Chapter Three: Was Yazeed’s khilafah rightful?

Abu Sulaiman al Nasibi in his article on Mu’awiya had tirelessly sought to canvass for his Imam Yazeed’s right to rule by stating:

Many Companions gave him the allegiance as well. Al-Hafedh Abdulghani Al-Maqdisay says: “His (Yazeed’s) caliphate is rightful, sixty of the companions of the prophet peace be upon him gave him the allegiance. Ibn`Umar was one of them.” [Qayd Al-Shareed min Akhbar Yazeed, by Ibn Khaldoun, p.70]

The concept of ijma is null and void since Allah (swt)’s opposition to the bayya to Yazeed can be proven from the Qur’an

We read in Surah Baqarah verse 124 (Yusuf ‘Ali transliteration):

“And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: “I will make thee an Imam to the Nations.” He pleaded: “And also (Imams) from my offspring!” He answered: “But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers.”

We will rely on the following classical Sunni tafseer’s to understand how the leading Sunni Ulema interpreted this verse.

  1. Tafseer Khazan, volume 1 page 89
  2. Ma’lam al Tazeel, Volume 1 page 89
  3. Fathul Qadeer, Volume 1 page 140
  4. Tafseer Madarak al Tazeel, Volume 1 page 84
  5. Tafseer Durre Manthur, Volume 1 page 118
  6. Tafseer Jama al Mubeen, Volume 1 page 118
  7. Tafseer Gharaib al Qu’an, Volume 1 page 439
  8. Tafseer Ibn Katheer, Volume 1 page 167
  9. Ahkam al Quran, Volume 1 page 69
  10. Tafseer al Kabeer, Volume 1 page 494

In Tafseer Khazan, volume 1 page 89 we read as follows:

“Allah (swt) said to Ibrahim (as) that we have made the condition of Imamate to be the same as that of Prophethood, that he who amongst your descendants is Dhaalim cannot attain it”.

The verse clearly guarantees Imamate to be administered, but NOT to those that are unjust. The Ahl’ul Sunnah Ulema in their tafseers have defined Dhalimoon (pronoun of the noun Dhaalim) as kufr and fisq (transgression). Both of these traits were inherent in Abu Sulaiman’s Imam Yazeed ibn Mu’awiya.

The opinions of Ahl’ul Sunnah on the kufr and fisq of Yazeed

As evidence we are relying on the following texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

  1. Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya(Urdu), Volume 8 pages 1146, 1147 & 1165
  2. Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala, Volume 4 pages 37-38
  3. Al Sawaiq al Muhriqa, page 131
  4. Tat-heer al Janaan, page 115
  5. Sharh Fiqh Akbar, page 73
  6. Fatawa Azeezi, page 80 Dhikr Yazeed
  7. Nuzlul Abrar, page 97 Dhikr Yazeed
  8. Yanabi al Mawadah, Volume 2 page 325 Part 60
  9. Al Nasaa al Kaafiya, page 120
  10. Tareekh Ibn Khaldun, Volume 1 page 179
  11. Sharh Aqaid Nasfee, page 113 Dhikr Yazeed
  12. Tareekh Kamil, Volume 3 pages, 152, 153 and 156 and 450 events of 52 Hijri
  13. Al Imama wa al Siayasa, page 165
  14. Iqd al Fareed, Voume 2 page 258 Dhikr Yazeed
  15. Tareekh Abu al Fida, Volume 1 page 186 Dkihr al Khabar Mu’awiya
  16. Al Akbar al Tawaal, page 268 Dhikr Yazeed
  17. Tareekh Tabari, Volume 7 page 146
  18. Rasail, page 129 by Abu Bakr Jauzi
  19. Maqatil Husayn, page 172 Ch 9
  20. Tadkhira Khawwas, page 164
  21. Shadraat al-Dhahab, Volume 1 page 69 events of 61 Hijri
  22. Tareekh al Khulafa, page 204 Dhikr Mu’awiya
  23. Al Khabar al Awal, page 61 Dhikr Hukumith Ibn Ziyad
  24. Tareekh Khamees, oage 300 Dhikr Yazeed
  25. Hayaat al Haywaan, Volume 2 page 196
  26. Tareekh Islam, Volume 2 page 356 events of 63 Hijri
  27. Ahsan aur Meezan, Volume 5 page 284
  28. Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 5 page 61 Surah Ibraheem part 13
  29. Muruj al Dhahab, Volume 3 page 78 Dhikr Yazeed
  30. Tauhfa Ithna Ashari, page 6 Chapter 1
  31. Mutalib al Seul, Volume 2 page 26 Dhikr Husayn
  32. Nur al Absar, page 139 Dhikr Husayn
  33. Sharh Maqassid, Volume 2 page 309 Part 6
  34. Al Tabaqat al Kabir, Volume 5 page 96
  35. Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume 3 page 522
  36. Tareekh Ibn Asakir, page 275
  37. Meezan al Itidal, Volume 4 page 440
  38. Wafa al Wafa, Volume 1 page 127
  39. Tabthaseer wa al Sharaf, page 265 Dhikr Yazeed
  40. Mujma al Buldan, Volume 2 page 253 Dkikr Harra
  41. Fatah ul Bari, Volume 13 page 70 Dhikr Yazeed
  42. Irshad al Sari, Volume 10 pages 171 and 199 Bab ul Fitan
  43. Sirush Shahadatayn, page 26 Dhikr Shahadat Imam Hasan
  44. Minhaj al Sunnah, page 239 Dhikr Yazeed
  45. Takmeel al Iman, page 178
  46. Shaheed Karbala, pages 11-12 by Mufti Muhammad Shaafi
  47. Sharh Muwatta Imam Malik, Volume 5 page 435 by Shaykh Muhammad Zakaria
  48. Tareekh Milat, page 55 Part 3 by Qadhi Zaynul Abideen
  49. Tarrekh Islam, Volume 2 page 56 by Akbar Najeeb Abadhi
  50. Bahar Shariat, Volume 1 page 76
  51. Hidayaat al Shi’a, Volume 1 page 95 by Allamah Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi
  52. Isthaklah ai Yazeed, page 312 by Maulanan Lal Shah Bukhari
  53. Fitna Kharijee, Volume 1 page 267 by Qadhi Madhar Husayn
  54. Muktubaat Shaykh ul Islam, Volume 1 page 267 by Maulana Husayn Hamdani
  55. Sharh Shifa, Volume 1 page 694 by Mulla ‘Ali Qari al Hanafi
  56. Siraj Muneer Sharh Jama Sagheer, Volume 3 page 382
  57. Hujutul Balagha, page 507
  58. Qasim al Ulum, page 221
  59. Nabraas ala Sharh Aqaid, page 553
  60. Asaaf al Raghbayn, page 210
  61. Yazeed bin Mu’awiya, page 30 by Ibn Taymeeya
  62. Maktubaat, page 203 by Qadhi Thanaullah Panee Patee
  63. Al Shabeeya, page 60 by Barelvi
  64. Al Mafooz, page 114 Barelvi
  65. Ahsaan alwa, page 52 by Barelvi
  66. Ahkam Shariat, Volume 2 page 88 Barelvi
  67. Fatawi, Volume 5 page 51 by AA Thanvi
  68. Fatawa Rasheediya, Volume 1 page 7
  69. Skahyk ul Islam by Muhammad Qaim Nantovi Volume 1 page 258
  70. Imam Pak aur Yazeed paleed, by M Shaafi page 33
  71. Tabat Ibn Sa’d, page 283 Dhikr Ma’aqil bin Sanan
  72. Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat, Volume 1 page 120
  73. Umdah tul Qari, Volume 11 page 334
  74. Fatawa Azeezi, Volume 1 page 21
  75. Izalat al Ghaneen, Volume 1 page 368 by Maulana Haydher ‘Ali
  76. Muttalib al Saul, page 26
  77. Nur al Absar page 139
  78. Neel al Auwtar Volume 7 page 181 Dhikr Jihad
  79. Tahdheeb by Abu Shakur Shaami page 15
  80. Al Samra, page 317 by ibn Shareef Shaami
  81. Mujmua al Zadhaar, page 241
  82. Khilafat Mu’awiya, aur Yazeed page 378 Dhikr Yazeed
  83. Muruj al Nubuwat, Volume 1 page 126
  84. Ahkam al Quran, Volume 3 page 119
  85. Tareekh Ibn Asakir, Volume 5 page 107
  86. Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, page 72 Surah Muhammad


The Nasibi author’s insistence that Yazeed was not a drunkard

Before we unveil the evil character of Yazeed, let us first cite the daring claim of Nasibi author:

It is also a lie that Yazeed was an alcohol drinking person.

The author has then used the alleged comments of Muhammad bin al-Hanafiyah to prove that Yazeed was a pious person. We will discuss the alleged tradition seperately in another chapter. Let us begin the actual ‘appraisal’ of Yazeed we find in Sunni books:

Ibn Kathir’s comments on Yazeed

Interesting the very same text al Bidaya from where Abu Sulaiman had sought to extol the virtues of his Imam Yazeed, also contains comments of Ibn Kathir proving that he was indeed a drunkard. Ibn Kathir is the Wahabi’s biggest historian and a student of Ibn Taymiyya himself. As far as Wahabis are concerned, his words are written in gold. Yet Ibn Kathir himself writes in ‘al Bidayah’ Volume 8 page 1169 “Dhikr Yazeed bin Muawiya”:

“Traditions inform us that Yazeed loved worldly vices, would drink, listen to music, kept the company of boys with no facial hair [civil expression for paedophilia with boys, a form of homosexuality], played drums, kept dogs [civil expression for bestiality], making frogs, bears and monkeys fight. Every morning he would be intoxicated and would bind monkeys to a horse saddle and make the horse run”.
 Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 Page 1169, Nafees Academy Karachi

Moreover we read:

قلت: يزيد بن معاوية أكثر ما نقم عليه في عمله شرب الخمر، وإتيان بعض الفواحش

I say: The worst of offences amongst the bad deeds of Yazeed ibn Mauwiya are drinking alcohol and engaging in some immoral acts’.

Munzar bin Zubayr’s comments on Yazeed

Imam Ibn Atheer Jazri records the following testimony of Munzar bin Zubayr in ‘Tareekh al Kamil’ Volume 3 page 450:

إنه أجازني بمائة ألف ولا يمنعني ما صنع بي أن أخبركم خبره وأصدقكم عنه والله إنه ليشرب الخمر والله إنه ليسكر حتى يدع الصلاة

‘He rewarded me with one hundred thousand, but this deed will not prevent me from telling you honestly about his status, by Allah he drinks alcohol, by Allah he is drunkard and even abandons prayer’
 Tareekh al Kamil, Volume 2 page 186

Imam Dhahabi’s naration and verdict on Yazeed ‘the drunkard’

Yazeed’s drinking despite Abu Sulaiman’s denials is such an established fact that even Dhahabi, relied on as an authority by Abu Sulaiman, testifies to this fact.

In “Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala” Volume 4 pages 37, Dhahabi narrates:

“Ziyad Haarthi narrated: ‘Yazeed gave me alcohol to drink, I had never drunk alcohol like that before and I enquired where he had obtained its ingredients from’. Yazeed replied: ‘it is made of sweet pomegranate, Isfahan’s honey, Hawaz’s sugar, Taif’s grapes and Burdah’s water’. Ahmed bin Masama’ narrated: ‘Once Yazeed drank alcohol and started to dance, suddenly he fell down and his nostril began to bleed’.

After citing the above cited traditions, Imam Dhahabi then gave his own verdict regarding Yazeed that has also been recorded by Allamah Ibn al-Emaad al-Hanbali (d. 1089 H) in “Shadharat al Dhahab” Volume 1 page 69:

وقال الذهبي فيه كان ناصبياً فظاً غليظاً يتناول المسكر ويفعل المنكر افتتح دولته بقتل الحسين وختمها بوقعة الحرة فمقته الناس ولم يبارك في عمره

“Al-Dhahabi said about him (Yazeed) that he was Nasibi, rude, harsh, would drink alcohol and committed evil deeds. He commenced his reign by killing al-Hussain and concluded it with the battle of al-Hara, so the people hated him and Allah didn’t bless his life”

Moreover, in his other authority work ‘Tarikh Islam’ Volume 5 page 30, Imam Dhahabi states:

قلت: ولما فعل يزيد بأهل المدينة ما فعل، وقتل الحسين وإخوته وآله، وشرب يزيد الخمر، وارتكب أشياء منكرة، بغضه الناس، وخرج عليه غير واحد، ولم يبارك الله في عمره، فخرج عليه أبو بلال مرداس بن أدية الحنظلي

I say: ‘When Yazeed did to the people of Madina what he did and killed al-Hussain and his brothers and progeny, and Yazeed drank alcohol, and performed abominable things, then the people hated him and rose up against him more than once. God didn’t bless his life and Abu Bilal Mirdas bin Adya al-Hanzali rose against him.’

Ibn Jauzi’s comments on Yazeed ‘the drunkard’

Allamah Samhodi in his book Wafa al-Wafa records the following from Imam Ibn Jauzi:

“After the incident of Karbala, Yazeed appointed his cousin Uthman bin Muhammad bin Abu Sufyan as Governor of Madina and asked him to secure Bayah his (Yazeed’s) Bayah from the people of Madina. He (Uthman) came to Madina and prepared a delegation and sent it to visit Yazeed so that it can give Bayah to Yazeed. Yazeed gave them gifts but despite this, when the delegation returned, it expressed negative things about Yazeed and said: ‘We have returned having visited a man who has no religion, he drinks alcohol, plays instruments, keeps the company of singers and dogs [civil word for bestiality], we declare that we have broken our allegiance to him…’ Abdullah bin Abi Umro bin Hafs Mukhzomi commented: ‘Although Yazeed gave me gifts and other benefits but the reality is this man is an enemy of Allah (swt) and a drunkard. I shall separate myself from him in the same way that I remove my turban from my head’ and having said that he removed his turban from his head and a person said: ‘I come out from his Bayah in the way that I come out from this shoe of mine’ then all people began to do this to the extent that there became a pile of turbans and shoes”

Ibn Hajr’s comments on Yazeed

In his book written against the Shi’a namely ‘Sawaiq al Muhriqa’ page 221, Ibn Hajr Makki al-Haythami sets out the Sunni position on Yazeed:

One group that includes Ibn Jauzi deem Yazeed a kaafir, another group says that he was not a kaafir, this is a matter of dispute in the Ummah and the majority of Ahl’ul Sunnah agree that he was a fasiq (transgressor), a fajir (one that commits debauchery) and a drunkard.

Al-Waqidi has recorded from various ways that Abdullah bin Hanzallah narrated: ‘verily we opposed Yazeed at that time when we feared that Allah (swt) would send down stones on us, Yazeed considered nikah (marriage) with mothers, daughters and sisters to be permissible, drank alcohol and abandoned prayers’.

Ibn Hajr al Makki like Abu Sulaiman and Azam Tariq was a major adherent of Mu’awiya, and in fact wrote a book in honour of Mu’awiya. Yet even he deemed Yazeed to be a fasiq. The Ulema of Ahl’ul Sunnah are united that Yazeed was a fasiq. Nasibis such as Abu Sulaiman and Azam Tariq of course beg to differ as they support anyone who hates Ahlulbayt, even if that person uses his penis to penetrate the anuses of young boys and dogs, and the vaginas of his sisters and mother.

A Sahabi’s testimony that Yazeed was an incestuous drunkard

We read the following testimony of the Sahabi Maqal bin Sinan in al-Mustadrak al-Hakim, Volume 3 page 522:

هو رجل يشرب الخمر ويزني بالحرم

“…he is a man who drinks alcohol and performs adultery with Mahram (blood relatives)”

al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz’s comments on Yazeed

Renowned Sunni scholar of Pakistan (Late) Allamah Shafi Okarvi Qadri who was known by the title “Khateeb A’zam of Pakistan” wrote a book “Imam Paak aur Yazeed Paleed” [The pure Imam and filthy Yazeed] wherein he refuted one of the lovers of Yazeed [la] Maulana Mahmood Abbasi. During the course of the argument, Allamah Okarvi quoted the famed anti-Shia scholar and the beloved of Ahle Sunnah Muhadith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehalwi who wrote the following about Yazeed:

“Verily, Hussain (as) rejected the proposal to give bayah to Yazeed because he was Fasiq, drunkard and an oppressor and Hussain went Makkah.[Sirul Shahadatayn, page 12]“
 Imam Paak aur Yazeed Paleed, page 97 (Zia ul Quran publications, Lahore)

Qadhi Thanaullah’s comments on Yazeed’s kufr

We read in Tafseer Mazhari:

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 whilst the place for the sunset (alcohol) is my mouth, thus, if one day alcohol was made Haram in Ahmad’s religion, then O addressee, 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

At another place (under the commentary of 24:55), Qadhi Thanaullah wrote:

“It is possible that this verse refers to Yazeed bin Muawiyah. Yazeed had martyred the grandson of Holy Prophet (s) and his companions, those companions were actually the members of the Prophet’s family. He disgraced the honor of the Prophet (s) and then became proud of it and stated: ‘Today, vengeance for the day of Badr has been taken’. He was the one who brought the army to storm Madina and destroyed it during the incident of Hara, and he dishonored the mosque that had been founded on the basis of Taqwa and which has been referred to as one of the gardens of heaven. He installed positions in order to stone the house of Allah, he was the one who martyred Abdullah bin Zubair [ra] the grandson of the first caliph Abu Bakr [ra]. He did such indecent things that he finally denounced the religion of Allah and made alcohol Halal that had been made Haram by Allah”
 Tafseer Mazhari [Urdu], Volume 8 page 268

Mu’awiya also knew that Yazeed drank alcohol and commited other sins

Ibn Kathir in his authority work ‘Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya’ (Urdu) Vol 8 page 1156 “Dhikr Yazeed bin Muawiya” testifies that Muawiyah also knew of Yazeed’s drinking and in this regard he advised him through poetry to hide such actibities away from the public glare. Ibn Kathir states:

Yazeed in his youth indulged in alcohol consumption and used to do other things youth would do, and this came to the attention of Mu’awiya who wanted to advise him warmly so he said to him: ‘O my son, you do have capability of achieving what you want without disgrace and debasement, which will destroy your youthfulness and value, and will make your enemy happy at your adversity and your friend will treaty you badly’. He then stated: ‘O my son, let me recite to you some couplets, try to learn manners from these couplets and memorise them by heart’. Thus, Muawiyah recited:
“Stay all the day long in the pursuance of heights and have patience on the departure of a close mate, until the darkness of night appears and your enemy falls asleep, thus, do whatever you wish to do throughout the night, night is like a day for the wise, there are plenty of Fasiq people whom you deem pious, but they spend their nights committing strange things, night has provided veils to their acts and he has spent the night with calm and pleasure, whilst the wish of a stupid person is of a visible nature.”

 Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya (Urdu) Vol 8 page 1156 (published by Nafees Academy Karachi)

We appeal to our readers to ponder over this reference carefully. Who knows a man’s character better than his father? Abu Sulaiman relied on Ibn Kathir’s narration wherein Ibn Hanafiyya said he had never seen Yazeed drinking alcohol. In the same book Ibn Kathir records the testimony of Mu’awiya himself, namely his advice that Yazeed keep his alcoholism a secret. Tell us Abu Sulaiman whose word is more reliable yours or Muawiya’s?

Yazeed’s rule was dogged by alcoholism and transgression

We read in Muruj al Dhahab:

“Due to his hatred of Allah (swt) Yazeed openly drank alcohol. In his deeds he followed the Seerah of Pharoah, but Pharoah was more just to his own subjects.”

In Wafyat al-Ayan Volume 3 page 287 popularly known as Tarikh Ibn Khalkan we read the following testimony of the great Sunni scholar Ibn Khalkan:

وهو اللاعب بالنرد والمتصيد بالفهود ومدمن الخمر، وشعره في الخمر معلوم

“Yazeed would hunt with cheetas play chess and drink alcohol and had famous poems about alcohol”.

We read the following testimony of Hassan al-Basri in Tarikh Abul Fida, Volume 1 page 288:

يزيد وكان سكيراً خميراً يلبس الحرير ويضرب بالطنابير

“Yazeed drank alcohol, wore silk and played the tambourine”.

We read in Hayaat al Haywaan:

وهو المتصيد بالفهد واللاعب بالنرد ومدمن الخمر

“Yazeed would hunt with cheetas, play chess and drink alcohol”.

People opposed Yazeed due to his atrocious deeds

We read in Tareekh Khamees:

ثم أن اكابر أهل المدينة نقضوا بيعة يزيد لسوء سيرته ويشرب الخمر

“The prominent people of Medina broke the bayya to Yazeed on account of his bad character and drinking alcohol”

Any narrations by Yazeed are to be rejected

In Ahsan aur Meezan:

“Yazeed was a fasiq, faajir, we cannot rely on his narrations”

Yazeed was such a fasiq that not a single hadith of his can be accepted, when this is the case then his khilafat cannot be accepted either.

Shah Abdul Haqq Dehlavis comments on impure Yazeed the drunkard

In Takmeel al Iman page 97 Shah Abdul Haqq Dehlavi gives Yazeed a number of titles such as impure, fasiq and drunkard.

It is not permissible to say Yazeed “(r)”

In Fatawa Abdul Hai, the author states after condemning Yazeed, “…one should not say Yazeed radhina or rahmathullah”.

Barelvi Ulema have deemed Yazeed a fasiq

Ahmad Reza Barelvi in Irfan al Shariat stated:

“There is an agreement amongst the Ahl’ul Sunnah that he was a fasiq and a fajir, the dispute is over whether he was a kaafir”.

Shariat Mukhammad Majid ‘Ali Shakir stated in Badh Shariat:

“Some say ‘Why should we discuss such a thing since he [Yazeed] was a King and he [Husayn] was also a King’ – one who makes such comments {refusing to hold opinion on Yazeed and Husayn (as)] is accursed, a Kharijee, Nasibi and hell bound. The dispute is over whether he [Yazeed] was a kaafir. The madhab of Abu Hanifa stipulates that he was a fasiq and fajir, nor was he a kaafir nor a Muslim”.

Deobandi Ulema have deemed Yazeed to be a fasiq

Whilst Azam Tariq claims to reflect the views of the Deobandi Sect, it is worthy to note that the founder of Dar al Ulum Deoband, Muhammad Qasim Nanuthee stated in Qasim al Ulum:

“Yazeed was a fasiq, he was irregular in Salat, committed Bidah and was Chief of the Nasibi”.

Ashraf ‘Ali Thanvi in Fatawi stated:

“Yazeed was a fasiq, there are different levels of fisq”.

Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi in Fatawa said:

“One should refrain from calling Yazeed a kaafir, but there is no objection to referring to him as a fasiq”.

In Shaheed ai Kerbala aur Yazeed, Deobandi scholar Muhammad Tayyib stated:

“Yazeed was a fasiq and a fajir and there is absolute unanimity amongst the scholars on this point”.

The Prophet’s prophecy that Yazeed would destroy the religion

We read in Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 5 page 435:

Abu Ubaida al-Jarah narrated that Allah’s messenger (s) said: ‘My nation’s matter will remain on justice until the first person who shall spoil it, who will be a man belonging to the Bani Umaya namely Yazeed.’

Shaykh Ahmed Aziz in his authority work Siraj al Munir Sharah Jami al-Saghir, Volume page elobarated:

يزيد بن معاوية واضرابه من احداث ملوك بني أمية فقد كان منهم ما كان من قتل أهل أهل البيت

“Yazid bin Mu’awyia and those is similar to him from the young rulers of Bani Umaya killed the progeny of Ahlulbayt”

Mulla Ali Qari in Sharh Shifa commenting on hadith that the Deen will be harmed by young men states:

“The destruction of the Deen at the hands of a young man refers to Yazeed bin Mu’awiya who sent Muslim bin Uqba to pillage Madina”

Mulla Ali Qari in Mirqat Sharah Mishkaat, commenting on hadith that the Deen will be harmed by young men states:

“It refers to those who came after the rightly guided caliphs such as Yazeed bin Muawiyah and Abdul Malik bin Marwan”

The amount of condemnation that the Sunni Ulema have vented against Yazeed is astounding. The amount of material that we have presented should convince our readers that the appraisals that these Nasibi present are lies, and the Azam Tariq’s and Abu Sulaiman’s of this world would never be able to reply to these references.

Yazeed was a homosexual

Imam Dhahabi records the following words from the sermon of Abdul Malik bin Marwan in ‘Tarkeeh Islam’ Volume 1 page 634:

ولست بالخليفة المستضعف – يعني عثمان – ولا الخليفة المداهن – يعني معاوية – ولا الخليفة المأبون – يعني يزيد

“I am not weak like Uthman and I am not cunning like Mu’awiya and I am not a homosexual like Yazid”

The tradition is also recorded in old transcripts of ‘Al Bidayah wal Nihayah’ whilst in the present transcripts available on the internet, the filthy Nawasib have committed Tahreef bu substituting the word Ma’bun (homosexual) with Ma’un (secure).

We would ask actual Sunnis to go and ask your imams whether a man that does such a thing is a fasiq (transgressor) or not? Can he be an Imam or not? We congratulate Azam Tariq the pride of Lut, who is advocating the piety of Yazeed, and deeming him to be a legitimate Imam. Perhaps the late Azam Tariq was himself a closet homosexual.

Yazeed used to copulate with his mother and sisters

Here we shall cite the following authentic Sunni sources:

  1. Tabaqat al Kabeera, Volume 5 page 66 Dhikr Abdullah bin Hanzala and Volume 4 page 283
  2. Tareekh ul Khulafa, (Urdu), page 210 Dhikr Yazeed
  3. Sawqih al Muhriqa, page 132 Dhikr Yazeed
  4. Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume page 522
  5. Al Isaba, Volume 3 page 469
  6. Ya Nabi al Mawaddah, page 326
  7. Tareekh Ibn Asakir, Volume 7 page 275
  8. Fatawi Abdul Hai, page 79
  9. Tareekh al Islam, Volume 2 page 356
  10. Aujaz al Masalaik Sharh Muwatta Imam Malik, page 435

We read in Tabaqat:

“Abdullah bin Hanzala the Sahaba stated ‘By Allah we opposed Yazeed at the point when we feared that stones would reign down on us from the skies. He was a fasiq who copulated with his mother, sister and daughters, who drank alcohol and did not offer Salat”

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti writes in Tareekh ul Khulafa:

“Waqidi has narrated from Abdullah bin Hinzala al Ghaseel: ‘We prepared to attack Yazeed at the time when we were sure that stones would come from sky because people were performing Nikah with their mothers, sisters and daughters. They were drinking alcohol and have left prayers’.”
 Tareekh ul Khulafa (Urdu) page 210 published by Nafees Academy Karachi

Imam Dhahabi has recorded the statement of Abdullah bin Hinzala al Ghaseel in the following manner:

فقال : يا قوم والله ما خرجنا حتى خفنا أن نرجم من السماء ، رجل ينكح أمهات الأولاد والبنات والأخوات

“Oh people, we better start a movement to oppose Yazeed otherwise stones may reign down on us because he is a man who performs zina with slave women, daughters and sisters.”

We read the following testimony of the Sahabi Maqal bin Sinan in al-Mustadrak al-Hakim, Volume 3 page 522:

هو رجل يشرب الخمر ويزني بالحرم

“…he is a man who drinks alcohol and performs adultery with Mahram”

Now we have these Nasibi such as Afriki and Sipaa-e-Sahaba are praising a man who was so filthy he indulged in incest to satisfy his lusts, and these Nasibi deem him to be the lawful successor to Rasulullah (s).

Yazeed bin Mu’awiya’s rejection of the Qur’an

We shall rely on the following reputable books of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

  1. Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah Volume 8 page 204 Dhikr Ras al Husayn
  2. Minhaj al Sunnah Volume 2 page 249 Dkikr Yazeed
  3. Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 73 Dhikr Yazeed
  4. Sharh Tafseer Mazhari Volume 5 page 21 Surah Ibrahim
  5. Shadraat al-Dhahab page 69 Dhikr
  6. Maqatail Husayn Volume 2 page 58 Dhikr
  7. Tadhkira tul Khawwas page 148
  8. Tareekh Tabari Volume 11 pages 21-23 Dhikr 284 Hijri
  9. Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani (commentary of Surah Muhammad)

When the head of Husayn (as), the grandson of the Holy prophet (saws), was presented before Yazeed he recited the couplets of the kaafir Zubayri:

“Banu Hashim staged a play for Kingdom there was no news from the skies nether was there any revelation”

We have proven from the sources of Ahl’ul Sunnah that Yazeed rejected the concept of revelation; rather he deemed all this a stage for power by Rasulullah (s). This proves that Yazeed was a kaafir, so what right do these Nasibi have to extol Yazeed, deem him to to the rightful Khalifah over the Muslims and Ameer’ul Momineen?

In Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani it is stated clearly:

“Yazeed the impure denied the Prophethood of Rasulullah (s). The treatment that he meted out to the people of Makka, Medina and the family of the Prophet proves that he was a kaafir”.

The problem is Sunni Islam accepts as a khalifa (literally ‘successor’ to the Prophet (saws)) a man who clearly did not believe in the Qur’an and instead believed the Holy Prophet (saws) was a fraud. This is part of Sunni doctrine. It is unacceptably and obviously FLAWED, both logically and also intuitively. So what can we make of this religion? Such ridiculous dogmas exist because the whole structure is based on a fundamental lie and injustice: the usurpation of the true Khilafat from Ali (as) which was his divinely sanctioned prerogative, and instead the institution of Abu Bakr as khalifa. So the lies became bigger and bigger as time went on, to the degree that in the 21st century Yazeed is even hailed as a Santa-Saint by the modern-day Nasibi camp amongst Sunnis.

Yazeed bin Mu’awiya’s declaration on the pulpit of the khalifa that Yazeed was not worthy of Khilafah

We read in Sawaiq, page 134 about what the khalifa succeeding Yazeed said in his inaugural address as khalifa:

“When Yazeed’s son came to power he gave the speech: ‘Khilafat is from Allah (swt). My grand father Mu’awiya bin Abu Sufyan fought for khilafat against that individual who was more entitled to it, that being ‘Ali. He [Mu'awiya] performed actions that you are all aware of, and he is suffering in his grave for that. Then my father Yazeed became the khalifah even though he was not deserving of khilafat. He fought the grandson of Rasulullah (s) [Husayn (as)] and is suffering in the grave on account of his sins.’ Mu’awiya bin Yazeed then proceeded to cry, ‘It is a terrible thing that we are fully aware of Yazeed’s bad deeds: he slaughtered the family of the Prophet (s), he deemed alcohol halal, and set fire to the Ka’aba. I don’t need this khilafat, you deal with it”

This is what a son said about his father and grandfather. Not surprisingly, this lone voice of conscience amongst the Umayyads didn’t last long in power, and was rapidly succeeded by the power-hungry branch of the Umayyads led by Marwan, whose devious and vile character are vouched for in the references at the start of this article. Here one khalifa is condemning his two predecessors. Yet Sunni Islam is content to believe that they were one happy family.

Similarly in Tareekh Khamees Volume 2 page 301, “Dhikr Mu’awiya the second” and Hayaat al Haywan Volume 1 page 88 “Dhikr al Awaaz” we read that Mu’awiya the second stated in a sermon:

“My father Yazeed did not deserve to attain the position as khalifah over the Prophet’s Ummah”.

Yazeed bin Mu’awiya was such a fasiq that his own son sought to distance himself from his reign and publicly declared that Yazeed was not entitled to be khalifah on account of his fasiq actions. These are the comments of Yazeed’s son. Yet despite the testimony of the countless scholars we have cited, the countless companions, and above all, Al-Hussain (as) himself, and here Yazeed’s own son, the 21st century Nasibis of and Sipah-e-Sahaba think they know better.

Mu’awiya was fully aware of Yazeed’s transgression

As evidence we shall rely on the following texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

  1. Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya (Urdu) Volume 8 page 1156 “Dhikr Yazeed”
  2. Tareekh Ibn Khaldun page 176 Dhikr Bayya
  3. Thatheer al Janaan page 52
  4. Nasa al Kaafiya page 38
  5. Tadkhira al Khawwas page 161 Dhikr Yazeed
  6. Serra al Alam’an naba Volume 3 page 105
  7. Tareekh Tabari Volume 2 page 174 Events of 56 Hijri

We read in Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya (urdu) Vol 8 page 1156 “Dhikr Yazeed bin Muawiyah”:

Yazeed in his youth indulged in alcohol consumption and used to do other things youth would do, and this came to the attention of Mu’awiya who wanted to advise him warmly so he said to him: ‘O my son, you do have capability of achieving what you want without disgrace and debasement, which will destroy your youthfulness and value, and will make your enemy happy at your adversity and your friend will treaty you badly’. He then stated: ‘O my son, let me recite to you some couplets, try to learn manners from these couplets and learn them by heart’. Thus, Muawiyah recited:
“Stay all the day long in the pursual of heights and have patience on the departure of a close mate, until the darkness of night appears and your enemy falls asleep, thus, do whatever you wish to do throughout the night, night is like a day for the wise, there are plenty of Fasiq people whom you deem pious, but they spend their nights commiting strange things, night has provided veils to their acts and he has spent the night with calm and pleasure, while the wish of a stupid person is of a visible nature.”

 Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya (Urdu) Vol 8 page 1156 (published by Nafees Academy Karachi)

The advocate of Mu’awiya then seeks to defend this action by stating:

“Mu’awiya’s advice that Yazeed hide his acts is in accordance with Hadith wherein Rasulullah (s) said that one should seek to cover up the faults of others”.

This proves that Mu’awiya was fully aware of his son’s disgraceful acts.

We also read in al Bidaya Volume 8 page 79:

وكتب معاوية إلى زياد يستشيره في ذلك ، فكره زياد ذلك لما يعلم من لعب يزيد وإقباله على اللعب والصيد

“Mu’awiya wrote to his [bastard] brother Ziyad to seek advice on securing the bayya for Yazeed. Ziyad was not receptive of this since he knew that he [Yazeed] was fond of hunting and had done bad deeds.”

Yazeed’s own uncle was aware of his bad acts. Hence to suggest that his dear father had no idea that his son possessed bad traits is an utter lie, after all he was the King over the nation who kept news of all developments throughout his empire. Is it believable he had no idea of the deeds of his own son? It is a testament to the truth that Mu’awiya’s own advocate Ibn Kathir highlights the fact that Mu’awiya knew of his son’s faults.

Mu’awiya’s motive behind appointing his Fasiq son as Khalifah

Abu Sulaiman al Nasibi in his article on Mu’awiya sought to apply conjecture, seeking to defend Mu’awiya’s appointment of his son by stating:

Perhaps the reason that pushed Mu’awiyah to take allegiance to Yazeed was to push away the disagreement and to be one in this crucial time at which the Ummah lived and where a lot of people claimed the caliphate. Hence, Mu’awiyah thought that by giving the leadership to Yazeed would be a good thing for the Ummah and it would prevent another affliction of happening

These Nawasib dig up the most bizarre excuses – the reason Mu’awiya made Yazeed his son was not for these namby-pamby ‘maybe’ reasons. It’s because all kings want to make their sons the king after them. It’s called monarchy and nepotism. It’s why all the scholars say Mu’awiya made Yazeed khalifa. Do the Ansar team live on another planet?

It is a fickle effort to cover up Yazeed’s Nasibi father’s sin. If we really want to know Mu’awiya’s motive, why use guesswork when we have his own testimony. We thus read in al Bidayah Volume 8 page 118 that prior to his death, Mu’awiya admitted his appointment of his son was based on his love for him, nothing else.

“If it was not my love for Yazeed, I would have known the path of guidance.”

This proves that Mu’awiya’s motive to appoint Yazeed was not to prevent affliction as this Nasibi claims, rather his aim was only based on the love of his son and his regret that he was blinded by love is proof that Mu’awiya was fully aware that his son was a transgressor who had no right to be deemed as the Guide over Muslims. Here Mu’awiya confesses to being misguided – so the Nasibi cult reveres and follows an imam who admits he is misguided!

In connection with these words of Mu’awiya, his great advocate Ibn Hajr al Makki in Thatheer al Janaan page 52 stated:

“Mu’awiya’s saying had it not been my love for Yazeed in my heart, although I know the path of guidance, serves as testimony against him [Mu'awiya]. He placed his fasiq son over the people. Mu’awiya’s love for his son destroyed his thinking and political astuteness. Mu’awiya’s allowing his personal feelings / love to decide how the Deen should be led, to the point that his son’s transgressions [which were beyond the pale of the Sharia and merited the death penalty] were an irrelevancy constitutes a major sin for which he shall be called to answer for on the Day of Judgement”.

We read in Siyar Alam al Nubla:

“Mu’awiya said to his son, ‘The thing that I fear most of all is my act of making you my successor”.

Mu’awiya indulged in all manner of act to secure a smooth transition of power for his son: threats, intimidation, and he even had Imam Hasan (as) martyred by poison. Such methods to make his fasiq son Khalifah over the Muslims are definitely a major sin.

The Qur’an deems singing Raag (Scales) to be a major sin

We know that Yazeed was fond of listening to music and hired girls for the same purpose. Advocate of Mu’awiya, Ibn Khaldun, stated in Tareekh Ibn Khaldun:

حدث في يزيد من الفسق أيام خلافته فإياك أن تظن بمعاوية رضي الله عنه أنه علم ذلك من يزيد فإنه أعدل من ذلك وأفضل

“Yazeed showed Fisq during his Caliphate, therefore don’t think that Mu’awiya [ra] knew that about Yazid (and remained silent), surely he is just, nay he (Mu’awiya) used to make him (Yazeed) refrain from listening to songs during his (Mu’awiya’s) life time.”

Now the method Muawiyah adopted to make his Fasiq son refrain from singing and other sins has already been cited earlier from Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya (Urdu) Vol 8 page 1156 according to which Muawiyah asked Yazeed to refrain from all the sins during daylight and conduct them uinder the protection of nights! As for the forbiddance of listening music, we read in Surah Luqman verse 6 (Yusuf ‘Ali transliteration):

But there are among men those who purchase idle tales (Lahw Al-Hadith) without knowledge (or meaning) to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a humiliating Penalty.

As evidence we shall advance the following texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah that have commented on this verse:

  1. Tafseer Mazhari Volume 7 page 260 al Luqman verse 6
  2. Tafseer Madarik Volume 3 page 25 Part 21
  3. Tafseer Ibn Katheer page 221 al Luqman verse 6
  4. Tafseer Fath’ul Qadeer Volume 4 page 226
  5. Tafseer Janan Volume 4 page 177 al Luqman verse 6
  6. Rafseer Ruh al Ma’ani page 67 Part 21 al Luqan verse 26
  7. Tafsser Tabari page 39
  8. Tafseer Qurtubi, commentary of verse 6 al Luqman

In Tafseer Mazhari we read:

“The scholars have deemed Raag (singing scales) to be haraam on the basis of this verse.

We read in Tafseer Ibn Katheer:

Ibn Masud commented about the Ayah: (And of mankind is he who purchases Lahu Al-Hadith to mislead (men) from the path of Allah), “This — by Allah — refers to singing.”

Imam of the Salafies Ibn Qayim records in Eghathat al-Lahfan, Volume 1 page 241:

“You never find some one that cares about songs and music save those who are misguided from the right path”

Mu’awiya’s own admission that Yazeed did not deserve to be khalifa

For this section we shall rely on the following texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

  1. Al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 118
  2. Thatheer al Janan page 52
  3. Nasa al Kaafiya page 38
  4. Tadhkira Khawwas page 161 Dhikr Yazeed
  5. Syiar al alam al Naba Volume 3 page 105

In al-Bidayah, we read the following about Muawiyah:

وقد أصابته لوقة في آخر عمره، فكان يستر وجهه ويقول: رحم الله عبدا دعا لي بالعافية، فقد رميت في أحسني وما يبدو مني ولولا هواي في يزيد لابصرت رشدي

In the end of his life, he got a blot (on his face) and would cover his face and say: ‘May Allah’s mercy be upon the one who invocates for my health, I have been blotted on my best body part had it not been my love for Yazeed, I would have known the path of guidance.’

Blinded by his love for his son, he was willing to impose his demonic fasiq son as the Khalifah over the Muslims. How considerate! Clearly Mu’awiya’s admission proves that even he did not feel Yazeed was deserving of khilafat. Nasibi Warrior Abu Sulaiman asserts the imposition was to save fitnah, but this is a lie. Mu’awiya never made such a claim, rather he stated that he made his fasiq son the Khalifah on account of his blind love for him i.e. a father’s natural love for his son. No doubt Nasibis will claim that Mu’awiya made a mistake in ijtihaad in this respect, but they should know that one of the conditions for a mujtahid to give rulings is that he has to be adil (just), and Mu’awiya was not adil, as we have proven in our article on Mu’awiya – the Ulema of Ahl’ul Sunnah have themselves defined Mu’awiya as a transgressor.

In ‘Siyar alam al Nubla’ we read:

إن معاوية قال ليزيد: إن أخوف ما أخافه شئ عملته في أمرك

Mu’awyia said to Yazeed: ‘The thing that I fear most is the fact that I have imposed you (as my successor)’.

Deobandi scholar Aadhi Zaynul Abdideen in Tareekh Milat page 55 states

“Mu’awiya was aware of the situation, having witnessed Yazeed’s acts he deemed him to be unacceptable”.
This is more proof that Mu’awiya knew of his son’s demonic personality and yet he still sought to appoint him as khalifah over the Muslims. Mu’awiya’s regret was a shame, the reality is he had a hatred for Ahl’ul bayt (as) in his heart and wanted to keep them out of power. We would like to ask these Nasibi: you assert that khilafat is not an exclusive right of the Ahl’ul bayt (as). Could you kindly tell us which merits were missing in the members of Ahl’ul bayt (as) but were present in the Banu Ummayya Clan? Did Allah (swt) keep traits of knowledge, sense, guidance away from the Ahl’ul bayt (as), and prefer to give worldly reign to the cursed tree of Banu Ummayya? Or should we blame the Muslims in general for turning their backs on religious righteousness?

The stipulation by the Ahl’ul Sunnah Ulema that the khalifah be just makes the khilafat of Mu’awiya and Yazeed batil

For this section we shall rely on the following authentic texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

  1. Izalatul Khifa page 20 Dhikr Sharth Imamate
  2. Sharh Muwafaq page 731 Muqassad Saneeh
  3. Sharh Maqasid Volume 2 page 271 Fadail Imama
  4. Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniya page 8 by Al Mawardi
  5. Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniya page 9 by Qadi Abu Yala
  6. Tauhfa Ithna Ashari page 178 Bab 7 Imamate aqeedah

We read in Izalat ul Khifa:

“The khalifah should be a man and should be adil. By ‘just’ we mean he should refrain from major sins and should not repeat minor sins. He should also be a mujtahid”.

We read in Sharh Muqassad:

“The Imam over the Ummah should possess these merits – have sense, be Muslim, be just, free, a man, a mujtahid, and brave”

We read in Sharh Muwafaq:

“It is incumbent on the Imam / Khalifah to be adil, he should not be zaalim, since a fasiq deems the treasury to be his personal wealth, and will waste money”.

Ahl al Sunna believe that no khalifa has the right to appoint his son as khalifa without shura (consultation)

Al Mawardi in Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniya page 8 states:

“When a khilafah intends on appointing a successor the khilafah should make efforts to locate the individual that is most deserving, and the condition of khilafat is if after this extensive search a person is located, provided he is not the Khalifah’s father or son, then he can be appointed without seeking the counsel of anyone else.”

Abu Yala in this same book, echoing the words of other Salaf Ulema stated that the contract of Imamate can only go to one that is Adil, and the Qur’an stipulates that it cannot be bestowed on one that is Dhaalim. We have the consensus from the Ulema of Islam that a fasiq cannot attain the station of Imam; we can prove from the texts of Ahl’ul Sunnah that both Mu’awiya and Yazeed were not adil. Mu’awiya’s deeds throughout his reign, including efforts to secure Yazeed’s nomination via duress prove that he was not adil. When Mu’awiya was himself unjust then he had no right to appoint his fasiq son as Imam over the Ummah. Moreover his methods of intimidation to ‘win’ backing for Yazeed, makes Nasibi claims that Yazeed’s khilafat was legitimate a complete farce.

Our challenge to Sipah-e-Sahaba and

Our open challenge to Nasibis such as Abu Sulaiman and the followers of Azam Tariq is to produce a single reference from the Qur’an / hadith that deems the Imamate of a fasiq khalifah to be legitimate. We are aware that there are ridiculous coined traditions deeming it lawful to pray salat behind a fasiq Imam, but we want proof with regards to the Imam (khalifa) of Muslims not the Imam of a salafi / Deobandi mosque.


Shia Pen Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to receive regular updates on our new publications.
Shia Pen uses the "Google Groups" system for its newsletters. Subcribe Now →