Yazid and Awasim wal Qawasim

A

AR Ahmed

sunniport user
A certain so-called "Sunni" YouTuber has quoted Awasim wal Qawasim of Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi. Note that Qadi sahib quotes Imam Abul Layth alSamarqandi without any sanad, thus making it necessary to disregard his citation.

See his clip here:




Furthermore, some of the Murabitun use this work Awasim wal Qawasim (the same work this Youtuber & Mawlawi Fazl Ahmad uses) to say this about Imam Husayn رضى الله عنه. The author says:

https://shaykhabdalqadir.com/syrian-syndrome/

"Buried under all this tangled web of deceptions lies hidden the ancient conflict of the Muslims and their struggle to preserve the truly evolutionary nature of their Divine mission to mankind, which, declaring the Unity of God, also announced to mankind that leadership was not genetically inherited, not a family inheritance, but rather a ruhani transmission of power, based not on genetics but capacity to govern. The Lady Aisha was the Defender of the Faith. On her right and left rode Talha and Zubayr, both guaranteed the Garden. Hussein, in the words of our greatest legalist, Qadi Abu Bakr of Granada, “was killed by the sword of his grandfather.”

It is also worth noting that 'ulama like the Hadith scholar al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir Sharh al-Jami` al-Saghir (§7163) wrote that : “Of the insolence, audacity and foolhardiness of this mufti [Ibn al-`Arabi al-Maliki] is that he authored a book on our Patron al-Husayn (Allah be well-pleased with him, ennoble his face, and disgrace whoever dishonors him) claiming in it that Yazid killed him justly with the sword of his Grandfather! We seek refuge in Allah from dereliction.”

It is an audacious lie to claim this work represents the a'immah of the past just as it is a lie to claim that the jumhur did la'n al-shakhsi on Yazid paleed.

Something similar to Imam al-Munawi was stated by Imam al-Alusi in his Tafsir of Surat Muhammad (upon him blessings and peace) (47:23).
 
Another video of this YouTuber attempting to "refute" A'lahazrat رضى الله عنه and do muwazana with Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه


Note that this individual mentions this fatwa from Fatawa Ridawiyya Sharif (10:197-8)

https://archive.org/details/FatawaRazawiyaJild10/page/197/mode/2up?view=theater

A'lahazrat Imam Ahmad Rida Khan رضى الله عنه mentions the refusal of Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه to do nisbat of the martyrdom of Imam A'ali Maqam رضى الله عنه in his Fatawa and does jarh on it on p. 198 under أقول

The claim that this YouTuber called Yazidi on one hand, but that Imam Ghazali رضى الله عنه is not declared as such, is such a straw man. Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه never called Yazid as "Amir al-muminin" or mentioned him as such as this YouTuber does. Thus, the comparison is incorrect.


As for this "be-jah" etaraz that whose tahqiq is greater? Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه or A'lahazrat, رضى الله عنه ? We condemn such comparisons and say both are great imams in their own right but that A'lahazrat Imam Ahmad Rida رضى الله عنه has a right to do ikhtilaf with elder ulama such as Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه .
 
AR Ahmed said:
A'lahazrat Imam Ahmad Rida Khan رضى الله عنه mentions the refusal of Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه to do nisbat of the martyrdom of Imam A'ali Maqam رضى الله عنه in his Fatawa and does jarh on it on p. 198 under أقول
Click to expand...
this is incorrect. the imbecile who made that video did not understand what he was reading. the moron should learn to read before making videos.

---
your description is also misleading. imam ghazali only did tawaqquf that one cannot say with certainty that yazid murdered imam husayn raDi'Allahu anhu. imam ghazali says [paraphrased with zabidi's sharh]:

did he do it with his OWN hand? it is obvious that he didnt'.
and did yazid command that he (imam husayn) raDi'Allahu ta'ala be killed? this cannot be established. rather there are reports that he washed his hands off this and claimed that he had only ordered ibn ziyad to arrest the imam and bring him.​

---
the jahil motor mouths do not read - and for every thing they read, they add 200% of the junk from their own convoluted minds.


---
alahazrat did not REFUTE imam ghazali either. he only said:

imam ghazali has said that one cannot attribute a kabirah to a muslim, even if it is a vile person like yazeed.
so
how can you attribute a kabirah to one of the mujtahid imams of muslims without proof?
​
if a person cannot understand the above statement, he can make his life better by herding sheep - his poor mind is not meant for knowledge.
 
Last edited:
many years ago i had compiled translations from various works on this issue. and then compiled as a book. the book is under review, and in sha'Allah will release sometime soon. we also have a lengthy translation from its commentary by zabidi and nearly 15 other works. on the issue of cursing yazid.

---
here below i post only the relevant portion from the entire discussion in ihyaa. anyone without prejudice can notice that imam ghazali is not supporting yazid - alayhi ma alayh - but only advising muslims to keep their tongues free from cursing. and he has cited hadith that highlight the perils of cursing.

if you still do not care for the repercussions and feel satisfaction in cursing yazid, it is your choice. those who abstain from cursing is not because they love yazid - rather, they worry for their own iman. and for those who are so confident that they will not be asked and know for certain that yazid has died a kafir, then they can do what they like.

nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.

yaz1.png

yaz2.png

yaz3.png

yaz4.png

yaz5.png
 
abu Hasan said:
this is incorrect. the imbecile who made that video did not understand what he was reading. the moron should learn to read before making videos.

---
your description is also misleading. imam ghazali only did tawaqquf that one cannot say with certainty that yazid murdered imam husayn raDi'Allahu anhu. imam ghazali says [paraphrased with zabidi's sharh]:

did he do it with his OWN hand? it is obvious that he didnt'.
and did yazid command that he (imam husayn) raDi'Allahu ta'ala be killed? this cannot be established. rather there are reports that he washed his hands off this and claimed that he had only ordered ibn ziyad to arrest the imam and bring him.​

---
the jahil motor mouths do not read - and for every thing they read, they add 200% of the junk from their own convoluted minds.


---
alahazrat did not REFUTE imam ghazali either. he only said:

imam ghazali has said that one cannot attribute a kabirah to a muslim, even if it is a vile person like yazeed.
so
how can you attribute a kabirah to one of the mujtahid imams of muslims without proof?
​
if a person cannot understand the above statement, he can make his life better by herding sheep - his poor mind is not meant for knowledge.
Click to expand...

i retract my description
 
Anwar.H said:
Also Sidi what does "vouchsafe him" mean here in this context?
Click to expand...
it is old usage - meaning protect him.

Anwar.H said:
And is there a clear jumhur specifically on cursing Yazid?
Click to expand...
no jumhur is not to curse him by the name.

Anwar.H said:
Sidi is it better to avoid cursing those who have died as infidels even if it is allowed?
Click to expand...
how do you know that a certain person has died an infidel? this is ghayb and only Allah ta'ala knows this - and by His informing the Prophets alayhimu's salam.

yes we treat those who are kafirs in worldly life as kafirs in death, and hence we do not do funeral prayers, or pray for thiem.
but no one can say with certainty that a certain person has died on kufr - or even on islam.

same thing with muslims. those who were muslims and died, we assume they died on islam (unless there is hard evidence they did not) and treat them as muslims. their funeral as muslims, their inheritance etc. and only Allah ta'ala knows how they left this world.

this is why we supplicate to Allah ta'ala five times a day, and many more times (whenever we see something contrary to islam) to protect us and grant us death upon faith and raise us among the righteous.

رَبَّنَاۤ أَفۡرِغۡ عَلَیۡنَا صَبۡرࣰا وَتَوَفَّنَا مُسۡلِمِینَ

فَاطِرَ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَ ٰ⁠تِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضِ أَنتَ وَلِیِّۦ فِی ٱلدُّنۡیَا وَٱلۡـَٔاخِرَةِۖ تَوَفَّنِی مُسۡلِمࣰا وَأَلۡحِقۡنِی بِٱلصَّـٰلِحِینَ




 
Anwar.H said:
And is there a clear jumhur specifically on cursing Yazid?
Click to expand...
Sorry for my phrasing here, I meant relating to cursing Yazid.
abu Hasan said:
how do you know that a certain person has died an infidel? this is ghayb and only Allah ta'ala knows this - and by His informing the Prophets alayhimu's salam.

yes we treat those who are kafirs in worldly life as kafirs in death, and hence we do not do funeral prayers, or pray for thiem.
but no one can say with certainty that a certain person has died on kufr
Click to expand...
That's what I thought and I assumed the implication on that page was those who lived as kafirs and were kafirs considerably close to their last moments in life.

And those types of people I do not habitually curse at all which is why I tried to indicate that I would prefer not to curse them.
 
HASSAN said:
Going off-topic, it'd be appreciated if you could create a list of the works you currently have in draft form; ما شاء الله, you amaze us every time when you say you've worked on xyz in the past
Click to expand...
Yes please, if possible it will highly be appreciated.

Allah bless you for your humble efforts.
 
A certain individual mentions this fatwa from Fatawa Ridawiyya Sharif (10:197-8)

https://archive.org/details/FatawaRazawiyaJild10/page/197/mode/2up?view=theater



A'lahazrat Imam Ahmad Rida Khan رضى الله عنه mentions the tawaqquf of Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه in his Fatawa Ridawiyya Sharif vol 10 p. 197 and specifically mentions it again on p. 198 under أقول



The claim that this YouTuber called Yazidi on one hand, but that Imam Ghazali رضى الله عنه is not declared as such, is such a straw man. Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه never called Yazid as "Amir al-muminin" or mentioned him as such as this YouTuber does. Thus, the comparison is incorrect.



As for this "be-jah" etaraz, whose tahqiq is greater? Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه or A'lahazrat, رضى الله عنه ? We condemn such comparisons and say both are great imams in their own right but that A'lahazrat Imam Ahmad Rida رضى الله عنه has a right to do ikhtilaf with elder ulama such as Imam al-Ghazali رضى الله عنه .Note, even so, A’lahazrat Imam e Ahle Sunnat radhiyallahu anhu does NOT refute Imam al-Ghazali quddisa sirruhu at all but mentions his view twice in passing.

As for this video, he mentions several ahadith about Sayyidina Abdallah ibn Umar and which was his ijtihad and then mentions an out out context qawl of ‘Allamah Abdus Sami Rampuri radhiyallahu anh in Anwar e Sati'a here:

AD_4nXe_NBsWR7ttZNNgZAzGC7M_ZmP_xEnLuW-BoSk_EfzcQKbxlOZGz3KU08vGgvN_tp-hmQ64MYW_DMmGqAANRpD8lXNMmX_k4B_xkKvp7-gdg13WlBhvb88cuJVBybD6hHJLwxoF


Note, ‘Allamah Rampuri alayhirrahmat wa ridwan did not intend that Yazid was haqiqatan from the tabi`in but only meant this in a lughawi sense.. This individual then does kalam on the belief that la’nat is a valid position and not to be stopped (albeit la’nat is not the majority view and not our view).

He also mentions the opinion and aqida of a certain group but makes the mistake of confusing the opinion of that group with the opinion of some ulama like Imam Ibn al Jawzi alayhirrahma and he accuses those ulama of being from that group.

He mentions the inkar of Imam al-Ghazali (wa ankar ba’d al ulama kal Imam al-Ghazali) from A’llama Abd al Aziz Parharwi alayhirrahmah in Nibras. Then he mentions the view that Yazid did not order the shahadat of Imam al-Husayn radhiyallahu anhu wa ardah but this does not prove his conspiracy theory about Imams like Allama Taftazani and Imam Ibn Jawzi alayhim ar rahmah. Furthermore, he mentions the 3 aqsam of la’n and then again reiterates the view of Imam al-Ghazali and concludes based on ahadith that la’nat is impermissible.

This individual has also quoted Awasim wal Qawasim of Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi. Note that Qadi sahib quotes Imam Abul Layth alSamarqandi without any sanad, thus making it necessary to disregard his citation.













Furthermore, some of the Murabitun use this work Awasim wal Qawasim (the same work this Youtuber & Mawlawi Fazl Ahmad uses) to say this about Imam Husayn رضى الله عنه. The author says:



https://shaykhabdalqadir.com/syrian-syndrome/



"Buried under all this tangled web of deceptions lies hidden the ancient conflict of the Muslims and their struggle to preserve the truly evolutionary nature of their Divine mission to mankind, which, declaring the Unity of God, also announced to mankind that leadership was not genetically inherited, not a family inheritance, but rather a ruhani transmission of power, based not on genetics but capacity to govern. The Lady Aisha was the Defender of the Faith. On her right and left rode Talha and Zubayr, both guaranteed the Garden. Hussein, in the words of our greatest legalist, Qadi Abu Bakr of Granada, “was killed by the sword of his grandfather.”



It is also worth noting that 'ulama like the Hadith scholar al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir Sharh al-Jami` al-Saghir (§7163) wrote that : “Of the insolence, audacity and foolhardiness of this mufti [Ibn al-`Arabi al-Maliki] is that he authored a book on our Patron al-Husayn (Allah be well-pleased with him, ennoble his face, and disgrace whoever dishonors him) claiming in it that Yazid killed him justly with the sword of his Grandfather! We seek refuge in Allah from dereliction.”



It is an audacious lie to claim this work represents the a'immah of the past just as it is a lie to claim that the jumhur did la'n al-shakhsi on Yazid paleed.



Something similar to Imam al-Munawi was stated by Imam al-Alusi in his Tafsir of Surat Muhammad (upon him blessings and peace) (47:23).



Furthermore, this individual claimed Imam al-Munawi and Mulla Ali al-Qari (in Sharh Fiqh alAkbar) alayhim ar rahmah declared Yazid a khalifa and that A’lahazrat alayhirrahmat wa ridwan did ikhtilaf from this. See Fatawa Ridawiyya volume 10, p 217. Yes, A’lahazrat Imam e Ahle Sunnat quddisa sirruhu did ikhtilaf on this point and his ikhtilaf was correct. Even so, this khilafat was not meant the way this individual takes it - it is meant as a nominal ruler. There will be 12 rulers. It doesn’t necessarily entail piety except for 4 blessed Rashidun Khulafa and Imam al-Hasan radhiyallahu anhum and Sayyidina Amir Mu'awiya ibn Abi Sufyan radhiyallahu anhum wa arDah.

The same answer is for the text of Fath al-Bari.
 
Last edited:
This chapata chura chamar adds manzila bayn al manzilatayn. Azali badbakht kharji.
La'natullahi ala qawm al-zalimin.
 
Furthermore, this individual tries to attack A'lahazrat رضى الله عنه by saying he rahmatullahi ta'ala alayyh was incorrect about imam ahmad ibn hanbal رضى الله عنه doing la'n of yazid when there are multiple narrations. this individual brings two narrations from the sunnah of al-khallal. (riwayat 845-6)

one of them has the narrator ahmad ibn muhammad al-mattar, abul 'abbas. imam khatib declares him thiqa. musa furber however writes:

"Al-Haytami cites Ibn al-Jawzi’s citation of a report by Qadi Abu Ya`la al-Farra’ that he permitted it but according to Abu Ya`la’s son the contrary is true. The latter report sounds more like what Imam Ahmad would say, but Allah knows best.”

thus there are multiple narrations and a'lahazrat imam e ahle sunnat رضى الله عنه is free of blame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top