Uzma Khatoon

The tragedy of Karbala is one of the turning points in Islamic history. It was not just a battle, but a deep struggle about justice, truth, and rightful leadership. On the 10th of Muharram in 61 AH, in the desert of Karbala (present-day Iraq), the grandson of Prophet Muhammad, Imam Hussain, along with over 70 of his companions, was killed by the army of Yazid. This conflict was not about personal or family rivalry—it was about whether Islamic leadership should be based on public consultation and justice, or monarchy and dictatorship.

To understand Karbala, we must look at the background. During the time of the third Caliph, Uthman ibn Affan, people accused him of favoring his tribe, the Banu Umayyah, by giving them powerful government positions. This led to widespread dissatisfaction, and in 656 CE, he was killed by angry rebels. After his death, Hazrat Ali was chosen as the fourth Caliph. However, Governor of Syria, Mu'awiyah , who was from the Umayyad clan, refused to accept Ali’s leadership. He demanded justice for Caliph Uthman’s murder first. This conflict led to major battles like Jamal and Siffin, and became known as the First Civil War.

Eventually, Mu'awiyah gained political power and signed a peace treaty with Ali's son, Hasan. The agreement said Mu'awiyah would not appoint anyone as his successor. However, he broke that promise and named his son, Yazid, as the next Caliph—something against Islamic traditions, which supported election by consultation (shura). When Yazid came to power, he demanded loyalty (bay'ah) from Imam Hussain. But Hussain refused, as he saw Yazid as corrupt and unworthy. Hussain received letters from people in Kufa (Iraq), asking him to lead them. On his journey there with his family, he was stopped at Karbala by Yazid’s forces. They denied him water, and on the 10th of Muharram, he and his companions were martyred.

After the massacre, Yazid’s army captured Hussain’s family and paraded them through Kufa and Damascus. This was meant to show Yazid’s power, but instead, it created public sympathy for Hussain. Around the same time, Abdullah ibn Zubair in Mecca had already rejected Yazid’s authority and declared himself the leader.

After Karbala, resistance against Yazid spread further in Mecca, Medina, and other parts of the Muslim world. This period (683–692 CE) is known as the Second Civil War (Second Fitna). Though the Umayyads later regrouped and ruled for some more decades, their moral authority had been badly shaken.

The Umayyads reorganized their power through a new branch—the Marwanid line. Caliphs like Abdul Malik ibn Marwan and Umar ibn Abdul Aziz introduced reforms like standardized coins, postal systems, and administrative centralization. But despite these changes, many non-Arab Muslims (mawali) remained treated as second-class citizens. In regions like Khorasan and Iraq, public frustration kept growing. People began to feel that the Umayyads favored only their tribe and ignored justice and equality.

This frustration led to the rise of the Abbasid movement. The Abbasids claimed to be descendants of the Prophet’s uncle Abbas. A revolutionary leader named Abu Muslim organized their efforts in Khorasan. Their message centered around the tragedy of Karbala. They said they would avenge the blood of Imam Hussain and restore true Islamic rule. Their slogan—“al-Rida min Aal-e-Muhammad” (The chosen one from the family of Muhammad)—gained wide support. They connected their campaign with the pain of injustice and the memory of Karbala.

The tragedy of Karbala did much more than shock the Muslim conscience; it triggered the slow collapse of the entire Umayyad order. Because the Umayyads had never built a clear state theology to justify their rule, they were defenseless when the Abbasids launched an aggressive, state-sponsored propaganda campaign that framed Karbala as proof of Umayyad tyranny. Trying to escape this charge, Umayyad spokesmen claimed, “What happened at Karbala was God’s decree.” The famous scholar Ḥasan al-Baṣrī answered that God never commands violence or injustice—He only commands good—and if humans commit evil, it is their own choice. His reply underscored a basic truth: people have the freedom to choose right or wrong, and rulers must answer for their actions. Karbala therefore stripped the Umayyads of moral legitimacy, emboldened every voice that questioned their authority, and opened the way for the Abbasids to end the dynasty altogether.

In 750 CE, the Abbasids defeated the last Umayyad Caliph at the Battle of the Zab River. The capital of the Caliphate shifted from Damascus (in Syria) to Baghdad (in Iraq). In the early years, the Abbasid rulers were more inclusive. They gave more rights to non-Arab Muslims, supported scholars, and presented themselves as defenders of the Prophet’s family. During Muharram, they supported public mourning gatherings (majlis), poetry, and remembrance events related to Karbala. But over time, even the Abbasids became centralized and monarchial. They also restricted Shia rituals when they feared rebellion. This showed that even when power changes hands, the desire to control voices of dissent remains the same.

The Shia view of khilafat has always been centered around the family of Hazrat Ali, especially through Imam Hussain’s lineage. From the beginning, Shia Muslims believed that true leadership must stay within the Ahl al-Bayt—the family of the Prophet Muhammad. Ahl al-Bayt means “People of the House,” referring to the Prophet’s closest family members, including Hazrat Ali, Bibi Fatima, Imam Hasan, and Imam Hussain.

Shias saw them as the purest and most spiritually qualified people to lead the Muslim community. They gave religious meaning to this belief, saying that the Ahl al-Bayt were divinely chosen and free from sin. In this way, the Shia understanding of khilafat was also limited and exclusive, not open to all Muslims. They opposed the Umayyads for turning khilafat into a monarchy, but they too supported a fixed lineage—just a different one. Even today, many Shias believe that leadership in Islam must continue only through the descendants of Imam Hussain. While their claim is based on love and respect for the Prophet’s family, it also became a way of giving political power a sacred status.

The division between Shia and Sunni Muslims became much clearer after the tragedy of Karbala. Before this event, there were political differences in the Muslim community, but they were not yet religious divisions. After Karbala, the followers of Imam Hussain began to organize themselves with a strong identity. They believed that only the family of the Prophet —especially through Hazrat Ali and Imam Hussain—had the right to lead the Muslim world. This belief became central to Shia thought.

On the other hand, Sunni Muslims believed that leadership could come from any qualified and accepted person through shura (consultation), not just from the Prophet’s family. Karbala became a painful symbol for Shias of a corrupt leader killing a rightful leader. Over time, Shias started to mark Muharram with mourning and rituals, while Sunnis remembered the event differently. This difference in memory, emotion, and religious understanding created two paths in Islam. After Karbala, the division was not just political—it became deeply spiritual and emotional too, shaping separate traditions of faith that continue today.

The memory of Karbala lived on not only in Shia thought, but also in Sufi and Sunni traditions. For Shia Muslims, Karbala became the symbol of resistance against injustice. Every year in Muharram, they mourn and remember Hussain’s sacrifice. Sufi traditions also honored Hussain’s values of truth, patience, and spiritual resistance. Though it is not accurate to say that Sufism started immediately after Karbala, many later Sufi teachings deeply respected Imam Hussain and his moral courage.

In politics, the memory of Karbala was used by different rulers for their own purposes. The Umayyads labeled it as rebellion. The Abbasids called it a tragedy caused by tyrants. Later Shia dynasties, like the Safavids in Iran, used Karbala to shape their identity and claim legitimacy. But beyond all political uses, the message of Karbala remained clear: no matter how powerful the oppressor, truth and justice must be defended—even if it cost one's life.

ALSO READ: Kashmiri environmentalist Manzoor Wangnoo revives twin lakes in Srinagar

Karbala was not just a historical incident. It changed the soul of Islamic society. It showed that legitimate power comes not from force, but from justice, ethics, and the will of the people. The lesson of Karbala still inspires people today—that it is better to die with honor than to live under injustice. That is why, even after 1,400 years, the story of Hussain remains alive—not just for Muslims, but for all people who stand for truth, dignity, and humanity.

Dr.Uzma Khatoon has taught in the Department of Islamic Studies at Aligarh Muslim University.