Did Imam Husain gave the oath of allegiance to Muawiyah?

[S. Insaf]

According to historian Taha Husain (Ali page 383 to 386):

"Though both Imam Hasan and Imam Husain were sons of Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Fatima but they had totally different temperament, outlook and character.
Imam Hasan was mild, thoughtful, serious and compromising avoiding war and bloodshed. Therefore he signed a peace treaty with Amir Muawiyah giving up his claim of Khilafat in order not live the terrible life and war as faced by his father.
Imam Husain did not like his brother’s pact with Amir Muawiyah. He considered it as a blow to their father’s principles. Imam Husain was very strict and rigid and non-compromising. But he kept quite then as he was loyal to his brother till his death, also because he was bound by the oath of allegiance given to Amir Muawiyah. Imam Husain was not the person to go against the oath of allegiance.
Imam Husain was keenly observing the developments. He saw that Muawiyah had acquired the full control over the Khilafat. Amir Muawiyah had adopted a soft policy of generosity and overlooking wrongdoings. He had appointed such governors and officers in deferent cities who were suppressing the people by terror and torture.
Looking to these circumstances Imam Husain did not rebel against Amir Muawiyah, even though he had the enough reason as Muawiyah had acted against the peace treaty. Amir Muawiyah went against the peace treaty twice. First when he massacred the Kofians and second when he appointed his son Yazid his successor, thus turning the Khilafat into Virasat.
Again misuse of Baitulmal (public treasury) by Amir Muawiyah for his extravagancy, appointment of autocratic tyrant governors who were given free hands to extract money and property from their subjects were all in breach of the peace treaty with Imam Husan. Imam Husain could be fully justified if had rebelled against Amir Muawiyah. But Imam Husain thought it was not the right time to oppose Amir Muawiyah but continued to critisise his governors and officers."

Taha Husain further says that:

"We can see the clear effects of politics and policies of Imam Hasan and Imam Husain. As along as Imam Hasan was alive no harm was done to the lives and properties of Shias. Shai Jamat used to criticize Amir Muawiyah in private. Amir Muawiyah also used to treat them kindly. But when Imam Husain came on the scene their protest became violent and in Kufa their protest reached to the level of open defiance. Now Amir Muawiyah also started smashing this protest by violent attacks."

Taha Husain claims that “Imam Husain was bound by the oath of allegiance given to Amir Muawiyah.” How far is it true?

This historical episode gives me the following insight:
1) Deviating from the earlier tradition of honesty and welfare of the community when over-ambitious, scheming and vindictive Sayedna Taher Saifuddin started his autocratic rule the Bohras did not oppose him then and soon he became so powerful like Muawiyah that it became very difficult to challenge him. Now they do not know how to overthrow the burdon. They are also not ready to secrify even slight comfort of their life.

2) The lives and the properties of all those Bohras who did not oppose Sayedna openly, remained safe but those who raised their voice of dissent openly had to face a tragic end.

3) It was Sayedna Taher Saifuddin who gave a free hand to his family members and Amils to extract money and property from Bohras and misuse the public treasury for their own comfort.

4) Though outwardly Dawoodi Bohra Priests show that they are the true followers of Hazrat Ali and Imam Husain in fact they are the followers of Muawiyah’s politics and policies.

[profrog]

s insaap you iblis snake you have shown your true colours in open now,all this time you and your god ajger have been claiming to just been against our moula but now you are going after imam hussein also,even to think what you have stated is a big sin that imam hussein would give oath to lain muawiyah,khuda laanat tara par

[profrog]

i know all your fellow shaitans will rush to your defence but bottom line is that you are biggest shaitan of all and had you been born during the time of adam a.s you would have given even the original iblis a run for his money with your sugar coated cynide poison pills which you spew from your mouth,again tara par lanat

[pro_pig]

insaf
i feel sorry for you that your parents as not teach u deen and duniya. what made you to bring this topic and month of mohrram in couple of days.
you r 60 yrs of i think you brain is instable show to doctor i will pay for that.

[Sajid Zafar]

Dear Saifuddin Bhai Insaf:

Don't get discourage or insulted. These people are blindfolded and brain washed as said by God almighlty in his book.

"HUMNE UNKE DILOO PER MOHER LAGA DEHE"

Keep up you good work.

[mbohra]

I am NOT defending Mr. Insaf- just clarifying.

Perhaps it was a TYPO. May be he, insaf, meant " Did Imam HASSAN give the oath of allegiance to Muawiyah? "

It seems that it is a historical fact that Imam Hassan for the sake of peace in Islam made a treaty and truce with Mu'awiyah.

Why Imam Hassan (a.s.) accepted the Truce?

The adventurer Khawarij and the dishonest friends of Imam Hassan (a.s.) made it inevitable for the Imam Hassan (a.s.) to accept truce with Muawiyah. But truce did not mean that Imam Hassan (a.s.) colluded and put up with Muawiyah and agreed to his cruel and brutal activities. But it meant to make a no war pact with Muawiyah for a certain period. Because, if Muawiyah became victorious he would had smashed and destroyed all the hopes of Islam and would have destroyed the foundation of Islam and killed all the true Muslims. Besides, the Roman Empire was seeking a chance to attack the Islamic lands, and this mutual difference of Muslims was the best opportunity for it. Thus Imam Hassan (a.s.) who was smoldering with pain spoke to his untrue and unfaithful friends, "I know that you would practice craftiness and artifice, a group who do not have neither shame nor religion have unconditionally handed themselves over to Muawiyah, woe to you, By God, Muawiyah will not fulfill his commitments. I wanted to establish for you the religion of the right but you did not help me. You started moving on the path of opposition and confrontation and committed dishonesty with me, which forced and obliged me to sign the treaty. By God, if I had friends and helpers I would not have surrendered the work to Muawiyah because, I consider the caliphate to be prohibited for Bani Ommayide. You will soon taste the bitterness of the conduct of Muawiyah, day and night. After the Imam Hassan (a.s.) was forced to make truce with Muawiyah, he wrote a letter to him saying, "I wanted to revive the right and put an end to rescinded and vanity and establish the ruler ship of God and the sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) but people did not agree and accompany me. Now, I am making a truce with you upon the conditions, which I know that you will not fulfill and comply with. But soon you would repent, but that will be a time when it will not be of benefit to you.

Then, he sent his cousin Abdullah Bin Harris to see Muawiyah so that he should get him committed upon the conditions, which he had presented after a negotiation with him, and write down the agreement, and treaty of truce.

A part of the truce treaty is as under: -

1. The blood of the Shias must remain respect worthy and their rights must not be confiscated and crushed.

2. Filthy language must not be used against Hazrat Ali (a.s.) and his Shias.

3. Muawiyah should practice upon the Book of God (The Quran) and the Sunnah of Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw).

4. The friends and companions of Imam Hassan (a.s.) must remain safe and secure from his mischief's and brutalities wherever they live and no one has the right to resist them.

5. Imam Hassan (a.s.) does not call Muawiyah, Ameerul Momineen and will not take his name in the Khutbas (sermons).

6. Muawiyah must not hand over the caliphate to anybody after himself.

The Breaking of the Pact:

After the peace pact was conducted, Muawiyah focused his attention upon Kufa and held the Juma prayer congregation at Nakheela. He evidently and clearly said in his Jumma speach "Oh people I did not fight against you so that you should offer your prayers and keep fast, instead, it was for the reason that I rule over you although you do not like it. I will crush all the conditions of truce pact conducted with Hassan bin Ali (a.s.) under my feet. But the conduct of Muawiyah in certain matters showed that he was strongly embarrassed and harassed due to the influence of Imam Hassan (a.s.) so that sometimes he was obliged to put into practice few of the points of the peace pact.

So that once when Ibn-e-Ziad the governor of Kufa followed and chased (to punish) one of the friends of Imam (a.s.), Imam Hassan (a.s.) wrote about the incident to Muawiyah, who at once reprimanded Ibn-e-Ziad about this event.

Finally Muawiyah Decided to make Yazeed his successor:

But the pact, which he had signed with Imam Hassan (a.s.), stopped him from this act. He decided to poison the Imam Hassan (a.s.) so that the way to the succession of his son Yazeed should become open and clear. And then make the people forcibly take oath of allegiance (for Yazeed's). Therefore, he contacted "Jodah bint Asash" the wife of Imam Hassan (a.s.) and deceived by luring her and sent a poison for her, with the message that if you make your husband take this poison you will get a prize of one hundred thousand Dirhams from me. Besides, I will select you as the wife of Yazeed and you will become the wife of the caliph of Muslims.

The dishonest hand poisoned the Imam's Utensil (food):

JUSTIFICATIONS OF THE TREATY
WITH MU'AWIYAH AND ITS TERMS
http://home.swipnet.se/islam/imamhassan.htm

But the whole point and intent of Imam Husein and his followers' glorious martyrdom was was his refusal to give the oath of allegiance to Yezid, son of Mu'awiya - and the rest as they say is the immortal history of Kerbala and Imam Hussein's and his faithful followers and family members' sacrifice for Islam.

[mbohra]

These are the items of importance of the treaty which were accepted by the two parties. As it is clear for the reader, it is of great benefit to the ummah and its noble Message. These terms were the most that Imam Hasan (a.s.) could achieve for the ummah and its mission. Were there any better substitute that could be achieved, he would not have hesitated to take advantage of them.

A number of Muslims objected to the treaty. Imam Hasan (a.s.) explained to them why he had taken this step. He said to Bashir al-Hamadani:

"I am, by no means, humiliating the faithful, but honoring them. By my making peace, I only wanted to spare you death, when I saw my followers lingering and refraining from going to war."

Al-Hamadani was the first one who was too coward to fight. To Malik bin Dhumrah, who talked to him about the document, he said:

"I feared, lest the Muslims should be uprooted from the surface of earth. I wanted the faith to have men who call to it."

He said to Abu-Sa'eed:

"Abu-Sa'eed! The reason why I made peace with Mu'awiyah is the same one which made the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) make peace with the tribe of Banu Dhumrah and Banu-Ashja', and the people of Mecca when he returned from al-Hudaibiyyah.(40)

Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (a.s.) refers to the significance of the treaty, and its positive effects for the benefit of Islam and Muslims, in these words:

"By Allah, what Hasan bin Ali (a.s.) did was better for this ummah than what the sun had shone on."(41)

It is because the wise leader, through studies of the status quo, takes a position towards some events, that he sees with his insight and mind what others, his contemporaries, fail to see, until after some time. That is exactly what happened to Imam Hasan (a.s.).

[abcd]

Poor Pro_pig,

You have proved again that you do not have brain. Instead of looking at the article on academically you have started cursing. BTW can you clarify what is deen and duniya and what you have learned from you parent besides cursing!

[like_minded]

profag and propig,

You are idiots!! and profag, stop calling names,, havent you learned any manners?? If you cant debate on a subject, stop abusing!!

[like_minded]

propig,

here we have millions of bohra minds brain-washed by the kotharis and have forgotten what actual islam is!!

You should volunteer sponsoring them to meet the medical expenses.

[profrog]

like i said before insaap your fellow shaitans will rush to defend you very fast.what they do not realise is that by trying to defend you they are also falling in the trap you have fallen that is putting doubts on the holy person of imam hussein sa,and they also will meet the same fate that you will meet,again laanat tara par ane tara sathiyo par

[kseeker]

This post is a direct reply to the original post.

1. Hasan (AS) gave his oath to Muwaiyah for the same reason Hazrat Ali (AS) gave his oath to Abu Bakar, Omer and Uthman...to avoid civil wars and to avoid Islam from being perished. He didnot want the Propehts hard work to go down the drain....

2. Husain (AS) never condemned and was never against any decision made by his elder brother.
It is true, he was a man of his word and never broke his aligience to Muwaiyah. Again something that their father did when Omer made the biddat of tarawi in ramazan.

3. After muawiyah died, Yazid wanted imam Hussain to give his alligience to him and Imam Hussain had planned to do so ( again for the same reasons as his brother and father) but he saw Yazid consuming alcohol, playing with dogs and enjoying whores thus he didnot give alligience! Not because he was hot tempered or wanted his right to the caliphate...

He didnot want Islam to perish at the hands of a drunkard. If he would have given Yazid his alligience, he was certain the Yazid would destory the religion completly by allowing all the banned things in islam....

He chose death over alligience.....

As far as ur claim that kotharis are following the methods of Muaiyah and Yazid, I would say that you are being very harsh.. trying to earn money is not wrong.. I do agree most of them are greedy bitches who loot people but i also see that bohra ppl do get some facilites too...

Please dont judge everyone based on few bad ones...

[tahir]

Originally posted by kseeker:
Yazid wanted imam Hussain to give his alligience to him and Imam Hussain had planned to do so ( again for the same reasons as his brother and father) but he saw Yazid consuming alcohol, playing with dogs and enjoying whores thus he didnot give alligience! Not because he was hot tempered or wanted his right to the caliphate...

For the same reason, Bohras shouldn't give allegience to the present dai who is so steeped in lust. He may not be overtly consuming alcohol or playing with whores but he is definitely doing things which are more catastrophic to the wider masses.

Regarding the facilities bohras get, well Imam hussain would have got many facilities had he given allegience.

[kseeker]

Originally posted by tahir:

he is definitely doing things which are more catastrophic to the wider masses.

would u please be kind enough to illustrate as to which habits of his are catastrophic to the wider masses?

[mburhan]

kseeker:

For starters, what about the FGM - Female Genital Mutilations, being practiced and enforced on Bohri girls at the very impressionable age, when they don't have any options to object or resist this barbaric and inhuman practice. This is a criminal offence in most western countries and is a breach of human and sexual rights of women.

[profrog]

what you are saying is that rasullah sa was wrong because this practice is done by all muslims and not only bohras,

[mburhan]

Profrog:

Show us by evidentiary documents if the practice was followed or enforced by the Prophet, as you allege or is mentioned in the Holy Quran, Shariah or Hadith, if any.?

Did you know that the Bohris are the only Asian community who, out of the dictate of their Leader, religiously follow this illegal and criminal activity under the guise of religion.

You apparently don't know the difference between your posterior orfice (or anterior or both, if you are a female) and the hole in the muddy ground.

[tahir]

Originally posted by kseeker:

Originally posted by tahir:
would u please be kind enough to illustrate as to which habits of his are catastrophic to the wider masses?

Moral, spiritual and ofcourse financial exploitation to start with. To know what that means, do your homework and read some threads on this board.

[kseeker]

@ MBURHAN..

the female genitals which r removed are ones which cause extreme sexual arousal in women..feelings which make them succumb to the temptation of pre-marital sex....

true, it is not compulsory in islam but there is do doubt that its removal does have a lot of positive effects..chances of pre marital sex is very low when a woman is undergone this procedure....

thus the high rates of pre marital sex in europe, also increasing the rates of AIDS and other illnesses

@TAHIR:
I hav gone through a lot of the topic on this forum. I have noticed that each topic is almost the same... both sects of bohra just taunting nd insulting each other..both sects r whiners....atleast most who r on this forum are...

i dont know how old u r, neither do i know wht atrocity have u faced on the hands of the kotharis...beleive me in not fond of them either...but frm my extensive experience of stayin with them, and away from them....i have to admit that for my afterlife, staying with them is better....

I would be glad if u would seriously elabborate on the problems u have against them....

[kseeker]

@ MBURHAN..

the female genitals which r removed are ones which cause extreme sexual arousal in women..feelings which make them succumb to the temptation of pre-marital sex....

true, it is not compulsory in islam but there is do doubt that its removal does have a lot of positive effects..chances of pre marital sex is very low when a woman is undergone this procedure....

thus the high rates of pre marital sex in europe, also increasing the rates of AIDS and other illnesses

@TAHIR:
I hav gone through a lot of the topic on this forum. I have noticed that each topic is almost the same... both sects of bohra just taunting nd insulting each other..both sects r whiners....atleast most who r on this forum are...

i dont know how old u r, neither do i know wht atrocity have u faced on the hands of the kotharis...beleive me in not fond of them either...but frm my extensive experience of stayin with them, and away from them....i have to admit that for my afterlife, staying with them is better....

I would be glad if u would seriously elabborate on the problems u have against them....

[kseeker]

@ MBURHAN..

the female genitals which r removed are ones which cause extreme sexual arousal in women..feelings which make them succumb to the temptation of pre-marital sex....

true, it is not compulsory in islam but there is do doubt that its removal does have a lot of positive effects..chances of pre marital sex is very low when a woman is undergone this procedure....

thus the high rates of pre marital sex in europe, also increasing the rates of AIDS and other illnesses

@TAHIR:
I hav gone through a lot of the topic on this forum. I have noticed that each topic is almost the same... both sects of bohra just taunting nd insulting each other..both sects r whiners....atleast most who r on this forum are...

i dont know how old u r, neither do i know wht atrocity have u faced on the hands of the kotharis...beleive me in not fond of them either...but frm my extensive experience of stayin with them, and away from them....i have to admit that for my afterlife, staying with them is better....

I would be glad if u would seriously elabborate on the problems u have against them....

[kalim]

Dear kseeker,

I have been on this board for a long time (about 6 years) and have never felt as angry as on reading your previous post on FGM. FGM is a crime. Period. No one can justify it by talking about "arousal", "temptation" or "pre-marital sex". People who condone it, for whatever reason, be they da'is, mullahs or shehzadas or ordinary bohras are criminals. No one, absolutely no one, has the right to mutilate a child. Anyway, why do you think pre-marital sex is bad? Don't answer this for it has been discussed extensively before. I believe people who make statements like you did are no better than anti-feminist thugs who compare women to uncovered meat. Just a source of temptation for men. Why can't men keep a check on their sexuality? If self control not a good thing? Or have your gods and prophets absolved men from all responsibility?

With logic like yours we should also start lobotomizing everyone at birth. That way they will not "succumb to temptation" and ask too many questions about jamaat autonomy, accountability, social justice, ethics etc. What better way to have a bunch of gullible followers than kill all urge to question? That is precisely what the orthodox are trying to do: lobotomize without surgery. You are worried about afterlife. What about this life? Do you not want to make it better for yourself and others around you? It seems very likely that this life is all we have. So we should make the best of it by creating happiness for ourselves and everyone around us. That is not going to happen if you throw out your ability to think rationally in the nearest trash can.

And you keep ask "what you have against them"? Have you actually read anything on this board? Have you even looked at the Natwani Commision report? Or read or experienced violence on the hands of the followers of the da'i who styles himself a "messenger of peace"? My grandfather, although a devoted follower of the da'i, a great writer and historian, was almost kicked out the community for simply inviting shaiks from the Jamia who much later turned against the da'i. His shock at this treatment was so intense that he died within a few years. Are these people the ones leading you to a good afterlife? Or are they leading you down the path to hell?

[Average Bohra]

Originally posted by kseeker:
chances of pre marital sex is very low when a woman is undergone this procedure.....

If Anajmi were to surgically remove your penis, or you his, chances of pre marital sex is very low . Your primitive thinking is disgusting and angering.

[anajmi]

Average Moron,

I am hoping that you were not thinking with your penis!!

[anajmi]

kalim,

Anyway, why do you think pre-marital sex is bad? Don't answer this for it has been discussed extensively before.

Well, if you are dumb enough to ask the question anyway, let me be stupid enough to answer it anyway.

Pre-marital and marital sex has to do with responsibility. The pro pre-marital sex folks are the ones who want no responsibility of any kind. These folks want to partake of every joy that the world has to offer but avoid any responsibilities that come with it. Ask these folks if it ok for them to be restricted to only one sexual partner and they will scream in disgust. Ask them if it is ok to restrict the number of partners to, say, 4 and they will again scream out loud. Tell them they can have unlimited partners and they will be very happy. Every single mother and b_astard out there is a result of the disbelievers.

Now tell these same folks that you are allowed to marry four women and they will accuse the muslims of being sex craved. What they don't understand is that the muslim man is expected to bear 4 times as much responsibility as an average man, and in case of a disbeliever that number is actually infinite as the disbeliever does not want the responsibility of even a single marriage.

Bottom line, a "pre-marital" sex is ok guy is nothing but a coward!!

[anajmi]

Bottom line, a "pre-marital-sex-is-ok" guy is nothing but a coward!!