The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.
S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#1

Unread post by S. Insaf » Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:46 pm

The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala - Part -I

Muharram is commemorated each year by Shia and Sunni Muslims and mourning reaches its climax on the 10th of Muharram, the day of the battle, known as Ashurah.

Ashurah is a day of sermons describing the sufferings and sacrifices of Imam Husain and his handful companions, their commitments, their bravery in battlefield and ultimately the way they were most mercilessly killed, followed by the marsiya, noha, and soaz, breast-beatings and public processions.

Unfortunately we have forgotten the lessons from the conflicts of past between right and wrong, good and evil, truth and falsehood. The entire tragedy of Karbala for Muslims believers has become the way of remembering, mourning and cleansing their sins. Hardly any one thinks why the martyrs of Karbala are revered even today after 1400 years? No one thinks that it is because they stood up firm and solid against tyranny and injustice of the rulers of the time. In doing so they were mercilessly butchered, their heads were cut off, their dead bodies were trampled upon and left behind unburied on the desert sand, even their womenfolk and the children were brutalized. Later their bodies were buried at one place and their heads at another far away place.

The people who committed this heinous crime were not the idolaters or enemies of Islam but they were Muslims, the followers of Islam. They obeyed the most shameful and atrocious orders of their ruler in order to safeguard their personal interests, worldly gains and worldly power without realizing that they were destroying the Islamic values laid down by their Holy Prophet. In the craze of demonstrating their loyalty to the ruler they forgot that the people whom they were killing and dishonoring were the noble people of the house of their Prophet Mohammad.

(What an irony today we the mourners and breast – beaters of these martyrs instead of drawing lessons from this calamity and standing against injustices, we have totally submitted ourselves to the tyranny. We are worried how we would face the consequences of Baraat, social boycott and how and where our dead bodies would be buried after our death and who would take us to Jannat. Though the holy Prophet has commanded us: “When one sees a tyrant ruler committing forbidden acts, and going against the Book of Allah and yet does nothing to try and stop him by actions or by words, then this man deserves to go into the fires of hell.” Islam stands out as the religion of truth and peace for all; it condemns and rejects any kind of oppression and any form of injustice to any creature of Allah Almighty. And yet we brutally attack and torture even our own blood relations.)

Let us examine the circumstances, the factors and the characters responsible for this Moral Degeneration of Muslims just after 30 years of Islam from the authentic (?) historical accounts.

Historiography of actual happenings on the battlefield of Karbala:-

Let me quote Goethe once again:
“Not everything that history offers us has actually happened. And what has actually happened has not happened the way it is presented to us, and what we know to have happened is only a very small part of what actually happened. The historian can have no more information about the past events than what has been handed down to him as source-material.”

1) Abi Mikhnaf (774 AD) is considered the first historian to systematically collect the reports of eyewitnesses of the tragedy of Karbala (the place of death / martyrdom).
His account was published in the book form titled "Ketab Maqtal Al-Husayn", considered original and a part of Primary sources, has been lost.
What has reached to us today has been transmitted through his student Hisham Al-Kalbi (died in 204 AH.)

2) There are four manuscripts of the Maqtal, located at Gotha (No. 1836), Berlin (Sprenger, Nos. 159-160), Leiden (No. 792), and St. Petersburg (Am No. 78) libraries.

3) Rasul Jafarian has counted 5 Primary sources on the original works on maqàtil which are now available. These are sources that could be relied upon for reviewing the Karbala happenings.

4) All these five maqtals belong to the period between the 2nd century AH and 4th century AH. These five sources are:

a) "Maqtal al-Husayn" by Abu Mikhnaf,
b) "Maqtal al-Husayn" by Ibn Sa'd – a Sunni Historian
c) "Maqtal al-Husayn" by Baladhuri – a Sunni Historian
d) "Maqtal al-Husayn" by Dinawari, and
e) "Maqtal al-Husayn" of Ibn A'tham.


Famous historian, Tabari has used Abi Mikhnaf’s account though he hasn't mentioned his Abi Mikhnaf’s name. Like Tabari the latter historians have written their histories on the basis of the original account by Maqtal Al-Husayn of Abi Mikhnaf. However they have added some narrations through their own sources.

Hisham Al-Kalbi and other Sunni Muslim historians including Balazari and Ibn Kathir narrated the events of Karbala from Abi Mikhnaf’s work. Also among Shi'a Shaykh al-Mufid has based his ‘Irshad’ on Abi-Mikhnaf’s account of history.
However, Shiane-Ali attached a much greater importance to the battle and have compiled many fabricated version of Abi Mekhnaf's book in Iran and Iraq.

Shia writings are classified in three groups:[52]

A) Religious texts: This category associates the chronological legendary character of history of Al-Husayn with notions relating to the origin of life and the Universe, that have preoccupied the human mind since the beginning of creation, and in which Al-Husayn is eternally present.
This category of writing holds that a person’s stance toward Al-Husayn and Ahl al- Bayt is a criterion for reward and punishment in the afterlife.

B) Historic texts: This category is the nearest to Sunni writings because it fully cherishes the historical personality of Al-Husayn and regards the Karbala’s incident as a revolt against oppression; dismissing the legendary treatment, while using the language of revolt against tyranny and despotic sovereignty.

C) Tragedic narratives intended for popular consumption, which may contain material not strictly supported by the Hadiths or the histories. This category comprises the literary works common in rituals and lamentations (poetic and prose) and is characterized by its melodramatic style, which aims to arouse pity and passion for Ahl al-Bayt’s misfortunes, and charge feelings during tempestuous political circumstances on the memory of Ashura.

To be Continued.............

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#2

Unread post by S. Insaf » Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:15 am

The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala – Part II
Dr. Taha Husain says: "So far as propagating beliefs and attracting people to follow them is concerned, nothing is more effective than persecution. It creates sympathy for those who undergo suffering, and are engulfed by tragedies, and who are subjected to pressure by the ruler. To the same degree it creates revulsion against this ruler who resorts to injustice, carries his tyrannies to the furthest limit and overburdens the population with hardships.
For this reason, the Imam Husain’s cause became great during the last decade of Mu'awiya's reign, and their call spread -and what a spread it was-in the eastern Islamic countries and southern Arabia. And by the time Mu'awiya had died, many people, and especially the general public in Iraq believed that hate of Umayyads and love of the Ahl al Bayt was their religion.”


Karbala is not an event of a bygone era just to arouse pity and passion for Ahl al-Bayt’s misfortunes, charge feelings of mourners and do breast-beating. But it becomes an inspiration for any revolutionary struggles if its significance is understood properly. The famous Arabic saying: "Every place is Karbala; every day is Ashura" is very much relevant today. The revolutionaries and reformers like Mahatma Gandhi and Munshi Premchand have been inspired by the sacrifices of martyrs of Karbala for a just cause.
But the most of the Muslim writers, orators and poets loosely base their compositions upon the traditionally known history of the events and dramatize them in order to make the people cry more.

Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer very rightly said:
Haqqa ke binae La Elaha hai Husain (Husian is the foundation of “There is no God”)

In order to understand the significance of martyrdom of Karbala, we have to go to the background of Islamic revolution. A revolution of knowledge, ethics and morality and for the drastic social change.
The Prophet of Islam was basically a revolutionary in his thought and deeds. He therefore worked for radical changes in the existing social structure of his time. He preached “la ilaha illallah’ (there is no god except Allah). This formula was very revolutionary in its socio-economic implications. He thereby not only negated the idols installed in Kaba but also outrightly negated the authority of powerful vested interests of his time and also the social structure set up by them. Any revolutionary first has to negate the established powers before he can work out any alternative which is free from exploitation and concentration of wealth and power in a few hands.

Muslims in holy Prophet’s time never fought for establishing their overlordship and taking away others freedom or to torture others and shed their blood or to emerge victorious or to exploit their wealth. Islam, Qur’an and the holy Prophet never claimed a worldly government. This was left to the free choice of the believers.

The status of the Arab society then was similar to the present day modern secular society. There were Jews of the mixed race, the Pagan Arabs and Muslims. The Prophet of Islam united them and gave the name “ummah”. It later applied only to the community of Muslims. There was no state or state machinery. What existed then was a primitive tribal democracy. The Prophet of Islam created a political community in Medina by an agreement “Sahifah” with different groups and tribes. It is described by most of the historians as “political genius of the Prophet of Islam”. This agreement was drawn when Muslims were in minority. The foundational principles of the Sahifah was the freedom of professing and practicing ones religion, customs and tradition and democratic form of governance without coercion or compulsion.
The Prophet of Islam in his last pilgrimage to Mecca said:
“The Arabs are not superior to the Ajami (non-Arab); nor an Ajami is superior to the Arab; neither White to the Black nor the Black to the White except by the degree of righteousness that one displays in ones transaction with each other.”

The Arab society before Islam was tribal society without any higher civilization or culture. When he was young the Prophet of Islam saw in Mecca, the birth place of Islam, an extremely disturbing situation. Mecca was developing as an important trading center because of its global location, a complex financial center of great international importance. The hoarding and concentration of wealth was unthinkable by tribal society. The norms and ethics of a commercial society was causing direct clash with the norms and ethics of the tribal society. Few individuals were accumulating wealth and majority of weaker section was left behind uncared and unprotected. An extreme of wealth and prosperity and poverty and slavery. Thus Islam came as a liberative religion to both Arabs and non-Arabs. Therefore it was obliviously challenged the rich non-believers and powerful vested interests interested in maintaining status quo.

But the caliphate period of 30 years after the demise of the Prophet of Islam was full of turmoil. Hazrat Abu Bakr was old and could rule just for three and half years. The following three caliphs were assassinated brutally. And killings and bloodsheds had become daily affairs. As Maulana Maududi says, a theo-democratic form of government was established and the Islam had spread to north and north-west Africa, Persia, Central Asia and Asia Minor. The people of diverse ethics and cultures who were embracing Islam for their social, political and economic reasons created problems. The rich lords like Abu Sufyan were anxious to retain their supremacy and their exploitative domination in the society so they opposed the Prophet of Islam. They severely tortured the followers of the Prophet of Islam and tried to wipe them out. They were interested more in either capturing power or enhancing their share in the power structure. Thus the power center began to shift to those who were hardly committed to Islamic ideals and revolutionary mission of Islam. During Hazrat Uthman Ibn Affan (a member of Umayyad clan) he placed some of the notorious members of Umayyad clan at prominent and strong positions throughout the State. Most notable was the appointment of Marwan ibn al-Hakam (Hazrat Uthman’s first cousin), Walid ibn Uqba (Hazrat Uthman’s half brother), Abdullah ibn Saad (Hazrat Uthman’s foster brother and Amir Muawiyah. And Abu Sufiyan’s son Amir Mu’awiyah, as his governor became the chief of new ruling class in Damuscus and Syria. He challenged the caliphate of Hazrat Ali though Hazrat Ali was rightfully elected caliph. However, since Uthman never named an heir, he cannot be considered the founder of a dynasty but Amir Muawiyah did shift the caliphate to monarchy and hieratic rule by appointing his son Yazid his successor. He also discarded the simplicity advocated and practiced rigorously by the Prophet of Islam. Amir Muawiyah constructed a spectacular palace full of luxury, put on silken robes prohibited for men in Islam, created an atmosphere of a royal court (darbar) where announcement of his arrival was made and people used to line up prostrating before him.

The hereditary appointment of Yazid by his father who was an infidel with his un-Islamic conduct as his successor was a counter revolution. Shia history informs us that Yazid was brought up in luxury of palaces and loved worldly vices. Drink, music, the company of women and hunting were his favorite pass time.

Where as Imam Husain had lived Islam every moment of his life and had been brought up by parents like Hazrat Fatima and Hazrat Ali. Imam Husain could not accept a counter-revolutionary heading a revolutionary Islamic regime.
To be continued.......

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#3

Unread post by S. Insaf » Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:17 pm

The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala – Part III
Developments before the Battle
Moawiyah had nominated his son, Yazid his successor and had started an empire-wide process of obtaining Bayat' (Misaq) for Yazid. Few notables persons were greatly disturbed seeing the legitimacy of Khlafat getting converted into a dynasty.
Among them Husain ibne Ali was the most significant personality being the only grandson of the Prophet.
When Moawiyah died in 60 AH, Yazid instructed his governor al-Walid bin Utba in Madina to immediately corner Husain and get his allegiance to Yazid. According to Tabri Imam Husain in presence of Marwan bin Hakam refused to do so and uttered his famous words that "anyone akin to me will never accept anyone akin to Yazid as a ruler."
Two days after Walid's attempt to force him to succumb to Yazid's rule Imam Husain left Medina and went to Mecca. During his stay in Mecca he received many letters from Kufa assuring him their support and asking him to come over there and guide them. He answered their calls and sent Muslim bin Aqeel, his cousin, to Kufa as his representative to ascertain the exact situation and public opinion in Kufa. Muslim along with Qays bin Mushir and Umara bin Abdallah left for Kufa. Muslim ibn Aqeel was welcomed by the people of Kufa, and some 18,000 of them swore allegiance to him. In Kufa he stayed in the house of al-Mukhtar bin Abi Ubayda. After his initial observation, Ibn Aqeel wrote to Hussain Ibn Ali that situation in Kufa is favorable. Al-Numan bin Bashir was the governor (Amil) of Kufa. He was appointed governor of Kufa by Moawiyah as he was lenient and Moawiyah knew that the most people in Kufa were loyal to Ali ibne Abi Talib, he did not want the mass opposition from Kufa. He came to know about Muslim’s arrival and frequent visits of large numbers of people to Muslim bin Aqueel. So he in his sermon after praising God said:
“Servants of God, fear God and do not rush into rebellion and discord. For in that men will be destroyed, blood will be shed and property will be plundered. I will not disturb those of you who remain quite. I will not apprehend you merely on ground of suspicion, accusation or hearsay.”

Abdallah Hadrami wrote a letter to Yazid:
“Muslim bin Aqueel has come to Kufa and people have pledge allegiance to him for Husain. Al-Numan bin Bashir is a weak man. Send a strong man if you need Kufa.”
When Yazid received this letter he immediately dismissed Al-Numan bin Bashir and appointed Ubayd-Allah ibn Ziyad the governor of Kufa. After the arrival of the new Governor of Kufa the scenario changed. His terror created fear in the hearts of people and they started wriggling out. Thus Muslim bin Aqeel and his host, Hani bin Urwa were executed on September 10, 680 without any considerable resistance of the people. The fear shifted the loyalties of the people of Kufa to Yazid against Husain ibne Ali.

Hussain ibn Ali also realizing a deep conspiracy to kill him during Hajj left Mecca a day before Hajj. He delivered a famous sermon in Kaaba highlighting his reasons to leave that he didn't want the sanctity of Haram to be violated, since his opponents had crossed any norm of decency and were willing to violate all tenants of Islam and Arab traditions.
When Hussain ibn Ali was making his mind to leave for Kufa, Abd-Allah ibn Abbas and Abdullah ibn Zubayr held a meeting with him and advised him not to move to Iraq, or, if he was determined to move, not to take women and children with him in this dangerous journey. Husain, however, had resolved to go ahead with his plan.
On their way to Kufa, the small caravan received the sad news of execution of Muslim ibn Aqeel and indifference of the people of Kufa. Instead of turning back, Husain decided to continue the journey and sent Qais ibn Musahhar al-Saydavi as messenger toward nobles of Kufa. He was captured in the vicinity of Kufa just like Muslim ibn Aqeel, Qais ibn Musahhar was executed.
Husain and his fellows were two days' journey away from Kufa when they were intercepted by the vanguard of Yazid's army; about 1000 men led by Hurr Riahy. The small caravan of Husain arrived at Nainawa (which was called Karbala, place of martyrdom after the tragedy) on 2nd Muharram 61 Hijri (October 2, 680). They were forced to pitch a camp on dry, bare land and Hurr stationed his army nearby.

mmv
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 12:16 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#4

Unread post by mmv » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:22 am

S. Insaf Nice post
keep posting the remaining part

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#5

Unread post by S. Insaf » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:46 am

The common men have a weakness. They get terrorized. This weakness is exploited by every tyrant in his favour. The courage of few fearless conscientious persons gets led down by the fear in the majority. That is why when Husain, heading for Iraq, met the poet Farazdaq on the way and Farazdaq informed Imam Husain about the circumstances in Kufa in his poetic way “The hearts of the people are with you but their swords are against you.”
Because when Muslim bin Aqueel had interred Kufa he was welcomed by every one. 18,000 people pledged allegiance for him. 40,000 people joined him in the after (Zohar) prayer in the Kufa masjid. But the moment the tyrant Udaydullah bin Ziyad entered Kufa by evening every one deserted Muslim. When he and Hani were beheaded their bodies were hanged in the market place for every one to see. This was done to further terrorize the general public. Kufa was the capital of Islamic state during Ali ibne Abi Talib’s caliphate. The Kuffans were loyal to him. They had invited Husain to Kufa. But once they got terrorized they in one-voice denied that they had ever written letters and invited Husain to Kufa. The silent majority watched him and his companions die brutally on the battlefield of Karbala. Though later they cried “Hai Husain hum naa the”.
Husain and Ahle-bayte who had undertaken journey from Mecca and Madina to rescue the Kuffans, were epitome of fearlessness. They did not deter their plans even when they heard the news of death of Muslim in Kufa. Thousands of Muslims had joined them and had come to Iraq deserted them the moment Husain’s caravan was intercepted on the borders of Iraq.

One can find the similarity in the situation in the Dawoodi Bohra Community as the last two Dais establishments have done every thing to terrorized and keep their iron grip on Dawoodi Bohras. Physical attacks, stoning of dead, stopping burials, exhuming and throwing away dead bodies, ransacking houses, ruining businesses, breaking blood relations and families etc were the methods used by them. These uncivilized acts committed by their followers were never condemned by these Dais hence the suspicion that they were master-minded by the Dais themselves.
Hence the words of poet Farazdaq ring in the ears of the reformists, “The hearts of the people are with you but their swords are against you.” But as the true believers of the significance of martydam they must continue their struggle:
Kuchh Usoolon ka nasha thaa, Kuchh muqaddas khuwab the
Har zamane mein Shahadat ke yahee asbaab the

aziz
Posts: 313
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:25 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#6

Unread post by aziz » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:38 am

What you have so conveniently forgotten is that the kerbala issue started at saqifa when the three whom you lovingly call hazrats stole moula ali sa haq and after that the zulm on ahle bayt started, but you in fear of alienating your progs still call them hazrats,
you try to get off as a scholar by quoting various shia texts and try to appear as a true follower of imam hussein sa ,i do not believe that you have a shred of imam husseins mohabbat in you cause you would not call them hazrats,even your own udaipuris disagree with you and say the laanat on this hazrats,

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#7

Unread post by S. Insaf » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:25 am

Dear Brother Aziz,
Hazrat is like calling Mr. in English which a journalistic ethics. I thank you for caring to read my write up for whatever worth it is but please please do not try to divert the topic.
As I have said in the Part I : Karbala is not an event of a bygone era just to arouse pity and passion for Ahl al-Bayt’s misfortunes, charge feelings of mourners and do breast-beating. But it becomes an inspiration for any revolutionary struggles if its significance is understood properly. The famous Arabic saying: "Every place is Karbala; every day is Ashura" is very much relevant today. The revolutionaries and reformers like Mahatma Gandhi and Munshi Premchand have been inspired by the sacrifices of martyrs of Karbala for a just cause.
But the most of the Muslim writers, orators and poets loosely base their compositions upon the traditionally known history of the events and dramatize them in order to make the people cry more.
For me the commemorating martyrdom of Karbala is platform where we can unite Muslims of all sects, but for you it is an occasion to curse and create hatred. Sayedna Burhanuddin Saheb has learnt a lesson and given up hate policy (I hope so) but you have not.

bohri
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:12 pm

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#8

Unread post by bohri » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:27 am

Brother Aziz - where did you get your ilm from - the vaiz of the Sultan? the Daras? or madrasa with your local mullah. Such purile and venomous spewing only solidifies the case for reform! DId the Sultan not publicly apologise for the very same message you are are mouthing? Are you now saying he dd not really mean it?

btw pehli raat mubarak!

aziz
Posts: 313
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:25 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#9

Unread post by aziz » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:54 am

Does part of your reform agenda apart from hatred of our moula also include love of this three usurpers whom insaaf calls hazrats,has your hatred blinded you ,
who are you trying to fool that hazrat means mr in english then why dont you call them mr usurpers instead of hazrat usurpers,
as for ilm its your boss the snake insaaf who claims to be very clever and intelligent only problem is that he uses his cleverness like iblis

SBM
Posts: 6507
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#10

Unread post by SBM » Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:16 am

AZIZ
Like a true Kothari, when nothing is there to argue, statr abusing. SO FAR THERE WAS NO ABUSE IN THIS THREAD AND IT IS KOTHARI AND ABDES LIKE YOU YOU START THE ABUSE

Al Zulfiqar
Posts: 4618
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#11

Unread post by Al Zulfiqar » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:51 pm

aziz wrote:What you have so conveniently forgotten is that the kerbala issue started at saqifa when the three whom you lovingly call hazrats stole moula ali sa haq and after that the zulm on ahle bayt started, but you in fear of alienating your progs still call them hazrats,
you try to get off as a scholar by quoting various shia texts and try to appear as a true follower of imam hussein sa ,i do not believe that you have a shred of imam husseins mohabbat in you cause you would not call them hazrats,even your own udaipuris disagree with you and say the laanat on this hazrats,
aziz, who is a true follower of imam hussain? one who lives his life head held up high in the face of zulm, lies and ayyashi and is willing to give up his life for the same, or one who lives the life of an absolute monarch, engages in zulm, creates false miracles around himself and goes on public tv to apologise for something which he believes is absolutely right???

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#12

Unread post by S. Insaf » Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:26 am

I remember the Bohra vaizeen describing a very touching story of two innocent kids of Muslim bin Aqueel in Kufa; that they were hungry and trusty; they were searching for shelter in the dead of night; then they were spotted by men of Ubaidulla bin Ziyad sitting and shivering in one corner in the darkness and mercilessly killed.

I have tried to search this story in the history books. But so far not found a single reference of this incident in any Shia or Sunni historian’s book. If some one can point out any source to verify this incident I will be highly obliged.

mmv
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 12:16 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#13

Unread post by mmv » Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:17 am

Salam S. insaf
i have read about it in one book on Karbala...
u can get it from
http://www.ezsoftech.com/ebooks/TheKarbala.pdf

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#14

Unread post by S. Insaf » Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:47 pm

Thank You brother mmv. The style of description and words used are typically Shia narration. I have quoted Dr. Taha Husain who says that - "So far as propagating beliefs and attracting people to follow them is concerned, nothing is more effective than persecution. It creates sympathy for those who undergo suffering, and are engulfed by tragedies, and who are subjected to pressure by the ruler. To the same degree it creates revulsion against this ruler who resorts to injustice, carries his tyrannies to the furthest limit and overburdens the population with hardships.” and also - "C) Tragedic narratives intended for popular consumption, which may contain material not strictly supported by the Hadiths or the histories."
Any way Thanks - I will confirm it with other sources.

porus
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#15

Unread post by porus » Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:03 pm

Heart wrenching story of the aftermath of Karbala in shown in a 2 hour movie. (In Arabic, with English subtitles):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvdpPggY04M

ozmujaheed
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:14 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#16

Unread post by ozmujaheed » Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:44 pm

How does one differentiate between all the Shia bayans what was created as story telling to explain vs. events witnessed by personal observation and recorded without any error.

How much of the facts have been encapsulated to create a grieving situation so as to keep people emotioanlly attached to the grieving situation whether intentionally or unintentionally even though not for any sinister motive.

Look at current movie making ...when they get a story the create a script to dramatise and create a situation that can spread over 90 minutes ..so a lot is a creation of the movie directors and story maker.

It would not matter but lately the amount of grief and lenght of rituals one displays or perfroms is used to judge ones level of faith !

JC
Posts: 1624
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#17

Unread post by JC » Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:33 pm

Bro Ozmu,

It has been the remake of an old movie .......... a current trend in Bollywood ......

Add new twists, scenes, scenarios, angels to old story, add new songs, bring in fresh faces, add some fights, some dances and story sells and sells and sells ...........

This is exactly being done, new innovations are being made, every narrator is adding something new to the story, new styles are being introduced, and it sells, sells and sells .......... NOBODY thinks logically when watching a movie or drama, righ??!! same is true when one is listening to a waez or shadat nu bayan ...... you have to leave your brains at home!!

The things like - Hussain 'thought', Hussain's talking to his 'horse' on Furat, Hussain's conversations with Jibrael, Hussain's conversation with Shimr, WHO counted the famous 12 Ragras ............ who counted 1900 wounds of Hussain ...... there are endless flaws in the story ............. but hey who cares .......????!!!!!

Do purjosh matam, come out smilingly, eat good food, go home .......... Janat is yours ........ (ask anyone, nobody f*** knows what JANAT is and is meant>>>)

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#18

Unread post by S. Insaf » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:23 am

The tragedy of Karbala is continued to be narrated in prose and poetry writings and recitations since more than millennia by countless persons. However the narration or presentation by an inspired revolutionary or a reformer differs from the ritualistic narration by the commoners.
I have always tried to understand it from the point of view of “The significance of sacrifices of martyrs of Karbala and their relevance to the Dawoodi Bohra reform movement”.

During the Caliphate of Usman the power went in the hands of exploitative governors (Amils) and the whole era ended in chaos, turmoil and his murder. There was unrest among the people all over the state. So much so that Moawiyah the governor (Amil) of Syria established himself strongly at Damascus and had built his royal palace, court (darbar) and army: a stronghold of his own and dared to challenge the rightfully appointed 4th Caliph, Ali ibne abi Talib.

Moawiyah carried out his ambition of keeping the power in his family and appointed his son his successor in his life, putting aside the Islamic democratic procedure to appoint a caliph through proper consultation and the term of treaty with Imam Hassan that the choice of caliph after Moawiyah would be left to the umma (people).

This act of Moawiyah was serious blow on Islam. It latter divided the Muslims in to Sunni and Shia Musims. It also converted a revolutionary caliphate in to monarchy that resulted in to hereditary rule both in Sunni and Shia Islam.

Yazid represented a real danger to the Islamic nation, for he was not a true Muslim, as he was born and brought up in royal palace in comfort and luxury. He was not properly educated with the teachings of Islam.

Since Yazid was not a legitimately appointed head of state he had to resort to repression and persecution in order to safeguard his position and control.
The repression and persecution create Fear. And the Fear in the majority on the one side results in the tragic end of Courage of handfuls to oppose the tyranny on the one side.

According to Taha Husain, in 680 there was a general resentment against the tyrannical and torturous rule of Yazid in the most parts of the state.
When Yazid succeeded his father to the throne, Imam Husain was 57 years old. The Ahle-baye, (family of the holy Prophet), who stood up against the tyrant ruler were an epitome of virtues and most importantly of fearlessness.

Their lives were under constant threat even within Mecca and Medina, they received the news of the capture and death of Muslim bin Aqeel, the poet Farazdaq told them that “The hearts of people are with you but their swords are with Yazid”, thousands of Muslims deserted them fearing a fight with treacherous forces, the request was not accepted by Umar bin Aas and there was no alternative left except death, the food and water supply was cut down for three days, but despite all adversities, their courage was unyielding and they refuse to surrender and pledge oath of allegiance to a tyrant. They remained determined to their commitment to awaken the conscience and unite Muslims against the despotic rule of Yazid and preferred martyrdom. As long as they were alive they kept their mission continued through speeches and appeals to the suffering people.

This epic tragedy occurred not only because of merciless rule of a tyrant but more because of the Fear installed in the minds of the majority. It was enough for Udaidullah bin Ziyad to eliminate Muslim in Aqeel and Hani, but in order to install permanent Fear in the minds of Kuffan he beheaded them and hanged their dead bodies in the market place in Kufa.

Similarly the tragedy of Karbala did not end there. But after the martyrdom of Imam Husain and his handful companions, the followers of Yazid celebrated their victory with gruesome display of triumph (Fat’he Mubeen). They separated the heads of martyrs and trampled upon their bodies. Survivors were dishonored, humiliated and taken chained in procession along with the heads of the martyrs through roads and each every by-lane of Kufa to create permanent Fear and crush further rebellion.

Before going into the war, Imam Husain was certain that in the event of his martyrdom, women folk and other supporters in his camp would be humiliated and tortured. But he also knew that such outrageous abuse of innocent supporters of Imam Husain and especially of women would provoke the fearful hearts and make them rethink with the truth. The brave survivors would use this blatant oppression to further the cause of Islamic revolution. And definitely the brave and unwavering women of the Imam’s camp played a central role in his post-war struggle.

His sister, Zainab fiercely narrated the crimes and inhumanity of Yazid and reminded the people that it was their cowardice that is strengthening the hands of tyrants.

A courageous person dies but once but a coward dies a hundred death of humiliation. The tragedy of Karbala offers two ways of life:
Stand up to injustice or
Live a life of Fear and constant slavery.

Mubarak
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#19

Unread post by Mubarak » Fri Dec 25, 2009 7:43 am

S. Insaf:
Moawiyah carried out his ambition of keeping the power in his family and appointed his son his successor in his life, putting aside the Islamic democratic procedure to appoint a caliph through proper consultation and the term of treaty with Imam Hassan that the choice of caliph after Moawiyah would be left to the umma (people).

Mubarak:
1) Like Moawiyah, Abu Baker too appointed Umar as his successor and “put aside Islamic democratic procedure”!

2) Religious head is appointed by Allah and not democratically elected by follower of Islam. Was Prophet Mohammed appointed by Allah or elected by people? Leaders prior to Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) like Prophet Ibrahim or his son Ismail or Prophet Aadam, etc - were they elected by people or appointed by Allah?

3) People can make mistake in democratically electing religious head but Allah never makes a mistake. The religious head must be errorless so he can lead by example and give always correct guidance. Democratically elected leaders can make mistake thus may give erroneous guidance.

4) Thus, there is no democracy in Islam. People who advocate democracy are the thieves who stole the rights from Allah appointed religious head.

SBM
Posts: 6507
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#20

Unread post by SBM » Fri Dec 25, 2009 7:55 am

Mubarak
You sound more like TALIBAN now
Imam Ali was elected by majority and thus Imam Ali revived the democratic process in Islam which was stolen years prior to.
According to your theory you should have no problem in accepting Syedna Burhanuddin as head of leader since he is appointed as Dai by Imam who was appointed by Allah thu succession.
In one posting you have described Syedna Burhanuddin as corrupt leader but according to Bohra belief he is appointed by Allah thru Imam so conclusion ALLAH MADE THE MISTAKE (nauzubillah) and Bohraism in not as serene and pure as you claimed to be.

Mubarak
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#21

Unread post by Mubarak » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:10 am

omabharti wrote:Mubarak
You sound more like TALIBAN now
Imam Ali was elected by majority and thus Imam Ali revived the democratic process in Islam which was stolen years prior to.
According to your theory you should have no problem in accepting Syedna Burhanuddin as head of leader since he is appointed as Dai by Imam who was appointed by Allah thu succession.
In one posting you have described Syedna Burhanuddin as corrupt leader but according to Bohra belief he is appointed by Allah thru Imam so conclusion ALLAH MADE THE MISTAKE (nauzubillah) and Bohraism in not as serene and pure as you claimed to be.
Dear Oma,

On 10th Zilhijj, Hijri Year 10, on the ground of Gadder-a-Khum, Mola Ali (a.s.) was categorically APPOINTED by Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) as his only and sole successor - i.e. there is NO elelction.

I do not have any personal theories, I firmly believe only in Dawoodi Bohras Fatimi Dawat.

Syedna Burhanuddin sahib is head of Dawoodi Bohra Shabab but he is NOT the APPOINTED Dai-al-Mutlaq.

Syedna Burhanuddin is characterless man and so is his family – you can read those details in thread “Dawoodi Bohras”.

George B. Shaw: Islam is the best religion but worst are its followers.

Likewise, Dawoodi Bohras Ismailiya Shia's is the only pristine and right faith and worst are its leaders: Syedna Burhanuddin and Asger Engineer, because these two act against the doctrine of Dawoodi Bohras Fatimi Dawat.

SBM
Posts: 6507
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#22

Unread post by SBM » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:49 am

Mubarak
In that case, the entire Dawoodi Bohra system is A SHIP IN THE SEA WITHOUT A CAPTAIN and if that is the case then entire
Fatimid Dawat is leaderless,clueless and totally useless at the current time.

anajmi
Posts: 13506
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#23

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:13 pm

George B. Shaw: Islam is the best religion but worst are its followers.

Quoting this guys doesn't do any good. This basically give a green light to people like George Bush to kill muslims indiscriminately while at the same time proclaim that Islam is a great religion. Do not be so naive. I am not sure where you get these silly ideas from.

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#24

Unread post by S. Insaf » Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:29 pm

The Peace Treaty that Imam Hasan agreed upon and signed with Moawiyah had the following salient points:-

1. That Moawiyah should rule strictly according to the Holy Qur’an and the Sunna of the Prophet.
2. That Moawiyah should not appoint or nominate anyone to the Caliphate after him but that the choice should be left to the Muslim umma.
3. That the people should be left in peace, wherever they are in the land of God.
4. That the persecution of the supporters of Ali ibne abi Talib should immediately be stopped; their lives and properties and families guaranteed safe conduct and peace.
5. That the cursing of Ali ibne abi Talib from the pulpit should stop immediately.
6. That no harm should be done secretly or openly against Imam Hasan and his brother Imam Hussain or any of the Ahle-bayt.

JC
Posts: 1624
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#25

Unread post by JC » Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:04 pm

Can some one shed light on these historical facts, please correct me if I am wrong:

1. Why did Ali sat in all three Caliphs cabinets? Once Omer said, 'had Ali been not there, Umer would have been killed' - that was when Ali saved him for giving a wrong judgement. This to me proves Ali was 'wholeheartedly' and 'sincerely' working with all three of his predecessors. So why Shias and Bohras do lanat to them today? I simply cannot accept that a person of Ali's staure would sit with them for politics or Taweel or Musleyhat or Taqeat or whatever. Ali was a man of Principles and he would not play politics, so much that he was dealing with the Rulers who can change the course of a nation.

2. If Mohammad was so much against first three, why would be stand up when Abu Baker would enter in masjid? Or shia would say this is concocted?

3. If Mohammad was so much against Abu Bakr why did he marry Ayesha? WHAT was the compulsion? reason? Marriage is such a secret institution and Mohammad would not violate it just for any political gain.

4. Why did Mohmmad gave his two daughers to Usman in marriage that he is known as Zuon-Nooreen?

5. Why did Ali gave his two daughters to Umer in marriage? WHY??!!! Such a brave and principled person like Ali..!!! why he would DO THAT??!!

6. How come Hussain was related to Yazid? I am not sure on this but I have heard in bohra waez that Ali Akber was offered peace and asylum as he was related to Yazid. My point: All was well with them till a point.

7. After Ali, it was agreed that Moawiyah will be Caliph and after him it will be Hassan. And Hassan entered into an agreement with Muawiyah.

8. It was Moawiyah who did not honour his words and I believe got Hassan poisoned and killed. Even then it was agreed that Caliphate should be given to Hussain instead it was given to Yazid.

9. Hussain could not take double betrayal.

10. People of Iraq were not happy with Yazid and started writing to Hussain to come to Iraq and establish his Khilafat there. They were willing to give him Bayet.

11. Hussain being angry on double betrayal decided to take Yazid head on (and very RIGHTLY SO). He decides to move to Iraq.

12. Hussain take his full family and starts towards Iraq to establish the Right Khilafat.

13. Yazid, as a normal ruler, could not tolerate that and ordered Hussain be stopped.

14. Hussain was betrayed by people of Iraq and hence he could fight Yazid and was martyred.

15. Till todate, the guilty nation of Iraq, does Chest Beating ........ they regret their betrayal to Hussain, and when they had realized that, since that day, they are doing Matam. And right, they should bloody well regret and beat their chests.

16. Then what is so Divine about Matam?? Why are others doing this, if they had NOTHING to do with Hussain's murder?

17. There was no issue of Imamat during those times. Sons of Ali were commonly known as Imams. Thats it.

Thank you guys!

porus
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#26

Unread post by porus » Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:37 pm

JC wrote:Can some one shed light on these historical facts, please correct me if I am wrong:

1. Why did Ali sat in all three Caliphs cabinets? Once Omer said, 'had Ali been not there, Umer would have been killed' - that was when Ali saved him for giving a wrong judgement. This to me proves Ali was 'wholeheartedly' and 'sincerely' working with all three of his predecessors. So why Shias and Bohras do lanat to them today? I simply cannot accept that a person of Ali's staure would sit with them for politics or Taweel or Musleyhat or Taqeat or whatever. Ali was a man of Principles and he would not play politics, so much that he was dealing with the Rulers who can change the course of a nation.
Ali's mission was clear. It was to preserve the nascent community of Muslims and to ensure that Quran's teachings were properly observed. I am assuming that you do not know history and that is the reason for asking questions. (Although, I suspect that you are not sincere).

Caliphate of Abu Bakr was presented to Ali as a fait accompli and he went along with the selection but worked with Abu Bakr to ensure survival of Islam. He did the same after Abu Bakr nominated Umar. Abu Bakr had no right, on the basis of the Quran or Sunna to nominate anyone as his successor. He cooperated with Ali with his mission paramount in his mind and abiding by the etiquette among the companions of the prophet. In view of historical records, Ali had disagreemnents with the rule of both the Khalifas.

Umar likewise, against any authority of Quran or Sunna, in his will had appointed a party of six to nominate his successor. They offered it to Ali if, and only if, Ali would follow both the Sunna of the prophet and the sunna of Abu Bakr and Umar. Ali refused, saying he will only be bound by Quran and the Sunna of the Messenger of Allah. Caliphate was then given to Usman.

If Ali was sure that Abu Bakr and Umar had followed the Quran and Sunna correcty, why did he not agree to the terms of the succession?

I will, perhaps, answer other questions later. But I want to dismiss the issue of Ayesha's marriage. Abu Bakr was an upright Muslim until the day the Prophet died. I think that his ambition got the better of him and he chose to ignore Prophet's nomination of Ali at Ghadeer-e-Khum.

porus
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#27

Unread post by porus » Fri Dec 25, 2009 4:06 pm

porus wrote: He cooperated with Ali with his mission paramount in his mind and abiding by the etiquette among the companions of the prophet.
This should read:

He cooperated with Abu Bakr with his mission paramount in his mind and abiding by the etiquette among the companions of the prophet.

anajmi
Posts: 13506
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#28

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:10 pm

I think that his ambition got the better of him and he chose to ignore Prophet's nomination of Ali at Ghadeer-e-Khum.
That is simply personal opinion. Hazrat Ali was not nominated at Ghadeer-e-khum. It is simply shia interpretation of what happened. Allowing a person who went against the prophet of Islam to rule and then assisting him during his rule wasn't the best way to "ensure the survival of Islam". Hazrat Ali should've done what his son chose to do. Infact, following this line of idiotic reasoning, one could say that Hazrat Ali's inaction led to the tragedy at karbala or that Imam Hussain should've followed in the footsteps of his father to "ensure the survival of Islam". What he did let to a major split in Islam with one faction now having to deal with the likes of Syedna who exploit followers in his name.
They offered it to Ali if, and only if, Ali would follow both the Sunna of the prophet and the sunna of Abu Bakr and Umar.
That is more shia fiction. The shia stories have been getting more and more imaginative and fictional over the last 1400 years. Attend a waez and hear it for yourself.

JC
Posts: 1624
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 4:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#29

Unread post by JC » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:44 pm

Thank you Bros Porus and Anajmi!

Bro Porus - I just want to learn more and get clarifications, if you have dobuts in my sincerety than i regret that.

My point is exactly Bro Anajmi has put it. WHY did Ali had to cooperate?? If first three rules were so much against Islam and Prophet, then Ali had no right to cooperate, like Bro Anajmi said, he should have revolted like Hussain. To me Hussain, could not take it more, and Yazid was far far worse a ruler, so he decided to create his own rightful Khilafat.

To me - IF Ali cooperated, then there was definite room for cooperation and improvement and he exactly did that, or atleast he did not consider first three Lanatables ............. so why cannot we follow Ali's footsteps and cooperate. What happened after Prophet is history and to me it should have no bearing on one's religion ......... so why to argue till that level.

And Hussain died for just cause .......... that was Allah's wish. Why do we have to do purjosh matam? Why we have to cry so much? Why Gham-e-Hussain has to be 'celebrated' till Qayamat? By doing these are we not going agaisnt the Reda of Allah??!! I have heard and read hundred times - Do Not Cry for Martyrs, they are not dead ..!!!!

porus
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2001 5:01 am

Re: The Factors - Characters leading to the tragedy of Karbala

#30

Unread post by porus » Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:05 am

JC wrote: My point is exactly Bro Anajmi has put it. WHY did Ali had to cooperate?? If first three rules were so much against Islam and Prophet, then Ali had no right to cooperate, like Bro Anajmi said, he should have revolted like Hussain. To me Hussain, could not take it more, and Yazid was far far worse a ruler, so he decided to create his own rightful Khilafat.
JC,

I already gave you the reason. It is a question of degree. It is beyond even a rudimentary decency to compare the great personalities like Abu Bakr, Umar and Usman with Yazid, who is disowned even by Sunnis except perhaps the hard core Wahhabis like Zakir Naik. Ali's watchful eye was on the rule of the 3 Khalifas and, to the credit of the three, they accepted his advice on serious matter concerning religion. And the 3 Khalifas had a very high regard for the Quran to ignore Ali's watchful eye on their rule. Ali's hand was offering guidance and he was content to bide his time. He was much younger than others.

Yazid, on the other hand, famously insulted the Quran by denying its revelation and was more concerned with avenging the death of his forebears at the hands of Muslims, especially, Ali, than ruling in accordance with Shariat. This is well known, but will be denied by his admirers as another Shia fantasy.

My personal views on Laanats against the three Khalifas and Maatam have been detailed previously on this board and I need not repeat them. If you wish you are welcome to search for them.

You can follow anajmi if you wish. I believe that you have been duped by the anti-Shia propaganda by extremist Sunnis, from whom anajmi gets his inspiration. For a long time on this board, anajmi has been shown to be an ignorant fitnati, who styles himself as the world's foremost expert on the Quran. He is nothing but a silly hot gospeller relying entirely on the anti-Shia websites for his knowledge of Islam. You can see his style. In the final analysis, he will raise hellfire and brimstone against his opponents by quoting 'punishment' ayats from Yusufali.

As I suspected, your insincerity is transparent and you have an axe to grind against the Shia. Well, you can get plenty of ammunition from the anti-Shia websites. I, along with the rest of the Shia, are not interested in your reprisals of their information here. We also can read their websites.