Özet:

One of the most critical tragedies in Islamic history is undoubtedly the Battle of Karbalā’. The religious and political consequences of this confrontation have survived to our days. There are two main figures of this battle: Ḥusayn b. ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 61/680) and ‘Umar b. Sa‘d b. Abī Waqqāṣ (d. 67/686). The former moved from Medina to Kufa upon the invitation letters of the people of Kufa and was brutally murdered in Karbalā’ and the latter was designated by ‘Ubayd Allāh b. Ziyād b. Abīh (d. 67/686) as the military authority to prevent al-Ḥusayn’s entering Kufa. Historical sources narrate the battle of Karbalā’ by taking al-Ḥusayn in the center of the story, since he was the grandson of the Prophet Muḥammad and, in the eyes of the Shiites, an ultimate religious authority. When the Umayyad army intercepted al-Ḥusayn for the first time from entering Kufa, he stated his interlocutors that he had set out his journey upon the invitation of the people of Kufa, that he did not want to fight, that he could return if they did not want him to enter the city, that he could pledge allegiance to Yazīd b. b. Mu‘āwiya (d. 64/683), or that he could join the jihad activities along the borders of the state. Nevertheless, he could not get any positive answer to his requests and was mercilessly slaughtered in Karbalā’. This way of narration, which centers al-Ḥusayn, is not wrong in essence. However, in order to comprehend the nature of the incident, it is necessary to expand the field of research a little bit more and examine the issue from the points of view of other parties. For instance, Yazīd, the caliph of the period, is often criticized for causing the incident and ‘Ubayd Allāh, the governor of Iraq, for having al-Ḥusayn killed. There are many and diverse narrations on this subject matter in historical sources. However, the name of ‘Umar b. Sa‘d, the commander of the Umayyad army at Karbalā’ and the person who was responsible for the incident in the first place, is rarely mentioned in these sources. Could this be just a coincidence? Or is it a darkening of the historical narrations? Unfortunately, it is very difficult to reach a definitive conclusion based on the available data. On the other hand, an important issue to be emphasized is the identity of ‘Umar b. Sa‘d. He was the son of Sa‘d b. Abī Waqqāṣ, one of the al-‘Ashara al-Mubashshara (the Ten Companions of the Prophet Muḥammad promised Paradise). He was related to the al-Ḥusayn on the basis of his common lineage with the Prophet Muḥammad. In other words, ‘Umar b. Sa‘d had the ability to foresee the possible consequences of his role. It is even known that al-Ḥurr b. Yazīd al-Tamīmī (d. 61/681), who had set out to prevent al-Ḥusayn before him, was convinced after talking to al-Ḥusayn and he changed sides, and tried to keep ‘Umar b. Sa‘d away from the battle plan. However, it is clear that ‘Umar b. Sa‘d did not want to leave his post, even though he had hesitations from time to time. Moreover, the threat of ‘Ubayd Allāh or the explanation that he would be given the governorship as a reward for his services alone was not enough for ‘Umar b. Sa‘d to accept the post. The responsibility of the task he accepted was incomparably greater than the position that was offered in return. On the other hand, as for the consideration that ‘Ubayd Allāh chose‘Umar b. Sa‘d based on his genealogical relation with al-Ḥusayn, it is impossible to accept such an assumption. Although ‘Ubayd Allāh sought an agreement with al-Ḥusayn at the beginning, the letter sent by ‘Ubayd Allāh through S̲h̲amir b. D̲h̲i’l-Jaws̲an clearly reveals ‘Umar b. Sa‘d’s stance and the responsibility he took, since this letter did not put ‘Umar b. Sa‘d under an additional administrative and military obligation and responsibility. On the contrary, it forced him to make a choice about his duty. ‘Umar b. Sa‘d also announced his decision by declaring that he would fight against al-Ḥusayn. Al-Ḥurr’s clear warning to stay away from the battle was not enough to change ‘Umar b. Sa‘d’s opinion. At the end, the conflict in Karbalā’, which continued as a confrontation between two groups that were not equal to each other, ended with the killing of al-Ḥusayn. ‘Umar b. Sa‘d then returned to Kufa and himself was killed in an uprising led by al-Mukhtār b. Abī ‘Ubayd (d. 67/687) to avenge the murder of al-Ḥusayn.

Anahtar Kelimeler: