Naik's response to Kerbala Controversy!!

Dialogues, discussion and debates between other faiths and sects.
User avatar
Ask Senior
Ask Senior
Posts: 255
Joined: 01 Jan 2005, 18:53
Location: Dar-es-Salaam.. Tanzania..

Naik's response to Kerbala Controversy!!

Postby Zahra.. » 09 Apr 2008, 15:12

Dr. Zakir Naik's Response to the Kerbala Controversy!!!!!


27 th December, 2007

(As Dr. Zakir Naik was on Hajj Pilgrimage and returned on 26 th Dec. 2007 he could not respond and clarify to the issue raised earlier).

This is in reference to a question and answer session in a recent programme on 2 nd Dec. 2007 by Dr. Zakir Naik. One of the Non-Muslim questioners posed a question with regards to the battle of Karbala and Yazeed, to which Dr. Zakir 's response evoked strong criticism from a certain group of the Muslim community because he said "May Allah be pleased with him" after the name of Yazeed and referred to Karbala as a political war.

1. A minority of the minority community i.e. the KSI (Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat) blew this issue out of proportion thinking that they caught Dr. Zakir on the wrong-foot. They thought that the whole of Muslim Ummah had a unanimous opinion against Yazeed. Howe ver, they did not know that there is a difference of opinion in the Ummah regarding Yazeed.

Irrespective of the difference of opinion on this issue in Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah yet it is unanimously agreed that one can say RadhiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleas e with him) for Yazeed.

As you are aware that Dr. Zakir has a large fan following from all the sects of Muslim Ummah including Isna Ashari, Khojas, Bohris etc. The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat could not tolerate the Shias getting influenced by Dr. Zakir 's talks.

Desperate attempts were made to instigate the whole of Muslim Ummah against Dr. Zakir Naik by publicizing the matter in all possible manners.

The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat in Mumbai is misleading the masses by making it appear as though Dr. Zakir Naik has made Yazeed into a Hero. Infact Yazeed is not a Hero for Dr. Zakir Naik.

2. I n order to maintain the unity in the Muslim Ummah, Dr. Zakir Naik expresses his sincere regret and said, "I regret if unintentionally any person or section of the people's feelings have been hurt due to any statement made by me." He also does the same while giving da 'wah to Christians and Hindus. He regrets hurting the Muslims unintentionally but that does not mean what he has said is wrong.

3. Any knowledgeable Mu slim whenever he takes the name of any "Sahabah" (companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) or Taba 'een (next generation after the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) his name is followed by RadiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleased with him) or Rahmatullahi Alaih (May Allah' s mercy be on him).

Thus Dr. Zakir Naik after mentioning the name of Yazeed, who is a Taba ' een, he followed his name with (May Allah be pleased with him). To pray for the Muslims is also instructed by Allah (swt) in the Glorious Qur 'an – 98:8, 9:100 and 58:22


Neither did Dr. Zakir praise Yazeed nor did he curse him. He did not comment on his actions. He only said "Yazeed (May Allah be pleased with him)" since he does not consider Yazeed to be a Kafir and it is allowed to pray for the believers as Ab raham (pbuh) too prayed for all the believers in the Glorious Qur'an - 14:41.

4. The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat claims that the whole of Muslim Ummah condemns the statement of Dr. Zakir. Who are the people the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat mentions as 'Muslim Ummah' ? Do the views of the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat represent the view of the Muslim Ummah? Do they have the fatawas of all the cross section of Muslims, especially the Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat, for their stand? If it is only Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat raking up the controversy, then they are misleading the common masses by saying Muslim Ummah.

There is a difference of opinion as far as the Muslim scholars are concerned regarding Yazeed. Some are neutral and some are against him. Some are e ven in favour of Yazeed like the revered scholar Imam Ghazaali.

When Imam Ghazaali was asked if it was all right to curse Yazeed, he replied "No".. He was asked was it all right to say "rahimahullah"? He said "Yes it is Mustahab (highly recommended)." [Qa id as Shareed min Akhbar e Yazeed pg 57-59].

Imam Ghazaali further said, "Yazeed was a Muslim and when we pray for the Muslims "Allhummagfirli Muslimineen was Muslimaat (O Allah forgive the Musilms men and women) he is also included in our prayers." [Qa id as Shareed min Akhbar e Yazeed pg 57-59].

Yazeed was also the commander of the Muslim army, which went to fight the battle of Constantinople, which was predicted by the Prophet (pbuh) himself along with the glad tidings, " Paradise will be granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval operation." [Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4 Book of Jihad Hadith 2924].

This was a very prominent war as far as the spread of Islam was concerned. There were Sahabah like Hussain Ibn Ali, Abdullah bin Abbas, Ibn Umar and Abu Ayyub Ansari and Abdullah bin Zubair (May Allah be pleased with all of them) who participated and fought under the leadership of Yazeed.

5. As far as the Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat is concerned, inspite of the difference of opinion it is agreed upon that it is permissible to say "May Allah have mercy on him" or "May Allah be pleased with him" for Yazeed. Therefore saying "May Allah be pleased with him" after Yazeed 's name is not Haraam, nor a sin and is not wrong.

This has been reconf irmed recently in writing from various Darul Ulooms and Islamic Organisations in India.

Fatawas to clarify and support the above stand.

a) Darul Uloom, Deoband.

b) Nadwatul Ulema, Lucknow (verbally confirmed on phone, written copy to be received)

c) Darul Uloom, Barelwi.

d) Jamaat-e-Islami-i-Hind, New Delhi. (verbally confirmed on phone, written copy to be received)

e) Darul Uloom Ahmadia Salfia, Darbhanga, Bihar.

f) Jamiatul-Ahle-Hadith, New Delhi

g) Aligarh Muslim University

h) Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi

i) And several others who have confirmed on phone and are expected to be received in the next couple of days.

Fatawas from scholars outside India:

1) Shaikh Abdullah Ibn Jibreen (on audio, written copy to be received)

2) Shaikh al Islam Ibn Taymiyah

6. Some people consider "political war" in a negative sense. By saying Karbala was a political war in no way does it mean that it was not a war for Islam or Justice. Many political wars were fought for the sake of Justice and Isla m.

Islam is a complete way of life, which also deals with political issues, which should be based on the Qur 'an and Hadith.

In his response to the questioner , Dr. Zakir also cited the example of the Battle of Jamal that was fought between the Mother of the Believers, Aaishah (RA) and Ali (RA). The battle took place as a result of difference of opinion on a political issue. We respect and revere both the companions of the prophet (pbuh). However, with regards to the battle of Jamal, we neither favour nor are we against any one of them.

7. We disagree with a certain group of Muslims who hurl abuses on Aaishah ( R.A.) and do not consider her from the Ahle Bayt i.e. family of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). However, the Qur 'an considers the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) as the members of Ahle Bayt in - 33:32-33.

Moreover, even the wife of Abraham (pbuh) is addressed by Allah (swt) as one among the Ahle Bayt of Abraham (pbuh) in the Glorious Qur ' an - 11:72-73.

Furthermore, this same minority Muslim sect also curses the first three caliphs of Islam, Abu Bakr ( R.A.), Umar (R..A.) and Uthman (R.A.) as well as the mother of believers Ayesha (R.A.).

8. If Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat tomorrow says don 't say "May Allah be pleased with him", after the name of Abu Bakr, U mar, Uthman, Ummul Mumineen Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with them all) will we stop saying "May Allah be pleased with them", after their names? Of course not!

As a whole, the majority of the Muslims condemn the act of anyone cursing any of the companions , including the first three caliphs of Islam as well as Ayesha (R..A.) the wife of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

9. Dr. Zakir Naik did not curse or criticize any Muslim. This same small minority sect of Muslim curse these revered Caliphs of Islam Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (May Allah be pleased with them all), and if they do it the whole Muslim Ummah will condemn them.

The Prophet (pbuh) himself said, "When a man curses anything, the curse goes up to heaven and the gates of heaven are locked against it. Then it comes down to the earth and its gates are locked against it. Then it goes right and left, and if it finds no place of entrance it returns to the thing it was cursed, and if it deserves what was said (it enters it), otherwise it returns to the one who utte red it."

[Sunan Abu Dawud Vol.3 Book of Manners Hadith 4887].

Aaishah (R.A.) reported that the Messenger of Allah said, "When your companion dies, leave him and do not revile him."

[Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol.3 Book of Manners Hadith 4881].

Allah will not question us on the Day of Judgement as to why didn' t we hurl abuses on Yazeed even if he deserved it, however Allah will surely hold us accountable if we curse anyone unjustly.

Our salvation does not depend on the issue of Yazeed as every person is responsible for his or her actions.

Allah says in Surah Baqarah, Chapter No. 2, Verse No. 134 & 141.

"That was a nation who has passed away. They shall receive the reward of what they earned and you of what you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used to do."

10. Dr. Zakir Naik holds the grandsons of the Prophet in high respect and whenever he mentions the name of Hassan ( R.A.) and Hussain (R.A.) he follows it with RadiAllahu Anhuma (May Allah be pleased with them).

Dr. Zakir condemns the person who actually killed Hussain (RadiAllahu Anhu) the grandson of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) whether he was the person from Yazeed ' s army or someone else.

11. Dr. Zakir Naik is held in high regards by millions of Muslims worldwide. There were more than two-hundred thousand people, including Bohras, Shias, Barelwis, Deobandis etc. during his speech and no one amongst them raised the issue, not even a single from more than 20 Islami c scholars from different parts of the world who came to speak at the conference.

This issue has been raised by a few Shias from Pakistan, where raising such kinds of discords are common and later on picked up by the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat in Mumbai.

12. Saying "May Allah be pleased with him" after Yazeed ' s name is a minor issue, but cursing the first three caliphs and Ayesha (R.A.) is a much more bigger issue and a grievous sin.

According to Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat cursing the first three rightly guided caliphs and the Mother of Believers, Ayesha ( R.A.) is a major sin (some scholars go to the extent of saying it is 'Kufr' i.e. disbelief while others say it is 'Fisq' i.e. grave sin).

If you make a mountain out of a mole hill because of saying "May Allah be pleased with him" for Yazeed then is not cursing the first three rightly guided caliphs of Islam and the Mother of Believers, Ayesha ( R.A.) a much more grievous sin?

We want unity among the Muslim Ummah. Is it proper for the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat to continue to create unnecessary discord on a ' difference of opinion' amongst Muslims with them?

13. If the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat give in writing that they will not curse the first three caliphs Hazrat Abu Ba kr, Hazrat Umar, Hazrat Uthman and the Ummul Mumineen Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with them all) InshaAllah Dr. Zakir Naik will never say RadiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleased with him) after the name of Yazeed since it is optional.

It is not Dr. Zakir Naik who has a difference of opinion regarding Yazeed, but he is aware that as far as the scholars of the Ahl-e-Sunnat-wa-Jamaat are concerned, there is a difference of opinion regarding Yazeed. That is the reason he neither praised him, nor condemned him.

Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers. We should try to unite the Muslim Ummah rather than creating more divisions. If only all Muslims read the Qur 'an with understanding and adhere to Sahih Hadith, Inshallah most of these differences would be solved and we could be one united Muslim Ummah. The best way to get the Muslims together is given in the following verse:

"And hold fast all together by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you) and be not divided among yourselves; " [Surah Ale Imran 3:103].
My Lord, You are as I please, so make me as You please – Imam Ali (a.s)
User avatar
Ask Senior
Ask Senior
Posts: 364
Joined: 21 Jan 2009, 20:13

Re: Naik's response to Kerbala Controversy!!

Postby Reyhana » 21 Oct 2009, 23:49



Hadith of the Prophet(saw) : ‘’Yuhsharu al-mar’u(al-insan) ma’a man ahab’’ ‘’Man will be resurrected on the Day of Judgement with those whom he loves.’’

(Sunni sources : Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal Vol. 3 page 336 Hadith No. 14644, Al-Tabarani Hadith No. 8953 ; Ibn Asakir Hadith No. 2427)

Sunni Sources say : Yazid was a fasiq (transgressor) a fajir(a debaucher, a person who leads a life of promiscuity) a drunkard, ‘’mal’oon’(accursed) and a ‘kafir’. He drank wine(shaaribul khamr). He kept dogs. He abandoned salat. He did not believe in the revelation of the Qur’an. He inaugurated his ‘dawla’(kingdom) with the killing of Shahid al-Husain(a.s.), the grandson of the Prophet(saw) and closed it with the catastrophe of ‘Al-Harra’ in which he ransacked Madina for three days during which many companions and Huffaz of Qur’an were massacred and women were raped). Finally, the Ka’ba was set on fire. In ‘Asma al Khulafa biography of Yazid ibn Mu’awiyah Allama Ibn Hazm writes, ‘’His abomination went to such an extent that when Yazid’s army attacked Madina, their horses urinated in the Mosque of the Messenger of Allah, and also in Riyad al Jannah.

Dr. Zakir Naik

I begin in the Name of Allah the All-beneficent, the All-merciful.

On 1st of December 2007 at the World Peace Conference a Hindoo sought your opinion regarding Husaini Brahmins and mentioned two characters, Ravan and Yazid as symbols of evil. In reply you said among other things that ‘there is a difference of opinion’ and ‘that is history’ and that ‘the war of Karbala was a political war’. Also after the name of Yazid you gave an epithet ‘May Allah be pleased with him’. To the vast majority of Muslims this was blasphemous and revolting.

I do hope that you will take seriously the following revelations from Sunni sources. You will see that there is a consensus among the vast majority of Muslims that Imam Husein(a.sw.) did not fight a political war. Imam Husain(a.s.) refused to give ‘bay’aa’(allegiance) to Yazid, a tyrant and one who openly indulged in sinful acts ; he gave his life and those of his family to save the faith of Islam from the hands of depraved Yazid. You will come to know that Yazid has not been been condemned by the Shias only but he has been condemned and cursed by Sunni scholars. You will also be able to judge the position of Imam Husain(a.s.) in the eyes of the Muslims and non-Muslims compared with that of Yazid.

CONTENTS: (From Sunni Sources)

1. What does the Qur’an say about the Prophet(saw) and Ahlul Bayt(a.s.)

2. The Prophet’s sayings and his declaration of war against the enemies of Ahlul Bayt(a.s.)

3. Shayk-ul-Islam, Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri’s recent remarks on Yazid

4. Establishing the fact that Yazid was responsible for the killing of Imam Husain(a.s.)

5. Yazid’s pride in killing Imam Husain(a.s.)

6. Why did Imam Husain(a.s.) rise up and fight against Yazid ?

7. Who was Imam Husain ?

8. Who was Yazid ?


Since you are so knowledgeable and conversant with Verses from Qur’an and Ahadith I am going to quote only a few verses from the Holy Qur’an(the translation is one published by Abul-Qasim Publishing House, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia which you are promoting) and the Ahadith from Sunni sources for your reminder and reflection. For Allah(swt) says in Surah Al A’laa Surah 87 Verse 9 ‘’So remind, if the reminder should benefit.’’

You so rightly advocate that ‘’what is important is the Qur’an and the Prophetic sayings.’’ and I agree totally with you. Let us therefore look at what the Qur’an and the Ahadith of the Prophet(saw) have to say.

First, You will agree with me that whatever the Prophet(saw) said was not out of his whim or inclination but it was by an inspiration from Allah(swt).

In Surah Al Najm Surah No. 53 Verse No.3. Allah says, ‘’Nor does he(the Prophet)(saw)) speak from his own inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed.’’

In Surah al-Ahzab Surah 33 Verse 6 Allah(swt) says, ‘’The Prophet(saw) is more worthy of the believers than themselves.’’ In Ma’ariful Qur’an by Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi he says that the meaning of the expression, ‘’The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves’’ mentioned by Maulana Thanvi is based on the saying of Ibn ‘Atiyyah and others which has been opted for by al-Qurtubi and most commentators. According to it, every Muslim is duty-bound to obey and implement the command of the Holy Prophet(saw) more than the command of his own parents.

Allah(swt) also says in Surah Al-Shura Surah 42 Verse 23 say, (O Muhammad), ‘’ I do not ask you for it (i.e.this message)any payment (but) only good will through (i.e. due to ) kinship.’’ In the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali which the late Ahmad Deedat used to promote, it says, ‘’No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.’’


The Messenger of Allah(saw) said: If one while praying between Rukn and Maqam (near Ka’bah) and fasting, dies but with the hate of the family of Muhammad(saw) he will enter the Fire. And he who abuses my Ahlul Bayt is verily an apostate and is driven out of Islam. And he who inflicts pain on my progeny upon him is the curse of Allah. And he who hurts me by hurting my progeny has verily hurt/angered Allah. Certainly Allah has made Paradise forbidden to he who does injustice to my Ahlul Bayt, or kills them, or assists against them or abuses them.

(Sunni reference : al-Sawi’iq al-Muhriqah by Ibn Hajar al-Hathami, Ch. 11, p. 357 who said this tradition is authentic)

‘’Allah’s Messenger(saw) looked at ‘Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn(Allah be pleased with them all) and said, ‘’ I am at peace with those with whom you make peace and I am at war with those with whom you make war.’’

Sunni sources : Sahih Tirmidhi v.5 p.699 ; Sunan Ibn Majah, English translation by Muhammad Tufail Ansari, Vol. 1 p. 81 ; Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v. 2 p. 767, Tradition No. 1350 and al Mustadrak al Hakim Vol.3 p. 149.

‘’Husain is from me and I am from Husain’’ is the famous saying of the Prophet(saw) (see Masnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal V.4 p. 172 ; Al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim V.3 p.177; al-Tabarani V.3 p.21; Mishkat al-Masabih by Khatib al-Tabrizi English Version tradition No. 6160 and al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqah by Ibn Hajar Haythami Ch.11 Section 3 p.291.

In another Hadith the Prophet said, ‘’One who fights Husain fights the Prophet’’ (Sunni sources : Sunan Ibn Majah p.14 Manaqib Husayn; Tirmidhi Vol. 2 p.587; Sawaiq al Muhriqa p.114 Dhikr Husain ; Yanabi al Mawaddah p.164 Ch.54 ; Mustadrak al Hakim Vol. 3 p.177 and so on.

Now that we have established from the Qur’an that the Prophet(saw) is dearer to us than our own selves, that he does not speak except by inspiration from Allah(swt) and that we have been commanded by Allah(swt) to love the family of the Prophet(saw) and now that we have also seen from the Ahadith in which the Prophet says that he who fights Husain fights him and he who angers Husain angers Allah, how should we rate those who shower praise on Yazid in the eyes of Allah(swt) and the Prophet(saw).

The Prophet(saw) would definitely not take it lightly and kindly the appellation ‘’May Allah be pleased with Yazid’’? pleased for what ? For killing Imam Husain and for not believing in the revelation of the Qura’n ? This is nothing but ‘kufr’ and disrespect for Allah(swt) and the Prophet(saw) It is incurring anger of Allah(swt) and the Prophet(saw). It follows from the above Hadith of the Prophet(saw) that one who hurts and angers the Prophet by saying May Allah be pleased with Yazid has waged a war against the Prophet(saw) and blasphemed Allah(swt) and the Prophet(saw).

What does the Qur’an say about those who cause annoyance to Allah and His Messenger ? See Surah Al-Ahzab Surah No. 33 Verse 57

‘’Indeed, those who abuse Allah and His Messenger – Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment. ‘’ Both Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Maududi have translated ‘’those who cause annoyance to Allah(swt) and the Prophet(saw)…..’’. Sunni scholar Sayyid Mahmood Alusi in ‘Ruh al Ma’ani Part 26 comments on Imam Husain’s murder. He says, ‘’ Those who state that Yazeed was not responsible and should not be cursed, or that he committed no sin are in fact Yazid’s helpers.’’


Let us hear what the world renowned scholar has to say about Yazid. Shaykhu-ul-Islam, Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-QadrI in his speech on the 3rd of October 2007(21 st Ramadhan) in Baghdad Town, Lahore on ‘’Manaqib Ali al Murtaza(a.s.) said in Urdu and I quote, ‘’Khasais Amiril Muminin Ali Ibn Abi Talib Imam Abu Abdulrahman An Nasai(r.a.) Sahibu-s-Sunan ne ye kitab khasais ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib parke Damishk me sunai to Kharji khare ho gae. Kharjioko na us waqt Ahlebayt ki ta’rif gawara thi na aaj gawara hai. Ye baat sunle. Unhone ye kiya ke Ahlebayt ke fazail aur manakib ko taake logo tak na pahonche wo chupana shuru’ kiya. Jo Khawarij hay, Yazid jayse badbakht aur lae’en jahannami aur dushmane Islam ke liye lafze Hazrat kehna unko zeb deta hai, unko tabiyyat manti hai, usko hazrat bhi kehte hai, Amiril Mu’mineen bhi kehte hay, likhte bhi hai.’’


Let us quote just a few Ahadith ( I can fill pages and pages of Ahadith from acknowledged Sunni sources but I will mention only a few that Yazid beyond any doubt was responsible for the killing of Imam Husain(a.s.)

In al-Bidayah ibn Ziyad admitted that he killed Imam Husayn(a.s.) on the orders of Yazeed. According to the testimony of Ibn Abbas Yazid killed Imam Husain(a.s.) We read in Tareekh Kamil: Ibn Abbas replied to a letter of Yazeed stating ‘You killed Husayn ibn ‘Ali as well as the youth from Banu Abdul Muttalib, who were beacons of guidance.’’ In Maqatil Husayn of al Khawarzmee Vol. 2 p. 80 Ch. 9 we read ‘’Yazeed wrote a letter to Waleed the Governor of Medina, in which he stated ‘Force Husayn to give bay’a. Should he refuse then strike off his head and return it to me.’’ I have at least 25 Sunni references confirming that Yazid was responsible for the killing of Imam Husain.


Ibn Asakir, writing on Yazid, states that when Husain’s head was brought before Yazid, he recited the couplets of Ibn Zubayri ‘’I wish my ancestors of Badr were here to see the severed head of the rebellious tribe(The Prophet’s tribe of Banu Hashim).’’ (Al Bidayah by Ibn Asakir Volume 8 p.204.

Following the murder of Husain, Yazid said, ‘’ I avenged the killing of my kaafir relatives in Badr through the killing of the family of the Prophet.’’

(Sharh Fiqh Akbar Vol. 1 p. 73)

Sunni scholar Sayyid Mahmood Alusi in ‘Ruh al Ma’ani Part 26 says, ‘’Those who state that Yazid was not responsible and should not be cursed, or that he committed no sin are in fact Yazid’s helpers.’’

Be he a Muslim or a non-Muslim the whole world with the exception of the Nasibis and the Khawarij have only one impression about Yazid ibn Mu’awiyyah and that is that he was corrupt and a pervert whereas Imam Husain(a.s.) the beloved grandson of the Holy Prophet(saw) was an epitome of love, truth and justice and above all the Saviour of Islam.

Now that we have established that it was Yazid who was responsible for the killing of Imam Husayn from the established Sunni sources, you cannot dismiss the event as a ‘’difference of opinion’’ and that it was just history. This was no ordinary personality, Dr. Zakir. He was the beloved grandson of the Prophet(saw).


There are some people who say that breaking the bay’aa of Yazid was not correct. That as a Khalifa he should not have been opposed or challenged.

‘’ Khilfah(leadership) is not established merely with the appointment of the Khalifa, rather(after his demise) it requires the approval of the Muslim Ummah’’ (al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya, page 9). Therefore the leadership of Yazid was also subject to the same criterion as others. In Tarikh al-Tabari, 4/262 and al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, 87/151 it is stated that so many letters were sent from the people of Iraq not accepting Yazid as their leader. The letters clearly stated that they had not given their allegiance to him. Even Abdulrehman Abi Bakr, the son of Abu Bakr and Abdullah ibn Zubayr refused to give allegiance to Yazid.

Imam Husain(a.s.) set out to uphold and apply ‘amra bil ma’aruf and nahyi ‘anil munkar’. Allah(swt) says in Surah Ali Imran Surah 3 Verse 104, ‘’And let there be (arising) from you a nation inviting to (all that is) good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful.’’ According to the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, it says, ‘’Let there arise out of you a band(group) of people inviting all that is good, Enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong’’.

The rising of Imam Husain against Yazid was therefore justifiable. Imam Tirmizi notes that the Prophet(saw) said, ‘’You should never let the fear of others prevent you from speaking the truth,’’ and the Prophet also said, ‘’ Speaking the truth in front of a wicked king or a tyrant is the greatest Jihad.’’ Hence, Imam Husain faithfully acted upon the words of the Prophet(saw).

Imam Nawawi writes in the commentary of Sahih Muslim that a group of scholars have said it is permissible to fight against a wicked, evil king because Imam Husain, Abdullah bin Zubair, and the pious people of Madina and Makkah fought against Yazid, and the Taba’een fought against Hajjaj bin Yusuf.

(Sharh Sahih Muslim chapter al-Amarah by Imam Nawawi. Hafiz Asqalani has also noted Imam Nawawi’s words in his book, Fath al Bari, Chapter on Fitan).

Imam Hafidh Jalaluddin Suyuti on the authority of Sahaba Uns bin Harith records, ‘’ I heard Rasulullah(saw) say ‘’ Verily my son(Husain) will be killed in a land called Kerbala, whoever amongst you is alive at that time must go and help him.’’ (Sunni Sources : Khasais al Kubra Vol.2 p.125 ; Tarikh Ibn Asakir Vol. 4 p. 341 Dhikr Husain; Kanzul Ummal Vol. 6 p. 223)

It was not a political war as you have claimed. On his departure from Mecca, Imam Husain wrote a will and handed it over to his brother Muhammad Hanafiyyah. The will read, ‘’I have not risen against Yazid in order to create corruption or discord, nor to elevate myself in the eyes of the people, nor to oppress.’’ Innama kharajtu litalabil islahi fi ummati jaddi wa abi’’ I have only risen to rectify, to reform the affairs of the Ummah of my grandfather and of my father. ‘’Uridu ‘an aamura bil ma’ruf wa anha ‘anil munkar.’’ I want to invite people towards good and forbid them from evil.’’

Imam Husain rose against Yazid because he refused to pay allegiance to him. When asked to give bay’aa to Yazid, Imam Husain said, ‘’ We are the household of the prophethood, the source of messengership, the descending place of the angels, through us Allah had begun showering His favours, whereas Yazid is a sinful person, a drunkard, the killer of innocent people and one who openly indulges in sinful acts. ‘Mithli la yubayi’u mithlah’. A person like me can never do bay’aa(pay allegiance) to a person like him(Yazid). I look upon death as but felicity of martyrdom and I regard life among oppressors and transgressors as nothing but agony and torture. By God I will never give you my hand like a man who has been defeated; nor will I flee like a slave.’’ This cannot therefore be political war.


Your own national hero, Mahatma Gandhi in 1924 writing in ‘Young India’’ about the battle of Karbala said among other things ‘’ I wanted to know the best of the life of one who holds today an undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind….the utter self-effacement of Husain, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission to save Islam.’’

So many people have paid glowing tribute to Imam Husain (a.s.) like Khwaja Muinuddin Chishti, Allama Iqbal, late Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, Banarasi Lal Varma, Mathur, ‘Adib’, Sardar Kunwar Singh Bedi and so many others.

Imam Husain is that purest soul that the Prophet(saw) used to interrupt his speeches to pick him up. He delayed his prostration to honour him. It was the honourable face of Imam Husain that the honourable Prophet’s lips, face and body touched and loved. It is that very same honourable face that Yazid bin Muawiyyah humiliated, slaughtered, put on the spears and kicked. No words can describe the pain profoundly felt in every humanh’s mind, soul and heart. The whole battle of Karbala was for Haqq against Batil, Freedom against Injustices. Every noble soul today grieves and is touched by the martyrdom of Imam Husain, the Master of the Youth of Paradise. Imam Husain is alive today more alive than ever, and living deep in our hearts, in our souls, and in our minds. His martyrdom still has the power to ignite the light of truth in the heart of all free people and to send a message to the downtrodden not to bow down to evil and not to surrender to tyranny. Persistent attempts to distance Imam Husain and his Sirah are afoot and more intense and serious than ever. The supporters of Yazid can no longer fool the Muslim Ummah. While we must pray for their guidance, we must not for a moment fall victim to their misguidance.

WHO WAS YAZID ? (from Sunni sources)

Ibn Jauzi, Abu Ya’la and Salih Bin Ahmad, arguing from the verses of the Holy Qur’an write that ‘’ it is proven that cursing Yazid is permissible. It is the duty of all Muslims that they should know the rights that Imam Husain has over them, and how, with the strength of his suffering, oppression and tyranny, he watered the tree of Islam with his own blood and the blood of his family. Otherwise, that blessed tree might have died because of the tyranny of the Bani Umayya. It was Husain who gave Islam a new life.’’

In a collection of Yazid’s own poetic couplets, Abul Faraj bin Jauzi has recorded the following in his Radd Ala’l Muta’sibul Anid. Yazid said, ‘’ 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. One who frightens us with doomsday, let him do so. These are false things which deprive us of all the pleasures of sound and music.’’

In Siyar A’lam al-Nubala(4:37-38) Al-Dhahabi said of Yazid ibn Mu’awiya

‘’Yazid drank and was a reprobate(depraved). He inaugurated his Dawla(kingdom) with the killing of the Shahid al-Husain and closed it with the catastrophe of al-Harra(the incident of al-Harra was when Madina was ransacked by Yazid for 3 days). He burnt the Ka’bah and killed the Shuhada of Badr.

Hafiz Ibn Kathir notes from Al-Bukhari that Ibn al-Harith had heard a hadith from the Prophet(saw) and while acting upon this hadith, he went to Karbala with Imam Husain: The Hadith reads, ‘’My son will be martyred in Karbala, and whoever is present there at that time should help my son.’’ For this reason, Anas bin Harith helped Imam Husain and was martyred with him.

(Tareekh Ibn Kathir chapter on Karbala by Hafiz ibn Kathir (Tareekh al Kabeer biography of Anas Ibn al-Harith by Imam Bukhari).

Imam Taftazani has written in his Sharh al Aqaid al Nasifi that Yazid was a kafir, all his supporters, helpers, those who agree with him are all kafirs !

Shaykh Amjad Ali al Azami has written in ‘Bahar e Shari’at that Yazid was ‘’paleed’’, and mal’un(accursed) and those who would exonerate him and support him(naudhubillah) as ‘’jahannam kay kuttay’’(dogs of hell).

The sunni scholar Ibn Hajr’s comments on Yazeed in Sawaiqh al Muhriqa writes ‘’ One group have deemed Yazid to be a kafir, another has stated that he was a Muslim but a fasiq(transgressor), a fajir(one that commits debauchery) and a drunkard. There is consensus over his fisq (transgression). One part of Ulama have stated that you can curse him by name. This includes individuals like Ibn Jauzi.

In Tareekh Kamil Ibn Khaldun, a 14th century Sunni scholar writes, ‘’ By Allah, Yazeed drinks alcohol and abandons Salat.

Ibn Kathir, a 14th century Sunni Shafi’i Islamic scholar writes among other things, ‘’Traditions inform us that Yazeed loved worldly vices, would drink, played drums, kept dogs and not a day would go by when he was not in a drunken state. He ransacked Madina for three days. Yazid committed a major sin. Sahaba and their children were slaughtered openly. Other heinous acts were also perpetrated. Whoever frightens Madina incurs the wrath of Allah, His Angels and all the people – and some Ulama have deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed. This includes individuals such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Allamah Hilalee, Abu Bakir Abdul Aziz, Qadhi Abu Ya’la and his son Qadhi Abu Husayn. Ibn Jauzi wrote a book deeming it permissible to curse Yazeed.(al Bidayah wa al-Nihayah (5).

Muhammad Zakariya al-Kandahlawi, a 20th century Hanbali Deobandi Islamic scholar wrote, ‘’ The army that Yazeed had sent to Madina comprised of 60,000 horsemen and 15,000 foot soldiers. For three days he shed blood freely, 1000 women were raped and 700 from the Quraysh and Ansar were killed. Ten thousand women and children were made slaves. Muslim bin Uqba forced people to give bay’aa to Yazeed in such a manner that people were enslaved and Yazeed could sell them as he pleased. No Sahaba who were with the Prophet(saw) at Hudaibiya were spared.’’ All the Sahaba at Badr were killed in this battle.

The Messenger of Allah(saw) said: If one while praying between Rukn and Maqam (near Ka’bah) and fasting, dies but with the hate of the family of Muhammad(saw) he will enter the Fire. And he who abuses my Ahlul Bayt is verily an apostate and is driven out of Islam. And he who inflicts pain on my progeny upon him is the curse of Allah. And he who hurts me by hurting my progeny has verily hurt/angered Allah. Certainly Allah has made Paradise forbidden to he who does injustice to my Ahlul Bayt, or kills them, or assists against them or abuses them.

(Sunni reference : al-Sawi’iq al-Muhriqah by Ibn Hajar al-Hathami, Ch. 11, p. 357 who said this tradition is authentic)

A murderer of the grandson of Rasululllah(saw) deserves outright condemnation and only an enemy of Ahlul Bayt would think of defending a Shaitan like him.

Wa aakhiru da’wana anil hamdu lillahi rabbil aalameen.

Murtaza Bandali
''The worst sin is that which the commiter takes lightly.''[saying of Imam Ali a.s. quoted in Nahjul Balagha]

Return to “Inter-religious Dialogue”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests