The Islamic Drama Page 4

  At the age of 40 in 610 AD, Muhammad, from the tribe of Quraish in Hijaz (Saudi Arabia), was chosen as Prophet by God. It was God’s messenger, the Angel Gabriel, who revealed this to him. Muhammad started, secretly, to tell a few people close to him about the nature of this revelation. First his wife, Khadija, and then Ali, his son-in-law and cousin, believed him to be the Prophet of God.4 After three years, Muhammad took the dangerous step of revealing his prophecy to people who had worshipped idols for ages. Abuse and exile did not stop Muhammad’s attempt to call people to surrender themselves to One God and obey His commands. By the time Muhammad died in Medina in 632, not only Arabia but a large part of the Middle East had been converted to Islam, either through conviction or by force (as a result of being defeated in holy wars such as the battle of Khybar and Tabuk5 waged by Muhammad and his followers).

  Muhammad had been Prophet and lawgiver, religious and political leader. Following his death in 632, a dispute between two groups that were close to him arose over his succession. S.Husain Jafri writes:

  When the Prophet died the question of his succession was therefore understood to combine both political and religious leadership, a principle well known to the Arabs though naturally with different degrees of emphasis on one or the other of these two aspects. To some it was more political than religious; to others it was more religious than political. The majority of the Muslims, who readily accepted Abu-Bakr, laid more emphasis on the socio-political side in accepting the customary procedure of succession to the chieftain-ship in its new interpretation given by the first caliph… To some of the Companions, a normal logical choice of successor would have been another Hashimite [Muhammad’s family], and the entire question of succession to the leadership of the Muslim community was, for them, a problem of great religious significance. In addition to political expediency, deep-rooted religious consideration had to be taken into account by certain of the Companions … Thus those who laid stress on the religious principle could not accept them [Abu-Bakr and Omar] as candidates for succession to Muhammad. The candidate could come only from the Banu Hashim, and amongst them the figure of Ali’ was by far the most prominent.6

  Muhammad’s death and the dispute over his succession paved the way for the creation of two different branches within Islam: the Sunnis, who were the followers of Abu-Bakr, Omar and Uthman (the first three caliphs), and the Shiʹas, who were the followers of Ali (the fourth caliph and cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet). The Sunni branch has the majority of followers in the Muslim world, while the Shiʹa branch is the main religion of Iran and Iraq and has followers in Lebanon, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other Muslim countries.

  Shiʹa literally means ‘partisan’ or ‘follower’ and refers to those who believe in the right of Muhammad’s family, in particular Ali, his cousin and son-in-law, and his grandsons, Hassan and Hussein, to succeed the Prophet.

  According to the Shiʹa sect,7 when the Prophet died, the leadership of Islam was to pass to Ali. They argue that Ali was the first male who, after Khadija, Muhammad’s wife, believed in the Prophet. Ali was the champion warrior in most of the holy wars that brought victory for Islam.8 He had also been ready to sacrifice himself by sleeping in Muhammad’s bed to save him from assassination. The Shiʹas also interpret the Qurʹanic verse: ‘People of the House, God only desires to put away from you abomination and to cleanse you’,9 in a way that supports the idea of familial succession. According to the Shiʹ a sect this verse refers to the family of the Prophet, the five Pure Souls, Muhammad, Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussein.

  Finally, they find further support for their belief in familial succession by pointing to Muhammad’s return from his final pilgrimage to Mecca, when he stopped at Ghadir Khum, a watering-place, raised Ali’s hand and addressed him as Amir-ul-muminnin, which means ‘Commander of the Faithful’.10

  There is also a hadith11 stating that on his deathbed Muhammad tried to reaffirm in writing the succession but was foiled by Omar, who claimed that the Prophet was delirious. It also says that when Ali was occupied with the burial of Muhammad, Abu-Bakr and Omar held an election among the circle of people close to the Prophet and, through the support of Omar, Abu-Bakr was selected as the successor of Muhammad. Unlike the Shiʹas, the Sunnis do not consider this act to be one of conspiracy against Ali, but rather see it as a natural choice since Abu-Bakr, Muhammad’s father-in-law, was the senior male closest to the Prophet.

  Ali did not accept Abu-Bakr’s caliphate, but remained silent in the interest of his people and of Islamic solidarity. Abu-Bakr’s caliphate was short: he died in 634 after only two years as caliph. Omar became the second caliph in the same year. In contrast to the first caliph, who was elected by a majority of the Companions of the Prophet, Omar was elected only by the will of the first caliph.12

  Omar remained as the second caliph for ten years, during which period he conquered Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Iran and attached these countries, along with their civilizations, to the Islamic state. His army invaded Iran in 652, defeated the Persians and destroyed their empire. He began the process of preparing the Iranians to convert to the new religion, Islam. However, this was met with strong resistance from the Iranians and took over four hundred years to accomplish. As Edward G.Browne states, Omar employed a variety of techniques to encourage his subject people to ‘convert’ to Islam:

  It is often supposed that the choice offered by the warriors of Islam was between the Qurʹan and the sword. This, however, is not the fact, for Magians, as well as Christians and Jews, were permitted to retain their religion, being merely compelled to pay a jizya or poll-tax… Towns which resisted the Muslims, especially such as, having first submitted, afterwards revolted, did not, of course, escape so easily, and, more particularly in the latter case, the adult males, or at any rate those found in arms, were generally put to the sword, and the women and children taken captive.13

  A Persian slave killed Omar in 644 and brought his caliphate to an end. There were two candidates, Ali and Uthman, who were willing to succeed to the caliphate. The vote of a six-man council, which had been appointed by Omar before his assassination, favoured Uthman, and so he became the third caliph. The selection of Uthman did not pass without protest from Ali and some of the powerful people of the Banu Hashim. Uthman ruled for ten years and was killed in 656. Ali was finally made caliph by his party. However, Uthman’s kinsman Muʹawiya, the governor of Damascus, accused Ali of complicity in Uthman’s murder. This led to a split in the ranks of Muslims, resulting in the first civil war.

  Ali, who is seen by many as the leader and founder of Shiʹism, ruled for about four years and his caliphate has been recognized as being different from those of the other three caliphs, in particular that of Uthman. Tabatabai, a prominent scholar of Shiʹism, writes about Ali’s different style of caliphate:

  During his period as caliph Ali followed the ways of the Holy Prophet and brought conditions back to their original state. He forced the resignation of all the incompetent political elements who had a hand in directing affairs and began a major transformation of a ‘revolutionary’ nature, which caused him innumerable difficulties.*14

  According to Shiʹa scholars such as Tabatabai, the caliphate of Ali brought Islamic justice back to the people. His simple and modest style of living, in contrast with the imperial style and grandeur of Muʹawiya, provided the people with a model of how to rule and live. Not surprisingly, his attacks on powerful people such as Muʹawiya and his attempts to bring back justice to the community finally led to his assassination in 661.

  Refusing to give power to Ali’s sons, Hassan and Hussein, Muʹawiya saw Ali’s death as a golden opportunity to seize power for himself. He soon sent Ali’s oldest son, Hassan, to Medina to live in a kind of exile. He also nominated his own son, Yazid, to be his successor. Hussein, Ali’s second son, refused to swear allegiance to Yazid, and this created a great deal of hostility and hatred between them. However, as long as Muʹawiya was alive, Yazid was not allowed to harm
Hussein. Muʹawiya died in 680 and Yazid took power. He did not waste any time in forcing Hussein to bow to him and accept his caliphate. The conflict between Yazid and Hussein, in fact, constitutes the main dramatic plot of the Taʹziyeh. From a dramatic point of view, Yazid and his family and Hussein and his family, directly or indirectly, became the antagonists and protagonists of every Taʹziyeh play. The argument that the Taʹziyeh emerged from the conflict between Imam Hussein and Yazid and the martyrdom of Imam Hussein in the desent of Karbala has been accepted widely by many scholars who have worked on the Taʹziyeh. Farrokh Ghaffary writes: ‘The common form of the Taʹziyeh had been developed from the historical tragedy of the Karbala and the martyrdom of Imam Hussein by the soldiers of Yazid, the caliph of the Umayyad dynasty in 680.’*15

  Yazid could not tolerate Hussein’s opposition to his caliphate for long. He wrote to the governor of Medina, where Hussein was living, and asked him to force Hussein to take the oath of allegiance. If Hussein refused, the governor was to cut off his head and send it to Yazid. The governor of Medina informed Hussein of the letter, but Hussein’s response was as defiant as ever: ‘I am ready for martyrdom because Yazid’s becoming the caliph of Muslims is the death and disintegration of Islam.’*16 Hussein knew that his defiance would lead to his being killed. There was no way that he and his small army could defeat the strong army of Yazid.

  Hussein first left Medina for Mecca. But, fearing that there would be a bloody battle between his and Yazid’s armies (a battle that would have shown disrespect to the House of God), he left Mecca. He was en route to Kufa when he and his followers were surrounded by Yazid’s army in Karbala, 70 kilometres from his destination. Hussein and his family and a small number of his followers (according to some sources not more than 72) 17 were surrounded by many soldiers, who cut Hussein and his followers off from provisions for eight days. During those eight days, Yazid’s army closed in on them, denied them access to water and forced them to endure the harsh conditions of the desert. Yazid’s generals, Ibne-Saad and Shimr, stationed soldiers on the road to the river to ensure that they could not slake their thirst. Despite Hussein’s brother Abbas’s brave act of reaching the river and returning with a few waterskins, Hussein’s family, especially the women and children, suffered badly for three days.18

  1. The battle of Karbala, the main plot of the Taʹziyeh.

  On the night of the ninth day Hussein assembled his family and followers and delivered a speech.19 He told them that there was nothing ahead for them in Karbala but death and martyrdom. He then ordered the lights in the tent to be extinguished so that whoever wanted to leave him could do so without any shame. A few left, but those who stood by him stood to the end. On that night his sister came to him, weeping in despair. She told him that he was the only one left of her family:

  ‘Alas for the desolation of my family! My mother Fatima is dead, and my father Ali, and my brother Hassan. Alas for the destruction that is past!’ but Hussein’s response was as usual calm: ‘Sister, put your trust in God, and know that man is born to die, and that heavens shall not remain; everything shall pass away but the presence of God, who created all things by His power, and shall make them by His power to pass away, and they shall return to him alone. My father was better than me, and my mother was better than me, and my brother was better than me; and they and all we Muslims have an example in the Apostle of God.’20

  The next day, the tenth day of Muharram, known as Ashura,21 in 680, Hussein and his family and followers finally stood against the army of Yazid. Hussein’s speeches before his own people and the army of Yazid now constitute the core dialogue of any Taʹziyeh play:

  Yazid made me choose one of the two: either I draw my sword and defend my honour and religion or surrender to shame and humility … I am obliged to choose the first way… Death is the beginning of our joy. There is only one bridge between this world and the other world and that is death. If we are victorious it will not be anything new for us, and if we are killed, the world will know that we are not defeated.*22

  On Ashura they fought from sunrise to sunset. It was in the afternoon that the battle reached its climax and Hussein’s followers and relatives were killed one after another. Among them were Ali Akbar, Hussein’s son, Qasim, Hassan’s son, and Abbas, Hussein’s half-brother. Wounded and bleeding, Hussein finally came face to face with Shimr, a general of Yazid’s army, and at the end of a long and bloody fight Hussein was killed. The women and children of his house watched that dreadful scene.

  After Hussein had been killed, Yazid’s soldiers set the tents on fire and captured the helpless women and children. The headless bodies of Hussein and his followers were left uncovered. On the morning of 12 Muharram, the army of Yazid left the Karbala for Kufa with 72 heads on the points of their lances, and carried off the Prophet’s family as captives.

  The tragedy of Karbala has been recalled and retold for hundreds of years in every religious gathering in the month of Muharram throughout the Shiʹa world, and especially in Iran. The story has been re-enacted by people in mourning processions reading eulogies, and the passion plays of the Taʹziyeh every year in the month of Muharram. These reenactments are presented in such a passionate and impressive style that even a non-believer is likely to be impressed and to show sympathy for those who were killed.

  A key element in understanding the philosophy and psychology of Shiʹism and Taʹ ziyeh is shuhadat or ‘martyrdom’.23 What drives the characters towards their tragic destiny in every play, without any doubt, is shuhadat. Its meaning and goals must be understood from a Shiʹa point of view. In order to understand the nature of the characters and their motives and even the stylistic form of performance in Taʹziyeh, we need to discover why Hussein and his followers went to war even though they understood that they had absolutely no chance of winning.24

  Hussein goes to Karbala to be martyred in order to protect the basis of Islam. At the same time, his death makes him a living symbol or role model for those who are in search of truth and justice in this world. S.Husain Jafri writes:

  In the case of Hussein, a careful study and analysis of the events of Karbala as a whole reveals the fact that from the very beginning Hussein was planning for a complete revolution in the religious consciousness of the Muslims. All of his actions show that he was aware of the fact that a victory achieved through military strength and might is always temporal, because another stronger power can in course of time bring it down in ruins. But a victory achieved through suffering and sacrifice is everlasting and leaves permanent imprints on man’s consciousness.25

  Hussein’s name in the Persian language and culture has become synonymous with ‘martyrdom’, ‘self-sacrifice’, ‘purity’ and ‘justice’. For Persians, Hussein is not only a religious hero, but a national and mythical hero.26 Why Hussein and Shiʹism found such a place in the mind and heart of Iranians is explained by William S.Haas, who writes:

  The Shiite creed itself must be interpreted as a defensive measure which does credit to the instinct of self-assertion and self-preservation of the Persian mind. The Persians adopted and developed Shiʹism because its mystic character struck a congenial note and offered a wide field for theological and metaphysical speculations, as well as for varied emotions. No doubt in the recesses of their souls the Persians, at least those of the first centuries after the Islamic conquest, identified themselves with the persecution and martyrdom of Ali and his house. They, too, were a defeated and humiliated people whose rights and deepest convictions had been violated and trodden upon…the great psychological function of the Shia schism was the defense and self-protection against the new religion.27

  According to Haas, Shiʹism succeeded in separating the Persian mind from the original Sunni Islam. However, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, a prominent scholar on this subject, holds a different view:

  Sunnism and Shiʹism are both orthodox interpretations of the Islamic revelation contained providentially within Islam in order to enable it to integrate people of different ps
ychological constitutions into itself. Both Sunnism and Shiʹism constitute an integral part of Islamic orthodoxy which existed from the beginning. Shiʹism is not heterodox nor is it a sect although within the world of Shiʹism there have been groups who have deviated from the main orthodoxy and are sects in the real sense.28

  Certain aspects of Nasr’s view might be true, but this does not deny the fact that Sunnism and Shiʹism are, religiously and politically, different from one another. These differences cannot be ignored. Of the ‘Five Principles of Islam’, Sunni and Shiʹa agree on only three: towhid, or affirmation of the unity of God, nubuwat, or the necessity of prophecy, and maad, or the Day of Judgment. Sunnism and Shiʹism disagree on the imamat, or the belief in the imams as successor of the Prophet, and adl, or the Justice of God. These two principles, which are the subject of argument between the Sunni and Shiʹa branches of Islam, deal mostly with the question of leadership and the social system. Both principles have a great impact on the social and cultural life of people. Other elements that distinguish Shiʹism from Sunnism are ‘protest’, ‘revolt’ and ‘martyrdom’, all of which are important in Shiʹa doctrine. When these various elements were combined with the dramatic plot of the Karbala story and moving characters such as Hussein, a ‘Holy Theatre’ was created. The Taʹziyeh has been able to address the metaphysical, philosophical and psychological needs of Shiʹa believers to this day, reflecting not only the religious but also the cultural and political life of the country.