The Islamic year begins with the month of Muharram. Even in previous nations, this month was considered sacred, and its significance remains undisputed today. Especially, the tenth day of Muharram, known as the Day of Ashura, holds an unforgettable place in the Islamic calendar. Scholars have debated its nomenclature and provided various interpretations. Some believe that the day holds the tenth level of reverence granted by Allah to the days of the Muslim Ummah, while others assert that Allah bestowed numerous favours upon His chosen prophets on this day.
The importance of the Day of Ashura is highlighted in a hadith narrated by Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas from the Holy Prophet (PBUH), which states that Allah created the heavens, the earth, and the mountains on Ashura. Prophet Adam (AS) was also created on this day, his repentance was accepted, and he was admitted to Paradise on the same day. Prophet Ibrahim (AS) was born on Ashura, and the sacrifice in place of his son was provided on this day. Pharaoh was drowned in the Nile on this day, Prophet Ayub (AS) was relieved of his suffering, Prophet Dawood (AS) was forgiven his transgression, and Prophet Isa (AS) was born on Ashura. Moreover, the Day of Judgment will occur on this day (Ghuniyat-ul-Talibeen)
In the Indian subcontinent and a few other Islamic countries, the significance of Muharram is particularly associated with the martyrdom of Husayn (AS). This monumental event has cast such a profound impact on our Islamic history that other significant occurrences of this day are often overshadowed or even forgotten. The martyrdom of Husayn (AS) embodies the essence of standing for truth against falsehood. This act of supreme sacrifice, known as martyrdom, is epitomised in the highest form by Husayn (AS), who, along with 72 companions, faced an army of six thousand and chose to lay down his life rather than bow to tyranny. This is the reason we commemorate the Day of Ashura.
Examining the historical narratives, we find that Hasan (AS) and Husayn (AS) symbolise two different approaches. While Husayn (AS) represents the political struggle, Hasan (AS) embodies a non-political stance. Husayn (AS) sought to achieve his objectives through confrontation, whereas Hasan (AS) achieved his through peaceful means. To grasp this nuanced difference, it is imperative to study these historical events with integrity and utilise their lessons to guide our communities.
History reveals that two prominent families, Banu Hashim and Banu Umayyah, resided in Mecca, with longstanding rivalries. When a member of Banu Hashim claimed prophethood, Banu Umayyah became his fiercest opponents. However, following the conquest of Mecca (8 AH), Banu Umayyah, like other Arab tribes, embraced Islam. During the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, competent individuals from Banu Umayyah held various Islamic offices, a notable example being Uthman ibn Affan (RA). Under his rule (25 AH to 35 AH), Banu Umayyah’s influence surpassed that of other tribes.
When Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA) became Caliph, Banu Umayyah revived their old rivalry, using Uthman’s murder as a pretext. Consequently, Ali’s (RA) caliphate (35 AH to 40 AH) was marked by internal conflicts and turmoil, culminating in his assassination by the fanatic Abdul Rahman ibn Muljam.
Following Ali’s (RA) martyrdom, Hasan (RA) was pledged allegiance as Caliph. At that time, only Iraq and Khorasan acknowledged his leadership, while regions like Syria, Palestine, Yemen, Hejaz, and Egypt remained under the control of Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, who had refused to acknowledge Ali’s (RA) caliphate due to Uthman’s murder. In Rabi al-Awwal 41 AH, Hasan (RA) commanded over forty thousand armed men, whereas Muawiyah had sixty thousand troops ready for battle. Here, Hasan’s (RA) non-political stance shines through, an aspect often overlooked by scholars and readers alike.
Having witnessed the fratricidal wars during his father’s caliphate, Hasan (RA) chose to abdicate in favour of Muawiyah to end the bloodshed, despite being the rightful caliph. This decision highlights a significant, albeit underappreciated, aspect of Islamic history, paralleling the heroic martyrdom of Husayn (AS).
After this, for two decades (41 AH to 60 AH), conditions remained peaceful, and there was considerable expansion in the borders of the Islamic state. Until the death of Amir Muawiyah (Rajab 60 AH), the situation remained calm, but when the issue of the caliphate arose again, Imam Hussein, who was not pleased with the martyrdom of his father and the abdication of his brother, refused to accept the caliphate of Yazid, just as Muawiyah had previously refused to accept the caliphate of his respected father, Hazrat Ali. It is here that the role of Imam Hussein (4 AH to 61 AH) begins, the memory of which is now commemorated on the day of Ashura.
When Utbah bin Abi Sufyan began the process of taking allegiance for Yazid bin Muawiyah in Medina, Imam Hussein excused himself and quietly left for Mecca with his family. Before his arrival, the people of Mecca had already pledged allegiance to Abdullah bin Zubair, a situation that was unacceptable to Hussein. For this reason, Hussein and his family did not pray behind those who were practically ruling Mecca at that time.
After the martyrdom of Hazrat Uthman, the conditions in Mecca and Medina were not favorable for Hazrat Ali, which led to the transfer of the capital of the Islamic state from Medina to Kufa in 36 AH. Similarly, after abdicating the caliphate, Imam Hasan left Kufa in 41 AH and settled permanently in Medina. Now, when Yazid became the caliph, the love of the people of Kufa for Ahl al-Bayt surged, and they began urging Imam Hussein through letters to take up the caliphate. Imam Hasan, well aware of the psychology of the people of Kufa and the sensitivity of the situation, had already advised his brother in his will about the people of Kufa, saying, “Do not be deceived by the people of Kufa, and I know well that both prophethood and caliphate cannot be combined in our family, so it is better for you to remain silent in this matter.”
However, Hazrat Hussein had chosen a role for himself, which was “the protection of the caliphate on the path of prophethood,” and the suffering faced by the Muslims due to the collapse of this institution had a severe impact on the Muslim Ummah. The incident of the martyrdom of Hazrat Uthman had already occurred before his eyes, and these rebellions had left a deep impression on Hussein’s mind. There is no doubt that various seditions had severely besieged the palace of the caliphate during the time of the first Umayyad caliph. Hazrat Uthman also sacrificed his life to prevent Muslims from internal warfare, even though a group of loyal Muslims was present at his house, and a large group of Banu Hashim was also ready to support and assist him. But Hazrat Uthman, having sworn them, restrained them from attacking their Muslim brothers and continued to recite the Holy Qur’an at his home. In fact, he was also adhering to the command of Shariah:
وَقَاتِلُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ وَلَا تَعْتَدُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُعْتَدِينَ
Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed, Allah does not like transgressors. (Surah Al-Baqarah, 190)
It is never permissible for a believer to initiate aggression in any way, as a Muslim seeks a path of goodness through invitation and advice, not by choosing the path of fighting. If aggression begins from others, there are two scenarios: if the aggression is initiated by disbelievers, then defense is ordered under specific conditions:
لَئِن بَسَطتَ إِلَيَّ يَدَكَ لِتَقْتُلَنِي مَا أَنَا بِبَاسِطٍ يَدِيَ إِلَيْكَ لِأَقْتُلَكَ إِنِّي أَخَافُ اللَّهَ رَبَّ الْعَالَمِينَ
If you should raise your hand against me to kill me – I shall not raise my hand against you to kill you. Indeed, I fear Allah, Lord of the worlds. (Surah Al-Ma’idah, 28)
Abu Musa narrates that when the Holy Prophet (PBUH) warned of an impending fitnah (strife), people asked, “What do you command us to do, O Messenger of Allah?” He replied, “Break your bows, cut your bowstrings, strike your swords against stones, and remain in your homes. If someone enters your house to kill you, be like the better son of Adam (Abel). Let him kill you, but do not kill him.”
This is why Hazrat Uthman ibn Affan set such a great practical example of the principles of Shariah and became the better son of Hazrat Adam. However, after this great deed, the subsequent events made it clear as day to Hazrat Imam Hussein that if Hazrat Uthman had defended the caliphate on the path of prophethood (and a few thousand people were killed to protect this institution of the caliphate, undoubtedly the institution of the caliphate would have been safe from chaos and anarchy, and Hazrat Ali, despite all his efforts, could not control the rebellions and internal conflicts during his five-year caliphate, and eventually, these unruly seditions claimed his life). Today, there would not have been such bloodshed among Muslims for the caliphate, and there would have been no place for the battles of Jamal and Saffain and the subsequent tragedies in the history of Islam.
Similarly, Hasan was appointed as Caliph by the Muslims of his time without any coercion. He was not only a legitimate Caliph, but his caliphate was also established on the principles of Prophethood. In contrast, Muawiyah’s claim to the caliphate was as unjustifiable as it had been against Ali, because the authority to elect and appoint a Caliph lay with the Shura (consultative body) comprising the esteemed Companions from Hijaz. Muawiyah was among the Tulaqaa (those who were freed by the Prophet at the conquest of Makkah), thus he had no role in the appointment of the Caliph. Muawiyah’s opposition, confrontation, refusal to obey, and rebellion against Ali were without justification. He was serving in the central government in a subordinate capacity and had no connection with the Shura. Therefore, Ali was the rightful Caliph, and his efforts to protect the institution of Caliphate were just. The conflicts and bloodshed resulting from these efforts cannot be blamed on Ali.
Hussain was fully aware that Muawiyah’s actions had placed Hasan at a similar crossroads where he stood today. Hasan had to either protect the institution of Caliphate or save the Muslims from the fierce sedition of civil war. Hasan chose the path of peace, sparing the Muslims from civil war, but had to endure the sorrow of witnessing the dismantling of the “Caliphate on the Prophetic model.” This strategy extracted a heavy toll from the Muslim community, and later, Hussain and the people of Hijaz also faced the consequences. Hussain had seen his father, Ali, sacrifice his life to protect the institution of Caliphate. Although Hasan, after witnessing all these events, chose a non-political approach and even advised his brother to do the same, Hussain chose the political path, following in his father Ali’s footsteps.
It is crucial to understand Hasan’s non-political approach. To do so, we must consult authentic Hadiths and numerous reliable historical sources. Hasan faced an even more challenging situation with Muawiyah than Hussain did with Yazid, yet his response was different, as exemplified in Hussain’s final sermon where he too, proposed three conditions to avoid conflict (Tabari, Vol. 4, p. 313).
Many traditions in the Hadith collections mention the virtues of Hasan and Hussain. While Hussain is often mentioned with affection, given his status as a grandson, the traditions about Hasan, which are not only more authentic but also point towards a significant role beyond familial love, are particularly noteworthy. For instance, Anas bin Malik states, “No one resembled the Prophet more than Hasan bin Ali.” Beyond physical resemblance, it is also evident from authentic traditions that the Prophet made a prophecy regarding Hasan’s significant future role.
Abu Bakr Siddiq narrates, “I saw the Messenger of Allah on the pulpit, and Hasan bin Ali was by his side. The Prophet turned to the people and then to Hasan, saying, ‘This son of mine is a leader, and perhaps Allah will use him to reconcile two large groups of Muslims’” (Bukhari).
This prophecy of the Prophet was fulfilled precisely in Hasan’s lifetime. He was given the pledge of allegiance in 40 AH, at a time when internal strife among Muslims had not yet ended. The rivalry between the Umayyads and the Hashemites was at its peak; neither side could eliminate the other nor were they willing to concede. When Hasan received the pledge, he took a promise from the people, “You will fight against whomever I fight, and make peace with whomever I make peace.” With this, Hasan’s caliphate posed a new challenge to Muawiyah. To confront this challenge, Muawiyah marched with an army of sixty thousand from Damascus to the fields of Madyain, while Hasan led an equally strong force from Kufa. Both armies faced each other like mountains, with Hasan’s soldiers having already pledged to fight to the death under Ali’s command.
In the fields of Madyain, Muawiyah sent a message to Hasan, proposing peace over war and suggesting that Hasan recognize him as Caliph and pledge allegiance to him. After thoughtful consideration, Hasan accepted this proposal and handed over the caliphate to Muawiyah, though this decision was not well-received by Hasan’s fervent supporters. Hasan replied with a historical statement, “If the caliphate was a rightful claim of Muawiyah, it has reached him. If it was my right, I have given it to him.” Following this peace, Muawiyah allotted an annual stipend of one hundred thousand dirhams to Hasan (Hafiz al-Dhahabi, Al-Ibr, Vol. 1, p. 48).
By stepping back, Hasan transformed internal discord into unity, averting another significant bloodshed after the battles of Jamal and Saffain. The Muslim forces, which had been engaged in internal conflicts since the third Caliph’s time, and had halted Islamic conquests, were now once again bringing news of victories. The door that had closed on the spread and expansion of Islam due to civil wars was reopened, thanks to Hasan’s initiative. True courage lies in retreating, when necessary, though few can muster such bravery. Outwardly, it appeared as a retreat, but it saved the Muslims from internal strife and restored their strength, leading to significant external victories.
If Hasan had insisted on the caliphate, it is possible that the Muslims would have been destroyed in internal wars within the first century of Hijrah. Islam, now a global religion spreading from China to Morocco, might have taken a different shape. The courage to act non-politically after the fact stemmed from Hasan’s significant contribution to the Muslim community, proving to be an invaluable asset to the Ummah of Muhammad (PBUH).
But if we look at the character of Hazrat Hussain, his methods are also strengthened that he has made such a determined history of sacrifices for the protection, defense and revival of the “Khilafah Ali Minhaj Nabuwat” that will last until the Day of Judgment. It will be a beacon for the oppressed. Hazrat Imam Hussain sent his cousin Hazrat Muslim bin Aqeel to Kufa on the strong insistence of the people of Kufa to save the institution of Khilafah. . It is known from the historical books that about eighteen thousand people had pledged allegiance to him on behalf of him, but when Ubaidullah bin Ziad, on the orders of Yazid, killed Hazrat Muslim bin Aqeel and his Kufi host Hani bin Arwa on the roof of the palace, they killed him. So it was as if Yazid’s first message to the people of Kufa was what would be the price of Hazrat Hussain’s allegiance. At the same time, the people of Kufa went silent in their homes and Hazrat Hussain, who had travelled more than half of the journey to lead these disloyal people, He did not return from his journey even though all the Jalil-ul-Qadr Companions in Makkah had forbidden him from this journey. Abdullah bin Umar, Abdullah bin Abbas, Amr bin Saad bin Al-A’as, Abdul Rahman bin Harith and other elders of Makkah strongly forbade Hazrat Hussain, but Hazrat Abdullah bin Zubair said that he should accept the government of Makkah instead of going to Kufa. Raise your hand, I pledge allegiance to your hand first. Abdullah bin Jafar bin Abi Talib wrote a letter to Madinah and persistently forbade it, but Hazrat Imam Hussain’s determined nature did not agree with it in any way, even he refused to accept the last word of Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas that women and children Leave in Makkah and travel or at least leave after Hajj which is only a few days away.
When Imam Hussain met Hazrat Abdullah bin Mutiyya on the way to Kufa in the first week of Dhul Hijj 60 AH, he respectfully said to Hazrat Imam Hussain: “I swear to you that you should return to Makkah, if you accept the caliphate from Banu Ummiya.” If they try to take it away, they will surely kill you and then every Hashemite will become bold to kill every Arab and every Muslim. But Hazrat Imam Hussain told his companions in clear words that The view is nothing but the revival of “Khilafah Ali Minhaj Nabuwat”. Hazrat Hussain was fully aware of the importance of Khilafah in the Islamic system of obedience. Hazrat Hussain was also aware of the manner in which the institution of Aoulal al-Amr was established by the Holy Prophet and the Caliphs of the Rashidun for the stability of the Islamic system of obedience. The caliph Yazid bin Muawiya, appointed by Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan, abolished the veneration and sanctity of this institution. It is very difficult for a person like Hazrat Hussain to sit down after seeing the religious and political damage caused to the Islamic society by the destruction of this institution. was
However, at the end of the day, Hazrat Hussain understood the situation in the field of Karbala. The martyrdom of Hazrat Muslim bin Aqeel, the disloyalty of the people of Kufa, his short caravan compared to Yazid’s Lashkar-e-Jarar seemed like a match between mountains and ants, but Hazrat Hussain was extremely brave, courageous and extremely noble. He was not at all afraid of death, but it was not possible for him to prevent the birth of compassion in his heart for his fellow women and children. Therefore, on the last day of Muharram 61 AH, the speech he gave in front of Yazid’s army in the field of Karbala was eloquent. It is a wonderful masterpiece of rhetoric. He also said, among other things: If the donkey of Jesus was left, the entire Christian nation would have nurtured it until the Day of Judgment.
In fact, if there was any other kind of problem, then the Kufi Muslims would probably be four hands ahead of the Christians, but here the grandson of the Prophet (PBUH) was standing in front of Yazid’s army as his political rival, and neither Muslims nor Christians are ready to forgive a political rival. The same Yazid who had marched on Madinah in 64 A.H. He had ordered Muslim bin Utbah to take full care of Hazrat Zain al-Abidin, the son of Hazrat Imam Hussain, because he was separated from the political life in Madinah and lived an isolated life in the suburbs of Madinah. They were because Yazid was very strict on what he inherited from his father, a rule of politics: “I do not stand between the people and their languages until they stand between us and our empire.” I am (Ibn Taseer Complete Volume 4 Page 5)
So, history tells us that Hazrat Hussain agreed to make peace with Yazid at the end.
- I should return to Makkah and engage in silent worship there.
- Let me go to a border to be martyred fighting the infidels.
- I am refraining from writing the third condition so as not to create more differences in the Ummah.
The change in Hazrat Hussain’s attitude caused a wave of joy in Yazid’s army, although they were facing each other in the field of Karbala, yet it was a state of respect for the Prophet’s grandson that people from both sides prayed together. used to do and often offered prayers under the guidance of Hazrat Hussain. When this message reached Ubaidullah bin Ziyad, he too was very happy at this excellent solution without a fight, but his adviser Shimar Zil-Joushan, who was Hazrat Hussain’s uncle and possessed a very bad temper, at the same time Ubaidullah bin Ziyad’s mind turned away. He closed all the ways of Hazrat Hussain’s return and finally started the battle of Karbala in which Amr bin Saad took the initiative by throwing the first arrow at Hazrat Hussain’s caravan, which ended in the martyrdom of Hazrat Hussain. It is worth noting here that Amr bin Saad was Hazrat Hussain’s paternal uncle and Shimar Zil-Joushan’s paternal uncle.
No matter how much the Nation of Islam can be proud of these two characters of history until the Day of Resurrection. Although Hazrat Hussain also tried to implement Hazrat Hasan’s non-political method in the last time, but Allah Ta’ala intended to take an unprecedented sacrifice from Hazrat Hussain by taking the task of protecting and defending the “Khilafah Ali Minhaj Nabuwat” from Hazrat Hussain. The purpose of his martyrdom was to convey the message to the Muslim Ummah that no matter how chaotic and turbulent the situation, the establishment and influence of the Islamic system of government, the Islamic system of obedience, which are among the first requirements of faith, should be continued at all times. Until the institution of Khilafah is completely restored to its original form. Apart from this, there are countless other lessons for us in these characters, the only condition is that we ourselves are sincere.
غریب و سادہ رنگیں ہے داستانِ حرم
نہایت اس کی حسینؓ ابتداء ہے اسمٰعیلؑ
Poor and simple colors is the story of Haram
Most of all, his Hussain (RA) origin is Ismail (AS).
