Points taken from the ladies classes of Hadhrat Moulana Dawood Seedat saheb (daamat barakatuhum) 27 October 2016.
Bi Ismihi Ta’ala
There has been a lot of discussion around Yazeed bin Muaawiya lately. In the past we only heard negativity about him. So much so that we have never heard of any Muslim keeping his son’s name Yazeed, and yet there were three Sahabah in the Battle of Badr whose names were Yazeed. Recently some of our Ulema have been mentioning positive aspects regarding Yazeed.
We have to try and understand the events leading up to the martyrdom of Hadhrat Husain (RA) and after. From the time of the martyrdom of Hadhrat Usman (RA),confusion had reigned in the ummah. Hadhrat Ali (RA) had his khilafat in Madinah Munawarah. Hadhrat Muaawiya (RA) moved away to Damascus. Hadhrat Ali (RA) then moved the khilafat (parliament) to Kufa with this in mind that if there is unrest then it rather be in Kufa than Madinah. Two major battles are fought. In the battle of Jamal, Hadhrat Ayesha RA and a group of sahabah had fought against Hadhrat Ali RA due to a misunderstanding. Muslim blood is shed on both sides. Thereafter, Jang e Siffin is fought between Hadhrat Ali RA & Hadhrat Muaawiya RA. No peace agreement or understanding could be reached. The issue of the murder of Hadhrat Usman RA was the basis for the whole dispute.
After the martyrdom of Hadhrat Ali RA, Hadhrat Hassan RA became Khalifa for just six months. In order to bring peace and unity he handed over the khilafat to Hadhrat Muaawiya RA. This was then a beautiful khilafat under an excellent man, a really superb leader.
During his lifetime, he felt it would be in the best interest of the ummat to select his successor so that there would be no dispute regarding the khilafat in the event of his demise. The person that he chose was his son Yazeed.
Regarding Yazeed there are 3 main views amongst our scholars.
The first is that Yazeed was very good at war. He proved to his father to be an excellent war strategist and commander in chief of the army. But his private life was full of wrongdoing, i.e. drinking, womanising and the likes. His father was totally oblivious to his habits, and thought that as he was a good war strategist, he might be the right candidate. Hadhrat Muaawiya RA didn’t appoint him, but went to all the provinces asking if they would all accept Yazeed. Some accepted and some some senior sahabah objected. These sahabah objected because of the impiety of Yazeed. Hadhrat Muaawiya RA passed away and Yazeed became Khalifa. As his father’s authority was not over his head, he started perpetrating these wrongs openly. This first group believed that Yazeed ordered the martyrdom (killing) of Hadhrat Husain RA – to the extent that they believe that Yazeed became kaafir.
The second view is the total opposite. They say that Hadhrat Muaawiya RA wanted to appoint a Khalifa but didn’t have his son in mind. He spoke to senior sahabah, of whom, many proposed that he appoint Yazeed, and some also advised that he desist. They said that it was not the way of Muslims to appoint a successor from the family but rather the best person for the task. They said that if he appoints his son, then this could become the norm. Hadhrat Muaawiya RA also had a lot of reservations. This second group also maintains that Yazeed was a pious person, a tahajjud ghuzar. They maintain that the Shiahs are responsible for the negative information regarding him and that there are authentic reports proving his Piety as well as his disapproval of the martyrdom of Hadhrat Husain RA.
It is stated that Yazeed was very upset on the killing of Hadhrat Husain RA. The family of Hadhrat Husain RA was asked to be brought to Yazeed. Yazeed said to the son of Hadhrat Husain RA that Ibn Ziyaad (a general in the army of Yazeed) was very hasty in doing what he had done. He asked the son if he could do anything for them and the reply was that all their wealth stolen by the troops be returned to them. They were sent back to Madinah Munawarah under protection, with gifts and wealth. This group maintains that a third force (Shias) are causing all the problems in the ummat and that Yazeed is innocent. This group praises him.
The view of the third group is that “He who maintains silence is successful”. Whether Yazeed was a good or evil person doesn’t make a difference to our imaan. Allah ta’ala didn’t make it a precondition that in order for us to be believers we have to find out whether Yazeed was a good or evil person. We cannot do anything to change Karbala or events surrounding it. We will only find the answers on the day of Qiyaamat. We should rather leave this matter to Allah ta’ala.
There are presently kitaabs being printed by extremely knowledgeable senior ulema on both the opinions. These kitaabs are written by our own Ulema and if one reads them then we must not become confused. Understand that this is a scholarly discussion and both views,despite being totally opposite, have always been found amongst the scholars.
We, as South African Muslims never really studied these issues as there is no real need to go into the details of these aspects. However, of late, due to the poison that the shiah menace is spreading, our Ulema have found the need to explain these aspects of our history in more detail. So we must not become confused that our own Ulema are differing regarding this issue as this is History and in history there are always differences of this nature.
There are 2 important things to remember :-
a. Knowing the details of these issues and getting to the bottom of it is unnecessary.
b. Regarding the wars between Sahaabah RA and the issue of Yazeed, the safest route is to maintain silence and leave the matter to Allah ta’ala.