Latest Controversy In Kashmir: Did Shias Kill Imam Hussain And Ahle Bayt (Family Of Prophet)?
By Mushtaq Ul Haq Ahmad Sikander, New
Age Islam
23 June 2023
The battle of Karbala was such a momentous
event that it divided the Muslim Ummah permanently among Shias and Sunnis.
These both groups have their own separate interpretation of Islam that has
assumed the status of sects, not schools of thought as some scholars believe
wrongly. All the efforts to bridge the Shia-Sunni divide has met with very
little success. Both these sects have their own set of rules and books from
which they derive their set of interpretation and rules. They have clear set of
rules that are mostly antagonistic to each other. The sayings of Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh) as have been compiled in different set of volumes is variegated
for Sunnis and Shias. Only the Quran is similar for both but again its
interpretation means different things to both of them. For Shias along with Risalat
(Prophethood), Imammate (Imams that carry Prophet’s legacy forward through
blood lineage) also forms an important element of faith. Similarly, the sayings
of Imams too are held as distinguished by Shias particularly Nahjul Balagah.
In the tragedy of Karbala, most of the
family of Prophet (Ahle Bayt) were mercilessly murdered at the hands of army of
Yazid who belonged to the Banu Ummayah clan. Now, this is not a space to debate
about who constitutes Ahle Bayt, for Shias family of Prophet through his
daughter Fatima (RA), her two sons and husband, the fourth Caliph of Islam, Ali
(RA) constitute the Ahle Bayt. Shias hold them in great reverence and the
Imammate continues from the family of Ahle Bayt. Shias commemorate the first
ten days of Moharram in mourning that led to the martyrdom of Ahle Bayt at Karbala.
They associate themselves with the tragedy at Karbala and believe they are real
inheritors of martyrs of Karbala, a position that is contested by Sunnis who do
not mourn, but condemn the actions of Yazid and his army generals. We have the
debate about Karbala still going on in Sunni and Shia sects. The circumstances,
the actual culprits, role of Yazid, strategy of Imam Hussain all are contested
by scholars of both sects. However, what has the consensus of all is that Imam
Hussain (RA) was insisted very strongly by people of Kufa and adjoining areas
to take their oath of allegiance (Bayah) and accept the leadership role. His
friends and other Muslims advised him against this journey informing him that
the people insisting and inviting him to come are not trustworthy based on
their previous experience towards his father and brother Hassan (RA). But Imam
Hussain’s logic was that he has got hundreds of letters from people and on the
day of judgement, what answer and proof he will put before Allah that he got an
opportunity to rectify things from monarchy to Caliphate and he has no excuse
to defend himself. Hence, he undertook the journey along with his family
members and few supporters.
Before undertaking the journey, Imam
Hussain had sent his cousin Muslim bin Aqeel (RA) to take Bayah on his behalf
and people turned out in thousands. Witnessing this popularity, he wrote to
Imam Hussain (RA) about the enthusiasm and support of people, while requesting
him to hasten his journey. Witnessing such an overwhelming support for Imam
Hussain, the dictatorial monarch Yazid bin Mawiya was alerted and he replaced
the Governor with Ubaidullah ibn Ziyad, the first illegitimate bastard among
Muslims who was granted legitimacy of rulership. He was a criminal dictator who
went after persecuting people that ultimately resulted people to break their
bayah towards Imam Hussain (RA). Muslim bin Aqeel (RA) was left with no
supporters, captured and his head severed from his body and dispatched to
Yazid. This news of renegading from Bayah and martyrdom of Muslim bin Aqeel
reached Imam Hussain and his family when they were about to reach Karbala and
fearing a revolt the siege was laid by Ibn Ziyad’s army. They demanded Imam
Hussain to declare his Bayah to the illegitimate ruler and monarch Yazid, only
then they were ready to lift the siege. Yazid like his father Mu'awiya wanted
the power to remain in his family as he started the kingship, while destroying
the Caliphate. His model became the pragmatic one that destroyed the real
caliphate for all practical reasons.
Imam Hussain informed them about his three
demands for negotiation and said no to Bayah of Yazid at Karbala. These three
demands included
1. Let him and his family return to Medina
from where they came
2. Let him go straight to the court of
Yazid, where he will negotiate with him
3. Allow him to leave the boundaries of the
kingdom so that he could migrate to some other place
They were not ready to accept any of these,
and started a massacre of the defenceless, helpless and travelling family of
Imam Hussain (RA) at Karbala. After the massacre they also burned down their
tents and letters, so as to destroy any evidence of their complicity in
provoking Imam or having to do anything with the rebellion which was evident
from the letters. So, the fact became common that People of Kufa are traitors
and untrustworthy. It is an irony that the leaders of the killer army asked the
marauding soldiers to get over the massacre of male members quickly as their Asr
prayers were getting delayed. This statement became a common idiom throughout
the Muslim world. Something similar about Jews and their rabbis was said by
Jesus (pbuh). “You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.”
(Matthew 23:24). The real spirit is lost but emphasis is on the rituals.
After committing gross injustice and
massacring the family of Prophet, the emphasis on prayers is futile by such an
army of criminal assassins. Once the massacre was over and the women of Ahle
Bayt captured along with only one surviving son of Imam Hussain, Zain ul
Abideen, the people of Kufa and enroute met them wailing and sobbing, offering
condolences. They were afraid of their lives so they did not support Imam and
his family at battlefield, but now sobbing and wailing was sheer hypocrisy,
giving rise to another idiom, statement and saying that goes like this in
Kashmiri, “Yemev Maer Imam Temay Karan Waiwela” meaning those who killed
Imams are the same ones who are mourning and wailing at their martyrdom.
The same statement was used recently by
Syed Altaf Bukhari, who founded J&K Apni Party (JKAP). Earlier he was a
minister in PDP-BJP regime. This statement he used in a certain context of
politicians who are decrying at the disempowerment of people of J&K,
although they are responsible for the current mess. The inviters of Imam
Hussain (RA) were responsible for his massacre and then they were mourning his
death. But this statement of his created a furore as he said those who killed
the Imams are saying Ya Imam. The Shias were offended and they started a public
tirade against him. All shades of Shias, politicians, scholars, bureaucrats,
activists came to the front condemning this statement, which they described as
anti-Shia. They constituted corrupt, criminal and followers of Yazid too in
real life who masquerade their Yazidi lifestyle behind Imammate and Ahle Bayt.
Bukhari, being not well versed in Islam and his party like any other political
party lacks any scholar who could have refuted such allegations.
First of all, why did Shias consider
themselves to be part of killers of Imam? At that time there was no Shia-Sunni
divide it started in the aftermath of Karbala. Saying Ya Imam although
is a practice of Shias because Imammate runs parallel to Risalat among
Shias. Something like calling on Imams is justified and legitimate for Shias
and crime and shirk for Sunnis. Sunnis do believe that Shi’ism initiated from Kufa
and its adjoining areas, after Karbala so the statement about wailing of those
who were complicit in killing imams is correct. But why did these sects become
so touchy about some random statements by a politician?
Given the tirade against him, Bukhari
tended apology as he has to keep in mind the electoral prospects otherwise, his
statement is valid. The current Shias are not responsible for the crimes of
their Shia forefathers and holding them responsible is wrong and will lead to
undermining any efforts towards unity. Similarly, holing the contemporary
Sunnis responsible for the crimes of their forefathers will not help. But mullahs
and sectarian stooges who have an axe to grind use historical narratives and
factual realities as tools, weaponising the current discourses that ultimately
leads to reinforcing the sectarianism. Both Shias and Sunnis hold each other
responsible for the ills that are confronting Islam, and blaming each other
certainly is not going to help. Bukhari, without any ill intention has uttered
the words that are used in common parlance and sending him to gallows for it is
uncalled for. Shias and Sunnis, will have to leave history behind and
understand the fact that those who massacred Imam and Ahle bayt at karbala,
were not Shias or Sunnis, but members of a brutal state and stooges of a
criminal king. There are black sheep in the ranks of both Shia and Sunnis, who
try to hijack and appropriate the message of Karbala, while following the
footsteps of Mawiya and Yazid.
-----
M.H.A. Sikander is Writer-Activist based
in Srinagar, Kashmir