I am a Sunni Muslim, I am very confused regarding the issue of yazeed!, was he a Muslim or a kaafir?
Can I have evidence aswell please?
I am a Sunni Muslim, I am very confused regarding the issue of yazeed!, was he a Muslim or a kaafir?
Can I have evidence aswell please?
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
1) As a Muslim, you are not required to have ANY opinion on anyone not mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Why do we, as Muslims, believe Luqman is going to heaven? Because it says it in the Qur'an. Why do we believe that Abu Lahab is going to hell? Because it says it in the Qur'an. As a Sunni, you should know there are narrations that testify that certain people are going to heaven (Khadijah, 10 Promised Paradise, the Ansaar, al-Hassan and al-Husayn for example) and certain people are going to hell (ibn Ubay al-Salool for example).
2) As far as Yazid is concerened, then know he is not a Companion nor is he considered from the Tabi3een. Rather, he was a ruler who ruled when there were quite a few who were better than him (al-Husayn, ibn Omar etc) and history has not recorded his reign as being good; neither morally nor secularly. Also, his actions led (if he didn't downright order) to the death of al-Husayn رضي الله عنه and other great Companions and Tabi3een.
3) Most of our scholars have said the right thing to do is to keep quite about him and neither curse him nor praise him and leave his affair to Allah. This is what we do with everyone, whether we perceive them as good or bad. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله says:لا نشهد لأحد بجنة ولا نار.We don't testify to anyone that they are going to heaven or hell.
والله تعالى أعلم
I am a Sunni Muslim, I am very confused regarding the issue of yazeed!, was he a Muslim or a kaafir?
Can I have evidence aswell please?
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
1) As a Muslim, you are not required to have ANY opinion on anyone not mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Why do we, as Muslims, believe Luqman is going to heaven? Because it says it in the Qur'an. Why do we believe that Abu Lahab is going to hell? Because it says it in the Qur'an. As a Sunni, you should know there are narrations that testify that certain people are going to heaven (Khadijah, 10 Promised Paradise, the Ansaar, al-Hassan and al-Husayn for example) and certain people are going to hell (ibn Ubay al-Salool for example).
2) As far as Yazid is concerened, then know he is not a Companion nor is he considered from the Tabi3een. Rather, he was a ruler who ruled when there were quite a few who were better than him (al-Husayn, ibn Omar etc) and history has not recorded his reign as being good; neither morally nor secularly. Also, his actions led (if he didn't downright order) to the death of al-Husayn رضي الله عنه and other great Companions and Tabi3een.
3) Most of our scholars have said the right thing to do is to keep quite about him and neither curse him nor praise him and leave his affair to Allah. This is what we do with everyone, whether we perceive them as good or bad. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله says:لا نشهد لأحد بجنة ولا نار.We don't testify to anyone that they are going to heaven or hell.
والله تعالى أعلم
Brother, good post, but why isn't Yazid considered a Tabi3een? Isn't a Tabi3een who met or saw one of the companions (RA) of the Prophet (SAW)?
Don't get me wrong, Yazid was a prick for some of the stuff he's done, but I always thought he would be classified as Tabi3een if not a companion.
I am a Sunni Muslim, I am very confused regarding the issue of yazeed!, was he a Muslim or a kaafir?
Can I have evidence aswell please?
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
1) As a Muslim, you are not required to have ANY opinion on anyone not mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Why do we, as Muslims, believe Luqman is going to heaven? Because it says it in the Qur'an. Why do we believe that Abu Lahab is going to hell? Because it says it in the Qur'an. As a Sunni, you should know there are narrations that testify that certain people are going to heaven (Khadijah, 10 Promised Paradise, the Ansaar, al-Hassan and al-Husayn for example) and certain people are going to hell (ibn Ubay al-Salool for example).
2) As far as Yazid is concerened, then know he is not a Companion nor is he considered from the Tabi3een. Rather, he was a ruler who ruled when there were quite a few who were better than him (al-Husayn, ibn Omar etc) and history has not recorded his reign as being good; neither morally nor secularly. Also, his actions led (if he didn't downright order) to the death of al-Husayn رضي الله عنه and other great Companions and Tabi3een.
3) Most of our scholars have said the right thing to do is to keep quite about him and neither curse him nor praise him and leave his affair to Allah. This is what we do with everyone, whether we perceive them as good or bad. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله says:لا نشهد لأحد بجنة ولا نار.We don't testify to anyone that they are going to heaven or hell.
والله تعالى أعلم
Brother, good post, but why isn't Yazid considered a Tabi3een? Isn't a Tabi3een who met or saw one of the companions (RA) of the Prophet (SAW)?
Don't get me wrong, Yazid was a prick for some of the stuff he's done, but I always thought he would be classified as Tabi3een if not a companion.
Why was yazeed a prick?
^^ i am asking u. why do u think he was a prick?
So u really think Sayyidna Hussain was killed on the orders of yazeed?
Yazeed is a prick because he was, among other things:
1. The killer of al-Husayn (ra)
2. An alcoholic
3. Corrupt
4. Illegitimate ruler (it was supposed to go to al-Hassan)
As for who first recorded the incident of Karbala, I do not know.
Tell us.
Yazeed is a prick because he was, among other things:
1. The killer of al-Husayn (ra)
2. An alcoholic
3. Corrupt
4. Illegitimate ruler (it was supposed to go to al-Hassan)
As for who first recorded the incident of Karbala, I do not know.
He was not the killer of husayn. The kufans were.
by calling him an alcoholic & corrupt u not only insult Sayyidna Ameer muawiya who raised such a child like that but u also insult the 3500 sahabas who were living at that time & paid allegiance to yazeed & yes that includes the Abdullah bin Umar.
& i now recommend u to find out who first wrote the incident of karbala.
Salam,
If you're asking whether he's a Muslim or a Kafir, he's definitely a Muslim no doubt about it, but also a power hungry ruler with corruption.
Did he order the killing of Husayn ibn `Ali? From my historical reading he never did such a thing, Husayn's martyrdom was unexpected and nobody had planned it, but people differ on whether he was pleased with Husayn's death or not.
There is evidence that he was pleased and there is counter evidence which shows he wasn't pleased. This may be settled with a thorough investigation which I'm sure none of us are going to do anytime soon.
Also the Tabi`ee is anyone who met a Sahabi, al-Baqir is a Tabi`ee for example since he met Anas.
Now al-Husayn ibn `Ali himself, who is a crown on the head of every believer, may Allah raise his reward higher and higher. Husayn's revolution based on my reading, he was wrong in participating in an armed rebellion and he was lured into it by a group of scum who were not loyal or trustworthy, his noble nature and sense of justice led him into a tough situation and he should have followed his brother's example and the advice of the senior Sahabah who advised him not to listen to the scum who sent him letters.
A second opinion on this matter was that he was right and his armed movement against the authorities was justified. I personally disagree with this as I feel it is in opposition to the texts of Rasul-Allah (saw) Wallahu A`lam.
@ imam ali Again u r relying on the false facts of the history. Yazeed was in his darul khilafa damascus which was about 700 miles from karbala. The incident took place in just one day. Back then there was no radio contact or high speed vehicles.
I want you to respond to these questions:
what was the age of Zain ul Abideen at that time and why did the "yazidis" spare him?
How many male members of Hussaini carvan came out alive of karbala?
What was the age of Sakina Ra at that time and why did she marry in a ummavi family laters?
Why did Hazrat zainab Ra decide to live in the same city in which yazid was living after the accident of karbala?
what was the total number of people with Hussain Ra? From where this "72" figure came?
@ imam ali Again u r relying on the false facts of the history. Yazeed was in his darul khilafa damascus which was about 700 miles from karbala. The incident took place in just one day. Back then there was no radio contact or high speed vehicles.
I want you to respond to these questions:
what was the age of Zain ul Abideen at that time and why did the "yazidis" spare him?
How many male members of Hussaini carvan came out alive of karbala?
What was the age of Sakina Ra at that time and why did she marry in a ummavi family laters?
Why did Hazrat zainab Ra decide to live in the same city in which yazid was living after the accident of karbala?
what was the total number of people with Hussain Ra? From where this "72" figure came?
How do you know they're false facts? Please explain and elaborate, kindly. Your turn to answer a question or two. You're evading my point about who he selected to handle the situation, as though it is irrelevant?
Al-Husayn (ra) did not fight "Yazid's forces" in Karbala - he fought the miscreants of Ahlul Kufa who betrayed him and murdered his cousin (Muslim ibn 'Aqeel).
I believe that Yazid would have much preferred al-Husayn (ra) alive and either pledging bay'a or off in some distant land, or fighting on the frontlines against the Byzantines (which al-Husayn (ra) offered to do).
Ibn Ziyad refused this, because he felt that his power would be undermined if he let al-Husayn (ra) go - ofcourse he was convinced of this by Ahlul Kufa.
Can you blame Yazid for the actions of Ahlul Kufa? I personally believe that unless we have explicit authentic proof that Yazid ordered his killing, laying the blood of al-Husayn (ra) at his feet based on mere conjecture is a very serious charge that people should avoid.
Yazeed is a prick because he was, among other things:
1. The killer of al-Husayn (ra)
2. An alcoholic
3. Corrupt
4. Illegitimate ruler (it was supposed to go to al-Hassan)
As for who first recorded the incident of Karbala, I do not know.
He was not the killer of husayn. The kufans were.
by calling him an alcoholic & corrupt u not only insult Sayyidna Ameer muawiya who raised such a child like that but u also insult the 3500 sahabas who were living at that time & paid allegiance to yazeed & yes that includes the Abdullah bin Umar.
& i now recommend u to find out who first wrote the incident of karbala.
Hani, having said all that, but do you not agree because of Yazid's decision making in terms who he selected to handle the situation at Kufa it resulted in the killing of Hussain (RA)?
Thus he is also partly to blame.
Hani, having said all that, but do you not agree because of Yazid's decision making in terms who he selected to handle the situation at Kufa it resulted in the killing of Hussain (RA)?
Thus he is also partly to blame.
obviously he's to blame directly for it.
Because the tragedy of karbala was first written by Abu mukhanaf loot bin yahya who was a shia.
& what troubles me more is that why 3500 sahabas didnt revolt against yazeed after Hussayns death?
Why did Hazrat zainab Ra decide to live in the same city in which yazid was living after the accident of karbala?
Why was Zainul abideen spared & all the rest killed?
obviously he's to blame directly for it.
Quoteobviously he's to blame directly for it.
If we are going to use that logic, then Mua'wiyah was also responsible for al-Husayn (ra)'s death. And then 'Umar (ra) was responsible because he appointed Mu'awiyah. And then Abu Bakr (ra) was responsible for recommending 'Umar (ra). And then Rasul Allah (ra) was responsible for giving Abu Bakr (ra) such a high status.
Yazid had no way of knowing what Ibn Ziyad would do.
Unless he gave him a direct order, you cannot make him directly responsible for al-Husayn (ra)'s death.
@imam ali
Yes, i once read in a book where the writer mentioned the possibility of this figure. Why r u amazed by 3500? those who were young when the Prophet died may have survived. They also count among the companions.
The way Ibn saad and his companions have been sketched in Maqtal e Hussain (by abu mukhanaf), it seems hard to accept that they left a 24 year old guy just cz he was ill. They killed ali asghar ibn hussain didnt they? who was just six months old! same goes for sakina.
Again u mention the facts as it was a conversation on the radio chatter. Remember yazeed was 700 miles away form karbala.
Quoteobviously he's to blame directly for it.
If we are going to use that logic, then Mua'wiyah was also responsible for al-Husayn (ra)'s death. And then 'Umar (ra) was responsible because he appointed Mu'awiyah. And then Abu Bakr (ra) was responsible for recommending 'Umar (ra). And then Rasul Allah (ra) was responsible for giving Abu Bakr (ra) such a high status.
Yazid had no way of knowing what Ibn Ziyad would do.
Unless he gave him a direct order, you cannot make him directly responsible for al-Husayn (ra)'s death.
Brother, Husayn, I don't think Hani means Yazid is to blame that way, but ibn Ziyad had a reputation for being a bit of an aggressive brute, and wasn't exactly the diplomatic type.
Yazid, for obvious reasons sent a dicating tryant to get the job done swiftly which was to stop Hussain (RA) from accomplishing his mission.
I'm not saying Yazid sent him there to kill Hussain (RA), no, but he was obviously overly concerned of his throne.
Yazeed didn't bring the killers to justice either...
Yazeed didn't bring the killers to justice either...
Quoteobviously he's to blame directly for it.
If we are going to use that logic, then Mua'wiyah was also responsible for al-Husayn (ra)'s death. And then 'Umar (ra) was responsible because he appointed Mu'awiyah. And then Abu Bakr (ra) was responsible for recommending 'Umar (ra). And then Rasul Allah (ra) was responsible for giving Abu Bakr (ra) such a high status.
Yazid had no way of knowing what Ibn Ziyad would do.
Unless he gave him a direct order, you cannot make him directly responsible for al-Husayn (ra)'s death.
Brother, Husayn, I don't think Hani means Yazid is to blame that way, but ibn Ziyad had a reputation for being a bit of an aggressive brute, and wasn't exactly the diplomatic type.
Yazid, for obvious reasons sent a dicating tryant to get the job done swiftly which was to stop Hussain (RA) from accomplishing his mission.
I'm not saying Yazid sent him there to kill Hussain (RA), no, but he was obviously overly concerned of his throne.
It is not proved from sunni sources that ibn ziyad was ibn ziyad was aggressive or brutal.
As for the character of Ibn ziyad we read in Sahih Muslim:
Ubaidullah b Ziyad visited Ma'qil b. Yasir al-Muzani in his last iliness. Ma'qil said (to him): I am narrating to you a tradition I heard from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). If I knew that I am to survive this illness. I would, not narrate it to you. I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: If God appointed anyone ruler over a people and he died while he was still treacherous to his people, God would forbid his entry into Paradise. Ibn Ziyad asked: Why didn't you narrate this tradition to me before this day? Ma'qil reprimanded him and said: I did not narrate it to you or I was not going to narrate it to you.
Sahih Muslim Hadith 4501.
Its clear from the hadith that Ibn ziyad was not a hot headed guy or aggressive as he is shown in the tale of karbala.
Yazeed didn't bring the killers to justice either...
the killers(kufans) were already brought to justice by the Hurr's men who were sent for the protection of Hussain's family. Ever wondered why the tents were burned? Thats because when the caravan stopped during a journey for a rest the three parties (hussayn's family, the kufans who were in the caravan & hurrs men) setup tents in a distance from each other. That was the turning point of the whole story. Hussain recieved the news that Muslim bin aqeel has been murdered in kufa. He decided to divert his caravan to damascus & talk to yazid. The kufans who were in the caravan panicked as the letters were to be presented to yazeed. So they were the one who burned the tents & killed hussains family. Hurrs men jumped in & than killed the kufans on the spot & oh yes the way to damascus is not from kufa but from karbala. So it is proved that Hussayn wanted to meet Yazid.
& here is a very interesting hadith for all those who represent the Ahlus sunnah:
Narrated Ibn AN Nu' aim : A person
asked 'AbdullAh bin 'Umar whether a
Muhrim (a person in the state of Ihram)
could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply),
"The people of Iraq are asking about the
killing of flies while they themselves
murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's
Messenger ;. And the Prophet 40 said,
'They (i.e., Al-klasan and A]-Husain) are my
two sweet basils 1 in this world.'"
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/62/100
& here is a very interesting hadith for all those who represent the Ahlus sunnah:
Narrated Ibn AN Nu' aim : A person
asked 'AbdullAh bin 'Umar whether a
Muhrim (a person in the state of Ihram)
could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply),
"The people of Iraq are asking about the
killing of flies while they themselves
murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's
Messenger ;. And the Prophet 40 said,
'They (i.e., Al-klasan and A]-Husain) are my
two sweet basils 1 in this world.'"
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/62/100
Yeah, I've come across this narration before.
& here is a very interesting hadith for all those who represent the Ahlus sunnah:
Narrated Ibn AN Nu' aim : A person
asked 'AbdullAh bin 'Umar whether a
Muhrim (a person in the state of Ihram)
could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply),
"The people of Iraq are asking about the
killing of flies while they themselves
murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's
Messenger ;. And the Prophet 40 said,
'They (i.e., Al-klasan and A]-Husain) are my
two sweet basils 1 in this world.'"
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/62/100
Yeah, I've come across this narration before.
& yet u r going against Abdullah ibn Umar's view.
The Kufan shia were definitely to blame.
Yazeed shares the blame indirectly. He's dead and Allah will judge him and He's the best of Judges. It doesn't make any difference to our theology.
Unlike the shia our religion comes from Allah and his Messenger not political disputes.
I am a Sunni Muslim, I am very confused regarding the issue of yazeed!, was he a Muslim or a kaafir?
Can I have evidence aswell please?