TwelverShia.net Forum

Yazid ibn Muawiyah

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Muslim ar Rusi

Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« on: May 13, 2016, 10:04:57 PM »
As salamu aleikum wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuhu dear brothers. What views do we share on Yazid ibn Muawiyah? And his father Muawiyah (r.a) ?
لا تعتقد دين الروافض إنهم أهل المحال وحزبة الشيطان

not a daish follower

Ibn Yahya

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2016, 10:13:18 PM »
He was not a good ruler but to say he was the worst thing to happen to islam is incorrect.

Hani

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2016, 10:26:52 PM »
Mu`awiyah we respect as a Sahabi, a strong ruler, an expert politician and genius in running the affairs of government. He is knowledgeable about Fiqh and has narrated a couple of prophetic reports. However, he is from the lowest of ranks of Sahabah since he embraced Islam very late. He has committed big mistakes while participating in the Fitnah and acted in a tribal manner not befitting his position as governor. His biggest blunder was allowing his son to rule after him which shows he still had qualities of Jahiliyyah that Islam never erased. We say may Allah forgive him.

Yazid is a corrupt politician who is very greedy and he bears the burden of all that happened in his time from troubles and chaos. He should have followed al-Hasan's example and left the leadership for Husayn to avoid blood shed. Although the proper people were not consulted about his ascension to authority yet he was officially and legally the legitimate leader of his time.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2016, 10:29:28 PM by Hani »
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Abu Jasim Al-Salafi

  • *
  • Total likes: 47
  • +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth
    • مدونة الحق الإسلامي
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2016, 12:41:35 AM »
Imam al-Thahabi said in Siyar A'lam-ul Nubalaa (سير أعلام النبلاء):

"ويزيد ممن لا نسبه ولا نحبه."

Translation:

"And Yazid is a person who we do not curse and do not like."
May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth. Ameen.

Student of Comparative Religion - Refuter of allegations made against Islam by Christians and Atheists.

Farid

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #4 on: May 14, 2016, 05:24:51 AM »
Quote
His biggest blunder was allowing his son to rule after him which shows he still had qualities of Jahiliyyah that Islam never erased. 

Ibn Khaldoon responded to this, if I am not mistaken. He suggested that Bani Umayyah wouldn't have wanted anyone else amd the political climate favored that the rule would stay within the family.

Plus, unlike popular belief, Yazeed was not known to be corrupt before he became a caliph.

Hani

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2016, 07:00:30 AM »
Ibn Khaldoun's words imply that Mu`awiyah had a good intention and I believe Mu`awiyah took more than one matter into consideration when promoting his son. However, it remains a major blunder that led to a big Fitnah in `Iraq and Madinah.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2016, 10:29:31 AM »
His biggest blunder was allowing his son to rule after him which shows he still had qualities of Jahiliyyah that Islam never erased. We say may Allah forgive him.



And I learnt he agreed with Hassan(ra) in their treaty that after him the caliphate will return to Hussain (ra) and then after that he violated the agreement and appointed Yazeed.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2016, 10:38:04 AM »
As salamu aleikum wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuhu dear brothers. What views do we share on Yazid ibn Muawiyah?

Wa alaikumsalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

The correct  Sunni Stance on Yazeed:

Here are the views of some renowned scholars of Ahlusunnah  regarding Yazeed.

(i). Imam of Ahlesunnah Ahmad ibn Hanbal(rah):

قيل : لأحمد ابن حنبل أيؤخذ الحديث عن يزيد فقال : لا ولا كرامة أو ليس هو فعل بأهل المدينة ما فعل ؟ وقيل له : إن أقواما يقولون : إنا نحب يزيد فقال : وهل يحب يزيد من يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ؟ فقيل له : أو لا تلعنه ؟ فقال : متى رأيت أباك يلعن أحدا

“It was said: Ahmad ibn Hanbal was asked: Would you take narrations from Yazeed?” He said: “No, and no karamah(honour) for him, was that not him who did to people of Madina what he has done?”. It was said to him: “Group says that they love Yazeed”. He asked: Does anyone love Yazeed who believes in Allaah and the Last Day?” It was said to him: Would you curse him?”. Imam answered: When did you ever see your father curse anybody?. (Ibn Muflih Hanbali in “Adabu sharia” ,1/336).

(ii). Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali:

Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali did not hold the opinion of cursing and declaring Yazid to be a disbeliever. He refuted the allegation on Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal that he cursed Yazid. So he writes: “The statement of Imam Ahmad only establishes cursing on all of the oppressors and there is no clarification or specification for the permissibility of cursing Yazid only.” (Dhayl Tabaqaat al-Hanabillah, 2/356).

(iii). Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani(rah):

In his book “al-Imta bil al-Arba’in al-Matbainatus Samah”, he said:

وأما المحبة فيه والرفع من شأنه فلا تقع إلا من مبتدع فاسد الاعتقاد فإنه كان فيه من الصفات ما يقتضي سلب الإيمان عمن يحبه لأن الحب في الله والبغض في الله من الإيمان والله المستعان

Loving and glorifying him (Yazid) is not done except by innovator who has void belief because he (Yazid) had such characteristics that his lover deserves to be faithless, because to love and hate just for the sake of God is a sign of faith. (Source: “al-Imta bil al-Arba’in al-Matbainatus Samah p 96.)”

Hafidh Ibn Hajar also said:

– يزيد بن معاوية بن أبي سفيان الأموي أبو خالد ولي الخلافة سنة ستين ومات سنة أربع ولم يكمل الأربعين ليس بأهل أن يروى عنه من الثالثة مد

Yazeed bin Muawiyah bin Abi Sufiyan al Amwi Abu Khalid. He was not in those to whom one can narrate ahadith.[Taqreeb at Tahdeeb  7777]

(iv). Imam Abul Faraj Ibn Al-Jawzi(rah)

Imam Ibn al-Jawzi(rah) wrote a whole book with the name of “الرد على المتعصب العنيد المانع من ذم يزيد” (Refutation of The bigot and stubborn who says it is not allowed to condemn Yazid.)

(v). Imam al-Ghazzali said:

فإن قيل هل يجوز لعن يزيد لأنه قاتل الحسين أو آمر به قلنا هذا لم يثبت أصلا فلا يجوز أن يقال إنه قتله أو أمر به

“And if it would be said: Is it permitted to curse Yazeed because he killed Hussain or ordered to? We would say: It’s not established(from any authentic report), and it’s not permitted to say that he killed him or ordered to kill him”.(Ihya uloom al-Din , 3/125).

(vi) Imam Ibn Salaah says:
لم يصح عندنا أنه أمر بقتل الحسين رضي الله عنه
“It is not authentic according to us that He(Yazid) commanded to kill Husayn.” ( قيد الشريد page 58, Al Khulaasa fi bayaani rayi 1/151)

(vii). Allama Ayni stated:
وَقَالَ الْمُهلب: فِي هَذَا الحَدِيث منقبة لمعاوية لِأَنَّهُ أول من غزا الْبَحْر، ومنقبة لوَلَده يزِيد، لِأَنَّهُ أول من غزا مَدِينَة قَيْصر. انْتهى. قلت: أَي منقبة كَانَت ليزِيد وحاله مَشْهُور؟ فَإِن قلت: قَالَ، صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم، فِي حق هَذَا الْجَيْش: مغْفُور لَهُم. قلت: لَا يلْزم، من دُخُوله فِي ذَلِك الْعُمُوم أَن لَا يخرج بِدَلِيل خَاص، إِذْ لَا يخْتَلف أهل الْعلم أَن قَوْله، صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم: مغْفُور لَهُم، مَشْرُوط بِأَن يَكُونُوا من أهل الْمَغْفِرَة حَتَّى لَو ارْتَدَّ وَاحِد مِمَّن غَزَاهَا بعد ذَلِك لم يدْخل فِي ذَلِك الْعُمُوم، فَدلَّ على أَن المُرَاد مغْفُور لمن وجد شَرط الْمَغْفِرَة فِيهِ مِنْهُم

al-Mulhab said: In this hadith there is virtue of Muawiyah(ra) because He is the first one who won naval expedition. And there is also a virtue of Yazeed because invaded Caesar’s City. I (al-Ayani) say what kind of Virtues of Yazeed? When his haal(condition) is famous? and If someone says that Prophet(saw) prayed for forgiveness in the right of this army. Then I say: It is not obligation that everyone is included in it without any specific evidence. There is no disagreement in people of knowledge that the saying of Prophet(saw) regarding maghfirah(forgiveness) is conditional that is If someone becomes murtad after the victory than he will not be the one who is forgiven with the agreement (of scholars). This is a proof that  the forgiveness is conditional..[Umda tul Qari 14/198]

(viii). Imam al Qurtubi(rah):

He mentioned some ahadith regarding the destruction of Ummah by youngsters and commented

وكأنهم والله اعلم يزيد بن معاوية وعبيد الله بن زياد

As If they are Yazeed bin Muawiyah and Ubaidullah bin Ziyad. [alTadhkirah fe ahwaal al Akhirah page 562]

(ix). Shaykh Allama Muqbil ibn Hadi al-Wadi(rah) said:

مختلفٌ فيه بين أهل السنة ، فمنهم من يراه كافراً ، ومنهم من يراه فاسقاً ، والذي رجحه الحافظ الذهبي – ولعله الصواب إن شاء الله – أنه يعتبر فاسقاً ، وأمره إلى الله .

Ahlesunnah differed in regards to him. And from them who called him Kaafir, and from them who called him Faasiq. And hafidh adh-Dhahabi preferred opinion – which is more correct, inshAllah – that he was Faasiq. And his ruling upon Allah. (Source)

(x). Shaykh Zubair Ali Zaee(rah) said:

“We do not send lanah(curse) nor declare him(yazeed) Kaafir, We consider him a Tyrant, Majrooh and whose trustworthiness is not known. We give his case to Allah and we announce that we are free from all the Tyrants”. [His article on ten lies of Sanabili page 24]

(xi). Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah described people’s attitudes towards Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah, and said:

شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية الموقف من يزيد بن معاوية فقال :

افترق الناس في يزيد بن معاوية بن أبى سفيان ثلاث فرق ، طرفان ووسط .

فأحد الطرفين قالوا : إنه كان كافراً منافقاً ، وأنه سعى في قتل سبط رسول الله تشفِّياً من رسول الله وانتقاما منه ، وأخذاً بثأر جده عتبة وأخي جده شيبة ، وخاله الوليد بن عتبة وغيرهم ممن قتلهم أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم  بيد على بن أبى طالب وغيره يوم بدر وغيرها . وأشياء من هذا النمط وهذا القول سهل على الرافضة الذين يكفرون أبا بكر وعمر وعثمان فتكفير يزيد أسهل بكثير .

والطرف الثاني : يظنون أنه كان رجلًا صالحاً وإمام عدل ، وأنه كان من الصحابة الذين ولدوا على عهد النبي وحمله على يديه وبرَّك عليه . وربما فضَّله بعضهم على أبى بكر وعمر ، وربما جعله بعضهم نبيَّا …

وكلا القولين ظاهر البطلان عند من له أدنى عقل وعلم بالأمور وسِيَر المتقدمين ، ولهذا لا ينسب إلى أحد من أهل العلم المعروفين بالسنة ولا إلى ذي عقل من العقلاء الذين لهم رأى وخبرة

والقول الثالث : أنه كان ملكا من ملوك المسلمين له حسنات وسيئات ولم يولد إلا في خلافة عثمان ، ولم يكن كافرا ، ولكن جرى بسببه ما جرى من مصرع الحسين وفعل ما فعل بأهل الحرة ، ولم يكن صاحبا ولا من أولياء الله الصالحين ، وهذا قول عامة أهل العقل والعلم والسنة والجماعة  .

ثم افترقوا ثلاث فرق فرقة لعنته وفرقة أحبته وفرقة لا تسبه ولا تحبه وهذا هو المنصوص عن الإمام أحمد وعليه المقتصدون من أصحابه وغيرهم من جميع المسلمين  قال صالح بن أحمد قلت لأبي : إن قوما يقولون : إنهم يحبون يزيد فقال يا بني وهل يحب يزيد أحدٌ يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر !! فقلت يا أبت فلماذا لا تلعنه ؟ فقال : يا بني ومتى رأيت أباك يلعن أحداً .

وقال أبو محمد المقدسي لما سئل عن يزيد فيما بلغني لا يُسَب ولا يُحَب   وقال : وبلغنى أيضا أن جدنا أبا عبد الله بن تيمية سئل عن يزيد فقال : لاننقص فيه ولا نزيد وهذا أعدل الأقوال فيه وفي أمثاله وأحسنها

The people differed concerning Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan, splitting into three groups, two extreme and one moderate.

One of the two extremes said that he was a kaafir and a munaafiq, that he strove to kill the grandson of the Prophet(saw) to spite the Messenger of Allaah and to take revenge on him, and to avenge his grandfather ‘Utbah, his grandfather’s brother Shaybah and his maternal uncle al-Waleed ibn ‘Utbah and others who were killed by the companions of the Prophet(saw) , by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and others on the day of Badr and in other battles – and things of that nature. To have such a view is easy for the Raafidis who regard Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as kaafirs, so it is much easier for them to regard Yazeed as a kaafir.

The second extreme group think that he was a righteous man and a just leader, that he was one of the Sahaabah who were born during the time of the Prophet and were carried and blessed by him. Some of them give him a higher status than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and some of them regard him as a prophet. Both views are obviously false to one who has the least common sense and who has any knowledge of the lives and times of the earliest Muslims. This view is not attributable to any of the scholars who are known for following the Sunnah or to any intelligent person who has reason and experience.

The third view is that he was one of the kings of the Muslims, who did good deeds and bad deeds. He was not born until the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan. He was not a kaafir but it was because of him that the killing of al-Husayn happened, and he did what he did to the people of al-Harrah. He was not a Sahaabi, nor was he one of the righteous friends of Allaah. This is the view of most of the people of reason and knowledge and of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.

Then they divided into three groups, one which cursed him, one which loved him and one which neither cursed him nor loved him. This is what was reported from Imaam Ahmad, and this is the view of the fair-minded among his companions and others among the Muslims. Saalih ibn Ahmad said: I said to my father, some people say that they love Yazeed. He said, O my son, does anyone love Yazeed who believes in Allaah and the Last Day? I said, O my father, why do you not curse him? He said, O my son, when did you ever see your father curse anybody?

Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi said, when he was asked about Yazeed: according to what I have heard he is neither to be cursed nor to be loved. He said, I also heard that our grandfather Abu ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Taymiyah was asked about Yazeed and he said: we do not deny his good qualities or exaggerate about them. This is the fairest opinion. (Source: Majmoo’ Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam, part 4, p. 481-484).

taken from
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/11/02/debunking-the-innovationbidah-of-celebrative-rituals-by-nasibis-on-ashura/

Muslim ar Rusi

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2016, 05:08:37 PM »
That's what shia sent me:

Imam Thahabi:
وكان ناصبيا فظا غليظا جلفا يتناول المسكر ويفعل المنكر افتتح دولته بمقتل الشهيد الحسين واختتمها بواقعة الحرة فمقته الناس ولم يبارك في عمره وخرج عليه غير واحد بعد الحسين كأهل المدينة قاموا لله.

"Siyar al-Alam Nabala" vol. 4 page 37-38

Ibn al-Jawzi:
ان انكاره على من استجاز ذم المذموم ولعن الملعون من جهل صراح، فقد استجازه كبار العلماء، منهم
االمام احمد بن حنبل )رضى اللّه( وقد ذكر احمد فى حق يزيد ما يزيد على اللعنه.
الردّ على المتعصّب العنيد ص 31.


"ar-Rod alal Muta'sib al-Anib" page 13.

According the translation he gave me this is about Thahabi calling him a nasibi and Abul Faraj cursing him. Is this true brothers?

JazakumuLlahy hairan for your replies.
لا تعتقد دين الروافض إنهم أهل المحال وحزبة الشيطان

not a daish follower

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 255
  • +19/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2016, 05:16:21 PM »

And I learnt he agreed with Hassan(ra) in their treaty that after him the caliphate will return to Hussain (ra) and then after that he violated the agreement and appointed Yazeed.

There was no such agreement.
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Farid

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #10 on: May 14, 2016, 07:20:56 PM »
@ Muslim ar Rusi:

There is no doubt that Ibn Al Jawzi curses him. However, as you can see above, other narrate that Imam Ahmad never cursed anyone.

I need to review what Al Thahabi said.

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #11 on: May 14, 2016, 08:51:51 PM »

And I learnt he agreed with Hassan(ra) in their treaty that after him the caliphate will return to Hussain (ra) and then after that he violated the agreement and appointed Yazeed.

There was no such agreement.

Oh OK
You mean that is just one of the Shia propaganda?
And please where can I get the authentic source to read the treaty between them?

Hani

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #12 on: May 14, 2016, 10:28:54 PM »
His biggest blunder was allowing his son to rule after him which shows he still had qualities of Jahiliyyah that Islam never erased. We say may Allah forgive him.



And I learnt he agreed with Hassan(ra) in their treaty that after him the caliphate will return to Hussain (ra) and then after that he violated the agreement and appointed Yazeed.

No such agreement was made. The entire point was that they're trying to return the matter to Shura. How would appointing Husayn after Muawiyah without consultation be a part of the deal.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Optimus Prime

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2016, 03:50:58 AM »
His biggest blunder was allowing his son to rule after him which shows he still had qualities of Jahiliyyah that Islam never erased. We say may Allah forgive him.



And I learnt he agreed with Hassan(ra) in their treaty that after him the caliphate will return to Hussain (ra) and then after that he violated the agreement and appointed Yazeed.

No such agreement was made. The entire point was that they're trying to return the matter to Shura. How would appointing Husayn after Muawiyah without consultation be a part of the deal.

Brother Hani.

What was the agreement then? What were the conditions?

Hani

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2016, 05:06:45 AM »
I can't write something on this as it would need a long research.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Optimus Prime

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2016, 05:46:08 PM »
I can't write something on this as it would need a long research.

I was hoping for like a brief summary or bullet points as to what the agreements were.

All good though.

Muslim ar Rusi

Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2016, 09:18:14 PM »
JazakumuLlahu hairan brothers, your answers were helpful. As far as i understood we do not love him nor do we curse him.
لا تعتقد دين الروافض إنهم أهل المحال وحزبة الشيطان

not a daish follower

Zillay_Shah

  • **
  • Total likes: 0
  • +0/-0
  • Ali Imam e manasto Malang Ghulam e Ali
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Yazid ibn Muawiyah
« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2016, 03:05:43 PM »
Asalam alikum, I agree with most of the points made by Hani except that yazeed was not " officially and legally the legitimate ruler. A ruler may nominate a person but its a mere suggestion until the people of learning or the shura actually appoint him, such did not happen with yazeed. The most prominent companions and tabien alive at the time the most superior of all namely Sayyiduna Imam Hussain (RA) and sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Zubayr (RA) did not at any point give baya nor endorse Yazeed. It is mentioned in Bukhari kitab al fitan the people of medina "dethroned him". Infact one may argue it violated the agreements of the sulh of al Hassan (RA). The ahlus sunnah some deemed it permissable to curse him others kept silent not out of love or respect but strictly caution. Unanimously none loved him. His charchter was made apparent by the testimony of his own son recorded by ibn kathir in the al bidaya, and his armies catapulting the kabah, the ruthless horrific attack upon the blessed city of medina killing its pious people and other far more henious crimes i rather not repeat. It is said once in the prescence of Sayyiduna Umar bin Abul Aziz who is considered by many a calipha rashid a person reffered to yazid as " ameerulmomineen" ( may God forbid)  this enraged the great Umar and he had him flogged. Some deviants who call themselves ahlus sunnah have tried defending yazeed they are welcome to him and we are free of him.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2016, 03:08:47 PM by Zillay_Shah »
"Every antagonist, in the combats of the tongue or of the sword, was subdued by his eloquence and valour,," Edward Gibbon.

Yes I dearly Love the Commander of the faithful the pride of the Believers Ali ( may Allah enoble his face) let the nawasib Burn in rage ;)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
1830 Views
Last post March 10, 2015, 08:38:41 PM
by Hani
22 Replies
5807 Views
Last post August 22, 2016, 02:11:16 PM
by muslim720
20 Replies
4478 Views
Last post November 11, 2015, 02:14:17 AM
by Ibn Yahya
5 Replies
594 Views
Last post September 14, 2019, 10:54:56 PM
by MuslimK