Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

We’ll begin with denoting the year, in which our Holy Leader was martyred in.

  • In 571 AD, our Holy Prophet was born.
  • He was 40 years old at the revelation.
  • Stayed in Mecca for 13 years.
  • And ʿāl-Imam ʿāl-Ḥūsāyn was martyred in year 61 AH.

571+40+13+61 = 685.

In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, page(s) 27-28.

685. This year it rained blood in Britain, and milk and butter were turned into blood.

2XPPgHT.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The years are likely different.. if you have noticed every year, the Month of Ramadan starts at a different time in the Gregorian calendar. That's because the method of dating is different.

I don't believe 61 lunar years would equal 61 years in the the Gregorian calendar. Therefore the year of the martyrdom wouldn't be 685AD.

On this converter, when I put 61 Hijri I get 680AD. When I put 685AD I get 66 Hijri. 

http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/hijri.htm

Not sure how accurate, but it makes sense that it would be different to your conclusion, because it takes into account that the calendars have diff dating methods.

Salam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salams,

There's two problems with using the above chronicle to say that the heavens literally wept blood for Imam Husayn (عليه السلام). First, as Sumerian points out, the reckoning of years is different between our calendar and their calendar. Their calendar is solar so their years are more properly years while our's is lunar so our months are more properly months while we have years that aren't really years. But one Hijri year doesn't overlap neatly over one Gregorian year -- and they were using Julian years at this point in time. Beyond that, the dating of some of these events don't seem to be based on anything, not even educated guesses. General Islamic historical convention tells us that Rasul Allah (saww) was around 40 years old when the first revelation occurred, generally placed in 610 AD, and that he was born during Aam al-Fiil, generally placed around 570 AD. His birth would've been earlier rather than later since Abraha is thought to have been mainly active in the 540s AD based on documentary evidence he produced, so placing it at 571 doesn't make much sense (albeit we really couldn't be certain about any one year more than the other). The year 685 AD aligns with the year 66 of the Hijri calendar, and while Muharram was on October 10th (or 7th October per the Julian calendar) the year Imam Husayn was killed, in the year 685 that aligns with the end of Rabi' al-Awwal so our Hijri calendar seems to be six years ahead if these events were to line up. The bigger problem is actually taking supernatural events like this described in such chronicles seriously. The Anglo-Saxon chronicle was a work created in the 9th century, two centuries after this event, and underwent further editing for centuries afterwards. It was furthermore written in a period where historical writing wasn't necessarily practiced as we do it but legendary accounts would often be conflated with real history. It was also written by Anglo-Saxon writers working in Old English about the Viking raid at the Lindisfarne Monastery (what opened up the Viking raids on England) that dragons were seen flying over stormy seas prior to their landing forecasting the impending doom. This, undoubtedly, didn't happen and you might try to argue that this is a reference perhaps to the designs of Viking long-ships with images of dragons often carved onto them but you can clearly see then a sort of fictionalization of the events. What we are effectively doing is misconstruing legend with history and trying to force two events to line up together which will only create bigger problems (that apparently we have six extra years in this Islamic calendar). This isn't to outright dismiss the entirety of the Anglo-Saxon chronicle or to say that there weren't cosmic signs of God's displeasure over the killing of the Imam. The former needs to be read critically using good historiographical methods, and the latter probably won't be proven by Old English writers, or Middle Chinese ones for that matter (though who knows what Medieval Greek and Classical Syriac hold).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 7/21/2019 at 11:46 PM, Simon the Canaanite said:

We’ll begin with denoting the year, in which our Holy Leader was martyred in.

  • In 571 AD, our Holy Prophet was born.
  • He was 40 years old at the revelation.
  • Stayed in Mecca for 13 years.
  • And ʿāl-Imam ʿāl-Ḥūsāyn was martyred in year 61 AH.

571+40+13+61 = 685.

In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, page(s) 27-28.

685. This year it rained blood in Britain, and milk and butter were turned into blood.

2XPPgHT.jpg

I calculated that 61 Hijri is 685 as there are 10 days difference between Hijri Calendar and Muslim Calendar and every fourth year is leap year. ,Generally the year of incident of Karbala is taken 680 AD but when I traced from current hijri to that AD  It was 685 actually. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...