Sayed Mahmoud Al-Mosawi
Whoever places the advice of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya (r) to his brother Imam al-Husayn (a) on the same footing as the other proposals presented to Imam al-Husayn (a) in Medina or in Mecca shortly before his departure for Iraq, heading toward Karbala, where his bloody martyrdom would take place, is mistaken.
For the circumstances of the advice of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya differ greatly, because of the person of Muhammad and because of the historical context of the event itself.
If we wish to know the truth of the matter or to present an analytical view of the event, we must return to fixed principles on which we rely in our analysis. For a reading must proceed from foundations to ramifications, and from strong reports to less strong ones; the reading must not run counter to this method by making weak reports the judge over strong reports. This is what happens to some when presenting an analytical reading of history, and therefore one strays from the path and stumbles in one's vision.
Many readings have been presented of the personality of Muhammad son of Imam ʿAli (a), known as Ibn al-Hanafiyya; but we present an example concerning what has been raised about his position on the departure of Imam al-Husayn (a) from Medina to Iraq, history presenting him as among those who offered advice to Imam al-Husayn (a) not to head for Karbala, and to keep away from the major cities or to choose Mecca or Yemen.
Before drawing attention to the event itself, we must lay down important foundations regarding the personality of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya so that our reading is made firm in a way consistent with them, and not the reverse. By way of example, not limitation, we mention the following among them:
First: Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya bears a great testimony from his father, Imam ʿAli (a), that he refuses that Allah Almighty be disobeyed. It has been reported from Abu al-Hasan al-Rida (a), who said: The Commander of the Faithful (a) used to say: The Muhammads refuse that Allah Almighty be disobeyed.
I said: And who are the Muhammads? He said: Muhammad ibn Jaʿfar, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa, and Muhammad son of the Commander of the Faithful (a)... (Rijal al-Kashshi, vol. 1, p. 286).
Second: It has come in the book al-Kafi of al-Kulayni, from Imam al-Hasan (a) in a hadith, his saying to his brother Muhammad: (O Muhammad ibn ʿAli, shall I not tell you what I heard from your father about you? He said: Yes indeed. He said: I heard your father (a) say on the Day of Basra: Whoever would like to be dutiful to me in this world and the Hereafter, let him be dutiful to Muhammad, my son). Vol. 1, p. 301.
Third: Imam al-Baqir (a) has given us a clear and certain fact, namely that Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya never opposed Imam al-Husayn (a) in any matter at all. This is the import of what was narrated in al-Manaqib from Imam al-Baqir (a), who said: Al-Husayn did not speak in the presence of al-Hasan, out of reverence for him, and Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya did not speak in the presence of al-Husayn, out of reverence for him).
Just as Imam al-Husayn (a) would not speak—that is, would not voice an opinion contrary to Imam al-Hasan (a)—so Muhammad ibn ʿAli (a) would not express an opinion contrary to his brother Imam al-Husayn (a); and this stems from the degree of reverence in which Muhammad believes.
These two pieces of evidence suffice us as a foundation for knowing who Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya is; in their wake and along their course we move on to the reports of an ambiguous history, which was written by pens of multiple aims and purposes: among them the sincere, truthful pen; among them the hateful, obstinate pen; and among them that which is permeated by confusion and ambiguity, whether in recording, transmission or interpretation.
We should not fail to mention what some of the mistaken have fallen into in their reading of the position of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya, in interpreting the expression (advice—al-naṣīḥa): they raised the objection of how a non-infallible could advise an infallible. This is a pure error that did not attend to the meaning of naṣīḥa in its reality and relied on the customary meaning of advice and what is understood by it in this age. For naṣīḥa in its reality is sincerity in word and deed, and it is the opposite of deception; that is, Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya was presenting what his knowledge and understanding had reached, being entirely truthful in that, but the Imam is above his knowledge and understanding, so he would listen to him and then inform him of the realities that none but the infallible Imam has access to.
Naṣīḥa in this sense is an obligation upon the subjects toward their imams, as has come in numerous narrations; that is, that they be sincere with them in word and deed and not deceive them in pursuit of this world and comfort. Hence we fully understand why Imam al-Husayn (a) said to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya after that: (O my brother, you have advised and shown compassionate concern, and I hope that your opinion is sound and successful).
So that the discussion does not become too long for us, we summarize the clarification in points and postpone elaboration to its proper place.
We say:
1 – Whoever reads the dialogue that took place between Imam al-Husayn (a) and his brother Muhammad, in the various maqtal books and sources, finds a refined manner of speech, full of respect and esteem between the two parties.
2 – Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya acknowledged that whatever he was saying, he said it only out of sincerity, solicitude and fear for the Imam (a) and for the women, and that he had held back nothing of advice and truthfulness without speaking it, because of the importance of the event. It remains that this was the limit of Muhammad's knowledge—and he was learned—but “above every man of knowledge is One who knows best” (Qurʾan 12:76), and no one among people rises above the knowledge of the Imam.
3 – Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya submitted to the matter at the end of the dialogue and did not object to the Imam's answer as another did, nor did he leave him in anger as others did, nor did he rejoice at his end in his killing as another did; rather he said “Indeed we belong to Allah and to Him do we indeed return” (Qurʾan 2:156), affirming what Allah had promised of the martyrdom of Imam al-Husayn (a). What reinforces the good conclusion of the dialogue is that Imam al-Husayn (a) gave him a task that is among the most delicate and dangerous tasks in the movement, namely to be his eye in Medina.
4 – Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya knew the station of Imam al-Husayn (a) with true knowledge. This is established by the long history in which he accompanied the Commander of the Faithful (a) and his brother Imam al-Hasan and then al-Husayn (a), and it is confirmed by his expressions in his dialogue, among which, for example: (You are the dearest of people to me and the most precious of them to me), (For you are like my self and my soul, the eldest of my household, the one on whom I rely and whose obedience is upon my neck, because Allah has honored you and made you one of the masters of the people of Paradise).
5 – The advice of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya included the centrality of the call (daʿwa); it was not only for the protection of the Imam and his safety and the safety of his family. For he called on him to keep away from the major cities in order to prepare for the call and summon people to himself later. For this reason we find that the Imam continued the dialogue with Muhammad and asked him: Where shall I go?—that is, in your view, which places do you see as suitable for this task? So he advised him to seek information from the people of Mecca, and if he did not find among them what he sought, to head toward Yemen, which was full of the Shiʿa of his father. Hence Imam al-Husayn (a) affirmed the inevitability of not pledging allegiance, and the two of them wept together because they knew the gravity of the situation.
6 – Among the things that many researchers have not noticed is that Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya advised the Imam (a) to go to Mecca as a first option, as he said to him: (Go out to Mecca; if the abode proves secure for you, that is what you love and I love). At the end of the dialogue the Imam made clear to him that he was indeed resolved to go to Mecca and had prepared for that, in his saying: (May Allah reward you well on my behalf, O my brother. You have advised and counseled what is right, and I hope, if Allah wills, that your opinion will be successful and well-guided. I have resolved to go out to Mecca, and I have prepared for that—I, my brothers, my brothers' sons and my Shiʿa; their affair is my affair and their opinion is my opinion. As for you, O my brother, there is nothing against you in staying in Medina, so that you may be an eye for me over them; and do not conceal from me anything of their affairs). Al-Futuh and al-Khwarazmi.
7 – As for what some cite, that Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya withheld himself and his sons from the Imam and refused to go in support of Imam al-Husayn (a), it is a dialogue that does not rise to befit the like of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya, whose station and manner with the Imam we have come to know. Moreover, this report was not transmitted by the Shiʿi maqtal books; it was transmitted exclusively by Sunni sources, such as the book al-Tabaqat al-Kubra of Ibn Saʿd, Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubalaʾ, and the book Taʾrikh al-Islam wa Wafayat al-Mashahir, none of which is to be relied upon where it contradicts what is in our narrational sources; for they are the criterion and the reference for what is relied upon from the sources of the opponents.
8 – When we do not know the reasons for Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya's not joining [the Imam], it is not justifiable for us to volunteer to interpret it in a bad light; rather, the opposite is correct. For this reason our eminent scholars set about searching for a valid excuse, and accepted what has come in the history books that he was ill; and it may have been for a secret, non-apparent political reason, such as being the Imam's eye in Illuminated Medina, and so on. This is the correct direction in historical reading. The Imam wrote to him the immortal letter that clarifies the principle of the Imam's (a) departure, in which came: (I have not gone forth in insolence nor in wantonness...); and this in itself suffices to be a reason for his staying in Medina.
Nor should we fail to emphasize the extent of the knowledge and awareness of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya (r) of the inevitability of the tragedy of Karbala: that Imam al-Husayn (a) would be killed by the transgressing party, and that Karbala is the place where his pure blood would be shed, the place of his noble grave and of the rising of its lofty minarets—by virtue of the mutually corroborating reports from the Prophet (s), which were known to far and near, and which could not have been hidden from Muhammad, raised as he was by Imam ʿAli (a).
Indeed, he had detailed knowledge of the event of Karbala and of its martyrs one by one and of their names; it has been reported from him in al-Manaqib that he said:
Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya said: And indeed his companions – that is, al-Husayn's (a) – are written down with us by their names and the names of their fathers. (al-Manaqib, vol. 4, p. 53).
