The Two Virtues for Which the “Envoy of Husayn” Gave His Life to Preserve
In an article examining why Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, did not halt his journey toward Kufa after hearing the news of Muslim ibn Aqil’s martyrdom, al-Naba al-Azim explored important dimensions of the character of Imam Husayn’s envoy, peace be upon him, in the city of Kufa.
Muslim: God’s Envoy of Light and the Vanguard of the Armies of Light
“The gardens and orchards have turned green, the fruits have ripened, and the streams have overflowed; therefore, if you wish, join the army that has been prepared for you. Peace be upon you.”
What beautiful words they employed to invite Imam Husayn, peace be upon him! What an engaging report they gave of Kufa’s condition! They described Kufa’s political circumstances to Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, as though everyone in Kufa thirsted for right and truth, the gardens of devotion to truth had flourished, and the hearts of Kufa’s people were overflowing with love for right and truth. It was as though an army devoted to truth stood ready to emerge and rise up. It was as though those inviting Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, to Kufa in such terms had awaited Mu'awiyah’s death for years. Those who summoned Sayyid al-Shuhada to Kufa, to rule and the caliphate, in such language should not merely have been devotees of Abu Abd Allah, peace be upon him; their life records should also have been filled with resistance to and repudiation of the Banu Umayyah.
The Umayyads Invited Sayyid al-Shuhada to Kufa!
But the truth was otherwise. Those who, in a poetic manner, portrayed themselves and Kufa as ready for Sayyid al-Shuhada were not people from whom one could expect allegiance to Imam Husayn, peace be upon him—let alone an invitation for him to oppose the Banu Umayyah. All those who wrote this letter to Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, shared one trait: every one of them had bloodied hands in the killing of Hujr ibn Adi (1). All of them testified against Hujr ibn Adi before the Umayyad governor, and their testimony led to the killing of Hujr ibn Adi.
Yes! A group among those who wrote to His Eminence Sayyid al-Shuhada, peace be upon him, were devoted adherents of Banu Umayyah—the very people through whom Mu'awiyah's vile policies of hostility toward Ali ibn Abi Talib, peace be upon him, were implemented and carried out. Another group consisted of the Kharijites. (2) Therefore, one cannot rely on the outward appearance of their letters. How can it be accepted that the followers of Banu Umayyah rose up against Banu Umayyah? Followers whose pockets were filled with Umayyad coins in return for their devoted service to Banu Umayyah.
The Killing of Imam Husayn, Peace Be Upon Him: An Umayyad Conspiracy
It is therefore evident that a conspiracy was at work. If one pays attention to the letter of Imam Husayn's brother, peace be upon him, to Yazid, the Kufans' invitation can no longer be regarded as an ordinary invitation. The letter of Imam Husayn's brother makes it clear that Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, did not leave Medina and then Mecca of his own choosing.
When Ibn al-Zubayr became secure in Mecca, proclaimed his caliphate, and began taking allegiance from the people, Ibn Abbas and other prominent figures did not pledge allegiance to him. Yazid wrote a letter to Ibn Abbas, thanking him and writing to him: “We shall not forget this favor of yours.” In reply, Ibn Abbas wrote to Yazid: “O Yazid! ... By God, my not pledging allegiance to Ibn al-Zubayr was not out of affection for you. Hold back, and do not do me any favor, for you will see no favor from me...... I will never forget that you pursued Husayn, peace be upon him, until that noble one went from the sanctuary of the Messenger of God to Mecca. You drove him into flight so that he would leave the Hijaz and enter the land of Iraq.”
These words point to subtle and unspoken aspects of Ashura—matters left unspoken that arise from facts and points of such delicacy and historical significance. Ibn Abbas continues: “You drove Imam Husayn, peace be upon him, out of the sanctuary of the Messenger of God, blessings and peace be upon him and his family, through fear, intimidation, and anxiety.... The blood of my family drips from your sword, and I must take revenge.” (3)
Umayyad Intimidation Forced Imam Husayn to Leave the Hijaz
Thus, in any case, Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) was compelled to leave Medina because of the policies of Banu Umayyah. It was not the letter of the people of Kufa that caused Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) to depart from Medina; nor was his departure from Mecca and the land of the Hijaz, on the basis of that letter, a matter of his own choosing. Rather, it was the intimidation and fear instilled by Banu Umayyah that compelled him to leave the Hijaz.
Whether Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) came to Karbala or not, he would have been martyred at the hands of Banu Umayyah. Yet Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) transformed this Umayyad threat into a historic confrontation between truth and falsehood—a confrontation between the two camps of truth and falsehood that would, until the Day of Resurrection, shatter the darkness and oppression of the adherents of Saqifah through the light of its guidance.
Muslim ibn Aqil: Forerunner of the Historic Battle Between Truth and Falsehood
Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) sent Muslim ibn Aqil to Kufa so that the proof might be completed against those who had written the letters; and, on the other hand, so that the conspiracy devised by the Umayyads to eradicate truth might be transformed into a confrontation between the camps of truth and falsehood—a confrontation in which the darkness of the Umayyad sedition was broken. Muslim ibn Aqil was therefore the forerunner of the historic battle between the camps of truth and falsehood. Muslim was not merely Imam Husayn’s (peace be upon him) envoy to Kufa; he was his messenger to all history, and a manifestation of the historical Imamate(4) of the Master of Martyrs (peace be upon him). The character of Muslim ibn Aqil, his movement, and his Alid-like conduct are among the first lessons that the school of Ashura offers to the future historical followers of Imam Husayn (peace be upon him).
Kufa Under Umayyad Siege
Muslim (peace be upon him) received the people’s pledge of allegiance in the city of Kufa and informed Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) of this pledge. Still unaware of Kufa’s future and the subsequent Umayyad conspiracies, he summoned the Master of Martyrs (peace be upon him) to Kufa in a letter, for at first he found Kufa obedient to Imam Husayn (peace be upon him). But the situation suddenly changed, and the cunning and deception of Banu Umayyah became so evident that he was not even able to report Kufa’s new circumstances to the Imam. Kufa came under the siege of Umayyads who, at the beginning of Muslim ibn Aqil’s arrival, had themselves been among those pledging allegiance to him; yet when Ubayd Allah entered Kufa, they revealed their true faces. Some who were not Umayyads were nevertheless deceived by the satanic awe projected by the Umayyads, and the glitter of their gold so dazzled their eyes that they could no longer see the truth. Kufa was besieged by the Umayyads: the true Shi‘a and devotees of Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) were either martyred or imprisoned, and ultimately Muslim ibn Aqil was captured through cunning and deception after a fierce battle and was brutally martyred.
Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) continued on his way upon hearing the news of Muslim’s martyrdom
A noteworthy point deserving attention is that the news of the martyrdom of Muslim ibn Aqil reached Sayyid al-Shuhada while he was en route to Kufa. Yet, despite the martyrdom of Muslim (peace be upon him), Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) continued on his way. Although any ordinary person, upon hearing the news of Muslim’s martyrdom, could have understood the people of Kufa’s breach of allegiance, Sayyid al-Shuhada did not alter his course toward Medina or Mecca. This was because, had he returned to Medina or Mecca, there would have been no safety for that lonely Imam; and undoubtedly, he would have been martyred in Mecca and Medina as well (5). Thus, the confrontation of Imam Husayn (peace be upon him) was not a struggle to obtain the caliphate; rather, Imam Husayn was moving toward shattering the darkness of Saqifa—a darkness that had so engulfed the universe that it could be broken only through the martyrdom of the Wali of God. In this confrontation between light and darkness, destiny was such that, through his martyrdom, the light of God would prevail over the darkness of Saqifa. Therefore, to analyze Karbala as an unsuccessful attempt to attain rule and caliphate is a grave error.
Muslim ibn Aqil did not enter Satan’s game
Through his movement in Kufa, Muslim ibn Aqil demonstrated to history the distinction between light and darkness. He entered a city whose ruler, years earlier, had been the Commander of the Faithful, Ali ibn Abi Talib. During that brief time, his life did not depart from the conduct of the Commander of the Faithful. Like his noble uncle, Imam Ali (peace be upon him), he did not resort to deception and guile. Likewise, like Ali (peace be upon him), he did not exploit the people’s ignorance, nor did he establish a government founded on assassination and betrayal. For he was the representative of an Imam who guides history, and resorting to guile and deception through him would mean legitimizing trickery and deceit. Had Ubayd Allah been destroyed at his hands through guile and deception, he would have prepared an army for the master of the free people of the world whose foundation was not knowledge and awareness, but satanic games.
In reply to one who asked him why he had not suddenly attacked Ubayd Allah and sent him unexpectedly to Hell, Muslim ibn Aqil said: «خصلتان أمّا أحدهما: فکراهة هانئ أن یقتل فی داره.و أمّا الاخرى: فحدیث حدّثه الناس عن النبی صلّى اللّه علیه و آله و سلّم: «إنّ الإیمان قید الفتک، و لا یفتک مؤمن». He said that he had not killed him for two qualities and considerations: first, Hani disliked that he be killed in his house; and second, a hadith that people narrate from the Messenger of God, may God bless him and his family and grant them peace: “Faith restrains assassination, and a believer does not assassinate.” Hani replied to Muslim: « أما و اللّه لو قتلته لقتلت فاسقا فاجرا کافرا غادرا! و لکن کرهت أن یقتل فی داری»! (6) By God, had you killed him, you would have killed a corrupt, wicked, unbelieving, treacherous man; but I disliked that he be killed in my house.
Attention to the two qualities identified by Muslim is of great importance: two qualities that have always existed in the front of truth and may indeed be among its defining features, and two qualities whose opposite has always characterized the front of falsehood.
Preserving the Sanctity of the Guest
First, Hani was unwilling to have the guest in his home killed. Muslim, too, did not draw his sword for the same reason: firstly, the sanctity of the guest holds a special place in the culture of the Noble Prophet of Islam and the Ahl al-Bayt of purity and infallibility; secondly, admitting a guest into one’s home implicitly means granting him safety—that is, the host’s home is regarded as a secure place for the guest. Thus, killing him in Hani’s house would have meant violating these two sanctities, contrary to the conduct of the Messenger of God.
Muslim’s adherence to God’s religion—namely, the tradition of the Prophet and his Household—prevented him from killing such a wicked and unbelieving man. Yet the camp of falsehood acted otherwise. The people of Medina, together with the usurpers, attacked the house of the daughter of a Prophet who had been a guest of that city, while the people of Medina had pledged to support him and his family. The Umayyads martyred Muslim even though they themselves had invited him and he was the guest of the Kufans. Those hospitable Kufans even withheld water from the Master of the Martyrs and his innocent children, and “how gladly they upheld the sanctity of Karbala’s guest!”
Preserving the Prophet’s Tradition
The second trait that kept Muslim from acting to kill Ubayd Allah was that the Prophet had said, “A believer does not engage in assassination or deceit.” Thus, even in the most difficult circumstances, Muslim ibn Aqil did not resort to assassination, in order to demonstrate that the Prophet’s command and his tradition take precedence over everything and every expediency, and that he was not willing to abandon the Prophet’s tradition at any cost. He showed that he was not the envoy of the dark camp of Saqifah, seeking to attain his goal at any price, even through guile and deception. Muslim was the envoy of God’s light upon the earth—an envoy whose conduct reflected the light of the guidance of the Master of the Martyrs. Yet this trait is not merely absent from the camp of darkness; rather, it stands in opposition to it. Muslim was unwilling to abandon a single tradition of the Prophet, whereas another readily declared forbidden the “two mut‘ahs” (7), which had been lawful in the time of the Prophet.
Although His Life Was in Danger, Muslim ibn Aqil Did Not Act Contrary to Even a Single Narration of the Prophet
Although his life was in danger, Muslim ibn Aqil did not act contrary to even a single narration of the Prophet; yet another easily institutes the innovation of the Tarawih prayer and happily says, “What a good innovation!” (8) The envoy of Aba Abd Allah does not send that embodiment of corruption to perdition, in order to show that assassination, deception, and stabbing from behind are not the way of the people of faith. Yet those who claim Islam and call themselves leaders have a black record of killing six-month-old infants: one six-month-old in Medina by setting the door on fire, and another six-month-old in Karbala with a three-pronged arrow!
Indeed, Muslim is the historic envoy of God’s light. His conduct is sufficient for people of understanding to emerge from darkness into light, cast aside the guardianship of false powers, accept God’s guardianship, and join the army of Imam Husayn, peace be upon him. Whenever someone pledges allegiance to Muslim’s qualities—namely chivalry and steadfast commitment to preserving the Sunnah of the Messenger of God, blessings and peace be upon him and his family—he has brought himself to the encampment of the Master of the Martyrs, peace be upon him.
Footnotes:
- 1. Waq'at al-Taff, p. 94, footnote.
2. Those who wrote letters to Sayyid al-Shuhada, peace be upon him, were of three groups: the sincere Shi'a, who were a minority; the Kharijites living in Kufa; and the agents and followers of Banu Umayyah. (Untold Realities of Ashura, Ayatollah Milani)
3. Tarikh Ya'qubi, vol. 2, pp. 247–249; al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh, vol. 4, pp. 127–128.
4. What is meant by the historical Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt, peace be upon them, is that they bear responsibility for guiding the community throughout all ages until the Day of Resurrection. Therefore, all their actions must be considered on this basis, just as it has been said concerning them: “the utmost prudence”; they possess the highest degree of foresight.
5. Kufa was the city that served as the center of the caliphate of Amir al-Mu'minin, peace be upon him. When such a city is under the control of Banu Umayyah, one can no longer expect Mecca and Medina to be safe places for Aba Abd Allah.
6. Waq'at al-Taff, p. 114.
7. Hajj al-Tamattu' and temporary marriage, which were lawful and common in the time of the Prophet, were prohibited by the second ruler.
8. Al-Bukhari al-Ju'fi, Abu Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Isma'il (d. 256 AH), Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, p. 707, Book of the Tarawih Prayer, Chapter: The Virtue of Whoever Stands in Prayer during Ramadan; edited by Dr. Mustafa Dib al-Bugha; publisher: Dar Ibn Kathir, al-Yamamah–Beirut; 3rd edition, 1407–1987.
Author: Hamed Sarem
Related articles
Comments
No comments yet.
