فصلنامه روش شناسی علوم انسانی
پیاپی 33 (زمستان 1381)

In this article, the writer deals with our duties in studying Imam Hussein's uprising and discusses about the research methods and views through which one should investigate Imam's uprising.The writer goes on to discuss two differing views, divine or metaphysical and human-historical ones, and their respective considerations.Regarding the human - historical view, the writer proposes eight insights and research methods for the sophisticated thinkers to take into consideration in their research works.In studying the consequences of Imam Hussein's uprising, the writer touches upon the political and especially psychological consequences of Imam Hussein's uprising.

It is considered to be of great significance to recognize the political and religious thoughts of the forces which arrayed against Imam Hussein's uprising and their contribution in one way or other to its defeat. This recognition also gives a useful guidline in understanding this modern critical period in Shi`ite history. Offering sound grounds and evidence, the writer tries to disclose the rule of Uthman's thought over the forces in Kufa and Karbala, bringing into light that taking the enemy forces as identical to their being Shi`ite is a historical fallacy which certain scholars and researchers propagate in their writings and dialogues and condemn Shi`ites (Shi`ites in the sense of being heretics or heteredoxies (ra¦fizee or extremist Shi`ah) as the only cause of the Event of Karbala¦, casting doubts on the mourning ceremonies held in commemoration of Imam Hussein's martyrdom and the sufferings experienced by his holy family.In this article, the writer tries to give some clarifications of the Uthman's thoughts and puts forward the criteria by which one can truly recognize the nature of the forces motivated by these thoughts and then brings into light the causes and grounds for spreading such thoughts and ideas in Kufa and Karbala¦ and its reflection as well as its effects on the forces which have come to put up a strong resistance to Imam Hussein's uprising.

The present article takes an external approach to the historical phenomenon of `Ashu¦ra¦ (the 1oth of Muharram when Imam Hussein and his followers were martyred in the hot plain called Karbala¦).At the outset, a brief introduction is given to clarify the historical explanation and its various forms (systematic, rational and narrative explanations) and a reference is made to the event of `Ashu¦ra¦.In studying the event of `Ashu¦ra¦, the writer tries to make use of some texts in the field of histriology for his analysis, basing his arguments on the systematic, rational and narrative explanations, and bring his discussion to a conclusion by insisting that modern historians should take into serious consideration the use of historical explanations in their attempts to analyze historical phenomena.

Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyeh is taken to be one of the Alawi figures about whose life some doubts and objections have been raised, among which one can refer to his alleged refusal to take part in the uprising of Karbala¦ as well as his unwillingness to accompany Imam Huseyn.Shi`ite scholars and traditionalists have made some efforts to give some arguments in favour of Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyeh to clear up ambiguities. They argue that Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyeh's refusal to take part in the uprising in Karbala was in no way due to his disobedience to Imam Huseyn and that there were some justified reasons in his dissociation with Imam Huseyn on his journey to Karbala and his unwillingness to participate in the uprising against the illegitimate ruling system. The reasons can be recounted as follows:1. His sickness at the time when Imam decided to depart Medina and Mecca.2. Imam's own decree that Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyeh is obliged to stay in Medina.3. Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyeh was not obliged by Imam Huseyn to take part in the uprising.Making helpful comments on the above - mentioned reasons, the writer tries to set forth the possibility that Muhammad ibn Hanafiyyeh, though he was not obliged by Imam to participate in the uprising, his unwillingness to accompany Imam Huseyn on his journey to Karbala¦ may be considered as a kind of violation or disobedience as a result of which he lost the opportunity to gain the `station' of triumph or salvation'.