Yazid Ibn Muawiya ( لعنة الله عليه )

Yazid  is a draconian figure in Islamic history who is condemned by Muslims all over the world for the past 1350 years.   However, he has some admirers as well, like   Salafis, Deobandis, and like minded groups who call him Amir ul Momineen and write ‘Radiallahu unhu’ ( رضي الله تعالى عنه ) with his name. They misinterpret and misquote historical references to exonerate Yazid from the crimes he committed during his reign.


We have explained the misconceptions of people about Yazid in the light of Quran, Ahadith and historical facts recorded in authentic Islamic History books.  Ahle Sunnah scholars’ opinions about Yazid have also been provided all through the article.  We have avoided Salafi and Shia sources, in view of their extreme views.  As usual, we have refrained from expressing our personal opinions throughout the article.

We hope our readers will benefit from it.  If you think some information related to a particular issue has been left, please write to us, giving authentic Ahle Sunnah references. We will try to accommodate it as far as possible.

There are 13 articles in this series that cover misunderstandings and differences of opinions about the tribulations that hit the Islamic nation during 48 years immediately after the death of Prophet Mohammad(صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) in 632.  For better understanding of these issues, it is important that you read these articles in the same sequence



Yazid Ibn Muawiya Ibn Abu Sufyan (يزيد بن معاوية بن أبي سفيان‎) was born on July 20, 647 (25 H) to Maysun Bint Bajdal al-Kulaibi al-Nasrania, aJacobite Christian from Kalb tribe in Syria. (Ref: Ibn Hajar,  ad-Dahabi, Ahmad, etc.).  It is reported that Muawiya’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)marriage to Maysun in 646, when he was 45 years old and working as Governor of Syria Province, was politically motivated as she was the daughter of a prominent Chief of Kalb Tribe. Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)had married other women before.  After  marriage, Maysun remained with her tribe.  It is recorded in authentic History books that one of his other wives, named Katwa, who was staying with him in the Governor’s palace, accompanied him when he went on a naval expedition in 650 (28 H).  


Early history of Maysun is not available except that she was a Christian woman from Kalb tribe.  It is reported that she gave birth to Yazid in 647.  It is not known if Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) knew the birth of Yazid or visited her to see Yazid after his birth.  It is also not known why she remained with her tribe after marriage. Yazid grew up among Christian neighborhoods all through his childhood and adolescence. There is no confirmed account about Muawiya’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)children, except that Yazid was the son of  Maysun.   


In 661, after the assassination of Hadhrat Ali (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) and abdication of Caliphate by Hadhrat Hassan (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ), Muawiya(رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) declared himself as Caliph in an impressive ceremony conducted by him for this purpose in Damascus.  Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) was 60 years old then. It is probably around this time Yazid joined his father in Damascus. 



Muawiya’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) Role as Governor

Muawiya’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)  Role as Head of State 



Christian population of Syria under Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)  had full autonomy.  Their tribal culture was respected and they had their own laws based on their age old Christian customs. Even judicial matters were dealt with, in accordance with their own laws, and by their own Church fathers. Christians used to pay a poll tax to the Government  for policing them against their enemies and to ensure peace among various Syrian tribes. 


Information about Yazid’s childhood is sketchy in history books. Most probably he came to live with his father in 662 when he was 15 years old.  Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) then made arrangements for training of Yazid in tribal warfare.  Yazid was not allowed to mix up with Arab children living in Damascus.   Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) decided Yazid to be his heir apparent and future King when Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) was 61 years old and Yazid was 16 years old.  Ibn Khaldun wrote :“Yazid’s time of Governance can be seen as fisq and debauchery, andMuawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) is to be blamed for that”. 


Yazid was born to a Christian mother and stayed with Christian relatives all through his childhood and adolescence. He did not see Islamic surroundings even when he was brought to his father’s palace in Damascus. Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) used to live like a Byzantine/Kisra King and did not bother much, and used Haram  in his day to day living and in his food (Ahmad, Abu Dawood, Abdulaziz Muhaddith Dahalwi, Ibn Asakir, etc.  Read more..


In these circumstances Yazid did not learn Islam or Islamic morals in the  company of Muslims in an Islamic environment that prevailed in Madina and Makka at that time.  This was the reason he remained a drunkard, a womanizer,  like most of his Christian tribal relatives.


Ibn Kathir wrote : “Traditions inform us that Yazid loved worldly vices, would drink, listen to music, kept the company of boys with no facial hair (young boys). (civilized expression for pedophilia). Yazid played drums. He enjoyed making dogs, frogs, bears and monkeys fight.  Every morning he used get intoxicated and used to bind monkey with the saddle of a horse and make the horse run.” (Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah, Dhikr Yazeed bin Muawiya , Vol 8 Page 1169).


Compare Yazid ( لعنة الله عليه ) with Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ). Look at Imam Hussain’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) family, his closeness with the Prophet of Islam (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم), his Islamic ideals and  his sacrifices in the cause of Islam.  It will help you in deciding who had strayed and who was on the right path of Islam. Who was the protector and who was the traitor of Islam.


Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups try to mislead innocent people into believing that Yazid was a truthful Caliph and Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) was a traitor (Astaghfirullah).



Deobandis claim they are the army of Yazid. They are protesting for Yazid and Ibn Ziyad to be declared as   Martyrs in place of Imam Hussain (رضئ الله تعالى عنه).


Darul Ifta Deoband, India, issued Fatwa # 2257 claiming Yazid  to beAmir-ul-Momineen and Sixth Khalifa-e-Rashid of Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم).

 Yazid is a lovable person for Salafis as well.  They have built schools, roads and other institutions in his name. 

Yazid bin Muawiya Government High School in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.




Yazid’s reign as Head of State was short and painful for Muslim Ummah.  In his first year of rule he ordered massacre of Imam Hussain ( رضئ الله تعالی عنه ) along with his family and 72 followers.  In the second year he attacked the Holy Ka’ba and set it on fire. Earlier in the same year he ransacked Madina, including Masjid-e-Nabawi and massacred thousands of people, including the entire generation of Sahabah and taba’een. He was a power-hungry, selfish, arrogant and spoiled man.  Ahle Sunnah Ulema are united that Yazid was a transgressor ( فاسق ), deboucher ( فاجر ), drunkard and womanizer. 



(1) Imam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani wrote:     

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

Loving and glorifying Yazid is not done except by a Heretic (apostate)  who has void belief because Yazid had such characteristics that his lover deserves to be faithless.  To love and hate just for the sake of Allah is a sign of faith. Al-Imta bil al-Arba’in al-Matbainatus Sama’a (الإمتاع بالأربعين المتباينة السماع), Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani, Dar ul Kutb al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon, 1997, Page 96]

Ibn Hajr also wrote :  “All Ahle Sunnah agree that Yazid was a fasiq (transgressor), fajir (debaucher) and a drunkard.  Al-Waqidi (748-822) recorded a narration : the people who had seen Yazid said ‘Verily we opposed Yazid fearing Allah would rain stones down on us because Yazid considered  Nikah with mothers and sisters permissible and drank alcohol.  Ad-Dhahabi narrates that when Abdullah bin Kuzai returned from Damascus, he stated that Yazid performs Zina with his close female kins. We better start a movement to oppose Yazid otherwise stones may rain down on us. This is the reason Ibn Hajr Makki calls Yazid one of the most debased men in History.”   


(2) Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad;  all agree that it is permissible to curse Yazid for his atrocities on Muslims.


(3) Imam Bukhari, in his book, Tarikh Kabir, listed biographical details of 213 people named Yazid. But he did not make any mention of Yazid Ibn Muawiya. This shows that the Imam did not want to mention the name of a person who is ‘la’anati’.   


(4) Allama Alusi al-Baghdadi wrote:   “And I say what is prevalent over my mind that Yazid Khabith ( يزيد الخبيث ) did not testify to the Apostleship of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم). According to me it is correct to curse a person like Yazid, although one cannot imagine a Fasiq like him and apparently he never repented.  The possibility of his repentance is weaker than the possibility of his faith (Iman).  Along with Yazid, Ibn Ziyad, Ibn Sa’ad and his group shall also be included. Verily, may Allah’s curse be upon all of them, their friends, their supporters, their group and upon everyone who inclines towards them until Qayamah and until an eye sheds a tear for Imam Hussain(رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)”. (Tafsir Ruh al-Ma’ani, Vol 26, Page 73) . 


(5) Ad-Dhahabi wrote about Yazid as follows:
وكان ناصبيا فظا غليظا جلفا يتناول المسكر ويفعل المنكر افتتح دولته بمقتل الشهيد الحسين واختتمها بواقعة الحرة فمقته الناس ولم يبارك في عمره وخرج عليه غير واحد بعد الحسين كأهل المدينة قاموا لله
Yazid was a disgusting Nasibi (those who hate Ahle bait). He drank wine and did evil. He started his kingdom with the killing of the Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) and ended it with the incident of al-Harra (siege of Madina which also makes him directly liable for La’nah as Sahih Ahadith prove). Hence the people hated him, he was not blessed in his life and many took up arms against him after Imam Hussain(رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) such as the people of Madina – they rose for the sake of Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی)  ( Siyar al Alam an Nabula, Volume No. 4, Page No. 37-38 )

Ad-Dhahabi also wrote: Ziyad Haarthi narrated: ‘Yazid gave me alcohol to drink, I had never drunk alcohol like that before and I inquired where he had obtained its ingredients from’. Yazid 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 Yazid drank alcohol and started to dance, suddenly he fell down and his nostril began to bleed’. (Siyar al A’lam wa al Nubalah, Volume 004, Page No. 037).

(6) Jalaluddin Suyuti mentioned in his book ‘The History of the Rightly Guided Caliphs’ (Tareekh al-Khulufa ar-Rashideen); “Nawfal bin Abi al-Faraat said  ‘Once I was with Umar bin Abdul Aziz when a man said in his presence  ‘Yazid, the leader of the believers’. Umar bin Abdul Aziz said [in shock] ‘Did you call Yazid the Leader of the Believers’? Umar then ordered for the man to be lashed 20 times”.

Suyuti further writes that Yazid was involved in sacking Madina and killing a generation of the Companions, and in desecrating and robbing Madinah. After creating carnage in Madina in the incident of Harrah, the army of Yazid proceeded to Makkah to confront Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Zubair (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ).  In Makka, the Army of Yazid committed unthinkable war crimes. Even Ka’abatullah was heavily damaged in Yazid’s military operation.  

It is in Hadith – Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم)  said, whoever terrifies the people of Madinah, upon him is the curse of Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی), that of His angels and that of all the people of the world. (Sahih Muslim).


(7) Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tarikh under events of 63 AH (682 AD) as follows:


Abdullah Ibn Zubair (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) said: فقال ابن الزبير يا هؤلاء قتل أصحابكم فانا لله وإنا إليه راجعون  (O’People, your companions have been killed. Inna lillahi wa inna elaihi raji’oon).  

وقد أخطأ يزيد خطأ فاحشا فى قوله لمسلم بن عقبة أن يبيح المدينة ثلاثة أيام وهذا خطأ كبير فاحش مع ما انضم إلى ذلك من قتل خلق من الصحابة وأبنائهم وقد تقدم أنه قتل الحسين وأصحابه على يدى عبيد الله بن زياد وقد وقع فى هذه الثلاثة أيام من المفاسد العظيمة فى المدينة النبوية مالا يحد ولا يوصف مما لا يعلمه إلا الله عز وجل وقد أراد بارسال مسلم بن عقبة توطيد سلطانه وملكه ودوام أيامه من غير منازع فعاقبه الله بنقيض قصده وحال بينه وبين ما يشتهيه فقصمه الله قاصم الجبابرة وأخذه أخذ عزيز مقتدر وكذلك أخذ ربك إذا أخذ القرى وهى ظالمة إن أخذه أليم شديد

Yazid committed a mistake and that too a disgusting one by ordering Muslim bin Uqba to make Madina “mubah” (Free for all) for three days.  This was his biggest and ugliest blunder. Many Sahaba and their children were slaughtered.  As it has been mentioned earlier that Yazid made Ubaidullah Ibn Ziyad kill the grandson of Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم), Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) and his companions (in Karbala). In a swift three days rampage in Madina, heinous crimes were committed about which nobody knows except Allah. Yazid wanted to secure his Governance by sending Muslim bin Uqbah, but Allah did against his wishes and punished him. Verily Allah killed him likewise. Allah made grip over the oppressing towns, no doubt His grip is painful and strict”. (Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah, Vol 8 Page 283)





Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups misquote and misinterpret Quranic verses, Ahadith and historical events to exonerate Yazid from the serious crimes he committed during his reign. We have  discussed below some of these misconceptions for the benefit of our readers.


(1) The Permanent Committee for scholarly Research and Ifta, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, appointed by the Government of Saudi Arabia issued a Fatwa about Yazid in which they said   “Loving this type of person is unlawful because Yazid performed actions that testified to his Fisq and Injustice and these are evident from his biography and in matters related to Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) and the people of Madinah when they were killed in the incidence of Al-Harrah”.   This fatwa was issued when Abdul Aziz Ibn Baz was the Chairman of the Committee and Abdur Razzaq Afify was the Deputy Chairman. (Fatwa # 1466, Part 3, Page 398).  Read more.


The above Fatwa establishes the fact that Yazid was responsible for the killing of Imam Hussain (in Karbala) and other Sahabah in Madina.


The Ruling family of Saudi Arabia and Salafi Scholars appointed by the Government are the ultimate authority for Salafis, Deobandis and their like minded Groups.  When their God fathers have issued a Fatwa attesting the Fisq and injustice and unlawful killings of Sahabah in the hands of Yazid, then Salafis, Deobandis and like minded should not write “Radiallahu unhu” with Yazid’s name and also they should not call him ‘Amir ul Momineen’.  But it is surprising to note that Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups go out and out in defending  and exonerating Yazid from the crimes he committed during his reign. Hard luck for these groups.  Needless to say that these groups will be raised with Yazid on the Day of Judgment and will go with him to the assigned destination reserved for Yazid.  There cannot be two opinions in this context. 


(2) Salafis drum beat that Imam Ahmad, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Ghazali, etc., preferred to keep silent about Yazid. They claim that their silence is a testimony that Yazid was a pious Khalifa.  This is a misleading argument. 


Read the following facts.   




Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal was asked by his son that a group of people (qawm) attribute us to [be with] Yazid , he replied, O son! Whoever believes in Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی), how can they have any association with Yazid?  And why should he not be cursed (laanat) when Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی)sends laanat on him in his Book.  The son asked where did Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی) send laanat on him in His Book? The Imam replied “in this saying of Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی)”: 

It is in Quran –  فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَن تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَتُقَطِّعُوا أَرْحَامَكُمْ – أُولَـٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فَأَصَمَّهُمْ وَأَعْمَىٰ أَبْصَارَهُمْ  (Do you then have the sign that if you get the authority, spread disorder in the land and sever your ties of Kinship? These are they whom Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی) has cursed and made them deaf from the truth and made their eyes blind’. (Mohammad –صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم), Verses 22-23)

And then said, is there any greater tribulation ( فساد ) than the assassination of Imam Husain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)? 

(References – Ibn Hajar Makki in al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa page 333, Tafsir Mazhari v. 8. p. 434,  Imam Al-Barzanji in al-Isha’at, Qadi Abu Ya’la in Mu’tamad al-Usool, Ibn al-Jawzi, etc.).


(ii) Imam Alusi wrote – نقل البرزنجي في «الإشاعة» والهيتمي في «الصواعق» أن الإمام أحمد لما سأله ولده عبد الله عن لعن يزيد قال كيف لا يلعن من لعنه الله تعالى في كتابه؟ فقال عبد الله قد قرأت كتاب الله عز وجل فلم أجد فيه لعن يزيد فقال الإمام إن الله تعالى يقول { فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَن تُفْسِدُواْ فِي ٱلأَرْضِ وَتُقَطّعُواْ أَرْحَامَكُمْ * أَوْلَـئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ لَعَنَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ } الآية وأي فساد وقطيعة أشد مما فعله يزيد؟

Reported by al-Barzanji in (al-Isha) and al-Haythami narrates in (al-Sawaiq) that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal’s son Abdullah narrated that he said to his father that he had seen people saying that they love Yazid. To this Imam Ahmad  said “For a person having belief in Allah, there was no reason to love Yazid”. Why should the person not be cursed who has been cursed by Allah in the Quran. To this Abdullah asked that where in the Quran had Allah cursed Yazid?. Imam Ahmad replied quoting the verse –  فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَن تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَتُقَطِّعُوا أَرْحَامَكُمْ – أُولَـٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فَأَصَمَّهُمْ وَأَعْمَىٰ أَبْصَارَهُمْ  (Do you then have the sign that if you get the authority, spread disorder in the land and sever your ties of Kinship? These are they whom Allah (سبحانہ و تعا لی) has cursed and made them deaf from the truth and made their eyes blind’. (Mohammad – صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم, Verses 22-23).  It is they whom Allah has cursed.” [Alusi, Ruh al-Ma’ani, Volume 026, Page No. 227 – (47:22-23)


(iii) Salafis, Deobandis and their like minded groups misinterpret the silence (sukoot) of Imam Abu Hanifa on the issue of Yazid.  Imam’s silence is not negative, rather,  it is positive on Yazid’s condemnation and his kufr. Our understanding is based on the following episode.


When Imam Zaid Ibn Ali Ibn Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)fought with the Umayyad ruler Hisham, Imam Azam Abu Hanifah gave a fatwa that whoever fights on the side of Zaid Ibn Ali Ibn Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) is like fighting on the side of Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) on the day of Badr.  In this episode, the Imam is equating Umayyad Hisham Bin Abdil Malik with kuffar because Imam Zaid Ibn Ali Ibn Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) was at war with him. Yazid was indeed worse than Hisham. Therefore, we can interpret Imam Abu Hanifa’s sukoot (slience) as his agreement on Kufr of Yazid. This is similar to Ammar Yassir Hadith Bukhari in which the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) declared the people fighting against Hadhrat Ali (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) in the battle of Siffin were ‘Unjust rebels who invited people to Hell’.


During Imam Abu Hanifa’s time, there were thousands of people,  who used to curse Yazid.   If Imam did not agree on sending La’ana (curse) on Yazid, he would have objected on this wide spread practice during his time. He remained silent. Thus his silence is his agreement, rather than rejection.



(iv) Imam Ghazali (1058–1111) wrote in Ihya Ulum al-Din.  “If it is asked, is it permissible to say “may Allah curse the murderer of Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) or may Allah curse the one who ordered the murder of Imam Hussain(رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)”, we say that the correct opinion is to say, “If the murderer of Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) died before repenting, then may Allah curse him”.


The  Imam would have mentioned a reference if Yazid repented before his death.  The Imam did not have any such reference available in the entire Islamic literature.  Also, there was nothing tangible in front of the Imam to regard Yazid as pious Khalifa because of his outrageous evil deeds.  Therefore, his silence is more inclined toward Yazid’s Fisq and Fujur, rather than treating him as a person who repented.   Allama Alusi al-Baghdadi wrote:   It is correct to curse a person like Yazid al-Khabith ( يزيد الخبيث ), although one cannot imagine a Fasiq like him, and apparently he never repented.  The possibility of Yazid’s repentance is weaker than the possibility of his faith (Iman).   (Tafsir Ruh al-Ma’ani, Vol 26, Page 73).



(3) Salafis claim that Yazid was not responsible for the massacre of Imam Hussain and his companions (رضئ اللھ تعالی عنہم اجمعین ).  It was Ibn Ziyad who killed the Imam. 

Authentic Islamic literature accounts confirm that when Yazid  wrote to Ibn Ziyad that he should go to Mecca & besiege Abdullah Ibn Zubayr (رضئ الله تعالى عنه), he refused and said, “I will not combine two things for a Fasiq (Yazid). I have already killed the son of Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) daughter (Fatimah –  رضئ الله تعالى عنها) and now (he asks me to) wage a war on Bayt ul Harram.”

It is also reported that when Ibn Ziyad martyred Imam Hussain (رضئ الله تعالى عنه) his mother Marjana said to him: May you die! what have you done and what crime have you committed, she also scolded him severely.

Abdullah Ibn Zubayr (رضئ الله تعالى عنه) used to say in his speeches that Yazid was a fraud, drunkard, one who does not perform Salah and stays with singing women. (Al-Bidayah Wal Nihayah, Vol 8, Pg 279)


Salafis, Deobandis and their like minded groups also claim that when the news of Imam Hussain’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) martyrdom reached Yazid, his family wept.  Yazid said  ‘curse of Allah be on Ibn Ziyad.  If Ibn Ziyad was a relative of Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ), he would have never killed him. I would have accepted the submission of Kufans without the killing of Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ).’  Salafis also say that Yazid accorded a gracious hospitality to the family members of Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) and arranged for their return to Madina with honor.


The above is an attempt by Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups to exonerate Yazid of his evil crimes. We have provided below undeniable evidence from authentic history books to prove that the above claims are  lies and misrepresentation of facts.  


(i) If Yazid had been truthful in his claim, and if he and his family sincerely wept for Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ), then he should have at least removed Ibn Ziyad from the Governor’s position.  History is a witness that Ibn Ziyad remained the Governor of Kufa and he even outlived Yazid.  Ibn Ziyad was killed by people during the insurrection of Al-Mukhtar long after the death of Yazid. (ii) Ibn Kathir wrote :
كان يزيد كتب إلى عبد الله بن زياد أن يسير إلى الزبير فيحاصره بمكة فأبى عليه وقال والله لا أجمعهما للفاسق أبدا أقتل ابن بنت رسول الله ص وأغزو البيت الحرام وقد كانت أمه مرجانة قالت له حين قتل الحسين ويحك ماذا صنعت وماذا ركبت وعنفته تعنيفا شديدا 

When Yazid wrote to Abdullah Ibn Ziyad that he should go to Makkah and besiege Abdullah Ibn Zubair (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) he refused to do so and said: By Allah I will not combine two things for a Fasiq (Yazid). I have already killed the son of Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) daughter (on his order) and now (he asks me to) wage war on Bayt ul Harram?However when Abdullah Ibn Ziyad martyred Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)  (and brought his head to be delivered to Yazid),  his mother Marjana said to him: May you die! what have you done and what crime have you committed, she also scolded him severely. [Al-Bidayah Wal Nihayah, Volume 8, Page No 279].  (iii) Ali Ibn Athir wrote : Ibn Abbas (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ)replied to a letter of Yazid stating ‘You killed Hussain Ibn Ali (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) as well as the youth from Banu Abdul Muttalib, who were beacons of guidance.” (Tarikh Kamil, Ali Ibn Athir)

(iv) After Ahle Bait e At Haar returned from Damascus, Abdullah Ibn Abbas (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) said “We discern the believers from the Munafiqeen via their regards for Hadhrat Ali (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ). (Tarikh al-Khulafa by Jalaluddin Suyuti).

(v) Ibn Kathir wrote: “Ibn Asakir, writing on Yazid, stated: When Hussain’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) head was brought before Yazid, he recited the couplets of Ibn Zubairi the kafir ‘I wish my ancestors of Badr were here to see the severed head of the rebellious tribe (Bani Hashim) (Al Bidaya wan Nihaya Volume 8 page 204 ) 
(vi) Qadhi Thanaullah wrote:When Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) was killed and the news reached Yazid, he said : “Had my predecessors lived they would have seen how I took revenge from the family of Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) and Bani Hashim.” The couplet which Yazid made had this in the end: I will avenge Ahmed (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) for whatever he did with my ancestors in Badr. Yazid even declared alcohol as permissible and in praise of it he said : “If liquor is Haram in the Deen of Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) then take it to be permissible according to the deen of Isa Ibn Marym(علیھ السلا م). [Tafsir al Mazhari Volume 5, Pages 211-212]

Yazid was born in 647 (15 years after the death of Prophet -صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم ) to Maysun, a Christian woman and he spent his childhood with his Christian relatives before he joined Muawiya (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) in Damascus. In Damascus, he was trained under the guidance and direct supervision of his father and was groomed to take up the responsibility of ruling the State after his father. We fail to understand as to who could have told him about the pre-Islamic situation of Makka and how many Makkan Pagans died in Badr. Who instilled the hatred of Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم ) and Ahle Bait in Yazid’s mind?  Who convinced him that their rule was for the purpose of taking revenge from Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم )  and his Ahle Bait for the killing of their relatives in Badr? 


Salafis claim that Yazid treated the family of Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) with hospitality.  Read the following authentic accounts to know the facts. 


Ibn Kathir wrote: 

(i) “Abi Hamza ash Shami from Abdullah al Yamani who narrated from Qasim bin Najit that he said: When Imam Hussain’s (علیھ السلا م) head was brought in the court of Yazid, he placed his stick on Imam’s (علیھ السلا م) teeth and said: The difference between him and me is,  as al-Hamam said,  ‘The swords are broken on the heads of those people who go against us and they are disobedient and cruel’.  Abu Barza as Salmi  said to him: By Allah your stick is touching the place which was kissed by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم)  for sure when Imam Hussain (علیھ السلا م) will arrive on day of judgment then Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) will be his intercessor. Whereas when you come,  your intercessor will be Ibn Ziyad.  Then he rose up, turned his back towards Yazid and left. “  

(ii) It is narrated through Haris bin Ka’b from Fatima bint Ali (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) that she said: When we were made to sit infront of Yazid, he had some mercy upon us, at that time a man from Syria came and asked Yazid to grant her, he meant me and I was a beautiful woman, hearing him I started to tremble and I thought that may be this was allowed for them, I held the clothes of my sister Zainab(رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) who was elder and more intelligent than me, she knew that it was not allowed.  She said to the man: By Allah you have lied and said a lowly thing, this thing is not allowed between you and her. Yazid got angry and said to Zainab (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا), “No you have lied instead, because by God She is halal for me and if I want to do it with her then I may do so”. Zainab (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) said: By Allah it is definitely not allowed for you except if you leave our Ummah and choose a deen other than Islam. With Zainab’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) explanation, Yazid became red in anger and said: “You are challenging me,  is a proof of your brother and father being expelled from Islam”. Zainab (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) replied: “Your father, your grandfather and you were guided through the deen of Allah, Deen of my father, deen of my brother and deen of my maternal grandfather”. Yazid said: “O’enemy of Allah you have lied”.  Zainab (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) said: “What kind of Ameer ul Momineen are you that you abuse by being one?”  Zainab (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) said that Yazid became speechless.  The Syrian again asked for the lady.  Yazid said to the Syrian man “Get lost, may God give you painful death”.  (Al Bidayah Wan Nihaya Vol 8)

History of Islam has recorded that fearing people’s revolt, Yazid treated Imam Hussain’s (علیھ السلا م) family with some caution.  He tried to convince them that he did not order the killing of the Imam (علیھ السلا م) and it was Ibn Ziyad who killed the Imam (علیھ السلا م). However, History is a witness that Yazid did not take any action against Ibn Ziyad, not even sent a letter of displeasure at the Killings and Ibn Ziyad remained as Governor of Kufa for a long time. Obviously, it was a false pretext of  Yazid to hide his crimes.  


The famous Ahle Sunnah Imam al-Barzanji (1640-1703), the Chief Mufti of Madinah (buried in Jannat ul Baqi) wrote in his book “Ishrat al-Sa’a” as follows: 

It was a false pretext of Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) to justify his fight with Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) under the guise of revenge for the murder of Hadhrat Uthman ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) because when he completely attained the power and became ruler of the whole State, he never opened the case of the murder of Hadhrat Uthman ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and did not arrest the murderers though he claimed earlier that the killers were still around. This  proves that all his fight was for worldly rule under the deceit of revenge for the murder.”


(4) There is a Hadith in Bukhari in which Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) said the first Muslim Army who will invade Ceasar’s city will be rewarded with Jannah. Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups falsely claim that Yazid was part of that army. Read the following facts.


UMM HARAM (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا)


Arab News is the National Newspaper of Saudi Arabia.  It is also the  most popular Saudi Arabian English Newspaper.  The Newspaper published an article on  June 2, 2011, titled “Women companions of Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم), Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا), traveling by Sea for Jihad”.  The article is available  on http://www.arabnews.com/node/379440. We have provided below a gist of that article for our readers.



Umm Haram bint Milhan (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) was the sister of Umm Sulaym (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا). Both sisters were very close to the Prophet(صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم), and he used to visit them in their homes. Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) was married to Ubadah ibn Al-Samit, one of the early Muslims from Madinah. He was one of 12 men who gave the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) the first pledge by the Ansar for unwavering support. A year later, he joined 73 men of the Ansar who gave the second and most solemn pledge of support which led to the immigration of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) and his companions from Makkah to Madinah.  The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) used to visit Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) at home, and if it was midday and he was tired, he might have a nap at her house.

It is in Sahih Muslim that Anas Ibn Malik, her nephew, reports: “The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) visited us and there were only myself, my mother (Umm Sulaym – رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) and my maternal aunt (Umm Haram – رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا). He (the Prophet – صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) said: ‘Let us pray in congregation’.  No obligatory prayer was due. He led us in prayer. When we finished he prayed for us, members of our household, praying Allah to grant us of every good thing in this life and in the life to come.” 

There is another related Hadith in Bukhari, as follows:

Narrated Khalid bin Madan ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) : That ‘Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) told him that he went to Ubada bin As-Samit ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) while he was staying in his house at the Seashore of Hims (currently Homs, Syria) with (his wife) Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا). Umair ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) said.  Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) informed us that she heard the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) saying, “Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition.  Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) added, ‘ I said, O’Allah’s Apostle(صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم), will I be amongst them?’  He replied, ‘You are amongst them’.  The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم)then said ‘the first army amongst my followers who will invade Caesar’s city will be forgiven their sins’.  ‘I asked, Will I be one of them, O’Allah’s Apostle (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم)?’  He replied in the negative.  (Bukhari, Vol 4, Book 52, Hadith # 175).

There are two points in the above Hadith; (a) The first batch of Muslims who will undertake a naval expedition; and (b) The first Muslim Army who will invade Caesar’s City;  both have glad tidings of Paradise. 

(a) The first batch of Muslims who will undertake a naval expedition

Arab News reported that ‘by the time the third Caliph, Uthman ibn Affan ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) was in power, the Muslims had taken over Syria, Palestine and Iraq. Yet the Byzantine Empire continued to launch raids on the new Muslim land. Some of these raids started from Cyprus, using ships. Uthman ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), therefore, decided to invade Cyprus. He instructed his governor in Syria, Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) to prepare for such an attack. Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) sent a force to Cyprus. Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) was all the time looking for the opportunity to join an army traveling by sea. When she realized that preparations were under way for the attack, she decided to join the army. The fleet set off, and when they landed in Cyprus, the Cypriots decided to negotiate peace. A treaty was signed with the Muslim State.

Later, when Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) was riding a mule in Cyprus, she fell off and died. She was buried in Cyprus in year 27 H (649). Her tomb is known as Hala Sultan Tekke Shrine in Cyprus. People of Cyprus used to refer to it as ‘the grave of the pious woman’. Even non-Muslims used to visit her grave and pray for rain near it, knowing that she was a most devout woman”.

The above account of the Arab News, taken from authentic Islamic History records confirms that the first Naval expedition of Muslims for Jihad was carried out somewhere in 647 (25 H) in which Umm Haram (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا)traveled. Yazid was not part of this travel as he was not born yet. Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) also did not travel in this expedition. 

It is reported in history books  that Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) traveled in a larger Naval fleet built by Muslims along with his wife Katwa in a later expedition in 650 (28 H).  He was also part of another naval expedition in 654 (32 H).(Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg 25 and Al-Bidaya Wan Nihaya, Vol 7, Pg 179)

(b) The first Muslim Army who will invade Caesar’s City.

(i) First Muslim Army which attacked Caesar’s city was sent by Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم).  The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) dispatched 3,000 Army personnel under the command of Zayd Ibn Haritha ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ). This battle is known as ‘the Battle of Muattah (معركة مؤتة , غزوة مؤتة‎) fought in 629 (5 Jumada I,  8 H), near the village of Muattah, East of the Jordan River in Karak Governorate of Roman Empire, between Islamic forces and forces of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire. (Ref: The Sealed Nectar, Islamic University of Madina, Darus Salam Publications). Read more…  

(ii) During the  Caliphate of Hadhrat Abu Bakr ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), Hadhrat Umar ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Hadhrat Uthman ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), many cities of the Eastern Roman Byzantine empire were taken over and Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Palestine was under Muslims control. 

(iii) In 644 (42 H) the Muslim Army attacked Rome, on their way to Constantinople.  ( Al-Bidayah Wan Nihayah Vol 8, Pg No 24).

(iv) In 645 (43 H) Muslims attacked Rome under the leadership of Basar bin Artaah ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and fought their way to Constantinople.  (Tarikh Ibn Khaldun, Vol 3, Pg No.9;  Al-Bidayah Wan Nihayah Vol 8, Pg No 24)

(v) In 646 (44 H) Muslims under the command of Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) entered Rome and spent winter there.  Basar bin Artaah ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) fought with Romans through the sea. (Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg no. 298)

It is in Hadith –  عن أسلم أبي عمران قال : غزونا من المدينة نريد القسطنطينية وعلى الجماعة عبد الرحمن بن خالد بن الوليد (Aslam Abi Imran ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) said: We went out on an expedition from Madina with the intent to attack Constantinople. Abd al-Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ )was the leader of our group. (Sunnan Abu Dawud, Vol No. 2 Hadith # 2512. Salafi scholar Albani declared it Sahih in his Takhrij).
Tabari wrote in his Tarikh : فمما كان فيها من ذلك دخول المسلمين مع عبد الرحمن بن خالد بن الوليد بلاد الروم ومشتاهم بها وغزو  [In 646 (44 H) The Muslims with Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) (as commander) entered Rome and the Ghazwa took place (Tarikh at-Tabri under events of 44 AH, Vol 5, Page 212: Published by Cairo: Dar al-Ma’arif)

In all the above expeditions, neither Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), nor Yazid participated.

There were more attacks on Roman cities in the following years. For details, please read authentic History books written by Ahle Sunnah scholars.


Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups try to portray the episode of Karbala as a political event.  They try to make the battle of Karbala look like a political issue between Shias and Sunnis. They place Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Hadhrat Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ )on one side and claim, their followers were Shias. 

It is probable that the people who deserted Imam Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) later became Shia, as some of the people who initially supported Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) later became Kharijis.  Does this mean that all the people who support Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Imam Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) are Shia?  

Shias and Salafis are two extremes in Islam. Ahle Sunnah wal Jama’a are the people of Sahih Iman.  They are the true followers and supporters of Ahle Bait e At Haar.

The Salafi practice of placing Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Hadhrat Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) on one side, and claiming their supporters to be Shias; and placing  Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Yazid on the other side and claiming their followers to be Sunnis is ridiculous. Salafis, Deobandis and like minded groups claim themselves as Sunnis and they take the side of  Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Yazid, and blame Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) and Imam Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) as responsible for the bloodshed in Islamic State.  Astaghfirullah. 

The episode of Karbala was the fight between Haq and batil.  It was a battle to safeguard Sahih Islam in the world.  And it is because of the ultimate sacrifice of Imam Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), that the real Islam is still alive in the world. 

It is true that the people who had written letters to Imam Hussain (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), later deserted him.  But this is also a fact that the real killers of Imam Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) were Yazidi Army. Similarly, in their long fight, Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) was on Haq, and Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) was on mistake.  An absolute majority of Ahle Sunnah Ulema consider Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) to be an unjust rebel.  Some Ahle Sunnah Ulema consider Muawiya’s (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) mistakes were Ijtehadi. We prefer to keep quite about Muawiya ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ).  Whatever it is, it is proved beyond doubt that Hadhrat Ali ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ), Hadhrat Hassan ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ )and Hadhrat Hussain ( رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ ) were on Haq.  Therefore, a person with Sahih Iman will support Khulafa e Rashideen and Ahle Bait who were on Haq.  If someone condemns them of wrong doings and supports their enemies, then he will be treated as one among the enemies of Ahle Bait.  

(i) It is in Hadith – Prophet Mohammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم)looked at  Hazrat Ali (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ) Sayyida Fatima (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہا) and Imams Hassan and Hussain  (رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہم) and said, “I am in war with those who will fight with you, and in peace with those who are peaceful to you.”(Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, al-Hakim, Tabarani, Mishkat, etc.).


(ii) Al-Hakim has recorded a Hadith through Ibn Abbas(رضئ اللہ تعالی عنہ). The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) said: “The stars are security for the people of Earth against drowning (when at sea) and Ahle Bait are a security to the people of the Earth against discord.  And if any tribe or group opposes my Ahle Bait, it will itself become fraught with discord and become a party to Iblis. (Imam Suyuti, Ihya al Mayyit bi Fadhaa’el Ahlul Bait).