As we have mentioned above during the leadership of Imam Ali (as) the majority of Kufans believed in the leadership of the first three caliphs. If they sided with Imam Ali (as) against Muawiya it was based on the principle that he had acquired powered via the same principles and pre-conditions that were applied to the first three caliphs. The same principle was adopted by the inhabitants of Medina, which is why despite their upholding the legitimacy of Uthman bin Affan’s Caliphate, they chose to fight under the banner of Imam Ali (as) in Jamal and Siffeen against the seditious elements..
Now the question arises why did the Kufans help Imam Hussain (as) when the ascribed to the legitimate caliphates of the first three Caliphs but not that of Imam Hasan (as)?
There are some reasons for that:
1) The Kufans had already turned against the governors of Bani Ummayah during the reign of Uthman bin Affan.
2) Whilst deeming him to be a legitimate Caliph they nevertheless sent forces out against him.
3) They opposed the Godfather of the Ummayad clan Muawiya since he had committed mutiny against the fourth legitimate caliph Imam Ali (as).
4) On the orders of Muawiyah, Ziyah ibn Summiyah massacred Kufans and the Kufans did not forget his cruelty towards them.
5) Muawiyah forced and/or bribed many to offer their allegiance to his son Yazid [laeen]. Yazid was not only a drunkard, womanizer but also extremely cruel and opportunistic. This single act of Muawiya harmed political Islam in such a way that in its history for the first time the leadership was handed down to an incompetent son hence turning the Islamic way of election and selection into nepotism and favouritism.
On the other side of Equation was Hussain - the grandson of Prophet himself (peace be upon them) - whose nobility, character and decency were testified by his most staunch enemies themselves. That is why the Kufans wrote letters to Imam Hussain to come and help them out.
Shia of Muawiya during Muawiya’s rule in Kufa
Muawiya ruled the Ummah for 20 years. During his era he obviously succeeded in creating a group of loyalists and appointees in each and every city under his rule. This group was extremely anti Ahle-bait. The evidence to this claim is found in a letter that this group of Shiatul Muawiyah wrote to Yazid on the arrival of Muslim bin Aqeel. Since by now their loyalty had switched to his son Yazid bin Muawiyah bin Abu Sufyan.
"Abdallah b. Muslim. B. Said al Hadrami an ally of the Banu Umayyah…went out and wrote the following letter to Yazid b. Muawiyah: ‘Muslim bin Aqeel has come to al-Kufa and the Shia have given the allegiance to him on behalf of al-Husayn b. Ali b. Abi Talib. If you have any need of Kufa send a strong man there, who would carry out your orders in the same way you would at against your enemy. Al-Nauman b. Bashir is a weak man or he is acting like a weak man”. He was the first to write to him. Then Umarah b. Uqbah wrote to him in a similar vein. As did Umar b. Sad b. Abi Waqqas”
History of Tabari, Volume 19 page 30
It was this same Sad bin Abi Waqqas who subsequently fought Imam Hussain (as) and in fact was proud at firing the first arrow at him.
Returning to Tabari as soon as Yazid obtained receipt of this letter he issued an order to Ibn Ziyad who was the son of Ziyah ibn Summayah, in which he wrote something very interesting:
"My followers (Shia) among the people of al-Kufah have written to me to inform me that Ibn Aqil is in al-Kufah gathering units in order to spread rebellion among the Muslims. Therefore, when you read this letter of mine, go to a’-Kufah and search for Ibn Aqil, as if you were looking for a bead , until you find him. Then bind him in chains, kill him, or expel him."
History of Tabari, Volume 19 page 31
One can gauge from the above reference there were two groups of Shias in Kufa:
1) Uthmani Shias i.e. the Umayyads, who openly showed their hostility towards the Ahl’ul bayt and were the voluntary spies for Yazid’s government. They believed in the Caliphate of the first three Caliphs and rejected Imam Ali (as)’.
The famous Nasibi Ibn Taymiyah confesses in his own work:
"The Uthmani Shias were openly hostile towards Ali from pulpit".
Minhaj al Sunnah, Volume 1 page 178
The army stationed in Kufa was sent by Muawiya soon after he became the caliph and obviously had a soft spot for Muawiyah and Yazid since the majority of the soldiers were from Syria.
The ordinary Kufans fell within the political grouping of Shiatual Ali as opposed to Uthmani Shias affirmed belief in all four Caliphs. They were the majority in Kufa.
2) The original Shia, those who followed the Ahle Bait spiritually were in minority in Kufa.
Dear Readers, in order to properly understand the events of Karbala, one needs to understand the difference between these different competing groups.
Qazi Noorullah Shosteri's statement that the majority of Kufans were (Imami) Shias
In the end let us put another false claim of wicked Nawasib to the test. The Nawasib misquote frequently one of the claims of a famous Shia scholar namely Qazi Noorullah Shosteri and use it as base to claim that the majority of Shias of the city of Kufa were not believers in Khilafah of Shakhayn but actually Imami Shias.
They knowingly quote from Majalis al-Momineen, page 25:
Nawasib quote:
"There is no reason to prove that the Kufans were Shias. The Kufans being Sunni is against logic and needs to be proven even Abu Hanifa though (who was a Kufan) was a Sunni. "
Reply One
Firstly, this quote of Qazi Noorullah is not geared towards the era of the battle of Karbala but toward the era of Abu Hanifa's lifetime and/or afterwards. He is not describing Kufa in 61 H - the Karbala era – he is describing the time during which Abu Hanifa lived in Kufa and/or afterwards at the most. Abu Hanifa was not even born during the times of Karbala.
Reply Two
Secondly, this is Qazi's personal opinion about Abu Hanifa’s era. The Nawasib need to show us some solid historical and factual based evidence to their claim of Kufa being Shia Imami city.
Reply Three
We have proven earlier by quoting authentic Sunni scholar and their authentic books that by the time of Karbala the Imami Shias were left in extreme minority in Kufa because the Nasibi governor Ziyah Ibn Summiyah slaughtered them mercilessly during his era.
Conclusion
This is just another example of wickedness and hypocrisy of Nasibis who use these tools to deceive ordinary Sunnis. They never hesitate in quoting any historical evidence absolutely out of context and/or twist it to further their own agenda which is to lay the blame of slaughter of Aale-Nabi (peace be upon them) on the shoulder of Shia Imami Muslims in order to absolve their forefathers from the most heinous crime committed by their first Imam Yazid-e-Laeen in the history of Islam and make fool of innocent Sunnis who are made to believe that all they are being told is the absolute truth.
Comments
Post a Comment