THE MASSACRE OF KARBALA

On the 10th of Al-Muharram 61AH, the sweet flower and blessing of this world, Hussein bn Aliyy (radiya Allahu anhu) was martyred in the city of Karbala.

Hussein bn Aliyy was born in Sha’baan, 4AH and Hassan was born in Ramadhan, 3AH. Hassan and Hussein are renowned as the leaders of the young men of Jannah. The Prophet once said “They are my two rayhanatayyah – two sweet flowers of this world, two blessings of this world”. Hussain was greatly respected by the companions so much so that once Abdullah Amr bin Al-Aas (radiya Allahu anhu) was once sitting in the shadow of the Ka‘bah and when he saw Hussein coming, he said, ”This man is the most beloved man on earth to the inhabitants of the heavens!”

The status of Ahlul Bayt (household of the Prophet) for the Sunni Muslims is proclaimed with genuine love for the entire blessed clan. Abu Bakr radiya Allahu anhu would say: “I swear by Allah that I would rather be kind and generous to Ahlul Bayt than my own family”.

Hussein and his brother Hassan both witnessed the Battle of Jamal and Siffeen and with the demise of Ali radiya Allahu anhu, Hassan was handed over Caliphate by the people of Kufa and Mu’aawiyah (radiya Allahu anhu) became the Caliph by the people of Syria.

We see exaggeration among the Muslims in two manners. Those who say that the history of Karbala should be buried and not be discussed, that some even go into praising Yazid bn Mu’awiyah, the tyrant whose army martyred Al-Husayn bn Ali and his companions. And the other extreme pertains to those who get caught up in superstition such as thinking that getting married in Muharram is bad luck or those who cut and whip themselves during mourning ceremonies (tatbir).

The massacre of Hussein and Ibn Zubayr are the tainted incidents during the rule of Yazeed.

Note that Hassan bn Aliyy (radiya Allahu anhu) died of poisoning in the year 49AH and thereabout. Mu’aawiyah was still alive then; he died Rajab of 60AH.

First, Yazid was illegitimately appointed to be the khalifah by his father Mu’aawiyah in violation of a peace agreement made by him and Al-Hasan bin Ali, Al-Hasan being the rightful khalifah after his father’s martyrdom. One narrative of the treaty is that Mu’aawiyah was to allow the Muslims to make Shuraa as to who was to be the khalifah after him. Another is that Mu’aawiyah was to transfer the khalifah back to Al-Hasan or Al-Hussein upon his death. In either case, it is clear that the written agreement was broken upon appointing Yazid to be khalifah, which started the trend within Bani Umayyah of appointed kings, who were all unjust except for the just khalifah Umar bin Abdil Aziz (radiya Allahu anhu). Hence, a clear reason for Al-Hussein refusal for giving Yazid allegiance was based upon a broken trust, which was violated upon the Ummah.

Two, it is clearer that a reason for Yazid having been unfit was his action of terrorizing the People of Al-Madinah when seeking allegiance from them through Walid bn Uqbah. Sahabah and their children were killed in the process. And the Prophet has said, “Whosoever spreads injustice and frightens the People of Al-Madinah, may the curse of Allah, His Angels and all the people be upon such a person.” This hadith is narrated by Imam Ahmad bn Hanbal in his Musnad and Ibn Kathir in Al-Bidayah wan Nihayah. Imam Ahmad found Yazid to be of such low moral character that he refused to write down any hadith narrated through him.

Ibn Al-Qayyim clearly said that it is from the sunnah not to love Yazid. Such was reported by other scholars such as Ibn Hajar and Imam As-Suyuti.

Third, there are people who have an erroneous belief that the stubbornness of Hussein got him killed because he was warned (by some Sahaabah) not to embark on his journey to Kufah (after which he and his family and men left Makkah under the rule of the tyrant Yazid who was forcing bay’ah on their throat – to Kufah where he was endorsed).

The straight answer to this is that, his death was not due to stubbornness but fulfilling a prophecy; the prophecy of the Prophet that Hussein will die as a Martyr and that whosoever is alive then should assist Hussein.

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani in his book “Al Isabah” on the biographies of the Sahabah had narrated an hadith where the Prophet had Pre- informed that Hussein shall be killed as a Martyr (in Karbala) and he enjoined those who will be alive to assist Hussein. That was why the companion Anas bn AlHarith accompanied Hussein to the battle field and he was also martyred. And several other ahadeeth on Hussein being a Shahid. He cannot be wrong in his actions and the Prophet referred to him as Shahid.

This, some people try to analogise it with the issue of Ammar bn Yaasir (radiya Allahu anhu) in the battle of Siffiin, whereby Mu’aawiyah group killed Ammar bn Yasir, and they claim it was a Ijtihad and fulfillment of prophecy. This is a fallacy.

Ammar bn Yasir was the one fulfilling a Prophecy and was a decisive criterion for the right and wrong party. Similarly, Hussein was fulfilling a prophecy and the Prophet forewarned that he must be assisted. The fulfilment of a Prophecy is applicable to those on the legitimate cause of action. Hussein’s action was legitimate, likewise Ammar bn Yasir but Mu’awiyah’s was not; so it is theological wrong to insinuate or suppose that Mu’aawiyah was fulfilling a Prophecy.

Theologically, a wrong cause of action could not be said to be a fulfilment of Prophecy. A layman committing atrocity does not have any specific prophecy to justify his atrocities. Rather the Prophecy regarding atrocities is that hell fire is the abode of the perpetrator. Hussein, Ammar bn Yasir were doing the right and legitimate thing. Prophecy is a legitimate cause of action that has been pre-informed by the Prophet before it happened.

Also, there is no ijtihad in the presence of a clearcut Nass (text). The Prophet said those who fought against Ali were rebel and the person who killed Ammar will be in hell because Ammar was with the right group. Then everybody or leader who does wrong would claim it is ijtihad! And it is this mentality that prompted the Ummayad to popularize the creed of Murji-ah and Jabariyyah so as to give theological legitimacy to their misdemeanors.

So, whoever is engaging in illegality and then claiming a fulfilment of a Prophecy should also be contented with the Prophesized negative consequence of his/her action in the hereafter which is Allah’s wrath.

Similarly, I observed that historians have presented the people of kufah as being deceitful and treacherous (أهل الغدر), this is further from truth but an attempt at given a dog a bad name to hang it. They are more upright against tyranny than the people of Sham.

Any student of history who has the ability to do independent research about the migration of the Sahabah will realise that the early Sahabah who are Saabiqoon migrated mostly to Kufah than to Sham; it was the Tulaqau (those who accepted Islam later after Fathu Makkah) among the Sahabah that were more in Sham with Mu’aawiyah. The Kufah, Meccan, Medina students of the Sahabah were very upright against tyranny due to the early Sahabah influence on them as the true Islamic teaching did not condone oppression unlike some in Sham who were only reporting hadith subservient to tyranny.

The tragedy of Karbala is not simply an historical event. It has contemporary implications regarding what is our standard of justice, who is fit for us to take our understanding of the Sunnah from and what are the practical standards for those who are to be entrusted with the affairs of the Muslims.

Ours is to discuss and learn from the past histories to avoid a repeat, and not to abuse, curse, vilify anyone. For the judgement lies in the hands of Allah.

May Allah’s blessings be upon the soul of the noble Prophet, his households, his companions and the generality of the Muslim Ummah.