[Holy Qur'an 17:81] And say: "Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish."

Friday, December 11, 2009

The Wolf Lying in Wait!!

The Wolf Lying in Wait!!

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

Aisha and her colleagues fought and murdered thousands of people. Eventually, they were defeated, and her colleagues perished in the war. But, she survived it. At this crucial period, Mu’awiyah rose from Syria, with the same claim as Aisha: Imam Ali (as) murdered Uthman and he would take revenge on him! So, there was the pretext for a bloody war that would consume close to 100,000 souls!

It is clear that Mu’awiyah too knew he was lying, and killing others on its basis. We briefly examined his curriculum vitae before. Let us present some other useful facts about this cunning character.

Imam al-Dhahabi recorded that:

Abi Burza said: 'We were with the Prophet (pbuh) then he heard someone singing. So he said: 'Go and see what is going on there'. Thus, I climbed and looked, I saw Mu'awiya and Amr bin al-Aas singing, then I returned and told (thePprophet). He (the Prophet) said: 'May Allah throw them in fitna (sedition) and push them towards hell'.

1. Mizan al-I'tidal, Volume 3 page 311

2. Siyar alam al Nubla, Volume 3 page 132

This is coming from a respected Salafi Imam and hadithist, and he made no attempt to weaken it, thereby accepting its authenticity. Mu’awiyah was an accursed person, pushed towards Hellfire by Allah (swt). He was a Companion, no doubt about that. But, his crimes were so evil that even top-ranking Sunni scholars declared him an inmate of Hellfire!

Shaykh Hasan ibn Ali al-Saqqaaf, the man who exposed the ignorance and dishonesty of al-Albani in his book Tanaqadat al-Albani Wadihat (The Clear Self-Contradictions of Al-Albani) states in his footnotes to ‘Daf` Shubah’ (pg. 237):

"I say: and Mu`aawiyah killed a group of righteous people from the Sahaabah and other noble personalities for the sake of gaining sovereignty. And from those was Abd ar-Rahmaan bin Khaalid bin Waleed. Ibn Jareer said in his ‘Taareekh’ (3/202) and ibn Atheer in ‘al-Kaamil’ (3/453) and the wording is his:

‘And the reason for his - Abd ar-Rahmaan bin Khaalid bin Waleed - death was that he became prominent in the eyes of the People of Shaam, and they inclined towards him due to his possessing characteristics of his father, and due to his usefulness (to the Muslims) in the Land of the Romans, and due to his great courage. So Mu`aawiyah became afraid and apprehensive of him, and commanded ibn Uthaal, the Christian, that he plan his murder. Mu`aawiyah guaranteed him exemption from his tax for as long as he lived and that he would be placed in charge of the tax revenues of Homs (a land in central Syria).

So when Abd ar-Rahmaan returned from Rum, ibn Uthaal slipped him a poisoned drink through the means of his servants. So he drank it and died at Hums, and Mu`aawiyah fulfilled what he had guaranteed ibn Uthaal.’

I say: is it permissible to kill a Muslim, and Allaah says, ‘and whosoever kills a believer deliberately, then his reward is Hellfire, to remain in there forever. And the Anger of Allaah is upon him and His Curse, and a great punishment is prepared for him" (4/93)?! And it was due to this that Hasan al-Basri said, with regards to Mu`aawiyah, as in ‘al-Kaamil’ (3/487):

‘There were four characteristics in Mu`aawiyah, and any one of them would have been a grave offense: His hastening towards evil by the sword against this Ummah until he took the matter (Khilaafate) without consultation, and amongst them were the remaining Sahaabah and other notable people. His passing the rule onto his son, an alcoholic, wearer of silk, and player of musical instruments. His claim to Ziyaad, and the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) said, "the child is for the bed, and for the fornicator is stoning." And he killed Hujr and the companions of Hujr, so woe to him for what he did to Hujr! And woe to him for what he did to the companions of Hujr!’

I say: so when the life of Mu`aawiyah is like this!!

There does not occur anything from the Prophet (SAW) with regards to his virtues, and al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee quotes in ‘Siyar A`laam an-Nubalaa’ (3/132) from Ishaaq bin Raahaway that he said, ‘there is nothing authentic from the Prophet (SAW) on the virtue of Mu`aawiyah’

And it is established in the Saheeh of Muslim (3/2010 no.2604) from ibn Abbaas that he Prophet (SAW) said to him. ‘go and call Mu`aawiyah.’ He said, ‘so I returned and said, "he is eating"’ so the Messenger (SAW) said, ‘may Allaah not fill his belly’

And on (pg. 241),

"So is an ijtihaad correct which allows killing Muslims, believing in the Oneness of Allaah.....?!

And is an ijtihaad permissible when there occurs a text (on the point in question)?! And it is mutawaatir from him (SAW) that he said about our Master Ammaar who fought alongside the Leader of the Believers, our Master Ali, ‘you will be killed by the aggressive party’ as is established in Bukhaaree and Muslim.

So is an ijtihaad valid despite the occurrence of many authentic texts (against it), from amongst them his saying (SAW), with regards to our Master Ali (RA), ‘the one to whom I am the mawlaa then Ali is his mawlaa. O Allaah love the one who loves him, and show enmity to the one who shows enmity to him.’

And al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee said in ‘Siyar A`laam an-Nubala’ (8/335) about this hadeeth, ‘mutawaatir.’

And in the Saheeh of Muslim (no.78 in al-Eemaan) about our Master Ali (RA) from him that he said, ‘indeed the promise of the unlettered Prophet (SAW) to me was, "none save a believer will love you, and none save a hypocrite will hate you."’

I say: so what is the ruling on the one that commands abusing and cursing our Master Ali the mawlaa of the believers by the testimony of the Messenger of the Lord of the Universe upon the pulpits?!!

And what is the ruling of the one who tests his subjects by cursing our Master Ali (RA) and to disassociate from him, and kills the one who does not abuse and curse him?!!

And from the strange, truly laughable things after this is that you find ibn Katheer saying in the ‘chapter on Covenants (Aqd)’ in his ‘Taareekh’ (8/20) about the virtue of Mu`aawiyah, ‘he is Mu`aawiyah bin Abee Sufyaan... uncle of the believers, and the writer of the revelation of the Lord of the Universe, he embraced Islaam and his father and mother were Hindus... on the Day of the Conquest.’ Then he said after that, ‘and the intention here is to show that Mu`aawiyah used to write the revelation alongside others....’

I say: No, by Allaah other than Whom there is none worthy of worship, your words are not correct O ibn Katheer, and not what you depend upon or what you think. As for your saying, ‘uncle of the believers’, then this is not correct at all, and that is because this does not occur in any authentic Sunnah or narration. And (building) upon your saying that Mu`aawiyah is the Uncle of the believers - then Habee bin Akhtab, the Jew, would be the grandfather of the believers, because he is the father of Sayyida Safiyyah, the wife of the Messenger (SAW), and this is not so."

This is a contemporary Shafi’I hadithist, who is well-known throughout the Sunni world. We would like to nail everything with this simple narration from the Holy Prophet (pbuh). We read from Imam al-Baladhuri in his Ansab al-Ashraf, Vol. 2, p. 120:

Ishaq and Bakr bin Haytham from Abdurazaq bin Hamam from Mu'amar from Ibn Taous from Taous bin Kisan from Abdullah Ibn Amr ibn Al-'as who stated: 'I was sitting with the Prophet of Allah when he said: 'A man will come out of this mountain pass, who will die and he will be outside my nation (Islam)'. I had left behind my father there for wudhu, and I feared, as if holding back my urine, that he would be the one to come, but Mu'awiyah came out. The Prophet said: 'He is the one'.

All the narrators are reliable:

Ishaq bin Abi Israel: Ibn Hajar said: 'Seduq' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p79), Dhahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Al-Kashif, v1 p234).

Abdulrazaq bin Hamam: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p599), Dhahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Siar alam alnubala, v9 p563).

Mu'amar bin Rashid: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah Thabt' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p202), Dhahabi said: 'Hujja' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p190).

Abdullah bin Taous: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p503), Dhahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Siar alam alnubala, v6, p103).

Taous bin Kisan: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p448), Dhahabi said: 'He had a great magnificence' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p90).

Abdullah bin Amro bin al-Sas: A Sahabi. Moreover, Hafiz Ahmad bin al-Sidiq said about this tradition: 'Sahih according to Muslim's condition' (Jawnat al-Attar, v2 p154)

It was not just the Holy Prophet (pbuh) who declared that Mu’awiyah would die outside the fold of Islam. Imam Baladhuri again records in Ansab al-Ashraf, Volume 3 page 403:

Al-Hussain bin Ali al-Aswad from Yahya bin Adam from Wakee from Ismail bin Abi Khalid from Shubail al-Yahsabi who said: 'I had requisition from Umar bin al-Khatab, hence I went to him to ask him but a man reached to him before me and talked to him, then I heard that Umar was saying to him: 'If I obey you, you will make me enter into hell.' Then I looked and it was Mu'awiyah'.

All the narrators are reliable:

Al-Hussain bin Ali al-Aswad: Ibn Hajar said: 'Seduq' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p216).

Yahya bin Adam: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p296). Wakee: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p284).

Ismail bin Abi Khalid: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p93).

Shubail al-Yahsabi: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p412).

So, Umar too deem him Hellbound! This is the opinion of Ibn Kathir. We read in his al Bidayah wa Nihayah Volume 8 page 135:

"The Sunnah is Mu'awiya should be referred to as king not khaleefa"

Let us now reveal the testimony of great Sunni Imam al-Atiqi about whom Imam Dhahabi wrote:

"The Imam the Muhadith, the Thiqah, Abu al-Hassan Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Mansor al-Baghdady al-Atiqi"

Siar alam alnubala, Volume 17 page 602

Allamah Khateeb Baghdadi records about him:

"I wrote from him and he is Seduq (truthful)"

Tarikh Baghdad, Volume 5 page 143

Now we read the following testimony of Imam al-Atiqi about Muawiyah in Tarikh Baghdad, volume 6, page 248 'Dhkir Yahyah bin Abdul Hameed al-Hamani':

"Atiqi said: 'Mu'awaiya did not die on the Islamic faith".

Salafi scholar, Abul ‘Ala al-Maududi, writes:

Kingship's foundation began with this change. The khilafat of Mu'awiya (ra) was not of a kind wherein he was appointed by the Muslims…despite this Mu'awiya wanted to be the Khalifa, he fought in order to achieve the khilafat, and his khilafat was not dependent on the satisfaction/acceptance of the Muslims. The people did not appoint him as Khalifa, he became so by force and when he became Khalifa, people had no other choice but to give him bay'a. Had the people not given him baya at that time, it would have not meant that those people had to lose their positions / ranks rather it would have meant bloodshed and disturbance which could not have been given preference over peace and order. That is why after Imam Hasan's (ra) abdication (in Rabi al-Awwal, 41 H) all the Sahaba, Tabayeen and Muslims agreed on his bay'a and that year was called 'Aam al Jamaat' because of considering the fact that at least civil war was made to an end. Mu'awiya was himself well aware of this position. He stated the following in his speech in the initial days of his Khilafat at Madina:

"By Allah, while taking charge of your government I was not unaware of the fact that you are unhappy over my taking over of government and you people don't like it. I am well aware of whatever is there in your hearts regarding this matter but still I have took it from you on the basis of my sword… Now if you see that I am not fulfilling your rights, then you should be happy with me with whatever is there."

khilafat wa mulukiyyat, chapter 5, pages 158-159 citing Al Bidaya wa al Nihaya by Ibn Katheer, vol 8, page 132

This guy unleashed Hell on the Islamic Ummah. He took advantage of the lies by Aisha and her colleagues, to further his evil desires. He fought for power, and got it. The Khawarij killed Imam Ali (as), while he himself murdered Imam Hasan (as), and his son beheaded Imam Husayn (as)!!


In Sunan Ibn Majah, Volume 1 page 45 we read the following tradition:

"On his way to Hajj, Sa'd met Mu'awiya and his companions mentioned 'Ali upon which Mu'awiya showed disrespect towards Ali, Sa'd got angry and asked 'why do you say such things?'"

One of the esteemed figures among Salafis, Shaykh Albani has declared the above-cited Hadith to be 'Sahih'.

Imam Ibn Jarir Tabari also records in his Tarikh, Vol. 18, p. 5:

"Al Hasan had already made peace with Muawiyah on condition that he concede to him what was in his treasury plus the revenue (kharaij) of Darabjird and that Ali is not reviled in his hearing."

One of the narrators in the chain of the cited tradition from Tareekh Tabari is Awnah bin al-Hakam al-Kalbi about whom Imam Dhahabi stated: 'He was truthful (seduq) in his narrations' (Siyar alam al-Nubla, v7 p201) while Imam Ejli included him in his book of authentic narrators "Marifat al-Thuqat" v2 p196. Shaykh Yaqut al-Hamawi (575-626) records: "Awanah bin al-Hakam bin Ayadh bin Wazer ibn Abdulharith bin Abi Husn bin thalba bin Jubair bin Amer bin al-Numan. He was a scholar in history and traditions, was thiqah...Abdullah bin Jaffar said: 'Awanah bin al-Hakam amongst the scholars of history and conquests from Kufa and highly knowledgeable in poems and eloquence, he had brothers and witty narrations, he was authentic and the whole al-Madaeni narrations are from him" (Mu'ajam al-Udaba, v2 p232). Safadi (d. 764 H) records about Awnah: "It appears that he is seduq". (Nakth al-Hayman, v1, p90). Also we read in the margin of Ibn Aarabi's book 'al-Awasim min al-Qawasim' by Allamah Muhibuddin al-Khatib, p189: "Awanah bin al-Hakam was one of the greatest Sheikhs of al-Madaeni".

Ibn Asakir records the same from a chain with three different variants:

Abu Bakar Muhammad bin Abdulbaqi from al-Hassan bin Ali from Muhammad bin al-Abbas from Ahmad bin Marouf from al-Hussain bin Muhammad from Muhammad bin Saad from Abu Ubaid from Mujalid from al-Shu'abi and Yunus bin Abi Ishaq from his father and Abi al-Sefr and others.

So the three variants are:

[1]. Abu Bakar Muhammad bin Abdulbaqi from al-Hassan bin Ali from Muhammad bin al-Abbas from Ahmad bin Marouf from al-Hussain bin Muhammad from Muhammad bin Saad from Abu Ubaid from Mujalid from al-Shu'abi.

[2]. Abu Bakar Muhammad bin Abdulbaqi from al-Hassan bin Ali from Muhammad bin al-Abbas from Ahmad bin Marouf from al-Hussain bin Muhammad from Muhammad bin Saad from Abu Ubaid Yunus bin Abi Ishaq from his father.

[3]. Abu Bakar Muhammad bin Abdulbaqi from al-Hassan bin Ali from Muhammad bin al-Abbas from Ahmad bin Marouf from al-Hussain bin Muhammad from Muhammad bin Saad from Abu Ubaid from Abi al-Sefr and others.

All the chains mentioning that Imam Hasan [as] put the following conditions before Muawiyah La'een:

"Not to curse Ali while he can hear that, send him the tax of Fesa and Darabjird in Persian every year."

Tareekh Damishq by Ibn Asakir, Volume 13 page 246

All the narrators in the 2nd chain are authentic.

Abu Bakar Muhammad bin Abdulbaqi: Ibn al-Jawzi said: 'Thiqah' (Trikh al-Islam, by Dhahabi, v36, p392), Dhahabi said: 'Adil' (Siar alam alnubala, v20 p23).

Hassan bin Ali al-Jawheri: Al-Baghdadi said: 'Thiqah' (Tarikh Baghdad, v7 p404), Dhahabi said: 'Seduq' (Siar alam, v18 p68).

Muhammad bin al-Abbas al-Khazaz: Al-Baghdadi said: 'Thiqah' (Tarikh Baghdad, v3 p337), Dhahabi said: 'Thiqa' (Siar alam, v16 p409).

Ahmad bin Maroof bin Beshr: Al-Baghdadi said: 'Thiqah' (Tarikh Baghdad, v5 p368), Dhahabi said: 'Thiqa (Tarikh Islam, v24, p103).

Hussain bin Muhammad bin Abdulrahman bin Fehm: Al-Baghdadi said: 'Thiqah' (Tarikh Baghdad, v8 p91), Dhahabi said: 'Huge Hafiz' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v2 p680) and also said: 'He was strict in narrating' (Tarikh al-Islam, v21 p164).

Muhammad bin Saad (the author of Tabaqat al-Kubra): Al-Baghdadi said: 'According to us he is among just people and truthful in narrating' (Tarikh Baghdad, v2, p366), Dhahabi said: 'Hafiz, Allamah, Hujja' (Siar alam, v10 p664).

Muhammad bin Ubaid al-Tenafsi: Both Ibn Hajar and Dhahabi declared him Thiqa (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p110 and Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p333).

Yunus bin Abi Ishaq: Both Ibn Hajar and Dhahabi decalred him Seduq (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p348 and al-Kashif, v2 p402).

[His father] Abi Ishaq al-Suba'i: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1, p739), Dhahabi said: Thiqah, Hujja (Siar alam, v5 p394).

We dont know whether it is intentional or by mistake, but in the copy of Tarikh Ibn Asakir the names of two narrators have been merged i.e. 'al-Hussain bin Muhammad bin Saad' which gives an impression that its a single narrator while they are two different people, the first one having sir name as Muhammad while the other one as his first name as Muhammad and thus, actually it should be 'al-Hussain bin Muhammad from Muhammad bin Saad' as correctly recorded by Imam Dhahabi and Imam Jamaluddin al-Mezi with two and three variants of chain respectively. We read in Siyar alam al-Nubla:

Ibn Saad: Narrated Muhammad bin Ubaid from Mujalid from al-Shu'bi and Yonus bin Abi Ishaq from his father...not to curse Ali while he can hear that..."

Siar alam al-nubala by Imam Dhahabi, Volume 3 page 263

So the two variants of chain that Dhahabi used are:.

[1]. Muhammad bin Saad from Muhammad bin Ubaid from Mujaled from al-Shu'bi.

[2]. Muhammad bin Saad from Muhammad bin Ubaid from Yunus bin Abi Ishaq from his father.

Imam Jamaluddin al-Mizzi records:

Muhammad bin Saad said: Narrated Muhammad bin Ubaid from Mujalid from al-Shu'abi – and Younus bin Abi Ishaq from his father – and Abi al-Sefer and others...not to curse curse Ali while he can hear that..."

Tahdib al-Kamal by Imam Jamaluddin al-Mizzi, Volume 6 page 246 Translation No. 1248

The three variants Imam Al-Mezi relied on are:

[1]. Muhammad bin Saad from Muhammad bin Ubaid from Mujalid from al-Shu'bi.

[2]. Muhammad bin Saad from Muhammad bin Ubaid from Yunus bin Abi Ishaq from his father.

[3]. Muhammad bin Saad from Muhammad bin Ubaid from Abi al-Sefr and others.

Mu’awiyah was shamelessly cursing Imam Ali (as), to the extent that Imam Hasan (as) had to go into a treaty with him, that he would not curse his father while he was within hearshot!

He did not stop there however. He actually ordered his subjects to curse Imam Ali (as) everywhere! Imam Sibt ibn Jawzi al-Hanafi in his Tadhkiratul Khawass page 113 narrates:

"Mu'awiya ordered the people and Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas to curse 'Ali, this angered Sa'd and fearing Allah (swt) he refused to do so, not caring what anyone else thought".

Mohibuddin al Tabari in his classical book of hadith 'Riyad ul Nadira fi Manaqib Ashrah Mubashrah' states that:

"Mu'awiya ordered Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas to curse Abu Turab"

Riyad ul Nadira, Volume 3, page 194

Ibn Taymiyyah said:

I say that both parties (Ali and Mu’awiyah) cursed each other.

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Vol. 4, p. 271

The governors of Mu’awiyah also used to put the decree into practice openly, to encourage the people. Ibn Kathir, in his al-Bidayah wa Nihayah, Vol. 8, p. 285, writes:

"When Marwan was a governor of Mu'awiya in Madina, he used to curse Hadhrat Ali on each Friday from the pulpit (Minbar). And Hadhrat Hasan bin Ali said to him: "Allah then cursed your father by the tongue of His messenger when you were in his "Sulub" (loin) and has said that Curse of Allah be upon Hakam and his progeny."

Imam Dhahabi also confirmed the Kufr act by Marwan (Laeen ibn Laeen) of cursing Ali bin Abi Talib [as]. Dhahabi has recorded:

"Marwan bin Hakam used to curse Hadrat Ali (as) in the Sermon (Khutba) of Friday."

Tarikhul Islam, by Al-Dhahabi, vol. 2, page 288

This is further evidence from Sahih Muslim:

The Governor of Medina who was one of the members of the house of Marwan called Sahl Ibn Sa'd, and ordered him to curse Ali. But Sahl refused to do so. The governor said: "If you don't want to curse Ali, just say God curse Abu Turab (the nickname of Ali)." Sahl said: "Ali did not like any name for himself better than Abu Turab, and Ali used to become very happy when somebody would call him Abu Turab."

Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Virtues of Companions, Section of Virtues of Ali, Arabic version, v4, p1874, Tradition #38

Another governor of Mu’awiyah was Mughira, in Kufa. We read with reference to Zaid bin Arqam in Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, Volume 4 Hadith 18485:

"The uncle of Ziad bin Alaqa narrated that al-Mughira bin Shu'aba abused Ali, so Zaid bin Arqam stood up and said: 'You know that the Prophet forbade abusing the dead, then why are you abusing Ali when he is dead?'"

The hadith has been recorded and declared 'Sahih' not only by Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arnaut in his margin of Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Imam Hakim in 'Mustadrak' Volume 1 page 541 Hadith 1419 'Kitab al-Janaiz' but the beloved Imam of Salafis Nasir al-Deen al-Baani also called it Sahih in 'Silsilat al-ahadith al-Sahiha' Volume 5 page 520 Hadith 2397.

Maybe this summarizes everything. Egyptian Sunni scholar Ahmad Zakhee Safwaath in his book Umar bin Abdul Aziz (Urdu tanslation bu Abdul Samhad al Azharee) pages 54-55 states:

"Hadhrath Umar (bin Abdul Aziz) abolished the practice of cursing Ali on the pulpits, that started during the reign of Amir Mu'awiya.

Historians have recorded that in 41 Hijri, Mu'awiya wrote to his Governors stating 'I have no responsibility for anyone who praises Ali and his family. As a result [reciters] from every pulpit in every village would curse 'Ali, they would distance themselves from 'Ali, and would disrespect him and his family.

Mu'awiya issued an edict throughout the provinces that no one should accept the testimony of any Shi'a or members of that person's family. In a separate order he stated that if it is established that an individual loves 'Ali and the Ahl'ul bayt, his name should be removed from the register and his stipends should be with held. In another order Mu'awiya said that any person who has friends that are Shi'a should be punished and his house should be demolished.

Mu'awiya went on Hajj, upon his arrival in Madina he intended on disrespecting 'Ali. People told him not to since Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas would oppose such an action. Mu'awiya sent a man to Sa'd so as to ascertain his viewpoint, Sa'd replied, 'If you perform such an act I shall never set foot in the Mosque again'. Mu'awiya chose to desist from this action until the death of Sa'd in 55 Hijri - it was then that he proceeded to climb on to the pulpit of 'Ali and from there spoke out against him, he then wrote to his Governors to discredit 'Ali. Umm Salmah wrote to Mu'awiya stating 'You are in fact cursing Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s), verily I testify that Rasulullah (s) loved him ['Ali]. Mu'awiya ignored her words".

In Tarikh Khamis, Volume 2 page 316 we learn:

"When Umar bin Abdul Aziz came to power be put an end to the bidah introduced by Mu'awiya, namely of swearing at 'Ali and cursing the family of the Prophet at the end of the Juma Khutba".

Similarly we read in Tarikh Abul Fida Volume 1 page 301 "Dhikr Mu'awiya":

"During the reign of Banu Umayya, Banu Umayya would curse 'Ali in the Friday Sermon, when Umar bin Abdul Aziz became khalifa he brought an end to this horrible bidah that had been introduced by Mu'awiya".

Even Ibn Taymiyyah never disputed this. He writes in his Fatawa Volume 2 page 408:

"The followers of Mu'awiya would curse Hadhrat 'Ali".


Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr in his authority work 'Al Istiab' records under the biography of Hujr bin Adi al-Adbar:

"Hujr was amongst the virtuous Sahaba"

Istiab, Volume 1 page 97 - Hujr bin Adi al-Kindi

Ibn Atheer in 'Asad'ul Ghaba' counts Hujr amongst the great Sahaba:

"He was amongst the virtuous Sahaba"

Asadul Ghaba fi Ma'rafat Sahabah, Volume 1 page 244

Imam Hakim in 'al-Mustadrak' created a chapter called:

"Manaqib Hujr bin Adi [ra] wa wahu rahib Asahab Muhammad" i.e. "Merits of Hujr bin Adi (May Allah be pleased with him) and he is one of the companions of Prophet ".

Mustadrak Hakim, Volume 3 page 468

Ibn Asakir recorded that Hujr bin Adi [ra] met Holy Prophet and Ibn Kathir echoed the same in his book 'Al–Bidayah wal Nihayah'. He records:

"Ibn Asakir has recorded that Hujr came to Holy Prophet and he heard (hadith) from Ali, Ammar, Sharajeel bin Marat and he is known as Sharjeel bin Marat"

Al-Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 55

Similarly while talking about Hujr bin Adi [ra], Hanafi scholar Kamaluddin Umar ibn al-Adeem (586-660 H/1191-1262) records in 'Bughyat al-Talib fi Tarikh Halab' Volume 2 page 298:

"He was among the people of Kufa, he came to Prophet as a delegate and narrated from Ali bin abi Talib"

Likewise Imam Ibn Qutayba Dinwari (213-276 H) records in his famed work 'Al-Maarif' page 76:

"He came to the Prophet as a delegate and converted to Islam, he attended the battle of al-Qadsiya, he attended the battles of Jamal and Sifeen with Ali then Mu'awiyah killed him in Adra along with his group"

While recording about the miracles possessed by the companions of Holy Prophet , Shafiyee scholar Allamah Hibatullah Lalkai (d. 418 H) records in his authority work 'Sharh Usool Etiqad Ahl Sunnah' Volume 7 page 18:

"What have been narrated from the miracles of Hujr bin Adi or Qais bin Makshooh who are the companions of Prophet "

Imam Dhahabi while recording details of Hujr bin Adi states:

"He had companionship and he was a delegate"

Siyar alam an Nubla, Volume 3 page 463

Modern-day Hanafi scholar, Mufti Ghulam Rasul, explains why and how he was killed in his Subeh al-Sadiq, pp. 93-94:

"Hujr and his associates were killed in 51 Hijri and I pray that Allah (swt) showers his mercy upon them. Verily they sacrificed their to protect the honour and dignity of the Lion of Allah, 'Ali. Their murderers told them that they would be saved if they cursed 'Ali - they refused saying 'We shall not do that which shall cause the wrath of Allah (swt). This is because Hujr and his companions knew that the truth was with 'Ali, he was the example of Harun, he was the brother of the Prophet (s) in this world and the next, 300 verses had descended in his praise, 'Ali was with the Qur'an and the Qur'an was with 'Ali, to look at 'Ali's face was an act of worship, to hate 'Ali was an act of Kufr and to have love and faith in 'Ali was a part of Iman. Rasulullah (s) said that the sign of a momin was love for 'Ali and the sign of a munafiq was hatred of 'Ali. It was in light of these facts that Hujr and his companions refused to disassociate themselves from 'Ali, they happily accepted death and willingly sacrificed their lives doe to their love for 'Ali".

We should also point out that Tareekh ibne Wardee Volume 1 page 55 also confirms that Mu'awiya killed Hujr on account of his love of Imam 'Ali (as).

For the same reason, he also killed Malik al-Ashtar (ra), the famous companion of Imam Ali (as):

"When 'Ali returned from Siffin he had sent al Asthar back to his command over the Jazirah and had said to Qays bin Sa'd 'Stay with me in charge of my personal guards (shurat) until we have finished this business of the arbitration (hukumah) and then do to Adharbayjan". So Qays remained with 'Ali over his personal guard and when the business of the arbitration was over, 'Ali wrote to Malik b, al-Harith al-Asthar, who was at the time in Nasibin. "Now you are one of those whose help I need in making the religion (din) effective, by whom I restrain the arrogance of the sinner, and by whom I fortify the dangerous fromtier district (thagir). I have Muhammad b. Abu Bakr over Egypt, but the rebels (Khawarij) there came out aganst him and he is a raw youth with no experience of war and untested. Come to me so that we can consider what is necessary regarding that, and leave behind over your province, those of your men who are trustworthy and sincere advisors. Salutations".

Malik came 'Ali and went in to him.'Ali told him the news about the men of Egypt and gave him the reports about them, and he said, "You are the only man for it. Set out there, may God have mercy on you. If I do not tell you what to do about it, it is because I am content with your own judgement. Ask for God's help if anything worries you, and micx firmness with gentleness. Be mild so long as mildness is effective, but insist on firmness when you have to". So al-Ashthar left 'Ali, went to the place where he had left his things, and got ready to set out for Egypt.

Mu'awiyah's spies came and informed him of 'Ali's appointment of Al-Asthar, and that weighed heavily on him for he coveted Egypt and knew that if Al-Asthar arrived there he would be a more difficult prospect than Muhammad b. Abu Bakr. He therefore sent to al Jayastar, one of those subject to the Kharaj tax, and told him that al Asthar had been appointed over Egypt. And he said to him, "If you take care of him, I will not take any Kharaj from you as long as I live; so do what you can to outwit him". al Jayastar then went to al Qulzum and waited there. Al Asthar left Iraq for Egypt, and when he reached al Qulzum al Jayastar met him and said, "Here is somewhere to stay and here is food and fodder. I am one of those subject to the Kharaj". Al Asthar stayed there with him and the diqhan came with fodder and food. Then, when he had fed him, he bought him a honeyed drink into which he had mixed poison. He gave it to him to drink and when he had done so he died.

Mu'awiyah proceeded to tell the Syrians, "Ali has sent Al-Asthar to Egypt – Call on God that he will suffice you against him". So everyday they implored God against Al-Asthar, and then he who had given him the drink came to Mu'awiyah and told him of Al-Asthar's death. Mu'awiyah stood among the people and delivered a khutbah. He praised God and extolled Him and then said "Ali b. Abi Talib had two right hands; one of them was cut off on the day of Siffin (meaning Ammar b. Yasir) and the other today (meaning Al-Asthar)".

History of Tabari, Volume 18 pages 144-146

Mu’awiyah also murdered a Compaanion of the Holy Prophet (pbuh), for the same reason! First of all let us cite a brief introduction of this person as recorded by Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani:

"Amr Ibn Al Hamiq, Ibn Kahil and they also call him Ibn Kahin, Ibn Habeeb Al Khuzai, a Sahabi who lived in Kufa then in Egypt, he was killed during the caliphate of Muawiya"

Taqreeb al Tahdeeb, page 420 Translation No. 5017

So Ibn Hajar pointed out that the Sahabi Amr bin Hamiq was killed during Muawiya's rule, Ibn Atheer records in Usdal Ghaba fi Mar'rafat Sahabah:

"Amr was hence arrested and murdered and his head was sent to Muawiyah in Syria."

Ibn Atheer has also recorded that:

"In Islam, the first head that was raised on a spear was the head of Amr bin Hamiq which was sent to Muawiyah."

Asadul Ghaba, Volume 1 page 846, Amr bin al-Hamiq al-Khazai

History of Tabari provides details in relation to the arrest and murder of Amr bin al Hamiq:

"When the latter saw Amr bin al-Hamiq, he recognized him, and wrote to Mu'awiyah with this information. Mu'awiyah wrote back 'Amr claimed that he stabbed Uthman bin Affan nine times with a dagger that he had with him, so stab him nine times just as he stabbed Uthman. At that, Amr was taken out and stabbed nine times, and he died from the first or second blow"

History of Tabari, Volume 18 page 137

Ibn Katheer while recording about the death of Amro bin al-Hamiq stated:

"The head of Amr bin Hamiq was cut off and was sent to Mu'awiya and it was displayed in in Syria etc. This was the first head that was displayed through the cities. The head was presesnted to the wife of Umro bin Hamiq, Amina bint Shareed who had been imprisoned in a dungeon by Mua'wiya. The head was thrown into her lap. His wife laid his hand over his forehead and kissed the face and said: 'You deprived me from him for such a long period of time and then you sent it to me after killing him. Thus, I duly accept this gift"

Al Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 52, death of Amro bin al-Hamiq al-Khazai

Ubaydullah bin Abbas was the son of the Prophet's uncle and was the ruler over Yemen during the reign of Ali bin abi Talib [as]. Because of his love for Imam Ali (as), his family suffered deaths. The critical hadith master, Ibn Abd al-Barr, records:

"Busar bin Irtat was a bad person… He slit the throats of the two children of Ubadullah ibn Abbas bin Abdul Mutalib in the presence of their mother, Mua'wiya had sent him to Yemen during the days of Sifeen"

al Istiab, Volume 1 page 49, Chapter: Busar

We read in Tarikh Ibn Asakir:

"Muawiya sent him (Busar) to Yemen, so he killed the two sons of Ubaydullah bin Al Abbas, and he remained Muawiya's companion till he died."

Tarikh ibn Asakir, Volume 10 page 146

Not even innocent children could evade the sword of Mu'awiya, Islam does not permit the killing of innocent children, in Sahih Bukhari, we find:

[4:52:257] Narrated 'Abdullah: During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.

In his war against Imam Ali (as), Mu’awiyah adopted all sorts of brutal methods. Someone was even buried alive for loving Imam Ali (as)! We read in Tarikh Kamil, Vol. 3, p. 245:

When Abdurehman bin Hasaan was arrested and presented before Muawiyah, he asked Aburehman: 'What is your notion about Ali?'. Abdurehman replied: 'It is better for you not to ask me regarding my notion about him'. Muawiyah said: 'By Allah, I will not spare you'. Abdurehman stated: 'I testify that Ali is amongst those people who do Dhikr of Allah copiously and establish justice in the world and pardon the mistakes/sins of the people'. Then Muawiyah asked: 'What is your notion regarding Uthman?'. Abdurehman replied: 'Uthman was the first person to open the gates of injustice and closed the gate of righeousness'. Muawiyah stated: 'You killed yourself'. Abdurehman said: 'Rather you killed yourself'. Then Muawiyah sent him to Ziyad and ordered that he be executed brutally, thus Ziyad buried him alive'

Ibn Kathir too has recorded it in his Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 52, Murder of Hujr, just as al-Tabari in his History of Tabari, Volume 18 page 151

Then there was a mass slaughter of the Shi’as of Imam Ali (as). Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr, in his al-Isti’ab, Vol. 1, p. 49, Chapter: Busar, writes:

"Narrated by Abu Amro Al Shaybani that Muawiya sent Busar bin Irtat Al-Fahri to kill the Shi'a of Ali… Abu Amro Al Shaybani says that Basr bin Arta'a attacked Hamdan, and took women as hostages, so they were the first women in Islam who were taken as hostages."

On the same page, we also read:

"Abi al-Rabab and his friend reported that they heard Abi Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) invocate and seeking refuge during his prayers and he spent a long time bowing and prostrating in his prayers. They say that they asked him: 'what do you you seek refuge from and what are you invocating for?' He said: 'I seek refuge to Allah from the day of al-Bala and the day of al-Awrah'. We asked him: 'What is it?' He replied: 'The day of al-Bala is the day on which the Muslim youth will clash and kill each other. The day of al-Awrah is the day on which the Muslim women will be made captives and their legs will be disclosed, and who among them have a great leg will be purchased according to the greatness of her leg. So I invocated not to make me live till that time, you two might live till that day'.

He (the narrator) said: 'Then Uthman was killed, and then Mu'awiya sent Busr bin Art'a to Yemen and the Muslim woman captives and took them into the market as slaves"

In Usd al-Ghabah, Vol. 1, p. 113, Chapter on Busar bin Irtat, we read:

"Muawiyah sent Busar to Yemen and Hijaz in order to kill the Shias of Ali"

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani confirms this in his al-Isabah, Vol. 1, p. 289, No. 642:

"In the beginning of 40 Hijri, Muawiyah sent Busar to Hijaz and Yemen with an instruction to kill the followers of Ali"

In his Siyar alam Nubla, Volume 3 page 409, al-Dhahabi writes:

Ibn Yunis said: 'A companion testified to the conquest of Egypt, he owned a house and a resort there. He ruled Hijaz and Yemen for Mu'awiya, he did many bad things and he got scruple (sickness) towards the end of his life'…He imprisoned Muslim women in Yemen and brought them for selling'.

It was the worst part of history for the followers of Imam Ali (as). It was the very era about which Sunni scholar Muhammad ibn Aqeel al-Hadrami stated in his book 'Al-atab al-Jameel ala ahl al-Jarh wa al-Tadeel' page 14:

"In some ages it was better for human beings to be accused of kufr and other things, rather than be accused of loyalty to Ali and his household."


This is what Imam Bukhari records:

Narrated Yusuf bin Mahak:

Marwan had been appointed as the governor of Hijaz by Muawiya. He delivered a sermon and mentioned Yazeed bin Muawiya so that the people might take the oath of allegiance to him as the successor of his father (Muawiya).

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, hadith 352

Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr, in his al-Istt’ab, Vol. 1, p. 250, records about his method:

"Abdurehman was againt Ali and Bani Hashim … he had fought in Sifeen alongside Muawiyah…When Muaiywah decided to take bayah from people for his Yazeed, he gave a sermon to the people of Syria in which he said: 'the time of my death is approaching, I am elderly and I want to make a ruler for you people, what do you people want?'. They said: 'We like Abdurehman'. Muawiya didn't like it but kept it within him and once Abdurehman got ill, Muawiya told the doctor to treat him and gave him a syrup that could kill him, the doctor administered it and killed him by giving him poison."

Mu’awiyah was ready to murder as many people as possible, as long as they stand in the way of Yazeed. But, he himself knew that Yazeed was not fit for caliphate. He placed his personal interests over Islam. 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".

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

'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'

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'.

Moreover, in his another authority work 'Tarikh Islam' Volume 5 page 30, Imam Dhahabi states:

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 against him more than once and God didn't bless his life and Abu Bilal Mirdas bin Adya al-Hanzali rose against him.'

All these vices of his son were known to him. Ibn Kathir in his 'Al Bidayah wa al Nihaya' Vol 8 page "Dhikr Yazeed bin Muawiya" writes:

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, untill 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."

Mu’awiyah, by appointing Yazeed, violated an agreement between him and Imam Hasan (as). When Imam Hasan (as) was caliph, he waged a horrible campaign against him, until the Imam was forced to abdicate in his favour. This was however in compliance with explicit instructions from the Messenger of Allah (swt)[1]. They both agreed however that after Mu’awiyah, Imam Hasan (as) was to become caliph.

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani records in Fathul Bari Sharh Bukhari, Volume 13 page 65 Kitab al Fitan:

"Hasan said:'I placed a condition on Mu'awiya that I will become leader after Mu'awiya"

Ibn Kathir too records in his al-Bidayah wa Nihayah, Volume 8 page 80 Dhikr 57 Hijri:

"When Mu'awiya made peace with Hasan, he made a promise that leadership would go to Hasan after him"

Allah [swt] says in Holy Quran (13:25)

But those who break the Covenant of Allah, after having plighted their word thereto, and cut asunder those things which Allah has commanded to be joined, and work mischief in the land;- on them is the curse; for them is the terrible home!

Some people question why Imam Hasan (as) made any treaty with him in the first place. However, it was made to relieve the Ummah of further bloodshed, considering that Mu’awiyah was hell-bent on that. Again, it is permissible to make treaties with evil people. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself made a treaty with the kafirs, on a matter of his own religion – Hajj! It was to avoid bloodshed, and it paid Islam. Mu’awiyah surprisingly agreed to a peace treaty, and this is what the Holy Qur’an states:

But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).

Surah Anfal verse 061

Ibn Taymiyyah perfectly captures it in these words:

"The second news is about the people who gathered when al-Hassan and Mu'awiya made treaty, but the treaty was based on malice"

Minhaaj al Sunnah, Volume 1 page 560

Yes! While the intention of the Imam (as) was pure, that of Mu’awiyah was malice. He had other plans in mind. Maybe he just decided to join the peace treaty out of pressure. The reason is that, after the treaty, he murdered Imam Hasan (as)!

Imam Hakim records in 'Al-Mustadrak' Volume 3 page 176:

"Qutada bin Du'ama al-Sedusi said that the daughter of al-Ash'ath bin Qais poisoned al-Hassan bin Ali and she was his wife, she received huge amount of money for that."

Neither Imam Hakim nor Imam Dhahabi advanced any sort of objection to this tradition endorsing the authenticity of the tradition. As for the person who was actually behind the murder of Imam Hasan [as], Imam of Ahle Sunnah Tabarani in his book Mu'ajam al-Kabeer, Volume 3 page 119 Tradition 2628 has recorded a tradition from some of the most authentic narrators of Sunni sect:

"Muhammad bin Abdullah Al-Hadarmi narrated from Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Numair from Yahyah bin Abi Bakir from from Shuba from Abu Bakr ibn Hafs who narrated that Sa'ad and Hasan, son of Ali (may Allah be pleased with both of them) died during the reign of Muawiya, and it is believed that he (Muawiya) poisoned him (Hasan)."

All the narrators of the tradition are Thiqa (authentic), let us present the views of the two biggest Rijal scholars of Ahle Sunnah namely Ibn Hajar Asaqalani and Dhahabi.

Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Hadrami: Al-Dhahabi decalred him 'Thiqah Mutlaqan' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz v2, p662). Ibn Hajar stated that people have authenticated him (Lisan al-Mizan, v5, p233).

Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Numair: Al-Dhahabi said: 'Thabt' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v2, p439). Ibn Hajar: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2, p100).

Yahya bin Abi Bakir: Al-Dhahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Al-Kashef, v2, p362), Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2, p298).

Shu'aba bin al-Hajaj: Al-Dhahabi said: 'Thabt Huja' (Al-Kashef, v1, p485), Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1, p418).

Abi Bakr bin Hafs: Al-Dhahabi said: 'al-Nisa'i authenticated him.' (Al-Kashef, v1, p546). Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1, p487).

Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr in his esteemed work al Istiab, Volume 1 page 115records:

Qatada and Abu Bakr bin Hafs stated that Hasan was administered poison, via his wife Ja'da bint Ashath. One group have said that Mu'awiya have sent Ja'da the poison and upon administering this poison, Ja'da was rewarded".


The crimes of Yazeed as a caliph were so cruel and gruesome that many of the topmost-ranking Sunni scholars permitted cursing of him.

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani records:

'Loving and glorifying him is not performed except by a heretic who has void belief because he (Yazid) had characteristics that his lover deserves to be faithless, because to love and hate just in the sake of God is the sign of faith'

Al-Emta bil al-Arbaeen, page 96

But first, let us bring some useful points. Imam Dhahabi records in Siar Alam al-Nubala, Volume 3 page 305:

Muhammad bin al-Dahak narrated from his father that he said: ‘When Hussain marched, Yazeed wrote to his governor Ibn Ziyad saying: ‘Hussain is marching to Kufa and he is a problem of your time not of other times, your state not of other states and you not for the other governors. At that time you might be free or be slaved.’ Therefore Ibn Ziad killed him and sent his head to him (Yazeed).

Imam Dhahabi again in his 'Tarikh Islam' Volume 5 page 30 states:

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.'

Yazeed was so evil a person that Imam Husayn (as) thought making any peace treaty with him would completely destroy Islam. He decided to make the ultimate sacrifice, to wake the dead conscience of the Islamic Ummah at that time, and forever.

We read in Al-Muqadima by Ibn Khaldun, page 254:

“It is impermissible to support Yazeed in the matter of killing Hussain, nay (Hussain's) murder is Yazeed's deed that proves him to be a Fasiq and Hussain a martyr.”

Despite his own hatred for the Ahl al-Bayt (as), Ibn Khaldun accepted that Imam Husayn (as) was a martyr, and Yazeed a Fasiq!

Let us read the veiws of Ibn Kathir regarding the role of Yazeed in the murder of Imam Hussain. While dicussing the events of 63 H, He stated:

"It is already mentioned that he (Yazeed) killed al-Hussain and his companions through Ubaidullah bin Zyad"

Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 243

After killing the Imam, Yazeed became very proud. We read in al Bidayah Volume 8 page 204:

Ibn Asakir in his history book states…. When Husayn's head was brought before Yazeed, he recited the couplets of Ibn Zubayri: 'I wish my ancestors of Badr were here to see the fright of al-Khazraj (tribe) as the spears hit’.

Moreover we read:

Al-Qasim bin Bakhit said: 'When the head of Hussain was placed in front of Yazeed bin Mu'awyia, he started to hit his (Hussain's) teeth with his stick, then he (Yazeed) said: 'His (Hussain's) and my example is same as the saying of Hasain Ibn al-Hamaam al-Mari:

'These swords split the heads of those men who pose harm to us and they were very disobedient and oppressors''.'

However, his happiness was shortlived, as the conscience of the people was indeed awakened. Ibn Kathir writes in his al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 235:

Yunus bin Habib al-Jarmi said: 'When Ibn Ziyad killed Husayn and his companions and sent their heads to Yazeed, he [Yazeed] became happy at the death of him (Husayn) which is why the position of Ibn Ziyad was elevated, but this happiness was only short lived and then he regreted'.

People rose against the crime, and he thus tried to dissociate himself from it. We read in al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, Volume 8 page 235:

'Curse be upon Ibn Marjana [Ibn Ziyad] for he pained Husayn and made him desperate although Husayn had asked him to be allowed to go wherever he wanted to or to come to me or he be allowed to go to the border but Ibn Ziyad rejected this and killed him and it is now due to this, that Muslims shall bear enmity towards me, now every person, good and bad shall bear hatred in their hearts towards me, people shall be shocked at my killing Husayn. I have nothing to do with Murjana's son. May Allah destroy him and reap destruction upon him'.

Ibn Katheer further commented as follows:

"Verily Yazeed cursed Ibn Ziyad for his actions and spoke ill of him, since the truth had dawned on him, that when the matter came out what would happen to him? But, neither did Yazeed punish Ibn Ziyad for his filthy act, nor did he say anything to him after, neither did he tell people to learn from this lesson, via retelling and condemning the episode".

al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 204

Imam Ibn Jauzi records in his book Al-Rad ala al-Mutaseb al-Aneed Al-Manee men Zam Yazeed, page 58:

Ibn Abi Dunya recorded from Salamah bin Shabib from al-Humaydi from Sufyan from Salim bin Abi Hafsa from Hassan (al-Basri) saying: “Yazeed bin Mu'awyia was prodding with a stick that place kissed by Allah's Messenger kissed, how shameful!”.

All the narrators are reliable:

Al-Hassan al-Basri: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

Salim bin Abi Hafsa al-Khayat: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

Sufyan al-Thawri: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

Abdullah bin al-Zubair al-Humaydi: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

Salamah bin Shabib: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

Abdullah ibn Abi Dunya: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

Hassan al-Basri died in year 109 H and he was 89 years old as its mentioned in Tahdib al-Kamal, which means he was 41 years old when Imam Hussain was martyred. We should also point out that narrator Salim bin Abi Hafsa al-Khayat is not the only narrator to transmit the tradition rather there are three more reliable narrators from the same generation (tabaqa) as of Salim who have narrated the same incident in the same book and in the science of Hadith such a method of determining authentication of a tradition is called Mutab'a which has also been used by the Imam of Salafis Albani. The three narrators are Imam Muhammad al-Baqar: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib). Khalid bin Yazid al-Saksaki: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib). Layth bin Saad: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah Thabt’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib).

The Holy Prophet (pbuh) used to kiss Imam Husayn (as). Yazeed the Accursed was making mockery of that blessed mouth, after beheading the Imam (as)![2]

For his crimes, the top Imams of the Sunni way deemed it permissible to curse him. Imam Ibn Jauzi in his book al-Rad ala al-Mutaseb al-Aneed al-Mane le zam Yazeed, page 41:

“Abu Jaffar al-Akbari from Abu Ali al-Hussain bin al-Junaid from Abu Talib bin Shahab al-Akbari from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin al-Abbas from Saleh bin Ahmad bin Hanbal who said: For a person having belief in Allah there was no reason to love Yazeed bin Muawiya. Why should the person not be cursed who has been cursed by Allah in the Quran. To this Saleh asked that where in the Quran had Allah cursed Yazeed bin Muawiya. Imam Ahmed replied quoting the verse: 'Then, is it to be expected of you, if ye were put in authority, that ye will do mischief in the land, and break your ties of kith and kin? Such are the men whom Allah has cursed for He has made them deaf and blinded their sight. Do they not then earnestly seek to understand the Qur'an, or are their hearts locked up by them?' [47:22-24].”

All the narrators are reliable:

Abu Jaffar al-Akbari: Dhahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh al-Islam, v23 p218).

Al-Hussain bin Junaid: Dhahabi said: ‘Authenticated’ (Al-Kashif, v1 p332).

Abu Talib bin Shehab al-Akbari: Dhahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh al-Islam, v25 p380).

Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Abbas: Dhahabi said: ‘Muhadith Imam’ (Siar alam alnubala, v15 p513).

Saleh bin Ahmad bin Hanbal: Dhahabi said: ‘Imam Muhadith Hafiz’ (Siar alam alnubala, v12 p529).

Shaykh Kamaluddin Muhammad bin Musa Damiri in his famed work Hayaat ul Haywaan, Volume 2 page 175 records:

"Abu Hanifa, Malik and Ahmad have two statements about cursing Yazeed, Tasreeh (i.e. to curse him by taking his name) and another one is with Talweeh (i.e. to curse without taking his name and only by using hint e.g. May Allah curse the killers of Imam Hussain)"

Prominent Shafiyee scholar Shaykh Sulaiman bin Muhammad bin Umar al-Bejarmi (d. 1221 H) records:

"Imam Ahmad has statements about cursing Yazeed both Talweeh (directly) and Tasreeh (indirectly) and so has Imam Malik and Abu Hanifa and we have similar statements in the madhab of our Imam Shafiyee and al-Bakri also said the same. Some of his (al-Bakri's) followers said about Yazeed 'may Allah increase his disgrace and put him in the lowest level of hell'"

Hashyat al-Bejarmi, Volume 12 page 369

All four Sunni Imams permitted the cursing of Yazeed[3]. Imam Showkani who enjoys authority amongst the Salafist also cursed Yazeed. We read in Nail al-Awtar, Volume 7 page 201:

“The alcoholic drunk, who disgraced the pure divine law, Yazeed bin Mu'awiya may Allah curse him”

Similarly Imam Abdulrauf al-Munawi in his authority work Faidh al-Qadir Sharah Jami al-Saghir, Volume 1 page 204 stated:

"Abu al-Faraj bin al-Jauzi stated in his book 'al-Rad ala al-Mutasib al-Aneed al-M'ane men zam Yazeed' that the pious scholars allowed cursing him"

Moreover Shaykh Sulaiman bin Muhammad bin Umar al-Bejarmi (d. 1221 H) also testified:

“Ibn al-Jauzi said: ‘The pious scholars permitted the cursing of Yazeed’ and he wrote a book about its permissibility”

Hashyat al-Bejarmi, Volume 12 page 369


The Times of India also carries this news:

Row over Islamic preacher's remarks[4]

27 Dec 2007, 0424 hrs IST, Mohammed Wajihuddin, TNN

MUMBAI: Islamic preacher Zakir Naik is in the eye of a storm for the laudatory remarks he made about a controversial Islamic figure during the recent peace conference in the city. Muslim scholars, both Shias and Sunnis, are threatening an agitation if Naik doesn't apologise and retract his controversial utterances soon.

At the concluding session of the 10-day Islamic peace conference at Somaiya Ground in Sion on December 2, Naik shocked many in the audience when he addressed Yazid as "Raziallah tala anho"(May Allah be pleased with him). He also reportedly called the battle of Karbala a political battle. Yazid has been historically condemned for having killed 72 Muslims, including Prophet Mohammed's grandson Imam Hussein and his close relatives, at the battle of Karbala in the 7th century on the banks of the Tigris (present day Iraq). The Shias consider it Yazid's unpardonable sin and commemorate the martyrdom with a 10-day mourning, culminating into Ashura (10th day) in Muharram.

"Naik's irresponsible remarks have hurt the sentiments of both the Shias and the Sunnis. The honorifics are reserved for the Prophet's companions, not for someone like Yazid, the butcher of Karbala. And he can't call Karbala a political battle as it was essentially a religious battle,"protested Shia scholar Maulana Zaheer Abbas Rizvi.

Naik, who returned from Haj on Wednesday, conveyed his reaction through his brother Mohammed Naik: "At the peace conference, while replying to a question, I neither condemned nor lauded Yazid. I did say 'May Allah be pleased with him' while mentioning Yazid. I can show the fatwas from seminaries like Darul Uloom Deoband supporting my stand."

By blessing Yazeed, this famous Salafi preacher blessed his crimes, and supported him against Imam Husayn (as). Also, by claiming that Imam Husayn (as) was engaged only a political struggle, and not a jihad for Islam, he took himself out of Islam because he actually made the allegation against the Holy Prophet (pbuh)!! He said: I am at war with whom they (Imam Ali, Bibi Zahra, Imam Hasan, Imam Husayn) are at war! This is the conclusive proof that Allah (swt) protected Imam Husayn (as) from engaging in mere political struggles.

Now, let us address a clear prediction about this accursed Yazeed from the Holy Prophet (pbuh):

Abu Hurayrah said:

I heard the truthful and trusted by Allah (i.e. the Holy Prophet) saying: "The destruction of my followers will be through the hands of young men from Quraysh".... Abu Hurayrah said: If I could, I would have named these youths and their parentage.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, No. 180

NB: Salafi translator, MM Khan has offered only a partial translation of the hadith.

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in his Fath al-Bari, Vol. 13, p. 10, while commenting on the hadith mentions another hadith from Ibn Abi Shaybah:

Abu Hurayrah used to go to the market saying:

"O Lord! Do not let me live to the year 60 AH nor witness the reign of the youths".

He accepts its authenticity and thus comments:

In these words there is an indication that the first youth to come to power was in the year 60 AH and indeed, this is what happened. Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah's succession took place in that year, and he remained in power till his death in 64 AH.

Abu Hurayrah also said:

I have memorized two kinds of knowledge from Allah's Apostle. I have propagated one of them to you and If I propagated the second, then my pharynx (throat) would be cut (i.e. killed).

Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 1, No. 121

Commenting on the hadith in his Fath al-Bari, Vol. 1, p. 216, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani says:

The Ulama believe that the knowledge that Abu Hurayrah did not disclose relates to the hadith in which the names, lifestyle and the times of the evil monarchs have been mentioned. Abu Hurayrah used to make a tacit reference about some of them, but would never mentio their real names, fearing for his own life. For instance, by seeking refuge in the Almighty from the year 60 AH and from the reign of the youths, he was making a tacit reference to the kingship of Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah, whose reign was in the year 60 AH.

So, on what basis do the remaining Salafis consider him a “righteous Salaf” and thus bless him?

Dr. Zakir Naik is a follower of Ibn Taymiyyah. This is what Ibn Taymiyyah himself said on the issue:

"There wasn’t any benefit either for religion or for life in his (Hussain's) rebellion"…. "His (Hussain) rebellion and murder caused a mischief, it would not have happened had he stayed at home, what he (Hussain) sought to achieve of the good and vanish of the evil he couldn’t achieve it, nay the evil became more by his rebellion".

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 316

We read in Muhadrat fi Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamyia, Volumne 2 page 129 by Shaykh Muhammad Khudri Beik (d. 1377 H):

"Hussain made a big mistake by his rebellion".

One would clearly notice hatred of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) in these positions of the Salafi Imams! These people are so deep in their hatred of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) that al-Dhahabi, one of their most prominent Imams, wrote this big lie about Imam Hasan (as). We read in Syar alam al-Nubala by Dahabi, Volume 3 page 253:

"He (Hassan) was exaggerator in marriage and divorce, he got married to seventy women!!!"


Our Salafi brothers often object to any weeping for any dead, and especially the Ashura weeping for Imam Husayn (as). But, this is clearly out of ignorance on their part!

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal[5] in his Fadail Sahabah, Vol. 3, p. 132, Hadith 1118 records:

"Narrated on the authority of Ahmed bin Isra'il:

I read in the book of Ahmed ibn Muhammed ibn Hanbal written by his own handwritting on the authority of Aswad ibn Amer Abu Abd ar-Rahman on the authority of Al-Rubay’ ibn Munthir on the authority of his father: that (Imam) Husayn ibn Ali used to say:

Whichever eye cries a drop of tears for us, or sheds a drop of tears for us, Allah will reward him (the person) with PARADISE.

All the narrators are reliable.

Munthir: Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani says: Thiqah (Taqreeb Tahdheeb, No. 6894) Al-Rubay’: Imam Ajili al-Kufi in his book Ma’rifat al-Thuqaat, No. 461 says: Thiqah. Al-Aswad: Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani says: Thiqah (Taqreeb Tahdheeb, No. 503) Ahmad ibn Isra’il: Imam Dhahabi says: He is Shiekh of the scholars, Khateeb (author of Tarikh Al-Baghdad). He is saduk (truthful) and knowing (3aref)" (Tadhkirat al-Huffaz, Vol. 3, p. 868, No. 838

Some people, based on some recorded hadiths, consider weeping for the dead to be incorrect. However, we read in the Qur’an that even the earth and the sky weep for the dead. If it is wrong, they will not do so. In the Holy Qur'an Allah (swt) refers to the drowning of Pharaoh and his army as follows:

Yusufali 44:29] And neither heaven nor earth shed a tear over them: nor were they given a respite (again).

Allamah Jalaludin Suyuti states in his commentary of the verse that the Holy Prophet (s) said:

"They had done no deed that would merit the earth and Heaven crying for them, neither did anything pleasant come from their speech nor did any good deeds reach the heavens, that would merit the earth and heaven crying for them."

Tafseer Durre Manthur volume 6, page 30

Allamah Fakhruddin Raazi after quoting the same tradition states:

"The same comments have been made by other commentators (Mufassireen)."

Tafseer e Kabir, volume 7, page 471

Suyuti also records this, in Tafseer Durre Manthur Volume 6, page 30:

A few people asked Hadrat ibn e Abbas (r.a) that if the heaven and the earth really cry for some people? His reply was: "Yes."

Considering that scholars of tafsir have relied upon the hadith, especially people who were also great hadithists like Allamah al-Suyuti, we are therefore confident about its authenticity. Anyway, even if the tradition is inauthentic, the meaning of the verse is still very clear.

Since Imam Husayn was a righteous person, the sky and the earth wept for him. Allamah Jalaludin Syuti writes:

The day when Hadrat Yahya bin Zakarya (a.s) was martyred the sky had got red and blood was dripping from it and the sky had also got red the day Imam Husayn (a.s) was martyred."

He further states that Zaid bin Ziyad has reported:

"When Imam Husayn was martyred, the corners of the sky remained red for a four month period."

Tafseer Durre Manthur Volume 6, page 31

Wahaby scholar Nawab Molvi Siddiq Hasan Khan Bhophali quotes Saddi in Tafseer Fatah ul-Bayan, volume 8, page 326:

"When Husayn (as) was martyred the heaven kept crying evidenced by the fact it turned red."

Even Ibn Katheer writes:

"When Hadrat Yahya bin Zakariya (a.s) was assassinated the sky turned red, it also turned red when Imam Husayn (r) was martyred. After the martyrdom of Husayn (r) fresh blood started to gush from wherever stones were picked up. There was a solar eclipse, the corners of the sky had turned red."

Tafseer Ibn Katheer, volume 9, page 163, published in Egypt

Allamah Ibn Jareer Tabari writes that Saddi said:

"When Imam Husayn (r) was martyred, the sky started weeping for him, the weeping of the sky was proven by its turning red."

Tafseer Jame'a al-Bayan, volume 25, page 68

We read again from al-Suyuti:

"Atta [ra] said: 'The sky cries in a manner that all of its corners get red'.

Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Vol 7 page 413 Surah Dakhaan Verse 29

He quotes Imam Hasan Basri to have said:

Al-Hassan [ra] said: "When the sky gets red it weeps."

Imam Mohammad ibn Jareer Tabari states in Tafseer Tabari, volume 22 page 33:

"It has been said that the crying of the sky is such that all of its corners get red."

Allamah Nizamuddin Nishapuri states in Tafseer Nisahpuri, volume 25, page 73:

"Many Mufassireen are of the view that the sky can cry, so they believe that the solar and the lunar eclipses, the corners of the sky getting red and the blowing of wild and pinching wind are forms of the sky weeping."

We read:

Zaid bin Zyad [ra] said: 'When Husayn was martyred, the corners of the sky remained red for a four month period'.

Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Vol 7 page 413 Surah Dakhaan Verse 29

Imam Ibn Jareer Tabari in his Tafsir Tabari , Volume 22 page 33 and Wahabi scholar Nawab Molvi Siddiq Hasan Khan Bhophali in Tafseer Fatah ul-Bayan, volume 8, page 326 stated:

Al-Seddi said: 'When Hussain bin Ali (r) was killed, the sky started weeping for him, the weeping of the sky was by turning red'.

We read in Tahdib al-Kamal by Jamaluddin al-Mizi, Volume 6 page 433:

Abu Qabeel said: 'When Husayn bin Ali was killed, the sun was eclipsed (so long) so that the stars appeared in the middle of day'

Imam Tabarani in his Mu’jam al-Kabir, Vol. 3, p. 113 records from Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri:

After the martyrdom of Husayn (r) fresh blood started to gush from wherever stones were picked up.

Imam al-Haythami in his Majma al-Zawaid, Vol. 9, p. 196 comments:

Tabarani has recorded it and all its narrators are narrators of sahih.

Imam Abi Bakar al-Haythami records in Majma al-Zawaed, Volume 9 page 316:

"Al-Zuhari said: 'After the martyrdom of Hussain fresh blood started to gush from wherever stones were picked up.'

Tabarani has recorded it and all its narrators are narrators of Sahih".

We further read:

"Um Hakim said: 'I was a young girl on the day al-Hussain was killed and the sky turned into red for days'.

Al-Tabarani recorded it, and the narrators until Um Hakim are the narrators of the Sahih".

Majma al-Zawaed, Volume 9 page 316 Tradition 15161

This is evidence of the earth weeping for the Imam. It did not just weep water. IT WEPT BLOOD, just as some Shi’as do today. Even the Holy Prophet (pbuh) mourned.

Some people have condemned the Shi’a who beat themselves while mourning Imam al-Husayn (as). However, we actually see that this is Sunnah! We read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 446:

Narrated 'Ali bin Abi Talib:

That Allah's Apostle came to him and Fatima the daughter of Allah's Apostle at their house at night and said, "Won't you pray?" 'Ali replied, "O Allah's Apostle! Our souls are in the Hands of Allah and when he wants us to get up, He makes us get up." When 'Ali said that to him, Allah's Apostle left without saying anything to him. While the Prophet was leaving, 'Ali heard him striking his thigh (with his hand) and saying, "But man is quarrelsome more than anything else." (18.54)

Ibn Hajr Asqalani in the commentary of this tradition in Fatah al Bari, Volume 3 page 11 writes:

"His statement 'striking his thigh' shows the permission of striking the thigh to express the grief"

We read in Tauhfa Ithna Ashari (a top anti-Shi’a bok) page 523 published in Karachi:

"When Aisha was defeated and Ali saw the corpses on the ground he began to beat his thighs"

We also read:

"Mu'awyia bin Hakam al-Sulami said: 'I was preforming prayers behind Allah's messenger (pbuh) then a man sneezed, thus I said to him: 'May Allah's mercy be upon you'. Thus the people looked at me, then I said to my self: 'O my, why are you looking at me?' Then they started striking their thighs, therefore I came to know that they want me to remain silent'".

This Hadith has been recorded by Albaani in his 'Sahih Sunan Abu Daud' Volume 1 page 175 Hadith 823

So, those who attack these Shi’as should take note. You might be attacking your own creed.

Ibn Abbas narrates:

"One afternoon I dreamt of Holy Prophet (s) standing with his hair disturbed and with dust tangled in them and he was holding a phial filled with blood. I said to the Prophet: "What are you holding?" The Prophet (s) replied: "I am holding this phial filled with the blood of my son and his companions that I have been collecting all the day long."

I remembered that day and when the news of Al Hussain's martyrdom came, and I matched that day with the day I had dreamt the Holy Prophet (s), I came to know that it was the same day".

Ibn Kathir has copied the hadith from Musnad Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his Al-Bidayah wa Nihayah, Vol. 8, p. 218, adding:

Its chain is strong.

Imam Al-Hakim too has recorded it in his al-Mustadrak, Vol. 4, p. 398, adding:

The hadith is sahih on the condition of Muslim who has not recorded it.

Imam al-Haythami too has recorded it in his Majma al-Zawaid, Vol. 9, p. 194, adding:

Both Ahmad and Tabarani have recorded it. The narrators of Ahmad are narrators of sahih

The annotator of Musnad Ahmad, Ahmad Muhammad Shakir (Dar al-Hadith, Cairo) states:

Its chain is sahih.

Now, not just humans, even jinns mourned the death of Imam Husayn (as). Umm Salamah (ra) has also narrated: "I heard the jinns mourning for al-Husayn."

Imam Tabarani has recorded it in his Mu’jam al-Kabir, Vol. 3, pp. 121-122. Ibn Kathir too has recorded it in his al-Bidayah wa Nihayah, Vol. 6, p. 259, and adds:

The hadith is sahih.

Imam al-Haythami too has recorded it in his Majma al-Zawaid, Vol. 9, p. 199, adding:

Tabarani has recorded it and all its narrators are narrators of sahih.

We further read:

'Maymunah (ra) said: 'I heard the jinns mourning for Husayn ibn Ali'.

Tabarani has recorded it and all its narrators are narrators of Sahih'

Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 9 page 199 Tradition 15180

Abu Naeem al-Asbahani records in Marifat al-Sahaba, Volume 5 page 333 Tradition 1686:

Habib bin Abi Thabit said: 'I heard the jinn mourning over al-Hussain'

Then Tradition 1687:

Abi Habab al-Kalbi said: 'Some grave diggers said: 'Whenever we went out side at night to the cemetery during (the days) of the al-Hussain murder, we heared the jinn mourning over him'

We also read in Tradition 1688:

Mazidah bin Jabir al-Hadhrami narrated from his mother that she said: 'I heard the jinn mourning over al-Hussain'

If our opponents still insist that we must not mourn the dead,then they will have to explain this hadith to us. We read in Saheeh al Bukharee Volume 2, Book 23, Number 390:

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

We went with Allah's Apostle (pbuh) to the blacksmith Abu Saif, and he was the husband of the wet-nurse of Ibrahim (the son of the Prophet). Allah's Apostle took Ibrahim and kissed him and smelled him and later we entered Abu Saif's house and at that time Ibrahim was in his last breaths, and the eyes of Allah's Apostle (pbuh) started shedding tears. 'Abdur Rahman bin 'Auf said, "O Allah's Apostle, even you are weeping!" He said, "O Ibn 'Auf, this is mercy." Then he wept more and said, "The eyes are shedding tears and the heart is grieved, and we will not say except what pleases our Lord, O Ibrahim! Indeed we are grieved by your separation."

The beloved scholar of Wahabis Ibn Katheer writes in his authority work al Bidayah wa al Nihaya, Volume 4, page 673, published by Nafees Academy Karachi:

Ibn Ishaq narrates that on the day when Hadhrat Jafar ibn Abi Talib was martyred in Ghazwa-e-Moutah; Holy Prophet (s) called upon Hadhrat Abdullah bin Jafar and made him sit on his lap and started kissing his forehead and eyes, while tears were flowing from his own Holy eyes.

The Sahaba inquired: O Prophet of Allah! Is it so that some grieving news has come about Jafar that has made your tears flow??

The Holy Prophet (s) replied: Yes, today Jafar has been martyred there, but the troubles and the plight that he went through before being martyred is very grieving.

On a last note, let us read this. Imam al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan al-Kubra (Vol. 4, p. 78) records:

Certainly, Fatima daughter of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) used to visit the grave of her uncle Hamza and wept and prayed there.

Our master Hamza (ra) died, and Bibi Zahra (as) still wept for him years after his death!

Imam al-Hakim too, in his al-Mustadrak (Vol. 1, p. 377) records:

Salman ibn Dawud - Ja'far ibn Muhammad - his father (Muhammad ibn Ali) - Ali ibn Husayn - his father (Ali ibn Abi Talib):

Fatima daughter of the Holy Prophet used to visit the grave of her uncle Hamza EVERY FRIDAY, and used to pray and weep there.

Al-Hakim says:

All the narrators of this hadith are thiqah.

Al-Dhahabi has said the same thing in his Talkhis, as well as al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan.

Of course, there was a building over the grave of Hamza (ra), right from the time of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself. That is why Bibi al-Zahra (as) was able to offer salat in it.

If a Salafi sees a Shi'a today doing the same thing. But, what does he think of Bibi Zahra, and the Companions who saw her "worshipping the grave" but kept quiet?

Salafis condemn us for weeping ON A REGULAR BASIS (although they are wrong on this point) for Imam Husayn (as), plus that long after his martyrdom. What would they say about Bibi al-Zahra (as)?


There are some weak Shi’a hadiths that our opponents rely upon against us. We will expose them one by one now.

This is the first hadith:

Imam Ja'far Sadiq (as) has said that patience and hardships, both comes to the believer, hence on the appearance of hardships, he exhibit patience and adversities impatience comes to kufr hence on the appearance of adversities, he exhibits signs of anxiety / mourning [Jazza]

Furu Al Kafi v 1, p 121

They seek to prove that Shi’as should have exercised patience rather than burst into tears. Anyway, Allamah al-Majlisi has declared it weak in his Mirat al Uqool Volume 3, page 92. besides, the tradition contradicts the Qur’an and Sunnah, where even prophets and Imams wept. We have just cited some examples.

This is the second hadith:

On asking the meaning of [Anxiety / Jazza] Mourning Imam Ja'far (as) said that extreme mourning means to wail and cry loudly and to beat face and chest and to eliminate the hairs of forehead. And one who maintained the lamenting ritual; he has abandoned patience and went against the path of Islam.

Furu e Kafi, Volume 1, page 121

Allamah Hilli in his book "Kitab Ar Rijjal" said that the narrator of the tradition, Suhail Bin Zayd 'very' weak', who narrated 'absurd traditions'. "Miraat Al Uqool" Volume 3, page 91 also grades the tradition as weak. Furu e Kafi has also stated it is weak. (Please see chapter 79, tradition 1, Kitab al khabair page 187)

This is the third tradition:

Imam Ja'far Sadiq (as) quoted Prophet (s) that when a Muslim hits his 'thighs' during the time of adversities , than his reward is destroyed.

Furu Kafi, volume 1, page 121

Furu al Kafi and Miraat al Uqool volume 3, page 92 have graded this tradition as Daef. It contradicts a Saheeh tradition in "'Man la Yanzarul Fiqh', Kitab at Taharah, Bab al Takhfiziyah":

"The one who is affected by calamity, whether he does patience or wail, his reward is paradise during suffering".

This is the fourth hadith:

The Prophet(s) instructed at the time of His death that Fatima (as) not strike her face or open her hair, do not invite the women to recite elegies nor weep and cry loudly.

Furu Kafi, Volume 2, page 214

Again, this one is also weak. This is according to Allamah al-Majlisi in Miraat al Uqool Volume 4, Page 513. Besides, we read in Al Bidaya Wal Nahaya volume 5, page 243:

"When Prophet (s) died on the bed and the women who were around him (s) had made their faces red by beating their faces."

This is the fifth one:

Ibn Baboya, through "Mo'tabar" (decent) chain has reported from Imam Mohammad al-Baqir (as) that the Holy Prophet (s) bequeathed Hadrath Fatima (sa) in following words:

"Fatima! When I die, don't gripe your hair due to my separation, don't disturb your hair and do not lament and do not mourn and do not call females who lament and scream."

Jila Ul Ayoon (Urdu translation) part 1, page 67, Published in Lucknow

This tradition is the translation of the same tradition of Kafi which was noted in the earlier proof and according to the reference from 'Miraat ul Uqool' that was proved to be a weak tradition. The Word Mo'tabar that is used for authentic traditions also includes weak ones, the inventor of this Expression too is Allama Majlisi, he himself has explained this point in his 'Risala e Rijaal' that the word 'Mo'tabar' also includes the weak traditions, see "Hadiyatul Mo'mineen" and "Durayat ul Hadees.

This is the sixth hadith:

O' Sister! By the right that I have on you. Be patient on my separation, and when I get killed do not beat yourself and do not gripe your hair, you are the daughter of Hadrat Fatima e Zahra (sa), show patience the wa she showed on the death of Holy Prophet (s).

Jila ul Ayoon (translated) Chapter of 'Qazaaha e Karbala' page 382

The hadith is ahad, having only one chain. It contradicts mutawatir hadiths and thus becomes an oddity in itself, a weak hadith. Besides, even Ibn Katheer records:

When the forces of Yazeed planned to attack the camp of Imam Husayn, Hadrat Zainab came to Imam Husayn and asked that why was there so much noise outside their tents, Imam replied that I just dreamt of Holy Prophet (s) and he said that you will be meeting me tomorrow, hearing this Hadrat Zainab started crying and hitting herself on the face.

Al Bidaya wal Nahaya Volume 8, Page 176, printed in Beirut

In the same book a bit further it is mentioned that:

Hadrat Zainab heard the elegies from Imam, reflecting the tragedy of Karbala and the Martyrdom of Imam Husayn she cried, lamented and beat herself on the head until she fainted.

Al Bidaya wal Nihaya Volume 8, Page 177, printed in Beirut

Ibn Katheer states that after the martyrdom of Imam Hussain [as], Umer Ibn Sa`d dispatched the women who were in the camps of Imam Hussain [as]:

They were made to sit on the camels, when they passed by the battlefield, they saw Imam Hussein (as) and his companions, the women started crying and shouting and Hadhrat Zaynab did Nudba for her brother and said:

O Muhammad (s)! O Muhammad (s)! May Allah and the angels on the heavens send blessings on you; Hussain (s) is lying on the ground blood-tangled with his organs cut-off, O Muhammad (s)! Your daughters have been made captives and your progeny is killed and lying on the ground with the wind blowing dust onto their bodies.

The narrator says: ?By God! Hadhrat Zaynab made every friend and enemy cry.?

Qarat bin Qais narrates that when the women passed by the killed, they cried and started hitting their faces.

Al Bidaya wal Nahaya, Volume 8, page 1091


Late Deobandi Sunni Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai records the following episode in his esteemed work 'Aqeedah Zahoor-e-Mahdi' pages 113-114 (published by Idarah Dawat-e-Islam, Karachi.):

Hafid Ibn Hajr states: "Our teacher, the prominent Muhaddith Hafid al-Haythami used to severely condemn Ibn Khaldun. When its reason was asked to him, he said that Ibn Khaldun while mentioning Hadrath Hussain has recorded a statement viz 'He was killed with the sword of his grandfather'. Sakhawi states that when our teacher Hafid Ibn Hajar narrated this statement, he cursed Ibn Khaldun, said something bad about him and was weeping. Hafid Ibn Hajar has said that those words of him are no longer written in the present history book. [Al-Zawa Al-Lamea, Volume 4 page 147]

It should also be kept in mind that Ibn Khuldun was a Nasibi and had deviations for the progeny of Ali"

The book 'Al-Zawa Al-Lamea' by Imam Sakhawi can be downloaded from the Salafi website mentioned below and the aforesaid reference can be seen in Volume 2 No. 387 of this version.

This honestly should not surprise anyone, since while the Holy Prophet (pbuh) guaranteed that his Ahl al-Bayt (as) would never contradict the Qur’an and while Allah (swt) declares them absolutely free from sin, Ibn Khaldun thinks differently:

"... and Ahl al-Bayt had deviated in religion and fiqh that they invented, and only they and their children follow it, by back stabbing the Sahabah. Yet they call themselves Infallibles to clarify their claim of this religious doctrine, just like the deviated Khawarij. The majority of our religion do not accept their doctrine, rather strongly denounce and reject it. We have nothing to do with their religion, nor do we narrate from their books. And there is no influence of them except on their own lands. Verily, the Shia books are only in their own lands that is the East, West and the Yemen."

Muqadmah Ibn Khaldun, page 446

Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Abdullah ibn al-Arabi al-Maliki (d. 543 H) was one of the famed Sunni scholars. Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records about him in Al-Jame al-Saghir, Volume 1 page 365:

"He wrote a book about Hussain (may Allah be pleased with and disgrace his opponents), he claimed that Yazeed killed him justly by the sword of his grandfather. We seek refuge in the Lord of the forsake".


Apart from the lie of Ibn Khaldun upon the Holy Prophet (pbuh), Sunnis generally lie that the real killers of Imam Husayn (as) were his Shi’as. This is because Kufa was the center of Shi’ism at the time, according to general perception, and it was the Kufans who betrayed him to the army of Yazeed. Some of them even claim that that is the reason Shi’as weep today, and why some of them cut themselves during Ashura!!

First, Ibn Taymiyyah himself admits that it was the Nasibis, and NOT the Shi’as, who killed him:

Their (the Rafidi’s) stubbornness and denying of the truth is worse than that of the Nasibis who killed al-Husayn.

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Vol. 4, p. 366, 368

Let s here now separate the rumours from the facts. First and foremost, the city of Kufa was founded by Umar. Imam of Ahl al-Sunnah Allamah Shibli Numani in al Faruq, Vol. 2, p. 95 states:

“The city was founded in 17AH and, as Omar had expressly commanded, houses sufficient to lodge forty thousand persons were built. Arab tribes were allotted separate quarters under the supervision of Hayaj ibn Malik. Omar had given clear instructions with regard to the plan of the city as well as its construction... The Jami Masjid was built on a raised square plateform and was so big that forty thousand persons could pray in it at one time.”

On the following page, we read:

“Besides the Jami Masjid, separate mosques were built for each quarter of the city. Among the people settled in Kufah were twelve thousand from Yemen and eight thousand of the Nazar Clan. Bahilah, Nim-ul Lat, Taghlab, Bani Asad, Nakha, Kindah, Azd, Mazainah, Tamim, Muharab, Asad and Amirm Bajalah, Jadilah and Akhlat, Juhaina, Muhjaz, Hawazin, etc”.

“In Omar’s lifetime the city came to attain such greatness and splendour that the Caliph called it the head of Islam”.

Apparently, Umar had settled his loyal friends in his new city. He clearly would not settle people who reject his caliphate there!

Te few Shi’as who happened to be there were expelled and murdered by Mu’awiyah. This is the testimony of Ibn Ziyad, Mu’awiyah’s governor in Kufa, while addressing Hani, a Shi’a:

“Didn’t you know Hani, when my father came to this land, he did not spare the life of any one of this Shi’a except for your father and Hujr? You know what happened to Hujr”.

Tarikh Tabari (English), Vol. 19, p. 38

Thus, those who betrayed Imam Husayn (as), claiming to be his Shi’a, were actually Sunnis. They later started the Tawabbun movement, that wrecked havoc on the men of Yazeed. The leader of the movement was a Companion!

We read in al Aqd al Shameen fi Tareekh al Jildh al Kameen Volume 4 page 607 that:

“Sulayman bin Surad al Khuza’i benefited from the companionship of Rasulullah (s) and narrated hadith from him”.

Imam Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin As`ad al Yameni also known as Al Yaf`ee states:

“Sulayman (ra) was a Sahabi of the Prophet (s) hadith have been narrated on his authority”.

Miraat al Janaan Volume 1 page 141 – Hyderabad edition

Dhahabi writes as follows:

“Sulayman bin Surad, the Leader of the al Khuza’i in Kufa, the Sahabi, he has a small narration from Ubayy and Jubayr bin Mut'im from Yahya bin Ya'mar and Uday bin Thabet and Abu Ishaq and others. Ibn Barr states ‘He (Sulayman) was amongst those that wrote to Imam Hussain [r] and gave him bayya. They were unable to support him and greatly regretted this, and subsequently waged war. I am of the opinion that he was a pious religious individual, he joined the army on account of his sin of failing to support Hussain [r], he made tauba (asked for forgiveness) and left to avenge the shedding of his (Hussain’s) blood, this army was known as the army of the Tawabun”

Siyar al-Aalam al-Nubla Volume 3 page 394 -395 (Beirut edition)

Ibn Barr writing on Sulayman bin Surad states:

“Sulayman bin Surad was a good, pious and religious man. During jahiliyya his name was ‘Laseer’ – Rasulullah (s) changed it to Sulayman. He was amongst those that wrote to Hussain ibn ‘Ali [r] and invited him to Kufa. When he [Hussain] arrived he was killed, although they did not participate in his murder, Sulayman bin Surad, Mussayib bin Najbah, Najab Furdhee and others expressed regret for having failed aid Hussain [r] and die with him”.

al Istiab Volume 2 pages 43-44

Ibn Kathir states as follows:

“And the people gathered in the home of Sulayman bin Surad, this gathering comprised of the great righteous Sahaba”.

Al-Bidayah, Volume 8 page 2

Ibn Kathir also records a letter of Mussayab bin Najabah that states clearly that whilst not siding with Yazeed, the Tawabun failed to support Imam Hussain (as) having themselves invited him:

“Allah (swt) has tested us, in relation to supporting the son of Rasulullah’s daughter. We were exposed as liars, he relied on our support and we failed to provide it, we broke our promise, we shall kill those that killed him and his family”.

al Bidayah Volume 8 page 247

It is very clear from all this, that the people who betrayed Imam Husayn (as), claiming to be his Shi’a, were led by prominent Companions!

Now, let us examine the story in some more detail. Ibn Kathir writes:

Upon returning to Makka he [Hussain] received letters from the people of Kufa, He sent Muslim bin Aqeel to go and assess the situation. Outwardly the people portrayed their support for Muslim bin Aqeel and in turn for Hussain – 1000 people gave bayya. Spies notified Numan bin Basheer, he did not openly adopt tough measures, but in this regard gave a sermon warning people against sedition and urged the people to remain loyal in the bayya that been afforded to Yazeed. One man stood up and said to Numan ‘This matter cannot be curtailed without adopting force, the approach that you have adopted is like that of weak people”.

…Yazeed said to Ibn Ziyad ‘When in Kufa find Muslim bin Aqeel and then kill him. Ibn Ziyad arrived in Kufa with 17 men having assessed the situation he spoke to the respectable people in his palace and queried the whereabouts of Muslim bin Aqeel. There was some opposition but Ubaydullah abducted these notables and deterred people from supporting Muslim.

So much so that by Maghrib prayers only thirty people remained with him, by night fall they also deserted him. That night Muslim stayed in the home of an elderly lady, her son notified Abdul Rahman bin Asheesh. Abdul Rahman told his father at that same time who was in Ubaydullah’s house, Ibn Ziyad asked why the secrecy, they told him and Ibn Ziyad immediately sent 70-80 men headed by Ibn Harith Makhzomi who was the head of police. Muhammad bin Asheesh and Abdul Rahman were with them. They collectively captured [Muslim] and sent him to Ibn Ziyad residence. Upon reaching the doors of the residence (he was met by) some of the sons of the Sahaba standing there. Muslim did not recognise them although they recognised him. They were waiting to meet Ibn Ziyad, Muslim’s face and clothes were covered in blood, whilst in that state he made a request for water, one of the group said, ‘You will not be able to drink this until you taste the hot water of Hell’. Muslim replied ‘Son of Hell you are more entitled to drink the fire of Hell; than me’.

Al Bidaya Volume 7 page 154

Ibn Katheer fails to name the group of Sahaba and tabieen that had taunted Muslim (as), Tabari identifies some names including one ‘Umro bin Harith Makhzoomi”.

Imam al-Dhahabi states:

“Umar bin Harith is counted amongst the Sahaba of Rasulullah (s) that had settled in Kufa… he is a Sahabi who narrated hadith from Rasulullah (s).

Siyar Al-Aalam al-Nubla, Volume 3 page 417

Later Ibn Kathir informs us about Umar bin Harith:

“Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad arrested Muslim bin Aqeel and sent him to Umro bin Harith Makhzoomi, who was the Chief of Police”.

al Bidaya Volume 7 page 155; Tabari Volume 6 page 198

Those waiting to meet Ibn Ziyad in his Palace were Kathir bin Shahab, we learn of him in Tabaqat ibn Sa’d Volume 6 page 103:

“He narrated traditions from Umar bin Khattab and was one of Mu’awiya bin Abu Sufyan’s Governors”.

We thus see a gradual playout of Sahabi participation in the betrayal and murder of Imam Husayn (as).

We pause here to ask our Sunni brothers: why did the Tawabbun not consider their betrayal a mistake in ijtihad, for which they would have one reward??

Let’s leave that aside. Instead, let us ask why Sunnis have awarded high places of nonour to the killers of Imam Husayn (as) in their religion. Before you disagree. Read this.

Dhahabi whilst writing on the life of Ibn Sa’d states in Siyar Al-Aalam al-Nubla Volume 4 page 349:

“Umar bin Sa’d lead the army that killed Imam Hussain (as), the Mukhthar killed him…Imam Nasai has narrated traditions from him”.

Ibn Hajr Asqalani writes:

“Umar Ibn Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas Zuhri Abu Hafs Madani lived in Kufa. He narrated traditions from his father and Abu Said al Khudri. His son Ibraheem and grandson Abu Bakr bin Hafs, Abu Isaac Al Subay'ee, Ayzaar bin Harees, Yazeed bin Abi Maryam , Qathadha, Zuhri and Yazeed bin Habeeb and others have narrated hadith from him. Ajli commented that he narrated hadith from his father, many took narrations from him, he is counted amongst the Tabieen, and he is Thiqah (highly reliable), he killed Al Hussain”

Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb Volume 7 page 450-451

Another Sunni scholar Jamalalddin Abi al Hajaj Yusuf al Mizzi in his detailed and esteemed Rijal book “Tahdeeb al Kamal” under under the topic “Umar ibn Sa’d” records:

“Ahmed ibn Abdullah al’Ajli said: He is the one that killed Hussain, and he is a thiqah (trustworthy) Tabiee.”

Vol. 21, No. 4240

This ‘reliable’ Umar bin Sad was the son of the Sahabi Sa'd bin Waqqas, about him Imam Bukhari wrote in Tareekh al Sagheer:

“When Imam Hussain arrived in Kerbala, Umar bin Sa'd was the first individual that cut the tent ropes”

Tareekh al Sagheer, Volume 1, page 75

So, the main killer of Imam Husayn (as) is one of the Sunni “righteous” Salaf!! Let’s go further!

On Ibn Ziyad, another of the killers, Ibn Hajr Asqalani states:

“He is 'UbaydAllah bin Ziad , the prince of Kufa for Mu'awiyah and his son Yazid , and he is the one who prepared the armies from Al Kufa to fight Al Hussain until he was killed in Karbala . He was known as Ibn Marjanah and she is his mother (Marjanah) .

Ibn Asakir has mentioned for him a "translation" in "Tarikh Dimashq" and he was mentioned in Sunan Abi Dawood… And he narrated from Sa'ed bin Abi Waqas and Mu'awiyah and Ma'qel bin Yasar and Ibn Umayyah the brother of Bani Ja'dah . And from those who narrated from him are Al Hasan al Basri and Abu al Malih bin Usama.”

T`ajeel al Munfa Bazawaid Rijal al Aimah al Arbah, page 180

This evil man, who Sunnis deem “thiqah”, clearly states why he murdered Imam Husayn (as). Ahmed Bin Daud Abu Hanifa Dinwari records the statement of Ibn Ziyad:

“I killed Al Hussain due to the reason that he revolted against our Imam [Yazid] and the very Imam[Yazid] sent me the message to kill Al Hussain. Now if the murder of Hussain is a sin then Yazid is responsible for it”

Akhbaar Tawaal, page 279 (Egypt) by Ahmed Bin Daud Abu Hanifa Dinwari

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti writes in Tareekh Khulfa, page 140:

“Yazid wrote his ruler in Iraq Ibn Ziyad for the murder of Hussain”

Another of the killers that Sunnis have embraced is Shabbath ibn Rib’i. Imam al-Dhahabi writes on him in Siyar Al-Aalam al-Nubla, Volume 4 page 150:

“This is the individual that rebelled against Imam Ali, he rejected the arbitration, and then subsequently repented…he narrated hadith on the authority of ‘Ali, Hudhaifa. Muhammad bin Ka’b Kurdhee and Sulayman Timee took hadith from him in Sunan Daud”

Ibn Hajr writes in Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 4 page 303:

“Shabath bin Rb'i al Tamimi AL Yurbo'i Abu 'Abd al Quddous Al Kufi, narrated from Hudayfa and Ali, and from those who narrated on him Mhammad bin Ka'eb Al Qarzi and Sulayman A Tamimi …. DarQutni states that he (Shabath) was a caller (Mu'azzen) for Sajah. Ibn Habban mentioned him among the truthworthy (Thiqa) and states that he committed wrongs, Bukhari and Muslim have narrated hadith on his authority where Fatima [r] had asked to be given a Servant. Al 'Ajali said that this is the first individual that assisted in the killing of ‘Uthman and also participated in the killing of Hussain [r].”

Such a multiple murderer is their thiqah Imam! Sunnis need to explain to us why they have granted red-carpet treatments to the people who beheaded Imam Husayn (as).

Of course, our Imams (as) have condemned people like these berayers and murderers who falsely claimed to be Shi’as. They are in fact Sunni Imams as we have proved. We read in Shi’a sources how our Imams (as) condemned them. They however differentiated between the true Shi’as, and false claimants like the above Sunni Imams. The ‘true’ Shia are those that follow the Imams in all aspects of their lives. Imam Kazim (as) defined the ‘true Shi’a as follows:

“These people claim that we are the Shi’a of ‘Ali, the true Shi’a are those whose actions are in accordance with his words”.

Rowza Kulayni page 107; Ahsaan al Fatawi Volume 1 page 84

[1] We read in Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 89:

Narrated Abu Bakra: I heard the Prophet talking at the pulpit while Al-Hasan was sitting beside him, and he (i.e. the Prophet ) was once looking at the people and at another time Al-Hasan, and saying, "This son of mine is a Saiyid (i.e. chief) and perhaps Allah will bring about an agreement between two sects of the Muslims through him."

[2] Some Salafis lie that Yazeed was related to Imam Husayn (as) by marriage, and therefore never mistreated him or his family. But, Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani records in the Muqadmah of his authority work Fathul Bari, page 339:

"The guardian of the daughter of Abdullah bin Jaffar bin Abi Talib, was her father. Yazeed bin Muawyiah proposed to marry her but she was married to her cousin al-Qasim bin Muhammad"

As for the other lie, we read in We read in al Bidayah wa Nihayah of Ibn Kathir Volume 8 page 188:

Following the killing of Husayn the tents were set on fire and women and their possession were distributed and scarves were removed from the heads of the women.

Habeeb as Sayyar Volume 2 page 33 also confirms that the tents belonging to the Ahl'ul bayt (as) were set alight.

Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 254 states that the women of the household were then imprisoned.

Ibn Emaad Hanbali, a rijal expert, records in his famed work Shadharat al-Dahab, Volume 1 page 61:

When he was killed, his head, women and Zain al-Abedin were taken to Damascus as slaves, may Allah destroy and disgrace whoever did this, whoever issued the orders and whoever was pleased with it.

[3] This proves that the matn (text) of all the hadiths recorded in the sahih books in his favour are false. For a sahih hadith, both the chain and the matn must be sahih. The chains of those hadiths are weak, since they are narrated by people with hatred of Imam Ali (as) in their hearts. Just check the narrators of ANY of those hadiths, and you will CERTAINLY confirm this. Hadiths from such people, who are hypocrites, are unacceptable even if anybody grades them sahih. Besides, by allowing the cursing of Yazeed, all four Sunni Imams rejected the matn of those hadiths, and thus their authenticity.

[4] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Row_over_Islamic_preachers_remarks_/articleshow/2653996.cms

[5] It seems the hadith is one of those added by Abdullah, son of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, to the book, or those added by a student of the Imam. The book was not completed by Imam Ahmad himself. Anyway, that has nothing to do with the authenticity of the hadith.


Post a Comment