When the incident of ‘Āshūrā occurred, a state of terror and fear rose among the Shi‘ites and the supporters of Imams (P.B.U.T.) throughout the Islamic world as far as the news was spread, especially the Arabian Peninsula and Iraq, because it was felt that the Yazīd’s government is prepared to strengthen his government to the point that he is prepared to kill Ḥusayn b. ‘Alī (P.B.U.H.), who is the son of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.), and was known throughout the Muslim world for the greatness of his reliability and sanctity, and this fear, whose effects were evident in Kūfa and Medina, after some time was completed with several other incidents–one of which is the incident of the Battle of Ḥarra–and a severe suffocation arose in the region of the influence of the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.), that is, in Ḥijāz (present-day Saudi Arabia), especially Medina and also Iraq, especially Kūfa. Relations became weak and those who were the supporters of the Imams (P.B.U.T.) and those who were regarded as potential opponents of Umayyad caliphate were living in a state of weakness and doubt.
A tradition is related from Imam Ṣādiq (P.B.U.H.) quoting that when Imam Ṣādiq (P.B.U.H.) was speaking about the Imams (P.B.U.T.) before him, he said,
«ارتَدَّ النّاسُ بَعدَ الحُسينِ إلّا ثَلاثَةً…»
[People reverted their religion after Ḥusayn (P.B.U.H.) except three (groups)]. People abandoned their religion after Imam Ḥusayn (P.B.U.H.) save three, and in another narration it says five, and other traditions have been mentioned seven people.
In a tradition which is from Imam Sajjād (P.B.U.H.)–whose narrator is Abū ‘Umar Mahdī–said, “I heard from Imam Sajjād (P.B.U.H.) who said,
«و ما بِمَكَّةَ وَ المَدينَةِ عِشرُونَ رَجُلاً يُحِبُّنا»
[Our faithful Shi‘ite Muslims do not exceed twenty both in Mecca and Medina]. In Mecca and Medina those who love the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) do not exceed more than twenty people.
We quoted these two traditions for the sake of clarifying the matter of the general condition of the Muslim world in relation to the Imams (P.B.U.T.) and their followers meaning this suffocation that arose brought about such a state that the adherents of the Imams (P.B.U.T.) were dispersed, scattered, disappointed, and frightened but there was no possibility of a collective uprising. Of course, it is related in the same tradition by Imam Ṣādiq (P.B.U.H.),
«ثُمّ إنّ النّاسَ لَحِقُوا وَ كَثُرُوا»
[Then the people joined them and multiplied.]
If we wish to explain the aforesaid issue a little further and in more detail, it will be that after the martyrdom of Imam Ḥusayn (P.B.U.H.) some people were frightened; however there was not such much fear to lead to total destruction of the organization of the followers of the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.). The reason is the very thing that we see that even at that time when they brought the captives of Karbalā to Kūfa, a movement is witnessed that is indicative of a Shi‘ite organization.
Of course, when we talk about a “secret Shi‘ite organization” it does not mean a complete cohesive organization that is common in today’s world; rather, what we mean is an ideological relationship that binds people to one another and forces them to make sacrifices and provokes them to do covert actions and as a result they bring a collective group to mind. In those very days when the descendants of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) were in Kūfa, on one of those nights, a stone falls from the sky in the place where they were imprisoned. They picked up the stone and saw that a piece of paper is enclosed around it. On that piece of paper it was written, “The governor of Kūfa has sent someone to Yazīd, in Shām, to find out how to deal with your condition and fate. If until tomorrow night, for example, you hear the sound of takbīr (saying Allah is Great) know that you will be killed right here, and if you do not hear it, know that this situation will get better for you.”
When we hear this story we clearly understand that a person from the friends and a member of this organization is present within Ibn Zīyād’s ruling apparatus and he knows all issues and events and has access to the prison, and he also has information about what is going to happen to these prisoners and they can also send news to the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) by saying takbīr and with the intensity that things had been done such things could also be seen.
Another example is ‘Abdullāh b. ‘Afīf Azdī who is a blind man; in those early stages of the arrival of the captives to Kūfa he shows a reaction that leads to his martyrdom, and other individuals like these could be found, whether in Shām or in Kūfa, who expressed interest and devotion toward them when dealing with the captives, or they cried, or they blamed each other; and such incidents had also happened before in Yazīd’s and Ibn Zīyād’s assemblies.
Therefore, although an intense fear had come about due to this course of events, it was not in such a way that it would completely disorganize the activities of the friends of the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) and cause them to become scattered and weak. However, after some time other incidents came about that increased this repression and hereby we can understand that the tradition,
«ارتَدَّ النّاسُ بَعدَ الحُسَين.»
[People will draw back from their religion after Ḥusayn (P.B.U.H.)] is related to that period of incidents or after those incidents or related to the intervals in between the incidents.
Throughout this period of several years–before that important and crushing incident came about–Shi‘ites were organizing their affairs and restoring their previous cohesion. Here, Ṭabarī relates that,
«فَلَم يَزل القَوم فی جَمعِ آلَة الحَرب و الاِستعدادِ للقِتال.»
[But the people were still gathering weapons of war and were ready to fight.] That is, those people–meaning the Shi‘ites–were gathering weapons of war and were preparing themselves for war, and secretly inviting the people, both Shi‘ites and non-Shi‘ites, to seek revenge for the blood of Ḥusayn b. ‘Alī (P.B.U.H.), and people were responding positively to these calls in groups. Moreover this condition continued until Yazīd b. Mu‘āwīya died.
Therefore we see that even though pressure and suppressions were great, yet these movements were also taking place–as Ṭabarī has also related–and perhaps it is for this reason that the author of the book “Jihād al-Shī‘a”, despite being a non-Shi‘ite author and does not have realistic views regarding Imam Sajjād (P.B.U.H.), yet he found out a reality that he related it this way, “After the martyrdom of Imam Ḥusayn (P.B.U.H.), this group of Shi‘ites became like one orderly organization whose beliefs and political ties bound them to one another and they also had their own communities and leaders as well as military forces. Moreover, the association of Tawwābīn (the Penitents) was the first manifestation of these organizations”.
Thus we feel that even though this Shi‘ite organization became weakened due to the incident of ‘Āshūrā, the Shi‘ite movements were engaged with their activities in face of this weakness so as to recover that organization to its initial status, until the Battle of Ḥarra took place. In my opinion the Battle of Ḥarra is a very tremendous turning point in the history of Shi‘ism that dealt a big blow.
The Battle of Ḥarra
The Battle of Ḥarra occurred exactly in 63 A.H. In short, the Battle of Ḥarra is that in the 62 A.H. a young person with little experience from Banī Umayyad became governor of Medina. He thought that in order to gain the hearts of the Shi‘ites of Medina, it would be fine to take some of them on a trip and invite them to meet with Yazīd and he did just so. He invited some of the Muslim leaders and some of the companions of the Imam (P.B.U.H.) and elders of Medina–most of whom were devotees of Imam Sajjād (P.B.U.H.)–to travel to Shām and become acquainted with Yazīd and to decrease the intensity of differences. They went to Shām and met with Yazīd and were his guest for a few days and were treated as guests. Then Yazīd gave each of them a large sum of money of fifty thousand dirhams or one hundred thousand dirhams, and they returned to Medina.
As soon as they returned to Medina they began to criticize Yazīd, as they had seen the atrocities that the government of Yazīd had committed. The case turned out quite the contrary [to what had been expected]; rather than praising Yazīd, they informed people of Medina of his crimes and told them, “How can Yazīd be a caliph while he drinks wine, plays with dogs, and commits all sorts of debaucheries; we have deposed him of caliphate”. ‘Abdullāh b. Ḥanala was one of the people of personality and honor in Medina who had risen up in advance and deposed Yazīd and called the people to himself.
This movement forced Yazīd to react, and as a result, he sent one of the old and decrepit commanders of the Umayyad named Muslim b. ‘Uqba along with some others to Medina to silence the people of Medina. Muslim b. ‘Uqba came to Medina and besieged the city for several days with the intentions of crushing the people’s resistance. Then he entered the city and killed and oppressed so many people and brought about so many catastrophes that it is regarded as one of the unprecedented examples in the history of Islam.
He exceeded his limits in killing and oppressing the people so much so that after that incident he was given the nickname of musrif and became known as “Musrif b. ‘Uqba”. The incidents of the Battle of Ḥarra are many and I do not wish to explain all of the incidents. I just wish to mention that it became the greatest means of intimidating the friends and the followers of the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.), especially in Medina where some fled, some were killed, and a group of the good companions of the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) like ‘Abdullāh b. Ḥanala and others were martyred and there was no one to take their places. This news was spread all corners of the world and it became known that the government apparatus stood firmly against these movements and would not allow them to take any action.
Mukhtār and Muṣ‘ab and the Movement of the Penitents
The next incidence that also caused the vanquishing and weakness of the Shi‘ites was the incident of the martyrdom of Mukhtār in Kūfa and ‘Abdul Malik b. Marwān’s dominance over the entire Muslim world. After the death of Yazīd, of the caliphs who came [to power] one was Mu‘āwīyat b. Yazīd who did not rule more than three months. After him came Marwān b. Ḥakam and he ruled for two years or less, and after him ‘Abdul Malik became caliph and was one of the most skillful of Banī Umayyad. It is said about him:
«كانَ عَبد المَلِك أشَدّهُم شَكيمَة، و أمضاهُم عَزيمَة»
[‘Abdul Malik was the hardest snaffle among them and the most determined].
‘Abdul Malik was able to take the entire Muslim world into his fist and create a dominant rule coupled with intimidation and severe repression.
‘Abdul Malik’s dominance over the government was based on the elimination of his competitors. Mukhtār, who was the epitome of Shi‘ism, was killed by Muṣ‘ab b. Zubayr before ‘Abdul Malik came to power. But ‘Abdul Malik wanted to put an end to the repercussions of Mukhtār’s movement and other Shi‘ite movements and he did this and indeed the Shi‘ites in Iraq, especially Kūfa, which was one of the main centers for Shi‘ism, became stagnant and were extinguished during that period.
Although in the year 64 and 65 A.H., the movement of Tawwābīn (the Penitents)–during which the martyrdom of Tawwābīn took place in the year 65 A.H.–breathed a fresh air into the stifled atmosphere of Iraq, but the martyrdom of them all, increased the atmosphere of intimidation and suppression in Kūfa and Iraq again. After the enemies of the Umayyad government–meaning Mukhtār and Muṣ‘ab b. Zubayr–began to fight with one another and ‘Abdullāh b. Zubayr, from Mecca, could not stand Mukhtār who was a supporter of the household of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.), and Mukhtār was killed by Muṣ‘ab. Again this fear and dread increased and hopes decreased. And finally, ‘Abdul Malik came to power; after a short period of time, the whole Muslim world, came under the full control of the Umayyad, and ‘Abdul Malik ruled powerfully for twenty-one years.
1986/19/07
At any rate, these events began following the incident of ‘Āshūrā and had repercussions such as the Battle of Ḥarra and the suppression if Tawwābīn movement in Iraq and the martyrdom of Mukhtār, Ibrāhīm b. Mālik Ashtar Nakha‘ī and other Shi‘ite elders; which, was suppressed after the liberation movements, whether in Medina or Kūfa–which were two main centers for Shi‘ism–were suppressed and intense suffocation was created against the Shi‘ites in the Muslim world and the followers of Imams (P.B.U.T.) remained in utter estrangement and loneliness after the martyrdom of these individuals.
The Period of the Intellectual Degradation
In addition to this intimidation another factor came into being and that was the intellectual degradation of the people throughout the Muslim world, which stemmed from the lack of regard for the religious teachings in a period of the last twenty years. In as much as the teaching of religion and the teaching of faith and the exegesis of the Qur’an and stating of facts became obsolete since the time of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) during the twenty-year period after 40 A.H. of the lunar calendar, the people had become wanton and hollow in terms of faith and belief tenets. When one puts the lives of the people of that period under a microscope, these issues become clear in different kinds of historical recounts and narrations. Of course, there were the scholars and reciters of the Holy Qur’an and traditionalists that we shall talk about, too. Yet the majority of the people were faced with a lack of faith, weakness, and a severe ideological disorder. Things had come to the point that some of the benefactors of the caliphate system even questioned Prophethood! It is written in books that Khālid b. ‘Abdullāh Qasrī, who was one of the mean and base puppets of the Umayyad,
«کانَ يفضّل الخَلافَة عَلی النُّبوّة»
[He used to separate caliphate from the Prophethood], would say, “Caliphate is higher than Prophethood”. The argument that he presented was that he used to say,
«أ خَليفَتك في أهلِك أحقُّ إليك و آثَرَ عِندك أم رَسولك؟»
[Is your caliph among your people your most loved one or is it your Prophet?] Place one person as your successor in your family, is this higher and closer to you or that person that you send to deliver a message? It is clear the person that you place in your home and is your caliph, he is closer to you. Then, Allah’s caliph–who was not even called the vicegerent of the Messenger of Allah–is higher than Allah’s Messenger.
This is what Khālid b. ‘Abdullāh Qasrī used to say and others would say the same. When I looked at the poems of the poets of the Umayyad period, I see that from the era of ‘Abdul Malik the term “Caliph of Allah” has been repeated so much that one forgets that the caliph is also the caliph of the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.), too! This continued until the ‘Abbāsīd period.
بَني اُميّة هبوا طال نَومكم إنّ الخَليفة يَعقوب بن داوود
ضاعَت خَلافَتكُم يا قَوم فَالتَمسوا خَليفَة الله بَينَ الزقّ والعود
[Banī Umayya your sleep has become prolonged, get up! Ya‘qūb b. Dāwūd has become caliph; your position of caliphate has been wasted, go find the vicegerent of Allah from among wine and musical instruments.]
Even the time when he wanted to dispraise the caliph, he would still call him the “Caliph of Allah”! And everywhere in the poems of the famous poets of that era like Jarīr and Farazdaq and Kathīr and others–there are hundreds of famous and great poets–when they speak in praise of the caliph, he is [addressed as] the Caliph of Allah; the holy Prophet (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) is not the caliph, and this is one example. The people’s beliefs, as such, had become weak even in relation to religious beliefs. People’s morals had been severely damaged.
I found out a notion when reading the book Al-Aqānī by Abū al-Faraj, and it was that in the years around seventy, eighty, ninety, and one hundred, until nearly fifty, sixty years after that, the greatest singers, musicians, sybarites, and the hedonists of the Muslim world, were either from Medina or from Mecca! Whenever the caliph was in Shām and he missed ghinā’ and he wanted a singer or a musician to entertain him, he would send someone to Medina or Mecca to bring famous mughannīs and minstrels to him. The morally evil and the most foul-mouthed poets were in Medina or Mecca. The Prophet’s (P.B.U.H. & H.H.) mahbaṭ of Revelation and the birth place of Islam had become the center of prostitution and corruption. It is good for us to know these things about Mecca and Medina. Unfortunately in the works we have at hand, there is no information of such things and this is a reality that did exist. Let me state one example of the prevalence of corruption and prostitution.
In Mecca, there was a poet by the name of ‘Umar b. Abī Rabī‘a among the poets who expressed everything openly and shamelessly; he was frank and foul-mouthed, and of course, he died at the height of power and poetic art. Now the stories of ‘Umar b. Abī Rabī‘a himself and what they did in Medina, is a chapter replete with sad history of that time; where [it is said about] Mecca and circumambulation and stoning Satan:
«فَوَالله ما أدري و إن كُنت داريا بِسَبع رَميت الجَمَر أم بِثَماني»
Which we have read in the book “Mughnī”, is about these places, which belongs to these places. Whilst performing the ‘stoning of Satan’ he says:
«بَدا لی مِنها معصم حينما جَمَرت وَ كَفّ خَضيب زينَت بِبنان»
Her wrist appeared during the stoning of Satan,
And her henna-tinged palm with decorated nails.
When this ‘Umar b. Abī Rabī‘a died, the narrator quotes, “In Medina there was a public mourning and people were crying in the alleys of Medina. Everywhere I went I saw an assemblage of young people, men and women who were standing and lamenting the death of ‘Umar b. Abī Rabī‘a. I saw a bondwoman who was going on an errand, for example there is a bucket in her hand and was fetching water. She was shedding copious tears and she cried and moaned and lamented because of the death of ‘Umar b. Abī Rabī‘a, she reaches an assemblage of young people, they asked, ‘Why are you crying so much?’ She said, ‘Because this man has died, he is no longer among us’. One said, ‘Do not worry; there is another poet in Medina. Khālid b. Makhzūmī, who was once governor of Mecca for a while, whom the same scholars of Shām had appointed. Like ‘Umar b. Abī Rabī‘a, he was also one of the poets who was foul-mouthed, slanderous, and expressed everything openly and shamelessly. He had written this poem, and he began to recite one of that poets’ poems. This bondwoman listened for a while–this poem, and its features, have been quoted in al-Aghānī–then she cleaned her tears and said,
«الحَمدُ الله الّذی لَم يخل حَرمَه»
[All praise belongs to Allah, that He did not leave His sanctuary [i.e. Ka‘ba] empty], finally, if one went, one has taken his place. This was the ethical state of the people of Medina.”
You see many stories about the evening parties in Mecca and Medina; not only among the low class but among all kinds of people. A mendicant and miserable person like the well-known Ash‘ab Ṭammā‘ [the greedy] who was a poet and clown, and the ordinary people in the streets and this very bondwoman and the likes of her, as well as the well-known sons of the nobles of Quraysh and even the Hashemite–whose names I will not mention, who were the well-known figures of the nobles of the Quraysh, either their women or their men–were among these same people that were drowned in corruption. During the rule of this same person from the Makhzūm tribe, ‘Āyisha bint Ṭalḥa arrived and was circumambulating [the K‘aba]. This man had a liking for her. The time for call to prayer (adhān) had come. That woman sent a message to him to tell them not to say the call for prayers until she was done with her circumambulation. That is he gave orders that they should not announce the afternoon call for prayer! They criticized this man, saying, “You say to delay all the people’s prayer because of one person, one woman who is circumambulating [the K‘aba]?!” He said, “By Allah, if her circumambulation would have been prolonged until tomorrow morning, I would have told them not to say the call for prayer! This was the situation of those days.
1986/15/11
