TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Sahabah-AhlulBayt => Topic started by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 12:23:17 PM
-
Here is a movement that is very significant historically but also theologically which I feel the intelligentsia of the Muslim Umma have neglected and not given due regard to. I’d like to point out that this movement was led by an eminent companion of the Nabi ﷺ namely, sayyidina Suleman b. Surad al-Khuza’i رضى الله عنه. They were not motivated by a desire for political power but purely for the expiation of a collective sin that the people of Kufa had incurred by not coming to the aid of Imam al-Hussain رضى الله عنه who was tragically martyred at Karbala. So they became known as the Tawwabun “penitents”. This is very significant because it marks the first real and legitimate religious revival movement in the very early history of Islam. This was a purely religious movement. Its only objective was to make atonement for a mistake. The movement found guidance from the story of the Israelites when they rebelled and turned back on their heels during the forty-day absence of Sayyidina Musa عليه السلام. It becomes apparent from that story that some of the Israelites outright committed apostasy by worshiping the golden calf, while some others wavered. Then the Nabi Musa عليه السلام instructed those among them who wished to repent and expiate their collective sin:
يَا قَوْمِ إِنَّكُمْ ظَلَمْتُمْ أَنفُسَكُم بِاتِّخَاذِكُمُ الْعِجْلَ فَتُوبُوا إِلَىٰ بَارِئِكُمْ فَاقْتُلُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ ذَٰلِكُمْ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ عِندَ بَارِئِكُمْ فَتَابَ عَلَيْكُمْ ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِيمُ
“O my people! Verily you have committed oppression upon your souls by your taking of the calf [in worship]. So turn back to your Originator [Allah] and kill yourselves. Verily, that is better for you with your Originator [Maker].” So He accepted your repentance. Verily, He is Oft-Returning, the Merciful. (Sura 2:54)
Undoubtedly, this blessed Ayah was the foundation of the thought and objective of the noble Tawwabin movement. Their subsequent actions form a basis for the correct Ta’wil of this Ayah; for they did not commit suicide, but rather, fought against and killed those from among themselves [anfusakum] who were responsible for the actual crime, i.e., the killing of Imam al-Hussain رضى الله عنه. Meaning, those Tawwabin from among Bani Israel did not commit suicide, rather, they took up the sword to kill the culprits from among themselves who were guilty of having crafted the golden calf and taken it as an object of worship, an act that became the collective sin of the nation. It is written in the Torah that when Moses saw the sin his people had committed by taking the idol of the calf in worship, he called upon them to come back to the side of the Lord. The Levites in particular rallied around Moses, who said to them: “Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.”
Three thousand men were killed as a result of the movement of the original Tawwabin. And so the Tawwabin of this Umma likewise armed themselves and set out to fight those who were responsible for the murder of Imam al-Hussain رضى الله عنه. And in the process, our Tawwabin achieved martyrdom at the Battle of Ayn al-Warda. May Allah accept their repentance and be pleased with them آمين
-
Now the Tawwabin movement apparently influenced other armed uprisings against the Ummayads and Abbasids. Regarding the Ummayads, we know, according to the testimony of SafinaRA who referred to them as “Banu al-Zarqaa” that they were most evil dynasty (Tirmidhi). And it is said that the Shajarat al-Mal’unah the “cursed tree” as mentioned in the Qur’an al-Karim, which the Prophet ﷺ beheld in a Vision as apes jumping upon his Pulpit is none other than the tyrannical rulers from Bani Ummaya. And it is said that the period of the Prophet ﷺ described as Lailat al-Qadr “Night of Destiny” is better than a thousand months, i.e., the precise length of the duration of the tyrannical Ummayad ruler (Tirmidhi)
So the honorable Imam, Zaid b. ‘Ali رضى الله عنه rose up in Kufa against Hisham b. Abdal Malik, through which he attained martyrdom. His son, the noble Imam, Yahia b. Zaid, rose up during the time of al-Walid b. Yazid b. Abdal Malik in Khurasan, and he too attained martyrdom. And we can talk about the uprisings of many others from Ahl-al-Bait, such as Imam Nafs al-Zakiyya رضى الله عنه and his relatives (brother, uncle, nephew, cousin, and son) during the time of the oppressor and Abbasid ruler al-Mansur. Imam Zaid’s other son, Isa b. Zaid, rose up during the time of the Abbasid oppressor “al-Mahdi”. And rose up the Companion of al-Fakhkh, al-Hussain b. ‘Ali b. al-Hassan b. al-Hassan al-Muthanna b. al-Hassan b. ‘Ali b. Abi Talib in the time of the Abbasid oppressor al-Hadi. He attained martyrdom near Mecca in the place called al-Fakhkh. A son of Abdullah al-Mahd and brother of Imam Nafs al-Zakiyya, namely, Yahia, rose up in al-Daylam during the reign of the oppressor Harun al-Rashid. And the uprising of the Companion of al-Taliqan (in modern-day Afghanistan), and the uprising of Muhammad b. Ja’far b. Yahia, the grandson of Yahia who rose in Daylam. Muhammad b. Ja’far’s uprising was in Herat (modern day Afghanistan). There were many uprisings by the Ahl-al-Bait particularly the progeny of Imam Zaid, during the time of the Abbasid oppressor al-Musta’in. These and many other subsequent uprisings illustrate the underlying desire in the hearts of the early Muslims that they be ruled by the pious Imams of Ahl-al-Bait, rather than the corrupt and oppressive Ummayad and Abbasid sultans. The entire early history of Islam is a history of turbulence, uprisings, and armed struggle to establish a just and pious government. That is the spirit of the Islamic message which many modern-day Muslims don’t seem to appreciate or understand.
-
These two lineages, i.e., the progeny of sayyidina Zayd al-Shahid b. ‘Ali Zayn al-Abidin رضى الله عنهما and the progeny of sayyidina Abdallah al-Mahd b. al-Hassan al-Muthanna رضى الله عنهما are like the two seas mentioned in Sura ar-Rahman from which emerge pearl and coral (55:22). It was from these two blessed lineages that many honorable men rose up against the oppressors to establish a pure and just government on the Earth. al-Mahdi al-Muntadhir رضى الله عنه will appear finally succeed in completing the mission of his forefathers.
-
My post disappeared. Not sure why....
-
@Zilfiqar, what are your sources of this Tawwabun movement story?
I heard from Yasir Qadi's lecture that the formation of Tawwabun movement marked the beginning of theological Shi'ism. In fact, even practice of "matam" originated from them. Could anybody confirm this?
-
Well they were sad and did perform a mourning session but it wasn't retarded like today's ones. The Tawwabun movement was not viewed negatively, they may have competed with Mukhtar's movement though since they were more legit. I wouldn't say it's related to the Imami Shia sects at all, it's just early political Shia movements.
-
@Zilfiqar, what are your sources of this Tawwabun movement story?
I heard from Yasir Qadi's lecture that the formation of Tawwabun movement marked the beginning of theological Shi'ism. In fact, even practice of "matam" originated from them. Could anybody confirm this?
Keep in mind that the Tawwabun movement was led by an eminent Sahabi, Suleman b. Surad al-Khuza'i رضى الله عنه whose narrations from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم are found in the Sahihayn. It is the agreed upon position of Ahlus Sunnati wal-Jama'ah that a Companion of the Prophet can never be described as "Mubtadi" or misguided.
-
Yes this is among the 5 revolution which occurred in the aftermath of Karbala.
-
Yes this is among the 5 revolution which occurred in the aftermath of Karbala.
I do not include the uprising of Mukhtar al Thaqafi, because Mukhtar was a Liar which our own Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم warned against "the Liar of Thaqif". Nevertheless, it is true that Allah can help the cause of this Religion through the agency of a wicked person:
إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُؤَيِّدُ الدِّينَ بِالرَّجُلِ الْفَاجِرِ
(Bukhari)
And this Hadith I have cited from Bukhari, it is in the context of the man who was doing Jihad with the Sahaba against the polytheists, but then committed suicide. Undoubtedly, through his fighting some aid was given to the Religion, despite the fact that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said he is doomed to hell. Likewise, although Mukhtar al Thaqafi was a Liar and evil person, nonetheless, Allah made him the agent through which the Religion of Islam was aided and revenge was exacted from the cursed killers of Sayyidina Imam al Hussain رضى الله عنه.
I do not know for sure if Mukhtar claimed to be a Prophet. It is obvious that he did not claim to bring a new Shari'a or a new Scripture from Allah. It is certain that he claimed to be a recipient of Wahi, or that the Angel was visiting him and talking to him. This is not to say that those who make such claims are automatically liars, as I do believe and many of the Sufis also in the concept of Wahi al Wilaya and that an Angel can come to a Believer and converse with him. We do believe in the concepts and occurrence of Ilham, Kashaf, Sharh al Sadr. But it is only that Mukhtar claimed these things for himself when in fact he was lying, not that these things are theoretically impossible after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Now if these things are impossible which Mukhtar was claiming, or if he claimed he was a Prophet in the sense of bringing a new Shari'a, the Sahaba would have made takfir of him, and none of the righteous people would have associated with him, but we know that isn't the case. This proves that Mukhtar was only a liar, but the essence of his claims are not such as would theoretically take one out of the fold of Islam. Sayyidina Abdullah b. Umar رضى الله عنه is known to have interceded with the Zubayrid governor of Kufa to have Mukhtar released from prison, and is known to have prayed behind both the Khawarij and the Khashabiya (Followers of Mukhtar)
Sunan al Kubra v.3 p.174
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-db1bHjrcLP0/WV2C-4BRtjI/AAAAAAAACdk/NJZxsyyMbNUfQbfChgn70ELPiEdgvCsFgCLcBGAs/s640/Untitled.png)
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ulhFGgaKi14/WV2DBqwgjiI/AAAAAAAACdo/bmZIlN09i8wiOQGNG4PaJ6OZoGxu-nbOACLcBGAs/s1600/Ibn%2BUmar%2Bgave%2BSalam%2Band%2Bprayed%2Bbehind%2BKhawarij%2Band%2BKhashabiya%2B%2528followers%2Bof%2BMukhtar%2Bthaqafi%2529%2B%2528Sunan%2Bal%2BKubra%2BBaihaqi%2Bv.3%2Bp.174%2529.png)
-
I’ve finished reading ‘Abd Allâh Ibn Mu’âwiya and the Janâhiyya: Rebels and Ideologues of the Late Umayyad Period by William F. Tucker (Studia Islamica, No. 51 (1908), pp. 39 – 57)
Abd Allah b. Mu’awiya was the great-grandson of sayyidina Ja’far al-TayyarRA. So this was neither an Alid nor Abbasid uprising during the latter part of the Ummayad rule, but nevertheless politically Shi’ite since it was motivated by a sense of allegiance to the Ahl al-Bayt. Tucker says about Abd Allah b. Mu’awiya: “the majority of sources accuse him of religious heterodoxy. This charge is probably more applicable to his followers, since he himself was more interested in politics than dogma.”
In the book Shi’ism in the Middle East by Aydin Bayram: “Shi’ites set up a certain Abd-Allah ibn-Muawiya as imam. He was a descendant of Ja’far ibn-Abi Talib, Ali’s brother. He is also considered to be hiding in the mountain of Isfahan. As a result, the belief in occultation (ghayba), which began with Muhammad al-Hanafiya returned.” (p. 12)
What I find very ironic is that Abd-Allah b. Mu’awiya was put to death under the orders of Abu Muslim al-Khurasani, architect of the Abbasid victory. According to one version, Abu Muslim’s governor in Herat, Abu Nasr Malik b. al-Haytham al-Khuza’i, was suspicious of Abd-Allah b. Mu’awiya, because he had the name “Mu’awiya” in his geneology, and found this to be strange for someone who claimed to be from the Ahl-al-Bayt. But it seems to me that the underlying reason for the killing of Abd-Allah b. Mu’awiya was because Abu Muslim considered him a dangerous rival.
During the uprising of Ibn Mu’awiya, the two main pillars of the support he received were from the Zaydiya and from the Rabi’a tribesmen of Kufa.
-
I read on Abdullah's Deviance here and there, definitely evidence that certain Hashemites abused lineage and even religion for authority.
I'll read the book InshaAllah.
Seems to have two other interesting works
http://www.iblatunis.org.tn/pmb/opac_css/index.php?lvl=author_see&id=21506
Can you share the book and other similar titles?
-
I read on Abdullah's Deviance here and there, definitely evidence that certain Hashemites abused lineage and even religion for authority.
I'll read the book InshaAllah.
Seems to have two other interesting works
http://www.iblatunis.org.tn/pmb/opac_css/index.php?lvl=author_see&id=21506
Can you share the book and other similar titles?
I've uploaded the article on to my Google Drive, and you can access it via my blog
https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/07/httpsdrive.html
Please tell me if the link works and you can access the pdf
-
Great thx it works, such works must always be available for public benefit.
-
I do not include the uprising of Mukhtar al Thaqafi, because Mukhtar was a Liar which our own Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم warned against "the Liar of Thaqif". Nevertheless, it is true that Allah can help the cause of this Religion through the agency of a wicked person:
I think people have fabricated information against Mukhtar al Thaqafi to lower his status. On the other hand, I don't think he was perfect either. He did give Imam Zain al Abideen a slave from which Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) was married.
Refer to 6:35 min mark.
-
Great thx it works, such works must always be available for public benefit.
As for the other titles, 1 is regarding Bayan b. Sam'an (Bayaniyya), 2. Mughirah b. Sa'id (Mughiriya) 3. Abu Mansur al Ijli (Mansuriyya)
The article I uploaded about Abd Allah b. Muawiyya and the Janahiyya is actually the fifth chapter of the book which includes these other titles. The book is Mahdis and Millenarians: Shi'ite Extremists in Early Muslim Iraq by William F. Tucker. I could not find any of the other chapters on Jstor so I'm afraid the only way to read them is to purchase the book. You can read the preface here (http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83849/frontmatter/9780521883849_frontmatter.pdf)
-
Yazeed Paleed
*Paleed is a Persian word which means unclean.
Last year I wrote an article concerning Yazeed Paleed:
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/10/the-reality-of-yazid-b-muawiya.html
It seems, however, that funding with a political objective originating from the Gulf, is resulting in a subtle new theory and introduction of Yazidi and Nasibi propaganda into the marketplace of ideas. Take for example the book of the "Shaikh" from India, Kifayatullah Sanabili
The First Assault on Constantinople and the Glad Tidings of Forgiveness for Yazeed
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uSZUWs1oqnU/WWM4wJ-I1HI/AAAAAAAAChY/ZV0w2gY7zbU7-I8vgMxBbpZiQP1hbz-2QCLcBGAs/s640/Untitled.png)
Before the (Weak) arguments of the Yazidi fikr are deconstructed it is very important to understand the political objective behind this new audacious movement.
-
عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ الزُّبَيْرِ ، قَالَ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : " لا تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى يَخْرُجَ ثَلاثُونَ كَذَّابًا : مِنْهُمْ مُسَيْلِمَةُ ، وَالْعَنْسِيُّ ، وَالْمُخْتَارُ ، وَشَرُّ قَبَائِلِ الْعَرَبِ : بَنُو أُمَيَّةَ ، وَبَنُو حَنِيفَةَ ، وَثَقِيفٌ
Abd Allah b. Zubayr narrated that Rasul Allah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam said: "The Hour will not be established until thirty liars appear, from among them, Musaylima, al-Ansi, and al-Mukhtar; and the most evil Arab tribes are Bani Umayya, Bani Hanifa, and Thaqif." (Musnad Abi Yaala; Hasan LiGhairihi)
Here the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam has mentioned the liar al-Mukhtar b. Abi Ubayd al-Thaqafi by name.
Here the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has mentioned the liar al-Mukhtar b. Abi Ubayd al-Thaqafi by name.
-
I can see a flaw in this narration's text. This criticism towards the 3 tribes.
-
I can see a flaw in this narration's text. This criticism towards the 3 tribes.
How is that a flaw?
-
عَنْ عِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ، قَالَ مَاتَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَهُوَ يَكْرَهُ ثَلاَثَةَ أَحْيَاءٍ ثَقِيفًا وَبَنِي حَنِيفَةَ وَبَنِي أُمَيَّةَ
Narrated 'Imran bin Husain:"The Prophet (ﷺ) died while he was having trouble with three tribes: Thaqif, Banu Hanifah, and Banu Umayyah." (Tirmidhi)
These are the exact three tribes mentioned as the worst of the Arab tribes in the Hadith of Abd Allah b. al-Zubayr.
-
Taken from my blog
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/10/the-reality-of-yazid-b-muawiya.html
Now let us turn to an authentically reported prophecy from the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) concerning Yazid:
حَدَّثَنَا هَوْذَةُ بْنُ خَلِيفَةَ ، عَنْ أَبِي خَلْدَةَ ، عَنْ عَوْفٍ ، عَنْ أَبِي الْعَالِيَةِ ، عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، يَقُولُ : " أَوَّلُ مَنْ يُبَدِّلُ سُنَّتِي رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي أُمَيَّةَ "
Abi Dharr (Allah be pleased with him) says: I heard Allah’s Messenger Sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam saying: “The first person to change my Sunnah is a man from the Bani Omayya.” (Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah and Al-Awa’il of Ibn ‘Asim)
According to another version from Abu Dardaa’ (Allah be pleased with him):
قَالَ أَبُو الدَّرْدَاءِ : سَمِعْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، يَقُولُ : " أَوَّلُ مَنْ يُبَدِّلُ سُنَّتِي رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي أُمَيَّةَ , يُقَالُ لَهُ : يَزِيدُ "
I heard the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) saying: “The first person to change my Sunnah is a man from Bani Omayya, he called him ‘Yazid’” (Tarikh al-Islam of Imam al-Dhahabi)
According to this prophecy, Yazid, who was the second of the Omayyad rulers, was the first person to go against and change the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him).
The most eminent Salafi Muhaddith of this time, Muhammad Nasir Uddin al-Albani (1914-1999), authenticated this Hadith:
Reference: Silsilat al Ahadith al-Sahiha; no. 1749
-
The underlying theme behind the glad tidings of the emergence of the Mahdi is revenge against the Zālimūn (oppressors) who were responsible for the martyrdom of al-Imām al-Hussayn (‘alayhir-Ridwān), and usurping the rule or Wilāya over the Muslims which should have been with the Ahl-al-Bayt. Apart from certain Pan-Arab nationalists, the Muslim Umma appreciates the fact that for the vast majority of its history it has been under the rule of oppressors and tyrants since the Umayyad dynasty, the Abbasids, the Ottoman Turks and now the various modern, highly militarised states. Although Yazīd Palīd is long dead, and the actual killers acting under his authority were brought to justice by the sword of Ibrahīm b. Mālik al-Ashtar (rahimahullāh), the legacy of that horrendous crime continues to taint us. This is because the rule of those associated with the injustice that characterised that crime has continued until this day. The uprising of al-Imām al-Hussayn b. ‘Ali (‘alayhumas-Salām) was with the intention of establishing a just and pious Wilāya upon the Muslim Umma. The subsequent uprisings from the illustrious personalities of Ahl-al-Bayt such as al-Imām Zayd b. ‘Ali b. al-Hussayn, and al-Imām Muhammad al-Nafs al-Zakiya (ridwān Allāh ‘alayhim ajma’īn), though ultimately unable to culminate in the successful establishment of that vision of a just rule, nevertheless illustrate the vitality of this movement against the Zālimūn. The promised Mahdi represents the sealing of the attainment of the objectives of this movement. The Salaf of this Umma were in a state of apocalyptic expectation and interpreted the events of their lifetimes in light of the Prophetic Ahādīth. It is a fact that the Mahdi spoken of as a pious Imām who will distribute wealth freely among the Muslims without account has not yet appeared, though the time is ripe. The present conditions, especially as they have unravelled in the Arab world, ought to be deeply reflected upon and conceptualised in a way so as to relate them to the advent of the expected Mahdi. We know that he is to appear in Makka, and that he will be recognised and given the Bay’a under the shade of the Ka’ba. At present, our sacred Shrines and the holy cities of Makka and Madīnat al-Munawwara are under the custody of al-Sa’ūd so-called ‘royal’ family. After the collapse of the Ottomans during the First World War, it is safe to say that the Saudis have occupied a geopolitical position of leadership and strength in the Muslim world. So it is they who have the most to lose and constitute the greatest reaction to a coming Mahdi as things stand now. Will the Army that marches against the Mahdi with the intention of assaulting Makka a Saudi force or a Syrian one? The designated successor of the present Saudi king Salman, his son Muhammad, is undoubtedly an aggressive and ambitious personality. Likewise, the bloodthirsty ruler of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, may as well be the Sufyāni described in the Hadīth reported in the Mustadrak of al-Hākim as emerging from the depths of Damascus. At present, it is not difficult to imagine either of these two forces as being the primary antagonists who will come up to oppose al-Mahdi (‘alayhir-Ridwān). But the Mahdi will ultimately succeed and rule for several years. And perhaps Constantinople, or Istanbul, will be reconquered through his agency. The regime in Turkey is fiercely nationalist and highly militarised, aside from being a member state of NATO. It is unlikely that such a state will submit itself to a charismatic religious figure from the Ahl-al-Bayt appearing in Makka; therefore not hard to imagine the circumstances under which a battle for Constantinople will occur. Another Hadīth suggests that the city will be conquered, but not militarily, rather through the power of Dhikr and glorification of Allāh’s Name, in other words, a spiritual conquest at the hands of Edomite converts (pious Muslims of Anatolia and Syria). Although weak, a Hadīth in Sunan Ibn Māja suggests a role for the Mahdi in the conquest of Constantinople and likewise Daylam in modern Iran. Whether the Mahdi will rule over the entire Umma or only the Arabs is uncertain. What is certain is that he will be a great military hero and warrior type messiah who will rejuvenate the spirit of Islām, and be guided in all his actions by the Sunna as our Prophet ﷺ was guided by the Wahi.
-
Taken from my blog
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/10/the-reality-of-yazid-b-muawiya.html
Now let us turn to an authentically reported prophecy from the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) concerning Yazid:
حَدَّثَنَا هَوْذَةُ بْنُ خَلِيفَةَ ، عَنْ أَبِي خَلْدَةَ ، عَنْ عَوْفٍ ، عَنْ أَبِي الْعَالِيَةِ ، عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، يَقُولُ : " أَوَّلُ مَنْ يُبَدِّلُ سُنَّتِي رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي أُمَيَّةَ "
Abi Dharr (Allah be pleased with him) says: I heard Allah’s Messenger Sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam saying: “The first person to change my Sunnah is a man from the Bani Omayya.” (Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah and Al-Awa’il of Ibn ‘Asim)
According to another version from Abu Dardaa’ (Allah be pleased with him):
قَالَ أَبُو الدَّرْدَاءِ : سَمِعْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، يَقُولُ : " أَوَّلُ مَنْ يُبَدِّلُ سُنَّتِي رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي أُمَيَّةَ , يُقَالُ لَهُ : يَزِيدُ "
I heard the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) saying: “The first person to change my Sunnah is a man from Bani Omayya, he called him ‘Yazid’” (Tarikh al-Islam of Imam al-Dhahabi)
According to this prophecy, Yazid, who was the second of the Omayyad rulers, was the first person to go against and change the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him).
The most eminent Salafi Muhaddith of this time, Muhammad Nasir Uddin al-Albani (1914-1999), authenticated this Hadith:
Reference: Silsilat al Ahadith al-Sahiha; no. 1749
I've never heard about this hadith where yazid is mentioned by name. Anyone have info on it?
-
I've never heard about this hadith where yazid is mentioned by name. Anyone have info on it?
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ngj8sQKX2a0/WXDGZtW-zCI/AAAAAAAACnI/T_7LcQXdcQUHbHZpvmjhOAgBA0rusAEmwCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LKN99Bf-ef0/WXDGc_ND_MI/AAAAAAAACnM/r3oR3QOPFBgU5Lv42qOEmXMRy48kw_UhQCLcBGAs/s1600/First%2Bperson%2Bto%2Bchange%2Bmy%2BSunnah%2Ba%2Bman%2Bfrom%2BBani%2BUmmaya%2B%2528Silsilah%2BSahihah%2B1749%2529.bmp)
-
A weak Hadīth suggests that the Mahdi will come from a village in Yemen called كَرِعَة Kari’a. This village is perhaps somewhere in the Sa’da governorate. Presently, that area is the scene of a fierce insurgency being waged by the Hūthis who are resisting the Saudi armed forces. It is also a very religious area with a variety of revivalist movements and sects jostling with each other for dominance. The Hūthis seek to liberate the two sacred Shrines from Saudi control. They have already penetrated into the Najrān region and bogged down the Saudi forces. This war doesn’t seem like it will end any time in the near future. Some analysts are predicting a civil war in Saudi Arabia (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_4kumlUQc). The recent appointment of Muhammad b. Salmān as ‘crown prince’ on 21 June 2017 is possibly setting the stage for a civil war in Saudi Arabia which may erupt once the present king dies. It is reported that Muhammad b. Nāyif was not too happy about having to be deposed from the position of ‘crown prince’ and was even placed under house arrest. Before that, Muqrin b. ‘Abd-al-‘Azīz was ‘crown prince’ but was replaced in 2015, sealing the power of the Sudayri clan. Undoubtedly, a civil war in Saudi Arabia between the feuding princes would weaken the country and present a golden opportunity to anti-Saudi factions such as the Hūthis, al-Qā’ida in the Arabian Peninsula, Daesh, and militant Shī’a of the Eastern Province. Events in the secretive kingdom are culminating into open armed conflict. As the United States pulls back from its involvement in the Middle East, having become energy independent, and Pakistan cannot be depended upon to come to anyone’s rescue in the event of a confused and chaotic civil war, except to perhaps guard the sacred Shrines. Nevertheless, once the lid is lifted on the current ‘calm before the storm’ in the Mamlaka, it will be extremely difficult to predict how events will unfold. The environment will be ripe for the emergence of the Mahdi and subsequent retribution against the conniving princes of the Khalīj.
-
عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ " يَقْتَتِلُ عِنْدَ كَنْزِكُمْ ثَلاَثَةٌ كُلُّهُمُ ابْنُ خَلِيفَةٍ ثُمَّ لاَ يَصِيرُ إِلَى وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمْ ثُمَّ تَطْلُعُ الرَّايَاتُ السُّودُ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ فَيَقْتُلُونَكُمْ قَتْلاً لَمْ يُقْتَلْهُ قَوْمٌ ثُمَّذَكَرَ شَيْئًا لاَ أَحْفَظُهُ فَقَالَ فَإِذَا رَأَيْتُمُوهُ فَبَايِعُوهُ وَلَوْ حَبْوًا عَلَى الثَّلْجِ فَإِنَّهُ خَلِيفَةُ اللَّهِ الْمَهْدِيُّ
Thawbān narrated that the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said: “Three will fight one another for your treasure, each of them the son of a Khalīfa, but none of them will gain it. Then the black banners will come from the East, and they will kill you in an unprecedented manner.” “When you see them, then pledge your allegiance to them even if you have to crawl over the snow, for that is the Khalīfa of Allāh, the Mahdi.” (al-Sunan Ibn Māja)
It is not altogether inconceivable that the three rivals that are each the son of a Khalīfa, here simply meaning a ruler who was granted Khilāfa in the land, are princes from the Saudi ‘royal’ family. I have already explained the situation regarding two deposed crown princes, Muhammad b. Nāyif and Muqrin b. ‘Abd-al-Azīz, in favor of a third, Muhammad b. Salmān. Whether this treasure they shall fight over refers to the throne of authority, literally some valuable thing hidden beneath the Ka’ba, or altogether something else, remains to be seen. The emergence of ‘black banners’ from the East is a reference to armed factions that will descend into the Middle East from the land of Khurasān, that is, modern-day Afghanistan. Present there are various pietist armed movements such as the Tālibān. Obviously those that are free of Khārijite tendencies from among them may be interpreted as the ‘Black Banners’ of the East. Should such armed groups make their way into the Middle East and the Arabian Peninsula one can well imagine the resultant blood bath, as the hedonistic and authoritarian regimes there will definitely not welcome them with open arms. When this occurs, the Muslims, particularly the Arabs, are instructed by the Prophet ﷺ to give their allegiance to the ‘Black Banners’ and not oppose them, for among them will be the Mahdi (‘alayhir-Ridwān). This is a nightmare scenario for those that have drunk from the cup of nationalism and absolute loyalty to their respective nation states. Now it becomes apparent why the messianic figure of Islām is opposed first and foremost by ‘Muslims’ themselves. These trials are meant to delineate two distinct camps from among the Umma; the Fustāti Īmān ‘Camp of Faith’ and the Fustāti Nifāq ‘Camp of Hypocrisy’. It is only when this process of sifting of the Umma into two distinct and opposing camps reaches its logical conclusion will the stage be set for the emergence of the Dajjāl. Turks, Egyptians and Kurds are among those that are very strongly intoxicated by the wine of nationalism. Until they cleanse their hearts of this unclean idol they will be unable to perceive the reality and philosophy of the Mahdi.