Separating the uprising of Imam Hussain (as) from jurisprudence is substantial deviation from the event of Ashura

Praise is due to the Lord of the worlds. Peace and blessings be upon Prophet Muhammad and his pure household

An important issue which is sometimes expressed in cyberspace is the question that, ‘What is the relationship between jurisprudence and mourning for Imam Hussain (as)?’ It is propagated that mourning for Imam Hussain (as) and the event of Ashura is above jurisprudence and rationality. It is said that jurisprudence should not interfere in this matter. From my point of view, this is absolutely wrong. I believe that it is substantial deviation from the event of Ashura if we separate it from jurisprudence. If we make mourning ceremonies, Karbala and Ashura devoid of jurisprudence and look at it apart from jurisprudence and then analyze it, this is a big alteration in the story of Ashura. 

In the beginning of his departure in the session invited to by Marwan to pay allegiance to Yazid, Imam Hussain (as) said, “We must bid farewell to Islam if the Muslim community is afflicted with a ruler like Yazid.” From the very beginning of his uprising the Imam (as) speaks of the right government for the Muslim community. 

Similarly, if other words of the Imam (as) on his way from Medina to Karbala are observed, they would be found intertwined with jurisprudence. Referencing to a quote from the Prophet (s.a.w.a) Imam Hussain (as) said, “Anyone who sees a tyrant sultan who violates divine rules, breaks God’s covenant, opposes the usual practice of the Prophet (s.a.w.a) and commits sins and oppression among the servants of God and he does not react verbally or in action God has the right to put him in the same place that he puts that oppressor.” This saying is clearly jurisprudential.

A strong argument about the uprising of Imam Hussain (as) is that he put into practice the theory of defensive war, that is, defending the core of Islam. If the uprising of the Imam (as) is not looked at from the aspect of defensive war, many questions regarding the event of Karbala will remain unanswered. Defensive war is a profound jurisprudential discussion. One should not say that Imam Hussain’s uprising has nothing to do with jurisprudence and therefore, mourning for him should also be regarded separately from jurisprudence. Our prominent jurists and mujtahids, whether those alive today and whether those who lived three hundred years ago all have mentioned jurisprudential points of mourning for the Ahl al-Bayt (as). In our age that the respected jurists as well as the Supreme Leader have expressed their jurisprudential views, some individuals suggest to the mourners for Imam Hussain (as) not to interfere with jurisprudence arguing that they are lovers of Imam Hussain (as) and a lover of Imam Hussain (as) has nothing to do with jurisprudence.

In cyberspace someone, who is unfortunately wearing clerical attire, says that Imam Hussain (as) does not need a guardian and based on this claim instigates people against the clerics and the jurists. Who says that Imam Hussain (as) needs a guardian? Broken be the mouth which says that Imam Hussain (as) needs a guardian. What are these assertions?

These great mujtahids and jurists consider themselves the least in rank among the servants of Imam Hussain (as). Why do you make such pronouncements to people? When a mujtahid, due to his responsibility, declares a jurisprudential rule and the believers accept from him willingly does it mean that he says he is the guardian? There is no mujtahid for whom mourning for Imam Hussain (as) has not become a part of his existence. All jurists have participated in mourning ceremonies for the Ahl al-Bayt (as) and have learned and taught in the same camp. They transfer to us what they have learned from Imam Hussain (as). Therefore, our great nation, the theorists, the intellectuals, the clerics, all should pay attention to this conspiracy lest their minds are contaminated with such claims. We should observe what religion says.

Imam Hussain (as) cried, “People are the world’s slaves and religion is only on their tongue.” Imam Hussain’s problem with the people of his time was that people had abandoned the religion. Taking this into account, can we say that in mourning ceremonies we should not interfere with jurisprudence or religion because we are lovers of Imam Hussain (as)? Love for Imam Hussain (as) is a great honor in its own right, but all aspects must be taken into account.

Part of speech by Ayatullah Fazel Lankarani (May God prolong his life) in the scholarly gathering on the subject of ‘Mourning Ceremonies during Corona Pandemic’