Reza Babaei: The Peace of Hasan is More Oppressed than the Ashura of Hossein

No one doubts the necessity of the uprising of the Lord of Martyrs (AS); but to understand the Peace of Hasan, greater comprehension and insight are required. For people – ordinarily and instinctively – grant the oppressed the right to fight and to seize their rights by tooth and claw; yet they censure a ceasefire and reconciliation. Hence, the Peace of Hasan is more oppressed than the Ashura of Hossein, and its defense can only be undertaken by the elite, historians, and the sharp-sighted. Only those aware of history and the interests of the community can grasp the self-sacrifice of the Imam (AS) in making peace with Mu'awiya and admire it; contrary to the simple-hearted who see no truth except in the garb of battle.

. Some of the grounds and reasons that led Imam Hasan (AS) to accept peace are, in brief, as follows:

One. Safeguarding the Essence of Religion

For the great Imams of the Shia (AS), preserving religion is more obligatory than preserving governance. The peace removed governance from the hands of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS); but it delivered religion from a tremendous and ruinous danger.

Two. Presence in the Position of Caliphate

Why did Imam Hasan (AS) not resist to the point of martyrdom like his brother? Had he not submitted to peace and remained on the battlefield until the last drop of blood, would history not have judged him more favorably? Would bloody resistance against the excesses of Mu'awiya not have embroiled the Damascus establishment in scandal and decay, just as the martyrdom of Hussein ibn Ali (AS) sent Yazid's rule down the slope of downfall and scandal, and ultimately led to its collapse? The answer is that the position of Imam Hasan (AS) in that era differed from that of his brother, the Lord of Martyrs (AS). Imam al-Mujtaba (AS) was the Caliph, and had he been killed as Caliph at the hands of his opponents or in war, he would have met a fate like Uthman, and judgments would have tended toward the view that dissatisfied and protesting Muslims killed their Caliph. Martyrdom in the seat of the Caliphate would not have stirred great waves and would have meant that the Caliph was killed by the people! But the Lord of Martyrs (AS) was a protesting citizen, and his martyrdom accused the government of tyranny, oppression, and injustice against the people. The grounds for this were also prepared. Imam Hasan (AS) knew that victory over the army of Damascus was impossible, and he also knew that his martyrdom on the battlefield would not greatly trouble the conscience of Muslims; for they would say two rulers fought each other and one was victorious! That is all. Martyrdom in such a field was considered being killed in the cause of preserving governance, not preserving religion and the essence of Islam. But the martyrdom of Hussein ibn Ali (AS) in Karbala was considered the martyrdom of one who rose against the oppression of the government and was unjustly martyred.

Three. Preventing the Repetition of Caliph-Killing

The practice of Ali (AS) and his sons was to preserve the seat of the Caliphate from being stained with blood. Ali (AS) strove with all his might to prevent the Caliph's blood from being shed. His defense of the seat of the Caliphate and keeping it untainted by blood was such that he himself says in Nahj al-Balagha: I defended Uthman to such an extent that I fear I may be a sinner: "I feared lest I be sinful."

Four. Binding the Umayyads to Commitments

The situation of the Islamic community at that time was such that if a war had broken out and the Umayyads had been victorious, they would have accepted no commitments and would have considered themselves indebted to no one. In such a situation, they could have inflicted irreparable damage upon the legacy of the Prophet (PBUH). The peace, to some extent, tied Mu'awiya's hands. Had Mu'awiya gained power through war, not peace, he would not have accepted even the limited commitments he undertook in the peace treaty, and it is unknown what path he would have taken.

Five. The Existence of an Actual Danger Beyond the Borders of the Islamic World

Another reason for the peace was the existence of a common enemy that had turned toward the borders of Islam, and had no one stood against it, perhaps not even the name of an Islamic country would have remained. According to historical reports, at that time, the Eastern Roman Empire was prepared to attack Islamic lands, and Mu'awiya – with whatever motive – could repel this danger. Therefore, continuing the war was in the interest of neither the Kufans nor the Damascenes, but rather would have paved the way for a military attack and the victory of the Romans over the Islamic world.

Six. Preserving the Blood of Muslims

Preventing the killing of a greater number of Muslims was another reason for Imam al-Mujtaba (AS) to accept the peace proposal; as he writes in a letter to Muawiyah: “If I wanted to fight anyone from the people of the Qibla (nominal Muslims), I would have fought you; but I have desisted from you and have come to terms with you for the good of the Islamic Ummah and to preserve the blood of Muslims.”

Seven. The Increase and Superiority of the Benefits of Peace over the Benefits of War

Another reason for accepting the peace treaty is that what Imam Hasan al-Mujtaba achieved through peace could in no way have been obtained through war. While preserving the lives and property of Muslims, the Imam (AS) found a valuable opportunity and position to go among the people and influence their thoughts and souls; that is, he found the opportunity to transform the military front into a cultural front, which was far more important, and in those days, more vital. Furthermore, he obligated the government of Syria to financially support a large segment of the Muslims of Medina and Kufa, especially the families of the martyrs.

Imam Hasan al-Mujtaba (AS) knew that peace, as much as it was in the interest of the Islamic world, would have unpleasant consequences for him, and that a group of Muslims would insult him and, for the crime of making peace with Muawiyah, would reproach and taunt him; but prudence and wisdom dictated otherwise. Observing the public interest is the wisest strategy adopted by compassionate and freedom-loving leaders, especially divine leaders, for they never sacrifice the public interest for personal and factional interests and their own reputation.

.

---

.

Reza Babaei: The Peace of Hasan is More Oppressed than the Ashura of Hossein

Reza Babaei | Ettela'at | Thursday, 23 June 2016

.

---

.