Yazeed was a Homosexual

Yazeed was a Homosexual

The Prophet’s prophecy that Yazeed would destroy the Religion

We read in Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 5 page 435:

Abu Ubaida al-Jarah narrated that Allah’s messenger (s) said: ‘My nation’s matter will remain on justice until the first person who shall spoil it, who will be a man belonging to the Bani Umaya namely Yazeed.’

Shaykh Ahmed Aziz in his authority work Siraj al Munir Sharah Jami al-Saghir, Volume page elobarated:

يزيد بن معاوية واضرابه من احداث ملوك بني أمية فقد كان منهم ما كان من قتل أهل أهل البيت

“Yazid bin Mu’awyia and those is similar to him from the young rulers of Bani Umaya killed the progeny of Ahlulbayt”

Mulla Ali Qari in Sharh Shifa commenting on hadith that the Deen will be harmed by young men states:

“The destruction of the Deen at the hands of a young man refers to Yazeed bin Mu’awiya who sent Muslim bin Uqba to pillage Madina”

Mulla Ali Qari in Mirqat Sharah Mishkaat, commenting on hadith that the Deen will be harmed by young men states:

“It refers to those who came after the rightly guided caliphs such as Yazeed bin Muawiyah and Abdul Malik bin Marwan”

The amount of condemnation that the Sunni Ulema have vented against Yazeed is astounding. The amount of material that we have presented should convince our readers that the appraisals that these Nasibi present are lies, and the Azam Tariq’s and Abu Sulaiman’s of this world would never be able to reply to these references.

Yazeed was a Homosexual

Imam Dhahabi records the following words from the sermon of Abdul Malik bin Marwan in ‘Tarkeeh Islam’ Volume 1 page 634:

ولست بالخليفة المستضعف – يعني عثمان – ولا الخليفة المداهن – يعني معاوية – ولا الخليفة المأبون – يعني يزيد

“I am not weak like Uthman and I am not cunning like Mu’awiya and I am not a homosexual like Yazid”

The tradition is also recorded in old transcripts of ‘Al Bidayah wal Nihayah’ whilst in the present transcripts available on the internet, the filthy Nawasib have committed Tahreef bu substituting the word Ma’bun (homosexual) with Ma’un (secure).

We would ask actual Sunnis to go and ask your imams whether a man that does such a thing is a fasiq (transgressor) or not? Can he be an Imam or not? We congratulate Azam Tariq the pride of Lut, who is advocating the piety of Yazeed, and deeming him to be a legitimate Imam. Perhaps the late Azam Tariq was himself a closet homosexual.

Yazeed used to Copulate with his Mother and Sisters

Here we shall cite the following authentic Sunni sources:

1. Tabaqat al Kabeera, Volume 5 page 66 Dhikr Abdullah bin Hanzala and Volume 4 page 283
2. Tareekh ul Khulafa, (Urdu), page 210 Dhikr Yazeed
3. Sawqih al Muhriqa, page 132 Dhikr Yazeed
4. Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume page 522
5. Al Isaba, Volume 3 page 469
6. Ya Nabi al Mawaddah, page 326
7. Tareekh Ibn Asakir, Volume 7 page 275
8. Fatawi Abdul Hai, page 79
9. Tareekh al Islam, Volume 2 page 356
10. Aujaz al Masalaik Sharh Muwatta Imam Malik, page 435

We read in Tabaqat:

“Abdullah bin Hanzala the Sahaba stated ‘By Allah we opposed Yazeed at the point when we feared that stones would reign down on us from the skies. He was a fasiq who copulated with his mother, sister and daughters, who drank alcohol and did not offer Salat”

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti writes in Tareekh ul Khulafa:

“Waqidi has narrated from Abdullah bin Hinzala al Ghaseel: ‘We prepared to attack Yazeed at the time when we were sure that stones would come from sky because people were performing Nikah with their mothers, sisters and daughters. They were drinking alcohol and have left prayers’.”

Tareekh ul Khulafa (Urdu) page 210 published by Nafees Academy Karachi

Imam Dhahabi has recorded the statement of Abdullah bin Hinzala al Ghaseel in the following manner:

فقال : يا قوم والله ما خرجنا حتى خفنا أن نرجم من السماء ، رجل ينكح أمهات الأولاد والبنات والأخوات

“Oh people, we better start a movement to oppose Yazeed otherwise stones may reign down on us because he is a man who performs zina with slave women, daughters and sisters.”

We read the following testimony of the Sahabi Maqal bin Sinan in al-Mustadrak al-Hakim, Volume 3 page 522:

هو رجل يشرب الخمر ويزني بالحرم

“…he is a man who drinks alcohol and performs adultery with Mahram”

Now we have these Nasibi such as Afriki and Sipaa-e-Sahaba are praising a man who was so filthy he indulged in incest to satisfy his lusts, and these Nasibi deem him to be the lawful successor to Rasulullah (s).

Yazeed bin Mu’awiya’s rejection of the Qur’an

We shall rely on the following reputable books of Ahl’ul Sunnah:

1. Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah Volume 8 page 204 Dhikr Ras al Husayn
2. Minhaj al Sunnah Volume 2 page 249 Dkikr Yazeed
3. Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 73 Dhikr Yazeed
4. Sharh Tafseer Mazhari Volume 5 page 21 Surah Ibrahim
5. Shadraat al-Dhahab page 69 Dhikr
6. Maqatail Husayn Volume 2 page 58 Dhikr
7. Tadhkira tul Khawwas page 148
8. Tareekh Tabari Volume 11 pages 21-23 Dhikr 284 Hijri
9. Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani (commentary of Surah Muhammad)

When the head of Husayn (as), the grandson of the Holy prophet (saws), was presented before Yazeed he recited the couplets of the kaafir Zubayri:

“Banu Hashim staged a play for Kingdom there was no news from the skies nether was there any revelation”

We have proven from the sources of Ahl’ul Sunnah that Yazeed rejected the concept of revelation; rather he deemed all this a stage for power by Rasulullah (s). This proves that Yazeed was a kaafir, so what right do these Nasibi have to extol Yazeed, deem him to to the rightful Khalifah over the Muslims and Ameer’ul Momineen?

In Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani it is stated clearly:

“Yazeed the impure denied the Prophethood of Rasulullah (s). The treatment that he meted out to the people of Makka, Medina and the family of the Prophet proves that he was a kaafir”.

The problem is Sunni Islam accepts as a khalifa (literally ‘successor’ to the Prophet (saws)) a man who clearly did not believe in the Qur’an and instead believed the Holy Prophet (saws) was a fraud. This is part of Sunni doctrine. It is unacceptably and obviously FLAWED, both logically and also intuitively. So what can we make of this religion? Such ridiculous dogmas exist because the whole structure is based on a fundamental lie and injustice: the usurpation of the true Khilafat from Ali (as) which was his divinely sanctioned prerogative, and instead the institution of Abu Bakr as khalifa. So the lies became bigger and bigger as time went on, to the degree that in the 21st century Yazeed is even hailed as a Santa-Saint by the modern-day Nasibi camp amongst Sunnis.

Yazeed bin Mu’awiya’s declaration on the pulpit of the khalifa that Yazeed was not worthy of Khilafah

We read in Sawaiq, page 134 about what the khalifa succeeding Yazeed said in his inaugural address as khalifa:

“When Yazeed’s son came to power he gave the speech: ‘Khilafat is from Allah (swt). My grand father Mu’awiya bin Abu Sufyan fought for khilafat against that individual who was more entitled to it, that being ‘Ali. He [Mu'awiya] performed actions that you are all aware of, and he is suffering in his grave for that. Then my father Yazeed became the khalifah even though he was not deserving of khilafat. He fought the grandson of Rasulullah (s) [Husayn (as)] and is suffering in the grave on account of his sins.’ Mu’awiya bin Yazeed then proceeded to cry, ‘It is a terrible thing that we are fully aware of Yazeed’s bad deeds: he slaughtered the family of the Prophet (s), he deemed alcohol halal, and set fire to the Ka’aba. I don’t need this khilafat, you deal with it”

This is what a son said about his father and grandfather. Not surprisingly, this lone voice of conscience amongst the Umayyads didn’t last long in power, and was rapidly succeeded by the power-hungry branch of the Umayyads led by Marwan, whose devious and vile character are vouched for in the references at the start of this article. Here one khalifa is condemning his two predecessors. Yet Sunni Islam is content to believe that they were one happy family.

Similarly in Tareekh Khamees Volume 2 page 301, “Dhikr Mu’awiya the second” and Hayaat al Haywan Volume 1 page 88 “Dhikr al Awaaz” we read that Mu’awiya the second stated in a sermon:

“My father Yazeed did not deserve to attain the position as khalifah over the Prophet’s Ummah”.

Yazeed bin Mu’awiya was such a fasiq that his own son sought to distance himself from his reign and publicly declared that Yazeed was not entitled to be khalifah on account of his fasiq actions. These are the comments of Yazeed’s son. Yet despite the testimony of the countless scholars we have cited, the countless companions, and above all, Al-Hussain (as) himself, and here Yazeed’s own son, the 21st century Nasibis of Ansar.org and Sipah-e-Sahaba think they know better.