The Birth
Anniversary of Imam Ali B. Hossein (A.S.)
Reprinted with permission from IRNA
(12/6/97). The following article has been slightly edited for the Shi'a
Homepage
"Agreement in error is far
worse than division for the sake of truth."
By Ali Amin-Nia
The Imam after Hossein b. Ali (AS) was
his son Ali b. Hossein Zayn al-Abidin (AS). He was also known as Imam
Sajjad. He was born in Medina in the year 38 A.H. (659). He lived with
his grandfather, the Commander of the Faithful Imam Ali (AS), for two
years, with his uncle, Imam Hassan (AS), for twelve years, and with his
father, for twenty-three years. After his father, he lived a further
year as an Imam.
His Imamate was confirmed in several
ways. He was the most meritorious of the creatures of God, after his
father in traditional knowledge and practices. He was more appropriate
for authority by virtue of his father and more entitled to his position
after him through his merit and lineage.
His grandfather designated him during
the lifetime of his father. The testamentary bequests were made by his
father and they were deposited with Umm Salama for him. He received them
when his father was martyred. Although any revelations of the official
atrocities against his father inevitably provoke a sense of disgust
denouncing the horrifying and shocking policies of the ruling elite as
repugnant to the conscience of man, I do not think that the fact of
cruelty as such is any more tolerable at any time. The circumstances of
his father's martyrdom still vivid in the minds of the people were
crucially important for his activities in the spreading of Islamic
principles and expressing his views of the incident.
Indeed, atrocity is a weapon of the
weak or imbalanced authority. This is a factual observation: it does not
exonerate those who use savagery as a weapon from any moral blame that
may be put on them by their victims or by anyone else. Nor does it imply
that the victims are morally inferior to the one who is perpetrating the
barbarity. This is particularly more so when involving the noble members
of the Household of the Prophet. All acts of enormity irrespective of
its year are open to severe criticism on moral grounds if on nothing
else.
The extreme wickedness of the
perpetrator can take to many forms and shapes.The atrocious ruling elite
are as an agent often miles away from where the atrocity is taking
place. The perpetrator of the evil instruction is more often than not
physically close to his victim. Often enough, the victims of atrocity
are the God-fearing members of the community.
The one who commits a wrongdoing and he
who is being wronged are irreconcilable and unlikely partners. It seems
that there will never be any agreement about the morality or immorality
of actions when involving the ruling elite and the subjects. However,
agreement in error is far worse than division for the sake of truth. The
atrocious ruling elite justifies its use of anomalies and eradicating of
its opponents by its conviction of the absolute righteousness of its
cause.
The innocent godly people justify their
opposition and overt and covert activities to entice people in their
enjoining good and forbidding the evil.Those who dispute the
righteousness of the ruling body or dismiss the relevance of the
opposition will disagree without the subjective judgments of those whose
actions they disapprove. Nevertheless, a cruel and atrocious power
structure may indeed be awesomely tyrannical and oppressive and an
opposition may be absolutely justified, yet people would still rather
remain as passive observers. Such is the eccentricity of human nature!
Of course, the ruling body has a right
to defend itself -- implicit in the absolute necessity of the power
structure. A properly constituted system of government, atrocious or
not, nevertheless is threatened with extinction. The idiosyncrasy of man
often cannot tolerate any set of standard for a long period of time. In
the confusion of such misunderstandings nothing can be helpful unless
derived from the divine constitution that is implicit in man.
Having objectives, for instance, is
grand. Achieving these objectives has nonetheless its limits. There are
many things in life for which man does not have to do anything or use
ruthless methods but wait. These will come to man tried or not. Here, it
is only fair to add that man can easily lose his remarkable tradition of
seeking help from godly people or the Almighty God in his private hours.
Ruthlessness never pays in the end. Is it not fairer to blame the
shortcomings of man on man himself and his whims?
It could be argued that if the godly
people were to insist on people's right to an honest life, the people
themselves would have, perhaps, revolted against these very same sincere
people. These are the peculiar In many ways, the time of Imam Ali b.
Hossein known as Imam Sajjad in 659 was a classic case of
post-insurgency and the response of the ruling elite was conducted on
classical counter-insurgency lines. Suppressive measures of one kind or
another were adopted and designed to deprive the Imam of the popular
support for his cause.
Against the advantage of this polity,
there were serious disadvantages. For one thing, the vivid memories of
the incident of Karbala and the people's ill-treatment of Imam Hossein
and the fact that the people did let him down at the most crucial moment
of his effort to uphold Islamic principles meant that the full glare of
publicity was permanently trained upon these events. Any departure from
the recommendations of Imam Sajjad and his standard of studying Islam
and performing prayers was immediately criticized by the public at
large.
Moreover, for the first time in a
situation of this kind involving the Household of the Prophet, public
support instead of the shame they carried for their disappointing
behaviors concerning Imam Hossein, played a major role in the
determination of public opinion, however tacit. We all know that even in
those days public opinion was never impartial, and that it could have
been easily marred. It can always be conditioned to favor the atrocities
of the ruling elite and place the godly people at a disadvantage. A
further disadvantage was of Imam's experience of the people.
The excessive and unrestricted control
of the unjust rulers of the situation was undoubtedly a grave handicap
to the efforts of Imam Sajjad in spreading the Islamic codes of conduct,
as any such restriction always is in a situation of this kind. Moreover,
the undoubted need for a humane social behavior served to reduce the
momentum of the official ferocious drive, giving some form of advantage
to the Household of the Prophet. |