Debunking the Hadith of Constantinople and exposing Yazid (lanatullah alaih)

Many so called "Islamic scholars" have emerged recently, who try to prove that Yazid was Jannati (nauzubillah). In fact these ignorant, dishonest people belong to the extremist terrorist ideology of Wahhabism. These people have the backing of oil rich monarchies, who have been hand in glove with the Anglo-American empire in destabilizing and imploding Islam from within. First these people were able to get rid of Ottoman Empire and the Khilafat, then they started spreading their poison in the name of 'pure religion' and 'tauheed' all over the world, through their donations and with the tactical support from Anglo-American intelligence agencies. In Indian Subcontinent, the Wahhabi sect is represented by ignorant, arrogant and extremist people who call themselves as 'Ahle Hadees' and the Deobandis. Evangelical TV preacher, Zakir Naik also belongs to this extremist sect. Thanks to Allah that Zakir Naik is banned in India.

Point by point rebuttal of the New Fitnah/Firqa by name of Ahle Hadith (Wahhabi) who love Yazid (lanatullah alaih)

The topic of Yazid (lanatullah alaih) has been one of the key points of debates and clashes between the orthodox Sufi-Sunnis and the new deviant sects like Wahhabism and Ahle Hadees. The children of Yazid (Ahle hadees and other deviant firqas) present the following Hadith in defense of their father Yazid (lanatullah alaih):

The Hadith:

Hadith giving glad tidings of Maghfirat and Jannah do not mention 'Constantinople'. Constantinople's conquest and maghfirat of that army is mentioned in hadiths concerned with Akhir uz zaman, i.e during Imam Mahdi's era.

Narrated Khalid bin Madan:

That 'Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi told him that he went to 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was staying in his house at the sea-shore of Hims with (his wife) Um Haram. 'Umair said. Um Haram informed us that she heard the Prophet saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition." Um Haram added, I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Will I be amongst them?' He replied, 'You are amongst them.' The Prophet then said, 'The first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins.' I asked, 'Will I be one of them, O Allah's Apostle?' He replied in the negative." - Sahih Bukhari, Vol IV, Book 52, Number 175.

So, according to this Hadith here are two glad tidings from Rasool Allah(صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ):

Those (army) who undertake the first naval expedition would attain Jannah (paradise).
The army which first invades Caesar's city (could be any city of Qaider, Constantinople not mentioned- Watch the video of Tahir ul Qadri given above) will be forgiven (of all the sins).

We shall prove that Yazid (lanatullah alaih) does not belong to both categories.

Yazid was not in the first Naval expedition:

Muslim army undertook their first naval expedition in the era of Usman Ghani (ra). It was around 27 to 33 Hijri. The second expedition was conducted in 52 to 58 hijri. Both the expeditions were carried out by Hazrat Muawiyah (ra) by permission from Hazrat Usman Ghani (ra). It is impossible for Yazid to have participated in the first Naval expedition, because his date of birth is 26th Hijri and he was 34 years old in 60 hijri when the Karbala massacre happened.

Yazid was not in second expedition willingly:

The second expedition was conducted by Amir Muawiyah (ra) and ordered his son (Yazid) to join it but Yazid remained heedless, adamant and made lame excuses. That army faced calamities and suffered from famine and disease. When Yazid came to know about it, he wrote this couplet; "I do not care if armies are suffering from hardships and troubles, I am enjoying the company of Umm e Kalsoom on a high throne, reclining on a cushion in deer meeran." When Amir Muawiyah came to know this, he swore to send Yazid to Sufiyan bin Auf (who was leading the expedition), so that Yazid could get his share in troubles. Yazid was sent in the second small batch.

Source: Tareekh Kamil- Ibn e Aseer, Vol 3, Page 458-459.

This second expedition was successful and was victorious. But Yazid can not be counted amongt the 'forgiven ones' because he was not in the war willingly. Any ibadat or amal of a person is only acceptable in the court of Allah when he does it willingly and with sincerity. No deed can be acceptable in the court of Allah which is done unwillingly and without any sincerity. Also any glad tidings Rasool Allah(صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ) might have foretold, is strictly conditional- as in, the person should not have turned apostate later, and he should have participated in the amal with sincerity and not for show off or under someone else's influence or with some other intention other than pleasing Allah and His Rasool(صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ) .

The Sanad of this Hadith are not trustworthy:

The Sanad of This Hadith is Filled with Kadiri heretics and Nasbis.

The sanad (chain of narration) has some narrators who belonged to deviant sects and haters of Ahle Bayt and Hazrat Ali(ra). Bukhari got this hadith from Ishaq Bin Yaid Damishqi, who got it from Yahya Bin Hamza, who in turn got it from Thawr (Saur) Bin Yazid, who got it from Khalid Bin Madan, who got it from Umar Bin Aswad Asni, who ultimately got it from Umm e Haram, who had (supposedly) hear it from Rasool Allah(صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ).

Narrators of this Hadith are all Syrians and loyalists of the Umayyad Clan, who were the rulers for long time (Muawiyah (ra) and Yazid and their dynasty).
The source of this hadith is only one person- Umm e Haram. No one else reported this hadith. looking at how important this hadith is- tidings of paradise and maghfirat- how come his hadith was not famous with multiple sources and narrators.
Why didn't Rasool Allah (صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ) tell this hadith to his close Sahaba or His (صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ) wives? Common sense says that such a Hadith should have been famous with the male sahaba, to encourage them and boost their morale to undertake naval expeditions and to attack Constantinople. Instead this hadith is kept secret and told only to one woman sahabiya. Does it make any sense?
Thawr (Saur) Bin Yazid (one of the chain of narrators) was a Nazbi (one who hates Ahle Bayt and Hazrat Ali(ra)): Ibn Saad (Sunni Imam) writes about Thawr (Saur)- "The ancestors of Yazid were fighting along with Muawiyah (ra) against Hazrat Ali (ra) in the battle of Siffin and they were killed in this war. whenever this Thawr used to hear the name of Ali (ra), he used to say "I dont like to hear the name of that person who killed my ancestors.""- Tabaqat Ibn Saad, Vol 7, under the topic: Thawr Bin Yazid al Kalayee.
Yahya Ibn Mueen (authentic Sunni author in the field of Rajal)states "This Thawr(Saur) was included in that party which used to curse Hazrat Ali(ra)."
Hafiz Ibn Hajar Asqalani, the great Imam of Ahle Sunnat in his Tehzeeb ul Tehzeeb part II, Page 33 states that Yahya Ibn Moin said that Yahya Ibn Hamza was from Kadiri sect (the heretics who reject fate and destiny-which is important part of faith for Muslims.)

Note: Yahya Ibn Moin was the teacher and Sheikh of Bukhari, Waqi Ibn Jirah was the teacher of Yahya Ibn Moin and the teacher and Sheikh of Waqi Ibn Jirah was Imam e Azam Abu Hanifa (ra). Strange that the Wahhabis follow Bukhari but reject the teacher of his teachers, Imam Abu Hanifa. How come a student who comes generations after Imam Abu Hanifa, has more knowledge than his masters' master?

Note: Imam Malik never used to narrate Hadith from Thawr (Saur) Ibn Yazeed.

Sahaba Ikram did not know about this Hadith:

Hazrat Abu Bakr(ra) didn't send any army against Constantinople:

Even after such glad tidings and such a great status this Hadith promises, Abu Bakr(ra) and Umar (ra) did not show any interest in neither naval expeditions nor attack on Constantinople. In his two and half years of Khilafat, Hazrat Abu Bakr (ra) did not show any interest to pursue and fulfill the prophecy of this Hadith, while he sent entire people of Madina in the Ridda wars to crush the apostasy. How come Abu Bakr (ra) did not know about this Hadith and never tried to attack nor atleast prepare a plan to attack Constantinople.

Umar (ra) rejected requests by Muawiyah (ra) to give permission to attack Constantinople:

Hazrat Umar (ra) had rejected repeated requests by Muawiyah (ra) for permission to attack Constantinople through a Naval expedition.

After Abu Bakr(ra), there was a long Khilafat period of Hazrat umar (ra) of 10 years, in which expeditions were launched all across the land. Khilafat of Umar(ra) reached over vast areas, various countries and continents were under his command. But even He, never sent any naval expedition to attack Constantinople. Why? Even Hazrat Umar(ra) was unaware of this Hadith? Why didnt Hazrat Umar (ra) try to capture Constantinople of there were such great glad tidings and high status declared for the army which launched first naval expedition against Constantinople?

On requests by Muawiyah (ra) to allow him to launch a naval attack on Constantinople, Hazrat Umar(ra) asked Amr bin Al -'As(ra) "Describe the sea and the seafarer to me, for I am uneasy about it." Amr bin Al-'As replied and gave a bad picture of the sea. When Umar (ra) read the reply, he wrote to Muawiyah (ra) "No, by Allah who sent Mohammad (صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ) with truth, I shall never send any Muslim there."- According to Ubaidah and Khalid, written in History of Tabari, Vol 16, events of 28th Hijri.

On repeated persistence by Muawiyah (ra) to let him attack Constantinople through a Naval route, Umar (ra) admonished Muawiyah (ra) "....How then can I bring the troops to this troublesome being (ocean)? By God, one Muslim is dearer to me than all that the Byzantines possess. Take care not to oppose me. I have given you a command, you know what Al-Ala' bin al Hadrami encountered at my hands. And I did not give him such categorical orders."

Had Umar (ra) knew this hadith, would he not rush his armies into naval fleets and attack Constantinople?

Hazrath Usman Ghani (ra) allows Muawiyah (ra) for the naval expeditions, but after 4 years of persuasion. Even then, Hazrat Usman Ghani (ra) orders "Do not conscript the people or cast lots among them. Let them decide for themselves , whoever chooses to go or not." Usman (ra) orders not to force people to go for the expedition and let the people volunteer and choose by themselves. Had Usman (ra) knew this Hadith, he would not have given such an order, instead he would have ordered the expedition himself and the Sahaba would recruit each other citing this Hadith and no one would have left behind in Madina.

Source: A Chronology Of Islamic History 570-1000 CE, By H.U. Rahman, 1999, Pages 48-49.
The Great Arab Conquests By Hugh Kennedy, page 326.

No mention of 'Paradise' in the same hadith taken from other Hadith books:
So definitely this Hadith was not known to the Sahaba, except one Umm e Haram(ra). If you read this hadith from other sources of Hadith, Umm e Haram(ra) narrated this same hadith to her Nephew Uns Bin Malik, there is no mention of paradise, yet when we read Bukhari, she narrates a non-mahram about the blessings of Paradise.

Conclusion:

Apart from the proofs from the study of Hadith and History, a Mo'min does not need any of this, common sense of a Muslim is enough to understand that Yazid is a Jahannami (hell dweller). First and foremost, his unpardonable sin was the shahadat of Imam Hussain (ra), the beloved Grandson of Rasool Allah(صَلَّى اللّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ). How can a Muslim ever hurt Rasool Allah (saw)?

After the sin of Karbala, Yazid attacked Makkah and catapults were used here to attack the Holy Kaba. Madina was ransacked. Thousands of Sahaba were killed in Madina, women were raped, Masjid un Nabawi was desecrated, horses were tied in Masjid un Nabawi and Salah was banned for a number of days. This is more than enough proof the conclude that Yazid (lanatullah alaih) is not just a fasiq but a Kaafir indeed.

Islam - The Right Path

Search This Blog