Sacrifice of Al Hussain?

[Hadrami]

Why was Yazeed so eager for Hussein's baya? That would definitely give Yazeed's Khilafat the ultimate seal of approval. It would give Yazeed's governance the legitimacy that he so badly needed. Otherwise he knew he was doomed.

Hussein's response. Hussein did not say;
"I will not give baya to Yazeed or Yazeed does not deserve baya". NO. But in fact Hussein laid down the principle by saying, making and giving such a beautiful statement that;
"Someone like me can never accept someone like Yazeed as Khalifa, someone like me can never give baya to someone like Yazeed".

and yet husayn ra accepted yazid's dad whom shia said was a munafiq/kafir as a legitimate khalifa. Well, shia bollywood version of history never makes sense

[iceman]

People are bringing in other matters like;
and why didn't Ali do something about Abu Bakr and Omar.
and what about the sacrifice of Zayd ibne Ali and his sons.
what about the killing of Usman,
and why didn't Hussein revolt against Moawiyah etc.
Please lets stick to the thread, subject and what is being discussed. If you want to discuss other matters then please by all means start a different thread. Rest assured everything will be addressed and handled. One step at a time

[iceman]

Why was Yazeed so eager for Hussein's baya? That would definitely give Yazeed's Khilafat the ultimate seal of approval. It would give Yazeed's governance the legitimacy that he so badly needed. Otherwise he knew he was doomed.

Hussein's response. Hussein did not say;
"I will not give baya to Yazeed or Yazeed does not deserve baya". NO. But in fact Hussein laid down the principle by saying, making and giving such a beautiful statement that;
"Someone like me can never accept someone like Yazeed as Khalifa, someone like me can never give baya to someone like Yazeed".

and yet husayn ra accepted yazid's dad whom shia said was a munafiq/kafir as a legitimate khalifa. Well, shia bollywood version of history never makes sense

Like I said lets stick to the subject. One step at a time. Steady on there!

[Hadrami]

maybe because you couldnt answer a simple question? Farid asked you a question which hasnt been answered, just like you didnt answer a question in anoter thread

[Hadrami]

Why was Yazeed so eager for Hussein's baya? That would definitely give Yazeed's Khilafat the ultimate seal of approval. It would give Yazeed's governance the legitimacy that he so badly needed. Otherwise he knew he was doomed.

Hussein's response. Hussein did not say;
"I will not give baya to Yazeed or Yazeed does not deserve baya". NO. But in fact Hussein laid down the principle by saying, making and giving such a beautiful statement that;
"Someone like me can never accept someone like Yazeed as Khalifa, someone like me can never give baya to someone like Yazeed".

and yet husayn ra accepted yazid's dad whom shia said was a munafiq/kafir as a legitimate khalifa. Well, shia bollywood version of history never makes sense

Like I said lets stick to the subject. One step at a time. Steady on there!

well it is related to subject. Muawiyah was as bad as yazid according to shia, but husayn ra pledge allegiance to him and gave his khilafa legitimacy. Any other bollywood excuses? 😁

[Abu Muhammad]

A question we need to ask ourselves is that why did Yazeed replace his governer in Kufa with ibne Ziyaad. Because ibne Ziyaad was very well known for his brutal natural and ruthless stance. He was known for his heavy handed tactics and would be able to crush the uprising by controlling the Kufans.

And this is exactly what he did through extreme means of violence and threatening behaviour. The Kufans are accused of betrayal,  that is not true. Extreme violence was used to kerb and control the Kufans. They were persecuted. They were tortured and murdered.

A simple question you need to ask yourself is that Ibn Ziyad came with only 17 men while those Kufans giving bay'ah to Al-Hussein was 12,000. That numbers alone shows you that Ibn Ziyad could have been easily crushed by them, if they really wanted to. But their inability to do that showed the kind of people the Kufans were and put your argument directly down the drain.

Even with Umar Ibn Sa'ad's forces, they only numbered 4,000, still lower than 12,000. Moreover, they came after the Ibn Ziyad came to Kufah.

What a pathetic argument!

[MuslimK]

Some sermons of Ali in Nahjul-Balagha about his followers in Kufa, they were known for their treachery:

Sermon #39: “I am faced with men who do not obey when I order and do not respond when I call them. May you have no father! (Woe to you!)...

Sermon #29: “...You claim in your sittings that you would do this and that, but when fighting approaches, you say (to war), “turn thou away” (i.e. flee away)....

Sermon #25: ...Even if I give you charge of a wooden bowl I fear you would run away with its handle. O’ Allah they are disgusted of me and I am disgusted of them...

More:
http://nahjul-balagha.net/the-companions-of-ali-bin-abi-talib/

http://nahjul-balagha.net/companions-of-the-prophet-vs-companions-of-ali/

[iceman]

maybe because you couldnt answer a simple question? Farid asked you a question which hasnt been answered, just like you didnt answer a question in anoter thread

Open your eyes and then read. That's your job and there's nothing I can do about that.

[iceman]

Some sermons of Ali in Nahjul-Balagha about his followers in Kufa, they were known for their treachery:

Sermon #39: “I am faced with men who do not obey when I order and do not respond when I call them. May you have no father! (Woe to you!)...

Sermon #29: “...You claim in your sittings that you would do this and that, but when fighting approaches, you say (to war), “turn thou away” (i.e. flee away)....

Sermon #25: ...Even if I give you charge of a wooden bowl I fear you would run away with its handle. O’ Allah they are disgusted of me and I am disgusted of them...

More:
http://nahjul-balagha.net/the-companions-of-ali-bin-abi-talib/

http://nahjul-balagha.net/companions-of-the-prophet-vs-companions-of-ali/

These weren't his followers these were the Muslims. This was and is the fate of the Muslims. What do you think of the Muslims now? How graceful and honourable do you think they are?

[iceman]

A question we need to ask ourselves is that why did Yazeed replace his governer in Kufa with ibne Ziyaad. Because ibne Ziyaad was very well known for his brutal natural and ruthless stance. He was known for his heavy handed tactics and would be able to crush the uprising by controlling the Kufans.

And this is exactly what he did through extreme means of violence and threatening behaviour. The Kufans are accused of betrayal,  that is not true. Extreme violence was used to kerb and control the Kufans. They were persecuted. They were tortured and murdered.

A simple question you need to ask yourself is that Ibn Ziyad came with only 17 men while those Kufans giving bay'ah to Al-Hussein was 12,000. That numbers alone shows you that Ibn Ziyad could have been easily crushed by them, if they really wanted to. But their inability to do that showed the kind of people the Kufans were and put your argument directly down the drain.

Even with Umar Ibn Sa'ad's forces, they only numbered 4,000, still lower than 12,000. Moreover, they came after the Ibn Ziyad came to Kufah.

What a pathetic argument!

These Kufans were Muslims just like you and just like those who believed in Khilafath. They weren't Imamiya. The Shias were those who stood by Hussein and perished and those who were persecuted by ibne Ziyad and those who were arrested and locked up or under house arrest like Mukhtar Sakafi etc.

[iceman]

My argument isn't pathetic but this is;
the Shias killed Hussein and it was the Shias who betrayed him and it was also the Shias who allowed his killing by standing by and it was the Shias who did this and it was the Shias who did that.

It seems and sounds like the vast majority of the Ummah was Shia Imamiya. Where was the Sunis and how did Khilafath exceed if Shias were everyone. Who sent forces to attack Madina after Karbala? And after this who sent forces to Mecca to attack the Holy Kaba? And are you still going to tell us that it wasn't about Islam?

[iceman]

Why was Yazeed so eager for Hussein's baya? That would definitely give Yazeed's Khilafat the ultimate seal of approval. It would give Yazeed's governance the legitimacy that he so badly needed. Otherwise he knew he was doomed.

Hussein's response. Hussein did not say;
"I will not give baya to Yazeed or Yazeed does not deserve baya". NO. But in fact Hussein laid down the principle by saying, making and giving such a beautiful statement that;
"Someone like me can never accept someone like Yazeed as Khalifa, someone like me can never give baya to someone like Yazeed".

and yet husayn ra accepted yazid's dad whom shia said was a munafiq/kafir as a legitimate khalifa. Well, shia bollywood version of history never makes sense

Like I said lets stick to the subject. One step at a time. Steady on there!

well it is related to subject. Muawiyah was as bad as yazid according to shia, but husayn ra pledge allegiance to him and gave his khilafa legitimacy. Any other bollywood excuses? 😁

Start another bollywood thread and then we will discuss it. Please stick to the subject. Just read and listen or do something else but useful if you can't contribute positively.

[Farid]

Iceman said:

When Hussein and his companions were eventually killed their bodies were refused funeral. Where did Islam go here? Their bodies were trampled by horses. What does Islam say here? The heads were cut off from the bodies and put on spears. What does Islam say about this?

And when the heads reached Yazeed's residence and were brought before him what did Yazeed say?
"Now I have avenged the killings of my ancestors in the battle of Badr". Where is Islam here?

And you talk about How Hussein saved Islam? And you say this wasn't about Islam. And you ask for references. Answer me this,  do you honestly believe that those who get in to authority and gain power they will leave things/material lying around which opposes them, that goes against them and which is damaging towards them?

You are correct in stating that these actions are un-Islamic, but you did not explain how Islam was saved by Al-Hussain's "sacrifice".

Most, if not all, political Muslim leaders today do un-Islamic things. Some are worse than others. However, Islam will continue to exist after they are six feet under. No matter how influential today, nobody can destroy Islam in the way that you are suggesting that Yazeed was going to.

The biggest crime that you have mentioned was the martyrdom of Al-Hussain. Wouldn't that mean that if he didn't "sacrifice" himself, then the crimes of Yazeed would have been much less significant?

The worst thing that you have mentioned about Yazeed, pre-Karbala, is that his mother used to dance. I'm not sure if you mentioned that he used to drink. Even though there are question marks around both accusations, I do not believe that these two things would lead to the destruction of Islam.

Oh, and Al-Hussain had nothing to do with the Battle of Badr, so please do not believe fabrications about Yazeed celebrating vengeance over his forefathers. You speak as if Ali killed a hundred people from Bani Umayyah in Badr. There were only four that were killed and only one (Al-Aas bin Sa'eed) may have been killed by Ali, while some scholars said that he was killed by Abu Yaseer Ka'ab bin Amr.

[Ijtaba]

If that is your strongest evidence, then you have to re-examine your beliefs on Al-Hussain, because again, you are forcing your judgement upon the people of Kufa, instead of accepting Al-Hussain's faith in them.

Also, refer to my original post. I've clearly stated that Al-Hussain attempted to back out from Karbala, which shows that he did not plan on getting sacrificed, nor did he want to get his family killed, which is a great sin by the way.

Agreed. Imam Hussain (a.s) never planned on getting sacrificed nor wanted his family to be killed.

Imam Hussain (a.s) attempting to back out from Karbala brings following questions in my mind:

- When did Imam Hussain (a.s) get to know about Muslim bin Aqeel's death and betrayal of Kufians?

- At the time when Imam Hussain (a.s) got news about Muslim bin Aqeel's death and betrayal of Kufians... what did Imam Hussain (a.s) do? Did he stop his journey to Kufa and head back towards Mecca or Medina?

- If he (a.s) did not head back towards Mecca... what was the reason for this? Was he surrounded by the Syrian armies at that time?

[Ijtaba]

Why? Its simple, because he didnt know its gonna end up that way, that his so called shia would abandoned him. The reason why its difficult for you to swallow that is because youve been fed lies by shia scholars that he knew whats gonna happen.

Imam Hussain (a.s) was really surprised when he saw his so called shias (i.e. Kufians) abandoning him. He saw these Kufians abandoning his father Imam Ali (a.s) and his brother Imam Hassan (a.s) and yet trusted them so much that he accepted their call and went to them. But who would have known these known disloyal, cowards, betrayers would betray Imam Hussain (a.s).

Even I am shocked how could these known betrayers and disloyal people leave Imam Hussain (a.s) alone against Syrian army?

[Ijtaba]

Some sermons of Ali in Nahjul-Balagha about his followers in Kufa, they were known for their treachery:

Sermon #39: “I am faced with men who do not obey when I order and do not respond when I call them. May you have no father! (Woe to you!)...

Sermon #29: “...You claim in your sittings that you would do this and that, but when fighting approaches, you say (to war), “turn thou away” (i.e. flee away)....

Sermon #25: ...Even if I give you charge of a wooden bowl I fear you would run away with its handle. O’ Allah they are disgusted of me and I am disgusted of them...

More:
http://nahjul-balagha.net/the-companions-of-ali-bin-abi-talib/

http://nahjul-balagha.net/companions-of-the-prophet-vs-companions-of-ali/

But still Imam Hussain (a.s) accepted their call of pledging allegiance and went to them with his family and close friends. This shows the love Imam Hussain (a.s) had for them i.e. Kufians.

[Farid]

@ Ijtaba:

Agreed. Imam Hussain (a.s) never planned on getting sacrificed nor wanted his family to be killed.

Just to make sure, are you currently of the opinion that he didn't plan on this, but ended up sacrificing himself to save Islam after he made his trip? Or are you of the opinion that he never sacrificed himself in any case and that the Shi'ee belief that he did is incorrect?

[Ijtaba]

@ Ijtaba:
Just to make sure, are you currently of the opinion that he didn't plan on this, but ended up sacrificing himself to save Islam after he made his trip? Or are you of the opinion that he never sacrificed himself in any case and that the Shi'ee belief that he did is incorrect?

My understanding is Imam Hussain (a.s) and his family (a.s) never wanted to sacrifice their lives for disloyal betrayers but it was the Will of ALLAH (SWT) to which Imam Hussain (a.s) and his family (a.s) submitted. My belief is ALLAH (SWT) made known to Imam Hussain (a.s) that HE (SWT) wanted Imam Hussain (a.s) and his family (a.s) to be sacrificed in Karbala.

You can disagree with me and we can agree to disagree on this issue.

[iceman]

Why? Its simple, because he didnt know its gonna end up that way, that his so called shia would abandoned him. The reason why its difficult for you to swallow that is because youve been fed lies by shia scholars that he knew whats gonna happen.

Imam Hussain (a.s) was really surprised when he saw his so called shias (i.e. Kufians) abandoning him. He saw these Kufians abandoning his father Imam Ali (a.s) and his brother Imam Hassan (a.s) and yet trusted them so much that he accepted their call and went to them. But who would have known these known disloyal, cowards, betrayers would betray Imam Hussain (a.s).

Even I am shocked how could these known betrayers and disloyal people leave Imam Hussain (a.s) alone against Syrian army?

A big question you refrain from answering/addressing, where were the Sunis when all this was going on? We hear a lot about Shias but what exactly were the Sunis doing?

[iceman]

@ Ijtaba:
Just to make sure, are you currently of the opinion that he didn't plan on this, but ended up sacrificing himself to save Islam after he made his trip? Or are you of the opinion that he never sacrificed himself in any case and that the Shi'ee belief that he did is incorrect?

My understanding is Imam Hussain (a.s) and his family (a.s) never wanted to sacrifice their lives for disloyal betrayers but it was the Will of ALLAH (SWT) to which Imam Hussain (a.s) and his family (a.s) submitted. My belief is ALLAH (SWT) made known to Imam Hussain (a.s) that HE (SWT) wanted Imam Hussain (a.s) and his family (a.s) to be sacrificed in Karbala.

You can disagree with me and we can agree to disagree on this issue.

How loyal were the people of Madina? The remaining companions of the Prophet (s) and the children of those who passed away? How concerned are the leaders of Muslim countries about the killings in Burma? Just as concerned and loyal as those who watched and witnessed the killing of Hussein and did nothing about it. They just comforted and satisfied themselves like you do by putting the entire blame on Kufans and the Shias like no Sunis or Muslims existed apart from the Kufans and the Shias. It's time to have some shame.