Does anyone know anything about him? He rebelled against Yazid ibn Muawiya, so he's cool in my book, but I read that some Sunni ulema have denounced him, saying that he had no right to rebell and was only power-hungry.
Does anyone know anything about him? He rebelled against Yazid ibn Muawiya, so he's cool in my book, but I read that some Sunni ulema have denounced him, saying that he had no right to rebell and was only power-hungry.
As Salam Alikum
He was a Companion of the Prophet (Peace and Blessings Be Upon Him) no Sunni Scholar in their right mind would ever be critical of the Companions. The only critcal statements I have heard are from the Shia Ulema but then again I would take that with a grain of salt since to them almost every companions is evil (noazbillah).
The Prophet (Peace and Blessings be Upon Him) asked us not to look down upon his Companions.
- Do not make them targets after me.
(Timridhi, Gharib; Musnad Imam Ahmad with 3 Hasan chains)
- None of you should come to me with anything (negative) about any of my Companions for I do not want to go out to you except except with a clear heart.
(Timridhi and Abu Dawud)
And with Allah is all Success.
The spiritual warrior is he who breaks an idol;
and the idol of each person is his Ego.
- Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri
Shi'te refrain from barking please.
Sayyidina Abdullah ibnaz Zubayr radhiyallahu anhuma is the light of our eyes and our Sayyid.
Sayyidina Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan radhiyallahu anhuma is the light of our eyes and our Sayyid.
Yazeed was the Khalifa of the Believers and the vaste majority of our Sahabah Karaam alayhim ridhwaan pledged on his hand. If they pledged then who are we to rebel against him?
Hey Selamat, salam alaykum,
You have come upon one of my dearest and favouretist of companions.
Let me give you my theory on the subject.
Now it all begins with who should be khalifah, now AlHassan ibn Ali raa agreed to drop his claim for khilafah to muawiyah to stop the fitna between the Muslims, all what remained of the companions had thought it was high time th blood shed ended, so that was his agreement, the khilafah would remain with Muawiyah up to his death.
Muawiyah in turn had promised to return the rule to shurah after his death. On the death of AlHassan, the prophets grandson, he changed his mind, anounced before the people of Iraq that his son was to be caliph after him. He denied it later, when he found the prophets companions were against him.
On the death of Muawiyah Yazid ruled, AlHussein went against him, once again because -as I think-the shurah which was part of the Islamic State at the time of the prophet and the rightly guided Caliphs and that had been established by the Saqifa of bani Saad was missing, you can't just put your son on the throne, it's not part of Islam, there has to be an election and the people have to choose, like they did in the Saqifa.
Well Yazid had AlHussein(the prophet's grandson) killed in Karbalaa, but the shurah was a part of the companions upbringing. The ruler must be chosen for several reasons, and not of these reasons includes a crude way of getting rid of ones opponents.
Anyhow, Abdullah Ibn Alzubair, the son of the prophet's cousin and the grandson of Abu BAkr Alsiddiq opposed Yazid. The Kaaba was destroyed and Abdullah ibn Alzubair rebuilt it.
Now check this, he rebuilt it adding in the Hijr of Ismail.As though he wanted to make the Kaaba whole again, to include the Hijr inside, as though he were saying, now is the time for us to include shurah once again into our Islamic shariah as it was at the time of the prophet and the rightly guided Khalifs.
according to the hadith the prophet said:
"Were it not that your people are still so close to the time of Kufr, I would have knocked the Kaabah down and rebuilt it with two doors a door through which they could enter and exit"
also:
Aisha said the the prophet saaws said:
Did you not see that when your people (ie Quraish) rebuilt the Kaabah they did not build it fully on the foundations of Ibrahim? She said: O messenger of Allah, why do you not restore it on the foundations of Ibrahim? Allah's messenger saaws: were it not that your people are still close to the time of Kufr( ie too new to Islam) I would have done that.
So ABdullah did what the prophet had wished to do. He incorporated the Hijr into the House and gave it two doors one on the east and one on the west{akhbaar MAccah-AlAzraqi}
When Yazid died, everyone came back to their senses and pledged the Khilafah to Abdullah.
AbdelMalik Ibn Marwan you know this guy? He's the one who signed a death warrant on Mohamed ibn Abu Bakr and indirectly made the anger of the mobs and the injustice of the khalifah of Egypt at the time of Uthman ibn Afan cause the death of the beloved Uthman ibn Afan. He was the guy who set the people against Ali ibn Abi Taaleb cos he refused to give up Mohamed Ibn Abi Bakr who was like one of his sons for trial.
Well Abdel Malik killed Abdullah's cousin in Syria(Alshaam) and killed the ruler in Egypt, and sent Alhajjaj to kill and maim Abdullah, when Abdullah found the army of Alhajjaj surrounding mecca he went to his blind sick mother, (she was round about ninety years old at that time, and she was our equally beloved Asmaa bint Abi Bakr who pregnant with Abdullah used to travel from mecca to Thawr cave to bring food to her father and the prophet during the Hijrah)
Anyways, Abdullah went to his mother and said to her: Mother they have come to kill me, and I fear they will mutilate my body.
She looked at her first born son, the first baby Muslim born in Medina during the immigration to medine from Mecca and answered:
My son do you think what you are fighting for is right?
He answered without hesitation: yes!
And she said that famous phrase of hers: Does the cattle bother with it's skinning after it has died?
So Abdullah put on his armour and took his sword and fought his last battle He was killed and crucified.
Asmaa dragged her sickened weakened body daily to stand and touch his body hanging there, for three days she went her daily pilgrimage to her son's body until in agony she was heard to say: When will the time come for this knight to stand again on his feet?
The people went to hajjaj and begged him to allow them to bury Abdullah and he agreed. Asmaa died a few days later.
He fought to the last ounce of breath in his body for a complete Islam, he is a beloved son of two beloveds and grandson of a beloved.
He is Abdullah son of Alzubair hawaariy alrasoul and his cousin and son of Asmaa bint Abi Bakr and grandson of Abi Bakr ibn Alsiddiq the prophets dear friend.
Well that's the tale now check this bit:
I realised that then after the death of Abdullah ibn Alzubair AbdelMalik ibn MArwan blocked up the western door and ordered the extended part of the Kaaba to be destroyed again and built it with the Hijr Outside. It is said that when he later heard of the hadith of sayeda Aisha that the prophet had wished for what Abdullah bin ALZUbair had done he regretted his action.
It just seemed to me that it was as though he was defying the presence of Shurah in the infrastructure of Islam, and you notice how ever afterwards, the rule seems to have been handed down father to son as though it was a personal right and not in accordance to the rules binding the choice of a ruler in Shariah.
hope you enjoyed that,
wa salam alaykum
Last edited by awwabah; 01-12-06 at 04:32 PM.
يا حبذا الجنة واقترابها
طيبة وبارد شرابها
Abdullah Ibn Alzubair
Mother, they have come to tear my flesh
and weld it to the city walls. The mangonels
have rocked my base and seared the sanctuary
with their fires. Until all collapsed,
yet I restored the stones, placed
the Hijr of Ismail inside the Kaaba
to make it whole. Am I the end
of Saqifat Bani Saad, the Shurah Pledge?
Dead cattle do not feel the skinner’s knife
and I will grind my teeth to powder,
bear the stretch and fray of nerves
before the mallet’s blow. Withstand
the splinter of ganglions in my sinews
and forbid my sweat to temper
the blood, that seeps across the nails,
hammered through each hand.
Am I the end of Saqifat Bani Saad?
I’ll save my breath for one more prayer,
yet even as I exhale, Hajaj has brought his axe
and forced the Hijr outside the House.
From King’s son to King’s son!
Where are the people’s voices,
where is the Shurah Pledge?
The Kaaba crumbles! Cement its crippled walls,
secure the Hijr of Ismail,
bring back the Pledge!
a poem that was written last year, tell me what you think of it.
wa salam alaykum
يا حبذا الجنة واقترابها
طيبة وبارد شرابها
As Salam Alikum
Before anyone starts calling the Ahl as-Sunnah Nasibi's let it be known that the Ulema remained silent on Yazid, they have refrained from cursing him or praising him. He is dead and his deeds will be judged by Allah Almighty.Originally Posted by Medievalist
The spiritual warrior is he who breaks an idol;
and the idol of each person is his Ego.
- Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri
Subhanallah, my Teacher quoted the same Hadith yesterday at the Mawlid.
As Salam Alikum
Sister awwabah I love the story of Abdullah (RA) and Asma bint Abu Bakr (RA).
I remember when our teachers read us the story everyone eyes in our class was full of tears. My favourite part is;
"Peace be on you, Mother, and the mercy and blessings of God."
"Unto you be peace, Abdullah," she replied. "What is it that brings you here at this hour while boulders from Hajjaj's catapults are raining down on your soldiers in the Haram and shaking the houses of Makkah?" "I came to seek your advice," he said.
"To seek my advice?" she asked in astonishment. "About what?"
"The people have deserted me out of fear of Hajjaj or being tempted by what he has to offer. Even my children and my family have left me. There is only a small group of men with me now and however strong and steadfast they are they can only resist for an hour or two more. Messengers of the Banu Umayyah (the Umayyads) are now negotiating with me, offering to give me whatever wordly possessions I want, should I lay down my arms and swear allegiance to Abdul Malik ibn Marwan. What do you think?"
Raising her voice, she replied:
"It's your affair, Abdullah, and you know yourself better. If however you think that you are right and that you are standing up for the Truth, then persevere and fight on as your companions who were killed under your flag had shown perseverance. If however you desire the world, what a miserable wretch you are. You would have destroyed yourself and you would have destroyed your men."
"But I will be killed today, there is no doubt about it."
"That is better for you than that you should surrender yourself to Hajjaj voluntarily and that some minions of Banu Umayyah should play with your head."
"I do not fear death. I am only afraid that they will mutilate me."
"There is nothing after death that man should be afraid of. Skinning does not cause any pain to the slaughtered sheep."
Abdullah's face beamed as he said:
"What a blessed mother! Blessed be your noble qualities! I have come to you at this hour to hear what I have heard. God knows that I have not weakened or despaired. He is witness over me that I have not stood up for what I have out of love for this world and its attractions but only out of anger for the sake of God. His limits have been transgressed. Here am I, going to what is pleasing to you. So if I am killed, do not grieve for me and commend me to God."
"I shall grieve for you," said the ageing but resolute Asmaa, (RA) "only if you are killed in a vain and unjust cause."
"Be assured that your son has not supported an unjust cause, nor committed any detestable deed, nor done any injustice to a Muslim or a Dhimmi and that there is nothing better in his sight than the pleasure of God, the Mighty, the Great. I do not say this to exonerate myself. God knows that I have only said it to make your heart firm and steadfast. "
"Praise be to God who has made you act according to what He likes and according fo what I like. Come close to me, my son, that I may smell and feel your body for this might be the last meeting with you."
Abdullah knelt before her. She hugged him and smothered his head, his face and his neck with kisses. Her hands began to squeeze his body when suddenly she withdrew them and asked:
"What is this you are wearing, Abdullah?"
"This is my armour plate."
"This, my son, ls not the dress of one who desires martyrdom. Take it off. That will make your movements lighter and quicker. Wear instead the sirwal (a long under garment) so that if you are killed your 'awrah will not be exposed.
Abdullah took off his armour plate and put on the sirwal. As he left for the Haram to join the fighting he said:
"My mother, don't deprive me of your dada (prayer)."
Raising her hands to heaven, she prayed:
"O Lord, have mercy on his staying up for long hours and his loud crying in the darkness of the night while people slept . . .
"O Lord, have mercy on his hunger and his thirst on his journeys from Madinah and Makkah while he fasted . . .
"O Lord, bless his righteousness to his mother and his father . . .
"O Lord, I commend him to Your cause and I am pleased with whatever You decree for him. And grant me for his sake the reward of those who are patient and who persevere." By sunset, Abdullah was dead. Just over ten days later, his mother joined him. She was a hundred years old. Age had not made her infirm nor blunted the keenness of her mind.
The spiritual warrior is he who breaks an idol;
and the idol of each person is his Ego.
- Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri
I remember now, it was a sheep!! lol, I shouldn't really write from memory, bad habit, jazak Allah for the proper wording.Skinning does not cause any pain to the slaughtered sheep."
btw Yazid is not a sahabi, he isn't a companion of the prophet, he was born 25/26 hijri during the khalifat of Sayedna Uthman. I don't know if he would classify as a tabi3ee, Allahu a3lam.
But you know when you think about it, his father was of the mualafati quluubuhum he was bought into Islam, and sayedna muawiyah though a wonderful sahabi and was known for his piety, he still had some dregs of preIslamism inside him, no one is perfect and Yazid was brought up as a child watching his father do battle against ALi bin Abi Taleb, so he would not have that same devotion to the family of the prophet that the companions had. He was brought up to a life of power and riches and it is hard to deprive someone who is used to princedom of his princedom I guess.
A child is affected by it's surroundings and I think I could find excuses for the actions of Yazid towards Sayedi Abdullah bin AlZubair who was not just a companion of the prophet but also brought up in a great household, the household of Abu Bakr, Abu Bakr's house hold is unique, he was a man that was rare amongst all men, and when this man wanted by the elite of Mecca runs away and leaves his family without food or money. You find his pregnant daughter working her way uphill to take them food and water, you find his son, acting as a spy to find out the news of mecca and bring it to his father and the prophet, you find his servant coming and going silently with his sheep to clear the footmarks of Asmaa and her brother. And you find a staunch Asmaa with a bleeding torn ear defiantly facing ABu Jahl and all Mecca and refusing to give up the whereabouts of the prophet.
That's Abdullah's mother, no wonder he isn't going to agree to anything but shurah, but Yazid was born into a rich Islam not a striving struggling one, so I think he would have to be different in the way he thinks and his tenacity to his rule.
As for AbdelMalik ibn MArwan, the one who created all the fitna and who was the cause of death either directly or indirectly of so many many companions, well he too was of the mualafati quloubuhum and yet if he hadn't ruled then where would we be without our beloved Omar Ibn AbdelAziz? He was his great great great great grandson.
So I guess it's best to leave Allah to judge people but it's also a good idea to learn from the mistakes of the past.
Wallahu a3lam
يا حبذا الجنة واقترابها
طيبة وبارد شرابها
mashaALlah u guys are so knowledgble,
“The great Imam ash-Shafi’, he went to his teacher Waki`
Complaining about the weakness of his memory.
He told him, ‘abandon rebellion, for knowledge is a light
And the light of Allah is not bestowed upon a rebel.”
Who's a Shia?
You know, you don't make any sense. I was once warned about people like you, you're one of those extremist athari. You hate Shia so much that everything that Shia hate is holy to you. To you and your kind, everyone is completely right and completely wrong at the same time. Ibn al-Zubayr was a pious sahaba to you, but was wrong to rebel against Yazid. Ali was righteous and so Muawiya, but Muawiya was right to rebell against Ali, who was also right to fight Muawiya who was wrong to rebel. So if Yazid was the legitimate amir-ul-mumineen, how can Ibn al-Zubayr still be the 'light of your eyes' since he rebelled?
As Salam Alikum
No the Ulema are in agreement that Ali (May Allah be Pleased with Him) was correct and Muawiya (May Allah be Pleased with Him) erred in his Ijtihad.Ali was righteous and so Muawiya, but Muawiya was right to rebell against Ali
Yazid was never amir ul-mumineen and many Sahaba's rose up against him and they were killed. Some Sunni Ulema permitted cursing Yazid but the vast majority stated that silence is best and his affair is with his Lord Most High.So if Yazid was the legitimate amir-ul-mumineen
And with Allah is all Success.
P.S. Just read , Imam Tabari’s Tarikh al-Umam wa al-Muluk & Imam Ibn Kathir’s al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya if you understand arabic, inshallah it will clear up a lot of misconceptions.
Last edited by al-ghazalli; 01-12-06 at 09:04 PM.
The spiritual warrior is he who breaks an idol;
and the idol of each person is his Ego.
- Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri
What did the Sunni ulema have to say about Yazid?
Ibn Kathir:
...Traditions inform us that Yazeed loved worldly vices, would drink, listen to kept the company of boys with no facial hair, played drums, kept dogs, not a day would go by when he was not in a drunken state.
....Muslim was ordered to ransack Medina for three days. Yazeed committed a major sin. Sahaba and their children were slaughtered openly; other heinous acts were also perpetuated. We have already mentioned that he had Ibn Ziyad kill the grandson of Rasulullah (s) Husayn and his companions. In those three days in Madina, it is difficult to mention the type of acts that were carried out. By doing this act Yazeed wanted to secure his governance,
in the same way Allah (swt) broke the neck of every Pharoah, the true King (swt) also broke the neck of Yazeed."
"Rasulullah (s) said whoever perpetuated injustice and frightened the residents of Medina, the curse (la'nat) of Allah (swt), His Angels and all people is on such a person.
....When Yazeed wrote to Ibn Ziyad ordering him to fight Ibn Zubayr in Makka, he said 'I can't obey this fasiq. I killed the grandson of Rasulullah (sawas) upon his orders, I'm not now going to assault the Kaaba'
- Al Bidayah wa al-Nihayah
Ibn Jauzi:
...Yazeed appointed his cousin Uthman bin Muhammad bin Abu Sufyan as Governor of Madina. He sent a delegation to visit Yazeed who bore gifts so that they might take the oath of allegiance to him. Upon their return they said 'We have returned having visited a man who has no religion, he drinks, plays instruments, keeps the company of singers and dogs, we declare that we have broken our allegiance to him. Abdullah bin Abi Umro bin Hafs Mukhzumee commented 'Yazeed gave me gifts. 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]….
Ibn Hajar al-Haytami:
One group have deemed Yazeed to be a kaafir, another has stated he was a Muslim but a fasiq (transgressor), a fajir (one that commits debauchery) and a drunkard. There is consensus over his fisq (transgression). One party of Ulema have stated that you can curse him by name, this includes individuals such as Ibn Jauzi and Ahmad. One group made up of individuals such as Ibn Jauzi deem Yazeed a kaafir, others say he was not a kaafir but rather this is a matter that has caused a difference of opinion.
The majority of Ahl'ul Sunnah all agree that he was a fasiq (transgressor), a fajir (one that commits debauchery) and a drunkard. Waqidi had recorded a narration 'Verily we opposed Yazeed fearing Allah (swt) would reign stones down on us, Yazeed considered nikah (marriage) with mothers and sisters to be permissible and drank alcohol".
- Al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah
Ibn Taymiyah:
Yazeed had the sword and hence he had the power to deal with anyone that opposed him. He had the power to reward his subjects with the contents of the treasury, and could also withhold their rights. He had the power to punish criminals; it is in this context that we can understand that he was the khalifah and king. Issues such as Yazeed's piety or lack of it, or his honesty or lack of it, is another matter. In all of his actions Yazeed was not just, there is no dispute amongst the people of Islam on this matter
- Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah
Ibn Khaldun:
Yazeed's time of governance can be seen as fisq and debauchery, and the blame is on Mu'awiya who should have controlled him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni_view_of_Yazid_I
agreed Sidi we know that he was not a just (adl) and he commited many sins, but he has died and his deeds will be judged by Allah Almighty.
The spiritual warrior is he who breaks an idol;
and the idol of each person is his Ego.
- Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri
True enough. I don't believe in cursing him, but when I'm told that (1) I'm a shia who is 'barking', and (2) that Yazid was the rightful Khalifa and no one had the right to rebel against him, I feel it's my duty to point out how our scholars view him. I think certain Athari extremists should stop barking.
The thing who had the audacity to say that Sayyidina Muawiyah radhiyallahu anh had the dregs of pre-Islam in him has said weighty words indeed.
May ALLAH recompense her for it.
Ya ALLAH raise me with Sayyidina Ali and Sayyidina Muawiyah.
Ya ALLAH raise me with Sayyidina Abu Sufyan and Sayyidatuna Hind.
Ya ALLAH raise me with the Companions and the Righteous and fill my heart with love for them and for those who love them, and as for those who bear animosity towards the Sahaabah fill my heart with animosity towards them.
BY ALLAH Sayyidina Ameer Muawiyah radhiyallahu anh is a star from the galaxy of Sahaabah and those dogs of this world and the next who presume to pass comments on Him would be better advised to ponder over their own pre-Islamic ideas rather than trying to spit on the stars - for truly a person who tries to spit at the stars only ends up dirtying his own face.
And mods - I tried to be refrained in my speech here, if even this is too offensive then so be it because the person who barks at my Nabi salallahu alayhi wa sallams Companions is nothing more than a dog in my eye. End of.
And in regards to Yazeed - it should be noted that MOST of the sons of Sayyidina Ali radhiyallahu anh did not go out with Sayyidina Husayn and further that the vaste majority of Sahaabah Karaam accepted him as the Ameer.
If Karbala was the epic battle between haq and batil that the Rawaafidh will have us believe then the Sunnis have no choice but to go and apostate and accept the Rafidhi aqeedah in regards the Sahaabah Karaam. On the other hand if Karbala was not that epic battle but rather a tragedy in our history and a plot caused by satanic forces from outside then we can honour our Elders and remain withing the limits of our deen - alhamdulillah.
What thing and who is 'her'?
thank you. May Allah forgive me if I have said something to anger Him. Sayedi Abi Dhar Alghafari had preislamic conceptions(jahiliyah trait) when he insulted sayedi Bilal by calling him the son of a slave. The prophet said so. If I say that it was wrong to call anyone by a name hated to him such as what sayedi Abi Dhar said, am I being critical of him? Of course not! I love him. I love all the sahabah.The thing who had the audacity to say that Sayyidina Muawiyah radhiyallahu anh had the dregs of pre-Islam in him has said weighty words indeed.
May ALLAH recompense her for it.
I think love of power and the wish to keep it in his family is a jahiliya trait, the intent was certainly not to insult sayedna Muawiyah, he was an extremely pious man. But the fact remains that sayedi Omar Ibn AlKhattab refused to allow any of his children to be chosen for khilaafah. He considered it a responsibility.
You don't see the difference between reading about the sahaba and trying to find out what went wrong where and hoping that such a thing doesnt occur again? Mistakes have to happen and when they do it is usually a good idea to know where they are and to learn from them, else what is the use of our reading or learning our history? It's not just stories to enjoy but rather history from which to derive understanding on how to improve our situation.
wa salam alaykum
"the thing"
يا حبذا الجنة واقترابها
طيبة وبارد شرابها
Sorry but your logic is flawed.
For Sayyidina Rasulillah salallahu alayhi wa sallam to comment on the Sahaabah Karaam is one thing - who the hell is anyone alive today to comment on them? I wont dilldally around and if you find my questioning offensive then thats life - who the hell are you to pass a comment on Sayyidina Ameer Muawiyah radhiyallahu anh. What is your standing that you think you can read history and make comments on people whose virtue is such that the dust that lands on their horses nostrils is worth more than us and our parents?
Secondly your comments:
"I think love of power and the wish to keep it in his family is a jahiliya trait, the intent was certainly not to insult sayedna Muawiyah, he was an extremely pious man"
anger me greatly. The insinuation is that Sayyidina Ameer Muawiyah had a love for power and wished to keep it in his family. Who the hell are you to judge his intentions. What do you know of his love for power and his wishes. I truly marvel at your audacity because you seem to think that people who are filthy inside and out today are in a position to judge the actions and intentions and hearts of the Companions.
I warn you that you are treading on very soiled ground - whatever the issue of the Sahaabah Karaam alayhim ridhwaan were you should learn from the ulama who say that we have no standing and no right to interfere in their personal and political matters. To think we are so wise as to comment on it is a great fallacy.
محمد رسول الله والذين معه اشداء على الكفار رحماء بينهم
“Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and those that are with him are Firm against the disbelievers and Merciful with each other..”
We should remember these words before we talk to our brothers and sisters.
The spiritual warrior is he who breaks an idol;
and the idol of each person is his Ego.
- Imam Abul Qasim al-Qushayri
And people should remember it even more when opening their mouths about the Sahaabah Karaam.
In other threads I admit my language may well have been extremely offensive and uncalled for - but here. No1 can make me backdown for it. Those who slight the Sahaabah Karaam in the slightest have no standing with me - we are from the descendents of HNJ.
peace be with you brother Medievalist,
I have no wish to have a standing with you or anyone. I don't set myself out to be anything.
If what I have said is considered a slight before Allah then may Allah forgive me.
I certainly don't consider I am even a spec in the shape of things compared to the sahabah of rasoul Allah, and those who followed them, if my words dont make sense then that is my fault, if my words offended Allah may He forgvie me and help me find the right path.
As for you peace be with you, I dont make a habit of arguing with brothers or sisters anywhere .
wa salam alaykum wa rahmatu Allah wa barakatuh
يا حبذا الجنة واقترابها
طيبة وبارد شرابها
alaykum salaam.
Abdullah ibn Omar {radhiyallahu a'nhu} gave bay3a to Yazid ibn Mua'wiya {radhiyallah an aboohoo}. Do you have a problem with him too, Selamat?
If you wish to praise Abdullah ibn Zubayr (radhiyallahu a'nhu}, that's fine. But not at the expense of Yazid.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone elses opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation." -Orson Welles
if anyone speaks ill of abdullah ibn zubayr (rA) then he is kaafir... so selamat if u speaking ill of him then u shld fear allah (swT)
oh hes not shiah by the way but hes close enough hes of the modern day khawarij....
And Allâh has set forth an example for those who believe, the wife of Fir'aun when she said: "My Lord! Build for me a home with You in Paradise, and save me from Fir'aun and his work, and save me from the people who are Zâlimûn
There is no nobility in anyone who lacks faith.
The wise man knows that the only fitting price for his soul is a place in Paradise.
My brother the Ahlul Bid'ah of Indo-Pak also have not to good words to say about Sayyidina Muawiyah radhiyallahu anh.if anyone speaks ill of abdullah ibn zubayr (rA) then he is kaafir... so selamat if u speaking ill of him then u shld fear allah (swT)
oh hes not shiah by the way but hes close enough hes of the modern day khawarij....
You heard of Mawlana Azam Tariq rahimahullah innit?
They say his son is called Muawiyah
What are you talking about? Are you all out of your mind?! Is there something in the athari creed that causes you to make no sense?if anyone speaks ill of abdullah ibn zubayr (rA) then he is kaafir... so selamat if u speaking ill of him then u shld fear allah (swT)
Where the ****ing hell was I insulting Ibn Zubayr??! Are you illiterate?! Can you not read that I wrote "he's cool in my book"?!?
Not particularly. I just don't like Yazid. I'm sorry if that offends you all, but when Sunni scholars (that includes, btw, your hero Ibn Taymiyya) agree that he was a very unjust ruler, I just can't like him.
calm down yeh.
im maturidi
abdullah ibn zubayr (ra).... and no one cares whether hes cool in ur book or not... cus ur book doesnt mean jack to anyone...
And Allâh has set forth an example for those who believe, the wife of Fir'aun when she said: "My Lord! Build for me a home with You in Paradise, and save me from Fir'aun and his work, and save me from the people who are Zâlimûn
There is no nobility in anyone who lacks faith.
The wise man knows that the only fitting price for his soul is a place in Paradise.
Yazeed was a filthy organism whom almostall the great Salaf as Saliheen have denounced. He was not the Ameerul Mumineen because Hazrat Imam Hussain radhiallahu taa'la anhu refused to pledge on his filthy hand.
Only some Khwarijii love yazid as the hate the ahlul bayt and Hazrat Ali radhiallahu taa'la anhu.
About Yazeed :
Ibn Kathir's comments on Yazeed
Ibn Kathir himself writes in Bidayah:
"Traditions inform us that Yazeed loved worldly vices, would drink, listen to
kept the company of boys with no facial hair [civil expression for paedophilia
boys, a form of homosexuality], played drums, kept dogs [civil expression for bestiality], not a day would go by when he was not in a drunken state".
Ibn Atheer's comments on Yazeed
In Tareekh al Kamil Volume 3 page 450 Ibn Atheer narrates from Munzir bin Zabeer:
"Verily Yazeed rewarded me with 100,000 dirhams but this cannot stop me from highlighting his state, By Allah he is a drunkard…"
Ibn Atheer's comments on Yazeed
In "Siyar A'lam Al-Nubala" Volume 4 pages 37-38, Dhahabi narrates:
"Ziyad Hurshee narrates 'Yazeed gave me alcohol to drink, I had never drunk alcohol like that before and I enquired where he had obtained its ingredients'. Yazeed replied 'it is made of sweet pomegranate, honey from Isfahan, sugar from Hawaz and grapes from Burdah…Yazeed indulged in alcohol and would participate in actions that opposed the dictates set by Allah (swt)".
Ibn Jauzi's comments on Yazeed 'the drunkard'
Ibn Jauzi in Wafa al-Wafa:
"Yazeed appointed his cousin Uthman bin Muhammad bin Abu Sufyan as Governor of Madina. He sent a delegation to visit Yazeed who bore gifts so that they might take the oath of allegiance to him. Upon their return they said 'We have returned having visited a man who has no religion, he drinks, 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 Mukhzumee commented 'Yazeed gave me gifts. 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]…."
Ibn Hajr's comments on Yazeed
In Sawaiqh al Muhriqa:
"One group have deemed Yazeed to be a kaafir, another has stated he was a Muslim but a fasiq (transgressor), a fajir (one that commits debauchery) and a drunkard. There is consensus over his fisq (transgression). One party of Ulema have stated that you can curse him by name, this includes individuals such as Ibn Jauzi and Ahmad. One group made up of individuals such as Ibn Jauzi deem Yazeed a kaafir, others say he was not a kaafir but rather this is a matter that has caused a difference of opinion.
The majority of Ahl'ul Sunnah all agree that he was a fasiq (transgressor), a fajir (one that commits debauchery) and a drunkard. Waqidi had recorded a narration 'Verily we opposed Yazeed fearing Allah (swt) would reign stones down on us, Yazeed considered nikah (marriage) with mothers and sisters to be permissible and drank alcohol".
"Dhahabi narrates that when Abdullah bin Kuzai returned from Damascus he stated that Yazeed performs zina with his mother, sister and daughters. We had better start a movement to oppose Yazeed otherwise stones may reign down on us"
This is one reason why Ibn Hajar al Makki calls Yazeed one of the most debased men in history.
A Sahaba's testimony that Yazeed was an incestuous drunkard
In Isaba we read:
"The Sahaba Maqil stated that 'Yazeed drank alcohol, committed zina with his mahram relatives, infact he performed every type of bad action"
Al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz's comments on Yazeed
In Sirush Shahadhathayn, Shah Abdul Aziz states:
"Imam Husayn did not give bayya to Yazeed because he was a drunkard, a fasiq and Dhaalim".
Ibn Taymeeya's condemnation of unjust Yazeed
Ibn Taymeeya in Minhajj:
"Yazeed had the sword and hence he had the power to deal with anyone that opposed him. He had the power to reward his subjects with the contents of the treasury, and could also withhold their rights. He had the power to punish criminals; it is in this context that we can understand that he was the khalifah and king. Issues such as Yazeed's piety or lack of it, or his honesty or lack of it, is another matter. In all of his actions Yazeed was not just, there is no dispute amongst the people of Islam on this matter".
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."
Ibn Khaldun states:
"Yazeed's time of governance can be seen as fisq and debauchery, and the blame is on Mu'awiya who should have controlled him".
We read in Tareekh Kamil:
"The narrator states 'By Allah, Yazeed drinks alcohol and abandons Salat"
We read in Tareekh Abul Fida:
"Yazeed played the tambourine, drank alcohol and raised bears [civil expression for bestiality]".
Hayaath al Haywaan states:
"Yazeed would hunt with cheetas, play chess and drink alcohol".
People opposed Yazeed due to his atrocious deeds
We read in Tareekh Khamees:
"The people of Medina broke the bayya to Yazeed on account of his bad acts, he used to drink alcohol"
Qadi Thanaullah's comments on Yazeed's kufr poetry
We read in Tafseer Mazhari:
"Yazeed deemed drinking alcohol to be Halaal, and he recited these couplets 'if the Deen of Ahmad deems alcohol to be haraam…"
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.
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".
Yazeed's attack on Harra
We read in 'au khanar al masalik' that Shaykh al hadith Muhammad Zakaria stated:
"The army that Yazeed had sent to Medina comprised of 60,000 horsemen and 15,000 foot soldiers. For three days they shed blood freely, 1000 women were raped and 700 named Quraysh and Ansar were killed. Ten thousand women and children were made slaves. Muslim bin Uqba forced people to give bayya to Yazeed in such a manner that people were enslaved and Yazeed could sell them as he pleased, no
Sahaba who were [with the Prophet (saws)] at Hudaibiya were spared".
Ibn Katheer in al Bidayah Volume 8 page 222 stated:
"Muslim was ordered to ransack Medina for three days. Yazeed committed a major sin. Sahaba and their children were slaughtered openly; other heinous acts were also perpetuated. We have already mentioned that he had Ibn Ziyad kill the grandson of Rasulullah (s) Husayn and his companions. In those three days in Madina, it is difficult to mention the type of acts that were carried out. By doing this act Yazeed wanted to secure his governance, in the same way Allah (swt) broke the neck of every Pharoah, the true King (swt) also broke the neck of Yazeed".
One who attacks Medina is cursed
We read in al Bidaya Volume 8 page 223
"Rasulullah (s) said whoever perpetuated injustice and frightened the residents of Medina, the curse (la'nat) of Allah (swt), His Angels and all people is on such a person"
Yazeed used to copulate with his mother and sisters
We read in Tabaqath:
"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"
Other sources:
1. Tabaqath al Kabeera Volume 5 page 66 Dhikr Abdullah bin Hanzala and Volume 4 page 283
2. Tareekh ul Khulafa page 209 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 Mawaddath 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. Al Masalaik Sharh Muwatta Imam Malik page 435
Yazeeds rejection of the Qur'an
Citing Tadhkira, Maqathil and Shazarath al Dhabah.
This is also found in the Arabic (non-Leiden) version of the History of Al-Tabari:
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"
In Tafseer Ruh al Maani it is stated clearly:
"Allamah Alusi stated, 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".
Point references:
1. Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah Volume 8 page 204 Dhikr Ras al Husayn
2. Minhajj al Sunnah Volume 2 page 249 Dkikr Yazeed
3. Sharh Foqh Akbar page 73 Dhikr Yazeed
4. Sharh Tafseer Mazhari Volume 5 page 21 Surah Ibrahim
5. Shazrah al Dhahab page 69 Dhikr Shahadth Husayn
6. Maqatahil Husayn Volume 2 page 58 Dhikr Shahdath Husayn
7. Tadhkira Khawwas page 148
8. Tareekh Tabari Volume 11 pages 21-23 Dhikr 284 Hijri
9. Tafseer Ruh al Ma'ani (commentary of Surah Muhammad)
Ibn Kathir in al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 231 narrates this hadith on the authority of
Abu Ubaydah:
"My Ummah shall be ruled with justice, until the first individual that shall destroy it, he shall from the Banu Ummaya, his name will be Yazeed".
We read in Izalath 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 Muwaffaq
"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".
1. Izalathul Khifa page 20 Dhikr Sharth Imamate
2. Sharh Muwaffaq page 731 Muqassad Saneeh
3. Sharh Muqassad Volume 2 page 271 Fadail Imama
4. Al Ahkam al Sultaneeya page 8 by Al Mawardi
5. Ahkam al Sultaneeya page 9 by Qadi Abu Yala
6. Taufa Ithna Ashari page 178 Bab 7 Imamate aqeedah
We read in al Bidaya that Uqbah bin Subhan narrates:
"I accompanied Husayn from Makka until the time that he was killed. I heard all of his speeches and at no point did he state 'Take me to Yazeed so that I can give him bayya"
Allamah Shibli in his book Zeyneb page 156 are also worthy of note:
"Husayn said 'I am from the Ahl'ul bayt of the Prophet. Yazeed is not worthy of receiving my bayya'"
1. Tareekh Kamil Volume 4 page 48 Imam Husayn
2. Al Bidayah Volume 8 page 175
3. Tareekh Tabari page 314
4. Tadkhira Khawwas page 141
Yazeed's own admission that he killed the family of the Prophet (sawas)
We read in Sharh Fiqh Akbar:
"Following the murder of Husayn, Yazeed said 'I avenged the killing of my kaafir relatives in Badr through killing the family of the Prophet".
The testimony of Shah Abdul Aziz that Yazeed killed Imam Hussain[as]
We read in Taufa
"Upon the orders of Yazeed the disgraceful people from Syria and Iraq killed Imam Husayn".
Yazeed ordered his Governor Waleed kill Imam Hussain (as)
We read in Maqathil Husayn:
"Yazeed wrote a letter to Waleed the Governor of Medina, in which he stated 'Force Husayn to give bayya. Should he refuse then strike off his head and return it to me.'
Yazeed wrote to Ibn Ziyad telling him to kill Imam Hussain (as)
We read in Mutaalib al Saul that:
"Ibn Ziyad wrote to Husayn 'I have received information that you have arrived in Kerbala, and Yazeed has told me not to kill you, provided you accept his authority and mine.'"
Ibn Ziyad's own admission that he killed Imam Husayn on the orders of Yazeed
We read in al Bidayah:
"When Yazeed wrote to Ibn Ziyad ordering him to fight Ibn Zubayr in Makka, he said 'I can't obey this fasiq. I killed the grandson of Rasulullah (sawas) upon his orders, I'm not now going to assault the Kaaba'.
Testimony of Ibn Abbas that Yazeed killed Imam Hussain (as)
We read in Tareekh Kamil:
Ibn Abbas replied to a letter of Yazeed stating 'You killed Husayn ibn 'Ali as well as the youth from Banu Abdul Muttalib, who were beacons of guidance."
Point 24 The testimony of Abdullah Ibn Umar that Yazeed killed Imam Hussain (as)
We read in Maqathil al Husayn:
"Ibn Umar wrote to Yazeed, 'Hasn't your heart gone black yet? You murdered the family of the Prophet?'
The testimony of Shah Abdul Haqq that Yazeed killed Imam Hussain (as)
We read in Ashiath al Lamaath:
"It is unusual that some say Yazeed did not kill Husayn when he instructed Ibn Ziyad to carry out the killing".
Yazeed's pride at killing Imam Hussain (as)
We read in al Bidayah Volume 8 page 204:
"Ibn Asakir, writing on Yazeed, states then when Husayn's head was brought before Yazeed, he recited the couplets of Ibn Zubayri the kaafir 'I wish my ancestors of Badr were hear to see the severed head of the rebellious tribe (The Prophet (saws's tribe of Hashim)."
Al Hafidh Jalaladun Suyuti (ra) records this tradition in Khasais al Kubra, on the authority of Sahaba Uns bin Harith:
"I heard Rasulullah (sawas) say 'Verily my son (Husayn) will be killed in a land called Kerbala, whoever amongst you is alive at that time must go and help him".
Khasais al Kubra Volume 2 page 125 (Maktaba Nurree Rizvi Publishers, Pakistan)
Yazeeds own words noted in Sharh Fiqh Akbar:
"Following the murder of Husayn, Yazeed said '
I avenged the killing of my kaafir relatives in Badr through killing the family of the Prophet".
Allamah Taftazani said Yazeed was worthy of more than just cursing
We read in Sharh Muqassad:
"The harms that were inflicted on the Ahl'ul bayt after the Sahaba are acts that cannot be covered up. These acts were so heinous that they cannot be hidden - all including animals testify to their suffering. Their pain was such that the earth and skies shed tears and beat themselves when their suffering is retold - and retelling this shall continue until the Day of Judgement. May Allah's curse be upon those that perpetuated injustices, and those that helped them (to carry out these acts). The curse on these individuals shall be even greater in the next world. If some Ulema are opposed to cursing, then it should be known that Yazeed deserves more than just cursing".
The Fatwa of Allamah Baghdadi - Yazeed denied the Prophethood, to curse him is an act of Ibadath
We read in Tafseer Ruh al Ma'ani page 72 commentary of Surah Muhammad:
"The wicked Yazeed failed to testify to the Prophethood of Hadhrath Muhammad (sawas). He also perpetrated acts against the residents of Makka, Medina and the family of the Prophet (sawas). He indulged in these acts against them during their lives and after their deaths. These acts are so conclusively proven that had he placed the Qur'an in his hands it would have testified to his kuffar. His being a fasiq and fajir did not go unnoticed by the Ulema of Islam, but the Salaf had no choice but to remain silent as they were living under threat."
The Fatwas of Qadhi Abu Ya'ala and Abu Husayn deeming it permissible to curse Yazeed
Ibn Katheer in al Bidaya stated:
"Whoever frightens Medina incurs the wrath of Allah, His Angels and all the people - and some Ulema have deemed it permissible to curse Yazeed. This includes individuals such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Allamah Hilalee, Abu Bakr Abdul Aziz, Qadhi Abu Ya'ala and his son Qadhi Abu Husayn. Ibn Jauzi wrote a book deeming it permissible to curse Yazeed".
Al Suyuti personally cursed Yazeed
In Tareekh ul Khulafa page 207, Dhikr Shahadath Husayn we read as follows:
"May Allah's curse be upon the killers of Husayn and Ibn Ziyad".
Qadhi Thanaullah Panee Pathee deemed it permissible to curse the kaafir Yazeed
We read in Tafseer Mazhari Volume 5 page 21, under the commentary of Surah Ibrahim verse 28 as follows:
"The Banu Umayya were initially kaafir, then some of them presented themselves as Muslim. Yazeed then became a kaafir. The Banu Umayya maintained their enmity towards the family of the Prophet (sawas), and killed Husayn in a cruel manner. The kaafir Yazeed committed kufr in relation to the Deen of Muhammad (sawas) proven by the fact that at the time of the killing of Husayn he made a pointed reference to avenging the deaths of his kaafir ancestors slain in Badr. He acted against the family of Muhammad (sawas), Banu Hashim and in his drunken state he praised the Banu Umayya and cursed the Banu Hashim from the pulpit".
Allamah Alusi set out the viewpoint of the Shaafi Ulema on this topic as follows:
Haseeya Nabraas page 551
"Amongst the Shaafi's we are in agreement that it is permissible to curse Yazeed"
My brother the Ahlul Bid'ah of Indo-Pak also have not to good words to say about Sayyidina Muawiyah radhiyallahu anh.
You heard of Mawlana Azam Tariq rahimahullah innit?
They say his son is called Muawiyah
All the sunni and sufi scholars i have met respect Ameer Muawiya radhiallahu taa'la anhu. One sufi scholar I know, made his close frind change his name to Muawiya.
So i think u r influenced by hearsay or believing some juhala. Besides there are many wahabbis who love Yazeed though Yazeed killed the family of Prophet Muhammad sallallahualaihiwassallam
That is merely to avoid fitna, because Yazeed was well known for killing anyone who opposed him and wouldnt mind even to kill any Muslim.
The salaf as saliheen are unanimous in calling yazeed a debauch, but it should also be known that in his initial days Yazeed disguised himself as a pious man but later started drinking openly and indulging in haraam deeds etc.
stop barking because no one is going to listen to u...
the son of ali (ra) said that yazeed was a pious man.... so who are you to say otherwise.... i know yous a brelvi or a shiah right
And Allâh has set forth an example for those who believe, the wife of Fir'aun when she said: "My Lord! Build for me a home with You in Paradise, and save me from Fir'aun and his work, and save me from the people who are Zâlimûn
There is no nobility in anyone who lacks faith.
The wise man knows that the only fitting price for his soul is a place in Paradise.
There is dispute as to whether or not Yazid sent the troops against Husayn (R), or the wali of Kufa at the time.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone elses opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation." -Orson Welles
Xtasy:
Listen to the "Shaykh ul Islam" of the Barelwis - Tahir ul Qadri and his comments about Yazeed.
Secondly you said Yazeed wasnt the Ameer ul Mu'mineen because Sayyidina Husayn didnt pledge on his hand. Read the history yeh - when Sayyidina Husayn radhiyallahu anh realised the treachery of the shi'tes of kufa - he offered three things to Yazeeds representative:
1. to meet with him
2. to pledge to him
3. to leave the mainland and move to the borders of the empire.
Thirdly - Imam Ghazzali stated that we cannot even say categorically that Yazeed ordered the killing of Sayyidina Husayn radhiyallahu anh because there is no proof for such an order.
Fourthly - your claim that the bid'atees of Indo-Pak express love for SAyyidina Muawiyah is laughable.
Fifthly - you are using books of tareekh to prove points? Ulama have quoted all sorts in the history books, including fabricated tales and local legends just on a scholarly basis. To use a book of history without resorting to looking at the status of the narration, without looking at what the author himself had to say about it is a trick employed with great zeal by the Rawaafidh and the Ahlul Bid'ah.
So the Sahaabah who pledged did it to avoid fitnah - which thus means that Sayyidina Husayn by not pledging was a fitnah-monger?
Wake up folks and use basic logic.
The true villains and culprits are being side-tracked and we are discussing people who aren't even the main players.
you know i hate about shias and some brelvis... they praise some one on the one hand... and then two minutes later theyll be insulting him...
let me first give an example of shiahs....
1) ali (ra) amazing man, best after the prophet (SaW) his successor, sword of allah (swT) etc etc how they normally praise him (not that we dont praise him mashallah Ali (ra) was the 'brother' of the prophet (saW) that is enough praise a man would need... anyway then five minutes later... ali (Ra) was beaten down and forced to give bayah, the same man who offered to take on the entire kaafir armies on his own, the same man who the romans would shake when they heard his name... ali (ra) watched his wife get kicked to death and her unborn baby killed.... as if ali (ra) would watch that... ali (ra) was forced to marry his dauther to a kaafir... naudhubillah may allah (Swt) curse anyone who believes that...
2) some brelvis and the sahaba (ra).... abdullah ibn umer (ra) and abdullah ibn zubair (rA) and the other sahabi (ra) who gave bayah to yazeed were scared for their lives... the same sahabi (ra) who would fight 100 to 1 subhanallah even a 1000 to one are now scared for their lives...
man these people are stupid seriously.....
And Allâh has set forth an example for those who believe, the wife of Fir'aun when she said: "My Lord! Build for me a home with You in Paradise, and save me from Fir'aun and his work, and save me from the people who are Zâlimûn
There is no nobility in anyone who lacks faith.
The wise man knows that the only fitting price for his soul is a place in Paradise.
Picking up on your point bruv. Someone once asked a Buzurg that what do you say of Ali?
The Buzurg replied: Which Ali?
The other replied: Is there more than one Ali?
Buzurg: Ofcourse. There is the Ali of the Shi'a, the one who does taqiyyah, the one who sits inside his hujrah whilst his wife is manhandled and the one who pledged out of fear to a group of heretics. Then there is our Ali - the husband of Fatimah, the Fateh of Khaybar and father of Hasnayn.
read it in the malfoozat of Hadrat Thanwi.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
