Author

Muhammad
Mahdi Al-Asifi [1]

Publisher(s):

ABWA Publishing
and Printing Center

The research and analysis on the Uprising of Imam Husayn (as) from Hijaz to Iraq.

Umar Kumo

Topic

Ashura

Person Tags

Imam Husayn

Publisher’s
Foreword

In the Name
of Allah, the All-beneficent, the All-merciful

The invaluable legacy of the Household [Ahl al-Bayt] of the Prophet (may peace be
upon them all), as preserved by their followers, is a comprehensive school of
thought that embraces all branches of Islamic knowledge. This school has
produced many brilliant scholars who have drawn inspiration from this rich and
pure resource. It has given many scholars to the Muslim ummah who, following in
the footsteps of Imams of the Prophet’s Household (‘a), have done their best to
clear up the doubts raised by various creeds and currents within and without
Muslim society and to answer their questions. Throughout the past centuries,
they have given well-reasoned answers and clarifications concerning these
questions and doubts.

To meet the
responsibilities assigned to it, the Ahl al-Bayt World Assembly (ABWA) has
embarked on a defence of the sanctity of the Islamic message and its verities,
often obscured by the partisans of various sects and creeds as well as by
currents hostile to Islam. The Assembly follows in the footsteps of the Ahl
al-Bayt (‘a) and the disciples of their school of thought in its readiness to
confront these challenges and tries to be on the frontline in consonance with
the demands of every age.

The
arguments contained in the works of the scholars belonging to the School of the
Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) are of unique significance. That is because they are based on
genuine scholarship and appeal to reason, and avoid prejudice and bias. These
arguments address scholars and thinkers in a manner that appeals to healthy
minds and wholesome human nature.

To assist
the seekers of truth, the Ahl al-Bayt World Assembly has endeavored to present
a new phase of these arguments contained in the studies and translations of the
works of contemporary Shi‘ah writers and those who have embraced this sublime
school of thought through divine blessing.

The
Assembly is also engaged in edition and publication of the valuable works of
leading Shi‘ah scholars

of earlier
ages to assist the seekers of the truth in discovering the truths which the
School of the Prophet’s Household (‘a) has offered to the entire world.

The Ahl
al-Bayt World Assembly looks forward to benefit from the opinions of the
readers and their suggestions and constructive criticism in this area.

We also
invite scholars, translators and other institutions to assist us in propagating
the genuine Islamic teachings as preached by the Prophet Muhammad (S).

We beseech
God, the Most High, to accept our humble efforts and to enable us to enhance
them under the auspices of Imam al-Mahdi, His vicegerent on the earth (may
Allah expedite his advent).

We express
our gratitude to Ayatullah Muhammad-Mahdi Asifi, the authors of the present
book, and Umar Kumu, its translator. We also thank our colleagues who have
participated in producing this work, especially the staff of the Translation
Office.

Cultural Affairs
Department

Ahl al-Bayt
(‘a) World Assembly

Introduction

The sermons
that are delivered concerning Imam Husayn (‘a) attract the largest audience
from all classes of people. The respect they have for these speeches is very
significant, a feature rarely found in other gatherings. Speakers for such
occasions are required to reciprocate this respect and earnest attendance by
doing justice to the feelings of the people and the gatherings for Husayn (‘a).

The people
who come from far and wide to listen to the lectures that are delivered about
Imam Husayn (‘a), expect the speakers to enrich their talks with a greater
knowledge of Islam and Qur’anic concepts; new horizons of thought,
understanding and analysis of Husayn (‘a) ‘s words, speeches and stances, as he
moved from Hijaz to Iraq; the speeches of his kinsmen and companions; the
positions they took and the sacrifices they offered, that are unique in
history.

The
uprising of Husayn (‘a) is replete with ideas, concepts, values and beautiful
scenes, the like of which are rarely witnessed in the words and deeds of
others, which speakers are expected to analyse as they trace his route from
Hijaz to Iraq. They should be able to present these lessons to their listeners
during the month of Muharram and also on other occasions.

The present
book is an effort in that direction but I cannot be sure that it has achieved
its goal. All the same, I have tried, knowing success is from God alone.

Muhammad
Mahdi al-Asifi

Holy Najaf

The 20th
day of Shawwal, 1425

Critical
Juncture In The Life Of Mankind

Days Of
Separation

The days of
separation are distinct occasions in history that classify people into two or
more groups. The place of these occasions in history is similar to that of
crossroads which people come across during their journeys. Roads and highways
bring together the travelers till they reach the crossroads where they split
into two, three or more groups. In the same way, days of difficulty separate
people who were together during days of ease and comfort.

The holy Qur’an
named the day of Badr the Day of Separation1 because the people who were
hitherto living together in Mecca during peace time were divided into two
belligerent parties on that day.

It is not
always possible for a person to live a life of civility and pleasant social
intercourse with all the people, for God Most High has assigned, in the course
of history and the life of mankind, days on which they have to make a
resolution concerning what they say or do. They have to take a decision on war
or peace; whether to continue their relationships or sever them; whether they
will turn towards God or away from Him. These days are the days of separation.

Ashura Is
Among The Days Of Separation

The day of
Ashura was a day of separation in Islamic history. It divided the people who
were living together during peace time into two different groups: one group
stood with Husayn (‘a) and fought the Umayyads, while the other supported the
Umayyads and fought Husayn (‘a). On that day, the people had no choice but to
select and decide on which side they would fight, and, there was no other
option. This is the feature which distinguishes the days of separation: it
forces the people to choose the party to which they will give their loyalty and
repudiate the other.

People are
unequal in terms of strength and weakness, courage and timidity, faith and
hypocrisy, generosity and niggardliness, and loyalty and repudiation, but these
differences do not appear clearly in time of peace and comfort. They meet in
the markets, the mosques and other gatherings with nothing to distinguish one
from the other and without knowing one another. Sometimes one does not know
even oneself! When the days of separation come the people can be distinguished
as they differ from one another, for a man’s true worth is known only in a
moment of crisis: thus, one’s nature which was unknown before, is now revealed
to others and, sometimes, even to himself.

The day of
Ashura was one such day. It divided the people into three groups. One was
seduced by the world so they succumbed to their vain desires and were
destroyed. Another group freed themselves from the grip of their desires and
managed to weather the test, albeit with great effort and suffering. All the
same, they were able to land safely and meet God at the end. A third group
hastened to meet their Lord unencumbered by other considerations and without
any difficulty, suffering or indecision. They separated themselves from the
object of trial as a hair comes out of sour milk.

These three
conditions with regard to turning towards or away from God are found at all
times and places, although people are not usually differentiated from one
another. It is the days of separation that differentiate people.

Now let us
ponder upon these three classes of people that the day of Ashura unveiled.
First Class

This is the
group that failed the test. On analysis we find that:

This class
of people did not like to be consumed by tribulation in the initial stage, nor
reject the truth,nor disregard God. In fact, they loved God and pursued the
truth, as this is something that is implanted by God Most High in the very
nature of every human being.

They
desired that God should bestow upon them the good of this world and the next,
so that theymay enjoy both. This desire is part of the innate nature of mankind
and forms part of our psychological reality.

The drive
towards this world was stronger in the minds of these people than the drive
towards God,but they were not cognizant of this fact before they reached the
crossroads (the point of separation). Others were also not aware of this trait
that was found in this group till they also reached the point of separation.
The point of separation disgraced them before others and acquainted them with
their own reality.

Second
Class

This group
reached the point of safety although with much difficulty. Analysis shows that:

This group
desired to enjoy the world and its pleasures and did not hold any aversion to
worldlypleasures as relished by all people.

They hoped
that God would give them this world and the next, and save them from any
predicamentin which they would have to choose one of the two. They hoped that
they would always live in peace and keep both their religion and their worldly
benefits, so that they might carry out their duties toward God Most High the
way He wanted and also enjoy worldly pleasures to their fill.

They wished
that their worldly inclination should not control or rob them of their ability
to choose andtake decisions. Therefore they wanted to possess a sound
conscience that was free to make resolutions despite the fact that they were
taking part in worldly matters like the rest of the people and enjoying the
world like them.

They
retained the freedom to decide by the time they reached the point of
separation, where itbecame mandatory to select one of the two ways: God or the
world. So they disassociated themselves from this world and turned towards the
next world, from falsehood towards the truth, from selfish interest and the opponents
of God (taghut) towards God, although with difficulty and much effort, for they
were disentangling themselves from the grip of the world.

This is the
nature of taking a difficult decision in life. There are two forms of decision
making: a difficult one and a simple one. The resolution taken by the people in
this class at the point of separation was among the most difficult things.
Nevertheless, they finally succeed in extricating themselves from the grip of
the world and move towards God, whatever the cost.

The book of
God gives us a picture of this class of people. It is about the companions of
the Messenger of God (S) who fought at Badr. These people are still cited as
examples of faith, perseverance, loyalty and sacrifice. However, what the holy
Qur’an portrays of their excruciating traumatic experience when they attacked
their enemies from the polytheists of Quraysh calls for pondering. The Most
High Says:

“they
were being driven towards death as they looked on.”(8:6).

Just as a
person extricates himself from the world when he is marched to his death,
seeing it before his eyes, those righteous ones from among the companions of
the Messenger of God disentangled themselves from the world at Badr.

Despite
this, they did not hesitate to answer the call of the Messenger of God (S).
They came forward, fought and were killed, thus attaining martyrdom. May God be
pleased with them and raise them to a high station in paradise with the
prophets, the messengers and the righteous. Excellent indeed are those companions!

(v) These
people were supported by God as a result of the effort they made in saving
themselves from the control of worldly desires. God bestowed on them two
important things: He gave them discernment, light and guidance so that they did
not deviate from the path and go astray, and, He gave them strength and support
so that they did not flag while trying to accomplish the uphill task that is
associated with the difficult road.

One does
not need more than these two things in his or her actions in order to make the
journey towards God. God Most High has assured both to any of His servants who
strive in his way. He says:

“As
for those who strive towards us, we shall surely guide them in our ways, and
God is indeed with the virtuous”. (29:69).

First comes
guidance, which is light and insight, then comes God’s support for his
servants. When God sees sincerity of purpose in His servant, He bestows His
support on him and makes this difficult journey easy for him.

Third Class

This group
rushes to meet God with great ease. Its members leave the world and its
attendant tribulations without difficulty as though they had never entered it,
so that the need to exit from it is does not exist. Such people mingle with the
people and do not live differently from them. They go along with the people in
the markets and other public places but their hearts never get attached to the
world.

We shall
mention two examples of this group from the young men of the Hashimite clan who
were present at Karbala. They are Ali al-Akbar and al-Qasim ibn Hasan (‘a).
These two lads did not hesitate to respond to the call of God, His messenger
and his friends – the Imams (‘a) ; the love for this world had never entered
their hearts; they did not combine worldly gain and religion as the people did;
and therefore, they did not face any difficulty at the point of separation.

These
people answered the call of Husayn (‘a) easily and hurried towards God, the way
we hurry towards a thing we long for; without hesitation, without having to
think, without any difficulty.

Perhaps the
period of youth is the best time to prepare for such situations as the mind is
not weighed down by anything. Young minds are fresh and not attached to the
world. Therefore it is easy for young people to discard worldly things. The
more one deals with the world the stronger grows one’s attachment to it.

This is the
stage of life in which the Qur’an quickly blends with the hearts and minds of
the youth who dedicate themselves to it. It is reported on the authority of
Imam Sadiq (‘a) that: “If a person studies the Qur’an during his youth, it
blends with his flesh and blood.”2

The
Messenger of God (S) is reported to have said: “Seven classes of people
will be admitted into the shade by God on the day when there will be no shade
apart from His. [They are:] a just ruler, a young person who grows up in the
worship of God…”3 He is also reported to have said: “Nothing is
more loved by God than a repentant youth.”4

From the
above we have seen three types of people who were present on the day of Ashura.
Below we shall analyse these groups and compare them. First we shall compare
the first class with the second. These two people are Umar ibn Sa’ad and
al-Hurr ibn Yazid al-Riyahi, may God have mercy on him. Then we will compare
the second and third classes. They are al-Hurr ibn Yazid al-Riyahi and Zuhayr
ibn al-Qayn, may God have mercy on them.

Comparison
Between The First And Second Class

Here we
shall consider Umar ibn Sa’ad, who was from the first group and al-Hur ibn
Yazid may God have mercy on him, who was from the second group. Both of them
were heroes of their camps. The first was from the camp of Husayn (‘a), while
the second was from that of the Umayyads. An amazing similarity existed between
the two, and it calls for study, reflection and analysis.

They were
both renowned and distinguished generals of the Umayyad army and chiefs of
their clansso they had strong worldly tendencies; they wanted comfort, respect
and position.

Each of
them wanted worldly gains as well as religion. But this was before they came
face to facewith the point of separation, which separates religious aspirations
from worldly ones, where one has to pick one option and take a decision.

Both of
them were trying to escape the point of separation so that they would not have
to selecteither the world or their religion.

Below are
two episodes about how the two men tried to escape the point of separation.

The Story
Of How Umar Ibn Sa’ad Tried To Escape Fighting Husayn (‘A)

Al-Tabari
has reported the story of Umar ibn Sa’ad when ibn Ziyad ordered him to march
towards Husayn (‘a).On that day Umar ibn Sa’ad was camping at Hammam A’yan at
the head of four thousand men, in preparation to move to Dustabi5 and Daylam.
Ibn Ziyad ordered him to postpone the journey to Dastabi and Daylam and move on
to fight Husayn (‘a).

Ibn Sa’ad
requested exemption from this duty. This was the first attempt on his part to
avoid the point of separation. When ibn Ziyad threatened that he would take
back the document in which he had appointed Ibn Sa’ad as governor of Rayy, the
latter applied for a night’s respite to think over the issue.6

It should
be noted that in his first attempt to avoid the point of separation, Ibn Sa’ad
shied away from giving a decisive answer when Ibn Ziyad threatened to revoke
his governorship. He could have returned Ibn Ziyad’s commission and freed
himself from this deadly sin which Ibn Ziyad wanted him to commit. He should
have confronted Ibn Ziyad’s threat with equal decisiveness. However, Ibn Sa’ad
did nothing of that sort; what he did was request a night’s respite in order to
think and decide!!!

This is the
first sign of irresoluteness which Ibn Ziyad promptly took note of. He saw the
point of weakness in the personality of the man he intended to send against
Husayn (‘a). In the night, Umar ibn Sa’ad consulted his friends and counselors
who strongly warned him against fighting Husayn (‘a). His nephew Hamzah ibn
al-Mughira ibn Shu’bah said to Umar ibn Sa’ad: I adjure you by God, do not set
out to fight Husayn (‘a) lest you sever your kinship ties, and sin against your
Lord. I swear by God that it is better for you to relinquish your worldly
possessions, your wealth and the power over the whole earth – if it were your
own – than to meet God with the guilt of Husayn (‘a) ‘s blood on you.”
“I will do (as you say), by the will of God”, replied Ibn Sa’ad.7

The next
day, Umar ibn Sa’ad went to Ibn Ziyad and said “You have commissioned me
for this work (i.e the governorship of Dastabi and Daylam) and the people have
already heard about it. Please implement it and dispatch to Husayn (‘a) someone
who is abler than I am at war.’ And he proposed some Kufan nobles. This was
Umar ibn Sa’ad’s second attempt to escape from the point of separation.

However,
since Ibn Ziyad had discovered this man’s point of weakness, he despised him. When
Ibn Sa’ad mentioned the names of some Kufan nobles that could be sent to fight
Husayn (‘a), Ibn Ziyad reprimanded him saying: “I am not seeking your
counsel on whom to send. Either you set out with our army or relinquish our
commission.”8

Thus, in
both attempts, Umar ibn Sa’ad failed to avoid the point of separation. Had he
succeeded he would have secured both his religion and his worldly interests.
Despite this futile effort, Ibn Sa’ad found himself at the crossroads. Now let
us leave Umar and look at al-Hurr (may God have mercy on him) at the point of
separation.

The Story
Of How Al-Hurr Tried To Escape Fighting Husayn (‘A)

Let us
glance at al-Hurr ibn Yazid al-Riyahi (may God have mercy on him) in a similar
situation, and see how this noble general of the Umayyad army attempted to
avoid the point of separation and tried to free himself from the ordeal of
having to fight the leader of the youths of paradise without his losing
anything of the world, and failed.

The
historians record that al-Hurr met Husayn (‘a) at the station of Dhu Husam9 and
requested the latter to accompany him to Ibn Ziyad in Kufa!!

Husayn (‘a)
answered him: “Rather you will die before achieving that”. Al-Hurr
said: (Then) take a median road between us which will neither lead you to Kufa
nor back to Medina, till I am able to write to Ibn Ziyad. Perhaps God may bring
about my exemption and save me from your affair.” Then he added: “I
adjure you by God for your own sake [do not fight] for I am sure that if you do
you will surely be killed.”10

Al-Hurr was
doing all he could so that God would save him from fighting Husayn (‘a) and
committing the most abominable of all sins. To get an outlet, Hur suggested to
Husayn (‘a) to act in a way that would spare him any encounter with the Imam.

If al-Hurr
was sincere in this effort then so far he found it difficult to forfeit his
worldly position.

(iv)
Despite their efforts, both Hurr and Ibn Sa’ad would have to meet the point of
separation from which they were running away. It would face them when they
would have no option but to choose either this world or the next, with no
possibility of having both. This is the point at which one of the men would
differ from the other: Umar ibn Sa’ad was irresolute and could not take the
brave decision. He answered Ibn Ziyad’s request and marched with the army to
fight Husayn (‘a) thereby incurring blame in this world and a mortal sin [to be
punished] in the hereafter.

On the
other hand, Hurr was able to take the difficult decision at the eleventh hour,
save his hereafter and attain honour in both worlds. However, Hurr lost the
governorship which Umar ibn Sa’ad coveted.

Let us see
how each of these two men behaved at the point of separation.

A Return To
Umar Ibn Saad At The Point Of Separation

History
reports that at the point of separation Umar ibn Sa’ad spent a whole night in
great anxiety and that was after Ibn Ziyad had threatened to revoke his
appointment as governor of Rayy. It is reported that Ibn Sa’ad repeated the
following two verses all night:

‘Should I
forgo the rule over Rayy, the object of my desire or return to God with the
blood of Husayn on my hands?

His killing
will lead me to hell for sure, but to rule over Ray is my desire.’

These two
verses portray the extent of this man’s anguish and how his conscience was
tormented. But at the end of the day he could not take the bold decision,
rather, he succumbed to the temptation of exercising authority over Rayy. So
his resolve flagged and in this way he welcomed the torment of inevitable
hellfire in order to get that position. His resistance crumbled and he complied
with Ibn Ziyad’s request.

However,
Hurr’s situation at the point of separation was different. He found himself in
a condition in which he had to choose between paradise and Hell. He knew that
if he chose paradise his worldly position would be completely lost. But he must
choose! So he chose paradise, thereby choosing God’s pleasure in preference to
this world; and he paid the price with his life for it and prospered.

Al-Muhajir
ibn Aws said: “On the day of Ashura I saw al-Hurr affected by a sort of
tremble. I said to him: Your condition is really amazing. By God, I have never
seen such a thing in you before, and if I were asked who the bravest of the
Kufans was, I would have said it was you. What then am I seeing in you?”

Al-Hurr
replied; “I swear by God, I am selecting one of two things: paradise and
hell. By God I will never prefer anything over paradise even if I am to be
chopped up and burnt!”11

However,
one thing remains clear; this decision of al-Hurr was indeed a very difficult
one, hence the shiver, which was a sign of the great effort needed for it.

Comparison
Between The Second And Third Class

Now let us
compare the second class with the third. This comparison will be more difficult
than the previous one. Nevertheless, it is indispensable if our study is to be
complete.

Both the
two groups succeeded in weathering the trial at the point of separation; they
moved towardsGod; they preferred to meet God rather than covet what the people
possessed; they took this decision at the most difficult moment of the point of
separation. In fact, a decision is needed when one finds himself at crossroads
at difficult moments. Thus these two classes of people possessed the
ingredients for taking this decision, so they eventually passed the test safely
and arrived in the presence of God. Thus far, the two groups are similar to one
another, and this is the most important point here.

However,
the second group passes through this tough part of the process with much
difficulty whilethe third group does so quite easily. Although the two take the
same decision, they differ from one another in their way of taking it. Ali
Akbar (‘a) heard his father say: ‘We are from God and to Him we are returning’
as he rode on his horse. Ali Akbar said to him: “May God never make you
see any evil, father! Why did you pronounce the return formula?”

“My
son” replied Husayn, “I dozed off and saw a rider who said: ‘The
people are moving and their death is moving with them.’ So I realized that we
were being informed of our imminent death.”

Then Ali
Akbar added: “Father! Are we not with the truth?”

“Surely,
I swear by the One to whom the bondsmen return”, replied Husayn (‘a).

Then Ali
ibn Husayn (‘a) said calmly: “Then we should welcome death as those on the
right path.”12 Ali ibn Husayn did not encounter any difficulty in
accepting this tough reality.

On the
night before the tenth of Muharram, al-Qasim ibn al-Hasan (‘a) who was only an
adolescent, asked his uncle, Husayn (‘a) about his martyrdom on the following
day. The latter had informed his companions about getting martyred on the day
of Ashura. Husayn said to him: “How do you consider death?” ‘Sweeter
than honey, Uncle!”, al-Qasim replied.

On hearing
that, Husayn gave him the good tidings of martyrdom on the day of Ashura.

How
different the resolutions of Ali al-Akbar and al-Qasim (‘a) are from that of
al-Hurr ibn Yazid alRiyahi (may God have mercy on him)! Worldly matters had not
entered the hearts of al-Qasim and Ali ibn Husayn at all, nor were their hearts
attached to the world for them to find it difficult to extricate themselves
from it. On the other hand Hurr’s case was different, for he was taken by a
shiver when he resolved to join Husayn in meeting God.

The two
groups share the quality of moving to meet God although each in its own
different way. Now which one of the two ways is better in the sight of God? I
do not know. And I don’t want to enter into a discussion on it. Each of them
will meet God with a set of deeds different from that of the other. Hurr’s
deeds comprised of great effort and difficulty which he suffered and these are
presentations which are loved by God Almighty…. The more the effort and
difficulty a particular work involves, the more the person who carries out the
work earns the love and pleasure of God Most High. It has been reported that,
“The best work is that which involves the most trouble.”

The two
Hashimite youths, Ali ibn Husayn and al-Qasim ibn al-Hasan (‘a) would meet God
with hearts that did not get attached to the world at all. This is another deed
which is loved by God Most High. He says

“The
day when neither wealth nor children will avail, except him who comes to God
with a sound heart.” (26:88-89).

Likewise,
God loves that person who takes the trouble to walk along the difficult path.
So, both groups meet God with deeds that are liked by Him: effort, striving
with difficulty, and a pure heart that is unattached to the world.

(iii) Why does
their meeting with God take different forms? Surely a believer has the right to
enjoy the good things of this world and he should not forbid himself what God
has made lawful to him.

These two
principles are fundamental in the law of God. The first one is indicated by the
following verse, ‘O you who have faith! Eat of the good things we have provided
you, and thank God…’(2:172).

And the
second one the following verse:

‘O you who
have faith! Do not prohibit the good things that God has made lawful to you…’
(4:78).

However a
third principle obtains which is no less important than the first two. One
should not take from the world, even the good part which is made lawful by God,
if it distracts him from His remembrance and lures him towards worldly things,
because when one is pleased with the world and takes much of it he easily gets
attached to it.

It is
because of this that the Messenger of God (S) and the pious servants of God
used to strive not to get involved in the good things of this life. It is related
that someone gave the Messenger of God (S) sweet candy as a gift but he refused
to partake of it. The man said: ‘Do you consider it unlawful?’ ‘No, however, I
would dislike craving for it’, he replied. Then he recited:

“You
have exhausted your good things in the life of the world”(46:20).13

This is a
fact. When one indulges oneself in the good things of life he craves for them
and it takes hold of his heart. Thus the control exercised by the world on the
hearts of the righteous is commensurate with their share of worldly things.

It is
related that the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) said: “Whatever you miss
of the world is booty (for you).”

God Most
High did not prohibit His servants from enjoying good provisions if they came
from a lawful source. However, indulging in them leads to a gradual attachment
to the world.

As far as
the religion of God is concerned, one is not barred from enjoying the good
things of life if he can save himself from falling at the zero hour. But how
can one assure oneself of escaping the fall when the hour comes, for indeed,
the world has brought down many people like him before? It is a risky game in
which the player doesn’t perform well sometimes and there is no guarantee that
he will succeed.

Secondly,
attachment to the world leaves irresistible effects on the heart that distract
one from the remembrance of God. They deprive the mind of clarity and
transparency and turn mental dimensions into a murky lot, even when a person is
able to overcome his desires and succeed in taking the correct decision at zero
hour. This is the difference between the second and third classes.

To cite an
application of the comparison of the second and third classes we shall cite the
stand of alHurr ibn Yazid al-Riyahi (may God have mercy on him) and that of
al-Qasim ibn al-Hasan (‘a) to depict the difficulty or ease of resolution. Both
of them had decided to fight alongside Husayn (‘a), although alHurr took this
decision after much trouble and effort, while al-Qasim ibn al-Hasan did so
quite easily without any hesitation or delay.

On being
asked by his uncle on the night before the tenth of Muharram how he considered
death, alQasim answered: ‘Sweeter than honey, Uncle’. He gave this answer in a
relaxed mood without having to contemplate. This reply was similar to that of
his grandfather, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) when he was asked by the
Messenger of God, may God bless him and his family,: ‘How patient will you be
in the face of martyrdom?’ ‘O Messenger of God!’, he replied, ‘Martyrdom is not
a situation [that requires] patience, but one worthy of rejoicing and
gratitude’.14

This mood
of Ali (‘a) draws the line between the two ways of encountering martyrdom!
Extricating oneself from the world with difficulty and dragging of the feet,
and instantly freeing oneself from the world. The first one needs patience
while the second comes with gratitude, and both, no doubt, are meritorious.
Perseverance for martyrdom is meritorious and more so if crowned with
gratitude. However, a person who welcomes martyrdom with gratitude, treating it
like any other blessing of God, will not find any difficulty in taking a
decision. For how can one experience difficulty in deciding to receive a
blessing from God? But he who considers martyrdom a trial from God needs much
patience and effort in order to pass the test… Both are meritorious.

It is hard
to prefer one over the other and distinguish which one is more esteemed before
God, but one fact stands clear: The person who takes the second stand is more
secure from the danger of falling than the one who takes the first. And, no
doubt, this is a big distinction.

Another
Comparison Between Al-Hurr And Zuhayr

There was
great similarity between the two men. Both were chiefs of their people. Al-Hurr
was a general of the Umayyad army while Zuhayr was a partisan of the Umayyads
(an Uthmani), as related in historical reports.

Both of
them were avoiding Husayn (‘a). The reason for Zuhayr’s attitude towards Husayn
was an opinion based on a misunderstanding and not due to worldly desires. As
soon as the truth dawned on him and his mistake became clear to him he did not
hesitate at all to change the course of his life. This change was surely a
complete transformation.

Let us
analyse Zuhayr’s transformation as related by al-Tabari from Abu Mikhnaf.

Al-Tabari
relates on the authority of Abu Mikhnaf, who said: “Al-Suddi told me, on
the authority of a man from the tribe of Fazarah, who said: When it was the
time of al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, we were hiding in the house of al-Harith ibn Abi
Rabi’ah … I said to the Fazari man: Tell me about your situation when you
returned (from Mecca) together with Husayn ibn Ali (‘a). He said: When we left
Mecca we were with Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn al-Bajali moving alongside Husayn (‘a)
Nothing was more hateful to us than moving near him so when Husayn moved on
Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn lagged behind, and when Husayn (‘a) camped Zuhayr continued
his journey until we halted one day at a station where there was no other way
for us but to camp near him. Husayn (‘a) camped on one side [of the road] and
we camped on the other. As we were having our meal Husayn’s messenger
approached, greeted us and entered.

Then he
said: ‘O, Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn! Abu Abdillah Husayn ibn Ali (‘a) has sent me to
summon you to him.’ He said: Every one of us threw away what was in his hands
and lost his voice as though there where birds sitting on our heads. Then
Dulham bint ‘Amr, the wife of Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn informed me, saying: ‘I said
to him: ‘Did the son of the daughter of the Messenger of God send for you and
you refuse to meet him? Glory be to God! Why don’t you meet him and listen to
what he has to say, and then come back?’ So Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn went and after a
short while came back his face shining with joy. Then he ordered that his tent,
luggage and provisions be taken to Husayn (‘a), and it was done. Then he said
to his wife: ‘You are divorced. Rejoin your family for I don’t want anything to
befall you on my account except good.’ Then he said to his companions: ‘He who
wants to follow me [can do so] otherwise I bid you farewell!’ ”15

In this
report we find four successive situations pertaining to Zuhayr.

Aversion
And Inaction

First, a
strong aversion and inaction with regard to meeting Husayn (‘a) to the extent
that he did everything not to halt at the same watering place with Husayn
(‘a).This aversion was caused by a great misunderstanding and wrong evaluation
of things, and not by deviation tendencies.

Shock And
Hesitation

Then
followed a strong mental shock.When Husayn’s (‘a) messenger brought Zuhayr the
message that the Imam wished to see him, Zuhayr and his companions were at a
loss till his brave and pious wife Dulham (may God have mercy on her) took the
initiative and diffused his terrible hesitation by asking him to respond to the
summons of the son of the Messenger of God (S).

Willingness
To Meet Husayn (‘A)

Thirdly,
indecisiveness left Zuhayr and he went with the messenger to meet Husayn (‘a)
and speak to him.

Response And
Acceptance

And lastly,
a quick receptiveness followed and Zuhayr firmly resolved to respond to
Husayn(‘a) ‘s call fully, without further hesitation or difficulty.

We do not
know what Husayn (‘a) told Zuhayr, we do not know what Zuhayr heard from Husayn
(‘a). We do not know what Husayn (‘a) could have told Zuhayr in such a short
time, for Zuhayr did not stay long with Husayn (‘a). The report says ‘soon he
came back rejoicing…’ and this shows that the meeting of Zuhayr with Husayn
(‘a) did not take long before the former transferred his Umayyad partisanship
to the

Alids. It
was a swift response to Husayn(‘a) ‘s invitation. He did not hesitate at all
nor drag his feet before responding to Husayn (‘a).

This
response of Zuhayr has two elements:

A strong
resolve which Zuhayr would never give up at any cost. He even said to his wife
to whom hewas indebted for this transformation: ‘You are divorced’ and to his
companions: ‘Pull down my tent and carry my luggage to Husayn’s (‘a) campside.’

The speed
and ease in taking his decision, with no effort or reluctance ‘After a while he
came backrejoicing’.

Analysis Of
Al-Hurr’s Unusual Stand

Al-Hurr
knew the Imam’s position very well and prayed behind him. When the Imam gave
him theoption of praying behind him or leading his companions in prayer while
the Imam prayed with his own, al-Hurr said: ‘You pray and we pray behind you’.
When the Imam said to him, ‘May your mother grieve over your death!’ it was
hard for him to bear, but he only answered: ‘I swear by God that if any other
man from the Arabs mentioned my mother in this way I would have mentioned his
mother the same way, whoever he might have been. But there is no way I can
mention your mother except in the best possible terms.’

Ibn Ziyad
ordered him to bring the Imam (‘a) to Kufa under escort but the latter strongly
refused. SoHurr tried to free himself of the responsibility he was charged with
and not be involved in Husayn (‘a) ‘s affair. Hurr hoped that God would save
him from getting involved in anything to do with that. He said to the Imam
‘Take the road between me and you, one that will neither take you to Kufa nor
back to Medina.’

However,
throughout these events Hurr was trying to keep his position in the Ummayad
army. He didnot want to give up the command of the army that was assigned to
him by Ibn Ziyad. His clinging to the world and its positions did not rob him
of treating the Imam with courtesy, nor did his courtesy stamp out his love for
the world.

Despite all
efforts to avoid the point of separation where he would have to pick one of the
two things: this world or the next, where he could not have both, it was the
will of God to take Hurr to the destined point. That was on the tenth day of
Muharram when he went to Umar ibn Sa’ad in Karbala and said to him: Are you
[really] fighting this man?’ Yes, I swear by God. [I will engage him in] a
fight, the least part of which will send heads and hands flying’, he replied.

At that
point Hurr realized that he had no choice but to choose either this world or
the next, and hecould never have both. He would either prefer this world over
the next or vice versa.

It became
hard for him to decide and it was then that he began trembling. This is a
condition abovethat of anxiety and confusion. Hurr found himself in a position
in which he had to resolve relinquishing all his worldly acquisitions, a fact
he had tried hard to avoid. Hitherto he had held on to those acquisitions as
much as possible. We do not know of a fiercer contest inside the human mind.
Hurr had experienced, at the zero hour of his life, a struggle between the
world and the hereafter right inside himself which he had been running away
throughout that period. He had been trying to reconcile the two but the will of
God was above that of Hurr. He came face to face with the point of separation!

So Hurr
took the inevitable decision and galloped his horse towards Husayn (‘a) to the
utter surpriseof his companions and the whole army. The commander of the army
Umar ibn Sa’ad could not believe it when he saw al-Hurr going over to Husayn’s
side at this critical moment.

He now came
to Husayn (‘a) with his head bowed in shame on account of how he had treated
the Imam some days before on the way to Karbala. He approached saying: ‘Is
there a chance to repent?’ ‘If you return to God He will accept you’, the Imam
replied.

Hurr
galloped his horse towards Husayn (‘a) as if he was running away from something
that pursued him, something he feared. But Hurr was a brave man undaunted by
anything. Why did he speed his horse towards Husayn? Who was pursuing him?

Hurr was
afraid of himself, lest his base self-prevented him from going over to Husayn’s
side by enticing him with the world. He wanted to put himself into a new
reality from which he could not go back again. So he galloped quickly to join
Husayn and put himself in a new reality, i.e. before Husayn (‘a), ashamed and
apologizing, seeking his pardon so that God might accept his repentance.

May God
have mercy on you O Hurr! You were a free man (hurr) as your mother named you;
you would not incline towards the allurements of the world.

May God
have mercy on you, O Hurr! Your companions testified to your bravery on the
battlefield and we testify that you were more valiant and strong in the battle
with your Self. We bear witness that the tough decision you took on that day
which perplexed the army and its general was a feat that could hardly be
accomplished by a joint effort of courageous men.

Surely God
loved and preferred you in the company of Husayn (‘a), to fight and attain
martyrdom by his side, while defending him. Congratulations on this great
divine gift!

Conclusion

Before we
close this discussion, I would like to take a final glance at the comparison
between the second and third classes.

At the end,
al-Hurr and Zuhayr (may God have mercy on them) met ‘in the abode of
truthfulness with an omnipotent King;’16 they supported Husayn; they fought,
were killed and attained martyrdom together; and they gained nearness to the
Messenger of God (S) in paradise. The bitter troubles suffered by alHurr might
not be less in value than the swift acceptance by Zuhayr. So what is the need
of comparison and analysis?

It is true
that in the final analysis both men attained their goal and there is no doubt
about that, but many a man has fallen while taking the leap from the world to
the hereafter and from ‘I’ to God, as the world overpowered him while he was
trying to extricate himself from its clutches. A great number of people have
lost the battle with the self. God Almighty declared the truth when He said:

“Indeed
man is at a loss, except those who have faith and do righteous deeds, and
enjoin one another to [follow] the truth, and enjoin one another to
patience.”(103:2-3).

Surely,
most people are at a loss and those who prosper are only a small group. Those
are the people who enjoin one another to follow the truth and enjoin one
another to patience, barring exceptional cases.

To be saved
from the hazards of this road, which are many and dangerous, one should not
give himself up to the world. This is the first necessary condition. The second
is that one should not appropriate much from the world but only take from it as
much as one needs. He who takes from the world will surely be taken by it
unless he limits himself to his needs with modesty, in which case worldly
enticements will not overpower him.

In his
sermon describing the God-fearing, the Commander of the Faithful said “You will
see him (the God-fearing person) modest in hopes, contented in mind; his food
inelaborate, his affairs simple, his greed dead…”17

This
doesn’t mean that one should prohibit himself the good things of life, rather
one should be contented with the amount he needs so that the world will not
overwhelm him and strip him of his willpower.

The
Commander of the Faithful is teaching us how to treat our ‘selves’ if they
prove obstinate with regard to obligations we dislike, and piety. We should
punish them through the pleasures of this world, which they love. This is an
excellent remedy for it trains the soul to accept cumbersome and arduous tasks
of obligations and piety.

“If his soul
is recalcitrant in matters it dislikes he will not give it what it wants.”18

In Surah Al
‘Imran, God most High says, concerning the day of Badr: “What befell you
on the day when the two hostsmet…”(3:166).

Wasa’il
al-Shi’ah 2/141.

Majma’
al-Bayan 2/385.

Mishkat
al-Anwar, 155.

In those
days, this place was said to lie between Hamedan and Rayy, but we could not
locate it on present-day maps.

Tarikh
al-Tabari 6/232.

Al-Muqarram’s
Maqtal al-Al-Husayn (‘a), pg. 214.

Ibid, pg.
214 – 215.

A hill
where al-Nu’man ibn al-Mundhir used to go hunting.

Sayyid Abd
al-Razzaq-al-Muqarram’s Maqtal al-Al-Husayn (‘a), 196.

Sheikh
Mufid’s Al-Irshad pg. 235.

Abu Mikhnaf
said: “Uqbah ibn Sam’an said: When we left the castle of Banu Muqatil and
moved on for some time al-Al-Husayn dozed off for a moment and then woke up
saying ‘We are from God and to him we are returning. Praise be to God, Lord of
the worlds.” He repeated this twice or thrice. Then Ali ibn al-Al-Husayn
approached him riding his horse and said: ‘We are from God and to him we are
returning. Praise be to God, Lord of the worlds! Father! May I be your ransom.
Why did you praise God and recited the return formula?

Al-Husayn
(‘a) said: My son! I dozed off for a moment and saw a rider who was saying:
“The people are moving along and death is moving towards them.” So I
realized that we are being given the news of our death.

He said to
him: Father! May God never let you see evil – are we not in the right?

Al-Husayn
(‘a) replied: “Surely, I swear by the One to whom the bondsmen return.

He said:
Father! in that case we wouldn’t mind to die as those in the right.

Then
al-Al-Husayn said to him: May God reward you with the best of what he rewards a
son for his obedience to his father!”

Tarikh
al-Tabari 7/307, the events of the year 61 (A.H.) (European edition).

Nur
al-Thaqalan, 5/15.

This is
found in Nahj al-Balaghah vo.2, pg.48 speech no 156. “I said: O Messenger
of God! When some of the Muslimsare martyred on the day of Uhud and I was deprived
of martyrdom and I felt it seriously, didn’t you tell me: Rejoice, for
martyrdom is waiting for you?

He said to
me: This is so. Then how is your perseverance? I said: O Messenger of God! This
is not a situation [that requires] perseverance but one of rejoicing and
gratitude.”

Tarikh
al-Tabari, 7, 290-291 Events of 61 A.H (European edition).

See Qur’an,
54:55.

Nahj
al-Balaghah 2/163, sermon 193 (Muhammad Abduh’s edition).

Al-Fatal
al-Nisaburi’s Rawdah al-Wa’izin, pg. 439; Al-Tabarasi’s Makarim al-Akhlaq, pg
447.

Meditations
On Husayn’s Speech On The Day Of Ashura

Husayn (‘a)
addressed the people on the Day of Ashura, saying:

“You have
drawn the sword with which we armed you, against us, and ignited the fire we
kindled against our enemy and yours, against us. So you have joined hands with
the forces of your enemies against your allies, in spite of being aware that
they (your enemies) have not established any justice among you, nor do you
expect any good from them.”1

This is
Husayn’s address to the people on the day of Ashura. It is a strange speech
which he gave at that critical hour before they drew their swords on him. This
address carries boundless grief on account of those people who drew their
swords against the son of the daughter of the Messenger of God, (S). I will
talk on a number of points regarding this speech.

1. “You
Have Drawn The Sword With Which We Armed You, Against Us.”

With
respect to any struggle people fall into three groups: The first and the second
are the opposing parties, while the third are mere observers who stay behind
without supporting the truth. This group makes up a wide cross section of
society.

The first
and second groups bear the price of the struggle, that is, hands and heads will
have to fall. This equally involves both the contesting parties and is not
specific to the party of truth or falsehood. This is the norm of God Most High
with regard to contests. God Almighty says:

“If you are
suffering they are also suffering like you, but you expect from God what they
do not expect.”(4:104).

He also
said:

“If a
wound afflicts you, a like wound has already afflicted those people; and We
make such vicissitudes rotate among mankind…” (3:140).

The party
of truth is distinguished in the contest by God’s help and support and the victory
He grants them. Indeed God has promised them that. God Most High says: “If
you help God, He will help you and make your feet steady” (47:7). and

“God
has ordained: ‘I shall surely prevail, I and my apostles.” (58:21).

This is
what the believers expect from God when they are engaged in a contest. This
expectation assures the hearts of the believers of divine support on the
battlefield, a support which will ensure the outcome of the conflict in their
favour. The foregoing analysis pertains to the two warring parties. The third
group is a very complex one that can easily slip towards the side of falsehood
as it is susceptible to enemy influence.

These are
the people whom Husayn (‘a) addressed on the day of Ashura. They had sheathed
their swords during the times of Ali (‘a) and al-Hasan (‘a). They had abandoned
Ali (‘a) in Siffin and after that al-Hasan (‘a) till he had to compromise with
Mu’awiya in order to save what remained of his father’s partisans. When these
people put down their arms and forsook Ali (‘a) and al-Hasan (‘a), Mu’awiya
drew them and after him, on the day of Ashura, Yazid did the same.

They did
not lay down arms for long because the field of struggle abhors those sitting
on the fence. He who does not side with truth on the field of contest and
prefers safety over trouble of battle will undoubtedly side with falsehood very
soon. The stand of the defenders of truth is firm and secure, and beyond the
reach of the enemy, but those who stand on the fence easily drift towards the
enemy side. They are defenseless and within easy reach of the enemy who can
allure them to join the bandwagon, or terrorize and force them to side with
falsehood.

Because of
this, the positions people take on the field of conflict boil down to two:
either they stand with truth in terms of loyalty and denouncement or they stand
with falsehood in a like manner. These were the people Husayn (‘a) was
addressing at Karbala. They had sheathed their swords and betrayed his father
and brother before and were drawing them on him in Karbala. So he said to them:
‘You have drawn the sword with which we armed you against us.’

The sword
denotes power. Before the advent of Islam, the Arabs were an isolated, weak
nation living in the desert with neither power nor wealth. Islam bestowed on
them power and wealth, made them bearers of the message of monotheism and
conquered the world for them, thus making them lords and rulers over the world.
Syria was then the seat of this power, which Islam had brought to the Arabs,
and it used it to exercise political and military influence over large parts of
Asia and Africa.

To these
people, Husayn (‘a) spoke on the day of Ashura at Karbala, saying:

“God has
guided you through my grandfather the Messenger of God (S) and, through him,
provided you with this vast control that stretches over the earth. He has made
you leaders and lords in the world.

Therefore,
this power and sword is ours although it is now in your hands. However, you
have forsaken my father and brother before; you sheathed your swords and abandoned
them then. And here you are today drawing the sword, which the Messenger of God
(S) placed in your hands, to fight the son of his daughter.

It would
have been more becoming of you to have fought Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan with this
sword before, in support of my father and brother, and today, Yazid ibn
Mu’awiya in my support … for they have left the tradition (sunnah) of God’s
Messenger and we tried to bring them back to the straight path but they did not
return to it.”

2. ‘And You
Ignited The Fire Which We Kindled Against Our Enemy And Your Enemy, Against
Us.’

What was
this fire that Husayn spoke about on the day of Ashura?

Who ignited
it?

Where did
he ignite it?

This fire
was the great explosion of light that took place in the Arabian Peninsula. It
sent to mankind a radiance that enlightened the hearts and minds of men from
the east to the west. With this light, which entered every house, God removed
the darkness of ignorance from mankind. This light turned into faith,
sincerity, service, certainty, values, sacrifice, prayer and supplication,
schools for the dissemination of knowledge and mosques for worship that soon
spread all over the world. It also emerged as uprisings and movements of the
oppressed against the oppressors. On the other hand, this fire eliminated the
thrones of the tyrants in Persia, Byzantine and Egypt. It also broke away the
fetters and shackles from the hands and feet of men, and set them free from the
grip of the oppressors.

The
Messenger of God (S) ignited this fire in the Arabian peninsula and it was
barely fifty years after its kindling that it illuminated the globe from east
to west. The Messenger of God, (S) did not select a specific class for this
call. In fact he released the dormant forces of innate nature and reason from
the souls of those Arabs who answered his call. He made them a great force that
vanquished the armies of Persia and Byzantium, and swept away the thrones of
Chosroe and Caesar.

This action
of the Messenger of God (S) was exactly like the work of an engineer when he
produces light and heat from a cold dark rock; or the way a cold dark piece of
wood gives us light and heat when it comes into contact with fire. He produced,
out of them, paragons of righteousness and piety, strength and resistance,
faith and submission to God, who were able to propagate this mission all over
the world. They became lords and leaders of humanity after having lived in
isolation from civilization in a plantless desert region.

In no more
than fifty years from the death of the Messenger of God (S), the people burnt
the house of his daughter. They set fire to Fatima’s (‘a) door in Medina, and
later to the tents of his household in Karbala.

How cruelly
they disregarded the rights of the Prophet’s family!

How
ungratefully they repaid the Messenger of God (S) for his favours!

How
regrettable the conduct of the servants!!

And God
Most High clearly expressed His Wish to them:

“Say,
‘I do not ask of you any reward for it except affection and respect for [my]
kith and kin.’ (42:23).

3. “You
Have Joined Hands With The Forces Of Your Enemies Against Your Allies.”

This is the
second act of apostasy, which is worse than the first. The Imam (‘a) pointed
out to the first when he said: ‘you have drawn the sword which we armed you
with, against us.’ When the people reneged the first time, the swords shifted
from the side of the Household of the Messenger of God (S) to the side of their
opponents and enemies. This fact has been precisely described by al-Farazdaq
when he met Husayn (‘a) on the way to Iraq. He said to the Imam (‘a): “Their
hearts are with you but their swords are against you.”2 This is a perfect
description of the psychological and political condition of the people at that
time. Indeed their hearts were with Husayn (‘a) until then although their
political inclinations were in favour of the Umayyads. This was the beginning,
and it constituted the first act of perfidy.

The normal
situation is that the hearts and swords should converge on the side of the
truth, but if the heart and the swords disagree, this is the first step towards
apostasy. The second step is when the two are agreed on being hostile to, and
fighting the Prophet’s Household (as.). This is the situation about which the
Imam (‘a) is informing us in this statement:

“You have
joined hands with the forces of your enemies against your allies.”

The term
al-ilb, which the Imam used, denotes rallying or joining hands with a common enemy
and needs some explanation. A nation (ummah) is a group of people who are
united by a common loyalty and a common thing which they repudiate. This is the
soundest and most precise definition of ummah (nation).

The Muslim
nation is united by loyalty to God, His Messenger (S) and the Imams (‘a) of the
believers.

“Your
guardian is only God, his Apostle and the faithful who maintain prayer and give
the zakat while bowing down [in rukuh].”(5:55).

He who
accepts this guardianship is part of this nation and he who rejects it or part
of it does not belong to this nation. Similarly, this nation has a common
position of repudiating the rebellious forces of taghut which God Almighty has
ordered us to disbelieve in, and the idolaters. So he who repudiates these two
is a member of this nation and he who does not is not its member.

“Worship
God and keep away from the Rebel” (16:36).

Thus, on
the day of Ashura, The Imam (‘a) said to them: A repudiation of God’s enemies
and a common hostility towards them used to unite us. We also shared a common
loyalty towards God’s friends. But today “you have joined the forces of your
enemies against your allies”, exactly the opposite of what should have been the
case. You should have united with your allies against your enemies. This is the
second act of apostasy.

In fact,
this was the condition of the people whom Husayn (‘a) addressed on Ashura. This
showed the change-over between the two poles of love and hate, loyalty and
repudiation, and it is the highest form of volte-face in the human personality.

4. “They
Have Not Established Any Justice Among You, Nor Do You Expect Any Good From
Them.”

The Imam
(‘a) is saying that their hearts have turned from guidance to misguidance, from
God’s friends to His enemies. They have become loyal to those that deserved
repudiation, while the Umayyads have not changed their former position: “they
have not established any justice among you.” The Umayyads are still committing
injustice as they did before, still steeped in oppression and deviation.

No change
had taken place in the stand of the Umayyads; the only thing that happened was
a volte-face of hearts from the axis of loyalty to that of repudiation and from
repudiation to that of (a new) alliance, for the people had shifted their
alliance from the Ahl al-Bayt (the Prophet’s household) to the Umayyads without
there being any change in the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) from the position of guidance
and righteousness, or in the Umayyads from their deviation and oppression.

“Nor do you
expect any good from them”

That change
of hearts was not prompted by any transformation in the Umayyads from unjust
rulers to justice-loving ones, nor was it because the people expected the
Umayyads to treat them with justice. Therefore, the people were not deceived by
the Umayyads when they gave them their loyalty and fought their antagonists.
What then prompted the people to change over from the family of God’s Messenger
(S) to the family of Umayyah? The reason was that the Umayyads had subdued them
with terror or enticement. There is a difference between deception and
degradation. One who is deceived by his enemy loves his enemy, is loyal to him
and fights his enemy’s enemy out of mistake. This is a weakness in terms of
awareness and knowledge but not a debasement. But he who allies himself with
his enemy and supports him with his arms and wealth, and then gives him his
heart knowing that he is his enemy abases himself and becomes contemptible.

Nations
have always been subdued and degraded either by force and terror or by money.
The Umayyads used both methods: debasement with force and terror and debasement
with money and power. Although they used enticements, propaganda and deception,
their excessive oppression, luxury and sinful style of life was too prominent
to be lost on anyone.

5. “Woe To
You! Are You Heading Towards These People And Forsaking Us?

This is the
most pathetic volte-face in man’s life: he turns against himself by loving his
enemy and hating his friend. A human being loves and hates; loves his friends
and hates his enemies. When one forgets oneself, he forgets who he should love
and who he should hate and above all, love and hate change places for him so
that he now loves his enemy and hates his friends! This is the condition with
which God punishes those who forget Him; He makes them forget themselves

“…who
forgot God so he makes them forget their own souls”. (59:19).

The people
Husayn (‘a) addressed on the day of Ashura were among those who forgot God so
He made them forget themselves, forgot who they loved and hated. They loved the
Umayyads who they were supposed to be hostile to because they perpetrated
tyranny, sin and ungodliness; and they fought their friends and allies whom God
had commanded the Muslims to love and obey, as recorded in the definitive
(muhkamat) verses of His book.3 I cannot imagine the extent of pain that
afflicted the Imam’s heart as depicted by this speech. A pain that stems from
his compassion for them with regard to the level of misery they had reached.
This pain was not because the Imam had lost their support in his tribulation.

6. “O
Slaves Of (This) Nation And Strangers!”

This is the
trait of slaves. Slaves must be loyal to whoever buys them. There is no
permanent principle for their loyalty. He who buys them from the slave market
deserves their loyalty, whether they like or hate him. Therefore their loyalty
changes hands instantly from one master to the new master who pays their price
to the old one and the latter hands over the whip to the former.

In an
instant, the slaves forget their old love and loyalty and become faithful to
their new master and new loyalty. People’s loyalty is to their parties, in ease
or difficulty and in defeat or victory, unlike those who are strangers to the
parties, for their loyalty is always for the victorious whether they are in the
right or not. This is the situation with floating political alliances; they
carry dangerous psychological implications that depict a lack of principles and
values. Also this attitude shows complete subordination to the one with the
upper hand and a complete abandoning of the self and values.

7. “Away
With You, O Slaves Of The Nation And Strangers To The Parties!”

Here the
Imam (‘a) is praying for their being distanced from the mercy of God. This is
because God’s mercy descends on man at different stations in man’s life. When
one distances himself from these points he removes himself from God’s mercy.
This is God’s norm of treating His servants so let us ponder on it. There is a
reciprocal relationship between the descending mercy of God and the points at
which it descends.

This
descending mercy activates the places it descends upon. When rain falls on a
land it becomes green, blossoms, ripens and bears fruit. This is what the
descending mercy does to its place of descent. The place of mercy also seeks
its place of descent and does not come down on a place unless it deserves the
descent of mercy.

This
deserving is to seek God’s mercy in the existential sense by having the
potential to receive it, and this is necessary for mercy to descend. On the
other hand, rejecting God’s mercy pushes it aside and makes it remote. God’s
mercy is continuously descending although there are factors that facilitate its
reception, just as there are factors that bring about its rejection.

Ponder over
the prayer of the righteous servant of God, Noah (‘a) against his people:

“And Noah
said: ‘My Lord! Do not leave on the earth any inhabitant from amongst the
faithless. If you leave them, they will lead your servants astray and will
beget only vicious ingrates.” (71:27).

It is a
strange prayer in which Noah (‘a) speaks of God’s norms of sending mercy and
cutting it off. All their potential for receiving goodness had dried up and all
readiness to seek mercy: “… and they will not beget any but vicious
ingrates”. So, on what would God’s mercy descend?

Husayn (‘a)
prays to God Most High against those people on the day of Ashura because their
hearts have lost all the values, which are the points in their souls at which
mercy descends. So there remained no place in their souls and lives on which
divine mercy would alight. Thus he said: Away with you! O slaves of the nation.

8. “An Old
Treachery That Was Part And Parcel Of Your Forefathers”

Just as
good can be deep-rooted, evil can also be so. The roots of goodness reach out
to innate nature, reason, conscience and the heart while those of evil are
linked to selfish desires. When evil and selfish desires take root in the mind
one loses all the sources of goodness that are in his soul. The foundations of
goodness that are associated with his heart, conscience, reason and innate
nature dwindle as well.

Heredity
plays a part in establishing goodness or evil. I do not mean to say that the
effect of heredity is inevitable but that it plays an important part. Heredity
enhances good and intensifies evil although not with coercion. This means that
mankind falls into two groups: the good tree and the bad tree (lit. tree) and
each one is a tree. A tree has roots and fruits and there are similarities in
some aspects between the roots and fruits of a tree. The roots of a tree form
its foundation, the fruits its derivatives while the trunk serves as the means
of conveying the features from the roots to the fruits.

In like
manner good and bad lines of mankind carry good and bad traits from ancestors
to their offspring so that goodness or evil are deep-rooted in each of them.
Consequently, these two sets of ancestors constitute two lines in human
history: a rising line that moves upwards continuously and a falling line,
continuous in descent. Nimrod’s family is on the descent and Abraham’s family
on the ascent; the family of Moses is ascending and the family of Pharaoh
descending.

The law of
heredity enhances this ascent and descent. It does not only convey the features
of good and evil from forefathers to offspring but also refines them and sorts
out evil from good and vice versa. As time goes on, the divergence between
these two families (of good and evil) widens until a time is reached when the
members of the evil family become devoid of goodness and its spring dries up
from their souls. At that point divine punishment descends on them since they
no longer deserve mercy.

This is
what happened at the time of Noah (‘a) and it could happen at any other time.
Then the bad family comes to an end and falls, and a new circle of history will
begin. Surely, the law of heredity carries good and bad traits from generation
to generation and promotes both the good and the bad together. It is this law
that Imam Husayn (‘a) was hinting at when he said:

“Certainly,
I swear by God that yours is an old treachery which has become part and parcel
of your forefathers and which the offspring among you have strengthened. So you
are the worst fruits: an eye sore to the viewer and an easy morsel for the
usurper.”

The Imam
(‘a) meant to say that treachery and wickedness was deep-rooted in them. It
first reared its head on the day of Siffin, after which sons inherited it from
their fathers. It took root first with their forefathers and gained strength
and blossomed at the hands of the offspring among those present.

Therefore,
they are the worst fruit of the bad tree. We must add that the inheritance we
are discussing here is that of values and behaviour and it does not apply to
biological inheritance. The law of biological inheritance in plants, animals
and humans does not necessarily apply to that of values, thoughts and
behaviour. The two laws can be completely different as in the case of Noah’s
son.

The Qur’an
gives a precise description of him saying:

“Indeed
he is a [personification of] unrighteous conduct”(11:46).

Although he
was among the offspring of Noah (‘a) who was a leader of the righteous. This
difference came from the determining factor in biological inheritance that does
not apply to the inheritance of actions and values, which follow will and
choice.

Sayyid Ibn
Tawus’s Al-Luhuf fi Qatla al-Tufuf pg. 58.

Sheikh
al-Sharifi’s Kalimat Imam al-Al-Husayn (‘a) pg. 370.

“Say, ‘I do
not ask you any reward for it except the affection for [my] relatives’ (42:23).

“Your
guardian is only God, His Apostle, and the faithful who maintain the prayer and
give the zakat while bowing down” (5:55).

Political
Goals Of Imam Husayn (‘a) ‘S Uprising

The two
Imams, Hasan and Husayn (‘a) had resolved to proclaim their revolt against
Umayyad rule

when
conditions become favourable. They had disclosed this to their partisans
(Shi’ah) more than once. The plan of the two Imams Hasan and Husayn (‘a) on
this issue, i.e. their position vis-à-vis the

Umayyads,
was the same. After the treaty of Imam Hasan (‘a) some groups of the Shi’ah of
Iraq wrote to

Imam Husayn
(‘a) requesting him to proclaim an uprising and revolt against Mu’awiya. They
rejected

Imam
Hasan’s (‘a) stand of accepting a settlement. In reply, Husayn (‘a) wrote:
“Abu Muhammad

[Hasan] has
said the truth. Let every man among you keep to his house as long as this man
(Mu’awiya) is alive.”1

God Most
High willed that Mu’awiya’s treachery against the Imam be executed. So he was
martyred before the death of Mu’awiya and Husayn (‘a) took the office of
leadership (imamah) and assumed the responsibility of leading the opposition
and the movement for change. The stand of Husayn (‘a) was a continuation of
that of his brother concerning Mu’awiya after the death of al-Mujtaba, Imam
al-Hasan (‘a). The people of Iraq wrote to him again, reiterating their demand
that he should lead them to revolt against Mu’awiya but Imam Husayn (‘a) again
did not respond to their request. He wrote:

“As
for my brother, I hope that God made him succeed and guided him to the right
with respect to what was coming. I, myself don’t have this view [of revolting
against Mu’awaya] today. So do not stir. May God have mercy on you! Keep to
your houses and guard against suspicion as long as Mu’awiya is alive.”2

However, an
underground political movement was in progress in Hijaz. Imam Husayn (‘a) was
directing it to awaken the Muslims against Umayyad rule, in preparation for an
all-out revolt after Mu’awiya’s death. The Imam (‘a) was in touch with some
Muslim dignitaries in Iraq and Hijaz who used to visit him and take his advice.
Despite the fact that these meetings were largely held in secret, they were not
hidden from the Umayyad spies. Therefore Marwan, Mu’awiya’s governor of Medina,
wrote to him, saying:

“Umar
ibn Uthman reports that an Iraqi man and some notables of the people of Hijaz
are visiting Husayn ibn Ali and that we cannot be sure that he will not revolt.
I investigated the matter and found out that he wants a conflict even today.
Please write and send me your view.”3

Mu’awiya
wrote to Marwan and ordered him to avoid confronting Husayn (‘a) as much as
possible. In any case, Husayn (‘a) had decided to revolt against Umayyad rule
after Mu’awiya died, and he had prepared his Shi’ah for that.

We do not
doubt the fact that the Imam did not intend, by his uprising against Yazid ibn
Mu’awiya, to overthrow the Umayyad regime militarily and come to power. He did
not have supporters in Hijaz who could be counted upon in his movement, except
in Iraq. Egypt and the Hijaz were too far away for its people to be well
acquainted with the circumstances of the revolution (to be of any help), and
Syria was the strong support base of Yazid ibn Mu’awiya’s rule and power.

The Iraqis,
apart from his Shi’ah, were not inclined towards the Imam and he knew very well
that it was impossible to depend on the Iraqi masses because they would side
with the victorious party. So it was best for him and his uprising if they did
not join him then, for they would break away from his army as they broke away
from that of his brother Hasan (‘a) before. They would only unnerve his
companions and partisans and no one would be steadfast except those who were
steadfast before in his brother’s army, and they were only a few and could not
face the Syrian army.

What
al-Farazdaq prophesied when he met the Imam in Al-Shaquq,4 had indeed come
true. He came up to the Imam and kissed his hand. The Imam asked him “How
did you leave the people of Kufa?” He said: ‘I left the people [in such a
condition that]: their hearts are with you and their swords with the
Umayyads.” Then Husayn (‘a) said to him: “You have told the truth and
done your duty. The affair is God’s, He does what He wills.”5

The
experience of Imam Hasan (‘a) was not forgotten by Husayn (‘a) nor was he abler
than his brother in mobilizing a military force to strike at Umayyad power and
overthrow the regime. The circumstances of Imam Husayn (‘a) were even more
difficult than those of Imam Hasan (‘a). The power of the Umayyads had been
consolidated and its influence had become extensive. By his well-known cunning
Mu’awiya had strengthened the Umayyad power base and extended its influence by
buying off the conscience of the people and unleashing fear and terror among
the forces of opposition. He controlled the majority through terror and
enticements, and they were now ever inclined towards the victorious party, the
one that proved its strength on the field.

So no new
event had happened on the political and military scene since the time of Imam
Hasan (‘a) except two things:

1:
Consolidation of Umayyad power base and extension of their influence in the
land.

2: Spread
of corruption in the Umayyad system that reached outright licentiousness and
debasement during the lifetime of Yazid and his rule.

The first
issue was not considered for any military mobilization by the Imam to overthrow
the system, what with the experience of Imam Hasan (‘a) which was still fresh
in the minds of his Shi’ah. The Iraqi forces of the day were unable to resist
the power of the Umayyads after the demise of the Commander of the Faithful,
Ali (‘a). What could be expected now that Umayyad rule had been consolidated
and they were the unchallenged power with a formidable army?

As for the
second issue, even if it was beneficial to arouse a small conscious opposition
group among the Shi’ah, there was certainly no use in instigating the majority
who had got used to, submitted to and even supported corruption. Therefore, the
only devoted people who could be at the disposal of the Imam, by way of a military
force, were those who were devoted to his brother, Hasan (‘a), i.e. the
steadfast ones among his partisans. So it was certainly unthinkable for the
Imam to be foolhardy and lead this small force to bring down the mighty Umayyad
rule, after the efforts of his brother had failed, under more favourable
conditions and with a stronger military force than the army he expected the
Iraqis to prepare for him after the death of Mu’awiya.

This is not
our personal interpretation of the circumstances which accompanied Husayn’s
(‘a) setting out to Iraq and his uprising; we find the same reading of issues
from all the people who advised the Imam to abandon the journey to Iraq; those
who could not bear to see him facing the same experience there as his brother
Imam Hasan (‘a) did. These men included Abdullah ibn Abbas, Abdullah ibn Ja’far
ibn Abi Talib and others. We also find this reading of events strongly and
repeatedly in the words of Imam Husayn (‘a) before he set out for Iraq and
after.

The Imam
Tells About His Death In Iraq

Here we
shall mention only two examples from the Imam’s speech, which strongly allude
to the fact that he was venturing into martyrdom and sacrifice rather than
thinking of military action to bring down the regime by force.

The first
was in Hijaz before leaving Mecca for Iraq and the second in Karbala.

The first
speech is reported by Ibn Tawus in Al-Luhuf, where he (may God sanctify his
soul) says: It has been reported that when he [the Imam] (‘a) resolved on
setting out to Iraq he stood up and addressed the people saying:

“Praise
be to God. Whatever God wills [is going to happen], there is no power except
God. May God’s blessings be on His Apostle. Death has been destined for the
children of Adam the way a necklace is destined [to hang from] a girl’s neck.
My yearning for my forefathers is like Jacob’s yearning for Joseph. A [form of]
death has been chosen for me and I will meet it. It is as if I am watching my
joints being cut up by desert foxes between Al-Nawawis and Karbala. Then,
surely, empty stomachs and starved bellies will be filled with my remains.6

There is no
escape from a day that has been inscribed with the pen [of destiny]. God’s
pleasure is our pleasure, we who are the Ahl al-Bayt. We shall persevere in His
trial and He will give us in full the rewards of the patient ones. The piece of
flesh of God’s Messenger (S) will never be separated from him; it will be
gathered for him in paradise, and by this he will be delighted, and with them
[those who are his flesh], what he has been promised will be fulfilled.
Therefore, he who is prepared to lay down his life for our sake and has made up
his mind to meet God should set out with us for I am setting out in the
morning, by the will of God.”7

We need not
comment on this speech because it is quite clear that the Imam (‘a) was
preparing his companions for a fierce battle that would essentially expect
sacrifice, blood and martyrdom. He was not hoping for any quick victory out of
it. In this speech of the Imam there is no hint of military objective as is
known in military actions; he is only preparing his companions for a bloody and
tragic sacrifice. He asks those who want to accompany him to prepare themselves
for meeting God and for laying down their lives for His sake.

The second
one was the speech Husayn (‘a) gave at Dhu Husam, one of the stations toward
Iraq. He said:

“Do
you not see that truth is not applied and falsehood is not prohibited? [So] let
the believers desire to meet God while one is in the right, for I do not
consider death but a bliss and living together with oppressors a disgusting
thing.”8

This
reading is not only indicated by these words and speeches that have been
successively transmitted by writers of biographies such as al-Tabari, Ibn
al-A’th’am, Sayyid Ibn Tawus and al-Mufid, every event in Husayn’s journey to
Iraq shows that the Imam was not preparing for a military activity for
overthrowing Umayyad rule. Therefore, the Imam was not thinking, and he could
not have thought of military action, rather he was with full awareness,
venturing into an unparalleled act of tragic sacrifice in which he would
surrender himself, his family and his companions. The purpose of this was to
jolt the sleeping conscience of the nation, and imbue it with action and the
spirit of courage and sacrifice.

Perhaps the
discussion the Imam had with his brother Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, (may God
be pleased with him) when he intended to leave Mecca for Iraq, also hints at
that objective. Sayid Ibn Tawus relates in Al-Luhuf that:

“When
Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah learnt about Husayn’s (‘a) plan to leave Mecca he came
to him and held the halter of his dromedary Husayn and said: ‘Brother, did you
not promise me to consider what I suggested to you?’ He had suggested to the
Imam to move to Yemen and abandon going to Iraq.

He replied:
‘Yes’. Then Ibn al-Hanafyyah said: ‘So what prompts you to leave in haste?’
‘After I left you’, replied the Imam, ‘the Messenger of God (S) came to me (in
a dream) and said: ‘O, Husayn! Go out, for God wills to see you killed.’

Ibn
al-Hanafiyyah then said to him: “We are from God and to Him we are returning!
Then what is the meaning of carrying these women with you?’ ‘God wills to see
them captives’, he replied. Then Ibn alHanafiyyah bade him farewell and went
away.9

Where
Military Campaigns Fail, Armed Struggle Succeeds

The result
we can derive from our quick analysis above is this: Imam Husayn (‘a) had
decided to undertake an armed struggle against the status quo, an action which
would be followed by a bloody sacrifice, and he was not thinking of confronting
Umayyad power with any military action at all.

These are
two forms of uprising, each of which fulfils a specific objective, and mixing
the two leads to a great historical mistake that causes confusion in our
understanding of the uprising of Husayn, its objectives and results.

Let us see
what aims and objectives the Imam intended to achieve by this armed struggle
and tragic sacrifice that he ventured into with full knowledge and awareness.

1. Freeing
The People’s Will

Usually
tyrants employ two effective weapons against the people when they revolt
against injustice: The weapons of terror and corruption. The characteristic
feature of these two methods is that they strip the nation of awareness and the
will and ability to act.

The first
requirements of any action are awareness and will. When one loses awareness and
the power of will, he loses all capacity to act and submits to the status quo.
Then the despot and his courtiers dominate the will, consciousness and fate of
the people, not even leaving their taste, morals and customs free. The very
personality of the people is completely distorted as the despot now controls
every aspect of their lives, while they get nothing from the tyrant except
orders to be obedient and submissive.

It is this
fact that the Qur’an alludes to with regard to the way Pharaoh treated his
people and the way they regarded him:

“So he
despised his people and they obeyed him. Indeed they were a transgressing
lot.” (43:54).

Pharaoh was
able to treat his people with contempt, and to dispossess them of their
consciousness, will and values by unleashing terror and spreading corruption.
In this way he was able to transform their personality completely, uprooting
from their souls the power of thinking and awareness, not to talk of will,
struggle and refusal. This is how Pharaoh gained their obedience and total
submission. This method is preferred by the leaders of deviation for gaining
the obedience and loyalty of the people, a loyalty that is usually established
over their shattered personality.

Henceforth
the rulers from among the leaders of deviation live undisturbed by the people
with nothing to decamp them from their side, while the people turn into a herd
of cowed sycophants whose consciousness and will changes into subordination to
the rulers. So they will love what the rulers love and will what they will.

Thus, the
process of transformation and distortion of the nation’s personality becomes
complete, with the result that two classes are formed in the community:

Class of
the arrogant: This includes the despotic rulers, their cohorts and the
‘nobility’ who benefitfrom them; the haughty, who lord it over the people. They
place themselves in place of God, in the position of authority over man’s life,
consider themselves master over the people and corrupt the earth. They are the
Rebels (taghut) 10 who cross the limits of servitude and obedience to God Most
High, to assume the position of arrogance and absolute authority in place of
God, and spread corruption in the lives of the people.

The
oppressed class: This class is despised by the tyrant and denied its right in
the scale ofhumanity, weakened and dispossessed of their God-given capabilities
and faculties. This large group becomes the subjugated class which accepts the
status quo, loses all its peculiarities and human values and turns into a
compliant tool that does the bidding of the tyrant. The first thing this class
loses is its consciousness and will and then every other thing God has given
it, such as values and capabilities.

“God
has set a seal on their hearts and their hearing, and there is a blindfold on
their sight” (2:7).

The tyrant
(taghut) dispossesses them of awareness and will by way of terror and
corruption. To save them from the grip of the tyrant they have to be given
their awareness and will back. This will enable them see things and people with
their God-given consciousness and not through what the tyrant loves or hates.
This will also enable them decide for themselves rather than allow the
oppressor to decide on their behalf.

Husayn (‘a)
was facing a bad socio-political reality in which the Umayyads had completely
distorted the personality of the nation and stripped it of its values,
capabilities, awareness and will. The worst thing with regard to this
volte-face was that the capabilities, which Islam had released from the inner
selves of those people in order to extirpate oppression and idolatry and
support monotheism and justice, had turned into a tool to prop up tyranny and
polytheism.

The sword
with which the Messenger of God (S) had armed them to fight the enemies of
Islam had transformed, in their hands, into an instrument of fighting the
Prophet’s descendants (‘a) and their allies instead of fighting their enemies.
This was the essence of the transmutation in civilization that took place in
the life of this nation at the hands of the Umayyads. It was to this reality
that Imam Husayn was alluding to in his second speech, which he addressed to
the army of Ibn Sa’ad on the day of Ashura.

“You have
drawn the sword with which we armed you, against us, and ignited the fire we
kindled against our enemy and yours, against us. So you have joined hands with
the forces of your enemies against your allies, in spite of being aware that
they (your enemies) have not established any justice among you, nor do you
expect any good from them.”11

I wonder
how this dangerous regression took place in the minds of these people to the
extent that their swords with which Islam had armed them in order to fight injustice
and idolatry, were now to fight the pure and trustworthy son of the Messenger
of God (‘a), in support of the rule of Mu’awiya’s sinful inebriate son, about
whose licentiousness, sinful habits, wine-drinking and indecency no Muslim had
any doubts. I wonder how this serious regression took hold of the lives of
these people so much so that their hearts and swords were in disagreement, as
al-Farazdaq said to Husayn (‘a). However, the two united in fighting the son of
God’s Messenger (S) and his family and companions who established prayer,
commanded what was good and prohibited what was evil? How did the power of
Islam change into a force that supported the enemies of Islam and attacked its
propogators. All this happened because the belligerent stand towards Islam and
the Islamic community of those who were fighting Islam only recently persisted.

They still
harboured the spirit of the days of Ignorance, upheld its customs and moral
outlook and terrorized and corrupted the people. Before the advent of Islam,
this isolated place was little known to other nations and it was stagnant with
hardly any enterprise, resolve or power of resistance. Then the Messenger of
God (S), awakened the strength, resolve and the power of initiative and action
that was dormant in the minds of these people. Islam was able to bring forth
their latent potential of action and revolution. This once ignorant people
produced the greatest movement of human civilization known in history. It burnt
off the thrones of tyrants and despots. However, this nation soon reversed its
steps, and this power, enthusiasm and initiative made a volte-face and started
to annihilate the propagators and allies of this religion. This negative action
was taken by the opulent and arrogant class, which, not long ago, was waging
war against the religion and actually carrying within it, its ideas, customs
and behavior, residues of the Days of Ignorance!

We do not
know of any tragedy befalling nations that is more painful and abominable than
turning against oneself; to the extent that one prefers what harms him to that
which benefits him; prefers corruption over honesty, fights his allies and
defends his enemies. The Muslims fell into such a tragedy at that time, and we
hear the Imam expressing his deep pain in these words: “Woe to you! Do you
help these people and forsake us?”

Undoubtedly,
the nation had been subjected to a civilizational apostasy of the type the Most
High points out here:

“If he
[the Apostle] dies or is slain, will you turn back on your heels?”(3:144).

It is our
duty to ponder over what happened. Whenever loyalty and repudiation exchange
places in the life of people the nation faces civilizational apostasy in its
history. When the nation slips into this apostasy it suffers self-alienation
and the principles it subscribes to are altered into something different. This
is because the nation’s identity depends on its loyalty and repudiation and
when loyalty exchanges position with repudiation, a nation faces regression.
This situation was what the Imam hinted at when he addressed the army of the
family of Abu Sufyan on the day of Ashura: “And you joined hands with your
enemies against your allies”

It is a
situation whereby one is estranged and hostile to oneself, for when one loves
his enemies and supports them against his own allies, he is really supporting
them against himself, and it is impossible for one to do that unless he becomes
estranged to himself and forgets himself. The way the Qur’an expresses this
situation is very precise:

“And
do not be like those who forget God, so He makes them forget their own
souls.”(59:19).

If one
forgets God, He will make him forget himself and he who estranges himself from
God will have his own soul estranged from him. In this condition of decline and
fall man surely loses his soul and the worst form of loss is for one to lose
his own soul.

When that
happens one is dispossessed of his capital entirely so nothing remains
thereafter for which any good might be hoped. God Most High says:

“As
for those whose deeds weigh light in the scales, it is they who have ruined
their soul, because they used to wrong Our signs.”(7:9).

The Most
High also says:

“Say,
‘Indeed the losers are those who ruin themselves and their families on the Day
of Resurrection.” (39:15).

Losing
one’s soul differs from any other loss because profit and loss is the increase
or decrease in what one possesses of the original ‘capital’. Any material or
spiritual gain that is earned is counted as ‘profit’, and when any material or
spiritual gifts that are bestowed by God are lost a ‘loss’ entry is made. In
both cases a person keeps his soul, which is the axis around which profits and
loss revolve. When one loses this axis he will have lost his soul and not only
his material or spiritual acquisitions. The fall of this pivot constitutes the
greatest loss, which is unlike any other. The Qur’anic expression “they
have lost [or ruined] themselves”12 which appears in several verses points to
this kind of loss. Another expression employed in the Qur’an to describe those
people who lose their souls in the life of this world is ‘injustice to
oneself’. The Most High says:

“And
they did not wrong Us, but they used to wrong [only] themselves.”(2:57).

The people
whom God punishes because of their injustice, are not wronged by Him but they
used to wrong themselves:

“…
and We did not wrong them, but they used to wrong themselves.”(16:118).

And
finally, good and evil ends with one’s soul: he who accepts guidance does so
for himself, and he who is misguided, does so against himself.

“Whoever
is guided, is guided only for [the good of] his own soul, and whoever goes
astray, goes astray only to its detriment” (10:108).

That is,
this deviation and transgression only affects them; these people are going
astray at their own peril, their efforts and actions come to naught, and they
earn for themselves nothing but deviation and ruin. It is indeed a great ruin
that one should lose himself and waste all his efforts like “Those whose
endeavours go awry in the life of the world.”(47:8).

When man
gets estranged from himself, and wrongs his own soul and becomes hostile to it,
he inevitably loses it. And when this happens his endeavours go awry and come
to naught.

Imam Husayn
(‘a) was alluding to this loss when he addressed al-Hurr’s companions at the
station of

Al-Baydah.
He said: “I am Husayn ibn Ali and my mother is Fatima the daughter of the
Messenger of God. My life is with your lives, and my family is with your
families. You have a model in me …. If you do not act [in the way expected of
you] and you go back on your word and revoke your allegiance to me; then you
have missed your good fortune and wasted your share. ‘So whoever breaks his
oath breaks it only to his own detriment13 and God will make me needless of
you.’14

Through
this transformation whose stages the Qur’an describes, man does injustice to
himself, estranges and loses himself and turns into something entirely
different from his former self. He moves with the people neither with his own
volition nor with awareness; he only does the bidding of someone else. He acts
according to the will of the tyrant who subjugates him and causes him to move
not in the direction of what is beneficial to him but in the direction of what
serves his enemy. Such are the people whose hearts become inverted and are
sealed by God. God Most High presented the truth when He said:

“We
transform their hearts” (6:115).

And

“God
has set a seal on their hearts” (2:7).

No will
power, nor any awareness, understanding or light by which they may move among
the people will ever return to them, unless God wills so. Undoubtedly, a
terrible change had occurred in the minds of these people resulting in a
dangerous inversion with few parallels in history. It reached an extent whereby
thirty thousand or more men left Kufa, the headquarters of the Commander of the
Faithful (‘a) to fight the lord of the youth of paradise, the [grand]son of
God’s Messenger (‘a) and son of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a), but only
seventy-odd men came out with Husayn (‘a) to confront Yazid ibn Mu’awiyah.

The only
explanation for this inversion and volte-face that is observed in the
collective personality of the nation – or at least a large cross section of it
– lies in the extensive efforts put by the Umayyads in terrorizing and
corrupting the people, in order to impose their control over the Muslims. Their
Islamic identity was distorted to such an extent that even their consciences,
perceptions and will power were controlled by the Umayyads. They pleased them
and served their purposes.

Therefore,
there was the need to jolt the conscience of the nation back into its
consciousness, will and values. It needed to feel the depth of the catastrophe
which befell it and feel repentant. If this jolt would not help anything with
regard to the affected generation, it was considered a necessary step for
saving the next generation, lest it become affected by this civilizational
regress.

The armed
struggle which the Imam (‘a) led and his tragic sacrifice created the necessary
effect on the nation’s conscience. It served as the clarion call that the
political and social climate was waiting for. The martyrdom of Husayn (‘a)
along with his family and companions, in its pathetic way jolted the Muslims’
conscience, made them feel repentant and enabled them retrieve their consciousness
and will, so that they could repent and atone for forsaking the son of the
daughter of God’s Messenger (S).

On that day
they felt that terrible nightmare weighing on their hearts and minds. Imam
Husayn’s sacrifice had violently shaken the Muslims’ conscience and led them to
feel the enormity of the crime that had been perpetrated and the depth of
apostasy and inversion that had plagued their minds and lives. This calamitous
event became the launching pad of many revolts and a great source of inspiration
for political movements in Islamic history. This was the revolutionary purpose
of the uprising of Imam al-Husayn

(‘a).

2.
Stripping The Ruling System Of Legitimacy

Despite the
enormity of what the Muslims lost and the deviation and regression that was
their lot during the period of Umayyad rule, there was still a greater danger
which would affect Islam directly, and not only the Muslims. It was possible
for that perversion to be applied to Islam itself so that it would be exposed
to the corruption that the Muslims became exposed to.

This was
probable because the perversion was issuing from the position of the Islamic
Caliphate, an office that enjoyed considerable legitimacy and sanctity in
Muslim minds. The Umayyads used to rely very much, for their political and
social position, on the issue of legitimacy. One way or the other, they were
giving the impression that the office of caliphate was more powerful than that
of the Messenger (S).

One of them
said: “The caliph is superior to the Apostle.” 15 They considered this position
as the shortest and easiest way by which to fulfill their aspirations and this
is why Mu’awiyah often tried to consolidate this legitimacy for himself, and
his son Yazid and those who would come after him. This position of legitimacy
which the Umayyads coveted was the greatest danger their dynasty caused Islam,
because deviationary tendencies started from the palaces of the caliphs and
reached the general public in the garb of legality. In those palaces there were
religious scholars of the court who justified this deviation and gave it a
touch of legality and, as a result, it apparently reflected and became
applicable to Islam. In this way, Islam lost its originality and purity on the
widest plane, i.e., among the general public.

In his
movement, the Imam (‘a) was intent on tearing away that garb under which the
Umayyad rulers took cover. He tried to strip their rule of the legitimacy and
sanctity which they strove to keep at all costs. In this way the Imam sought to
prevent the Umayyad rulers from corrupting Islam. He used to state this
position clearly.

He
announced his view about Yazid and his ineligibility for the office of the
caliphate, and discredited him whenever he got the chance. The Imam openly
declared this view of his concerning Yazid when alWalid ibn Utbah summoned him
to give his pledge of allegiance in the presence of Marwan. After a long speech
and with the intention of making known to Marwan his view on Yazid and his
stand concerning the allegiance, the Imam said:

“O Governor!
We are the people of the House of Prophethood, the source of the message, the
place which angels frequented and the descending place of mercy. Through us,
God started [His religion] and through us will He seal [it]. Yazid is a sinner,
who drinks wine, kills people unlawfully and commits sin openly, so my type
cannot pledge allegiance to his type.”16

Indeed the
Imam’s uprising against Yazid, his war with the army of Ibn Ziyad after
refusing to pledge allegiance to Yazid and his calamitous martyrdom along with
his family and companions at the hands of the army of the caliphate struck a
final blow to the legitimacy of that rule. Imam Husayn’s martyrdom in this
tragic way in Karbala aroused the feelings of all Muslims; the generation of
the killers and the generations that followed. They felt the enormity and
repugnance of the crime right inside their consciences and they became
resentful of Yazid and the other Umayyad caliphs who succeeded him. The
standing of the caliphate with respect to the law fell in the eyes of the
people and it no longer had that position of legitimacy and sanctity in the
minds of the Muslims.

It cannot
be doubted that this crime which was perpetrated in Iraq by the apparatus of
Umayyad rule left a deep mark on the collective Muslim conscience, if not in
that generation but surely in the one that immediately followed. This heinous
deed brought down the position of Umayyad rule, which was henceforth viewed as
any other secular regime whose reigns are held by the mightiest, not the righteous.
People’s relationship with the new leadership was no longer a purely religious
relationship that stemmed from the people’s belief in the legitimacy of the
leadership. As a result, the perversions that took place through Umayyad state
apparatus did not exert a pronounced corrupting effect on Islam any longer. To
a large extent, the religion became immune to the distortions the rulers
introduced, and from that date, the Muslims took, as religious authority,
another class, different from the ruling class, which the people referred to
for their worldly affairs, as necessity dictated.

From that
date a line of thought, apart from that of the rulers, began to emerge in
Muslim society. This was the line of the scholars and jurists in whom the
people put their trust. And the more the scholars and jurists distanced
themselves from the kings and rulers, the stronger was the people’s confidence
in them.

A perusal
of Islamic history will reveal a stark disparity between the respect the
caliphate commanded before the Battle of the Bank [the battle that Imam Husayn
fought took near the Euphrates] and after it. The essential feature of this
disparity is that the caliphate after the battle of Karbala lost its legitimacy
and the garb of religion it once wore.

To sum up,
Imam Husayn’s uprising was a revolt against Yazid in the form of an armed
struggle that was followed by a tragic and pathetic sacrifice unparalleled in
Islam’s history, and not a military campaign that was aimed at overthrowing the
system. To understand the uprising of Imam Husayn (‘a) it is essential to be
aware of this fact. He never thought that Iraq could confront Syria, nor did he
expect loyalty from the Iraqis, or expect them to struggle against Umayyad
terror and enticement.

At the best
of times, none among the Iraqis would have been faithful to the Imam except a
small band of his Shi’ah with whom he confronted Yazid. As such, the Imam (‘a)
knew this fact and understood it very well. Therefore, the Imam was not seeking
a military conquest when he rose up but an effective jolt to the conscience of
the misled Muslims to vigourously stir their minds and sentiments through the
tragedy he would meet at the hands of the Umayyad army in Karbala.

The purpose
of the Imam’s bloody and pathetic sacrifice was to arouse the Muslims against
the power of the Umayyads and to discredit and strip them of the well-guarded
legitimacy of the Umayyad machinery of government as a whole. It was also to
cause their political and social isolation within the Islamic world especially
in the provinces of Hijaz and Iraq which were considered the heart of the
Muslim world at that time. The Imam’s success in achieving all these goals was
undoubtedly resounding.

This is the
victory which Imam Zayn al-Abidin (‘a) hinted at in his answer to a questioner
in Syria who was overwhelmed by the horror of Husayn’s death in Karbala. The
man said: ‘Who is victorious, O, Ali ibn al-Husayn?’ ‘When it is time for
prayer and the mu’ezzin (caller to prayer) makes the call you will know who is
victorious?’ he replied. This is the political outcome of Imam Husayn’s
uprising. From these two results of Imam Husayn’s revolt we can comprehend the
great historical role played by the Imam’s uprising in Islamic history.

Al-Daynuri’s
Al-Akbar al-Tiwal pg. 221.

Ibid pg.
222.

Ibid, pg.
224.

A station
on the way to Mecca after Waqisah as one comes from Kufa. See Mu’jam al-Buldan,
5/283.

Ibn
al-Atham’s Al-Futuh 5/124; Al-Khwarizmi’s Maqtal 1/222.

In this
metaphor, the Imam might have had in mind his enemies at Kabala –Translator.

Al-Luhuf
pg. 53 (Isfahan edition: 1366. A.H. Iranian Calender); Muhaddith al-Qummi’s
Nafas al-Mahmum pg. 163 (Qum,

Basirati
pub. 1405 A.H.) and pg. 70 (Sidon: Al-Irfan publications 1331 A.H.) 8. Tarikh
al-Tabari 7/301 (European edition).

Sayyid Ibn
Tawus, Al-Luhuf pg. 55 (Isfahan edition); Nafas al-Mahmum pg. 164 – 165 (Qum,
1405 A.H.). The last partwhich talks about the women is reported by al-Mas’udi
in Ithbat al-Wasiyyah pg. 141 (Najaf, Al-Haydariyyah press).

In
Al-Mufradat, al-Raghib says that taghut denotes the rebels and those who are
worshipped instead of God. Pg. 304 –305.

Sayyid Ibn
Tawus’s Al-Luhuf fi Qatla al-Tufuf pg. 58.

Refer to
Qur’an, 6:12; 7:9; 11:21; 23:103; 39:15 etc.

The Imam
hints at the God Most High’s norm of effacement.

This
passage alludes to the divine norm of Substitution that comes after Effacement.
Tarikh al-Tabari 6/ 229.

It was the
tyrant al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi who said it while comparing the caliphate
of Abdulmalik and theapostleship of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and
his family. See Ibn Abi al-Hadid’s Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 9/238.

Al-Luhuf fi
Qatla al-Tufuf pg. 17-18; Al-Khwarizmi’s Maqtal al-Husayn (‘a) 1/184; Bihar
al-Anwar 44/325.

Husayn (‘a)
’S Letter From Karbala To His Brother, Muhammad

Mayassar
ibn Abd al-Aziz reported that Abu Ja‘far (‘a) has said: Husayn ibn Ali (‘a)
sent a letter from

Karbala to
Muhammad ibn Ali. [It read]: “In the name of God, the Merciful, the
Compassionate. From Husayn ibn Ali to Muhammad ibn Ali and the Hashimites who
are with him. [Know that] the world is as if it has never been and the
hereafter is as if it has always been. Peace.”1

The Reason
The Letter Was Written

Husayn (‘a)
wrote this letter from Karbala to his brother Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah at a
critical juncture in the history of this nation. The Umayyads had gone to great
lengths in tyranny and had corrupted Islamic society. They had succeeded in
spreading terror, temptation and deception to different regions of the Islamic
world, and the people had responded to this three-pronged agent of control and
acquiesced to the oppression and corruption that was being perpetrated by the
Umayyads. They altered the outlines of this religion to such an extent that
nothing would have remained of Islam but its name, as Husayn (‘a) said: “Then
bid farewell to Islam for the nation has been afflicted with a shepherd like
Yazid.”

On the one
side, the people had been possessed by fear and terror and their preference for
safety and well-being, and on the other by enticements. Imam Husayn (‘a) had
witnessed this severe trial in all its ramifications as he traveled from Medina
to Karbala… And now here he was confronting the army of the Umayyads. He was
the son of the daughter of the Messenger of God (S), and one about who no one
was in any doubt as to his honour in the sight of God and his eligibility for
the leadership of the Muslims. With all this, no one stood by him from this
nation, large as it was, except seventy-two souls from his family and
companions.

There were
two faces to this tribulation: an external one in the form of the political and
social life of the nation that came under the oppression and corruption of the
Umayyads, and an internal one which was the minds of the people with their love
for the world, personal well-being and anxiety about death. Between these two
faces a clear reciprocal relationship existed, for terror and corruption
results in weakness and mental impotence, and love for the world enables the
rulers to oppress and corrupt the people.

Yes, Husayn
(‘a) was facing a big problem, as big as the Islamic world itself. It was
two-sided, one inside the minds and the other in the political life of the
nation. He was working to change both. On the first front he was working in
order to condemn the rule of the Umayyad family, nullify the legitimacy of
their power and expose their crimes and corruption to the Muslims. On the
second front, the Imam was trying to break away the barrier of fear from the
minds of the Muslims and imbue them with enthusiasm, bring back the will-power
which they had been robbed of and restore their trust, strength, courage, and
reliance on God.

The Imam
was striving to remove the widespread defeatist tendency that was affecting the
Muslims. He knew that the reason behind all this defeatism was internal: love
for the world and neglect of the hereafter. He thought that the way to treat
this terrible psychological problem was to make the hereafter the object of
desire not the world, and make them overcome the fear of death. It was against
this background that the Imam wrote to his brother Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah
and addressed the community of his grandfather. He presented the diagnosis of
the problem and gave the precise prescription for its treatment.

“[Know
that] the world is as if it has never been and the hereafter is as if it has
always been. Peace.”

Devotion To
God And Withdrawing From The World

The
statement of the Imam, precise as it was, contained the whole solution:
exclusive devotion to God by reducing the charm and glamour of the world. The
Commander of the Faithful (‘a) once said concerning Uthman ibn Maz‘un (may God
have mercy on him) “I used to have a brother in [faith and the love of] God
whose contempt for the world exalted him in my eyes.” In addition to cutting
down the fascinating effect of the world, one has to attach great importance to
the hereafter in his mind and arouse interest in it. This is what the Imam
alluded to in his address: “[Know that] the world is as if it had never been
and the hereafter is as if it has always been.”

Now let us
ponder over this statement of the Imam and discuss both parts of it. But before
that we shall ask: what is ‘the world’ and what is ‘the hereafter’?

What Are
The World And The Hereafter?

What is meant
by the world is attachment to it and what is meant by the hereafter is having a
relationship with God and wanting to meet Him. With this, one can live in the
world while being among the people of the next world, and we can describe them
as living in the world and not living in it.

They are
living in it in the sense that they move amidst the worldly people in their
normal activities such as business transactions and family life. However, they
do not live in this world since their hearts never get attached to it, nor does
the world penetrate into their hearts. Their hearts are only attached to God:
they sense, in this world, the blessings of paradise and the torment of hell.

How Can A
Person Be Among The People Of The Hereafter While Living In This World?

If we want
to know how one can be among the people of the hereafter while still living in
this world, and how one can treat the malaise of attachment to the world and
free his soul from it and subsequently attach himself to the hereafter, we have
to ponder over these words with which the Imam (‘a) addressed Muhammad ibn
al-Hanafiyyah: … “[Know that] the world is as if it has never been and the
hereafter is as if it has always been.”

Worldly
life will surely come to an end and one’s relationship with the world will not
last; all that one acquires in this world and one’s attachments will finish. It
is the hereafter that is permanent:

“What is
with you will be exhausted but what is with God is permanent.” (16:96).

What is
with us is our possessions and what we are attached to in the life of this
world, and what is with God is the peace and pleasure of the next world.

God Most
High says:

“The
parable of the life of this world is that of water which we send down from the
sky. It mingles with the earth’s vegetation from which humans and cattle eat.
When the earth puts on its luster and is adorned, and its inhabitants think
they have power over it, Our edict comes to it, by night or day, whereat we
turn it into a mown field, as if it did not flourish the day before. Thus, do
we elaborate the signs for a people who reflect” (10:24).

It is the
permanent and enduring pleasures that deserve man’s attachment instead of the
fleeting enjoyments that quickly disappear and cannot last for man. Every
enjoyment is fitted for man’s affection to the extent for which it lasts for
him, and the relationship between the duration of worldly pleasures and those of
the next world is the same as the relationship that exists between the limited
and the unlimited or the absolute. So the proportion of one’s attachment to the
world and the hereafter should be the same as the proportion of the duration of
limited worldly pleasures to that of the limitless pleasures of the hereafter.

Man’s
attachment to this world and its pleasures and his disregard for the hereafter
often stem from an illusion of the permanence of, as well as, his false hopes
in, the former and forgetfulness with regard to the hereafter. This is the
consequence of illusion and forgetfulness.

The cure
for this condition is for one to assume that the world has never been. This
assumption will soon come true willy-nilly, for when all that pertains to the
world is taken away from him it will be as though the world has never been.
Secondly, one should assume that the hereafter is already here, and it will
also soon come, because for each individual, the hereafter starts when he
breathes his last. These two suppositions, which are very near to reality, are
indeed the remedy for that baseless illusion and forgetfulness.

From The
Hereafter To The Hereafter

Based on
this conception of the world and the hereafter, when the sons of the hereafter
leave this world they, in fact, leave the hereafter for the hereafter and not
the world for the hereafter. This is because they have never really lived in
this world nor has it ever become wedded to their hearts, to have necessitated
their removal from it to the next world: they were already living in the
hereafter before moving to the hereafter. Based on this understanding of the
world and the hereafter mankind fall into four classes:

The first
class, which moves from the world to the world. The second class which moves
from the hereafter to the world The third class which moves from the world to
the hereafter.

The fourth
class which moves from the hereafter to the hereafter.

The first
class: The people who move from the world to the world are those who do
everything in this world for its sake only; they never seek God’s pleasure and
other-worldly reward at all. All their activities are from the world and back
to it because if, for instance, they leave the house for the shop they are
moving from the world to the world: their stay in the house is for worldly
concerns, likewise is the time they spend in the shop.

The second
class: The people who move from the hereafter to the world are those who are
transformed from attachment to the hereafter to attachment to the world, and
after having worked for God’s sake they become egoistic. Such people change
from a position of work and activity for God’s sake to gain his pleasure and
the reward of the hereafter, to that of seeking worldly benefits; thus they
turn away from God towards the world.

The third
class: the people who move from the world towards the hereafter are in direct
opposition to the second class. This group forsakes the fleeting possessions of
this world and refuses to be attached to it, and instead seeks the pleasure of
God and the rewards of the hereafter and courts it.

The fourth
class: Those who move from the hereafter to the hereafter. We have already
talked about them. They live in the world among the people, move in business
centres and streets as people do, and establish social relationships like
marriage as people do, but their hearts never get attached to the world. These
people move from the hereafter to the hereafter in all the activities they
engage in this world.

Incentives
And Barriers

Like every
other activity, movement towards God has incentives and barriers. When the
incentives are there and the barriers are removed man can set out on his way
toward God whereas, in the opposite case, his movement towards the Almighty is
hampered. Among the principal things that induce one into this activity is the
yearning to meet God (in the hereafter) and among the most important barriers
is love of this world and attachment to it.

For man to
be able to move towards God Almighty he has to make his heart oblivious of the
world so that he will not be attracted towards its lures, lest it distract him
from God. This is what Imam Husayn (‘a) meant by his precise but significant
and forceful words: ‘As if the world has never been’. On the other hand, one
must think about the hereafter till he becomes attracted towards it. This is
what the Imam intended by saying ‘As if the hereafter has always been’, that
is, it has been ever since the beginning; never was it hidden nor will it ever
be.

When man
succeeds in concealing the world from his heart and conscience, and makes the
hereafter always present, he starts off on his upward journey to Almighty God
at a quick and firm pace because of the presence of a strong spur and the
absence of barriers. When on the other hand, worldly matters are strong and
influence the mind and feelings and the hereafter disappears from one’s heart
and conscience, all activity comes to a standstill. Between the poles, there
exist a number of stages by which man progresses or falls.

The Imam
had witnessed widespread acquiescence to falsehood and divergence from the
truth, acceptance of tyranny and submission to tyrants. The source of this
situation was preference of this world over the next, safety over tribulation,
and the fear of death, apprehension and pursuit, and their attendant
difficulties. And the root cause of all this is love for this world and
disregard for the hereafter.

The Imam
(‘a) wanted to address that phenomenon which was widespread among the people at
that time so he wrote that letter to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah and through
him, to the Hashimites who were with him and to the rest of the people.

Now we
shall study these two points from Imam Husayn (‘a)’s letter:

‘As If The
World Has Never Been’

The
assumption ‘As if the world has never been’ is not an empty one; it is a
reality which the Imam portrays in this way. The basis of this supposition is
to consider despicable the value, duration and enjoyments of this world. This
scorn for the world means divesting it of all value and consequence except, of
course, where the world constitutes a means of building the hereafter and
discharging the duties of servitude to God and carrying out one’s
responsibilities as His viceroy on earth. In this case the world per se loses
all value to man ‘as if the world has never been.’ It is related in Islamic
texts that the example of man in this world is like that of a traveler who
takes rest in the shade of a tree for an hour or so on a hot day, and then
leaves it and goes on. Such is man’s stay in the world.

The Messenger
of God (S) is reported to have said: “What do I have to do with the world? My
relationship with the world is only like the case of a rider on a summer day
that takes rest for an hour or so in the day in the shade of a tree, and then
goes away.”2

It is reported
from the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) who said: “The world is not a permanent
home and you are in it, like riders who erected a canopy and took some rest and
then carried their belongings and went away. They were light when they entered
it but burdened when they left it. They did not desire to leave it nor have
they found a way of returning to what they left in it.”3

The
Messenger of God (S) was asked: ‘How does a man live in the world?’ ‘The way
the caravan passes’, he replied. ‘How long does one stay in it?’ the questioner
asked. ‘As long as the one who is left behind by the caravan stays’, he
replied. Then the questioner asked: ‘How much is [the lapse] between the world
and the hereafter?’ ‘The twinkle of an eye’, he replied, ‘God, the Mighty and
Sublime, has said: “The day when they see what they are promised [it will be]
as though they had remained only an hour of a day.” (47:35).4

It is also
reported from the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) that “the world is [like] the
shade of a cloud or a dream in sleep.”5

In another
narration he also said: “Indeed, the world is the home from which no one will
be safe [while one is still] in it and one cannot retrieve anything that is
part of it (the world). People have been tempted in it as a trial. Whatever
they acquire of its possessions they will be made to leave behind and called to
account for them. And what they take that does not belong to it (the world)
they will arrive [in the hereafter] to meet it and abide by it. To the prudent,
the world is comparable to the shadow, which after full length diminishes and
after once increasing decreases.”6

Ali (‘a)
also said concerning the world: It is never limpid for the drinker or faithful
to the companion”7 These real pictures that Islamic sources depict of the world
make it completely contemptible in the eyes of the people ‘as if it has never
been’. This is what Husayn (‘a) wanted to tell the people on that day: that the
world will not stay nor be untainted for anyone. Therefore it is inappropriate
or even impermissible for a free man to submit to its dictates and abandon the
responsibility to bid what is right and forbid what is wrong and to strive
against the unjust, or prefer personal well-being over tribulation.

As If The
Hereafter Has Always Been

The hereafter
is the place for requital while the world is the place for work. In the hadith,
it is stated that: today (i.e. the world) [is time for] work and not for
accounting and tomorrow (i.e. the next world) [is time for] accounting and not
for work. This is the most precise description of this and the next world. So
what is the requital of the hereafter?

The
requital of the hereafter consists of rewards and punishments, both outward and
inward. The outward sensory aspect comprises paradise and hell, respectively.
The inward aspect of requital is nonsensory. Starting from this world man
receives the recompense of his deed, as he performs them, in the form of either
elevation or regression. However, this internal aspect of one’s work is not
perceived by the senses during the work. When one dies and the veil is removed
from his eyes he will see it: “We have removed your veil from your eyes
and so your sight is acute today.”(50:22).

Concerning
those who misappropriate the property of orphans, the holy Qur’an says:

“Indeed
those who consume the property of orphans wrongfully only ingest fire into
their bellies.”(4:10).

This fire
which they put in their bellies when they wrongfully consume the orphan’s
property is the same fire which will burn them internally in hell although they
will only feel it in that world and not here. Thus they receive their reward
during the act except that they do not sense it until after their death.

The
blessings and torment of the next world will commensurate with man’s level of
perfection or decline. Just as there are levels of perfection, there are levels
of decline. The blessings or torment will reflect the level of perfection or
decline he reaches. It has been related in a hadith about reciting the Qur’an,
on the authority of the Messenger of God (S) that “It will be said to him (i.e.
the reciter of the Qur’an): Recite and ascend. For every verse he recites he
ascends one level”8

On the
authority of Ali ibn Husayn Zayn al-Abidin (‘a) who said: “It will be said to
the person who has read the Qur’an: ‘Read and ascend’. He who enters paradise
from among them will not be surpassed in position except by the prophets and
the truthful ones.”9

These texts
show that Qur’an reciters have varying positions in paradise and the blessings
they are provided by God will be according to their position in the hereafter,
which in turn will be in proportion to their positions in this world, which
commensurate with what they have read of the Qur’an.

On the
authority of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a): “It will be said to the
reciter of the Qur’an: Read and ascend, and recite the way you were reciting in
the world, for your position in the world is

[proportional]
to the last verse you read”10This depicts a series of proportionate things:
what a believer receives of the blessings of paradise is proportionate to his
position in the next world. His position in the next world is proportionate to
his position in this world. His position in this world is proportionate to what
he reads, comprehends and acts upon from the Qur’an. This is the meaning of
‘Read and ascend’.

A deeper
and more intense portrayal of this fact is given in verse forty-six of Surah
Hud where an eternal picture of Noah’s son is given as:

“Indeed
he is [a personification] of unrighteous conduct.” (11:46).

This
picture is among the treasures of knowledge in the Qur’an. Man is nothing but
his own deeds and

Noah’s son
was an example of unrighteous deed. Man’s action is his position in this world
and this in turn is his position in the next. Just as Noah’s son was of
unrighteous conduct, there are many examples of righteous conduct in this
world. If we follow the series of proportion we previously mentioned we will
arrive at the amazing outcome to which Imam Husayn (‘a) draws our attention,
that is, the hereafter is in fact standing before us in this world although we
do not feel it.

Sensing the
hereafter right here in this world balances man’s behaviour by refining his
manners and freeing him from subservience to selfish desire, in setting the
soul free and helping it to soar toward God and in removing the barriers that
hinder his progress on the way to the Almighty.

After this
presentation of Islamic texts from the Book [the Qur’an] and the Sunnah [the
Prophet’s tradition] we wish to say that the position of the believer in the
hereafter, whether ascending or descending, will be proportionate to his works
— righteous or otherwise. Every good work that man does in this world raises
him and every bad one lowers him. And the degrees by which he ascends or
descends into paradise or hell respectively, depend on his position in this
world.

This issue
is of paramount importance in Islamic culture. In a nutshell, man encounters
the recompense for his actions in this world even before the next although he
does not sense it. What he receives in the hereafter in the form of blessings
or torment constitutes the external aspect, whereas his internal ascendance or
fall becomes his lot in this world. Man ascends and descends in this world and
this ascent and descent are connected to the ascent and descent in the
hereafter, except that one can remedy one’s fall in this world but cannot do so
in the hereafter.

This means
that one achieves nearness to God through his good works and gets distanced
from Him because of his bad deeds. ‘As if one is living in the hereafter and as
if it has always been.’ Therefore the hereafter is standing here in this world
and this is the meaning of ‘And as if the hereafter has always been’ in Imam
Husayn’s letter to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah and the Hashimites who were with
him.

The Results
That Follow The Two Viewpoints

First
viewpoint: Presence of this world and absence of the hereafter.

Second
viewpoint: Absence of this world and presence of the hereafter. ‘As if the
world has never been and as if the hereafter has always been.’

The first
view urges love, attachment and devotion to the world, and disregards the
hereafter, arouses inordinate hopes and expectation with regard to the world as
if it will never end and forgets the hereafter as if it will never come. He who
loves the world seeks to preserve himself physically and becomes a coward,
shrinks from struggling and prefers safety, and loses his self-esteem and
honour. The Commander of the Faithful (‘a) used to say: “The world
debases.”11

This
explains Islam’s disapproval of the world which seduces man, and makes him lose
his innate wisdom by attaching him to worldly possessions, inducing
indifference towards the hereafter, making him turn away from God and finally
causing his ruin. Among the outstanding consequences of this viewpoint are
weakness, cowardice and humiliation; lack of a firm stand in the face of
oppressors and dependence on them; and sluggishness towards fighting the
oppressors, and choosing personal welfare in the life of this world.

This is
what the Almighty says to such people:

“Oh
you who have faith! What is the matter with you that when you are told: ‘Go
forth in the way of God’, you sink heavily to the ground? Are you pleased with
the life of this world instead of the hereafter? But the wares of the life of
this world compared with the hereafter are but insignificant.”(9:38).

Finding
pleasure in and relying on the life of this world and paying much attention to
worldly property results in inertia that prevents one from struggling in the
way of God. It also makes one sluggish, which is the bane of man’s activity
towards God.

The Outcome
Of The Second View

The
greatest outcome of it is renunciation of the world and concern for the
hereafter. Asceticism is a praiseworthy trait that imbues man with strength of
character, courage, insight and attention to God. It makes a person take
courageous stands and frees him from indecision, impotence and humiliation.

Contempt
for the world and death, and concern for the hereafter are the source of all
courage and resolute stands in man’s life. On the other hand, attachment and
dependence on the world and giving much attention to it strips man of the power
to take decisions and remain steadfast in it, leads to justifications and
pretexts in giving up one’s stance, and finally, an outright denial of one’s
former position.

Expelling
The World From The Mind And Replacing It With The Hereafter

This is the
essence of Husayn’s letter to his brother Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah and the
Hashimites who were with him: erasing the world from their minds and ushering
in the hereafter ‘As if the world has never been, as if the hereafter has
always been’. It was a precise prescription to cure the lethargy that prevented
the Muslims from taking a courageous and responsible stand against the Umayyad
conspiracy which caused great damage to the Muslims and Islam. It corrupted
them in mind and spirit and played havoc with their culture. It stole from them
their will and conscience.

These were
the stages planned by the Umayyads to destroy the cultural, intellectual and
social dimensions of the then Islamic society. A vast movement was necessary to
foil this conspiracy, but it had already paralyzed the people’s will and
conscience to such an extent that they were no longer able to respond to the
son of the daughter of God’s Messenger (S), who urged them to struggle against
this plot and nullify it.

Imam Husayn
(‘a) wished to cure the people’s apathy towards jihad, their weakness with
regard to bidding what is good and forbidding what is bad, their inability to
confront injustice and oppression, and their preference for personal safety. It
was a precise prescription to remedy that situation.

First Point

The first
point in this prescription is to prepare the minds to relinquish the world in
order to meet God by feeling contempt for the world and its temporary
enjoyments, possessions and vicissitudes. Preparing the mind in this way has a
number of benefits:

1- One will
not get attached to the world, nor rejoice at it, nor depend on it.

2-One will
not grieve for what is lost or be filled with despair by misfortunes.

3- One will
not become anxious about losing God-given bounties in the future.

The Most
High says:

“So
that you may not grieve for what escapes you nor exult for what comes your
way.” (57:23).

Three
things drive man into tribulations: joy, grief and fear. Rejoicing over worldly
possessions, grief over what he loses and fear and anxiety about what he may
lose in future. When he rids himself of these three hurdles the world will
become inconsequential before him and he can prepare to meet God. He will be
freed from the grip of fear, weakness, inertia and indecision.

The path to
all this, as we have already said, is for one to undervalue the world and
assume that God has provided him with things as trial in the form of wealth,
spouse and children. Then he can free himself from fear, grief and rejoicing at
worldly acquisitions. Attachment to the world is similar to the force of
gravity with respect to the earth; if you are able to leave the earth’s
gravitational field, the force of gravity that controls your movements will
cease to act on you.

Similarly,
if one can make his mind leave the world while still living in it he will no
longer be affected by the affliction called “attachment to the world.” When
people die and leave this world they become amazed at how those living are
wedded to the world, its embellishments and possessions.

Islam does
not ask people to live a life of seclusion or withdraw themselves from
political and social circles and family life, nor abandon worldly enjoyments.
This issue is too obvious to warrant any comment. It is also very clear that
Islam invites people to activity in order to seek for provisions and develop
the world, with the condition that the gravitational pull of the world does not
overpower them or strip them of their freedom of will. This middle path is to
extricate the soul from attachment to the world but not from the world per se.
There is a clear difference between these two things. God Almighty has
mentioned the perfect yardstick in His book:

“So that
you may not grieve for what escapes you nor exult for what comes your way.” (57:23).

When we
become sure of ourselves with regard to ‘grief’, ‘joy’ and ‘fear’, then one can
enjoy what God has made permissible, without objection. This cannot be achieved
unless one removes himself from the world’s field of attraction and this is the
meaning of the well-known hadith: “Die before you die.” The first death which
the hadith urges is voluntary death while the second death the hadith refers to
is involuntary death.

What is
required of man is to die voluntarily before the inevitable involuntary death.
Voluntary death means that one should extricate oneself from attachment to the
life of this world before the involuntary death removes him from the world.
This is what is meant by distancing the world from the soul, and it is a hard
psychological process.

This is the
first point in Imam Husayn’s prescription for his brother, Muhammad ibn
al-Hanafiyyah, the Hashimites who were with him and the rest of the people. Man
has two viewpoints before him; one of them intensifies his torment and anxiety
while the other removes anxiety, torment and fear from him.

The first
is the assumption that man will live very long, which is a false assumption.

The second
one is that life is short. The basis of this assumption is the absence of the
world in the mind of that individual who always keeps death in sight so that
the world no longer seems to be under his control; or, as if he has never lived
in it to encounter difficulty in separation from it.

This
assumption frees man from the seduction and captivity of the world but it does
not seek to isolate him from the world; it only frees the soul from getting
attached to it and nothing else. The person with this view participates with
people in business, in the school, on the farm, in public and at home, out of a
sense of duty and responsibility and not because of attachment and dependence.
The two motives differ in the sense that should any misfortune befall one’s
business or affect his children he will not be overwhelmed by grief, which, one
who is attached to the world will experience.

Second
Point

The second
point in Imam Husayn’s prescription is making the hereafter always present in
the mind. This is also a difficult mental activity. The Imam’s expression of
this point is an exact one: ‘As if the hereafter has always been’. That is, it
has always been around since man first entered this world and will remain when
he returns to God. It would have been different if he had said ‘as if the
hereafter is around.’

Does the
world really mean attachment to it and the hereafter meeting God? A man can
live a long life in this world associating with people both at home and in
public and participate in social life without getting attached to the world at
all and without separating from God ever since he came to know Him through his
innate nature and his intellect. Such people have entered the world, remained
outside it, known God and never parted with Him. Their bodies are in the world
together with the people while their hearts are averse to the worldly
possessions to which the people are attached and on which they depend.

The
Commander of the Faithful, Ali (‘a) gave an apt description of the condition of
these people in the world, as recorded by al-Sharif al-Radi in a sermon in Nahj
al-Balaghah which came to be known as the sermon of the God-fearing. He said:
“If there had not been fixed periods (of life) ordained for each, their spirits
would not have remained in their bodies even for the twinkling of an eye
because of (their) eagerness for the reward and fear of chastisement.The greatness
of the Creator is seated in their hearts, and, so, everything else appears
small in their eyes.To them, Paradise is as though they see it and are enjoying
its favours.To them, Hell is also as if they see it and are suffering
punishment in it.”

In this
sermon the Imam (‘a) mentions the mental procedure followed by these people in
order to make the hereafter present before their eyes while they live and
interact with the people: “And when they come across a verse which contains
what creates eagerness for (Paradise) they pursue it avidly, and their spirits
turn towards it eagerly, and they feel as if it is in front of them.”

This is the
process of making the hereafter present which is the second point in the Imam’s
letter to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah. These two issues provide the cure for all
the misfortunes one may encounter in this world, the means of freedom from
one’s captivity that is caused by attachment to it and the launching pad for
the journey to God Almighty. Thus man changes from a mere object that is flung
around by the flow of events to an active element of change that is responsible
before God for determining the fate of human beings and building society.
Likewise, from being a servant of despotic rulers and their desires he turns
into a caller who arouses the nation and warns oppressive rulers to mend their
ways or face their doom.

Bihar
al-Anwar 45/87.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 73/123.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 78/18.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 73/122.

Ghurar
al-Hikam 1/102.

Nahj
al-Balaghah, Sermon 63.

Ghurar
al-Hikam 1/85.

Usul
al-Kafi 2/441.

Mustadrak
al-Wasa’il 1/299, first lithographic edition.

Majma’
al-Bayan 1/16.

Ghurar
al-Hikam 1/11.

Defying
Death On The Day Of Ashura

How Do We
Deal With Death?

The issue
of death and the way to deal with it is among the prominent elements of the
bloody fight by the Bank of the Euphrates on the day of Ashura. From this
angle, the event of Ashura is distinct among great historical events.

When Husayn
(‘a) was leaving Hijaz and heading towards Iraq he announced that he would meet
his death on that trip. He also informed the people of his own death and urged
them to lay down their lives for the same cause and prepare themselves for
their meeting with God. Throughout the journey to Karbala, Husayn (‘a) had been
frankly telling his companions and the people he met that their destination was
inevitable death. His companions entertained no doubts about it: they were
absolutely sure.

The only
excuse offered by those who wished to forsake Husayn (‘a) was their fear of
death, and there are many instances of this in Husayn’s journey to Karbala.
This is a remarkable feature of the battle of Ashura which distinguishes it
from other similar incidents. For a revolutionary leader to invite people to
their death is very rare, if not completely unheard of. Such leaders invite the
people to activism and revolution and request them to get ready to sacrifice
their lives for it, if need be. Husayn’s case was different

. He did
not seek a military conquest as imagined by the people; he only wanted to
embark boldly upon a tragic sacrifice unparalleled in history, in order to jolt
the nation’s conscience. Husayn (‘a) had found that the Umayyads had succeeded
in controlling the people’s will and rendering them subservient through terror
and exile.

In this
atmosphere the Umayyads tried to reinstitute pre-Islamic values and views in
the new Islamic society with no significant opposition from the community.
Therefore a strong jolting of the people’s conscience was necessary to restore
the will they had been robbed of, and this could only be achieved by a tragic
sacrifice unparalleled in history! Thus Husayn (‘a) prepared his family and his
companions for this tragedy!

This
feature of the event of Ashura makes it unique when compared to most other similar
events in history. It is a deceitful mistake of history to have stripped Ashura
of this feature. If the feat of defying death and seeking martyrdom be divorced
from the event of Ashura it will be nothing more than an insurrection against
Umayyad rule by an extremely unequal military force. It would not have achieved
its goals as expected by those who were advising Husayn (‘a) against his
journey to Iraq, without realising his intention. The Imam (‘a) was seeing what
they were not seeing and knew what they knew not.

How Do
People Face Death?

Death is an
important matter with regard to how people organize their lives. With respect
to this natural phenomenon which is a part of God’s inexorable norms, people
fall into two groups: the overwhelming majority who are apprehensive of death
and try to escape it, and the minority who challenge death and long for it.

The fear of
death and challenging death, play a significant role in organizing people’s
lives and in determining their destiny. If a nation is afraid of death
oppressive rulers will not need much effort to subjugate and cow them down.
Their lives become subservient to the despot and they gradually lose their
innate nature and conscience, which form the basis of a decent life. However, a
nation which has the power to face death without fear and proves it, cannot be
made to bow down to the will of tyrants. It is impossible to rob such people of
their will and goals.

We shall
now dwell, to some extent, on these two situations (i.e. fear of death and
challenging death):

Fear Of
Death

Fear of
death deeply affects people’s lives and has wide-ranging effects in society
with respect to activism and struggle, so this phenomenon deserves a closer
study. By God’s will, we will discuss, in what follows, the causes of this
phenomenon, its negative effects on society, and the useful educative ways to
cure minds of this condition.

Causes

Attachment
to the world is among the most important causes of fear of death. If one lives
in this world like all people and enjoys its good things but his heart does not
get attached to it, death will not frighten him. We shall discuss this point
presently, God willing.

Another
cause of fear of death is poor preparation for the hereafter, because of which
one is afraid of embarking on a new phase of life that will be everlasting. It
is to this fact that the following Qur’anic verse alludes, while addressing the
Jews, who believed that God preferred them over all other nations and that they
were His friends to the exclusion of other people:

“Say,
‘O Jews! If you claim that you are God’s favorites to the exclusion of other
people, then long for death, should you be truthful. Yet they will never long
for it because of what their hands have sent ahead, and God knows best the
wrongdoers.”(62:6-7).

This is a
litmus test to gauge the truthfulness of their claim. Lack of preparation for
the hereafter results from getting wedded to the world, therefore, this is the
principal factor that causes fear of death. Something to this effect has been
related from Imam al-Sadiq (‘a): “He who loves the world is humiliated”.1 This
narration could be analyzed and interpreted in this way: love for the world and
attachment to it is among the causes of uneasiness towards death, and the two
are in fact two sides of a single issue; he who loves the world becomes afraid
of death.

Whoever
fears death is humiliated because he does not have the ability to take a stand
on a bold resolution, and when a man is unable to do so he becomes a compliant
tool whose actions are dependent on those of the arrogant powers: This is the
humiliation which Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) speaks about in this narration.

This is a
precise yardstick by which a person’s readiness for the hereafter, in this
world, may be known. The more one’s attachment to the life of this world is,
the less his preparation for the next; and the less one’s preparation for the
hereafter is, the more his apprehension about death. Someone said to Abu Dharr
(may God be pleased with him): “Why do we dislike death?” He replied: “Because
you have built this world and demolished your hereafter; so you dislike moving
from a refurbished place to ruins.”

Then he
asked: “How do you consider our meeting God?” “The good doer will [meet Him]
like someone who has been away and now returns to his family, the wrongdoer
will [meet God] like the slave who had run away and now returns to his master.”
The questioner added: “How do you see our condition with God?” He replied: “Put
your works before the Book of God, the Blessed, the Sublime [for He says]:
“Indeed the pious shall be amid bliss, and indeed the vicious shall be in
hell” (8:13-14), then the man said: “So where is God’s mercy?” Abu Dharr
answered: “Indeed God’s mercy is close to the virtuous.” (7:56).2

The Stand

Strength,
courage and audacity certainly constitute one of the two elements that make a
stand, the other being political awareness. Since fear of death weakens man, it
inevitably deprives him of the power to take a practical stand on difficult
questions. Man’s worth in the field of encounter does not lie in his intention
alone; it rests on his stand as well.

A large
number of Muslims during the time of Imam Husayn (‘a) were not pleased with
Yazid and his actions; they hated him very much, but Husayn translated that
hatred and rejection to action. The value of Imam Husayn’s work lies here, for
a stand is the embodiment of opinion and affiliation; bringing out views,
affiliations, loyalty or repudiation from the mind to the arena of
confrontation.

All people
do not approve of injustice but some openly declare their disapproval either by
civil disobedience, demonstrations and strikes or by revolution. Of course, the
disapproval which remains in the mind unexpressed will not cost the disapprover
anything. It is practical stand taken on the field of confrontation that costs
one dear and proves a burden.

It is this
action that requires struggle and sacrifice, and imposes the consequences on
the one who takes it. It is essential to note that passive resistance and
armchair opposition cannot change the course of history; what does is the
action of those who take the bold decision. Rejection and dislike which one leaves
in his mind does not make any difference in political and social realities nor
does it stir people; it is positive action that moves people and brings about
political and social changes. In the end, confrontation and encounter is the
real stand.

Changing
From A Position Of No Stand To That Of A Contrary Stand

Civilizational
conflicts do not tolerate non-stands so if a man cannot cope with the difficult
stand and is too weak to take the right stand, he cannot remain neutral to the
last; non-stands get transformed into contrary stands. The reason why
non-stands turn into contrary stands is exactly why stands change into
non-stands, i.e. fear of death.

What
disables man from taking the right position will surely disable him from
slipping into falsehood, and in this way he will be classified within the front
of falsehood. As we said, the field of confrontation will not leave one alone
without classifying him. If he does not align himself with the party of truth
in which he believes, the battlefield will sooner or later enlist him into the
ruling order, at which time he will be among the army of the rebellious [to
God] (taghut), even if his heart and mind are with the truth.

Here one is
split into two opposing halves: his view (his mind) and his sentiment (his
heart) taking the direction of truth and his outward stand and declared
position (his will) taking the side of falsehood. This is a clear case of
schizophrenia in which a person is split into two contradictory parts with the
result that his personality loses its harmony and his outward actions are in
conflict with his internal situation.

This is the
issue to which Imam Husayn (‘a) called the attention of Ibn Ziyad’s army in
Karbala on the day of Ashura, saying: “You have drawn on us the sword we placed
in your right hands”3 Indeed this sword that is mentioned by the Imam denotes
power and authority and it was Islam that gave them this power [as a whole].

The Arabs
were a weak nation isolated in the desert. The Messenger of God (S) brought
them Islam from God. With these people, he set up a formidable force to conquer
east and west, overthrew the thrones of despots and oppressors, liberated
oppressed peoples, set free God’s servants from the yoke of oppression and
servitude and directed them away from servitude to man towards servitude to the
One, the Irresistible. Surely, the Messenger of God (S) entrusted them with
this power.

One of the
achievements of the Messenger of God (S) made possible through the support of
Almighty God was to make this nation a great and miraculous force. This is what
is intended by this precise statement which expresses the depth of the tragedy:
‘the sword we gave you, which is in your right hands’.

What was
appropriate for them was to draw that sword on the enemies of God and His messenger,
but they used it against the Prophet’s Household and his successors. They were
supposed to use the sword to fight the leaders of oppression and polytheism but
they used it on the leaders of monotheism and justice, in support of the
leaders of polytheism and injustice.

This is the
depth of the tragedy which befell this nation during the time of the Umayyad
rulers. This is also the correct description of the Kufans which was given by
al-Farazdaq when Imam Husayn (‘a) asked him about the situation he left behind
in Kufa, for the majority of the Kufans were Alids and the hearts of the Alids
were with Husayn although their swords had turned against him.

Many of
those who came out with Ibn Ziyad’s army to fight Imam Husayn (‘a) loved him
before; they were among those who wrote to him requesting him to join them.
What identifies man is his opinion, love, hate and stand: Whenever these three
elements are complete and harmonious man is strong, but when they are opposed
and contradictory he becomes weak and, as a result, turns into a pliant tool in
the hands of the oppressors.

The Last
Stage Of Apostacy

Al-Farazdaq
did not say-although he should have said-that the first and second stages of
man’s renegation are from a stand to a non-stand and then from a non-stand to a
contrary stand. The third stage is reached when the stand which is contrary to
the truth overpowers man’s thought and opinion and directs him towards the
opinion of the opponent by adorning it till he completely contradicts the first
opinion [the truth].

Then his
view turns into its antithesis: love turns into hate and hate into love. This
is the final stage of renegation which al-Farazdaq did not mention. This final
stage could well have been hidden to him but the Qur’an has recorded it most
clearly:

“Then the
fate of those who committed misdeeds was that they denied the signs of God and
they used to deride them” (Qur’an, 30:10).

It is a
blatant commission of misdeed for a believing man to wield a sword against God,
His messenger (S) and His friends and fight them in defense of taghut. Should
one do this, God Almighty will remove faith, awareness and the ability to have
a stand from him so that he will deny the signs of God, and when he denies
God’s signs, His messengers and His friends, he ends up treating them as
enemies and hating them. This completes the apostasy.

Realignment
On The Opposing Side And A Turnabout

Thus the
three centres of human personality-the mind, the heart and the will (or
opinion, sympathy and stand) once again realign after getting split up, and are
filled with confusion and anxiety. The human personality regains harmony but in
the opposite direction altogether; a negative one which is inclined to
disobedience of God, His messenger (S) and His friends.

Three
States In Man’s Life

State one:
Harmony between hearts and swords in the direction of truth.

State two:
Conflict between hearts and swords and between truth and false hood.

State
three: Harmony between hearts and swords in the direction of falsehood.

The First
State

The
condition whereby hearts and swords are in harmony represents the sound natural
state in which the three centres, the mind, the heart and the will meet, so
that opinion joins love and hate and they are connected with a stand. This
state is that of harmony, perseverance and strength because the coming together
of these three centres imbues man with strength. This condition is a natural
and innate one where mutual influence exists between these three factors. The
effects of this condition on man are that he lives a tranquil life that does
not know anxiety, because psychological comfort does not stem from external
peace and comfort but from internal mental harmony. With this condition man
develops in a balanced way.

The Second
State

This is a
situation in which hearts and swords contradict each other and that is when
man’s will succumbs to the agents of enticement and terror which are applied by
taghut. Taghut aims at occupying the three centres of human personality
altogether; however, the first to be terrorized is the will. This is where the
fall starts and it is the first stage of apostasy, although the mind and the
heart still remain unchanged. The situations we mentioned above are now
reversed: one loses comfort, tranquility and mental equilibrium, and instead,
suffers from anxiety and disorder and his personality becomes deprived of ‘the
baptism of God.’ (2:138).

This is the
stage at which the degradation of man’s personality begins and the conscience
struggles to restore harmony and balance inside itself. If it succeeds, then
the personality will surely regain its balance and harmony. At this stage,
people fall into two groups: one with the type of al-Hurr’s personality, who
had a strong and sound conscience, which brought him back to God again, and another
group with a personality like that of Umar ibn Sa’ad, who lacked such strong
conscience and descended to the last stage of degradation.

The Third
Stage

At this
stage harmony among the three seats of human personality returns once again but
in the direction of disrepute. Internally, man seeks order, so if he is unable
to get it in the right direction due to his weak conscience which cannot
harmonize the personality on the side of truth, order returns him to the side
of falsehood. Man’s heart and mind will now realign with his [now untoward]
will and action.

This is
level zero of man’s degradation, in which taghut and worldly desire drain the
conscience and take over both mind and heart. When this happens taghut occupies
all the three forts of human personality and empties the conscience of whatever
power of struggle God Almighty has endowed it with. There upon, God’s mercy on
man comes to a halt because mercy descends on the conscience, the heart, the
mind and the will, and when they are all drained away there remains no place
for mercy to descend on. This is a state of unbelief.

There
exists a more abased state: the state of hypocrisy in which the swords return
to the side of truth but not in compliance with it but to conspire against it.
Because of this, God Almighty says:

“Indeed
the hypocrites will be in the lowest reach of the fire…” (4:145).

After this
passage about the stages of man’s degradation we shall now return to our
discussion about defying death and fearing death.

The Effects
Of Fear Of Death On Society

Fear of
death leaves wide ranging negative effects on human life; it robs people of the
power to resist and makes them easy prey for tyrants, who deplete the
resistance Almighty God has bestowed their consciences, the strength He has
endowed their will and the awareness He has given their minds. As a result, all
the values, morals, will and resistance which God has given them is drained
off.

This state
of total draining-away and depletion is the despicable condition which God
Almighty mentioned as part of the way the despots treat their people: “So he
despised his people and they obeyed him.”

Pharaoh
would not have been able to subjugate the people to his will and power without
draining their values, morals, power of resistance, will and conscience which
God had bestowed on them. [The verse refers to Pharaoh and his people.] Man
becomes inconsequential as a result of total submission to tyrants. The
instrument which is preferred most by the arrogant is terrorising, because the
fear of death makes it easy for anyone to sow the seeds of terror in any
society.

Educative
Methods For Fighting This Situation

Curtailing
expectations from life in this world.

Remembering
God and yearning to meet Him.

First
Method

Curtailing
one’s expectation from worldly life and weakening one’s relationship with it.

A firm
attachment to the world and too much hope in it are among the greatest fetters
that hamper man’s progress towards God. When one frees oneself from them, he
becomes less encumbered for the journey towards God Almighty and is never
frightened by death. In fact he becomes indifferent to it, never worrying
whether it falls on him or he falls on it, as Ali Akbar (‘a) said to his father
as they approached Karbala: ‘Dear Father! In that case we do not fear to die,
being on the right.’ Imam Husayn (‘a) replied: ‘May God reward you with the
best of what He rewards a son for serving his father!”4

Second
Method

Remembering
God and making firm one’s longing to meet Him through death.

Death is,
to the believer, a way of meeting God, and, meeting Him is the greatest joy.
The life of this world screens one from experiencing the presence of God, and
when death overtakes him the covering leaves his eyes

“We
have removed your veil from you, and so your sight is acute today” (50:2).

At that
time, the believer will behold the beautiful names and attributes of God, and
His sublimity, beauty, omnipotence and greatness. To the believer, this
represents the highest pleasure which is incomparable to paradise and its
houris and all the blessings God has created in it.

It is
recorded in Makarim al-Akhlaq that the Messenger of God (S) has said: “O Ibn
Mas’ud! Curtail your hopes; when morning comes, say: ‘I may not see evening’
and when evening comes, say: ‘I may not see morning’. Resolve on leaving the
world and love to meet God and do not dislike to meet him, for indeed God loves
to meet those who love to meet Him and he dislikes meeting those who dislike
meeting Him.”5

The
Messenger of God (S) also said: “When light enters the chest it expands.” He
was asked: ‘Does that have a sign by which it may be known?” “Yes”, he replied.
“Withdrawing from the house of deception, returning to the everlasting house
and making preparation for death before it descends”6

Ali (‘a) is
reported to have said: “Arouse the desire for the delights of paradise in
yourselves and you will love death and loathe living”7

Some Scenes
Of Confronting Death In Al-Taff

In what
follows I will recount one out of many scenes of al-Taff [the bank of the
Euphrates where the battle of Ashura’ took place] where death was held in
contempt and even positively sought for, and the longing to meet God exhibited.
This was one of the most beautiful scenes that history has recorded in that
regard.

The Imam
gathered his companions and family on the night before the tenth of Muharram
and asked them to go wherever they wanted and leave him alone. He wanted them
to be fully aware of their situation. He said to them:

“I commend
God with the best commendation and praise Him for both ease and difficulty. O
Lord! I praise you for the honour you granted us through prophethood; You gave
us hearing, sight and hearts; and taught us the Qur’an and made us comprehend
religion. So include us among the grateful.

“I do not
know of any companions more loyal and better than mine; nor a family kinder and
more devoted. May God bless you all for my sake. Listen! I think our
appointment with these enemies is tomorrow and I permit you all to go away and
leave me; you are free and you [no longer] have any duty towards me. The night
has provided you with cover so avail yourselves of it. Let each one of you hold
the hand of [i.e. go with] one of my family (may God reward you all!) and
disperse in the rural and urban areas of the land [and take refuge there] till
God brings relief. These people are only after me; should they get me, they
will forget the rest.”8 His family’s reply:

The Imam
had hardly finished his speech when that select group of his noble family
declared that they would choose the way he took. They would follow him and
never take a different course. So they all stood up with tearful eyes and said:
“Why should we do that? The worst thing that can happen to us is to remain
alive after your death? May God we do not live to see that day!”

His brother
Abu al-Fadl al-Abbas was the first to reply, then the noble ones of the
Prophet’s family followed suit. Then the Imam turned to the sons of his uncle
Aqil and said:

“The
killing of Muslim [ibn Aqil] suffices you a share, so you can go, for I allow
you.” The noble men of Aqil’s family started up and spoke passionately:

“What do we
say to the people? Do we say: ‘we have left alone our leader and our cousins,
who are the best of cousins, without having shot any arrows together with them,
nor getting pierced by a spear, nor struck by a sword, and without knowing what
they had done to be killed?! Never! By God we will not do that. Instead, we
will sacrifice our lives, wealth and families for your sake; we will fight on
your side till we reach the same destination as you. Abominable indeed, is life
after you!”9

His
Companions’ Reply

With tears
running down his cheeks, Muslim ibn Awsajah sprung up and addressed the Imam in
these words:

“Should we
abandon you? What will be our plea with God for our inability to discharge our
duty to you? I swear by God that I will never forsake you; rather I will pierce
their chests with my spear and strike them with my sword as long as its hilt
remains in my hand. If I will have no arms with which to fight them I will pelt
them with stones till I die on your side.” Then Sa’ad ibn Abdullah al-Hanafi
said:

“By God we
will not abandon you. [We will remain with you] till God ascertains that we
have kept our duty toward His Messenger in your regard. By God if I know that I
will be killed and then revived, then burnt, then [my ashes] blown away, then
the whole process repeated seventy times, I will not abandon you, till I meet
my death in your defense! How can I not do that [i.e. persevere] when it is but
a single death after which I will meet everlasting honour?”10

Zuhayr
said: “By God, I would like to be killed, then revived, then killed again till
I am killed a thousand times in this way, if only God the Almighty and Sublime
will ward off death from you and these noble souls of your family as a result.”

The rest of
the Imam’s companions also declared their readiness to die sacrificing
themselves for his sake. So he expressed his gratitude to them all and stressed
that they would all meet their death the next day. Oh hearing this, they
answered in chorus:

“Praise be
to God who honoured us by making us your helpers to be martyred along with you.
Will you not be pleased that we should be together with you in your station, O
son of the daughter of the Messenger of God (S)?11

The Imam
had tested these people and found them to be the most loyal of men whose souls
had been enlightened with the light of faith, who had freed themselves of all
worldly concerns and who, as the historians inform us, were martyrdom-thirsty
and poised to earn the blessings of the hereafter.

When
Muhammad ibn Bashir al-Hadrami was informed that his son had been captured at
the frontiers of al-Rayy he complained: I do not want my son to remain in
captivity while I live after him. The Imam got the impression that the man
wanted to get his son released from captivity so he allowed him to leave,
saying: “You are free to go and work for the release of your son.” Al-Hadrami
replied: “May wild beasts devour me if I leave you …”12

Al-Qasim
ibn al-Hasan, an adolescent who had not reached puberty, said to Husayn (‘a)
“Am I among those who will be killed?” Touched by this, he said: “How do you
consider death, my son?” “Sweeter than honey, Uncle!” he replied. On hearing
this, the Imam said: “Surely, by God, may your uncle be your ransom! Certainly
you will be killed along with the men with me after you meet a tough ordeal. My
son Abdullah [the suckling child]13 will also meet the same fate.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 6/128 (hadith 14).

Bihar
al-Anwar, 6/137 (hadith 72).

Al-Muqarram’s
Maqtal al-Al-Husayn (‘a), 286.

Sheikh
al-Samawi’s Ibsar al-Ayn fi Ansar al-Husayn (‘a), pg 21-22.

Makarim
al-Akhlaq, 452.

Kanz
al-Ummal 1, 76 (hadith 302).

Ghurar
al-Hikam, 413 (Ch: 42 No. 25)

Ibn
al-Athir’s Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh 4/ 57, Beirut ed. 1965. In Al-Muntazam, Ibn
al-Jawzi has recorded another version ofthe Imam’s speech: ‘It is recorded in
Sayyid al-Muqarram’s Maqtal al-Husayn (‘a) that he said: “You are free from your
oath of allegiance to me so join your clans and clients” And he said to His
family: “You are permitted to leave me for you cannot stand them by virtue of
their great numbers and strength, and no one is wanted except me. The Sublime
and Mighty God will support me and never deprive me of His good watch as was
His wont with our good forebears.”

A group of
people left his camp and then his family said to him: “We will not part from
you. Whatever grieves you should grieve us and whatever befalls you should befall
us, we shall be nearest to God when we are with you.’ He said to them: If you
have prepared yourselves for what I have prepared myself then know that God
bestows honourable stations for His servants only because they bear
adversities, and that God has conferred on me and on my family, of whom I am
the last to stay in the world, such honours that will make it easy for me to
bear adversities. Indeed you have a portion of God’s honours. Know that the
sweet and the bitter of this world are but a dream and the hereafter is the
place for waking up, and the successful is the one who succeeds in it and the
damned is the one who is damned in it”.

Ibn Athir’s
Al-Tarikh, 4/58.

Al-Muntazam
5/179; Tarikh al-Tabari 6/239.

Bihar
al-Anwar 44, 298; Al-Bahrani’s Al-Awalim, 350.

Tarikh Ibn
Asakir 13/54; Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 1/150, al-Maqarram’s Maqtal al-Husayn (‘a)
165-170.

Al-Muhaddith
al-Qummi’s Nafas al-Mahmum, 230.

Some
Instances Of Loyalty In The Supplication: Ziyarat Warith

Three
aspects of loyalty are portrayed in this supplication

Salutation:
that is “Peace be on you, O heir to Adam, God’s chosen one.”

Testimony:
that is “I bear witness that you are the pious and devout Imam”

Stand: that
is “My heart is in submission to your heart and my actions follow yours.

In the
following passages we will discuss these three aspects of loyalty which appear
in this supplication.

First
Aspect: Salutation

This is the
first manifestation of loyalty which has three parts:

First:
Peace be on you, O heir to Adam, God’s chosen one!

Second:
Peace be on you, O son of Muhammad, the chosen one!

Third:
Peace be on you, O God’s avenger, the son of God’s avenger!

Among the
elements of loyalty are salutation and submission i.e, not disputing and
differing with the leadership, both in the mind and in behaviour. By submission
we mean practical obedience and compliance. However, this obedience stems from
internal harmony and love for the leader and not from coercion. The
relationship of the community with its leaders is that of firmly rooted
submission that is visible in behaviour.

This
relationship is exhibited at the end of the formal prayer in the form of
salutation: “Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be on you, O Prophet.” The
fruit reaped by the servant when he soars toward God in prayer is obedience and
love for the [God-appointed] leaders. Islam has prescribed the word ‘peace’ as
the faithfuls’ salutation for one another. This general greeting: ‘Peace be on
us and on God’s righteous servants’ is the closing part on which the
worshippers finish their prayers.

The
importance given to spreading peace arises from the emphasis that is laid on
the type of relationship that should exist between Muslims. This relationship
is established on the basis of eschewing discord and disagreement among
Muslims; removing hatred, malice and ill-will from minds; establishing love and
fellow feeling in hearts and cooperation and concord in action.

Second
Aspect: Testimony

Testimony
is a declaration of trust, faith and loyalty, and such a testimony must be
coupled with submission so that they complement one another.

In this
supplication, testimony appears in three parts:

1.
Testifying to the message and movement of Husayn (‘a): “I bear witness that you
established the prayer, paid the zakat, enjoined what is good and forbade the
bad and obeyed God and His messenger (S) till you died”

To
establish the prayer is not just to perform it, because the latter is only a
personal duty stemming from individual obligation, whereas the former carries a
message in the life of the believers. Establishing the prayer means to firmly
establish worship and the relationship with God in people’s lives. It also
involves urging the people to keep up prayer for God’s sake by openly declaring
this obligation that has been enjoined on them.

“You
enjoined the good and forbade the bad”: When Husayn (‘a) revolted against Yazid
he was not after kingship, power or position, rather, he sought to establish
good deeds and uproot evil i.e. establish loyalty to God and destroy taghut.

On the day
of Ashura, Husayn (‘a) addressed the people saying: “Do you not see that truth
is not acted upon and falsehood is not being forbidden? Let the believer desire
to meet God. [As for me] I consider death to be nothing but a source of bliss
and living with oppressors only a vexation.”1

At the
station of Al-Baydah, Husayn addressed al-Hurr’s companions in these words: “O
you people! The Messenger of God (S) has said: Whoever watches an unjust ruler
who violates what God declares sacrosanct, breaks His covenant, contradicts the
tradition of the Messenger of God (S) and rules the people in a way
characterized by sin and transgression, and, does not oppose him by word or
deed, God has the right to make him share his doom. Certainly, these people
[Yazid and co.] have sworn obedience to Satan, leaving aside obedience to the
Merciful; they have engaged in corruption openly and suspended the legal
punishments; they have monopolized the treasury and they have permitted what
God prohibited and disallowed what He permitted.”2

Thus Husayn
(‘a) was not after power and wealth, but he saw that a despot was spreading
corruption in the land, wreaking havoc, making permissible what God forbade and
transgressing His limits. So he rose up against Yazid in Karbala, with his
faithful group which welcomed his call for bidding the good, forbidding the
bad, reinstituting what is right, and extirpating what is wrong.

2.
Testifying to the fact that the Imam was immaculate both internally and in his
behaviour. God has exclusively endowed the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) with this purity.
The Most High says:

“Indeed
God desires to repel all impurity from you, O people of the Household, and
purify you with a thorough purification.” (33:33).

In
addition, testifying that this virtuousness was passed on from father to son
and God Most High destined this purity to be preserved within this noble line
throughout the eras of ignorance that came to pass in human history Over the
different ages God Most High has chosen this blessed line for the office of
Imamate in the life of man.

“Indeed
God chose Adam and Noah, and the progeny of Abraham and the progeny of Imran
above all nations. Some of them are descendants of others, and God is
All-hearing, Allknowing.”(3:33-34).

Let us look
at this section of the supplication of Ziyarat Warith: “I bear witness that you
were a light in noble loins and pure wombs. The era of ignorance did not soil
you by its impurities nor did it clothe you in its garments of darkness.”

I do not
want to pass on without pointing to this beautiful expression of purity of this
house; the result of the fecundation brought about by noble loins and purified
wombs: loins of men who were above worldly things that people scramble for; and
wombs of women who were chaste and free from the scum of civilizations of the
ages of ignorance seen by man.

3-
Testifying to the position which was taken by Husayn (‘a) with regard to what
the nation was experiencing; the leadership role assigned to him by God in the
form of Imamate and guardianship over the Muslims; and the fact that God had
commissioned him to guide the community. Coupled with this, was the position of
his offspring in leading and guiding the Muslims towards God Almighty.

We also
read in it: “I bear witness that you are among the pillars of religion and the
pivots of believers. I bear witness that you are the pious, the obedient, the
chaste, the guided and the guide. I bear witness that the Imams from your
offspring are the epitome of piety, the milestones of guidance, the stronghold
and proof over the people of the world.”

Third
Aspect: Stand

This is the
stage for asserting loyalty, which comes after submission and testimony. Here
stand pertains to both faith and action. Faith is eloquently described through
these words: “I believe in you and in your return, I have firm faith in the
rules of my religion, and my heart is submissive to your hearts”, in the
supplication of Ziyarat Warith. The practical part of this stand consists in
deference and obedience to them: “And my actions follow yours.”

A
compelling indication of the sincerity of one’s stand is one’s submission to
the Imams with respect to the rules of religion and the final deeds of one’s
life. Nothing is as dear as the religious rules by which one worships God
Almighty and the last acts in life, for acts done in the beginning or middle
parts of one’s lifetime can be compensated for by repentance, soul searching
and correction, unlike those done at the closing part. One’s last deeds
determine one’s fate.

The best
proof of having trust in the Imams (‘a) and being sincerely loyal to them is
for one to receive from them the rules of religion and take inspiration from
them for what one does at the end of one’s life. That unrestricted submission
as described above is of the highest type because it is untainted by the least
resistance or misgiving in the heart, that is the submission of the heart to
the heart: “and my heart is in submission to your hearts.” This is when the
hearts get into contact and mutual understanding.

Similarly,
one’s stand as regards to action is described thus: “And my actions follow your
actions.” This represents complete obedience and submission to the commands of
God.

Therefore,
the stand means complete faith, unrestricted submission and absolute trust,
followed by total commitment and obedience with regard to action. In a special
ziyarah of Imam Husayn (‘a) on the day of Arafat, the following section occurs:
“I am at peace with the one who is at peace with you, at war with the one who is
at war with you, hostile to the one who is hostile to you and friend to the one
who is friend to you. [In this way shall I remain] till the day of
Resurrection.” In the special Ziyarat al-Arba’in prayer we read:

“I bear
witness that I believe in you and your return, I have firm faith in the rules
of my religion and will have till the final call of death, my heart is
submissive to your hearts, my actions follow your actions and my support for
you is ready till the time God grants permission [for action]. So I am fully on
your side and not on the side of your enemy. God’s blessings be on you, both
your souls and bodies, on the present and the absent ones among you”.

This is a
declaration of total readiness for support, after which comes this beautiful
rendition of loyalty: “With you! With you! With your enemy, never!” By
repeating togetherness: ‘With you, with you’, the covenant of loyalty is
emphasized just as it is through affirming and negating i.e. expressing loyalty
to the Imams and repudiating their enemies: ‘With your enemy, never!’

Similarly,
the supplication on the first of Rajab conveys this expression of loyalty to
the one who stood up in Karbala on the day of Ashura’ inviting mankind to God,
to strive against the forces that were rebellious towards Him and break their
arrogance and direct them to serve God alone. It reads: “At your service, O
inviter towards God! If my body did not respond to you when you sought help [on
the day of Ashura] or my tongue when you called for support, surely my heart responds
to you”.

The best
response indeed is that of the heart. We have missed the chance to respond to
the call of the caller to God in Karbala physically, but our hearts, which God
has filled with loyalty to Him and His friends (the Imams) (‘a), will ever
comply with the Imam (‘a). We shall always respond to his call to fight the
oppressors and break their power and strength; to bring the people over to the
service of God, establish His law and uphold the divine limits in human life;
and free mankind from the axis of the rebellious (taghut) and direct them
towards loyalty to Almighty God.

Repudiation:
The Other Face Of Loyalty

After this,
comes repudiation, which is the other face of loyalty, for there can be no
loyalty without repudiation: they are two faces of the same issue, two parts of
a single reality, and any stand is made up of these two.

One’s
promise of loyalty is fulfilled through his repudiation because a declaration
of loyalty alone does not cost one much. Most of the troubles that one may
suffer come as a result of repudiation. It is only too easy for one to live
with all in a friendly and peaceful environment by respecting the feelings and
sensibilities of everybody. One can play a double game and guard against
collusion with all. One can smile at everybody in order to gain their
acceptance. Such a person can live in peace and comfort, earn the love and
sympathy of all and live free from problems and inconveniences.

However, he
cannot be part of the circle of those loyal to God, His messengers, His friends
and the believers; he cannot join this obedient family which pledges its
loyalty to God, His messenger (S) and His friends; he cannot have a stand; he
cannot love, hate or resent sincerely; and in his political and social
relationships, he cannot go beyond mere formality. Without loyalty there can be
no sincerity in relations or stand, and no sincerity is possible without
repudiation. But repudiation entails many demands on one’s social relations
with family and society, and on one’s comfort, well-being and stability.

The price
of being loyal is to be able to repudiate, and the price for repudiation is to
accept difficulties, inconveniences and troubles. These are equations God has
established by virtue of His inexorable norms that govern human life. Abu
Ja’far al-Baqir (‘a) is reported to have said: “There are ten things which help
enter paradise when one meets God:

To bear
witness that there is no deity except God

To bear
witness that Muhammad (S) is the Messenger of God

To affirm
whatever comes from God

To
establish the prayer

To pay the
alms (zakat)

To fast in
the month of Ramadan

To perform
the pilgrimage to the House

To be loyal
to God’s friends

To
repudiate God’s enemies

To avoid
all intoxicants.”3

The Prophet
(S) wrote to the bishop of Najran, “I summon you to worship God and to shun the
worship of His servants; I invite you to loyalty to God instead of His
servants. If you reject this then you must pay the tribute and if you reject
this, then know that I am declaring war on you”4 Therefore, the boundary
between Islam and unbelief is the declaration of loyalty and repudiation.

The
Messenger of God (S) said: “Surely the strongest bond of faith is to love or
hate for the sake of God, to be loyal to God’s friends and to be hostile to His
enemies.”5

Imam
al-Rida (‘a) said: “It has been reported that God communicated to a devout
among the Children of

Israel
whose heart was entertaining a thought, saying: As for your devotion to Me you
are taking pride in

Me and as
for your asceticism, it is a deferment of comfort. Now have you befriended my
friend and shown enmity to my enemy?”6It is related that someone came to the
Commander of the Faithful and said: ‘O Commander of the Faithful! I love you
and also love so-and-so’, and he mentioned one of his enemies. He answered:
“Now you are one-eyed: either become blind or have complete sight.”7

A one-eyed
man’s sight is weak for he can only see with one eye. One’s loyalty is similar
to this when he does not repudiate the enemy or cannot dare to do it because he
wants to be accepted by everybody. Such people do not remain one-eyed with
half-sight for ever; either God guides them so that they have full sight or
they lose that half sight and become blind, thereby completely losing their
loyalty. It was said to Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) that “so-and-so person is loyal to
you but finds it difficult to repudiate your enemy” to which he replied “Never!
He lies who claims to love us but does not repudiate our enemy!”8

The
questioner in this narration set his question precisely: there was no doubt
that the person about whom the question was put was loyal but he was unable to
repudiate, and this inability rendered his loyalty weak and shaky. He did not
have enough courage to declare his stand and establish or sever relationships
in an open and decisive manner. Therefore, the Imam (‘a) replied that true
loyalty can in no way be separated from repudiation as its consequence, and
whoever is weak in repudiation must be weak in loyalty as well.

In
al-A’mash’s narration, Imam Sadiq (‘a) is reported to have said: “To love God’s
friends (the Imams) is obligatory, loyalty to them is obligatory and to
repudiate their enemies is also obligatory. To repudiate the perfidious,
(al-Nakithun), the unjust (al-qasitun) and the renegades (al-mariqun) is
obligatory. To repudiate the idols (al-ansab) and the divination arrows
(al-azlam), who are leaders in deviation and injustice is obligatory. [It is
obligatory to repudiate] all these people, the first of them and the last.”9

From Abu
Muhammad al-Hasan al-Askari (‘a), from his forefathers (‘a): one day the
Messenger of God (S) said to a companion of his: “O servant of God! Love for
God’s sake and hate for His sake, give your loyalty for His sake and be hostile
for His sake, for you will not earn His friendship except that way. No one will
taste faith, even though he might have performed abundant prayers and fasts,
except that way. Nowadays, most of the people’s fraternity is based on the
world: they love or hate one another for its sake. This will not avail them
anything in the sight of God.”

The man
said to him: “How do I know that my loyalty and hostility are for the sake of
God, the Mighty and Sublime? And who is God’s friend to whom I must be loyal,
and who is His enemy against whom I must be hostile?”

Then the
Messenger of God (S) pointed to Ali (‘a) and said: ‘Do you see him?’ ‘Yes’, the
man replied. Then he said: “The friend of this man is a friend to God so
befriend him, and his enemy is God’s enemy, so be hostile to him. Be a partisan
to this man even if he killed your father and your son, and show enmity to his
enemy even if he was your father and your son.”10

A more
emphatic version of this issue has been related in the famous hadith of
al-Ghadir where the Messenger of God (S) said: ‘For whomsoever I am master and
authority (mawla) Ali is master and authority. O God! Befriend his friends and
be enemy to his enemies and help his helpers and forsake those who forsake
him.”

The hadith
of al-Ghadir is one of the most explicit narrations which describe the deep
connotations of loyalty (wilayah) and bring out its positive dimensions i.e.
being loyal and its negative dimension i.e. repudiating its antithesis.
Al-Allamah al-Amini opens his impressive work Al-Ghadir with a hadith from the
Messenger of God (S) which pertains to this topic and we will like to close our
discussion on loyalty and repudiation with it.

The
Messenger of God (S) said: “Whoever is pleased to live the way I live, die the
way I die and dwell in the garden of Eden which is made known by my Lord, let
him be loyal to Ali after me and also be loyal to his friends and let him
believe in the Imams after me, for they are my family. They have been created
out of my stuff and endowed with understanding and knowledge. Woe unto those of
my nation who belie their merit, who violate my kinship with respect to them.
May God not extend my intercession to such violators.”

After this
long discussion on repudiation we shall return to our talk on Ziyarat Warith to
study the repudiations and curses that appear in it.

The Groups
That Are Cursed In Ziyarat Warith

In this
supplication three groups of people have been cursed and repudiated:

“May God
curse the people who killed you. May God curse the people who oppressed you.
May God curse the people who hear about this and are pleased with it.”

The first
group consists of those who were directly responsible for killing Husayn (‘a):
“May God curse a people who saddled and bridled [their animals],and prepared
and traveled in order to kill you, O my master, O Abu Abdullah!”11

The second
group comprises all those who oppressed Husayn (‘a) and acted unjustly toward
him, who facilitated the tragedy, supported and paid allegiance to his enemy
and openly opposed him. This group includes all those who made preparations to
fight Husayn (‘a) or facilitated it, abandoned him, supported his adversaries,
contributed in their equipment, assisted the tyrant in fighting him, and all
the followers of these people.

Different
wordings of repudiation and curse on this group are found in both general and
special prayers on visiting (ziyarat) Imam Husayn’s tomb in Karbala (‘a). In
the specific Ziyarat Ashura we read: “May God curse the people who killed you.
May God curse those who prepared the ground for them by facilitating the means
for fighting you; I turn to God and to you and repudiate them and their
adherents and followers.”

In the
general Ziyarat Ashura also we have: “I turn to God and His messenger (S) in
repudiation of those who laid down the foundations for injustice and oppression
against you and the people of the Household, built their unjust system on it
and continued on the path of their injustice and oppression against you and
your adherents. I denounce them, taking recourse to God and to you.”

In the
second special Ziyarat Ashura which is narrated in Al-Mazar al-Qadim, we read:
“May God curse the people who laid down the foundations of injustice against
you, prepared the ground for oppressing, molesting and harming you, and
perpetrated the same in your houses and among your adherents. I turn to God the
Mighty and Sublime and to you, and repudiate them and their adherents and
followers.”

This group
was large, for it included all those who contributed in fighting Husayn (‘a) or
facilitated the war against him, prepared for it, pledged allegiance to the
tyrant for fighting him, mobilized and assisted in any other way in the
campaign along with their adherents and followers.

The third
group consisted of those that heard about the tragedy and approved of it. The
issue of this group demands pondering. Who are those people who heard about
this incident and approved of it? For sure, they were not those who
participated in the battle or in oppressing the victims directly, otherwise
they would have been classified among the first two groups, then there would
have been no need for mentioning a third.

Therefore,
this group definitely included those who heard Husayn’s (‘a) call for help but
did not help him, choosing their well-being instead of supporting the Lord of
the Martyrs (‘a) in the battle of Al-Taff. They are those who abandoned him on
the day of Ashura. Certainly, this group approved of what happened on the day
of Ashura, because had they not been pleased with it, this betrayal of the grandson
of the Messenger of God (‘a) would not have been possible.

Their
failure to join Husayn (‘a) and support him, and their preference for this
world over the next concealed their approval of Yazid’s actions, otherwise,
such glaring negligence and opting for personal peace invariably leads to an
approval of injustice. In other texts this group is described as having
betrayed Abu Abdillah Husayn (‘a) and preferred their well-being to supporting
him. In the second general ziyarah we read:

“May God’s
curse be on the people who killed you, the people who opposed you, the people
who denied your leadership, the people who supported your enemies, and the
people who witnessed this but did not martyr themselves [in your defence].” The
relevant part of this ziyarah is ‘and the people who witnessed this but did not
martyr themselves.”

In the
seventh general ziyarah, this passage appears: “I bear witness that your
killers are in the fire. It is part of my duty to God to profess the
repudiation of those who killed you, those who fought you, those who rallied
support against you, those who mobilized people against you and those who heard
your voice but did not help you.” The relevant part is ‘and those who heard
your voice but did not help you.’ The following passage appears in the ziyarah
of the Night of Qadr (destiny) and the nights before the two festivals [of the
1st of Shawwal and the l0th of Dhu al-Hijjah]: “I bear witness that those who
opposed and fought you, those who abandoned you and those who killed you are
cursed on the tongue of the Unlettered Prophet (S).”

It is
obvious from this text that the three accursed groups are: the group which
fought Husayn (‘a), the group which helped and supported the first, the group
which forsook Husayn (‘a) and neither answered his call nor helped him. Indeed
the battle of Al-Taff was a real one that had ideological, political and
cultural dimensions and as such, it required real stances in terms of loyalty
and repudiation, both before and now. It does not accept a position of
reluctance and indifference today just as it rejected that in the past; it
deems such an attitude to be no better than the hostile stand.

What
Conflicts Of Civilization Do To Man

Ideological
conflicts group people into two, one affirming a given direction and the other
negating it. This dichotomy and divergence later continues for ages, and the
more deep-seated in people’s conscience such a question is, the wider and more
pronounced the resultant ideological effects become. The battle of Al-Taff is
among the foremost of such conflicts by virtue of a number of factors; 1- The political
and ideological confrontation of civilization that took place on that
battlefield.

The
unmistakable cultural and ethical dissimilarity between the two camps. The
status of Husayn, theson of the Messenger of God’s daughter (‘a) and Lord of
the youths of paradise is known to all Muslims, just as Yazid ibn Muawiya, the
son of the liver-eating woman [Yazid’s grandmother chewed the liver of Hamza,
her arch-enemy, when he fell in the battle of Uhud] and a descendant of the
tree which is cursed in the Qur’an is known to all. No one from that date till
today has ever doubted the true nature of the two contending parties and no one
doubts who among them was calling towards God and who was inviting towards
hell.

The painful
tragedy which befell the grandson of God’s Messenger (S) and his family
andcompanions in Karbala on the day of Ashura.

These and
other factors make the question of Al-Taff a distinct historical event which
has inevitable significance. It classifies the people into two distinct groups;
a conformist group which is a member, supporter and loyal to Imam Husayn, and
another one which is hostile and in opposition. No one is allowed to stand on
the fence watching the battle without its dust affecting him. So there has to
be a clear stand and an act of loyalty and an act of repudiation. No one
conversant with the circumstances of this battle will confuse truth with
falsehood.

The First
Day Of Separation

We said
before that this conflict classified men, with respect to loyalty and
repudiation, into two distinct groups, right from the year 61 A.H till today,
and this distinction will continue for a long time to come.

The Holy
Qur’an calls this conflict separation, and that is what separates the people
into distinct groups with respect to loyalty and repudiation. The first day of
separation in Islamic history is the day of Badr. The Most High says:

“On
the Day of separation, the day when the two armies met…” (8:41).

It is thus
designated because it was the first day in which the Muslims met the polytheists
in a decisive military encounter which grouped the people into two distinct
parties based on the question of loyalty and repudiation. It was the first
armed confrontation between monotheism and polytheism in the history of Islam,
on the result of which depended the destiny of mankind and the direction to be
taken by human civilization. It is true that the people who fought on the side
of the Messenger of God at Badr were three hundred or a little more and the
Quraysh army which fought him were a thousand or a little more but that
confrontation had more profound and far reaching consequences than what appears
from the history of the valley of Badr in the second year after Hegira. Behind
the Quraysh polytheists who fought in Badr stood an extensive front of the
polytheists of the Arabian Peninsula and even beyond.

The
intensity of events in the wake of that encounter is proof of this fact. With
his small group, the Messenger of God (S) faced that large front of polytheism
and God Almighty gave him victory over it. Had God not made that group
victorious on the day of Badr, He would not have been worshipped and no one on
earth would have mentioned His name.Therefore, the day of Badr has separated
mankind into two distinct groups based on their loyalties: one group of three
hundred and thirteen fighters and another consisting of the wide front of
polytheism with all its vast powers. Surely, it was the first day of separation
in Islam’s history.

A
simplistic look at the battle field of Badr in the second Hegira year will only
see these two fighting forces, but on scrutiny will find two entities, two
civilizations, two ideologies locked in a fierce struggle for existence. The
contest was not over a few articles of trade carried by Quraysh merchants as
the historical reports apparently suggest. These two camps represent vast
frontlines of people throughout history; they are not limited, they extend to
endless periods. The day of Badr is not only the day of separation which
grouped the people in the year 2 A.H. on the basis of loyalty and repudiation,
but it will remain as the day of separation for all periods of Islamic history.

The Second
Day Of Separation

The Second
Day of Separation12

Just as the
day of Badr is the first day of separation in the history of Islam, the day of
Ashura is the second. In this unequal but decisive battle Husayn (‘a) and a
small band consisting of his family and companions stood on one side of the
line. On the other was Ibn Ziyad at the head of a large army and behind him was
Yazid with his vast power, great wealth, army and capabilities. A

lso in
their support were all those loyal to Yazid, all those who were benefiting from
him, all those who deviated because of him, all those who fought on his side,
including those who stood on the fence in the political field and preferred
their well-being and watched from a distance while the conflict went on, and,
all the followers of those people.

Therefore,
for the day of Ashura the quality of separation was quite obvious: it had
grouped the people into two distinguishable groups based on loyalty,
repudiation, ethics, thought, inclination and ideology. That day still remains
a means of separation in the history of Islam. It divides the people on the
basis of loyalty and repudiation to the present day and forever.

The Third
Day Of Separation

After
mentioning two days of separation in Islamic history, that is Badr and Ashura,
we must not close this discussion without mentioning the third day of
separation, an extension of Badr and Ashura. This is the day of the victory of
the contemporary Islamic Revolution which happened in 1399 A.H. It was one of
God’s days in history, in which the Pahlavi regime fell and the great Islamic
Revolution became victorious under the leadership of Imam Khomeini (may God
sanctify his soul).

This day
does not only mean the fall of the Pahlavi dynasty in Iranian history but the
end of one stage in Islamic history and the beginning of a new epoch. The
historical value of the fall of the Pahlavi dynasty and the establishment of
the Islamic Republic lies in two things;

1: The end
of a period of apathy, weakness and despair; ready acceptance of western or
eastern tutelage; backwardness in intellectual, scientific, political, military
and economic matters; subservience to arrogant powers of the world and
defeatism in the face of surging western civilization.

2: The
beginning of a new movement in the direction of Islam and the establishment of
God’s religion on earth; removing the shackles and fetters off hands and feet;
and breaking the yoke that had been imposed by western and eastern imperialism
in the political, economic, military and scientific arenas. This new beginning
paved the way for a return to God and to Islam; induced mankind to the service
of God; empowered God’s law in human life; and restored Islamic norms, values,
morals and limits in the practical life of people. In a nutshell, it began a
new epoch in history.

This day is
a true extension of the day of Ashura, just as the latter was a real
continuation of the day of

Badr. The
main elements that constituted the civilizational values of the great and
comprehensive Islamic government which was actualized on that day are also the
values of the glorious Islamic Revolution that succeeded against world
imperialism:

1- This
revolution is a revolution based on principles in the true meaning of the term.
It is a new type of activism and revolutionary work in contemporary history and
in the contemporary political milieu that is unfamiliar with this kind of
movement. It is the revolution of monotheism against polytheism in the sense we
explained in the present chapter: monotheism and polytheism with regard to
loyalty.

This
uprising aims at severing the Muslim’s relationship with taghut dressed in the
garb of eastern and western imperialism and their stooges in this region, and
also severing the relationship with other focal points of loyalty (nationalism,
patriotism, tribalism, factionalism, etc) that are paraded as substitutes to
monotheism. This revolution aims at binding Muslim loyalty to God Almighty, His
Messenger (S) and His friends, and also unifying all loyalty for God alone, and
boycotting and confronting all other centres of attraction that are working to
extract allegiance from the people.

It is not a
revolt against backwardness in science and technology, nor a revolt against
poverty and economic backwardness, nor a revolt against colonialism and
exploitation, nor an uprising to free oil wells from the grip of oil barons,
nor a class struggle, nor yet a revolt of the oppressed against the oppressors
like the Negro revolt in Islamic history, although the Islamic revolution
mirrored all these issues and succeeded in achieving all the results that such
revolts aim at.

The Islamic
revolution is essentially a different thing. It is a revolution of loyalty to
God against all spurious alternative centers of loyalty, a revolt of monotheism
in the face of polytheism, a revolt of Islam against ungodliness (jahiliyyah).

When this
revolution achieves its aims on this earth it will wipe out scientific,
technological and cultural backwardness; remove poverty and economic
backwardness; uproot exploitation and colonialism; stop colonial oil companies
from exploiting oil wells and the abuse of Muslim wealth and resources; end
oppression and arrogance and the domination and oppression by one class of
another.

This
revolution will achieve these aims and in fact other goals that are more
extensive and loftier, under condition that it maintains its real essence and
remains a revolt of monotheism against polytheism, without getting derailed
towards its secondary objectives.

The first
and distinguishing feature of this revolution is its divine nature. It is this
quality that links it to

Badr,
Siffin and Ashura, to the movement of the prophets (‘a) and to the path of the
righteous friends of God. Should this revolution be divested of this feature
and become satisfied with secondary aims and mottos it will lose the support
God Most High bestows on it.

This
revolution is fundamentally different from all modern revolutions such as the
French revolution, the October revolution and the revolutions that took place
in Africa and Asia since the Second World War. All of these revolutions were at
best rebellions of one class against another or an uprising for freedom from
foreign domination or from despots. No revolution of contemporary times can be
regarded as an exception with regard to these principles.

On the
other hand, the Islamic revolution is that of monotheism which sprung up from a
starting point that is essentially different from those of all other
revolutions. It starts in the direction of freeing mankind from human pivots of
loyalty of whatever type, except those linked to loyalty to God, inducing man
to the service of God, empowering His law in human life and strengthening
loyalty to Him in all aspects of man’s life.

2- This
revolution is the outcome of the cumulative effect of the great efforts of all
those who work for God, past and present, and the vanguard of Islamic activity,
those who understood the backwardness of the Muslim nation, accepted
responsibility, and faced the difficulties they met along the difficult path.
They work for the pleasure of God in different regions of the Islamic world and
at various levels of knowledge and culture.

All these
people together, whether they are our contemporaries or of earlier periods,
share the role of putting up the foundations of this revolution, making this
divine movement a reality and stirring this strong human wave that shook the
very pillars of tyranny. The theological student who invited his fellow
students towards God, His Messenger (S) and the establishment of God’s law; the
speaker who addressed the people in the mosques and other gatherings to
propagate Islamic guidance and awareness; the scholar; the writer, the poet,
and man of letters; teachers, workers, doctors,… both men and women; all
those who conveyed the Islamic vision; all those who laid a stone to make the
foundation of this revolution, wherever they may be; … all these people
played a role in this blessed revolution and have a claim on it and God’s
reward for it.

This
prodigious revolution which shook the ground from under the feet of the tyrants
and threatened their existence and interests is not the outcome of a short span
of time or the efforts of a limited number of Islamic workers and activists; it
is the fruit of generations of Islamic activity. If this revolution suffers
serious damage from whatever cause, the loss the Muslim nation will suffer will
be very great indeed; the effect of such damage will not be limited to the
Iranian pole or their Islamic leaders.

On a
different plane, the revolution carries with it all the pain, deprivation,
tyranny, suffering and difficulties endured by the Muslims during the period of
weakness, apathy and defeatism in their history. All those who endured
oppression for God’s sake, who were beaten in dungeons; all the tears, the
blood, the cries of pain; all orphanhood, bereavement and widowhood; and all
those who migrated for the sake of God also contributed to this revolution.

This
revolution symbolises all that pain and suffering in concrete form. However, if
the second factor i.e., pain and suffering had been all that the revolution stood
for, it would have seen mob action, destruction and emotion become the
overriding feature of the uprising. But the presence of the first factor i.e.,
the ideology and its power and effectiveness in actualizing this blessed
revolution was the main factor that directed the revolution and made sure it
maintained its course free from deviations.

The
purposeful efforts rendered during that period by God-oriented activists fell
within the pure Islamic line, that is, the line of the jurisconsult which was
personified by Imam Khomeini, and which later came to be known as the Imam’s
line. Certainly there were groups that deviated to the right or to the left but
they did not represent the main current of the Islamic movement. This current
was moving in the direction of the pure Islamic line. The jurists, the scholars
and the well-guided Islamic authorities played an important role in steering
this current, organizing and maintaining the course it took.

Unlike what
the enemies of Islam try to show or what some simple-minded Muslims get
deceived into believing, the Islamic revolution is not a regional affair or
just an Iranian Islamic revolution; it is an Islamic revolution for which God
Most High decreed that Iran should be its launching pad. Any effort to give it
a national colour and remove it from the feelings of all Muslims is surely an
act of treason against Islam and the Muslims if it comes from the enemies of
this nation who stay in wait for evil to befall it.

When such
actions come from Muslims then they must be due to naivety and ignorance led
astray by some act of treason. The purpose of this treason is to isolate the
revolution from Muslim feelings and Muslim public opinion in order to cordon it
off and subsequently destroy it. It is our duty as Muslims to confront these
conspiracies with awareness in an atmosphere of Islamic responsibility.

All
subsequent revolutions that will take place in Islamic lands taking direction
from this will be regarded as different stages of a single all- encompassing
revolution. They are not other revolutions in place of this one, and not even
extensions of it; they are but different stages of one comprehensive
revolution, the first of which has been destined by God to happen in Iran at
the hands of this brave and sacrificing Muslim people.

It is like
an earthquake which starts from a point and then extends along the fault line
to wide areas, as a result of some hidden geological reactions deep down in the
earth. This revolution is similar to this. In the depths of the Muslim nation,
strong and wide ranging interactions have taken place under the influence of
action (the first factor) and reaction (the second factor), away from the eyes
of world imperialism.

When the
imperialists were taking pride in their great victories over the Muslim world
and were power drunk on that account, those interactions were set in motion in
the depths of the Muslim nation till they reached their peak. Then came the
earthquake that shook the ground beneath the feet of the rulers in the White
House, the Kremlin and Elysée palace, and those tyrants did not regain their
sobriety until after the tremor. The starting point was Iran but the fault line
is a long unbreakable chain starting from Tehran to Baghdad, to Quds to Kabul
and Central Asia.

Indeed what
happened in Iran was a phenomenon much greater than our limited political
imagination; it was an actualization of what God, the Glorious and Sublime
promised his oppressed righteous servants in this verse:

“And
we desired to show favour to those who were oppressed in the land and make them
leaders and to make them the heirs, and to establish them in the
land…”(28:5-6).

Before
anything else we have to understand the true dimensions of this revolution and
then spread this awareness among the Muslims in order to foil the plots that
are being hatched by the enemies of Islam who aim at making the contemporary
Islamic revolution a regional affair. They intend to limit it to Iran and
Persian nationalism and subsequently isolate it from Muslim public opinion and
sympathy.

When one
follows the speeches of Imam Khomeini, the leader of the revolution, (may God
sanctify his soul), one will notice a deep understanding of these conspiracies
and wise efforts to thwart them. Because of the comprehensive nature of this
revolution the idea of exporting it started with its birth and from the words
of the leader himself. He who is acquainted with the nature and roots of this
revolution knows very well that it does not admit of national or geographical
boundaries nor does it stop at the boundaries to seek permission from the
gatekeepers so that they may grant it passage.

This
revolution is a current that does not seek permission, nor pause, nor recognize
boundaries, nor wait, nor hesitate!

Awareness
of these realities is necessary to protect and support the revolution instead
of limiting its horizon to a national affair. We are presenting these facts to
Islamic thinkers and workers so that they may assume their responsibilities
before God Most High with respect to this revolution.

This
revolution is one of the days of separation in Islamic history and it has
grouped the people, withregard to their opinion, into two groups: supporters
and adversaries.

Since the
first days of the emergence of this revolution faithful hearts and conscientious
souls began to flock around it and they spent the hours that preceded its birth
in great anxiety. History held its breath, as it were, to follow up this great
birth which meant the revival of the divine civilization, the return of Islamic
leadership on earth and the rule of God in man’s life after going through a
barren period in which apathy, weakness and psychological defeat were ripe,
when the Muslim world experienced degrading assimilation into the ungodly
systems of eastern and western arrogant powers, with the result that global
unbelief controlled our nation, land and resources.

As opposed
to this, the unjust and arrogant people who had sold their souls to the devil
sensed danger. They had detected in it a rebirth as large as history itself.
What was going on in Tehran was not like other incidents that happen here and
there, it was, in fact, the end of one stage of history and the beginning of
another. They felt a hazardous development taking them unawares so they
immediately declared their hostility to the revolution and did not hide their
fear of it from the very beginning.

This
revolution has been received differently by the two groups. One greeted it with
sympathy and love, and prayed for God’s support and waited for its victory with
self-abandon. The other group received it with malice and apprehension. They
could not hide their fear even at the inception of this blessed government
after the victory of the revolution. This division on the question of loyalty
or support, repudiation or opposition is a feature of the days of separation in
history which the revolution will face through its different phases.

It is quite
natural for the birth of this power to be a declaration of long-lasting contest
between Islamand anti-Islam (jahiliyah) because this revolution will seek to
overthrow the forts of jahiliyah and arrogance throughout the world to free the
hands of the oppressed from their shackles and throw off their yokes; and break
the awe of the great powers from the minds of Muslims. Therefore it is
impossible for world arrogance to keep silent in the face of this divine wave
without stirring trouble and difficulty for this revolutionary call, without
seeking to isolate it and obstruct its way.

He who
comprehends God’s norms in history will be able to understand clearly the
inevitability of conflict between these two forces: the growing Islamic force
and the force of global unbelief. This conflict will prove to be the hardest,
the longest and the most permanent because, as we have said, it is a struggle
for existence and such a struggle is always long drawn, severe and permanent.
It is not a contest for a piece of land or for mineral resources such as oil,
iron or copper that can admit mutual understanding.

This
revolution started in a region which was completely under the influence of the
great powers and it is now working to break the blockade from the whole Muslim
world. It is only natural for the forces of imperialism to confront this
revolution in its infant state through all forms of pressure and conspiracy,
both internally and externally, in order to muzzle and isolate it till it wears
out.

The
Iran-Iraq war was part of this awful imperialist plot and a part of the
conflict we talked about. The Iraqi regime was not the antagonist in this war;
it was only a channel for the will of the great powers. The real antagonists in
the conflict were the imperialists who divide the oppressed peoples of the
world among themselves and control them.

The Islamic
revolution must face this long and severe confrontation as this is part of
God’s norms that cannot be altered. The revolution cannot carry out great
achievements or prepare its people to perform great feats and face difficult
challenges if they do not exercise enduring confrontation.

5- The
outcome of this struggle will be in favour of the God-fearing and this is the
last thing we may doubt. A believing nation does not defend itself rather it
defends God’s religion, His law and the limits He has set. It does not face its
own enemies but God’s, and it does not fight with its own power and strength
but with the power and strength of God.

When a
nation fulfils these conditions, puts its trust in God, presents itself to Him,
lessens its attachment to the world, fortifies itself against inordinate
desires and then rises up for the sake of God individually or in groups; surely
God Most High will grant it victory, sooner or later. This is God’s promise and
He does not break his word. Let us listen to some verses from the book of God:

“Certainly
Our decree has gone before in favour of Our servants, the apostles, that they
will indeed receive [God’s] help, and indeed Our hosts will be the
victors”. (34:71-73).

“…
and it was a must for us to help the faithful”. (30:47).

“Indeed
we shall help Our apostles and those who have faith in the life of the
world…” (40:51).

“The
confederates of God are indeed the victorious” (5:56).

“… and
God suffices as guardian, and God suffices as helper.”(4:45).

“… and
your Lord suffices as helper and guide.”(25:31).

“O, you who
have faith! If you help God, He will help you and make your feet firm” (45:7).

When war
becomes protracted and severe God will not leave us at the mercy of our
enemies, He does not go back on His word and abandon His faithful servants.
Blessed is He and greatly exalted above that!

“This is
what God and his apostle had promised us.” (33:22).

If the
struggle is prolonged it is so that God may put his servants’ hearts to test in
order to separate the steadfast among them from the weak-hearted; so that he
may give the believers a firm footing on the battlefield; so that the believers
may find it easy to detach themselves from the love of this world in order to
face the struggle; so that they may gain more certainty with God in the middle
of the struggle, for one is bestowed with certainty at the time of tribulation
more than at times of peace and comfort; so that believers might learn through
experience how to confront mighty challenges and difficulties on God’s path and
thereby increase their fortitude, strength and bravery; so that loyalty and
repudiation may be firmer in the hearts of believers, for loyalty is through
sacrifice and service, and repudiation [of the adversary] is more vigorous
during confrontation and war.

This
struggle and its attending difficulties are not exclusive to this revolution or
this religion, they are a divine norm which God applies in the lives of His
righteous servants whom he selects for His mercy, those whom God Most High will
allow to live in paradise together with His truthful servants.

“Do you
suppose that you will be let off while God has not yet ascertained those of you
who wage jihad and those who do not take, besides God and His Apostle and the
faithful, anyone as [their] confidant? God is well aware of what you do.”
(9:16).

“Do you
suppose that you shall enter paradise though there has not yet come to you the
like of [what befell] those who went before you? Stress and distress befell
them…” (2:214).

We like to
pick the fruits of victory by the shortest route with the least means, without
our religion expecting anything from us. We want to simply extend our hands and
attain victory, leadership and vicegerency [imamah and khilafah] over the
world.

However,
the wise God knows that victory that comes without difficulties cannot qualify
man to be the leader and vicegerent of God on earth. Therefore, God wants us to
face confrontation by treading the difficult path and gain strength and
actualize the dominion of God’s religion in our lives.

“… and
you were eager that it should be the one that was unarmed [lit. ‘one that was
free of thorns’]. But God desires to confirm the truth with His words and to
root out the faithless, so that he may confirm the truth and bring falsehood to
naught, though the guilty should be averse.”(8:7-8).

Let us pay
attention to the following clear verses of God’s Book in Surah Al Imran, which
explain, in eloquent style, the norms of God with regard to struggle, distress,
trial, help and conquest.

“Do not weaken
or grieve: you shall have the upper hand, should you be faithful.” (3:139).

If a wound
afflicts you, a like wound has already afflicted those people; and We make such
vicissitudes rotate among mankind to ascertain those who have faith that We may
take witnesses from among you, and God does not like the wrongdoers. (3:140).

Also, He
wishes to purge those who have faith and wipe out the faithless. (3:141).

Do you
suppose that you can enter paradise while God has not yet ascertained those of
you who have waged jihad and not ascertained the steadfast?” (3 142).

In these
blessed verses from the chapter Al Imran there are clear answers to all the
questions that may arise in the believers’ minds about this terrible
confrontation between Islam and unbelief. The Muslims thought that after God
had granted them victory at Badr success would always be on the side of the
faithful group; as long as they believed in God and His apostle and struggled
along His path they would never fail to achieve victory, whatever the circumstances.

When God
made them test the bitterness of defeat at Uhud, where they suffered a reverse
when the archers disobeyed the command of God’s Messenger (S) and left their
positions to gather the spoils, the believers’ hearts quivered and their confidence
in victory was shaken. They began to have misgivings as to whether the outcome
of the affair would be in their favour.

Weakness
overwhelmed them and they were seized by grief for the leading personalities
who were martyred in the battle, and for the select group of believers who
fulfilled their promise to God and were sincere to Him in deeds and jihad.

Then God
Most High returned to their hearts the confidence for victory and reassured
them that the outcome would be in favour of the believers however much the
injuries, pains, drawbacks and difficulties along the tough road might be. God
removed from their minds all feebleness and grief, and convinced their hearts
of victory. “Do not weaken or grieve: you shall have the upper hand,
should you be faithful.”

Then God
Most High reminded the people that the wounds they sustained during the war
were also sustained by their enemies; they were not exclusive to them. The
wounds, the hardships, the troubles and the losses are demands of war to be
extracted from both parties, and no battle takes place without pain and wounds.

The divine
norm is such that vicissitudes rotate among mankind, one day in favour of the
believers and bitter for the infidels, and another in favour of the infidels
and bitter for the faithful. Thus will victory be rotated among them but the
ultimate outcome will always be in favour of the faithful. This alternation
does not change God’s decree that the outcome is to be in favour of the
God-wary. Vicissitudes are rotated in this way and the faithful are made to
test hardship and ease; victory at one time and the bitterness of defeat at
another, in order to sort out the believers from the hypocrites.

Had the
mission always been associated with victory and spoils, and coupled with ease
and comfort, hypocritical elements would have flocked around it, people who are
only good at sitting on the fence and being absent during battle, only to
return when the spoils are distributed and press for choice portions of it.

“So
when there is panic, you see them observing you, their eyes rolling, like
someone fainting at death.” (33:19).

If the
course of this mission were to be free of adversities and drawbacks hypocrites
and the weakhearted would flock around and taken up sensitive positions. If
this were to happen, the mission’s leadership role in men’s life would be
suspended and it would lose its power of bringing about change.

The mission
would leave the tough path that confronts taghut and take the comfortable
course awash with pleasures and worldly wares. It would then lose its capacity
for change and action similar to what happened at the time of the Umayyads and
Abbasids.

Therefore
this journey needs, from time to time, a strong uprising that can push aside
the hypocrites and the weak-hearted and sort out the people with strong faith
who keep their word with God and are sincere to Him in their works. The course
taken by this mission is unlike what the people are accustomed to with respect
to other systems and governments which seek a life of comfort and ease that is
free from all shortcomings.

Nothing
harms this mission like a calm, comfortable and pompous life. In such a situation,
this call will have lost its most important feature, since God Most High has
made the period of distress and adversity a means of making the mission’s
environment clear of such feeble minded people who usually opt for a calm,
comfortable life. When the journey suffers adversities, hardships and reverses
the field is left solely for the believers. The journey then belongs to the
sincere group only and the faithful are distinguished from others “so that
God may ascertain those who have faith.”

This is not
the only benefit of vicissitudes and the rotation of victory and defeat,
hardship and ease on the believers. Another benefit is that God may take
witnesses, exemplars and leaders on earth. It is through these hardships,
drawbacks, war-inflicted wounds and the pains of confrontation that witnesses
are produced in this nation, “Thus we have made you a middle nation that
you may be witnesses to the people…”(2:143), as well as leaders and models of
perseverance, patience and faith.

Unique
models in faith that adorn human history are not made in a calm and cozy life;
they are made in the thick of difficulties, in the midst of action, amidst
blood and tears. This journey also needs these singular models of faith and
perseverance selected by God during trying and difficult circumstances,
“…that He may take witnesses from among you”(3:140).

Thirdly,
these vicissitudes help in the making of this nation and the appraisal of its
personalities. These wounds, pain and difficulties purge the believers, cleanse
them and purify their hearts from doubt and selfish desires, and free them of
their weaknesses. Many a believer’s internal points of weakness remain hidden
from him, but during tribulation they appear so that he can correct them, for
many a weakness of the mind cannot be corrected during peace time; only
hardship and difficulties can put them right.

Just as
hardships and difficulties sort out believers from hypocrites, they also clear
the believer’s soul from weaknesses and doubts; they purge the faithful. As for
the infidels, tribulations and hardship efface and ruin them completely;
therefore, they cannot struggle against difficulties and adversities. “So
that God may purge those who have faith and that He may wipe out the
faithless.”

As such it
is not correct to think that whoever proclaims the two testimonies [i.e. to the
oneness of God and the prophethood of Muhammad (S) ], becomes a Muslim and will
enter paradise, for among the people are hypocrites whose testimonies do not
descend from their lips into their hearts. Believers are at different levels of
faith; they do not occupy the same position in terms of belief and good works.
There are believers who prefer wellbeing to striving and fighting in the way of
God.

Then there
are striving (mujahidun) believers. Then there are striving believers who are
patient. It will be a mistake to think that everyone will have the same rank in
paradise, for each will have his own rank and position as seen by God. These
ranks and position are determined only during trying circumstances, when the
believer is distinguished from the hypocrite, the striving believer from the
ordinary one and the patient, striving believer from the impatient one.

6- This
blessed revolution marks the beginning of a major turning point in man’s history
and civilization; it is a matter of great consequence with regard to the life
and future of mankind. Whoever examines the narrations that are related from
the Messenger of God, (S) and his family, will not doubt the fact that this
revolution, given its salient features and its leadership, will prepare the
ground for the greatest revolution in human history and the appearance of Imam
al-Mahdi of the family of Muhammad (S), may God hasten his appearance.

Surely the
promised day which God and His Apostle have promised us; the establishment of
the great Islamic power, the empowering of the oppressed over the land and Imam
al-Mahdi’s great revolution is close at hand, God willing. The present
revolution paves the way for the coming one and prepares the Muslim community
for the reappearance and rising of one who undertakes the office of the Imamate
(alQa‘im) from the family of Muhammad (‘a). The following is an assortment from
those narrations:

From
Abdullah ibn Mas’ud who said: “We came to see God’s Messenger and found
him delighted, his face showing his happiness. Whatever we asked of him he told
us and whenever we were silent he initiated a topic. Then some Hashimite youths
among whom were Hasan and Husayn (‘a) passed by. When he saw them he looked at
them persistently and his eyes welled up, so we said to him: O Messenger of
God! We see in your face signs of pain. Then he said:

“We
are a household for whom God chose the hereafter instead of the world. After me
my family will be expelled and dispersed in the land till the time black
standards rise from the east. [The standard bearers] will ask for their right
but they will be denied it, then they will ask for it again but they will be
denied it again, then they will ask for it again, fight [for it] and be victorious.
He who meets this situation from among you or among your descendants, let him
come to the Imam (leader) from my family even if he has to crawl on ice, for
those [standards] are standards of guidance which they will hand over to a man
from my family whose name will be the same as mine and his title [Abul Qasim]
the same as mine. He will fill the earth with equity and justice, as it will be
filled with inequity and oppression.”13

In Bihar
al-Anwar Allamah al-Majlisi narrates that Imam al-Baqir (‘a) said: “It is
as if I am together with some people who have come from the east. They will
request for their right but they will be denied it, then they will request for
it again. When they realize that, they will brandish their swords and

[consequently]
they will be granted their request but they will not accept it till they rise
up. They will not hand over their [standards] except to your companion (i.e.
al-Mahdi (‘a). Those who are killed among them will be martyrs. Indeed if I
were to witness that time I would keep myself at the disposal of the leader of
this affair.”14

It is
reported in Al-Bihar that Abu al-Hasan al-Rida (‘a) has said: “A man from
the people of Qum will invite the people to the truth and a group of people
[who are tough] like pieces of iron will rally around him. Storms will not
cause them to slip, they will be undaunted by war and never get tired of it,
they will depend on God and the outcome will be in favour of the God-wary.”15

It is also
related in Al-Bihar, from Ali ibn Maymun al-Sa’igh, from Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) who
said: “A time will come when the city of Qum and its people shall be a
proof against mankind. That will be at the time of occultation of the one from
us who will rise (al-Qa’im) till the time of [his] appearance. Had it not been for
that, the earth would swallow up its inhabitants.”16

Through
other chains of transmission, it is reported that Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) said about
Kufa: “Kufa shall become empty of the faithful and knowledge shall
diminish in it and recoil as a snake recoils. Knowledge shall [then] appear in
a town known as Qum which will become a source of learning and culture [and it
will spread] until there remains no one abased concerning the religion [i.e. on
account of their ignorance of it], not even women who are secluded in their
quarters. This will happen when the appearance of our Qa’im draws near and God
will make Qum and its people serve as the proof.

Otherwise,
the earth will swallow up its people and no proof will have remained on earth.
So knowledge will flow from it [Qum] to other lands in the east and west and
God’s proof against mankind will then be complete, till there remains no one on
earth to whom religion and knowledge has not reached. After that the Qa’im will
appear and become the cause of God’s punishment and anger on the servants, for
God does not punish the servants till after they deny his proof.”

Commenting
on the saying of God the Exalted: “…And if you turn away He will replace
you with another people and they will not be like you” (47:38), Al-Zamakhshari
the author of Tafsir alKashshaf said: The Messenger of God was asked about
those people while Salman was sitting by his side. He patted him on the thigh
and said: ‘This one and his people. I swear by the One in whose hand is my
soul, if faith were to be suspended at the Pleiades some men from the Persians
will attain it.”17

These
assorted narrations indicate that this blessed revolution will God willing last
till the appearance of Imam al-Mahdi of the family of Muhammad (‘a), and
prepare the world for him, may God hasten his appearance.18

Abu
Nu’aym’s Hilyat al-Awliya 2/39.

Tarikh
al-Tabari, 6/229.

Al-Saduq’s
Al-Khisal, 2/52; Bihar al-Anwar 27/53.

Al-Ahmadi
al-Mayaniji’s Makatib al-Rasul, 120.

Al-Barqi’s
Al-Mahasin, 165; Bihar al-Anwar 27/52.

Fiqh
al-Rida, 51; Bihar al-Anwar 27/52.

Bihar
al-Anwar 27/58.

Bihar
al-Anwar 27/58.

Al-Khisal
2/153-154; Bihar al-Anwar 27/52.

Tafsir
al-Imam al-Askari, 18; Ma’ani al-Akhbar 113; Uyun al-Akhbar 161;Ilal
al-Sharaya’ 58; all quoted in Bihar al-Anwar 27/54.

It is taken
from the general Ziyarat Warith and the special Ziyarat Ashura with slight
differences.

From
another direction, Siffin could be considered the Second day of Separation in
Islam and Ashura could be the third.

Al-Mustadrak
ala al-Sahihayn 4/ 464.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 51/83; 52/43.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 60/216, 446.

Bihar
al-Anwar, 60/213.

Tafsir
al-Kashshaf, 4/331.

. We refer
the reader to Sheikh Ali al-Kurani’s Al-Mumahhidun li al-Mahdi for explanation
and analysis of thesenarrations and also how they fit the present context of
the blessed Islamic Revolution.

Loyalty And
Repudiation In The Supplication Of Ziyarat Ashura

Ziyarat
Ashura is among the soundly transmitted supplications that come down to us from
the Ahl alBayt (‘a) and are recited at visitations to the holy burial places of
the Chosen Ones (‘a) and other occasions. It has been related by Ibn Qulawayh
(may God have mercy on him) in Kamil al-Ziyarat through an acceptable chain of
transmission, a standard which he maintained throughout the narrations of his
book. It has also been reported by Sheikh al-Tusi (may God have mercy on him)
and other veritable narrators of hadith.

It is the
persistent practice of the faithful to recite this supplication throughout the
year, and with it declare their association with the school of the Ahl al-Bayt
(‘a) and their disassociation with their enemies. Through this supplication the
faithful openly show their loyalty to Husayn (‘a) and his family, and repudiate
their adversaries in the decisive battle that took place in Karbala in 61 A.H.
between Husayn (‘a), his family and companions on one side and the Umayyads on
the other. This supplication is replete with the concepts of loyalty and
repudiation, association and separation, greetings of peace and cursing.

Loyalty And
Repudiation: The Most Prominent Features Of The Day Of Ashura

The day of
Ashura was a day full of faith, sincerity, service and values, but the most
prominent feature of this day was loyalty to God, His Messenger (S) and those
vested with authority, and also a repudiation of their enemies. This loyalty
and repudiation was demonstrated by Husayn’s companions through their rare act
of sacrifice in Karbala. This place witnessed the most marvelous scenes of
sacrifice, freedom, resistance and struggle in history which were the fruits of
loyalty and repudiation.

In this
rare and wonderful scene of loyalty and repudiation we also witness rare
instances which depict values and morals that are responsible for drawing the
attention of the people to the event for the last thirteen centuries. The
morals and values depicted include faith, monotheism, freedom, love for God and
struggle for His sake, hate for God’s sake, remembrance [of God], renouncing of
the world, sincerity, gratitude, piety, altruism, allegiance, self-esteem,
strength, courage, patience, far-sightedness, acute discernment and much more
that we are not aware of, which history recorded for us concerning the blessed
party that accompanied Husayn (‘a) on his journey to God on the day of Ashura
and prior to that.

Beauty
attracts man wherever it may be: in nature, in society, in forms and figures or
in values, morals and meaning. It is amazing that we find loyalty and
repudiation in the camp that was opposed to Husayn

(‘a) as
well, although in a completely opposite direction: loyalty to taghut and
repudiation of God’s

friends,
and loyalty to the party of Satan and repudiation of the party of God.

As loyalty
and repudiation are reversed, values and morals follow suit; both follow God’s
norms. Thus we witness these opposites within the camp that fought Husayn (‘a):
heedlessness to God as opposed to remembering him, polytheism as opposed to
monotheism, selfishness as opposed to altruism, cowardice as opposed to
courage, weakness as opposed to strength, ingratitude as opposed to
gratefulness, sin as opposed to piety, love for God’s enemies and hate for His
friends as opposed to love for God and for His sake and hate for His sake,
egocentrism as opposed to concern for others, meanness as opposed to
generosity, humiliation as opposed to self-esteem and honour, anxiety as
opposed to patience, treachery as opposed to loyalty.

We witness
these and other negative values of that camp as opposed to the positive ones
that abound in Husayn’s camp. In this camp, after his right hand had been cut
off by the enemy, al-Abbas raises this battle cry.

‘By God if
they cut off my right hand, I will forever defend my religion,

And
[defend] the Imam who is certain in faith.’

From the
other camp we read that when Shimr, the killer of Husayn (‘a) met Ibn Ziyad
and, requested a prize, said:

‘Make my
mount heavy with silver or with gold, [for] I have killed the cultured lord.

I have
killed the man with the best father and mother, and the best of men when
genealogies are mentioned.’1

These two
opposing loyalties and repudiations that we see on the day of Ashura in
Karbala, issuing from the two contending camps will continue throughout history
among the supporters of Husayn and the supporters of the Umayyads.

We read in
history that some people endure all kinds of suffering and tyranny, and the
distress of travel in order to visit the grave of Husayn (‘a). Others
demolished the structures in its precincts and also inundated it, so that the
signs which mark the resting place of Husayn (‘a) might be effaced. In
addition, they killed the pilgrims and cut off their hands to prevent people
from visiting the tomb of Husayn (‘a) in the past, [and blow them up today with
bombs].

The Three
Peculiarities Of The Al-Taff Battle Theatre

The most
prominent peculiarities of this arena with regard to loyalty and repudiation
are three:

It was a
field which inherited loyalty and repudiation. These two were not new to this
theatre; it inherited them from earlier theatres in the long struggle between
the prophets and their followers on one side and the despots on the other.
Secondly, it was a separating theatre that classified the people since 61 A.H.,
into two distinct groups that are opposed on the question of loyalty and
repudiation.

Thirdly, it
was a legator from which we inherit loyalty and repudiation. Had it not been
for this legacy which we received from Karbala these twin concepts would not
have been preserved for us. The Umayyads corrupted loyalty and repudiation just
as they corrupted many of the fundamentals and laws of religion. They robbed
the people of their loyalty and repudiation by deflecting their courses.
Through his death and the death of that band of his family members and
companions, Husayn (‘a) restored the two to their rightful places. Below is an
exposition of these three peculiarities:

An
Inherited Theatre

The battle
theatre of Al-Taff was that of confrontation between truth and falsehood,
monotheism and polytheism; a call towards servitude and submission to God, and
an invitation to taghut, and empowering it over the people by enslaving them.
This was the fiercest and the most desperate type of confrontation in history
because it was a struggle on the question of loyalty and repudiation between
loyalty to God and repudiation of taghut on one side and loyalty to taghut on
the other.

This
encounter was not new that started in Karbala in 61 A.H, rather it was an
extension of the contest of civilizations that run along the lines of accepting
and denouncing, with the prophets and their followers on one side and despots,
dictators and their courtiers on the other.

Husayn (‘a)
was in the line of the prophets and their followers while the Umayyads, their
helpers and governors took the path of the oppressors and despotic rulers.
Historians inform us that when Imam Husayn (‘a) was leaving Medina he was
repeatedly mentioning John, the son of Zachariah, and his murder.

The values
which distinguished Husayn’s camp at Karbala were the same values and norms
which characterized the prophets’ camp in history. These values were belief in
monotheism, remembrance of God, piety, sincerity, denouncing the world and its
glory; perseverance and sacrifice in the path of God, establishing the prayer,
paying zakat, bidding the good and forbidding the bad, waging jihad on the
oppressors, justice and kindness.

By
contrast, the traits that characterized the Umayyad camp in Karbala were the
same traits of the camp of oppressors, despots and dictators throughout history.
Husayn’s (‘a) companions spent the night before the 10th of Muharram droning
like bees [on account of their worship]. Some were standing, some sitting, some
bowing and some prostrating themselves.2

‘On them
were signs of devouts who were humble before God as dawn came over them.

And when
morning came the glitter of sharp swords testified to their being freemen.’

Fatima
daughter of Husayn (‘a) said: “My aunt Zaynab spent all that night
standing in her prayer niche pleading for succour from her Lord. By God our
eyes did not find sleep nor did the sounds [of our prayers] abate.”3

Such was
the case in Husayn’s (‘a) camp. They were yearning to meet God, denouncing the
world and its vanities, and they were glad because they were going to meet
martyrdom in God’s way. Their eagerness reached the extent that one of them was
cracking jokes with his friends on that night. Burayr cracked a joke with
Abdurrahman al-Ansari and the latter said to him: This is no time to jest.
Burayr replied: “My people know that I never liked to jest, neither as a
middle-aged man nor as a young man, but [it is because] I am delighted by what
we shall meet. By God, there is nothing between us and the houris except their
swords. I wish that they would attack us now.”4

The only
concern of the other party was to get gold, silver, governorships and presents
in exchange for fighting the son of the daughter of God’s Messenger (S). Umar
ibn Sa’ad undertook the fight with an eye on the governorship of Al-Rayy.
Al-Yafi’i says: And he promised the said governor (Umar ibn Sa’ad) to make him
ruler of the city of al-Rayy and the sinner sold guidance in exchange for
error.

These are
two attitudes, two cultures, two methods in life. They are two ways of acting
and two norms, and they are distinct from one another throughout the history of
confrontation between the party of God and the party of taghut. Despite the
fact that as time passes the features and forms of methods and practices do
change but the essence of these two norms, cultures and methods remain the
same. These two norms are the norm of God’s friends and their methodology and
that of taghut and its methodology.

We find
this great disparity between these two methods, cultures and norms clearly
portrayed in the theatre of Karbala in a confrontation between two camps only a
few metres apart. We read in the supplication of the Commander of the Faithful
(‘a) which is known as Ziyarat Amin Allah:

“[O God]
Make my soul assured with Your decree, pleased with what You predestined, [make
it] follow the ways of Your friends, and separate me from the character of your
enemies.”

They are
two norms and two methods. We pray to God the Exalted to make us follow the
practice of His friends and separate us from the norms of His enemies. Surely
the battle theatre of Al-Taff was an extension of the arena of confrontation in
the history of the prophets, and Husayn (‘a) took the positions taken by the
prophets, testamentary legatees (awsiya’) and God’s friends, while the Umayyads
took the positions of the imperious despots of history. So the loyalty was the
same and the repudiation was also the same.

This arena
truly inherited the theatre in the strictest sense of the term. All values and
their contraries, all loyalty and repudiation had been transported from the
depth of history to the time of Husayn (‘a). The more deep-rooted loyalty and
repudiation are, the deeper, firmer, stronger and more intense a product of
awareness they become. Indeed loyalty and repudiation in Husayn’s (‘a) camp in
Karbala carried all the strength and awareness of the loyalty and repudiation
that accumulated during the history of the prophets.

It is for a
specific reason that the greetings of peace to Husayn (‘a) in Ziyarat Warith
took this wonderful wording that depicts his position in Karbala. It came with
the expression ‘heir of the prophets’:

Peace be on
you O heir of Adam, God’s chosen one!

Peace be on
you O heir of Noah, God’s prophet.

Peace be on
you O heir of Abraham, God’s friend.

Peace be on
you O heir of Moses, the interlocutor of God.

Peace be on
you O heir of Jesus, spirit of God.

Peace be on
you O heir of Muhammad, the beloved of God.

A
Separating Theatre

The day of
Ashura was a day of separation in history. The greatest days of separation for
this nation are Badr, Siffin and Al-Taff. The days of separation divide the
people into two spheres of confrontation and spare no one. On the day of
Al-Taff the people were well-informed about truth and falsehood, guidance and
deviation with respect to the conflict; the matter was not ambiguous to anyone
on the battle field.

The matter
was too clear for the Umayyads to have been able to obfuscate it by their
propaganda. Whoever took to deviation on that day must have followed
misguidance with full knowledge and no one got misguided because of having
confused truth with falsehood.

On the day
of Ashura, Husayn (‘a) stood between the battle lines and addressed the Umayyad
army saying:

“O
people! Tell me: who am I? Then search your souls and rebuke yourselves, and
see whether it is permissible for you to kill me and violate my sanctity. Am I
not the son of the daughter of your Prophet (S) and the son of his legatee who
was his cousin, the first believer in God who accepted what His Messenger
brought from his Lord? Was not Hamza, Lord of the martyrs, my [father’s] uncle?
Was Ja’far al-Tayyar not my uncle? Has not the saying of God’s Messenger about
me and my brother saying ‘These two are lords of the youths of paradise’,
reached you? If you believe what I say [well and good]– and it is the truth,
for by God I have never told a lie since I knew that God detests the one who
lies and that it harms its fabricator –.

“If
you disbelieve me, there are among you those who will tell you if you ask. Ask
Jabir ibn Abdillah alAnsari, Abu Sa’id al-Khidri, Sahl ibn Sa’ad al-Sa’idi,
Zayd ibn Arqam and Anas ibn Malik. They will tell you that they have heard this
saying of God’s Messenger (S) concerning me and my brother. Is this not
deterrent enough for you against spilling my blood?”

Then Shimr
said: ‘I must be worshipping God on a fringe if I know what he is saying.’

Habib ibn
Muzahir said to him: ‘By God, I think you: are: worshipping God on seventy
fringes. I bear witness that you are saying the truth that you do not know what
he is saying, for God has put a seal on your heart.’5

The
plainness of truth and falsehood, and also guidance and deviation in this arena
had divided it on that day into two groups, on the basis of loyalty and
repudiation. Whoever stood by Husayn (‘a), his family and companions was
showing loyalty to God, His Messenger (S) and the Imams (‘a) of the Muslims
after him, and repudiating Yazid and his governors, soldiers and courtiers.

Whoever did
not stand by Husayn (‘a) on that day, his loyalty must have been for Yazid and
his repudiation against God’s party. The pretext of confusion or ignorance
could be accepted from no one. The pretext of one who sat on the fence, who was
indifferent to what was happening on the battlefield, could also not be
accepted.

Therefore
whoever knew that Husayn (‘a) had sought for help in order to support God’s
religion and heard his call but neither supported him nor got enraged and
aggrieved on account of him, nor attempted to defend him, must have in fact
been pleased with those people’s action and automatically fell within the
sphere of those to be cursed and repudiated. In Ziarat Warith we read:

May God
curse the people who killed you…

May God
curse the people who oppressed you …

May God
curse the people who heard of that and accepted it.

These are
part of the peculiarities of the days of separation in history which separate
the people completely. The dividing line here is loyalty and repudiation which
divides the people into two camps and does not accept the position of
spectators who stand on the periphery of the battlefield, preferring their
well-being. Those who remain observers when conflicts break out might think
that they can escape their religion if they avoid both camps, but they do not
know that they are entering headlong into predicament! God the Exalted said:

“Look!
They have already fallen into predicament…” (9:49).

May God
have mercy on Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn for he had full awareness and insight on the
day he went out towards them [the enemy] riding his long-tailed horse and
well-armed. He said: “O people of Kufa! Beware of God’s punishment!
Beware! Indeed it is the duty on a Muslim to advice his brother Muslim and we
are still brothers following one religion, so long as the sword has not come
down between us. You deserve our admonition, but when the sword descends [all]
bonds will be severed and we will become one nation and you another.

God has
tested us and you with the descendants of His prophet Muhammad (S) to see our
action and yours. We are inviting you to help them and abandon these despots
Yazid and Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad for you will not get anything from them except
harm, as long as their power lasts. They will gorge out your eyes, cut off your
hands and feet, mutilate you and hang you on the trunks of palm trees. They
will kill your exemplars and those versed in the Qur’an among you, like Hujr
ibn ‘Adi, and Hani ibn Urwa and their types.”

The people
reviled him and praised Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad and added: “We shall not
depart until we kill your man and those who are with him or unless we send him
along with his companions to Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad in submission.”

Then Zuhayr
said: “Servants of God! The son of Fatima is more entitled to love and
support than the son of Sumayyah. But if you do not help them, I commend you to
God’s care that you should not kill them. Open the way between the man and
Yazid, for by my life, Yazid will be contented with your obedience without you
killing al-Husayn (‘a).

Then Shimr
shot an arrow at him and said: “Keep quiet! May God silence your noise! We
are fed up with your prattle.”

Zuhayr
said: “O son of the one who urinates on his heels! I am not talking to you
because you are only an animal. I do not think that you have learnt even two
verses of the Book of God. Know that the humiliation of the Day of Resurrection
and a painful chastisement awaits you. Then he [Zuhayr] turned to the people
and said loudly:

“Servants
of God! Do not be seduced into leaving your religion for that uncouth man and
his ilk. By God, the intercession of Muhammad (S) will not include a people who
spill the blood of his descendants and his family and kill those who help them
and defend their women folk.”

Then a man
from his camp called Zuhayr saying: “Abu Abdillah [i.e. Imam Husayn] is
saying: Come back. By my life, you have advised these people, as if a believer
of Pharaoh’s people had admonished his people and intensified his plea, if only
advice and conveyance [of information] is of any avail.”6

A Legator
Theatre

We
inherited loyalty and repudiation from the battle theatre of Al-Taff on the day
of Ashura. Had it not been for Ashura we ourselves would not have been
acquainted with loyalty and repudiation except loyalty for the rulers and the
kings however they might be; and repudiation of their enemies whoever they
were, since loyalty would then have been the prerogative of the man who handled
the whip even if he was unjust, and repudiation would have been against the one
who opposed him even if he invited people to God and His Messenger (S).

Certainly,
the Umayyads had corrupted the concepts of loyalty and repudiation which caused
the corruption and destruction of everything in this nation. A nation is,
according to the soundest definition, nothing but loyalty and repudiation. The
Umayyads knew this fact very well and they also knew the effect an attack on
these two pillars would have on the nation’s existence.

May God
have mercy on al-Farazdaq! When the Imam met him on the way and asked him about
the people he left behind, he replied: “You have asked the one who is
conversant with the issue. Their hearts are with you but their swords are
against you.”

This is the
first step towards destroying loyalty and repudiation and the next one is when
the corrupting and destroying shifts from the swords and external stances to
the hearts; to love and hate, and this means everything with regard to loyalty
and repudiation.

The
Umayyads had aimed at the most important things for a nation’s existence and
corrupted them and robbed the people of them. To ruin the loyalty and
repudiation of the people they had to rob them of their conscience, their will
and also their resistance, and when people lose these three things nothing will
remain of them except dross.

The story
of this assault is long and we will not go into detail here. We have done that
in our book Warith al-Anbiya’.

Husayn (‘a)
had envisaged this painful and unfortunate situation when he said in a speech
that was all grief and pain, as he described the tragedy of the Muslims of that
period: “The world has changed beyond recognition: its good has turned
away and nothing remains of it except the drops [that remain in a container
when it is emptied of its water] and a despicable life like unwholesome
pasture. Don’t you see that truth is not acted upon and falsehood is not
refrained from?”

Husayn (‘a)
had no option but to fight the despots himself, with his family and companions
even if they were few in number. Through his tragic death he was able to
achieve two important things for Islam and the Muslims. These achievements
were:

Restoration
of awareness, will and resistance in Muslim minds.

Stripping
Umayyad rule of legitimacy.

Indeed the
death of al-Husayn (‘a) together with that blessed party comprising his family
and companions had caused a deep jolt on the languid Muslim souls of that day.
Those people had left Husayn (‘a) with only a small band of his family and
companions, and looked on as the awful war broke out between him and the
despots, without taking the slightest action.

The tragic
way in which Husayn died, jolted the Muslim conscience which had been suspended
by Umayyad misrule. It restored their will, awareness and resistance, and this
was the greater of the two achievements. The second one is that it stripped
Umayyad government of legitimacy. They were ruling the Muslims from the
position of Successor (khalifah) to the Messenger of God (S) and it was from
that position that they derived their legitimacy. They also distorted the laws,
values and principles of this religion by invoking this very position.

When Husayn
(‘a) went out to fight that tyrant and was martyred by the forces of the
Umayyads the people came to know that God’s Messenger (S), His religion and his
nation all denounced the

Umayyads.
Although Umayyad rule continued even after Husayn’s death it became like any
other ruling family or temporal rulers and kings: they no longer represented
vicegerency to the Messenger of God (S) in the minds of the Muslims.

Since that
date the Muslims recognized two different lines: the line of the jurists and
the line of the rulers. In the opinion of the Muslims, the line of the jurists
was the legitimate one, except when they obeyed the rulers. This is as far as
the Sunni sphere is concerned. With the followers of the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) the
issue was much clearer.

Were it not
for Husayn’s death, the people would not have known the religion except through
the palaces of the Umayyads which were filled with luxury, sports, music,
oppression and murder. If the martyrdom of Husayn and his family and companions
had not taken place nothing would have remained of Islam but its name. It is
just like what Husayn (‘a) said to Marwan on the day he invited him to pay
allegiance to Yazid:

“Farewell
to Islam if the nation is put to test with [the rule of] a herdsman like
Yazid”

Emotional
Co-Existence With The Al-Taff Tragedy As Expressed In Ziyarat Ashura

The text
that is known as Ziyarat Ashura forcefully and clearly embodies loyalty and
repudiation as it should be and crystallizes all the loyalty and repudiation
that abounded in the battlefield of Al-Taff and has drawn people towards it
since that wonderful historic day in the year 61 A.H. When one reads the text
of Ziyarat Ashura one strongly senses a feeling of coexistence with it since
that very day, and it is a feeling that is known and felt by those who are
accustomed to and constantly read this text. The tragic words that appear in
this ziyarah truly, precisely and subtly convey our emotional and transparent
coexistence with the tragedy of Al-Taff:

“The
calamity is surely grievous; very heavy and distressing indeed is your
tribulation on us and on all the people of Islam; heavy and distressing indeed
is your tribulation on the heavens and on all its inhabitants…– How great a
tribulation it is and how great a calamity it is for Islam, for all the heavens
and the earth!”

It is on
purpose that the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) and the scholars of their school emphasize
the constant recitation of this ziyarah. Reading this text transports us to the
Ashura environment and conveys to us the meanings of loyalty and repudiation
that abound in Ashura. It also conveys to us the values that overflow from them
and consolidate those concepts in our souls. Loyalty and repudiation draws the
distantly related near and pushes close relations away.

The ideas I
am putting down in this discussion are some meditations about loyalty and
repudiation as they appear in Ziyarat Ashura, in the hope that God may bestow
on us their flavour and the lofty concepts which this ziyarah is full of. The
following ideas derived from it have been meditated upon:

Scenes Of
Loyalty And Repudiation In Ziyarat Ashura

Loyalty and
repudiation cover the whole scope of man’s life, time, place and geography. I
do not know of a situation that covers man’s life the way this one does. They
divide history into two parts, a part for God’s friends and another part for
God’s enemies.

We are now
living with Abraham (‘a), Noah (‘a), Moses (‘a), Jesus (‘a), God’s Messenger
(S) and the Imams (‘a) from his family who came after him, the guided, the
guides. We pay allegiance to them and follow their guidance the same way as if
we were living with them in their own times, and we hope to remain together
with them both here and in the hereafter. On the other hand we turn to God in
repudiation of Pharaoh, Haman, Nimrod, the Sabbath-breakers, Men of the Ditch
and the murderers of the Israeli prophets, and we also repudiate Abu Sufyan,
Abu Jahl, Muawiyya and Yazid, as though we were present during their times.

The
interposing centuries and epochs of history do not obscure our loyalty to the
first group nor our repudiation of the second. It is a peculiarity of loyalty
and repudiation that they transcend epochs and centuries to join the ends of a
single journey over the ages. We feel today the grief for Husayn (‘a)’s ordeals
and death in Karbala as if the tragic incident happened in our own lives.

Similarly,
these two issues transcend geography. Today we are partners to the Muslims of
Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia, Chechnya, Pakistan and Iraq in the tyranny,
suffering, murder and deprivation which they are enduring at the hands of God’s
enemies, as if these things are happening to us and our families. In the same
vein, we are hostile to Israel and America as if they are carrying out
aggression against our own families and homes.

Indeed
loyalty and repudiation draws near the distant ones and separates those who are
near one another. Many a brother is hostile towards his full brother but loyal
and sympathetic to his brothers in religion, although not in blood, in faraway
parts of the earth without seeing them, knowing their names or even seeing
their pictures. Loyalty and repudiation joins Salman al-Farisi with the
Prophetic Household and separates Abu Lahab from it, expelling and condemning
him. “Perish the hands of Abu Lahab and Perish he!”(111:1).

Thus
loyalty and repudiation transcend time and place and cover the domains of
history and geography. They also cover the scope of man’s life: his soul, his
heart, his intellect, his education, his social relations, his political life,
his war and his peace. No aspect of his life, his behaviour, personality and
thought, his love, hate and desire and all that surrounds him, remains outside
the scope of loyalty and repudiation.

In Ziyarat
Ashura we meet wonderful scenes of loyalty and repudiation that spread over all
dimensions of man’s life. Some examples of them are cited below:

Loyalty,
Repudiation And Hostility

This is an
extensive topic that affects maintaining or severing of relationships, love and
hate. It is mentioned repeatedly in Ziyarat Ashura:

“I am
seeking proximity to God through paying allegiance to you and repudiating those
who fought you and declared war on you. I am friendly to the one who is loyal
to you and hostile to the one who is hostile to you.”

The
contrast between loyalty and repudiation, and loyalty and hostility accurately
explains a believer’s stand in the theatre of confrontation that extends over
the ages till today. Loyalty to the family of God’s Messenger (S) and hostility
to their enemies – the matter could not have been more explicit!

Greetings
Of Peace And Cursing

This
loyalty turns into peace in social relations and also into pleas of expulsion
from the sphere of God’s mercy and severing of social relations. In Ziyarat
Ashura we read: “Peace be on you, O son of the Messenger of God (S)! Peace
be on you, O son of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a)! Peace be on you, O son
of Fatima al-Zahra (‘a)! May God curse the people who laid the foundation of inequity
and oppression against you, the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a). May God curse the people who
pushed you away from your positions and removed you from the ranks which God
has assigned you.”

Greetings
are a declaration of love, affection, cooperation and acting peaceably toward a
person. A curse is a declaration of separation and severing of ties and
expulsion.

Peace And
War

Loyalty and
repudiation are an amazing affair. They start from intentions, hearts, culture,
publicity, literature, poetry and literary contests and extend to confrontation
and battlefields. It is said in Ziyarat Ashura:

“I am
at peace with whoever is at peace with you and at war with whoever fights you,
to the day of Resurrection.”

The
duration of this peace or war will not end till the Day of Resurrection when
God will separate the people.

Another
section reads:

“I am
at peace with whoever is at peace with you, at war with whoever is at war with
you, loyal to whoever is loyal to you and hostile to whoever is enemy to
you.”

This
repetition, emphasis and careful wording are surely done for some significant
reason. The question of loyalty and repudiation constitute the essence and
spirit of this religion. Therefore, a believer must consider these two issues
carefully with respect to all areas of his life. Without this his faith will
not be complete.

Association
And Disassociation

Among the
instances of loyalty and repudiation in this ziyarah there is the question of
association, a complete association in both this and the next world, and also
that of separation. We read from this ziyarah:

“So I
pray to God to let me be with you in this world and the next, and to confirm
for me a good standing with you…”

There are
two forms of association: a true one and a false one. The second type of
companionship is that of the believer who is seen conversing with the man with
two gardens7 and this is not the required type of association. The required one
is the one which proves true both in ease and in difficulty.

In the same
ziyarah there is this prayer: “And make firm for me a good standing with
You together with Husayn (‘a) and those companions who laid down their lives in
his defense.”

Firmness
and good standing with God is to be coupled with being together with Husayn
(‘a) as the section quoted above shows: ‘with God’ and ‘together with
Husayn.” It cannot be otherwise, for every good standing with God must
necessarily be together with God’s righteous servants and friends, and
conversely, every good standing with God’s friends will necessarily be with God.

This companionship
(ma‘iyyah) is for the righteous servants of God who are true to their word in
ease as well as in difficulty, and God has commanded us to cultivate it:

“O,
you who have faith! Be wary of God and be with the truthful.” (9:119).

But this
companionship requires patience and forbearance.

“Content
yourself with the company of those who pray to their Lord morning and evening,
desiring His Face, and do not lose sight of Him by desiring the glitter of the
life of this world. And do not obey him whose heart we have made oblivious to
Our remembrance, who follows his own desires and whose conduct is [mere]
profligacy.”(18:28).

This
companionship is the one that is maintained on the long and arduous road of
obedience to God and His Messenger (S), so he who obeys them is together with
God’s righteous servants.

“Whoever
obeys God and the Apostle (S), are with those whom God has blessed: the
prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous, and what excellent
companions they are!”(4:69).

What
wonderful company this is, and what wonderful companions they really are!
“… and excellent companions they are!” This companionship is an
all-inclusive one in this world and the next, in life and in death. We pray to
God in Ziyarat Ashura:

“O
God! Make my life like the life of Muhammad and the Family of Muhammad (‘a) and
my death like the death of Muhammad and the Family of Muhammad (‘a).”

This is
among the best short supplications, for no life is better than the life of
Muhammad (S) and the Family of Muhammad (‘a) and no death is better than their
death, and no companionship is better than being with Muhammad (S) and the
Family of Muhammad (‘a).

In the
qunut (supplication which is recited while standing in prayer) of the prayer of
Id al-Fitr (the festival ending the month of Ramadan) we read:

“I
beseech you, for the sake of this day… bless Muhammad (S) and the Family of
Muhammad (‘a) and admit me into all the good into which you admitted Muhammad
(S) and the Family of Muhammad (‘a) and bring me out from all evil from which
you brought out Muhammad and the Family of Muhammad, May Your blessings be on
him and on them all.”

This is the
best thing a servant can seek from God the Exalted when he prays.

In contrast
to this companionship is the total separation from the enemies of God, His
Messenger (S) and His friends, in their moments of sadness and joy, their
customs, their social gatherings and their culture, norms and ethics.

In Ziyarat
Ashura we denounce the enemy’s feelings of happiness, joy and delight on
account of their success against the Household of God’s Messenger (S) and the
death of al-Husayn (‘a) and his family. We part ways with them in terms of
feelings, sentiments and emotions. Ponder over this section:

“O
God! This is a day (Ashura day) in which the Umayyads and the son of the
liver-eating woman found delight. This is a day with which the family of Ziyad
and the family of Marwan were pleased because they killed Husayn (‘a) … O
God! Compound Your curse on them and subject them to a painful chastisement.”

“O
God! I am seeking proximity to you on this day; at this my place and all my
life, by repudiating and cursing them, and through pledging allegiance to Your
prophet and the Family of Your prophet (on whom and them be peace).” This
total separation and complete association are the outcome of repudiation and
loyalty in man’s life.

Distress
And Vengeance

Another
instance of loyalty and repudiation that is exhibited in this ziyarah is the
distress that is felt because of what befell Husayn (‘a) and his family, and
the plea for success in taking revenge on his enemies and killers, may God
curse them. But who are the killers of Husayn against whom we may seek to take
vengeance? The answer is: Every oppressor who is pleased with Husayn’s death is
a partner to his killers, wherever he is placed by history, whether in our time
or before it. The horror we experience on account of Husayn’s death is among
the effects of loyalty in our lives, and there can be no true loyalty without
joining the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) in their tribulations and what they tasted at the
hands of the oppressors, by way of these emotions and sentiments.

Let us
ponder over this section of Ziyarat Ashura:

“Indeed
the loss is very agonizing; your disaster is momentous and agonizing to us and
to all the adherents of Islam. Your disaster is indeed momentous and agonizing
in the heavens and to all the inhabitants of the heavens. It is a disaster that
is so great, and the loss in its wake is so great, for Islam and for all the
heavens and the earth.”

It has been
reported in a sound hadith that if any believer grieves on what has befallen
Husayn and his companions God will give him a reward similar to theirs and
gather them together. In contrast to this grief and sadness for the death of
Husayn (‘a), there is supplication for success in punishing the killers of
Husayn. Though we were not beside Husayn (‘a) on the day of Ashura in 61 A.H.
in Karbala, we shall not miss the chance to avenge the blood of Husayn (‘a) and
his companions on the killers and those who are inclined to them, by God’s
will.

Let us
consider this part of Ziyarat Ashura:

“I
pray to God who has honoured you and honoured me through you, to bestow on me
the ability to avenge you[r blood] together with the Expected Imam from the
Household of Muhammad (S).”

One may
ask: where do you find those who killed or oppressed Husayn (‘a) to exact
vengeance on them? Let us allow the Qur’an to supply the answer, for in it
there is light and insight: Concerning the Jews who were contemporary with the
Messenger of God (S) when they requested him to bring them an offering that
would be consumed by fire, as a condition for their belief in him, the Most
High says:

“[To] those
who say ‘God has pledged us not to believe in any apostle unless he brings us
an offering consumed by[heavenly] fire, say, ‘Apostles before me certainly
brought you manifest signs and what you speak of. Then why did you kill them,
if you were truthful?”(3:183).

However,
the Jews at the time of the Prophet (may God bless him and his family) did not
kill any prophet, so why did God the Exalted ascribe the killing of the
prophets to them?:”Then why did you kill them, if you were truthful?”

The
explanation of this in the Book of God is that these people accepted the action
of their forefathers, and because of that God held them accountable for the
crimes of those people and condemned them accordingly. We shall throw more light
on this point when we discuss generalizations on loyalty and repudiation, God
willing.

Based on
this Qur’anic way of viewing things, every oppressor, murderer or criminal,
every tyrant who is delighted at the death of Husayn (‘a) is partner to his
killing. Every despot who causes havoc in the land by killing, tyrannizing and
oppressing God’s servants must necessarily be pleased with the murder of Husayn
(‘a) and have a part in it.

Loyalty And
Repudiation Are Two Faces Of The Same Question

Loyalty and
repudiation are two faces of a single issue and it is through repudiation that
loyalty is found. A pledge of loyalty that is not coupled with repudiation does
not cost anything. It is not a burden at all to treat all contending parties
with courtesy and pretense of love with the aim of earning their friendship and
respect and also to save oneself from the inconveniencies of opposition.

However,
this action remains no more than mere courtesy and a show of affection; that
has no value in terms of loyalty. Loyalty is to belong and not a ceremony or
pretense of love, and one cannot belong to a cause without separating from its
antithesis. Association in the arena of conflict cannot take place without a
separation.

The
Messenger of God (S) said to Ali (‘a): “Loyalty to you will not be
accepted unless [it is coupled] with repudiating your enemies. This is what
Gabriel communicated to me. So let anyone who wishes, believe it, and let
anyone who wishes, disbelieve it.”8

Imam
al-Sadiq (‘a) said to al-Safwan: “Know that loyalty is incomplete,
affection impure and friendship not reliable unless it is coupled with
repudiating their [the Ahl al-Bayt] adversary whether he is close or distant.”9

There is a
strong emphasis on the motto ‘loyalty and repudiation’ in a number of places in
Ziarat Ashura,

“I am
seeking proximity to God, His Messenger, the Commander of Faithful, Fatima,
al-Hasan and you (‘a) through being loyal to you and repudiating anyone who
fought you and declared war on you, and through repudiating anyone who laid the
foundation of oppression and injustice against you.”

“I
seek proximity to God, then to you by pledging allegiance to you and
repudiating your enemies and those who declared war on you, and by repudiating
their followers.”

The purpose
of this emphasis is so that the people may not incline towards their comfort
and well-being and only voice their allegiance and leave out the repudiation,
since on the battlefield loyalty has no meaning without repudiation.

Loyalty And
Repudiation: Blessing And Honour That God Bestowed On Man

Life has
been a theatre for conflict ever since man inhabited the earth… and this is
history. History is the story of the contention between the axis of monotheism
and polytheism and all mankind fall into two sections: One section considers
allegiance to God to be their focal point and they are the callers towards
monotheism. The others pay allegiance to taghut as their centre and they are
the polytheists. God the Exalted brings the first group out of darkness into
light, and the second group is driven out of the light and led into darkness by
taghut.

“God
is the patron of the faithful: He brings them out of darkness into the light.
As for the faithless, their patrons are the taghut (rebels) who drive them out
of the light into darkness. They shall be the inmates of the Fire and they
shall remain in it forever,” (2:257).

Both
centres spread in different directions through different extensions in life.
The first centre extends through the Messenger of God (S), those vested with
authority (ulu al-amr), and the believers.

“Obey
God and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority among you.”(4:59).

“Your
patron is only God, His Apostle and the faithful who maintain the prayer and
give the zakat while bowing down.” (5:55).

The centre
of rebellion also possesses a domain of love. It comprises the community of
taghut and its extensions. Every nation is a close-knit group that is united by
a set of organic relationships which the Holy Qur’an describes in these precise
terms: “They are alike” “They are comrades of one another”. Believers are
a single nation. God the Exalted says:

“The
faithful men and women, are comrades of one another” (9:71).

And:

“… those
who give them shelter and help, it is they who are truly the faithful.” (8:74).

The
faithless and the hypocrites are also one nation:

“The
faithless are associates of one another” (8:73).

Thus human
society consists of two sections, two nations, two axes, and for each there is
a loyalty and repudiation, a connection and a separation, an association and an
estrangement.

Loyalty and
repudiation divides the scene of life into two distinct and opposing groups.
Now where is one’s position in this chart? To which axis does one belong? With
which group will one be classified? These are among the most important and most
momentous questions that face mankind, and their value lies here. The value of
man resides in the position one occupies and the stand one takes on this chart:
is it with God, His prophets and His friends, or with taghut and base desires?

It is
indeed miserable for a person to live this life without knowing where he
stands, with whom he stands, to which axis he belongs, whom to fight, with whom
to live peacefully and support? The least to be said about such people is that
they live a life of confusion, and the most grievous ruin and confusion takes
place in the theatre of confrontation when one is forced to determine one’s
stand in it.

Man
certainly lives this life in a theatre of conflict from which there is no
escape. Therefore one cannot but determine his stand vis-à-vis this conflict.
The most dangerous thing is for one not to know where he stands in this
contest: that is, to live in confusion in the midst of this conflict.

Such people
will, most certainly, slip into the camp that opposes monotheism for they
cannot stay long in their confusion. They will soon take the position that is
unfriendly and hostile to God’s friends. Surely to have loyalty to God, His
Messenger (S) and His friends, and repudiate His enemies is a form of awareness
and knowledge; it is the most sublime type of knowledge and awareness. God has
honoured us with this knowledge and saved us from loss, confusion and darkness.

God’s
blessings are many and great and the greatest blessing which He has honoured us
with is that of knowledge, loyalty and repudiation. Ziyarat Ashura points to
this blessing of God to us:

“So I pray
to God who gave me the honour of knowing you and knowing your friends, and
endowed me with repudiating your enemies, to put me in your company both in
this and the next world.”

Indeed God
the Exalted has bestowed us with immense gifts and blessings among the greatest
of which is loyalty. From Abu Ja’far al-Baqir (‘a) who said: “Islam is built on
five things: prayer, fasting, zakat, pilgrimage and loyalty (wilayah).” Zurarah
said: I asked: Which is the best among these things? He said: “Loyalty is the
best because it is the key to the rest and the one to whom loyalty is to be
pledged (alwali) is their guide.” Then he added: “The peak of the affair, the
door of [all] things and the [source] of earning the pleasure of the Merciful
is to obey the Imam after knowing him.”10

From Ja’far
ibn Muhammad, from his father, from Ali (‘a) or al-Hasan ibn Ali (‘a) who said:
God has made five duties obligatory and he did not make anything obligatory but
the good and beautiful. [They are]: prayer, fasting, zakat, pilgrimage, and
loyalty to us, we the Ahl al-Bayt. The people discharged four of them and
treated the fifth one lightly. By God they will not have the four completely
until they complete them with the fifth.”11

Without
loyalty and repudiation, man will remain confused with no focus or line of
action which may put his life in order. When he pays allegiance to God, His
Messenger (S) and His friends whom He commands us to be loyal to, and
repudiates their adversaries, he finds a position in this life and remains in
it.

Generalising
(ta‘mim) loyalty and repudiation is among the known aspects of this religion.
By virtue of this generalization the bases of loyalty and repudiation are
extended greatly. Loyalty covers those whom God made it obligatory for the
believers to pay allegiance to, be loyal to, love and be pleased with them in
all ages. Repudiation covers God’s enemies whom He commanded us to denounce,
and all those who befriend them and accept their actions for all time.

The
extension also includes reward and punishment, condemnation and protest. Some
people who were not present in the jihad and did not suffer hunger and
oppression, nor were they touched by the sword will also be rewarded because
they loved the fighters and were pleased with their actions. Similarly,
punishment will include some people who did not commit any murder but loved the
killers and were pleased with their deeds. Therefore, God will punish them for
the crimes of the killers.

The cause
of these extensions is the issue of approval and anger. Approval arises from
love while anger stems from hate. When a person is pleased with a people’s
action he is deemed a partner to them and rewarded if the action is good or
punished if it is bad. When a person is angry with a people he repudiates them.

Love and
approval join one to those whom he loves or approves of. Similarly, hate and
anger separates one from those whom he hates or is angry with. It is a factor
that causes association or separation. Since those Jews who were contemporaries
to the Messenger of God (S) accepted the action of their forefathers of killing
the prophets, God Almighty considered them responsible for their forefather’s
crimes, condemned them for it, forced the proof for it against them, although
they did not live in their times, much less have a role in their killing.

From
Muhammad ibn al-Arqat, from Abu Abdillah al-Sadiq (‘a) who said: “Do you stop
over at Kufa?” “Yes”, I replied. “Then you do see the killers of Husayn among
you?”, he asked. I said to him: “May I be your ransom! I have not seen a single
person from them.” He said: “Then you do not consider as killer anyone but the
person who killed or the one who ordered it? Have you not heard the saying of
God: “Apostles before me have certainly brought you manifest signs. Then why
did you kill them, if you were truthful?”? What apostle did those living with
Muhammad (S) kill, since there was no apostle between him and Jesus (‘a)?
However, they did approve their killing and because of that they are called
killers.12

To approve
of a thing makes the one who approves a partner in the action of the one who is
given the approval, whether the action is good or bad, whether the approver
also does the action or not. This partnership extends to all the outcomes of
the action: reward, punishment, responsibility and condemnation.

The
Commander of the Faithful (‘a) (according to the version of Sharif al-Radi in
Nahj al-Balaghah) said: “O people! What brings people together is consent
(al-rida) and resentment (al-sakhat). Thamud’s she-camel was killed by one man
but God included them [all] in punishment since they all consented to it.” The
Glorious God said: ‘But they hamstrung her whereupon they became regretful’ It
was not long before their land sank with a sound like that of a hot plough
sinking into quicksand”13

The
Commander of the Faithful (‘a) said: “He who accepts the action of a people is
like one who takes part in it along with them. Anyone who takes part in
falsehood commits two sins: The sin of the action and the sin of approving.”14

Some
general supplications on visitations (ziyarat) of the Imams (‘a) read:

“We bear
witness with our intentions and hearts that we are partners of your friends and
supporters of the past in shedding the blood of the Perfidious (al-Nakithun),
the Unjust (al-Qasitun), the Apostates (al-Mariqun) and the killers of Abu
Abdillah (‘a), the Lord of the youths of paradise, and we regret having missed
those battles.”

This is a
wonderful text which can be comprehended only by the learned one who has
insight into God’s

norms in
history and society. This is an extensive topic of religious knowledge in
Islam; it is the knowledge of consent (al-rida) and resentment (al-sakhat).

Based on
this way of knowing, we have been partners of Abraham (‘a), the vanguard of
monotheism, in inviting people towards it, breaking the idols and struggling
against Nimrod, the despot of his time. Likewise, we have been associates of
Moses (‘a) and Jesus (‘a) in their call to monotheism and rejection of tyrants.
We have also been partners of the Messenger of God (S) in the wars he fought.

We join all
the righteous, the saints, the Imams of Monotheism and guided callers [to
religion] and those who glorify the name of God the Exalted, throughout
history. We join them in inviting the people to God, treating God’s servants
with sincerity, in remembering God and glorifying Him, in pain and anxiety, in
the shedding of the oppressors’ blood, in their blood being shed by the
oppressors, in demolishing the bastions of injustice and polytheism and in
erecting the pillars of monotheism, justice…”15

Generalizations
Of Loyalty In Ziyarat Ashura

There are
three stages and generalizations on loyalty in this ziyarah:

In the
first stage we declare our allegiance to Husayn (‘a) with regard to the war he
fought with the Umayyads; the second stage extends the loyalty to include, in
addition to the Imam, the souls who rallied around him in Karbala and
sacrificed themselves in support and defense of the son of the daughter of
God’s messenger (S) ; the third stage extends to the people who are loyal to
his supporters. This level of loyalty includes all those who are loyal to them
in all ages, and anyone who pays allegiance to them is covered by this loyalty.

“I am
seeking proximity to God, then to you through allegiance to you and allegiance
to your allies.”

This last
generalization of loyalty is all-inclusive and it extends over time and place.
From what Imam alRida (‘a) wrote to al-Ma’mun about pure Islam, the section on
loyalty (wilayah) we read:

“Wilayah is
for the believers who followed the way of their Prophet (S) and did not change
or alter [anything], people like Salman al-Farisi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari and
al-Miqdad. Wilayah is also for their followers and partisans who follow their
guidance and walk along their path.”16

Generalizations
Of Repudiation In Ziyarat Ashura

Similar to
loyalty, repudiation also has a number of extensions.

The first
extension of repudiation takes the form of denouncing the killers, those who
declared war on Husayn (‘a) and those who paved the way and enabled them to
fight him.

“May God
curse the family of Ziyad and the family of Marwan. May God curse the Umayyads
dynasty. May God curse the son of Marjanah. May God curse Umar ibn Sa’ad. May
God curse Shimr. May God curse the people who saddled and bridled [their
mounts] and traversed the land in order to fight you. O God! Curse that band
which fought Husayn, which rallied together, paid allegiance to one another and
concurred on killing him.”

In the
second extension of repudiation we denounce their partisans, their followers
and their allies, and those who pledge allegiance to them and those who are
pleased with them.This is an extensive generalization that spreads along with
time and space.

“I turn to
God and to you in repudiating them, their supporters, their followers and their
allies. I seek proximity to God through allegiance to you and repudiating your
enemies and those who declared war on you by repudiating their supporters and
followers.”

The third
extension of repudiation includes those who laid the foundation of injustice on
the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a), those who laid the foundations of this monstrous
injustice against the Family of the Prophet (‘a).

“I turn to
God and to His Messenger (S) in repudiating everyone who laid the foundations
of inequity and oppression on you.”

The fourth
extension includes not only those who oppressed the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) but also
the people who acted unjustly toward their supporters and followers down the
centuries up to the present day, for oppressing these people stems from oppression
and inequity against the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) themselves.

“And I turn
to God and His Messenger in repudiation of anyone who laid down the foundation
of that, built its structures upon it, and went on with his oppression and
inequity against you and your supporters. I turn to God and to you in
repudiating them.”

The fifth
extension is the most inclusive and most extensive of all.

“O God!
Curse the first man to cheat Muhammad (S) and the Family of Muhammad (S) of
their right, and the last man to follow him in that act…”

This
generalization comprises all those who oppressed them and those who condone the
injustice, from the first day to the last, from the first person to the last.
This is among the most all-inclusive generalizations of repudiation.

Monotheism
And Purity Of Faith Depicted In Loyalty

Loyalty
Comes Under The Concept Of Monotheism

This is one
of the important principles of Islam and the Qur’an is replete with the
expressions of this fact. God the Exalted says:

“Judgment
belongs only to God; He expounds the truth and He is the best of judges.”
(12:40).

“Sovereignty
belongs to God. He has commanded you to worship none except Him.” (12:67).
There are many verses expressing the same truth.

No loyalty
can be correct except that which comes within the extension of loyalty to God
and by His permission and command. God says:

“Your
authority (wali) is only God, His Apostle and the faithful who maintain the
prayer and give alms –zakat- while bowing down (in prayer).” (5:55).

Any loyalty
that is outside the range of loyalty to God is baseless and unacceptable in
Islam. God the Exalted says:

“Have they
taken guardians (awliya’) besides Him? It is God who is the Guardian (al-wali)”
(42:9).17

“Say,
‘Shall I take for guardian [anyone] other than God, the originator of the
heavens and the earth…?” (6:14).

“.. Nor do
you have besides God any guardian or any helper.” (29:22).

The Holy
Qur’an explicitly affirms this reality. Here are some blessed verses from the
Wise Book of God which explain this fact.

“Do you not
know that to God belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth? And besides
God you do not have any guardian or any helper.”(2:107).

The holy
verse affirms that the kingdom of the heavens and the earth belongs to God and
anyone other than Him does not possess anything of them. From this fact, it is
clear that absolute guardianship over mankind must necessarily belong to Him
and man has no right to take anyone other than God as guardian.

To the
Glorious God belongs absolute guardianship and control over all that pertains
to man, both his actions and his beliefs; no one other God has the right to
man’s guardianship except by His permission and command, and within the
extension of His guardianship. The holy verse conveys the restriction of
guardianship to God alone from two angles:

The fact
that the heavens and the earth belong to God alone and therefore, the
guardianship overmankind should be only His, to the exclusion of all His
creatures.

The literal
meaning since the pair of articles ma…illa is one of the articles which
denote restriction [of a subject to a predicate or vice versa] in Arabic
language.18

Ghayr can
replace illa so that it becomes permissible to ‘restrict’ with the pair ma–
ghayr.19 One can say Ma ja’ani ahadun ghayr Muhammad (No one came to me except
Muhammad). The word duna (besides) in the holy verse: “And besides God you do
not have any guardian or any helper”, means ghayr. Based on this, the verse
employs a restrictive phrasing which, whether viewed from form of expression or
from import, restricts guardianship to God alone.Restriction (hasr) often
involves negating and affirming, so it serves to negate the guardianship of
anyone other than God and affirm His guardianship. Numerous verses of the Book
of God can be quoted. God the Exalted says:

“And
warn by its means those who fear being mustered toward their Lord, besides whom
(dunahu) they shall have neither any guardian nor any intercessor, so that they
may be Godwary” (6:51).

He says:

“Leave
alone those who take their religion for play and diversion and whom the life of
this world has deceived, and admonish with it lest any soul should perish
because of what it has earned: for it shall not have any guardian besides God
nor any intercessor…”.(6:70).

He also
says:

“Indeed
to God belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth. He gives life and
brings death. And besides God you do not have any guardian or helper”. (9:116).

In Surat
al-Sajdah, the Qur’an says:

“It is
God who created the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them in six
days, and then He settled on the Throne. You do not have besides him any
guardian or intercessor. Will you not then take admonition?” (32:7).

This holy
verse clearly indicates the relationship between God’s power over the heavens
and the earth and His guardianship over creation and His legislative
guardianship on man. It indicates also the restriction of guardianship to God,
to the exclusion of others whom the people regard as guardians apart from
Him..20

Just as loyalty
to the friends of God derives from the concept of monotheism, it also comes
under purity of faith (ikhlas) by virtue of the same reason. Thus, loyalty to
God’s friends and taking them as guardians is correct only where it is done for
God’s sake, where a person seeks nearness to God through it. Otherwise, such
loyalty will have no value. Therefore, loyalty comes under the concepts of
monotheism and purity of faith.

From Abu
Khalid al-Kabuli who said: A group of people came to Ali ibn Husayn ibn Ali (‘a)
and said: “Our cousins [lit, sons of our uncle] called on Mu’awiya ibn Abi
Sufyan seeking his support and grants while we call on you to pay our respects
to [the kinsmen of] the Messenger of God, may God bless him and his
family,”

Ali ibn
Husayn (‘a) said: “Anyone who loves us, not for anything worldly that he
may get from us, and is hostile to our enemy, not because of an old grudge
between them, will come to God on the Day of Resurrection together with
Muhammad, Abraham and Ali (‘a).”

True
loyalty is that by which a person seeks proximity to God, and one cannot
approach God except by doing the things He commands. Therefore, loyalty cannot
be truely correct unless it is commanded by God the Exalted. Loyalty to the
Messenger of God (S) and his Ahl al-Bayt is a thing that is commanded by God
and His Messenger (S). Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) is reported to have said: “God has
bound together obedience to the one He vested with authority with obedience to
His Messenger, and obedience to His Messenger with obedience to Him…”

Therefore,
we seek closeness to God through this loyalty; we do not consider loyalty to
the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) as a way of seeking worldly gains and the pleasure of the
rulers, but that of earning God’s pleasure and nearness to Him, Sublime is
He.”

Monotheism
And Purity Of Faith Depicted In Repudiation

Purity of
Faith as depicted in Repudiation:

This idea
has been hinted at in Ziyarat Ashura:

“And I
seek proximity to God and His Messenger… by repudiating those who fought you
and declared war against you.”

It has been
shown that real faith means to love and hate for God’s sake.

It has been
reported from Abu Muhammad al-Askari (‘a), from his forefathers, that the
Messenger of God (S) one day said to one of his companions:

“Servant
of God! Love for God’s sake, hate for God’s sake, befriend for God’s sake and
be hostile for God’s sake, for you will not gain loyalty to God except this
way. A man cannot have the taste of faith, even if he prays and fasts much,
till he acts that way. Today most of the friendships between the people have
turned into worldly concerns, they love one another because of it and hate one
another because of it, and this [attitude] will not gain them anything before
God.”21

In another
hadith, the Messenger of God (S) one day said to one of his companions:
“Servant of God! Love for God’s sake, hate for God’s sake, befriend for
God’s sake and be hostile for God’s sake, for loyalty to God cannot be attained
except in this way. A man will not get the taste of faith, even if he prays and
fasts much, till he acts that way.”22

From Abu
Abdillah as-Sadiq (‘a) who said: “The firmest bond of faith is that you
love for God’s sake, hate for God’s sake, give for God’s sake and withhold for
the sake of God, the Mighty and Sublime.”23 Therefore, no one can attain
loyalty to God unless he makes his heart sincere to Him so that his loving and
hating, his nearness and remoteness [in social relations] and his loyalty and
repudiation are all for God’s sake. Among the many ties of faith there is none
as firm as loving and hating for the sake of God.

From Abu
Abdillah as-Sadiq (‘a): “He who loves an infidel has hated God and he who hates
an infidel has loved God.” Then he added: “A friend to God’s enemy is an enemy
of God.”24

From Abu
Ja’far al-Jawad (‘a): “God has communicated to a prophet [saying]: Your
asceticism [only] serves to expedite your rest and your complete turning to Me
[is a form of] taking shelter with Me. So have you treated with hostility an
enemy of mine or with friendship a friend of mine?”25

From Abu
Abdillah as-Sadiq (‘a): “Anyone who loves for God’s sake, hates for God’s sake,
gives for God’s sake, and withholds for God’s sake, has attained complete
faith.”26

From Abu
Ja’far al-Baqir (‘a), from the Messenger of God (S): “A believer’s affection
for a fellow believer for God’s sake is one of the greatest branches of faith.
Surely anyone who loves for God’s sake, hates for God’s sake, gives for God’s
sake and withholds for God’s sake, is among the chosen ones of God.”27

From Abu
Abdillah as-Sadiq (‘a): “The Messenger of God (S) asked his companions: “Which
among the bonds of faith is the firmest?”

They said:
‘God and his Messenger know best’. Some said: ‘It is prayer’, others said: ‘It
is fasting’, a third group said: ‘It is pilgrimage’ and a fourth said: ‘It is
jihad.’

Then the
Messenger of God (S) said: “All what you said is meritorious but it is not
that. The firmest bond of faith is to love for God’s sake, to hate for God’s
sake, to be loyal to God’s friends and to repudiate God’s enemies.”28

From Abu
Ja’far al-Baqir (‘a): “If you want to know whether there is any good in you,
you should check your heart. If it loves the people who are obedient to God,
the Mighty and Sublime, and hate those who sin against Him then there is good
in you and God loves you. But if it hates the people who are obedient to God
and loves those who sin against him, then there is no good in you and God hates
you. A man is an associate of the one he loves.”29

For the
purpose of emphasis, this notion has appeared a number of times in Ziyarat
Ashura:

“O God! I
am seeking proximity to you on this day, in this place and [all] the days of my
life, by repudiating the enemies of Muhammad and his Family (S) and cursing
them.”

Therefore,
to repudiate the enemies of God and His friends, like loyalty, is a form of
expressing monotheism and purity of faith.

Two
Loyalties Cannot Meet In The Heart Of A Faithful Person.

The heart
of the faithful cannot contain two loyalties because, as we said before,
loyalty comes under the concept of monotheism. True loyalty is for God and for
those God has commanded us to pay allegiance to, and any form of loyalty that
falls within this range is true loyalty. On the other hand, any loyalty that is
not to God, not to what he commands and not within the extension of his loyalty
is invalid loyalty.

True
loyalties are associated with one another and they all occur within the range
of loyalty to God, which is in fact a single loyalty. Two different loyalties
cannot meet in a sound heart because a single heart cannot bear more than one
loyalty and one attachment, and man has but one heart. This can only be
possible where the heart or the loyalty is corrupted. God the Exalted says:
“God has not put two hearts within any man…” (33:4).

In Ziyarat
al-Jami’ah we read: “With you, with you, never with other than you”.30

The
repetition of ‘with you’ i.e. in their company (‘a) in this section of the
ziyarah coupled with rejecting the company of anyone else serves to emphasize
the notion of the unity of loyalty which we indicated above. Every form of
loyalty apart from loyalty to them is invalid and this is because the only true
loyalty is loyalty to God and what lies within its spectrum, among which, of
course, is loyalty to God’s prophets, His messengers, their successors and the
believers. Whatever is not allegiance to God, His messengers, His friends and
the believers is a different loyalty entirely and two loyalties do not converge
in one heart.

Concerning
God’s saying: “God has not put two hearts within any man”, Abu Ja’far al-Baqir
(‘a) said:

“So that he
[man] may love with one and hate with the other. Having love for us makes [a
person’s] love purely for us, the way fire purifies gold from impurities. He
who wants to know our love let him test his heart; if the love for our enemy
shares the heart with our love then he has disowned us and we have disowned
him.”31

Thus one
cannot have two loyalties in his heart for then either the loyalty is defective
or the heart is diseased just as the man who came to the Commander of the
Faithful (‘a) and said: ‘O Commander of the Faithful! I love you as well as
so-and-so’, and mentioned one of his enemies. He replied: “As for now you are
one-eyed; you will either become blind or gain complete sight.”32 It has been
related that after the demise of the Messenger of God (S) the people found a
slip in the scabbard of his sword in which was written: “May God … curse him
who allies himself with other than his [rightful] patrons.”33

Ascension
Points Of Loyalty And Repudiation In Ziyarat Ashura

Nothing
purifies monotheism and purity of faith like loyalty and repudiation and this
is because to repudiate is to face the most severe test on one’s monotheism and
sincerity. One’s level in these two matters cannot be tested by a better method
than through loyalty and repudiation.

This twin
method exposes to what level one is truly a monotheist and truly sincere. It is
not all those who claim a pure monotheistic faith that turn out to be true to
their belief in monotheism and sincere in it. They will have to undergo a
divine test in loyalty and repudiation at the theatre of confrontation so that
God may ascertain the sincerity of their love, hate, support and sacrifice for
the sake of the people God has obliged them to pay allegiance; in struggle,
perseverance and enduring suffering and tyranny for His sake; in loving those
He loves and detesting those He detests; and in dissociating themselves from
those who fight and hate His allies even if they are harmed by doing this.
There is no better and stricter test of one’s monotheism and sincerity in this
world than through loyalty and repudiation.

Belief in
monotheism and having purity of faith cannot be known for certain in peace time
or by theorizing, and remain mere claims till the believer enters the field of
confrontation where he will be required to exhibit loyalty, repudiation,
support, sacrifice and service; and also to bear sufferings, persecution, loss
of children and wealth and to face other hazards. It is then that God will
ascertain and sort out the truthful.

For this
reason God the Exalted has made loyalty and repudiation one of the greatest
points of descent for His mercy in man’s life. These points always commensurate
with the level of purity of monotheism and faith since loyalty and repudiation
in the theatre of confrontation constitute the crystallization of the highest
level of monotheism and sincerity.

In all
places and at all times God’s mercy descends but there are points of descent
for mercy that are distinguished from others by place, time or situation. By
time I mean particular days, nights and hours that induce God’s mercy to
descend. The night of Destiny and the month of Ramadan are examples. By place I
mean places that attract God’s mercy more than others. Such places include the
Grand Mosque at Mecca, the Prophet’s mosque, the valley of Arafat and the
precincts of Imam Husayn’s mausoleum. By situations, those conditions intended
attract God’s mercy, such as conditions of supplicating, experiencing the dire
need of God, ecstasy, weeping for fear of God, and meekly entreating Him. These
conditions invite God’s mercy more than others.

True
loyalty and repudiation are among the best conditions that attract God’s mercy
and therefore, one of the best points at which God’s mercy descends. In it
prayers are answered, mercy and blessings come down on mankind and hearts are
softened. The points at which mercy descends are also man’s stairways to God;
his supplication, his glorification of God’s name, his love, his yearning, his
sincerity, his monotheism and his entreaty to God all ascend from these points.

Loyalty to
the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) and repudiating their adversaries is among the best points
of descent for mercy and the points of man’s ascent towards God Almighty. By
way of loyalty and repudiation God the Exalted has taught us the signs of our
religion, brought us out of ignorance and delivered us from ruin.

In Ziyarat
al-Jami’ah, there is an allusion to some of these points of descent and points
of assent:

“Through
loyalty to you, God has taught us the signs of our religion and set right what
had been corrupted of it. Through loyalty to you the word became complete, the
blessing became great and disunity turned into harmony. Through loyalty to you
the obedience that is enjoined is accepted. It is through you that God brought us
out of humiliation, expelled our worries and hardships and saved us from the
precipice of destruction and from the Fire. Whoever befriends you is
felicitous, who is hostile to you is ruined, who rejects you is lost, who
separates from you is deviated, who is devoted to you succeeds, who takes
refuge with you is secure, who affirms you is saved, who resorts to you is
guided…”

Now let us
ponder over mercy’s points of descent and man’s points of ascent to God in the
issue of loyalty and repudiation in Ziyarat Ashura.

Honour And
Distinction

The first
point of descent is where God honoured us with knowing the Ahl al-Bayt and
being loyal to them and repudiating their enemies. Through them He bestows on
us this honour and distinction both here and in the hereafter, and what an
honour and distinction it is in the sight of God! “I pray to God who honoured
your position and honoured me through you.” Surely God has honoured us through
Husayn (‘a) and as he honoured Husayn (‘a), he has also honoured us by showing loyalty
to him and by denouncing his enemies.

Among those
points of descent and ascent is to have distinction with God both here and in
the hereafter. This is a rank that every truthful believer and every martyr
hopes for.

“O God make
me through Husayn (‘a) a noble person before You both here and in the
hereafter.”

Avenging
The Death Of Husayn (‘A)

This is
another honour. We beseech God the Exalted to enable us avenge the death of
Husayn (‘a), for his death in Karbala was a continuous transgression perpetrated
against monotheism and justice and against the Messenger of God (S). The
avenger of this blood is God Himself. He is the first avenger of it and also of
the blood spilled by the accursed Abdurrahman ibn Muljam in the prayer niche of
the mosque in Kufa. Thus God, the Glorious and Exalted is the first avenger of
the blood of Husayn and his father (‘a): “Peace be on you, O avenged one of
God, son of His avenged one, [the victim of] the injustice which is not yet
avenged.” Then the bearers of the message of monotheism and justice in turn,
assume the responsibility to avenge the pure blood that was unjustly shed in
Karbala.

To avenge
is in fact an extension of the spirit of martyrdom. Martyrdom is sacrifice,
mission and avenging. Husayn (‘a), his family and his companions accomplished
the first part, leaving for us the second and third, that is, upholding the
mission of this blood and avenging it. This duty constitutes the best and most
important point in man’s life where mercy descends and from which loyalty and
repudiation ascend.

The
movement to avenge the death of the Imam (‘a) started almost immediately after
his martyrdom and it will continue till the Mahdi of the Family of Muhammad
(may God hasten his appearance) takes over. He will surely avenge this sacred
blood and, all the unjustly spilt blood of the defenders of monotheism and
justice. He shall be the seal of the avengers of this pure blood.

In this
ziyarah we pray to God to bestow upon us the ability to avenge the blood of
Husayn (‘a) in the company of his descendant, the Supported Guide, the Guided
one from the Family of Muhammad (may God expedite his appearance).

“I pray to
God who honoured your rank and honoured me through you, to bestow on me [the
ability] to avenge your death, in the company of the Supported Imam of the
Family of Muhammad (‘a). I also beseech Him to make me attain your laudable
station that is with God, and to give me the ability to avenge you, in the
company of the Imam of guidance, the victor among you who will declare the truth.”

To Be In
The Company Of The Ahl Al-Bayt (‘A) And Attain A Good Standing With Them

The Company
Of The Truthful

God the
Exalted has commanded us in His Book:

“… and be
with the truthful.” (9:119).

And the
company of those having loyalty is as God the Exalted says:

“Whoever
obeys God and the Apostle-they are with those whom God has blessed including
the prophets and the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous, and what
excellent companions they are!”(4:69).

This
association is in fact an onerous and difficult one. The supporters of the
prophets were being threatened by the people, of dispossession of their lands
and of being driven away from their families, if they did not disassociate
themselves from the prophets.

“They say:
‘Should we follow the guidance with you we will be dispossessed of our
territory.”(28:57).

It is for
this reason that God Almighty ordered His Prophet and the believers who were
with him to be steadfast and patient:

“So be
steadfast, just as you have been commanded – [you] and whoever has turned [to
God] with you.” (11:112).

“Content
yourself with the company of those who pray to God morning and evening,
desiring His face, and do not lose sight of them, desiring the glitter of the
life of this world.”(18:28).

The
association that is based on loyalty and repudiation is one of the most
difficult types of association to maintain and, therefore, it requires
patience, steadfastness and firmness. So long as one is not sincere in loyalty,
so long as one has no firm footing, one cannot continue this hard march along
the difficult path. Concerning the companions of the Messenger of God (S), who
were true to their word and stood firm in loyalty and repudiation, God Most
High says: