International Shia News Agency
ASHURAFeaturedImam HusaynOther NewsReligious ArticlesShia books

Truth About Imam Hussain’s (A.S) Uprising (Part 3)

Shia Graph, Ashura, Imam Hussain

SHAFAQNA | by Murtadha Mutahhari: As we have already mentioned the invitation of the Kufans to Imam Hussain (A.S) to come to Kufa and set up an Islamic government there represented the third side [of the triangle] of causes of his uprising. The request of the Umayyad’s from the Imam (AS) that he endorsed Yazid’s appointment to the office of the caliphate epitomized the “defensive strategy”.
However, as is known, the Imam (AS) consequently turned that request down, and set out to oppose the corrupt ruling establishment with all means at his disposal out of upholding the religious duty of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil”. This ingredient, [or the third side of the triangle], should be dubbed “the attacking strategy” of the Imam’s (AS) uprising.

Let us now dwell a while on those factors to examine which of them carried more weight than the others. It goes without saying that each of the three factors is different from the others in its cumulative value and importance to the revolt. That is, each of the contributory causes added, in its own right, a unique and significant dimension to the revolt. For example, the Imam’s (AS) acceptance of the Kufans’ invitation to go to Kufa is as significant as the other two factors, and yet in accordance with their importance and impact on the [overall result] of the uprising. Among the factors is that which enhances the significance of a certain [reformist] movement. Similarly, the leader of the movement can influence that particular factor, by way of raising its profile.

The human being, for instance, is well aware of many things that he attaches importance to. For example, his appearance could be regarded as an asset; his coveting jewellery could be deemed another valuable experience. There are as well other material and abstract things which man would wish to acquire as they are considered exhibits of beauty. And no doubt, power and high profile, especially divine positions, are viewed by man as sources of pride, splendour and value. Even the external material appearances, which denote these added values, confer on man an added value. To illustrate this, take a person who has put on the special garb of the clergy. Although, in itself, the attire is not indicative of the godliness of the one who wore it, in that it is not a criterion by which one can measure erudition of the wearer, nor the level of his piety, yet it can be seen as giving such an impression to the person putting on such garb.

Likewise, the person who wears such clothes could earn the respect and regard of others. By the same token, such attire becomes a source of pride for the person who is dressed up in it. The parable of this is the jewellery worn by women, in that how items of jewellery can adorn women and how the latter can derive satisfaction from and pride in wearing them. The same comparison can be applied to revolutions, in that there may be factors that are capable of enhancing their richness and appeal. This is the result of the theoretical differences between one revolution and the other. Some are bereft of the moral dimension and characterized by bigotry, instead; others may be purely materialistic, giving them their distinctive features. And yet, if a revolution is characterized by the moral, human, and divine aspects, it should stand head and shoulders above all other revolutions.

Thus, all the three factors which contributed to the initiation of Imam Hussain’s revolt, gave it the significance it boasts, especially the third factor. Sometimes, a particular person with a particular significance in a particular uprising could add a new value to it, i.e. a special added value and significance. In as much as a certain factor adds a new value to the value of the person, he in return gives a boost to this value. For example, the attire of a spiritual person (cleric) or a university professor could exude pride and aesthetic appearance to those who wear those uniforms. The opposite is also true, in that the person in those garbs is the source of pride and aestheticism due to their impeccable character, probity, and knowledge.

Sa’sa’a bin Sawhan was one of Imam Ali’s (AS) companions and a renowned and consummate orator; he was commended by the famous man of letters, al-Jahidh. When he wanted to congratulate the Imam (AS) on his election to the office of caliphate, he said something to the Imam (AS) that was different from what all the other people said, thus, “O’ Ali! You adorned the caliphate with splendour. You are the source of its pride. It granted you neither grandeur nor pride. The caliphate was in need of a person of your calibre, and yet you were not in need of its [allure]. I, therefore, congratulate the caliphate because your name has become synonymous with it; I do not applaud you because you have become the Caliph!”

As a result, it can be said that the factor of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil” had given Imam Hussain’s (AS) uprising an added significance. And by his, his family’s and companions’ ultimate sacrifice, the Imam (AS) has raised the profile of this institution. There are many people who might claim the upholding of this religious obligation. Imam Hussain (A.S) demonstrated this on the ground, “I seek to enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil and follow the traditions of my grandfather and my father.” This is the parable of Islam that might be a source of pride for many a man. And yet, there have been Muslims whom Islam holds dear and feels proud of.

The various titles, which were earned by many luminaries, such as “Fakhrul Islam – the Pride of Islam”, “Izzuddin – the Glory of Religion”, and “Sharafuddin – the Honour of Religion”, are indicative of this meaning. Abdu Thar, Ammar bin Yasir, [among the Companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.)], and Ibn Sina (Avicenna), [(980 – 1198 CE), the famous Muslim philosopher and physician], were brought up on the ideals of Islam and thus have become a source of pride for it. Islam, in return, feels proud of some of its sons, who had been moulded in its image, so much so that they have earned an international renown, not least because they have left their mark on the human civilization.

The world cannot deny the contribution of Khawaja Nasiruddin At-Tusi, [(597 – 672 AH, 1201 – 1274 CE), the Muslim Philosopher, Vizier, and Theologian], to the human civilization, because the credit goes to him for some discoveries relating to the moon. So, it can be said that Imam Hussain bin Ali (A.S) has indeed given the required momentum to the tradition of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil”. And when it is maintained that this institution raises the weight of Muslims, this does not come from a vacuum. The Holy Quran has stated this:

“You are the best of peoples evolved for mankind. Enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah (SWT).” (Quran 3:110).

Just ponder the couching of this verse, especially with regard to the quality bestowed on “the best people”. That is, it is merely by virtue of their upholding the religious duty of “enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong”, they have earned that sublime praise. So, the worth of this Umma (community) is in its upholding this obligation. However, insofar as Imam Hussain’s (AS) uprising is concerned, it is the Imam who has conferred that sublime honour on this obligation by the sacrifices he personally made, and those of his family and companions. However, it is not enough that we, Muslims, are not up to the responsibility of upholding this religious obligation, we are proving to be a liability to it. It is regrettable that people have paid much attention to not so important things, such as growing one’s beard and prohibiting the wearing of gold [for men], and paid lip service to significant matters that should be upheld.

In contrast, Imam Hussain (A.S) revolted to keep the principle of “enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong” live in all spheres of life. He used to say that Yazid was the epitome of rejection and that he should be effaced from the world of Islam. He further affirmed that the Imam of Muslims must be the one who upholds the injunctions contained in the Book of God, [i.e. the Holy Quran], administer justice, and follow the true religion. Imam Hussain (AS) sacrificed everything in the way of safeguarding this institution and enforcing it. The Imam gave a more sober meaning to death in this cause. It has become to imply grandeur and honour. Since he set out on his journey from Medina to Karbala’, he was always talking about death in dignity and honour, i.e. the death in the cause of right, truth, and justice. Such a death is akin to a beautiful necklace that adorns the neck of a young woman. The Imam often recited a line of poetry en-route in his fateful journey to Karbala’.

The poem read something like this: Despite the fact that this life is sweet and beautiful, yet, the next life is sweeter and more beautiful. Since, in the end, man will leave behind, after death, all his worldly possessions, the good comes out of giving away one’s wealth in good causes, instead of hoarding it. By the same token, since the human body would turn to dust after death, why should not man die a sweet and honourable death? Thus, dying with the sword in the cause of God is much greater and lovelier. On the other side of the equation, the example of Abu Salama Al-Khallal, who used to be dubbed “the Minister of the Household of Mohammad” in the court of the Abbasid Caliph, serves the reverse of the above-mentioned honourable death.

His story goes like this: When he fell out of favour with the Abbasid Caliph, an incident which he later paid with his life for, he wrote two letters, one to Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (A.S) and the other to Mohammad bin Abdullah Al-Mahdh, offering them his services and those of Abu Muslim, [i.e. intending to stage a palace coup]. This was his message to them: Should you be prepared for this, [i.e. taking over the caliphate], and accept our offer, we will kill those, [i.e. the Abbasid rulers]. The immediate impression the contents of this letter gives is that the writer is disloyal because he addressed his letter to two different people, but only when his relationship with his masters turned sour.
As soon as Imam As-Sadiq (AS) received the letter and read it, he burned it before the eyes of the emissary who carried it to him. When the messenger asked the Imam (AS) as to his reply, the Imam informed him that he had nothing to add to what the messenger had just seen, [i.e. of burning the letter]. The Abbasid killed Abu Salama before he could meet with his messenger. Some people seem to raise the objection as why the Imam did not respond positively to the invitation of Abu Salama who called on him to rise to assume power with his help. That is, while the intension of Abu Salama was known; he was not sincere in his appeal as he wrote his letter immediately after he had fallen out favour with the Abbasid Caliph, who was sure that he could not be trusted any more. Thus, he met his violent death soon after.

Nevertheless, if Imam Hussain (A.S) turned a blind eye to all those letters he had received from the Kufans, inviting him to go to them and set up an Islamic government there, he would have never escaped similar criticism. In Imam Hussain’s case, he responded positively to the Kufans’ appeals when he realized that they were genuine in their call for him to come to them. Thus, it became incumbent on him to respond. Let us examine which of the following two matters came first and consequently had precedence over the other. Did the Imam’s (AS) rejection of the Umayyad’s call to him to endorse Yazid as Caliph come first, i.e. prior to the Kufans’ invitation to him to come to Kufa and form an Islamic government? It goes without saying that the former came first for demanding Imam Hussain’s swearing of allegiance to Yazid was made immediately after the demise of his father, Muawiyah.

The messenger, who brought the news of Muawiyah’s death to the governor of Medina, brought with him a letter containing a demand that Imam Hussain, and some other personalities, endorsed the succession of Yazid to the caliphate. It is quite probable that the Kufans did not know then of the news of the demise of Muawiyah. Historical events lend support to this theory. That is, many days had elapsed on Imam Hussain’s rejection of the demand from him to swear allegiance to Yazid before he was forced under pressure to leave Medina and embark on his opposition movement there and then, i.e. 27th Rajab on the way to Mecca, [in a sort of self-imposed exile]. He arrived in Mecca on 3rd Sha’ban. He received the letters from the Kufans on 15th Ramadhan. [In the Islamic Hijri Calendar, those three months run consecutively, thus, Rajab, Sha’ban, and Ramadhan].

That is, a month and a half after the Umayyad’s made their intention of demanding the Imam to swear allegiance known, and his subsequent flat rejection of the demand. Imam Hussain stayed in Mecca for forty days. Accordingly, he did not reject the Umayyad’s call for him to endorse Yazid as Caliph because of the Kufans’ appeals to him to head to Kufa to form the next Islamic government. He made his position manifestly known that he would not give in to Yazid, even if not a foothold in the entire globe was left for him. This is the second reason for the rising of Al-Hussain (A.S).

The third pillar of the Imam’s rising is the upholding of the Islamic duty of “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil”. The Imam (A.S) started his dissident movement from Medina determined to shoulder the responsibility of this duty. However, even if he was not asked to pay allegiance to Yazid and there was no invitation for him to go to Kufa to set up a rival caliphate there, he was resolved that it was his duty to uphold that tradition, not least because corruption was about to take a stranglehold over the Islamic world then.
To recap, in each one of the three aspects of his revolt, the Imam (A.S) had had a particular issue to address and a duty to discharge. As regards the first aspect, it was his decision to refuse the Umayyad’s demand to endorse Yazid’s succession to the caliphate. Regarding the second facet, he responded positively to the appeal of the Kufans for him to set up a rival caliphate in Kufa. In relation to the third aspect, he took the necessary action to take on the corrupt ruling establishment. Thus, he can be safely branded a revolutionary.

Truth About Imam Hussain’s (A.S) Uprising (Part 2)

Related posts

Imam Hassan (AS): Biography, Characteristics & Teachings

asadian

Commentary on Imam Sajjad’s (AS) Treaties of Right (Part 20)

parniani

Shia answers: Which Verses in the Holy Quran refer to the absent Imam (AJ)?

asadian

The life of Imam Hussain (AS)

asadian

Imam Musa ibn Jafar Al-Kadhim (AS)

Yahya

What are benefits of Islamic unity according to Imam Ali (AS)?

AH

Leave a Comment