ઈમામ હુસૈન અ.સ ને કોણે કત્લ કર્યા? યઝીદ કે શિઆઓ

ઈમામ હુસૈન અ.સ ને કોણે કત્લ કર્યા? યઝીદ કે શિઆઓ

        શંકા

                મુસ્લિમોનો એક વિભાગ જે પોતાની જાત ને યઝીદ નો બચાવ કરવા માટે કે ઈમામ હુસૈન અ.સ ના કત્લ માટે યઝીદ જવાબદાર નથી માટે નબળા બહાનાઓ બનાવે છે અને પોતાની પીડાઓ માટે શિય્યત ને જવાબદાર ગણાવે છે ,તે આક્ષેપો માંથી એક ખુબજ મોટો આક્ષેપ એ છે કે શિયાઓ એ પોતેજ ઈમામ હુસૈન અ.સ ને કત્લ કર્યા અને હવે તેઓ આ કાર્ય માટે પસ્તાવો કરે છે

જવાબો :

        ૧,કોણે હમઝા અ.સ ને શહીદ કર્યા ?

        ૨,સાથીદારો નો રોલ

        ૩,યઝીદ નો રોલ

        ૪, શિયાઓ કોણ છે?

        ૫,યઝીદ નાં સૈનિકો ની ટુકડીઓ શિયા ન હતી

        જ.હમઝા ને કોણે શહીદ કર્યા?

        કોણે જ. અમ્માર અ.સ ને શહીદ કર્યા?

                આ નકામું બહાનું યાદ અપાવે છે કે તે દલીલ ની જે યઝીદ નાં પિતાએ ૧૪૦૦ વર્ષ પહેલા સીફ્ફીન માં રજુ કરી હતી.કારણ કે તે પોતે જવાબદાર હતો જ. અમ્માર ર.અ  ને કત્લ કરવામાં જેની તસ્દીક હ.રસુલે ખુદા સ.અ.વ એ કરી હતી

        હ.અમ્માર ર.અ જે એક મહાન સહાબી છે જેના માટે જન્નત નક્કી છે તેના કત્લ નો દોષ મોઆવિયાએ બચવા માટે હ.અમીરુલ મોઅમેનીન અલી ઇબ્ને અબી તાલિબ અ.સ પર નાખ્યો,તેણે એવી દલીલ કરી કે,કેમ કે હ.અલી અ.સ જ.અમ્માર ને જંગે સીફ્ફીન માં લાવ્યા હતા એટલે તે જવાબદાર ગણાય નહિ કે મોઆવિયા(લા.અ)

       

        અગર મોઆવિયા નાં આ તર્ક (વિચાર) ને સ્વીકારી લેવામાં આવે તો તેનાપ્રમાણે હ. રસુલે ખુદા સ.અવ. જવાબદાર છે પોતાના કાકા જ.હમઝા ર.અ. ના કત્લ માટે( નૌઝોબીલ્લાહ),કારણ કે હ. હમઝા.ર.અ. જંગે ઓહદ માં હ. રસુલે ખુદા સ.અ.વ નાં કહેવાથી આવ્યા હતા.

                દેખીતી રીતે પોતાના આક્ષેપો પોતે કરેલો ગુનોહ બીજા લોકો પર નાખવો જે આ કાર્ય થી પર છે તે આ મુસલમાનો ની જૂની આદત છે .

                        આવો આપણે જોઈએ કે કેવી રીતે આપણે ગુનેહગાર ને ઓળખી શકીએ  મુસલમાનો ના આ તર્ક ના આધારે :

                કોણે જ. હમઝા અ.સ ને કત્લ કર્યા ?

                 (૧) ચોક્કસ,ઇત્હાસની રોશનીમાં  સહી સમજણ બતાવે છે કે હ. હમઝા અ.સ ને કત્લ કરવા માટે ઝીમ્મેદાર મક્કા નાં એ લોકો છે કે જેઓએ હ.રસુલે ખુદા સ.અ.વ. અને મુસલમાનો સાથે જંગ કરી હતી

        (૨) અને આપણે જોયું કે મોઆવિયનાં તર્ક પ્રમાણે હ. હમ્ઝા અ.સ ને કત્લ કરવા માટે જવાબદાર હ.રસુલે ખુદા સ.અ.વ છે (નૌઝોબીલાહ)

        (૩) મુસ્લિમો નાં તર્ક પ્રમાણે હ. હમઝા અ.સ ના મૃત્યુ નાં જવાબદાર બીજો અલગજ સમૂહ છે,આવો આપણે જવાબ શોધવા માટે સુ.આલે ઇમરાન ની આયત  ૧૫૩ નો સહારો લઈએ

 “ (તે સમયને યાદ કરો) જ્યારે તમે આગળને આગળ નાસી જતા હતા અને પાછા વળીને પણ કોઈને જોતા ન હતા અને પાછળથી રસૂલ તમને બોલાવી રહ્યો હતો, .......

            જેમકે મુસ્લિમો નાં તર્ક મુજબ શિયાઓ નાં વિશ્વાસઘાતે હ. ઈમામ હુસૈન અ.સ ને કત્લ કર્યા તેજ રીતે સહાબીઓ ના વિશ્વાસઘાતે જંગે ઓહદ માં હ. હમઝા અ.સ ને કત્લ કર્યા

                જો કે સ્પષ્ટ કારણો આ મુસ્લિમો કબુલ નહિ કરે અને આ મુસ્લિમો પોતાના તર્કઓ ને શિયાઓ ની વિરુદ્ધ રજુ કરશે

ઉસ્માન લ.અ ને કોને કતલ કર્યો?

        (૧)સહી સમજણ બતાવે છે કે ઉસ્માન લ.અ ને કત્લ મુસ્લિમો એ કર્યો કે જેઓએ તેના ઘર પાસે ઘેરો કર્યો અને અંતે તેણે કતલ કર્યો તેની ખરાબ અનીતિ ને કારણે

        (૨) પરંતુ આ મુસ્લિમો નાં તર્ક પ્રમાણે જે આક્ષેપ મુકે છે સીધો તેના પર જેઓ વિશ્વાસઘાત કરે છે તેના પ્રમાણે તો ઉસ્માન ને કત્લ કરવાનો જવાબદાર મોઆવિયા બિન અબી સુફયાન થાય

        આ વાત છુપી નથી કે ઉસ્માન ના ઘરનો ઘેરાવ એક મહિના સુધી ચાલ્યો હતો તે દરમિયાન તેણેઅમુક લોકો ને મદદ માટે પયગામ મોકલ્યા હતા,તેમાંથી એક તેનો પીતરાય ભાઈ મૌવીયાહ પણ હતો. જો કે મોઆવિયા એ પોતાના સૈનિકોને મોકલ્યા ના હતા જે ઉસ્માન ને બહાર નીકાળે,અને આ હકીકત છે કે મોઆવિયા પાસે મોટું લશ્કર હતું છતાં મદદ ન કરી અને બે જ વર્ષ પછી આજ લશ્કર જંગે સીફ્ફીન માં આવ્યું હતું .

Harrah – Another proof of Yazid’s transgression

A group of Muslims seek to exonerate Yazid b. Muawiyah of all his crimes. As a matter of fact, these Muslims do not even acknowledge the crimes and for the most evident crime of killing the son of Allah’s Prophet — Imam Husain b. Ali (a.s.), they are quick to gloss over it with the most weird claims including the ridiculous one of Shias themselves having killed Imam Husain (a.s.)!

To such Muslims, it is fitting to point out that not every crime perpetrated by Yazid is easy to sweep under the carpet. Although no crime can parallel the killing of Imam Husain (a.s.), Yazid is responsible for many crimes that are evident even to the most biased historian and no one doubts even for a moment that Yazid is the perpetrator of these crimes. If the most biased historian was to ignore Imam Husain’s (a.s.) killing under one pretext or another, there is no way for him to ignore Yazid’s other crimes. The incident of Harrah is one such crime and all Muslims regardless of their sect are unanimous that the responsibility for Harrah lies at the doorstep of Yazid b. Muawiyah.

But first an interesting comparison to underscore Yazid’s antecedents.

Who is most despicable, Yazid or Firaun?

Yazid is often referred to as the Firaun of the Islamic nation. But this comparison is not entirely fair to Firaun. Yazid was far worse than Firaun and he dared to commit some of the most heinous crimes in the history of mankind that even Firaun hesitated from committing.

A very interesting incident that occurred in Yazid’s court highlights how he was far more wretched than Firaun. After the incident of Karbala, the women of Imam Husain’s (a.s.) household were brought in Yazid’s court devoid of their veils. Along with the women was Allah’s Proof — the son of Imam Husain (a.s.) — Imam Zainul Abedeen (a.s.). Yazid began gloating over his success in front of his courtiers and sought to belittle the exalted status of Imam Husain (a.s.) and his father — Ameerul Momineen (a.s.). However, Zainul Abedeen (a.s.) despite being fettered in heavy chains and shackles was not intimidated and gave a fitting reply to Yazid’s taunts. This sparked off a dialogue between Yazid and Zainul Abedeen (a.s.) in which Imam (a.s.) as expected, held the upper hand and crushed Yazid’s arguments with utter disdain. This did not go down well with Yazid and he turned to his advisors to counter Zainul Abedeen (a.s.). His advisors advised him to condemn Zainul Abedeen (a.s.) to death.

When Imam Muhammad Baqir (a.s.), who was merely two years and some months old at the time, heard this suggestion made by Yazid’s advisors, he addressed Yazid, ‘They have recommended to you as opposed to the recommendation of the courtiers of Firaun. When he (Firaun) asked their opinion regarding Prophet Moosa (a.s.) and Prophet Haroon (a.s.), they said: Give respite to him and his brother, while these people recommend that you should kill us, whilst there is a reason for this.’

Yazid was confused with this argument and sought the reason for Firaun’s benevolence towards Prophet Moosa (a.s.) and Prophet Haroon (a.s.) in this matter.

Imam Baqir (a.s.) clarified, ‘The reason why Firaun did not kill Moosa (a.s.) was because he (Firaun) was of legitimate birth, while a Prophet and his children are only slain by the illegitimate ones.’ When Yazid heard Imam’s (a.s.) explanation he became silent and hung his head in shame. (Nafasul Mahmoom, Section 13, from Isbaat al-Wasiyyah of Masoodi)

It is apparent that Yazid was subdued by Imam Muhammad Baqir’s (a.s.) arguments and his silence only affirms his guilt. His sending the captives back to Medinah is further admission of this guilt. What is ironical however is that even though Yazid had accepted that he was wrong in slaying the son of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), he still finds widespread support from his ardent fans who 1,400 years after Karbala insist on affixing his name with the reverential suffix ‘May Allah be pleased with him’ something that is reserved for the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) choicest companions like Hazrat Salman Muhammadi (r.a.), Hazrat Abu Zarr Ghaffari (r.a.), Hazrat Miqdaad (r.a.), etc.

Yazid’s reign lasted for three years and nine months. In a short period of just 45 months, Yazid perpetrated crimes that would make even the most oppressive tyrants shudder. In the very first year of his reign (61 AH), he dispatched a huge army to murder the son (according to the verse of Mubaahelah) of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) — Imam Husain (a.s.). The army was given explicit orders to show no mercy to Imam Husain (a.s.), to cut all water supply to his tents, to surround him and his women, to kill the men mercilessly, to take the women captive and parade them on the streets without their veils.

Yazid stands exposed

After Imam Husain’s (a.s.) martyrdom, news of Yazid’s transgressions spread far and wide. The people of Medinah dispatched a delegation to Syria to get first-hand information of Yazid’s offenses. As was expected the delegation was disgusted with Yazid’s corrupt ways and returned to inform the Medinites of his innumerable vices — alcoholism, chess addiction, seeking entertainment with singing girls, dogs and monkeys, indulging in intercourse with mehram women (mother, sister), abandoning prayers, and topping all this by murdering the grandson of their beloved Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

The Medinites were appalled to hear that the Caliph of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) nation indulged in such unmentionable indecencies. They began cursing Yazid openly and finally drove out his governor — Usman b. Muhammad b. Abi Sufyan, along with Marwan b. Hakam and other members of Bani Ummayyah from Medinah. They appointed Abdullah b. Hantala as the governor and gave him their allegiance.

Yazid retaliates

Obviously a man of Yazid’s status and tyrannical temperament would not take such a rebellion lying down. He immediately dispatched a large army towards Medinah under the command of Musrif b. Aqbah Muri (also called as Mujrim). When Musrif approached Medinah, he camped at a place called Harrah-e-Raqim (Sangistaan), which is at a distance of one mile from the mosque of Suroore Ambiya. Seeing Yazid’s army camped outside their city, the Medinites came out to fight the army. Yazid’s army was equipped with lot of ammunition and overwhelmed the Medinites in every department. Consequently the Medinites were no match against this army and a large number of them were killed in the ensuing battle. The accursed Marwan b. Hakam was constantly inciting Yazid’s army to attack the Medinites. Finally the Medinites realized that they could not successfully counter the army and retreated to Medinah and sought shelter in the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

Medinah under attack

However, Musrif was not satisfied at overcoming the Medinites in battle. Being Yazid’s associate, he wanted to complete their humiliation and wished to be remembered in history for this. So he entered Medinah with all pomp and splendour at the head of his massive army. This incident became famous as the incident of Harrah and occurred in Zilhajj 63 A.H., three months before Yazid’s death.

Yazid b. Muawiyah – A Branch of the Cursed Tree

And We did not make the vision which We showed you but a trial for men and the cursed tree in Quran as well?

(Surah Bani Israel (17): 60)

Tabari, explaining the revelation of this verse, has documented a dream that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had wherein the children of Hakam b. Abi Aas (from the family of Umayya) were jumping up and down upon his pulpit like monkeys. This dream upset the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) so much that he never laughed again.

Tafsir-e-Tabari, vol 15, pg 177; Al-Durr al-Mansur, vol 4, pg 191

Aaesha told Marwaan b. Hakam that Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) told her:

The ‘cursed tree€™ in the Quran implies you (i.e. Marwan b. Hakam and his family).

Al-Durr al-Mansur, vol 4, pg 191

It is a different story altogether that Aaesha still chose to align herself with Marwaan b. Hakam, fully aware of his antecedents, in the battle of Jamal.

Marwaan b. Hakam is the father of ‘Bani Marwan’ (the progeny of Marwan). His acronym (Kuniyyat) was Abu Abdil Malik. His genealogy is Marwaan b. Hakam b. Abil Aas b. Umayya.

Thus, the bottom line is that history has proved that ‘the cursed tree’ is none other than the family of Umayya — Banu Umayya. Yazid, the accursed son of Muawiyah is from this very family.

Yazid genealogy

His father name was Muawiyah and that of his grandfather Abu Sufyan. His grandmother was Hinda the one who ate the liver of Hazrat Hamzah (a.s.), the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) uncle, after the battle of Ohad. She was notorious throughout Mecca as being a woman of loose character. She had a string of lovers and paramours. Abu Sufyan’s cousin Musaafir b. Amr who was famous among the Quraish for his good looks, generosity and skill as a poet, became Hinda’s lover. Even after marrying Abu Sufyan, Hinda did not severe her amorous and illicit relationship with Musaafir. And so Musaafir is one of the four people considered to have possibly fathered Muawiyah.

Sharho Nahjil Balaghah by Ibne Abil Hadid, vol. 1, pg. 30

Yazid’s mother’s was Maisoon b. Bakhdal Kalbi, a Christian. She was extremely beautiful due to which Muawiyah became inclined towards her. However when she conceived Yazid, Muawiyah abandoned her. Hence, Yazid was born in her house where she and many other women of immoral character breast-fed him.

Yazid’s genealogy and the immoral deeds of his parents and grandparents have been widely chronicled. Abu Sufyan, Hinda the liver eater, Marwaan and their cronies were in the forefront in opposing the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and the Ahle Bait (a.s.).

The despicable attributes of Yazid

Every society and all religions of the world declare alcoholism, gambling, genocide, incest, fornication and the like to be the worst of actions. Humanity deems that any person who indulges in these acts should be condemned. Islam has denounced these activities, declared them to be unlawful (Haraam) and threatened with severe punishment, both in this world as well as the hereafter, for those who commit them. Moreover, a friendly relationship with such people too is prohibited in Islam. A far cry indeed from declaring such persons to be caliphs and leaders. The Holy Quran says:

And obey not from among them any sinner or ungrateful one.

(Surah Insaan (76):24)

According to Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanavi, sinner or ungrateful implies “a wrongdoer or an unbeliever.

The word of Quran is clear. They have no one to blame but themselves for having chosen such persons as their leaders. Now let us throw some light on Yazid’s character.

Yazid relieved Walid of his position as Governor of Medina and appointed Usman b. Muhammad b. Abu Sufyan in his place. Usman despatched a delegation of notables of Medina which included Abdullah b. Amr-e-Makhzoomi, Abdullah b. Hanzala Ansari, Fandar b. Zubair and others to Yazid who gave them a great reception and on their departure, showered them with lavish gifts. However, when the same delegation returned to Medina, its members spoke out against Yazid and his deeds, saying:

‘We have visited a person who has no faith whatsoever. One who drinks wine, plays the tambourine and has prostitutes thronging his court. He plays with dogs and sleeps with children and slave-girls. O people, bear witness that we hereby dismiss Yazid from the post of Caliphate.’

On hearing this, many refused to acknowledge Yazid as a Caliph.

Tarikh-e-Tabari, vol. 4, pg. 3, The Events of 62 A.H.

Here we have Tabari bringing to light the gist of Yazid’s abominable qualities by narrating one incident. However other writers like Masoodi in Murooj al-Zahab, Sibt b. Jawzi in Tazkeratul Khawaas, Tabari in Taarikhul Umam, Ibn Athir in Al-Kaamil, Yaqoobi in his Taraikh and others have also recorded numerous unabashed sins and iniquities of Yazid. Here, we restrict ourselves to mentioning a few incidents.

After the tragedy of Karbala, Yazid invited Ibn Ziyaad to his court, bestowed gifts upon him and gave him a free rein in his harem. One night, while lying intoxicated with his head in Ibn Ziyaad’s (l.a.) lap, he ordered that songs be sung and then addressed the wine bearer thus:

‘O wine bearer! Give me wine enough to fill my heart with joy. Then let Ibn Ziyaad drink similarly, for he is the one who is aware of my secrets and possessions. The one whose hands strengthen my caliphate, the one who fills my coffers with war-booty, the one who killed the Kharijite (Imam Husain (a.s.), God forbid), and has vanquished my enemies and those envious of me.’

Tazkirah al-Khawaas by Sibt ibn Jauzi, pg 290

This and several other incidents also serve as reminders to those who deny Yazid’s role in killing Imam Husain (a.s.).

Proclamation of enmity with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and the denial of the Day of Judgment

Yazid while addressing Aalia, a concubine of his harem sung the following verses:

‘O Aalia! Come near me, give me wine and sing me a song,

Because I dislike praying to Allah, 0 Aalia! Speak to me of Aby Sufyan who was a great man,

As he moved with great swiftness towards Ohad (to battle the Muslims),

He showed great valour against Muhammad (i.e. he killed many Muslims),

And caused the wailing and grieving Muslim women to gather in a large group,

O Umme Ahim (Aalia’s acronym), after I die, marry again,

And hope not to meet me on the Day of Reckoning,

For all that has been said about that day is meaningless and untrue;

Spoken merely to pacify the heart.’

Tazkirah al-Khawaas by Sibt ibn Jauzi pg 291

The following poem proves that Yazid never submitted to Islam nor to the teachings of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

‘Neither has any divine information descended nor any revelation made (to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)).

Naasekh al-Tawaarikh, ch. 3, pg.136, Taarikh-e-Tabari, vol. 11, pg. 358