ASHA: Blast From The Past

सैयद अली नदीम रेज़ावी

इंसानियत की नैतिक और सियासी सोच को आकार देने वाले बहुत सारे वाकियों में से कुछ ही कर्बला की तरह दिलों पर गहरा असर छोड़ते हैं। कर्बला के मैदान में इमाम हुसैन इब्न अली की शहादत को तेरह सदियाँ बीत चुकी हैं, फिर भी यह दर्दनाक वाकया आज भी लोगों को सोचने, रोने, सीखने और प्रेरणा लेने पर मजबूर करता है। कर्बला सिर्फ एक छोटे से गिरोह और एक ताकतवर सरकार के बीच लड़ी गई जंग नहीं थी। न ही यह सिर्फ खिलाफत की सियासी जंग थी। यह सबसे बढ़कर, ज़मीर की परीक्षा थी। इसने हर इंसान को सच्चाई और ताकत, इंसाफ और सुविधा, नैतिक पकड़ और दुनियावी फायदे के बीच चुनाव करने पर मजबूर कर दिया। इस ऐतिहासिक वर्णन के लिए बुनियादी स्रोतों में अल-तबरी की तारीख अल-रुसुल वा अल-मुलुक, इब्न अल-असीर की अल-कामिल फी अल-तारीख, और इब्न कसीर की किताब अल-बिदाया वा अल-निहाया शामिल हैं। जैसा कि आरोन एम. हैगलर द इकोज़ ऑफ़ फितना में बताते हैं, कर्बला के मतलब को नए सिरे से समझाने की चाहत इन मुअर्रिखों की तहरीर के बीच में है, और संदर्भ के उन पलों में छोटी-छोटी तब्दीली भी उनके मतलब को पूरी तरह बदल देती है।

कर्बला को खास अहमियत देने वाली बात यह है कि यह वाकया पैगंबर मुहम्मद की जीती-जागती याद के दौरान हुआ। उस वक्त बहुत से सहाबा जीवित थे जिन्होंने पैगंबर को देखा था, उनके खुत्बे सुने थे, उनके साथ जंग लड़ी थी और उनकी तालीमात को दूसरों तक पहुँचाया था। कर्बला और पैगंबर के जीवनकाल के बीच की दूरी बहुत कम थी। फिर भी जब इमाम हुसैन ने यज़ीद इब्न मुआविया की हुकूमत को मानने से इनकार कर दिया और खिलाफत को मौरूसी बादशाहत में बदलने को चुनौती दी, तो मुसलमान समाज गहरे बंटवारे का शिकार हो गया। कुछ हुसैन के साथ खड़े हुए। कुछ ने उनसे हमदर्दी तो जताई मगर कुछ नहीं किया। कुछ ने बीच का रास्ता अपनाया। दूसरों ने खुद को हाकिमों की सरकार से जोड़ लिया। इस मायने में, कर्बला सिर्फ हुसैन की परीक्षा नहीं बल्कि पूरी एक पीढ़ी की परीक्षा बन गई।

कर्बला की गहरी तारीख को समझने के लिए, पहले कुरैश कबीले के अंदरूनी हालात को देखना होगा, जिस कबीले से हुसैन और यज़ीद दोनों ताल्लुक रखते थे। कुरैश एकजुट कबीला नहीं था। वे कई खानदानों में बँटे हुए थे, जिनमें सबसे मशहूर बनू हाशिम और बनू उमय्या थे। इस्लाम से पहले, ये खानदान मक्का समाज में इज्जत, रुतबा और रहनुमाई के लिए आपस में लड़ते थे। बनू हाशिम को काबा और हाजियों को सुविधाएँ देने की वजह से बड़ी इज्जत हासिल थी। बनू उमय्या, दूसरी तरफ, कबीले की सबसे अमीर और सियासी तौर पर सबसे ताकतवर शाखाओं में से एक थे।

जब पैगंबर मुहम्मद ने अपना पैगाम सुनाया, तो सबसे सख्त मुखालिफत बनू उमय्या के बड़े लोगों से आई, जिनमें अबू सुफयान इब्न हर्ब भी शामिल थे। फिर भी मक्का की फतह ने इन रिश्तों को बदल दिया। पहले के मुखालिफ इस्लाम क़बूल करके नई जमात में शामिल हो गए। पैगंबर ने जानबूझ कर सुलह की कोशिश की और क़बायली अदावतों से ऊपर उठने की कोशिश की। कुछ देर के लिए, ऐसा लगा कि जाहिलियत की ये अदावतें एक बड़े नैतिक और मज़हबी नज़ारे के सामने मिट गई हैं।

हालाँकि, पैगंबर की मौत के बाद इख्तियार और रहनुमाई के सवालों ने धीरे-धीरे उन दरारों को फिर से खोल दिया जो कभी पूरी तरह नहीं भरी थीं। अबू बकर और उमर की खिलाफत के दौरान, ये तनाव काबू में थे। उस्मान के ज़माने में, जो खुद बनू उमय्या के थे, उमावियों का असर तेजी से बढ़ते साम्राज्य में फैल गया। उस्मान की शहादत और उसके बाद इमाम अली और मुआविया के बीच जंग ने इन छिपी हुई दरारों को सबके सामने ला दिया।

फिर भी इन जंगों को सिर्फ क़बायली अदावतों के नाम पर नहीं समझा जा सकता। अली के हिमायतियों में बहुत से गैर-हाशमी भी थे, जबकि मुआविया के बहुत से हिमायतियों का बनू उमय्या से कोई खास लगाव नहीं था। मसले तेजी से इंसाफ, हुकूमत, इख्तियार और इस्लामी रियासत की असलियत जैसे सवालों के इर्द-गिर्द घूमने लगे। जब तक हुसैन ने यज़ीद का सामना किया, तब तक यह जंग क़बायली वफादारी से कहीं आगे निकल चुकी थी।

कर्बला के सबसे हैरतअंगेज़ पहलुओं में से एक यह है कि यह दर्दनाक वाकया पैगंबर मुहम्मद की जीती-जागती याद में हुआ। उनके बहुत से सहाबा 61 हिजरी / 680 ईस्वी में अभी ज़िंदा थे जब इमाम हुसैन ने उमय्यद हाकिम यज़ीद इब्न मुआविया का सामना किया। फिर भी इस मुसीबत के सामने उनके जवाब एक जैसे नहीं थे।

आम ख़याल के उलट, बहुत कम सहाबा शरीकन हुसैन के लश्कर में या उनके खिलाफ लड़ने वाली फौज में मौजूद थे। कर्बला के ज़्यादातर प्रमुख किरदार अगली पीढ़ी, ताबिऊन से थे। सहाबा में से जिन्होंने रिवायतन इमाम हुसैन का साथ दिया और शहादत पाई, उनमें अनस इब्न अल-हारिस अल-काहिली शामिल हैं। दूसरे, जैसे जाबिर इब्न अब्दुल्लाह अल-अंसारी, सहल इब्न साद अल-साइदी, और अबू सईद अल-खुदरी, अहल अल-बैत से अपनी मुहब्बत की वजह से याद किए जाते हैं, हालाँकि बुढ़ापे और हालात ने उनकी शरीकत को रोका।

बहुत से मशहूर सहाबा, जिनमें अब्दुल्लाह इब्न उमर, अब्दुल्लाह इब्न अब्बास, अनस इब्न मालिक, और जैद इब्न अरकम शामिल हैं, ने हुसैन का साथ नहीं दिया। उनकी वजहें अलग-अलग थीं। कुछ का ख़याल था कि बग़ावत से सिर्फ और ज़्यादा खून-खराबा होगा, जबकि दूसरों ने सियासी तटस्थता की राह अपना ली। खास बात यह है कि इस बात के बहुत कम सबूत हैं कि बड़े जीवित सहाबा ने कर्बला में इमाम हुसैन के खिलाफ जंग लड़ी। जिन लोगों ने उनके खिलाफ जंगी मुहिम की कमान संभाली और उसे अंजाम दिया, जैसे उबैदुल्लाह इब्न जियाद, उमर इब्न साद, शिम्र इब्न धिल-जौशन, और दूसरे, काफी हद तक नौजवान पीढ़ी से ताल्लुक रखते थे।

इन अलग-अलग जवाबों की तारीखी अहमियत इस बात में है कि कर्बला पूरी जमात के लिए ज़मीर की परीक्षा बन गया। पैगंबर से क़ुर्बत ने कोई एक सियासी रुख पैदा नहीं किया। कुछ ने हुसैन का साथ दिया, कुछ ने हमदर्दी की, कुछ ने सावधानी की सलाह दी, और दूसरों ने उमावी हुकूमत के साथ समझौता कर लिया। इस तरह कर्बला हमें याद दिलाता है कि न तो पैगंबर की सोहबत, न ही शरीफ़ खानदान, न ही माज़ी की कामयाबियाँ किसी को तारीख के नैतिक फैसलों से बरी करती हैं। लोगों का फैसला आखिरकार इस बात पर नहीं हुआ कि वे कौन थे, बल्कि इस बात पर हुआ कि उन्होंने सच्चाई और ताकत की जंग में क्या किया।

इससे पहले कि हम उन लोगों का जायज़ा लें जिन्होंने इमाम हुसैन के खिलाफ सक्रिय रूप से जंग लड़ी, सहाबा के रुतबे को परखने के लिए एक बुनियादी उसूल क़ायम करना बेहद ज़रूरी है। सुनहरी उसूल यह है कि सिर्फ वही सहाबा मोहतरम और महबूब हैं जो सकलैन (क़ुरान और इत्रत अहलुलबैत अलैहिमुस्सलाम) से तमस्सुक और वफादारी करते रहे, इत्तिबा करते रहे और मवद्दत फिल क़ुर्बा की राह पर रहे।

इस उसूल को सामने रखते हुए, हम उन सहाबा के बारे में तारीखी सबूतों की तरफ रुख करते हैं जो कर्बला में उमर इब्न साद की फौज में मौजूद थे। निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों का मुख़ालिफ फौज में मौजूद होना दर्ज है:

1. अब्द अल-रहमान बिन अबी सबरतुल जुफी (यज़ीद बिन मलिक अल-जुफी)

यह शख्स सहाबी थे और उनके वालिद भी। दोनों अहले कूफा में से थे। इनके बेटे का नाम खुसैमा था। (अल-इसाबा, जिल्द 4, सफ़ा 260, नंबर 5141)। रोज़े आशूरा यह सहाबी उमर इब्न साद की फौज में क़बीला मज़्हज और असद की अफवाज का जनरल था। (तारीख अल–तबरी, जिल्द 5, सफ़ा 422; अल-कामिल फी अल-तारीख, जिल्द 3, सफ़ा 168)।

2. खालिद बिन उरफुतह

यह शख्स उमर इब्न साद के लश्करों में से एक लश्कर का सरदार था कर्बला में। (अल-तबक़ात अल-कबीर, जिल्द 5, सफ़ा 273, नंबर 932; अल-इसाबा, इब्न हजर, जिल्द 2, सफ़ा 209-210, नंबर 2187)। यह बात खास तौर पर ध्यान देने योग्य है कि पैगंबर मुहम्मद ने खालिद इब्न उरफुतह को फरमाया था: “ऐ खालिद, मेरे बाद फितने, आज़माइशें और इख्तिलाफात पैदा होंगे। अगर तुम अल्लाह के उस बन्दे बन सको जो मारा जाए न कि जो मारे, तो ऐसा करो।” यह नबवी नसीहत, जो उन्हें मुसीबत के दौर में मारने वाले के बजाय मारे जाने वाला बनने की ताकीद करती है, कर्बला में पैगंबर के नवासे को क़त्ल करने वाली फौज में उनकी शरीकत के बिल्कुल उलट है।

3. अम्र बिन हज्जाज जुबैदी

यह सहाबी उस फौज के अफसर थे जिसे उमर इब्न साद ने नहरे फुरात के किनारे तैनात किया था। (अल-इसाबा, जिल्द 4, सफ़ा 510, नंबर 5823)। और इसने रोज़े आशूरा इमाम हुसैन से निहायत बदकलामी भी की थी। (तारीख अल-तबरी, जिल्द 5, सफ़ा 412; अंसाबुल अशराफ, जिल्द 3, सफ़ा 390)। तारीखी मराजे इस बात की तस्दीक करते हैं कि 7 मुहर्रम, 61 हिजरी को उमर इब्न साद ने 500 सिपाहियों का एक दस्ता अम्र बिन हज्जाज की कमान में नहरे फुरात के किनारे तैनात किया, ताकि अहले बैत को पानी से महरूम किया जा सके।

4. हिजार बिन अब्जर

यह सहाबी कर्बला में उमर इब्न साद की फौज में मौजूद था। इमाम हुसैन ने उन्हें रोज़े आशूरा अपने एक खुत्बे में संबोधित किया और उनसे यह सवाल किया था: “क्या तुमने, शबस बिन रबी, क़ैस बिन अश’अस और यज़ीद बिन हारिस के साथ मुझे खत में ये बातें नहीं लिखी थीं?” (अल-इसाबा, इब्न हजर, जिल्द 2, सफ़ा 143, नंबर 1960)। हिजार बिन अब्जर उमर बिन साद की फौज के कमांडरों में से थे और उन कुफियों में से थे जिन्होंने इमाम हुसैन को कूफा बुलाने के लिए खत लिखे थे। हालाँकि, जब उबैदुल्लाह बिन जियाद ने कूफा पर क़ब्ज़ा किया तो वह इमाम हुसैन के खिलाफ हो गए और मुस्लिम बिन अकील से लोगों को अलग होने पर मजबूर किया।

5. मसरूक बिन वाएल अल-हज़रमी

इनका क़ौल दर्ज है: “मैं उन सवारों की अगली सफ़ में था जो हुसैन की तरफ आए थे। मैंने अपने दिल में कहा कि मैं अगली ही सफ़ के सवारों में रहूँ, शायद मुझे हुसैन का सिर मिल जाए, और इस ज़रिए से उबैदुल्लाह के दरबार में क़द्र और मंज़िलत पा लूँ…” (अल-इस्तीआब, इब्न अब्द अल-बिर्र, जिल्द 4, सफ़ा 1472, नंबर 2549; तारीख अल-तबरी, जिल्द 5, सफ़ा 431)।

सच तो यह है कि कर्बला की सबसे हैरतअंगेज़ बातों में से एक यह है कि हुसैन के साथ शहीद होने वाले लोग क़बायली रिश्तों से एकजुट नहीं थे। वे अलग-अलग पृष्ठभूमियों, इलाकों और तबकों से आए थे। उन्हें एकजुट करने वाली चीज़ खून नहीं बल्कि यक़ीन था। जैसा कि टॉर्स्टन हाइलेन द कर्बला स्टोरी एंड अर्ली शी’इट आइडेंटिटी में बताते हैं, यह कहानी शुरुआती शिया इस्लाम में एक मिसाली दास्तान बन गई, जो सच्चाई और झूठ के बीच अमर जंग की नुमाइंदगी करती है। इस जंग का तसव्वुरी फ्रेमवर्क, जिसमें ‘यज़ीदियत’ ताकत को सच्चाई और ‘हुसैनियत’ सच्चाई को ताकत मानती है, मुर्तज़ा मुतह्हरी जैसे विद्वानों ने विकसित किया और डॉ. मुहम्मद ताहिर-उल-कादरी सहित मौजूदा मुफक्किरों ने इसे बयान किया है।

पहला गिरोह: जिन्होंने दिलो-जान से हुसैन का साथ दिया

पैगंबर के सहाबा में से जो हुसैन के साथ लड़े और शहीद हुए, उनमें अनस इब्न अल-हारिस अल-काहिली थे। बाद की रिवायतों के मुताबिक, उन्होंने पैगंबर को हुसैन की आने वाली शहादत के बारे में बात करते सुना था। जब वह वक़्त आया, तो अनस खामोश खड़े नहीं रहे। बुढ़ापे के बावजूद, उन्होंने हुसैन का साथ दिया और शहादत क़बूल की। उनके फैसले ने पैगंबर की पीढ़ी और उनके नवासे द्वारा उठाए गए कदम के बीच तारीखी रिश्ते को ज़ाहिर किया।

अब्द अल-रहमान इब्न अब्द रब्ब अल-अंसारी एक और सहाबी थे जिन्होंने गदीर खुम का वाकया देखा था और अली की जानशीन पदवी के बारे में हदीस रिवायत की थी। उन्होंने मक्का से हुसैन का साथ दिया और कर्बला में शहीद हुए, जिससे साबित होता है कि पैगंबर के अहल-ए-बैत के प्रति उनकी वफादारी सिर्फ ज़बानी नहीं थी बल्कि उन्होंने इस पर अपनी जान दे दी।

सईद इब्न अब्दुल्लाह अल-हनफी ने कूफा के लोगों की तरफ से हुसैन को कई अहम खत पहुँचाए। आशूरा की शाम को, उन्होंने एलान कर दिया कि वह हुसैन को कभी नहीं छोड़ेंगे। जंग के दिन, उन्होंने हुसैन को नमाज़ पढ़ते वक़्त अपने बदन से बचाया और शहीद होने से पहले बहुत से तीर अपनी छाती पर खाए। उनकी कुर्बानी वफादारी की सबसे बड़ी मिसाल है।

हबीब इब्न मुज़ाहिर अल-असदी 70 साल के सहाबी थे जो पैगंबर और इमाम अली के करीबी थे। वे अपनी पक्की वफादारी के लिए मशहूर थे और कर्बला में शहीद होने वालों में पहले थे। उनकी उम्र ने उन्हें अपना नैतिक फर्ज़ निभाने से नहीं रोका।

बेशक, हुसैन के ज़्यादातर हिमायती सहाबा के बाद की पीढ़ी से ताल्लुक रखते थे। उनमें मुस्लिम इब्न औसाजा, बुरैर इब्न खुदैर, नाफी इब्न हिलाल, और ज़ुहैर इब्न अल-क़ैन शामिल थे। इन लोगों को पूरा यक़ीन था कि हुसैन का छोटा गिरोह जंग जीत नहीं सकता। फिर भी उन्होंने उनका साथ देने का फैसला किया। उनकी वफादारी फायदे के हिसाब पर नहीं बल्कि इस यक़ीन पर थी कि कुछ उसूलों की हिफाज़त हर हाल में की जानी चाहिए।

ज़ुहैर इब्न अल-क़ैन की दास्तान खास तौर पर दिलचस्प है। शुरू में जंग में शामिल होने से गुरेज़ करते हुए, उन्होंने इराक के सफर के दौरान हुसैन से मुलाकात की। तारीखी रिवायतें बताती हैं कि ज़ुहैर का काफिला इमाम से बचना चाहता था, लेकिन हालात ने उन्हें उसी जगह रुकने पर मजबूर कर दिया। जब हुसैन के क़ासिद ने उन्हें बुलाया, तो ज़ुहैर के साथी इतने परेशान हुए कि उन्होंने खाना नीचे रख दिया। यह उनकी बीवी, लेडी दुल्हम थीं, जिन्होंने उन्हें याद दिलाया: “अल्लाह के पैगंबर के बेटे ने तुम्हारे पास किसी को भेजा है और तुम्हें बुलाया है; क्या तुम उनके पास जाने को राज़ी नहीं हो?” इमाम के साथ निजी मुलाकात के बाद, ज़ुहैर पूरी तरह बदल गए। उन्होंने अपनी बीवी को तलाक़ दे दिया ताकि वह उनकी शहादत के बाद दोबारा शादी कर सके। जो शख्स जंग से बचना चाहता था, वह हुसैन का सबसे बड़ा हिमायती बन गया, हुसैन पर आने वाले तीरों को अपने सीने पर रोकता हुआ मुस्कुराता रहा और आखिरकार जंग के मैदान में जमीन पर गिर पड़ा। उनकी ज़िंदगी बताती है कि आखिरी पल में भी ज़मीर जाग सकता है, और सच्ची पकड़ अक्सर अपनी प्राथमिकताओं को पूरी तरह बदलने की माँग करती है।

बुरैर इब्न खुदैर अल-हमदानी इमाम अली के बहुत बूढ़े और परहेज़गार सहाबी थे जो अपनी गहरी इबादत के लिए मशहूर थे। उन्होंने हुसैन से शहीद होने की इजाज़त माँगी, वह क़यामत के दिन पैगंबर से मिलने के लिए बेताब थे। कुर्बानी के लिए उनका यह जोश बताता है कि ये लोग शहादत को दर्दनाक वाकया नहीं बल्कि सबसे बड़ी इज़्ज़त समझते थे।

हुसैन के लश्कर में जॉन भी शामिल थे, जो अबू धर्र अल-गिफ़ारी के आज़ाद किए गए नौकर थे। बुजुर्ग, अफ्रीकी मूल के, और पीछे हटने के लिए हर बहाना रखने वाले, उन्होंने फिर भी इमाम के साथ लड़ने पर जोर दिया। उनकी मौजूदगी ने हुसैन के क़ौस की वैश्विक हैसियत की गवाही दी। कर्बला ने अरबों और गैर-अरबों, रईसों और आज़ाद किए गए ग़ुलामों, उलेमा और जांबाजों को एक साथ इकट्ठा किया, सब इंसाफ की एक ही मुहिम पर जुटे हुए थे।

कर्बला की सबसे हैरतअंगेज़ कहानियों में से एक हुर्र इब्न यज़ीद अल-रियाही की है। ज़ुहैर के उलट, हुर्र पहले से ही दुश्मन की फौज में था। उसने हुसैन से नफरत की वजह से नहीं बल्कि अपने आला अफसरों के हुक्म की तामील के लिए यज़ीद की फौज में शामिल हो गया था। फिर भी आशूरा की रात को, हुर्र बेचैन था। वह हुसैन के कैंप में बच्चों को प्यास से चिल्लाते सुन सकता था। उसके ज़मीर ने उसे आवाज़ दी: “तूने क्या किया हुर्र? तूने फातिमा के बेटे को इस हालत में क्यों डाला? क्या अल्लाह कभी माफ़ करेगा?” यह पेशेवर फौजी सारी रात सो नहीं सका। उसके अंदर एक सिपाही की ज़िम्मेदारी और उसके इस्लामी ज़मीर के बीच जंग थी। जब आखिरकार उसने हुसैन के कैंप में जाकर पनाह माँगी, तो इमाम ने उसे तुरंत माफ़ कर दिया और कहा कि उनके दादा, पैगंबर ने भी उसे माफ़ किया है। हुर्र ताकतवरों, अमीरों और बहुतों की तरफ से कुछ भूखे-प्यासे लोगों की तरफ आया था जो जलती हुई रेत में ज़रूर मर जाएँगे। वह जंग का पहला शहीद बना, उसने आखिरी पल में अपना फैसला किया। उसका यह बदलाव बताता है कि इंसान किसी भी वक़्त अपनी राह चुनने की आज़ादी रखता है, और जो उसे चाहता है उसके लिए अल्लाह की रहमत कभी दूर नहीं है।

इसकी और मिसाल साद इब्न अल-हारिथ अल-अंसारी से मिलती है, जो पहले खारिजी आंदोलन का हिस्सा थे जिसने अली का विरोध किया था, मगर हुसैन के परिवार की फरियाद सुनकर उन्होंने अपनी वफादारी बदल दी और इमाम के साथ लड़े यहाँ तक कि वह भी शहीद हो गए। ऐसी कहानियाँ इस बात को पुख्ता करती हैं कि सच्चाई की पुकार पुरानी सियासी या फिरक़ापरस्ताना वफादारियों से परे है।

दूसरा गिरोह: जो “तटस्थ” रहे

अगर कर्बला उन लोगों को मान-सम्मान देता है जो हुसैन के साथ खड़े हुए, तो यह हमें उन लोगों के बारे में भी सोचने पर मजबूर करता है जिन्होंने ऐसा नहीं किया। इस दूसरे गिरोह में वे सहाबा शामिल थे जिन्होंने पैगंबर के खानदान से हमदर्दी तो जताई मगर आखिरकार खामोशी और अलग-थलग रहने को तरजीह दी। वे अक्सर खूनी जंग (फितना) के डर या चुप रहने को ही धार्मिक तौर पर सुरक्षित रास्ता समझने की सोच की वजह से ऐसा करते थे।

जीवित सहाबा में जाबिर इब्न अब्दुल्लाह अल-अंसारी थे। 61 हिजरी तक वह अंधे और बहुत बूढ़े हो चुके थे। शरीकन हिस्सा लेने से काफ़िर, वह फिर भी अहल अल-बैत के लिए समर्पित रहे और कर्बला के सांग के बाद हुसैन की कब्र पर जाने वालों में पहले व्यक्ति के तौर पर याद किए जाते हैं। उनके किरदार ने हमदर्दी और अदब को ज़ाहिर किया, भले ही हालात ने उनकी शरीकत को न रोका हो।

इसी तरह, सहल इब्न साद अल-साइदी और अबू सईद अल-खुदरी ने पैगंबर के अहल-ए-बैत से मुहब्बत और उनके साथ बर्ताव पर बेचैनी जताई। फिर भी वह भी जंग से अलग रहे।

ज़ैद इब्न अरकम और अनस इब्न मालिक के मामले ज़्यादा पेचीदा हैं। दोनों बड़े-बड़े सहाबा थे। दोनों ने हसन और हुसैन की फज़ीलतों के बारे में रिवायतें पेश की थीं। फिर भी किसी ने हुसैन का साथ नहीं दिया। ज़ैद इब्न अरकम ने जब हुसैन का कटा हुआ सिर उबैदुल्लाह इब्न जियाद के सामने रखा गया तो एतराज किया। उन्होंने महसूस किया कि यह कितना बड़ा जुर्म है। फिर भी यह एहसास वाकया के बाद आया। जब हुसैन को मदद चाहिए थी, ज़ैद गैर-मौजूद थे।

अनस इब्न मालिक भी इसी तरह का एक मुश्किल केस हैं। पैगंबर के सबसे करीबी खिदमतगारों में से एक और हदीस के सबसे बड़े रावियों में से एक, वह उमय्यद दौर में ज़िंदा रहे। फिर भी उन्होंने न तो हुसैन का साथ दिया और न ही हुकूमत को खुली चुनौती दी। यह एहतियात थी, बुढ़ापा, सियासी मुंह मोड़ना या कुछ और, यह बहस का मुद्दा है। जो साफ़ है वह यह कि पैगंबर की नज़दीकी ने कर्बला के वक़्त किसी की प्रतिक्रिया अपने आप तय नहीं की।

शायद सबसे प्रभावशाली जीवित सहाबी जिसने हुसैन का साथ नहीं दिया, अब्दुल्लाह इब्न उमर थे। दूसरे खलीफा उमर इब्न अल-खत्ताब के बेटे, उन्हें मुस्लिम समाज में बड़ी हैसियत हासिल थी। फिर भी इब्न उमर का मानना था कि खूनी जंग एक ज़ालिम बादशाह से भी ज़्यादा खतरनाक है। इसलिए उन्होंने हुसैन का साथ देने से इनकार कर दिया और संयम की सलाह दी। साथ ही, उन्होंने यज़ीद के काम में भी शरीकत नहीं की। उनका रुख तटस्थता और सियासी खामोशी का था।

अब्दुल्लाह इब्न अब्बास, एक और बड़े सहाबी, ने हुसैन को कूफा जाने से रोकने की कोशिश की, उन्हें डर था कि उनके साथ धोखा होगा। उन्होंने मुस्लिम समाज में और ज़्यादा खून बहने से बचने के लिए यज़ीद की बादशाहत को क़बूल कर लिया। अब्द अल-रहमान इब्न अबी बक्र, पहले खलीफा अबू बक्र के बेटे, ने भी पिछली लड़ाइयों में हज़ारों मुसलमानों की जान लेने वाले बंटवारे से बचने के लिए यज़ीद की बादशाहत को क़बूल किया।

दूसरे सहाबा, जिनमें मुहम्मद इब्न मसलमाह और अबू बकराह शामिल हैं, ने भी ऐसा ही रवैया अपनाया। उन्होंने खूनी जंग से किनारा करना पसंद किया और नए खून-खराबे के अंजाम से डरते थे। उनके फैसले धार्मिक फर्ज़ की एक खास समझ को ज़ाहिर करते हैं, जो मुक़ाबले पर स्थिरता को तरजीह देती है।

तीसरा गिरोह: जिन्होंने उमावियों का साथ दिया

यह समझना ज़रूरी है कि बहुत कम बड़े सहाबा ने यज़ीद के लिए जंग लड़ी। कर्बला के दर्दनाक वाकये के ज़िम्मेदार बड़े लोग पैगंबर की पीढ़ी से नहीं बल्कि एक जवान सियासी ठिकाने से थे जो उमावियों के ज़माने में उभरा था। इस तीसरे गिरोह में वे लोग शामिल थे जिन्होंने हुसैन के क़त्ल में बराह-ए-रास्त हिस्सा लिया। उनमें से बहुतों ने पहले पैगंबर के खानदान से हमदर्दी जताई थी, मगर सियासी या ज़ाती फायदे के लिए उन्होंने हुकूमत का साथ दिया।

इनमें उबैदुल्लाह इब्न जियाद थे, कूफा के गवर्नर जो इस क़त्ले-आम के ब्राह्मण थे। उन्होंने फौज भेजी और पानी रोकने का हुक्म दिया। उमर इब्न साद उस यज़ीदी फौज के कमांडर थे जिसने कर्बला में हुसैन का मुक़ाबला किया। शिम्र इब्न धिल-जौशन वह बेरहम शख्स था जो हुसैन का गला काटने के लिए बदनाम है। इनके अलावा हाजिर इब्न अब्जर, क़ैस इब्न अल-अश’अथ, और शबथ इब्न रिबी भी शामिल थे। इनमें से बहुत से लोग कभी इमाम अली से जुड़े थे या पहले अहल अल-बैत से हमदर्दी रखते थे। फिर भी जब उन्हें उसूल और सत्ता के बीच चुनाव करना था, तो उन्होंने हुकूमत का साथ दिया।

उमर इब्न साद की कहानी खास तौर पर सबक सिखाने वाली है। मशहूर सहाबी साद इब्न अबी वक्कास के बेटे, वह हुसैन के मर्तबे से पूरी तरह वाकिफ़ थे। तारीखी रिपोर्टें बताती हैं कि उन्होंने इमाम के खिलाफ कमान क़बूल करने से पहले झिझक महसूस की थी। फिर भी ओहदे और सियासी तरक़्की का लालच उनकी झिझक पर भारी पड़ा। उनकी त्रासदी जहालत में नहीं बल्कि ज़मीर पर हौसला को तरजीह देने में है। वह सही रास्ता जानते थे, फिर भी उन्होंने वह चुना जो दुनियावी फायदा देता था।

इसी तरह, शिम्र इब्न धिल-जौशन ने कभी अली की फौज में जंग लड़ी थी। फिर भी वह हुसैन के सब से बड़े दुश्मनों में से एक बन गया। उसका यह बदलाव बताता है कि सच्चाई की नज़दीकी उसमें पक्के रहने की गारंटी नहीं देती। इंसान अपने फैसलों से खुद को बार-बार परिभाषित करता है।

शबथ इब्न रिबी ने उमय्यद फौज में चार हज़ार लोगों का एक दस्ता तैयार किया जिसने हुसैन को घेर लिया। मुहम्मद इब्न अल-अश’अथ उमय्यद फौज का एक और दस्ते का सरदार था और उन क़बायली सरदारों में से एक था जिन्होंने कूफा में अपने लोगों पर दबाव डाला कि वे हुसैन के चचेरे भाई मुस्लिम इब्न अकील को छोड़ दें। इन सब लोगों को इंसाफ के लिए खड़े होने का मौका मिला था, मगर उन्होंने ताकत के साथ खड़े होने का चुनाव किया।

सही रास्ते और मौक़ापरस्ती में फ़र्क

यह हमें कर्बला के सबसे गहरे सबक पर लाता है। न तो खानदान और न ही बुज़ुर्गों से नज़दीकी इंसान को नैतिक गिरावट से बचा सकती है। हुसैन और यज़ीद दोनों कुरैश के थे। दोनों इज़्ज़तदार खानदानों से थे। दोनों को इस्लाम से बदली हुई जमात की मीरास मिली। फिर भी तारीख उन्हें एक दम अलग-अलग तरह से याद करती है, उनके चुनाव की वजह से।

यही उसूल कहीं ज़्यादा वसीअ तौर पर लागू होता है। अबू लहब पैगंबर के चाचा थे, फिर भी क़ुरान में उनकी मज़म्मत की गई। सलमान अल-फारसी खून के रिश्ते से पैगंबर से कोई नाता नहीं रखते थे, फिर भी उन्होंने बड़ा मर्तबा हासिल किया। बिलाल इब्न रबाह, ग़ुलामी में पैदा हुए, उस इज़्ज़त के मालिक हैं जो बहुत से अमीर-ज़ादों को कभी नहीं मिली। कर्बला ने तारीख के ज़रिए उस उसूल की तस्दीक़ की जो वही ने पहले ही बता दिया था: इंसान की क़दर उसके खानदान से नहीं बल्कि उसके कामों से तय होती है।

जैसा कि शेख-उल-इस्लाम डॉ. मुहम्मद ताहिर-उल-कादरी ने बताया है, कर्बला का दौर असल में दो फलसफों के बीच की जंग है। एक गिरोह मानता है कि ताकत ही सच्चाई है और उसका साथ देना चाहिए। दूसरा कहता है कि सच्चाई ही ताकत है और उसे पूरी तरह क़बूल करना चाहिए। ताकत को हक़ समझना ‘यज़ीदियत’ है, जबकि सच्चाई को ताकत समझना ‘हुसैनियत’ है। यह फ़र्क कर्बला के दिल में है। यज़ीद ने ज़ुल्म, जबर, तानाशाही, बद-अमली और ताकत पर पूरा क़ब्ज़ा करने वाले निज़ाम की बुनियाद रखी। इमाम हुसैन ने इस ज़ुल्म और बेरहमी के निज़ाम के खिलाफ सच्चाई का झंडा बुलंद किया। यह जंग ताकत पाने के लिए दो शहज़ादों के बीच नहीं थी बल्कि सच्चाई और झूठ, इंसानियत और बर्बरता, इंसाफ और ज़ुल्म की ताकतों के बीच थी।

इन गिरोहों के बीच का सख़्त फ़र्क, जिन्होंने सच्चाई के लिए सब कुछ क़ुर्बान कर दिया, जो स्थिरता के लिए खामोश रहे, और जिन्होंने हौसला के लिए क़त्ल किया, कर्बला के नैतिक सबक की जड़ है। यह बताता है कि ज़मीर की असली परीक्षा किसी के खानदान या पिछले एलानों में नहीं बल्कि आखिरी फैसले में है जब उसूल और ताकत एक-दूसरे के सामने खड़े हों। तारीख पहले गिरोह को हीरो के तौर पर याद करती है, दूसरे को ख़ामोशी के ज़रिए मिलीभगत की सावधानीपूर्ण मिसाल के तौर पर, और तीसरे को इस बात की निशानी के तौर पर कि दुनियावी हौसला रूह को कैसे गंदा कर सकता है।

इस्लाम की बाद की तारीख ने इस सबक को मज़बूत किया। अब्बासियों ने उमय्यदों को उखाड़ फेंका जबकि उन्होंने पैगंबर के खानदान से अपने रिश्ते के ज़रिए जायज़ीत का दावा किया। फिर भी बहुत से अब्बासी हुक्मरानों ने अली की औलाद को सताया और उसी सख़्ती से मुख़ालिफत को कुचला। उनके किरदार ने एक बार फिर साबित कर दिया कि खून का रिश्ता अकेले कोई नैतिक क़ीमत नहीं रखता। हाशिम और उमय्या दोनों की औलाद में नेक और हौसलामंद दोनों क़िस्म के लोग पैदा हुए। तारीख उनका फैसला उनके खानदान से नहीं बल्कि उनके किरदार से करती है।

यही वजह है कि कर्बला सदियों और तहज़ीबों में गूंजता रहता है। यह सिर्फ शियाओं की याद या मुसलमानों की याद नहीं है। यह एक आम इंसानी नैतिक नाटक है। यह ऐसे सवाल पूछता है जिनका सामना हर ज़माने को करना पड़ता है। ज़ुल्म के सामने क्या करना चाहिए? क्या हमदर्दी काफी है, या सच्चाई को अमल की ज़रूरत है? क्या स्थिरता की खोज ख़ामोशी को जायज़ ठहराती है? क्या ताकत को क़बूल किया जा सकता है जब वह उसूल से समझौता करे?

हुसैन के साथ खड़े होने वालों ने क़ुर्बानी के ज़रिए इन सवालों का जवाब दिया। जो तटस्थ रहे, उन्होंने एहतियात के ज़रिए जवाब दिया। जिन्होंने उमय्यदों का साथ दिया, उन्होंने इताअत, हौसला या सियासी गणना के ज़रिए जवाब दिया। तारीख उन सब को इसी हिसाब से याद करती है।

आखिरी तहलील में, कर्बला सिर्फ इमाम हुसैन की शहादत नहीं थी। यह किरदार की पोल खोलने वाला वाकया था। इसने एक पूरी पीढ़ी की खूबियों और कमज़ोरियों को बेनक़ाब कर दिया। इसने साबित कर दिया कि समाज में असली बंटवारा क़बीलों, खानदानों या परिवारों के बीच नहीं है, बल्कि उन लोगों के बीच है जो उसूल चुनते हैं और जो ताकत चुनते हैं। इस दर्दनाक वाकये ने शुरुआती मुस्लिम समाज के लिए ज़मीर की एक गहरी परीक्षा का काम किया, और इसका नैतिक पैग़ाम सदियों से गूंजता रहता है। यह कई रूहानी रिवायतों में पाई जाने वाली एक बुनियादी हक़ीक़त की तस्दीक़ करता है: इंसान की क़दर उसके खानदान से नहीं बल्कि उसके कामों से तय होती है, बुज़ुर्गों से नज़दीकी से नहीं बल्कि उसके फैसलों की दरुस्ती से।

यही वजह है कि कर्बला आज भी ज़िंदा है। हर ज़माना अपने ज़ुल्म की नई सूरतें, अपनी हम-अहंगी के नए दबाव, ताकत और रुतबे के नए लालच पैदा करता है। जो सवाल सहाबा, ताबिऊन, उमय्यदों और हुसैन के हिमायतियों के सामने था, वह आज भी इंसानियत के सामने है। जब सच्चाई और ताकत एक-दूसरे के सामने खड़ी हों, तो हम किस तरफ खड़े होंगे? सच्चाई का साथ दुनियावी कामयाबी तो नहीं दे सकता, मगर वह अकेला नैतिक पकड़ और तारीखी तस्दीक़ प्रदान करता है। सच्चाई का साथ देना, चाहे वह सबसे आसान रास्ता न हो, एक ऐसे उसूल को ज़िंदा रखना है जो किसी भी इंसाफ़पसंद और इज़्ज़त वाले समाज की बुनियाद है। हुसैन की ज़बरदस्त अज़मत सिर्फ इस बात में नहीं है कि वह कौन थे, बल्कि इस बात में है कि उन्होंने क्या चुना। उनके बहुत से मुख़ालिफों की त्रासदी सिर्फ इस बात में नहीं है कि वह कौन थे, बल्कि इस बात में है कि उन्होंने क्या चुना। और इसी में कर्बला का हमेशा रहने वाला सबक छिपा है, एक सबक जो हमें तारीख के गवाह बनने की बजाय इंसाफ की अमर जंग में फ़ाइल बनने का बुलावा देता है।

आखिरी नोट: सहाबा को एक समान नहीं देखा जा सकता

इसके नैतिक और रूहानी पहलुओं के अलावा, 61 हिजरी की कर्बला की त्रासदी का बहुत गहरा मतलब है कि हम मुसलमानों की पहली पीढ़ी को कैसे समझें। उस दिन के वाकयात ने एक बार और हमेशा के लिए साबित कर दिया कि पैगंबर मुहम्मद के सहाबा को एक जैसे मोहतरम और सीधे-सच्चे लोगों के एक समान गिरोह के तौर पर नहीं देखा जा सकता। हुसैन के रुख के सामने जो जवाब आए, उनमें उनके साथ शहीद होना भी था, बे-हिसी से तटस्थ रहना भी था, और उनके क़त्ल में बराह-ए-रास्त शामिल होना भी था, यह अलग-अलग जवाब उस सोच को खारिज कर देते हैं कि सब सहाबा एक जैसे नेक, मासूम या ऐब से पाक थे।

यह नतीजा किसी फिरक़ापरस्ताना ज़द-ओ-कोच का नहीं बल्कि तारीख की साफ़ गवाही का है। जिन क्लासिकी किताबों ने सहाबा के नाम और काम संभाल कर रखे हैं, वे एक ऐसी जमात पेश करती हैं जो हर इंसानी जमात की तरह, नैतिक हिम्मत, सियासी हौसला, ज़ाती यक़ीन और रूहानी समझ की अलग-अलग दरजों वाले लोगों से बनी थी। यह कि कुछ सहाबा हुसैन का साथ देते हुए मारे गए, जबकि दूसरे खामोश खड़े रहे, और फिर भी दूसरे या उनके बेटों ने उनकी शहादत में सक्रिय हिस्सा लिया, यह साबित करता है कि ‘सहाबी’ होना कभी भी नैतिक या रूहानी मासूमियत की गारंटी नहीं था।

क़ुरान खुद इस हक़ीक़त से वाकिफ़ कराता है। यह बार-बार उन लोगों में फ़र्क करता है जो ईमान लाते हैं और नेक काम करते हैं और जो गुमराही में पड़ जाते हैं, चाहे उनका बाहरी ताल्लुक या पैगंबर से नज़दीकी कैसी भी हो। पैगंबर मुहम्मद ने खुद चेतावनी दी थी कि उनके साथ रहने वाले सब नहीं बचेंगे, यह बताते हुए कि कुछ को क़यामत के दिन कौसर के हौज़ से धकेल दिया जाएगा, और उनसे कहा जाएगा: “तुम्हें नहीं मालूम कि उन्होंने तुम्हारे बाद क्या नई बातें ईजाद कीं।” यह नबवी चेतावनी, सहीह अल-बुखारी और सहीह मुस्लिम जैसी मानी हुई हदीसों में मौजूद है, यह उसूल कायम करती है कि पैगंबर की सोहबत, जितनी बड़ी इज़्ज़त है, गलती से पाक होने की ज़मानत नहीं देती और न ही नजात की गारंटी देती है।

कर्बला इस ख़याली उसूल को तारीख की सख़्त हक़ीक़त में बदल देता है। अनस इब्न अल-हारिस, जो हुसैन के लिए शहीद हुए, और उमर इब्न साद, जिन्होंने हुसैन के खिलाफ फौज की कमान संभाली, के बीच जो फ़र्क है, वह इससे ज़्यादा बड़ा नहीं हो सकता। दोनों सहाबा या सहाबा की औलाद थे। दोनों को एक ही नबवी मीरास मिली। फिर भी उनका चुनाव एक दम अलग था। इसी तरह, अब्दुल्लाह इब्न उमर की बे-हिसी, चाहे वह फितना के डर से कितनी भी सच्ची क्यों न हो, हबीब इब्न मुज़ाहिर के जान-निसारी के सामने साफ़ नज़र आती है। ये मामूली लोग नहीं बल्कि अपने ज़माने के बहुत बड़े लोग हैं।

सुनहरी उसूल जो पहले बयान किया गया, उसे कर्बला के वाकयात में अपनी पूरी तस्दीक़ मिलती है। सिर्फ वही सहाबा इज़्ज़त और मुहब्बत के लायक हैं जो सकलैन (क़ुरान और इत्रत अहलुलबैत) से जुड़े रहे, उनकी पैरवी करते रहे और मवद्दत फिल क़ुर्बा की राह पर रहे। तारीखी रिकॉर्ड बताता है कि सभी सहाबा इस कसौटी पर खरे नहीं उतरे। कुछ, जैसे अनस इब्न अल-हारिस और हबीब इब्न मुज़ाहिर, ने पैगंबर के खानदान की हिफाज़त में अपनी जानें दे दीं। दूसरे, जैसे अब्दुल्लाह इब्न उमर, ने सियासी खामोशी को चुना। और कुछ, जैसा कि हमने देखा, शारीरिक तौर पर उस फौज में मौजूद थे जिसने पैगंबर के नवासे का क़त्ल किया, और इस्लामी तारीख की सबसे बड़ी त्रासदी में सक्रिय रूप से शामिल रहे।

इस तारीखी हकीकत के बहुत बड़े मज़हबी और तारीखी मायने हैं। यह माँग करती है कि हम सहाबा का मुताला बारीकी, फ़िक्री तज्ज़िया और नैतिक सूझ-बूझ के साथ करें, न कि उस अंधी ताज़ीम के साथ जो सब फ़र्क मिटा देती है। यह हमें लोगों का मूल्यांकन उनके कामों और फैसलों के आधार पर करने पर मजबूर करती है, न कि सिर्फ उनके ओहदे या पैगंबर से नज़दीकी के आधार पर। यह हमें याद दिलाती है कि नैतिक इख्तियार सोहबत से नहीं बल्कि सहीह अमल से हासिल होता है। यह उस उसूल की फिर से तस्दीक़ करती है कि पैगंबर के खानदान से मुहब्बत (मवद्दत फिल क़ुर्बा) सिर्फ जज़्बात का मामला नहीं बल्कि ज़मीर की परीक्षा है जो ठोस वफादारी और कुर्बानी का तक़ाज़ा करती है।

इस तरह कर्बला की त्रासदी अंधी ताज़ीम की हर किस्म के लिए ज़ोरदार ललकार है। यह मुसलमानों और तारीखदानों को एक जैसा बुलावा देती है कि वह पहचानें कि पहली इस्लामी जमात नेकी और बदी, हिम्मत और बज़दिली, उसूल और मौक़ापरस्ती का एक पेचीदा जाल थी। यह हमें लोगों का फैसला उनके लेबल से नहीं बल्कि उनके कामों से, उनके दावों से नहीं बल्कि उनकी क़ुर्बानियों से करने का सबक देती है। यह क़ुरान के फरमान के मुताबिक है: “और जिसने ज़र्रे के बराबर नेकी की होगी वह उसे देख लेगा, और जिसने ज़र्रे के बराबर बदी की होगी वह उसे देख लेगा” (क़ुरान 99:7-8)।

आखिरकार, कर्बला हमें सिखाता है कि सच्चाई तादाद, रुतबा या खानदान से तय नहीं होती, बल्कि ज़मीर की दरुस्ती और यक़ीन की हिम्मत से तय होती है। यह हमें याद दिलाता है कि तारीख हमारा फैसला इस आधार पर नहीं करती कि हम किसके साथ हैं बल्कि इस आधार पर करती है कि हम क्या चुनते हैं। और यह हमें यह क़बूल करने पर मजबूर करती है कि पैगंबर के सब से करीबी लोगों में भी, कुछ ऐसे थे जो इज़्ज़त की बुलंदियों पर पहुँचे और कुछ ऐसे थे जो नैतिक गिरावट की गहराइयों में गिरे। यह कर्बला का सख़्त सबक है, और यह एक ऐसा सबक है जिसे तारीख का कोई भी ईमानदार तालिब-ए-इल्म नज़रअंदाज़ नहीं कर सकता।

—————————————————————

मराजे और हवाले

यह मज़मून क्लासिकी तारीखी मराजे और जदीद तहकीक़ के गहुर मुताला पर मबनी है।

बुनियादी तारीखी मराजे:

· अल-तबरी, तारीख अल-रुसुल वा अल-मुलुक (पैगंबरों और बादशाहों की तारीख)
· इब्न अल-असीर, अल-कामिल फी अल-तारीख (मुकम्मल तारीख)
· इब्न कसीर, किताब अल-बिदाया वा अल-निहाया (शुरू और आखिर)
· अल-बलाधुरी, अंसाब अल-अशरफ (शरीफ़ों के खानदान)
· इब्न अब्द अल-बिर्र, अल-इस्तीआब फी मारिफ़त अल-अशाब (सहाबा की पहचान में मुकम्मल जानकारी)
· इब्न हजर अल-असकलानी, अल-इसाबा फी तम्यीज़ अल-सहाबा (सहाबा की पहचान में सही जानकारी)
· इब्न साद, अल-तबक़ात अल-कबीर (बड़े तबक़ात)

जदीद तहकीक:

· हैगलर, आरोन एम. द इकोज़ ऑफ़ फितना: डिवेलपिंग हिस्टोरियोग्राफिकल इंटरप्रिटेशन्स ऑफ़ द बैटल ऑफ़ कर्बला। यह किताब बताती है कि कर्बला के मतलब को नए सिरे से समझाने की चाहत मुअर्रिखों की तहरीर के बीच में कैसे है।
· हाइलेन, टॉर्स्टन. द कर्बला स्टोरी एंड अर्ली शी’इट आइडेंटिटी। यह बताती है कि यह दास्तान शुरूआती शिया इस्लाम में एक मिसाली कहानी कैसे बन गई।
· मुतह्हरी, मुर्तज़ा. द मार्टिरडम ऑफ़ इमाम हुसैन एंड द लेसन्स ऑफ़ कर्बला। यह ‘यज़ीदियत’ और ‘हुसैनियत’ के टकराव को समझने के लिए तसव्वुरी फ्रेमवर्क मुहैया कराता है।
· ताहिर-उल-कादरी, डॉ. मुहम्मद. द फिलॉसफी ऑफ़ कर्बला। यह ताकत को सच्चाई और सच्चाई को ताकत के दरमियान फ़र्क साफ़ करता है।
· जाफरी, एस.एच.एम. द ओरिजिंस एंड अर्ली डिवेलपमेंट ऑफ़ शी’आ इस्लाम। यह शुरूआती इस्लामी समाज की सियासी और मज़हबी दरारों को समझने के लिए ज़रूरी तारीखी पृष्ठभूमि देता है।
· मैडेलुंग, विलफर्ड. द सक्सेशन टू मुहम्मद: ए स्टडी ऑफ़ द अर्ली कैलिफ़ेट। यह कर्बला के वाकयात तक ले जाने वाली सियासी गतिशीलता का पूरा तज्ज़िया पेश करता है।

मकामी और सवानिही मराजे:

· एनसाइक्लोपीडिया ब्रिटानिका में कर्बला की जंग, यज़ीद प्रथम, उबैदुल्लाह इब्न जियाद, और उमर इब्न साद के बारे में मुख्तसर जानकारी बड़े किरदारों और सियासी हालात का मुख़्तसर जायज़ा देती है।
· बड़े किरदारों के सवानिह, जिनमें हुसैन के हिमायती और मुख़ालिफ़ सहाबा शामिल हैं, क्लासिकी तारीखी किताबों और जदीद तहकीकों दोनों के मुफ़स्सिल ब्यान से लिए गए हैं, जिनमें इब्न साद और इब्न हजर अल-असकलानी की सवानिही किताबें भी शामिल हैं।

हदीस के मराजे:

· हसन और हुसैन की फज़ीलतों के बारे में जो रिवायतें सहाबा ने बयान कीं, जैसे ज़ैद इब्न अरकम और अनस इब्न मालिक, वे सुन्नी और शिया हदीस की मानी हुई किताबों से ली गई हैं, जिनमें सहीह अल-बुखारी, सहीह मुस्लिम, और अल-तिर्मिधि तथा इब्न माजाह के संग्रह शामिल हैं।
· कौसर के हौज़ के मामले में पैगंबर की चेतावनी सहीह अल-बुखारी और सहीह मुस्लिम में दर्ज है।खालिद इब्न उरफुतह की हदीस मुस्नद अहमद में दर्ज है।

Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

Among the many events that have shaped the moral and political imagination of humanity, few possess the enduring power of Karbala. More than thirteen centuries have passed since the martyrdom of Imam Husain ibn Ali on the plains of Karbala, yet the tragedy continues to evoke reflection, grief, admiration, and inspiration across cultures and generations. Karbala was not merely a battle fought between a small group of supporters and a powerful state. Nor was it simply a dispute over political succession. It was, above all, a test of conscience. It compelled individuals to choose between truth and power, justice and expediency, moral conviction and worldly advantage. The foundational sources for this historical narrative include the classical works of al-Tabari’s Tarikh al-rusul wa-l-muluk, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi al-tarikh, and Ibn Kathir’s Kitab al-bidaya wa-l-nihaya. As Aaron M. Hagler demonstrates in The Echoes of Fitna, the desire to reframe the meaning of Karbala is central to these historians’ narrative construction, and even small changes to contextual expository moments fundamentally change their meaning.

What makes Karbala especially significant is that it occurred within living memory of the Prophet Muhammad. Many of the participants and observers belonged to a generation that had seen the Prophet, heard his sermons, fought beside him, and transmitted his teachings. The distance between Karbala and the Prophet’s own lifetime was remarkably short. Yet when Imam Husain refused to recognise the authority of Yazid ibn Mu’awiya and challenged the transformation of the caliphate into hereditary monarchy, the Muslim community found itself deeply divided. Some stood with Husain. Some sympathised with him but remained inactive. Some advocated neutrality. Others aligned themselves with the ruling establishment. In this sense, Karbala became not only Husain’s trial but the trial of an entire generation.

To understand the deeper background of Karbala, one must first examine the internal dynamics of the Quraysh, the tribe from which both Husain and Yazid emerged. The Quraysh were not a monolithic entity. They were divided into several clans, among the most prominent being the Banu Hashim and the Banu Umayya. Before Islam, these clans competed for prestige, influence, and leadership within Meccan society. The Banu Hashim enjoyed distinction through their association with the Ka’ba and the services they provided to pilgrims. The Banu Umayya, meanwhile, emerged as one of the wealthiest and most politically influential branches of the tribe.

When the Prophet Muhammad proclaimed his message, some of the strongest opposition came from leading figures of the Banu Umayya, including Abu Sufyan ibn Harb. Yet the conquest of Mecca transformed these relationships. Former opponents embraced Islam and were incorporated into the new community. The Prophet consciously sought reconciliation and transcended old tribal antagonisms. For a brief period, it appeared that the rivalries of pre-Islamic Arabia had been overcome by a broader moral and religious vision.

However, questions surrounding authority and leadership after the Prophet’s death gradually reopened tensions that had never entirely disappeared. During the caliphates of Abu Bakr and Umar, these tensions remained largely contained. Under Uthman, himself a member of the Banu Umayya, Umayyad influence expanded throughout the rapidly growing empire. The assassination of Uthman and the subsequent conflict between Imam Ali and Mu’awiya brought these underlying divisions into the open.

Yet it would be mistaken to interpret these struggles solely as tribal rivalries. Ali’s supporters included numerous non-Hashimites, while many of Mu’awiya’s supporters had no particular attachment to the Banu Umayya. The issues increasingly revolved around questions of justice, governance, authority, and the nature of the Islamic state. By the time Husain confronted Yazid, the conflict had acquired a significance that transcended clan loyalties.

One of the most striking aspects of the tragedy of Karbala is that it unfolded within living memory of the Prophet Muhammad. A number of his Companions (Sahaba) were still alive in 61 AH / 680 CE when Imam Husain confronted the Umayyad ruler Yazid ibn Mu’awiya. Yet their responses to the crisis varied considerably.

Contrary to popular assumptions, very few Companions were physically present either in Husain’s camp or in the army opposing him. Most of the principal actors at Karbala belonged to the next generation, the Tabi’un. Among the Companions who are traditionally remembered as having joined Imam Husain and embraced martyrdom was Anas ibn al-Harith al-Kahili. Others, such as Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Sa’idi, and Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, are remembered for their devotion to the Ahl al-Bayt, though age and circumstance prevented their participation.

A number of distinguished Companions, including Abdullah ibn Umar, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Anas ibn Malik, and Zayd ibn Arqam, did not join Husain. Their reasons varied. Some believed that rebellion would lead only to further bloodshed, while others adopted a position of political neutrality. Significantly, there is little evidence that major surviving Companions actively fought against Imam Husain at Karbala. The men who commanded and carried out the military campaign against him, such as Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad, Umar ibn Sa’d, Shimr ibn Dhi’l-Jawshan, and others, largely belonged to a younger generation.

Before examining those who actively fought against Imam Husain, it is essential to establish a fundamental principle for evaluating the status of the Companions. The Golden Principle is that only those Companions are honourable and beloved who remain firmly attached to and loyal to the Saqlain, the Quran and the Itrat Ahlulbayt (peace be upon them), who continue to follow them, and who remain on the path of love for the near kin (mawaddat fil Qurba).

With this principle in mind, we turn to the historical evidence of those Companions who were present in the army of Umar ibn Sa’d at Karbala. The following individuals are recorded as having been present in the opposing forces:

1. Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Sabratul Ju’fi (Yazeed bin Malik al-Jufi)

This individual was a Companion, as was his father. Both were from the people of Kufa. His son was named Khusaima. (Al-Isaba, Volume 4, page 260, number 5141). On the day of Ashura, this Companion was a general over the forces of the tribes of Mazhaj and Asad in the army of Umar ibn Sa’d. (Tarikh al-Tabari, Volume 5, page 422; Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh, Volume 3, page 168).

2. Khalid bin Urfutah

This person was a leader of one of the armies within the forces of Umar ibn Sa’d at Karbala. (Al-Tabaqat al-Kabeer, Volume 5, page 273, number 932; Al-Isaba, Ibn Hajar, Volume 2, pages 209-210, number 2187). It is noteworthy that Khalid ibn ‘Urfutah had been told by the Prophet Muhammad: “O Khalid, after me, events, trials, and divergence will occur. So if you can be the servant of Allah who is killed, and not the one killing, then do so.” This prophetic advice, which counselled him to be the one killed rather than the killer in times of tribulation, stands in stark contrast to his actual participation in the army that killed the grandson of the Prophet.

3. Amr bin Hajjaj Zubaidi

This Companion was the officer over the force that Umar ibn Sa’d had stationed on the banks of the River Euphrates. (Al-Isaba, Volume 4, page 510, number 5823). He was also recorded as having spoken extremely harshly to Imam Husain on the day of Ashura. (Tarikh al-Tabari, Volume 5, page 412; Ansab al-Ashraf, Volume 3, page 390). Historical sources also confirm that on the 7th of Muharram, 61 AH, Umar ibn Sa’d stationed a force of 500 soldiers led by Amr bin Hajjaj on the banks of the River Euphrates, to deprive the Prophet’s Household of water.

4. Hijaar bin Abjar

This Companion was present in the army of Umar ibn Sa’d at Karbala. Imam Husain addressed him in one of his sermons on the day of Ashura and asked him: “Did you not write to me in a letter, along with Shabath ibn Rib’i, Qays ibn al-Ash’ath, and Yazid ibn Harith?” (Al-Isaba, Ibn Hajar, Volume 2, page 143, number 1960). Hajjar b. Abjar was among the commanders of Umar b. Sa’d’s army and was one of those who wrote to Imam Hussain on behalf of the Kufians, inviting him to Kufa. However, after Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad took over Kufa, he turned against Imam Hussain and forced people to scatter away from Muslim b. Aqil.

5. Masrooq bin Waa’el al-Hazrami

His statement is recorded as follows: “I was in the front line of the horsemen who came towards Husain. I said in my heart that I should remain in the front line of the horsemen, so that perhaps I might obtain the head of Husain, and through this means gain status and position in the court of Ubaydullah…” (Al-Isti’ab, Ibn Abd al-Birr, Volume 4, page 1472, number 2549; Tarikh al-Tabari, Volume 5, page 431).

The historical importance of these differing responses lies in the fact that Karbala became a test of conscience for the entire community. Proximity to the Prophet did not produce a single political position. Some supported Husain, some sympathised with him, some counselled caution, and others accommodated themselves to Umayyad rule. Karbala thus reminds us that neither companionship with the Prophet, nor noble lineage, nor past achievements exempted anyone from the moral choices that history demanded. Individuals were ultimately judged not by who they were, but by the decisions they made when confronted with the conflict between truth and power.

One of the most striking aspects of the tragedy of Karbala is that it unfolded within living memory of the Prophet Muhammad. A number of his Companions (Sahaba) were still alive in 61 AH / 680 CE when Imam Husain confronted the Umayyad ruler Yazid ibn Mu’awiya. Yet their responses to the crisis varied considerably.

Contrary to popular assumptions, very few Companions were physically present either in Husain’s camp or in the army opposing him. Most of the principal actors at Karbala belonged to the next generation, the Tabi’un. Among the Companions who are traditionally remembered as having joined Imam Husain and embraced martyrdom was Anas ibn al-Harith al-Kahili. Others, such as Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Sa’idi, and Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, are remembered for their devotion to the Ahl al-Bayt, though age and circumstance prevented their participation.

A number of distinguished Companions, including Abdullah ibn Umar, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Anas ibn Malik, and Zayd ibn Arqam, did not join Husain. Their reasons varied. Some believed that rebellion would lead only to further bloodshed, while others adopted a position of political neutrality. Significantly, there is little evidence that major surviving Companions actively fought against Imam Husain at Karbala. The men who commanded and carried out the military campaign against him, such as Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad, Umar ibn Sa’d, Shimr ibn Dhi’l-Jawshan, and others, largely belonged to a younger generation.

The historical importance of these differing responses lies in the fact that Karbala became a test of conscience for the entire community. Proximity to the Prophet did not produce a single political position. Some supported Husain, some sympathised with him, some counselled caution, and others accommodated themselves to Umayyad rule. Karbala thus reminds us that neither companionship with the Prophet, nor noble lineage, nor past achievements exempted anyone from the moral choices that history demanded. Individuals were ultimately judged not by who they were, but by the decisions they made when confronted with the conflict between truth and power.

Indeed, one of the most remarkable features of Karbala is that the men who died with Husain were not united by tribal affiliation. They came from different backgrounds, regions, and social classes. What united them was not blood but conviction. As Torsten Hylén explores in The Karbala Story and Early Shi’ite Identity, the story developed into a paradigmatic myth in formative Shi’ism, representing the eternal struggle between truth and falsehood. The conceptual framework of this clash, with ‘Yazidiyat‘ representing power as truth and ‘Hussainiyat‘ representing truth as power, has been developed by scholars such as Murtaza Mutahhari and articulated in the writings of contemporary thinkers including Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri.

The First Group: Those Who Wholeheartedly Sided with Husain

Among the Companions of the Prophet who are recorded as having fought and died with Husain was Anas ibn al-Harith al-Kahili. According to later traditions, he had heard the Prophet speak of Husain’s future martyrdom. When that moment arrived, Anas did not remain a passive observer. Despite his advanced age, he joined Husain and embraced martyrdom. His choice symbolised the continuity between the Prophet’s generation and the stand taken by his grandson.

Abd al-Rahman ibn Abd Rabb al-Ansari was another Companion who had witnessed the event of Ghadir Khumm and transmitted the hadith about Ali’s succession. He accompanied Husain from Mecca and was martyred at Karbala, demonstrating that his commitment to the Prophet’s family was not merely verbal but was sealed with his life.

Sa’id ibn Abd Allah al-Hanafi delivered several crucial letters to Husain from the people of Kufa. On the night before Ashura, he famously declared that he would never abandon Husain. On the day of battle, he shielded the Imam with his own body while Husain was praying, receiving numerous arrows before being martyred. His sacrifice exemplifies the highest form of loyalty.

Habib ibn Muzahir al-Asadi was a 70-year-old Companion who had been close to the Prophet and Imam Ali. He was known for his unwavering loyalty and was among the first to be martyred at Karbala. His advanced age did not deter him from fulfilling what he understood to be his moral obligation.

Most of Husain’s supporters, however, belonged to the generation after the Companions. Among them were Muslim ibn Awsaja, Burayr ibn Khudayr, Nafi’ ibn Hilal, and Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn. These men understood perfectly well that Husain’s small band could not achieve military victory. Yet they chose to remain. Their loyalty was not based upon calculations of success. It was rooted in a conviction that certain principles are worth defending regardless of consequences.

The story of Zuhayr ibn al-Qayn is particularly revealing. Initially reluctant to become involved in the conflict, he encountered Husain during the journey to Iraq. Historical accounts relate that Zuhayr’s caravan had sought to avoid the Imam, but circumstances obliged them to halt at the same location. When Husain’s messenger summoned him, Zuhayr’s companions were so troubled that they put down their food. It was his wife, Lady Dulham bint Amr, who reminded him: “The son of the Holy Prophet of Allah has sent someone to you and called you; are you not prepared to go to him?” Following a private conversation with the Imam, Zuhayr underwent a profound transformation. He divorced his wife so that she might be free to remarry after his inevitable martyrdom. The man who had sought to avoid the struggle became one of Husain’s most devoted defenders, smiling as he intercepted arrows meant for the Imam and receiving them in his chest until he fell dead on the battlefield. His life demonstrates that conscience can awaken even at the last moment, and that true conviction often requires a complete reorientation of one’s priorities.

Burayr ibn Khudayr al-Hamdani was a very old, pious Companion of Imam Ali who was known for his deep devotion. He begged Husain for permission to be martyred, eager to meet the Prophet on the Day of Judgement. His enthusiasm for sacrifice illustrates how these men viewed martyrdom not as a tragedy but as the ultimate honour.

The camp of Husain also included John, the freed servant of Abu Dharr al-Ghifari. Elderly, of African origin, and possessing every excuse to withdraw, he nevertheless insisted upon fighting beside the Imam. His presence testified to the universal character of Husain’s cause. Karbala brought together Arabs and non-Arabs, nobles and freedmen, scholars and warriors, all united by a commitment to justice.

One of the most remarkable transformations at Karbala was that of Hurr ibn Yazid al-Riyahi. Unlike Zuhayr, Hurr had already belonged to the opposing army. He had joined Yazid’s forces not out of hatred for Husain but out of a soldier’s duty to execute the orders of his superiors. Yet on the night before Ashura, Hurr was restless. He could hear the children in Husain’s camp crying from thirst. His conscience whispered to him: “What have you done Hurr? Why did you put the son of Fatimah in this position? Will Allah ever forgive?” This career soldier could not sleep the whole night. Within him there was a struggle between his duty as a soldier and his Islamic conscience. When he finally crossed over to Husain’s camp, the Imam forgave him immediately, declaring that his grandfather, the Prophet, also forgave him. Hurr had travelled from the side of the strong, the well-fed, and the many, to the side of a few hungry and thirsty men who would certainly perish in the burning sands. He became the first martyr of the battle, making his choice at the final moment. His transformation demonstrates that human beings possess the freedom to choose their path at any moment, and that God’s mercy is not far for those who seek it.

This is further evidenced by figures such as Sa’d ibn al-Harth al-Ansari, who, despite initially being part of the Kharijite movement that had opposed Ali, was moved by the cries of Husain’s family to switch his allegiance and fight alongside the Imam until he too was martyred. Such stories underscore that the call of truth transcends prior sectarian or political affiliations.

The Second Group: Those Who Remained “Neutral”

Yet if Karbala honours those who stood with Husain, it also compels us to examine those who did not. This second group consisted of Companions who expressed sympathy for the Prophet’s family but ultimately chose political quietism and inaction. They were often motivated by a fear of civil war (fitna) or a belief that staying passive was the safer religious option.

Among the surviving Companions of the Prophet was Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari. By 61 AH he was blind and advanced in age. Unable to participate physically, he nevertheless remained devoted to the Ahl al-Bayt and is remembered as among the earliest visitors to Husain’s grave after the tragedy. His conduct reflected sympathy and reverence, even if circumstances prevented active participation.

Similarly, Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Sa’idi and Abu Sa’id al-Khudri expressed affection for the Prophet’s family and discomfort with the treatment they received. Yet they too remained outside the conflict itself.

More complex are the cases of Zayd ibn Arqam and Anas ibn Malik. Both were distinguished Companions. Both had transmitted traditions concerning the virtues of Hasan and Husain. Yet neither joined Husain. Zayd ibn Arqam is reported to have protested when Husain’s severed head was displayed before Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad. He recognised the enormity of what had occurred. Yet recognition came after the event. When Husain required support, Zayd had remained absent.

Anas ibn Malik presents a similarly difficult case. One of the Prophet’s closest attendants and among the greatest transmitters of hadith, he survived well into the Umayyad era. Yet he neither joined Husain nor openly challenged the regime. Whether this reflected caution, age, political withdrawal, or other considerations remains debated. What is clear is that closeness to the Prophet did not automatically determine one’s response to Karbala.

Perhaps the most influential surviving Companion who declined to support Husain was Abdullah ibn Umar. The son of the second Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab, he enjoyed enormous prestige within the Muslim community. Yet Ibn Umar believed that civil conflict represented a greater danger than even an unjust ruler. He therefore refused to support Husain’s course and counselled restraint. At the same time, he did not actively participate in Yazid’s cause. His position was one of neutrality and political quietism.

Abdullah ibn Abbas, another prominent Companion, tried to dissuade Husain from going to Kufa, fearing he would be betrayed. He accepted the reality of Yazid’s rule to avoid further bloodshed among the Muslim community. Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr, the son of the first Caliph Abu Bakr, also opted to accept Yazid’s reign to prevent a repeat of the divisions that had cost many Muslim lives in previous conflicts.

Other Companions, including Muhammad ibn Maslamah and Abu Bakrah, adopted similar attitudes. They preferred disengagement from civil conflict and feared the consequences of renewed bloodshed. Their choices reflected a particular understanding of religious duty, one that prioritised stability over resistance.

The Third Group: Those Who Sided with the Umayyad Power

It is important to recognise, however, that very few prominent Companions actively fought for Yazid. The principal figures responsible for the tragedy belonged not to the Prophet’s generation but to a younger political elite that had emerged under the Umayyads. This third group consisted of individuals who actively participated in the killing of Husain. Many of them had previously professed support for the family of the Prophet, but they chose to side with the state for political or personal advancement.

Among them were Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad, the governor of Kufa who was directly responsible for orchestrating the massacre. He sent the army and gave the order to prevent Husain from accessing water. Umar ibn Sa’d was the commander of the Yazidi army that confronted Husain at Karbala. Shimr ibn Dhi’l-Jawshan was the ruthless figure who is most infamous for slitting Husain’s throat. Also among them were Hajar ibn Abjar, Qays ibn al-Ash’ath, and Shabath ibn Rib’i. Several of these men had once been associated with Imam Ali or had previously professed sympathy for the Ahl al-Bayt. Yet when confronted with a choice between principle and power, they sided with the state.

The story of Umar ibn Sa’d is especially revealing. The son of the famous Companion Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, he was fully aware of Husain’s stature. Historical reports suggest that he hesitated before accepting command against the Imam. Yet the promise of office and political advancement ultimately outweighed his reservations. His tragedy lies not in ignorance but in choosing ambition over conscience. He knew the right path, yet he chose the one that promised worldly gain.

Similarly, Shimr ibn Dhi’l-Jawshan had once fought in Ali’s army. Yet he became one of Husain’s most ruthless enemies. His transformation demonstrates that proximity to truth does not guarantee permanence in it. Human beings continually define themselves through their choices.

Shibth ibn Rib’i led a contingent of four thousand men in the Umayyad army that besieged Husain. Muhammad ibn al-Ash’ath was another leader of a contingent in the Umayyad army and one of the tribal chiefs who pressured their men to abandon Husain’s cousin, Muslim ibn Aqil, in Kufa. These men had all been given the opportunity to stand for justice, yet they chose to stand with power.

The Contrast Between the Right Path and Opportunism

This brings us to the most profound lesson of Karbala. Neither lineage nor proximity to greatness provides immunity from moral failure. Both Husain and Yazid belonged to Quraysh. Both descended from respected lineages. Both inherited the legacy of a community transformed by Islam. Yet history remembers them in radically different ways because of the choices they made.

The same principle applies more broadly. Abu Lahab was the Prophet’s uncle, yet the Qur’an condemned him. Salman al-Farisi was unrelated to the Prophet by blood, yet achieved immense spiritual distinction. Bilal ibn Rabah, born into slavery, occupies a place of honour that many aristocrats never attained. Karbala reaffirmed through history what revelation had already established through principle: human worth is determined not by ancestry but by action.

As Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri has articulated, the epoch of Karbala is fundamentally a clash between two philosophies. One segment holds that power is truth and should be supported. The other maintains that truth is power and should be wholly embraced. Considering power as right is ‘Yazidiyat‘, whereas truth as power is ‘Hussainiyat‘. This distinction lies at the heart of the tragedy. Yazid laid the foundation of a system marked by oppression, coercion, dictatorship, corruption, and absolute sway over power. Imam Husain raised the banner of truth against this system of cruelty and oppression. The clash was not between two princes seeking power but between the forces of truth and falsehood, humanity and barbarism, justice and oppression.

The stark contrast between these groups, those who sacrificed everything for truth, those who remained silent for stability, and those who murdered for ambition, is the core of the moral lesson of Karbala. It shows that the true test of conscience lies not in one’s lineage or past declarations, but in the final choice made when principle and power are in direct opposition. History remembers the first group as heroes, the second as cautionary examples of complicity through inaction, and the third as symbols of how worldly ambition can corrupt the soul.

The later history of Islam reinforced this lesson. The Abbasids overthrew the Umayyads while claiming legitimacy through their own relationship to the Prophet’s family. Yet many Abbasid rulers persecuted descendants of Ali and suppressed opposition with equal severity. Their conduct demonstrated once again that genealogy alone possesses no moral significance. The descendants of Hashim and Umayya alike produced figures of virtue and figures of ambition. History judges them not by their clan but by their conduct.

This is why Karbala continues to resonate across centuries and cultures. It is not merely a Shi’i memory or a Muslim memory. It is a universal moral drama. It asks questions that every generation must confront. What should one do when faced with injustice? Is sympathy sufficient, or does truth require action? Does the pursuit of stability justify silence? Can power be accepted when it compromises principle?

The men who stood with Husain answered these questions through sacrifice. Those who remained neutral answered them through caution. Those who sided with the Umayyads answered them through obedience, ambition, or political calculation. History remembers all of them accordingly.

In the final analysis, Karbala was not simply the martyrdom of Imam Husain. It was the revelation of character. It exposed the strengths and weaknesses of an entire generation. It demonstrated that the true division within society is not between tribes, clans, or families, but between those who choose principle and those who choose power. The tragedy served as a profound test of conscience for the early Muslim community, and its moral clarity resonates through the centuries. It affirms a fundamental truth found in many spiritual traditions: that human worth is determined not by ancestry but by action, not by proximity to greatness but by the integrity of one’s choices.

That is why Karbala remains alive. Every age produces its own forms of injustice, its own pressures to conform, its own temptations of power and privilege. The question that confronted the Companions, the Tabi’un, the Umayyads, and the supporters of Husain continues to confront humanity today. When truth and power stand opposed to one another, on which side will we stand? The side of truth may not offer worldly success, but it alone offers moral coherence and historical vindication. To side with truth, even when it is not the path of least resistance, is to uphold a principle that is the bedrock of any just and dignified society. The enduring greatness of Husain lies not simply in who he was, but in what he chose. The enduring tragedy of many of his opponents lies not in who they were, but in what they chose. And therein lies the eternal lesson of Karbala, a lesson that calls upon us not to be passive observers of history, but active participants in the timeless struggle for justice.

A Final Observation: The Impossibility of a Uniform View of the Companions

Beyond its moral and spiritual dimensions, the tragedy of Karbala in AH 61 carries profound implications for how we understand the earliest generation of Muslims. The events of that fateful day conclusively demonstrate that the Companions of the Prophet Muhammad cannot be treated as a uniform group of revered and upright individuals. The diversity of responses to Husain’s stand, ranging from martyrdom alongside him, to passive neutrality, to active participation in his killing, shatters any simplistic notion that all Companions were uniformly righteous, infallible, or beyond moral reproach.

This is not a conclusion derived from sectarian bias but from the objective testimony of history itself. The classical sources that preserve the names and actions of the Companions reveal a community that was, like all human communities, composed of individuals with varying degrees of moral courage, political ambition, personal conviction, and spiritual insight. The fact that some Companions died defending Husain, while others stood by in silence, and still others or their sons actively contributed to his martyrdom, demonstrates that the category of ‘Companion’ was never a guarantee of moral or spiritual infallibility.

The Qur’an itself anticipates this reality. It repeatedly distinguishes between those who believe and do righteous deeds and those who fall into error, regardless of their outward affiliation or proximity to the Prophet. The Prophet Muhammad himself warned that not all who accompanied him would be saved, declaring that some would be turned away from the Pool of Kawthar on the Day of Judgement, and he would be told: “You do not know what they innovated after you.” This prophetic warning, preserved in canonical hadith collections including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, establishes the principle that Companionship with the Prophet, while a great honour, does not confer automatic immunity from error or guarantee salvation.

Karbala brings this abstract principle into stark historical reality. The contrast between Anas ibn al-Harith, who died for Husain, and Umar ibn Sa’d, who commanded the army against him, could not be more striking. Both were Companions or sons of Companions. Both inherited the same prophetic legacy. Yet their choices could not have been more different. Similarly, the neutrality of Abdullah ibn Umar, however sincerely motivated by a fear of fitna, stands in sharp relief against the active sacrifice of Habib ibn Muzahir. These are not marginal figures but some of the most prominent individuals of their generation.

This historical reality has significant theological and historiographical implications. It demands that we approach the study of the Companions with nuance, critical analysis, and moral discernment, rather than with an uncritical reverence that flattens all distinctions. It compels us to evaluate individuals based on their actions and choices, not merely on their status or proximity to the Prophet. It reminds us that moral authority is earned through righteous conduct, not inherited through association.

The tragedy of Karbala thus serves as a powerful corrective to any tendency towards blind veneration. It calls upon Muslims and historians alike to recognise that the early Islamic community was a complex tapestry of virtue and vice, courage and cowardice, principle and opportunism. It invites us to judge individuals not by their labels but by their deeds, not by their claims but by their sacrifices. In doing so, it aligns with the Qur’anic injunction: “And whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it” (Qur’an 99:7-8).

Ultimately, Karbala teaches us that truth is not determined by numbers, status, or lineage, but by the integrity of one’s conscience and the courage of one’s convictions. It reminds us that history judges us not by the company we keep but by the choices we make. And it compels us to acknowledge that even among those closest to the Prophet, there were those who rose to the highest stations of honour and those who fell to the deepest depths of moral failure. This is the sobering lesson of Karbala, and it is one that no honest student of history can afford to ignore.

—————————————————————-

Sources and References

This essay is based upon a close reading of both primary historical sources and modern scholarly analyses.

Primary Historical Sources:

· Al-Tabari, Tarikh al-rusul wa-l-muluk (History of the Prophets and Kings)
· Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil fi al-tarikh (The Complete History)
· Ibn Kathir, Kitab al-bidaya wa-l-nihaya (The Beginning and the End)
· Al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-ashraf (Genealogies of the Nobles)

· Ibn Abd al-Birr, Al-Isti’ab fi ma’rifat al-ashab (Comprehensive Knowledge of the Companions)
· Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Al-Isaba fi tamyiz al-sahaba (The Injury in Distinguishing the Companions)
· Ibn Sa’d, Al-Tabaqat al-Kabeer (The Major Classes)

Secondary Scholarship:

· Hagler, Aaron M. The Echoes of Fitna: Developing Historiographical Interpretations of the Battle of Karbala. This work demonstrates how the desire to reframe the meaning of Karbala is central to historians’ narrative construction.
· Hylén, Torsten. The Karbala Story and Early Shi’ite Identity. This explores how the story developed into a paradigmatic myth in formative Shi’ism.
· Mutahhari, Murtaza. The Martyrdom of Imam Husain and the Lessons of Karbala. This provides the conceptual framework for understanding the clash between ‘Yazidiyat’ and ‘Hussainiyat’.
· Tahir-ul-Qadri, Dr Muhammad. The Philosophy of Karbala. This articulates the distinction between power as truth and truth as power.
· Jafri, S.H.M. The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam. This provides essential historical context for understanding the political and theological divisions of the early Islamic community.
· Madelung, Wilferd. The Succession to Muhammad: A Study of the Early Caliphate. This offers a comprehensive analysis of the political dynamics that led to the events of Karbala.

Encyclopaedic and Biographical Sources:

· Encyclopaedia Britannica entries on the Battle of Karbala, Yazid I, Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad, and Umar ibn Sa’d provide authoritative overviews of key figures and political dynamics.
· Biographical details of key figures, including the companions and opponents of Husain, are drawn from detailed accounts in both classical historiography and modern analyses, including the biographical dictionaries of Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.

Hadith Sources:

· References to the traditions concerning the virtues of Hasan and Husain, transmitted by Companions such as Zayd ibn Arqam and Anas ibn Malik, are drawn from the canonical collections of Sunni and Shi’i hadith, including Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and the compilations of al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah.
· The prophetic warning regarding the fate of some Companions at the Pool of Kawthar is recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. The hadith of Khalid ibn ‘Urfutah is recorded in Musnad Ahmad.

Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

Author’s Note

The observations presented in this essay draw upon the work of a number of distinguished scholars who have explored the history of Muharram, Karbala, and the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt in the Indian subcontinent. Among the most important of these are Professor Athar Abbas Rizvi’s pioneering study Intellectual Ithna’asharis of India and Allama Saiyid Sibtul Hasan’s monumental Tarikh-e-Azadari, as well as his Hindu Qaum aur Azadari. The discussion also incorporates insights derived from several of my own research papers presented over the years at national and international conferences dealing with Muharram, Shi’ism, the history of the Ahl al-Bayt, and the cultural interactions between Islam and the Indian subcontinent.

As this article is intended for the general reader and those unfamiliar with the subject, detailed references have been omitted in favour of a more accessible narrative. Readers interested in pursuing the subject further may consult the works mentioned above and the growing body of scholarship devoted to Muharram and the history of the Ahl al-Bayt in South Asia.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

---

The Crescent Over India

As the crescent of Muharram appears over India and a new Islamic year begins, millions once again turn their thoughts towards Karbala. Across the country, from Kashmir to Kerala, from Gujarat to Bengal, gatherings are held in memory of Imam Husain ibn Ali, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, who was martyred on the plains of Karbala in 680 CE. Majlis assemblies are organised, elegies are recited, alams are raised, and processions move through streets that have witnessed these commemorations for centuries.

Yet for the Indian subcontinent, Muharram is not merely the remembrance of a tragedy that occurred in distant Iraq. It is also the story of a profound historical relationship between India and the memory of Karbala. Over more than thirteen centuries, the tragedy of Imam Husain became woven into the cultural, emotional, literary, and spiritual life of South Asia in a manner unparalleled anywhere else in the world.

The commemoration of Muharram in India represents one of the most remarkable examples of how a historical event from the early Islamic period was transplanted, adapted, and transformed within a non-Arab cultural milieu. What began as a specific remembrance of a particular tragedy evolved into a shared civilisational legacy that transcended religious, linguistic, and regional boundaries. The story of Husain ceased to be merely a narrative of Islamic history and became instead a universal moral parable, accessible to all who valued justice, truth, and resistance against oppression.

---

India in the Imagination of Early Islam

One of the most intriguing traditions associated with Karbala concerns Imam Husain himself. According to accounts preserved within the historical memory of the followers of the Ahl al-Bayt, when the forces of Yazid blocked his movement and demanded submission, Imam Husain expressed a desire to leave the territories under Umayyad control and proceed towards Hindustan. Whether one accepts this account literally or regards it as a later memory, the reference itself is revealing. It suggests that India was already known to the family of the Prophet as a land beyond the reach of Umayyad authority, a place associated with refuge and possibility.

The mention of Hindustan was not accidental. Long before the rise of Islam, India and Arabia had been connected through trade and maritime networks. Indian merchants regularly sailed to Arabian ports, while Arab traders frequented the western coast of India. Indian textiles, spices, perfumes, medicines, and luxury goods were familiar in Arabia. Traditions preserve references to Indian products that were known and appreciated during the Prophet’s lifetime. Merchant communities from the Indian coast had established themselves in various parts of the Arab world, and commercial caravans moved regularly between the two regions. By the seventh century, India occupied a recognised place in the geographical and cultural imagination of Arabia.

Indian traditions preserve memories of even closer connections with the earliest period of Islam. The well-known story of Cheraman Perumal, the ruler of Kerala who is said to have travelled to Arabia and embraced Islam during the lifetime of the Prophet, continues to occupy an important place in the historical memory of the Malabar coast. The mosque associated with his name at Kodungallur remains a symbol of these early links.

Likewise, South Indian traditions remember figures such as Thameemul Ansari, whose shrine is located near Chennai, and Syed Ukkashah Oliyullah of Portonovo in Tamil Nadu, who is believed to have been among those who witnessed the signs of prophethood on Muhammad’s person. Whether every detail of these traditions can be historically verified is less important than the fact that they reflect a deeply rooted belief that India was connected to Islam from its earliest days.

---

The Zutts and Early Support for the Ahl al-Bayt

The relationship between India and Karbala became even more significant after the martyrdom of Imam Husain. In the years following the tragedy, support for the Ahl al-Bayt emerged in many regions of the Islamic world. According to traditions preserved in South Asia, some of the earliest responses in favour of Imam Husain and against Yazid came from Indian communities living in West Asia.

Arabic sources refer to groups known as the Zutts (Jat), generally understood to have been communities of Indian origin, many of whom are associated with Jat groups from the north-western regions of the subcontinent. These Zutts had settled in Iraq, Syria, and other parts of the Middle East through trade, migration, and military service. According to traditions preserved in Muharram literature and historical memory, when the surviving members of the Prophet’s family, led by Hazrat Zainab and Imam Zain al-Abidin, were being taken captive towards Damascus after Karbala, contingents of Zutts attempted to assist them. Some accounts also speak of Brahmin groups joining these efforts. Many are said to have been killed by the forces of Yazid before they could succeed.

Whether every detail of these accounts can be independently verified is a matter for historians to examine, but their survival across centuries is itself significant. They reveal that generations of Indians remembered themselves as having stood with the family of the Prophet in one of the darkest moments of Islamic history.

This memory of solidarity with the oppressed, of choosing the side of justice even at great personal risk, became a foundational element of the Indian Muharram tradition. It established a template that would be repeated across centuries: Indians, regardless of their own religious affiliations, finding in the tragedy of Karbala a cause worthy of their sympathy and support.

---

The Husaini Brahmins: A Living Legacy

This memory survives most visibly in the remarkable tradition of the Husaini Brahmins. Found particularly in Punjab, Kashmir, and parts of northern India, these communities have long maintained that their ancestors fought and died in support of Imam Husain and his family. Though they remain Hindu by faith, they regard Husain with extraordinary reverence and affection. Their traditions speak of sacrifice, loyalty, and devotion to the cause of Karbala. Whether approached through the lens of history, anthropology, or cultural memory, the Husaini Brahmins represent one of the most remarkable examples of Karbala’s ability to transcend religious boundaries and become a universal symbol of righteousness.

The Husaini Brahmins have preserved their own distinctive rituals and narratives. They participate in Muharram processions, recite elegies in their own languages, and maintain family traditions that connect them to the events of Karbala. Their continued presence in the Muharram landscape of India challenges any simplistic understanding of the commemorations as exclusively Muslim. They demonstrate instead that the memory of Husain belongs to all who identify with his cause.

---

India as a Sanctuary for the Prophet’s Family

The Indian connection with the Ahl al-Bayt did not end with Karbala. During the Umayyad and Abbasid periods, members of the Prophet’s family and their supporters frequently faced persecution. Many sought refuge in distant lands beyond the direct reach of imperial authority. South Asia emerged as one of the most important destinations for these migrants.

Traditions preserved in Sindh remember Raja Dahir as among the earliest rulers to extend protection to refugees connected with the family of the Prophet. Whether all such traditions can be reconstructed in precise historical detail, they nevertheless reflect a long-standing memory that India became a sanctuary for those associated with the Ahl al-Bayt during periods of political persecution.

Over the centuries, descendants of the Prophet settled across different regions of the subcontinent. Their presence left an enduring imprint upon the religious and cultural landscape of South Asia. One important reminder of these early migrations survives at Samana in present-day Patiala district of Punjab. There, local tradition associates an ancient shrine with an Imamzada believed to have been a son of Imam Ali al-Rida, or Imam Raza, who migrated to India to escape political persecution. Whatever the precise details of his journey, the shrine stands as a powerful symbol of the historic links that connected India with the family of the Prophet. Similar traditions and shrines can be found across Sindh, Punjab, Awadh, Bengal, Kashmir, and the Deccan, demonstrating how India became not only a land that remembered Karbala but also a land that sheltered those who carried its memory.

The presence of these shrines across the subcontinent created a sacred geography of Karbala in India. They became centres of pilgrimage, sites where the memory of the Ahl al-Bayt was preserved and transmitted. They also became points of contact between Muslim and non-Muslim communities, as many of these shrines attracted devotees from diverse religious backgrounds.

---

The Transformation of Muharram in India

It was through these centuries of interaction that Muharram acquired its uniquely Indian character. The remembrance of Karbala gradually absorbed local artistic, literary, and cultural forms without ever losing its essential message. Indeed, it may be argued that nowhere outside Iraq and Iran did Muharram develop such a rich and diverse cultural expression as it did in South Asia.

This transformation occurred at multiple levels. In the realm of material culture, new forms of commemorative objects emerged. In the realm of literature, new poetic genres were developed. In the realm of ritual, new practices were incorporated. In each case, the result was not a dilution of the Karbala message but its enrichment through engagement with Indian cultural traditions.

The Emergence of the Tazia: A Crucial Distinction

The most visible example of this process was the emergence of the tazia, and here it is essential to make a critical historical distinction that has often been overlooked. The eminent scholar Allama Saiyid Sibtul Hasan, in his monumental Tarikh-e-Azadari, was the first to point out that the tazia was introduced to India by Amir Timur (Tamerlane) following his invasion in 1398 CE. According to this tradition, Timur brought with him a sacred relic—an actual wooden tazia or representation associated with the Ahl al-Bayt, which he introduced into the subcontinent. This relic was a physical object of veneration, connected directly to the family of the Prophet and their memory.

However—and this is where the scholarly contribution of Allama Sibtul Hasan becomes especially significant—what Timur introduced was a relic, a sacred artefact brought from West Asia. The tazia as it subsequently developed and became known across India was something entirely different. It was not a relic brought from elsewhere but a direct import from the local indigenous cultural tradition of India.

The Indian tazia, constructed from bamboo, paper, wood, metal, and other locally available materials, drew its forms and structures not from West Asian prototypes but from the ceremonial and processional traditions that had long existed in the subcontinent. Its towering, multi-tiered structures bore a striking resemblance to the great rathas (chariots) of eastern India, the temple processional cars that had been part of Hindu religious practice for centuries. Its construction techniques, its ornamental styles, and its processional use all reflected indigenous artistic and ritual traditions.

This distinction is crucial for understanding the true nature of Muharram in India. The relic brought by Timur remained a sacred object, but it was the indigenous adaptation—the Indian tazia—that became the central symbol of Muharram across the subcontinent. The local artisans who built these tazias were not replicating West Asian forms; they were drawing upon their own cultural traditions, their own inherited skills, and their own aesthetic sensibilities to create something that was simultaneously a symbol of Karbala and an expression of Indian civilisation.

In many regions, the forms these tazias assumed reflected indigenous artistic traditions with remarkable fidelity. Some resembled ceremonial chariots associated with local religious practices. Certain tazias consciously echoed the architectural forms of the great rathas of eastern India. The magnificent tazias of Lucknow, the elaborate structures of Bengal, the distinctive forms of the Deccan, each reflected local artistic traditions while serving the universal purpose of commemorating Imam Husain.

This adaptation did not weaken the message of Karbala. Rather, it enabled that message to be expressed through a cultural language familiar to Indian society. The tazia became a bridge between worlds, a symbol that could be embraced by Muslims for its connection to Karbala and by non-Muslims for its resonance with their own cultural traditions. It was through this indigenous form that Muharram truly became an Indian tradition, rooted not in foreign importation but in local creativity and cultural synthesis.

Allama Sibtul Hasan’s insight thus illuminates a fundamental truth about the Indian Muharram tradition: it was not merely transplanted from elsewhere but was actively transformed and recreated within the subcontinent. The tazia, as it developed in India, was a product of Indian civilisation, a testament to the ability of the Karbala message to find new expression through local forms. Its forms, its materials, its construction techniques, and its processional use all spoke of India even as its purpose remained the remembrance of Husain.

The Spread of the Tazia Tradition

From its early development, the tazia tradition spread across the subcontinent, acquiring distinctive regional characteristics. In Awadh, particularly in Lucknow, tazias became extraordinarily elaborate, with exquisite craftsmanship and intricate detailing. In Bengal, they often incorporated local materials and motifs. In the Deccan, they reflected the artistic traditions of the region. In Gujarat and Rajasthan, they were influenced by local architectural styles. In South India, particularly in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, they developed their own distinctive forms and associated rituals.

The artisans who constructed these tazias came from diverse communities. Muslim artisans worked alongside Hindu craftsmen. The skills required were often hereditary, passed down through generations within families. In many cases, Hindu families maintained the hereditary responsibility for constructing tazias, a tradition that continued even when the surrounding context changed. These artisans did not see themselves as merely building structures; they understood themselves as serving the memory of Karbala through their craft.

The tazia became a central feature of Muharram observances across the subcontinent. Its construction involved collaboration across communities. Its procession through the streets became a public spectacle that engaged entire neighbourhoods. Its final immersion or burial symbolised the martyrdom of Husain and the tragedy of Karbala, providing a tangible focus for the emotional and spiritual engagement of the devotees.

The Literary Traditions of Muharram

Alongside the material culture of the tazia, the great literary traditions of Muharram developed in conversation with local cultural forms. The marsiyas of Mir Anees and Mirza Dabeer transformed the events of Karbala into one of the greatest achievements of Urdu literature. Through their poetry, generations learned not merely the history of Karbala but also its ethical and emotional significance. Their works became part of the cultural heritage of South Asia, read and appreciated by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Similar developments occurred in Bengali, Punjabi, Sindhi, Kashmiri, and Dakani literary traditions. The seventeenth-century Bengali poet Saiyad Sultan, for example, demonstrated how Islamic sacred history could be expressed through Bengali literary forms, illustrating the broader process through which Islam and local cultures interacted and enriched one another.

The literary traditions of Muharram served multiple functions. They preserved the historical memory of Karbala. They provided emotional and spiritual sustenance to the devotees. They educated new generations about the moral lessons of Husain’s sacrifice. And they created a shared literary heritage that united diverse communities.

The Development of Ritual Practices

Alongside the material and literary dimensions of Muharram, distinctive ritual practices developed in India. The majlis assemblies became forums for the transmission of the Karbala narrative and its moral lessons. The alam processions became public expressions of solidarity with the Ahl al-Bayt. The recitation of elegies became a means of emotional engagement with the tragedy.

These ritual practices incorporated elements from Indian cultural traditions. The use of local musical forms, the integration of indigenous performative styles, and the participation of diverse communities all contributed to the distinctive character of Muharram in India. The result was a tradition that was simultaneously Islamic and Indian, neither diluted in its commitment to the Karbala message nor detached from its South Asian context.

The Synthesis of Traditions

The development of the tazia tradition exemplifies the broader pattern of synthesis that characterised Muharram in India. The Karbala message was preserved and transmitted, but it was expressed through forms that were deeply rooted in Indian civilisation. The result was not a foreign tradition transplanted unchanged but an indigenous tradition that carried within it the memory of Karbala.

This synthesis was possible because of the universal appeal of the Karbala message. The values for which Imam Husain stood, justice, truth, resistance against oppression, and the willingness to sacrifice for principle, were values that resonated with Indian ethical traditions. The cultural forms through which these values were expressed were already familiar and accessible. The result was a tradition that could be embraced by people across religious boundaries.

---

Muharram Beyond Muslim Communities

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Muharram in India was its ability to transcend communal boundaries. Across large parts of the subcontinent, Muharram was never solely a Muslim observance. Hindus, Sikhs, tribal communities, artisans, peasants, nobles, and rulers all found ways of associating themselves with the commemoration of Imam Husain.

The Taziyadari by Non-Muslims

One of the most captivating traditions related to this wider participation is the taziyadari (commemorations of Karbala) by non-Muslim communities. This tradition reflects the deep resonance of the Karbala narrative across religious boundaries. Non-Muslims did not merely observe Muharram from a distance; they actively participated in its rituals, sponsored its processions, and incorporated its messages into their own cultural frameworks.

Rajput Participation

Among the most notable non-Muslim patrons of Muharram were the Rajputs. Rajputs, despite being Hindu, were notable patrons and participants in the commemorations. The Rajput rulers of Jaisalmer, for instance, commissioned the construction of the Tazia Tower within the Badal Palace complex in the late nineteenth century. This five-story tower, built by Muslim artisans for their Hindu rulers, stands as a magnificent architectural symbol of shared heritage and communal harmony. It represents a remarkable example of how the memory of Karbala could find expression through the patronage of non-Muslim rulers.

The Rajput connection with Muharram extended beyond Jaisalmer. In various Rajput states, rulers participated in Muharram processions, sponsored the construction of tazias and alams, and provided support for the commemorations. This patronage reflected not merely political calculation but also genuine reverence for the figure of Imam Husain and the values he represented.

Maratha Participation

Similarly, Maratha households, including the Scindias of Gwalior and the Holkars of Indore, were known to conduct and patronise Muharram processions, demonstrating their reverence for the legacy of Imam Husain. The Scindia family of Gwalior, in particular, maintained a long tradition of participation in Muharram. Their involvement reflected the broader pattern of Maratha engagement with Islamic cultural traditions, a pattern that included patronage of religious institutions, participation in festivals, and integration of diverse cultural elements.

The Maratha connection with Muharram represented a continuation of the inclusive traditions of the Deccan sultanates and a reflection of the composite culture that had developed in the region. It demonstrated that reverence for Husain was not confined to any single community but was shared across religious boundaries.

Beyond Royal Patronage

The participation of non-Muslims in Muharram extended beyond royal patronage. In villages and towns across the subcontinent, Hindu communities participated in the commemorations. In many regions, families that were not Muslim maintained hereditary responsibilities connected with Muharram observances.

This is particularly evident in many parts of Karnataka, where even today, in villages with no Muslim population, Hindu communities come together to build an Ashura Khana and observe Muharram with great devotion. They construct tazias, participate in processions, and maintain traditions that have been passed down through generations. This continued observance reflects the deep roots that Muharram has established in the cultural fabric of India.

Sikh and Tribal Participation

Sikh communities have also participated in Muharram commemorations, particularly in Punjab and other northern regions. The values of resistance against oppression and martyrdom for justice resonated with the Sikh tradition. Similarly, tribal communities in various parts of India incorporated Muharram rituals into their own traditions, adapting them to local cultural frameworks.

In each case, the participation of non-Muslim communities was not merely an act of passive observation but of active engagement and integration. These communities did not simply watch Muharram processions; they built tazias, recited elegies, maintained traditions, and transmitted the memory of Karbala to their own generations.

---

Cultural Exchange and Mutual Enrichment

Few commemorative traditions in Indian history have facilitated cultural interaction on such a scale. Through Muharram, Islamic ideals found expression through Indian cultural forms, while Indian society absorbed and reinterpreted the ethical message of Karbala. The result was not cultural confusion but cultural enrichment. The story of Husain became part of the moral imagination of communities far removed from the original events of seventh-century Iraq.

The Role of Artisans and Craftsmen

One of the most important aspects of this cultural exchange was the role of artisans and craftsmen. The construction of tazias, alams, and other Muharram objects required the skills of artisans from diverse communities. Hindu artisans built tazias for Muslim patrons. Muslim artisans worked alongside Hindu craftsmen in the production of commemorative objects. This collaboration created bonds of interdependence and mutual respect.

The artistic traditions of Muharram thus became a site of cultural synthesis. The forms, motifs, and techniques employed in Muharram objects reflected a fusion of Islamic and Indian aesthetics. This fusion was not the result of conscious syncretism but of practical collaboration and shared artistic traditions.

The Role of Literature and Performance

The literary and performative traditions of Muharram also facilitated cultural exchange. The elegies of Muharram were recited not only in Urdu and Persian but also in Bengali, Punjabi, Sindhi, Kashmiri, and other regional languages. These recitations were attended by diverse audiences. The moral messages of Husain’s sacrifice were communicated to communities who might otherwise have had little contact with Islamic traditions.

The performative aspects of Muharram also contributed to cultural interaction. The processions, the majlis assemblies, and the various rituals of Muharram were public events that engaged entire communities. They became occasions for social interaction, cultural exchange, and the reinforcement of shared values.

The Ethical Dimension

At its core, the appeal of Karbala across religious boundaries was ethical. Imam Husain’s stand against tyranny, his willingness to sacrifice everything for justice, and his refusal to submit to illegitimate authority resonated with communities far beyond the Islamic tradition. These values were universal in their appeal, and they found echoes in the moral traditions of diverse Indian communities.

The ethical message of Karbala was communicated through the narratives, elegies, and rituals of Muharram. It was reinforced through the participation of non-Muslim communities and the integration of Karbala into their own moral frameworks. The result was that Husain’s sacrifice became a shared moral reference point, a story that could be invoked across religious boundaries to articulate principles of justice and resistance.

---

Muharram and the Composite Culture of India

In many respects, Muharram became one of the greatest ambassadors of cultural exchange in South Asian history. It helped create Muslims who were deeply attached to the teachings of Islam while remaining firmly rooted in the civilisation of India. At the same time, it introduced countless non-Muslims to the universal values embodied by Imam Husain: courage in the face of oppression, loyalty in times of adversity, and the willingness to sacrifice everything for truth and justice.

The Integration of Local Traditions

The integration of local traditions into Muharram observances was not a recent development but a process that had been unfolding for centuries. From the earliest days of Islam in India, the remembrance of Karbala was expressed through local cultural forms. This integration was facilitated by the fact that the Ahl al-Bayt tradition emphasised certain values that were already present in Indian ethical traditions: devotion to truth, resistance to injustice, and sacrifice for principle.

The integration of local traditions enriched Muharram without diluting its core message. The values of Karbala were communicated through forms that were familiar and accessible to Indian audiences. The result was that Muharram became simultaneously Islamic and Indian, transcending the binary that modern discourse often imposes on religious and cultural identity.

The Role of Sufism

The Sufi tradition in India played a particularly important role in the spread of Muharram beyond Muslim communities. Sufi orders emphasised devotion to the Ahl al-Bayt and incorporated the remembrance of Karbala into their spiritual practices. The Sufi emphasis on love, devotion, and the inner dimensions of faith resonated with Indian spiritual traditions and facilitated the integration of Muharram into the broader religious landscape.

Sufi shrines became centres of Muharram observance in many regions. The devotional poetry of Sufi saints contributed to the literary traditions of Muharram. The Sufi emphasis on the ethical and spiritual dimensions of Karbala communicated its message to diverse audiences.

The Role of Syncretic Traditions

The participation of non-Muslim communities in Muharram reflected the broader pattern of syncretic traditions in Indian history. Across the subcontinent, communities had long engaged in shared religious observances, developed syncretic rituals, and maintained traditions that transcended religious boundaries. Muharram was one of the most prominent examples of this pattern.

This syncretic tradition was not the result of theological confusion but of practical coexistence and mutual respect. Communities that participated in Muharram did not abandon their own religious identities; rather, they found in Muharram a way of expressing values that were already important to them. The result was a tradition that was enriched by the contributions of diverse communities.

---

The British Period and Beyond

The pattern of Muharram observance continued during the British period, though it was also affected by colonial policies and changing social conditions. The British administration sometimes attempted to regulate Muharram processions and to manage the interactions between different communities. The introduction of modern technologies, new modes of communication, and changing social structures influenced the character of Muharram observances.

In some regions, the British period saw a decline in non-Muslim participation in Muharram, as colonial policies and the emergence of communalism created new divisions. However, in other regions, the traditions of shared observance continued. The legacy of centuries of cultural interaction was not easily erased.

Survivals in the Modern Period

Even today, traces of this shared heritage survive in various parts of India. In places such as Gwalior and Baroda, Muharram processions long enjoyed the patronage of Hindu ruling houses. While the political context has changed, some of these traditions continue.

In villages across South India, particularly in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, non-Muslim communities maintain Muharram traditions that have been passed down through generations. These communities build tazias, participate in processions, and preserve the memory of Karbala. Their continued observance reflects the deep roots that Muharram has established in Indian culture.

In many regions, Hindu families maintain hereditary responsibilities connected with Muharram. These families continue to perform their traditional roles, even when the larger context of communal relations has changed. Their commitment to these responsibilities reflects the enduring significance of Muharram in Indian culture.

The Challenge of Communalism

The emergence of communalism in the modern period has challenged the traditions of shared observance. In some regions, the participation of non-Muslims in Muharram has declined. In others, Muharram has become more exclusively identified with Muslim communities.

However, the traditions of shared observance have not disappeared entirely. In many parts of India, non-Muslim communities continue to participate in Muharram, maintaining connections that have been established over centuries. The persistence of these traditions reflects the resilience of India’s composite culture and the enduring appeal of the Karbala message.

---

Lessons for Our Own Age

The history of Muharram in India offers an important lesson for our own age. The devotees of the Ahl al-Bayt who embraced local languages, customs, artistic traditions, and cultural forms never believed that doing so weakened their faith. On the contrary, they understood that cultures are enriched through dialogue and interaction. Their devotion to Husain did not make them less Indian, and their attachment to Indian civilisation did not make them less Muslim.

The Universality of the Karbala Message

The history of Muharram in India demonstrates that the message of Karbala is universal in its appeal. The values for which Imam Husain stood, justice, truth, resistance against oppression, and the willingness to sacrifice for principle, are values that can be embraced by people of all faiths and none.

This universality has been recognised across centuries and across communities. Non-Muslims who have participated in Muharram have not done so despite their religious identities but because of their own commitment to these universal values. They have found in the memory of Karbala a way of expressing principles that were already important to them.

The Possibility of Cultural Synthesis

The history of Muharram in India also demonstrates the possibility of cultural synthesis. It shows that religious traditions can interact with local cultures without losing their essential character. It shows that devotion to a particular religious figure or tradition can be expressed through diverse cultural forms. And it shows that cultural synthesis can produce rich and creative traditions that transcend any single religious or cultural framework.

This is a lesson of great importance for our own age, when questions of religious and cultural identity are often framed in terms of exclusion and conflict. The history of Muharram in India suggests an alternative: a model of cultural synthesis in which religious devotion and cultural identity are not in tension but in dialogue.

The Tazia as Symbol of Synthesis

The tazia, in particular, embodies this synthesis. Its form is Indian, its purpose is remembrance of Karbala. It represents the creative engagement of Indian civilisation with the message of Imam Husain, an engagement that produced something new and distinctive. The tazia is not a foreign object but an Indian object that carries a universal message. It is a testament to the ability of Indian culture to absorb, transform, and enrich traditions from elsewhere.

The Resilience of Shared Traditions

Finally, the history of Muharram in India testifies to the resilience of shared traditions. Despite the challenges of communalism, colonialism, and modernisation, many of the traditions of shared Muharram observance have survived. They have been preserved by communities that have maintained their connections to Karbala across generations.

This resilience suggests that the traditions of shared observance are not mere relics of the past but living traditions that continue to have meaning in the present. They represent a resource for building bridges across communities, for fostering mutual understanding, and for affirming the values that unite us.

---

Karbala on the Banks of the Ganga

As Muharram begins once again, the memory of Karbala reminds us that the struggle between truth and falsehood, justice and tyranny, conscience and power, is never confined to one place or one time. In India, that message acquired a uniquely rich and inclusive expression. Through centuries of migration, refuge, memory, literature, ritual, and shared participation, Karbala became part of the civilisational heritage of the subcontinent.

To remember Muharram in India is therefore not merely to mourn the martyrs of Karbala. It is also to remember a remarkable historical encounter between the message of Imam Husain and the civilisation of India. It is to remember how a tragedy that occurred on the banks of the Euphrates came to find one of its most enduring homes on the banks of the Ganga, the Yamuna, the Godavari, the Krishna, and the Kaveri. It is to recognise that this land did not dilute the message of Husain. Rather, it embraced it, enriched it, and carried it forward across generations.

The Continuing Relevance of Karbala

The continuing relevance of Karbala in India is not merely a matter of historical interest. It is also a matter of contemporary significance. In a world marked by conflict, injustice, and oppression, the message of Husain remains as urgent as ever. His stand against tyranny, his refusal to submit to unjust authority, and his willingness to sacrifice everything for principle continue to inspire people across the world.

In India, this message has been expressed through distinctive cultural forms. The tazias, elegies, processions, and rituals of Muharram have carried the memory of Karbala across centuries and across communities. They have made the message of Husain accessible to people of diverse backgrounds and have integrated it into the cultural fabric of the subcontinent.

The Future of Muharram in India

The future of Muharram in India will depend on the continued vitality of these traditions. It will depend on the willingness of communities to maintain their connections to Karbala and to pass them on to future generations. It will depend on the recognition that the message of Husain is not a relic of the past but a living tradition with continuing relevance.

There are reasons for optimism. The resilience of Muharram traditions across centuries suggests that they will continue to endure. The participation of diverse communities in Muharram suggests that the tradition remains a source of shared meaning and value. And the continuing appeal of the Karbala message suggests that it will continue to resonate with people across religious and cultural boundaries.

A Shared Civilisational Heritage

That is why, more than thirteen centuries after Karbala, millions across the Indian subcontinent continue to bow their heads before the memory of the Prophet’s grandson. They do so because the message of Husain belongs not to one community alone, but to all who cherish justice, dignity, compassion, and freedom.

The story of Karbala in India is a story of how a historical tragedy became a shared civilisational heritage. It is a story of how a memory was preserved, transmitted, and transformed across centuries and across communities. It is a story of how a message of justice and resistance found expression in diverse cultural forms. And it is a story that continues to unfold, as new generations discover the meaning of Karbala and make it their own.

In the final analysis, the history of Muharram in India is a testament to the power of memory, the resilience of tradition, and the universality of the values for which Imam Husain stood. It is a reminder that the struggle for justice and truth is never confined to any single time or place. And it is an invitation to all who cherish these values to join in the remembrance of Karbala, to carry forward its message, and to ensure that the legacy of Husain continues to inspire generations to come.

---

A Note on Sources

This essay has drawn upon the work of numerous scholars who have explored the history of Muharram, the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt, and the cultural interactions between Islam and the Indian subcontinent. The following works have been particularly influential in shaping the understanding presented here:

• Rizvi, Athar Abbas. Intellectual Ithna’asharis of India. This pioneering study explores the development of Twelver Shi’i thought and practice in India, including the history of Muharram observances.
• Hasan, Saiyid Sibtul. Tarikh-e-Azadari. This monumental work provides a comprehensive history of the development of Muharram commemoration traditions in South Asia. Allama Sibtul Hasan’s insight regarding the distinction between Timur’s relic and the indigenous Indian tazia has been particularly influential in shaping the understanding presented here.

• Hasan, Saiyid Sibtul Hasan, Hindu Qaum Aur Azadari. It provides the details of how the non-Muslims in India commemorated Muharram.
• Schimmel, Annemarie. Pain and Grace: A Study of Two Mystical Writers of Eighteenth-Century Muslim India. This work explores the literary and devotional traditions associated with the Ahl al-Bayt in India.
• Pinault, David. The Shiites: Ritual and Popular Piety in a Muslim Community. This study provides insights into Shi’i devotional practices, including Muharram observances.

• Rezavi, S Ali Nadeem, ‘The State, Shias and Shiism in India’, Studies in People’s History, vol 4, no.1 2017

• Rezavi, S Ali Nadeem, ‘The Shia Muslims’, Religious Movements and Institutions in Medieval India, Ed JS Grewal
• Various conference proceedings and research papers presented at national and international conferences on Muharram, Shi’ism, the history of the Ahl al-Bayt, and cultural interactions between Islam and the Indian subcontinent.

Readers interested in pursuing the subject further are encouraged to consult these works and the growing body of scholarship devoted to Muharram and the history of the Ahl al-Bayt in South Asia.

Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

With the setting of the old moon and the appearance of the new, the month of Muharram once again enters our lives. For Muslims across the world, it is not merely the beginning of a new Islamic year. It is a month laden with memory, reflection, devotion, and profound historical significance. It is a month that invites believers to look inward, to examine their conscience, and to renew their commitment to truth, justice, and righteousness.

Muharram is one of the four sacred months mentioned in the Qur’an, months that have been sanctified by God and during which wrongdoing and bloodshed are especially condemned. The very word Muharram, as already mentioned in an earlier blog, is derived from the root haram, conveying the meanings of sanctity, respect, and prohibition. It is a month that is both sacred and inviolable, a period during which humanity is reminded of the value of peace and the sanctity of life.

The Qur’an refers to these sacred months in Surah al-Tawbah (9:36), where God declares that there are twelve months in the divine reckoning, of which four are sacred. According to the Prophet Muhammad, these four months are Dhul Qa’dah, Dhul Hijjah, Muharram, and Rajab. Dhul Qa’dah and Dhul Hijjah precede Muharram and are closely associated with the rites of Hajj, while Rajab, occurring midway through the year, has long been regarded as a month of reverence and devotion. In pre-Islamic Arabia, warfare was traditionally suspended during these months to ensure safe travel and pilgrimage, and Islam reaffirmed their sanctity while emphasising their spiritual significance. Muslims are therefore encouraged to increase acts of worship, charity, repentance, and self-discipline during these blessed periods, while being especially mindful to avoid injustice and wrongdoing.

The tenth day of this month of Muharram, known as Ashura, occupies a special place in the religious memory of Muslims. Sunni traditions associate this day with a number of momentous events in sacred history. It is said to be the day on which the repentance of Prophet Adam was accepted, the day on which Prophet Nuh and his companions were saved from the Flood, the day on which the fire prepared by Nimrod was rendered cool and harmless for Prophet Ibrahim, and the day on which Prophet Musa received divine commandments. It is also associated with the deliverance of the Children of Israel from Pharaoh’s oppression, the restoration of Prophet Ayyub’s health, the reunion of Prophet Yusuf with his father Ya’qub, the deliverance of Prophet Yunus from the belly of the fish, the forgiveness of Prophet Dawud, the restoration of Prophet Sulayman’s kingdom, and the raising of Prophet Isa to heaven.

Yet for millions of Muslims, particularly those devoted to the memory of the Prophet’s family, the tenth of Muharram is remembered above all as the day on which Imam Husain ibn Ali, the beloved grandson of Prophet Muhammad, was martyred on the plains of Karbala in 680 CE. The first ten days of Muharram are therefore not days of celebration but days of mourning, remembrance, and spiritual reflection.

The tragedy of Karbala occupies a unique place in human history. It was not merely a political confrontation nor simply a battle for temporal power. It was a moral struggle between principle and expediency, justice and tyranny, truth and falsehood. Yazid, who had assumed the leadership of the Muslim polity through hereditary succession and political influence, sought the allegiance of Imam Husain in order to legitimise his rule. Husain refused. He could not endorse a system that, in his view, violated the ethical and spiritual foundations established by his grandfather, the Prophet Muhammad.
In refusing submission, Imam Husain knowingly chose a path that would lead to suffering and death. Yet he understood that silence in the face of injustice would amount to complicity. His stand transformed what might otherwise have been a forgotten political dispute into one of the most enduring symbols of resistance against oppression in human history.

The immediate impact of Karbala was profound. The brutal killing of the Prophet’s grandson, along with members of his family and loyal companions, shocked the Muslim world. It compelled people to question the legitimacy of a regime that could perpetrate such an act. The martyrdom of Husain awakened a moral consciousness that had become dormant under political expediency and fear. His sacrifice exposed the true nature of tyranny and reminded believers that faith demands moral courage.
The long-term consequences of Karbala have been even more far-reaching. Across centuries and continents, the memory of Imam Husain has inspired countless struggles for justice and human dignity. His message transcended the boundaries of religion, ethnicity, and nationality.

Karbala became a universal symbol of the eternal struggle between oppression and freedom. The celebrated verse captures this truth with remarkable eloquence:

Qatl-e-Husain asl mein marg-e-Yazid hai,
Islam zinda hota hai har Karbala ke baad.

The martyrdom of Husain becomes, in reality, the death of tyranny itself, for every Karbala renews humanity’s commitment to truth and justice.

But then, to those who are the Shi’a, the Friends of Ali, Karbala is unique: it can be emulated but never duplicated. Thus Karbala is a unique singular event.
What makes Imam Husain’s sacrifice particularly remarkable is the foresight and wisdom with which he approached his mission. He chose not to remain in Mecca, despite the sanctity and security it offered, because he did not wish bloodshed to occur within the sacred precincts. Nor did he wish his death to pass unnoticed as an isolated assassination. By proceeding towards Iraq, the very centre of Yazid’s power, he ensured that the confrontation would reveal the true nature of the regime and would be remembered by history.

Equally significant was the composition of his small caravan. Husain did not seek military strength. His companions came from different tribes, regions, and social backgrounds. Among them were elderly veterans, freed slaves, devoted followers, and even those newly joined to his cause. They represented the diversity of the Muslim community itself. Their presence demonstrated that Karbala was not a tribal conflict or a struggle for political power. It was a defence of moral principles.

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Husain’s planning was his decision to take with him the women and children of his household. Their survival ensured that the story of Karbala could never be buried. After the massacre, it was his sister, Sayyida Zainab, who emerged as the voice of the revolution. Through her courageous speeches in Kufa and Damascus, she exposed the injustice of Yazid’s regime and preserved the message for future generations. If Husain’s blood laid the foundation of the movement, Zainab’s eloquence ensured its permanence in history.

Professor Syed Jafar Raza Bilgirami described Imam Husain’s achievement as the reconstruction of a system of life. According to him, Karbala represented the triumph of reason over greed, conscience over appetite, and justice over brute force. Husain demonstrated that true civilisation rests not upon power but upon ethical restraint and moral responsibility. In doing so, he offered humanity a timeless code of conduct.

It is therefore not surprising that scholars, historians, and thinkers from diverse backgrounds have been moved by the tragedy of Karbala. We have seen that whether it is Edward Gibbon, Thomas Carlyle, E. G. Browne, Charles Dickens, or Muhammad Iqbal, they, and many more have recognised in Husain’s sacrifice a universal lesson in courage, conviction, and moral integrity. Karbala continues to evoke sympathy, admiration, and inspiration because it speaks to fundamental human values that transcend religious boundaries.
As Muharram begins once again, Muslims gather in mosques, imambaras, and homes to remember these events. Majalis are held, elegies are recited, and the stories of Karbala are narrated anew. These gatherings are not merely commemorations of a distant past. They are opportunities to renew one’s commitment to justice, compassion, and truthfulness. They remind believers that faith is not simply a matter of ritual but also of moral responsibility.
Muharram thus arrives as a month of mourning, but also as a month of spiritual awakening. It teaches that truth may suffer but can never be defeated; that numbers do not determine righteousness; and that the courage of a small group of principled individuals can transform the course of history.

As we welcome this sacred month, may we reflect deeply upon the lessons of Karbala. May the memory of Imam Husain inspire us to oppose injustice wherever it appears, to uphold human dignity, and to remain steadfast in the pursuit of truth. May this Muharram become a source of peace, reconciliation, and moral renewal for all humanity.
Amen.

Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

Our Higher Secondary results had come out in the daily newspapers during the long summers of 1977. As my father was unwell having suffered a damaged heart valve, he had arranged my solo visit to Lucknow where a maternal uncle of my mother and his son Rais Mamu lived. Rais Mamu was employed in the Shia Degree College, perhaps as a Finance Officer? I never knew and never enquired. I only knew that they dotted over me. Rais Mamu and Ladli Mumani, (herself related to me independently of her in-law connections) had no issue of their own, and thus treated me as their son. My mother’s uncle, Rais Mamu’s father had very rough relations with my Nana, over some issue: he thought that his dead sister’s daughter (my mother) had been deprived of her Nanihāl, and even some material belongings, which according to him, should have been given by my Nana to my mother. My mother had never mentioned any of this to any of us. However, I heard all this stuff whenever I was in Lucknow.

Rais Mamu and his wife, Ladli Mami, were regular at the annual “Jalsa e Majālis” of Shaheed e Sālis, at Agra, (whose name I later came to know was Qazi Nurullah Shustari, a Qazi under Akbar and Jahangir, usually held each year around Diwali those days. There was hardly any Shia worth his salt, who would not be there – people from Bollywood to politicians, from Nawabs to Khoja Isna Ashari rich merchant families. My father was the Secretary of the Anjuman e Moinuz Zaerīn and Mutawalli of the waqf of Shaheed e Sālis. He always, in my memory of those days, called Rais Mamu from Lucknow to be the Accountant during those annual public functions spanning over almost a week. When ultimately my father expired in 1978, and for years on, during the jalsa of Shaheed e Salis in Agra, my bed would be in the room allocated to Rais Mamu and Ladli Mami.

Coming back to the day when my Higher Secondary results were announced, I remember Rais Mamu all excited to take me to Chowk at a place where all the day’s newspapers were available. He was excited and feeling very proud as if his own son was going to get his first important result. Mami too was quite happy and I remember her preparing special meals for the occasion. Their excitement was making me very nervous for I understood that they had very high expectations from me, at best a mediocre, in reality a dud, who was more confused than anything else whenever any chapter of Mathematics or Chemistry or Physics was placed before me. I could understand only the English teacher, or feel enthusiastic only if taken to a historical or cultural location! Deep in my heart I feared for the result, for which the entire family of my Mamu was excited!

Ultimately we reached the place where dozens of newspapers were placed on wooden stands and hundreds of people were pouring over them. With great enthusiasm my Mamu dived into the crowd! From distance I could see him desperately scanning the numerous columns for that elusive Roll number. Ultimately he located it deep down below where the roll numbers of ordinary second divisions were placed. The excitement drained from his eyes. I could make out his utter disbelief and disappointment!

Yet when he came to me he said: “Chalo qulfi khātey hain! First division na sahi, kya hua? Pass to ho!”

I still feel the relief which I felt that moment: the relief of the first step which took me towards the hidden passion: History. When I returned back to Aligarh, my father received me with a smile: “merā beta tārikh ka ustād banega!” In fact, before I returned, our English teacher, Sir Ahmad, who was also the Vice-Principal at Our Lady of Fatima Higher Secondary School, and a friend of my father, had actually informed him that his son should “opt” for either English or History.

The rest, as they say is History! I vividly recall all this as I demit my service in the subject which I never opted for in school, but which ultimately gave me everything.

Looking back now from the other side of a full career, I realise that the best results are not always the ones printed in a newspaper column. Sometimes a quiet second division, a plate of qulfi, and a father’s knowing smile are enough to set a life on its true course.

(To be continued)

सैयद अली नदीम रेज़ावी

जब हर साल मुहर्रम का महीना आता है, तो दुनिया भर में करोड़ों लोगों का ध्यान इराक़ के एक छोटे से मैदान की ओर चला जाता है, जहाँ इंसानी इतिहास की सबसे महत्वपूर्ण घटनाओं में से एक घटी थी। कर्बला में इमाम हुसैन इब्न अली की शहादत को चौदह सौ साल से भी अधिक समय बीत चुका है, लेकिन उनकी याद आज भी उतनी ही ताज़ा और ज़िन्दा है। उनका नाम आज भी अलग-अलग देशों, धर्मों और संस्कृतियों के लोगों के दिलों में दुःख, श्रद्धा, सम्मान और प्रेरणा की भावना पैदा करता है। इतिहास में बहुत कम ऐसी हस्तियाँ हुई हैं जिनकी स्मृति इतनी लंबी अवधि तक मानवता की सामूहिक चेतना में जीवित रही हो।

स्वाभाविक रूप से यह प्रश्न उठता है कि आखिर इमाम हुसैन को चौदह सौ साल बाद भी इतनी शिद्दत से क्यों याद किया जाता है? इसका उत्तर केवल उनकी शहादत की त्रासदी में नहीं, बल्कि उन आदर्शों में छिपा है जिनके लिए उन्होंने जीवन जिया और अपने प्राण न्योछावर कर दिए।

कर्बला केवल एक युद्ध नहीं था। यह सत्य और असत्य, न्याय और अत्याचार, अंतरात्मा और सत्ता के बीच का संघर्ष था। जो घटना उमय्यद शासन के इतिहास की एक छोटी-सी लड़ाई बनकर भुला दी जा सकती थी, वह समय के साथ एक शाश्वत नैतिक प्रतीक बन गई। हर पीढ़ी अपने संघर्षों की झलक कर्बला में देखती है और यही कारण है कि हुसैन की याद कभी धूमिल नहीं पड़ती।

इमाम हुसैन पैग़म्बर मुहम्मद के प्यारे नवासे, इमाम अली और बीबी फ़ातिमा के बेटे थे। वे अहल-ए-बैत, जिनके बारे में हम पहले लिख चुके हैं, से सम्बन्ध रखते थे, जिनके प्रति मुसलमानों के दिलों में गहरा प्रेम और सम्मान है। लेकिन उनकी महानता केवल उनके वंश के कारण नहीं है। इतिहास में अनेक लोग प्रतिष्ठित परिवारों में जन्मे, लेकिन बहुत कम ऐसे हुए जिन्होंने अपने नैतिक साहस और आदर्शों के बल पर इतिहास की दिशा बदल दी। हुसैन की महानता इस बात में थी कि उन्होंने अन्याय को वैधता देने से इनकार कर दिया, जबकि ऐसा करने से उनकी जान बच सकती थी।

जब यज़ीद ने उनसे बैअत की माँग की, तो हुसैन ने समझ लिया कि यह कोई व्यक्तिगत या राजनीतिक विवाद नहीं है। यदि वे यज़ीद की सत्ता को स्वीकार कर लेते, तो वे ऐसी व्यवस्था को वैधता प्रदान कर देते जिसे वे इस्लाम की नैतिक शिक्षाओं के विरुद्ध मानते थे। बैअत कर लेने से उन्हें सुरक्षा, सम्मान और आराम मिल सकता था। विरोध करने का अर्थ था कठिनाइयाँ, कष्ट और मृत्यु। इसके बावजूद उन्होंने प्रतिरोध का मार्ग चुना।

उन्होंने स्पष्ट रूप से कहा कि वे न अहंकार के कारण उठे हैं, न विद्रोह के लिए, न भ्रष्टाचार फैलाने के लिए और न किसी अत्याचार के लिए, बल्कि केवल अपने नाना की उम्मत में सुधार लाने के लिए उठे हैं। इन शब्दों से स्पष्ट हो जाता है कि कर्बला सत्ता प्राप्त करने का संघर्ष नहीं था, बल्कि मूल्यों और सिद्धांतों की रक्षा का संघर्ष था।

इसी कारण प्रसिद्ध विद्वान फ़ाज़िल-ए-हंसवी ने इमाम हुसैन को “दूसरे बानी-ए-इस्लाम” अर्थात इस्लाम का पुनर्स्थापक कहा। इस अभिव्यक्ति में एक गहरी सच्चाई छिपी है। यदि पैग़म्बर मुहम्मद ने वह्यी के माध्यम से इस्लाम की स्थापना की, तो हुसैन ने अपनी कुर्बानी देकर उसकी नैतिक आत्मा को बचाया। अनेक मुस्लिम चिंतकों का मानना है कि इस्लाम की स्थापना मक्का और मदीना में हुई, लेकिन उसका संरक्षण कर्बला में हुआ।

दार्शनिक और शायर मोहम्मद इक़बाल ने इसी विचार को बड़ी खूबसूरती से व्यक्त किया। उनके अनुसार कर्बला ने यह सुनिश्चित किया कि इस्लाम केवल वंशवादी सत्ता का उपकरण न बन जाए, बल्कि अंतरात्मा और न्याय का धर्म बना रहे। हुसैन के रक्त ने धर्म और अत्याचार के बीच हमेशा के लिए एक रेखा खींच दी।

लेकिन हुसैन का महत्व केवल इस्लाम तक सीमित नहीं है। इसी कारण अल्लामा सैयद अली नक़ी नक़न साहिब ने उन्हें “शहीद-ए-इंसानियत” कहा। हुसैन का संघर्ष उन प्रश्नों से जुड़ा है जो हर इंसान के सामने आते हैं। अन्याय के सामने क्या किया जाए? क्या सत्य से बढ़कर व्यक्तिगत सुरक्षा है? क्या एक छोटा समूह किसी शक्तिशाली व्यवस्था को चुनौती दे सकता है? क्या सम्मान और गरिमा के लिए जीवन का बलिदान दिया जा सकता है? कर्बला इन प्रश्नों का उत्तर सिद्धांतों से नहीं बल्कि कर्म द्वारा देती है।

कर्बला का युद्ध असमान था। हुसैन अपने परिवार और कुछ साथियों के साथ एक विशाल सेना के सामने खड़े थे। उनके शिविर में बुज़ुर्ग, महिलाएँ और बच्चे भी थे। उन पर पानी तक बंद कर दिया गया। एक-एक कर उनके साथी शहीद होते गए। उनके अठारह वर्षीय पुत्र अली अकबर शहीद हुए। उनके नन्हे बेटे अली असग़र को भी मार दिया गया। उनके भाई, भतीजे और मित्र एक-एक कर कुर्बान हो गए। अंततः स्वयं हुसैन भी कर्बला की तपती रेत पर शहीद हो गए।

सैनिक दृष्टि से यह पराजय थी, लेकिन इतिहास के नैतिक निर्णय में यह एक महान विजय थी। जिसने हुसैन को मारा वह साम्राज्य बहुत पहले मिट चुका है। जो शासक स्वयं को विजेता समझते थे, उन्हें आज केवल अत्याचार के प्रतीक के रूप में याद किया जाता है। इसके विपरीत हुसैन आज भी करोड़ों दिलों में जीवित हैं।

यही नैतिक विजय उन्हें “अबुल अहरार”, अर्थात स्वतंत्र लोगों का पिता बनाती है। हुसैन के लिए स्वतंत्रता केवल राजनीतिक आज़ादी नहीं थी। वह अंतरात्मा की स्वतंत्रता थी। वह अपने सिद्धांतों को सुरक्षा और सुविधाओं के बदले बेच देने से इंकार करने का नाम थी। वह अन्याय के सामने “नहीं” कहने का साहस था।

जब उनके सामने आत्मसमर्पण और मृत्यु में से किसी एक को चुनने का समय आया, तो उन्होंने घोषणा की:

“हम ज़िल्लत को स्वीकार नहीं करेंगे।”

ये शब्द चौदह सौ वर्षों से गूँज रहे हैं। यही कारण है कि दुनिया के अलग-अलग हिस्सों में उत्पीड़ित लोग कर्बला से प्रेरणा लेते हैं। हुसैन ने दिखाया कि कुछ परिस्थितियों में सम्मान के साथ मृत्यु, अपमान के साथ जीवन से बेहतर होती है।

कर्बला की याद केवल इसलिए नहीं बची कि वहाँ क्या हुआ था, बल्कि इसलिए भी कि वह आज भी क्या सिखाती है। मुहर्रम केवल मातम का महीना नहीं है। यह हर साल नैतिक जागरण का अवसर है। यह इंसानियत को याद दिलाता है कि अत्याचार के सामने चुप रहना भी अन्याय में साझेदारी है। हर वर्ष कर्बला की याद हमें अपने भीतर झाँकने के लिए प्रेरित करती है और पूछती है कि हम सत्य के साथ खड़े हैं या अन्याय से समझौता कर रहे हैं।

कर्बला केवल प्रतिरोध ही नहीं सिखाती, बल्कि करुणा, त्याग और दूसरों के लिए जीने का संदेश भी देती है। हज़रत अब्बास इसका सबसे प्रेरक उदाहरण हैं। जब वे अत्यधिक प्यास के बावजूद फ़ुरात के पानी तक पहुँचे, तो उन्होंने स्वयं पानी पीने के बजाय प्यासे बच्चों को याद किया। उनका यह आचरण “ईसार” की उस इस्लामी शिक्षा का सर्वोत्तम उदाहरण है जिसमें दूसरों की ज़रूरतों को अपनी ज़रूरतों पर प्राथमिकता दी जाती है।

इसी तरह कर्बला में महिलाओं की भूमिका भी अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण है। यदि बीबी ज़ैनब का साहस, धैर्य और वाणी न होती, तो संभव है कि कर्बला का संदेश आने वाली पीढ़ियों तक न पहुँच पाता। यदि हुसैन ने कर्बला को अपनी कुर्बानी दी, तो ज़ैनब ने यह सुनिश्चित किया कि वह कुर्बानी भुलाई न जाए। वास्तव में कर्बला की कहानी तलवारों से जितनी बनी, उतनी ही ज़ैनब की वाणी से भी अमर हुई।

हुसैन की महानता का प्रमाण उन असंख्य व्यक्तित्वों में भी दिखाई देता है जिन्होंने उन्हें श्रद्धांजलि दी। महात्मा गांधी ने स्वीकार किया कि उन्होंने हुसैन से सीखा कि अत्याचार सहते हुए भी विजय कैसे प्राप्त की जा सकती है। गांधी ने कहा था:

“मैंने भारत को कोई नई चीज़ नहीं दी। मैंने केवल कर्बला के नायक के जीवन से सीखे हुए सबक भारतवासियों तक पहुँचाए हैं। यदि भारत को बचाना है तो उसे हुसैन के रास्ते पर चलना होगा। मैंने हुसैन से सीखा कि अत्याचार सहते हुए भी विजय कैसे प्राप्त की जाती है।”

जवाहरलाल नेहरू ने कर्बला को सभी समुदायों के लिए एक महान शिक्षा बताया। मोहम्मद अली जिन्ना ने हुसैन की प्रशंसा इसलिए की क्योंकि उन्होंने अन्याय के सामने झुकने के बजाय मृत्यु को स्वीकार किया। रवीन्द्रनाथ टैगोर ने कहा कि सत्य और न्याय को जीवित रखने के लिए सेना और हथियारों की नहीं, बल्कि हुसैन जैसी कुर्बानी की आवश्यकता होती है।

पश्चिमी विद्वानों ने भी हुसैन की प्रशंसा की। एडवर्ड गिबन ने लिखा कि कर्बला का दृश्य सबसे उदासीन पाठक के हृदय को भी झकझोर सकता है। थॉमस कार्लाइल ने कहा कि कर्बला यह साबित करती है कि सत्य की लड़ाई में संख्या का कोई महत्व नहीं होता। चार्ल्स डिकेन्स ने लिखा कि यदि हुसैन सत्ता चाहते, तो वे अपने परिवार को साथ लेकर न जाते। वाशिंगटन इरविंग ने निष्कर्ष निकाला कि हुसैन का संघर्ष केवल धर्म और न्याय के लिए था।

हुसैन का प्रभाव केवल विद्वानों और लेखकों तक सीमित नहीं रहा। उन्होंने स्वतंत्रता आंदोलनों, उपनिवेशवाद विरोधी संघर्षों और सामाजिक न्याय के अभियानों को प्रेरित किया। भारत के स्वतंत्रता संग्राम से लेकर दक्षिण अफ्रीका में रंगभेद विरोधी संघर्ष तक, कर्बला अत्याचार के विरुद्ध धैर्य और प्रतिरोध का प्रतीक बनी रही। नेल्सन मंडेला जैसे नेताओं ने भी हुसैन के संघर्ष में साहस और आत्मसम्मान का स्रोत देखा।

क्रांतिकारी शायर जोश मलीहाबादी ने शायद सबसे सुंदर शब्दों में हुसैन की सार्वभौमिकता को व्यक्त किया:

“इंसान को बेदार तो हो लेने दो,
हर क़ौम पुकारेगी हमारे हैं हुसैन।”

जब लोग कर्बला का अर्थ समझ लेते हैं, तब वे हुसैन को किसी एक सम्प्रदाय या समुदाय की सीमाओं में नहीं बाँधते। वे उन सभी के हो जाते हैं जो स्वतंत्रता, न्याय और मानव गरिमा में विश्वास रखते हैं।

मोहम्मद अली जौहर ने भी कर्बला का संदेश इन शब्दों में अमर कर दिया:

“क़त्ल-ए-हुसैन अस्ल में मर्ग-ए-यज़ीद है,
इस्लाम ज़िन्दा होता है हर कर्बला के बाद।”

यह शेर इतिहास की एक गहरी सच्चाई को व्यक्त करता है। अत्याचार कुछ समय के लिए विजयी दिखाई दे सकता है, लेकिन अंततः नैतिक साहस ही जीतता है। हर युग अपना एक यज़ीद पैदा करता है, लेकिन हर युग अपना हुसैन भी खोज लेता है।

यही हुसैन की अमरता का रहस्य है। असंख्य शासकों ने विशाल साम्राज्यों पर शासन किया, लेकिन उनके नाम इतिहास की पुस्तकों तक सीमित रह गए। हुसैन के पास न कोई साम्राज्य था और न कोई सेना, फिर भी उनका नाम आज भी करोड़ों दिलों में जीवित है। उनकी महानता सांसारिक शक्ति में नहीं, बल्कि नैतिक अधिकार में थी। उन्होंने कष्ट को शक्ति में, कुर्बानी को प्रेरणा में और शहादत को अमरता में बदल दिया।

इसीलिए उन्हें “अबुल अहरार” कहा जाता है।

इसीलिए अल्लामा अली नक़ी ने उन्हें “शहीद-ए-इंसानियत” कहा।

इसीलिए फ़ाज़िल-ए-हंसवी ने उन्हें “दूसरे बानी-ए-इस्लाम” कहा।

और इसी कारण कर्बला के चौदह सौ वर्ष बाद भी इमाम हुसैन का नाम दिलों को रोशन करता है, न्याय के लिए संघर्ष करने वालों को प्रेरित करता है और मानवता को यह याद दिलाता है कि सत्य, चाहे कितना ही अकेला क्यों न हो, अंततः पराजित नहीं हो सकता। हर मुहर्रम इसी संदेश को नया जीवन देता है। हर कर्बला की याद यह बताती है कि गरिमा समर्पण से बड़ी है, अंतरात्मा सत्ता से अधिक शक्तिशाली है, और सत्य के लिए खड़ा होने वाला एक अकेला इंसान भी इतिहास की दिशा बदल सकता है।