Merits of Imam Hussain (ra) and his martyrdom by cursed Yazid.
Merits of Imam Hussain (ra) and his martyrdom by cursed Yazid.
(Merits of Imam al- Hasan and Hussain and latter’s martyrdom by tyrant/fasiq/cursed Yazid and his partners)
The battle of Karbala is a very important part of our history. People who support Banu Ummiya rule starting from Ameer Mua’wiya try to cover it up. Some extremist Salafis go to the extent of even defending Yazid.
Let us first look at the merits of Imam Hasan and Hussain (alayhum salam).
Qur’an states: Then whoever argues with you about it after [this] knowledge has come to you - say, "Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves, then supplicate earnestly [together] and invoke the curse of Allah upon the liars [among us]. [Sahih International: 3:61]
In explanation of this verse there are Sahih hadiths which state:
Narrated 'Amir bin Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas: From his father who said: "When this Ayah was revealed: 'Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women... (3:61)' the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) called 'Ali, Fatimah, Hasan and Husain and said: 'O Allah! This is my family.'" [Jami’ at- Tirmidhi, Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 2999. Declared Sahih in Salafi dar us Salam version]
Qur’anic verse 33:33 also applies on family of Prophet including Imam al- Hassan and Hussain (alayhum salam). It has been explained before in this book.
Let us see some more beautiful hadiths in explanation of verse 33:33
Narrated Umm Salamah: "The Prophet (ﷺ) put a garment over Al- Hasan, Al- Hussain, 'Ali and Fatimah, then he said: 'O Allah, these are the people of my house and the close ones, so remove the Rijs from them and purify them thoroughly." So Umm Salamah said: 'And am I with them, O Messenger of Allah?' He said: "You are upon good."'[Jami’ at- Tirmidhi, # 3871. Hadith is Hasan]
There are many such hadiths.
It was narrated that Ibn 'Umar said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Hasan and Husain will be the leaders of the youth of Paradise, and their father is better than them." [Sunnan Ibn Majah, 1.118, Declared Hasan in Salafi Dar us Salam version]
It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever loves Hasan and Husain, loves me; and whoever hates them, hates me.'" [Sunnan Ibn Majah 1.143, Declared Hasan in Salafi Dar us Salam version]
عَنْ يَعْلَى بْنِ مُرَّةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم " حُسَيْنٌ مِنِّي وَأَنَا مِنْ حُسَيْنٍ أَحَبَّ اللَّهُ مَنْ أَحَبَّ حُسَيْنًا حُسَيْنٌ سِبْطٌ مِنَ الأَسْبَاطِ "
Narrated by Ya'la bin Murrah (RA), The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Husain is from me, and I am from Husain. Allah loves whosoever loves Husain. Husain is a Sibt among the Asbat."[Sibt first means Grandson and Asbat here will refer to many tribes i.e. he will have many offspring]
[Narrated in Jami' at- Tirmidhi in Merits of Al- Hassan and Hussain, Hadith No.4144, where he declared it Hasan (fair). All the narrators are completely relied upon (thiqat) and this hadith is absolutely authentic]
Other Books which narrate this hadith:
Imam al- Bukhari in his Adab ul Mufrad with Authentic chain, Book 19, Hadith # 364 Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Hadith # 17231 Published by Dar ul Ihya li Tirath al Ar'abi, Beirut, Lebanon. Sahih Ibn Hibban, Hadith # 6857 Sunnan Ibn Majah Hadith # 147 Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Hadith # 27931 Masbah al- Zajajah by Imam al Hafidh al Busayri (rah), Hadith # 53, he said after narrating it:
هذا إسناد حسن رجاله ثقات
Translation: This chain is "Good and all men are Thiqat”
Narrated 'Ali bin Husain: from his father, from his grandfather, 'Ali bin Abi Talib: "The Prophet (ﷺ) took Hasan and Husain by the hand and said: 'Whoever loves me and loves these two, and their father and mother, he shall be with me in my level on the Day of Judgement."
[Jami’ at- Tirmidhi, Hadith # 3733. Wrongly declared as Weak and Munkar Jiddan by Mutashadid Albani due to blind following of al- Dhahabi, also wrongly declared as weak by Zubayr Ali Zai. All Rijaal of this narration are reliable and then it is golden chain starting from Ali bin Jafar bin Muhammad bin Ali who was brother of great Imam of Ahlul Bayt Imam Musa Kadhim. Imam Ibn Hajr Asqalani called him Maqbool (acceptable). He is definitely known as brother of Imam Musa Kadhim. Ahmad Shakir a Salafi Muhaqiq over Musnad Ahmad has declared the chain as “HASAN (GOOD)” in Takhreej of Musnad Ahmad, Hadith # 576, Published by Dar ul Hadith, Cairo]
The above hadith has shawahid over it, like for example in another hadith narrated with different chain it states:
أخبرني أبو بكر إسماعيل بن الفقيه بالري ثنا أبو حاتم محمد بن إدريس ثنا كثير بن يحيى ثنا أبو عوانة داود بن أبي عوف عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي زياد أنه سمع عبد الله بن الحارث بن نوفل يقول : ثنا أبو سعيد الخدري رضي الله عنه أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم دخل على فاطمة رضي الله عنها فقال : إني وإياك وهذا النائم يعني عليا وهما يعني الحسن والحسين لفي مكان واحد يوم القيامة
هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد ولم يخرجاه
Translation: Abu Sa’eed al- Khudri (ra) said: The Prophet went to Fatima (a.s) and said: Me, you, this person sleeping i.e. Ali, Hasan and Hussain will be in same place on day of Judgment [Mustadrak al- Hakim (3/147, Hadith # 4664). Imam al- Hakim declared the chain as Sahih and al- Dhahabi also declared it Sahih]
Imam Ibn Kathir (rah) writes about Imam Hussain: You are Hussain bin Ali bin Abi Talib bin Abdul Muttalib bin Hashim Abu Abdullah al Qarshi al Hashimi, the grandson (of Prophet), son of his daughter Fatima Az Zahra, bouquet of flowers for Prophet in this world who got martyred in Karbala. [Al Bidayah wan Nihayah, 8/195, Urdu Version]
There are many more hadiths in praise of Imam Hasan and Hussain. Let us now come towards incident of Karbala and prove conclusively that Yazid bin Mu’awiya was a disgusting, treacherous, and cursed tyrant. He also used to consume alcohol. Some scholars went to the extent of declaring him Kafir.
Quran states: Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment (Yusuf Ali: 33:57)
What could be a bigger annoyance to the Prophet than getting his grandson brutally martyred and ransacking the place which he had declared to be Sacred (i.e. Madina al Munawara)
Qur’an states: So would you perhaps, if you turned away, cause corruption on earth and sever your [ties of] relationship? Those [who do so] are the ones that Allah has cursed, so He deafened them and blinded their vision. [Sahih International: 47:22-23]
In explanation of these verses Imam Alusi al- Hanafi (rah) said:
واستدل بها أيضاً على جواز لعن يزيد عليه من الله تعالى ما يستحق. نقل البرزنجي في «الإشاعة» والهيتمي في «الصواعق» أن الإمام أحمد لما سأله ولده عبد الله عن لعن يزيد قال كيف لا يلعن من لعنه الله تعالى في كتابه؟ فقال عبد الله قد قرأت كتاب الله عز وجل فلم أجد فيه لعن يزيد فقال الإمام إن الله تعالى يقول
فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَن تُفْسِدُواْ فِي ٱلأَرْضِ وَتُقَطّعُواْ أَرْحَامَكُمْ أَوْلَـئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ لَعَنَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ
محمد: 22] الآية وأي فساد وقطيعة أشد مما فعله يزيد؟
Translation: The Proof of sending curse upon Yazid is derived from this (verse), as was mentioned by Al- Barzanji (rah) in his Al- Ashaat and Imam al- Haythami (rah) in As- Sawaiq from Imam Ahmed (rah) that his son Abdullah asked him about sending Lanah on Yazid, (Imam Ahmed) said: Why cannot curse be sent on him when Allah has sent curse on him in Quran, Abdullah (rah) asked: Recite the Kitab of Allah so that I know how curse is sent on Yazid? Imam Ahmed (rah) mentioned these verses: Would ye then, if ye were given the command, work corruption in the land and sever your ties of kinship? Such are the men whom Allah has cursed…(47:22, 23) Hence what could be a bigger Strife than what Yazid did? [Ruh ul Ma’ani by Imam Al- Alusi, Volume 9 Under Surah Muhammad: 22, 23]
Allama Alusi also said:
الذي يغلب على ظني أن الخبيث لم يكن مصدقاً برسالة النبـي صلى اللـه عليه وسلّم
…
أن الخبيث كان مسلماً فهو مسلم جمع من الكبائر ما لا يحيط به نطاق البيان، وأنا أذهب إلى جواز لعن مثلـه على التعيين ولو لم يتصور أن يكون لـه مثل من الفاسقين، والظاهر أنه لم يتب/ واحتمال توبته أضعف من إيمانه، ويلحق به ابن زياد. وابن سعد. وجماعة فلعنة اللـه عز وجل عليهم أجمعين، وعلى أنصارهم وأعوانهم وشيعتهم ومن مال إليهم إلى يوم الدين ما دمعت عين على أبـي عبد اللـه الحسين
Translation: And I say what is prevalent over my mind that disgusting (Yazid) did not testify to the messengership of the Holy Prophet (Peace Be upon Him). According to me it is correct to curse a person like Yazid, although one cannot imagine a transgressor like him and apparently he never repented, the possibility of his repentance is weaker than the possibility of his faith (Iman). Along with Yazid, Ibn Ziyad, Ibn Sa'd and his group shall also be included. Verily, may Allah's curse be upon all of them, their friends, their supporters, their group and upon everyone who inclines towards them until Qiyamah and until an eye sheds a tear for Abu Abdullah Hussain (ra). [Tafsir Ruh al- Ma'ani, Volume 26, Page No. 73]
What is authentically narrated from Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (rah) is that he was asked by his student Muhana (rah) regarding Yazid bin Mu’awiyah. He Imam Ahmad said, which is paraphrased: He (Yazid) is that person who did with Madina (and it’s residants) so and so. Then he was asked what he did? Imam Ahmad said he looted it. He was asked should we narrate hadiths from Yazid? Imam Ahmad said: No you cannot narrate hadith from him. And it is not Jaiz for anyone to take even one hadith from him. He was asked who were with Yazeed when he did such (heinous crimes)? Imam Ahmad said, the people of Syria.
(Ar Raddo alal mutasib il Aneed al Maan’i min Dhami Yazeed. By, Imam Ibn Jawzi.Page # 40. Published by Dar al Kutb al Ilmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon. Sanad is Hasan li Dhatihi)
This is severe Jarh (criticism) on Yazid.
Another great Mufasir and author of great books, a scholar accepted by all Sunni Muslims i.e. Qadhi Thana Ullah Panipatthi (rah) writes in explanation of verse 14:28
Quran states: Hast thou not seen those who gave the grace of Allah in exchange for thanklessness and led their people down to the Abode of Loss (Pickthall: 14:28)
Tafsir: Bani Ummaiya had always rejoiced upon disbelief, however Abu Sufyan, Ameer Mu’awiya, Amr bin Aas and others became Muslims. Later Yazid and his companions rejected the blessings of Allah and rose the flag of enmity towards Ahlul Bayt and finally brutally martyred Imam Hussain (RA) to the extent that Yazid even denied the religion of Muhammad (Peace be upon him). He after martyrdom of Imam Hussain (RA) said: Had my predecessors lived they would have seen how I took revenge from the family of Prophet and Bani Hashim, The couplet which Yazid made had this in the end: I will avenge Ahmed (i.e. Prophet) for whatever he did with my predecessors in Badr (Naudhobillah). Yazid even declared alcohol as permissible and in praise of it he said: If liquor is forbidden in the religion of Muhammad (Peace be upon him) then take it to be permissible according to the religion of Jesus (a.s). [Tafsir al Mazhari Volume 5, Pages 211-212]
Imam Ibn Kathir (rah) says in his Tarikh al- Bidayah wan Nihayah under events of 63 AH
فقال ابن الزبير يا هؤلاء قتل أصحابكم فانا لله وإنا إليه راجعون
وقد أخطأ يزيد خطأ فاحشا فى قوله لمسلم بن عقبة أن يبيح المدينة ثلاثة أيام وهذا خطأ كبير فاحش مع ما انضم إلى ذلك من قتل خلق من الصحابة وأبنائهم وقد تقدم أنه قتل الحسين وأصحابه على يدى عبيد الله بن زياد وقد وقع فى هذه الثلاثة أيام من المفاسد العظيمة فى المدينة النبوية مالا يحد ولا يوصف مما لا يعلمه إلا الله عز وجل وقد أراد بارسال مسلم بن عقبة توطيد سلطانه وملكه ودوام أيامه من غير منازع فعاقبه الله بنقيض قصده وحال بينه وبين ما يشتهيه فقصمه الله قاصم الجبابرة وأخذه أخذ عزيز مقتدر وكذلك أخذ ربك إذا أخذ القرى وهى ظالمة إن أخذه أليم شديد
Translation: Ibn Zubayr (RA) said: O PEOPLE YOUR COMPANIONS HAVE BEEN KILLED – Inna Lillahi Wa Inna Ilaihi Rajiun
"Yazeed committed a mistake and that too a disgusting one by ordering Muslim bin Uqba to make Madina legal for three days. This was his biggest and ugliest blunder. Many Sahaba and their children were slaughtered. As it has been mentioned before that Yazid made UbaydUllah Ibn Ziyad kill the grandson of Prophet Husain and his companions.
In those three days, heinous crimes happened in Madina about which nobody knows except Allah. Yazeed wanted to secure his governance by sending Muslim bin Uqbah but Allah did against his wishes and punished him. Verily! Allah killed him likewise Allah made grip over the oppressing towns, no doubt His grip is painful and strict" [Al Bidayah Wan Nihayah, Vol 8 Page 283]
The crime of Yazid was not only getting Imam al- Hussain (RA) martyred but also that he made Madina mubah (legal) for three days. He committed heinous crimes there. This also makes him liable of Allah’s Curse.
Imam Ahmed narrates this report from Sa’ib bin Khalad (RA) that the Prophet of Allah (Peace be upon him) said: Whosoever spreads injustice and frightened the people of Madina, then Curse (Lanah) of Allah, his Angels and all the people is upon such a person. [Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal as narrated by Imam Ibn Kathir in Al Bidayah wan Nihayah Vol 8 Page No. 274]
The incident of al- Harrah (attack and looting of Madina by order of Yazid) is known from Tawatur. This is why Ibn Kathir (rah) said:
ثم أباح مسلم بن عقبة الذى يقول فيه السلف مسرف بن عقبة قبحه الله من شيخ سوء ما أجهله المدينة ثلاثة أيام كما أمره يزيد لا جزاه الله خيرا وقتل خيرا خلقا من أشرافها وقرائها وانتهب أموالا كثيرة منها ووقع شر وفساد عريض على ما ذكره غير واحد فكان ممن قتل بين يديه صبرا معقل بن سنان وقد كان صديقه قبل ذلك ولكن أسمعه فى يزيد كلاما غليظا فنقم عليه بسببه
Translation: And he Muslim bin Uqba who is known as As- Salf Musraf bin Uqba, May Allah not do well to this leader of evil and ignorance, he made Madina legal for 3 days on the order of Yazid. May Allah also not grant Jaza and khayr to him(i.e. Yazid), he got many righteous killed and also looted the amwaal in Madina in great numbers, this has been multiply narrated that he created a lot of Shar and Fasad. It is mentioned that Hadrat Muafl bin Sanan (RA) was tied infront (of Ibn Uqba) and then martyred, you were his friend before but later you used strong words against Yazid due to which he became angry at you. [Al- Bidayah Wan Nihayah, Volume 8, Page No 280]
Also Ka’ba was burnt by Army of Yazid as it is stated in Sahih Muslim:
'Ata' reported: The House was burnt during the time of Yazid b. Muawiya when the people of Syria had fought (in Mecca)… [Sahih Muslim, Hadith # 3083]
There is no proof whatsoever that Yazid stopped his Army from attacking Makkah and Madina. Neither did Yazid punish people like Muslim bin Uqba and UbaydUllah Ibn Ziyad after their atrocities.
Sahaba were against forceful Bayah of Yazid as proven from Sahih Bukhari (The hadith has been mentioned in Chapter # 7 under heading of “Hadiths which depict Ameer Muawiya in bad light, hadith # 5”)
Let us look at more hadiths:
وعن عمران بن حصين ، قال: مات النبيُّ وهو يكره ثلاثة أحياءٍ: ثقيفٍ، وبني حنيفة، وبني أميَّة
Imran bin Hussain (ra) narrates that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) went by being unhappy with three tribes 1. Thaqif. 2. Bani Hanifa 3. Bani Umaiya [Mishkaat al Masabih Hadith #5992]
First narrator is Zayd bin Ahzam at- Tai'i, regarding him Hadith specialists said:
قال أبو حاتم، والنّسائي : ثقةٌ
Translation: Abu Harim and Imam Nasa’i said: He is “RELIED UPON” [Tahdhib ul Kamaal #2317]
The second narrator is Abdul Qahir bin Shu’ayb , regarding him Hadith specialists said:
Imam Ibn Hibaan mentioned him in "Thiqaat" (14271) and Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said of him that "There is no harm in him" [Taqrib ut Tahdhib # 4682]
Third narrator is Hishaam bin Hasaan, regarding him Hadith specialists said:
وقال العِجْلـي : بصريٌّ، ثقةٌ، حسنُ الـحديث
وقال أبو حاتِـم : كان صَدُوقا
Translation: Imam al Ajli said: He is Basri, RELIED UPON” and “Good in hadith”
Imam Abu Hatim said: He is "TRUTHFUL" [Tahdhib ul Kamaal #8064]
Fourth narrator is the great Imam Hasan- al Basri, who needs no introduction.
Fifth narrator is Imran bin Husain (ra) the Sahabi of Prophet (Peace be upon him)
Sheikh Abdul Haq Muhadith Dhelvi (rah) writes: From Thaqif came Hajaj bin Yusuf, who captured 1 lac 20 thousand Muslims and martyred them, from Bani Hanifa came Musaylma Kadhaab who claimed Prophethood and "FROM BANI UMAIYA CAME YAZID AND IBN ZIYAD WHO WERE CRUEL AND THEY MARTYRED IMAM HUSSAIN" [Ash'at al Lamaat 2/623]
Defenders of Yazid such as Salafi Kafayat Ullah Sanabli has denied this hadith due to Tadlees of Hishaam, although the matn of hadith is absolutely correct due to undeniable history regarding these three tribes. Anyways here is another hadith about Banu Umaiyah.
Sa'eed bin Jumhan narrated: "Safinah narrated to me, he said: 'The Messenger of Allah(s.a.w) said: "Al-Khilafah will be in my Ummah for thirty years, then there will be monarchy after that."' Then Safinah said to me: 'Count the Khilafah of Abu Bakr,' then he said: 'Count the Khilafah of 'Umar and the Khilafah of 'Uthman.' Then he said to me: 'Count the Khilafah of 'Ali."' He said: "So we found that they add up to thirty years." Sa'eed said: "I said to him: 'Banu Umaiyyah claim that the Khilafah is among them.' He said: 'Banu Az- Zarqa' lie, rather they are a monarchy, among the worst of monarchies." [Jami’ at- Tirmidhi, Vol. 4, Book 7, Hadith 2226. Declared Hasan (good) in Dar us Salam version. Please note that Sanabli has tried to declare the last part of this hadith as weak by hook and crook methods and quoted Albani, but that proves ignorance of Salafis in hadith methodology]
عن أبي ذر قال: سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول: «أَوَّلُ مَنْ يُبَدِّلُ سُنَّتِي رَجُلٌ مِنْ بني أُمَيَّةَ».
Abu Dhar (ra) narrates that he heard from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) saying: The first one to change my Sunnah will be a man from Bani Umaiyah [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (8/340)]
Imam al Manawi (rah) explains this hadith:
قال البيهقي في كلامه على الحديث: هو يزيد بن معاوية
Translation: Imam Bayhaqi while commenting on this hadith said that “IT WAS YAZID BIN MUAWIYA” [Faydh ul Qadeer (3/94)]
In another hadith with slightly different wording narrated by totally different narrators it even mentions name of Yazid. It states:
حدثنا الحكم بن موسى حدثنا الوليد بن مسلم عن الأوزاعي عن مكحول عن أبي عبيدة قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم : لا يزال أمر أمتي قائما بالقسط حتى يكون أول من يثلمه رجل من بني أمية يقال له يزيد
Translation: Abu Ubaidah (ra) said that the Allah’s Messenger (Peace be upon him) said: The matter of my Ummah will remain upright until the first person who will make them divided will be from Bani Ummaiyah “WHO WILL BE CALLED YAZID” [Musnad Abu Ya’la (2/175, Hadith # 871). All Rijaal of this narration are Thiqaat (relied upon) except there is inqita (disconnection) between Makhul and Abu Ubaydah, also Walid bin Muslim is Mudalis, however it is also narrated with different chain without Walid (Abu Ya’la, Hadith # 870) hence Tadlees issue is removed. Remember Makhul is “Thiqa Faqih” so he cannot be accused of lying. Kafayat Ullah Sanabli has made blunder to call this hadith as fabricated although there are many Shawahid of it]
This hadith has come with many different chains and in another long hadith which is absolutely authentic the name of Yazid is also mentioned. It is narrated by Ibn Asakir (rah) as:
أخبرنا أبو سهل محمد بن إبراهيم أنا أبو الفضل الرازي أنا جعفر بن عبد الله نا محمد بن هارون نا محمد بن بشار نا عبد الوهاب نا عوف ثنا مهاجر أبو مخلد حدثني أبو العالية حدثني أبو مسلم قال غزا يزيد بن أبي سفيان بالناس فغنموا فوقعت جارية نفيسة في سهم رجل فاغتصبها يزيد فأتى الرجل أبا ذر فاستعان به عليه فقال له رد على الرجل جاريته فتلكأ عليه ثلاثا فقال إني فعلت ذاك لقد سمعت رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وسلم) يقول أول من يبدل سنتي رجل من بني أمية يقال له يزيد فقال له يزيد بن أبي سفيان نشدتك بالله أنا منهم قال لا
Translation: Abu Muslim (rah) said that Yazid bin Abu Sufyan (ra) took part in a battle with people and he earned spoils of war. In one warrior’s part came a “BEAUTIFUL” slave girl, but Yazid bin Abu Sufyan snatched that (beautiful) girl from him. That warrior came to Sayyiduna Abu Dhar (ra) and asked for help against Yazid bin Abu Sufyan. Abu Dhar told Yazid to return the slave girl to him but he refused, he said it three times but he refused, at this Abu Dhar said: Fine Do what you want because I heard the Prophet (Peace be upon him) saying: The first person to change my Sunnah will be a man from Banu Umaiyah called Yazid. At this Yazid bin Abu Sufyan said: I ask you for the sake of Allah, am I one of them? Abu Dhar said No! Then Yazid bin Abu Sufyan returned the slave girl to the warrior. [Ibn Asakir in Tarikh al Dimishq (65/249, 250)]
This narration clearly refers to Yazid bin Mu’wiya (LA) and is absolutely authentic. Even leading Salafi Muhadith Zubayr Ali Zai declared it authentic, however one Yazid sympathizing Salafi/Nasibi i.e. Mr. Kafayat Ullah Sanabli has tried to call all these reports coming from different chains as fabricated, he used hook and crook methods due to his love for Yazid. He exchanged heated words with Zubayr Ali Zai in this regard but after reading the exchange it becomes clear that these reports are authentic and Sanabli has just spread deceit.
Imam al- Bukhari (rah) has set a whole chapter title in his Sahih Bukhari as:
باب: قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: (هلاك أمتي على يدي أغيلمة سفهاء).
Translation: Chapter: The Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: The destruction of my Ummah will happen from the hands of “YOUNG FOOLISH BOYS” [Sahih Bukhari. Kitab al- Fitan, Chapter # 3. In Online version see: Vol. 4, Book 56, Hadith 802, & Vol. 9, Book 88, Hadith 180]
Such young stupid boys include Yazid.
Imam Ibn Hajr al- Asqalani explains:
وأن أولهم يزيد كما دل عليه قول أبي هريرة رأس الستين وإمارة الصبيان فإن يزيد كان غالبا ينتزع الشيوخ من إمارة البلدان الكبار ويوليها الأصاغر من أقاربه
First of them was Yazid as proven by the words of Abu Hurraira (who feared) 60 AH and kingdom of young (foolish boys) because Yazid dismissed elder Shuyukh from city but appointed minor figures from his friends [Fath ul Bari (13/9, Under Hadith # 7058, Published by Dar ul Fikr, Beirut, Lebanon)]
Let us look at the authentic hadith of Abu Hurraira (ra):
أخبرني محمد بن علي بن عبد الحميد الصنعاني بمكة حرسها الله تعالى ثنا إسحاق بن إبراهيم أنبأ عبد الرزاق أنبأ معمر عن إسماعيل بن أمية عن سعيد عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه يرويه قال ويل للعرب من شر قد اقترب على رأس الستين تصير الأمانة غنيمة والصدقة غرامة والشهادة بالمعرفة والحكم بالهوى
هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين ولم يخرجاه بهذه الزيادات
Translation: Abu Hurairra (ra) said: Woe to the Arabs for a disaster that is fast approaching at the turn of the year 60! The public trust will become spoils of war, almsgiving will be considered a fine, people will only bear witness for their friends, and lusts will govern [Mustadrak ala Sahihayn by Imam al- Hakim. Imam al- Hakim declared it Sahih on the criteria of Bukhari and Muslim. Al-Dhahabi agreed with him too (4/530, Hadith # 8489)]
It is a fact that rule of Yazid started in 60 AH and Abu Huraira (ra) passed away before 60 AH.
Now let us come towards hadiths and reports which people like Zakir Naik and Mr.Sanabli misuse.
It states: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, 'The first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins. [Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 52, Hadith 175]
Yazid was not in the first army who invaded Ceaser’s city.
Sahih hadith in Sunnan Abu Dawud states
عن أسلم أبي عمران قال : غزونا من المدينة نريد القسطنطينية وعلى الجماعة عبد الرحمن بن خالد بن الوليد
Translation: Aslam Abi Imran (ra) said: We went out on an expedition from Madina with the intent to attack Constantinople. Abd al- Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid was the leader of our group. [Sunnan Abu Dawud, Volume No. 2 Hadith # 2512, Albani declared it Sahih in his Takhrij]
Imam at- Tabri says in his Tarikh
فمما كان فيها من ذلك دخول المسلمين مع عبد الرحمن بن خالد بن الوليد بلاد الروم ومشتاهم بها وغزو
Translation: In (44 AH) The Muslims with Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid entered Rome and the battle took place [Tarikh at- Tabri under events of 44 AH]
Note: Yazid did not go to Rome until it was past 50 AH, rather about 6 to 7 battles had already taken place before he went, thus he is not liable for this glad tiding by any means!
Plus Yazid was later sent as a punishment and he was indulged in immoral vulgar deeds which had hurt Ameer Muawiya.
Imam Ibn Al- Atheer (rah) writes:
في هذه السنة وقيل : سنة خمسين سير معاوية جيشًا كثيفًا إلى بلاد الروم للغزاة ،وجعل عليهم سفيان بن عوف ، وأَمَرَ ابنه يزيد بالغزاة معهم فتثاقل واعتلّ فأمسك عنهأبوه ، فأصاب الناس في غزاتهم جوعٌ ومرض شديد ، فأنشأ يزيد يقول :
ما إن أباليبما لاقت جموعهم *** بالفرقدونة من حمى ومن موم
إذا اتكأت على الأنماط مرتفقًا *** بدير مروان عندي أم كلثومِ
فبلغ معاوية شعره، فأقسم عليه ليلحقنّ بسفيان في أرض الروم، ليصيبه ما أصاب الناس، فسار ومعه جمع كثير أضافهم إليه أبوه
Translation: In this year i.e. 49 AH or 50 AH, Muawiya (ra) sent a huge army towards Rome. He made Sufyan bin Awf (ra) as its commander and he ordered his son Yazid to go with them, however Yazid “ACTED TO HAVE BECOME SICK AND DENIED TO GO” When the warriors were struck with harsh hunger and diseases, Yazid (mockingly) said this poetry:
At Farqudwana immense wrath covered them, whether they had fever or whatever I don’t care because I am sitting on a high carpet and Umm ul Kulthum (one of his wives) is between my armpits.
When Ameer Muawiya (ra) heard these phrases he made Yazid to take an oath and join Sufyan bin Awf in Rome so that “HE COULD ALSO BE STRUCK BY THESE SAME DIFFICULTIES AS THE WARRIORS OF ISLAM HAD FACED (THIS WAS PUNISHEMENT TO YAZID)” Yazid became helpless and he had to go and Ameer Muawiya sent another army with him [Tarikh Ibn al Atheer, Volume No.3, Page No. 131]
Imam Badr ud- din Ayni (rah) said:
قلت: الأظهر أن هؤلاء السادات من الصحابة كانوا مع سفيان هذا ولم يكونوا مع يزيد بن معاوية، لأنه لم يكن أهلاً أن يكون هؤلاء السادات في خدمته
Translation: I say that it is obvious that the great amount of sahaba went under the leadership of Sufyan bin Awf (ra) and “NOT WITH YAZID BIN MUAWIYA BECAUSE HE WAS NOT DESERVING OF LEADING THEM” [Umdat ul Qari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari 14/197, 198]
He also explained this hadith as:
وقال المهلب: في هذا الحديث منقبة لمعاوية لأنه أول من غزا البحر، ومنقبة لولده يزيد، لأنه أول من غزا مدينة قيصر. انتهى. قلت: أي منقبة كانت ليزيد وحاله مشهور؟ فإن قلت: قال، صلى الله عليه وسلّم، في حق هذا الجيش: مغفور لهم. قلت: لا يلزم، من دخوله في ذلك العموم أن لا يخرج بدليل خاص، إذ لا يختلف أهل العلم أن قوله، صلى الله عليه وسلّم: مغفور لهم، مشروط بأن يكونوا من أهل المغفرة حتى لو ارتد واحد ممن غزاها بعد ذلك لم يدخل في ذلك العموم، فدل على أن المراد مغفور لمن وجد شرط المغفرة
Translation: Ibn Muhallab said: This hadith has a merit of Ameer Muawiya (ra) “BECAUSE HE WAS THE FIRST WHO DID THE BATTLE ON SEA” it also has a merit of Yazid because he was the first to invade ceaser’s city (which has been proven false above). Imam Badr ud din Ayni said: How could it have a merit of Yazid when his worth is already known to us. If you say that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said about this army that all their sins will be forgiven then I say that “IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO INCLUDE EVERYONE WITHOUT EXCEPTION” because scholars agree that forgiveness is “CONDITIONED” to those who really deserve it because if someone of the invaders had become “APOSTATE AFTER INVASION” then he would not be included amongst those who got forgiveness and this is proof that forgiveness mentioned in this hadith is “CONDITIONAL” [Umdat al Qari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari 14/198]
Imam ibn Hajr al- Aqalani also give similar explanation [Fath ul Bari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari 6/200, 201]
Imam al Qastallani (rah) has also mentioned this in his Irshad al Sari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari 5/101
This proves that all the greatest commentators of Bukhari excluded Yazid (LA) from this hadith.
Imam Abdur Rauf al Manawi (rah) also explains this hadith as:
لا يلزم منه كون يزيد بن معاوية مغفوراً له لكونه منهم إذ الغفران مشروط بكون الإنسان من أهل المغفرة ويزيد ليس كذلك لخروجه بدليل خاص ويلزم من الجمود على العموم أن من ارتد ممن غزاها مغفور له وقد أطلق جمع محققون حل لعن يزيد
Translation: It is not necessary that Yazid would be forgiven just because he was with the group of Muslims (who took part in the Jihad) because the forgiveness is conditional i.e. It will only for him who “ACTUALLY DESERVED IT AND THIS IS NOT THE CASE WITH YAZEED” and there is exception in his case due to authentic proofs. If someone deliberately persists and says that this hadith includes everyone then we will have to include even people who later turned apostates and above all a group of scholars have also said that it is “LAWFUL TO SEND CURSE ON YAZID” [Faydh al Qadeer 3/84]
Imam al Zarqani (rah) also excluded Yazid from this tiding in his Sharh of Muwatta 3/42
Rijaal of the hadith in Bukhari:
One of the narrators is Thawr bin Yazid. It is said about him
إنه كان قَدَرياً، وكان جدّ ثور بن يزيد قد شهد صفين مع معاوية، وقُتِلَ يومئذ، وكان ثور إذا ذكَرَ علياً قال لا أحبّ رجلاً قتل جدّي
Translation: Ibn Sa’d (rah) said: He belonged to the “Qadri’ite sect (those who deny destiny)” his grandfather was present in battle of Sifeen and participated alongside Ameer Muawiyah and was killed in the same war. Therefore whenever the name of Ali was taken in- front of Thawr he used to say: "I do not love the man who killed my grandfather۔"[Imam al Mizzi in Tahdhib ul Kamaal 3/275, Also see Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani’s magnificent Tahdhib ut Tahdhib 1/358]
قال الطّبراني : ثور بن يزيد الشاميّ، كان قدريّا،
Imam al- Tabrani (rah) said: Thawr bin Yazid belonged to the “Qadriyah (a sect which denied fate or made wrong interpretations on it)” [Tahdhib ul Kamaal 3/279]
Imam Ibn Hibban also mentioned him to be Qadr’ite [Kitab ul Thiqaat 6/128]
Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said in his Fath ul Bari:
والإسناد كله شاميون
Translation: All (narrators in this hadith) are from Syria [Fath ul Bari 6/200]
Remember Syria was headquarter of Yazid’s rule and It is also proven that Yazid used to force other people in giving pledge of allegiance to him and also to praise him, hence it is possible that this hadith was made up to somehow send the cursed Yazid to Paradise.
Another narrator of this hadith is Umair Ibn al- Aswad. Regarding him Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said:
ومات في خلافة معاوية، وليس له في البخاري سوى هذا الحديث
Translation: He died in the caliphate of Muawiya (ra). Imam Bukhari has not taken any hadith from him “EXCEPT THIS ONE” [Fath ul Bari 6/200]
Another narrator of this hadith is Khalid bin Madan although he is Thiqa but he used to narrate hadiths directly from Ameer Muawiya (ra) which means that Ameer Muawiya (ra) was amongst his shayukh, this makes the hadith weak even further because Ameer Muawiya (ra) was sympathetic towards his son Yazid.
Another report which sympathizers of Yazid and also Shia use against Sahaba is:
Narrated Nafi`: When the people of Medina dethroned Yazid bin Muawiya, Ibn `Umar gathered his special friends and children and said, "I heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, 'A flag will be fixed for every betrayer on the Day of Resurrection,' and we have given the oath of allegiance to this person (Yazid) in accordance with the conditions enjoined by Allah and His Apostle and I do not know of anything more faithless than fighting a person who has been given the oath of allegiance in accordance with the conditions enjoined by Allah and His Apostle , and if ever I learn that any person among you has agreed to dethrone Yazid, by giving the oath of allegiance (to somebody else) then there will be separation between him and me." [Sahih Bukhari Vol. 9, Book 88, Hadith 227]
First of all this hadith by itself proves that many Sahaba and Tabiyeen of Madina dethroned Yazid, hence their opinion will supercede that of Ibn Umar (r.a). Also this happened after Martyrdom of Imam Hussain (a.s). According to one sound opinion in Shariah, once a tyrant ruler has established his kingdom then no matter he is most wicked still we are told in Shariah not to fight him or dethrone him as that will create more turmoil. You shall understand the reasoning behind this from the next chapter of this book which is on Khawarij. In present times this applies to situation in Syria where Bashar al Assad is a tyrant Shia ruler but still rebellion against him is not justified.
Thirdly, Ibn Umar (r.a) is proven to be a well wisher of Imam Hussain (a.s) , he himself along with many other Sahaba had denied to give Bayah to Yazid even during Ameer Muawiya (ra)’s time when Bayah was taken for Yazid. Also it is proven from books of Tarikh (history) that Ibn Umar stopped Imam Hussain from going to Kufa as people there would betray him.
It states in al- Bidayah wan Nihayah of Ibn Kathir: When during the lifetime of Mu’awiya (ra) the Bayah of Yazid was taken, Imam Hussain (a.s) along with Ibn Zubayr (ra), Abdur Rahman bin Abi Bakr (ra), Ibn Umar (ra) and Ibn Abbas (ra) rejected to give Bayah to him, Ibn Abi Bakr (ra) passed away on this opinion but when Ameer Mu’awiya died in 60 AH, Ibn Abbas (ra) and Ibn Umar (ra) agreed to give bayah to Yazid (i.e. because of their Ijtihad due to hadith which tell us to obey the ruler even if we see bad traits in him) [See: Al- Bidayah wan Nihayah Volume # 8, Pages :195 to 250. Urdu version published by Nafees Academy. Brackets are mine.]
Hence it is proven that Ibn Umar (r.a) also considered Yazid a Fasiq and tyrant ruler and considered Imam Hussain (a.s) on truth. However Ibn Umar (r.a) was more of a pacifist and did not involve himself in fighting the corrupt rulers therefore unlike Imam Hussain (r.a) and other superior Sahaba , Ibn Umar accepted kingship of Yazid in spite of knowing Yazid did not desrve it. Ahlus Sunnah believes that his Ijtihad was wrong but according to sound hadith a Mujtahid gets one fold reward even if he reaches a wrong conclusion.
Also Shia who use the hadith of Bukhari to ridicule Ibn Umar (r.a) should know that Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah (rah) the very son of Imam Ali (a.s) also gave Bayah to Yazid after martyrdom of Imam Hussain (a.s) so would Shia call him names too? Also Shiapen which is a Shia website shows many quotes from books of Tarikh that Ibn Umar (r.a) was even bribed by Ameer Mu’awiya (ra) to accept Yazid as a ruler but Ibn Umar (r.a) did not sell his faith during time of Ameer Muawiya, however only later on after death of Ameer Muawiya he accepted to give Bayah.
Another hadith which is misused by people like Mr. Sanabli is:
It has been reported on the authority of Jabir b. Samura who said: I went with my father to the Messenger of Allah (may peeace be upon him) and I heard him say: This religion would continue to remain powerful and dominant until there have been twelve Caliphs. Then he added something which I couldn't catch on account of the noise of the people. I asked my father: What did he say? My father said: He has said that all of them will be from the Quraish. [Sahih Muslim, Hadith # 4482]
The Nasibis say that Yazid was among these righteous 12 Caliphs. However they ignore a Sahih hadith from Sunnan Abu Dawud which states:
Narrated Jabir ibn Samurah: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: The religion will continue to be established till there are twelve caliphs over you, and the whole community will agree on each of them. I then heard from the Prophet (ﷺ) some remarks which I could not understand. I asked my father: What is he saying: He said: all of them will belong to Quraysh. [Sunnan Abu Dawud, Hadith # 4266. The Hadith is authentic whereas Albani has wrongly said that “Whole community will agree on each of them” is not correct. Ibn Hajr and other scholars have relied on this hadith]
It is a fact that whole Ummah did not agree upon Yazid. Shia are also wrong in believing that such hadiths refer to their 12 Imams because the hadith mentions the word “Caliphs” whereas after Imam Hasan none of the shia Imams became caliphs nor Ummah agreed upon them.
Plus, if we do not understand this hadith in light of other hadiths i.e. Caliphate staying till 30 years and after that there will be Kingship (and of worst kind), then hadiths will contradict. Hence this hadith about 12 caliphs applies to 7 known Caliphs which are.
1. Sayyiduna Abu Bakr.
2. Sayyiduna Umar.
3. Sayyiduna Uthman.
4. Sayyiduna Ali.
5. Sayyiduna Hasan.
6. Hadrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz
7. And Last will be Imam Mahdi.
These seven are confirmed whereas remaining four will come before Imam Mahdi from Quraish. This is why Ibn Kathir (rah) said:
ومعنى هذا الحديث البشارة بوجود اثني عشر خليفة صالحاً يقيم الحق ويعدل فيهم, ولا يلزم من هذا تواليهم وتتابع أيامهم, بل وقد وجد منهم أربعة على نسق وهم الخلفاء الأربعة: أبو بكر, وعمر, وعثمان, وعلي, رضي الله عنهم, ومنهم عمر بن عبد العزيز بلا شك عند الأئمة وبعض بني العباس, ولا تقوم الساعة حتى تكون ولايتهم لا محالة, والظاهر أن منهم المهدي المبشر به في الأحاديث الواردة بذكره
Translation: The meaning of this Hadith is a glad tiding of 12 righteous caliphs (after the Prophet) who will establish truth and treat people with justice. It does not necessarily mean that they will come one after another. Four of them have come one after another i.e. four caliphs Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali. Among them is undoubtedly Umar bin Abdul Aziz (rah), and some from Bani Abbas. The Day of Resurrection will not come until the 12 caliphs rule. And apparently Imam Mahdi whose glad tiding has been mentioned in many narrations is one of them [Tafsir Ibn Kathir (3/65)]
Please note that Ibn Kathir (rah) calls them righteous and who will establish truth and treat people justly. This cannot apply on Yazid by any standards. Plus Ibn Kathir jumped straight to Umar bin Abdul Aziz after mentioning four Khulafa ar-Rashideen (Note: Some scholars do not mention Imam Hasan in righteous caliphs because he ruled only for 6 months. Qadhi Iyaadh in his ash- Shifa has mentioning him among 5 righteous caliphs whose rule would stay till thirty years. If we count rule of these caliphs for thirty years then it ends with Imam Hasan)
Also the scholars were not certain who these 12 caliphs would be except for the 7 mentioned above. Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rah) said:
قال بن بطال عن المهلب لم ألق أحدا يقطع في هذا الحديث يعني بشيء معين
Ibn Battal narrates from al- Muhallab: I have not met anyone who is certain about the meaning of this Hadith [Fath ul Bari (13/211)]
Ibn ul Jawzi (rah) also said:
هذا الحديث قد أطلت البحث عنه، وتطلّبت مظانّه، وسألت عنه، فما رأيت أحدا وقع على المقصود به
I have done long research on this hadith, checked many references, and made many enquiries, still I did not see anyone who was able to explain it. [Kashf -al- Mushkil (1/449)]
Technically the Prophet (Peace be upon him) did not consider Banu Umaiyyah to be worthy enough to be given Khumus of war booty let alone Prophet considering them to be righteous caliphs except for Sayyiduna Uthman (ra) and Umar bin Abdul Aziz (rah) whose caliphate is proven from clear hadiths.
Narrated Jubair b. Mu'tim: On the day of Khaibar the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) divided the portion to his relatives among the Banu Hashim and Banu 'Abd al- Muttalib, and omitted Banu Nawfal and Banu 'Abd Shams. So I and 'Utham b. 'Affan went to the Prophet (ﷺ) and we said: Messenger of Allah, these are Banu Hashim whose superiority we do not deny because if the position in which Allah has placed you in relation to them ; but tell us about Banu 'Abd al- Muttalib to whom you have given something while omitting us though our relationship is the same as theirs. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: There is no distinction between us and Banu 'Abd al- Muttalib in pre- Islamic days and in Islam. We and they are one, and he (ﷺ) intertwined his fingers. [Sunnan Abu Dawud, Hadith # 2974. Declared Authentic by Albani]
Note: Banu ‘Abd Shams are Ummayad.
People like Mr.Sanabli also use other weak reports like one from Ibn Abbas (ra) where he said: Yazid bin Muawiya is a pious and righteous man from the family of Ameer Muawiya (ra) [Ansaab al- Ashraaf by al- Balazari (5/302, 303)]
This report is weak due to “Abul Huwairith Abdur Rahman bin Muawiya” Regarding one hadith having him Imam al- Haythami (rah) said:
وفي إسناده: أبو الحويرث عبد الرحمن بن معاوية، ذكره ابن حبان في الثقات والأكثر على تضعيفه
Translation: In this Isnad is Abul Huwairith Abdur Rahman bin Muawiya. Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqaat but “MAJORITY HAVE CALLED HIM WEAK” [Majma uz Zawaid (1/32)]
Mr.Sanabli has spread deceit that Imam al- Haythami (rah) was wrong whereas majority have done Tawtheeq of him.
Imam Malik has said he is not Thiqa, Imam Nasa’i has said: He is “NOTHING” Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani gave overall hukm over him that he is “Truthful but “SA’EE AL HIFZ (WEAK IN MEMORY),” remember Sa’ee al Hifz is Mufasar Jarh, so even if Sanabli makes false deduction that majority have done tawtheeq of him then Mufasar Jarh will supercede. [Refer to Tahdhib ul Kamaal of Hafidh al Mizzi and also Taqrib ut Tahdhib of Hafidh Ibn Hajr]
On top of this al- Balazari himself said about Yazid: Yazid was the first one to drink wine openly, enjoyed through songs and hunting. He kept singing girls and beardless boys near him, he enjoyed all things which are enjoyed by evil people like playing with monkeys, making dogs and cocks fight. “BESIDES HE KILLED IMAM HUSAIN (RA), HE KILLED PEOPLE OF HARRAH, HE SET HOLY KA’BA ON FIRE AND (GOT) STONES THROWN ON IT” [Same book Anaasb al- Ashraaf by Balazari (5/287) which Sanabli hypocritically did not quote]
It is a fundamental Usool that when same Imam who narrated virtue of someone but he himself refutes him then the narration is considered weak according to him. How can he bash Yazid so severely when he has narrated a report on his praise? This proves that the report is weak not only by itself but also according to the Imam who narrated it.
Mr.Sanabli & Co also use report from Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah (rah) in praise of Yazid, which states:
ولما رجع أهل المدينة من عند يزيد مشى عبد الله بن مطيع وأصحابه إلى محمد بن الحنفية فأرادوه على خلع يزيد فأبى عليهم، فقال ابن مطيع: إن يزيد يشرب الخمر ويترك الصلاة ويتعدى حكم الكتاب.
فقال لهم: ما رأيت منه ما تذكرون، وقد حضرته وأقمت عنده فرأيته مواضبا على الصلاة متحريا للخير يسأل عن الفقه ملازما للسنة، قالوا: فإن ذلك كان منه تصنعا لك.
فقال: وما الذي خاف مني أو رجا حتى يظهر إلي الخشوع ؟ أفأطلعكم على ما تذكرون من شرب الخمر ؟ فلئن كان أطلعكم على ذلك إنكم لشركاؤه، وإن لم يكن أطلعكم فما يحل لكم أن تشهدوا بما لم تعلموا.
قالوا: إنه عندنا لحق وإن لم يكن رأيناه.
فقال لهم أبى الله ذلك على أهل الشهادة، فقال: * (إلا من شهد بالحق وهم يعلمون) * [ الزخرف: 86 ] ولست من أمركم في شئ،
قالوا: فلعلك تكره أن يتولى الامر غيرك فنحن نوليك أمرنا.
قال: ما أستحل القتال على ما
تريدونني عليه تابعا ولا متبوعا.
قالوا: فقد قالت مع أبيك، قال: جيئوني بمثل أبي أقاتل على مثل ما قاتل عليه، قالوا: فمر ابنيك أبا القاسم والقاسم بالقتال معنا، قال: لو أمرتهما قاتلت.
قالوا: فقم معنا مقاما تحض الناس فيه على القتال، قال: سبحان الله ! ! آمر الناس بما لا أفعله ولا أرضاه إذا ما نصحت لله في عباده.
قالوا: إذا نكرهك.
قال: إذا آمر الناس بتقوى الله ولا يرضون المخلوق بسخط الخالق
Translation: When people of Madina came back from Yazid then Abdullah bin Mutih (ra) and his companions came to Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah (rah) and told him to break the pledge of allegiance to Yazid, but Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah refused to do so. Abdullah bin Mutih (ra) said: Yazid drinks alcohol, abandons Salah (prayer) and goes against rulings of Qur’an. At this Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah said: I did not see any such thing in him like you are saying, rather I have gone to him and did Qiyaam with him, during this I found him steadfast in prayer, searcher of good, student in knowledge of deen, and always abiding by Sunnah. The people (Sahaba and Tabiyeen) said: Yazid did this just to show you, then Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah replied: What fear did he have from me or what did he want from me that he had a need to do good deeds in front of me?
What you people say of him regarding consuming alcohol, did Yazid himself inform you about it? If yes then you are all involved in his sin, and if Yazid did not tell you all of this then it is not permissible for you to bear witness about something for which you have no knowledge. “PEOPLE (SAHABA AND TABIYEEN) SAID THIS IS TRUTH IN OUR SIGHT” although we have not seen it. At this Muhammad bin Hanafiyah said: Allah does not accept bearing witness of this sort because Allah has said: “Those who bear witness to truth and have knowledge of it too” therefore I cannot take part with you in these actions. At this they said: Maybe you dislike that someone else other than you becomes ruler, therefore (do not worry) we (will) make you our ruler. Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah said: I do not consider your Qitaal on this matter to be right, what need do I have to follow anyone and make people follow me?
At this people said: You have fought along with your father! Muhammad bin Hanafiyah said: Then bring people like my father and with whom he fought. They said: Grant your children Qasim and Abul Qasim to fight along with us. Muhammad bin Hanafiyah said: If I give them such an order then why shouldn’t I join with you? People said: Alright you just go with us and incite people for war. Muhammad bin Hanafiyah said: Subhan Allah! The thing which I dislike myself and stay away from it then how can I order people for it? If I do this then I will not be well wisher of people in matters of Allah. They then said: Then we will force you. Muhammad bin Hanafiiyyah said: I will still ask people to fear Allah and do not anger their Lord for the wishes of creation. [Ibn Kathir in al- Bidayah wan Nihayah (8/233) with Broken chain between Ibn Kathir and Imam al Mudayni (rah)]
Mr.Sanabli has tried to call this narration as authentic with hook and crook methods. First of all the chain between Imam Ibn Kathir (rah) and Imam al- Mudayni (rah) is broken. Imam Ibn Kathir nor others narrated with a continuous chain upto Ibn Mudayni (rah). Mr. Sanabli has done gymnastics to assume that Ibn Kathir and al- Dhahabi must have narrated from al- Harrah the book of al- Mudayni which is now lost.
Imam Ibn Mudayni (rah) died in 215 to 232 AH according to difference in opinions. Whereas Ibn Kathir was born in 701 AH. Hence there is a long gap of hundreds of years and this narration is Munqata (broken) without a shadow of doubt.
We do not accept this narration to be authentic but still let us understand what this narration asserts.
a) Abdullah bin Mutih (ra) was a Sahabi whereas Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah (rah) was a Tabi’i. According to Usool the saying of Sahabi will supercede.
b) The majority of Sahaba and Tabiyeen differed with Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah so their stance will supercede.
c) The majority were right in saying that Yazid showed his good character just to show off in front of Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah.
Mr. Sanabli & Co then use narration from Imam Hussain (ra) claiming that he called Yazid as “Ameer ul Momineen”
He quoted from Tarikh at- Tabri which states: Imam Hussain marched towards Yazid from the route of Syria, however horse riders stopped him on the way and he stopped. At this Imam Hussain asked them for the sake of Allah and Islam. UbaydUllah ibn Ziyad had sent Amr bin Saad bin Abi Waqqas, Shimr, and Husain bin Nimr towards him. Imam Hassain asked them for the sake of Allah and Islam to “TAKE HIM TO AMEER UL MOMINEEN YAZID SO THAT HE CAN PLEDGE ON THE HAND OF YAZID” [Tarikh at- Tabri (3/229)]
This report is weak without a doubt. Hence word Ameer ul Momineen being used there is refuted. This narration is to be rejected for the following reasons.
1. Sanabli claimed that the narration is authentic according to criteria of Sahih Muslim because he also narrated hadiths via route of Ibaad bin al- Awaam from Husain. This is ignorance of Sanabli as Imam Muslim only narrated from this route in Maqroon and Mutabiyat form. The scholars like Ibn Hajr, Imam Nawawi, Ibn Salah and others have said that when Bukhari and Muslim mention some narrations in Maqroon and Mutabiyat form then their chain is not always deemed authentic. Sanabli is ignorant in Usool ul Hadith.
2. Sanabli has lied that Hussain is among Qadeem Shayookh of Ibaad bin al- Awaam and he narrated from him before he detoriated in memory. Here is reply to Sanabli. Imam al- Iraqi said: Before detoriation Suliman at- Taymi, Suliman al- Amash, Shu’ba, and Sufyan (Thawri) narrated from Husain bin Abdur Rahman [Al- Taqiyad wal Iedha Sharh Muqadmah Ibn Salah, Page # 406. Similar is said by Ibn Hajr in Muqadmah of Fath ul Bari called Hadi us Sari, Page #398. Also See Fath al Mughees by Imam al- Sakhawi (4/374). Hence it is proven that Ibaad bin al- Awaam heard from Husain when he detoriated in memory hence this report of Tabri is weak without a shadow of doubt]
3. Above all Hilaal bin Yasaaf was not present with Imam Hussain nor in Army of Yazid, hence who narrated this incident to him is not known. So it is also Munqata.
Mr.Sanabli the Nasibi Ghayr Muqalid has used hook and crook methods to praise and defend Yazid. We have refuted him on all the strongest hadiths he misused and also sayings from Sahaba and Tabi’i like Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah.
Imam Ibn Hajr (rah) made the whole title in his book al- Imta bil al- Arb'ain as "SENDING LANAH ON YAZID (لعن يزيد)"
وأما المحبة فيه والرفع من شأنه فلا تقع إلا من مبتدع فاسد الاعتقاد فإنه كان فيه من الصفات ما يقتضي سلب الإيمان عمن يحبه لأن الحب في الله والبغض في الله من الإيمان والله المستعان
Translation: Loving and glorifying him (Yazid) is not done “EXCEPT BY AN INNOVATOR WHO HAS VOID BELIEF” because he (Yazid) had such characteristics that his lover deserves to be faithless, because to love and hate just for the sake of God is a sign of faith. [al- Imta bil al- Arba'in al- Matbainatus Samah (الإمتاع بالأربعين المتباينة السماع), Author: Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah), Publication date: 1997, Page No. 96, Publisher's name: Dar ul Kutb al iLmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon]
Imam al- Hakim states:
هو رجل يشرب الخمر ويزني بالحرم
Translation: He (Yazid) was a man who drank alcohol and did fornication with Mahram (i.e. blood relatives) [Mustadrak ala Sahihayn, Volume No. 3/598 Hadith # 6274]
Imam Jalal ud din Suyuti (rah) states in his great work Tarikh ul Khulafa:
You (Imam Hussain) were martyred and your head was brought to Ibn Ziyad on a plate. "May Allah's curse be upon the person who killed you, also on Ibn Ziyad "AND UPON YAZID" [As- Suyuti in Tarikh ul Khulafa, Page No. 165]
Allama Taftazani (rah) the author Sharh al Aqaid al Nasafi said:
نتوقف في شأنه بل في كفره وإيمانه لعنة الله عليه وعلى أنصاره وأعوانه
Translation: We do not hesitate in his (Yazeeds)’s case whether in his kufr or faith. “MAY ALLAH’S CURSE BE UPON HIM, HIS HELPERS AND SUPPORTERS” [Imam Ibn Imaad in Shadhrat al Dhahab, 1/68]
Imam al- Sakhawi (rah) said:
باغ على الخمير السكير الهاتك لحرم الشريعة المطهرة يزيد بن معاوية لعنهم الله
Translation: The rebel drunkard, who mocked at the pure Shariah. Yazid bin Muawiya “MAY ALLAH’S CURSE BE UPON HIM” [Nayl al Awtaar, 7/330]
Imam al- Dhahabi (rah) writes about Yazid
وكان ناصبيا فظا غليظا جلفا يتناول المسكر ويفعل المنكر افتتح دولته بمقتل الشهيد الحسين واختتمها بواقعة الحرة فمقته الناس ولم يبارك في عمره وخرج عليه غير واحد بعد الحسين كأهل المدينة قاموا لله
Translation: He (Yazid) was a disgusting Nasibi (heretical cult of those who hate Ahlul bayt). He drank and did evil. He started his kingdom with the killing of the martyr al- Hussain (RA) and ended it with the incident of al- Harra (i.e. besiegement of Madina which also makes him directly liable to be cursed as Sahih hadiths prove). Hence the people hated him, he was not blessed in his life, and many took up arms against him after Imam Hussain (RA) such as the people of Madina - they rose for the sake of Allah [Siyr A'lam an Nubala, Volume No. 4, Page No. 37-38]
Even Ibn Khuldun (rah) who was accused of Nasb, explains : When the qualities of “FISQ” emerged in Yazid then Sahaba differed over him, so some Sahaba “MARCHED AGAINST HIM AND STOOD AGAINST HIM” and considered it necessary to break his Bayah like Imam Hussain (ra), Abdullah Ibn Zubayr (ra) and their followers and some due to “INTENSE STRIFE AND FEAR OF MASSIVE KILLING” did not march against him because at that time Yazid had become a very strong (and tyrant) ruler [Muqadma Ibn Khuldoon, Page No. 177]
Some people claim that Imam Ahmad Raza Fadhil of Baraili (rah) somehow defended Yazid in his Fatawa Ridhwiyyah. So let us look at his explanation in the esteemed work:
He said: Yazeed was Paleed (disgusting), he was Qat’an and Yaqeenan (Absolutely and with conviction) Ba Ijmah (with consensus) of Ahlus Sunnah a “FASIQ AND FAJIR (sinner and transgressor)” who committed “KABAIR (BIG) SINS”
On this do the Ahlus Sunnah have agreement, however in his Takfir, sending (direct) Lanah there is dispute. “IMAM AHMED BIN HANBAL (RA) AND HIS COMPANIONS CALL HIM KAFIR AND THEY DO THAT BY CURSING HIM WITH NAME AND THEY DO ISTADLAL FROM THIS AYAH: Then, is it to be expected of you, if ye were put in authority, that ye will do mischief in the land, and break your ties of kith and kin? Such are the men whom Allah has cursed for He has made them deaf and blinded their sight. [Quran 47:22, 23]
“THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT YAZID DID FASAD WHEN HE BECAME RULER” rather he utterly disrespected the Haramayn Tayibayn, the Ka’ba itself and the blessed shrine of Prophet (Peace be upon him). He (got) horses tied in Masjid an Nabwi due to which the urine of them even spilled over the pulpit (Naudhobillah), for three days Adhaan and prayer was stopped in Masjid an Nabwi, he got thousands of innocent Sahaba martyred in Makkah, Madina and Hijaaz, got stones being thrown on Ka’ba, got the Ghulaaf torn and burnt, This “KHABEETH” made the pure and pious ladies of Madina as Halal for his army (i.e. to do Zina .. AstaghfirUllah), he kept the loved one of Prophet as thirsty and hungry for 3 days and then got him slaughtered along with his companions. The ones who were brought up in the lap of Prophet, he made the horses trample their bodies (AstaghfirUllah) The blessed face of Imam Hussain (ra) which was used to be kissed by Prophet, it was gotten cut and put on a spear and displayed it to public …
Imam Ahmed Raza (rah) after proving all this said (Please note the honesty of this Imam in Fiqh): Imam Ahmed and his Companions send Lanah on Yazid whereas our Imam Abu Hanifa (rah) has done “SUKOOT (MAINTAINED SILENCE)” over calling him Kafir or sending Lanah upon him, due to “CAUTION” but be clear that him being “FASIQ AND FAJIR” is proven from “TAWATUR” but Kufr is not Mutawatir, so whosoever does not (Consider him kafir) will not be held responsible but whosoever rejects that he was Fasiq o Fajir and puts blame on the Malzoom Imam Hussain (ra) is “CLEARLY AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTALS OF AHLUS SUNNAH AND DOES ZALALAT AND IS FROM BAD MADHAB” rather this could never come from the heart of person who has the lamp of Prophet (Peace be upon him)’s love [Fatawa al Ridhwiyyah, Volume No. 14, Pages: 591, 592, Published Lahore, Pakistan]
Imam Ibn Hajr al- Asqalani (rah) gave an overall hukm regarding Yazid in his Taqrib ut Tahdhib as:
ليس بأهل أن يروى عنه
Translation: He is not deserving that anything should be narrated from him [Taqrib ut Tahdhib (2/331)]
Now imagine the pathetic state of a person regarding whom Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Hajr gave an overall hukm that nothing should be narrated from him.
We have comprehensively explained reality of Yazid and also refuted the biggest proofs which defenders of Yazid like Zakir Naik and Kafayat Ullah Sanabli use.
About Author:
