karbala-ml_ridhwan_kajee

does not curse Yazîd, nor should he go to the other extreme of taking
Yazîd as his bosom friend, but rather should treat and view Yazîd in
exactly the same manner as he views the other Islâmic rulers that came
thereafter. In the Fatâwa of Shihâb Ramli it is mentioned that cursing
Yazîd is not permissible. This has been clearly mentioned by a group of
recognized scholars, with the author of Khulasah being amongst them.
The author has written that the Mazhab of the Ahl-e-Sunnah regarding
Yazîd is that which has been mentioned in ‘Bad’ul’Amaali’, which is:
و لم يلعن يزيدا بعد موت سوى المكثار في االغراء غاؿ
(After the death of Yazîd only he shall curse him who is an extremist,
and who is desirous of nothing but stirring trouble)
The author has also made reference to the refutation of Mullâ Ali
Qari against the criticism of Taftâzâni leveled against Yazîd. The
student of Ibnul-Hummâm, Kamâl ibn Abi Sharîf, has also refuted
Taftâzâni’s writings, ending on this note that Taftâzâni’s criticism of
Yazîd does not befit with the demands of justice.
On a concluding note the author has mentioned that there are four
Ahâdith recorded in the Sihâh which lend great indication that Yazîd
was indeed far from what general history has depicted of him.
Amongst them is the Hadith of Sahih Bukhâri, in which mention is made
that Hadhrat Abdullâh ibn Umar gathered his sons and servants and
warned them that Rasulullâh had warned the Ummah against
treachery. Ibn Umar then stated that since they had pledged
allegiance to Yazîd, on the name of Almighty Allâh and His Messenger',
it was not at all permissible for them to now break that allegiance. Ibn
Umar threatened that if any of them breaks their allegiance he, Ibn
Umar, shall cut off ties completely with that individual.
10