[Reader-list] Fwd: Intizar Husain on Husaini Brahmins

Tue Dec 16 10:12:48 IST 2008

Dear Yasir,

Wish to correct you on the mistranslation of one verse:

Quote
""
2. here is khwaja moeen uddin chishti ajmeri

shaah ast hussain, baadshaah ast hussain
deen ast hussain, deen panaah ast hussain
sar daad na daad dast dar dast e yazid
haqqa ke binaa e la ilah ast hussain  (farsi)

hussain is king, correct belief and saviour of the faith / gave his head but
not his hand in yazid's / true (haqqa) it is that hussain is not without
(binaa) no god (la ilah)""

haqqa ke Benaa e la ilah ast hussain

means
Without doubt, Husian is the foundation of the faith

(Haqqa) Without doubt, the foundation  (binaa in persian and urdu is 'bunyaad') of La Ilah  (which would translate as the 'faith')  is hussain.

not Urdu/Hindi  Bina - without!!

A passing comment on the rest of the discussion points to the diversity and richness of a tradtion.  There are multiple readings of historical events and their varied contemporary uses.  Ironically, some would want to read History only to find material to create conflicts that suite them in the present.  

The other project that may also lead out of reflection on history, could be to use of history to understand the contemporary conflicts, with the aim to mangage them better.

I remember an old couplet here:

Ek to woh hai ke jo aazari jaan banta gaya
Aur ik woh hai jo duniya ki zubaan banta gaya

best
gowhar

--- On Tue, 12/16/08, yasir ~يا سر <yasir.media at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: yasir ~يا سر <yasir.media at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Fwd: Intizar Husain on Husaini Brahmins
> To: kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com
> Cc: reader-list at sarai.net, "prabhat kumar" <prabhatkumar250 at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 1:01 AM
> Thanks Kshmendra,
> 
> This statement helps. I'll quote two well known
> couplets/rubaaee
> 
> 1. here is iqbal, somewhat modernist:
> 
> nehaayat rangeen o saadaa hai daastaan e haram
> intiha hai jis ki hussain, ibtidaa hai ismail  (urdu)
> 
> this the reference to the sacrifice of Ibrahim of his son
> Ismail (marking
> bakr eid) - the beginning of the story of the house (kaabaa
> / house of
> Abraham) - being brought to completion by the sacrifice of
> hussain, family
> and friends - that it is colorful with blood and simple in
> its
> connection/intent.
> 
> 2. here is khwaja moeen uddin chishti ajmeri
> 
> shaah ast hussain, baadshaah ast hussain
> deen ast hussain, deen panaah ast hussain
> sar daad na daad dast dar dast e yazid
> haqqa ke binaa e la ilah ast hussain  (farsi)
> 
> hussain is king, correct belief and saviour of the faith /
> gave his head but
> not his hand in yazid's / true (haqqa) it is that
> hussain is not without
> (binaa) no god (la ilah)
> 
> these two gentlemen are well known sunnis although liable
> to be labeled
> shia. among sufis as i mentioned in the earlier email,
> certain naqshbandi
> strains are anti-shia" - others are sympathetic, and
> take their spiritual
> line directly from Ali, while being sunni. some take it to
> Abu bakr, the
> naqshbandi admit their violence'/rashness in thought
> may be due to Umar's
> 'vein'. Shah Wali ullah a naqshbandi sunni accepted
> the shias as a school of
> thought among muslims along with the sunni schools. so
> tolerance and
> spiritual affiliation are the determinants.
> 
> Although it is true that a group formed around Ali (later
> shian e ali)
> during the prophets lifetime - while Ali prepared the
> prophet''s body for
> burial, the other fellows were meeting to appoint the 1st
> caliph - there is
> also the reverence for the ahle-baith (people of the house)
> - around which
> the controversy was spread about which wives/families were
> included in the
> prophet's house reference. most sunni sources (such as
> tabari) also point to
> ali, fatima, hasan and hussain (never in doubt), while some
> give the
> alternatives which include umme salma, or even aisha.
> 
> With reference to your other interesting mail about the
> non-existence of
> mohammad, because the first biography was much later, and
> authencity of
> versions were then pinned around the 'science of
> men'(ilm ur rijal) or
> really the science of the geneologies and characters of
> transmitters of
> knowledge. it was during this time that Muwayia
> acccelerated his campaign to
> sway opinion in his favour through a proliferation of
> hadiths. Yazid's
> father's (Muawiya) father was Abu sufyan, a meccan
> chief who sought to
> regain the power he had lost to muslims and mohammad, by
> accepting islam a
> little later after giving up the city of mecca peacefully.
> Ali and Mohammad,
> first cousins belonged to the Hashim clan which abu sufyan
> and later muawiya
> sought to displace and make the caliphate their own - which
> they did. In the
> sunni traditional narrative the chapter of the pious
> caliphs (khulafa e
> rashideen) closes at the 4th, Ali.
> 
> With Muawiya and later Yazid it is clear that the state,
> now no longer led
> by pious men, in which there is much chaos and dissension,
> is no longer a
> caliphate in spirit. This was also hussains refusal' to
> yazid. Maududi, the
> well known but non-traditional scholar (and founder of
> Jamaat e Islaami, the
> political party) makes a similar point in his book Khilafat
> aur Malookiat.
> 
> On the other hand, Ibne Khaldun's argument is for
> continuity of state and
> the challenge to it. In this light Hussain is a rebel to
> challenge yazid and
> the state, and so meets his end. this is the only argument
> i have come
> across which can be argued aginst hussain, and it finds its
> adherents. there
> are also arguments against shia common practices from which
> retrogressive
> heresy is argued. that is a problem for the shias
> themselves too, as many
> shia scholars argue against harming oneself, bloodletting,
> etc, and against
> some rituals which taunt the sunnis...
> 
> so basically what i am saying is that most sunnis also own
> hussain, in which
> the relative importance of karbala to islam is put to
> question (as compared
> to the shias), with the exception of that school of thought
> within sunnis
> which considers hussain a rebel and shias apostates. what
> are their numbers,
> i dont know.
> 
> aslo, I have'nt heard the Naik and Israr statements
> myself, but i know this
> generates heat, also Ghamdi on geo tv. where would they fit
> exactly is also
> difficult, without actual views i have seen/heard in some
> detail. There is
> no question about respect for Ali among Sunnis.
> 
> I agree the controversy over Mohammad/hussain's hair
> would be serious and
> would generate heat, not because hussain is not liked but
> because the
> versions are so different. but i have no idea. The origins
> of Laal Shahbaaz
> in Sehwan are also differently told: historians say it is
> central asia
> (transoxania, mawra un nahr oxus), but pop belief among
> shias says that he
> is descended from the imams (obviously an attempt to make
> him their own),
> unlike abdullah shah in Karachi, who actually (probably)
> is.
> 
> btw i heard that the prophets hair in the baadshahi mosque
> in lahore was
> loaned to the shah of brunei or somewhere to take to his
> country and then
> bring it back after some time. it came back but since then
> it has gone
> missing .... needless to say it is a commentary on the
> state of affairs in
> pakistan.....
> 
> best
> 
> ps: have been busy elsewhere getting educated   :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Kshmendra Kaul
> <kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com>wrote:
> 
> >  Dear Yasir
> >
> > Perhaps I should have put it differently and said that
> "Hussain is one of
> > the most important personages for Shias and carries a
> significance in Shia
> > Islamic annals much greater than in the Sunni
> ones"
> >
> > Consequently it would be quite a comedown for the
> Sunni control over
> > Hazratbal to be told that the "Hair Relic"
> is of Hussain and not Mohammed.
> > The Shias would want 'control' over it.
> >
> > Of course you know that 'Ashura' (10th day of
> the month Muharram when
> > Hussain was killed in Karbala) carries distinctly
> separate significance for
> > the Shias and Sunnis. That in no small means is
> because of the separate
> > significance Hussain himself carries for the Shias and
> the Sunnis.
> >
> > You would also know about the controversies
> surrounding the comments of Dr
> > Zakir Naik and Dr Israr Ahmed about Yazid and Ali.
> Would you add the 2 to
> > your "jihadist / extremist" list?
> >
> > The divide between the Shias and Sunnis runs much
> deeper than Hussain.
> > With Ali at the fonthead of that divide, would you
> argue over (subsequent to
> > various struggles over who should be the Khalifa) the
> divide
> > getting concretised in the Battle of Karbala between
> Yazid and Hussain and
> > Hussain's death?
> >
> > If that is so, and with Yazid (alongwith Muaviyah
> sworn enemy of Hussain's
> > father Ali) as Sunni and Hussain as Shian-e-Ali how
> could one possibly
> > conclude that Hussain is not firmly on tha Shia side
> of the Sunni/Shia
> > divide?
> >
> > Perhaps you know better.
> >
> > I totally agree with you that (perhaps) most Muslims
> are in the 'consensual
> > middle' and that is how it should be.
> >
> > Since the thread started over the "Hair
> Relic", it was not farfetched to
> > look at the passions any such controversy would evoke
> from the 'extreme
> > positions'.
> >
> > Wish you would participate oftener. I have the selfish
> motive of wanting to
> > get educated.
> >
> > Take care
> >
> > Kshmendra
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On *Fri, 12/12/08, yasir ~يا سر
> <yasir.media at gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > From: yasir ~يا سر <yasir.media at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Fwd: Intizar Husain on
> Husaini Brahmins
> > To: kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com
> > Cc: reader-list at sarai.net, "prabhat kumar"
> <prabhatkumar250 at gmail.com>
> > Date: Friday, December 12, 2008, 11:33 AM
> >
> >
> > Dear Kashmendra,
> >
> > I dont know the the history of the Hazratbal hair. but
> you are overstating
> > or even misstating the shia sunni divide on the
> question of Hussain.
> >
> > Most sunnis revere Hussain and his fight to death
> against Yazid son of
> > Muawiya. During the Muharram month/s you will hear
> Sunni sermons eulogizing
> > the sacrifice and mourning the deaths of the
> prophet's family and friends.
> > The account of the events by Zainul abedin (the next
> Imam, and Hussain's
> > son) of the events is read as a text in sunni
> religious seminaries. Sunnis
> > may also participate with Taziyas and attend
> 'Shia' Majalis, or just watch
> > them on TV etc. They may or may not accord the same
> level of reverence to
> > karbala as shias, some of whom also go overboard with
> the case.
> >
> > That said, there are certain sunni sub-sects, among
> them particularly the
> > ahle Hadith (aka wahhabi), and certain historical
> naqshbandis (mujaddid alf
> > saani) who may consider shias heretics, kaafirs etc,
> virtually on par with
> > deniers such as 'hindus'. I dont think this
> strain is the most common
> > although occasionally one runs into them - most are in
> the consensual
> > middle. Not surprisingly this strain (the tendency you
> have described) is
> > around in jihadist / extremist outfits.
> >
> > best
> >
> >
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to
> reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject
> header.
> To unsubscribe:
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
> List archive:
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>