| 02 March 2004 | Tuesday | 10 Muharram 1425 |
Hussain's mission
Supreme sacrifice for a sacred cause
The world of Islam is facing unprecedented challenges. Among all major world civilizations, only this religion is being branded a threat to the rest of the world. To an extent, extremist and fanatical elements within the Islamic world have, through their misguided deeds, provided an opportunity to the hegemonic forces to use the Islamic bogey for fulfilling their geo-economic aims of aggrandisement and domination.
With ominous clouds hovering over the world of Islam, Karbala stands out as an unshakeable point of reference, proclaiming the dictum that victories gained by brute force are ephemeral, in the face of sustained endeavour and strength of will.
With the passage of centuries and down the corridors of hallowed time, Imam Hussain (A.S) has come to symbolize more and more, the courage of conviction and compassion, the sense of justice and integrity, which the Ummah needs for its survival and advancement.
Carlyle has said that all great ages are ages of faith. Few episodes in history will rank besides Karbala as epic manifestation of faith. The month of Moharrum which heralds the advent of the Hijra Calendar has traditionally been an eventful month.
But the saga of Karbala has lent to the month a unique dimension and marked it as a memorable milestone in human history. Passage of a millennium and a half has not diminished the profound imprint that Karbala etched on the pages of history and on the hearts and minds of men and women of faith.
Karbala stands for rejection of any unjust dispensation, irrespective of the price for opposing or seeking to change it. In the words of Hazrat Ali (A.S), while an order based on Kufr may last for a while, tyranny will not endure.
However the message of Karbala seems to have been lost on many of the regimes in the Islamic world, pursuing self-serving, divisive policies, characterized by expediency, half-truth compromise and retreat.
Allama Iqbal saw the history of Islam as marked by two definitive sacrifices, that of Ismail in the beginning and of Imam Hussain at a defining moment in Islamic history. For Iqbal, the role of Imam Hussain (A.S) in the history of Islam is as central as the position of Sura' Ikhlas in the Holy Quran.
In the words of Dr. Anne Marie Schimmel, one of the most profound western scholars of Islam, "It is from Hussain (A.S) that we have learnt the message of the Holy Quran.
When the grandeurs of Damascus, Baghdad and Granada have been forgotten, the heart-strings of the Ummah would still respond to Hussain's melody and their faith remain firm, responding to his call to prayer".
Like Arabic poets earlier, Sanai, Attar and other Persian poets saw the martyr of Karbala as the epitome of character and moral courage, a virtue regarded by Allama Iqbal as the security for all other virtues. Yunus Emre, the Turkish poet described Imam Hussain as the "fountainhead of martyrs" and the young martyrs of Karbala as "the tears of the saints". Qaani, the great Persian thinker and poet in his moving elegy, in the form of question and answer, wrote:
"What is raining-blood; from where-the
eyes; when-day and night; why-because
of grief, grief for the King of Karbala".
Karbala was not a clash between princes or families or clans. It was a confrontation between ideologies and principles. To see it in a narrower light, leading to divisiveness in our ranks, is to belittle the significance of Karbala's message. The most important obligation that our Ulema and intellectual elites have is to portray the unifying nature of Karbala's universal message.
It is most important that we present the real message of Karbala to our people, especially the younger generation whose minds are troubled by conflicting ideologies and systems.
In this connection we should bear in mind the enlightened teaching of Hazrat Ali (A.S): "In educating your people, remember to educate them for the needs of their generation, not for the requirements of your generation"!
The unique aspect of Karbala lies in the fact that all its trials and tribulations had been foreseen by the noble Imam and his followers. While there have been innumerable examples of massacres and bestialities in history, no comparable historical episode comes readily to mind, in which a whole group decides not in the heat of a fleeting moment, but after due deliberation and choice, to court certain death and torture, for the sake of a cause when a safe alternative was available.
This was unlike other great tragedies, which though most heart-rending were different in the sense that the victims had unfortunately no other choice available. Even on the battlefield with its attendant dangers, there is in most cases, the feeling of a margin of possible safety, if not victory.
Unlike the other mythological tales of certain ancient cultures and the unverified traditions of pre-Islamic creeds, not subjected in the way as has been Islam to the searchlight of history, the epic of Karbala has an authenticity to which even non-Muslim intellectuals including Gibbon, Carlyle and others have testified. Said Gibbon, "In a distant age and clime, the scene of the death of Hussain would evoke the sympathy of the coldest reader"!
Apropos of the legacy of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) preserved by the martyrs of Karbala, it may be pertinent to refer to the work of historian, Michael Hart titled "The hundred most influential persons in history", which includes prophets, philosophers, conquerors, generals, scientists, inventors and others.
The distinguished non-Muslim historian has, in his work, ranked the Holy Prophet (PBUH) at the very top of this list as the most influential historical figure of all times, surpassing Jesus Christ, Lord Buddha, Confucius and all other titans in every major field of human thought and endeavour.
The Imam's profound concern for human feelings, the highest test of civilization, is reflected, inter alia, in the moving episode of his extinguishing the small light in the camp, in the dead of night, on the eve of Ashura, and asking his friends and companions to leave if they so desired, in the interests of their safety, under the cover of darkness, without suffering any embarrassment. That his companions spurned the path of safety and preferred to face the severest tribulations and certain death, showed the mettle of which they were made.
Never was the message of Karbala as relevant to the Islamic Ummah as it is today. It is the ability to stand firm and to be prepared, if the cause is high enough, for the greatest sacrifice that gives strength and ultimate, if not immediate, victory to a people.
The forces of tyranny are influenced in their designs by their assessment of a people's capacity to stand up and be counted. The Soviet superpower and the French had no option but to retreat in the face of the sacrifices offered in the Afghan Jihad and the Algerian Revolution by a million martyrs.
The Islamic world today faces uphill struggles, though of a dissimilar nature, in Kashmir, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. In Kashmir an occupying army of over half a million continues to inflict daily death and destruction. Thousands of young Kashmiri lives have been blighted in Indian prisons and torture camps.
The Palestinian struggle continues to throw up known and unknown heroes in the Intifada. In the words of a Palestinian poet, addressed to the Israeli occupiers:
"And in your hearts, we shall stay,
A piece of glass, a cactus thorn,
And in your eyes, a blazing fire!"
Kashmir and Palestine have re-written the political vocabulary of human cruelty on the one hand and the toughness of the human will on the other. The defenders of Sarajevo, Sebrenica, Gorazde and other bastions of resistance have written new chapters in the history of steadfastness and fortitude.
If the Muslim world, however, has not succeeded so far in many of its struggles, it is because of the dichotomy between its Islamic professions and actual practice, the perceived contradictions between the narrow, self-serving interests of the different regimes in the Islamic world and because of the absence of necessary conviction and faith, which were symbolized so fully at Karbala.
The instructive quality of the sorrow evoked from a correct assimilation of Karbala's universal message is eloquently expressed in the following lines of Syed Ale Raza :-
haq parasti sey na honey de jo ghafil woh gham
jis sey tharrai parastar-ey batil woh gham
mustaqil jis sey key zalim sey barait ho jai
jis sey hamdard-ey mazloom ki aadit ho jai.
Hussain's mission
Both the Bible and the Quran illustrate that there have been two types of responses when a society reaches the brink of a moral collapse. The first is the destruction of a whole society.
This was seen in the case of the people of Noah, or the cities of the plain. The second is the martyrdom which strikes at the conscience of society to restructure it on a new ethical foundation. It was in evidence at Kerbala.
The aim of the Yazid regime was three fold: to uphold tyranny over freedom, to humiliate the guardians of morality and to lay the foundations of a third Rome. The actions of both sides showed that they were fully conscious of their aims; Husain by bringing into the fray an impossibly small band of warriors and Yazid by receiving the severed head of Husain, outside his castle, exactly at the site where the head of John the Baptist is buried.
Leaving a written will and testament to his step-brother Muhammad al Hanafia, he wrote: "Husain testifies that there is no God but Allah, alone with no associate. Muhammad is His subject and Messenger, sent by the Almighty with the Right and Truth. Verily I go out to seek the reform in the community ... to command them towards the good and forbid what is evil."
Matters had come to a head when Yazid on his succession pressed the Governor of Madina to force Husain bin Ali to swear fealty to him. Husain left Madina rather than comply.
His well-wishers like Abdullah bin Umar urged him to be conciliatory, Husain replied, "There is no honour for this world in the eyes of God. This is such a debased place that the head of John son of Zacharias was presented to a low born person of the Israelites. Are you not aware that the Bani Israel while coming out after dawn used to kill seventy prophets and behave as if they had done nothing.
"In spite of these cruelties God did not immediately grasp them, but gave them opportunity and leave. But ultimately the Almighty punished them so that no one escaped. God is victorious above all and unfailingly takes retribution. O Ibn Umar, understand fully that to aid me is obligatory and compulsory, even on you."
This conversation took place two days before Husain left for Makkah. When he left, this verse was on his lips: "If without my blood the Faith of Muhammad remains thirsty, O sword come and attack me."
When Husain was advised to avoid highways and take to the side roads for his safety, he replied, I shall not leave the highway until God fulfils his desire. When Imam Husain reached Makkah there was an attack against Abdullah bin Zubair, the governor Amr bin Saeed resolved to violate the sanctity of the Kabah. According to Ibn Sa'd assassins had been sent in the garb of pilgrims. Consequently Husain left Makkah before Haj.
The Governor of Makkah sent forces under the command of his brother Yahya bin Saeed to bring Husain back forcibly to Makkah. There was hand to hand fighting between the two sides.
Finally the followers of Husain were victorious. After being defeated, Amr bin Saeed sent to the Imam a promise of immunity to call him back but since this promise did not absolve him from pledging fealty to Yazid, Husain and his followers went ahead.
The same day that Imam Husain set out from Makkah, his followers, Muslim bin Aqeel and Hani ibn Urwa were executed in Kufa. Just as he had left behind the battalion of Amr bin Saeed, the Imam encountered the renowned Arabic poet Farazdaq.
The poet recounts that he found the grandson of the Prophet (PBUH) outside Makkah carrying swords and shields, 'May my parents be a sacrifice to you, 0 son of the Prophet (PBUH)?' He said. The Imam asked him to tell about himself. He said he was a person of Iraq.
This is all the Imam asked him and did not question him further but asked about the place he was coming from. He replied, their hearts were with him (Imam), but their swords were with the Umayyads and the outcome is with God. The Imam replied 'you speak the truth' and then he replied to his questions about the rituals of Haj and other religious queries. Imam Husain bin Ali continued on his journey and wherever he halted, he addressed the people of the area, explaining why he had undertaken his mission and how the chains of tyranny could be broken.
At Thalabia, Husain received the news that Muslim bin Aqeel and Hani bin Urwah had been martyred. At Zubala the Imam learnt that his emissary Qays bin Mashar had also been killed. Here the Imam assembled the followers, and instead of speaking directly, read out a speech. "In the name of God, The Merciful, The Compassionate.
I have received grim news that Muslim bin Aquil, Hani bin Urwa and Abdullah bin Yaqtar have been killed. Our supporters have abandoned us. Whoever from you, who wishes to leave me is allowed to do so, I relieve you of my responsibility."
Hearing this, the majority of his followers left him and took different paths, and only those who had originally accompanied him from Madina were left. The Imam had apparently prepared each and every word, and had deliberately sought to dissuade those who had hopes of fortune or worldly gain.
How Imam Husain would carry out his mission would depend on the people around him, therefore he dismissed a multitude that had gathered to his cause, but on the other hand sought out a person who was deliberately avoiding him, Zuhair bin Qayn.
Zuhair bin Qayn was conscious of a moral obligation to join the Imam but he also wished to avoid a battle, he was following the same path as Husain, but camping separately. The Imam sent a messenger to him and Zuhair set aside his inhibitions and answered his summons.
Shortly after Zuhair joined him, the Imam's progress was barred by the person who would play a pivotal role in the unfolding tragedy, Hur bin Yazid. Zuhair advised Imam Husain to attack Hur's contingent before the enemy forces increased. Husain explained that he could not begin the battle. It was after being surrounded by Hur, that Imam Husain gave a sermon:
"O people, the Messenger of God (PBUH) has said that if any person sees a ruler who is a tyrant, who allows what is forbidden by God and forbids what is allowed by God, who breaks his pledge to God, who goes against the practice of the Messenger of God (PBUH) and if such a person does not by word or deed oppose such a ruler God will treat him also as a tyrant and a despot. Listen, these rulers have adopted the rule of Satan, and have left the obedience of God, they have spread dissension. To oppose them is first and foremost, my right".
This sermon which the Imam gave at Baiza was stern. It put into plain words his aim and purpose. This sermon was aimed at Hur and his followers who were the vanguard of Yazid's army. This speech slowly affected Hur. Nevertheless, he forced Imam Husain to halt at Karbala, far from the river. On the day of the battle, Zuhair bin Qayn who had been reluctant to help the Imam and Hur bin Yazid who actively opposed him entered the list on his side together, and were martyred in each other's company. Edward Gibbon without naming Hur eulogized him in the following words:
"A chieftain from the opposing side, crossed over to claim the partnership of inevitable death". In these words the great historian was able to identify the ideological strand of the conflict.
This also reveals the strategy of Husain, to obtain the testimony of his enemies in his favour. Imam Husain well knew that the Arabic word Shahadat stood for both martyrdom and testimony. That is the reason that he kept with him a tiny force but a force which was the soul of integrity, but some as we shall presently see, had joined conditionally.
In the afternoon of the tenth of Muharram, all the relatives of Imam Husain had been martyred: Abbas, his brother the standard bearer, Ali Akbar his grown up son, Ali Asghar his infant son, his young nephews Qasim, Aun and Muhammad all after braving the heat, thirst and hunger for three days.
When the Imam was fighting with a handful of his followers Zuhak bin Abdullah approached him and said "I had said that till the time I see people fighting with you, I shall fight but when I see that no warrior is left, I shall leave." Imam Husain allowed him to leave.
When after Imam Husain was martyred and his head was being raised on a lance, Suwaid bin Amr, his follower who lay wounded under the heap of corpses, was aroused. He got up, was unable to find his sword, picked up a dagger and attacked the enemy till he was killed. It is by contrasting the conduct and spirit of Zuhak and Suwaid that we can see how the spirit of martyrdom, though under great strain and pressure, ultimately prevailed, and the mission of Imam Husain became universal and eternal.
Supreme sacrifice for a sacred cause
Great events are those which leave indelible marks upon the future course of history. The blood-stained and heart-rending incident that took place at Karbala is no doubt one of those consequential events.
However, the chances are that emotional insulation, highly charged sentiments and a possible squint-eye observation may thickly wrap up the potential moral and political values flowing from the incident and consequently water down the real significance of what Imam Husain stood for and sacrificed his life upholding them.
One of the very basic questions is why after all did he choose to ignore the "ground realities" which he was fully cognizant of and whose consideration is the order of our day? Why could he not brace himself for a single shot of "realism" which has become the panacea for all the ills of Muslim lands and the most coveted life-maintaining elixir for present day Muslim rulers.
Could it be maintained with even an infinitesimal iota of truth that he was not aware of the tremendous power, the crushing military might, the ruthlessness and brutality of those whom he was planning to strike against?
Would it be reasonable to suppose that it was not in his knowledge that he had only a negligible number of followers who were ready to lay their lives for him? Moreover, would it be correct to say that he was so forgetful that he could not even dimly recall the treacherous betrayal that had earlier been inflicted upon his father and again on his elder brother by those who were writing to him incessantly from Kufah, assuring him of their faithfulness and support and inviting him to have a showdown with the regime of the day?
Would it not be a most daring travesty of truth, a flagrant violation of all norms of sincere, objective and honest enquiry, and a mean, malicious, despicable, ill-intentioned, diabolic, and satanic attempt at the character-assassination of one of the most noble, honourable, conscientious, and unblemished souls of the history of Islam, to even indirectly and obliquely hint at his being so power-hungry, to grab political reins that he could hazard anything?
Any such possible assumption is patently, obviously, categorically false, devoid of truth, bereft of veracity. The Imam was never ignorant of the fast developing situation. He was in the full know of all the facts.
He knew that Hani and Muslim bin Aquil had been murdered. He knew that the Kufans had already begun showing their true colours. How could he possibly ignore the fact that his followers consisted of a few of his near kith and kin, some others belonging to the tribe of Ansar.
Besides, had he been power hungry he would have never dared to challenge the military might of the "superpower" of the time. Why then didn't he recognize the "ground realities"? Why didn't he seek refuge in the philosophy of "realism"? The only plausible answer is that there was something that was more valuable than life and property for the Imam to preserve. There was some principle, dearer than snatching political power, for which the Imam was ready to risk any thing.
Could it possibly escape the attention of any moderately sane person, or any one who has not bid adieu to his common sense that only a simple twist of tongue, a mere mumbling of a few words, a false show of allegiance, a little outward indication of yielding to the demand of the rulers or their agents, a gesture suggesting inclination to submit to the whims of those in power even though believing in the heart of hearts that such a step was being taken to ward off evil, and that it was under duress and coercion, and due only to a real and grave danger to life and property that such undesirable act had to be undertaken.
Had it been done, a catastrophic tragedy would have been very conveniently avoided. Who could know better than Imam Husain that such a step was, under the dreadful circumstances, perfectly justified in the eyes of law and ethical code. Nevertheless, he didn't succumb to the alluring temptation. Why? Couldn't he assess the gravity of the situation? How could he be so oblivious to the immediate dangerous consequences the circumstances were pregnant with.
Nevertheless, he didn't invoke the rule of legality of action performed under duress and coercion, even though by refusing to do so he was laying himself and followers fully exposed to extremely perilous situation. Was it not because he was guarding and upholding a principle so vital for the honour, integrity and dignified existence of a nation?
Earlier, Imam Hasan, who with a view to avoiding unnecessary spill of the Muslim blood and sensing that affairs could be fairly managed even without him, had decided to strike a deal with the adversary of his father and abdicate in his favour, acted in accordance with the Prophetic prediction that "This son of mine (Imam Hasan) would be instrumental in making peace between two warring groups of my Ummah".
Imam Husain, though showing initially some discomfort over the decision, yet under the guidance and benign influence of his elder brother, had acquiesced to his will and accepted without much demur his assessment and evaluation of the situation and circumstances. After passing away of Imam Hasan and later Amir Mu'awiyah the situation drastically changed.
Now at the helm of affairs was a person who in the considered opinion of Imam Husain was entirely ill-suited for managing the affairs of the Khilafah and totally incapable of looking after the religious and political interests of the Ummah. In his view if such a person was allowed to rule he was sure to ruin even the basic ideological texture of the Ummah.
There was an intense move, a fervent campaign on foot to acquire the acceptance, the Bai'ah, of all those whose opinion mattered in deciding the political and religious affairs of the Ummah, the Ahl al-'aqd wa al-hall.
No doubt there were eminent personalities whose views were very much at odds with those of Imam Husain. Their assessment of the political and military clout of the governing elite, the strength of the collective will of the masses to stand against the rulers and the extent of damage to the life and property in the event of armed conflicts and the ensuing political disorder and the social and economic upheaval, widely differed from that of the Imam.
They opined, and they had every right to do so, that under the circumstances the best and the least harmful course of action to adopt in the interest of Ummah, was to avoid any chance of armed conflict with the powers that be. On the contrary there were other illustrious persons of equal integrity, piety and vision who held diametrically opposed opinions. For them it was the now-or-never situation. Imam Husain subscribed to the latter view.
In the opinion of the Imam the stage was already set for a change. Had the incompetent and corrupt ruler, at this juncture, been allowed to harvest the benefits of his illegitimate rule, it was sure to create and establish an intrinsically bad example and a morally condemnable and politically reprehensible practice for all times to come. It was bound to mutilate, disfigure and distort beyond recognition the Islamic principle of morally good governance and permanently close the door in the face of rule of law.
Moreover, it may lead, in due course, to destabilization of the entire social edifice and economic structure of Islam. Any crazy adventurer who happened to muster, by hook or by crook, certain amount of political clout would extend his dirty hand to snatch the sacred seat of Khilafah and exploit and plunder the Ummah in the name of maintaining status quo or law and order.
In the opinion of the Imam it was an unforgivable offence to let prevail and perpetuate such a situation. Someone had to rise to the occasion, face the intertwined risks, bear the consequent hazards, ready himself to put at stake all that one can cherish and yearn for in this material life, expose himself, his family, relatives, friends and supporters to every type of mental anguish and torture and physical hazards and hardships.
And who else other than Husain had the indomitable courage and the Ibrahimic faith to dare sit on a volcano and march up to the cannon's mouth. And so he came, he fell, and he conquered. Together fell those who accompanied him and they carved out an indestructible niche in the eternal wall of human history of faith and love and duty.
Husain was the man created for the occasion and he performed his job admirably. He was the most outstanding one out of all the ahl al-hall wa al-'aqd. He was not bound to any one by any oath of allegiance except to Allah and His Messenger. He was duty bound to uphold, preserve, secure, save, salvage and keep in its original form and spirit the legacy of Islam.