Showing posts with label English. Show all posts
Showing posts with label English. Show all posts
FORGERIES OF THE ENEMIES OF IMAM AL-HUSAYN
In Zad al-Ma’ad, ‘Allamah al-Majlisi says that it is preferable not to observe fasting on the ninth and tenth of Muharram because the Umayyads used to observe fasting on these two days in order to express delight for and to gloat over the martyrdom of Imam al-Husayn (a.s.). Having seen a good omen in the killing of Imam al-Husayn (a.s.), the Umayyads and their fans fabricated many lies against the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and falsely ascribed to him that he mentioned many merits to be the reward of those who would observe fasting on these two days. On the other hand, the Holy Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.) are reported to have warned against observing fasting on these two days in general and on the tenth of Muhammad, the Day of ‘Ashura’, in particular.
The Umayyads - may Allah curse them - used to store up their annual nutriment in their houses on the tenth of Muharram; accordingly, Imam al-Rida(a.s.) is reported to have said, “If one refrains from arranging for any worldly benefit on the tenth of Muharram, Almighty Allah will grant him all his needs for this world and the world to come. If one considers the tenth of Muharram to be the day of his misfortune, sadness, and weeping, Almighty Allah will make the Resurrection Day the day of his delight and happiness; and he will be delighted by us in Paradise. If one considers the tenth of Muharram to be a blessed day and he thus stores up any annual nutriment on that day, Almighty Allah will not bless that which he stored up and will add him to the gang of Yazid, ‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad, and ‘Umar ibn Sa’d - may Allah curse them all.”
In conclusion, it is required to suspend any worldly activity on this day and to devote oneself to weeping, mourning the martyrdom of Imam al-Husayn (a.s.), recalling his misfortunes, and ordering one’s family members to hold a consolation ceremony in the same way as one may hold for his dearest people. It is also required to abstain from eating and drinking up to the last hour of the day at which one may break the abstention with a drink of water at least, without intending ritual fasting, since to observe fasting on this day is discommended except in cases of obligatory fasting, such as vow fasting and the like. It is also required not to store up anything in the houses, not to laugh, not to entertain oneself, and not to play. It is recommended, on this day, to invoke Almighty Allah to lay curse on the slayers of Imam al-Husayn (a.s.) one thousand times by saying following statement:
The summary of the aforementioned worthy essay of ‘Allamah al-Majlisi is that the reports that are ascribed to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) concerning the merits of the tenth of Muharram, the Day of ‘Ashura’, are all in all fabricated. This topic has been discussed at length by the author of Shifa’ al-Sudur at explaining the famous Ziyarat ‘Ashura’ and, precisely, the statement that reads, “O Allah, verily, the descendants of Umayyah saw a good omen in this day... etc.”
The summary of the author’s explanation is as follows: The Umayyads used to regard this day as good omen and they thus used to do many things on it.
(1) They betook as custom on this day storing up the annual nutriment considering such to achieve happiness, good livelihood, and luxury up to the next year. In order to deny this bad habit, the Holy Imams (a.s.) warned against it in many narrations.
(2) They considered the tenth of Muharram a feast day on which they would commit to the manners of celebration, such as conferring upon the family members with whatever they need, procuring new clothes, having one’s mustache cut, trimming the nails, and shaking hands with each other as well as other norms.
(3) They and their fans have been observing fasting on the tenth of Muharram after they have fabricated numerous traditions entailing the significance of observing fasting on this day.
(4) They and their fans have declared that it is recommended to supplicate Almighty Allah on this day
Hadees e Rasool ( s.a.w.a )
Rayyan ibn Shabeeb relates that once when he visited the Prophet's 8th Infallible Successor, Imam Reza (A.S), on the advent of Muharram, the Imam said: "O Ibn Shabeeb! Muharram is the month in which the people of the Age of Ignorance (Jahiliyya) had forbidden the committing of any oppression as well as armed conflicts. Yet, this ummah did not respect the sanctity of this month or the dignity of their own Prophet. In this month, they killed the Prophet’s offspring… God will never forgive them.
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you wish to cry, then cry for Husain who was slaughtered like a sheep, and was killed along with the members of his household. Eighteen people were martyred along with him who had no equal on Earth. The seven heavens and the earths mourned in his martyrdom…
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you cry for Hussein (A.S) in such a way that tears flow down your cheeks, then God will forgive all the sins that you have committed whether minor or major, whether they be a few instances or a lot…
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you would like to meet the Honourable the Exalted God without having any sins then visit (the shrine of) Hussein (A.S).
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you would like have the company of the Prophet in the halls of Paradise, then curse the murderers of Hussein (A.S).
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you would like to be in the same high ranks in Paradise with us, then be sad when we are sad and be happy when we are happy."
Hadees e Rasool ( s.a.w.a )
Rayyan ibn Shabeeb relates that once when he visited the Prophet's 8th Infallible Successor, Imam Reza (A.S), on the advent of Muharram, the Imam said: "O Ibn Shabeeb! Muharram is the month in which the people of the Age of Ignorance (Jahiliyya) had forbidden the committing of any oppression as well as armed conflicts. Yet, this ummah did not respect the sanctity of this month or the dignity of their own Prophet. In this month, they killed the Prophet’s offspring… God will never forgive them.
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you wish to cry, then cry for Husain who was slaughtered like a sheep, and was killed along with the members of his household. Eighteen people were martyred along with him who had no equal on Earth. The seven heavens and the earths mourned in his martyrdom…
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you cry for Hussein (A.S) in such a way that tears flow down your cheeks, then God will forgive all the sins that you have committed whether minor or major, whether they be a few instances or a lot…
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you would like to meet the Honourable the Exalted God without having any sins then visit (the shrine of) Hussein (A.S).
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you would like have the company of the Prophet in the halls of Paradise, then curse the murderers of Hussein (A.S).
"O Ibn Shabeeb! If you would like to be in the same high ranks in Paradise with us, then be sad when we are sad and be happy when we are happy."
Hazrat Jafar al-Tayyar’s (a.s.) martyrdom and mourning over Imam Husain (a.s.)
Critics of mourning (azadari) level the following charges in support of their claims:
- Weeping over dead is bidah (innovation) and there is no evidence of mourning from the Prophet’s(صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم)
- Weeping is the cause of punishment for the person inside the grave.
- Food distributed to the mourners is innovation and has no place in Islam. In the least it is a waste of resources.
Reply
There is a reply to all the objections in a single event – the martyrdom of Hazrat Jafar al-Tayyar (عليه السلام)– cousin of the Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم).
Hazrat Jafar Ibn Abi Talib (عليه السلام) was the Holy Prophet’s (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) first cousin. He was among the standard bearers of the Muta battle, where he eventually embraced martyred. As soon as the Holy Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) was informed of his martyrdom, he rushed to meet his sons.
When the Holy Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) entered Jafar’s house, he called them aside and kissed them so that his eyes were soaked with tears.
When Jafar’s wife (Asma) witnessed this, she realized it must have something to do with her husband. So she asked: May my father and mother be ransom on you! Is there any news of Jafar and his companions?
He (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) said: Yes, today he has been martyred.
Asma cried loudly and women surrounded her. Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) entered the house and exclaimed while weeping: ‘Alas, my uncle!’
Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) said: Mourners should weep over the likes of Jafar.
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v 6 p 370 trad 27,131
- Al-Seerah al-Nabaviyyah v 5 p 31
- Al-Seerah al-Halabiyyah v 2 p 790
Waqedi narrates:
After the martyrdom of Jafar Ibn Abi Talib (عليه السلام) when Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) entered the house of his daughter Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.), he saw her weeping: ‘O my beloved uncle!’
He (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) said: Women should mourn over Jafar in such a way.
Then he (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) instructed: Prepare food for Jafar’s family and feed them.
- Al-Maghazi v 2 p 214
Comprehensive reply to the skeptics
Traditions and reports related to Hazrat Jafar al-Tayyar’s (عليه السلام) martyrdom are conclusive in deriving the following points:
- Weeping over dead is Sunnah of Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم).
- Not only did the Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) himself mourn the dead, he was just as eager to see others mourn the dead. Hence, the instruction to mourn the likes of Jafar.
- A Sunnah is opposite of bidah (innovation), hence if weeping is Sunnah, then it cannot be bidah. In fact, stopping the Muslims from mourning is bidah.
- Contrary to the claims of the skeptics, weeping over the dead is not cause of punishment for the person inside the grave. Would the Holy Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم) legitimize weeping over Jafar al-Tayyar (عليه السلام) and indirectly punish his own cousin. The punishment over mourning relates to the dead from the disbelievers.
- Feeding the mourners is a Sunnah of the Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم). Hence to dismiss the food as innovation or needless expenditure amounts to replacing the Prophet’s Sunnah with one’s own opinion.
The Truth About Imam Husain’s Revolution
Different phenomena vary as to their realities. Similarly, every uprising or revolt is unique as to the truth/s underlying its eruption [and eventual success or otherwise]. In order to understand a particular matter, or a state of affairs, you should know the deeper reasons underling its existing form and the characteristics that gave it that specific appearance. You should also be conscious of the material causes of that matter, or issue, i.e. its constituents or ingredients. In other words:
The forces/causes that produced the revolt or uprising, which signify its truth are called “the causes at work”.
The nature of the revolt and its goals represent “its intents and purposes”.
The actual action plan, implementing it, and all what goes with it represent “its material causes”.
The end result that the revolt has come to produce represents its “overall picture”.
[Applying these parameters], was Imam Hussain’s uprising a result of an angry outburst?
Islam is different from some other movements for change or reform that took place as a result of certain circumstances that in turn led to eruptions.
Dialectics, for example, encourages heightening disagreements, inciting discontent, and showing opposition even for genuine reforms in order to bring things to a head on collision, i.e. an explosive revolution, not a conscious one.
Islam does not subscribe to these types of revolutions. The history of most Islamic revolts or uprisings speaks of the rationale behind such revolts, in that they came as a result of a complete understanding of the status quo they were determined to change. Thus, Imam Hussain’s revolt was not a result of an angry outburst, prompted by the pressures exerted by the Umayyad rule, especially during the reigns of Mu’aawiyah [the founder of the dynastic rule], and his son, Yezid.
Rather, it was a very well calculated move. What substantiates the position the Imam (a.s.) took in this regard was the letters he exchanged with both the men; and the sermons he gave on different occasions, especially that one he addressed the Companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) in Mina, [in present day Saudi Arabia] with. All this evidence points in the direction of one conclusion. That is, the Imam was fully aware of what he was intending to do, viz. taking on the ruling establishment. His revolt was free from any angry reaction; rather, it was a purely Islamic uprising.
Looking at Imam Hussain’s revolt from another perspective, i.e. the way he was treating his followers, one can only come out with one conclusion. He was determined not to let the feelings of his companions run high, in a bid to avoid his revolt’s earning any description of an explosive one. Of this strategy was his repeated attempts to appeal to his companions to leave his company, with a view to sparing them the fate that was awaiting them all, i.e. him included. He used to remind them every now and then that they should not expect any materialistic gain in their march, other than definite death. After he commended his companions, describing them as among the best of friends, he pleaded with them one last time, i.e. on the eve of the 10th of Muharram, [62 AH, 680 CE], to leave if they so wished, making it clear to them that they would be safe, for the Umayyad’s were after his head alone.
You can hardly find a leader who aspires to utilize the dissatisfaction of his people to push them to revolt who talks in the same way Imam Hussain (a.s.) was talking to his companions. It is true that he was responsible for outlining to them their religious duty to rise against the despotic rule, in that resisting injustice and repression is such an obligation they have to discharge, yet he was seeking that his companions would discharge their responsibility of their own accord, i.e. without coercion.
That was why he reiterated to them to melt away from the battlefield under the cover of darkness because the enemy was not going to pursue them had they taken flight, nor had he wanted to force them to fight. He further advised them that he would absolve them from their oath of allegiance to him, should they have chosen to forsake him, in that he left it to their own consciences. That is, whichever way they decided, it had to be dictated by siding with the right, i.e. without compulsion, either from him or from the enemy. It would be their own choice alone. However, their decision to remain with the Imam gave the martyrs of Kerbala the high regard they are held with.
To draw a comparison between the position taken by Imam Hussain (a.s.) and Tariq bin Ziyad in the battle of Jabal Tariq [the Rock of Gibraltar], we would say that what Ibn Ziyad resorted to of action is symptomatic of a leader with a politician’s mentality, whereas Imam Hussain was conscious not to force the fight on his comrades in arms.
What Ibn Ziyad did was to burn all the food supplies save that which could sustain his troops for twenty-four hours. He then addressed them in a sermon to the effect that they had no choice but to win the battle, making it clear that if they did not win, the result would be one of two: They would either be routed by the army of the enemy or got drowned in the sea, should they have chosen to flee. In contrast, Imam Hussain (a.s.) left the choice to the small band of his followers to engage the enemy in combat or turn back, for neither the enemy nor he were coercing them to fight.
Indeed, the Imam’s revolt had its roots in the complete understanding, by all parties of his camp, of its inevitability. Thus, it should not be described as though it were brought about by a disgruntled man. This responsible revolt had a multiplicity of factors, in that it was neither a single entity nor a single-aim movement.
Among the differences that exist between matters of the physical world and the social one is that in the material world minerals always demonstrate a single essence. For instance, you cannot find, as a raw material, gold and copper in a single entity. In contrast, in social phenomena, it is quite possible that a single phenomenon might demonstrate a variety of realities and essences. Man is such a wonder because he can boast several essences at the same time.
The forces/causes that produced the revolt or uprising, which signify its truth are called “the causes at work”.
The nature of the revolt and its goals represent “its intents and purposes”.
The actual action plan, implementing it, and all what goes with it represent “its material causes”.
The end result that the revolt has come to produce represents its “overall picture”.
[Applying these parameters], was Imam Hussain’s uprising a result of an angry outburst?
Islam is different from some other movements for change or reform that took place as a result of certain circumstances that in turn led to eruptions.
Dialectics, for example, encourages heightening disagreements, inciting discontent, and showing opposition even for genuine reforms in order to bring things to a head on collision, i.e. an explosive revolution, not a conscious one.
Islam does not subscribe to these types of revolutions. The history of most Islamic revolts or uprisings speaks of the rationale behind such revolts, in that they came as a result of a complete understanding of the status quo they were determined to change. Thus, Imam Hussain’s revolt was not a result of an angry outburst, prompted by the pressures exerted by the Umayyad rule, especially during the reigns of Mu’aawiyah [the founder of the dynastic rule], and his son, Yezid.
Rather, it was a very well calculated move. What substantiates the position the Imam (a.s.) took in this regard was the letters he exchanged with both the men; and the sermons he gave on different occasions, especially that one he addressed the Companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) in Mina, [in present day Saudi Arabia] with. All this evidence points in the direction of one conclusion. That is, the Imam was fully aware of what he was intending to do, viz. taking on the ruling establishment. His revolt was free from any angry reaction; rather, it was a purely Islamic uprising.
Looking at Imam Hussain’s revolt from another perspective, i.e. the way he was treating his followers, one can only come out with one conclusion. He was determined not to let the feelings of his companions run high, in a bid to avoid his revolt’s earning any description of an explosive one. Of this strategy was his repeated attempts to appeal to his companions to leave his company, with a view to sparing them the fate that was awaiting them all, i.e. him included. He used to remind them every now and then that they should not expect any materialistic gain in their march, other than definite death. After he commended his companions, describing them as among the best of friends, he pleaded with them one last time, i.e. on the eve of the 10th of Muharram, [62 AH, 680 CE], to leave if they so wished, making it clear to them that they would be safe, for the Umayyad’s were after his head alone.
You can hardly find a leader who aspires to utilize the dissatisfaction of his people to push them to revolt who talks in the same way Imam Hussain (a.s.) was talking to his companions. It is true that he was responsible for outlining to them their religious duty to rise against the despotic rule, in that resisting injustice and repression is such an obligation they have to discharge, yet he was seeking that his companions would discharge their responsibility of their own accord, i.e. without coercion.
That was why he reiterated to them to melt away from the battlefield under the cover of darkness because the enemy was not going to pursue them had they taken flight, nor had he wanted to force them to fight. He further advised them that he would absolve them from their oath of allegiance to him, should they have chosen to forsake him, in that he left it to their own consciences. That is, whichever way they decided, it had to be dictated by siding with the right, i.e. without compulsion, either from him or from the enemy. It would be their own choice alone. However, their decision to remain with the Imam gave the martyrs of Kerbala the high regard they are held with.
To draw a comparison between the position taken by Imam Hussain (a.s.) and Tariq bin Ziyad in the battle of Jabal Tariq [the Rock of Gibraltar], we would say that what Ibn Ziyad resorted to of action is symptomatic of a leader with a politician’s mentality, whereas Imam Hussain was conscious not to force the fight on his comrades in arms.
What Ibn Ziyad did was to burn all the food supplies save that which could sustain his troops for twenty-four hours. He then addressed them in a sermon to the effect that they had no choice but to win the battle, making it clear that if they did not win, the result would be one of two: They would either be routed by the army of the enemy or got drowned in the sea, should they have chosen to flee. In contrast, Imam Hussain (a.s.) left the choice to the small band of his followers to engage the enemy in combat or turn back, for neither the enemy nor he were coercing them to fight.
Indeed, the Imam’s revolt had its roots in the complete understanding, by all parties of his camp, of its inevitability. Thus, it should not be described as though it were brought about by a disgruntled man. This responsible revolt had a multiplicity of factors, in that it was neither a single entity nor a single-aim movement.
Among the differences that exist between matters of the physical world and the social one is that in the material world minerals always demonstrate a single essence. For instance, you cannot find, as a raw material, gold and copper in a single entity. In contrast, in social phenomena, it is quite possible that a single phenomenon might demonstrate a variety of realities and essences. Man is such a wonder because he can boast several essences at the same time.
Imam Hussain (A.S) Revolution's Results
What
had Imam Husayn's revolution meant in history? Some people who are not
familiar with its motives, innocently inquire about its results. Others
have even questioned the wisdom of striking at a mighty force like the
Umayyads, which was fatal. Although the revolution's motives have
already been discussed, a brief review of the changes in the Muslim
World after Imam Husayn's revolution is appropriate;
1. Murdering Imam Husayn (as) the grandson of the Prophet (S) was a great shock to the whole Muslim world. This is not to mention the way he was murdered or the treatment given to his family who had the highest esteem and respect of all Muslims. Consequently, all Muslims dissociated themselves from the Umayyad's deeds and policies. Indeed, who wants to share in the certain curse upon those who murdered the family of the Prophet?
Thus, this revolution had done the task of unveiling the Umayyad's un-Islamic character to the general public and left no doubt in any person's heart about the Umayyad's substance.
Therefore, the concepts which the Umayyad's were propagating in order to distort the ideals of Islam found no listening ear any longer, diverting the Umayyad's mischief of changing Islamic concepts and ideals.
2. Imam Husayn's revolution set a lively example as to the duty of Muslims in such conditions. It had deeply penetrated peoples’ hearts and produced great pains within them for not doing their Islamic duty. This feeling which pained people all the time transformed into repentance and then to an open revolt against the Umayyad's regime. Thus, the revolution provided the stimulant to move their spirit and set it in a dynamic movement. Indeed, the Islamic movement was put to a new gear throughout the rest of the Islamic history.
A series of revolutions manifesting Imam Husayn's revolutionary spirit and reforms emerged at successive intervals. Tawabeen's revolution took place immediately after Karbala's tragedy. Another revolution at Madina was aiming at doing away with the Umayyads deviated regime. Al-Mukhtar Al-Thaqafi led another revolution which stormed the Umayyad's regime in Iraq and he was able to punish all principal collaborators in the campaign against Imam Husayn in Iraq. Mitraf ibn Al-Mughira's revolution against Hajjaj and Abdul Malik was another result.
However, there were a chain of revolutions in all parts of the Muslim world which eventually did away with the Umayyad's regime. Imam Husayn's revolution was the principal slogan of the revolutionaries against the Umayyad's. The Abasides came and soon their conduct was exposed as not that which the family of the Prophet was advocating. They realized that the revolution’s results were stolen and before they could do anything, the main personalities which carried the revolt through were treacherously eliminated by murder, poison and imprisonment.
The attempts to restore Islamic conduct have never ceased throughout Islamic history. Bitter experiences and intermittent material failures are natural results of struggle. Most importantly is the triumph of the Islamic spirit against intimidation and attempts to obscure its shining face and glory. A ceaseless revolution in Muslim lives is a reality, which the enemies of Islam failed to extinguish.
The secret key of this blessed revolution lies in the firm faith in God, the unshakable conviction, which puts material supremacy and gain in an inferior position to God's satisfaction. These ideals were demonstrated by Imam Husayn when the Muslims were in need of such an example most.
The revolution of Imam Husayn was not solely for changing a government, if it was so, then it would be wrong to call it a revolution. Imam Husayn was advocating a drastic change in the social set up, the economic and political structures and refining Islamic concepts from foreign ideas which had crept into Muslims' minds and thoughts.
Imam Husayn wanted to change the life of Muslims to be in conformity with Islamic laws and ideals. Indeed, this explains one main reason for why Imam Husayn was let down by the tribes of Kufa after being promised support, and his call was ignored by the rest of the Muslim world. Hence, a revolution means a drastic change in one's life or the collective life when applied to a large scale.
For more detail ....please read the Full Article Here
1. Murdering Imam Husayn (as) the grandson of the Prophet (S) was a great shock to the whole Muslim world. This is not to mention the way he was murdered or the treatment given to his family who had the highest esteem and respect of all Muslims. Consequently, all Muslims dissociated themselves from the Umayyad's deeds and policies. Indeed, who wants to share in the certain curse upon those who murdered the family of the Prophet?
Thus, this revolution had done the task of unveiling the Umayyad's un-Islamic character to the general public and left no doubt in any person's heart about the Umayyad's substance.
Therefore, the concepts which the Umayyad's were propagating in order to distort the ideals of Islam found no listening ear any longer, diverting the Umayyad's mischief of changing Islamic concepts and ideals.
2. Imam Husayn's revolution set a lively example as to the duty of Muslims in such conditions. It had deeply penetrated peoples’ hearts and produced great pains within them for not doing their Islamic duty. This feeling which pained people all the time transformed into repentance and then to an open revolt against the Umayyad's regime. Thus, the revolution provided the stimulant to move their spirit and set it in a dynamic movement. Indeed, the Islamic movement was put to a new gear throughout the rest of the Islamic history.
A series of revolutions manifesting Imam Husayn's revolutionary spirit and reforms emerged at successive intervals. Tawabeen's revolution took place immediately after Karbala's tragedy. Another revolution at Madina was aiming at doing away with the Umayyads deviated regime. Al-Mukhtar Al-Thaqafi led another revolution which stormed the Umayyad's regime in Iraq and he was able to punish all principal collaborators in the campaign against Imam Husayn in Iraq. Mitraf ibn Al-Mughira's revolution against Hajjaj and Abdul Malik was another result.
However, there were a chain of revolutions in all parts of the Muslim world which eventually did away with the Umayyad's regime. Imam Husayn's revolution was the principal slogan of the revolutionaries against the Umayyad's. The Abasides came and soon their conduct was exposed as not that which the family of the Prophet was advocating. They realized that the revolution’s results were stolen and before they could do anything, the main personalities which carried the revolt through were treacherously eliminated by murder, poison and imprisonment.
The attempts to restore Islamic conduct have never ceased throughout Islamic history. Bitter experiences and intermittent material failures are natural results of struggle. Most importantly is the triumph of the Islamic spirit against intimidation and attempts to obscure its shining face and glory. A ceaseless revolution in Muslim lives is a reality, which the enemies of Islam failed to extinguish.
The secret key of this blessed revolution lies in the firm faith in God, the unshakable conviction, which puts material supremacy and gain in an inferior position to God's satisfaction. These ideals were demonstrated by Imam Husayn when the Muslims were in need of such an example most.
The revolution of Imam Husayn was not solely for changing a government, if it was so, then it would be wrong to call it a revolution. Imam Husayn was advocating a drastic change in the social set up, the economic and political structures and refining Islamic concepts from foreign ideas which had crept into Muslims' minds and thoughts.
Imam Husayn wanted to change the life of Muslims to be in conformity with Islamic laws and ideals. Indeed, this explains one main reason for why Imam Husayn was let down by the tribes of Kufa after being promised support, and his call was ignored by the rest of the Muslim world. Hence, a revolution means a drastic change in one's life or the collective life when applied to a large scale.
For more detail ....please read the Full Article Here
Imam Hussain's Revolution: Reasons and Motives
All those who are familiar with the Imam's life do
certainly realize that his role in serving Islam had started very early
in his life. He has contributed to the rising Islamic movement when he
was a boy, and played a significant role, when his father was the
Commander of the faithful, taking part in all three wars that his father
fought along with the rest of the faithful companions and followers.
When his brother Hassan (A.S.) became Imam, he obeyed
and followed him in all what he said or did. Then his role entered a
new stage with the passing away of his brother. And since the role of
any Imam of Ahl ul-Bait is defined in accordance with the nature of the
social and political conditions of his age, the Imam drew a new course
in determining the direction of the Islamic movement.
Winds of Revolution:
When Muawiah died in the middle of Rajab of year
60(Hijra), and his son Yazied took power, and ordered his walis to ask
for the people's pledge of loyalty and especially that of Imam Hussain
(A.S.), a wave of rejection and opposition to the policy of betrayal and
tyranny mounted, and the Imam decided to rise to his religious
responsibilities as the lawful Imam and the leader of the Islamic nation
entrusted with the task of preserving its divine message.
He (A.S.) went to his grandfather's (S.A.W) grave, and recited the following prayer:
"O God, This is the grave of your Prophet, Muhammad
(S.A.W) and I am his daughter's son, and I have come to know what you
undoubtedly know. O God, I like to enjoin the good and reject the evil. I
ask you O All-Mighty God by this grave and by who is in it to choose
for me what would please You and Your Prophet".
Thus Imam Hussain (A.S.) pledged that he would defend
the message whatever the cost, as long as it would lead to Allah's
satisfaction.
The Imam went on to meet with his relatives and
followers and inform them of his intention to leave to Mekkah. He was
met by a lot of opposition of those who tried to dissuade him, either
because they were afraid that he would get killed, or because they were
not courageous enough to follow him. But his resolve to uphold the right
was not shaken by such objections or threats.
He declared his first revolutionary communiqué which took the form of a will he wrote to his brother, Muhammad bin Al-Hanifiah:
"...I did not revolt for the cause of evil tyranny or
corruption, but to reform my grandfather's (Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W))
nation. I want to enjoin the good and denounce the evil, and take the
course of my father and grandfather".
This eternal communiqué was the official declaration of his revolution.
The Imam (A.S.) traveled to Mekkah and there he chose
to stay at the house of Al-Abass bin Abdul Mutalib, where the faithful
believers of Mekkah, as well as those outside it, started to visit him
and pledge loyalty to him. News about the political uprising in Kaufa
reached Mekkah, and the leaders of the city wrote a letter in which they
declared their opposition to the Ummayad rule, and they would not
accept anybody else but Imam Hussain (A.S.) to rule them. This letter
was followed by many other letters asking the Imam to come to their city
to assume his rule as an Imam of the faithful.
On the way to the Greater Martyrdom:
Yazid became so worried that he decided to send an
army led by Amr bin Saad bin Al-Ass, to kill the Imam wherever they
found him and whatever the costs. When the Imam heard that Yazied's army
was heading towards Mekkah, he was afraid that they would violate the
sanctuary of the City, so he decided to leave to Kaufa although he knew
before hand the ultimate destiny he was to face.
Imam Hussain (A.S.) and his companions headed towards
Iraq; although he was certain that he was going to be killed. But he
believed that the true victory of Allah's message would be realized
through his martyrdom, since there was no one else to stand up for the
oppression. He knew that the nation would not wake up except by such a
great shock. Therefore, let this shock be his martyrdom, along with Ahl
ul-Bait who went all the way with him.
The Reasons of the Revolution:
Imam Hussain (A.S.) did not possess the necessary
force that would enable him to win; he did not even rely on those who
wrote to him from Kaufa. For he declared his revolution before he
received their letters and delegates. Al-Hijaz too did not give him
enough support to be able to stand against the Ummayads. Therefore he
decided to leave to Iraq for the sole reason of preventing any blood
shedding in the Holy City of Mekkah. Moreover, he knew that he was
destined to die; yet he went on.
Why then did he insist; and why did he declare his revolution?
To answer this question, one should be aware of the following facts:
First: Yazied represented a real danger to the
Islamic nation, for he was not a true Muslim. He was not properly
educated with the teachings of Islam. And he used to drink alcohol,
gamble, and commit all other sins according to historic sources. He
said: Banu Hashim staged a play to obtain the Kingdom. Actually, there
was neither any news (from Allah) nor any revelation. Such a man could
not be entrusted with the affairs of the nation. Nevertheless, the
faithful forces, with Imam Hussain (A.S.) as their leader, had benefited
a lot from these points of weakness in the personality of such an evil
ruler.
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
Is it wrong to commemorate his martyrdom every year?
Courtesy : http://www.al-hadi.us/religion/index.html
I find it very unfortunate to discuss this question. Disturbingly, there are people who accuse the Shia'a of bida'a (innovation) because, every year, they intensely and passionately commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, his family and companions at Karbala'. Every year and for 10 days, the followers of Ahlul Bayt commemorate and mourn over the tragedy of Karbala'. Is is really wrong, in principle, to commemorate Imam Hussein's martyrdom? What are these troubled and hateful people afraid of? Why do they not commemorate Imam Hussein as well? Is it really against the Sunnah to do so? Let me put it in a simpler way: is it wrong to commemorate the loss of a loved one? Is it not humane to do so? Did the prophet prohibit us to do so?? For the record, the true Ahlul Sunnah do not oppose this commemoration. The people who oppose this practice can not claim to be from Ahlul Sunnah. They are quite different and have their own agenda: oppose the Shia'a and make Kafir those who do not share their viewpoint.
I find it very unfortunate to discuss this question. Disturbingly, there are people who accuse the Shia'a of bida'a (innovation) because, every year, they intensely and passionately commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, his family and companions at Karbala'. Every year and for 10 days, the followers of Ahlul Bayt commemorate and mourn over the tragedy of Karbala'. Is is really wrong, in principle, to commemorate Imam Hussein's martyrdom? What are these troubled and hateful people afraid of? Why do they not commemorate Imam Hussein as well? Is it really against the Sunnah to do so? Let me put it in a simpler way: is it wrong to commemorate the loss of a loved one? Is it not humane to do so? Did the prophet prohibit us to do so?? For the record, the true Ahlul Sunnah do not oppose this commemoration. The people who oppose this practice can not claim to be from Ahlul Sunnah. They are quite different and have their own agenda: oppose the Shia'a and make Kafir those who do not share their viewpoint.
Let me quote what ibn Katheer said in al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya and this
exactly what these people say today about the Shia'a who commemorate the
martyrdom of al-Hussein:
Every Muslim will be saddened by the killing
of Imam Hussein. He is from the leaders of the Muslims, and the son of
the daughter of the messenger of Allah who is the preferred of his
daughters. He was a great worshipper, courageous and generous. But it is
not good when the Shia'a show their grief and sadness which is mostly
artificial (theatrical) and hyprocritical.
His father was greater than him and he was killed. However, they do not commemorate his killing as they do for al-Hussein. His father was killed on a Friday while he was heading to Salat al-Fajr on 17th of Ramadan year 40 A.H. Similarly, Uthman was greater than Ali according to Ahlul Sunna wal-Jama'a. He was killed while under-siege in his residence in the month of Dhul-Hijja year 36 A.H. Yet the people do not commemorate his killing. Similarly, Umar is greater than Uthman and Ali. He was killed while praying Salat al-Fajr and reading the Quran. Yet, the people do not commemorate his killing. Similarly, al-Siddiq was greater than him and yet, the people do not commemorate his killing. And the prophet, who is the master of all in this world and the hereafter. He died as the prophets before him died. Yet, no one commemorates their death as these ignorant Rawaffid do for al-Hussein....
فكل مسلم ينبغي له أن يحزنه قتله رضي الله عنه، فإنه
من سادات المسلمين، وعلماء الصحابة، وابن بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم
التي هي أفضل بناته، وقد كان عابداً وشجاعاً وسخياً،
ولكن لا يحسن ما يفعله الشيعة من إظهار الجزع والحزن الذي لعل أكثره تصنع
ورياء.
وقد كان أبوه أفضل منه فقتل، وهم لا يتخذون مقتله مأتماً كيوم مقتل الحسين،
فإن أباه قتل يوم الجمعة وهو خارج إلى صلاة الفجر في السابع عشر من رمضان
سنة أربعين، وكذلك عثمان كان أفضل من علي عند أهل السنة والجماعة.
وقد قتل وهو محصور في داره في أيام التشريق من شهر ذي الحجة سنة ست
وثلاثين، وقد ذبح من الوريد إلى الوريد، ولم يتخذ الناس يوم قتله مأتماً.
وكذلك عمر بن الخطاب وهو أفضل من عثمان وعلي، قتل وهو قائم يصلي في المحراب
صلاة الفجر ويقرأ القرآن، ولم يتخذ الناس يوم قتله مأتماً.
وكذلك الصديق كان أفضل منه ولم يتخذ الناس يوم وفاته مأتماً، ورسول الله
صلى الله عليه وسلم سيد ولد آدم في الدنيا والآخرة، وقد قبضه الله إليه كما
مات الأنبياء قبله، ولم يتخذ أحد يوم موتهم مأتماً يفعلون فيه ما يفعله
هؤلاء الجهلة من الرافضة يوم مصرع الحسين.
ولا ذكر أحد أنه ظهر يوم موتهم وقبلهم شيء مما ادعاه هؤلاء يوم مقتل الحسين
من الأمور المتقدمة، مثل كسوف الشمس والحمرة التي تطلع في السماء، وغير
ذلك.
وأحسن ما يقال عند ذكر هذه المصائب وأمثالها ما رواه علي بن الحسين: عن جده
رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال: ((ما من مسلم يصاب بمصيبة فيتذكرها
وإن تقادم عهدها فيحدث لها استرجاعاً إلا أعطاه الله من الأجر مثل يوم
أصيب منها)).
رواه الإمام أحمد وابن ماجه.
Now the reasons why it is not wrong to commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Hussein:
- Is it wrong to periodically remember your lost loved ones? Is it
inhumane? Is it Haram?? Is it wrong, inhumane and Haram to weep for them
when remembered??
When the prophet lost his beloved uncle Abu Talib and his beloved wife
Umna Khadija, two priceless losses and few days apart, the prophet
called that year the year of Sadness (A'am al-Huzn). Badriddeen
al-A'aini reported in U'umadatul Qari the following:
....because Abu Talib and Khadija died within three days. Sa'aed said in his book Kitab al-Nussuss that the prophet named this year the Year of Sadness...وأيا ما كان، فلم يشهد أمر أبي طالب لأنه توفي هو وخديجة في أيام ثلاثة، قال صاعد في (كتاب النصوص) : فكان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يسمي ذلك العام عام الحزن،
Imam Abdul-Wahab al-Sha'arani wrote in Kashf al-Ghumma A'an Jami'i al-Ummah:
Then Umna Khadija died after Abu Talib, and the prophet named that year the Year of Sadness.ثم توفيت خديجة رضي الله عنها بعد أبي طالب فسمى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ذلك العام عام الحزنibn Mandhur al-Afriqi wrote in Lissan al-A'arab:
The year of Sadness: it is the year in which Umna Khadija and Abu Talib died, so the prophet named that year the Year of Sadness.
Tha'alab reported this from ibn al-Aa'arabi, who said: they both died 3 years before the Hijra (the migration to Medina).وعامُ الحُزْنِ: العامُ الذي ماتت فيه خديجةُ -رضي الله عنها- وأَبو طالب فسمّاه رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- عامَ الحُزْنِ.In fact the prophet never stopped remembering Umna Khadija, even while he was married to his other wives. This fact is well-known among the scholars of both denominations. This consistent remembrance made Umna A'aysha so jealous that she used to ill-describe her. The details of her jealousy can be found here: Umna Aysha.
حكى ذلك ثعلب عن ابن الأَعرابي، قال: وماتا قَبْل الهِجرة بثلاث سنين.
The point is the prophet continued to remember his beloved wife long after her death. This is the Sunnah of the prophet. For the prophet to declare the year he lost his uncle and his wife the Year of Sadness indicates that his loss affected him for a while. Therefore, remembrance of Imam al-Hussein is not against the Sunnah.
Why Imam Hussein (a.s.) Is not being forgotten?
The importance of the history of life of Imam
Hussein (also Husayn) (a.s.) which has been converted to one of most
sensational epics of human history is not only because of arousing most
powerful waves of sensations of millions of people around itself every
year and creates a ceremony which is more sensational than other
ceremonies, but its importance is mostly because that: It has no
“motive” other than pure religious and humanly and popular sensations
and feelings and this magnificent ceremony that observes in respect and
commemoration of this historical incident has no need to preliminaries
and advertisements and it is unexampled in its kind in this aspect.
Most of us know this truth, but the point which has not been truly cleared for lot of people (especially non-Muslim thinkers) yet and still is remained like a puzzle in their minds is that: Why is this historical incident which has several similar examples in “quantity and quality” emphasized so much? Why does the ceremony which is observed in respect and commemoration of this memory set up more magnificent and more sensational from the last year?
Why today that there is no sign of “Umavi (related to Umayya) party” and their companions and heroes of this incident must have been forgotten, the incident of Karbala has become eternal?!
The answer to this question should be sought among the main motives of this revolution; we assume that analyzing this matter is not so hard and complicated for persons who are familiar with the history of Islam.
In more clear way, the bloody incident of Karbala is not a chart of a battle between two political competitors for achieving the throne of leadership or estates or lands.
Also, this incident has not been emanated from the explosion of hatreds of two hostile tribes which begins for gaining tribal privileges.
In fact, this incident is a clear scene of the battle between two doctrines related to individuals and beliefs that its blazing fire has not been extinguished during the adventurous history of mankind, from the farthest times to today; this fight is the continue of the fight of all prophets and reformer men of the world and in other hand it is the continue of the battles “Badr and Ahzab”.
We all know that when prophet of Islam (s.a.) arose as the leader of an intellectual and social revolution, for saving the mankind from all kinds of idolatry and superstitions and saving people from the claws of ignorance and oppression and collected the oppressed and truth-wanting groups of people who were the most important elements of evolution around himself, at this time oppositions of this reforming movement who were rich idolaters and usurious persons pf Mecca as their heads used all of their forces for repressing this voice of freedom and creativity of these anti-Islamic acts was in hands of “Umavi party” and their leader Abu Suffian.
Most of us know this truth, but the point which has not been truly cleared for lot of people (especially non-Muslim thinkers) yet and still is remained like a puzzle in their minds is that: Why is this historical incident which has several similar examples in “quantity and quality” emphasized so much? Why does the ceremony which is observed in respect and commemoration of this memory set up more magnificent and more sensational from the last year?
Why today that there is no sign of “Umavi (related to Umayya) party” and their companions and heroes of this incident must have been forgotten, the incident of Karbala has become eternal?!
The answer to this question should be sought among the main motives of this revolution; we assume that analyzing this matter is not so hard and complicated for persons who are familiar with the history of Islam.
In more clear way, the bloody incident of Karbala is not a chart of a battle between two political competitors for achieving the throne of leadership or estates or lands.
Also, this incident has not been emanated from the explosion of hatreds of two hostile tribes which begins for gaining tribal privileges.
In fact, this incident is a clear scene of the battle between two doctrines related to individuals and beliefs that its blazing fire has not been extinguished during the adventurous history of mankind, from the farthest times to today; this fight is the continue of the fight of all prophets and reformer men of the world and in other hand it is the continue of the battles “Badr and Ahzab”.
We all know that when prophet of Islam (s.a.) arose as the leader of an intellectual and social revolution, for saving the mankind from all kinds of idolatry and superstitions and saving people from the claws of ignorance and oppression and collected the oppressed and truth-wanting groups of people who were the most important elements of evolution around himself, at this time oppositions of this reforming movement who were rich idolaters and usurious persons pf Mecca as their heads used all of their forces for repressing this voice of freedom and creativity of these anti-Islamic acts was in hands of “Umavi party” and their leader Abu Suffian.
Mourning ( Azadari ) is not a Bid'at ( Innovation ) - PROVED!!
First Objection:
Martyrdom should be celebrated not mourned!!!
REPLY:-
Rasulullah(saww) mourned those that were martyred!!
Many companions were martyred in the battles that took place during the time of the Holy Prophet (s) and of course all of them succeeded in their respective examinations. Hamza was named as the Lord of the Martyrs, and hence received a larger but rather than express joy at what his uncle had attained he cried and lamented over him and asked that the women of Quraysh to likewise.
1) Seerat un Nabi, volume 1, page 345.
2) Ma'arij al Nabuwat, Rukn 4, chapter (Bab) 6, page 123
Similarly we have already cited the incident where Holy Prophet (s) wept over the martyrdom of Jaffar Ibn Abi Talib (as). If mourning for a martyr is incorrect than what do Nawasib think about Holy Prophet (s)? The fact of the matter is that Prophet (s) himself gave best reply of the pathetic Nasibi belief for celeberating the martyrdom rather to mourn it.
The Holy Prophet (s) said : “Yes, Today Jafar has been martyred there, but the troubles and the plight that he went through before being martyred are very grieving.”
Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihaya, Volume 4 page 673
This proves that mourning and lamenting for a martyr was practiced by the Holy Prophet (s) and hence it is Sunnah of the Prophet whilst celebrating the loss of a martyr has no textual proof.
1) Seerat un Nabi, volume 1, page 345.2) Ma'arij al Nabuwat, Rukn 4, chapter (Bab) 6, page 123
Similarly we have already cited the incident where Holy Prophet (s) wept over the martyrdom of Jaffar Ibn Abi Talib (as). If mourning for a martyr is incorrect than what do Nawasib think about Holy Prophet (s)? The fact of the matter is that Prophet (s) himself gave best reply of the pathetic Nasibi belief for celeberating the martyrdom rather to mourn it.
The Holy Prophet (s) said : “Yes, Today Jafar has been martyred there, but the troubles and the plight that he went through before being martyred are very grieving.”
Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihaya, Volume 4 page 673
This proves that mourning and lamenting for a martyr was practiced by the Holy Prophet (s) and hence it is Sunnah of the Prophet whilst celebrating the loss of a martyr has no textual proof.
Lady Hajra mourned when she heard of her son’s pending death!! Traditions record that Hajra fainted when she visited the spot where her husband intended to slaughter his son. Some of the narrators say that it was this very grief that gradually caused her death. Nasibi logic would dictate that Hajra should have been doubly happy because her son was alive and also got the rewards for succeeding in the examination - she should have kept praising Ismail (as), however, she was a mother and not a foe, the latter would have been happy at the hardships faced by her son and husband. It is natural that whenever a loved one is in trouble, or if he has faced hardships, it always causes pain and sorrow, hence those who love Imam Husayn (as) will mourn and cry and his enemies will praise their persecutors.
One can never rejoice over the terrible suffering of the Ahl’ul bayt (as)!!!
Whilst martyrdom is the sign of a great individual, it is also a time of reflection / sadness at an individual's suffering.
One can never rejoice over the terrible suffering of the Ahl’ul bayt (as)!!!
Whilst martyrdom is the sign of a great individual, it is also a time of reflection / sadness at an individual's suffering. One can never rejoice over the terrible suffering of the Ahl’ul bayt (as)When our fourth Imam Zayn ul Abideen (as)was asked that which incident was of most pain to you during and after the Karbala? Imam (as) replied"Shaam! Shaam! Shaam!"
Although martyrdom is a high status a fact recognised by our Imams, the unveiling the daughters of Muhammad (s), making them prisoners and parading then bare head and foot through the streets of Damascus, is not a happy occasion, is this something that the Bani Hashim should be proud of? Should they rejoice at such humiliation?
Although martyrdom is a high status a fact recognised by our Imams, the unveiling the daughters of Muhammad (s), making them prisoners and parading then bare head and foot through the streets of Damascus, is not a happy occasion, is this something that the Bani Hashim should be proud of? Should they rejoice at such humiliation?
SECOND OBJECTION:
Shia rituals are a waste of money Shi'a waste money and blood on this Day - why?
Reply –
The Eid sacrifice should likewise be deemed a waste of money
At Mina on one day hundreds of thousands of goats are slaughtered and there meat often goes to waste, if its okay for such a waste of money on that day then why the objection to mourning for Imam Husayn (as)? If such spending at Mina is remember the event of Ismail (as) the Shi'a can also do the same on Ashura.
When our fourth Imam Zayn ul Abideen (as) was asked that which incident was of most pain to you during and after the Karbala? Imam (as) replied"Shaam! Shaam! Shaam!"
Although martyrdom is a high status a fact recognised by our Imams, the unveiling the daughters of Muhammad (s), making them prisoners and parading then bare head and foot through the streets of Damascus, is not a happy occasion, is this something that the Bani Hashim should be proud of? Should they rejoice at such humiliation?
THIRD OBJECTION:
You cannot mourn over someone that is alive!
Imam Husayn (as) is alive so why do you do participate in mourning rituals for the living?
Reply –
This exposes the hypocrisy of the Nawasib
Herein lies clear proof of Nasibi contradictions. When we debate on the concept of using the Imams (as) as a means of approach the same Nasibi objects, saying that you can't seek help from the dead!
Is this not a blatant contradiction! For these Nasibi Mullah there example is like that of a dog in Surah Araf 007.176
"His similitude is that of a dog: if you attack him, he lolls out his tongue, or if you leave him alone, he (still) lolls out his tongue. That is the similitude of those who reject Our signs; So relate the story; perchance they may reflect."
FOURTH OBJECTION:
Quran prohibits the visiting of graves!
Allah has forbidden us to visit graves, as is clear from Surah Tauba, so why do the Shi'a create image depicting the grave of Imam Husayn (as)?
Reply –
This prohibition refers to the graves of hypocrites!
In this verse Allah has forbidden the holy Prophet (s) to go to the grave of a Munafiq. Hence a person who thinks that his parents or Imams are Munafiq should abstain from going to their graves and making their images.
FIFTH OBJECTION:
– Azadari is an unnecessary waste of public money!!The Shi'a population give a lot of money to Ulama and Zakireen, that's why they are not speaking against this. If they don't get this money, then this Azadari will also come to an end.
Reply –
Those that donate towards Azadari are duly rewarded by Allah (swt)
[Shakir 9:74] ... because Allah and His Messenger enriched them out of His grace; therefore if they repent, it will be good for them; and if they turn back, Allah will chastise them with a painful chastisement in this world and the hereafter, and they shall not have in the land any guardian or a helper.Look at how these people are getting jealous. These Mullahs receive no grace for implementing the of bidah of Tarawih, whereas the Shi'a Ulama and Zakireen praise Ali (as) and his family, and Allah blesses them with His grace in this world and in the next. The Nasibi Mullahs are people who keep burning in jealousy here, and also in the next world. Inshallah.
SIXTH OBJECTION:
All symbols associated with Azadari are false
The Shi/'a processions depict false Blood and False Arrows, the blood and arrows is placed over the Zuljanah, upon which Shi'as weep is false.
Reply:
When the brothers of Yusuf (as) came to Yaqub (as) and told him that their brother Yusuf (as) had been eaten by a wolf, and that all that remained was his bloodied shirt, the blood was not that of Yusuf (as), but was kept by Yaqub (as) as a symbol over his suffering. Yaqub (as) would weep bitterly when looking at that replica. The cradle of six month old Asghar (as) is not the real cradle, but it symbolises the suffering of a six month old child, as such we think of him (as) when we look at the cradle, remembering that a child of such a tender age met a fate wherein an arrow used to hunt wild beasts was fired in to his neck. Yaqoob (as) placed the shirt over his eyes and bloodies his face with it.
We can see that the Sunnah of one Prophet was to look at the replica and mourn over it profusely.
Yaqub (as) started weeping bitterly after looking at that replica. If such symbols constitute Bidah or shirk, then the Nawasib should apply a Fatwa on the Nabi (as) in the first instance. All of these symbols serve as a reminder of the tragedy of Karbala, and the callous manner in which innocent men were killed, and their women folk taken prisoner. We weep in the same way that Yaqub (as) wept over the sufferings of his son.
SEVENTH OBJECTION:
In Repudiation of The Criticisms on Azadari of Imam Husain (a.s.)
Mumbai’s largest circulated daily
newspaper, The Times of India had published an article on February 6,
2006 by an extremist, Abu Bakr, captioned ‘Why should Muharram be
considered sacred?’ The article and its claims were effectively debunked
in the same newspaper. Following is the gist of the article.
Mr. Abu Bakr: Unfortunately your
inability to follow the teachings of Islam is reflected in your
writings. Let us examine what you have written and what the reality
actually is.
You wrote:
The tenth day of Muharram is ‘Aashura’.
The Jews of Madina fasted on this day, the day on which Prophet Moses
(a.s.) and his followers crossed the Red Sea miraculously. So the Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.a.) directed the Muslims to fast on the day of Aashura.
The Answer:
The hadith you have quoted is in actuality thus:
The Prophet (s.a.w.a) on migrating to
Madina found the Jews fasting on the 10th of Muharram. On enquiry, he
was told: “It is an auspicious day; it is the day when God delivered the
children of Israel from their enemy (i.e. Pharaoh); and, therefore,
Moses fasted on that day.” The Prophet (s.a.w.a) said, “I am worthier of
Moses than you are.” Thereupon, he fasted on that day and ordered (the
Muslims) to fast.
(Al- Saheeh of al-Bukhari, Vol.3; Egypt ed.; p.54. Mishkatul-Masabih; Delhi ed.; 1307 A.H.; p.l72)
It is noted by the commentator of
Mishkatul-Masabih that “it was in the second year, because in the first
year the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had arrived at Madina after ‘Aashura, in
Rabi’ul-awwal.”
It should be noted that the Jews had
their own calendar and monthly cycles. There is no logic in saying that
they fasted on the 10th of Muharram- unless it could be proved that this
date always coincided with a Jewish day of fast.
The first month of the Jews (Abib, later
named Nisan) coincided with Rajab of the Arabs. W.O.E.Oesterley and
Theodore H.Robinson have written that in Arabia “the most important of
all the new-moon festivals was that which fell in the month of Rajab
(sic), equivalent to the Hebrew month ‘Abib, for this was the time when
the ancient Arabs celebrated the Spring festival.” (Hebrew Religion;
S.P.C.K., London; 1955; p.128)
Probably, in ancient times the two
branches of Hazrat Ibrahim’s (a.s.) household followed the same system
of intercalating an additional month. And in this way the 7th Jewish
month, Tishri I, coincided with Muharram. And the ‘Aashura of Muharram
synchronized with 10th of Tishri I, the Jewish Day of Atonement – a day
of fast. The two calendars lost their synchronization when Islam, in the
9th year of Hijrah, disallowed intercalation. But on deeper
consideration it transpired that this parity was lost long before the
advent of Islam, because the Arabs did not follow any mathematical
calculation in their intercalation. That was why Muharram of the 2nd
year of Hijrah began on 5th July, 623 C.E. (Al-Munjid, 21st ed.), months
before Tishri I (which always coincides with September-October).
Clearly, ‘Aashura’ of Muharram in that
year (or, for that matter, during the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) whole life at
Madina) had no significance whatsoever for the Jews.
You wrote:
In the beginning, fasting on this day
was obligatory but later, the fasts of Ramadan were made obligatory and
the fast on the day of Aashura was made optional.
You further state:
Yet, the sanctity of Aashura cannot be
ascribed to this event for the simple reason that the sanctity of
Muharram and the day of Aashura was established during the days of the
Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), much before the birth of Husain.
The Answer:
The question is: Why did they fast on that day?
The Jewish Midrashic literature relates
the 10th day of the 7th month (Yom Hakippurim – Day of Atonement) to the
event of bringing the tablets of the Covenant from Mount Sinai, as Dr.
Mishael Maswari-Caspi has written in his letter.
The question is: If the Jews had wanted
to keep the long-lost synchronization of Tishri I and Muharram in view,
how was it that they forgot to narrate this tradition to the Prophet
(s.a.w.a.)?
The month in which God delivered the
Israelites from Pharaoh was Abib (i.e. Rajab), as the Bible clearly
states: “Observe the month of Abib, and keep the pass-over unto the Lord
thy God: for in the month of Abib the Lord thy God brought thee forth
out of Egypt by night.” (Deut. 16:1)
The question is: How could the Jews
transfer an event of Abib (originally coinciding with Rajab) to
Muharram, in open defiance of their Torah?
Here is a point to ponder for the
Muslims: The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was sent with a religion to abrogate all
previous religions and shari’ah. How was it that he deigned to imitate
the custom of the Jews?
It is clear from above-mentioned facts
that the Jews had no reason at all to fast on Aashura of Muharram at
that period; and this story, built on that premise, is just that – a
fiction. Obviously, it was invented by a narrator who only knew that
once upon a time Muharram coincided with the Jews’ Tishri I; but was
totally unaware of contemporary Jewish religion and culture.
One feels constrained to mention here
that this and other such traditions were forged by camp-followers of the
Umayyads, after the martyrdom of Imam Husain (a.s.), as a part of their
campaign to turn the 10th of Muharram into a day of rejoicing. These
traditions are of the same genre as those which say that it was on the
10th of Muharram that Noah’s ark rested on Mount Arafat, the fire
became cool and safe for Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) , and Hazrat Isa (a.s.)
ascended to the heavens. In the same category came the traditions
exhorting the Muslims to treat Aashura as a festival of joy, and to
store one’s food-grain on this very day, as it would increase one’s
sustenance and bring the blessings of Allah to the household.
You wrote:
In fact, it is one of the merits of
Husain (a.s.) that his martyrdom took place on this day. Another
misconception is that it is an inauspicious month since Husain was
killed during Muharram. Hence people avoid conducting marriages during
this period.
This is baseless. If the death of an
eminent person on a particular day renders that day unlucky for all
times to come, no day of the year would be free from bad luck. The Holy
Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) have liberated us
from such superstitious beliefs.
The Answer:
This is nothing but blind prejudice
since there are no traditions which state that it is haraam (unlawful)
to conduct weddings on Aashura or in month of Muharram and Safar. I
would like to ask you that will you get married on the day your father
or mother die or will you postpone it for a month or so as a mark of
respect or consideration? (I wouldn’t be surprised if you say – there
is no harm).
You wrote:
Lamentations, breast-beating and
mourning in memory of Husain’s martyrdom are not sanctioned by Islam.
Though such martyrdoms are tragic, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) has
forbidden holding mourning ceremonies on the death of any person.
People of Jaahiliyyah (ignorance) used to mourn over their deceased then The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) stopped the Muslims …………..”
The Answer:
Hasn’t it occurred to you that had it
not been for these mourning rituals, the distinction between the path of
Imam Husain (a.s.) and that of Yazid would have been destroyed. Yazid
will for ever be deemed as a hateable man who symbolises filth, shame,
debauchery, decadence, immorality, mental corruption, and all the
ingredients existent in the DNA of Iblis (Devil).
We deem our Azadari (mourning) as the
means via which we can express our sorrow for the Ahle bait (a.s.). The
words of Imam of Ahle Sunnah Allamah Fakhrudeen Raadhi are very
important:
“It is our firm belief that one who dies with love for the descendants of Muhammad (s) dies a martyr”.
(Tafseer-a-Kabir, vol. 7, p. 390, line No. 9)
Crying and Blood shed for Imam Husain (as) from Qur'an
فَمَا بَكَتْ عَلَيْهِمُ السَّمَاءُ وَالْأَرْضُ وَمَا كَانُوا مُنْظَرِينَ
"And neither heaven nor earth shed a tear over them: nor were they given a respite (again)"
Holy Quran Sura Dhukhan, Verse:29 (44:29)
---Tafseer of the above verse in narrations from the Imam's (as)---
Ibrahim Al Nakhai narrates:
عن
إبراهيم النَّخعيِّ قال : خرج أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام فجلس في المسجد
واجتمع أصحابه حوله وجاءَ الحسين عليه السلام حتّى قام بين يديه فوضع يده
على رأسه فقال : يا بني إنَّ الله عَيَّرَ أقواماً بالقُرآن ، فقال : فما
بَكَتْ عَلَيْهِمْ السَّماءُ وَالأرضُ وَما كانُوا مُنظَرينَ ، وأيْمُ
اللهِ ليَقتلنّك بَعدي ، ثمّ تبكيك السَّماءُ والأرض
The
Commander of the Believers (as) came out and sat in the mosque and his
companions gathered around him. Then Imam Husain (as) came and stood in
front of him.The Commander of the Believers (as) placed his hand over the head of Husain (as) and said:
O My Son! Allah has degraded some people in the Quran by saying; neither did the heavens weep over them, nor the earth, nor were they granted respite’ (44:29). I swear to Allah that they will kill you after me and then the heavens and the earth will weep over you.
[Note: There are many more narrations which say the same as in this narration]
Source: Kamil Al Ziyarat Chapter.28 Hadees.2
http://www.rafed.net/books/doaa/kamil/k08.html#93
---How did the heavens and the Earth weep for Imam Husain (as)??---
Narrated from Umar ibn Wahab, from his father, who said:
Dawud bin Farqad narrates:
I heard Aba Abdillah (as) [Imam Sadiq (as)] say:
أخبرنا
عُمَرُ بنُ وَهْب ، عن أبيه ، عن عليِّ بن الحسين عليهما السلام قال :
إنَّ السّماء لم تبكِ منذ وضعتْ إلاّ على يحيى بن زَكريّا والحسين بن عليِّ
عليهم السلام ، قلت : أيّ شيء كان بكاؤها؟ قال : كانت إذا استقبلت بثوب وقع على الثَّوب شبه أثر البراغيث من الدَّم
Ali ibn Husain (as) [Imam Sajjad (as)] said:
The
Heavens have never wept over anyone since the day they were created
except for Yahya ibn Zakariyya (as) and Husain bin Ali (as).
I asked, “How did the heavens weep?”
Imam (as) replied, “If you would have faced (the wind) with a garment, you would have seen something similar to a red mist of blood on it.”
Source: Kamil Al Ziyarat Chapter.28 Hadees.12
http://www.rafed.net/books/doaa/kamil/k08.html#93
Imam Raza (as) in a long narration to Riyan ibn Shabeeb:
يا ابن شبيب لقد حدثني أبي ، عن أبيه ، عن جده أنه لما قتل جدي الحسين أمطرت السماء دما وترابا أحمر
Imam
Raza (as) said, “O Ibn Shabeeb! My father narrated that his father (s)
quoted on the authority of his grandfather (s) that when they murdered
my grandfather Al-Hussein (s), the heavens cried (dark) red blood and dirt.
Source: Uyun Akhbar Al Riza Vol.1 Pg.299 / Bihar Al Anwar Vol.44 Pg. 286
http://www.al-shia.org/html/ara/books/lib-hadis/behar44/a29.htmlDawud bin Farqad narrates:
عن
داودَ ابن فَرْقَد قال : سمعت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول : كان الَّذي
قَتَلَ الحسينَ بنَ عليٍّ عليهما السلام ولد زنا ، والَّذي قَتل يحيى بن
زَكريّا ولد زنا ، وقال : احمرَّتِ السَّماء حين قُتل الحسين بن عليٍّ سنة ،
ثمّ قال : بَكتِ السَّماء والأرض على الحسين بن عليٍّ وعلى يحيى بن
زَكريّا ، وحُمرتها بُكاؤها
I heard Aba Abdillah (as) [Imam Sadiq (as)] say:
The Killer of Husain ibn Ali (as) was conceived illegitimately and the killer of Yahya ibn Zakariyya (as) was also conceived illegitimately. When Husain ibn Ali (as) was killed, the heavens turned red for one year.The heavens and the earth have (only) wept over Husain ibn Ali (as) and Yahya ibn Zakariyya (as) and the heavens weep by becoming red.
Narrated from Ali bin Mus-hir Al Quraishi who said:
عن
عليِّ بن مُسْهِر القُرَشيِّ «قال : حدَّثتني جدَّتي أنّها أدركتِ الحسين
بن عليٍّ عليهما السلام حين قُتل فمكثنا سنة وتسعة أشهر ، والسّماء مثلُ العَلّقةِ مثلُ الدَّم ، ما ترى الشَّمس
My grandmother told me that she was alive at the time of killing of Husain bin Ali (as).
She said, “The heavens turned red like blood after the killing of Husain (as) for one year and nine months, and we could not (even) see the sun.”
Source: Kamil Al Ziyarat Chapter.28 Hadees.5
http://www.rafed.net/books/doaa/kamil/k08.html#93
Abi Ma’shar narrates from Al Zuhri who said:
حدَّثني أبو مُعْشر ، عن الزُّهْريّ قال : لمّا قتل الحسين عليه السلام أمطرتِ السّماء دماً . لمّا قتل الحسين عليه السلام لم يبق في بيت المَقْدِس حَصاةٌ إلاّ وجد تحتها دمٌ عَبيط
When Husain (as) was killed, the heavens rained blood, and no stone was removed in Bayt Al-Maqdis without (one) seeing fresh blood under it.
Source: Kamil Al Ziyarat Chapter.28 Hadees.20
http://www.rafed.net/books/doaa/kamil/k08.html#9312th Imam (atfs) Shedding tears of blood for Imam Husain (as)Imam of the time, Imam Az Zaman (atfs) himself says the following in Ziyarat-e-Nahiya:
فَلَئِنْ
أَخَّرَتْنِى الدُّهُورُ ، وَ عاقَني عَنْ نَصْرِك َ الْمَقْدُورُ وَ لَمْ
أَكُنْ لِمَنْ حارَبَك َ مُحارِباً، وَ لِمَنْ نَصَبَ لَك َ الْعَداوَةَ
مُناصِباً ، فَلاََ نْدُبَنَّك َ صَباحاً وَ مَسآءً ، وَ لاََبْكِيَنَّ لَك َ بَدَلَ الدُّمُوعِ دَماً
"Since I haw been pushed behind by the passage of time and being prevented from helping you by fate and I could not fight those who had fought you. And (since) I had rot been able to face your enemies I will continue to weep morning and evening and weep for you with tears of blood."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)