Amir Moghul
Bewakoof Insaan!! there is only one Shia sect all over the globe ‘Mashallah’, there are no sects within Shia’s as your maligned self try to portray, literal meaning of the word ‘Shia’ is Friend so whoever is the friend of Ahlul-bait-e- Rasul saww, he is a Shia’, [Asef]
Muslims must denounce terrorists’ use of aggressive Quranic verses: Hindu forum 12 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1189
=====================
'Tum Amir Moghul Bhi ho, Jamshed Basha Bhi ho, Chor bhi ho, Be-Iman bhi ho, Kahne ko to Musallmaan bhi ho, Per Ye to Bataao, Kya INSAAN bhi ho'? Ps: Dushmana-e-Ahlebait sirf Haiwaan ho sakte hain Insaan nahi!!!! [Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez]
Spiritual heritage of Imam Khomeini 09 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1183
'Tum Amir Moghul Bhi ho, Jamshed Basha Bhi ho, Chor bhi ho, Be-Iman bhi ho, Kahne ko to Musallmaan bhi ho, Per Ye to Bataao, Kya INSAAN bhi ho'? Ps: Dushmana-e-Ahlebait sirf Haiwaan ho sakte hain Insaan nahi!!!! [Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez]
Spiritual heritage of Imam Khomeini 09 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1183
==================================
Amir Moghul sahab
aapko is baare me kya kahna hai? "Ayesha's entry onto the battlefield of Jamal was a violation of the Quran Allah (swt) states clearly with regards to the wives of Rasulullah (s):
"And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance;...." Al-Quran 33:33 Comment Our contention is that Ayesha’s leaving her residence following the demise of the Holy Prophet [s] and accompanying into battle a rebellious male movement that opposed the Khalifa of the time, was an open violation of this verse. [fikarmand Musalman]
http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/ayesha/en/index.php
Amir Moghul sahab
aapko is baare me kya kahna hai? "Ayesha's entry onto the battlefield of Jamal was a violation of the Quran Allah (swt) states clearly with regards to the wives of Rasulullah (s):
"And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance;...." Al-Quran 33:33 Comment Our contention is that Ayesha’s leaving her residence following the demise of the Holy Prophet [s] and accompanying into battle a rebellious male movement that opposed the Khalifa of the time, was an open violation of this verse. [fikarmand Musalman]
http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/ayesha/en/index.php
How ‘Pakistan’s Switzerland’ became Taliban land 02 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1167
====================================
Dear Asef Sahab, Dear and Respected Ms Kaneez Sahiba and Mr Worried Muslim,
Answers as per my humble knowledge is as under:
At the juncture of conciliation between Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] and Hazrat Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] one of the Sects had absolutely discarded Shiaism and never subsequently included themselves among the Shias. Nau Bakhti observes that when Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] and Muawiyyah committed themselves to patch-up and Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] accepted the goods dispatched to him by Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] accepted the goods dispatched to him by Hazrat Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him], thes people started lambasting him. They opposed him, damned his Imamat and concurred with the opinion of the populace.
Sabaism had spread most shabbily during this period. A Shia historian acknowledges its wide-spread impact. He observes that this worst innovation first permeated among some of the Iraqis like an epidemic. He has also enumerated the factors that contributed to its wide-ranging influence and in this he has relied on the authority of Ibn abi al-Hadid. They were people of limited vision. Therefore it was not unexpected of them to be over-impressed by the miracles performed by Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]and to be led astray. They easily formed the belief that the divine essence had been injected into Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. It is generally said that they had heard from their forefathers the God often penetrated the mortal frame of His prophets. Therefore they held a similar belief about Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. It is also possible that this view was deliberately propagated by some atheists who wanted to inject their atheistic beliefs into the flesh and soul of Islam.
Shias during the period of Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]:
After the death of Hazrat Hassan [May Allah be pleased with him], the Shias flocked round his brother Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. The most stupendous event and the most glorious episode that occurred during his tenure was his rebellion against Yazid. Yaqubi, one of the extermist Shias, observes that when Yazid was appointed Caliph after the death of his father, he wrote to Walid bin Uqbah bin abi Sufiyyan, the governor of Madina, to secure the pledge of Hussain bin Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. When Walid pressured Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. to pledge fealty to Yazid, he left for Makkah where he stayed for a few days. Meanwhile the citizens of Iraq dispatched a number of letters to him which assumed the from of an unbroken series of messages. The last letter he received was from Hani’ bin abi Hani’ and Said bin Abdullah Khithami. The letter is reproduced below:
"We begin with the name of Allah! To Hussain bin Ali from his Muslim Shias. You should come immediately. Everyone is waiting for you. They do not acknowledge any body else as their Imam. Therefore you should come as soon as possible".
Another Shia historian Masudi writes:
"When Hazrat Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] died, the residents of Kufah dispatched innumerable letters to Hadhrat Hussain bin Ali that they had disciplined themselves to take the oath of allegiance at his hand. They wrote: We would prefer to die than to pledge fealty at the hand of some on else. That is why we do not participate in the Friday and congregational prayers". Another letter contained the following message:
"The gardens are jush green and the fruits have ripened. Therefore you can come whenever you like. The army awaits your arrival".
When the letters piled up and the Kufi demand turned into an insistent refrain, Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] sent Muslim bin ‘Aqil lbin abi Talib to Kufah. He also dispatched a letter to the residents of Kufah and told them that the letter was a prelude to his visit. When Muslim arrived in Kufah, the people swarmed round him and pledged fealty to him. They gave their word of honour that they would extend their maximum help and co-operation to Hadhrat Hussain".
Mufid [Shia Scholar] adds:
"All the Kufis pledged to Muslim while crying and the number of these people exceeded eighteen thousand".
After a few days Hadhrat Hussain received a letter from Muslim:
"One lac people are ready to pledge at your hand. Therefore don’t delay".
Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. set out towards kufah after receiving the letter. But Hazrat Ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] called on him. Hazrat ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] was a spring of the Banu Hashim, he was the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. he was an experienced man and had a better grasp of the psychic make-up of the Shias of his times, as has been attested by Masudi: Hadhrat ibn Abbas said to him: "O my cousin! I have come to know that you intend to visit Iraq. Don’t you know that these people are traitors? They are inviting you to fight but you shouldn’t make haste. If you want to fight with this tyrant and do not like to stay in Makkah, you should better go to Yemen. It is off the main route and you’ll also find a number of helpers and supporters there. Stay there and seek the good will of the people. From there you should write to citizens of Iraq out their Amir. If they have the power to extradite him and there is no one to oppose you, then you are welcome to go there. I don’t rule out their treachery. If they don’t act up to your wishes, then you should stay put and await divine verdict. The place is riddled with castles and valleys. Hadhrat Hussain replied: O my cousin! I know you are my will-wisher and sympathizer. But Muslims bin ‘Aquil has sent me a letter in his own hand that all the people there are agreed to take the oath of allegiance at my hand. Therefore I have decided to visit them. Ibn Abbas explained: I know these people to the roots of their hair. I have tried and tested them. What they did to your father and brother is not hidden form you. They will conspire against you in complicity with their Amir and pack you off straight to martydom—Ah! how truly Ibn Abbas had spoken! How sympathetic was he towards Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. and how well-informed about the designs of the Kufis! – If you march in this direction, and Ibn Ziyyad comes to know about your departure, he will mobilize his army and seek an open confrontation with you. The people who have dashed off letters to you will turn into your implacable enemies. If you don’t agree to my proposal and are determined to leave for Kufah, then, for God’s sake, don’t take your wife and children along. By God! I apprehend that you may be martyrred as Hazrat Uthman [May Allah be pleased with him] was martyred and his wife and children remained passive spectators".
These were the explicit words of Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] and the amount of prestige he enjoyed in the eyes of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] is no secret.
Mufid comments: "Amir-ul-Mominin dined with Hazrat Hassan [May Allah be pleased with him] one night, with Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] the next night and with Hadhrat Abdullah bin Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] the night after.
He constantly suffered at the hands of the Shias who spared no opportunity to humiliate him. They tortured him so much that he was forced to confess: I wish Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] could exchange you with his men as dinar are exchanged with dirham. He should take ten of you and give me one of his men in exchange.
Abu Bakr Hisham also endorsed the views of Hazrat Ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] that the Shias were dishonest and traitorous. Therefore he should not fall into their trap. According to Masudi Abu Bakr bin Harith bin Hisham called on Hadhrat Hussain and said to him: O my cousin! I like to sympathize with you but I don’t know how to express my sympathies! Hadhrat Hussain replied: Abu Bakr! You are one of those who cold not be labeled dishonest or insincere. Therefore you are welcome to express your views. Abu Bakr said: your father was among the early Muslims who had embraced Islam. After entering the fold of Islam, he left behind a pleasant and favorable impression. He always launched a tempestuous attack (on the enemy). People attached great expectations to him and had evolved a consensus around him. When he marched towards Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him], every one had supported him except the Syrians. Even otherwise he enjoyed a better status than Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] but in spite of all this the people degraded and disgraced him. They were reluctant to wage Jehad; greed and lechery overpowered them. They not only prickled and annoyed him but also opposed him tooth and nail until he quaffed the cup of martyrdom. Then the treatment they extended to your elder brother after the death of your father is not hidden from you either. You are a direct witness to these happenings and yet you are ready to ho to them who opposed your father and brother. You want to fight against the residents of Syria and Iraq and the person who wields greater power than you and who is fully laced with arms. People fear him more and expect more form him. If come to know that you have set out towards them, they will bribe the people with wealth and goods. People are creatures of flesh. Those who have promised to help and support you will turn against you. Those who seem to love you at present are the ones who will insult you later. Therefore fear God and don’t go there.
Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] replied: O, my cousin! May god bless you! Your opinion has come the hard way. Whatever God has decided, must be implemented.
Abu Bakr said: O Abu Abdullah! We except reward from Allah. Then Abu Bakr, Harith bin Khalid bin ‘As bin Hisham Mukhzuma called on the governor of Makkah. They were reciting the verse
(There are so many advisers who are disobeyed and the one who can guess hidden things equates advice with trash and bilge).
As per Shia Scholars and Historians:
Masudi remarks that the news of Muslim’s arrival in Kufah had been passed on to Yazid also. He appointed Ubaidullah bin Ziyyad the governor of Kufah. Ubaidullah marched form Basrah at a hurricane speed and arrived in Kufah soon after noon. When he sneaked into Kufah, he was wearing a black tiara which covered up his face. He was riding a mule. People were expecting the arrival of Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. When Ibn Ziyyad saluted the people, they responded with slogans of welcome until he reached the palace. Noman bin Bashir was also inside the palace. He sat down near him and then turned his attention towards him. He asked: O son of the Messenger of Allah! what is your command? Why have you preferred my city to others? Ibn Ziyyad replied: you have been too much in the dark and then he drew aside the cover from his face. He recognized him and opened the gate. People exclaimed: he is Ibn Marjana. And then they threw pebbles at him. He ignored them and entered the palace. When Muslim heard the news of his arrival, he hid himself in the house of Hani’ bin Urwah Muradi. Ziyyad sent Muhammad bin Ashath bin Qais to fetch Hani’. When he was brought to Ziyyad, he asked him about Muslim, but he gave a blank reply. When Ibn Ziyyad spoke to him a little bluntly and ruthlessly’ Hani’ said" I am under obligation to your father Ziyyad and I would like to pay it back. Would you like a piece of good advice? Ibn Ziyyad adked: What is that? Hani’ replied: pack up your wealth and goods and make a straight dive for Syria along with your family and children before any harm comes to you: Now the right has arrived: one who has a better claim to rule than you has arrived. On hearing this, Ibn Ziyyad said: bring him closer to me. When he was brought closer, he applied the stick he was holding in his hand on his face with such force that his nose snapped and he receive a wound on his forehead. The flesh on his face flaked off and he borke the stick on his head and face. Hani’ tried to snatch a policeman’s swordbut someone pushed him and widened the distance between him and the sword. Hani’s companions kicked up a roar at the door, clamouring the death of their companion. Ibn Ziyyad threatened them and locked up Hani’ in a side-room. He sent out Qadhi Shrakh to tell the people that Hani’ had not been murdered Consequently, they left for their homes. When Muslim came to know that Ziyyad had maltreated Hani, he came out with the slogan "Ya Mansur" which was immediately taken up by the residents of Kufa and eighteen thousand people instantly rallied to his call. Muslim also marched towards Ibn Ziyyad but his companions locked him up inside the place. By evening not even a hundred people were left with him. When he realized that the people were slipping away, he moved towards the carved gate He had hardly reached the gate that he was left which only three companions; and when he came out of the gate, not a single man accompanied him. He was in a real quandary. He did not know where to go. There was no one to guide him. He climbed down his horse and roamed through the streets of Kufah in a state of utter stupe-faction. He was absolutely in a fix as he was stranded. He kept on walking until he reached the house of the slave-maid of Ashath bin Qais. He asked for water and she gave him some water to drink. When she asked him what had happened, he reeled off to her the entire gamut of events. She suddenly softened towards him and provided him shelter where he could hide himself. When his son came home, he found out that he was hiding there. Next morning he conveyed the news to Muhammad bin Ashath who conveyed it to Ibn Ziyyad. Ziyyad murdered him. He also murdered Hani’ bin Marwah when he was calling out the children of Murad for hilp. He was the chieftain of the tribe. When he rode on his horse, four thousands armoured people and eight thousands footmen accompanied him. If his enemy Banu Kandah had responded to his call, the number of his armoured companions would have risen to twenty thousands. But all of them displayed nauseating cowardice and chicken-heartedness and failed to heed the call of their leader.
Meeting with Hur in Qadsiyyah:
When Hadhrat Hussain arrived in Qadisiyyah, he happened to meet Hur Yazid Yamimi who asked him: O grandson of the Messenger! Where are you heading? He replied: I am heading towards this city. Hur informed him that Muslim had been martyred. He also gave him details of his torture and agony Muslim had suffered at the hands of the Kufis and the functionaries of the stated. He advised him to return as Kufa hardly held any hope of better prospects of him. He found Hur’s advice reasonable and pragmatic and decided to retrace his steps. But Muslims’ brother, out of righteous anger, became intransigent and swore not to return until they avenged the murder of his brother or received martyrdom in the process. Hadhrat Hussain replied there was hardly any point in living after they had all died.
Hadhrat Hussain’s address:
Under the circumstances, he gathered all the people and addressed them:
"O people! I have received horrifying news. Muslims bin Aqil, Hani’ bin ‘Urwah and Abdullah bin Yaqtar have embraced martyrdom. Our Shias have betrayed and humiliated us. Therefore any one who likes to leave us is welcome to do so. I’ll not be offended in the least".
When people heard his words, they started slinking on the right and on the left until, within a short span of time, only those people remained who had set off from Madinah with him. Those who had joined him on the way disappeared into thin air. Only a sprinkling of these people held on to the hem of his companionship. He had consciously uttered these words to off-set the false expectations of a party of Baddus who had joined his raks simply to live in clover in a town whose citizens obeyed the Imam unconditionally. Thus they looked forward to Kufah as veritable paradise where they would laze and roll away their time in utter luxury. They were the least inclined to face the ordeal of a rough and ready life. Hadhrat Hussain did not like to keep them in the dark by letting them in on the true nature of his sojourn.
Umor bin Loxan:
When the morning came, he commanded his companions to take their animals to water. The animal drank to their bladder’s content and they set out on their journey. When they reached Batn-i-‘Aqbah, they encamped there. He met Umro bin Lozan, a chief of Banu Akrimah. He asked him: which way are you heading? Hadhrat Hussain replied: I am heading towards Kufah. The chief said: I make you swear by God that you should go back. You are not going to Kufah but you are going to face the points of spears and the blades of swords. If these people, who have dashed off letters to you, side with you during the battle and furnish you with arms and weapons, it’ll be in the fitness of things for you to go there. But as things stand, the situation is replete with danger and your visit will be most inexpedient. He replied: O God’s creature! I am not unaware of it either but no one can prevail over divine plans.
Departure towards Kufah:
Then he marched towards Kufah. On the way he chanced to meet a person who informed him about the betrayal and cowardice of the Kufis and told him bluntly that he did not have a single supporter and helper. He added that in-stead of helping him, the Kufis might turn against him.
When the armed forces of Kufah intercepted him, he realized that the actual situation clashed with the promises of help and the assurances of support with which their letters were cluttered and clogged. They had taken a complete volte face. He asked one of his companions to bring him the two bags containing their letters. He brought the bags and poured out their contents right in front of them.
At Karbala:
The Kufis disowned both the letters and the messages. He continued the march till he landed in Karbala. When massive armies rallied against Hadhrat Hussain, he was convinced that there was no shelter for him. He raised his hands for prayer: O Allah! arbitrate between us and this nation who had invited us to help us but who have waged war against us.
Hadhrat Hussain fought bravely and spiritedly until he quaffed the cup of martyrdom. The people who fought against him on the battlefield or who put him to martyrdom were all Kufis. There was not a single Syrian who had taken part in the fray.
The Shia historian Yaqubi—mentions that when the Kufis martyed him, they plundered his goods and belongings and escorted the ladies to Kufah. When the ladies entered Kufa, the women of that town came out of their houses screaming and beating there chests. Hadhrat Ali bin Hussain remarked: if they are mourning for us, then who has murdered us?
Baghdadi observes: The Rafidihis of Kufah are notorious for their meanness and treachery. These two flaws have become almost proverbial. It is generally stated: "Abkhil min Kufi" (that person even beats the Kufis in spite) and "Aghdar min Kufi" (that person is even more treacherous than the Kufis).
Betrayal of Kufis:
artyrdom of Hadhrat Ali, they submitted allegiance to his son Hadhrat Hassan, but when he set off to fight against Hadhrat Muawiyyah, they betrayed him at Sabat Madain. Sana J’afi forced him down his horse with a spear-blow at his thigh. This episode was one of the reasons which compelled Hadhrat Hassan to patch up with Hadgrat Muawiy-yah.
The second treachery was that they scribbled letters to Hadhrat Hussain bin Ali and invited him to visit Kufah. Their express purpose was to seek his support against Yazid bin Muwaiyyah. He was deceived by their overt intentions and set out towards them. When he landed in Karbala, the Kufis betrayed him and, instead of supporting him, they supported Ubaidullah bin Ziyyad. The result was that Hadhrat Hussain and his kinsmen died on the sunbaked sand of Karbala in a state of abject misery and utter helplessness. The fourth person they played the hoax on was Yazid bin Ali bin Hussain bin abi Talib. They supported him against Yousaf bin Umar, but snapped out of their allegiance to him, and in the thick of battle, handed over Yazid bin Ali to his enemy who put him to death.
These were the Shias! the Shias of Ali, Hussan and Hussain and this is the treatment they had extended to their Imams and forefathers. I have deliberately discussed it at length because Shiaism underwent a radical change after this accident. The change related to the new complexion they put on the hoodwink the people. Previously, it was a purely political group: but now it donned a religion mask. They had actually supported Hadhrat Ali and his progeny against Hadhrat Muawiyyah and Banu Umayyah. Wellhausen has clearly stated in reference to the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain and the subsequent revenge taken by Mukhtar that Shiaism at that time dressed itself in new robes in Kufah. It had its roots in Iraq and was restricted to political alignments only. At first there was no distinction between the elite and the non-elite and they stood in the same row though the elite acted as their leaders. But when dangers surrounded them on all sides, they turned over a new leaf and softened their attitude as a result of the persuasion of Amwis in Syria. Then their services were utilized against the Shia movements and this was the time when they detached themselves from the Shia of Ali which resulted in a further circumscription of the Shia objectives. Later on, Shiaism graduated towards its tranformation as a religious group though they had a standing political dispute with the leading members of various tribes. After the martyrdom of distinguished people, it transformed itself into a specific movement. The helpersand supporters of Sulaiman bin Sard were against the movement of the distinguished personages of different tribes. Mukhtar was, of course, the first person who parasitically instilled new life into the movement. He included the Mawalis in the movement as well. Their inclusion was relatively easier on account of their inclination towards religious matters. They also virtually ignored national and communal prejudice though the Arabs still practised it. Similarly, these people (the Mawalis) disliked those who harboured any malice against the Arab chieftains.
When the association of the Shias grew deeper with these insurgents, they were stripped of their Arab and national identity. Though the basis of their association was Islam it was not early Islam but and entirely different brand.
Now Shiaism started assimilating alien views and beliefs. Besides, it split up into different groups and sects. Each person who entertained malice against Islam drew his nourishment from Shiaism. Thus Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and Hindus, who were keen to intromit their views into the speculative framework of Islam, relied on the crutches of Shiaism. Besides, people who wanted to stabilize their particular religion and rebel against their incompetent rulers, found solace in the seductive innovations of Shiaism. All of them utilized their spurious love of the house of Ali as a label for the completion of their nefarious interests. The Jews injected the concept of return of resurrection into the body-frame of Shiaism and the Shias had declared the fire of hell unlawful for their community. And if any Shia was thrown into hell, he would stay there only for a few days. They actually parrotted out the views of the Jews who believed that they would stay in the flames of hell only for a few days. Under the influence of Christian beliefs they held that Imam enjoyed with Him. Imam is the converging point of divine and non-divine attributes. Prophethood is interminable. A Prophet is the receptacle of divinity. He develops an inalienable union with the God-head and their separation becomes impossible. Shiaism also encouraged and publicized the concepts cherished by Brahmins, philosophers and pre-Islamic Zorostrians became the raison d,tre of Shiasim. Some of the Persians also put on the mask of Shiaism and revved up their activities against Banu Umayyah. The fact was that they loathed the Arab rule and wanted to strengthen their own rule.
Maqrizi observes that the Persians had an edge over all other nations. They over-estimated themselves at least in their own eyes. This is attested by the fact that they attached to themselves meliorative epithets while they conferred on others pejorative labels. They strongly believed in the master-slave dichotomy, reserving the first half of the polarity for themselves and distributing freely the second half among the people of the world. When the Arabs defeated them, though ironically, the regarded them the least dangerous, it had a devastating impact on Persians and they magnified their humiliation beyond all proportion. Therefore on various occasions, they floated the balloon of their conspiracy against Islam but each time the Muslims, by the grace of God, pricked it and it burst in the mid air scattering hapazardly its synthetic shards. When they had been frequently frustrated in direct and overt confrontations, they found it more effective and convenient to rely on indirect and underhand strategies. Therefore, some of them slipped into Islamic garbs and under the pretext of love of the Ahl-i-Bait and by openly stressing the innocence of Hadhrat Ali, they attached the Shias towards themselves and ultimately derailed them by taking them through different routes.
The Shias splintered into three sects after the martyrdom of Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] as has been mentioned by Shia Scholar Nau Bakhti. The details of these sects are as follows:
Kaisaniyyah:
After the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain a group of his friends and supporters was simply dazed by the whirl of circumstances. They had witnessed two precedents one after the other. The first precedent was established by the conduct of Hadhrat Hussain. Both of them held the stature of Imams for them. Therefore they were at a loss to evaluate their conduct. On the one hand was Hadhrat Hassan who, inspite of the overwhelming number of his companions, had refused to battle with Hadhrat Muawiyyah and offered him the reins of power on a platter; on the other hand was Hadhrat Hussain who, inspite of the heavy odds against him, had refused to knuckle under and preferred to resist the force of tyranny and oppression. Hadhrat Hussain clearly knew that the forces of Yazid out-numbered his men but he did not bend under their numerical pressure and embraced martyrdom along with his companions on the battle field. He obviously preferred the chess board of war to the negotiation table of humiliating peace. If Hadhrat Hassan was justified in his stand, the conduct of Hadhrat Hussain was unjustified either as he felt more crippled and handicapped compared with his brother. And if Hadhrat Hussian’s action was justified it would automatically invalidate the action of Hadhrat Hassan. on account of this fundamental complication, the Imamat of the two brothers because suspect in their eyes. Some of them squirmed out of the commitment to their Imamat and started piping the tunes called out by other people. But the rest of Hadhrat Hussain’s companions clung to their faith in his Imamt as they had done in the past.
After Hadhrat Hussain, these people split into three gorups. One of the groups believed in the Imamat of the thesis that after Hadhrat Hassan and Hussain there wan nobody who could be closer to Amir-ul-Mominin than Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah as Hadhrat Hussain was more entitled to the Imamat after the death of Hadhrat Hassan, Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah is most deserving of the Imamat. Thus he is our Imam.
The second group believes that Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah is Imam Mehdi, and Hadhrat Ali has predicted about him. No one among the Ahl-i-Bait can either oppose him or deny his Imamat nor can he draw his sword out of the sheath without his permission and then handed over the Khilafat to him in the same way. Similarly, Hadhrat Hussain’s war with Yazid also carried his sanction. If Hadhrat Hassan and Hussain had acted without a green signal form him, they would have been derailed and destroyed because any one who opposed Muhammad bin Haniyyah was an ingidel and a disbeliever. It was Muhammad who had appointed Mukhtar bin abi Ubaid as the governor of Iraq and Syria and ordered him to avenge the blood of hussain by killing his murderes, and to dig them out form their hiding places. He also name him "Kaisan" on account of his intelligence and his followers are called Mukhtariyyah or Kaisaniyyah.
Kaisaniyyah came into the limelight after the martyrdom of Hadhrat Ali and later on acquired the label of Mukhtariyyah. A number of Shia off-shoots and sub-group sprang out of Kaisaniyyah: for example, Karabiyyah, Harbiyyah, Razarmiyyah, Bayaniyyah, Rawindiyyah, Abul-Mulammiyyah, Hasmiyyah, Haritiyyah and many other sects.
The common denominator among these sects is the Imamat of Muhammad bin Hanifiyyah and the net-work of beliefs churned out by Abdullah bin Saba. All these sects believe in back-biting, resurrection and transmigration. One of their poyes says:
(The Imams of Quraish are the supporters of right: they are fout and all of them are of equal stature)
(One of them is Hadhrat Ali, and the three are his sons who are grandsons of the Messenger of Allah and all the people know them)
(One of the grandsons is a paragon of virtue and piety and the other disappeared at Karbala)
(and the third grandson will not die until he leads the armies with a flag fluttering in front)
(They have vanished into the lap of luxury (Ridhwal) and will remain invisible for a certain period. They have honey and water at their dispsoal)
Baghadadi in his book "Al-Firq Bain-ul-Firq" has answered these verses. A Kaisani poet says:
(O people! Go to the man who lives the valley of Ridhwa, visit his house and pay homage to him)
(Can any damage be done to this group from our sides who made him the ruler and conferred on him the title of Khalifah and imam)?
(They waged war with all the residents of the earth on his account though he lives at a distance of seventy years of travel)
(He lives in seclusion in the heart of the valley of Ridhwa and the angels chat him up)
(Ibn Khaula has not tasted death nor has the earth hidden his bones)
(On account of his virtues, he is furnished with the best residence and company, and his companions treat him with tremendous regard). Baghdadi has retaliated in the language.
(You have wasted a whole life span waiting for a person whose bones are hidden in the earth)
(There is not a single Imam in the valley of Ridhwa whom the angels chat up)
(He has neither honey nor water at his disposal, nor any other syrup that could substitute for food)
(The son of Khaula tasted death as his father had tasted it)
(If social superiority and religious piety were the guarantee of an eternal life, then the Prophet (peace be upon him) would be blessed with immortality.)
It is noteworthy that Imamat had been transferred to Banu Abbas from Kaisaniyyah. Some of its sects believed that the Imamat had passed on to Muhammad bin Ali bin Abbas from Abu Hashim bin Muhammad bin Hanifiyyah, from him to his son Ibrahim, form Ibrahim to Abul Abbas and form Abdul Abbas to Abu J’afar Mansur who was the founder of the Abbasiyyah dynasty.
Of all the Shia sects, the sect of Mukhtar bin abi Ubaid Thaqafi enjoyed the best reputation and attached the largest number of followers. It gained the widest circulation because it came out with the unequivocal call to avenge the blood of Hadhrat Hussain. Kashi has reported in his book "Rijal" through Muhammad bin Masud, Ibn abi Ali Khiza’, Khalid bin Yazid Umri and Hassan bin Zaid, It is attributed to Umar bin Ali that Mukhtar dispatched twenty thousands dinar to Ali bin Hussain which he accepted and repaired his own house and the house of ‘Aqil bin abi Talib that were in a delpidated condition. Later, he sent him forty thousands dinar which he declined to accept because he had by that time articulated his beliefs.
Mukhtar was the person who persuaded people to acknowledge the Imamat of Muhammad bin Haniyyah. Those who responded to his invitation were called Mukhtariyyah or Kaisaniyyah, by virtue of which the surname of "kaisan" was appended to his name. Some people suggest that the surname Kaisan was conferred on him on him by Maula bin abi Talib. He prompted him to avenge the murder of Hussain and he also identified the murderers to facilitate his vengeance. He was his confidant but also had an edge over him. Whenever he came to know that an enemy of Hussain was hiding in some house, he would rush to the place, raze it to the ground and kill all the living things in it. The dilapidated houses of Kufah were reduced to a shambles by him. As a matter of fact, he acquired the status of proverbial figure among the Kufis. Whenever they found someone in a state of misery and penury, they at once imputed it to the evil act of Abu Umrah. A poet wrote:
(He is the devil. You can’t except anything good form him. H will provoke you to rebellion but he will not dole out even a crumb of food.)
"It is generally stated about Mukhtar that he is a magician (Tabri Vol. 2, P. 730), that he is anti-Christ (Tabri, P. 686). He is generally dubbed as a liar. All these epithets were showered on him not because he was a self-styled spokesman of Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah, but because he claimed himself to be a prophet thought he had done it only surreptitiously. But some of his acts clearly betrayed his intentions and reflected his prophetic pretensions. When he spoke, he gave the impression as if he was sitting in the presence of the Lord and knew the hidden secrets of the universe. His linguistic versatility and eloquence also helped in the projection of his image as an extraordinary person. His main object was to impress the people and he achieved a reasonable measure of success objective, but the majority of people who were impressed by his objective, but the majority of people who were impressed by his rhetoric and tactics generally belonged to the illiterate masses or were know for their stupidity. However, as his reputation increased, the strategies of the Muslims grew more subtle and comprehensive to beat him at his own game. And when he was finally defeated, the whole world turned against him, and after his murder his memories fell prey to the arrows of convention and ritual. In the initial phase he was condemned alright but no attempt was made to disfigure him. But in the later phase a regular campaign of character-assassination was launched against him which created a distorted impression of his personality on the minds of the future generations: The attempt at disfigurement was motivated mainly by spite and jealousy. It was he who had ordered the flight of white pigeons. He had also invented the concept of "Bada" about God to justify his whimsical sides form one religion to the other and stripped his followers of any right to criticise his religious jumps and shuffles. Tabri’s account has played a considerable role in his projections along these lines.
If we want an answer to the question whether he was a genuine prophet or an imposter, we’ll have to first established the fact whether he was sincere or in-sincere in his efforts. It seems he used prophethood as an instrument or his socio-political elevation and the same argument is applicable to the modus vivendi adopted by Muhammad. It should also be kept in mind that islam is a political religion and each Muslims prophet is justified in elevating his political status. But even more pernicious and dangerous is the fact that he camouflaged himself behind an imaginary personality and nothing was know about him or perhaps no attempt was made to probe into his reality. Therefore it is certain that there was come flaw in his sincerity, on this count at least. It is another story that the circumstances did not permit him to rely on a specific appellation but packaged himself in abstract terms as the nucleus of truth. Mukhrat had derived his beliefs from Sabaism, an innovatory sect (designed mainly to scoop away the concrete form the foundation of Islam). Sabaism held tremendous appeal especially for the elite of various tribes, and under its influence, the Shias had adopted an obscene and aggressive posture against the Sunnis which brought into the limelight Shia-Sunni differences. Sabaism is also known as Kaisaniyyah. Kaisan was simultaneously the chief of Mawalis and Sabais which obviously leads one to the conclusion that Mawalis and the Shias were one and the same.Banking on this conclusion, some people are inclined to believe that Shiasm has its religious roots in Iran because majority of Kufh Mawalis hailed form Iran.
The other beliefs held by these people are recorded at length in other books bearing on the issue. Here the beliefs are discussed keeping in view the constraints of space and the restraints of relevance. Since these issues have a built-in propensity to slide out of hand, every effort relatively larger space to this Shia group and its ring leader because it is a legacy of Sabaism. The Shias who appeared on the scene later derived their views and beliefs from this nucleus sect. Consequently, true Shiaism started melting away and the early Shias were on the wane. They soon went out of circulation because they could not cosmeticize their wares. The progeny of Ali and Banu Hashim topped the list of the genuine Shias who were receding fast into the limbo of oblivious. The Sabai views were no invested with sufficient strength to elbow them out, and had overtly aggressive designs towards all the genuine Shias. But the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain dampened their devilish enthusiasm by creating a soft corner in the hearts of people for Hadhrat Ali and his children. Those who demanded revenge for the blood of Hussain felt a sense of deep frustration. Their blood simply boiled when they reflected on the murder of Hussain. They wanted to dismantle the entire administrative structure that carried the stigma of Hussain’s blood. Some of them denigrated everything that was even remotely connected with the Government; they openly condemned and fluted their beliefs and edicts. When these people realized that the rulers respected Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, companion of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the wives of the Prophet, they disaffiliated themselves from them and started lambasting the pious personalities. They did not condemn them out of principle or because they had any difference of opinion with them. It was out of sheer stubbornness and a sense of deep-rooted indignation that they declaimed any statement or slogan that rose from the pulpit because, in their purblindness, they equated the voice of the priest with the voice of the administrators. It is indeed a reflection of their radicalism that had seeped into their hearts and minds as a consequence of the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain. Therefore Allama Zahadi and Ibn Taimiy have stated that all the early Muslims shared on unqualified convergence of opinion on the superiority of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. Even the Shias of Ale held the same conviction. Ibn Batah attributes it to his Shaikh who is more popularly known as Abul Abbas bin Masruq (the tradition is filtered through Muhammad bin Hamid, Jaria, Suffiyan and Abduallh bin Ziyyad bin Haider that Abu Ishaq Sabi’i came to Kufah. Shimr bin Atiyyah persuaded us to call on him. When we went over to see him, he said to us: when I left Kufa, there was not a single person who doubted the superiority of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. Now when I arrived here, I have found people talking against them. By God! I fail to guess what are they talking about!
Zamura quotes Said bin Hassan who is reported to have heard from Layth bin Salim: I have lived in the period of early Shias and I know from my experience that they did not prefer anyone to Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar in status.
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (through Suffiyan bin ‘Uyyinah and Khalid bin Salmah) attributes it to Masruq who reportedly laid special stress on the love and status of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar and raised it to the level of a tradition. It should be noted that Hadhrat Masruq is considered one of the distinguished Kufi successors of the companions of the Propher (peace be upon him). Hadhrat Taus has also endorsed him. Hadhrat Masud, too, expresses similar views. It was obviously binding on the early Shias to show respect to these pious personages because Ali’s words have come down to us with unbroken continuity that Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Umar are the most superior persons in the Muslim Ummah after the Prophet (peace be upon him). This tradition is frequently and repeatedly attributes to him, and as a stamp of its certification, it exits in eighty authentic versions.
Imam Bokhari has supported it in his "Sahih" with special reference to his Hadith "Ba-Tariq Hamadaniyyin" (the people who were Hadhrat Ali’s closest associates). Rather, he himself often expresses:
(If I am serving as a porter at any one of the gates of Paradise, I would tell the Hamadains to enter Paradise sagely and fearlessly). Imam Bokhari attributes a tradition to Suffiyan Thauri who is a Hamadiani and he has ascribed it to Muhammad bin Haniyyah. He said: I asked my father who was the vest person after the Prophet (peace be upon him)?
Hadhrat Ali: don’t you know my son!
Muhammad: No, I don’t.
Hadhrat Ali: Abu Bakr is the best man.
Muhammad: And who after him?
Hadhrat Ali: after him, Hadhrat Umar.
Since it was a person to-person dialogue between Hadhrat Ali and his son, it would not be fair to assume that Hadhrat Ali was dissimulating at that time and trying to hide his true feelings in the interest of expediency. And then the reporter also happens to be his own son who proclaimed it form the pulpit to obviate the possibility of any skeptical reaction to the truth of its contents. Hadhrat Ali himself openly stated that if any person was brought before him who declared him superior to Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar he would flog him the way he flogged a back—biter and a transgressor.
Muhibbuddin Khatib has noted in the margin of "Al-Muntaqa" that it provides a chronological line of demarcation to isolate early Shiaism from later Shiaism. Abu Ishaq Sab’i was a distinguished scholar of Kufah. He was born during the Caliphate of Hadhrat Uthman and three years before his martyrdom. He died in 127 A.H. He was only a child during Hadhrat Ali’s tenure as Caliph. He himself says that his father lifted him and he saw Hadhrat Ali delivering the sermon. At that time both his head and beard were grey. If we ever find out the exact date he left Kufah, we could come closer to what actually happened in that period in which the Shias of Kufag were Alvis and, like their Imam, believed unconditionally in the superiority of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. We would also come to know when did the Shias actually oppose Hadhrat Ali on this issue: It is very strange that both the Khwarjis and the Abbasis clung to the old belief and honoured their commitment with Hadhrat Ali but the Shais in the very first century disobeyed their own Imam by raising their promises in the last days of Abu Ishaq Sabi’i.
The change brought a radical shift in Shia beliefs. At first they had challenged only the peripheral issues. But now they questioned the very basis of their beliefs on account of their hatred of the rulers and the administrators. In their fury they identified the beliefs with those of the administrators. They forgot that the convictions were divinely oriented while the rulers had their human flaws and short-comings and their weaknesses did not nullify the validity of the convictions. But men do get disoriented and slide off the rails in a state of anger. And the Shias were no exception the worst aspect of their detracking was that they raised a mere prejudice into a philosophy which could neither by substantiated by convention nor bolstered by logic. They became so splenetic that they started denigrating the Quran, which is the main bulwark of the faithful against the rampancy of evil, and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) which is an explanation and clarification of the Quranic injunctions.
After the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain, the Shias fell a frequent prey to al sorts of obscenities and vulgarities which often assault a faithless community or a group of people who consciously and wilfully opt for the evil way. The early Shias felt chessed off by their evil practices and tried to raise barricades against the proliferation of their devilish views but their efforts proved futile. However, when they realized that the Shias had reached a point of no return and were absolutely disinclined to give up their sinful way of life, they bade farewel to Shiaism. Their decision to give a parting kick to Shiaism was not an emotional decision. It was a gall-out of their conviction that the Shias could not wriggle out of the quagmire of corruption into which they had suck on account of greed and lechery. When Mukhtar had settled himself comfortably at the steering – wheel of the Honda Accord of Shiaism, Ibrahim refused to join him as an accomplice in dismantling the fundamentals of Islam. This refusal has been attested to by Wellhausen, the distinguished German orientalist. Ibrahim bin Ashtar was the head of the Nakha off-shoot of the Mizhif tirbe. He was a shred and highly opinionative person. Like his father, he was a sincere admirer of Hadhrat Ali. He had good relations with Muhammad bin Haniyyah, though he did not like the brand of Shiaism that was in vogue in those days. He neither associated himself with Sulaiman Sard nor did he display any interests in Mukhtar’s improvisations. The other people also failed to rope him in. At last he received a letter from Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah in which he had been asked unequivocally to acknowledge the personality of Mukhtar bin Ubaid. But what really terrified him was the fact that Ibn Hanifiyyah had used the by-name "Mehdi" in his letter, though, as far as he knew, he had never attached any extra epithet or label to his orighinal name. This unexpected change led him belief that the letter had been forged. But the messengers who had brought the letter confirmed its genuineness. Later Mukhtar himself attested to its authenticity. However, two persons attracted his attention, presumably for their own safety. They were ‘Amir bin Sharahil Shobi—reporter, Jurist and Muhaddith and his father Sharahil. He drew Amir aside and asked him about the reliability of the witnesses who had attested to the authenticity of the letter. Amir told him that they were among the distinguished people of Egypt and Arabia, and therefore they were generally considered trustworthy and dependable. In view of the reputation they enjoyed, they could not have possibly doctored the evidence. (Tabri 612/2). Ibn Ashtar asked them to write down their names. He consequently wrote a brief review bearing on these events. When he was convinced about the unadulterated contents of the letter, he extended it the honour it deserved and reserved himself for the service of Mukhtar bin abi Ubaid.
But when Mukhtar took a somerasult and dabbled unashamedly in the propagation of his latent Sabai views, which lambasted the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and preached open enmity against the Prophetic views and way of life, people twirled their whiskers against him. They condemned him for his heretic and blasphemous ideas. They accused him of usurpation of power. They said that he had installed himself into the highest executive seat without the consent and command of Ibn Hanigiyyah and he and his Sabaism had introduced an innovation into the body-politic of Islam which was mainly designed to debunk and disown their illustrious and pious forefathers.
These elderly people took control of the important centres of Kufah. They dumped Mukhtar into the palace and disconnected him with the world outside. He tried to bamboozle them with a cleverly devised plan. He suggested that two independent delegations should be dispatched to Ibn Haniyyah for investigating the state affairs. One would represent him and the other delegation would represent them. The delegates would find out whether Ibn Haniyyah had extended his support to him or not. But his plan did not materialize and he failed to pull a rabbit out of his magic bag.
Wellhausen adds: "Mukhtar was at the zenith of power, but the pits of destruction also lay before him. The old Arab Shias did not trust him. That is why they had disposed him and quarantined him from power".
False Story of Persian Princes Sheher Bano w/o Hazrat Hussein [May Allah be pleased with him]
Details are sufficient to establish a profile of the changes that appeared in the conduct of the early Shias and their later manifestation. After the change, Shiaism was trimmed down to a set of obscene and vulgar exercises as it was drained of its galvanizing spirit. They believed that the white pigeons were angels. They also held strange beliefs about prophethood and the unknown. A new wave of dissension hit the Shias after the murder of Mukhtar. One of the sects came out with the proposal that Ali bin Hussain was their Imam. He had two patronyms: one was Abu Muhammad and the other was Abu Badr, which was relatively more popular. This sect clung to their faith in his Imamat till his death in 94 A.H. in the month of Muharram. He was fifty years old when he died. He was born in 39 A.H. His mother was known as Salafah but was called Jahan Shah before she acquired the status of a slave-maid. She was the daughter of Yazdjard bin Shahr yar bin Kisra Abr Wiz bin Hurmuz. Yazdjard was the last king of Iran.
Dear Asef Sahab, Dear and Respected Ms Kaneez Sahiba and Mr Worried Muslim,
Answers as per my humble knowledge is as under:
At the juncture of conciliation between Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] and Hazrat Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] one of the Sects had absolutely discarded Shiaism and never subsequently included themselves among the Shias. Nau Bakhti observes that when Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] and Muawiyyah committed themselves to patch-up and Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] accepted the goods dispatched to him by Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] accepted the goods dispatched to him by Hazrat Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him], thes people started lambasting him. They opposed him, damned his Imamat and concurred with the opinion of the populace.
Sabaism had spread most shabbily during this period. A Shia historian acknowledges its wide-spread impact. He observes that this worst innovation first permeated among some of the Iraqis like an epidemic. He has also enumerated the factors that contributed to its wide-ranging influence and in this he has relied on the authority of Ibn abi al-Hadid. They were people of limited vision. Therefore it was not unexpected of them to be over-impressed by the miracles performed by Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]and to be led astray. They easily formed the belief that the divine essence had been injected into Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. It is generally said that they had heard from their forefathers the God often penetrated the mortal frame of His prophets. Therefore they held a similar belief about Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. It is also possible that this view was deliberately propagated by some atheists who wanted to inject their atheistic beliefs into the flesh and soul of Islam.
Shias during the period of Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]:
After the death of Hazrat Hassan [May Allah be pleased with him], the Shias flocked round his brother Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. The most stupendous event and the most glorious episode that occurred during his tenure was his rebellion against Yazid. Yaqubi, one of the extermist Shias, observes that when Yazid was appointed Caliph after the death of his father, he wrote to Walid bin Uqbah bin abi Sufiyyan, the governor of Madina, to secure the pledge of Hussain bin Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. When Walid pressured Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. to pledge fealty to Yazid, he left for Makkah where he stayed for a few days. Meanwhile the citizens of Iraq dispatched a number of letters to him which assumed the from of an unbroken series of messages. The last letter he received was from Hani’ bin abi Hani’ and Said bin Abdullah Khithami. The letter is reproduced below:
"We begin with the name of Allah! To Hussain bin Ali from his Muslim Shias. You should come immediately. Everyone is waiting for you. They do not acknowledge any body else as their Imam. Therefore you should come as soon as possible".
Another Shia historian Masudi writes:
"When Hazrat Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] died, the residents of Kufah dispatched innumerable letters to Hadhrat Hussain bin Ali that they had disciplined themselves to take the oath of allegiance at his hand. They wrote: We would prefer to die than to pledge fealty at the hand of some on else. That is why we do not participate in the Friday and congregational prayers". Another letter contained the following message:
"The gardens are jush green and the fruits have ripened. Therefore you can come whenever you like. The army awaits your arrival".
When the letters piled up and the Kufi demand turned into an insistent refrain, Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] sent Muslim bin ‘Aqil lbin abi Talib to Kufah. He also dispatched a letter to the residents of Kufah and told them that the letter was a prelude to his visit. When Muslim arrived in Kufah, the people swarmed round him and pledged fealty to him. They gave their word of honour that they would extend their maximum help and co-operation to Hadhrat Hussain".
Mufid [Shia Scholar] adds:
"All the Kufis pledged to Muslim while crying and the number of these people exceeded eighteen thousand".
After a few days Hadhrat Hussain received a letter from Muslim:
"One lac people are ready to pledge at your hand. Therefore don’t delay".
Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. set out towards kufah after receiving the letter. But Hazrat Ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] called on him. Hazrat ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] was a spring of the Banu Hashim, he was the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. he was an experienced man and had a better grasp of the psychic make-up of the Shias of his times, as has been attested by Masudi: Hadhrat ibn Abbas said to him: "O my cousin! I have come to know that you intend to visit Iraq. Don’t you know that these people are traitors? They are inviting you to fight but you shouldn’t make haste. If you want to fight with this tyrant and do not like to stay in Makkah, you should better go to Yemen. It is off the main route and you’ll also find a number of helpers and supporters there. Stay there and seek the good will of the people. From there you should write to citizens of Iraq out their Amir. If they have the power to extradite him and there is no one to oppose you, then you are welcome to go there. I don’t rule out their treachery. If they don’t act up to your wishes, then you should stay put and await divine verdict. The place is riddled with castles and valleys. Hadhrat Hussain replied: O my cousin! I know you are my will-wisher and sympathizer. But Muslims bin ‘Aquil has sent me a letter in his own hand that all the people there are agreed to take the oath of allegiance at my hand. Therefore I have decided to visit them. Ibn Abbas explained: I know these people to the roots of their hair. I have tried and tested them. What they did to your father and brother is not hidden form you. They will conspire against you in complicity with their Amir and pack you off straight to martydom—Ah! how truly Ibn Abbas had spoken! How sympathetic was he towards Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. and how well-informed about the designs of the Kufis! – If you march in this direction, and Ibn Ziyyad comes to know about your departure, he will mobilize his army and seek an open confrontation with you. The people who have dashed off letters to you will turn into your implacable enemies. If you don’t agree to my proposal and are determined to leave for Kufah, then, for God’s sake, don’t take your wife and children along. By God! I apprehend that you may be martyrred as Hazrat Uthman [May Allah be pleased with him] was martyred and his wife and children remained passive spectators".
These were the explicit words of Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] and the amount of prestige he enjoyed in the eyes of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] is no secret.
Mufid comments: "Amir-ul-Mominin dined with Hazrat Hassan [May Allah be pleased with him] one night, with Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] the next night and with Hadhrat Abdullah bin Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] the night after.
He constantly suffered at the hands of the Shias who spared no opportunity to humiliate him. They tortured him so much that he was forced to confess: I wish Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] could exchange you with his men as dinar are exchanged with dirham. He should take ten of you and give me one of his men in exchange.
Abu Bakr Hisham also endorsed the views of Hazrat Ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] that the Shias were dishonest and traitorous. Therefore he should not fall into their trap. According to Masudi Abu Bakr bin Harith bin Hisham called on Hadhrat Hussain and said to him: O my cousin! I like to sympathize with you but I don’t know how to express my sympathies! Hadhrat Hussain replied: Abu Bakr! You are one of those who cold not be labeled dishonest or insincere. Therefore you are welcome to express your views. Abu Bakr said: your father was among the early Muslims who had embraced Islam. After entering the fold of Islam, he left behind a pleasant and favorable impression. He always launched a tempestuous attack (on the enemy). People attached great expectations to him and had evolved a consensus around him. When he marched towards Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him], every one had supported him except the Syrians. Even otherwise he enjoyed a better status than Muawiyyah [May Allah be pleased with him] but in spite of all this the people degraded and disgraced him. They were reluctant to wage Jehad; greed and lechery overpowered them. They not only prickled and annoyed him but also opposed him tooth and nail until he quaffed the cup of martyrdom. Then the treatment they extended to your elder brother after the death of your father is not hidden from you either. You are a direct witness to these happenings and yet you are ready to ho to them who opposed your father and brother. You want to fight against the residents of Syria and Iraq and the person who wields greater power than you and who is fully laced with arms. People fear him more and expect more form him. If come to know that you have set out towards them, they will bribe the people with wealth and goods. People are creatures of flesh. Those who have promised to help and support you will turn against you. Those who seem to love you at present are the ones who will insult you later. Therefore fear God and don’t go there.
Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] replied: O, my cousin! May god bless you! Your opinion has come the hard way. Whatever God has decided, must be implemented.
Abu Bakr said: O Abu Abdullah! We except reward from Allah. Then Abu Bakr, Harith bin Khalid bin ‘As bin Hisham Mukhzuma called on the governor of Makkah. They were reciting the verse
(There are so many advisers who are disobeyed and the one who can guess hidden things equates advice with trash and bilge).
As per Shia Scholars and Historians:
Masudi remarks that the news of Muslim’s arrival in Kufah had been passed on to Yazid also. He appointed Ubaidullah bin Ziyyad the governor of Kufah. Ubaidullah marched form Basrah at a hurricane speed and arrived in Kufah soon after noon. When he sneaked into Kufah, he was wearing a black tiara which covered up his face. He was riding a mule. People were expecting the arrival of Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him]. When Ibn Ziyyad saluted the people, they responded with slogans of welcome until he reached the palace. Noman bin Bashir was also inside the palace. He sat down near him and then turned his attention towards him. He asked: O son of the Messenger of Allah! what is your command? Why have you preferred my city to others? Ibn Ziyyad replied: you have been too much in the dark and then he drew aside the cover from his face. He recognized him and opened the gate. People exclaimed: he is Ibn Marjana. And then they threw pebbles at him. He ignored them and entered the palace. When Muslim heard the news of his arrival, he hid himself in the house of Hani’ bin Urwah Muradi. Ziyyad sent Muhammad bin Ashath bin Qais to fetch Hani’. When he was brought to Ziyyad, he asked him about Muslim, but he gave a blank reply. When Ibn Ziyyad spoke to him a little bluntly and ruthlessly’ Hani’ said" I am under obligation to your father Ziyyad and I would like to pay it back. Would you like a piece of good advice? Ibn Ziyyad adked: What is that? Hani’ replied: pack up your wealth and goods and make a straight dive for Syria along with your family and children before any harm comes to you: Now the right has arrived: one who has a better claim to rule than you has arrived. On hearing this, Ibn Ziyyad said: bring him closer to me. When he was brought closer, he applied the stick he was holding in his hand on his face with such force that his nose snapped and he receive a wound on his forehead. The flesh on his face flaked off and he borke the stick on his head and face. Hani’ tried to snatch a policeman’s swordbut someone pushed him and widened the distance between him and the sword. Hani’s companions kicked up a roar at the door, clamouring the death of their companion. Ibn Ziyyad threatened them and locked up Hani’ in a side-room. He sent out Qadhi Shrakh to tell the people that Hani’ had not been murdered Consequently, they left for their homes. When Muslim came to know that Ziyyad had maltreated Hani, he came out with the slogan "Ya Mansur" which was immediately taken up by the residents of Kufa and eighteen thousand people instantly rallied to his call. Muslim also marched towards Ibn Ziyyad but his companions locked him up inside the place. By evening not even a hundred people were left with him. When he realized that the people were slipping away, he moved towards the carved gate He had hardly reached the gate that he was left which only three companions; and when he came out of the gate, not a single man accompanied him. He was in a real quandary. He did not know where to go. There was no one to guide him. He climbed down his horse and roamed through the streets of Kufah in a state of utter stupe-faction. He was absolutely in a fix as he was stranded. He kept on walking until he reached the house of the slave-maid of Ashath bin Qais. He asked for water and she gave him some water to drink. When she asked him what had happened, he reeled off to her the entire gamut of events. She suddenly softened towards him and provided him shelter where he could hide himself. When his son came home, he found out that he was hiding there. Next morning he conveyed the news to Muhammad bin Ashath who conveyed it to Ibn Ziyyad. Ziyyad murdered him. He also murdered Hani’ bin Marwah when he was calling out the children of Murad for hilp. He was the chieftain of the tribe. When he rode on his horse, four thousands armoured people and eight thousands footmen accompanied him. If his enemy Banu Kandah had responded to his call, the number of his armoured companions would have risen to twenty thousands. But all of them displayed nauseating cowardice and chicken-heartedness and failed to heed the call of their leader.
Meeting with Hur in Qadsiyyah:
When Hadhrat Hussain arrived in Qadisiyyah, he happened to meet Hur Yazid Yamimi who asked him: O grandson of the Messenger! Where are you heading? He replied: I am heading towards this city. Hur informed him that Muslim had been martyred. He also gave him details of his torture and agony Muslim had suffered at the hands of the Kufis and the functionaries of the stated. He advised him to return as Kufa hardly held any hope of better prospects of him. He found Hur’s advice reasonable and pragmatic and decided to retrace his steps. But Muslims’ brother, out of righteous anger, became intransigent and swore not to return until they avenged the murder of his brother or received martyrdom in the process. Hadhrat Hussain replied there was hardly any point in living after they had all died.
Hadhrat Hussain’s address:
Under the circumstances, he gathered all the people and addressed them:
"O people! I have received horrifying news. Muslims bin Aqil, Hani’ bin ‘Urwah and Abdullah bin Yaqtar have embraced martyrdom. Our Shias have betrayed and humiliated us. Therefore any one who likes to leave us is welcome to do so. I’ll not be offended in the least".
When people heard his words, they started slinking on the right and on the left until, within a short span of time, only those people remained who had set off from Madinah with him. Those who had joined him on the way disappeared into thin air. Only a sprinkling of these people held on to the hem of his companionship. He had consciously uttered these words to off-set the false expectations of a party of Baddus who had joined his raks simply to live in clover in a town whose citizens obeyed the Imam unconditionally. Thus they looked forward to Kufah as veritable paradise where they would laze and roll away their time in utter luxury. They were the least inclined to face the ordeal of a rough and ready life. Hadhrat Hussain did not like to keep them in the dark by letting them in on the true nature of his sojourn.
Umor bin Loxan:
When the morning came, he commanded his companions to take their animals to water. The animal drank to their bladder’s content and they set out on their journey. When they reached Batn-i-‘Aqbah, they encamped there. He met Umro bin Lozan, a chief of Banu Akrimah. He asked him: which way are you heading? Hadhrat Hussain replied: I am heading towards Kufah. The chief said: I make you swear by God that you should go back. You are not going to Kufah but you are going to face the points of spears and the blades of swords. If these people, who have dashed off letters to you, side with you during the battle and furnish you with arms and weapons, it’ll be in the fitness of things for you to go there. But as things stand, the situation is replete with danger and your visit will be most inexpedient. He replied: O God’s creature! I am not unaware of it either but no one can prevail over divine plans.
Departure towards Kufah:
Then he marched towards Kufah. On the way he chanced to meet a person who informed him about the betrayal and cowardice of the Kufis and told him bluntly that he did not have a single supporter and helper. He added that in-stead of helping him, the Kufis might turn against him.
When the armed forces of Kufah intercepted him, he realized that the actual situation clashed with the promises of help and the assurances of support with which their letters were cluttered and clogged. They had taken a complete volte face. He asked one of his companions to bring him the two bags containing their letters. He brought the bags and poured out their contents right in front of them.
At Karbala:
The Kufis disowned both the letters and the messages. He continued the march till he landed in Karbala. When massive armies rallied against Hadhrat Hussain, he was convinced that there was no shelter for him. He raised his hands for prayer: O Allah! arbitrate between us and this nation who had invited us to help us but who have waged war against us.
Hadhrat Hussain fought bravely and spiritedly until he quaffed the cup of martyrdom. The people who fought against him on the battlefield or who put him to martyrdom were all Kufis. There was not a single Syrian who had taken part in the fray.
The Shia historian Yaqubi—mentions that when the Kufis martyed him, they plundered his goods and belongings and escorted the ladies to Kufah. When the ladies entered Kufa, the women of that town came out of their houses screaming and beating there chests. Hadhrat Ali bin Hussain remarked: if they are mourning for us, then who has murdered us?
Baghdadi observes: The Rafidihis of Kufah are notorious for their meanness and treachery. These two flaws have become almost proverbial. It is generally stated: "Abkhil min Kufi" (that person even beats the Kufis in spite) and "Aghdar min Kufi" (that person is even more treacherous than the Kufis).
Betrayal of Kufis:
artyrdom of Hadhrat Ali, they submitted allegiance to his son Hadhrat Hassan, but when he set off to fight against Hadhrat Muawiyyah, they betrayed him at Sabat Madain. Sana J’afi forced him down his horse with a spear-blow at his thigh. This episode was one of the reasons which compelled Hadhrat Hassan to patch up with Hadgrat Muawiy-yah.
The second treachery was that they scribbled letters to Hadhrat Hussain bin Ali and invited him to visit Kufah. Their express purpose was to seek his support against Yazid bin Muwaiyyah. He was deceived by their overt intentions and set out towards them. When he landed in Karbala, the Kufis betrayed him and, instead of supporting him, they supported Ubaidullah bin Ziyyad. The result was that Hadhrat Hussain and his kinsmen died on the sunbaked sand of Karbala in a state of abject misery and utter helplessness. The fourth person they played the hoax on was Yazid bin Ali bin Hussain bin abi Talib. They supported him against Yousaf bin Umar, but snapped out of their allegiance to him, and in the thick of battle, handed over Yazid bin Ali to his enemy who put him to death.
These were the Shias! the Shias of Ali, Hussan and Hussain and this is the treatment they had extended to their Imams and forefathers. I have deliberately discussed it at length because Shiaism underwent a radical change after this accident. The change related to the new complexion they put on the hoodwink the people. Previously, it was a purely political group: but now it donned a religion mask. They had actually supported Hadhrat Ali and his progeny against Hadhrat Muawiyyah and Banu Umayyah. Wellhausen has clearly stated in reference to the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain and the subsequent revenge taken by Mukhtar that Shiaism at that time dressed itself in new robes in Kufah. It had its roots in Iraq and was restricted to political alignments only. At first there was no distinction between the elite and the non-elite and they stood in the same row though the elite acted as their leaders. But when dangers surrounded them on all sides, they turned over a new leaf and softened their attitude as a result of the persuasion of Amwis in Syria. Then their services were utilized against the Shia movements and this was the time when they detached themselves from the Shia of Ali which resulted in a further circumscription of the Shia objectives. Later on, Shiaism graduated towards its tranformation as a religious group though they had a standing political dispute with the leading members of various tribes. After the martyrdom of distinguished people, it transformed itself into a specific movement. The helpersand supporters of Sulaiman bin Sard were against the movement of the distinguished personages of different tribes. Mukhtar was, of course, the first person who parasitically instilled new life into the movement. He included the Mawalis in the movement as well. Their inclusion was relatively easier on account of their inclination towards religious matters. They also virtually ignored national and communal prejudice though the Arabs still practised it. Similarly, these people (the Mawalis) disliked those who harboured any malice against the Arab chieftains.
When the association of the Shias grew deeper with these insurgents, they were stripped of their Arab and national identity. Though the basis of their association was Islam it was not early Islam but and entirely different brand.
Now Shiaism started assimilating alien views and beliefs. Besides, it split up into different groups and sects. Each person who entertained malice against Islam drew his nourishment from Shiaism. Thus Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and Hindus, who were keen to intromit their views into the speculative framework of Islam, relied on the crutches of Shiaism. Besides, people who wanted to stabilize their particular religion and rebel against their incompetent rulers, found solace in the seductive innovations of Shiaism. All of them utilized their spurious love of the house of Ali as a label for the completion of their nefarious interests. The Jews injected the concept of return of resurrection into the body-frame of Shiaism and the Shias had declared the fire of hell unlawful for their community. And if any Shia was thrown into hell, he would stay there only for a few days. They actually parrotted out the views of the Jews who believed that they would stay in the flames of hell only for a few days. Under the influence of Christian beliefs they held that Imam enjoyed with Him. Imam is the converging point of divine and non-divine attributes. Prophethood is interminable. A Prophet is the receptacle of divinity. He develops an inalienable union with the God-head and their separation becomes impossible. Shiaism also encouraged and publicized the concepts cherished by Brahmins, philosophers and pre-Islamic Zorostrians became the raison d,tre of Shiasim. Some of the Persians also put on the mask of Shiaism and revved up their activities against Banu Umayyah. The fact was that they loathed the Arab rule and wanted to strengthen their own rule.
Maqrizi observes that the Persians had an edge over all other nations. They over-estimated themselves at least in their own eyes. This is attested by the fact that they attached to themselves meliorative epithets while they conferred on others pejorative labels. They strongly believed in the master-slave dichotomy, reserving the first half of the polarity for themselves and distributing freely the second half among the people of the world. When the Arabs defeated them, though ironically, the regarded them the least dangerous, it had a devastating impact on Persians and they magnified their humiliation beyond all proportion. Therefore on various occasions, they floated the balloon of their conspiracy against Islam but each time the Muslims, by the grace of God, pricked it and it burst in the mid air scattering hapazardly its synthetic shards. When they had been frequently frustrated in direct and overt confrontations, they found it more effective and convenient to rely on indirect and underhand strategies. Therefore, some of them slipped into Islamic garbs and under the pretext of love of the Ahl-i-Bait and by openly stressing the innocence of Hadhrat Ali, they attached the Shias towards themselves and ultimately derailed them by taking them through different routes.
The Shias splintered into three sects after the martyrdom of Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him] as has been mentioned by Shia Scholar Nau Bakhti. The details of these sects are as follows:
Kaisaniyyah:
After the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain a group of his friends and supporters was simply dazed by the whirl of circumstances. They had witnessed two precedents one after the other. The first precedent was established by the conduct of Hadhrat Hussain. Both of them held the stature of Imams for them. Therefore they were at a loss to evaluate their conduct. On the one hand was Hadhrat Hassan who, inspite of the overwhelming number of his companions, had refused to battle with Hadhrat Muawiyyah and offered him the reins of power on a platter; on the other hand was Hadhrat Hussain who, inspite of the heavy odds against him, had refused to knuckle under and preferred to resist the force of tyranny and oppression. Hadhrat Hussain clearly knew that the forces of Yazid out-numbered his men but he did not bend under their numerical pressure and embraced martyrdom along with his companions on the battle field. He obviously preferred the chess board of war to the negotiation table of humiliating peace. If Hadhrat Hassan was justified in his stand, the conduct of Hadhrat Hussain was unjustified either as he felt more crippled and handicapped compared with his brother. And if Hadhrat Hussian’s action was justified it would automatically invalidate the action of Hadhrat Hassan. on account of this fundamental complication, the Imamat of the two brothers because suspect in their eyes. Some of them squirmed out of the commitment to their Imamat and started piping the tunes called out by other people. But the rest of Hadhrat Hussain’s companions clung to their faith in his Imamt as they had done in the past.
After Hadhrat Hussain, these people split into three gorups. One of the groups believed in the Imamat of the thesis that after Hadhrat Hassan and Hussain there wan nobody who could be closer to Amir-ul-Mominin than Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah as Hadhrat Hussain was more entitled to the Imamat after the death of Hadhrat Hassan, Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah is most deserving of the Imamat. Thus he is our Imam.
The second group believes that Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah is Imam Mehdi, and Hadhrat Ali has predicted about him. No one among the Ahl-i-Bait can either oppose him or deny his Imamat nor can he draw his sword out of the sheath without his permission and then handed over the Khilafat to him in the same way. Similarly, Hadhrat Hussain’s war with Yazid also carried his sanction. If Hadhrat Hassan and Hussain had acted without a green signal form him, they would have been derailed and destroyed because any one who opposed Muhammad bin Haniyyah was an ingidel and a disbeliever. It was Muhammad who had appointed Mukhtar bin abi Ubaid as the governor of Iraq and Syria and ordered him to avenge the blood of hussain by killing his murderes, and to dig them out form their hiding places. He also name him "Kaisan" on account of his intelligence and his followers are called Mukhtariyyah or Kaisaniyyah.
Kaisaniyyah came into the limelight after the martyrdom of Hadhrat Ali and later on acquired the label of Mukhtariyyah. A number of Shia off-shoots and sub-group sprang out of Kaisaniyyah: for example, Karabiyyah, Harbiyyah, Razarmiyyah, Bayaniyyah, Rawindiyyah, Abul-Mulammiyyah, Hasmiyyah, Haritiyyah and many other sects.
The common denominator among these sects is the Imamat of Muhammad bin Hanifiyyah and the net-work of beliefs churned out by Abdullah bin Saba. All these sects believe in back-biting, resurrection and transmigration. One of their poyes says:
(The Imams of Quraish are the supporters of right: they are fout and all of them are of equal stature)
(One of them is Hadhrat Ali, and the three are his sons who are grandsons of the Messenger of Allah and all the people know them)
(One of the grandsons is a paragon of virtue and piety and the other disappeared at Karbala)
(and the third grandson will not die until he leads the armies with a flag fluttering in front)
(They have vanished into the lap of luxury (Ridhwal) and will remain invisible for a certain period. They have honey and water at their dispsoal)
Baghadadi in his book "Al-Firq Bain-ul-Firq" has answered these verses. A Kaisani poet says:
(O people! Go to the man who lives the valley of Ridhwa, visit his house and pay homage to him)
(Can any damage be done to this group from our sides who made him the ruler and conferred on him the title of Khalifah and imam)?
(They waged war with all the residents of the earth on his account though he lives at a distance of seventy years of travel)
(He lives in seclusion in the heart of the valley of Ridhwa and the angels chat him up)
(Ibn Khaula has not tasted death nor has the earth hidden his bones)
(On account of his virtues, he is furnished with the best residence and company, and his companions treat him with tremendous regard). Baghdadi has retaliated in the language.
(You have wasted a whole life span waiting for a person whose bones are hidden in the earth)
(There is not a single Imam in the valley of Ridhwa whom the angels chat up)
(He has neither honey nor water at his disposal, nor any other syrup that could substitute for food)
(The son of Khaula tasted death as his father had tasted it)
(If social superiority and religious piety were the guarantee of an eternal life, then the Prophet (peace be upon him) would be blessed with immortality.)
It is noteworthy that Imamat had been transferred to Banu Abbas from Kaisaniyyah. Some of its sects believed that the Imamat had passed on to Muhammad bin Ali bin Abbas from Abu Hashim bin Muhammad bin Hanifiyyah, from him to his son Ibrahim, form Ibrahim to Abul Abbas and form Abdul Abbas to Abu J’afar Mansur who was the founder of the Abbasiyyah dynasty.
Of all the Shia sects, the sect of Mukhtar bin abi Ubaid Thaqafi enjoyed the best reputation and attached the largest number of followers. It gained the widest circulation because it came out with the unequivocal call to avenge the blood of Hadhrat Hussain. Kashi has reported in his book "Rijal" through Muhammad bin Masud, Ibn abi Ali Khiza’, Khalid bin Yazid Umri and Hassan bin Zaid, It is attributed to Umar bin Ali that Mukhtar dispatched twenty thousands dinar to Ali bin Hussain which he accepted and repaired his own house and the house of ‘Aqil bin abi Talib that were in a delpidated condition. Later, he sent him forty thousands dinar which he declined to accept because he had by that time articulated his beliefs.
Mukhtar was the person who persuaded people to acknowledge the Imamat of Muhammad bin Haniyyah. Those who responded to his invitation were called Mukhtariyyah or Kaisaniyyah, by virtue of which the surname of "kaisan" was appended to his name. Some people suggest that the surname Kaisan was conferred on him on him by Maula bin abi Talib. He prompted him to avenge the murder of Hussain and he also identified the murderers to facilitate his vengeance. He was his confidant but also had an edge over him. Whenever he came to know that an enemy of Hussain was hiding in some house, he would rush to the place, raze it to the ground and kill all the living things in it. The dilapidated houses of Kufah were reduced to a shambles by him. As a matter of fact, he acquired the status of proverbial figure among the Kufis. Whenever they found someone in a state of misery and penury, they at once imputed it to the evil act of Abu Umrah. A poet wrote:
(He is the devil. You can’t except anything good form him. H will provoke you to rebellion but he will not dole out even a crumb of food.)
"It is generally stated about Mukhtar that he is a magician (Tabri Vol. 2, P. 730), that he is anti-Christ (Tabri, P. 686). He is generally dubbed as a liar. All these epithets were showered on him not because he was a self-styled spokesman of Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah, but because he claimed himself to be a prophet thought he had done it only surreptitiously. But some of his acts clearly betrayed his intentions and reflected his prophetic pretensions. When he spoke, he gave the impression as if he was sitting in the presence of the Lord and knew the hidden secrets of the universe. His linguistic versatility and eloquence also helped in the projection of his image as an extraordinary person. His main object was to impress the people and he achieved a reasonable measure of success objective, but the majority of people who were impressed by his objective, but the majority of people who were impressed by his rhetoric and tactics generally belonged to the illiterate masses or were know for their stupidity. However, as his reputation increased, the strategies of the Muslims grew more subtle and comprehensive to beat him at his own game. And when he was finally defeated, the whole world turned against him, and after his murder his memories fell prey to the arrows of convention and ritual. In the initial phase he was condemned alright but no attempt was made to disfigure him. But in the later phase a regular campaign of character-assassination was launched against him which created a distorted impression of his personality on the minds of the future generations: The attempt at disfigurement was motivated mainly by spite and jealousy. It was he who had ordered the flight of white pigeons. He had also invented the concept of "Bada" about God to justify his whimsical sides form one religion to the other and stripped his followers of any right to criticise his religious jumps and shuffles. Tabri’s account has played a considerable role in his projections along these lines.
If we want an answer to the question whether he was a genuine prophet or an imposter, we’ll have to first established the fact whether he was sincere or in-sincere in his efforts. It seems he used prophethood as an instrument or his socio-political elevation and the same argument is applicable to the modus vivendi adopted by Muhammad. It should also be kept in mind that islam is a political religion and each Muslims prophet is justified in elevating his political status. But even more pernicious and dangerous is the fact that he camouflaged himself behind an imaginary personality and nothing was know about him or perhaps no attempt was made to probe into his reality. Therefore it is certain that there was come flaw in his sincerity, on this count at least. It is another story that the circumstances did not permit him to rely on a specific appellation but packaged himself in abstract terms as the nucleus of truth. Mukhrat had derived his beliefs from Sabaism, an innovatory sect (designed mainly to scoop away the concrete form the foundation of Islam). Sabaism held tremendous appeal especially for the elite of various tribes, and under its influence, the Shias had adopted an obscene and aggressive posture against the Sunnis which brought into the limelight Shia-Sunni differences. Sabaism is also known as Kaisaniyyah. Kaisan was simultaneously the chief of Mawalis and Sabais which obviously leads one to the conclusion that Mawalis and the Shias were one and the same.Banking on this conclusion, some people are inclined to believe that Shiasm has its religious roots in Iran because majority of Kufh Mawalis hailed form Iran.
The other beliefs held by these people are recorded at length in other books bearing on the issue. Here the beliefs are discussed keeping in view the constraints of space and the restraints of relevance. Since these issues have a built-in propensity to slide out of hand, every effort relatively larger space to this Shia group and its ring leader because it is a legacy of Sabaism. The Shias who appeared on the scene later derived their views and beliefs from this nucleus sect. Consequently, true Shiaism started melting away and the early Shias were on the wane. They soon went out of circulation because they could not cosmeticize their wares. The progeny of Ali and Banu Hashim topped the list of the genuine Shias who were receding fast into the limbo of oblivious. The Sabai views were no invested with sufficient strength to elbow them out, and had overtly aggressive designs towards all the genuine Shias. But the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain dampened their devilish enthusiasm by creating a soft corner in the hearts of people for Hadhrat Ali and his children. Those who demanded revenge for the blood of Hussain felt a sense of deep frustration. Their blood simply boiled when they reflected on the murder of Hussain. They wanted to dismantle the entire administrative structure that carried the stigma of Hussain’s blood. Some of them denigrated everything that was even remotely connected with the Government; they openly condemned and fluted their beliefs and edicts. When these people realized that the rulers respected Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, companion of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the wives of the Prophet, they disaffiliated themselves from them and started lambasting the pious personalities. They did not condemn them out of principle or because they had any difference of opinion with them. It was out of sheer stubbornness and a sense of deep-rooted indignation that they declaimed any statement or slogan that rose from the pulpit because, in their purblindness, they equated the voice of the priest with the voice of the administrators. It is indeed a reflection of their radicalism that had seeped into their hearts and minds as a consequence of the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain. Therefore Allama Zahadi and Ibn Taimiy have stated that all the early Muslims shared on unqualified convergence of opinion on the superiority of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. Even the Shias of Ale held the same conviction. Ibn Batah attributes it to his Shaikh who is more popularly known as Abul Abbas bin Masruq (the tradition is filtered through Muhammad bin Hamid, Jaria, Suffiyan and Abduallh bin Ziyyad bin Haider that Abu Ishaq Sabi’i came to Kufah. Shimr bin Atiyyah persuaded us to call on him. When we went over to see him, he said to us: when I left Kufa, there was not a single person who doubted the superiority of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. Now when I arrived here, I have found people talking against them. By God! I fail to guess what are they talking about!
Zamura quotes Said bin Hassan who is reported to have heard from Layth bin Salim: I have lived in the period of early Shias and I know from my experience that they did not prefer anyone to Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar in status.
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (through Suffiyan bin ‘Uyyinah and Khalid bin Salmah) attributes it to Masruq who reportedly laid special stress on the love and status of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar and raised it to the level of a tradition. It should be noted that Hadhrat Masruq is considered one of the distinguished Kufi successors of the companions of the Propher (peace be upon him). Hadhrat Taus has also endorsed him. Hadhrat Masud, too, expresses similar views. It was obviously binding on the early Shias to show respect to these pious personages because Ali’s words have come down to us with unbroken continuity that Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Umar are the most superior persons in the Muslim Ummah after the Prophet (peace be upon him). This tradition is frequently and repeatedly attributes to him, and as a stamp of its certification, it exits in eighty authentic versions.
Imam Bokhari has supported it in his "Sahih" with special reference to his Hadith "Ba-Tariq Hamadaniyyin" (the people who were Hadhrat Ali’s closest associates). Rather, he himself often expresses:
(If I am serving as a porter at any one of the gates of Paradise, I would tell the Hamadains to enter Paradise sagely and fearlessly). Imam Bokhari attributes a tradition to Suffiyan Thauri who is a Hamadiani and he has ascribed it to Muhammad bin Haniyyah. He said: I asked my father who was the vest person after the Prophet (peace be upon him)?
Hadhrat Ali: don’t you know my son!
Muhammad: No, I don’t.
Hadhrat Ali: Abu Bakr is the best man.
Muhammad: And who after him?
Hadhrat Ali: after him, Hadhrat Umar.
Since it was a person to-person dialogue between Hadhrat Ali and his son, it would not be fair to assume that Hadhrat Ali was dissimulating at that time and trying to hide his true feelings in the interest of expediency. And then the reporter also happens to be his own son who proclaimed it form the pulpit to obviate the possibility of any skeptical reaction to the truth of its contents. Hadhrat Ali himself openly stated that if any person was brought before him who declared him superior to Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar he would flog him the way he flogged a back—biter and a transgressor.
Muhibbuddin Khatib has noted in the margin of "Al-Muntaqa" that it provides a chronological line of demarcation to isolate early Shiaism from later Shiaism. Abu Ishaq Sab’i was a distinguished scholar of Kufah. He was born during the Caliphate of Hadhrat Uthman and three years before his martyrdom. He died in 127 A.H. He was only a child during Hadhrat Ali’s tenure as Caliph. He himself says that his father lifted him and he saw Hadhrat Ali delivering the sermon. At that time both his head and beard were grey. If we ever find out the exact date he left Kufah, we could come closer to what actually happened in that period in which the Shias of Kufag were Alvis and, like their Imam, believed unconditionally in the superiority of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar. We would also come to know when did the Shias actually oppose Hadhrat Ali on this issue: It is very strange that both the Khwarjis and the Abbasis clung to the old belief and honoured their commitment with Hadhrat Ali but the Shais in the very first century disobeyed their own Imam by raising their promises in the last days of Abu Ishaq Sabi’i.
The change brought a radical shift in Shia beliefs. At first they had challenged only the peripheral issues. But now they questioned the very basis of their beliefs on account of their hatred of the rulers and the administrators. In their fury they identified the beliefs with those of the administrators. They forgot that the convictions were divinely oriented while the rulers had their human flaws and short-comings and their weaknesses did not nullify the validity of the convictions. But men do get disoriented and slide off the rails in a state of anger. And the Shias were no exception the worst aspect of their detracking was that they raised a mere prejudice into a philosophy which could neither by substantiated by convention nor bolstered by logic. They became so splenetic that they started denigrating the Quran, which is the main bulwark of the faithful against the rampancy of evil, and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) which is an explanation and clarification of the Quranic injunctions.
After the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussain, the Shias fell a frequent prey to al sorts of obscenities and vulgarities which often assault a faithless community or a group of people who consciously and wilfully opt for the evil way. The early Shias felt chessed off by their evil practices and tried to raise barricades against the proliferation of their devilish views but their efforts proved futile. However, when they realized that the Shias had reached a point of no return and were absolutely disinclined to give up their sinful way of life, they bade farewel to Shiaism. Their decision to give a parting kick to Shiaism was not an emotional decision. It was a gall-out of their conviction that the Shias could not wriggle out of the quagmire of corruption into which they had suck on account of greed and lechery. When Mukhtar had settled himself comfortably at the steering – wheel of the Honda Accord of Shiaism, Ibrahim refused to join him as an accomplice in dismantling the fundamentals of Islam. This refusal has been attested to by Wellhausen, the distinguished German orientalist. Ibrahim bin Ashtar was the head of the Nakha off-shoot of the Mizhif tirbe. He was a shred and highly opinionative person. Like his father, he was a sincere admirer of Hadhrat Ali. He had good relations with Muhammad bin Haniyyah, though he did not like the brand of Shiaism that was in vogue in those days. He neither associated himself with Sulaiman Sard nor did he display any interests in Mukhtar’s improvisations. The other people also failed to rope him in. At last he received a letter from Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah in which he had been asked unequivocally to acknowledge the personality of Mukhtar bin Ubaid. But what really terrified him was the fact that Ibn Hanifiyyah had used the by-name "Mehdi" in his letter, though, as far as he knew, he had never attached any extra epithet or label to his orighinal name. This unexpected change led him belief that the letter had been forged. But the messengers who had brought the letter confirmed its genuineness. Later Mukhtar himself attested to its authenticity. However, two persons attracted his attention, presumably for their own safety. They were ‘Amir bin Sharahil Shobi—reporter, Jurist and Muhaddith and his father Sharahil. He drew Amir aside and asked him about the reliability of the witnesses who had attested to the authenticity of the letter. Amir told him that they were among the distinguished people of Egypt and Arabia, and therefore they were generally considered trustworthy and dependable. In view of the reputation they enjoyed, they could not have possibly doctored the evidence. (Tabri 612/2). Ibn Ashtar asked them to write down their names. He consequently wrote a brief review bearing on these events. When he was convinced about the unadulterated contents of the letter, he extended it the honour it deserved and reserved himself for the service of Mukhtar bin abi Ubaid.
But when Mukhtar took a somerasult and dabbled unashamedly in the propagation of his latent Sabai views, which lambasted the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and preached open enmity against the Prophetic views and way of life, people twirled their whiskers against him. They condemned him for his heretic and blasphemous ideas. They accused him of usurpation of power. They said that he had installed himself into the highest executive seat without the consent and command of Ibn Hanigiyyah and he and his Sabaism had introduced an innovation into the body-politic of Islam which was mainly designed to debunk and disown their illustrious and pious forefathers.
These elderly people took control of the important centres of Kufah. They dumped Mukhtar into the palace and disconnected him with the world outside. He tried to bamboozle them with a cleverly devised plan. He suggested that two independent delegations should be dispatched to Ibn Haniyyah for investigating the state affairs. One would represent him and the other delegation would represent them. The delegates would find out whether Ibn Haniyyah had extended his support to him or not. But his plan did not materialize and he failed to pull a rabbit out of his magic bag.
Wellhausen adds: "Mukhtar was at the zenith of power, but the pits of destruction also lay before him. The old Arab Shias did not trust him. That is why they had disposed him and quarantined him from power".
False Story of Persian Princes Sheher Bano w/o Hazrat Hussein [May Allah be pleased with him]
Details are sufficient to establish a profile of the changes that appeared in the conduct of the early Shias and their later manifestation. After the change, Shiaism was trimmed down to a set of obscene and vulgar exercises as it was drained of its galvanizing spirit. They believed that the white pigeons were angels. They also held strange beliefs about prophethood and the unknown. A new wave of dissension hit the Shias after the murder of Mukhtar. One of the sects came out with the proposal that Ali bin Hussain was their Imam. He had two patronyms: one was Abu Muhammad and the other was Abu Badr, which was relatively more popular. This sect clung to their faith in his Imamat till his death in 94 A.H. in the month of Muharram. He was fifty years old when he died. He was born in 39 A.H. His mother was known as Salafah but was called Jahan Shah before she acquired the status of a slave-maid. She was the daughter of Yazdjard bin Shahr yar bin Kisra Abr Wiz bin Hurmuz. Yazdjard was the last king of Iran.
No comments:
Post a Comment