The Villains of Karbala - Father Christopher Clohessy

Who were the key villains in and around Karbala? What were they like as people and what traits did they hold? What were their incentives to commit such heinous acts?
Episode 3: Tales of Ashura
Join host Ahmed Gokal with special guest Father Christopher Clohessy, Professor of Shi'i Studies in Rome, to explore events and personalities surrounding Karbala from an academic, spiritual and interfaith perspective.
Click Here to subscribe & keep updated with all our latest videos:
kzbin.info...
Donate & Support Ahlulbayt TV today:
www.justgiving.com/ahlulbaytf...
Follow Ahlulbayt TV on social media:
Facebook - / ahlulbayt
Twitter - / ahlulbayttv
Instagram - / ahlulbayttv
Website: www.ahlulbayt.co.uk/
Ahlulbayt: Documentaries -
/ ahlulbayttvdocs
Ahlulbayt: Reborn -
/ ahlulbayttvreborn
Ahlulbayt: Health in Islam -
/ ahlulbaythealthinislam
Children's ABTV (CABTV) -
/ childrensabtv
Ahlulbayt: General Q&A -
/ ahlulbayttvqanda

[@Zarghaam12]

The buck stops at Yazeed because he started the whole thing and ordered the killings... and this is what he said when the head of Imam al-Husai, the Propeht's grandson was brought to him. Starts as: لیت أشیاخی ببدرٍ شَهِدوا جزعَ الخزرجِ من وَقْع الأسَلْ لأهلّوا و استهلّوا فرحاًثُمّ قالوا یایزیدُ لاتُشَلْ ... and ends is like this, *the last two lines revealing all about Yazeed's kufr* : یقول البیتان الأخيران كل ما نريد معرفته: لعِبَتْ هاشمُ بالملکِ فلا خبرٌ جاءَ ولاوحی نَزَلْ لستُ من خُنْدُفٌ ان لم انتقمْ من بنی أحمدَ ماکانَ فَعَلْ The whole poem is translated as below: Were it my ancestors of Badr, seeing this, They'd say, let your hand not tire! I have taken revenge from the progeny of Ahmed We killed the best of them, equaling Badr's score *Banu Hashim played with power and kingdom* ! *There was no angel, and no revelation descended* ! It is clear from the last two verse what Yazeed did not believe in: 1) The apostolic mission of the Prophet(s), 2) No revelation and therefore no Allah! He was a kafir without any doubt. *And yet there are people who say he was "pious and rightful Muslim caliph". In that case we need to change the definition of of both, piety and Islam! Quite moronic* ! *We also need to remember it all began with Saqeefah* ! *al-Husain had been killed at Saqeefah* ! قد قُتل الحسِن في السقيفة

[@2002muju]

Buck stops with Yazid, totally agree brother...

[@ZRizvi]

All are involved, the killers, the planners but agree that the buck stops at the one who ordered i.e. Yazeed as the ultimate beneficiary to legitimize his power. Killers are also not the lesser evils as they showed their extreme brutality as well.

[@8heavyhchamp8]

He spoke fair.. better than both sunni and shia because he never cursed or praised non which we failed to emulate due to tribal/religious politics... so much so you'll see both sunni and shia say they are the 1 of the 73 sects so everyone else goes to hell... if you see your sunni or shia friend in paradise then tell God HE made a mistake

[@Zarghaam12]

*Yazeed was cursed by Many SUNNI scholars to show that he was a tyrant. Only dumb Salafis & Wahabis have a problem with that* ! *And let's not forget, Karbala happened because Saqeefah happened , and we know who was responsible for what happened at Saqeefah - Umar and Abu Bakr betrayed the Prophet* !

[@HAmmar0121]

The shiite versions make more sense of what happened even though he spoke well too from a christian and an academic perspective. Tell God He make a mistake?

[@8heavyhchamp8]

@@HAmmar0121 yes tell God he made a mistake of letting sunni or shia or other sects into paradise because most of muslims believe in that 73 hadith without proper explanation saying only their sect is right

[@Zarghaam12]

Fr. Clohessy is being quite charitable at times! Furthermore, he also needs to read other literature about this event, i.e. historical not just hadeeth. Even Sunni scholars, present and past, have been very open about this and hold Yazeed ibn mu'awiyah responsible. Read "Maqtal-ul-Husain" by al-Khwarizmi (Sunni who quotes many other fellow Sunis). The buck does stop at Yazeed for not just initiating the whole thing but also ordering the killing. Also if he was supposedly a nicer person than Ibn Ziyaad, why did he keep him as governor of Kufah. In fact, Ibn Ziyaad was finally promoted by Yazeed!. The accounts saying Yazeed was shocked and regretful are of course written to gain sympathy for him. His attitude is amply demostrated by his own words: لیت أشیاخی ببدرٍ شَهِدوا جزعَ الخزرجِ من وَقْع الأسَلْ لأهلّوا و استهلّوا فرحاًثُمّ قالوا یایزیدُ لاتُشَلْ لعِبَتْ هاشمُ بالملکِ فلا خبرٌ جاءَ ولاوحی نَزَلْ لستُ من خُنْدُفٌ ان لم انتقمْ من بنی أحمدَ ماکانَ فَعَلْ The whole poem is translated as below: Were it my ancestors of Badr, seeing this, They'd say, let your hand not tire! I have taken revenge from the progeny of Ahmed We killed the best of them, equaling Badr's score *Banu Hashim played with power and kingdom* ! *There was no angel, and no revelation descended* ! *The last two lines reveal Yazeed's true feelings and his kufr, when he says* : لعِبَتْ هاشمُ بالملکِ فلا خبرٌ جاءَ ولاوحی نَزَلْ لستُ من خُنْدُفٌ ان لم انتقمْ من بنی أحمدَ ماکانَ فَعَلْ *Banu Hashim played with power and kingdom* ! *There was no angel, and no revelation descended* ! *He reduces the Prophet's apostolic mission to just a power game and desire for a kingdom* ! *BTW, all the empire building started after his death, with Abu bakr and Umar ibn al-Khattab, the two betrayers at Saqeefah launching conquests, a point not even mentioned in the Quran. But they would not have known since they didn't know how to read, by their own admission* ! *And he is also quite wrong about Salahuddiin Ayyubi. The actual account after he took over Jerusalem is not so rosy. While he did not commit a massacre, all the Christian captives were sold into slavery* ! Not nice.