The Glorious Koran has mentioned many verses about ahl al- Bayt (the members of the House).

 

It has ordered men to love them. It has told them about their purity. It has uiged men to cleave to them. It has urged them to obey them. It has declared that they have the most outstanding merit and position.

 

Throughout his lifetime, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, followed the Holy Koran showing that his family gathered outstanding merits and glorious traits that sometimes impose their obedience and following on men and sometimes bind men to love them and sometimes make the hearts and selves of men incline toward them, and so on.[1]

 

That was for the happiness of men themselves to take the religion from its people and knowledge from its origin. So, it is a must on people to respect them, cleave to them, and refrain from other than they.

 

Ahl al Bayt (I.e. ‘Ali, al- Zahra’, their two sons, and at- Husayn’s Sons, peace be on them.) were a prototype for the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, in all his outstanding merits and traits.

 

So, whoever wants the knowledge of the Prophet, they are the gate of his city, whoever wants his utterance they are the aspect of his eloquence, whoever wants his good manners finds examples from his behavior, whoever wants his religion finds them the lamps of his law, whoever wants his asceticism finds in them his method, whoever wants to obey his family they are the chosen of his progeny, and whoever wants to look at him, they are the beauty of his face. These were the outstanding merits of ahl al- Bayt in comparison with those of the Owner of the Bayt (House), this is some of what they were an example for his Holy Character, may Allah bless him and his family.

 

Whoever has a relation with Allah’s Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family, can continue this relation through them, or is at enmity with Islam they are a righteous number for it, or is at objection with the religion they are the strongest shield, or is at war with the right, or follows the wrong but they are the enemies of the wrong.

 

When good was mentioned, they were the guides for it, or charity began, they were the standard for it, or justice was spread, they were the friends of it, or men went into glorious deeds, they went deeper into it, or the people of boasting competed to win noble deeds, they were more than them in

 

1 In our book Al- ShT’a Wa Silsilat ‘Usuraha’, We have mentioned some of what has come in the Book about the outstanding merits of AhI aI- Bayt and the Summons to follow them.

 

round, and if they vied in nobility, the stop would be with them, so every virtue begins from them aiad to them it belongs.

 

As the members of the House (ahl al- Bayt)were as we have mentioned, Banü Omayya (the Omayyads) adopted a hostile, stubborn attitude towards them. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, killed many people from them for Allah, so they felt that it was time to take their revenge on ahl at- Bayt.

 

If they had shut their eyes to the protectors of Islam and the propagandists of the religion, then the Prophet would have come with his mission, it was as if that he and his memory had not died, Islam and its laws and its regulation would have taken place as Allah, the Exalted, and the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family wanted. If they had taken a neutral attitude towards them, men would have known the outstanding merit Qf ahl at Bayt and their right would have appeared for the world, no means would have stayed with the Omayyads who went up on the pulpits of Islam and no pretext to dominate the Muslim homeland and enslave people.

 

The Omayyads were still showing and hiding their enmity for the most pure Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, there would have been no heresies if their attitudes for the family of the mission were good, and if they had been contrary to what the days knew from them, that would have been innovation in their natures and manners.

 

As for Banfl at- ‘Abbass (the AbbassTds), when they ruled (Muslims), and crossed the pidge to achieve their ambitions, the pidge which they built on the shoulders of ShT’a, and made its pillars of the skulls of those simple people, knew that if the situation became calm, people would ask them about the truth and its position and the caliphate and its people, because they stood by them to destroy the thrones of the Omayyads, revenge the holy blood which was shed without crime, and found the Caliphate of at- Rida, who belonged to the family of Mohammed, may Allah bless him and his family. Meanwhile they did not rise and resisted (the Omayyads) to appoint BanU at- ‘Abbass (the ‘AbbassTds) in place of Banfl ‘All (the ‘AlawTds). So, the ‘AbbâssTds decided to kill those men who paved the way for them to sit in the throne authority, such as Abtl-Salama al- Khallâl and the like, because they were afraid of that examination. Also, they decided to limit Banfl ‘All and watch and spy on them, because they were afraid of those trends which were on their minds, or for which men urged them. Moreover, they decided to muzzle the ShT’a with terrorism because they were afraid of that question and punishment. So, the crime of Banfl ‘All with them was because they were people of right, and the people of homage and caliphate whether through the family relationship or textual nomination or outstanding merit.

 

There was nothing summoning the Abbassids to inflict blows against the AlawTds but because they were worthier of the Caliphate than they, had a lofty position among people, and had great figures whom the hearts desired. So, the Abbâssids tried to put down the dignity of the family of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, and kill those great figures under the pretext of inclining the hearts towards them. They tried to kill them to prevent the ShVa of ahl at- Bayt from forming the power ahl at-Bayt used to revolt against them.

 

The difference between the Omayyads and the Aabbâsids is as follows: The Omayyads waged war against the Hashimites for two things- to get revenge for themselves for the Prophet and take the leadership, while the ‘Abbâslds waged war against them to obtain the thrones and protect them only, namely they did not intend to wage war against the Prophet and his mission though their war against the mission and its propagandists.

 

If you take a quick look at what ahl at- Bayt suffered because of their outstanding merits, you will know how men wage war against religion and how they get used to the love of this world and it allies, and you will know that the Abbâssids took the same course as the Omayyads did though the latter waged war against alit aI- Bayt more then the former.

 

(At the Battle of) Karbala', Banui Omayya killed at- Husayn b. ‘Au, peace be on them, a pure choice of his family, and a righteous choice of his Companions when they committed a forbidden act, namely they played with the religion according to their desires, and the Abbass?ds killed ‘Ali b. at- Husayn and matchless figures of the ‘Alawids through a trap when they committed forbidden acts with which they angered the religion and its people.

 

Banfl Omayya poisoned three Imams: at- Hasan, al-Sajjad, and at- Baqir, peace be on them, and banfl at- ‘Abbass poisoned six Imams: at- Sâdiq, at-Kazim, at- Rida, at- Jawad, at- HadT, and at- ‘Askari, peace be on them.

 

Hishâm b. Abd at- Malik sent for at- Baqir and at- Sâdiq, peace be on them, (to go) to Sham to mistreat them. When they arrived in Sham, he found that he had no choice but to honor and send them to Medina because he worried that people might be charmed by them, while banii at- ‘Abbass did not leave any Imam to live in his house: Al- Saffah sent for at- Sadiq; at- Mansflr sent for him several times, too; at- Rashid sent for at- Kazim, imprisoned him, then released him. Not long after, he sent for him again and imprisoned him. He was in prison till he was killed with poison and do not ask about what he committed against him and the words he said to summon people to come together to the pidge.

 

Al- Ma’mfln sent for at- Rida (to go) to Tfls. Al- Rida did not come BACK home, rather he was killed with poison, in Khurasân. Al- Ma’mfln also sent for a!- Jawad but released him without mistreatment. When aI- Mu’tasim took the reins of authority, he sent for Abii- Ja’ far at- Jawad, peace be on

 

him, and imprisoned him. When he released him from prison, he avJe a plan to kill him with pOiSOfl. Al- Mutawakit sent for Abti at- Hasan at-Hadi, peace be on him, and\ went on putting down his dignity till he perished. At- Hadi was liable to various kinds of mistreatment by the Abbassid kings. He was sometimes imprisoned, and sometimes released, then at- Mu’taz poisoned him. His son Abfl Mohammed at- Hasan, peace be on him, stayed at Samarfl’. They did not allow him to go BACK to Medina nor did they allow him live in his house, rather they sometimes imprisoned him and sometimes released him till at- Mu’tamid killed him with poison. When at- Mu’tamid knew at- Hadi had a son called Abü at- Qasim aged five years, he began looking for him to kill him, but he (Abtl at- Qasim) had disappeared because of their oppression and assassinations (since then) till today.

 

The Omayyads destroyed a group of the Alawids with poison, imprisonment, assassination, and hanging. Among them were Zaid, Yahya, and the like on the day (of the Battle) of at- Hura. Besides, they killed Abd Allah b. Mohammed b. at- Hanafiyya, and others. The Abbassids killed a large number at Fakh and in their prisons. Moreover, every Abbassid ruler who sat on the throne killed a group of the Alawlds.

 

Because of the oppression of the Omayyads, many AtawTds fled, such as Yahya, Abd Allah at- Ja’fari, and the like. Because of the persecution of the Abbasslds, many AtawTds- like at- Qasim and Ahmad the two sons of Imam at- Kâzim, peace be on him, Tsa b. Zaid, and the like- fled to far countries, such as India and Iran. Many of the Atawids did not declare their ancestry because they were afraid of the Abbasid governors.

 

If the Omayyads betrayed some of the Alawrds and killed them with poison, then do not ask about those whom the Abbassids betrayed (i.e. they were many).

 

If you run over.(the book) ‘Maqatil at- Tâlibiyytn’, you will know what banfl at- ‘Abbâs committed against them.

 

The Omayyads burnt the tents of the Sons of the mission on the day of (the Battle of) Karbata, and the AbbasTds burnt the house of Imani at- S&iiq though he and his family were in it. At- Sadiq went out to put out the fir, but some of it entered the corridor.

 

The Omayyads deprived the daughters of the mission of their (ornaments) at (the Battle) of Karbala, also at- Rashid sent his leader at-Jaltldy to Medina to deprive the Tatibiyyat (TalibTd women) of their ornaments.

 

At- Jatudy was harder than a rock in carrying out his want so that he took alt the ornaments of the AtawTd and the TâtibTd women.

 

When Zayd was killed, Hishfim banished all AlawTds from Iraq to Medina and asked them to ping guarantees so as not to go out of it. (42) Also Mflsa a!- Hady banished all Atawtds and their children from Medina to Baghdad after the event of Fakh.

 

They met him, and their face became yellow because of the terrorism, tiredness, and accidents they suffered from.

 

If we want to make a comparison between the abusive actions of the two dynasties towards ahl at Bayt, we will find that the AbbasTds committed actions the Omayyads had not committed before. For example, al- Rashtd and at- Mansflr buried some of the AlawTds in side the walls of the buildings in Baghdad.

 

Al- Rshrd cut down the tree that was by the tomb of a!- Husayn. Those who visited his tomb shaded themselves under that tree. Al- Mutawakil demolished his tomb. Also he demolished the buildings and the houses around it. Moreover, he plowed and planted the land of Karbala to remove the tomb and wipe out its remains. For this reason the poet said

 

By -Allah, the Ommayyads, committed the killing of the son of the daughter of their prophet.

 

While he was wronged.

 

The children of their father committed something like it.

 

So, by your life, his grave became demolished.

 

They felt sadness that they did not take part in his killing, so, they followed him while he is dead.

 

The days of banti Omayya were one thousand months. During those days, they killed the prototypes of the Alawrds. If you count from the beginning of the days of banfl at- ‘Abbass to one thousand months, you wilt know that the AbbassTds killed the doubles of those whom the Omayyads killed. They killed them while they knew their outstanding merit and their blood relation. Müsâ b. ‘Isa, who waged war against the people of Fakh, said about at- Husayn, the owner of Fakh, and his companions:” By Allah, they are the noblest of Allah’s creatures; they are worthier of what is in our hands than us, but the authority is barren, if the owner ofthis grave, namely the Prophet may Allah bless him and his family, disputed with us for authority, we would hit his nose with the sword.”[1]

 

This bold guilty (person) admitted his crime, but he did not mention the truth thoroughly, because the Apostle of Allah, may Allah abless him and his family, and the choice of his family did not request it for religion, enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong, and removing heresies and misguidance. If they requested authority for authority, we would not shower the Omayyads and the Abbastds with the arrows of blame, then is it right to blame the person who overcomes his rival when they dispute each other for authority?

 

1 Maqatil al- Talibiyyin,

 

Maqatil al- Husayn b. ‘Ali, Sahib Fakh

 

Do you think that al- Husayn with his rise, Zayd with his revolt, Yahyâ with his jihad, and at- Husayn in Fakh with his defense, and the like of the Tâlibi5 with religion and intellect, sacrifice their selves and the valuable for authority?

 

Why did they request a mere life in this world while they were the propagandists of religion, the leaders of right guidance, and the lamps of mind? Why did they request authority while they knew that their power was not enough to obtain victory? Yes, they sacrificed those valuable selves and the respected because they knew that religion was more valuable than their selves. Whoever finds the cost expensive, sale is easy for him. Besides, people understood the plain truth and certain religion, and the truth overcame the falsehood through plea and proof after those sacrifices.

 

The Battle of Karbala and the sacrifices of the Atawids were examples for the masters of religion and teachings for the men of truth during the competition between guidance and misguidance and truth and falsehood, and left no reason for the propagandists of religion to refrain from sacrificing themselves for supporting them. Through their acts, they taught them that victory is obtained with sacrifice, life is achieved with death, and those experiences were done to prevent people from advancing feebleness as an excuse, because victory is not for an urgent victory. In other words, the day of al- Husayn and the days of the Alawids were the days of victories for their enemies. Still, afterward, men realized that victory was for those revolutionary Alawids who had spared no effort for religion, and the defeat in life and religion were for their enemies who were victorious then.

 

Through those events, the world understands the religion and j ihad which ahl al Bayt adopted to enliven the Muslim Law, and the reason why their enemies waged those war against them. Then the intentions of the two parties have became clear; other wise (we have the right to ask): What was the crime of that suckling baby whose milk dried and whose lips faded because of thirst? Why did they kill him with an arrow white he was on the chest of his father? Why did that arrow make him flickering like the slaughtered bird? Why did they kill those innocent children while they did not take part at that battle?

 

What was the crime that ted the Omayyads to rob the women of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, (i.e. his grandsons), of their (possessions)? Why did they force them to ride thin (camels) while they were hitting and abusing them? Why were they moved from one country to another as the slaves were moved?

 

If al- Husayn and his family waged war against the Omayyads for authority, then there was no need to make their horses tread on his body, no need to raise his head on the spear, and no need to capture his family and force them to ride thin camels. I wonder; is cutting the heads off, peaking

 

the chests and the BACKs with the hooves of the horses, robbing the bodies (of their clothes), leaving them naked in the open without burying, and taking the women as prisoners, the ambition of a person who revolts (aga.7inst the ruling regime) for property and authority?

 

The thing that throws salt in the injuries, harms the ulcer, and increases the misfottune, is that the people did not commit those ugly crimes against al- Husayn and his family because they were ignorant about his position or they thought that he deviated from religion, rather they knew that he was the owner of religion, the master of the caliphate, the master of the young men of Paradise, and the basil of the Prophet. Moreover, they knew hia outstanding merits.

 

Not only they knew al- Husayn, peace be on him, but also his family and companions, such as Yahya, Zayd, and the people of Fakh, who were liable to the sword, poison, prison, and oppression.

 

Consequently, there would be no heresies if the world clearly understood those known attitudes to know that the battle between ahl al Bayt and their enemies was a battle between the virtue and the vice, and those who wanted to get the thrones were not able to get them but by waging war against ahl al Bayt to wipe them out of existence because they thought that they would not be able to achieve their ambitions while ahl al Bayt had a standing ghost and shade people sit in. Therefor, the crime of ah I al Bayt towards those people was that they were the people of religion and the masters of outstanding merits, so men were not able to sit in the thrones of the Caliphate while ahl al Bayt were the most qualified for it. The nation knew their position among the children of Islam.

Book Name:   Imam Sadiq

 Author: Shaykh Muhammad al-Hussein al-Mudaffar