Summary of the above
Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu) together with being a close Sahabi of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), which in itself is sufficient for one's praise, was blessed with many noble qualities and traits which made him an outstanding leader and a winner of hearts. His twenty year rule of peace and stability, which had been preceded by years of war and internal conflict, bear ample testimony to this.
If the purpose of mentioning all of the above was merely to highlight the status of this great Sahabi, then despite this too being necessary in today's time and an act of great merit, but in the context of what we are trying to discuss, i.e. the reality behind Karbala, such a discussion would naturally seem out of line, especially it has generally never been denied that he was a great man. The only problem seems to be with his son, Yazid.
The actual purpose of the entire discussion in actual fact has nothing to do with regards to the personality and status of Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu), but it had been rather brought to lay the foundation of a most important issue, which constitutes the basis of the investigation into the reality of Karbala.
In simpler words, whoever shall read about the conditions and stability in the era of Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu), and shall study his noble traits and qualities, he shall be forced to admit that Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu) left nothing during his reign of rule as a cause for any group to rise in rebellion. Yet if one were to look a bit deeper, he would find the people of Kufa continuously calling for the overthrow of the government of Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu) and the reinstating of the Ahle-Bayt. What was Hadhrat Mu'awiyah doing wrong that made them beg the Ahle-Bayt to come over and have him overthrown? Was it that he too was committing adultery or was he drinking liquor or was he an oppressive, stone-hearted ruler?.
The fact that the people of Iraq were continuously making attempts to incite Hadhrat Hasan and Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhuma) to rebel against Hadhrat Mu'awiyah is a no hidden matter. A few examples of their nefarious activities during the era of Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu) have already been mentioned. But for the purpose of re-highlighting this fact, a narration from Mu'jam al Tabrani, which has a sound and strong chain of narrators, shall now be mentioned:
Yazid bin al-Asam narrates that once whilst on a journey with Hadhrat Hasan ibn Ali (radhiyallahu anhu), a bundle of letters reached him, Hadhrat Hasan (radhiyallahu anhu) called for a container, and had water poured into it. He then threw the letters into the water, without even bothering to glance at its contents. I asked 'O Abu Muhammad! (Hadhrat Hasan), who has sent all of these letters?' He replied, 'It has come from the people of Iraq, a group that shall never accept the truth, and shall never desist from their evil. As for myself, I do not fear being deceived by these people. However I do fear that they may have an impact on him!' Saying this Hadhrat Hasan pointed towards Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhu).
When one questions as to the reason behind Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhu) going over to Iraq to assist with the overthrow of Yazid, the answer shall generally be that Yazid a tyrant, an adultrer, a habitual drunkard, etc, (allegations that never have been proven).
But, if the same question is now put forward that these reasons are all well and valid, but what then was then reason behind the people of Iraq calling Hadhrat Hasan (radhiyallahu anhu) over; for the same sort of overthrowing duringbthe reign of Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu), was he too doing the same?
If this question can be answered, it shall open up an entire new understanding of the incident of Karbala. Had the people of Iraq never complained of any governor before Yazid, one could have possibly believed all their sorrowful tales of the cruelity of Yazid, his oppression, his open transgression, etc. However after realizing that a group of people from Iraq were from the very beginning always at the throat of their leader, desiring his removal from his post, irrespective of their status; when one realizes that overthrowing the government was always their goal and that they would do anything to accomplish it, one shall then look at the entire incident of Karbala and the accusations against Yazid, preceded by the assassination of Hadhrat Hasan (radhiyallahu anhu) from a different angle, and insha Allah many unanswered questions shall then find answers.
The issues that shall be discussed Insha Allah be discussed are of an extremely delicate nature. It is like a bush of thorns, from which very few have come out unscathed. The majority who attempted falling into these issues were finally forced to take sides, some would side with Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhu) (which would obviously be the safe option), but would then have to answer as to why none of the Sahaba of Makkah Mukarramah and Madinah Munawwarah were not prepared to join him in his joirney to Iraq, and he would also have to explain why Hadhrat Mu'awiyah (radhiyallahu anhu) after ruling wisely for approximately twenty years, chose to make an unwise and rash decision to appoint his son who was (according to this group) not at all fit for the job, and thus put his hereafter in jeopardy.
As for the second group, who would side with Yazid (which is not a good decision at all), he would, besidea having to face the wrath of the Ummah, have to answer as to why Yazid such a hasty decision in sending Ubaidullah ibn Ziyaad over ro Kufa to deal with Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhu). When the matter was of such great importance, why did he himself not go over to Kufa and deal directly with the problem? And if it is said that Yazid never had asked for the assassination of Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhu), then why did he later not have Ubaidullah ibn Ziyaad punished for not obeying his command? Also, why did he order an attack on the blessed cities of Makkah Mukarramah and Madinah Munawwarah just before his passing away?
To attempt a through investigation into the matter of Karbala, with the purpose of making a decision in favour of one of the two groups, and finding the other blameworthy, such an attempt is not only futile and dangerous, but it is in fact fully in line with what the shayateeni forces had wanted from the very beginning. Taking sides has and shall achieve nothing except further weakening of the Ummah.
YOU ARE READING
Karbala: A "Bloody" Consipracy and the Secrets Behind It
SachbücherINTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC The death of Hadhrat Hussain (radhiyallahu anhu), which is commonly known as 'Karbala', was indeed one of the most tragic events in the history of Islam, but not for the reasons which have generally been understood. If the...