It is due to the tradition, which confirms the same, and which is related to how the responsibility of wilaya was offered to everything in existence: whoever accepted it would surely benefit therefrom, and whoever refused would be deprived. The condition of everything changed, and all beings were altered. The wild beasts mourned him with tears in their eyes. It is as if I can see the wild beasts stretching their necks on his grave mourning him all night long till the morning.
And it rained blood. He fled away from it. If it does not reach you in this life, the Fire shall be your abode in the hereafter. Everyone in the mansion was amazed. It was not long before the news of his martyrdom came. This is narrated by the most eloquent among all the orators of Khawarizm, namely Ahmad Ibn Mekki [al-Khawarizmi] who died in A.
Al-Husayn's martyrdom was surrounded with super-natural events. It is as though the Almighty, the most Exalted One, wanted then to inform the nation, as well as the succeeding generations, to be acquainted with this epic the like of which has never been witnessed. The Prophet S happened to make his ablution there and he poured the left-overs of his ablution water under that tree.
Through such a blessing, the tree was brought back to life: it became green once more, and its produce was quite bountiful. People continued to use its leaves as a medicine. After some time, they looked at it and noticed how its trunk was literally bleeding. They were terrified for having seen something nobody else had ever seen.
When the night brought the mantle of its darkness, they heard someone weeping and wailing without seeing anyone at all. They heard another voice saying:. In fact, anyone who touched the sassafran which had been plundered [from Husayn's family] was burnt thereby and reduced to ashes.
The taste of the meat of the camels which they had looted was bitterer than that of colocynth, and they saw fire coming out of it. The [soul of the] Messenger of Allah S did, indeed, attend and witness the huge host which was bent on eradicating his family from the face of earth, and he saw the wailing of the orphans and the sobbing of the ladies who had lost their loved ones, and he heard the cries of the children because of thirst.
In fact, the army heard a thunderous voice saying,. I see the Messenger of Allah S eying you, once looking at you, and once looking at the heavens, holding his holy beard! May Allah never accept your Adha nor Fitr [Eid] prayers! She was shaken, and she fainted. She grieved for him a great deal, remaining only for a short while thereafter before departing to Allah, the most Exalted One. Skip to main content. View this page in our App. View View. Table of Contents. Post Martrydom Events.
A nurse set out to suckle her infant. A cage for eternity from which the bird had flown away Every prophet, every messenger, and every martyr. To a tyrant in the reign of slaves? History provides satisfaction to salatin, muluk, wozara and learned people. A reader of history learns how the Holy Prophet faced problems. One learns from the deeds of those good rulers who were just. The seventh condition was that one should always speak the truth, because history is basically based on truth.
Barani goes on to give the reason for writing Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi. He says that there would be no point in following Minhaj. To critically examine what he has written would also not be fair because he was an eminent historian. An analysis of Tabaqat-i-Nasiri would also create many questions in the mind of readers. Scholars would appreciate his attempt, which he did not want.
Barani indirectly implied that he did not agree with what was written by Minhaj. There is not a single one who could tell me about the historical events of Balbans reign. Even God says in the Holy Quran that you learn from the deeds of early generations. When we have no knowledge of it, how can we take lessons from that? If people belonging to lower sections of society have no interest in history, then there is no problem.
It is highly surprising that even the ulema and umara have no interest in having the knowledge of the contributions of their predecessors. There was no scholar of Balbans period who could tell him the details about the developments during his reign. Actually, it is quite surprising that some of the ulema who, after the.
Barani was proved true. Modem historians of medieval Indian history consider his Tarikh a remarkable contribution. The kind of information and analysis provided by Barani has no parallel in the works on the Sultanat period. Barani is basically a man of ideas. Under the influence of these scholars, he Muhammad bin Tughluq did not refrain from killing pious and religious Muslims such as dervishes, ulema, mashaikhs and even Saiyids.
Having explained all this, Barani emphatically states that the Sultan led a pious life, offering prayers five times punctually. In the second version, he is not only critical of this policy of the Sultan, but also gives a long list of the officers who had started their careers from the lower rank. The first version does not contain any reference to his conversation with the Sultan about the people's defiance of royal policies.
See a Problem?
The ashraf elite alone should enjoy high positions in the government as well as in society. But how was this possible? Barani solved this problem by suggesting that knowledge should not be given to people of the lower sections of society. He appreciated Iltutmishs terminating the services of some officers who were found to have affiliations with lower classes. Nizami when he opines that, This class-consciousness ultimately developed into a complex, and embittered his attitude towards the lower sections of society. The source of this bitterness was political, not religious or social.
People had accepted the Islamic concept of social equality and social justice. The conversion of the Caliphate to Mulukiyat had further strengthened these feelings. During the Sultanat period, even to think of social equality or justice was totally out of the question. It was not only Barani who held this opinion.
It was the feeling. In mulukiyat one cannot even think of social equality. It may be Hindu, Chistian or Muslim monarchy condition is one and the same. Barani complains that talented people do not enjoy the status due to them. But at the same time he reminds us about the attitude of ulema and mashaikh. Now such type of God-fearing ulema and mashaikh are not there, who could dare to tell the truth in front of the Sultan, even though it would not be liked by him. Here Barani is appreciative of the role of those ulema who were learned, pious and also courageous.
Post Martrydom Events
He also quotes the example of Haroonur Rashid. He asked Abu Yusuf to arrange the meeting. Abu Yusuf said that when he was poor, Daud Tai used to invite him home, but since he joined the post of Qazi, though he visited his house about twenty times, he never met him. Daud Tai had made himself the enemy of worldly interests.
But he himself served as nadeem secretary of Muhammad bin Tughluq, and. It shows that Barani was not able to live up to his own principles.
Barani was not only against Hindus but also firmly hostile to nonSunni Muslims. Barani believed that one should condemn Muslims who are anti-Sunni, and no non-Sunnis should not be allowed to hold any position in the government. Muawiyah organised Umaiyads in the governing class. Sunnis always held power and controlled the governments in different countries, and they did not allow non-Sunnis to share power. In the first version Barani had given information about Mongol invasion under the command of Tarmashirin, around A.
The New History (tarikh-i-jadid) of Mirza Ali-Muhammed the Bab
Agha Mahdi Husain while writing his Tughluq dynasty in 19th century, consulted Baranis second version of Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi, because first version of Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi, was not known to eminent historians of medieval Indian history. Mahdi Husain rejected the testimony of Isami for Tarmashirins invasion, on the ground that had it taken place, Barani, who was the nadeem secretary of Muhammad bin Tughluq, would not.
I agree with Prof. Siddiqi when he argues that, It is not difficult to explain the reason for this omission in the second version. Baranis praise of Tarmashirin, still a Buddhist that he had given a good account of his fighting capacity as well as the credit given to Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq instead of Malik Yusuf Bughra condemned as one of the tyrants in the second version for gaining victory over the Mongol army and compelling it to retreat must have invited criticism of his Tarikh from the readers associated with the camp of Firoz Shah.
Therefore, Barani seems to have omitted to mention this event in his revised version and thus avoid further controversy.