Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Kai Thaabit

The Big Fitnah

What is your opinion regarding the fitnah  

12 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your opinion regarding the fitnah

    • It is important to study this part of Islamic History to defend the sahaba against accusations
      10
    • We should ignore this part of Islamic History
      0
    • I Don't know
      2
    • We should focus on the problems of our time
      2
  2. 2. The Conflict between Ali abi Talib and Mu'awiyah

    • We should love both because they are both sahaba
      6
    • We should take sides either favor Ali or Mu'awiyah
      0
    • We should forgive and ignore their mistakes
      4
    • It is important to study the conflict between them for the purpose of preserving the Islamic History and keep falsehood away from truth
      7
    • I prefer to avoid this topic because it can be depressing
      0
    • I don't know
      1
  3. 3. Have you listened to audio lectures?

    • No, I have not come a cross a trustworthy lecture regarding this topic
      3
    • No, because I try to avoid this part of history
      0
    • Yes, and I found good lectures
      4
    • Yes, but they were not trustworthy
      1
    • Other
      4


Recommended Posts

Assalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahee wa Barakatu

 

Right now, I am listening to a lecture by Kamal El Mekki about this topic and I would like to know your opinion. Do you prefer to avoid this part of history or do you feel that it is necessary to know and study the Fitnah and how it came about in order to protect the sahaba and to know what is truth or false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Wa Alaykum Salam wa rahmatu llahi wa barakatuh

 

I have not voted, sorry. I think it depends on your level of knowledge whether you should learn Islamic history or not. If you know your basics, I mean if you can master them, then why not?

 

I think we should know the Qur'an inside and out and that's where I am ignorant the most. And that's where all the knowledge is. If you know this well, why not study the Sunna? The title answers your doubts. It was something big in history it seems.

 

I like seeking what is halal and haram from fatwas (Sh. Munajjid and classical scholars, gold) because that's how I get to learn my way of life. I think knowledge we should act upon must be our search- just my opinion. Memorizing the Qur'an would be best for those who truly are seeking knowledge.

Edited by Orthodox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

Brother I hate to boast myself , but seriously i have extensive knowledge on the subject and i suggest we do not discuss that topic on the forum seriously , it will not benefit our dunya and might force us to judge and take sides and might reflect negative on our Aakhira .

 

So let it be , my 2 cents Allah knows best .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am ignorant about this topic as well as many others. I do not think ayone would take sides even if they dislike some deeds of the ashaba. All ashaba are thrustworty.

 

I have not read this from anywhere so it may not be 100% accurate (smile).

Edited by Orthodox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

No If you Know about it more and in depth then you will take sides because i have experienced this with most people in real life and the internet i have met over the years .

 

The only part of the fitna we can talk about is the murder of Sayidina Hussien Bin Ali r.a. cause that part is clear and Yazeed was a tyrant and some say fasiq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assalamu Alaykum

 

I am not intending to discuss about this part of Islamic History. I just want to know if brothers and sisters have studied it and learned about this part of history.

 

Hussain bin Ali r.a was not killed by Yazeed bin Mu'awiyah nor did he order the murder of Rasulullah's grandson, but the murderer was Abdullah ibn Ziyad. I know there are various versions of this part of history as well. Therefore, it is better to leave this issue to the history and not get too much involved in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

No Brother Yusha , The Umayyad Khilafah was a centralized government and any order that came , came straight from above and then to the Governer in the case it was ibn ziyad .

 

Now their were more than one party who were involved in the murder of Sayidina Hussien r.a. and that was Yazeed, Ibn Ziyad, The Shia of Kufa ( Using the term only avoid sect discussion) and someone called shimr who did the actual killing.

 

Sunni scholars have differed on Yazeed , Imam Ghazali rah defended him and said he should not be cursed , Ibn Jawzi author of Talbees Iblees cursed him and said he should be cursed, Ibn Taymiyah rah took the middle stance and said he shouldnt be cursed or loved and he was responsible for the death of the prophets :sl: grandson and his family and the people of (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Battle_of_al-Harrah"]Al Harrah[/url] ( a place part of madeenah) which was ransacked and sahaaba and their families killed in addition the the destruction to part of the Kabah during the siege of Makkah.

 

I can give you the references if you like and here is exactly what Ibn Taymiyyah rah said "

 

Shaykh al-Islam described people’s attitudes towards Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah, and said:

 

The people differed concerning Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan, splitting into three groups, two extreme and one moderate.

 

One of the two extremes said that he was a kaafir and a munaafiq, that he strove to kill the grandson of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to spite the Messenger of Allaah and to take revenge on him, and to avenge his grandfather ‘Utbah, his grandfather’s brother Shaybah and his maternal uncle al-Waleed ibn ‘Utbah and others who were killed by the companions of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and others on the day of Badr and in other battles – and things of that nature. To have such a view is easy for the Raafidis who regard Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as kaafirs, so it is much easier for them to regard Yazeed as a kaafir.

 

The second extreme group think that he was a righteous man and a just leader, that he was one of the Sahaabah who were born during the time of the Prophet and were carried and blessed by him. Some of them give him a higher status than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and some of them regard him as a prophet. Both views are obviously false to one who has the least common sense and who has any knowledge of the lives and times of the earliest Muslims. This view is not attributable to any of the scholars who are known for following the Sunnah or to any intelligent person who has reason and experience.

 

The third view is that he was one of the kings of the Muslims, who did good deeds and bad deeds. He was not born until the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan. He was not a kaafir but it was because of him that the killing of al-Husayn happened, and he did what he did to the people of al-Harrah. He was not a Sahaabi, nor was he one of the righteous friends of Allaah. This is the view of most of the people of reason and knowledge and of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetIslam-qa(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/en/ref/14007"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetIslam-qa(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/en/ref/14007[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assalamu Alaykum

 

I am not intending to discuss about this part of Islamic History. I just want to know if brothers and sisters have studied it and learned about this part of history.

 

Hussain bin Ali r.a was not killed by Yazeed bin Mu'awiyah nor did he order the murder of Rasulullah's grandson, but the murderer was Abdullah ibn Ziyad. I know there are various versions of this part of history as well. Therefore, it is better to leave this issue to the history and not get too much involved in this.

 

Jazak Allah Khair akhi for knowing that we muslims should stick to the correct path of Islam .. which of course following the companions and mothers of believers may Allah be pleased with them all.

 

Another source is the book " Al Awa'sim min'al Qwa'sim" by sheik Abu Bakr Al Arabi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jazak Allah Khair akhi for knowing that we muslims should stick to the correct path of Islam .. which of course following the companions and mothers of believers may Allah be pleased with them all.

 

Another source is the book " Al Awa'sim min'al Qwa'sim" by sheik Abu Bakr Al Arabi

 

Yusha's stance is wrong.

I will read the book thank you :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

I wont say his stance is wrong bro mcfly , but he probably did not know about the stance of Shiekh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah rah posted above .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

But the brother Nile Salafy ignored the fatwa you posted.

He said Yusha was correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

Bro mcfly people are free to state their opinions without us imposing our thoughts and opinions on them , maybe brother Nile Salafy missed what i posted , we should always think good .

 

:sl: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

I gave this part of the history as an example to show that even there there are different versions of the story. In one story I read that Yazeed ibn Mu'awiyah order the killing of Husayn ibn Muhammad, but in anothe lecture the lecturer stated that he did not order ibn Zayd to kill Husayn radi Allahu anhu, but to capture him and bring him to Yazeed ibn Mu'awiyah.

 

I don't know which of the above is the correct story. However, I agree that he should have put Abdullah ibn Zayd and his accomplices to Justice because of the murder of Husayn. The murder of Husayn was as bad as the murder of Uthmaan ibn Affaan. When Uthmaan was killed the Sahaba immediately stood up and want to fight the murders of Uthmaan especially Mu'awiyah. But Yazeed did not have the same eager to avenge the killers of Husayn. Allah knows best. He is surely responsible for the killing, even if he did not order the killing.

 

Yazeed was surely responsible for the siege of Madinah where descendants of the Ansar and some of the Ansar were killed. It is hypocrisy to have hatred against Ansar and they killed them.

 

Yazeed was just a weak leader and not fit for Khilaafa. He just became Khaleefa because he was the son of Mu'awiyah.

 

I learned how Umar ibn Al Khattaab dealt with his amirs when the were too exaggeratingly harsh to people. Now, Yazeed did not have the power either due to his wickedness or weakness to do the same.

 

I am not trying to sugar coat the behavior of Yazeed, but just want to mention the different stances I heard so far. I don't have an own stance, but I just tried to present the different stances that I heard or read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

I am not sure what your lecturers source is brother Yusha but their is evidence that proves otherwise in addition to the stance of the scholars that declare yazeed sometimes to be a Fasiq , and like Ibn Taymiyyah rah said he was responsible for the death of Sayidina Hussien r.a. .

 

The Only Modern day scholar who defended Yazeed in a lecture i can think of is Zakir Naik and he was wrong in that stance 100% .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

I do not understand why some people love Yazid Bin Muawiya so much.

They will say and do anything to make him look innocent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

I mentioned that he is responsible for the killing of Husayn, but I just mentioned that there are different versions. You cannot blame me that there are different stories and you cannot expect me to know which historical account is the authentic.

 

The saying of ibn Taymiyyah helps a lot in this case and I go with what he mentioned about Yazeed ibn Mu'awiyah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

He consider him to be a dhaalim and a fasiq.

 

In this thread, I want to know how brothers and sisters approach this part of our history. I want to know if you think we just ignore the story or is it beneficial to study the fitnah.

 

Discussion about Yazeed ibn Mu'awiyah in detail was not my intention, but it was beneficial, because I learned more facts about this story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

Brother its something we rather not get into , for a small example how do explain to a Sunni Muslim why the Son of Sayidina Abu Bakr sideeq Muhammad r.anhuma jumped the house of Sayidina Uthman r.a. with intention to kill him ?

 

Even though he did not and repented at the last moment , thats the amount of Fitna you have to deal with and thats why i dont think people will even get into the thread.

 

Allah knows best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

My Question would be, Why did the Sahaba allow the murder of Imam Uthman ra to take place?

Saad Ibn Abi Waqas ra

Ali Bin Abu Talib ra

Abdurahman ibn Auf ra

Al Zubayr ra

Talha ra

Many more, where were they when it took place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

Brother Mcfly its not that easy to answer that Question , the Problem is that the rebels completely surrounded the house of Sayidina Uthman r.a. while the Muslim armies loyal to the Khilafa were mostly concentrated in Iraq , Shaam and Egypt.

 

Sayidina Uthman himself ordered the rest of the Sahaba especially those who you mentioned not to get involved even though they insisted to do so , he was adamant that they do not get involved. So the Sahaba Like Sayidina Ali r.a. and Sa'ad Bin Abi Waqas r.a. only took food to his house and accompanied him when going to and from the Masjid to lead Fardh salat. However When the rebels Jumped the walls of the House of Sayidina Uthman r.a. all were their defending especially the youth Like Sayidina Al Hasan and Sayidina Al Hussien , Sayidina Abdullah Ibn Azubair, Sayidina Muhammad Ibn Talha and many more رضي الله عنهم but the fitnah was so great and number of rebels too many that they could not defend Sayidina Uthman ra. , Also defending the Khalif to the last second was a Jewsih Sahabi names Abdullah Ibn Salaam not to be confused with Abdullah ibn Saba' who started the Fitnah. ( Abdurahman Ibn Auf died during the Khilafah of Sayidina Uthman r.a.) .

 

You can read more here In arabic :

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetrasoulallah(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/v2/document.aspx?lang=ar&doc=4583"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetrasoulallah(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/v2/document.asp...ar&doc=4583[/url]

 

and even More Detail here :

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetal-eman(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=269&CID=13"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetal-eman(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/islamlib/viewchp.as...=269&CID=13[/url]

 

But what is sure and agreed on by Most Muslim historians is that Non of the Sahaaba r.a. or their children took stance on the side of the rebels , including Muhammad Bin Abu Bakr As sideeq who repented at the last Moment and he was struck down by the rebels as well . The rebels Jumped the House from the rear while he r.a. was reciting Quran and Killed him on the day of Eid Al Adha and that was the beginning of the fitnah that never stopped till this day.

 

And Allah knows best .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

I feel very sad now.

You are right we should not ask these questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Respected brothers and sisters, I say that you do not busy yourselves with this. Saying SubHanAllah, etc... would be many better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My Question would be, Why did the Sahaba allow the murder of Imam Uthman ra to take place?

Saad Ibn Abi Waqas ra

Ali Bin Abu Talib ra

Abdurahman ibn Auf ra

Al Zubayr ra

Talha ra

Many more, where were they when it took place?

 

It was the will of Allah to grant these heroes the rank of martyrdom. If you knew what martyrs get in the Akhirah, you would not feel sad about them.

 

Also, the men you are talking about are themselves among the Sahabah.

 

Alhamdulillahir Rabbil Al Ameen!!!! Allahu Akbar!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×