The Martyrdom of Imam Hussain (A.S.)

The month of Muharram is the first month of the Islamic calendar year. An important and tragic event took place on the tenth of Muharram that shook the Muslim world. It was the murder of Imam Husain (A.S.), his family members, and his close friends by the army of Yazid. Yazid was at that time the despotic ruler of the Muslim world, who came to power as the self-proclaimed “sixth caliph of Islam” after the death of his father, Mu’awiya. Yazid gave himself the title of ameer-ul-mu’mineen, meaning “commander of the faithful.”
Husain was one of the two grandsons of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.A.W.), and the younger of the two sons of Hazrat Fatima (A.S.), the daughter of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet loved his two grandsons, Hasan and Husain, dearly, and since he had no surviving sons of his own, he used to call them his “sons,” out of affection.
There are numerous traditions, recorded by many historians, which indicate the great love and respect the Holy Prophet had for his grandsons. According to one tradition, the Holy Prophet declared that Hasan and Husain were the “Princes of the Youth of Paradise.” Prophet Muhammad (S.A.A.W.) took his grandsons with him, along with his daughter Fatima and son-in-law Imam ‘Ali (A.S.), to face the challenge of the Christian delegation from Najrain, which had come to dispute with the Holy Prophet about his divine mission. The Christians were awe-struck at the sight of the Holy Prophet and his family, and withdrew the challenge. This event became known as Mubahila, and is recorded in the Holy Qur’an in chapter 3 verse 61.
Historical Background
During the caliphate of Imam ‘Ali, Mu’awiya declared himself the governor of Syria. After the assassination of ‘Ali by a Kharijite, ‘Ali’s elder son, Imam Hasan, succeeded him, being judged as the most qualified and deserving by the people. By this time, however, Mu’awiya had amassed enough support in and around Syria to unilaterally declare himself caliph of whole Islamic world. In order to avoid bloodshed, preserve unity, and in fact to save the religion of Islam from destruction, Imam Hasan signed a peace treaty with Mu’awiya. The treaty included these terms: (1) Mu’awiya would be the temporal political head of the Muslim empire; (2) Mu’awiya would not appoint his own successor, but would leave the caliphate to the will of the majority (which favored Imam Husain); and, (3) Mu’awiya would allow the Muslims to live in peace, free from oppression, especially those belonging to the Hashimite tribe (the tribe of the Holy Prophet and his family).
Mu’awiya violated the terms of this treaty and, near his death, designated his son Yazid as his successor. Yazid was an immoral and ruthless man with no sense of justice. He employed bribery and coercion to win support. Imam Husain, as the protector and guardian of the religion established by his noble grandfather, Prophet Muhammad (S.A.A.W.), refused to swear allegiance to him. Yazid realized that he could never legitimize and consolidate his rule without the allegiance of Imam Husain, the grandson of the Holy Prophet. Consequently, he decided that he would either force the Imam to submit to his rule, or else he would have him killed.
In the 61st year after Hijra (680 AD), Imam Husain, while performing the pilgrimage in Mecca, received the news that assassins had been sent by Yazid to kill him. Desiring to protect the sanctity of the Holy City, he interrupted his pilgrimage and headed towards Kufa, in modern-day Iraq on invitation of the people there to come and teach them about Islam. He took with him his family members and close friends, including his six-month-old infant son, Ali Asghar. His journey to Kufa was intercepted by a detachment of Yazid’s army, led by a commander named Hur. Hur had orders to re-direct the Imam to camp in the desert plains of Karbala, on the banks of the River Euphrates. In order to avoid bloodshed, Imam Husain chose not to resist, and followed Hur’s directions. He and his companions were forced to camp at a great distance from the river, which was the only source of water in the area.
On the seventh day of Muharram, Ibn Ziyad, the governor of Kufa, ordered that food and water supplies were to be blocked from reaching Imam Husain’s camp. In the meantime, the ranks of Yazid’s army were increasing by the thousands. The blistering sun scorched the desert sand, and the thirst was becoming unbearable in Husain’s camp. The children especially were becoming dehydrated and weak, and Imam Husain pleaded with Yazid’s army to supply water at least to those children, but to no avail.
On the tenth day of Muharram, Yazid’s army was ready to attack the small band of defenders in Imam Husain’s camp. One by one, his friends and relatives took permission to go out and fight and each one laid down his life in the defense of Islam. Two of his nephews, who were only ten years old, were among the brave soldiers who died fighting. The commander of Husain’s forces was Abbas, his brother, who had inherited his chivalry from his father ‘Ali, the Lion of Allah. Abbas asked Husain’s permission to go and fight his way through to the river and bring back some water for Sakina, Husain’s four-year-old daughter, and the other children. The Imam reluctantly gave him permission to go and fetch water. Abbas took an empty flask, charged into Yazid’s army, cut through the ranks, and arrived at the river. While he filled the pitcher with water, he himself did not drink a drop, for he reasoned that he could not do so while Imam Husain, Sakina, and the others were still thirsty. Abbas did not make it back to the camp, however. The whole army of Yazid converged upon him. He died defending the precious pitcher of water.
Imam Husain’s six-month-old son, Ali Asghar, was on the verge of death from dehydration. Husain brought him out of the tent to show his pitiful condition to the soldiers in Yazid’s army, pleading for at least enough water to save the infant’s life. The enemy denied his request. A heartless archer from the enemy army shot an arrow that struck the infant, killing him in his father’s own arms.
Soon, Imam Husain was left alone to face Yazid’s army, since all the able-bodied male members of his camp had died fighting one by one. He made a final plea to the army of Yazid, reminding them of his kinship with the Holy Prophet of Islam, the love and respect which the Holy Prophet had used to show him, and the numerous traditions in which the Holy Prophet had warned the Muslims not to disobey or injure him. He reminded them of his desire to uphold the truth and his status as one of the true protectors of the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet. He asked to be allowed to leave the Muslim kingdom, so that Yazid would not perceive him as a threat to his power. Finally, he clearly warned them that by shedding his blood, they would be subjected to the wrath of Allah (S.W.T.) and they would lose any hope of the intercession of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.A.W.). The commanders of the opposing army were unmoved, and reiterated their desire to kill Imam Husain unless he chose to submit to the authority of Yazid. Husain was left with no choice but to take a firm and final stand against falsehood, and to fight for the preservation of Islam. He fought bravely, and in the end he achieved martyrdom.
The Significance of Imam Husain’s Martyrdom
Immediate outcome of Imam Husain’s actions: Muslims and non-Muslims alike have acknowledged that Imam Husain saved Islam from destruction by sacrificing his life. Yazid had been successful in winning over the allegiance of the great majority of Muslims, and the rest of the Muslim world was in a state of moral slumber. The principles of Islam were being plundered, the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet was being tampered with, and phony traditions were being concocted to justify the rule of Yazid. It was the singular sacrifice of Imam Husain and his faithful followers that shook the Islamic world out of its slumber. The Muslims were forced to ask themselves why the beloved grandson of the Holy Prophet had been murdered so brutally. It then dawned upon the people what the true nature of Yazid and his supporters was.
Long term outcome of Imam Husain’s actions: Imam Husain, by challenging Yazid and in the process laying down his life, changed the world and re-shaped human destiny forever. Yazid, and indeed all future despots, were put on notice that they would not be tolerated, and that truth and justice would be upheld and would ultimately succeed, regardless of the costs. The Iranian revolution that uprooted and overthrew an unjust government, and the liberation of Lebanon from foreign occupation are two of the more recent exemplars of these principles laid down by Imam Husain.
Imam Husain’s Philosophy:
Professor Syed Jafar Raza Bilgirami beautifully describes Imam Husain’s philosophy. He states that at Karbala, Imam Husain came to rebuild a system of life. He gave a practical embodiment to the rational concept of justice. He successfully placed the spirit (savage, war-making qualities in man) and the appetite (greed for material things and lust for power) under the command of reason (‘Aql). In Karbala, he formulated a new code of life to safeguard the peace and security of human society for all times to come.
Imam Husain’s Foresight and Planning for the Battle of Karbala:
Imam Husain chose not to flee or hide from Yazid, because that would not have exposed Yazid’s corruption of Islam and would have served to legitimize his unjust rule. He knew that by rejecting Yazid’s demands, he would most likely be killed. However, he also did not want to die like any other martyr. He wanted his death to serve as a starting point for a revolution that would strengthen justice and oppose tyranny for all times to come. This type of stance needed planning and wisdom. As pointed out by scholars, Imam Husain’s planning encompassed three factors:

1. The choice of location;
2. The choice of companions; and,
3. Foolproof arrangements for passing on the event to the annals of history.
The Choice of Location:
Imam Husain chose not to stay in Mecca because he did not want his blood to desecrate the Holy Precincts. Besides, if he were to be killed by hired assassins, then the killers’ motives would not be clear and his death would fade away on the pages of history. So he chose to travel to Iraq (the den of the tyrant himself), where his mission would receive the maximum publicity, and where Yazid’s evil would be best exposed. The events of history proved that Imam Husain was right.
The Choice of Companions:
Hujjatul-Islam Maulana Ali Naqvi has written that in Karbala, the largest number of true Muslims gathered in the entire history of Islam. Imam Husain was not seeking the best fighters, since his goal was not to fight to win a physical war. He was looking for men of principle, true Muslims, firm and patient, who would go through the utmost hardships successfully.
His companions included men of different tribes, coming from different parts of Arabia and beyond. They included, among others, an elderly companion of the Holy Prophet, some liberated slaves, and a young newlywed Christian couple. The age of his supporters ranged from six months to a ripe old age of over 90.
The heterogeneity of Imam Husain’s supporting group indicates that he did not want the confrontation with Yazid to be misrepresented as a struggle between two clans, or a campaign for gaining power.
Preserving His Sacrifice in the Annals of History:
Imam Husain took women, children, and all of his family members with him. This strategy ensured that after his death, his message would be spread through his family members, and that Yazid would not be able to suppress the truth or falsify Imam Husain’s motives. History proves that it was a brilliant move. His sister Zainab (A.S.), through her scholarly and bold speeches, and with no fear of the tyrant Yazid, eloquently proclaimed the truth and exposed the falsehood of Yazid in his own court. He was speechless and humiliated before her. His court was full of dignitaries, both local and from other nation-states, and his own supporters. They were shocked to hear the truth put forth so forcefully, and many were brought to tears. The same scene was repeated in the bazaars and marketplaces of the country, all along the travel route of the surviving captives. Husain had laid the foundation of the revolution with his blood. His sister Zainab stirred the revolution with her oratory. That revolution changed the world forever.
Statements of Historians and World Leaders:
This unique historical sacrifice of Imam Husain and his small band of 71 male supporters has caught the attention of historians, scholars, and writers throughout the world, in all periods of history. Some of the more notable quotes and insights are given below:
“Of that gallant band, male and female knew that the enemy forces around were implacable, and were not only ready to fight, but to kill. Denied even water for the children, they remained parched under the burning sun and scorching sands, yet not one faltered for a moment. Husain marched with his little company, not to glory, not to power of wealth, but to a supreme sacrifice, and every member bravely faced the greatest odds without flinching.” - Dr. K. Sheldrake
“If Husain had fought to quench his worldly desires, as alleged by certain Christian critics, then I do not understand why his sister, wife, and children accompanied him. It stands to reason therefore, that he sacrificed purely for Islam.” - Charles Dickens
“The best lesson which we get from the tragedy of Cerebella is that Husain and his companions were rigid believers in God. They illustrated that the numerical superiority does not count when it comes to the truth and the falsehood. The victory of Husain, despite his minority, marvels me!” - Thomas Carlyle
“In a distant age and climate, the tragic scene of the death of Husain will awaken the sympathy of the coldest reader.” - Edward Gibbon
“The tragedy of Karbala decided not only the fate of the Caliphate, but also of Mohammadan kingdoms long after the Caliphate had waned and disappeared.” - William Muir
“Imam Husain uprooted despotism forever, till the Day of Resurrection. He watered the dry gardens of freedom with a surging wave of his blood, and indeed he awakened the sleeping Muslim nation. If Imam Husain had aimed at acquiring the worldly empire, he would not have traveled the way he did. Husain weltered in blood and dust for the sake of truth. Verily, therefore, he becomes the foundation of the Muslim creed ‘La Ilaha Il-lallah,’ meaning, there is no deity but Allah (God).” - Sir Mohammad Iqbal
“A reminder of that blood-stained field of Karbala, where the grandson of the Apostle of God fell, at length, tortured by thirst, and surround by the bodies of his murdered kinsmen, has been at anytime since then, sufficient to evoke, even in the most lukewarm and the heedless, the deepest emotion, the most frantic grief, and an exaltation of spirit before which pain, danger, and death shrink to unconsidered trifles.” - Browne’s History of Persia
References:
The Martyrdom of Imam Husain by Yousef N. Laljee
The Spirit of Islam by Ameer Ali
Imam Husain and Planning of the Incident of Karbala by S.G. Haider
Imam Husain and His System of Life by Syed Jafar Raza Bilgirami

The stance of Imam Hussain (as)

Was this only a political dispute?

Note : Reader are requested to go through this lengthly article till the end to know how truth is separated from falsehood

Azam Tariq al Nasibi stated:
    IT WAS ONLY A POLITICAL DIFFERENCE WITH YAZID AND HAZRAT HUSAYN WANTED TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION. IT WAS NEVER A CONFRONTATION BETWEEN ISLAM AND KUFR AS NONE OF THE CONTESTANTS EVEN ONCE CALLED EACH OTHER AS KAFIR (INFIDEL).

Reply One

What this Nasibi has failed to recognise is the fact that opposition to Ahl’ul bayt (as) is inexorably linked to the Deen; it cannot simply be watered down to a political dispute. In this connection we shall cite a narration of a Sunni scholar Allamah Shibli:

“‘Ali [r] said to Mu’awiya ‘Guard yourself from hating me since Rasulullah (s) said that on the Day of Judgement those that hate me shall be turned away from the Pond of Kauthar and be thrown in the fire”.

This one example serves as proof that Mu’awiya’s hatred / opposition to Imam ‘Ali (as) can never be defined as a political dispute. Had it just been a political matter, Hadhrath ‘Ali (as) would not have threatened Mu’awiya his enemy with Hell Fire. This example serves as proof that even the political enemies / opponents of ‘Ahl’ul bayt (as) shall burn in Hell.
Reply Two

Hafiz Ibn Asakir records this tradition on the authority of Sahabi Anas bin alHarith:
أنس بن الحارث يقول سمعت رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه و سلم ) يقول إن ابني ذا يعني الحسين يقتل بأرض يقال لها كربلاء فمن شهد ذلك منكم فلينصره

“I heard Rasulullah (s) say ‘Verily my son, means Husayn, will be killed in a land called Kerbala, whoever amongst you is alive at that time must go and help him”.
Tarikh Dimashq, Volume 14 page 223

If this was only a political dispute, then why did Rasulullah (s) deem it incumbent on the Sahaba to help his grandson Husayn (as), who he called his son? Politics is something without compulsion, for in Islam it is part of religion, for Islam is a system of life. And there is no ordinance in Islam that compels a person to follow a certain political persuasion UNTIL that person submits to Islam. But here Rasulullah (s) commands the companions to side with Imam Husayn (as), making it a duty on them to side with Husayn (as). Hence it can only be deemed to be a religious ordinance for THOSE WHO BELIEVE and have embraced Islam. The difference between Husayn (as) and Yazeed was thus, incontrovertibly, a religious one, for the Holy Prophet (saws) made it a duty for the Muslims who follow his religion to side with Husayn (as). This logic is undeniable and crystal-clear.
 
Was this a battle of truth against falsehood?

Azam Tariq Nasibi stated:

    “THE BATTLE OF KARBALA IN 61 A.H. WAS NOT A BATTLE BETWEEN TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD OR ISLAM AND KUFR AS IS ALLEGED BY THE SHIAS”.

This is an attempt by the champions of the 21st century Nasibi movement to deny how all Muslims, Shia and Sunni alike, view the Battle of Karbala. To most Muslims, Shia and Sunni alike, Husayn (as) embodied faith and the true religion, while Yazeed embodied kufr and the devil. After all, did not Husayn (as)’s grandfather tell the Muslims to side with Husayn (as). Thus most Muslims see in Karbala the ultimate battle between the forces of good and those of evil. The Nasibis would instead have us see it another way, simply as the embodiment of good happens also to be the Third Shia Imam, and this adulation for him by the Sunni world is intolerable to the Nasibi cult. Ansar.Org’s favourite Nasibi son Afriki also sought to discredit the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as) – by mocking the notion of most Muslims that this was a battle between truth and falsehood. In his article on ‘Who killed Imam Husayn?’ he stated:

    However, it is regrettable that despite the huge amount of attention the subject of Karbala enjoys, the event is persistently portrayed as two-sided. It is always depicted as Husayn against Yazid, Right rising up against Wrong, the Quest for Justice against the Forces of Oppression.

Reply One – In the battle of Kerbala Imam Husayn (as) was with the truth and Yazeed adhered to falsehood

As we cited above, Ibn Asakir has recorded this tradition on the authority of Sahabi Anas bin al-Harith:

“I heard Rasulullah (s) say ‘Verily my son, means Husayn, will be killed in a land called Kerbala, whoever amongst you is alive at that time must go and help him”.

This same narration can be located in the following Sunni books:

    al Isaba Volume 1 page 81 Dhikr Uns bin Harith
    Khasais al Kubra Volume 2 page 125
    Kanz ul Ummal Volume 6 page 223 Dhikr Husayn
    Sirush Shahadatayn page 80
    Kifayath al Talib page 429 Dhikr Husayn
    Neel al Autar page 88
    Zakhair al Uqba page 146


Comment

If two individuals are fighting and the Prophet (s) tells you to go to the aid of one of them, then that individual will be on the path of truth, since the Prophet (s) would never give an order to stand with falsehood. In Kerbala, on one side was the illegal Khaleefa Yazeed bin Mu’awiyah on the other was Imam Husayn grandson of the Prophet (s), an individual whom the Prophet (s) gave an order that his Sahaba come to his aid.
Reply Two – One who fights Husayn (as), fights the Prophet (s)
We will prove this by citing the following Sunni sources:

    Adhaab al Mufraad page 17
    Sunan ibn Majah page 14, Manaqib Husayn
    Sunan Tirmidhi Volume 2 page 587 Manaqib Husayn
    Zakhair al Uqba page 133 Dhikr Husayn
    Sawaiqh al Muhriqa page 114 Dhikr Husayn
    Ya Nabi al Mawaddth page 164 Chapter 54
    Jama al Usool Volume 10 page 21
    Mustadrak al Hakim Volume 3 oage 177
    Kanz al Ummal Volume 6 page 220 Manaqib Husayn
    al Fusl al Muhimma page 171 Dhikr Husayn
    Ahsaaf al Raghibeen page 175 Dhikr Husayn
    Nuzlul Abrar page 55 Dhikr Husayn
    Mirqaat Sharh Mishqaat page 55

In Adaab al Mufarad, page 17 we read:

“The Prophet (s) said Husayn is from me and I am from Husayn”

In Mirqaat, Qadhi Iyad states:

“Our Prophet via Prophetic knowledge and revelation knew that his grandson Husayn would be martyred fighting Yazeed bin Mu’awiya, that is why the Prophet made a specific reference about him, stating he shared three qualities with him (s), 1. Loving both is compulsory 2. Disrespecting both is a sin 3. Fighting both is haraam and a sin”

This Hadeeth proves that in the same way one that fights the Prophet can never be on Haqq (Truth), likewise on that fights Husayn can never be on Haqq either, this proves that in Kerbala Yazeed was on the path of falsehood, and Husayn (as) on the path of truth.
Reply Three – One that fights the Ahl’ul bayt fights the Prophet

Was there an ijma in Yazeed’s Khilafah?

Azam Tariq stated:
    ALL THE MUSLIM CITIZENS INCLUDING THE THEN LIVING SAHABA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF HAZRAT HUSAYN AND ABDULLAH BIN ZUBAIR SWORE ALLEGIANCE TO YAZID. WHEN HAZRAT HUSAYN DECIDED TO GO FROM MAKKAH TO KUFA WHERE THE PEOPLE WERE CONSTANTLY INVITING HIM FOR BAYT (OATH OF ALLEGIANCE) HIS CLOSE ASSOCIATES AND WELL-WISHERS LIKE ABDULLAH BIN UMAR, HAZRAT ABU SAEED KHUDRI, HAZRAT ABU DARDA, HAZART ABDULLAH BIN ABBASS, HAZART MUHAMMAD BIN ABU HANIFA ETC. TRIED TO PERSUADE HIM NOT TO UNDERTAKE THIS JOURNEY AS IT WAS FULL OF RJSKS AND HAZARADS. THEY WERE HOWEVER, NOT SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR ATTEMPT AND HAZART HUSAYN PROCEEDED ON HIS MISSION OF REFORMATION CONCEIVED ON THE BASIS OF HIS OWN IJTEHAD.

Mu’awiya planned the succession of Yazeed for seven years

We read in Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 247 Dhikr Mu’awiya:
فلم يزل يروض الناس لبيعته سبع سنين، ويشاور، ويعطى الأقارب ويداني الأباعد، حتى استوثق له من أكثر الناس.

“Mu’awiya spent seven years seeking to galvanise the people’s minds towards giving bayya to Yazeed and he rewarded those that ascribed to his views. He [Mu'awiya] tried to get closer to those that opposed this purpose [to intimidate them]“.
 
Mu’awiya appointed Mugheera bin Shu’ba to carry through his objective of intimidation

As evidence we shall rely on the following texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

    Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 870. The events of 56 Hijri
    Tarrekh al Kamil Volume, 3 page 252 The events of 56 Hijri
    Tareekh Ibn Khaldun, Volume 3 page 16
    Tareekh al Khulafa, page 205 Dhikr Mu’awiya
    Al Imama wa al Siyasa, page 152
    Nasa al Kafiya, page 38

For the sake of brevity we shall cite al Bidayah:

“Mu’awiya made plans to remove Mugheera bin Shuba from his post of Governor of Kufa and replace him with Sa’eed bin Aas. When Mugheera caught wind of his intention, he arrived in Damascus and said to Yazeed bin Mu’awiya ‘Your father should appoint you as khalifah after him’. When Yazeed asked Mu’awiya if this was indeed the case, he replied ‘Who said this to you?’ He [Yazeed] said Mugheera bin Shuba. This recommendation pleased Mu’awiya immensely; he kept Mugheera in post, and ordered him to drum up support for giving bayya to Yazeed. Upon his return to Kufa, Mugheera did actions to secure the bayya for Yazeed”.
 Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 870 (Nafees Academy Karachi)

Mu’awiya set the wheels in motion and wanted people to give bayya to Yazeed. It is critical to note that in doing so Mu’awiya was breaching the terms of the treaty that had been reached with Imam Hassan (as), namely that Mu’awiya would NOT appoint a successor after him and that the succession to the khilafat would return to the Imams of the Shia i.e. Al-Hassan (as) and after him his successor Al-Hussain (as). Mu’awiya is thus in breach of a solemn oath he took not to make the khilafat a monarchy by appointing his own son as Crown Prince.
 
Imam Hassan (as) made peace to avoid bloodshed

This issue is fundamentally tied up with the forced abdication of Al-Hassan (as) as khalifa in the face of Muawiya’s rebellion against Imam Hassan (as)’s lawful and noble khilafat. Al-Hassan (as)’s is deemed by Jalal-ud-din Suyuti in his established Sunni account of the khilafat the fifth rightly guided khalifa, and while most Sunnis have not heard this he ruled for six months and was by their scholars rightly guided.

For this section we shall focus on the following texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

    Irshad al Sari Sharh Bukhari, Volume 1 page 198 Bab ul Fitan
    Umdah thul Qari fi Sharh Bukhari, Volume 11 page 361 Kitab al Fitan
    Mirqaat Sharh Mishqat, Volume 11 page 379
    Al Istiab, Volume 1 page 370

For the sake of brevity we shall cite al Irshad:

“Imam Hasan did not abdicate on account of any bribe / worldly gain or weakness; rather he made peace so as to avoid fitnah and bloodshed.”
Mu’awiya had agreed that the Khilafat would return to Imam Hasan (as) when he died

This is undeniable and is testified to, amongst numerous other Sunni works, in:

    Fathul Bari fi Sharh Bukhari, Volume 3 page 65 Kitab al Fitan
    Mirqat Sharh Mishqat, Volume 11 page 38 Bab Manaqib Ahl’ul Bayt
    Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 871 ‘The events of 56 Hijri’
    Hayaat al Haywaan Volume, 1 page 53 Dhikr Khilafa
    Tareekh Khamees, Volume 2 page 29 Dhikr Hasan
    Al Imama wa al Siyasa, page 18 Sulh Hasan
    Al Istiab, Volume 1 page 370 Dhikr Hasan

Ibn Kathir records:
وقد كان معاوية لما صالح الحسن عهد للحسن بالأمر من بعده

“When Mu’awiya made peace with Hasan, he made a promise that leadership would go to Hasan after him”
 Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 871 (Nafees Academy Karachi)

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalaini records in Fathul Bari:
اني اشترطت على معاوية لنفسي الخلافة بعده

“Hasan said:’I placed a condition on Mu’awiya that I will become leader after Mu’awiya”

The fact that Mu’awiya wanted to make Yazeed his successor was hugely embarrassing for him, since this contravened the peace treaty and hence the better option would be to remove Imam Hasan (as) (this has been discussed in our article on Mu’awiya). In the meantime Mu’awiya’s flagrant breach of the treaty continued. This is an embarrassment for the Nasibis as this treaty and its terms are not controversial and accepted by all. Thus the Nasibis might claim that this happened after Imam Hasan (as) was martyred but the fact is…

Charity of Imam Husain (A.S.), an example for others

By: Ayatullah Shaheed Syed Abdul Husayn Dastaghaib Shirazi
 
An Arab had to make a big payment by way of blood money, which amounted to a thousand gold coins at least. He asked people, who was the most generous gentleman in Medina? They said, “Husain.” He went to Husain and said, “O My Master! I am in such and such trouble. They have directed me to you.” Husain also, first asked him some questions, which will take a long time if I relate to you. It was understood that he was not a nomad. He was an intelligent person, faithful and knowledgeable. He (Husain) said, “Come with me.”
Then Husain took him to his house. Husain had four thousand gold coins, which he hid in his coat. He did not open the door but gave them to that man from a little opening in such a manner that the latter may not see him and feel ashamed. Husain said, “Please accept these four thousand Dinars and excuse me, this is all that I have.” He seeks excuse (You give a few Toomans in God’s path keeping your head high!
. The Arab was surprised with all this. So he asked, “O my Master! You gave me so much money but have not opened your door, why?” Husain said, “So that you may not feel ashamed, by looking at me. I have protected your self-respect. I hid myself from you.” This is because he does not consider the wealth as his own and does not consider himself as a doer of a good deed.
He considers this wealth as the wealth of God. He considers himself a servant of God. He also considers this good sense also from God and knows that God has done a favor to him. One who gives something to someone and then shows his favor has made his spending void or invalid.

ثُمَّ لا يُتْبِعُونَ مَا أَنفَقُوا مَنًّا وَلا أَذًى

“Then, do not follow up what they have spent with reproach or injury.[240]

مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَعَمِلَ صَالِحًا فَلَهُمْ أَجْرُهُمْ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ وَلا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ

Source: http://haidryonline.wordpress.com
 

Crying is the Sunnah of the Prophets (peace be upon all of them)

The real requirement is that on suitable circumstances, mourning should be performed as practiced by the Prophets, as we read in Tafseer Kabeer, volume 1 page 285
“All the Prophets, Adam (as), Nuh (as) and Daud (as) mourned and cried over their hardships, and their acts weren’t invalid”
Similarly, we read in Sunan Ibn Majah, volume 2 page 285:
عن سعد بن أبي وقاص قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم : ( ببكوا فإن لم تبكوا فتباكوا )
Sa’ad bin Abi Waqas has reported from Holy Prophet (s) that he said: “Cry and if u can’t cry then make a crying face.”
Therefore criticizing our mourning and lamenting means criticism of the Sunnah of the apostles.

Crying particularly for the tragedies befallen the Ahlulbayt (as) is Sunnah of Holy Prophet (s)

We read in Sunan Ib Maja, Volume 1 page 517:
Narrated by Alqamah from Abdullah bin Masood:
One day we were sitting with Holy Prophet (s) while some children from the house of Bani Hashim came there. When the Holy Prophet (s) saw them, tears welled up in his eyes and he became pale.
Ibn Masood said that he told the Holy Prophet (s) “Your face reflects anxiety”. The Holy Prophet (s) stated: “Exalted God has granted us, the Ahlulbait, Hereafter instead of worldly pleasure.
After me, soon my Ahlubait will face calamity, hardship and misery till people having black flags will rise from East and seek justice, which will be denied them. They will wage war, they will be supported and will be given what they were demanding. They will not accept until it is handed over to one from our Ahlulbait (i.e. Mahdi) .He will fill the earth with justice as it was filled with unjustice. Whoever amongst you is alive at that period,should try to reach them even if he has to tread on ice in that pursuit.”

Safiya (r), Sayyida Fatima (as) and Rasulullah (s) cried over the slain body of Hamza (as)

In Madarij al-Nubuwath, volume 2, page 152 Shaykh Muhammad Abdul Haq Mohaddith Dehalvi writes:
” Safiya came and stood by the head of Hamza’s (r.a) body and she along with Fatima (s.a) kept crying for him and due their mourning, Holy Prophet (s) also started crying.”

Holy Prophet (s) wept over the martyrdom of Jaffar ibn Abi Talib (as)

The beloved scholar of wahabis Ibn Katheer writes in his authority work al Bidayah wa al Nihaya, Volume 4, page 673, published by Nafees Academy Karachi:
Ibn Ishaq narrates that on the day when Jafar ibn Abi Talib was martyred in Ghazwa Moutah; Holy Prophet (s) called upon Abdullah bin Jafar and made him sit on his lap and started kissing his forehead and eyes, while tears were flowing from his own Holy eyes.
The Sahaba inquired: “O Prophet of Allah! Is it so that some grieving news has come about Jafar that has made your tears flow?”
The Holy Prophet (s) replied: “Yes, Today Jafar has been martyred there, but the troubles and the plight that he went through before being martyred is very grieving.”
al Bidayah wa al Nihaya, Volume 4, page 673
Nawasib such as the people of Sipah-e-Sahaba [kr-hcy.com] often advance a notion namely the martyrdom of the people who have laid their lives in the way of Allah(swt) should be celebrated and not mourned due to the fact that they are victorious and mourning their deaths is a sign of showing doubts in their victorious end. The people who uphold such pathetic beliefs and mock Shias should see the above cited episode carefully and tell us wasn’t Prophet(s) sure about the best place that Jaffar (as) had attained after his martyrdom ? Holy Prophet(s) not only wept for the martyrdom of Jaffar Ibn Abi Talib (as) but also gave best relpy for any such pathetic comment i.e Prophet(s) was distressed over the tragedies befallen on Jaffar (as) before his martyrdom. The Shias likewise mourn for the cut-throat calamities that sturck Imam Hussain (as) and his companions before attaining the status of martyrs.

Sahaba along with Holy Prophet(s) wept over the martyrdom of Hamza (ra)

Shiekh Abdul Haq Dehalvi writes that companions including Abu Bakar wept over the miserable death of Hamza (ra) along with Holy Prophet(s):
“It is narrated that when the tragedy stricken people were standing in the way to welcome the Holy Prophet (s) back, Fatima, the daughter of Hamza(ra) was standing by the roadside and watching the army of Prophet (s) coming in numbers, Fatima was trying to find her father amongst them but she didn’t see him. Then she went to Abu Bakr and inquired: “Where is my father, I don’t see him in the army.” Abu Bakr’s eyes filled with tears and with a heavy heart he replied: “The Prophet of Allah must be coming soon.” When Holy Prophet (s) arrived, and she didn’t see her father even with the Prophet (s), she held the rope of Prophet’s carriage [horse/camel] and said: “O Prophet of Allah! Where is my father?” Prophet (s) replied: “I am your father.” She said: “O Prophet of Allah! I smell blood from this speech.” And tears started to flow from her eyes, with this tears leaked out of the eyes of the other companions too. She then said: “O Prophet of Allah! Narrate the condition of my father’s martyrdom.” Holy Prophet (s) replied: “My daughter! If I narrate the state of his martyrdom, you will not be able to control yourself.” Hearing this Fatima (Hamza’s (ra) daughter) screamed out.”
Madarij un Nabuwat, Volume 2, page 230 published in Karachi
If weeping over the dead is Haram than what do Nawasib think about companions and Holy Prophet (s) who were so aggrived and wept over Hamza’s martyrdom ?

Rasulullah (s) wept at the death of his son Ibraheem (as)

We read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 23, Number 390:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
We went with Allah’s Apostle (pbuh) to the blacksmith Abu Saif, and he was the husband of the wet-nurse of Ibrahim (the son of the Prophet). Allah’s Apostle took Ibrahim and kissed him and smelled him and later we entered Abu Saif’s house and at that time Ibrahim was in his last breaths, and the eyes of Allah’s Apostle (pbuh) started shedding tears. ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf said, “O Allah’s Apostle, even you are weeping!” He said, “O Ibn ‘Auf, this is mercy.” Then he wept more and said, “The eyes are shedding tears and the heart is grieved, and we will not say except what pleases our Lord, O Ibrahim! Indeed we are grieved by your separation.”
A more detailed tradition is recorded in Mishkat al Masabih:
Uns bin Malik reports that we entered the house along with the Prophet(s) and Ibrahim was taking his last breaths. Tears started to flow from Holy Prophet’s (s) eyes. Abdur Rehman bin Auf said “O` Prophet of Allah! Your such condition.” Holy Prophet(s) replied “O` Son of Auf! This is a blessing and after which one cries too” he further added “then the eyes cry and the heart becomes grieved but we do not say anything against Allah’s will (it means that we do not complain to Allah) O` Ibrahim no doubt that we are grieved and sad over your departure.”
Mishkaat, Volume 1, page 298 Published Karachi

Comment

The ingredients of Azadari for Imam Husayn (as) are lamentation and crying, and this is in accordance with the Sunnah of the Prophet (s) who mourned the loss of his son in such a manner.
If Nasibis seek to ask us whether Rasulullah (s) mourned his loss annually perhaps they could show us any evidence wherein the Holy Prophet (s) performed ‘Tarawih’ prayers in congregation? If they cannot then why do the Ahl’ul Sunnah follow this practise every year? According to our faith even if Holy Prophet (s) performed an act just once in his life that is his Sunnah, unless it is prohibited at a later date.
There is a world of difference in Ibrahim’s death and the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as). When Ibrahim parted he was at his home with his parents whereas Imam Husayn (as) was in a foreign land, thirsty for three days and mercilessly martyred whilst in an act of prostration.
The mourners of Ahlul bayt (as) mourn respectively over everything related to the Holy Progeny. Mourning for Ibrahim is not prohibited according to our faith; we can produce flags, cradles as symbols of grief. If we can conduct mourning gatherings for the ordinary dead we can do likewise for the Holy Prophet’s (s) beloved grandson who he referred to as his son. In reality our gatherings are protest processions against all forms of tyranny and oppression.
Social customs point to the fact that memorials are conducted for those who have contributed towards humanity through their sacrifices and have changed the course of history. Imam Husayn (as) sacrificed all that he had for protecting the Deen that had been conveyed by 124,000 Prophets. Had Ibrahim (as) reached this point of his life and achieved something like this we would have likewise mourned him in the same manner.

Rasulullah wept whenever he was foretold the tragedy that would befall on Husain (a.s.) and his companions

We read in Fadhail Sahaba by Imam Ahmed, volume 2 page 965 Hadith 1357:
The Prophet (s) said: ‘An angel that has never visited me before, entered my house today and said to me: ‘This son of yours will be killed. If you wish, I can give you some soil from the earth wherein he shall die’. The Prophet (s) then said: ‘The angel brought to me soil that was red’’.
In the footnote we read:
The chain is Sahih. He (Ahmed bin Hanbal) has brought this Hadith in his Musnad as did al-Haythami in Majma al-Zawaid and has said: ‘Ahmed has recorded this Hadith and its narrators are Sahih and Tabarani has recorded this Hadith from Ayesha with a Sahih chain. And in Majma al-Zawaid it is mentioned: ‘Ahmed has narrated this as have Abi Ya’la and Tabarani and Bazzar and its narrators are all Thiqaat (truthworthy).
Fadhail Sahaba by Imam Ahmed, volume 2 page 965 Hadith 1357
Musnad Abi Ya’la Al-Musili, Volume 1 page 298 Hadith 363:
Abdullah ibn Naji narrated from his father who said: ‘I went with Ali, they faced Nainawa as they were going to the battle of Siffeen then Ali called out and said: ‘O Aba Abdullah, have patience, O Aba Abdullah have patience on the bank of the Euphrates’. I asked: ‘What do you mean by Aba Abdullah’? Ali replied: ‘One day I went into the room of the Prophet (s) whilst his (s) eyes were gushing with tears, I therefore asked of him: ‘O Prophet (s), has someone angered you? What makes your eyes gush with tears?’ He (s) replied: ‘Gabriel has just left me; he (Gabriel) told me that Hussain will be killed on the banks of the Euphrates river. Gabriel then said to him (s): ‘Shall I let you smell its soil (wherein Hussain will be killed)? I said: ‘Yes’. So Gabriel extended his hand and presented a handful of the soil and gave it to me, I was then unable to prevent my eyes from gushing into tears’’’.
Hussain Asad Salim said:
‘The chain is Hasan’. Haythmani has recorded it in Majma al-Zawaid. Ahmed also has narrated it as did Abu Ya’la and Bazzar and Tabrani and the narrators are Thiqaat (trustworthy).
Musnad Abi Ya’la Al-Musili, Volume 1 page 298 Hadith 363
We also read in Musnad Abi Ya’la Al-Musili, Volume 6 page 129 Hadith 3402:
Anas bin Malik said: ‘The angel of rain asked permission from his Lord to visit the Holy Prophet (s) who granted permission. On that day the Prophet (s) was with Umme Salamah. The Prophet (s) told her: ‘Guard the door and do not let anyone in’. While she was at the door, Hussan bin Ali burst into the room, so the Prophet (s) began to hug and kiss him. The angel said to Prophet (s): ‘Do you love him?”. He (s) replied: ‘Yes’. The angel said: ‘Your nation will kill him. If you wish, I can show you the place wherein they will kill him’. The Prophet (s) said: ‘Yes’. So the angel took a handful of soil from the spot of his (Hussain’s) murder and showed it and it was Sahla or red soil’. So Umma Salamah took the soil and put it in her clothing’. Thabit said: ‘We would say that the sand was from Karbala’.
Hussain Asad Salim said: ‘The chain is Hasan’.
In Musnad Ahmed it is recorded: ‘The angel struck his hand and brought red sand’.
Musnad Abi Ya’la Al-Musili, Volume 6 page 129 Hadith 3402
Imam Ibn Habban has also recorded this in Sahih Ibn Habban, Volume 5 page 142 Hadith 6742. Al-Haythmai in Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 9 page has recorded a number of traditions wherein we read that Umme Salamah preserved the abovementioned soil in a bottle with her. Al-Albaani records a ‘Sahih’ Hadith:
Gabriel came to me and informed me that my Ummah will kill my son Hussain. I asked: ‘This Hussian?’. He (s) replied: ‘Yes’ he then brought me some of its soil that was red. Narrated by Umm al-Fadhal bint al-Harith that she went to the Holy Prophet (s) and said: ‘O Prophet (s), I have seen an unclear dream tonight’. He (s) asked: ‘What is it?’ She replied: ‘I saw that as if a part of your body was cut off from you and was placed upon my chest’. He (s) said: ‘You have seen something good. Inshallah Fatimah will bear a baby boy and he will be upon your chest.’ So Fatima gave birth to Hussain and he was on my chest as the Prophet (s) had notified me. On one day I went to the Holy Prophet (s) and put Hussain on his chest then he turned his face to the side and I witnessed his (s) eyes flowing with tears. I asked: “Prophet of Allah (s), may parents be sacrificed for you, what is wrong?” he (s) then mentioned it (the above hadith).
Silsilah Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiyah, Volume 2 page 462 Hadith 821
We can see from these traditions that Rasulullah (s) was foretold about the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as) on four separate occasions, by three different angels. Upon being notified of the tragic demise of his grandson, Rasulullah (s) broke down into tears, distraught at what was to become of him. On none of these occasions did Rasulullah (s) appear impassive and motionless at the news, his emotions overtook and his eyes were filled with tears when he was notified of what harm would befall his grandson (as). If Rasulullah (s) cried so profusely at the news of what was to happen to his grandson in the future, can one imagine his state would be on the Day of Karbala, when Husayn (as) was showered with arrows, his head decapitated and horses trampled over his body? This proves that crying when hearing of the suffering of Husayn (as) is a Sunnah of Rasulullah (s).
The tradition can also be read in:
Sawaiq e Muhirqah, page 641

It is not permissible to cry at the suffering of the Kuffar

Another incident that Nasibis seek to twist as proof that crying for Imam Husayn (as) concerns the lack of remorse offered by Prophet Shuayb (as) for his people. We read in Surah e Araf verses 91-93:
[Yusufali] But the earthquake took them unawares, and they lay prostrate in their homes before the morning!
The men who reject Shu’aib became as if they had never been in the homes where they had flourished:
the men who rejected Shu’aib – it was they who were ruined!
So Shu’aib left them, saying: “O my people! I did indeed convey to you the messages for which I was sent by my Lord: I gave you good counsel, but how shall I lament over a people who refuse to believe!
According to the words of Prophet Shu’aib (as) lamenting over the calamities befallen on righteous people is permissible but not for those calamities that confront unbelievers. This is clear from the verse; he (as) refused to lament for those that did not believe.

The weeping of the skies and Jinn for Imam Husayn (a.s)

Ibn al Hashimi in his article ‘Why Sunnis Do Not Comemmorate Ashura’ thought it imperative to search out the opinions of his fellow Naasbi brethren, it is hence not surpising to see that
Ibn al Hashimi cites Sunnipath.com:
Ibn Kathir said in al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya (8:201-202):
Al-Tabarani mentioned in this chapter very strange reports indeed and the Shi`a went overboard concerning the day of Ashura, forging many hadiths that are gross lies such as the sun being eclipsed on that day until the stars appeared, no stone was lifted except blood was seen under it, the celestial region became red, the sun and its rays seemed like blood, the sky seemed like a blood clot, the stars were hurling against one another, the sky rained red blood, there was never redness in the sky before that day, and the like… among other lies and forgeries of which not one report is sound

Reply – Sunni traditions confirm this reality

We would not have expected anything less from Ibn Kathir for his Nasabi bigotry is what compelled him to assert this, that Ibn al Hashimi happily cited without a seconds thought. Had the Nawasib of Sunnipath looked beyond Ibn Kathir they would have realised that the grief of Imam Husayn (as) is the grief on which not only Humans, but even Jinn, angels, animals, birds, the sky and trees, all lament. We read in Yanabi ul Mawwaddah by Allamah Shaykh Sulaiman al-Hanafi al-Qanduzi, page 392:
“The sky wept for forty days on (the martyrdom of) Imam Husayn (as)”.
We read in Tahdib al-Kamal by Jamaluddin al-Mizi, Volume 6 page 433:
وقال أبو الأسود النضر بن عبد الجبار عن بن لهيعة عن أبي قبيل لما قتل الحسين بن علي كسفت الشمس كسفة بدت الكواكب نصف النهار
Abu Qabeel said: ‘When Husayn bin Ali was killed, the sun was eclipsed (so long) so that the stars appeared in the middle of day’
Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi has narrated the lamenting and wailing of Jinn on page number 96 of his book titled “Sirrul Shahdatain”. He has also quoted the verses of the elegy, which was recited by the Jinn while weeping over Imam Husayn (as). Ummul Momineen Um Salma (ra) has also narrated as recorded by Imam Abi Bakar al-Haythami:
عن أم سلمة قالت‏:‏ سمعت الجن تنوح على الحسين بن علي‏.‏ رواه الطبراني ورجاله رجال الصحيح‏.‏
”I heard the jinns mourning for Husayn ibn Ali’.
Tabarani has recorded it and all its narrators are narrators of Sahih’

Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 9 page 199 Tradition 15179
We further read:
وعن ميمونة قالت‏:‏ سمعت الجن تنوح على الحسين بن علي ‏، رواه الطبراني ورجاله رجال الصحيح‏
‘Maymunah (ra) said: ‘I heard the jinns mourning for Husayn ibn Ali’.
Tabarani has recorded it and all its narrators are narrators of Sahih’

Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 9 page 199 Tradition 15180
Abu Naeem al-Asbahani records in Marifat al-Sahaba, Volume 5 page 333 Tradition 1686:
عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت ، قال : « سمعت الجن ، تنوح على الحسين
Habib bin Abi Thabit said: ‘I heard the jinn mourning over al-Hussain’
Then Tradition 1687:
عن أبي جباب الكلبي ، قال : حدثني الجصاصون قالوا : « كنا إذا خرجنا بالليل إلى الجبانة عند مقتل الحسين ، سمعنا الجن ينوحون عليه
Abi Habab al-Kalbi said: ‘Some grave diggers said: ‘Whenever we went out side at night to the cemetery during (the days) of the al-Hussain murder, we heared the jinn mourning over him’
We also read in Tradition 1688:
عن مزيدة بن جابر الحضرمي ، عن أمه ، قالت : سمعت الجن ، تنوح على الحسين
Mazidah bin Jabir al-Hadhrami narrated from his mother that she said: ‘I heard the jinn mourning over al-Hussain’
Marifat al-Sahaba, Volume 5 page 333
These are evidences of natural phenomena that occurred on the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as) that has been preserved in Sunni works, which proves that every creation in the universe mourned over the martyrs of Karbala. Where there will be intense weeping and wailing, and moaning and lamenting, there will be chest beating and face smiting as well as is seen in daily life.

How does Heaven/Sky cry?

Let us now ascertain how heaven cries, and how we know when it does. Allamah Jalaludin Suyuti records:
وأخرج ابن جرير وابن المنذر عن عطاء – رضي الله عنه – قال : بكاء السماء حمرة أطرافها
“Atta (ra) said: ‘The sky cries in a manner that all of its corners get red’.
Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Vol 7 page 413 Surah Dakhaan Verse 29
He quotes Imam Hasan Basri to have said:
وأخرج ابن أبي الدنيا عن الحسن – رضي الله عنه – قال : بكاء السماء حمرتها
Al-Hassan (ra) said: “When the sky gets red it weeps.”
Imam Mohammad ibn Jareer Tabari states in Tafseer Tabari, volume 22 page 33:
وقيل: إن بكاء السماء حمرة أطرافها.
“It has been said that the crying of the sky is such that all of its corners turn red.”
Allamah Nizamuddin Nishapuri states in Tafseer Nisahpuri, volume 25, page 73:
“Many Mufassireen are of the view that the sky can cry, so they believe that the solar and the lunar eclipses, the corners of the sky getting red and the blowing of wild and pinching wind are forms of the sky weeping.”

The weeping of the heaven and earth over Imam Husayn (as)

Now let us analyze that who those people are who are cried at by the heaven and the earth.
Allamah Jalaludin Syuti writes that Ibrahim (ra) said:

Crying and wailing for Imam Hussain (as)

Crying is a natural act
Islam is a religion based on nature. Wailing or weeping is the innate instinct of a human being. A newborn child starts his life crying. Weeping is not prohibited in any religion or creed of the world. Tears are automatically shed when a man is confronted by any physical, mental or spiritual mishap, and tears are not only the sign of grief but also a kind of reimbursement for that grief. Now in whose grief does a newborn child weep? That’s the question, which can be answered by the one who remembers his own weeping when he was born. It is said, that when Adam (as) was sent to this earth from heaven, he wept on that migration and hence every child of Adam (as), weeps when he opens his eyes in this world. If this is true, then this reason for wailing certainly supports our point of view that in the grief of a departure, wailing is a natural habit. Wailing or weeping is a natural instinct hence Allah (swt) has also praised this act and has said in the Holy Qur’an:

We read in Surah Maryam 019.058

YUSUFALI: Those were some of the prophets on whom Allah did bestow His Grace, – of the posterity of Adam, and of those who We carried (in the Ark) with Noah, and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel of those whom We guided and chose. Whenever the Signs of (Allah) Most Gracious were rehearsed to them, they would fall down in prostrate adoration and in tears.

Surah An-Nahl verse 53

YUSUF ALI: And ye have no good thing but is from Allah. And moreover, when ye are touched by distress, unto Him ye cry with groans.

It is quite clear from these words of Allah (swt) that He praises this act and dislikes mocking the concept of weeping. Therefore, during mortification or humility before Allah (swt) and during the situations of calamity and catastrophe, wailing is the act of the praised ones and since ‘wailing’ is a composite act of mourning it serves as evidence for mourning.

Crying is an act of believers


[Yusufali 5:83] And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: they pray: “Our Lord! We believe; write us down among the witnesses.

This proves that crying is an act of the believers and according to the Holy Qur’an flowing of tears is a sign of believing in the truth.

This verse was revealed when some Christians from Habsha visited Madina. Shah Abdul Qadir Mohaddis Dehlavi gives its explanation in his “Tafseer e Moza al Qur’an”.

“When the persecutions by the pagans of Makkah were no longer bearable, the Holy Prophet(s) ordered the Muslims to migrate to some other country. That same day nearly 80 Muslims (some alone and some along with their families) migrated towards Habsha. The ruler of Habsha in those days was a very just man; the pagans of Makkah approached the king and lied to him that this new group of people calls Jesus Christ a slave. On hearing this, the king asked the Muslims to recite something from their book, which the Muslims did. After hearing the recitation of the Holy Qur’an some of their saints started crying and said that this is exactly what they have come to know by his Excellency Jesus Christ, and he had further said that after Him, another apostle would come and no doubt this person is that apostle. The king accepted Islam secretly, and this verse has been revealed for him.”

The flowing of tears from eyes is called crying and crying is one of the aspects of mourning, therefore the relation of this verse with mourning is automatically proved.

Of relevance is Abu Bakr’s very own admission that the Sahaba would weep when reciting the Quran. We are citing the comments of Ghazzali in “Ahya ul Uloom Adeen” Volume 2, Urdu Translation by Maulana Nadeem Al Waajdi Fazil Deobandi, Published in Karachi:

“When Abu Bakr saw an Arab man weeping while listening to the Holy Quran He said : “We used to weep in the same manner as you are weeping but now our hearts have become stonned”

The entire content of the Qur’an is true as is Husayn (as)’s martyrdom. According to Hadeeth Thaqlain both have an unbreakable link. Just as the eyes of believers are filled with tears when they hear the recitation of the Holy Qur’an, they also shed tears when hearing of Imam Husayn’s (as) martyrdom. Husayn (as) was the Talking Qur’an and the moment one hears about the hardships faced by Imam (as) one laments over his death and shed tears.
Lamentation from the Qur’an

We read in Surah Bara’at verse 82:


Is Azadari against patience (sabr)?


The Nasibi Mullah states:
Haq Char Yaar:
IN THE QUR’AN THE MUSLIMS ARE ADVISED:
“O YE WHO BELIEVE!
SEEK HELP IN PATIENCE AND PRAYER; FOR VERILY ALLAH IS WITH THOSE WHO ARE PATIENT.” (2: 153).

Reply One – Overview of the verse

Our initial replies to these Nawasib are as follows:
  1. Azadari is not against the concept of patience. If weeping is against the concept of patience than why in Qur’an it is mentioned that weeping increases (earnest) humility.[Yusufali 17:109] They fall down on their faces in tears, and it increases their (earnest) humility.
  2. If Azadari is against patience then could this Nasibi Mullah translate the surrounding verses and prove his point.
  3. If Azadari is against patience than we would like to ask why Qur’an refers to the lengthy mourning of Prophet Yaqub (as) as ‘Perfect Patience’ (Sabr-e-Jameel), when he lost his eyesight and in fact nearly died?

Reply Two – The Meaning of Sabr in this verse

In his commentary of the verse (2:153) al Muhaddith Shah, Abdul Qadir Dehlavi wrote:
Here the actual meaning of ‘patience’ is to ‘stand fast’ because in the next verse, ‘Jihad’ has been discussed.

Comment

Allah (swt) is actually telling us to stand fast and firm during Jihad and this Nasibi is advancing the term Sabr as evidence for the prohibition of mourning, now shall we adhere to Allah (swt) or this Mullah?
The Deobandi Sects esteemed scholars Allamah Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Shah Abdul Qadir in their respective Tafseers gave a similar translation of the verse.
Here the translation of Shah Sahib is correct that no matter how arduous the war is, and no matter how many hardships are faced during the war, one should not flee the battlefield. So we come to know that the meaning of ‘patience’ also in this ayah is to stand fast and to run from battlefield is impatience. Therefore Allah (swt) is with those soldiers who don’t run from the battle, they are the ones who are truthful and righteous/Allah-fearing [Muttaqi] The runners are impatient people and they have no relation whatsoever with Allah (swt), truthfulness and Taqwa. Lest there be any doubt about the meaning of Sabr here, let us allow Saheeh al Bukharee to expand on the ‘Sabr’ of the Sahaba in this context:
We read in Sahih Bukhari ‘Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihad) Volume 4, Book 52, Number 205:
Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:
When we reached (Hudaibiya) in the next year (of the treaty of Hudaibiya), not even two men amongst us agreed unanimously as to which was the tree under which we had given the pledge of allegiance, and that was out of Allah’s Mercy. (The sub narrator asked Naf’i, “For what did the Prophet take their pledge of allegiance, was it for death?” Naf’i replied “No, but he took their pledge of allegiance for patience.”)
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 86:
Narrated Salim Abu-An-Nadr:
‘Abdullah bin Abi Aufa wrote and I read what he wrote that Allah’s Apostle said, “When you face them (i.e. your enemy) then be patient.”
This tradition therefore leaves no doubt that Sabr in this verse means to maintain one’s position in battle, as is also attested in the Surah Aal-e-Imran:
003.125
YUSUFALI: “Yea, – if ye remain firm [Sabr], and act aright, even if the enemy should rush here on you in hot haste, your Lord would help you with five thousand angels Making a terrific onslaught.
We appeal to justice the narration of Sabr exploited by these Nasibi to apply to the Shi’a needs to be applied to the Sahaba first. Analyse any battle, Uhud, Khayber, Khunduq, Hunayn, where can firm footing be established? Did they adhere to this form of Sabr? If we analyse history it can be proved without a shadow of a doubt that they did not.
Sabr’ does not therefore serve as evidence on the prohibition of the Azadari, the mourners of Leader of the Youth of Paradise, Imam Husayn (as) are truthful and people of heaven and no doubt Allah (swt) is with the mourners because mourners are with the oppressed ones and the enemies of the oppressor, Allah (swt) who is “Aadil” will likewise be with the oppressed group.

Wearing black clothes

Nasibi Qadhi Mazhar Husayn in his book “Hum Matam kyoon nahee kartay” [Why we do not perform mourning] says that black was the attire of the people of Pharaoh and the people of Hell.
Ibn al Hashimi al-Nasibi also touched the issue: 
Traditionally, the Shia wear black clothes in the month of Muharram. In fact, during this month, it is considered Mustahabb (highly recommended) to do so. We find most Shia do wear black in certain parts of the year, including the Shia Ulema (scholarship) and Maraje’ (high scholars). In fact, the Shia Ayatollahs tend to wear black year-round, and very rarely do we see them not wearing black cloaks.
Herein we find a contradiction in the Shia faith. According to the authentic Shia Hadith, wearing black clothes is actually Haram (forbidden)! We see the following Hadith referenced on the reliable Shia website, Al-Shia.com:
Amir-ul-mu’minin said:
“Do not wear black clothes, that is the dress of Pharaoh”
(Source: Al-Shia.com, http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/faqih/faqih-1/a41.html)
Imam As Sadiq was asked about pray in the black clothes, he said:
“Don’t pray in it, that is dress of people of fire”
(Source: Al-Shia.com,
http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/faqih/faqih-1/a41.html)
There is obviously nothing wrong with wearing black clothes, and the Ahlus Sunnah has nothing in their books which forbids it. However, the Shia Hadith declare that Amir Al-Mumineen Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and Imam As-Sadiq (رضّى الله عنه) declared it Haram. And yet, we find the Shia scholars wearing black, as well as the Shia masses who do so out of a sense of religious obligation.

Reply One


Firstly, the Shia scholars who consider it Mustahabb (highly recommended) to wear black clothes during the month of Muharram, they base their fatwa on respecting the signs of Allah according to the verse ‘{and whoever respects the signs of Allah, this surely is (the outcome) of the piety of hearts.}’ [22:32]. There are divergent views among the scholars as to whether the month of Muharam is one of the signs of Allah or not. But Ibn al-Hashimi’s claim that the Shia masses do so out of a sense of ‘religious obligation’ is no doubtedly an exaggeration.
And most importantly, we do not know from where Ibn al-Hashimi al-Nasibi has deduced that wearing black is Haraam in Shia school. The two Shia traditions he has used in his article, when read with other similar traditions, the maximum status of weaing black clothes that the Shia scholars have deduced is Makrooh [will lessen some reward] but they did not declare it Haraam [prohibted act], as we read in Majma al-Faeda by Ardabili, Volume 2 page 87 and in Al-Muhadab al-Bare by ibn Fahad al-Heli, Volume 2 page 21. As for clear tradition from a Imam [as] regarding the actual status of the issue, we read in Wasail al-Shia, Volume 4 page 382:
“Abu Abdullah (a) said: ‘The black dress is Makrooh except in three things, shoes, turban and cloak”.
Thus, one may not adopt the habit of wearing black clothes but here we are only discussing things from the prespective of mourning for Imam Hussain [as]. Black is considered as a sign to express grief and wearing black solely for the purpose to express one’s grief for the murder of the Prophet’s grandson cannot be equated to the rutine wearing trends. We read in prominent Shia work Bihar al-Anwar, Volume 45 page 70:
Umar bin Ali bin al-Hussain said: ‘When al-Hussain bin Ali (as) was killed, Bani Hashim’s women used to wear black clothes’.
In another Shia book Al-Hadaeq al Nasirah, Volume 3 page 142, it is stated that:
“The act of wearing black, in reality, has nothing to do with the (illogical) traditions condemning it because it has been mentioned (enduringly) for posterity in the most authentic traditions that the symbols of mourning should be made manifest in the mourning for Imam Husayn (as).
Thus, when Imam Husayn (as) was martyred, the ladies of Banu Hashim wore the black attire and they did not change it even if the weather was hot or cold. The ladies would be busy mourning and Imam Zain ul Abideen (as) would bring food for them”.
We do not see any condemnation of Imam Zain al-Abdeen [as] for the women of Bani Hashim on wearing back clothes for expressing their grief for the slain Grandson of Holy Prophet [s] which shows that Imams of Ahlulbayt [as] distinguished between one’s love for wearing black clothes in rutine and in wearing them to epxress one’s grief for the tragedies beffalen Ahlulbayt [as].

Reply Two

It is obvious that the actual motive of Ibn al-Hashimi behind this short article was to point out the ‘inconsistency in religion’ and then concluded ‘that Shi’ism is not true Islam’. If that is the case, then let us present some facts for Ibn al-Hashimi:
  1. Quran instructs to take two witnesses before you divorce while Sunnis oppose the notion.
  2. Quran and Sunnah forbid us to kill each other and consume Haraam but the ‘Faqih’ and ‘Hadi’ of Nawasib namely Muawiya allowed the same [Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4546].
  3. Bayhaqi has recorded that “Prophet (pbuh) while leading the prayer used to recite ‘Bismiallah alrahman al-Rahim’ whenever he wanted to recite Quran’ [Al-Sunnan al-Kubra, v2 p47 Tradition 2225] but we read that “The Malikis say that it is Makrooh to recite Tawiz before reciting a sura during prayer and reciting ‘Bismillah’ before the Fatiha or the sura as well” [Al-Fiqh ala al-Madahib al-Arba, v1 p170].
  4. “Narrated Aisha: ‘Do you make us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys? I used to lie between the Prophet and the Qiblah and whenever he wanted to prostrate he used to pinched my leg and I would then pull my legs” [Sahih Bukhari, v1 p193] while Salafi Imam Ibn Uthaymin stated that “Thus the correct view in this issue is that the prayer gets invalid by the passing of a woman, donkey and black dog.” [Al-Sharh al-Mumtea, v3 p214].
Now shall we paraphrase Ibn al-Hashimi’s remarks:
‘This is truly an inconsistency in religion. The Faith of Allah should not have inconsistencies in it, and yet we find that Sunnism is full of such discrepencies. Hence, we can only conclude that Sunnism is not true Islam’.

 

Who were the killer of Imam Husain (a.s.)?

 Intentional distortion
 (Published in ‘Al-Jawwad’, February 1956 A.D. issue)
A reference of Rizwan editor has been discussed  in which he has accused Shias for killing Imam Husain (s). He has purposely distorted the translation of the text of Majalisul Muttaqin on this topic though comprehension also plays a major role in this translation. The wordings of Majalisul Muttaqin are taken from the Maqtal of Abi Mikhnaf.
 First let us see how this incident is narrated in the Maqtal of Abi Mikhnaf:
Imam Husain (s) told Umme Kulthum, “Bring Ali Asghar to me.” He took the child near the army and said, “O People! You killed my brother, son, helper and friends. Now, none except this child is left, in whose liver flames are leaping due to thirst. Give him a sip of water.”[1]
 [1] Maqtal, Abu Mikhnaf, Pg. 39, Printed Bombay, 1311 AH
Shahid-e-Rabe’ has described this matter in the text which is presented by the Rizwan editor. Its correct translation is as follows:

“O People! You killed my Shias (friends) and martyred my family members.”
However, note the capability of the Rizwan editor who translates as, “O Shias! You killed me too…
The Lord of the worlds has condemned Jews and Christians in numerous places in Quran that they distorted Divine scriptures and “they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of…”[1] In this way, they wanted to live a happy life. For example, refer to the following verse of Quran:
“Most surely there is a party amongst those who distort the Book with their tongue that you may consider it to be (a part) of the Book, and they say, It is from Allah, while it is not from Allah, and they tell a lie against Allah whilst they know.”[2]
[1] Surah Maidah 5:31
[2] Surah Aale Imran 3:78

Did you see how the Rizwan editor made a successful attempt to become a connotation of this verse by twisting the tongue and changing the wordings? He also proved the following saying of the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) practically:
“Whatever has happened among the past nations will happen among this nation also. To such an extent that even if they had entered a burrow of an animal, you too would enter it.”
Umar was greatly interested in the Jews and hence, he had to face the displeasure of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) one day. Surely, that habit has reached the Rizwan editor through inheritance. Like Jews, he also, “altered the words from their places and…neglected a portion…” Thus in this unequivocal statement he changes simple term of ‘My Shias’ into pieces made ‘Me’ a separate word. He made ‘Shias’ a predicate of ‘people’, which was actually the suffix of ‘My’ and created a new compound ‘Shia people’ and immediately translated it as, “O Shias! You killed me and my Ahle Bayt also.”
“(They) distort the Book with their tongue that you may consider it to be (a part) of the Book, and they say, it is from Allah, while it is not from Allah.”[1]

This adornment of new ways has made you rightful that you roam telling your disciples:
“What is accomplished by me, could not be accomplished by even Rustom.”
But, my lord! If you did not have the capability to understand Arabic and Persian you should at least have thought how it could be correct to say ‘You killed me’ taking Ali Asghar (s) on his hands? Was Imam Husain already martyred at that time? But how could the Rizwan editor understand these points of common sense?  
Because,
“Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing and there is a covering over their eyes.”[2]
[1] Surah Aale Imran 3:78
[2] Surah Baqarah 2:7

This is the result of your distortion and dishonesty in quoting a statement of Rijal Kishi’ that ‘Killers of Husain were Shias’.
If you really want to know who the killers of Husain were and who their followers are today, read my article ‘Killers of Husain (s)’ from beginning to end. It is printed in ‘Arbaeen special issue 1374 A.H. of Razakar’. It is such a clear mirror that you would be able to see your features very clearly. If you have any shame you would refrain from making such statements in future.

What a scandal, that people who consider the accursed Yazid, the accursed Marwan as their caliphs, who accept narrations of Umar Saad (l.a.) and accursed Shimr, who consider the enmity of Ahle Bayt and obedience of killers of Husain a part of their belief, are taunting the slaves of holy Ahle Bayt (s) that ‘Killer of Husain were Shias’.

اگر یزید کی بیعت نہ کرتے تو کافر ہوجاتے۔!!!

اہل بدعت و جماعت سلفی گروپ کے محقق محمد عبدالجبار لکھتا ہے

اصحاب رسول ص اگر یزید کی بیعت نہ کرتے تو کافر ہوجاتے۔
مقاصد الامامۃ و مناصب الخلافۃ ص-22
مصنف مولوی عبدالجبار
طبع کھنڈیلہ ضلع جےپور