Chapter Eleven: Cursing Yazeed
Answering the Fatwa of Abu Hamid Ibn Ghazzali
The lovers of Yazeed have made efforts to exalt him as a pious and just khalifa who has been the victim of a smear campaign spanning 1,400 years waged by both Sunni and Shia Ulema. They have thus sought to rewrite history. In the midst of all the scholars who condemned Yazeed, including Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal who issued Takfir on him (see above), the Nawasib found one, and only one ‘father figure’ of traditional Sunni Islam: Ibn Ghazzali. It is interesting to note that the same Nasibis that HATE Ghazzali on account of his Sufi leanings are happy to embrace his position on Yazeed. He miraculously transforms from deviant to the greatest scholar after the four Fiqh Imams. Azam Tariq rants off the prized fatwa as follows:
A QUESTION WAS PUT TO IMAM GHAZZALI WHETHER THERE IS A VALID GROUND FOR CURSING YAZID FOR HIS ALLEGED COMPLICITY IN THE MURDER OF HAZRAT HUSAYN. THE IMAM GHAZZALI REPLIED AS UNDER:-
“IT IS NOT LAWFUL TO CURSE ANY MUSLIM. ANYONE WHO CURSES A MUSLIM IS HIMSELF ACCURSED. RASUL-ALLAH (SAW) SAID: “A MUSLIM IS NOT GIVEN TO CURSING.” BESIDES THE ISLAMIC SHARIAH HAS PROHIBITED US FROM EVEN CURSING THE ANIMALS. HOW THEN IT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE TO CURSE ANY MUSLIM WHEN THE HONOUR OF A MUSLIM IS MORE SACRED THAN THE HOLY KABA AS MENTIONED IN A HADITH (IBN MAJAH).
“THE ISLAMIC FAITH OF YAZID IS PROVED WITHOUT ANY SHADOW OF DOUBT. AS REGARDS THE MURDER OF HUSAYN, THERE IS NO DEFINITE EVIDENCE THAT YAZID EITHER KILLED HIM OR ISSUED ORDERS FOR HIS KILLING OR APPROVED ANY SUCH PLANS. WHEN NOTHING HAS BEEN PROVED IN THIS REGARD, HOW WOULD IT BE LAWFUL TO CAST DOUBTS AND ASPERSIONS ON YAZID WHEN ENTERTAINING SUSPICION ABOUT A MUSLIM IS UNLAWFUL IN ISLAM.”
ALMIGHTLY ALLAH SAYS IN THE QUR’AN “O YE WHO BELIEVE! SHUN MUCH SUSPICION; FOR LO! SOME SUSPICION IS CRIME. AND SPY NOT, NEITHER BACKBITE ONE ANOTHER. WOULD ONE OF YOU LOVE TO EAT THE FLESH OF HIS DEAD BROTHER? YE ABHOR THAT (SO ABHOR THE OTHER). AND KEEP YOUR DUTY (TO ALLAH).” (49: 12).
HAZRAT ABU HURAIRAH REPORTED ALLAH’S MESSENGER AS SAYING “DESPISING HIS BROTHER MUSLIM IS ENOUGH EVIL FOR ANY ONE TO DO. EVERY MUSLIM’S BLOOD, PROPERTY AND HONOUR ARE SACRED TO A MUSLIM.” (MUSLIM).
IMAM GHAZZALI REITERATES:
“ANYONE WHO THINKS THAT YAZID ORDERED THE KILLING OF HUSAYN OR LIKED THE KILLING OF HUSAYN SUCH A PERSON IS ABSOLUTELY FOOL. . . . . . . . .”
“AS REGARDS SAYING (RADIALLAHU ANHA) AFTER THE NAME OF YAZID, THIS IS NOT ONLY PERMISSIBLE BUT COMMENDABLE. IT IS RATHER INCLUDED IN OUR DUA WHEN WE PRAY FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF ALL MUSLIMS AND YAZID WAS CERTAINLY A MOMIN (BELIEVER).” ( ,BERIRUT, P. 288).
Here Ghazzali takes on every other classical Sunni scholar from the year dot to the present-day, by presenting a supporting statement for Yazeed. All four Sunni madhabs, including the four sheikhs deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed (see below).
Ghazzali has linked his defense for Yazeed with the murder of Imam Hussain but the fact is that that was not the only crime Yazeed had committed but the list is way too lengthy. Thus this very fact is suffice to bring down the building that Ghazzali had created in defence of Yazeed.
Allah (swt) in his pure book sends curses on various types of people, for example in Surah Baqarah verse 161 we read:
“Those who reject Faith, and die rejecting, – on them is Allah’s curse, and the curse of angels, and of all mankind”
In Surah Aal-e-Imran verse 61 we read:
“If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after (full) knowledge hath come to thee, say: “Come! Let us gather together, – our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!”
It is stated in Surah Hud verse 18:
Who doth more wrong than those who invent a life against Allah? They will be turned back to the presence of their Lord, and the witnesses will say, “These are the ones who lied against their Lord! Behold! The Curse of Allah is on those who do wrong!
And Surah Hud verses 59-60:
Such were the ‘Ad People: they rejected the Signs of their Lord and Cherisher; disobeyed His messengers; And followed the command of every powerful, obstinate transgressor.
And they were pursued by a Curse in this life, – and on the Day of Judgment. Ah! Behold! For the ‘Ad rejected their Lord and Cherisher! Ah! Behold! Removed (from sight) were ‘Ad the people of Hud!
Surah Maida verse 78:
Curses were pronounced on those among the Children of Israel who rejected Faith, by the tongue of David and of Jesus the son of Mary: because they disobeyed and persisted in excesses.
These verses prove that it is the Sunnah of Allah (swt) and his prophets (peace be upon all of them) to curse rejecters. Can there be a greater rejecter that Yazeed who rejected the Ahl’ul bayt (as), the Qur’an stipulates love for them to be a part of Deen; he killed them and openly rejected the Prophethood of Rasulullah (s)?
Ghazzali supporters should refrain from cursing the Devil – since according to Ghazzali the act of cursing someone that you do not know is pointless, and it is better to use one’s tongue to recite Surah Fateha. This type of logic contradicts the practice Allah (swt) and his Rasul (s) – for no man can be as forgiving and pious as Rasulullah (s), and yet we learn that at various points during his life that he would curse his enemies and those of Allah (swt). If Ghazzali would deem this practice to be a sin then is he accusing Rasulullah (s) of indulging in sinful actions?
It is very amusing that these Nawasib afford Ghazzali this rank because he gave this pro Yazeed fatwa – but fail to apply the Fatwa to their own lives. They have issued takfeer and cursed other Muslim Sects such as the Shi’a and Barelvi, indeed no one has escaped their takfeer tirade. They accept one part of the fatwa and then leave the part that serves no benefit to them – if they deem Ghazzali to be a reliable Hujjut-ul-Islam then should they not be adhering to everything that their dear imam had said? Instead they curse the Sufis, and Ghazali is famous for being his Sufi leanings.
We read in Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 1147:
“Rasulullah (s) said whoever perpetuated injustice and frightened the residents of Madina, the curse (la’nat) of Allah (swt), His Angels and all people is on such a person”
Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 1147, Nafees Academy Karachi
We have already presented the event of Harra before our readers and shown how Yazeed ordered his Nasibi troops to attack the city of Madina. Rasulullah (s) cursed those that caused fear to Madina. When Rasulullah (s) cursed an individual that perpetrated such an act then what right does this third rate Nasibi group have to demand that we refrain from cursing Yazeed? Whoever adheres to the Sunnah of Rasulullah (s) shall definitely curse Yazeed.
Sura Rad verse 25:
But those who break the Covenant of Allah, after having plighted their word thereto, and cut asunder those things which Allah has commanded to be joined, and work mischief in the land; – on them is the curse; for them is the terrible home!
Surah Ash Shura verse 151-2:
“And follow not the bidding of those who are extravagant, – Who make mischief in the land, and mend not (their ways).”
The sum total of these two verses is as follows:
- We should steer away from mischief makers
- Allah (swt) has cursed those that indulge in mischief through the land
With these two verses in mind, now contemplate this verse:
Surah Baqarah verse 220:
“Their bearings on this life and the Hereafter. They ask thee concerning orphans. Say: “The best thing to do is what is for their good; if ye mix their affairs with yours, they are your brethren; but Allah knows the man who means mischief from the man who means good. And if Allah had wished, He could have put you into difficulties: He is indeed Exalted in
We would appeal to those with open minds to decide for themselves whose intention was mischief and whose intention was good in this circumstance? There are two paths: one of the Banu Ummayya with Yazeed at the helm (the Nasibi path) and one of Ahl’ul bayt (as) with a Shia Imam in Husayn (as) at the helm – which of these two individuals was working for the benefit of the Deen and for the salvation of our souls? Who was the mischief monger whose actions have been cursed by Allah (swt)?
Was the killing of Imam Husayn (as) not an act of Fitnah? Was the attack on Madina, slaughtering and raping its inhabitants not an act of Fitnah? Was the assault on Makka that included catapulting the Kaaba with fire causing it to catch fire not acts of Fitnah. Was killing men in the most sacred of all sanctuaries where it is forbidden to kill even an ant an act of Fitnah? It is forbidden to kill a man in the sanctuary of the Ka’aba even if that man is about to kill you, yet Yazeed slaughtered innocents there! There is no need to exercise caution when one is cursing an enemy of Allah (swt). It is a praiseworthy act so long as it does not create Fitnah.
Reply Seven – The Ulema of Ahl’ul Sunnah deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
One: Imam Ahmad issued Takfeer against drunkard Yazeed and deemed it permissible to curse him
The Salafi cult share a close nexus with the Hanbali doctrine. Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal’s unequivocal Takfeer against Yazeed has such difficulties to the Salafies and other Nawasib that they have sought to cast doubts on the existence of such a Fatwa and have instead suggested hat Imam Ahmed urged his adherents to remain neutral and maintain silence on the matter of Yazeed. Curiously in this period of post modernity, we are witnessing a phenomenon wherein those professing adherence to Sunni Sufi influenced belief system are advocating a neutral viewpoint of Yazeed, at the forefront of this is Cyber Shaykh de jour Gibrael Hadad who has sought to (just like the Salafies) corroborate his point by falsely suggesting that Imam Ibn Hanbal adopted silence towards Yazeed.
Hadad opines as follows:
wondered what the position of the scholars of Ahl us sunna towards Yazid is. I ask this because I have read claims from Shia sources that quote:
“Most of your ulema regard Yazid as an infidel. Even Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and many other great ulema of your sect suggest that curses on him should be recited.
Wa `alaykum as-Salam:
What would be the source for this new concoction?
Abu Muhammad al-Tamimi said in `Aqidat al-Imam Ahmad as narrated from him by Ibn Abi Ya`la in Tabaqat al-Hanabila (2:273): “He [Imam Ahmad] withheld saying anything about Yazid ibn Mu`awiya but rather committed his matter to Allah. He would refrain from speaking against anyone from the first century. But our [Hanbali] colleagues differ concerning him [Yazid]. Some declared it permissible to blame him because he terrified Madina, and the Prophet cursed whoever terrifies Madina.
Others withheld from taking any position.
Imam Ahmad was asked about it and he said: ‘People prayed behind him and took his alms.’ Others considered him among the Muslims that sinned and it is better to refrain from taking any position in what is not obligatory. It was impermissible to curse any Muslim unless the Law provided a proof-text to that effect. For it is narrated and transmitted that ‘To curse a Muslim is like killing him’ and ‘The believer is not one given over to cursing.’”
We shall rebut this assertion by pointing out that this approach is otiose when we have the testimonies of esteemed Sunni scholars who confirmed the fact that Imam Ahmed did issue Takfeer against Yazeed and deemed it permissible to curse him. For example, we read in the prominent Sunni work Sharh Fiqh Akbar, page 88 that has also been quoted by the Mufti of Daarul Uloom Qadriyah Jilaniyah London namely Mufti Ghulam Rasool in:
Hasab wa Nasab, Volume 2 pages 89-90 (published in London)
“He considered alcohol halal and at the time of killing Husayn and his companions, he stated: ‘I have avenged the death of my ancestors at Badr’ and other statements like this. This is the reason that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal declared Yazeed to be a kaafir as the copy of Yazeed’s statement was proved authentic to him (Imam Ahmed)”
Similarly, Ibn Hajar Makki al-Haythami in his book al-Menah al-Makkia fi Sharh al-Hamzia, page 220 recorded:
“Yazeed attained the worst level of corruption and moral degeneracy to the point that committing such evil actions had become the norm.This was to such an extent that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal declared him a Kafir . Given that he (Ahmad Ibn Hanbal) is highly knowledgeable and a scholar of high integrity, he would only issue such statements on account of the actions perpetuated by Yazeed that would thus prove such a statement.”
Haddad has relied upon a report recorded by Qadhi Abu Ya’la regarding his and Imam Ahmed’s stance on Yazeed, later in this chapter we will be citing none other than but Imam Ibn Katheer who himself comfirmed that both of these esteemed personalities, amongst others, deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed and the affirmation by Ibn Katheer shall sreve as the final nail in the coffin such Yazeed apologetics.
Allamah Syed Mahmood Alusi al-Baghdadi (d. 1270 H) under the commentary of 47:22-23 as well as other Sunni scholars quoted the following opinion of Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal regarding Yazeed:
Al-Barzanji in al-Isha’at and al-Haythami in al-Sawaiq have recorded that Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal’s son (Saleh) narrated that he said to his father that he had seen people saying that they love Yazeed bin Muawiya. To this Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal said “For a person having belief in Allah there was no reason to love Yazeed bin Muawiya. Why should the person not be cursed who has been cursed by Allah in the Quran. To this Saleh asked that where in the Quran had Allah cursed Yazeed bin Muawiya. Imam Ahmed replied quoting the verse: ‘Then, is it to be expected of you, if ye were put in authority, that ye will do mischief in the land, and break your ties of kith and kin? Such are the men whom Allah has cursed for He has made them deaf and blinded their sight. Do they not then earnestly seek to understand the Qur’an, or are their hearts locked up by them?’ [47:22-24].
1. Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 227
Online Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 72
2. Tafsir Mazhari (Urdu), volume 10 page 326 (Published by Darul Isha’at Karachi)
3. Ghidha al-albab li-Sharh Manzumat al-Adab by Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Saffarini al-Hanbali (d. 1188), Volume 1 page 182
4. Adab Shari’a by ibn Muflih al-Hanbali, Volume 1 page 342
5. al-Rad ala al-Mutaseb al-Aneed al-Mane le zam Yazeed, page 41
In Sawaiq al-Muhriqa (Urdu), page 734, the conversation ends with the words of Imam Ahmed:
“Can there be any worse fitna than this murder (of Hussain)?”
Sawaiq al-Muhriqa (Urdu), pages 733-734
We should point out that the above cited stance of Imam Ahmed has been narrated by out and out authentic personalities of Ahle Sunnah therefore, any other statement, if any, of Imam Ahmed contradicting the above stance automatically loses its credibility. Now in order to know the authenticity of the said tradition, let us see the chain of narration recorded by Imam Ibn Jauzi in his book al-Rad ala al-Mutaseb al-Aneed al-Mane le zam Yazeed, page 41:
“Abu Jaffar al-Akbari from Abu Ali al-Hussain bin al-Junaid from Abu Talib bin Shahab al-Akbari from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin al-Abbas from Saleh bin Ahmad bin Hanbal who said:…”
Abu Jaffar al-Akbari: Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh al-Islam, v23 p218). Al-Hussain bin Junaid: Dahabi said: ‘Authenticated’ (Al-Kashif, v1 p332). Abu Talib bin Shehab al-Akbari: Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh al-Islam, v25 p380). Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Abbas: Dahabi said: ‘Muhadith Imam’ (Siar alam alnubala, v15 p513). Saleh bin Ahmad bin Hanbal: Dahabi said: ‘Imam Muhadith Hafiz’ (Siar alam alnubala, v12 p529).
Two: Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafiyee and Imam Malik deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Prominent Shafiyee scholar Shaykh Sulaiman bin Muhammad bin Umar al-Bejarmi (d. 1221 H) records:
“Imam Ahmad has statements about cursing Yazeed both Talweeh (directly) and Tasreeh (indirectly) and so has Imam Malik and Abu Hanifa and we have similar statements in the madhab of our Imam Shafiyee and al-Bakri also said the same. Some of his (al-Bakri’s) followers said about Yazeed ‘may Allah increase his disgrace and put him in the lowest level of hell’”
Hashyat al-Bejarmi, Volume 12 page 369
Shaykh Kamaluddin Muhammad bin Musa Damiri in his famed work Hayaat ul Haywaan, Volume 2 page 175 records:
“Abu Hanifa, Malik and Ahmad have two statements about cursing Yazeed, Tasreeh (i.e. to curse him by taking his name) and another one is with Talweeh (i.e. to curse without taking his name and only by using hint (e.g. May Allah curse the killers of Hussain)”
Three: Allamah Mahmood Alusi’s takfeer against Yazeed and deeming it permissible to curse him
Allamah Syed Mahmood Alusi al-Baghdadi (d. 1270 H) in his famed commentary of Quran namely Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 73 under the commentary of the verse 47:22-23, wrote his views about Yazeed in the following words:
“And I say what is prevalent over my mind that (Yazeed) Khabeeth did not testify to the messengership of the Holy Prophet (s)… According to me it is correct to curse a person like Yazeed, although one cannot imagine a Fasiq like him and apparently he never repented, the possibility of his repentance is weaker than the possibility of his faith (Iman). Along with Yazeed, Ibn Ziyad, Ibn Sa’ad and his group shall also be included. Verily, may Allah’s curse be upon all of them, their friends, their supporters, their group and upon everyone who inclines towards them until Qayamah and until an eye sheds a tear for Abu Abdullah Hussain (ra)”
Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 73
Alusi also states:
“So what will you say about damn Yazeed, did he have love or hate for Ali (kr)? I assume you will not have any doubt that Yazeed, curse be upon him, had a strong hatred against Ali (ra) and also against both of his sons Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain may blessings and peace be upon their grandfather, parents and upon them. Therefore as proved from Mutawatur (reliable) Hadith it becomes apparent to say that he, the accursed one, was a hypocrite.””
Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 79
We should point out that Ghazzali was an adherent of the Shafiye madhab and so was Allamah Alusi who set out the viewpoint of the Shafiye Ulema on this topic as follows:
“Amongst the Shafiyees we are in agreement that it is permissible to curse Yazeed”
Haseeya Nabraas page 551
When a renowned Shafiye scholar has taken the responsibility to reflect the opinion of the Shafiye Ulema, confirming that they deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed, then the opposite voice of Imam Ghazzali’s fatwa becomes batil (false).
We have cited actual Sunni texts wherein the grand Sunni Ulema deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed. Azam Tariq seeks solace in the fatwa of al Ghazzali. Now whose fatwa bears greater value, the sole fatwa of Ibn Ghazzali or the fatwas of all the Sunni Ulama that we cited? Why should this single Ghazzali fatwa be deemed to be strong and conclusive enough to nullify the fatwas of all these Sunni Ulema? Would the more correct approach not to be to reject Ghazzali’s fatwa and give greater credence to these Salaf Ulema who had an ijma (consensus) that it was permissible to curse Yazeed? Why are the Salafi and Deobandi seeking to create doubts over a matter that has attained a broad consensus amongst the Sunni Ulema? In reality by quoting Ghazzali they are trying to divide the Sufis, who they are well-known to despise. Our du’a is that Allah (swt) guides these advocates of Yazeed to disown and hate him and to develop faith and love for the family of the Prophet (s).
Four: Qadhi Thanaullah Paani Patti’s takfeer against Yazeed and deeming it permissible to curse him
Qadhi Thanaullah Paani Patti (d. 1225) was a Sunni scholar of the twelfth century, who studied under the teachings of Shah Waliullah Muhadith Dehalvi (d. 1176 H) while his anti-Shia son Shah Abdul Aziz Muhadith Dehalvi (d. 1239 H) would call Qadhi Thanaullah the ‘Behaqqi of his time’. He was also the Khalifa of Mirza Mazhar Jaan Janan (d. 1195 H) who would refer to Qadhi Thanaullah as ‘Ilm al-Huda’. His commentary of the Holy Quran, Tafseer Mazhari is popular among the Sunni masses particularly amongst the Deobandies. The following views of Qadhi Thanaullah about Yazeed will silence those Deobandies who adhere to the Salafi/Wahabi stance of absolving Yazeed from his Kufr. Qadhi wrote:
Yazeed and his associates did Kufr with the bounties of Allah. They deemed it their aim to have a grudge against the progeny of the Prophet (s) and murdered Hussain (ra) with oppression and Yazeed did Kufr with the religion of Prophet (s) to the extent that Yazeed recited the following couplets over the murder of Hussain (ra)
‘Where are my ancestors, they should come and see that I have take revenge from the progeny of the Prophet and Bani Hashim’.
And the last prose is:
‘I would not be from the progeny of Jandab had I not taken revenge from the progeny of Ahmad for whatever they had done.’
Moreover, he made alcohol Halal and these are his couplets for alcohol:
‘The treasure of alcohol is in a utensil which is like silver and the branch of grapes are loaded by grapes which are like stars, the depth of the branch of grapes is alternate for the stars over sun, the east of this sun (alcohol) is the hand of the drinker while the place for the sunset (alcohol) is my mouth, thus, if one day alcohol was made Haram in Ahmad’s religion, then O addressee, you just take it according to the religion of Masih ibn Mariam (i.e. deem it Halal)’
Tafseer Mazhari [Arabic], Volume 5 page 271, commentary of 14:29
Tafseer Mazhari [Urdu], Volume 6 pages 202-203, commentary of 14:29
Qadhi Thanaullah in one of his letters wrote:
“Verily, the Kufr of Yazeed is proven from authentic traditions, thus he is worthy of being cursed, though there isnt any benefit in cursing him but ‘Al-Hub fi Allah’ (love for the sake of Allah) and ‘Al-Bughz fi Allah’ (hatred for the sake of Allah) demands it. [Maktubaat, page 203]”
Imam Paak aur Yazeed Paleed, page 104 (Zia ul Quran publications, Lahore)
Five: Shafiyee jurist Ibn Ali bin Emaaduddin deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Let us proceed with the views of the great Shafiyee scholar al-Kesa al-Harsi. The prestigious rank of this Shafiyee scholar and his views about Yazeed are recorded by Ibn Katheer:
“Ibn Ali bin Emaaduddin Abu Hassan Tabari, who was known as al-Kesa al-Herasi and was amongst the activist pioneer jurists (Fuqaha) of Shafiya (sect), he was born in 450 H. He benefited from Imam al-Harmayn, he and Imam Ghazzali are amongst his prominent students…at Nizamamiyah in Nishapur, he used to curse Iblis seven times at every stair of Nizamiya and there were 70 stairs in all. He heard plenty of hadiths, he debated, issued edicts, taught and was amongst the Akabir Fuzala and master of jurists…And he was asked an edict about Yazeed bin Muawiyah to which he mentioned that Yazeed was a cheater and immoral and deemed it permissible to slander him”
Al-Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 12 page 213
Shaykh Kamaluddin Muhammad bin Musa Damiri (742-808 H) in ‘Hayaat ul Haywaan’ Volume 2 page 196 recorded the views of this great Shafiyee scholar in detail. When he was asked whether it is permissible to curse Yazeed, he replied:
أقول لصحب ضمت الكأس شملهم … وداعي صبابات الهوى يترنم
خذوا بنصيب من نعيم ولذة … فكل وإن طال المدى يتصرم
“As for cursing him, there are two types of statements from the Salaf Saliheen, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik and Imam Ahmed Hanbal, one statement is with Tasreeh (i.e. to curse him by taking his name) and another one is with Talweeh (i.e. to curse without taking his name and only by using hint e.g. May Allah curse the killers of Imam Hussain) but according to us, there is only one statement which is Tasreeh, not the Talweeh and why should that not be the case since Yazeed used to play the game of hunting cheetahs, chess and always used to drink alcohol thus amongst his couplets, the one regarding alcohol is:
I say to my friends who have been gathered by the alcohol and the warmness of romance are calling in rhythm to take your portion of bounties and enjoyment because every person shall die no matter how long his age is (thus do all kinds of enjoyment you want to do in this short time span).”
Allamah Ibn Khalikaan (d. 681 H) in Wafayat al-A’yan, Volume 3 page 287 also recorded the very text with difference of words.
Wafayat al-A’yan, Volume 3 page 287
Six: Imam Saaduddin Taftazani deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed and he personally did so
Imam of Ahle Sunnah Saaduddin Taftazani also cursed and issued takfeer against Yazeed, as recorded by Imam Ibn Emaad Hanbali (d. 1089 H) as well as by Allamah Mahmood Alusi under the commentary of 47:22-23:
‘We don’t delay in his (Yazeed’s) case, not even in his kufr and faith, may Allah curse him, his supporters and his helpers’
1. Shadharat al Dhahab, Volume 1 pages 68-69
2. Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 26 page 72
Shafiyee scholar Shaykh Sulaiman bin Muhammad bin Umar al-Bejarmi (d. 1221 H) while referring to Imam Saduddin Taftazani’s authority work Sharah Aqaid records:
“According to Sharh Aqaid al-Saad, it is permissible to curse Yazeed”
Hashyat al-Bejarmi, Volume 12 page 369
In his book Sharah Maqasid, Imam Saaduddin Taftazani stated:
“The injustices perpetuated against Ahlulbayt are so clear that no one can deny them…may Allah curse those who committed injustices against them…if they say that there are some scholars who don’t allow the cursing of Yazeed whilst the acknowledge he is worthy of it, we say that he deserves it…how can such legitimacy remain unclear to them? how can there be no agreement on this?”
Seven: Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti personally cursed Yazeed
Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti is also one of those prestigious Sunni scholars who personally cursed Yazeed, we read in Tareekh Khulafa:
“Allah’s curse be upon all three Ibn Ziyad, Yazeed and the murderer of Imam Hussain”
Tareekh ul Khulafa (Urdu) page 208, published by Nafees Academy Karachi
Eight: Qadhi Shawkani personally cursed Yazeed
Qadhi Shawkani who enjoys authority amongst the Salafi cult also cursed Yazeed. We read in Nail al-Awtar, Volume 7 page 201:
“The alcoholic drunk, who disgraced the pure divine law, Yazeed bin Mu’awiya may Allah curse him”
Nail al-Awtar, Volume 7 page 201
Nine: Hanafi Imam Mullah Ali Qari deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
While answering a question over whether it is permissible to curse Muawiyah, Imam of Ahle Sunnah Mullah Ali Qari replied:
“It is not permissible but it is permissible to curse Yazeed, Ibn Ziyad and their likes. [Sharah Shifa, Volume 2 page 556]”
Imam Paak aur Yazeed Paleed, page 93 (Zia ul Quran publications, Lahore)
Ten: Imam Ibn Jauzi deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Now comes the discussion of one of the revered jurists of Ahle Sunnah namely Abul Faraj Ibn al-Jauzi (d. 597 H) who deemed the act of cursing Yazeed so important that he wrote a separate book on this topic and this has caused such a serious damage to the lovers of Muawiyah’s vile family that they have sought to deny the aforesaid stance of their Imam Ibn Jauzi. A modern day Sunni scholar G F Haddad also joined the camp:
Abdu’r-Rahman Abu’l-Faraj Bin Jauzi has written a book on this subject, Kitabu’l-Radd la’l-Muta’asibu’l-Anidu’l-Mani’an La’n-e-Yazid La’natullah.
Ibn al-Jawzi was a prolific author of over seven hundred books, but I doubt very much that the above is one of them. This can be checked by looking up the Kuwaiti publishing house of Idarat al-Buhuth wa al-Turath who brought out a complete bibliography and manucriptography of his works a few years ago
It is strange to see that a modern day Sunni is trying to cast doubts on the existence of such a book on the basis of personal opinion without any corroborative evidence to support his stance and relied on the bibliography of a recent publishing house that had no details of this Ibn Jauzi’s work in their list. How can a famed scholar advance such feeble arguments! We should state that it doesn’t require rocket science to check his book and confirm the same moreover the testimonies of some of the esteemed (early) Sunni scholars about the stance of Ibn Jauzi should suffice to water down Nasibi denials and Hadad’s personal baseless guess work. To enable this let us cite the testimony of the orthodox early Sunni Imam Ibn Kathir (774 H):
“Abul Faraj Ibn Jauzi wrote a separate book deeming it permissible to curse Yazeed”.
Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 1148, Nafees Academy Karachi
Similarly Imam Abdulrauf al-Munawi in his authority work Faidh al-Qadir Sharah Jami al-Saghir, Volume 1 page 204 stated:
“Abu al-Faraj bin al-Jauzi stated in his book ‘al-Rad ala al-Mutasib al-Aneed al-M’ane men zam Yazeed’ that the pious scholars allowed cursing him”
Faidh al-Qadir, Volume 1 page 204 Tradition 281
Moreover Shaykh Sulaiman bin Muhammad bin Umar al-Bejarmi (d. 1221 H) also testified:
“Ibn al-Jauzi said: ‘The pious scholars permitted the cursing of Yazeed’ and he wrote a book about its permissibility”
Hashyat al-Bejarmi, Volume 12 page 369
Now for the pathetic argument that a modern day publishing house has not recorded the name of this book along with the names of the books written by Imam Ibn Jauzi, we should point out that the following esteem biographical Sunni works confirm that the book under discussion was authored by Imam Ibn Jauzi:
1. Kashf al-Zunun, by Haji Khalifa, v1, p839
2. Hidyat al-Arafeen, by Allamah Ismail Pasha Baghdadi, v1, p521
3. Mu’ajam al-Moalafeen, by Umar Raza Kahala, v6, p178
As a final slap in the ugly face of Nasibism, we herewith attach a scan of the cover of Ibn Jauzi’s book under discussion i.e. Al-Rad ala al-Mutaseb al-Aneed Al-Manee men Zam Yazeed (The answer to the stubborn fanatic who prevents the cursing Yazeed) revised by a Sunni shcolar Dr. Haytham Abdulsalam Muhammad:
Al-Rad ala al-Mutaseb al-Aneed Al-Manee men Zam Yazeed (published in Beruit)
Eleven: Al-Khilal, Abu Bakr Abdul Aziz, Qadhi Abu Yala and Qadhi Abul Husayn deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Ibn Kathir in Al-Bidayah Wal-Nihayah has recorded the stance of some of the prominent Imams of Ahle Sunnah such as Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (d. 241 H), Imam Abi Bakar Ahmed bin Muhammad bin Harun al-Khalal (d. 311 H), Imam al-Qadhi Abu Ya‘la ibn al-Farra’ – Muhammad ibn al-Husayn ibn Muhammad ibn Khalaf (d. 458) and his son Imam Muhammad ibn al-Qadhi Muhammad Abi Ya‘la ibn al-Husayn, Al-Qadhi Abu al-Husayn al-Farra’ polularly known as Ibn Abi Ya‘la (d. 526):
“Whoever frightens Madina incurs the wrath of Allah, His Angels and all the people”. Those people who deem it permissible to curse Yazeed bin Muawiyah deem this and other similar kinds of hadiths as a base and this tradition is from Ahmad ibn Hanbal and has been taken by Al-Khilal, Abu Bakr Abdul Aziz, Qadhi Abu Yala and his son Qadhi Abul Hussain. Abul Faraj Ibn Jauzi wrote a separate book deeming it permissible to curse Yazeed”.
Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 1148, Nafees Academy Karachi
Regarding the view of Qadhi Abu al-Hussain mentioned by Ibn Kathir, Shaykh Kamaluddin Damiri in his book Hayaat ul Haywaan, Volume 2 page 174 has elaborated the same:
The Qadhi Abul Hussain Muhammad bin al-Qadhi Abu Y’ala al-Faraa al-Hanbali wrote a book about those who deserve to be cursed and he included Yazeed and said: ‘Whoever forbids cursing Yazeed must be unaware of the lawfulness of cursing him or he is a hypocrite who wants to give the false impression or may be he gives false impression to the ignorant ones by (the prophet’s (s)) statement: ‘The believer never curses’ while this (Hadith) is about those who don’t deserve to be cursed’.
Twelve: Amr bin Bahr al-Laythi (d. 255 H) deemed Yazeed to be an accursed
One of the early Sunni scholars Amr bin Bahr al-Laythi (d. 255 H) popularly known as Al-Jahidh stated in his book Al-Risalah al-Hadyia Ashar, page 398:
“The evil deed which Yazeed committed by killing Hussain and took the daughters of Allah’s messenger as slaves and hit the lips of Hussain’s (head) with the stick and scared the people of Madina and destroyed the Ka’aba, shows that he (Yazeed) was rough, stone hearted, Nasibi, possessed bad thoughts, venom, hatred, hypocrite, was out of the pale of faith, Fasiq and an accursed, and who ever forbid cursing the accursed is himself an accursed person.”
Thirteen: Ahmad bin Sulayman bin Kamal al-Hanafi (d. 944 H) deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Another Hanafi scholar namely Ahmad bin Sulayman bin Kamal al-Hanafi (d. 944 H) deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed. Imam Abdulrauf al-Munawi in his authority work Faidh al-Qadir Sharah Jami al-Saghir, Volume 1 page 204 stated:
“Mawula ibn al-Kamal said: ‘The truth that cursing is lawful though its popularly known that he is a kafir and his horribleness and evil deeds are successively narrated in detail’”
Faidh al-Qadir, Volume 1 page 204 Tradition 281
Fourteen: Imams of Bukhara such as Imam Quwamuddin al-Safari, Ibrahim bin Zahid and Imam Tahir bin Ahmed deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
The book ‘Khulasa tul Fatawa’ authored by Shaykh Imam Tahir bin Ahmed bin Abdul Rasheed al-Bukhari is deemed as one of the most prestigious edict works in the Hanafi school of thought (d. 542 H). He states in Volume 4 page 390:
“One should curse Yazeed bin Muawiyah and likewise Hajjaj. I heard Shaykh Al-Imam Al-Zahid Quamuddin al-Safari narrating from his father that it is permissible to curse him. He used to say: ‘There is no harm in cursing Yazeed’.
Imam Quamuddin al-Safari (d. 576) has been introduced in the following words by Imam Abdul Hai Lucknawi:
“Shaykh ul Islam, Imam of the Imams, unique in subjects pertaining to religion be it related to Usool or Furu and a Mujtahid of his time”
Al-Fawaid al-Bahiyah, page 32
Whilst he relied upon his father’s edict regarding the permissibility to curse Yazeed, the said individual was himself acknowledged as a notable scholars of his era. He was Imam Ibrahmi bin Ismaeel popularly known as al-Zahid al-Safari (d. 534). He was a contemporary of Imam Ghazzali and was a teacher of Imam Hassan bin Mansur Qadhi Khan the author of the famous ‘Fatawa Qadhi Khan’. Imam Sam’ani in his authority work Al-Ansab has recounted him in the following manner:
His entire family was known for their knowledge and piety, a fact acknowledged by Allamah Abdul Qadir Qarshi in ‘Al-Jawahir al-Muziyah fi Taabqat al-Hanafiya’ page 32 who stated:
“Family of scholars and qualified ones”
As Imam Tahir, the author of ‘Khulasa tul Fatawa’ has relied upon the above cited edict in the latter part and did not submit any evidence to contradict it, one can safely deduce that all three Imams of Bukhara namely Imam Tahir bin Ahmed bin Abdul Rasheed al-Bukhari (d. 542 H), Imam Quamuddin Hammad bin Ibrahim al-Safari al-Bukhari (d. 576) and Imam Ibrahim bin Ismaeel popularly known as al-Zahid al-Safari (d. 534) all deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed.
Imam Abdulrauf al-Munawi in his authority work Faidh al-Qadir, Volume 1 page 204 has also recorded the edict of Imam Quwam al-Deen al-Safari:
Ibn al-Kamal narrated that Imam Quwam al-Deen al-Safari who said: ‘There is no harm in cursing Yazeed’
Faidh al-Qadir, Volume 1 page 204 Tradition 281
Fifteen: Imam Ibn Bazzaz al-Kurdari al-Hanafi deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Shaykh Imam Hafizuddin Muhammad bin Muhammad ibn Shahab popularly known as Ibn Bazzaz al-Kurdari al-Hanafi (d. 827 H) states in Fatawa Bazzazia, Volume 6 page 344:
“It is permissible to curse Yazeed and likewise Hajjaj but it is better to refrain from doing so, it is narrated from Imam Quamuddin al-Safari that there is no problem in cursing Yazeed…Kurdari states that the truth is the popular position with regards to the Kufr of Yazeed coupled with the Mutawatur reports of his evil acts, the details of which are known, supports him being cursed”
Sixteen: Shaykh Abdulrahman bin Yusuf al-Ajhwari’s Takfeer agasint Yazeed
Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Shebrawi (d. 1172 H) who the in year 1137 H was the Sheikh at Al-Azhar University recorded the folllowing about Shaykh Abdulrahman bin Yusuf al-Ajhwari al-Maliki (d. 960 H) in his book al-Itehaf Behub al-Ashraf, page 69:
Allamah Ajhwari said: ‘Imam Muhammad bin Arafa and the scholars who followed him chose to consider Hajaj as kafir and there is no doubt that his (Hajaj’s) crime is similar to Yazeed’s crime, nay its less’.
Seventeen: Abu al-Barakat al-Demashqi al-Shafiyee (d. 871 H) himself cursed Yazeed
Abu al-Barakat Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Demashqi al-Shafiyee (d. 871 H) was also among those Sunni scholars who personally cursed Yazeed. He stated in his book Jawahir al-Matalib, Volume 2 page 272:
“May Allah curse Yazeed”
Eighteen: Imam Abu Bakar al-Jassas deemed Yazeed as La’een
One of the most prominent Hanafi Imams namely Abu Bakar Ahmed Ali al-Razi al-Jassas (d. 370 H) recalled Yazeed in the following manner in his authority work Ahkam al-Quran, Volume 3 page 154:
“After the four caliphs, the companions ofthe Prophet (s) participated in Jihad alongside Fasiq leaders, thus Abu Ayub Ansari participated in Jihad with Yazeed La’een.
Ahkam al-Quran al-Jassas,Volume 3 page 154
It is strange to note that Nawasib belonging to Sipah-e-Sahaba claim to be the adherents of the Hanafi sect, yet they tend to defend Yazeed when we see the abovementioned stance of a great Hanafi jurist and Imam!
Nineteen: Daata Ganj Bakhsh al-Hajveri cursed Yazeed
Abul Hassan Ali Ibn Usman al-Jullabi al-Hajveri al-Ghaznawi is a name that requires no introduction for Sunnis that frequent from the Indian Subcontinent. Better known as Daata Ganj Bakhsh, this 11th Century Persian Sufi Saint is a renowned learned Sunni figure and his burial place in Lahore is attended by thousands of followers on a daily basis. He penned a number of works the most famous being Kashf al Mahjhub regarded as the first treatise on Sufism. It is this very book on page 76 whilst discussing Imam Zainul Abideen (as) he states as follows:
“When Husayn and his children were killed at Karbala there was none left except Ali to take care of them; and he was ill. The women were brought unveiled on camels to Yazid b. Muawiya – may God curse him, but not his father!”
Kashf al Mahjhub, page 76 English translation by Prof. Renold A. Nicholson]
Twenty: Qadhi Saleh bin Mahdi al-Maqbali deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed
Prominent Mujtahid of era namely Allamah Qadhi Saleh bin Mahdi al-Maqbali (d. 1108) who is much liked by Ahle Hadith/Salafies writes in his authority work Al-Ilm Al-Shamikh Fi Ethaar Al-Haq Ala Alaba wal Mashaikh, pages 367-368:
“And even more strange is a person who praises Yazeed who reverted from Islam, the one who insulted the honorable people of this Ummah, dishonoring the sanctity of Madina of Messenger (Sale Allah Aleh Wa Aalihi Wasalam), killed Hussain the son of the Prophet and his Ahlulbayt and humiliated them and he treated them in such a manner that even if the enemies of Islam, the Christians were to do the same acts, they might have been more reasonable.
And amongst those praising Yazeed is Hujut Al-Islam A-Ghazzali, but in all of his acts, he is like a person who collects wood in the dark, who alongside the wood, also unknowingly collects snakes and scorpions.
And only that person would deem Yazeed’s act as normal who is secluded from the generosity of Allah and who has been wretched by taking part in such evil deeds. Therefore neither exaggerate nor understate this. To observe patience in this matter is like holding a red hot coal whilst ignorance is on the increase in our era. We seek blessings and protection from Allah. Ameen.
Amongst the strange matters of Jurisprudence (Fiqh) is one that has been mentioned by Ibn Hajar Haythami in Sawaiq al-Muhriqa (namely that) it is not permissible to curse Yazeed even though there is strong agreement (Ijma) that it is permissible to curse one who was a drunkard, did not exhibit mercy, dishonored the sanctity of Madina of the Messenger, murdered Al-Hussain, gave the order for his murder and who was pleased with his murder, as for Yazeed as a person it’s not permissible even though he had committed all these acts and he was an absolute evil-doer (Fasiq).
We find in their Jurisprudence similar reasoning, meaning that it is not permissible to curse a specific person therefore it is inconclusive and is based on the comparison of evidence (Qiyas al Dalala). Therefore based on this idea neither specific drunkard nor a specific adulterer should have been subject to the Islamic punishment (Hadd) and a similar approach should have been adopted in the rest of the matters of Islamic Law (Sharia), after all, the method is the same. Therefore your logic is also invalid as you have rejected a fundamental idea hence what proof is to be acceptable.
So the logic of comparing evidence should be as follows: that Yazeed is he who consumed alcohol, the one who drinks alcohol is an accursed one, therefore this Yazeed is accursed.
However if they claim that cursing should be avoided based on the saying of the Prophet (Sale Allah Aleh Wa Aalihi Wasalam): ‘A believer does not curse copiously’ then this would be better for God fearing individuals and God knows best.
Al-Ilm Al-Shamikh Fi Ethaar Al-Haq Ala Alaba wal Mashaikh, pages 367-368
Twenty One: Allamah Abdul Ali Muhammad Sahalwi cursed Yazeed
Allamah Abdul Ali Muhammad Sahalwi al-Ansari al-Lucknawi in his authority work Fawateh al-Rehmut Ba-Sharah Musalam Al-Sabut, Volume 2 page 273:
(يزيد) ابنه مع أنه كان من أخبث الفساق وكان بعيدا بمراحل من الامامة بل الشك في ايمانه خذله الله تعالى والصنيعات التي صنعها معروفة من أنواع الخبائث
“And his son Yazeed was the most deceptive of all evil doers (Fasiq) and was so far away from the status of Imamate, in fact his faith (Iman) is questionable, may Allah not bless him. All those various types of evil acts he committed are well known”
Fawateh al-Rehmut, volume 2 page 273
Nasibi grounds for NOT cursing Yazeed
Continuing on from the above text we read Ibn Katheer tried to explain why some concerned parties opposed cursing Yazeed. This is the bit that Azam Tariq failed to quote and thus took Ibn Katheer’s words out of context (yet again):
“Some have opposed cursing Yazeed and written books urging people to refrain from such a practice since by making Yazeed a waseela for cursing, the curse may fall back onto his father and other Sahaba”.
By this reasoning, Ibn Katheer has in effect placed the ropes into the hands of his Nasibi brethren; the only reason that Yazeed should not be cursed is because by doing so his dear old father might also be at risk of being cursed. If Mu’awiya or the other Sahaba did nothing wrong, then what on earth is there to worry about?
One should applaud Imam Abu Ya’ala and his son who sided with the truth. It is also interesting that Ibn Kathir, whose work is quoted by Azam Tariq, actually does nothing to exonerate Yazeed.
Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s views regarding those that praise Yazeed
The statement by one of the most esteemed Sunni Imams Ibn Hajar Asqalani regarding the one who praises Yazeed is quite serious, yet we find Nawasib like those of Ansar.org, Sipah-e-Sahabah (hcy.com) and some self proclaimed scholars like that of Dr. Zakir Naik trying to absolve Yazeed [la] and making an attempt to praise him. Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani records:
‘Loving and glorifying him is not done except by a heretic who has void belief because he (Yazeed) had such characteristics that his lover deserves to be faithless, because to love and hate just in the sake of God is the sign of faith’
Al-Emta bil al-Arbaeen, page 96
- Was there an ijma in Yazeed’s Khilafah?
- Was Yazeed’s khilafah rightful?
- The stance of Imam Hussain (as)
- Yazeed’s killing of Imam Hussain (as)
- The incident of Hara
- Hadith referring to Yazeed and his era
- Analysing hadith allegedly blessing Yazeed
- The alleged comments of Muhammad al Hanafiyya
- Cursing Yazeed
- Azam Tariq’s false attempts to represent Sunni aqeedah
- Answering common Nasibi objections to the stance of Imam Hussain (as)
- No public Twitter messages.