15

If we present the scenes of the events of Karbala’ before the people and year after year express our anguish and sorrow for the tragedy, what objections can be leveled against it? We only do that which we see the Almighty doing.

Those who object that Shias practice seasonal grief should note that the events of Ibrahim and Ismail (a.s) have been regulated by divine timetable and accept their folly.

Azadari of Husayn (a.s) is not Innovation

Now let me explain that the Azadari of Husayn (a.s) is not included among the ‘events after the Prophet’. Rather the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) had performed it. Please pay attention to the following narration of Allamah Ibn Hajar Makki, which he has quoted on the authority of Shobi and also Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal:

Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s) said: One day I came to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) and saw tears in his eyes. I asked, “Has someone angered you?” Why are there tears in your eyes?” The Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said, “A little while ago Jibraeel told me that Husayn shall be slain at the banks of Euphrates. Jibraeel asked me if I would like to get the soil of that place so that I can smell it. I said, ‘Yes.’ Thus Jibraeel extended his hands and then gave me a handful of soil, due to which tears flow from my eyes.”

This tradition informs us that weeping for Imam Husayn (a.s) is not only permissible, rather it is the Sunnah (practice) of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) and according to:

…whatever the Apostle gives you, accept it…16

It is obligatory for us to emulate it. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) was so much upset when he heard the forecast of the martyrdom of his beloved grandchild. Pay attention to this. If the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) had been alive after the incident of Karbala’, what his condition would have been? And how he must have made elaborate arrangements for the Azadari of his son?

This incident also contains the point worth noting that in spite of the fact that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) loved Husayn (a.s) to an indescribable degree and Husayn was himself present before the eyes of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) and he (the Prophet) was also given the news of the martyrdom but in order to create more intensity in the emotion of grief he felt it necessary that he sends for the soil of the place of Husayn’s martyrdom and smell it. The sentence: “Jibraeel extended his hands and then gave me a handful of soil, due to which tears flow from my eyes,” tells us that if we also keep before us the water skin, the standard, the Taboot,17 Ta’ziyah, Tauq,18 Zanjeer,19 cradle and arrow in order to increase our emotions of grief it would exactly be according to the verse of Qur’an:

…you have in the Apostle of Allah an excellent exemplar…20

And it would be a perfect emulation of the practice of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). Before the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s), except for soil of the place of his martyrdom no other article was available which could have spurred the sorrowful emotion, therefore he had to be content upon this much. Now after the martyrdom when we are aware of all the details of the martyrdom and it is also possible to picture them in our imagination, why should we not express them all? So that we could form as much detailed imagination as is possible and to give as much condolence as is possible to the personality of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) for his grief?

Although this tradition, along with the Azadari of Husayn (a.s) also proves the justification of all the things connected with Husayn I feel that I should present the justification of some pillars of Azadari in brief, based on the events of the time of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w).

Nauha103 and Majlis104

The following incident is recorded in Madarijun Nubuwwah, Maarijun Nubuwwah and other books as well. It is that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) did not weep for anyone as much as he did for His Eminence, Hamzah. He stood before the bier of Hamzah, wept and that also loudly, and so much so that he fainted. He used to say:

“O Hamzah! O uncle of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w)! O lion of Allah and His Prophet! O one who performed the good deeds. O Hamzah, O one who removed the sorrows, O Hamzah! O one who removed the enemies from the face of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w).”

The above blessed words of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) clearly justify the dirges and mournful poetry that is recited in the rituals of Azadari.

…who has a heart or he gives ear and is a witness.21

After that when the ladies of Medina began to lament upon the martyrs of Uhad and the sound of lamentation from the house of His Eminence, Hamzah did not reach the blessed ears of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w), he exclaimed sadly: “Alas! There is no lady to lament the death of my uncle, Hamzah!” When the Helpers (Ansar) heard this, they sent their ladies to the house of Hamzah and they arrived there and immediately organized a mourning assembly and began to weep and wail. When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) heard their wails he prayed for them that may the Almighty Allah be pleased with them, with their children and grandchildren.

This incident, beyond any doubt proves that to mourn the martyrdom of one who has laid down his life in the path of God, the collective loud wailing of a large number of people is not only a legitimate act, it is in accordance with the direction of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w).

…sufficient as a witness…22

Keeping this incident in mind which is a perfect proof, please pay attention to the following narration of Abdullah Ibn Umar that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said: “The weeping of the living causes chastisement to the dead one. Even if we disregard the fact that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) had expressed the desire for ladies to weep on His Eminence, Hamzah and he prayed good for those who wept, how can you explain away the verse of Qur’an that says:

…and no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another…23

Does this verse not refute the above statement? Now side by side this, also pay attention to the report of the respectable traditionist, Ayesha, who when told about the above report of Abdullah Ibn Umar that ‘the dead are punished because of the weeping of the living ones’, said, “May Allah forgive him, he has not lied intentionally. He has either forgotten or misunderstood. The fact is that some Jews were weeping for a person who had died in their community and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was passing that way. He (s.a.w) said: “These people are weeping for him though he is involved in divine punishment in his grave. (Refer to chapter of weeping for the dead). All sects accept this tradition.

After this there remains no point in further analyzing or discussing the report of Abdullah Ibn Umar.

Taboot and Ta’ziyah

Making a Ta’ziyah and paying homage to it is labeled as idol worship. Though it is foolishness to call a replica of a non-living thing as an idol, and that too from the tongues of those whose traditional reports prove that it is recommended to make the replica of even living things. Ayesha is reported to have said:

“I used to play with my doll in the presence of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) and some of my friends used to play with me. When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) used to enter they hid themselves from him. Then the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) used to send them to play with me again.” Muhaddith Dehlavi, in explanation of this tradition says, “It is permitted to make a doll and play with it.”24

Anyway, let us move away from this discussion. If you want to hear the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) speak of making a replica of a grave see the following traditional report:

A companion told the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) that he has vowed to kiss the threshold of Paradise and the Hourul Ein.25 The Holy Prophet (s.a.w) told him: Go and kiss the feet of your mother and the forehead of your father. He asked what he should do if his parents were not alive anymore? He was told to kiss their grave. Again he asked what he should do if he didn’t know where their grave was? The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) told him to, “Draw two lines and consider one as the grave of the mother and the other as the grave of the father and kiss them, and do not break your vow.”

This tradition is itself so detailed and self-explanatory that there seems no need of further elaboration.

Ma’tam

If I am unable to present an instance of Ma’tam26 (Chest beating) during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) it is perhaps due to my shortsightedness. However, the following incident is sufficient enough to prove my claim:

Mutawakkil ordered that Ma’tam should be held at the place where funeral prayer was recited on the bier of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal. Thus 2.5 million people gathered at that place and Muslims, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and people of four schools performed Ma’tam there.

This is the same Mutawakkil who had tried to erase even the traces of the tomb of the blessed son of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). But today he is so much moved at the death of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal that he himself is arranging for Ma’tam and in following him the four schools of thought mourn the tragedy. So much so, that the figure of people performing Ma’tam reaches to 2.5 millions, and at that time no one felt the need to say anything against it, that Ma’tam is an innovation. Rather histories describe the event in a boastful way.

But you should not think that the same tone and same acceptance is expressed in case of the Ma’tam of Husayn (a.s). Allamah Suyuti writes in Tarikhul Khulafa in the account of Caliph Muit that: “Women performed Ma’tam for Husayn (a.s) and this was the first time that Nauha was done for Husayn (a.s) in Baghdad and this innovation (Bid’ah) continued for many years.” Its really a great pity that in the view of the great scholars of Islam, the respect of the son of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) is not equal to that of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

In the end I only wish to state that time is such a medicine that cures even the deepest wounds; but the grief for Husayn (a.s) is such that even after the passage of so many centuries it still retains its original freshness. This itself is the proof that the mourning for Husayn (a.s) is having Divine assistance.

Notes

1. Surah Taubah 9:32

2. Urdu couplet

3. Mourning rituals for the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.)

4. An effigy of the tomb of Imam Husayn (a.s.)

5. A replica signifying the standard carried by His Eminence, Abbas in the battle of Karbala’

6. A mourning assembly

7. Beating of chest

8. Qamus

9. Special prayers recited by Sunnis during the month of Ramadan

10. A long coat worn in India and Pakistan

11. Surah Ibrahim 14:26

12. Surah Baqarah 2:24

13. Surah Fatiha 1:6-7

14. Surah Hajj 22:32

15. Surah Rum 30:30

16. Surah Hashr 59:7

17. Effigy of a bier

18. Iron-collar

19. Chain

20. Surah Ahzab 33:21

21. Surah Qaf 50:37

22. Surah Nisa 4:79

23. Surah Anam 6:164

24. Mishkatul Masabih, Jame al-Usool, Jame Bain as-Sahiain

25. The Hourie of Paradise

26. Beating of chest in mourning

How Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s) saved Islam from Destruction

Since the last 10 years, Maulana Sayyid Sa’eed Akhtar Rizvi is involved in religious propagation in East Africa. In that region writing in Urdu is of no avail. Due to this the respected Maulana has devoted all his attention to writing in English and Swahili languages. The English bi-monthly, “Light” and Swahili bi-monthly “Sauti ya Bilal” have been published without a break since the last 10 years and the Maulana has written hardly anything in Urdu. The present article was also published in September 1966 issue of the Light Magazine.

The relationship between religion and rulership is very delicate. Until the time rulers are content to follow the religion, it is all right. But when their aspirations exceed the limits and they aspire to also control religion and keep it under their subjugation, it is the beginning of strife and destruction. This is the time when the Genghis Khan gets the sword of religion in his hand. In such an event, it is only religion that has to bear the loss. For example the acceptance of Christian religion by Emperor Constantine was more harmful to Christianity than open opposition of the previous irreligious kings.

Ideal Islamic State

Islam did not remain heedless of this peril and it had provided the cure right from the beginning. No Muslim had the right to make any kind of changes or distortions in the Islamic law. In an Islamic government there is nothing as “Law-making committee.” The Almighty Allah, alone is the supreme authority and the sole lawmaker, Whose laws have been conveyed to us through Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w). These laws are final and complete. They have solution of every imaginable problem and every possible condition. And if some problem requires elucidation or interpretation only those appointed for this by the Almighty are eligible to discharge this duty. These are the holy Imams, specified by Allah Almighty. They are infallible and they have been appointed by Allah through His Prophet.

Because Islam continued to give a disciplined way of life and progressed during the lifetime of the Prophet and because all the departments of this Islamic state functioned under the divine guidance of the Holy Prophet, it was suitable, rather utmost necessary that after the passing away of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) the reins of the kingdom should remain in the hands of those impeccable Imams who were the divine representatives after the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w), and who were appointed by Almighty Allah. This method would have saved Islam from distortion and would have established it on a firm foundation forever.

In this way Islam would have remained free from the claws of materialist proud rulers and it would have remained pure of the emotional ups and downs of the kings and Emirs and their unwarranted zeal and nuances.

This was the reason that the Holy Messenger declared, on the basis of the specific directions of the Almighty, that after him there would be twelve Imams, and he also informed that, “Of whosoever I am the master, this ‘Ali is also his master.” This step was taken so that Islamic Shariah may not be sacrificed at the altar of political intrigues.

However, some people, whose aspirations did not discriminate lawfulness and illegality, did not like this, and they deemed it such that rulership should not remain in the hands of ‘Ali and his successors. In this way Islam was forever deprived of the security that was bestowed upon it by Allah.

As a result Islam became a target of all those ills that had befallen the previous religions.

Why Islam became a target of destruction

It is very painful to write on this subject. However, if we are able to survey the past without any bias and bigotry it would be a very firm step for benefit of our future guidance. I have heard people expressing astonishment that how could a person like Yazid acquire the rulership of Islamic dominions? What created a favorable atmosphere for such an eventuality? Nothing in this world happens without a cause.

Those who were flowing in the current of the events may not have realized the importance of each and every incident, but when we consider those events today we can place each and every incident in a proper perspective. And our judgment would be more correct than the judgment of those who had practically acted in that drama.

The root cause of every calamity of the early history of Islam as we have stated above, was that Islam was deprived of the guidance of ‘Ali and the Imams after him. This in itself was a great calamity. In addition to this those caliphs who occupied the seat of rulership derived full benefit of their temporal authority and they imposed the view on the public that religious leadership is subservient to temporal authority.

And whosoever succeeds in acquiring temporal authority (in whichever way) he would be considered a lawful caliph and religious guide. He also (as history witnessed) had the power to make changes and abrogations in the Islamic Shariah. Due to this wrong notion people considered every act of the rulers as the criterion of religion. As a result of which there began decadence in following the Islamic law and Shariat.

Decadence of Islam

This decadence began soon after the passing away of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). Those who got the political power did not waste a moment in making it absolute and permanent. Therefore naturally the laws of economy and justice were modified in such a way that they should serve the purpose.

The method of equal distribution of Sadaqah,1 Zakat2 and war booty was given up and a fixed amount as pension was awarded to the companions of the Prophet. This pension varied from two Dinars to a thousand Dinars. In this way, tongues were sealed of those who could have supported the opposition group.3

On the other hand, steps were taken to weaken the economic condition of those from whom there was chance of danger. That is why clear disobedience was committed of the Islamic laws of inheritance and gifts in the case of Fatima Zahra, who was the daughter of the Holy Prophet and wife of ‘Ali.

The land of Fadak gifted by the Holy Prophet to his daughter was confiscated illegally. The first caliph claimed thus while Fadak was in the possession of Fatima. Thus the first caliph was a plaintiff. According to universal law the burden of proof was on the caliph and not on Fatima. Instead Fatima was asked to provide witnesses to prove her right. She presented witnesses but they rejected them on the pretext that they had personal interest in the property.

The caliph presented a solitary tradition, which was against the clear commandments of Qur’an and whose veracity could not be established by any companion at that time. In spite of this the verdict was based on this tradition. Also since in this case the caliph was himself the plaintiff, legally and ethically he was not eligible to hear the case. But he did preside over the case. He delivered a verdict and declared that his claim was valid. In this way, through this extraordinary case, a new form was given to the Islamic Shariah and the rule of justice.4

Khums5 money, which was the right of Fatima, was also denied. Though it was the right given to her family by the Holy Qur’an.6

Here it would not be out of place to mention that during that same period a companion of the Prophet, Jabir Ibn Abdullah claimed that the Messenger of God had promised him some things. This claim of his was accepted without calling for proof and witnesses. Due to this policy, Fatima and her family members were even deprived of her personal heritage while those supported by the government managed to pile up huge wealth and properties.7

A few examples of such machinations will suffice here:

When Abdur Rahman bin Auf (who was favored by all the first three caliphs) died, he left besides other things, four widows. Every widow was entitled to receive 1/32 of the inheritance according to the Shariah. One of them was also in the waiting period (Iddah) of a revocable divorce. That is why she was compelled to accept less than what was her legal right. (This is another example of subverting the Islamic law). Thus she received less than 1/32 part. In spite of this she was given a hundred thousand in cash.

Talha bin Ubaidullah (another favored one of the government) had a fixed income of 2000 Dinars besides other incomes. When he died he left behind 2200000 Dirhams and 2000000 Dinars in cash. Apart from this he had unspecified property worth millions.

At the time of his death, Zubair bin Awwam left 50000 Dinars, 1000 horses and hundreds of bonded servants.8

The Islamic emphasis against hoarding of wealth was disregarded. A new society was brought into shape in the Islamic world, which was exactly opposed to Islam in nature and character. However, the people considered it to be in consonance with Islam only because it was established by those who were considered to be the interpreters of Islam.

The Rise of the Umayyads

The most harmful feature for Islam was the resurgence of the Umayyads and their return to a position of power. They were the same Umayyads who were sworn enemies of Islam. This also materialized under the patronage of the caliphs. During the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah, the Umayyads waged battle after battle against Islam, under the leadership of Abu Sufyan.

At last their power was destroyed in 8 A.H. when the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) conquered Mecca without any bloodshed or armed conflict. Now, since no other option remained, they changed their tactics. That is, now they donned the garb of Islam. However, Islam never reached their hearts and the blood of infidelity continued to flow in their veins. The Holy Qur’an has referred to them at least on six occasions, and in every place they are denounced in the most humiliating manner. In the view of Qur’an, these people are “the accursed tree or family.”9

Here it is worth quoting a tradition of Abdur Rahman bin Auf. He inquired from the second caliph regarding the following verse of the Holy Qur’an:

“Fight for Allah as is worthy of fighting.”

The second caliph replied, “It shall be applicable to the time when the Banu Umayyah shall be the rulers and the Bani Mughaira shall be their ministers. At that time it would be the duty of Muslims to fight against them with all their might.”10

How astonishing was the miracle of human psychology! Who could believe that the same caliph who knew that it would be the duty of every Muslim to perform Jihad for the sake of Allah against the Banu Umayyah, should himself appoint them to the governorship of Syria (Shaam)? And that he should fashion the plot of the drama of Shura in such a way that an Umayyad becomes the absolute ruler of Muslims in the form of the third caliph! More surprising than this is that it is the same Abdur Rahman bin Auf who played a very important role in the appointment of the third caliph.

The Bani Umayyads remained absolutely silent in the last period of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). However, after the passing away of the Messenger they got an opportunity to flex their muscles. Abu Sufyan first of all, called upon His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s), but he refused to have any sort of cooperation from this well-known foe of Islam. After that Abu Sufyan went to the first caliph. If he had also rebuffed the offer of Abu Sufyan like ‘Ali (a.s) there would not have been any problem. But under the advice of the second caliph, he was given the offer of Syria. At that time Abu Sufyan had already reached old age, so his son Yazid was sent with an army to Syria and after the conquest of Syria he was appointed as the governor of the province.

Then after the demise of Yazid, his brother, Muawiyah succeeded to the governorship of Syria.11

How strange are the changing circumstances in politics! Who could have anticipated that the same Bani Umayyads who during the lifetime of the Messenger had continued to use all their power for the destruction of Islam should one day become the absolute authority of the Islamic kingdom? They could not harm Islam in any way when they resorted to open enmity against it.

However, through internal conspiracy they nearly destroyed Islam. After the second caliph, Uthman became the third caliph. When people gave allegiance at the hands of Uthman, Abu Sufyan came to him and gave the following advice, “O sons of Umayyah! Now that you have obtained this kingdom, play with it like a child plays with a ball. And pass it among your family from one to another. Because this kingdom is a reality. As for Paradise and Hell, we don’t know whether they exist or not.”12

We do not know the response of the caliph to this statement but History indeed witnesses that this advice was put into effect in the best way possible.

The Holy Prophet (s.a.w) had banished Hakam bin Aas and his son, Marwan from Medina. He was the uncle of the third caliph and Marwan was his son-in-law. Therefore he ignored the command of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). Not only did he recall Marwan to Medina but also appointed him as his absolute vizier. Not only the Khums money of Africa (which amounted to millions) was entrusted to him, but Fadak was also gifted to him. (We have already mentioned Khums and Fadak in the foregone pages).13

Abdullah bin Abi Sarh was a relative of the caliph. On the day of the conquest of Mecca the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) had issued orders that he must be put to death even if he is found in the Holy Ka’ba. However, despite this fact, Uthman sheltered him in his house and obtained pardon for him after much petitioning. In the reign of Uthman, such a person was appointed as the governor of Egypt.14

Walid bin Uqbah was a cousin of the caliph. The Holy Qur’an refers to him as ‘transgressor’.15

He was a drunkard and a man of very bad character. But he was appointed as the governor of Kufa. One day he came to the Mosque intoxicated and began to lead the Morning Prayer. Instead of the prescribed two units he recited four. Then on top of that he turned to the people and asked, “If you like I can make you recite some more units.”16

Not only the above three persons, everyone connected with the Banu Umayyah obtained an influential post.17 These people utilized their power and position to weaken the Islamic society, to distort the Islamic ethics, to dishonor the principles and laws of Islam, to ridicule the worship acts and in other words to destroy each and everything related to Islam.

Within a period of less than 25 years after the Prophet of Islam (s.a.w), the standard of Islamic leadership became the lowest in the long history of the religions of the world. Generally, the Muslims instead of being the slaves of the Almighty became the servants of gold and silver (riches and wealth). The third caliph was murdered not because he was making the Bani Umayyads richer and richer and in this process distorting the principles of equitable distribution of wealth in Islam.

And also not because he was making his kinsmen masters of the Muslim people, while in the view of the Qur’an they were from the accursed (family) tree. Rather it was due to the fact that all this was not liked by other great people of the Islamic world whom the caliph had ignored. They were of the view that they should also be accorded the opportunity to amass wealth. They would not have opposed the Bani Umayyads if they had also been allowed some share in that wealth.

His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s) wanted to save Islam

His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s) always endeavored to make the people realize what a terrible mistake they had committed by accepting others as their religious leaders. This mode of action was not for any selfish gain but for the sake of Islam which by being usurped by incapable characters was being necessarily becoming distorted. When after the second caliph, ‘Ali (a.s) was offered the post of caliphate subject to the condition that he would continue the practice of the former caliphs, he rejected the offer immediately. Because accepting this condition would have implied his approval to the illegal caliphates of the former caliphs.

After the third caliph when people petitioned him to accept the caliphate he agreed only with the condition that he would re-establish the Islam of the Prophet’s time. He thought that he would have the opportunity to purify Islam from the innovations that had crept into it and distorted the pristine principles of faith.18

However the justice and equity of His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s) tasted bitter to the transformed Muslim leaders. They had become accustomed to preferential treatment. And they disliked that anybody should change the unjust system. If it were not true, what was the reason that Talha, Zubair and Ayesha raised the banner of revolt against His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s)? While during his brief reign he only tried to establish the system that existed in the Prophet’s lifetime.

The view of the Muslims regarding the social principle had undergone such a change that they could not bear these corrective measures that he, ‘Ali (a.s) had taken to reestablish them.19

Battle after battle was waged against him. And ultimately he was martyred in the Kufa mosque while he was praying. And in this way the Muslims lost the sole opportunity through which their society could have been reestablished on the ethical, social and economical justice of the Islamic principles.

Imam Hasan (a.s) stepped forward to help

Imam Hasan (a.s) (who was the divine representative after the martyrdom of his respected father), realized that the ailment of the Muslims has reached such a stage that no hope of cure remained. Dishonesty had become their faith, treason was their loyalty, and wealth their sole beloved and selfish gain their only aim. Now it was almost impossible that a divine government could be established among them.

Now the most important question before Imam Hasan (a.s) was how Islamic principles could be safeguarded? The former rulers had changed the faith in the superior authority of the Prophet into faith in the supreme authority of the rulers. They had gained from this wrong belief and departed from the world, but they left behind Islam fraught with utter confusion and perplexity. To allow this wrong notion to continue was the greatest danger to Islam. Now, when it was no more possible to establish a divine government, the only option was to tell the people that worldly rulership and religious leadership were not same but different things. And that the responsibility of the defense of religion and its leadership is entrusted by Allah. It is not rulership, that is bestowed by people. The aim was that people should realize that religion is not tied to a crown and throne (kingship).

Religion is separated from leadership

After His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s), only Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s) could perform this function. They were having innumerable merits, not from the people and army but from the Almighty Allah. According to the statement of the Holy Qur’an, both of them were sons of the Messenger. Love and affection towards them was obligatory on the Muslims. They were purified of all defects and no error was possible from them. They were the chiefs of the youths of Paradise. Their obedience was incumbent upon the people because they were Imams, whether they be sitting or standing; that is whether they make peace or war.

The gist of the matter is that their authority was absolute in every circumstance, because their Imamate was not based on political power. Therefore, depending on the exigency they could reject rulership and also oppose the rulership of that time.

That is why the beloved sons of ‘Ali and Fatima (a.s), with the absolute authority bestowed on them by Allah and the Messenger, chose such a way that the religion was forever emancipated from the terrible clutches of the despotic rulers. Firstly, Imam Hasan (a.s) abandoned political power and showed that his religious position and post was not needful of and dependent on temporal rulership.

The greatest benefit of this step of Imam Hasan (a.s) was that the point of view of the Muslim community regarding the connection between rulership and religious rulership began to undergo a change, as would become clear later on. Muawiyah tried his best to change many principles of Islam but he failed in his endeavor. If the same changes and innovations had taken place during the time of the first three caliphs, the Muslim community would have accepted them as they accepted some other innovations.

However, now Imam Hasan (a.s) had entered the picture. And this wrong notion was destroyed that religion is the handiwork of rulership. That is why Muawiyah could not succeed much. Rather, today there are even some Sunni people who are not prepared to accept him as a caliph.

Evil deeds of Muawiyah

Now we should turn our attention towards Damascus. It was the time when Muawiyah was the accepted ruler of the Muslim populace. Not through selection or nomination but through force and armed conflict. We have already seen the atmosphere preceding it that every un-Islamic imagination or method was accepted as a part of Islam. The only condition was that the ruler in power must present it.

Muawiyah tried by all means to take advantage of this view. The power of money reached to the zenith. Poison, sword and gold were made use of to the optimum level to achieve the unjust aims of the tyrannical rulers. It became very common to kill the opponents, to martyr the opposite party by poison and treason, to imprison those whose loyalty was doubtful and to burn down their houses and property. Imam Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (a.s) was martyred through poison. Hujr bin Adi and his companions were accorded security in the name of God but martyred in the most cruel manner. Malik Ibn Ashtar was martyred through poison.

Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr (son of the first caliph) was put inside a donkey’s skin and burnt to death. Ayesha (daughter of the first caliph and the wife of the Prophet) was killed by being pushed into a trench, which was later filled up with lime and she was left to perish in that hole. Khalid bin Walid’s (whom the Sunnis call the sword of Allah) son, was killed by poison. Amr bin Hamaq, the respectable companion of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) was killed in an atrocious manner.

We have already discussed the beliefs of Abu Sufyan, and Muawiyah was not better than his father.

It is worth narrating the report of the trusted governor of Muawiyah here. Once he was having a conversation with Muawiyah. During the talk, Muawiyah said, “Why should I do good to the people? Even if I do good how can I hope that I would be remembered with a good name? See, a person from Bani Teem (that is the first caliph) ruled over the people, and did many great things for them. But when he died his name also died with him.

Today people refer to him only as “Abu Bakr” and that’s all. After that came a person from Bani Adi (that is the second caliph) and he ruled with absolute authority for ten years. But his name also ended with him. And now people refer to him most of the time as “Umar”, and that’s all. But look at Ibn Abi Kabasha.20 His name is called out five times every day and the Muezzin21 screams from every mosque, “I witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” Now after his success what else remains to be done and what good deed could be remembered?

Except for this open insult of the Messenger and Azan what else could be expected from an offspring of Abu Sufyan? In addition to political intrigue, misappropriation of trusts, dishonesty, barbarity and murder, he also tried to change the method of worship.

Examples of innovations are also found in the previous regimes. Caliph number two added: “As-Salaato Khairum min an-Nawm”22 in the Morning Azan.23 He also removed “Hayya Alaa Khairil Amal”24 from the Azan. He started conducting Tarawih prayers in congregation. Caliph number three added one more Azan before the Friday Prayer. And he also started the custom of sermon before the Eid Prayers.

He initiated the ritual of performing full prayer while on a journey though it was an established practice to recite two units instead of four during the time of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). But Muawiyah went most ahead of his predecessors. He omitted the recitation of Bismillah (In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.) from the chapters of Qur’an recited in the ritual prayers. Similar was the case with the utterance of ‘Allaho Akbar’ (Allah is the Greatest) before every action in prayer. He stopped this custom.

He recited the sermon of the Friday Prayer in seated position on the pulpit. When he was going to confront His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s), the caliph of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) he ordered his soldiers to recite the Friday Prayer on Wednesday itself. It is needless to say that people acted upon his instructions. During the Hajj, instead of jogging between the Safa and Marwah mountains, he rode on a horse. Even though no excuse existed for him to do so. He removed the “talbiyah” (Labbaik, Allahumma Labbaik25 ) from the rituals of Hajj.

However the most significant of these innovations is the joining of hands during Prayer. There are many historical proofs that show that it was only Muawiyah who had started this custom. Imam Malik (the founder of the Maliki sect) has commanded his followers to keep their hands open and straight during prayers. (As the Shias do). And he stated its reason was that the people of Medina used to keep their hands loose in prayers and the people of Medina had seen the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) praying.

Hence the method of the people of Medina must indeed be based on the emulation of the Messenger. Imam Malik died in 179 AH. In addition to his logic, we have the traditional reports of Abdullah bin Zubair, Ibn Sireen and other scholars of Islamic jurisprudence that prove that at least until the 2nd century of the Hijrah Calendar, the people of Medina did not join their hands during Prayer.

On the other hand Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Ahmad Hanbal (who were educated in Iraq and Syria where the influence of Banu Umayyah was more) have advised their followers to join their hands. And more interesting is the verdict of Imam Shafei (who initially lived in Mecca and Medina and later resided in Iraq and Egypt), who says that both options are permitted in Prayers.

Some proofs of innovation in Prayer are also found through two companions of the Prophet. Anas bin Malik (an aged companion of the Prophet) went to Damascus. He wept incessantly on whatever he witnessed there. He said, I don’t see anything among you that I had witnessed in the time of the Prophet except this prayer and that is also transmogrified.

Another companion of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w), Abu Darda said, “I don’t find anything here in accordance with the religious law, except that they perform the ritual prayers in congregation. Apart from this, everything has been abandoned.” When His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s) was engaged in battle against Muawiyah, he said, “We are fighting them so that the prayer may be established anew.”

Here it would be most appropriate to mention that when His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s) led the prayers in his caliphate, people became joyous and automatically exclaimed, “This is how the Prophet prayed. We have witnessed this prayer after a long time.” Among those who expressed such views are the notable names of Umar bin Hussayn, Abu Musa Ashari and Abu Huraira.

Muawiyah was the first person in Islam who not only took usury in trade, but he also made it permissible according to religious law. He openly indulged in wine, singing, music and dance, while all these things are clearly prohibited in Islam.

He initiated the cursing of the Prophet’s cousin and his caliph, His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s), and this shameful practice continued among the Muslims until the end of the first century of the Hijrah. Here it is necessary to remind that His Eminence, ‘Ali (a.s) is the one, love and respect towards whom is made obligatory on all Muslims through the command of the Qur’an and the instructions of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). Love for ‘Ali is love for the Messenger, and enmity towards ‘Ali is construed as enmity towards the Prophet. Peace and harmony with ‘Ali (a.s) is peace and harmony with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). And discord with him is same as discord with the Prophet. Also, cursing ‘Ali (a.s) is like cursing the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w).

Openly opposing the established principles of Qur’an and Islam, Muawiyah announced in the Friday sermon that all the income of the Islamic kingdom was his personal property and to distribute it among the Muslims or not rested upon his personal discretion. If he likes he may give something from it to whomsoever he likes, but if he does not, no one had any right to question him because it was his personal property.

These examples clearly show that Muawiyah not only tried to change the worship acts, he endeavored to make changes in every field of the Islamic law. If he was not able to succeed it was only because of the divine diplomacy of Imam Hasan (a.s).

Let me also mention that the diplomacy of Imam Hasan (a.s) also proved successful in the fact that through it, it became sufficiently easy to distinguish between a true believer and a hypocrite. During the lifetime of the respected father of Imam Hasan (a.s), in the last four years, all Muslims used to consider him as the ruler of the Muslim dominions. Among them were some who believed him to have been divinely appointed and the majority considered him to be the consensual caliph. The faith did not have any benefit from this milling crowd of people harboring different views as circumstances have shown clearly. The treaty of Imam Hasan (a.s) with Muawiyah removed all the misconceptions and only those true believers remained with Imam Hasan (a.s) whose faith could not change with the changing political scenario.

If one studies this much history of Muawiyah one would begin to wonder if more destruction of Islam was possible. But to say this would be premature because the curtain had not yet risen on the last act of this drama. The worst of Muawiyah’s plots was appointing his son, Yazid as his successor. He tried all means to make his plan successful, through bribes as well as intimidation. By intrigue and by deception, by poisoning and by blatant murder.

A few years after this evil nomination, the ruler of Muslims, who called himself the Prophet’s successor, departed from the world with the crucifix around his neck. Now Yazid was the absolute ruler of complete Islamic territories that spread upto Azerbaijan in the east to Yemen in the south and to Egypt in the west and Iran in the east.

Beliefs and acts of Yazid

What was the character of this so-called caliph of the Prophet?

He was such that he openly denied the messengership of the Messenger (s.a.w). He made his beliefs clear in the following couplets:

“Banu Hashim (the Prophet and his family) has played a game to obtain temporal power.

The fact is that neither an angel came to them nor any revelation descended.”

Intoxicated in this wrong belief, he considers that the tussle between Islam and disbelief to be a battle between two clans and is overjoyed that he has succeeded in taking revenge from the progeny of the Prophet on behalf of his ancestors.

“If only my ancestors who died in Badr had been alive and seen how their opponents (Ahl al-Bayt of Prophet) were suppressed, they would have screamed in joy: O Yazid! May your hands never tire! We have killed their leader and in this way took revenge of Badr. And I won’t be eligible to be called the descendant of the fighters of the Ditch (Khandaq) if I had failed to take revenge from Muhammad and his relatives.”

This much is sufficient to learn about his true beliefs. Let us now see what he says regarding other pillars of Islamic faith:

Qiyamat (Day of Judgment)

“O my beloved! (Do not be sure of reunion after death) Because whatever you have heard of life after death is mere fiction which makes one heedless of the joys of this real world.”

Wine and Worship

Your God has not said that Hell is for those who drink. Rather He has said that it is for those who pray.”

Against the background of his misguided notions it is also necessary that we study his evil feats.

In addition to the tragedy of Karbala’ he committed so many atrocities in the history of humanity that each alone is sufficient to make him forever deserving to be cursed.

Here we shall present only two examples of his evil feats in which he was not successful but his aim became very much obvious. It was at the time when he was the heir apparent of Muawiyah.

First of all he wanted to marry Ayesha, the widow of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). At that time the age of Ayesha was more than fifty years. This desire only proves that all he wanted was to insult the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) and Holy Qur’an, because the Holy Qur’an has prohibited the Muslims to marry the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). Thus Yazid also intended to insult the Muslims who considered the wives of the Prophet as the mothers of the believers.

Yazid had to give up the desire at the behest of his father, who was a cunning diplomat, and he knew that this blatant act would cause the loss of all opportunities of Yazid of ever becoming the Caliph.

Secondly he tried to drink wine on the roof of the House of God, that is the Holy Ka’ba. On this occasion also he was restrained by his friends and advisers.

After gaining caliphate he began to openly ridicule the Islamic worship acts (as we have stated before). He dressed up dogs and monkeys in the attire of scholars and religious leaders. Chess and playing with bears was his favorite pastime. He used to spend all his time everywhere in drinking wine without any hesitation whatsoever. He had no respect for any woman. So much so that even the ladies among his blood relation, like the mother, sisters, paternal aunts, nieces and daughters were like other women for him.

Plunder of Medina

Yazid ordered attack on Medina and the holy town of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) was freely plundered. Three hundred virgins (along with other ladies) became the target of their lusts. Three hundred reciters of the Holy Qur’an and seven hundred companions of the Messenger were martyred mercilessly. The Holy mosque of the Prophet remained shut for many days and Yazid’s forces utilized it as a stable for their mounts, and dogs took shelter in it.

Even the holy pulpit of the Messenger did not remain safe from filth. At last the commander of the forces compelled the people of Medina to pay allegiance to Yazid in the following words: “We are the slaves of Yazid. And it is upto him whether he restores our freedom or sells us in the slave market.” Those who wanted to pledge allegiance for Yazid upon the condition that he would follow the Qur’an and the traditions of the Prophet were put to death. Here it would not be importunate to state that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) has said:

“Whoever terrifies the people of Medina shall be under divine curse forever.”

Siege of Mecca

After this, under orders from Yazid, the army departed for Mecca and these people laid siege to the Holy City of God. This army could not enter the town so they used catapults and by this method rained stones and burning logs of wood on the Ka’ba. Kiswa, that is the cloth covering of the Ka’ba was burned down and a part of the Holy Ka’ba collapsed.

In this way we have reached such a time when everything connected to Islam, from the roots of religion to the sanctified worship acts, from family life to social system all were under attack and were being destroyed.

Through whom? Through Yazid who was supposed to be the protector and defender.

And the most important matter was that some of those innovations would indeed have been considered Islamic and made a part of Islam. Because since the last fifty years people had become accustomed to accept all that the ruler does as the true criteria of Islam. Today no sign would have remained of Islam if Imam Hasan (a.s) had not put a stop to this tendency and if Imam Husayn (a.s) had not openly opposed the reigning king (that is Yazid).

Calamities of Imam Husayn (a.s)

Neither anyone possessed such courage nor anyone had such love for Islam and neither did so much responsibility rest on anyone regarding Islam as it rested on Imam Husayn (a.s). Husayn was the son of the daughter of the Prophet. He was the beloved son of ‘Ali and Fatima and the younger brother of Imam Hasan (a.s). He was the heir and successor to all of them. Islam was the religion that his grandfather had brought and established. Since the beginning this family was a staunch defender of Islam. The members of this family could offer any sacrifice for Islam. And many a times they sacrificed everything they possessed for Islam and even gave up their life and lives of their beloved ones. Imam Husayn (a.s) was used to sacrificing everything for the sake of Islam. He found Islam in peril and he rose up for its defense. He also saw that it was the best opportunity to present an effective and final sacrifice for Islam. So that it maybe forever safe from danger. Therefore he came to Karbala’ along with some of his selected relatives and companions who did not exceed 150 persons including women and children. The whole world knows what happened at Karbala’. And how Imam Husayn (a.s) and his companions and relatives (including a six-month infant) tasted the cup of martyrdom on the 10th of Muharram 61 AH. How they bore the torture of thirst and hunger from the seventh to the tenth of Muharram. How their tents were burned down and how their household possessions plundered. How their ladies and ailing son and little children were made captives. And how they were presented in the courts of Ibn Ziyad and Yazid in Kufa and Damascus. How they underwent the tortures of imprisonment for a full year. How they were released after that. All know these facts and therefore I need not go into the details here.

Imam Husayn (A.S) Gave The Final Shape To The Separation Of Imamate And Rulership

Imam Husayn (a.s) was martyred and Yazid apparently seemed victorious; but only apparently. Actually it was Husayn (a.s) who emerged a victor and he wrote the story of his success on the sands of Karbala’ with his blood. There were many aspects of this success of his. However, I intend to discuss only one aspect over here. As we have seen before, Yazid was the absolute ruler of the Islamic kingdom. And according to the principles established by the previous three caliphs, each of his action was supposed to have been considered as the standard and criteria of religion.

Imam Husayn (a.s) had no such political certificate. But he was the only one who could confront Yazid (the reigning king) and not be called a rebel, because he possessed every certificate from God and the Prophet that his elder brother Imam Hasan (a.s) had received. And the tradition of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) that: ‘Husayn is from me and I am from Husayn,’ had clarified that every action of Husayn was same as that of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w).

Therefore when people learnt about the tragedy of Karbala’ they could not in any way believe that Husayn (a.s) would have been in the wrong. Because to say that Husayn was on the wrong was same as saying that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was on the wrong (God forbid), that is why Yazid (l.a.) became the target of cursing in the whole Islamic world.

In this way the task of separating religion and politics that was started during the time of Imam Hasan (a.s) reached completion at the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s) and it was the link of the same chain. The peace treaty of Imam Hasan (a.s) and the battle of Imam Husayn (a.s) are complimentary to each other and it is not possible to understand them in isolation from each other.

It is mentioned in traditions that the upper portion of Imam Hasan’s (a.s) body and the lower portion of Imam Husayn’s (a.s) resembled that of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w). Perhaps the Almighty Allah wanted to make it a sign that in order to understand the true and correct religion of the Prophet, it is necessary to study the life of both the grandsons together. The two brothers together saved Islam from the willful deeds of the rulers.

Imam Husayn (a.s) turned the stream of the opinion of the people in the right direction. After the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s) political power did not denote religious authority. After Karbala’ the status of ruling kings did not remain such that their act should become a law of Islam. Anyone could become a king through nomination or consensus. Anyone could occupy the throne by force and compulsion. However becoming the ruler of people was something else and being a religious leader is different. The former is appointed by the people and the latter by Almighty God. Imam Husayn (a.s) at last opened the eyes of the Islamic world forever.

Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s) saved Islam from the slavery of rulers and in this way saved it from decadence and destruction. And the names of Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s) shall also remain attached to Islam forever.

Notes

1. Alms

2. Poor Tax

3. Sharh Nahjul Balagha (Ibne Abil Hadid Mutazali), Vol. 1 , Pg. 133, Rauzatul Ahbab, Vol. 1, Pg. 410 and Vol. 2, Pg. 25

4. Futhuhul Bayan, al-Balazari, Pg. 42-43, Tarikh Khamis, Vol. 2, Tarikh Kamil of Ibne Athir, Vol. 2, Pg. 85, Tarikh Tabari, Vol. 3, Pg. 95-98, Sirah Ibne Hisham, Vol. 3, Pg. 408, Kitabul Imamah wal Siyasah, Ibn Qutaybah, Wafa al-Wafa, Vol. 2, Chapter 6, Marijun Nubuwwah, Rauzatul Auf Saheli, Vol. 2, Pg. 247, Tafsir Durre Manthur, Vol. 4, Pg. 177, Habibus Sayr, Part 1, Pg. 58, Insanul Uyoon, Vol. 3, Pg. 400, Balaghatun Nisa, (Sermons of Fatima Zahra).

5. 20 percent tax

6. Kanzul Ummal, Vol. 3, Pg. 129-135, Musnad Ahmad Hanbal, Vol. 1, Pg. 4, Al-Farooq, Allamah Shibli Nomani, Vol. 2, Pg. 117.

7. Sahih Bukhari, Book of Khums, Sahih Muslim, Tabaqat Ibne Sa’ad.

8. Al-Istiab, Ibne Abde Barr, Vol. 2, Pg. 560, Vol. 1, Pg. 208 and 215, Politics in Islam, Khuda Bakhsh Khan, Pg. 151, Muruj az-Zahab, Masudi, Vol. 2, Pg. 222

9. Tafsir Durre Manthur Suyuti (Surah 17) Vol. 4, Pg. 191, and other books of Qur’anic exegesis and traditions. Also refer to the chapter, “Bani Umayyah in the view of Qur’an.”

10. Tafsir Durre Manthur Suyuti Vol. 4, Pg. 371

11. Refer to my book of Islamic History

12. Al-Istiab, Vol. 4, Pg. 76-77, Tarikh Abul Fida, Vol. 2, Pg. 61

13. Muruz az-Zahab, Vol. 2, Pg. 223, Kanzul Ummal, Vol. 6, Pg. 90, Tadkeratul Khawaasul Ummah, Pg. 134, Fathul Bari, Sharh Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3, Pg. 141, Rauzatul Manazir, (published with Murujuz Zahab, Pg. 209).

14. Al-Istiab, Pg. 393, Al-Isabah fi Marifatus Sahaba, Vol. 2, Pg. 316-317, Tafsir Durre Manthur, Vol. 3, Pg. 30

15. Al-Isabah published with Al-Istiab, Vol. 3, Pg. 632, Lubabun Nuqool

16. Tafsir Nishapuri, Vol. 21, Pg. 72, Tafsir Durre Manthur, Vol. 5, Pg. 178, Tafsir Malimut Tanzil, Baghavi, Pg. 702, Tafsir Kashaf, Zamakhshari, Tarikhul Khulafa, Suyuti, Pg. 105, Tarikh Kamil, Ibne Athir, Vol. 3, Pg. 40, Tadkeratul Khawaasul Ummah Pg. 117, Sharh Fiqh Akbar, Pg. 92, Muruj az-Zahab, Vol. 1, Pg. 303, Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2, Pg. 72

17. Tarikhul Khulafa, Suyuti, Pg. 105, Tarikh Kamil, Ibne Athir, Vol. 3, Pg. 40, Spirit of Islam, Sayyid Amir ‘Ali, Pg. 417-437

18. Refer to Nahjul Balagha and its various commentaries

19. Nahjul Balagha, Al-Istiab (Published with Al-Isabah) Vol. 3, Pg. 47, Tarikh Tamaddun Islami, Vol. 4, Pg. 37

20. The infidels of Quraish used to refer to the Prophet with this derogatory title and Muawiyah is also using this epithet

21. Caller of Azan

22. Prayer is better than sleeping

23. Call for Prayer

24. Prayer is the best of deeds

25. Here I am, O Lord. Here I am.