Merits of Imam Husain(a.s)-Part 2

The Imam says: 'I am not one of those people and whatever the future circumstances and the political conditions of Iraq may be, I shall achieve my object. I have risen only to perform the duty which devolves upon me from Allah in the present circumstances. It is not my object to become a caliph or to rule over the Muslims. If I am successful I shall have performed my duty and it will be quite right, and if my enemy is the winner, even then I shall have performed my duty. There is no other object of my movement'. Truly speaking it makes no difference for the godly persons, and those, who have no material motive and perform jihad for Allah, with a view to perform their duty, whether they are victorious or defeated. This interpretation is also on account of the inadequacy of words, otherwise the word defeat does not exist in the dictionary of the godly persons. This was what Imam Husayn said while going to Iraq when he told Farazdaq: "If we succeed we shall thank Allah, but even if destiny does not favor us we shall not perish, because our intention is good. It is possible that we may be killed but we shall not die, because there is a great difference between being martyred in the path of Allah and for the sake of enjoining to do good and restraining from evil on the one hand and dying and perishing on the other".

 

The Imam said exactly the same thing on the day of Āshura in one of his addresses to the people of Kufa. By reciting some poetical verses of the companion of the Holy Prophet named Farwa bin Murādi, he hinted that if some of his friends or enemies thought that that was a day of his death, defeat and destruction, they were sadly mistaken, for the fact was that it was the day of his martyrdom -a martyrdom which would be the first step towards his eternal life.

 

Ibn Tawus writes that when Burayr bin Khuzayr Hamdani counseled the people but they did not pay any heed to him, the Imam himself mounted a camel and asked them to become silent. When they became silent and attentive he praised Allah in a befitting manner and invoked blessings for Muhammad, the angels and other Prophets. Then he said: "O People! Woe be to you! You have deceived us. You cried for help, and we got up quickly to come to your rescue. However, you wielded against us the same sword, which we had given in your hands and kindled for us the same fire, which we had lit to destroy our common enemy. You joined your enemies to fight against your friends and well-wishers, although you have not received justice from them (i.e. from the enemies) in the past and cannot also entertain any hope in the future. Woe be to you! Why did you not take a final decision and forsook us when the swords were still sheathed and the people were tranquil and calm? Why did you begin to fly hurriedly like newly-winged locusts, and why did you fall in the fire of mischief like moths? May you never be blessed, O mean people! who have thrown the Qur'an away and tampered with its words.

 

"O you supporters of sins and friends of Satan and those who have wiped out and destroyed the traditions of the Prophets! Have you withdrawn your hands from our assistance and are you going to support the oppressors? I swear by Allah that you have always been unfaithful. You are inherently faithless people. You are the most filthy fruit, which is of no use to your friends and well-wishers, and chokes their throats, but is easily swallowed by the enemies. By choking the throats of the friends it is meant that you promise assistance and support and boast of your devotion and manliness, but when you are put to test and when it is time to defend Islam and offer sacrifice, you are not only useless, but your oppression and injustice does not spare even your friend, and threatens his life like a choking morsel!"

 

Then the Imam said: "O people of Kufa! You should know that this bastard (i.e. Ubaydullah) son of that bastard (i.e. Ziyad) has obliged me to choose one of the two things; either the swords be unsheathed i.e. there occurs a fierce battle, which culminates in my martyrdom and self-sacrifice or I should fall into disgrace and humiliation and submit to his will so that he may do with me whatever he likes. However, disgrace and humiliation are not acquainted with us. Allah does not like that we should be put to shame and humiliation. The Prophet and the godly persons do not yield to abjectness and humiliation.

 

We have been brought up in the laps of pure mothers. The young men with the sense of honor and the gentlemen with undaunted courage will not go the way of ignoble and weak persons so long as the path of death and martyrdom is open before them, and will not also agree to our humiliation and abjectness. Although at present my faithful friends are few, and many others have ceased to support me, I shall not choose any path other than fighting, and shall not go except the way of martyrdom".

 

It was here that the Holy Imam recited the following poetic verses of Farwa ibn Musayk Muradi which represent a world of spiritual greatness, peace and vigor.

 

"If we have been victorious today it is not something new, because we have always gained victory and even if we are defeated, predominance and victory is ours; and truth is victorious in all circumstances, whether it wins or loses.

 

We are treading this path with courage and manliness and are not accustomed to fear and cowardice. However, what can be done if it be so destined that we should meet martyrdom and others should attain to rulership.

 

It is customary in the world that after attacking the people and trampling upon them death goes back and then renews its attack and crushes another group.

 

Fate is drawing the gentlemen of Bani Hashim towards death in the same manner in which it did in the past ages.

 

If the kings of the world had been immortal, we, who are the rulers of the Kingdom of heaven, would have lived for ever. And if the virtuous and magnanimous persons had continued to live in the world, we, who are the basis of magnanimity and the essence of virtue, would have continued to live.

 

Tell those who rejoice at our misfortune and affliction today: "The time of your affliction is also drawing near, and time will bring down a terrible disaster on you".

 

With this spirit, showing his greatness, determination, devotion and faith, the Imam proceeded from Makkah to Iraq. He knew very well what he was doing, where he was going and what the result of his action would be. However, others and even the relatives and devotees of the Holy Imam were worried lest the favorable circumstances should become unfavorable and eventually the Imam should be martyred. The Imam was going to meet martyrdom but his friends and relatives were requesting him not to go lest he should be killed.

 

One of those persons was Abdullah bin Ja'far, the nephew and son-in-law of Imam Ali. After the departure of Imam Husayn from Makkah Abdullah sent him a letter through his sons Awn and Muhammad. In that letter he entreated the Imam in the name of Allah to return. He also wrote: "I am afraid that you and your men will be martyred, and if you are killed today light will disappear from the world, because people are guided by you and all faithful persons count on you. You should not, therefore, be in a hurry, because I am coming after this letter". Then Abdullah left along with the brother of Amr bin Sa'id, the Governor of Makkah. He was carrying a letter from his brother (the Governor of Makkah) to the Imam wherein he assured him of security and asked him to return to Makkah with full confidence. Both of them came to the Imam, presented the letter of the Governor of Makkah to him and insisted on his returning. The Imam told them in reply: "I have seen my grandfather, the Prophet of Allah, in a dream and he has directed me to continue my mission". They asked him as to what else he had dreamt, but he told them that he had not informed anyone about his dream and would not do so throughout his life. Abdullah bin Ja'far lost hope of the Imam's return. However, he ordered his two sons, Awn and Muhammad to join the Imam. Later they were martyred on the day of Āshura.

 

The Imam continued his journey towards Iraq till he reached near Kufa. From there he wrote a letter to the people of Kufa and sent it to them through Qays bin Mashar Saidawi. He had not yet received the news of the martyrdom of Muslim bin Aqil. In this letter he wrote to the Kufians: "I have received Muslim's letter and have come to know about your allegiance, sincerity, and firm determination to assist me in the path of Allah. I pray to Allah that He may not withhold His kindness from us and grant you handsome reward for your sincerity and firm determination. I left Makkah on Tuesday the 8th of Zil-Haj i.e. on Tarwih Day and have proceeded towards you. When my messenger reaches Kufa you should reinvigorate your resolve and quicken your efforts. If Allah wills I, too, shall join you soon".

 

Qays took the Imam's letter and proceeded to Kufa, but when he reached near the city he was arrested and taken before Ibn Ziyad. Ibn Ziyad asked him to mount the pulpit and abuse Husayn bin Ali. Qays mounted the pulpit, praised Allah and then said: "O people! Husayn is the best of all creatures living at present, and is the son of Fatima, the daughter of your Prophet. I have been sent by him. All of you should rise to assist him". Thereafter he cursed Ubaydullah and his father and invoked blessings for Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib. As ordered by Ubaydullah he was hurled down from the roof and consequently all his bones were cracked.

 

The Imam continued his journey towards Kufa till he reached a place called Zurud. There he learnt about the martyrdom of Muslim and Hani and said: "We are from Allah and to Him we all will return." He also said repeatedly: "May Allah's blessings be upon both of them".

 

At the halting place called Uzaybul Hajanat he received the news of the martyrdom of Qays bin Mashar. He invoked blessings for him and prayed that Allah might grant him a place in Paradise. At the halting place called Zabala he informed his companions about the martyrdom of Muslim and Hani and the state of affairs in Kufa, and said: "Our supporters have withdrawn their support from us. Whoever wishes to leave us and go his way should do so". It was here that most of his companions went away, and only a few of them remained with him.

 

Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari, the famous Islamic traditionalist, exegetic, historian and jurist, in his famous history book entitled Tarikh-e Umam Wal Muluk, has stated that "Imam Husayn addressed the people at the halting place called Zi Hasam and delivered a brief speech. In this speech he stated more clearly the motive of his rising and announced his readiness to be martyred. He said: "You can see what turn the matters have taken. The people are becoming disloyal and unkind. Their goodness is disappearing. The world is passing quickly and nothing except something insignificant and a mean and worthless life remains out of it. The world today is just like a pasturage in which nothing grows except harmful grass".

 

Why did the Imam speak ill of the state of affairs at that time and why did he complain and express regret? He himself explains this in his concluding sentences. There he does not speak about the anxieties of life, or drought or lack of security and peace. The thing which had made life unpleasant and unbearable for the Imam was other than those things which usually make life unpleasant and unwholesome for the people.

 

Just think what the situation at that time was. It was the time when the vanguard of the needy had arrived and there was a danger of the Iraqi soldiers crowding round the Imam. Some persons, therefore, wished that the Imam had not taken this step. Possibly some short-sighted persons imagined that the Imam himself also thought in the same way and regretted his action and its consequences. It was, therefore, necessary that the Imam should reveal the motive of his rising to some extent and mention more clearly what had made his life unpleasant, difficult and unwholesome. It was for this reason that in the above-mentioned brief address he also said: "The present condition of the Muslims is such that truth is not being followed and falsehood is not being abandoned".

 

Imam Husyan meant to say: 'In these circumstances it is necessary for an able and self-sacrificing personality like me, the son of the Prophet of Allah, to rise. Don't you see and in other words why don't you ask me as to why I don't surrender and take the oath of allegiance, and why I don't recognize the present Islamic Government formally and acknowledge Yazid, the grandson of Abu Sufyan as the leader and Imam of the Muslims of the world? Don't you know that there is now no occasion for asking these questions? Don't you see the present condition of the Muslims and don't you realize that the people do not act upon Truth?' Apparently the Imam might mean that, for example, the people told lies or indulged in back-biting in their meetings or kept asleep in the morning and allowed their prayers to lapse. However, it is not so, because such sins have always existed among the people to a more or lesser extent. It seems that the Imam wanted to say: 'Don't you see that the present leadership of the Muslims does not conform to the real Caliphate and Succession of the Prophet of Allah. It does not follow the Prophet and has deviated from its natural course which ought to be adherence to truth and justice. The present caliphate is committing oppression, leaving the tyrants free and even encouraging them.'

 

Then Imam Husayn said: "In such circumstances a pious person should crave for death and this regrettable condition makes a believer fond of martyrdom and meeting Allah".

 

In the sermon delivered by Imam Husayn in Masjidul Haram he spoke about death, martyrdom and self-sacrifice. Here also he spoke about martyrdom and lack of interest in life. He said: "Living with oppressors does not bear any fruit except weariness, annoyance and vexation". What the Imam said here briefly was stated by him in detail and he explained more clearly the conditions prevailing in those days when he came face to face with Hur bin Yazid Riyahi who had come from Kufa along with one thousand horsemen to arrest him.

 

 
 

Merits of Imam Husain(a.s)-Part 1

We should now like to quote some traditions relating to Imam Husayn from Ibn Athir's book entitled Usudul Ghabah.

 

A man asked Abdullah bin Umar: "What will be the position if the blood of a mosquito touches the dress of a man?" Abdullah bin Umar said: "Look here! This Iraqi enquires about the blood of a mosquito, although these very Iraqis killed the son of the Prophet of Allah and I myself have heard the Holy Prophet saying: "Hasan and Husayn are my two fragrant flowers in the world".

 

The Holy Prophet said: "Husayn is from me and I am from Husayn. Allah loves him who loves Husayn. Husayn is the son of the Prophet and father of the Imams".

 

Anas bin Harth Kahili, and his father who were the companions of the Holy Prophet, says that he heard the Holy Prophet saying: "This very son of mine (i.e. Husayn) will be killed at a place in the region of Iraq. Whoever is present at that time and is in a position to assist him should assist him".

 

The prelude to what had been said by the Holy Prophet became apparent in 60 A.H. and Imam Husayn also got ready to meet martyrdom. However, it was not, as some persons have imagined, that, as there was no chance of his escaping death, and he knew that even if he surrendered he would be killed, he became helpless and exposed himself to martyrdom. In fact this was not the position, and whoever says or writes this, says something flabby and baseless. If that had been the case what value would there have been of the Imam's action and how could the world attach all this importance to this sacred rising? This movement is the central point of all the sacred movements of the history of Islam and is in fact the center of all sacred religious movements, whether they were initiated before Imam Husayn or were led after him by Zayd bin Ali, Husayn bin Zayd, Sahib Nafs Zakiyya and his brother Ibrahim, Husayn Shahid Fakh and others. How is it possible that such a movement should be analyzed with such baseless explanations?

 

The correct position is the same to which we have referred earlier and said that towards the end of 60 A.H. and in the beginning of 61 A.H. Imam Husayn felt that the Islamic society had reached a stage of spiritual and moral degradation which could not be reformed except by means of rising and martyrdom. It does not, however, mean that it was not possible for him to continue to live and he, therefore, chose to be martyred. What is meant is that he could not find any prospect for the existence of religion and the Islamic ummah except by means of sacred revolution. He concluded that if he wanted the Muslim ummah to live, and there should be a Muslim ummah in the world, he himself must be sacrificed and his dear ones like Zaynab, Umme Kulthum, Fatima bintul Husayn and Ali bin Husayn (Peace be upon them) who were the greatest and the most eloquent orators of the world of Islam should continue Imam Husayn's mission by inviting the attention of the Muslim ummah to its shameful condition, in the bazaars of Iraq and Syria, deliver the Muslim ummah permanently from the danger of death and annihilation, keep alive the sacred movements which were started before Husayn bin Ali and open a smooth path for the future religious movements of the Muslims.

 

After Walid bin Utbah, the Governor of Madina, tried to coerce the Imam under the orders of the caliph of the time to submit and take oath of allegiance, and the incident of the night of 28th Rajab took place, the Imam did not take the oath of allegiance and deferred his final decision to the following day. Thereafter Abdullah bin Zubayr got alarmed and ran away from Madina on the following day, but the Imam stayed on in Madina. On that day he came out of his house to find out whether there was any fresh news. Marwan bin Hakam met him on the street and said to him during the course of their conversation: "Sir, I am your well-wisher. You should hear me and listen to what I say". The Imam replied: "Let me know what you have to say. If it is something good for me I shall surely accept it". Marwan said: "I suggest that you should take the oath of allegiance to Yazid. This will be beneficial to your world as well as to your faith (i.e. if you recognize Yazid as the caliph, Imam and leader of the Muslim nation, and endorse his leadership of the Muslims of the world, you will preserve your faith as well as your worldly interests, but in case you do not take the oath to him, and oppose him, you will destroy your faith and the world will also slip away from your hands)."

 

The Imam said in reply to these presumptuous words of Marwan: "We are from Allah and to Him we shall all return." (Surah al-Baqarah, 2: 156). This verse is usually recited to console ourselves or others when a calamity befalls us. The calamity in connection with which the Imam recited this verse to console himself and others was the intellectual degradation of the Muslims i.e. they had deviated from the true path of religion to such an extent that Marwan had the audacity to say that if Husyan bin Ali took the oath of allegiance to Yazid his faith as well as his worldly interests would be secure, but otherwise both of them would be jeopardized. Then the Imam said: "If the affairs of the Muslim ummah have really taken such a turn that a person like Yazid is going to be the protector of Islam and the Muslims and the ruler of the Muslim world and successor of the Holy Prophet, one should say: "May Allah save Islam", because I have myself heard the Prophet of Allah saying that caliphate is unlawful for the family of Abu Sufyan". Thereupon the discussion between the Imam and Marwan got protracted and eventually Marwan parted with the Imam in a state of anger.

 

Imam Husayn went from Madina to Makkah and on the 8th day of Zil-Haj, which is called tarwih day and which coincided with the day on which Hāni bin Urwah was arrested by Ibn Ziyad, and Muslim bin Aqil staged arising in Kufa, he (Imam Husayn) proceeded to Iraq. The Muslims wondered much at the Imam's sudden departure from Makkah at a time when the ceremonies of Haj were to be performed.

 

Farazdaq, a poet whose name is well-known in the history of Islam says: "In 60 A.H. I took my mother to Makkah to perform Haj. When I arrived in the precincts of the sanctuary and was driving my mother's camel I saw Husayn bin Ali. He was armed and was going out of Makkah. I asked the people: "To whom do these camels belong?" They replied that they belonged to Husayn bin Ali. Thereupon I went to the Imam, saluted him, and said: "O son of the Prophet of Allah! May Allah grant your wishes and may my parents be your ransom, why are you leaving Makkah without performing the ceremonies of Haj?" He replied: "If I had not made haste and not come out of the city I would have been arrested". Then he asked me: "Who are you?" I replied: "I am an Arab." I swear by Allah that he did not make any further investigation or inquiry about me. Then he said: "Do you know anything about the people you have left behind (i.e. the Iraqis)?" I replied: "You have enquired about it from the right person. I know those people very well. Their hearts are with you and their swords are against you. The Divine decree descends from heaven and Allah does what He likes". The Imam said in reply: "You have spoken the truth. Only that thing which Allah wills happens. If the Divine decree is according to our wishes we shall thank Allah for His blessings, and it is also He who can make one succeed in the matter of thanksgiving. And if the Divine decree does not accord with our wishes, and blocks the path of hope, even then one, who has good intentions and a pure heart, does not perish". Farazdaq said: "May Allah grant your wishes and protect you from all calamities".

 

Then Farazdaq enquired from the Imam about Haj ceremonies and took leave of him after obtaining the requisite answers.

 

What the Holy Imam said to Farazdaq needs very careful consideration. The Imam meant to say: 'I am not one of those persons who have an object in view and strive to achieve it, but mayor may not meet success. I have a set objective before me and, whatever the circumstances may be and whoever gains victory or sustains defeat, I shall attain to that objective. A person may work hard to acquire wealth. Another may strive to attain to a high position. Another may go to a doctor for his own treatment or that of his patient. Another may step into the battlefield to defeat his rival. Some may perform good deeds or apparently good deeds to acquire renown and honor. It is possible that such persons may achieve their object, and it is also possible that in spite of their best efforts they may not meet success. It is not necessary that man should achieve what he desires. More often than not our earnest desires suddenly turn into failures. That is what happens to most of the people. They make efforts to achieve their object. At times they are successful, but at other times they not only fail to achieve success but also lose their wealth, and occasionally their life, without getting anything in return.

 

Why do Shiites consider the Imams ‘Ma`sum,’ infallible?

Answer:
There are several reasons proving that the Imams of the Shiites, all members of the household of Prophet Muhammad (Ahl al-Bayt), are all infallible (i.e. protected against errors and sins). Only one of the reasons is presented here:

According to Shiite and Sunni scholars, the blessed Prophet, in the last days of his life, said, “I leave behind two invaluable things for you: the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt. They will never be separated until they meet me at the fountain of Kawthar.”[1]

[1] Al-Hakim's al-Mustadrak, part 3, p. 148; Al-Sawa`iq al-Muhriqah, part 11, chapter one, p. 149. Similar texts are mentioned in Kanz al-`Ummal, part one on al-I`tisam bil-Kitab wal-Sunnah, p. 144; Musnad Ahmad, part five, pp. 182 and 189.

There is no doubt that the Qur’an is secure from any deviation and mistake. How can there possibly be any mistake in the divine revelation sent down by God, carried by Gabriel, and received by the blessed Prophet? It is as clear as daylight that all the three are free from any error.

 Muslims maintain that the Holy Prophet is safe from any errors in receiving, guarding and conveying the revelation. With the book of Allah so truly and firmly free from any error, it is obvious that the household of the Prophet, the Ahl al-Bayt, are also secure from errors and mistakes, for the household have been paired with the Qur’an in the tradition cited above. Thus, since the two have been paired up with the Qur’an, they must be infallible in guiding and leading the people. Put another way, there is no reason why an erring person should be paired up with the Qur’an.

The clearest evidence to the infallibility of the Imam is the words of the holy Prophet, who said, “These will never be separated until they meet me at the Fountain of Kawthar.” Should the household of the Prophet not be protected against errors, or should they ever err, they will get separated and deviate from the error-free Qur’an; this, nonetheless, has strongly been refuted.

Certainly “the household” cited above does not mean all the prophet’s relatives, in-law or ancestral, for surely not all of them were secure against errors. Therefore, the honor is peculiar to some members of his family, the Imam, who have been beacons for the Ummah, and guardians of the prophetic Sunnah and the Shariah (the religion) throughout history.

Also, twenty-six Muslim scholars have written separate books on the recording and handing down of this tradition. For instance, the famous Muslim historian, Abu-Ja`far Tabari wrote two volumes of books on this issue. `Allamah Amini’s book Al-Ghadir, provides further information in this regard.
 

Crying on Imam Husain(a.s) is not a bid'at(Innovation)

Brothers from Ahle Sunnat have wriiten this article in Jang Newspaper ( December)

Mourning on Dead and Martyrs from Ahle Sunnah

o I have quoted & highlighted just few traditions from Ahle Sunna, there are numerous such tradition which proves on Mourning & remembrance on Imam Husein (a.s) as a sunna because of his High position and greatest sacrifice for saving the ISLAM.

 Imam Husein (a.s) hold such a high position in the eyes of humanity that even the non believers remembers his sacrifice every year….Inshallah if God wills will post more references related to this.

To remember the Martyrs is not only the Sunnah of Prophet(s) but also the practice of Sahaba

When read in Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya, Volume 4 page 45, published Beirut:

It is narrated by Abu Hurariah(r) that the Prophet(s) used to visit the graves of martyrs every year. When He(s) would reach the entrance of the mountain, He(s) would say (to the martyrs): ‘Asalam alailekum Bima Sabartum’. This means ‘peace be on you due to your patience and you have reached a pleasant place due to this.’ Then after Prophet(s), Abu Bakar also used to come (every year), and after him Umar used to do the same and then Usman also did the same”After this narration the word ‘every year’ is recorded in the narrations of Waqidi.

The Shi’a accordingly commemorate the memory of martyrs of Kerbala every year. The Prophet (s) and his companions would visit the graves of Uhud’s martyrs every year. Similarly we like to go to the tomb of Imam Husayn (as) every year in Muharam.If one cannot implement this practise by practically visiting Kerbala every Muharam there is no grounds to abandon it altogether, we seek to do as much as we can to remember our ill-treated Imam. So we commemorate the day with processions, conferences, and mourning to show our love and faith, though we cannot go to the tomb every year.

Mourning from History & it’s repeatation

1. Mourning by Adam (as) and Hawa (as) for their slain son.

“The Father and Mother of humanity wept for their son Habeel for so long that their tears turned into a stream”. [Tareekh Yaqoobi, volume 1, page 3]

2. It is said that Prophet Yaqoob (a.s.) wept so much for his son Yusuf (a.s.) that the pupils of his eyes became white.

“And he turned away from them, and said: O my sorrow for Yusuf! And his eyes become white on account of the grief,” (Surah Yusuf 12:84)

3.Unanimously all Muslim agree that the Holy Prophet (s) named the year in which Khadija (as) and Abu Talib (as) died as “Aam al Huzn” i.e. ‘The Year of Grief’.

What other reason could there be for naming a whole year as ‘Aam al Huzn’, other than the Prophet(s) dedicating it to commemorate the loss of his uncle and beloved wife? Is this act of the Prophet(s) a Sunnah or not? We the Shi’a mourn our Imam (as) for ten days, Rasulullah (s) mourned for an entire year. Even after the passage of a year Rasulullah (s) never got over this grief, and this was known to Ayesha who wanted him (s) to abandon his remembrance of his dead wife.

We read in Saheeh al Bukharee Hadeeth: 5.166 this narration from Ayesha:

“I did not feel jealous of any of the wives of the Prophet as much as I did of Khadija though I did not see her, but the Prophet used to mention her very often, and whenever he slaughtered a sheep, he would cut its parts and send them to the women friends of Khadija. When I sometimes said to him, “(You treat Khadija in such a way) as if there is no woman on earth except Khadija,” he would say, “Khadija was such-and-such, and from her I had children”.

The testimony of Ahl’ul Sunnah’s from H.Aysha is clear evidence that the Prophet (s) never got over grieving his wife and it is obvious that the Dhikr of Khadija (as) would also have taken place in presence of receptive ears. The process of Dhikr between a speaker and listener is called a congregation (Majalis). We likewise commemorate the deaths of Khadija (as) and Abu Talib (as) and the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as).If Muslims have no issue with celebrating nights such as the Miraaj of our Prophet (s) then there is no reason to abandon the remembrance of calamities because both grief and happiness are important in life.

4. H.Umar said: ‘whenever I venture out at sunrise I remember the death of my brother Zaid bin Khattab [al Bidaya wa al Nihaya, Volume 6 page 370].

Look at the words of your Master Umar who remembered the death of his brother throughout his life. so what it the harm in remembering the death of Holy prophet (s.a) or his grandson Imam Husein (a)

5. We read in the Sunni text Gham – e – Husayn, Page 7 the following words of this Sufi Saint: The ten days of Muharam are for we Muslims, days of mourning and grief. To lament on the slaughtered Imam is certainly following in the Holy Prophet’s (a) footsteps. I consider weeping and lamenting on Imam Husayn (as) and making others too cry & weep an act of great reward. I do not wish to talk or remember anything other than the Tragedy of Imam Husayn (as) during these ten days of Muharam. All the Saints and holy men and Sufi personalities in Hindustan have always openly expressed grief and sorrow and cried and wept profusely on the Day of Ashura. Maulana Shah Muhammad Suleiman Hanafi Qadri Chishti, the residing Saint of Phulwari Shareef also commemorated this grief & sorrow.

If expressing grief and sorrow, weeping for Imam Husayn (as) and making others do the same were Haraam, then all the Sufi Saints and holy men of Hindustan would not have perpetually practiced this sorrow during their

6. “Imam al Harmain” whose actual name was Abdal Malik having Ziauddin as his title, according to Allamah Shibli Naumani was considered as a supreme scholar of his era and many renowned ulema were his students which included Imam Ghazali. Imam Ghazali while mentioning the mourning over his death writes in his authority work ‘Kunjeena Hidayaath’ the Urdu translation of Kameela Sa’aadth page 3 “The Imam of Haramain died in 478 Hijri. At that time all the market stalls in Nishapur were closed and the pulpit in the Jami Mosque was broken, his students that numbered almost 400 destroyed their books and pens and mourned him for a whole year.”

We appeal to justice. These are the people, who have a historical enmity with writing materials, but we have no idea why the pulpit was destroyed. Did these esteemed students (who were themselves scholars) have no knowledge of the verses on patience.

7. Shah Abdul Aziz Muhadith Dehlavi while explaining the philosophy of Martyrdom writes in the preface of his Book ‘Sirr al Shahdatain’: “The martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as) is in reality the martyrdom of his grandfather Muhammad Mustafa (s)” We therefore infer from this that mourning of the leader of the martyrs, Husayn (as) is mourning (Azadari) of his grandfather the Seal of Prophets, the most beloved of Allah’s creation, Muhammad Mustafa (s).

8. In Uswa – e – Sufia Uzzaam, Page 9 that : Sheikh al Islam Maqdoom Ala’ al Haq Pindavi (ra) used to mourn for all ten days of Muharam and would say: “How could one achieve sainthood when he does not mourn and weep on the family of the Holy Prophet (s) and perform Azadari for these pure personalities? One who doesn’t have a heart of stone.”

Thus a Sunni saint has himself declared that he who does not perform Azadari cannot be a saint (wali) and he who abstains from such mourning, is stone – hearted.

9. When we read about Owais al-Qarni the great Muslim Sahabi, praised by both Shi’a and Sunni erudite.

He had an immense love for the Holy Prophet (s). When the news reached him in Yemen that two teeth of the Holy Prophet (s) were brokenin the battle of Ohad, he extracted all his teeth. When the Holy Prophet (s) got the news in Medina that Owais had struck down all his teeth, he (s) exclaimed, “Indeed Owais is our devoted friend”. This event can be found written in [Seerate Halbia' vol II, page 295.]

The renowned Sunni Scholar Shiekh Farid al Din Attaar in ‘Tadhkhirah tul Awliya’ Urdu translation page 17 and 18 writes:

” Uways Qarni (ra) said to Umar Khattab (ra): ‘If you were true in friendship than why on the day when the holy teeth of the Prophet (s) were broken didn’t you break your teeth in companionship? Because, it is a condition of companionship.’ Then he showed his teeth all of which were broken and said ‘I broke all of my teeth without seeing you (O Prophet) and in the state of Ghaybah in your companionship. I had broken one tooth but couldn’t get satisfaction so kept on breaking them one by one until I had broken them all ‘”.

Had the breaking of teeth by Uways Qarni (ra) been in opposition to Shariah,

Umar would certainly have pointed it out at the time or at least commented and answered the accusation by Uways Qarni (ra) of his less than perfect companionship. The silence of Umar proves that he didn’t deem the act of breaking one’s teeth as done by Uways Qarni (ra) as opposed to Shariah but considered it an act of sincerity and also a proof of friendship

Secondly even Holy prophet (s) did not condemn this act but was happy with this extreme form of self harm and said “Indeed Owais is our devoted friend”  so this proves that self harming in love of Holy prophet (s) was the sign of ectreme Love which is not bidat nor prohibited. 

Weeping on death of Holy prophet (s)

Ibn Abbas cried and even Bhukari in his Sahih mentions this incident as a “Calamity of Thursday”

Narrated by Said bin Jubair

That he heard Ibn ‘Abbas saying, “thursday! And you know not what thursday is? After that Ibn ‘Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn ‘Abbas, “What is (about) thursday?” He said, “When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah’s Apostle deteriorated, he said, ‘Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray.’The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet, They said, ‘What is wrong with him? Do you think he is delirious? Ask him (to understand). The Prophet replied, ‘Leave me as I am in a better state than what you are asking me to do.’ Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying, ‘Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.’ ” The sub-narrator added, “The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn ‘Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot.’

[SAHIH BUKHARI, Eng Volume 4, Book 53, Number 393 ]

H.Abu Bakr wept on death of Holy prophet (s)

Narrated by H.’Aisha

Abu Bakr came from his house at As-Sunh on a horse. He dismounted and entered the Mosque, but did not speak to the people till he entered upon ‘Aisha and went straight to Allah’s Apostle who was covered with Hibra cloth (i.e. a kind of Yemenite cloth). He then uncovered the Prophet’s face and bowed over him and kissed him and wept, saying, “Let my father and mother be sacrificed for you.

[SAHIH BUKHARI, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 733

All people wept on death of Holy prophet (s)

Narrated by H.'Aisha

(the wife of the Prophet) Allah's Apostle died while Abu Bakr was at a place called As-Sunah (Al-'Aliya) 'Umar stood up and said, "By Allah! Allah's Apostle is not dead!" 'Umar (later on) said, "By Allah! Nothing occurred to my mind except that." He said, "Verily! Allah will resurrect him and he will cut the hands and legs of some men." Then Abu Bakr came and uncovered the face of Allah's Apostle, kissed him and said, "Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you, (O Allah's Apostle), you are good in life and in death. By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, Allah will never make you taste death twice." Then he went out and said, "O oath-taker! Don't be hasty." When Abu Bakr spoke, 'Umar sat down. Abu Bakr praised and glorified Allah and said, No doubt! Whoever worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, then Allah is Alive and shall never die." Then he recited Allah's Statement.: "(O Muhammad) Verily you will die, and they also will die." (39.30) He also recited: "Muhammad is no more than an Apostle; and indeed many Apostles have passed away, before him, If he dies Or is killed, will you then Turn back on your heels? And he who turns back On his heels, not the least Harm will he do to Allah And Allah will give reward to those Who are grateful." (3.144) The people wept loudly.....

[SAHIH BUKHARI,Volume 5, Book 57, Number 19]

MORE ABOUT WEEPING FOR DEATH FROM AHLE SUNNAH

Holy Prophet(s) wept on the death of his son Ibrahim

Narrated by Anas bin Malik

We went with Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) to the blacksmith Abu Saif, and he was the husband of the wet-nurse of Ibrahim (the son of the Prophet). Allah’s Apostle took Ibrahim and kissed him and smelled him and later we entered Abu Saif’s house and at that time Ibrahim was in his last breaths, and the eyes of Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) started shedding tears. ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf said, “O Allah’s Apostle, even you are weeping!” He said, “O Ibn ‘Auf, this is mercy.” Then he wept more and said, “The eyes are shedding tears and the heart is grieved, and we will not say except what pleases our Lord, O Ibrahim ! Indeed we are grieved by your separation.”

[SAHIH BUKHARI, Volume 2, Book 23, Number 39]

Holy Prophet(s) wept on the death of  son of one of his daughters

Narrated by Usama

A son of one of the daughters of the Prophet was dying, so she sent a person to call the Prophet. He sent (her a message), “What ever Allah takes is for Him, and whatever He gives is for Him, and everything has a limited fixed term (in this world) so she should be patient and hope for Allah’s reward.” She then sent for him again, swearing that he should come. Allah’s Apostle got up, and so did Mu’adh bin Jabal, Ubai bin Ka’b and ‘Ubada bin As-Samit. When he entered (the house), they gave the child to Allah’s Apostle while its breath was disturbed in his chest. (The sub-narrator said: I think he said, “…as if it was a water skin.”) Allah’s Apostle started weeping whereupon Sa’d bin ‘Ubada said, “Do you weep?” The Prophet said, “Allah is merciful only to those of His slaves who are merciful (to others).” 

[SAHIH BUKHARI, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 540]

Holy Prophet(s) wept on the death of Zaid, Jafar & Abdullah bin Rawaha

Narrated by Anas bin Malik

The Prophet said, “Zaid took over the flag and was martyred. Then it was taken by Jafar who was martyred as well. Then ‘Abdullah bin Rawaha took the flag but he too was martyred and at that time the eyes of Allah’s Apostle were full of tears. Then Khalid bin Al-Walid took the flag without being nominated as a chief (before hand) and was blessed with victory.”

[SAHIH BUKHARI Volume 2, Book 23, Number 338]

Narrated by Anas bin Malik

Allah’s Apostle delivered a sermon and said, “Zaid received the flag and was martyred, then Ja’far took it and was martyred, then ‘Abdullah bin Rawaha took it and was martyred, and then Khalid bin Al-Walid took it without being appointed, and Allah gave him victory.” The Prophet added, “I am not pleased (or they will not be pleased) that they should remain (alive) with us,” while his eyes were shedding tears.

[SAHIH BUKHARI Volume 4, Book 52, Number 29]

Holy Prophet(s) wept on the death of Sad bin ‘Ubada

Narrated by ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar

Sad bin ‘Ubada became sick and the Prophet along with ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf, Sad bin Abi Waqqas and ‘Abdullah bin Masud visited him to enquire about his health. When he came to him, he found him surrounded by his household and he asked, “Has he died?” They said, “No, O Allah’s Apostle.” The Prophet wept and when the people saw the weeping of Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) they all wept. He said, “Will you listen? Allah does not punish for shedding tears, nor for the grief of the heart but he punishes or bestows His Mercy because of this, He pointed to his tongue .” and added, “The deceased is punished for the wailing of his relatives over him.” ‘Umar used to beat with a stick and throw stones and put dust over the faces (of those who used to wail over the dead).

[SAHIH BUKHARI Volume 2, Book 23, Number 391]

The tradition of Umar and his son as explained by H.Ayesha

Narrated by ‘Abdullah bin ‘Ubaidullah bin Abi Mulaika

……Ibn Abbas added, “When ‘Umar died I told all this to Aisha and she said, ‘May Allah be merciful to Umar. By Allah, Allah’s Apostle did not say that a believer is punished by the weeping of his relatives. But he said, Allah increases the punishment of a non-believer because of the weeping of his relatives.” Aisha further added, “The Quran is sufficient for you (to clear up this point) as Allah has stated: ‘No burdened soul will bear another’s burden.’ ” (35.18). Ibn Abbas then said, “Only Allah makes one laugh or cry.” Ibn Umar did not say anything after that 

[SAHIH BUKHARI Eng Volume 2, Book 23, Number 375] & [Sahih Muslim. Chap. 9, Tradition No.25]

Zainab binte Jahash the wife of Prophet (s.a.w.s.) narrates:

One day the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s) was in my house and Husain (a.s.) was also there. For some moments I forgot about him. He entered into the Prophet’s room. I tried to pick him up but the Messenger of Allah restrained me. Then he stood up to perform the prayers while holding Husain (a.s.) in his arms. When he went into ruku (bending in genuflection) or sajdah (prostration) he put down Husain (a.s.) and again took him in his arms when he stood up. Then he sat down and wept. When he finished his prayers I said, “O Messenger of Allah! Today I have seen you do something that I had never seen before.”

He said, “Jibraeel came to me and informed me that this Husain (a.s.) will be killed by my ummat (people).” (Mustadrakul Sahihain, 4:398)

He then showed me the soil of the place of his martyrdom. He gave me (a handful of) red dust.”

It is human’s nature that a person weep or grief on him, whom he loves very much. No one weeps on an unknown person or enemy. It is not BIDDAD to weep, because weeping is in human’s nature and it is gifted by ALLAH, so He never prohibit such a thing which He has kept in our nature. As ALLAH says in Holy Quran, “And that is He (Allah) it is Who makes (Men) laugh and makes (them) weep”. (Chp-53 : Verse-43)

Now you can judge by this few tradition with YOUR SELVES,

1) Whether Weeping is in human’s nature and its attachment is with the heart or not?

2) If someone is put to death by torture, whom we love, then, will we weep in his respect or not?

3) If such a tragedy falls on the day of Eid, or any death occurs in our family, shall we celebrate that day as a Eid?

4) If Prophet Muhammad (P.) can weep on Hazrat Husain (p), Why can’t we?

5) Is it suitable to celebrate Marriage, Birthday or any other function in the month of Muharram?

6) Do we celebrate or do we attend such happy occasions when there is a death of our beloved? where as Imam Husein (a) was the beloved of Holy prophet (s)

7) Whether grieving for martyr is Biddad or Sunnah of Holy Prophet (P.)?  Whether a day of Ashura is a day of Sorrow or Happiness?

Courtesy : http://moralsandethics.wordpress.com/

SHIA IMAMIYYA ITHNA ASHARI AND THEIR BELIEF

This is the real Shia group, which believes in the twelve Imams after the Holy Prophet. The other factions have nothing in common with our group; they have only assumed the name Shia.

BELIEF IN ALLAH AND THE PROPHETS

The Shia Imamiyya group believes in the Ever-Existing Almighty Allah. He is One, in the sense of the absolute oneness of His essential existence. He is One, with none comparable to Him. He is the Creator of everything in existence. There is no match or equal to Him in any respect. The holy prophets and messengers were sent to tell the people about Allah, how to worship Him, and how to know Him. All of the prophets preached and guided the people according to the tenets set forth by the five major prophets: Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and last of all, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, whose religion shall last until the Day of Judgement.

BELIEF IN CHASTISEMENT, REWARD, HELL,PARADISE, AND DAY OF JUDGEMENT

Allah Almighty has fixed recompense for our deeds, to be given to us in Paradise or Hell. The day fixed for the recompense of our deeds is called the Day of Judgement. When the world's life ends, Allah Almighty will re-animate the beings of the world from the beginning to the end. He will let them gather in the Mashar, the place of the gathering of the souls. After a just reckoning, everyone will be given reward or punishment according to his deeds.

These things have been foretold in all divine books: the Torah, Bible, and the Holy Qur'an. For us, the most authentic source of guidance is the Holy Qur'an, which has reached us from the time of the Holy Prophet without any change. We act upon the injunctions contained in the Holy Qur'an, and we hope to be recompensed by Allah. We believe in all those obligatory commandments which are contained in the Holy Qur'an, like Namaz (prayers), Ruza (fasting), Zakat and Khums (yearly religious taxes), Hajj (Pilgrimage to the Ka'ba) and Jihad (holy war).

BELIEF IN THE ARTICLES OF PRACTICE

Similarly, we believe in the Articles of Practice of the faith, including the obligatory and optional practices and all other injunctions that have reached us through the holy Prophet. We are determined to abide by them and to perform them to the best of our capacity. And we refrain from all sins, large or small, like drinking, gambling, fornication, sodomy, usury, murder, tyranny, which have been forbidden in the Holy Qur'an and hadith.

BELIEF IN IMAMS

We Shias also believe that, just as there is a messenger from Allah who conveys to us orders and injunctions, and who is elected and introduced to us by Allah, there is also a successor, caliph or protector of religion, who is appointed by Allah, and is introduced to us through the Prophet of Allah. Accordingly, all prophets of Allah introduced their successors to their umma (followers). The last of the holy prophets, who was the most perfect and most exalted of all prophets of Allah, left for his followers guides to help the people avoid confusion. According to the established hadith, he introduced to the people his twelve successors, the first: Ali Bin Abi Talib. The last Imam, the Mahdi, who is present in the world but is in occultation, will appear at an unknown time in the future, when he will fill the seething world with justice and peace.

The Shia Imamiyyas also believe that these twelve Imams have been ordained by Allah and have been introduced to us through the last Holy Prophet. The last of the holy Imams has vanished from sight (by divine command), just as other Imams disappeared, during the time of previous prophets, as stated in many books written by your ulema.

This sacred being has been preserved by Allah Almighty so that he may one day fill the world with justice. In short, the Shia believe in all that is contained in the Holy Qur'an and in authentic hadith. I am grateful to Allah that I have adopted these beliefs, not merely in blind imitation of my parents but through logical reasoning and study.

The Infidelity of Yazid

Among the facts proving Yazid's infidelity are his own poetic couplets. For instance, he writes:

"If drinking (wine) is prohibited in the religion of Muhammad, let it be so; I will accept Christianity."

"It is this world alone for us. There is no other world. We should not be deprived of the pleasures of this world."

These couplets appear in the collection of his poetical works, and Abu'l-Faraj Bin Jauzi has recorded them in his Radd Ala'l-Muta'asibu'l-Anid. Again he says:

"One who frightens us with the story of doomsday, let him do so. These are false things which deprive us of all the pleasures of sound and music."

Sibt Ibn Jauzi writes in his Tadhkira, page 148, that when the descendants of the Prophet were brought as captives to Syria, Yazid was sitting in the second story of his palace. He recited the two following couplets:

"When the camel litters carrying prisoners appeared, a crow cawed (a bad omen in Arabia). I said: O crow, whether you caw or not, I have taken vengeance on the Prophet."

"Vengeance" refers to the fact that his elders and near relatives were killed in the battles of Badr, Uhud, and Hunain. He avenged their deaths by killing the sons of the Prophet.

Another proof of his infidelity is that when he had a party to celebrate Husain's martyrdom, he recited the irreligious couplets of Abdullah Bin Uzza Ba'ri. Sibt Ibn Jauzi, Abu Raihan, and others have written that Yazid wished for the presence of his ancestors, who were all infidels, and were killed in the battle of Badr on the order of the Prophet. Yazid said: "I wish those of my clan who were killed at Badr, and those who had seen the people of the Khazraj clan wailing (in the battle of Uhud) on account of lancet wounds, were here. They would have hailed me with loud cries and said: 'O Yazid, may your hands never be paralyzed' because I have killed the chiefs of his (the Prophet's) clan. I did so as revenge for Badr, which has now been completed. The Bani Hashim only played a game with government. There has come no message from Allah, nor was anything revealed. I would not belong to the Khandaq family if I had not taken vengeance on the descendants of the Prophet. We avenged the murders of Ali by killing his son, a horseman and a brave lion."

Who was Muawiya bin Abu Sufyan

The story of Ashura and the great sacrifice made by Imam Hussain (a.s.) to save the religion of Islam was a classic tale of good versus evil. Imam Hussain (a.s) lost the battle but definitely won the war. The evil in these events was personified by Yazid ibn Muawiya (may Allah curse him), a man who was simply a despicable human, let alone a so-called Muslim.

His reign as "caliph" was short but painful. In his first year of rule he commanded his forces to kill the grandson of the Holy Prophet, along with his family and friends and in the second year he attacked the Holy Kaa'ba and set fire to it. He was a power-hungry, selfish and arrogant man but tracing through history, he was not the real brains behind the attempt to destroy Islam, the real brains was his father - Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan. Of the trio of the founding Umayyad fathers, Abu Sufyan, Muawiya and Yazid, Muawiya is the most significant, the most influential and most cunning.

Sunnis lay a lot of credit on Muawiya's door. They have a lot invested in him. They don't really take note of Abu Sufyan and condemn the actions of Yazid, on the whole (apart from fools like Dr. Zakir Naik). Muawiya on the other hand is treated with a lot of respect. They call him Hazrat Muawiya - rasiallahu-anhu (may Allah be pleased with him) amongst other respectful titles. He has been bizarrely sanctified by the Ahle Sunnah over the centuries, his reputation has been shrouded in myths, legends and propaganda.

During Muharrum I heard an excellent lecture about Muawiya. From my notes and further research on the man, I want to explore who Muawiya was, we need to be aware of who he was and what he represented. The lecturer carefully explored his real record, the truth about his life and deeds and ambitions. We have to know who these people are in order to represent our faith in a better light and even enlighten our brethren in the Ahle Sunnah about the truth behind Muawiya.

The Ahle Sunnah like to give him three main claims to fame. Firstly, he was a great companion of the Holy Prophet. Looking at history, he was in the Holy Prophet's midst only for the last 2 years of the Prophet's life. Any hadith claiming words of praise about Muawiya from the Holy Prophet have been fabricated by Muawiya himself. He was a great propaganda machine and spent much of his time in power creating new hadiths about himself and Bani Ummaya. He also created other hadiths trying to discredit Imam Ali (a.s.) and Bani Hashim in an attempt to legitimise his rule.

The reality is that he was not a great companion of the Holy Prophet, and the Prophet enunciated not one word of praise or merit about Muawiya. Many Sunni scholars have come to this conclusion in their research, including Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Jalaluddin Al-Suyuti and Abdul-Haqq Dehlavi who all attest to there being no hadiths in praise of Muawiya in their books.

The Ahle-Sunnah also believe Muawiya to have been a legitimate ruler, caliph of the Muslims. He obtained the Caliphate by ousting the 2nd Holy Imam, Imam Hasan (a.s.) through bribery and blackmail of Imam Hasan's supporters. He negotiated a peace treaty with Imam Hasan (a.s.) and then systematically broke every single article of the treaty. He broke the central condition of the treaty - regarding succession to his rule, by appointing his cursed son Yazid as Caliph.

He is, in effect, Islam's first tyrant. He was the man who created structures of kinship and autocracy. He dug the roots of tyranny, terror and totalitarianism that defaces Islam today. Famous Sunni scholar, Abul Ala Maududi, in his 1973 book "Caliphate and Kingship", outlines in detail the numerous ways in which Muawiya enriched himself at the expense of the people, how corrupt he was, how many companions and innocent Muslims he killed and how he amassed both power and wealth. He turned the Caliphate into a Kingship. (After all that criticism, Maududi still managed to end the book with "Hazrat Muawiya, (r.a.)"!!)

If he is a true Caliph and deserved the title, why is he not one of the Khulafa-e-Rashideen - the four rightly guided Caliphs? Why does it end with Imam Ali (a.s.), why wasn't Muawiya added to this list? They know the truth, but cannot bring themselves to admit as much. The irony is that how could he be a great Caliph when some of his own companions refused to pray behind him? A companion of Abu Huraira, no friend of the Shia, claims in Sirat-e-Halabiya that "On the plains of Siffin, Abu Huraira would pray Salat behind Ali, but would go and eat with Muawiya. Someone asked why he did this, to which he replied "Food with Muawiya is better, but Salat under Ali is better.""

In fact, Muawiya himself made it obvious that he was only interested in power and material gain. He didn't even pretend to have any inclination towards the spiritual, the moral and the Islamic aspects of caliphate and leadership of the Muslim community. Sunni scholar Sibt ibn al-Jawzi writes in his book, Mir’at al-Zaman that Muawiya openly claims "I did not fight you to pray, fast and pay charity, but rather to be your leader and to control you!" From the horses mouth himself.

His last claim to 'fame', say the Ahle-Sunnah, was that he was a writer of the Holy Quran when it was first revealed - 'Writer of the Revelation." Before analysing this claim further, in and of itself it's not that big a deal to be the Writer - one of the writers became an apostate in later life, as claimed by Sunni scholer Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani who writes in his book "Fath al-Bari": "The first man from the Quraysh who was the writer of the revelation was Abdullah bin Saad. After this he apostatised and became a kaffir."

Was Muawiya a Writer of the Revelation? As I mentioned earlier, he converted to Islam in 630 AD, just 2 years before the death of the Holy Prophet. How could he be the writer, when most of the Quran had already been revealed and transcribed by the companions of the Prophet? Sunni scholar Allama Zahabi in his book "Tareekh ul Islam" states that "Muawiya was the writer of the Prophet's correspondence, his letters between the Prophet and the Arabs." I guess "Writer of Letters" doesn't quite have the same ring to it. This is further backed up by notorious Egyptian Sunni scholar Sayyid Qutb, the forefather of Al-Qaeda, who writes in his book "Social Justice in Islam" "The erroneous fable still persists that Mu'awiya was a scribe who wrote down the revelations of Allah's Messenger. The truth is that when Abu Sufyan embraced Islam, he besought the Prophet to give Mu'awiya some measure of position in the eyes of the Arabs; thus he would be compensated of being slow to embrace Islam and of being one of those who had no precedence in the new religion. So the Prophet used Mu'awiya for writing letters and contracts and agreements. But none of the companions ever said that he wrote down any of the Prophet's revelations, as was asserted by Mu'awiyas partisans after he had assumed the throne. But this is what happens in all such cases."

So Muawiya was not the man who wrote down the Quran. He was however the man who made his army place 500 copies of the Quran on spears and lances during the Battle of Siffin when he was losing and yet he is still praised by Sunnis today. When Newsweek claimed in 2005 that soldiers had desecrated copies of the Quran in Guantanamo Bay these same Sunnis were up in arms across the globe and yet they ignore the mistreatment of the Quran by Muawiya centuries ago. He's not the writer of the Quran, he is an abuser of the Quran.

Having briefly discussed some of the reasons why Sunnis try to claim Muawiya as a good man, the lecturer went to discuss who Muawiya really was, the type of man he was. What's in a name? Rather appropriately perhaps, the meaning of Muawiya is a female barking dog, a b*tch. His parents named him, literally, a b*tch! Setting the path for many Muslim leaders today, he was the first ruler to publicly drink alcohol. Sunni scholar Ahmad ibn Hanbal writes in his famous collection of Hadtih: "Musnad" ""Abdullah bin Buraida said: 'I entered on Muawiya with my father, then he (Mu'awiya) made us sit on a mattress then he brought food to us and we ate, then he brought a drink to us, Muawiya drank it and then he offered that to my father, thus (my father) said: 'I never drank it since the messenger of Allah made it [that drink] Haram'...."

However, his greatest claims to infamy are the harsh treatment and even the killings of several companions of the Holy Prophet & Imam Ali (a.s.) for which he was responsible. Abu Dharr al-Ghifari was a great companion of the Holy Prophet, who stated that "The earth has not borne nor has the sky covered, a man more truthful than Abu Dharr"- as narrated by Sunni scholar Allama Muhammed ibn Saad in his book Tabqat Ibn-e-Saad. He goes on to narrate how Abu Dharr constantly used to criticise the corrupt and lavish rule of the third caliph, Uthman ibn Affan. On Muawiya's say so, Uthman had him flogged and whipped and then exiled outside Madina, to Al-Rabathah, where he died alone a few years later.

Muawiya was responsible for the death of the great companion of the Holy Prophet, Ammar ibn Yasir. There are many Sunni narrations praising the status of Ammar ibn Yasir. According to the Sunni book Sunan ibn Majah (one of the Sunni six major Hadith collections), the Holy Prophet said "Ammar is filled with faith, with imaan, from the crown of his head, to the soles of his feet." He was the son of Yasir and Sumaya, who were amongst the first people that were martyred in the name of Islam.

When it came to his death, it was prophesied by the Holy Prophet and is mentioned in both Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim (the 2 most important Sunni books of hadith). Sahih Bukhari narrates: "Ibn 'Abbas said to me and to his son 'Ali, "Go to Abu Sa'id and listen to what he narrates." So we went and found him in a garden looking after it. He picked up his Rida', wore it and sat down and started narrating till the topic of the construction of the mosque reached. He said, "We were carrying one adobe at a time while 'Ammar was carrying two. The Prophet saw him and started removing the dust from his body and said, "May Allah be Merciful to 'Ammar. He will be inviting them (i.e. his murderers, the rebellious group) to Paradise and they will invite him to Hell-fire." 'Ammar said, "I seek refuge with Allah from affliction." (Volume 1, Book 8, Number 438). And in Sahih Muslim: "This hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Umm Salama that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to 'Ammar: A group of rebels would kill you." (Book 041, Number 6968).

Who were these rebels that would kill Ammar ibn Yasir? History is clear when it records the death of Ammar in the Battle of Siffin. He fought in the ranks of Imam Ali (a.s.) and was killed by the army of Muawiya. The famous English translator of Sahih Muslim, Abd-al-Hamid Siddiqui goes on to add a footnote to the above hadith about Ammar: "This narration is clearly indicative of the fact that in the conflict between Hadrat Ali and his opponents, Hadrat Ali was on the right as Ammar Ibn Yasir was killed in the Battle of Siffin fighting in the camp of Hadrat Ali." It does not, therefore, make much sense to say that both Imam Ali (a.s.) and Muawiya were in the right.

Muawiya then went on to have Ammar ibn-Yasir beheaded and mutilated. It was Muawiya who first introduced such immoral and un-Islamic practices that his cursed son Yazid would then continue at Karbala and that so many Muslim terrorists continue around the world today - with their beheadings of hostages and mutilations of the bodies of their enemies.

Muawiya was also responsible for the deaths of other Muslims such as Hujr ibn Adi. Abul Ala Maududi writes in "Caliphate and Kingship" that Muawiya had Hujr ibn Adi buried alive for refusing to curse Imam Ali (a.s.). He also killed Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr - son of the first caliph and foster son of Imam Ali (a.s.), and then wrapped him in the carcass of a dead donkey and burned it to ashes. It was following this incident as narrated by Allama ibn Athir, in his book Tarikh-e-Kamil, that Ayesha, wife of the Holy Prophet and sister of Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr, began cursing Muawiya after every salat.

His greatest crime was killing the grandson of the Holy Prophet - Imam Hasan (a.s.). Muawiya paid Imam Hasan's wife, Jada 100,000 dirhams and his son, Yazid's hand in marriage if she would kill her husband. She poisoned his water, causing him to suffer for 40 days before dying. This has been reported in many major Sunni hadith books, including works by Abul Fida, Abdul Rahmān bin Abd Rabbāh, Ibne Shahnah and Ibne Abdul Birr. Muawiya went on to pay Jida the money, but refused to marry his son to her - if she could kill one husband, what would stop her killing her next husband?

Muawiya is arguably the greatest contributor to the Sunni-Shia split that exists today. His hatred of Imam Ali (a.s.) and the Ahlul Bayt continues to this day from his followers, from those Sunnis who ignorantly respect him. The Sunnis who try to build up Muawiya are living in denial. Muawiya was a corrupt, greedy and un-Islamic leader and should be treated as such. The lecturer covered a lot detail and discussed the truth behind Muawiya and some of his hideous actions. I hope I've been able to explain what I've learnt from the lecture and further research in a clear manner. I encourage you to open your eyes and hearts and come to realise who Muawiya really was.

Imam Husain(a.s) Concept of Religion and Leadership

The Message of the Prophet of Islam passed into the hands of the worldly Umayyads within thirty years of his death. After the death of 'Ali in 40/661, Mu'awiya b. Abi Sufyan appropriated the office of the leadership of the community for himself through the use of force and deceit and ruled the Muslims for twenty years. On Mu'awiya's death, his son Yazid assumed the role of the leadership of the Muslims as the caliph in accordance with the former's unprecedented testament. Yazid's anti-Islamic behaviour and openly irreligious practices were well known throughout the Muslim world and earned for him contempt and disfavour, especially among those who cared for Islamic religio-ethical values. An embodiment of all sorts of vice, tyranny, injustice, oppression and despotic rule, Yazid wanted Husayn to pay him homage as the leader of the Muslim community and submit himself to his authority. That was the crucial point in Islamic history when the meaning of religion had to be reasserted and the function of leadership redefined. This was done by Husayn b. 'Ali with the most effective method of sacrifice, suffering and martyrdom. In reply to the letters written by the people of Iraq inviting him to come to Kufa to take up their leadership, as they had no imam other than him, Husayn wrote to them:

    From Husayn b. Ali to the believers and Muslims [of Iraq]: 

You have invited me to come to you because you have no imam to guide you, and that you hope my arrival there will unite you in the right path and in the truth. You must be clear about the fact that the imam can only be one who follows the Book of God, makes justice and honesty his conduct and behaviour, judges with truth, and devotes himself to the service of God.

In response to the invitation of the people of Basra, Husayn replied:

    . . . I have sent my messenger to you and I call you to the Book of God, and the sunna of his Prophet, the sunna which has become obliterated; innovations have become active and energetic. If you listen to me and obey my orders, I will guide you to the right path. May the peace and mercy of God be upon you.

There is space here only to give these two quotations from numerous such statements which Husayn made from the time he left Medina till his martyrdom about six months later. These quotations are by themselves a complete explanation of Husayn's approach to the question of leadership as well as of the function of religion in society. They also explain the duties of an imeim and the nature of the Imamate which was so distorted at this point in Islamic history.

The main points which emerge from them are: (i) that an imam is one who unites the people; (ii) that he should lead them to the right path and to truth; (iii) that the Qur'an, as the Book of God, is an eternal truth, and the duty of the imam is to follow its model, and conduct his life according to the will of God; (iv) that the imam must make justice and honesty the cornerstones of his life; (v) that truth in its most universal and absolute form must be his only criterion; (vi) and that he must devote himself to the service of God.

The functions of the imam enumerated here are both particular and universal, descriptive and normative, and primary and evaluative; they can be applied in every society, time and epoch. They are particular, descriptive and normative when read strictly in the context of Islam, and are universal, primary and evaluative if read in their general meaning which embraces all religions and the whole of humanity. The key terms in Husayn's declarations are: the unity of people (which is basically a unity of purpose), the right path, truth, justice and honesty, and devotion to the service of God. These are in the essence of all religions as well as of Islam. Here religion is not separated from the well-being of society, and society is based on the eternal reality which creates consciousness in society.

An inseparably implied meaning of Husayn's declarations is that the leader of men need not take an active part in politics or in governmental affairs. His primary function is to serve humanity with ethical and normative integrity. He must create moral consciousness and a sense of responsibility which transcends the limits of the political community. He must serve social and spiritual values, but unfortunately totalitarian and despotic regimes subordinate spiritual and moral activities to their ends. It is at this point that Husayn rises up to set a new standard of leadership for challenging totalitarianism, despotism and the forces of evil. There were two ways open to him, one to mass his forces, gather strength, power, weapons and the military might to combat the despotic rule of Yazid. This would not have been difficult for the prestigious grandson of the Prophet, if he had wanted to resort to such action. But the actions of Husayn show that from the beginning to the end his strategy aimed at a much higher goal than simply accession to the caliphate, the term given to temporal authority in Islam. There is no evidence that he tried, while at Mecca, to enlist active supporters from among the people who gathered around him, or to propagate his cause among the great number of people who were coming to Mecca for the hajj; there is also no evidence that he attempted to send his emissaries to stir up any rebellion in the provinces such as the Yemen or Persia, which were sympathetic to his household, even though he was advised by some of his family members to do so. Above all, had he acted promptly on the invitation of the Kufans, while Umayyad control over the city was weak, he might have had a fair chance of success in grasping temporal power. In the six-month period before the battle of Karbala', Husayn did nothing to consolidate his strength and military power. Instead, throughout this period he was preparing himself for a different strategy of revolution.

Some of the writers on Karbala', looking at it from the common standards of war and victory, describe Husayn's action as an ambitious attempt to wrest political power and as an error of judgement. Husayn's numerous speeches, addresses, letters and statements bear testimony to the fact that he was fully aware of the situation and the consequences. Suffice it to point out that on the road from Medina to Mecca, then at the time when he was being the 'House of God' for Kufa, and finally throughout the journey from Mecca to Kufa he was informed and warned by dozens of people about the danger and that 'the hearts of the Iraqis were for him but their swords were for the Umayyads'. But Husayn's replies to all of those who attempted to deflect him from his purpose were always more or less in the same vein:

    I leave it to God to choose what is best.... God is not hostile to him who proposes the just cause.

From these replies it is clear that Husayn was fully aware of the dangers he would encounter and that he had a certain strategy and plan in mind to bring about a revolution in the consciousness of the Muslim community. Furthermore, it is also very clear from the sources, as has been pointed out above, that Husayn did not try to organize or mobilize military support, which he easily could have done in the Hijaz, nor did he even try to exploit whatever physical strength was available to him. On the contrary, from the moment he left Mecca for Kufa, time and again he gathered those accompanying him and asked them to leave him alone and go to safety, the last of these requests being on the night of 'Ashura'. Is it conceivable that anyone striving for political ascendancy would ask his supporters to abandon him? No one can answer this question in the affirmative. What then did Husayn have in mind? Why was he still heading for Kufa?

A careful study and analysis of the events of Karbala' reveals that from the very beginning Husayn was planning for a complete revolution in the religious consciousness of Muslims. All of his actions show that he was aware of the fact that a victory achieved through military strength and might is always temporary, because another stronger power can, in the course of time, bring it down in ruins. But a victory achieved through suffering and sacrifice is everlasting and leaves permanent imprints on man's consciousness. Husayn was brought up in the lap of the founder of Islam and had inherited the love and devotion to the Islamic way of life from his father. As time went on, he noticed the great changes which were rapidly taking place in the community in regard to religious feelings and morality. The natural process of conflict and struggle between action and reaction was now at work. That is, Muhammad's progressive Islamic action had succeeded in suppressing Arab conservatism, embodied in heathen pre-Islamic practices and ways of thinking. But in less than thirty years' time this Arab conservatism had revitalized itself as a forceful reaction to challenge Muhammad's action once again. The forces of this reaction had already moved into motion with the rise of Mu'awiya, but the succession of Yazid was a clear sign that the reactionary forces had mobilized themselves and now re-emerged with full vigour. The strength of this reaction embodied in Yazid's character, was now powerful enough to suppress, or at least efface, the Prophet's action. His conduct amounted to open ridicule of Muhammad's sunna and the norms of the Qur'an. He openly defied the Prophethood of Muhammad and the revelation received by him. Now this same Yazid had become the head of the Muslim community and was asking Husayn to accept his authority. Husayn's acceptance of Yazid, with the latter's reactionary attitude against Islamic norms, would not have meant merely a political arrangement but an endorsement of Yazid's character and way of life as well. Thus the entire ethical and religious system of Islam, in the thinking of Husayn, was now in dire need of the reactivation of Muhammad's action against the old Arabian reaction and required a complete shaking up.

He realized that mere force of arms would not save Islamic action and consciousness. To him it needed a shaking and jolting of hearts and feelings. This, he decided, could only be achieved through sacrifice and suffering, and therefore, in order to save Islam and its values, and the freedom of man and his dignity, Husayn made one of the greatest sacrifices in human history. Eighteen male members of his family including a six- month-old son and 44 of his companions were killed in front of him and then he himself laid down his life at the altar of truth and human rights.

Husayn's body, already torn by numerous wounds, was trampled under the hooves of the horses, his tents were burnt and looted; the helpless women and children were shamelessly paraded through the streets of Iraq and Syria as captives, and were treated with humiliation at the crowded courts of Ibn Ziyad in Kufa, and Yazid in Damascus.

Husayn was fully aware of the extent of the brutal nature of the reactionary forces. He knew that after killing him the Umayyads would make his wife and children captives, and take them all the way from Kufa to Damascus. This caravan of the captives of the Prophet's immediate family would publicize Husayn's message and would force the Muslims' hearts to ponder on the tragedy. It would make the Muslims think over the whole affair and would awaken their consciousness. This is exactly what happened; Husayn succeeded in his purpose. It is difficult today to evaluate exactly the impact of Husayn's action on Islamic morality and way of thinking because it prevailed. Had Husayn not shaken and awakened Muslim consciousness by this method, can it be said that Yazid's way of life would not have become standard behaviour in the Muslim community, endorsed and accepted by the grandson of the Prophet. Even after Yazid, despotic rulers have held power in Islam, and the character and personal behaviour of these despotic rulers has not been very different from that of Yazid, but the change in thinking which prevailed after the sacrifice of Husayn always served as a criterion of distinction between the Islamic concept of leadership and the behaviour of totalitarian and despotic rulers. Husayn tells the world that it is no use destroying man; we must destroy man's anti-human actions and conduct. If rulers are overthrown but the system remains unaltered, nothing is gained.

Nasibi support for Yazeed

Let us see how the Salaf Imam's treated Yazeed in their writing's. Let us begin with Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Abdul Hamid Ibn Ghazzali. 

Ibn Khallikan records one of his fatwas in reply to the following question:

"Q. What opinion should one hold of an individual that curses Yazeed, deems him a fasiq and encourages others to curse him? Did Yazeed intend to kill Hussain [r] or were his actions aimed at defending himself? Can we say (rahmathullah) after saying his name or is silence the best approach to adopt?

'A. 'It is not allowed to curse a Muslim at all and whosoever does so is himself cursed; and how can the curse of a Muslim be ever allowed when prohibitions in this matter are clear cut. Yazeed's being a Muslim and his non-participation in killing Hadhrat Hussain (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) nor his being pleased with this are all established from authentic narration's. When his involvement in the murder of Hadhrat Hussain (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) is not proven, it would not be correct to entertain any negative opinions about him for this is tantamount to harbouring evil thoughts about a Muslim without evidence which itself is Haraam. Allah Taãla says, 'O believers! Abstain from suspicions as some suspicions are sinful.' As to bless him with Duáss of mercy; not only is it permissible but in fact, Mustahabb (preferable) we do so in every Salaat for it is encompassed in this all-inclusive Duá: 'O Allah forgive the believing men and women' for he was a believer - quoted from: Tareekh Ibn Khalikkan Volume 1 page 413, "Dhikr Aqelbin Hairth"; Tafseer Ruh al Ma'ani Volume 26 page 73 "Surah Muhammad verse 23"; Hayatul Hayawaan p. 196.
So in the eyes of Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Abdul Hamid Ghazzali:

1) One that curses Yazeed is himself cursed

2) Yazeed was a momin

3) There is no clear evidence that he killed Imam Hussain

4) To say Yazeed rahmathullah is a permissible action

4) We should supplicate in favour of Yazeed after every Salat

Ghazzali is one of the esteemed kingpin's of Ahl'ul Sunnah, an Imam of the Salafies - who makes known his glowing admiration for Yazeed! Can you explain why you take Nasibis with such abhorrent to be your Imams? Or is the truth that he is only saying openly what you state privately?

Compare Ghazzali's support for Yazeed to his opinion on discussing Imam Hussain (as)'s martyrdom:

"It is a sin for the people to narrate the martyrdom of Hasan and Hussain, as retelling the troubles of the family of the Prophet (s), creates enmity towards the Sahaba".

This so called Hujutul Islam Abdul Hamid Ghazzali (d. 505 Hijri) on the one hand is issuing a Fatwa seeking mercy for Yazeed, and at the same time gave a fatwa deeming it haraam to even discuss the tragedy that befell Imam Hussain (as).

Another darling of the Salfi Nasibi's is Qadhi 'Abu Bakr Ibn Arabi. He is a clear authority figure for the Salafies since we have often come across Nasibi sites where his fatwa of takfeer against the Shi'a has been cited. So let us see the esteemed rank that Ibn Arabi gave to Yazeed and his adviser Marwan.

On Marwan, Ibn Arabi stated

"With regards to Marwan and Yazeed, critics who assert that they were both fasiq, are themselves fasiq. Marwan is in the eyes of the Sahaba, tabieen and fuquha a just individual, he was a high ranking member of the Ummah".

al Awasim min al Kawasim page 88-89

In relation to Yazeed, Ibn Arabi states as follows:

"If we state that knowledge and justice are the key features to be a Khalifa, some will claim that Yazeed was neither Adil nor was he an Aalim. We will ask 'Where is your source for claiming that these conditions were missing in Yazeed? If this was indeed the case then Ibn Zubayr and Hussain bin 'Ali would have informed us".

al Awasim min al Kawasim page 222

Ibn Arabi's support for Yazeed continues:

"If it is claimed that Yazeed drank alcohol we should point out that such a claim cannot be verified until we have the word of two witnesses, who testified against Yazeed? On the contrary a just man Yahya bin Bakeer narrates from Lays bin Sa'd, 'Ameer'ul Momineen Yazeed died on the following date…' Lays referred to him as Ameer'ul Momineen when his rule had come to an end, if Lays did not feel that this was the case he would not have referred to Yazeed as Ameer'ul Momineen after his death".

al Awasim min al Kawasim page 227

Interestingly Nasibis also follow the way of their Salaf Imam Ibn Arabi - writer Abu Sulaiman had sought to deny that Yazeed drank alcohol. Alhamdolillah we have already refuted this in our article on Mu'awiya we are quoting it here to show the affection that these Nasibi have towards Yazeed.

Salafi also  states:

It is also a lie that Yazeed was an alcohol drinking person. We will let Muhammad bin Ali bin Abi Talib to answer this claim because Muhammad knew Yazeed the best because he lived with him for a while. Ibn Katheer says in Al-Bidayah: (When the people of Al-Medina returned from Yazeed, Abdullah bin Mutee'a and his companions walked to Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiyah. They wanted Muhammad to agree to dismiss Yazeed, but Muhammad refused. Ibn Mutee'a said: "Yazeed drinks alcohol, does not pray, and ignores the rule of the Book." Muhammad answered them: "I never saw what you are saying about him. I came to him, and stayed with him for a while and I saw him taking care of his prayers, looking for goodness, asking about jurisprudence, and clinging to the Sunnah." They said: "He was acting like that!" Muhammad answered: "And what did he scare from me or please so that he shows piety to me? Did he show you what you saying about drinking alcohol? If he did, then you are his partners, but if he did not, then it is not lawful for you to testify what you do not know." They said: "It is the truth for us even if we did not see it." Muhammad said: "Allah refused that on the people of witness, Allah says: "Except for those who testified with truth and they know," and I have nothing to do with you anymore." They said: "Perhaps you did not like someone to take control rather than yourself, therefore, we give you our leadership." He said: "I do not make this fight lawful for me, either as a leader or as a follower." They said: "But you fought with your father!" He answered: "Give me someone like my father to fight the like of what my father fought." They asked: "Then, order your sons Abu Al-Qassim and Al-Qassim to fight with us." He answered: "I would have fight if I ordered them." They said: "At least join us to urge people to fight." He said: "Praise be the Lord! Do you want me to order the people to do what I do not do and do not accept? I would not then advised Allah's slaves for the sake of Allah." They replied: "Hence, we will force you." He said: "Then I will order the people to fear Allah and do not make a creature happy at the expense of the Creator's anger." Then Muhammad left to Makkah." 

[Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah for IbnKatheer,vol.8,p.236]


Ibn Arabi's writing do not just include an appraisal of Yazeed, they also contain attacks on Imam Hussain (as) that clearly point to his Nasibi aqeedah. Writing on the position taken by Imam Hussain (as) he states:

"Hussain failed to take heed of the words of Ibn Abbas who was the greatest scholar of that time, nor did he listen to the Sahaba Ibn Umar. He rebelled, he wanted to be young when he was in fact old, people were not present around him, he did not have helpers to support his stance, nor did he have people that were willing to sacrifice their lives for him…No one supported him (Hussain) when he rebelled. His grandfather the most merciful of all Prophets, foretold disputes and warned of fitnah, it was on this basis that Yazeed fought Hussain"

al Awasim min al Kawasim page 231-232

So Ibn Arabi is seeking to inform the people that:

Yazeed was with the truth

Yazeed's stance was supported by hadith that he relied when taking the action he did.

Imam Hussain decided to rebel, having failed to listen to Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar.

By rebelling Imam Hussain (as) was causing fitnah

Imam Hussain (as) was acting in violation to the words of Rasulullah (s)

This Nasibis entire portrayal is that Imam Hussain (as) died as a baghi fighting the rightful Imam. This is a serious matter since a baghi can NOT be declared a martyr under Shari'a, you can not even read the funeral prayers of a baghi.


Yazeed was a Sunni Muslim

We read in Sharh Qaseeda page 16:

"Other than a kaafir, is is not permissible to curse a Muslim and Yazeed was not a kaafir but was a Sunni Muslim"

 Sharah Qaseeda Amali, Page 16

When the Ulema of Ahl'ul Sunnah have themselves declared Yazeed to be a Sunni Muslim, is there any further need to discuss the beliefs of those that killed Imam Hussain (as)? Mullah Ali Qari al Hanafi, Hujutul Islam Ghazzali, Ibn Hajr al Makki and Ibn Katheer have forbade the cursing of Yazeed, and these are the Ulema that supported the killers of Imam Hussain (as), from their comments one can conclude that their Imam was Yazeed, Yazeed's madhab can be determined on the basis of the madhab that these Ulema adhered to.

We have presented these examples to show that these are individuals that have been extolled as Sunni's when they are actually Nasibis who had deep felt sympathies for Yazeed. We would urge our Sunni brothers not to be taken in by these Nasibis who claim to love Ahl'ul bayt (as) - their actual beliefs are derogatory towards the memory of Imam Hussain (as). 

 

Their tactic is to:

protect Yazeed,

praise Yazeed's character

absolve Yazeed of wrongdoing

oppose cursing Yazeed

For the benefit of those who may be taken in by these Nasibis we shall conclude this post with the words of an 'actual' Sunni scholar Sayyid Mahmood Alusi who stated (on Imam Hussain's murder):

"Those who state that Yazeed was not responsible and should not be cursed, or that he committed no sin are in fact Yazeed's helpers".

Ruh al Ma'ani Part 26

Some questions for  Nasibi

1. In Mishkat al Masabih Volume 3 page 244 we read this hadith:

"Oh Allah I love these two (Hasan and Hussain) love those that love them" - Do you accept his hadith of Rasulullah (s)?

2. If you accept this du'a then does Allah (swt) not love the Shi'a?

3. When Allah (swt) loves the Shi'a tell us does he love their enemies or hate them?

4. When you and your Nasibi Imams deem Imam Hussain (as) to be a baghi, can we conclude that you love Imam Hussain (as)?

5. Ibn Asakir records (in Mishbaath ba Sunnath page 219) a hadith on the authority Hadhrath Ayesha:

"Oh Allah never shower your blessings on the cursed, killer Yazeed, he will rebel against my beloved Hussain and martyr him"

When we have this hadith on the authority of Ayesha how do your Salaf Imams have the audacity to claim that absolving Yazeed of any wrongdoing is the correct approach?

6. When Rasulullah (s) has coined Yazeed a cursed murderer then when why do your Imams such as Ghazzali deem cursing Yazeed as haraam, are such fatwas not in violation to the words of Rasulullah?

7. In this hadith Rasulullah (s) explicitly named Yazeed, as a cursed murderer then is this not clear proof of him being cursed and hell bound?

8. When Rasulullah (s) deemed Yazeed to be a baghi could you explain why your brother Abu Sulaiman relied on a fatwa that "His (Yazeed's) caliphate is rightful"?

?