Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook    Log in with Windows Live    Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Dr.Zakir Naik Defends Yazeed bin Muawiya


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
22 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Javed-Q

Javed-Q

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 2
  • Posts: 4
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Joined: 20-June 11
  • Local time: 12:00 AM
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 20 June 2011 - 11:39 AM

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

As-Salaamu-Alaikum-Wa-Rahmatullah,

I knew that Zakir Naik had made some controversial statement, but I did not know the exact thing that he had said. I was shocked when I heard Dr.Zakir Naik telling “May Allah be pleased with him” for Yazeed on YouTube, yesterday. I had always admired Dr. Zakir Naik’s memory and his lectures, I have seen many of his lectures, including the first lecture of his life. But I could not imagine that Dr. Naik will give such a dumb statement regarding Yazeed. Dr.Naik, also, later defeats his statement and gives an explanation about his statement regarding Yazeed. I was also shocked to read the comments of Muslims that “every Muslim’s opinion about Yazeed is not that he was an evil man”. It is well known fact that Yazeed was an evil person, he lived a life of luxury and was a drunkard and an womanizer; he had no respect for Islam, Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) or the pious Sahaba (R.A); After the martyrdom of Hazrath Hussain (R.A) when Yazeed went to Medina, he had tied his horses near the grave of Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه و سلم, the horses were so close that, it was possible that, their urine drops could fall on the holy grave. It was under his command that Hazrath Hussain (R.A) was martyred mercilessly, even the small children accompanying him were not spared by Yeezid’s men. How can a Muslim call a person good who has mercilessly killed the grandchildren of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) if he really loves Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه و سلم. It is common sense that if I love and revere somebody, I will naturally love his family members and the grandsons of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) were pious and true Muslims.

Dr. Zakir defends his statement by referring to a hadith in Sahih Bukhari which states that Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) had stated that whoever conquers and enters Constantinople first, will enter paradise. I agree that Sahih Bukhari is the most trusted source of hadith, and the ahadith in Sahih Bukhari are very much close to reality, but still, all the ahadith in Sahih Al-Bukhari are not 100 per cent correct. This is because Hazrath Imam Bukhari (Rahmatullah Alaih) was not the “knower of the unseen”, he did not have knowledge of the truthfulness of the chain of  narrators through whom the hadith was related. He only tried his best, by examining the trustworthiness and truthfulness of the chain of narrators, to collect the hadith which are most likely to be true. But only Allah knows what was in the hearts of the chain of narrators, whether they narrated the truth as they heard from the narrator on the upper order of chain (as was the case in most of the ahadith of Sahih Bukhari) or whether they manipulated the hadith according to their evil intentions and desires.

After the Martyrdom of Hazrath Usman (R.A) there was lot of turmoil among the Ummah. Unfortunately, Muslims fought and killed their own Muslim brothers in the battles of Jamal and Siffin. In the battle of Siffin, Muawiya fought with Hazrath Ali (R.A) and snatched away the Caliphate of Hazrath Ali (R.A), accusing him of murdering Hazrath Usman (R.A) [Nousubillah], which a person like Hazrath Ali (R.A) cannot even imagine in his dreams. After this, Muawiya was the King of all the countries which were under the Islamic Caliphate. Muawiya made lot of attempts to defame Hazrath Ali (R.A). He started the practice to curse Hazrath Ali (R.A) during Jummah prayer, and this odious ordinance given by Muawiya was carried out in all the Masjids until Hazrath Umar bin Abdul Aziz (Rahmatullah Alaih) came and stopped it.

Muawiya had  ardent and devoted followers who would do anything to propagate his line of thinking, i.e., to defame Hazrath Ali (R.A) and his progeny and put a veil on the acts of Muawiya and his progeny. These people were so careful in their behavior that no one can discern their true intentions, and common people will take them to be true and sincere Muslims. These people are also responsible for making it appear that there was lot of dissention between Hazrath Ali (R.A) and the first three Caliphs (R.A) . In fact there was not so much of dissention between them, this, these people did to create further division between Shias and Sunnis. Because if they prove that Hazrath Ali (R.A) was at variance with the first three Caliphs (R.A), then people will regard Hazrath Ali (R.A) to be wrong and Muawiya will appear right in the eyes of people. Hazrath Imam Bukhari (Rahmatullah Alaih) did not have the knowledge of what is in the hearts of people, hence he collected the hadith from everybody who he felt was a true and sincere Muslim, according to his life and behavior.

How can Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) say about a person who has killed his grandson so mercilessly,  whom he loved so much, that he would enter paradise. Even if Rasulullah (S.A.W) did not know the exact person who would conquer Constantinople, Allah will surely be knowing, then how would Allah inspire Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) to say such a hadith?

But, I do agree with Dr.Naik on one thing - In matters relating to Sahaba, calling a good person bad is a million times more bigger sin than calling a bad person good. Hence Shia do not have any right to point their finger on Dr.Naik, because they have committed a far worse sin by calling the first three Caliphs (R.A), who were righteous and pious Sahaba of Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه و سلم, and Ummul Momineen Hazrath Aisha (R.A) as bad.

Shias commit a grave offence, which can lead to Kufr, by cursing the Mother of all Believers Hazrath Aisha (R.A) and the first three Calips (R.A) [Nousubillah];  But who is responsible for this behavior of the Shias?  Why did Shias become extremist in matters relating to the Sahaba (R.A)?  The Sunnis are responsible for this.  Sunnis (Ex: Dr. Zakir Naik of this era), whose praising of the killers of Hazrath Hussain (R.A) and cursing his father Hazrath Ali (R.A), made the Shias extremists.

Remember, it was Muawiya, whom the Sunnis regard as their Amir, who started the practice of, cursing Hazrath Ali (R.A) in the Mosques, and not vice-versa. Till today, with some  exceptions, the Sunnis, after taking the name of Hazrath Ali (R.A) call him “Karamallahu Wajhu”; which means “May Allah be lenient with him”, this indirectly means that Hazrath Ali (R.A) has made some grave offence [Nousubillah] and that Allah should be lenient towards him on the Day of Judgment, and should not punish him according to his deeds. This, the Sunnis, say for a Sahaba for whom the Prophet Muhammad [S.A.W] had said during his last Haj, “Whoever is a friend of Ali is my friend, O Allah Thou also be friend to him, and, Whoever is an enemy of Ali is my enemy, O Allah Thou also be an enemy to him”, and yet the Sunnis claim to love Prophet Muhammad [S.A.W]. Allah knew that there were people in the Ummah who had started hating Hazrath Ali [R.A], hence Allah caused these words to come out of the holy mouth of our beloved Prophet [S.A.W] during his last Haj, this was a special occasion, and all the Sahaba [R.A] were present on this occasion and hence nobody, not even Sunnis, can deny this hadith. Even after knowing this hadith, Muawiya started the practice of cursing Hazrath Ali [R.A].

The Shias began to feel that nobody was concerned about Hazrath Ali [R.A], and no Sunni, except few, objected to the cursing of Hazrath Ali [R.A], nor did anyone had any remorse for the sad martyrdom of Hazrath Hussain [R.A], hence they became extremist, in order to defend Hazrath Ali [R.A] and his progeny. It is true that other Sahaba [R.A] were  also martyred in the way of Allah during the battles of Badr, Uhud etc, but these Sahaba [R.A] were killed by the Kafirs, whereas, the irony with the martyrdom of Hazrath Hussain [R.A] was that his killers were all Muslims. Sunnis, not condemning the killers of Hazrath Hussain [R.A] and praising his killers and cursing his father Hazrath Ali [R.A], was the precise reason why the Ummah got divided into two sects. And this division of the Ummah is exploited by the enemies of the Ummah to achieve their selfish ends even today, the battle between Iran and Iraq from 1979 to 1989 is the best example of this, in which many innocent Muslims lost their lives.

People say that Yazeed had not ordered the martyrdom of Hazrath Hussain [R.A], and that his men in Kufa took this decision themselves without his knowledge. If this is true, then did Yazeed gave the killers of Hazrath Hussain [R.A] death penalty for killing a Muslim not to mention that he was also the grandson of Prophet Muhammad [S.A.W]? The answer is a BIG NO, he did not give them any punishment at all. If he was true, then he should have proved himself by punishing the perpetrators of Hazrath Hussain’s [R.A] murder.  Then, is it sufficient for Yazeed to say that he did not order the killing of Hazrath Hussain [R.A], while moving his stick on the lips of the beheaded head of Hazrath Hussain [R.A], to absolve him from the grievous sin he had committed? People also say that even if he ordered the killing of Hazrath Hussain [R.A] then he would have repented before death. If repentance after killing a Muslim [first of all I do not believe he ever repented] is sufficient, then why did Allah ordain that the killer of a Muslim should be beheaded in retaliation for his committing the murder? Does anyone who killed a Muslim should be asked only to repent? Those who commit fornication also has to be stoned to death. If repentance was the way out, then those who commit fornication have, in-fact, not harmed anyone! They have only committed a sin with mutual consent? If repentance was the punishment for such grave sins, then fornicators should not be stoned to death! There was a Sahabia [R.A], who, during the life of Prophet Muhammad [S.A.W] confessed in front of Rasulullah [S.A.W] that she had committed adultery by mistake. Rasulullah [S.A.W] ordered her to be stoned to death and not to just repent! But, when the Sahaba [R.A] were throwing stones very harshly on her, Rasulullah [S.A.W] ordered them to throw slowly and said that she has repented to such an extent that Allah has forgiven her. Did Allah forgive her simply because she repented? No, if this was a case then Rasulullah [S.A.W] would not have ordered for her to be stoned. Allah forgave her because she was repenting and also bearing the ordeal for committing adultery and not simply because she was repenting! Is Yazeed superior to this Sahabia [R.A] or is he special, so that he gets away only with repentance after committing the murder?


And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell
to abide therein, and the Wrath and the Curse of Allah are upon him, and a
great punishment is prepared for him. -  Quran [4:93]


Whatever I have mentioned, people who are biased towards their sect will surely not like, but those who are mature and look at it with neutral mind will understand the essence of what I want to say.

Thanked by 1 Member:
wiki3377

#2 OFFLINE   Jhangvi

Jhangvi

    Technical Admin

  • Admin
  • Topics: 363
  • Posts: 3,540
  • Thanked: 911 times
  • Joined: 27-November 04
  • Local time: 10:30 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 20 June 2011 - 12:31 PM

Your post itself speaks that you are no else but a Shia. Welcome to the forum!

And when it is said unto them (Kuffars): Believe as these people [Sahabah {R.A}] believe; they say: "Shall we believe as these foolish believe? Alert! they (Kuffars) are the foolish but they know not. {Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah#13}


224 Urdu Books on Shia - ردِ شیعہ پر 224 اردو کتابیں


Thanked by 1 Member:
SunniMujahid

#3 ONLINE   swords_of_sunnah

swords_of_sunnah

    Sunni Researcher and Writer

  • Moderator
  • Topics: 643
  • Posts: 7,407
  • Thanked: 523 times
  • Joined: 01-February 09
  • Local time: 01:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida (US)
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 20 June 2011 - 01:43 PM

well please check that does his IP matches with omarashid... because he is fond of creating such articles..
Allah is the MAULA of those who believe, whereas the disbelievers have no MAULA (Quran 47:11)

HASBUNALLAHU WA NEMAL WAKEEL, NEMAL MAULA WA NEMAN NASEER
Translation: "Allah (Alone) is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs (for us); what an Excellent Maula (Patron, Lord) and what an Excellent Helper!

#4 OFFLINE   Jhangvi

Jhangvi

    Technical Admin

  • Admin
  • Topics: 363
  • Posts: 3,540
  • Thanked: 911 times
  • Joined: 27-November 04
  • Local time: 10:30 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 20 June 2011 - 04:32 PM

 swords_of_sunnah, on 20 June 2011 - 01:43 PM, said:

well please check that does his IP matches with omarashid... because he is fond of creating such articles..
No. Anyways, check your PM for details.

And when it is said unto them (Kuffars): Believe as these people [Sahabah {R.A}] believe; they say: "Shall we believe as these foolish believe? Alert! they (Kuffars) are the foolish but they know not. {Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah#13}


224 Urdu Books on Shia - ردِ شیعہ پر 224 اردو کتابیں


#5 OFFLINE   maulana yazeed

maulana yazeed

    Advanced Member

  • Senior Member
  • Topics: 580
  • Posts: 973
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Joined: 19-August 10
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 20 June 2011 - 07:58 PM

Khomeini  not  fit  to  suck  the  sweat  from  yazeed's  socks !
SHIAISM  IS  THE  RELIGION  OF  THE  DEVIL !

#6 OFFLINE   Fatah-Momin

Fatah-Momin

    .

  • Senior Member
  • Topics: 2,084
  • Posts: 10,690
  • Thanked: 31 times
  • Joined: 22-December 04
  • Local time: 12:30 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 20 June 2011 - 10:05 PM

Javed-Q want a debate on any  topic start a thread, and please do not run off.

#7 OFFLINE   Javed-Q

Javed-Q

    Junior Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 2
  • Posts: 4
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Joined: 20-June 11
  • Local time: 12:00 AM
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:00 AM

 Fatah-Momin, on 20 June 2011 - 10:05 PM, said:

Javed-Q want a debate on any  topic start a thread, and please do not run off.

I swear by Allah that I will never back out. But, if you become aggressive and abusive (which, generally people who are on the wrong do because of frustration), then I will not continue the debate, because I don't like improprieties in religious debates.

Whatever I wanted to say I have already mentioned in the article, it is for you to start a thread.

#8 OFFLINE   Javed-Q

Javed-Q

    Junior Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 2
  • Posts: 4
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Joined: 20-June 11
  • Local time: 12:00 AM
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:34 AM

 Jhangvi, on 20 June 2011 - 12:31 PM, said:

Your post itself speaks that you are no else but a Shia. Welcome to the forum!


I am neither a Shia or a Sunni, I am only a Muslim. I have been born and brought up in a Sunni family.

I hate Shias, because they abuse the Sahaba (R.A), and , I do not like the Sunnis because of their hostile attitude towards Hazrath Ali (R.A).

The verse which you have mentioned, fits best on you for your attitude towards Hazrath Ali (R.A).

Do you people ever give a thought to what your scholars write about Hazrath Ali (R.A) and the consequences of talking light about him, on the Day of Judgement. Hazrath Ali (R.A)was among the Sahabas (R.A) who have converted to Islam in the beginning itself and he had participated in all the battles along with Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) and was along with him through out his life. You talk light of Hazrath Ali (R.A) at the cost of Muawiya, who got converted to Islam only after Fateh-Macca! And can you not understand this much, that a person who is a true Muslim, will never abuse his Muslim brother in private, let alone abusing him in Mosques during Jummah Prayes.

The Shias have got out of limits, they are above the pale of reclamation and decency, by their cursing of eminent Sahabas (R.A), they will have to bear the burden of their grievous sin on the Day of Judgement, but what about Sunnis, they claim to respect all the Sahaba (R.A) and at the same time have a hostile attitude towards a Sahaba like Hazrath Ali (R.A) and attach "Karamallahu Wajhu" to his name, while they call all the other Sahabas (R.A) as "Radiallahu Anho"; is this not clear discrimination against Hazrath Ali (R.A). You call me a Shia because of my mentioning of the hadith of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) during his last Haj, but what about what Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) had said to Hazrath Ali (R.A) before handing over to him the flag before the Battle of Khaibar, and the way Hazrath Ali (R.A) fought the Battle of Khaibar; this incident alone is sufficient to prove his level of Iman.

#9 OFFLINE   muhammad.ahmed

muhammad.ahmed

    Newbie

  • Newbie
  • Topics: 0
  • Posts: 1
  • Thanked: 0 times
  • Joined: 02-February 13
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 02 February 2013 - 09:33 AM

Jo bhi yazzed ko r.a khy ga wo saboot dy ga k wo yazeedi hai,jis ny hussain (r.a) ko shaheed kraya

#10 OFFLINE   UmarBinKhatab

UmarBinKhatab

    Qur'an And Sunnah

  • Special Member
  • Topics: 238
  • Posts: 1,368
  • Thanked: 470 times
  • Joined: 03-November 04
  • Local time: 09:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 02 February 2013 - 10:31 AM

yazeed with all his evils and short comings is billions of times better than shia hypocrites who took prophet Mohammed (saw) and his a'al as gods besides Allah. They did not stop here but continued by insulting men of ahlul-bait (including our beloved prophet) for been cowards who could easily get manhandled by ....................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

umar?
No.
_____________

khalid bin Waleed?
No
_____________

group of men?
No
_____________

group of women?
No
_____________

By a single woman?
Yes.

Yes these accursed kafir rafidah believe a single woman could easily manhandle our beloved prophet (saw)....the prophet who we believe was given the strength 30 men could get easily manhandle by a single woman according to this devilish cult of shi'ism...I have video proof for what I am saying and insha Allah I will upload it whenever Allah wills.

Don't be in disillusion that nawasib got perished..but they have reincarnated in rawafid. Rafidi shias are the real nawasib of today.
On the authority of Anas, who said: I heard the messenger of Allah say:

Allah the Almighty has said: "O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great as its."

related by Al-Tirmithi, who said that it was a good and sound Hadith.

#11 OFFLINE   Optimus Prime

Optimus Prime

    New_Muslim

  • Senior Member
  • Topics: 131
  • Posts: 1,477
  • Thanked: 142 times
  • Joined: 29-November 12
  • Local time: 07:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 02 February 2013 - 09:43 PM

View PostUmarBinKhatab, on 02 February 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

yazeed with all his evils and short comings is billions of times better than shia hypocrites who took prophet Mohammed (saw) and his a'al as gods besides Allah. They did not stop here but continued by insulting men of ahlul-bait (including our beloved prophet) for been cowards who could easily get manhandled by ....................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

umar?
No.
_____________

khalid bin Waleed?
No
_____________

group of men?
No
_____________

group of women?
No
_____________

By a single woman?
Yes.

Yes these accursed kafir rafidah believe a single woman could easily manhandle our beloved prophet (saw)....the prophet who we believe was given the strength 30 men could get easily manhandle by a single woman according to this devilish cult of shi'ism...I have video proof for what I am saying and insha Allah I will upload it whenever Allah wills.

Don't be in disillusion that nawasib got perished..but they have reincarnated in rawafid. Rafidi shias are the real nawasib of today.

I agree brother.

Although Yazid had his dark habits and what not, there are narrations he did rule a certain land and if one did so they would be rewarded Jannah. He never directly order the assassination of Hussain (RA) anyway. Need to cut the bloke some slack. Allah will enforce justice as he sees fit on the matters of Karbala.

Edited by New_Muslim, 02 February 2013 - 09:44 PM.


#12 OFFLINE   Musaddique

Musaddique

    Newbie

  • Newbie
  • Topics: 0
  • Posts: 1
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Joined: 25-June 13
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 25 June 2013 - 05:28 AM

my dear brothers, sisters, friends assalamualikum

I just want to say..What happened in those day with Imam Hussain we properly don't know but Imam hussain given no of SUBAK to all of us. in that one of is don't forget NAMAZ. and don't be with those who are interested in DUNIYA...


and all muslims are one unity whether shia or sunni...all are one...all had said "LA ILAHA ILLALLAHU MUHAMMADAR RUSULULLAHE" from thier tongue...


and all sahaba are best amongst us...
1)Hazrat Abu Bakar Siddiq (R.A)
2)Hazrat Umar(R.A)
3)Hazrat Usman(R.A)
4)Hazrat Ali(R.A)

these four are the Qulfa-E-Rashideen...

Thanked by 1 Member:
Ashique Ali Shah

#13 OFFLINE   SunniMujahid

SunniMujahid

    حسبنا اللہ نعم الوکیل

  • Senior Member
  • Topics: 88
  • Posts: 497
  • Thanked: 303 times
  • Joined: 10-January 10
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Reading History Books and Various Islamic Books. Searching for truth
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 25 June 2013 - 06:53 AM

View PostMusaddique, on 25 June 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:


Imam hussain given no of SUBAK to all of us.


these four are the Qulfa-E-Rashideen...

Dear what is SUBAK???

And it is not Qulfa - E - Rashideen. It is Khulafa e Rashideen.

علم حاصل کرو۔ مہد سے لحد تک
جس نےمیرے صحابہ سے بغض رکھا، اس نے گویا مجھ سے بغض رکھا


فرمان رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم


#14 OFFLINE   Ashique Ali Shah

Ashique Ali Shah

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 14
  • Posts: 133
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Joined: 04-June 13
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:08 AM

Most Islamic scholars during the Abbasid Caliphate regarded Yazid (L.A)  as a tyrant who was directly responsible for three major historical atrocities in standard Islamic history: The Karbala massacre of the Hashimite caravan of Husayn ibn Ali, the pillage and plunder of the city of Madinah (by Yazid's general Ibn Uqbah al-Murri) in which over 10,000 Muslim citizens were slaughtered and Muslim women were indiscriminately raped, and the siege of Mecca in which Yazid's commander Ibn Numayr ordered his troops to catapult fireballs to the shrine of the Kaaba.

REFERENCE:
  • Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. pp=372-379, Tarikh Al-Tabari Vol. 3.
  • ^ Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. pp=309-356, Tarikh Al-Tabari Vol. 4.
  • ^ Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. History of al-Tabari Vol. 19, The Caliphate of Yazid b. Mu'awiyah.
  • ^ Al-Athir, Ali ibn. pp=282-299, pp=310-313, Ibn al-Athir Vol. 3.
  • ^ Al-Dhahabi, Muhammad bin Ahmad. pp=30, Tarikh Ul Islam Vol. 5.
  • ^ Ibn Kathir, Ismail bin Umar. pp=170-207, pp=219-221, pp=223, Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah Vol 8.
  • ^ Al-Suyuti, Jalaluddin. pp=165, Tarikh Ul Khulafa.
  • ^ Maududi, Sayyid Abul Ala. pp=181, Khilafat Wa Mulukiyyat.


#15 OFFLINE   Ashique Ali Shah

Ashique Ali Shah

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 14
  • Posts: 133
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Joined: 04-June 13
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:15 AM

"The first army amongst my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins."
Technically, the location of the subject of this sahih hadith of Prophet Muhammad is the city of Homs (Emesa), Syria. Before its capture in Muharram 15 AH (March 636 CE) by the Muslim forces sent by Caliph Umar bin al-Khattab, Homs (Emesa), Syria was the headquarters of Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Emperor Heraclius (i.e. Caesar or Qaisar). The Muslim army that captured in quick succession the Eastern Roman Empire’s cities (Tiberias, Baalbek, and Homs), was led by Abu Ubaydah bin al-Jarrah al-Thaqafi (father of the Karbala & Madinah avenger Mukhtar al-Thaqafi); some notable sahabah who participated in these military campaigns were Miqdad bin al-Aswad al-Kindi, Bilal bin Rabah, and most prominently, Khalid bin al-Waleed. Consequently, the first army to invade “Caesar’s City” was led by Abu Ubaydah bin al-Jarrah al-Thaqafi; if "Caesar's City" meant a city named after a Caesar, then Constantinople or Qustuntunia (named after its founder, Roman Emperor Constantine the Great) still would not qualify, as the very first city (not town or village) which was invaded by a Muslim army that was named after a Roman emperor was Tiberias (in honour of Tiberius Caesar). Tiberias surrendered to Abu Ubaydah's army in Zulhijjah 13 AH (January 635 CE).

Reference:
  • Al-Bukhari, Muhammad bin Ismail. pp=409-410, Hadith No. 2924, Sahih Al Bukhari Vol. 1.
  • ^ a b Al-Bukhari, Muhammad bin Ismail. Book 52, No. 175, Sahih Al Bukhari Vol. 4.
  • Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Ahmad bin Ali. Fath ul-Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari.
  • ^ Al-Athir, Ali ibn. pp=339, Tarikh Kamil Vol 2.


#16 OFFLINE   Ashique Ali Shah

Ashique Ali Shah

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 14
  • Posts: 133
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Joined: 04-June 13
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:24 AM

Yazid was killed by his own horse after it lost control, his remains were never confirmed to have been found. Yazid died at the age of 36 (age 38 in Hijri-Lunar calculation) after ruling for three years and was succeeded by his son Muawiyah II. Yazid was buried in Damascus. Although it is thought that his grave no longer exists, few believe that it is located in a small street near Umayyad Mosque without any mark or distinction, as is customary in Islamic tradition.

Hitti, Philip K. (1943). The Arabs: A short history. Princeton University Press.

#17 OFFLINE   Servant-of-Sahaba

Servant-of-Sahaba

    Advanced Member

  • Senior Member
  • Topics: 72
  • Posts: 616
  • Thanked: 283 times
  • Joined: 11-April 12
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 25 June 2013 - 11:40 AM

View PostAshique Ali Shah, on 25 June 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

Most Islamic scholars during the Abbasid Caliphate regarded Yazid (L.A)  as a tyrant who was directly responsible for three major historical atrocities in standard Islamic history: The Karbala massacre of the Hashimite caravan of Husayn ibn Ali, the pillage and plunder of the city of Madinah (by Yazid's general Ibn Uqbah al-Murri) in which over 10,000 Muslim citizens were slaughtered and Muslim women were indiscriminately raped, and the siege of Mecca in which Yazid's commander Ibn Numayr ordered his troops to catapult fireballs to the shrine of the Kaaba.

REFERENCE:
  • Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. pp=372-379, Tarikh Al-Tabari Vol. 3.

  • ^ Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. pp=309-356, Tarikh Al-Tabari Vol. 4.

  • ^ Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. History of al-Tabari Vol. 19, The Caliphate of Yazid b. Mu'awiyah.

  • ^ Al-Athir, Ali ibn. pp=282-299, pp=310-313, Ibn al-Athir Vol. 3.

  • ^ Al-Dhahabi, Muhammad bin Ahmad. pp=30, Tarikh Ul Islam Vol. 5.

  • ^ Ibn Kathir, Ismail bin Umar. pp=170-207, pp=219-221, pp=223, Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah Vol 8.

  • ^ Al-Suyuti, Jalaluddin. pp=165, Tarikh Ul Khulafa.

  • ^ Maududi, Sayyid Abul Ala. pp=181, Khilafat Wa Mulukiyyat.

ashique Ali Shah , is this copy paste from shia site ....
Sayyidina Umar said, ‘Our chief Abu Bakr (RA) is the best of us and was the dearest of all of us to Allah’s Messenger.” ۔-
Sayyidina Abdullah bin masood said Umar’s acceptance of Islam was victory of Islam, his migration was divine Help his Caliphate was divine Mercy-----
Sayyidina Abdullah ibn Abbas Al hashmi says if everyone would agree on the murder of Hazrat Usman then stone  pouring down from the sky ---
Sayyidina Umar ra said Congratulations to you, O Ali after today you are friend of every believer , He said If Ali was not there, Umar would have perished.


Defense of Sahaba


Thanked by 1 Member:
SunniMujahid

#18 OFFLINE   Ashique Ali Shah

Ashique Ali Shah

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • Topics: 14
  • Posts: 133
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Joined: 04-June 13
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 June 2013 - 12:24 PM

No my dear brother this is not copy paste from shia forum, but this is true History about Yazid (L.A) bin Hazrat Amir Muwaviya (R.A) if you have any doubt so you can also check reference Surely, thanks.

#19 OFFLINE   AbuMuslimKhorasani

AbuMuslimKhorasani

    یا مقلب القلوب ثبت فلبی علی دینک

  • Moderator
  • Topics: 269
  • Posts: 2,006
  • Thanked: 260 times
  • Joined: 13-September 10
  • Local time: 06:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:زمین
  • Interests:Defending Islam against deviant sects.
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 25 June 2013 - 12:57 PM

No doubt about his fisq  but there is no need to add (L.A) after his name. This is what the Rawafid do. We shouldn't copy people of misguidance.

Edited by AbuMuslimKhorasani, 25 June 2013 - 01:05 PM.


Thanked by 3 Members:
Ashique Ali Shah, Servant-of-Sahaba, SunniMujahid

#20 OFFLINE   SunniMujahid

SunniMujahid

    حسبنا اللہ نعم الوکیل

  • Senior Member
  • Topics: 88
  • Posts: 497
  • Thanked: 303 times
  • Joined: 10-January 10
  • Local time: 11:30 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Reading History Books and Various Islamic Books. Searching for truth
  • Religion:Islam (Sunni)

Posted 25 June 2013 - 05:23 PM

This is a shia propaganda that all sunis curse Yazid .

Our Sunni bro /and sis do not know what Suuni scholars said?


From all the evidences I will just quote Sunni scholars here

NOTE; There is no comparison Of Syedna Hussain (RA) ( a sahabi ) & Yazid :RehmatullahAlyhi: (non sahabi)


READ CAREFULLY, IT SHOWS MANY OF SUNNI SCHOLAR'S VIEW ABOUT YAZEED. NOT TALKING ABOUT SHIA WHO CURSE EVERY ONE.



NO-1 Imam Ahmad bin Hanbil :RehmatullahAlyhi:

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami in al-Sawaiq al-Muh.riqa cited Ibn al-Jawzi's attribution of this position to Imam Ahmad via Abu Ya`la in his Mu`tamad fîl-Usul, the latter narrating it from Salih. ibn Ahmad, from the Imam. However, Abu Muh.ammad al-Tamimi in his `Aqidat al-Imam Ahmad relates a contrary position from Imam Ahmad, as narrated by Abu Ya`la's son in Tabaqat al- Hanabila and Ibn Muflih. in al-Maqsad al-Arshad:

He [Imam Ahmad] withheld saying anything about Yazîd ibn Mu`awiya but rather committed his matter to Allah. He would refrain from speaking against anyone from the first century. But our [Hanbali] colleagues differ concerning him [Yazid]. Some declared it permissible to blame him because he terrified al-Madina and the Prophet :[S.A.W.W]:  Allah bless and greet him - cursed whoever terrifies al-Madina. Others withheld from taking any position. Imam Ahmad was asked about it and he said: 'People prayed behind him and took his alms.' Others considered him among the Muslims that sinned and it is better to refrain from taking any position in what is not obligatory. It was impermissible to curse any Muslim unless the Law provided a proof-text to that effect. For it is narrated and transmitted that to curse a Muslim is like killing him and that the Believer is not one given to cursing.

From the above it can be seen that the claim that "Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal permits that curses be pronounced against Yazid" made by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Rasul al- Barzanji in al-Isha`a fî Ashrat al-Sa`a (Shukri ed. p. 77 and p. 144) is not correct even though Ahmad did forbid narrating from him cf. T.abaqat al-H.anabila (1:347) from Muhanna ibn Yah.ya al-Shami.


NO.2 Imam Taymiyyah :RehmatullahAlyhi:
“The Muslims conquered Constantinople twice, first in the time of Mu’awiyah with Abu Ayub al Ansari and after that battle Abu Ayyub was buried.” [Majmou’ Al Fattawa v18]

Abdullah ibn Umar narrated that

“The Messenger said, “the first army that conquers Constantinople will be forgiven.”

That is the conquest by Mu’awiyah (ra) and among that army was Yazeed ibn Mu’awiyah, so how dare some people insult Yazeed when Allah has forgiven that army?

The second conquest of Constantinople was the one of Abdul Malik ibn Marwan who appointed his son Maslamah and sent an expedition for Constantinople, they did not enter but agreed to build the aghia Sophia Masjid (now a museum) and to rule over it by Islam. After that Muhammad Al Fateh opened it completely.


NO.3 What follows is a list of some of the scholars who held various opinions about Yazeed ibn Mua’wiyyah.

1. Imaam Muhammad Ghazzalee :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.505H)

Imaam Muhammad Gazzalee said he (Yazeed) was a Muslim with a correct aqeedah and a complete Muslim and it is not permissible in the sharee’ah to curse and abuse him.

See Ahyaa al-Uloom (3/108),
Wafyaat al-A’yaan (1/328),
Miratul-Janaan (3/176),
Al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/173),
Hayaat al-Haiwaan (2/176),
Sawaa’iq al-Meharqah (pg.222),
Dhuu al-Ma’alee (pg.49),
Sharh Fiqhul-Akbar (pg.87),
Nibraas (pg.551),
Shadhraat adh-Dhahab Fee Akhbaar Minal Madhab (1/69),
Tafseer Rooh al-Ma’anee (13/73),
Fataawa Azeezee (1/100),
Fataawa Abdul-Hayy (1/60),
Aqaa’id al-Islaam (pg.223).

2. Imaam Qaadhee Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabee Maalikee :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.543H)

He did not hold permissible the cursing and abusing of Yazeed nor declaring him to be a disbeliever. He said,
“If it is said justice and knowledge are from the conditions of Khilaafah and Yazeed neither had justice or knowledge, then we will say what is the thing by which he have to come to know Yazeed had no justice or knowledge.” (al-Awaasim Minal Qawaasim (pg.222)

He also said,

“Where are those historians who wrote against Yazeed in mentioning alcohol and open sinning, do they not have any shame?” (al-Awaasim Minal Qawaasim (pg.222)

3. Shaikh Abdul-Mugeeth Hanbalee :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.583H)

He was not in favour of cursing Yazeed nor declaring him to be a disbeliever, rather he authored a biography of Yazeed with the title of, “Fadhal Yazeed.”

“And his book ‘Fadhal Yazeed bin Mu’awiyyah’, has mentioned strange incidences.” (Hidaayatul A’aarifeen Asmaa al-Mu’allifeen Wa Athaar Musannifeen (5/623),
Al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/328).

Haafidh Ibn Katheer :RehmatullahAlyhi: said about Abdul Mugeeth,
He was from the righteous Hanbalee’s who the common folk referred to.” (al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/328).

Imaam Ibn al-Jawzee :RehmatullahAlyhi:  said,

“I hope from Allaah that me and Abdul-Mugeeth will be together in Paradise. Muhib ud deen Abul-Baqaa said from this we find (ibn al-Jawzee) knew Abdul-Mugeeth was from the righteous worshippers of Allaah and may he have mercy on both of them.” (Dhail Tabaqaat Hanabillah (1/356) of Ibn Rajab.)

4. Allaamah Abul-Khair Qazwainee. :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.590H)

Imaam Ibn Katheer said,

“After he left Qazwain he went to Baghdaad where he became a teacher in Madrassah Nizaamiyyah and he would admonish and deliver lectures to the people. So on the day of Ashoorah he sat on the minbar to admonish the people, it was said to him to curse Yazeed bin Mu’awiyyah. He replied, “He was but an Imaam Mujtahid.”

(al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (9/13),
Risaalah al-Mustarfah Lee-Bayaan Mashoor Kitaab as-Sunnah al-Musharfah (pg.132).

5. Allaamah Ibn as-Saalah :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.646H)

He was also not in favour of cursing Yazeed or saying he was a disbeliever.

Ibn Hajr Makkee writes,

“Ibn Salaah who is from our jurists and scholars of hadeeth, I have seen in his Fataawa that when he was asked concerning the individual who would only curse Yazeed because he ordered the death of Hussain. Then in answer to this he said, according to us Yazeed ordering the death of Hussain is not correct and cursing and abusing Yazeed is not the sign of a believer…..” (as-Sawaa’iq al-Meharqah (pg.222).

6. Shaikh ul-Islaam Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.728H)

He was neither in favour of cursing Yazeed nor declaring him to be a disbeliever. He says,

And the people who curse Yazeed and other such people like him then it is UPON them to bring evidence,
Firstly: that he (Yazeed) was an open sinner and an oppressor and therefore prove he really was an open sinner and an oppressor. As allowing them to be cursed also needs to be proven that he continued this open sinning and oppression to the end up until his death.


Secondly: Then after this they must prove that it is permissible to curse specific people like Yazeed.”

He goes onto say,
and the verse, “May the Curse of Allaah be upon the oppressors.” Is a general verse like the verses concerning punishment.”

He goes onto say,
And the hadeeth of Bukhaari states the first army to wage Jihaad against Constantinople is forgiven and the first army to do Jihaad against Constantinople, their Ameer was Yazeed ibn Mu’waiyyah and the word army entails a specific number and every member of this army is included in this forgiveness………..”

(Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah Fee Naqdh Kalaam ash-Shee’ah Wal-Qadariyyah (2/252),
al-Muntaqa Minhaaj al-Ei’tidaal Fee Naqdh Kalaam ar-Rafdh Wal-Ei’tizaal (pg.290).

7. Haafidh Imaam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.751H).

Haafidh Ibn Qayyim writes in his book al-Manaar al-Muneef,

The he goes onto say on the same page,

ALL the narration’s that mention the censure of Mu’awiyyah are lies.”
(al-Manaar al-Muneef Fis-Saheeh Wadh-Dha’eef (pg.220).

8. Haafidh Imaam Ibn Katheer :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.774H)

After mentioning the position of al-Haraasee (of the permissibility of cursing) he mentions his statements and says,
“Imaam Ghazzalee has opposed the attribution of open sinning and tyranny to Yazeed and has prohibited from abusing Yazeed because he was a muslim and it is not established he expressed happiness or joy on the death of Hussain….”
(al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/173).

9. Haafidh Ibn Rajab :RehmatullahAlyhi: (d.795H)

Haafidh Ibn Rajab also did not hold the opinion of cursing and declaring Yazeed to be a disbeliever. On the contrary he refute the allegation on Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal that he cursed Yazeed. So he writes in clear words,

“The statement of Imaam Ahmad only establishes cursing on all of the oppressors and there is no clarification or specification for the permissibility of cursing Yazeed only.” (Dhail Tabaqaat Hanabillah (2/356).

10. Mulla Ali Qaaree :RehmatullahAlyhi:  (d1014H).

Mulla Ali Qaaree said,

“The majority of the Scholars have prohibited cursing Yazeed and Hajjaaj.” (Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat (4/52).
Comments

Lifting the blame from the Imaams series part 15 - Yazeed ibn Mu’awiyyah part-1



11. Grand Mufti Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baz of Saudi Arabia praises Yazeed

Ameer al-Mu’mineen Yazeed :RehmatullahAlyhi: ibn Mua’wiyyah was a believer with a correct and sound Aqeedah (belief) and accusing him to be a disbeliever is absolutely incorrect and a pure slander.

“Yazeed’s Islaam was correct as he was a believer.”
(Wafyaan al-A’yaan Wa Abnaa Ibnaa az-Zamaan (1/328),
Mir’atul-Janaan Wa-Ibratul-Yaqzaan Fee Ma’arifah Maa Ya’abir Min Hawaadith az-Zamaan (3/177).

Shaikh ul-Islaam Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah :RehmatullahAlyhi: said,
“Yazeed was from the teenage muslims he was neither a disbeliever nor a Zindeeq (heretic) he used to give a lot (of wealth in charity) and he was brave. He did not have the evil and bad things which the enemies attribute to him.”
(al-Waseeyatul-Kubraa (pg.300), Majmoo al-Fataawa (2/41).

He also said,
“This man (Yazeed) was a king from amongst the Muslim kings and he was not like this and that (as the people claim).”
(Minhaaj as-Sunnah (2/247).

He also said,
“Rather the Islaam of Mu’awiyyah, Yazeed, Banee Ummayyah and Banee Abbaas is established with Tawatur (ie so many narration’s) and similarly their praying, fasting and Jihaad against the non-believers is also established.”
(Minhaaj as-Sunnah (1/163)

Abdul-Hayy Husainee said,

“Attributing Fisq (open sinning) and disbelief to Yazeed ibn Mu’awiyyah is unlawful (haraam) and considering this to be lawful (ie these attributions to him) are unlawful (haraam).”

Nazhatul-Khawaatir Wa Bahjatul Masaama’a Wan-Nawaazir (7/514).

Ibn Hajr al-Makkee :RehmatullahAlyhi: said,

“Yazeed was a believer from amongst the believers.” (as-Sawaa’iq al-Meharqah (pg.223).

Mulla Ali Qaaree :RehmatullahAlyhi: said,
“Yazeed having Eemaan is not something which is hidden.” (Sharh Fiqhul al-Akbar (pg.88).

Ibn Khaldoon said,
“A majority of the companions :RA Anhum: were with Yazeed and they did not hold it permissible to rebel against him.”

(Muqaddimah Ibn Khaldoon (pg.217

None of the four imam and the authors of the six well known books of hadeeth declared yazeed to be a disbeliver or a heretic.Yazid was an important general and naval commander in his father's Syrian army. As early as 668 the Caliph Muawiyah I sent an army under his son Yazid against the Byzantine Empire. Yazid reached as far as Chalcedon and took the important Byzantine center Amorion. Although the city was quickly recovered, the Arabs next attacked Carthage and Sicily in 669. In 670 the Arabs captured Cyzicus and set up a base from which to launch further attacks into the heart of the Empire. Yazid’s fleet captured Smyrna and other coastal cities in 672.


*Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari records under the year 49 Hijri (or 669-670 CE) during the reign of Muawiyah I, a number of forces, including one under Yazid attacked Constantinople. This First Arab siege of Constantinople was a naval assault lasting through the years 670-677. Abu Ayyub al-Ansari :RA Anho: was also among the notables accompanying Yazid. This journey marks an important event in the life of young Yazid (27 at that time), as he became one who was promised paradise

Then this family created a great scienctist Khalid bin Yazid, which was grand son of Muawiya file:///C:DOCUME~1STARIZ~1.COMLOCALS~1Tempmsohtmlclip11clip_image001.gifand beloved son of Yazid file:///C:DOCUME~1STARIZ~1.COMLOCALS~1Tempmsohtmlclip11clip_image001.gif. This was first chemist in muslims and we take first step in the field of sciece. From this brilliant start we take start in this field and make progress day by day. Although during the Abbasis era, it braked because they were bloody or you can say 'bleeding was their hobby' having no sense how to rule and how to progress. Science makes progress through sound planning which was not in abbasis. With the end of their era, it again started and created a number of scitists like Jaber bin Hayan a chemist, Ibne seena a phisycian, Yaqoob Alkandi etc...

In short, for making progress in the field of science, we have to follow up omvis and seek high knowledge like the family of yazid May allah bless him and all peacefull muslims.

It is not proven from Hz. Umar bin Abdul Aziz :RehmatullahAlyhi: that he gave order of 20 lashes to the person who said ameer ul momineen to Yazeed. because

1. Muhammad bin Mutawakkal is weak according to Imam Abu Hatim, Ibn Adi, Abu Ali Ghisani,Ibn Rajab, Ibn al qayserani, Ibn Hajar asqalani said he is sudooq but he did many mistakes.

2. There is no chain from Imam Dahabee to Muhammad bin abi sirree, neither Dahabee ra claimed that he is narrating from his book.

3. It is proven otherwise that. Hz. Umar bin abdul Aziz :RehmatullahAlyhi: never beaten anyone with the exception of the one who insulted Muawiyah RadhiAllahanho [Tareekh Damishq 39/211]

Sources : -
http://answers.yahoo...19040733AAfpqXh

http://www.systemofl...h#axzz2X9pToWWf

Edited by SunniMujahid, 25 June 2013 - 05:30 PM.

علم حاصل کرو۔ مہد سے لحد تک
جس نےمیرے صحابہ سے بغض رکھا، اس نے گویا مجھ سے بغض رکھا


فرمان رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم


Thanked by 1 Member:
Servant-of-Sahaba




Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Welcome to HCY Forum
Please Login or Register to use full features.