Category: Tarikh

Praise be to Allah.
Firstly: 

The noble Sahaabi Mu‘aawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him)
was one of the scribes who wrote down the Revelation; he was well known for
forbearance, knowledge and virtue, and his achievements and good
characteristics were many. And it is not permissible to cast aspersions upon
him at all. He was one of the leaders of the Muslims who ruled on the basis
of justice as much as he could. With regard to what happened during his time
of turmoil and internal conflict, we should refrain from discussing it and
should not talk about it on the basis of falsehood. We testify that all the
Companions of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) were good and virtuous; whoever among them tried to work things out and
got it right will have a twofold reward, and whoever among them tried to
work things out and got it wrong will have one reward. 

Please see the answer to question no.
140984 

Secondly: 

When ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) died, and his son
al-Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) offered the funeral prayer for him,
the people swore allegiance to him as caliph, and they urged him to mobilise
to fight the people of Syria. He had no intention of fighting anyone, but
they prevailed upon him and gathered a huge number of men, the like of which
had never been seen before. He marched with the army, heading towards Syria,
then turmoil, differences of opinion and division arose in the army. When
al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali realised that the army was not all united behind him, he
resented them and at that point he wrote to Mu‘aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan (may
Allah be pleased with him), offering to come to terms for a peace deal
between them. Mu‘aawiyah sent ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Aamir and ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn
Samurah to him and a peace deal was concluded. Al-Hasan swore allegiance to
Mu‘aawiyah as caliph, and yielded the caliphate to him. That occurred in 40
AH, which was called the year of unity (‘aam al-jamaa‘ah) because the
people united under Mu‘aawiyah in that year.

The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) foretold this action and praised al-Hasan for it, namely giving up
leadership and no longer seeking it, thus sparing the Muslims from bloodshed
and seeking that which is with Allah. So al-Hasan gave up the caliphate and
passed the reins to Mu‘aawiyah in order to unite the Muslims behind one
ruler. 

Al-Bukhaari (2704) narrated that Abu Bakrah said: I saw the
Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on the minbar,
with al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali beside him, and he turned to the people sometimes and
turned to al-Hasan sometimes, and said: “This son of mine will be a leader,
and perhaps Allah will bring about reconciliation through him between two
great groups of Muslims.” 

When Mu‘aawiyah seized power and entered Kufah, he gave a
speech there and all the people throughout the regions were united behind
him. al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali, along with his brother al-Husayn, the rest of their
siblings and their cousin ‘Abdullah ibn Ja‘far, travelled from Iraq to al-Madinah
al-Munawwarah – blessings and peace be upon the best of its inhabitants. 

When Mu‘aawiyah was dying, he summoned Yazeed and gave his
final instructions to him, and the people swore allegiance to Yazeed. Among
them were many of the Sahaabah, including Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Abbaas (may
Allah be pleased with them). al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali and ‘Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr
(may Allah be pleased with them) refused to swear allegiance to him. 

See: al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah (8/16-21 and 8/175). 

Ibn Battaal (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Al-Hasan handed over the reins of power to Mu‘aawiyah,
reconciled with him and swore allegiance to him, pledging to listen and obey
so long as he ruled according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His
Prophet. Then they entered Kufah and Mu‘aawiyah received the oath of
allegiance from the people of Iraq. That was the year of unity, when the
people united and came to an agreement, and war ceased. All the Sahaabah who
had stayed away from civil war swore allegiance to Mu‘aawiyah. Sa‘d ibn Abi
Waqqaas, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar and Muhammad ibn Muslimah swore allegiance to
him, and the people were very happy about that. Mu‘aawiyah bestowed upon al-Hasan
ibn ‘Ali three hundred thousand dinars, a thousand garments, thirty slaves
and one hundred camels, and al-Hasan ibn Ali left for Madinah. Mu‘aawiyah
appointed al-Mugheerah ibn Shu‘bah as governor of Kufah, and he appointed
‘Abdullah ibn ‘Aamir as governor of Basrah, and he left for Damascus, which
he took as the capital of his kingdom. 

End quote from Sharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari (8/97) 

Thirdly: 

The scholars stated that al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali stipulated that
Mu‘aawiyah should not appoint anyone as his successor; rather the matter was
to be decided by consultation among the Muslims. 

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

When they reconciled, al-Hasan wrote it in a document to
Mu‘aawiyah, as follows: 

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
This is what has been agreed upon by al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased
with him) and Mu‘aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan. He has made a peace deal with him
on the basis that al-Hasan will hand to him the reins of power to rule the
Muslims, provided that he rule according to the Book of Allah, may He be
exalted, the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah
be upon him) and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. Mu‘aawiyah ibn Abi
Sufyaan has no right to appoint anyone to succeed him; rather the matter is
to be decided by the Muslims on the basis of consultation and shoora. [This
agreement is also] provided that the people should be safe wherever they may
be on Allah’s earth, whether they be in Syria, Iraq, the Hijaz or Yemen; and
provided that the companions and party of ‘Ali should be safe, and their
lives, property, womenfolk and children should be safe wherever they may be.
Mu‘aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan gives his solemn promise and oath before Allah to
that effect, and that he intends no ill towards al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali or towards
his brother al-Husayn, or any of the members of the family of the Messenger
of Allah, either secretly or openly, and he will never disturb any of them,
no matter where they may be. 

This was witnessed by So-and-so, and by So-and-so the son of
So-and-so, and sufficient is Allah as witness. 

When the peace deal was done, Mu‘aawiyah requested al-Hasan
to speak before a gathering of people and tell them that he had sworn
allegiance to Mu‘aawiyah and handed over the reins of power to him, and he
agreed to do that. 

End quote from as-Sawaa’iq al-Muhriqah ‘ala Ahl ar-Rafd
wa’d-Dalaal wa’z-Zandaqah (2/399) 

See also the book al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali (may Allah be
pleased with him) by Dr as-Sallaabi (p. 253) [This book is available in
English under the title Al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Tâlib: His Life and
Times]. 

Fourthly: 

When Mu‘aawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) saw the
extent of the dissent, division and turmoil among the people, and the extent
to which they were prone to internal conflict, he feared that their division
might become worse after he died, and that dissent and turmoil would
increase. So he decided that the best solution was to take allegiance for
his son after him. He consulted the senior Sahaabah, the leaders of the
people and the governors of the regions, and they all give their consent to
that. Delegations came agreeing to swear allegiance to Yazeed, and many of
the Sahaabah also swore allegiance to him, to the extent that al-Haafiz ‘Abd
al-Ghani al-Maqdisi said: His caliphate was valid; sixty of the companions
of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
including Ibn ‘Umar, swore allegiance to him. It is proven in Saheeh al-Bukhaari
(7111) that Ibn ‘Umar swore allegiance to Yazeed. It was narrated that Naafi‘
said: When the people of Madinah announced that they no longer accepted
Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah as caliph, Ibn ‘Umar gathered his close friends and
children and said: I heard the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) say: “A banner will be set up for every betrayer on the Day of
Resurrection.” We swore allegiance to this man in accordance with the
conditions enjoined by Allah and His Messenger, and I do not know of any
betrayal greater than that of one who swears allegiance to a man according
to the conditions enjoined by Allah and His Messenger, then begins to fight
him. If I ever learn that any of you withdrew his allegiance or gave
allegiance to someone else, then that will mark the end of the relationship
between me and him. 

Perhaps the reason why Mu‘aawiyah told the people to swear
allegiance to Yazeed was that he thought that this would prevent division
and would unite the people at that critical stage through which the ummah
was going, as he was aware that many people were claiming the right to be
the caliph. So he (may Allah be pleased with him) thought that appointing
Yazeed as caliph was in the best interests of the ummah and was a precaution
that would prevent turmoil, if the decision-makers agreed on him. 

See: al-Mufassal fi’r-Radd ‘ala Shubahaat A‘da’ al-Islam
(13/228) 

Ibn Khaldoon (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

What prompted Mu‘aawiyah to give precedence to his son Yazeed
and appoint him as caliph, rather than anyone else, was the belief that this
would serve the interests of the Muslims by uniting them and bringing them
together behind one man, with the approval of the decision-makers at that
time, who were from Banu Umayyah, because at that time Banu Umayyah would
not accept anyone (as caliph) except one of their own number. They were the
strongest clan of Quraysh and the ones who had the greatest influence. So
Mu‘aawiyah preferred Yazeed, over others who may have been thought more
qualified than him, for that reason, and he overlooked others who were more
virtuous in favour of one who was less virtuous, because he was keen to keep
the Muslims united behind one leader, which is a matter of great importance
in Islamic teachings. It is not possible to think of any other motive for
Mu‘aawiyah than that, because his good character and the fact that he was a
Sahaabi would rule out any other motive. 

The fact that some of the senior Sahaabah were present and
kept quiet indicates that there was nothing suspicious in what Mu‘aawiyah
did, because such people would not be deterred from speaking out against
something wrong, and Mu‘aawiyah was not one of those who would be too
arrogant to accept the word of truth. All of them were too noble to do that,
and their good character would rule it out. 

End quote from Muqaddimat Ibn Khaldoon (p. 109) 

He also said: 

Mu‘aawiyah issued instructions for Yazeed to become caliph
for fear of the Muslims becoming divided. 

End quote from Muqaddimat Ibn Khaldoon (p. 106) 

Muhibb ad-Deen al-Khateeb (may Allah have mercy on him) said
in his commentary on al-‘Awaasim min al-Qawaasim (p. 229): 

Mu‘aawiyah did not choose the best option because he was
afraid of turmoil and bloodshed if he left the matter to shoora (mutual
consultation). He thought that strength, obedience, order and stability
would be on the side of those who supported his son (i.e., they had more
power and would be more able to maintain order). End quote. 

In conclusion, Mu‘aawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) did
what he thought best served the interests of the ummah at a time of
division, when there was turmoil in its ranks, and he thought that keeping
the Muslims united and warding off turmoil was more important than
fulfilling the condition stipulated by al-Hasan (may Allah be pleased with
him), when he gave up his claim to the caliphate and swore allegiance to
him. Sharee‘ah seeks to attain and perfect that which serves the people’s
best interests and to ward off and reduce that which causes harm. 

Moreover, the most that can be said concerning this matter is
that Mu‘aawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), who was the caliph of the
Muslims, tried to work out what was the best option concerning this issue.
He would have two rewards if he got it right, and he would have one reward
if he got it wrong, in sha Allah. What happened in this case or others of
imperfection or shortcomings on his part may well be overlooked and forgiven
by the Most Gracious, Most Merciful, and the Companions of the Prophet
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) are more deserving of being
excused and pardoned by Allah, may He be glorified and exalted. 

And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.
Dhuth-Thudayyah’s full name was Hurqoos ibn Zuhayr al-Bajali. He was one
of the Khawaarij (Khaarijites) who rebelled against Ameer al-Mu’mineen
‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), spread mischief in the land and shed
blood that it was forbidden to shed. ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him)
fought them at the battle of an-Nahrawand and killed them; none of them
escaped except a few. 
The
Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) urged the
believers to fight them. The first of them was Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah at-Tameemi,
who told the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him):
Be fair! And Dhu’th-Thudayyah was the last of them.
 He was a
very dark black man, who had a foul odour and a deformed arm; there was only
an upper arm, with no forearm, and at the end of his upper arm there was
something like a nipple on which there were some white hairs. 
They (the
Khawaarij) are the ones concerning whom the Messenger of Allah (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) said:
“Among the progeny of this man will be people who will recite
the Qur’an, but it will not go any further than their throats. They will
pass through Islam as an arrow passes through the prey. They will kill the
people of Islam and leave the idol-worshippers alone. If I live to see them,
then I will certainly kill them like ‘Aad (i.e., as ‘Aad were destroyed).”. 

Dhu’th-Thudayyah was the sign of these people; he was the sign of fitnah
(turmoil) and a symbol of mischief and evil. 
When ‘Ali
(may Allah be pleased with him) and the believers who were with him fought
them, he asked them to look for this man among the slain, and they found
him. ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and those who were with him
rejoiced greatly at that, and ‘Ali prostrated to Allah in gratitude. 
al-Bukhaari
(3610) and Muslim (1064) narrated that Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allah be
pleased with him) said: Whilst we were with the Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and he was sharing out some
wealth, Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah, a man from Banu Tameem, came to him and said: O
Messenger of Allah, be fair! The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) said: “Woe to you! Who will be fair if I am not fair? You
will be doomed and lost if I am not fair.” ‘Umar said: O Messenger of Allah,
give me permission to strike his neck. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Let him be, for he has companions, in
comparison to whose prayer one of you would regard his prayer as
insignificant, and he would regard his fasting as insignificant in
comparison to their fasting. They recite the Qur’an but it does not go any
further than their collarbones. They will pass out of the faith as an arrow
passes out of the prey. Their sign will be a black man, one of whose upper
arms will be like a woman’s breast, or like a piece of quivering flesh. They
will emerge when there is division among the people.” 
Abu Sa’eed
said: I bear witness that I heard this hadeeth from the Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and I bear witness that ‘Ali ibn
Abi Taalib fought them when I was with him. He ordered that that man be
sought, and he was found and brought; I looked at him and saw that he was
just as the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
had described him. 
According to
another report narrated by them (al-Bukhaari and Muslim):
“Among the progeny of this man will be
people who will recite the Qur’an, but it will not go any further than their
throats. They will pass through Islam as an arrow passes
through the prey. They will kill the people of Islam and
leave the idol-worshippers alone. If I live to see them, then I will
certainly kill them like ‘Aad (i.e., as ‘Aad were destroyed).” 
It was
narrated that Naafi‘ ibn Maslamah al-Akhnasi said: Dhu’th-Thudayyah was a
man
from (the clan of) ‘Arnah from (the tribe of) Bajeelah. He was a very dark
black man who had a foul odour. He was well-known among the troops, and
before that he used to accompany us. 
Al-Bidaayah
wa’n-Nihaayah, 7/289 
Ibn al-Atheer
(may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Dhu’th-Thudayyah – thudayyah
is the diminutive of thadiy (breast nipple) And may be taken as meaning a
piece of a breast. 
An-Nihaayah,
1/592 
Muslim
(1066) narrated from ‘Ubaydah as-Salmaani, from ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased
with him) that he mentioned the Khawaarij and said: and said: Among them is
a man with a defective arm, or a small arm. I would tell you what Allah
promised on the lips of Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
to those who kill them. I said: Did you hear that from Muhammad (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him)? He said: Yes, by the Lord of the Ka‘bah;
yes, by the Lord of the Ka‘bah; yes, by the Lord of the Ka‘bah.
Muslim
(1066) and Abu Dawood (4768) narrated that Salamah ibn Kuhayl said: Zayd ibn
Wahb al-Juhani told me that he was 
He was in
the army that was with ‘Ali and went out to fight the Khawaarij. ‘Ali said:
O people, I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be
upon him) say: “There will appear some people among my ummah who will recite
the Qur’an and your recitation will not compare to theirs, and your prayer
will not compare to theirs, and your fasting will not compare to theirs.
They will recite the Qur’an and you will think that it is to their credit
but in fact it will count against them. Their prayer will not go any deeper
than their collar bones and they will pass out of Islam as an arrow passes
out of the prey. If the army that attacks them knew what has been decreed
for them on the lips of their Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him), they would have relied on their deeds. The sign of that is that among
them there is a man who has an upper arm but no forearm, and on his upper
arm there is something like a nipple with white hairs on it. Would you go to
Mu’aawiyah and the people of Syria, and leave these people in charge of your
families and wealth in your absence?  By Allah, I hope that they are the
same people, for they have shed blood unlawfully and attacked the people’s
cattle. March in the name of Allah. 
Salamah ibn
Kuhayl said: Zayd ibn Wahb described to me the stops (made by the army)
until he said: then we crossed a bridge, and when we met (the Khawaarij),
who were being led that day by ‘Abd-Allah ibn Wahb al-Raasibi, he (‘Abd-Allah)
said to (his men): Throw your spears and draw your swords from their
sheaths, for I am afraid that they may urge you to negotiate as they did on
the day of Haroora’. So they threw their spears and unsheathed their swords,
and (the companions of ‘Ali) fought back with their spears, and they (the
Khawaarij) were killed and piled up one on top of another, but only two of
the people (i.e., the companions of ‘Ali) were killed that day. ‘Ali said:
Search among them for the one with the deformed hand. But they did not find
him. Then ‘Ali himself went to some people who had been killed and were
lying on top of one another. They took them out and found him among those
who were closest to the ground (at the bottom of the pile). He said takbeer
and said: Allah spoke the truth and His Messenger conveyed it. ‘Ubaydah al-Salmaani
stood up and said: O Ameer al-Mu’mineen, by Allah besides Whom there is no
other god, did you hear this from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him)? He said: Yes, by Allah besides Whom there is no
other god – until he asked him to swear three times and he did so. 
Then Abu
Dawood narrated that Abu’l-Wadee’ said: It is as if I can see him, an
Abyssinian wearing a shirt, one of his hands like a woman’s nipple with
hairs on it like the hairs on the tail of a jerboa. 
Classed as
saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood. 
Ahmad (850)
narrated that Taariq ibn Ziyaad said: We went out with ‘Ali to fight the
Khawaarij, and he killed them then he said: Look, for the Prophet of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said that there would emerge
people who would speak of the truth but it would not go past their throats;
they will pass out of the truth as the arrow passes out of the prey. The
sign is that one of them will be a black man with a deformed arm, with some
black hairs on his arm. If it is him, then you have killed the worst of
people, and if it is not him, then you have killed the best of people. And
we wept, then he said: Look. So we looked and we found the deformed man, and
we fell down in prostration and ‘Ali fell down in prostration with us. 
This hadeeth
has several isnaads; see al-Irwa’, 2/231 
Al-Haafiz
(may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
It was
narrated that Abu Maryam said: Indeed that deformed man was with us in the
mosque, and he was a poor man. I gave him a burnous of mine to wear and I
saw him attending meals with ‘Ali. He had on his arm something like the
breast of a woman, with a nipple on its end like the nipple of a breast,
with something on it like the whiskers of a cat. Both reports were narrated
by Abu Dawood. 
At-Tabari
narrated it at length via Abu Maryam. In it, it says: Before that, ‘Ali used
to tell us that some people would appear and the sign would be a man with a
deformed arm. I heard that from him many times until I saw him – meaning the
deformed man – not wanting to eat with ‘Ali because he often heard that from
him. And in it, it says: Then he instructed his companions to look for the
deformed man, so they looked for him but they could not find him until a man
came and told him: We have found him beneath two slain men in a ditch. 
According to
the report of Aflah: ‘Ali said: Which of you recognises this man? One of the
people said: We recognise him; this is Hurqoos. 
According to
the report of ‘Aasim ibn Shamkh, Abu Sa‘eed said: Ten of the Companions of
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told me that ‘Ali
said: Look for the sign that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) spoke of, for I have never told lies and I will never
tell lies. He (that man) was brought, and ‘Ali praised and thanked Allah
when he recognised the sign. In the report of Abu Bakr, the freed slave of
the Ansaar, from ‘Ali, there were seven nipples around it. In that report it
states that the people were upset after the killing of the people of the
river, but ‘Ali said: I do not think but he was one of them. They found him
on the bank of the river, beneath the slain. ‘Ali said: Allah and His
Messenger spoke the truth. The people rejoiced when they saw his body, and
what they had been feeling disappeared. 
End quote
from Fath al-Baari, 12/298 
For more
information on the sect of the Khawaarij (Kharijites), please see the answer
to question no. 182237. 
And Allah
knows best.

Praise be to Allah.
Firstly: 

What is required is to think positively of those whom Allah chose to
accompany His Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him): for they
are the best companions of the best Prophet, and it is not permissible to
say anything of them but the highest words of praise; if anyone criticises
them, then this gives rise to suspicion about the sincerity of his religious
commitment. 

Abu Zar‘ah ar-Raazi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If you see a man
criticising any of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him), then know that he is a heretic. That is because
in our view, the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) is true, and the Qur’an is true. No one transmitted this Qur’an and the
Sunnah to us except the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him). They only seek to undermine our witnesses (to
the authenticity of the texts) in order to declare the Qur’an and Sunnah
false, but these people are more deserving of criticism, for they are
heretics.

End quote from al-Kifaayah fi ‘Ilm ar-Riwaayah by al-Khateeb
al-Baghdadi (p. 49). 

See also the answer to question no.
187689 

Secondly: 

The Companions of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
fought one another ,and each party had a reason to fight, which was based on
their own understanding of the texts and on their own ijtihaad, whereby each
party believed it was in the right. Hence when it became clear to some of
them that they were mistaken, they regretted going out and fighting, and
regret is repentance, and repentance erases what comes before it, especially
in the case of the noblest of mankind, and the highest in status and most
respected of them after the Prophets and Messengers of Allah. 

Whoever examines this matter properly will realise that this fighting was
caused by those who sought to spread discord by spreading rumours and false
ideas.  

Many of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) went out during this
fighting seeking to reconcile between the people. Fighting was the most
hateful thing to them, but the decree of Allah inevitably came to pass. 

Thirdly: 

Al-Bukhaari (447) narrated from Abu Sa ‘eed al-Khudri, in the report about
the building of the mosque (in Madinah), that he said: We would carry one
brick at a time, but  ‘Ammaar would carry two bricks at a time. The Prophet
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) saw him and brushed the dust from
him, saying: “Woe to ‘Ammaar; he will be killed by the transgressing group;
he will be calling them to Paradise and they will be calling him to Hell”.
‘Ammaar said: I seek refuge with Allah from tribulation. 

What is meant by calling to Paradise in this hadith is calling to the means
of attaining it, which is obedience to the caliph (Ameer al-Mu’mineen), and
what is meant by calling to Hell is calling to that which leads to it, which
is opposing the caliph and rebelling against him. 

But whoever did that on the basis of ijtihaad and valid interpretation is
excused. 

Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

This hadith is one of the signs of Prophethood, as the Prophet (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) foretold to ‘Ammaar that he would be killed
by the transgressing group, and he was killed by the people of ash-Shaam
(greater Syria) in the battle of Siffeen, when ‘Ammaar was with ‘Ali  and
the people of Iraq, as will be explained in detail below. ‘Ali had more
right to rulership than Mu‘aawiyah did. 

The fact that the companions of Mu‘aawiyah are described as transgressors
does not imply that they were disbelievers, as the ignorant followers of the
misguided sects, such as the Shi‘ah  and others, try to claim. That is
because their decision to fight was based on their own ijtihaad and
interpretation of the texts, and not everyone who engages in ijtihaad gets
its right; rather the one who gets it right will have a twofold reward and
the one who gets it wrong will have a single reward. 

Those who added to this hadith after the phrase “you will be killed by the
transgressing group” the words “Allah will not grant them my intercession on
the Day of Resurrection” fabricated this additional material, falsely
attributing it to the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be
upon him), for he did not say it, as it was not narrated via any acceptable
chain of narration. And Allah knows best. 

With regard to the words “he will be calling them to Paradise and they will
be calling him to Hell”, ‘Ammaar and his companions were calling the people
of greater Syria to reconciliation and unity, whereas the people of greater
Syria wanted to seize power from one who was more entitled to it, and they
wanted the people to be divided, with each part of the Muslim lands having
its own ruler, which would lead to disunity and division of the ummah, for
this was the implication of their view and the consequences to which it
would lead, even if they did not intend that. And Allah knows best.

End quote from al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah (4/538) 

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
If
it is said: “He was killed at Siffeen, when he was with ‘Ali, and those who
killed him were with Mu‘aawiyah, with whom were some of the Sahaabah, so how
can it be said that they were calling to Hell?”

The answer to that is that they thought that they were calling to Paradise,
and their action was based on ijtihaad, so there is no blame on them for
following what they thought was best. What is meant by calling people to
Paradise is calling them to that which leads to it, which is obeying the
ruler. This was the stance of ‘Ammaar, who was calling them to obey ‘Ali,
who was the ruler whom it was obligatory to obey at that time, whereas they
(Mu‘aawiyah and his followers) were calling people to something other than
that, but they are excused for the wrong conclusion they reached, which was
based on misinterpretation of the texts. 

End quote from Fath al-Baari (1/542). See also: Majmoo‘ Fataawa
Shaykh al-Islam (4/437) 
So
it is essential to differentiate between the one who tries to work it out
but reaches a wrong conclusion, and the one who deliberately causes mischief
and turmoil. 

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And if two
parties or groups among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace
between them both, but if one of them rebels against the other, then fight
you (all) against the one that which rebels till it complies with the
Command of Allah; then if it complies, then make reconciliation between them
justly, and be equitable. Verily! Allah loves those who are equitable.

The believers are nothing else than brothers (in Islamic
religion). So make reconciliation between your brothers, and fear Allah,
that you may receive mercy”

[al-Hujuraat 49:9-10]. 

This indicates that it is possible for fighting to occur among the
believers, without that meaning that one of the groups is regarded as no
longer being believers because of their fighting the other group. Then
Allah, may He be exalted, says: “The
believers are nothing else than brothers (in Islamic religion). So make
reconciliation between your brothers”
[al-Hujuraat 49:9-10]. 
So
Allah described them as being brothers, despite their fighting, and He
commanded the Muslims to reconcile between them. 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, explains that despite their fighting
and transgression against one another, they are still believers and
brothers, and He enjoined reconciling between them. But if one of them
transgresses after that, then the transgressing group is to be fought, but
He did not enjoin fighting from the outset. 

The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stated that the
groups that would pass out of the faith [the Khawaarij or Khaarijis] would
be killed by the closer of the two groups to the truth, and ‘Ali ibn Abi
Taalib and those who were with him were the ones who fought
them.                                     

The words of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) indicate
that they were closer to the truth than Mu‘aawiyah and those who were with
him, although both groups were believers.

End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (25/305-306) 
It
was narrated that Abu Sa‘eed al-Khudri said: The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “A group will secede from
my ummah at a time of division among the Muslims, and they will be killed by
the group that is closer to the truth.”

Narrated by Muslim (1064). 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This saheeh hadeeth indicates that both of the groups who engaged in
fighting – ‘Ali and his companions, and Mu‘aawiyah and his companions – were
following the truth, and that ‘Ali and his companions were closer to the
truth than Mu‘aawiyah and his companions.

End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (4/467). See also: Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa
(4/437-438). 

For more information, see the answers to questions no.
147974 and 140984
To
sum up: 

The words “they will be calling him to Hell” do not imply disbelief – Allah
forbid. The one who says that is only highlighting his extreme ignorance.
Rather these hadiths come under the heading of the hadiths of warning, like
those hadiths which say that the one who consumes riba will be in the fire,
and the one who consumes the orphan’s wealth will be in the fire, and other
hadiths that contain warnings; they do not necessarily imply that the person
who does that is a disbeliever, although they do indicate that his deed is
haraam and is in fact a major sin. 
In
fact some of the scholars interpreted the words “they will be calling him to
Hell” as referring to the Khawaarij (Kharijites). 

Ibn Battaal (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

The words “he will be calling them to Paradise and they will be calling him
to Hell” can only be correctly applied to the Khawaarij to whom ‘Ali sent
‘Ammaar to call them to join the jamaa‘ah (main body of the Muslims); they
cannot be correctly applied to any of the Sahaabah, because it is not
possible for any of the Muslims to interpret any of their actions except in
the best manner, because they were the companions of the Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), whom Allah praised and testified
to their virtue, and said (interpretation of the meaning):
“You 
are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind”
[Aal ‘Imraan 3:110]. 

The commentators said: This refers to the Companions of the Messenger of
Allah. It is narrated in a saheeh report that ‘Ali sent ‘Ammaar to the
Khawaarij to call them to join the jamaa‘ah (main body of the Muslims), with
whom there is protection from error. 

End quote from Sharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari (2/98-99) 

For more information, please see the answer to question no.
171167

And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.Firstly: 
The swearing of allegiance (bay‘ah) by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) [to Abu Bakr] is proven in as-Saheehayn (al-Bukhaari and Muslim), even though it happened a few months late. 
It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that her father Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) entered upon ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) after he requested a meeting with him:
‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib recited the Tashahhud, then he said: O Abu Bakr, we acknowledge your virtue and what Allah has given you. We do not envy you for any favour that Allah has bestowed upon you, but you did it without consulting us and we thought that we had the right (to be consulted) because of our kinship with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). He kept speaking to Abu Bakr until Abu Bakr’s eyes filled with tears. When Abu Bakr spoke, he said: By the One in Whose hand is my soul, kinship with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is dearer to me than kinship with my own people. As for this dispute that occurred between me and you concerning these properties, I have not deviated from the right path with regard to them, and I have not given up something that I saw the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) do with them, rather I have done it too.
‘Ali said to Abu Bakr: Your appointment for my oath of allegiance is this afternoon. When Abu Bakr had prayed Zuhr, he ascended the minbar and recited the tashahhud, and he spoke of ‘Ali and his delay in swearing allegiance, and the excuse that he had given, then he prayed for his forgiveness. And ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib recited the tashahhud and spoke highly of Abu Bakr, and said that what he had done was not due to jealousy of Abu Bakr, or a refusal to accept the favour that Allah had bestowed upon him, but we thought that we should have had a share in the matter, but it had been decided without consulting us, and we were upset with that. The Muslims were pleased with this and said: You have done the right thing. Then the Muslims became closer to ‘Ali, when he did the right thing.
Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3998) and Muslim (1759). 
According to another version narrated by Muslim in his Saheeh:
Then ‘Ali stood up and spoke highly of Abu Bakr, and he mentioned his virtue and the fact that he had been one of the first to enter Islam. Then he went to Abu Bakr and swore allegiance to him, and the people came to ‘Ali and said: You have done the right thing, you have done well. And the people became close to ‘Ali when he did the right thing. 
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
With regard to ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) delaying swearing of allegiance (to Abu Bakr), ‘Ali mentioned it in this hadith and Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) apologised to him.  
Moreover, this delay on ‘Ali’s part did not undermine the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr and it did not undermine ‘Ali himself. 
With regard to swearing allegiance, the scholars are unanimously agreed that for an oath of allegiance to be valid, it is not essential that all the people, or even all the decision-makers and prominent people, should swear allegiance. Rather there should be a group of scholars, leaders and prominent figures who do so. 
With regard to it not undermining ‘Ali or his character, that is because it was not essential for everyone to come to the leader, put his hand in his and swear allegiance to him; rather once the decision-makers and prominent figures have sworn allegiance to the leader, the individual is required to accept his leadership, not show dissent and not rebel against him. 
That was the case with ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) during that period, before he swore allegiance, because he did not show dissent towards Abu Bakr or rebel against him. But he was held back from coming to him for the reason mentioned in the hadith. In order for swearing allegiance to be valid and proper, that did not depend on him being present, and neither he nor anyone else was required to attend for that purpose. As it was not required, he did not come. 
Nothing has been narrated from him to suggest that he thought that the oath of allegiance was not valid, and he never expressed any objection (to Abu Bakr being appointed caliph). However he did have some misgivings in his mind, hence his coming was delayed until that matter had been dealt with. 
The reason for his misgivings was that, because of his high status and the fact that he himself was a person of virtue in all aspects, and was closely related to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and so on, he thought that no decision should be made without him being consulted and being present. But the excuse given by Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and the rest of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them all) was quite clear: it was because they thought that hastening to swear allegiance was in the greater interest of the Muslims, and they were afraid that if they delayed it, that could lead to problems and disputes that would in turn lead to serious negative consequences. Therefore they delayed burying the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) until they had sworn allegiance, because that was the most important matter, so as to ensure that no dispute would arise concerning his burial, shrouding, ghusl, funeral prayer and so on, without having anyone who could have the final say on such matters. Hence they thought that giving precedence to swearing allegiance was the most important issue at that time. End quote. 
Sharh Muslim (12/77-78) 
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
It was as if they excused him for not coming to swear allegiance to Abu Bakr whilst Faatimah was still alive, because he was preoccupied with caring for her during her illness, and consoling her for the grief she felt at the loss of her father (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). Moreover, when she got upset with Abu Bakr’s response when she asked him about inheritance, ‘Ali decided to go along with her in keeping away from him.
End quite. Fath al-Baari (7/494) 
Secondly: 
There is also a report which says that ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) swore allegiance to Abu Bakr at the very beginning, and he did not delay doing so, but there is some doubt as to whether the report which mentions that can be confirmed.
The hadith was narrated via Wuhayb ibn Khaalid, from Dawood ibn Abi Hind, from Abu Nadrah, from Abu Sa‘eed. 
The hadith was taken from Wuhayb ibn Khaalid by four of his companions, three of whom narrated a brief version which does not mention ‘Ali and az-Zubayr swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) at the beginning of his caliphate. These three are: 
1.‘Affaan ibn Muslim
as we shall see the report narrated from him, and we will explain that anyone who narrated from ‘Affaan ibn Muslim concerning the issue of the oath of allegiance ( bay‘ah) was mistaken 
2.Abu Dawood at-Tayaalisi in al-Musnad (1/495, no. 603)
And it was narrated via him by Ibn ‘Asaakir in Tareekh Dimashq (19/314) 
3.Zuhayr ibn Ishaaq
who is a da‘eef narrator, as it says in Mizaan al-I‘tidaal (2/82). He narrated it via Ibn ‘Adiyy in al-Kaamil (3/223) and said: I do not know that anyone narrated it from Dawood apart from Zuhayr ibn Ishaaq and Wuhayb. Zuhayr has some strong hadiths, and the one who narrated the most from him among the Basris was Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr al-Maqdimi. I hope that there is nothing wrong with him. Ibn Ma‘een only objected to him for an interrupted hadith, as I have mentioned. As for his hadiths that have isnaads, most of them are sound. End quote. 
As for the fourth narrator from Wuhayb ibn Khaalid, he narrated a lengthy version which mentions ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and az-Zubayr swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them all).
This narrator was al-Mugheerah ibn Salamah Abu Hishaam al-Makhzoomi, who was trustworthy, as it says in Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (10/261). Imam al-Bayhaqi narrated it from him in as-Sunan al-Kubra (8/143) and said: 
Abu’l-Hasan ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Haafiz al-Isfaraa’eeni said:  Abu ‘Ali al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali al-Haafiz told us: Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ishaaq ibn Khuzaymah and Ibraaheem ibn Abi Taalib informed us: Bandaar ibn Bashaar told us: Abu Hishaam al-Makhzoomi told us: Wuhayb told us: and he mentioned a similar report. 
Abu ‘Ali al-Haafiz said: I heard Muhammad ibn Ishaaq ibn Khuzaymah say: 
Muslim ibn al-Hajjaaj came to me and asked me about this hadith, and I wrote it for him in a document, and read it to him, and he said: This hadith is worth a camel. I said: Worth a camel? It is worth a pearl the size of the full moon! End quote. 
The words “and he mentioned a similar report” refer to the report which mentions the oath of allegiance, as was clearly stated in the report of Ibn ‘Asaakir in Tareekh Dimashq (30/277), via Imam al-Bayhaqi himself. 
Imam adh-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said, after quoting the report which mentions the oath of allegiance:
Although its isnaad is good, it contains some objectionable matters, so think about it. End quote. 
Al-Muhadhdhab (6/3239) 
With regard to the difference of opinion concerning ‘Affaan ibn Muslim, there follow some details concerning this matter: 
The difference of opinion concerning ‘Affaan ibn Muslim was due to two reasons: 
-1-
the first reason was that it was narrated by senior imams who had learned the brief version of the report from ‘Affaan, in which there is no mention of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and az-Zubayr swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them all). The wording of this report is as follows: 
When the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) died, the spokesmen of the Ansaar stood up and some of them said: O Muhaajireen, when the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) sent a man from among you, he would pair him with a man from among us, so we think that two men should take charge of this matter, one man from among you and one man from among us. 
Zayd ibn Thaabit stood up and said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was one of the Muhaajireen, and we were the helpers of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). So the leader should only be from among the Muhaajireen, and we will be his helpers as we were the helpers of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)). 
Abu Bakr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: May Allah reward you with good, O Ansaar, and may He keep your spokesman steadfast. By Allah, if you had said something other than this, we would not have accepted it from you. 
Narrated from him by Ibn Abi Shaybah in al-Musannaf (7/430) 
And by Imam Ahmad in al-Musnad (35/489) – Mu’sasat ar-Risaalah edn. 
And by Ibn Sa ‘d in at-Tabaqaat (3/212) 
And by al-Balaadhuri in Ansaab al-Ashraaf (3/318) 
Ahmad ibn al-Qaasim ibn al-Musaawir al-Jawaahiri, as narrated by at-Tabaraani in al-Mu‘jam al-Kabeer (5/114) 
Ja‘far as-Saayigh, as narrated by Ibn ‘Adiyy in al-Kaamil (3/223). He said: ‘Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Marwaan narrated it to us: Abu’s-Saqr al-Warraaq, who is Yahya ibn Dawood al-Baghdaadi, narrated it to us, and Muhammad ibn Muneer ibn Sagheer told us: Ja‘far as-Saayigh told us: ‘Affaan told us. 
Adh-Dhahabi said concerning this report: 
This is a saheeh isnaad. End quote. 
Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’ (2/433) 
Al-Haythami said concerning this report: 
It was narrated by at-Tabaraani and Ahmad, and its men are the men of as-Saheeh. End quote. 
Majma‘ az-Zawaa’id (5/183) 
-2-
the second reason is that it was narrated by one of the companions of ‘Affaan ibn Muslim, who narrated the longer report which mentions ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and az-Zubayr swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq (may Allah be pleased with them all). The wording is as follows: 
When the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) died, the spokesmen of the Ansaar stood up and one of them said: O Muhaajireen, when the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) appointed a man from among you, he would pair him with a man from among us, so we think that two men should take charge of this matter, one of them from among you and the other from among us. 
And the spokesman of the Ansaar began to speak, one after another, along the same lines. 
Then Zayd ibn Thaabit (may Allah be pleased with him) stood up and said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was one of the Muhaajireen; the leader should only be from among the Muhaajireen, and we will be his helpers as we were the helpers of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). 
Abu Bakr (may Allah have mercy on him) stood up and said: May Allah reward you with good, O Ansaar, and may He keep your spokesman steadfast. Then he said: If you had done something other than this, we would not have accepted it from you. 
Then Zayd ibn Thaabit took Abu Bakr’s hand and said: This is your leader, so swear allegiance to him; so they began to swear allegiance to him. 
When Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) sat on the minbar, he looked at the faces of the people, and he did not see ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), so he asked about him, and some of the Ansaar got up and brought him. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) said: O son of the paternal uncle of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and his son-in-law, do you want to cause division among the Muslims? 
‘Ali said: Not at all, O successor of the Messenger of Allah. And he swore allegiance to him. 
Then he did not see az-Zubayr ibn al-‘Awwaam (may Allah be pleased with him), so he asked about him and they brought him, and he said: O son of the paternal aunt of the Messenger of Allah and his disciple, do you want to cause division among the Muslims? He said the same as ‘Ali had said: Not at all, O successor of the Messenger of Allah. And they both swore allegiance to him. 
Narrated by Ja‘far ibn Muhammad ibn Shaakir from ‘Affaan in this lengthy version. It was also narrated thus by al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak (3/80), and from him and from his shaykh Abu Muhammad al-Muqri’, by al-Bayhaqi in as-Sunan al-Kubra (8/143). Al-Haakim said: This hadith is saheeh according to the conditions of al-Bukhaari and Muslim, although they did not narrate it. End quote. Adh-Dhahabi did not say anything about it in at-Talkhees. 
Although Ja‘far ibn Muhammad ibn Shaakir was classed as thiqah (trustworthy) by al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadi, Ibn Manaadi and Maslamah ibn Qaasim – as it says in Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (2/102) – he differed from the senior imams who had memorised the hadith of ‘Affaan ibn Muslim better than he did. The correct version of the hadith from ‘Affaan ibn Muslim is the shorter version, in which there is no mention of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) at that time. 
Sa‘d ibn Iyaas al-Jareeri followed Dawood ibn Abi Hind in narrating from Abu Nadrah, and his version mentions ‘Ali and az-Zubayr swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them all), as it says in Tareekh Dimashq (30/278). But its isnaad includes ‘Ali ibn ‘Aasim ibn Suhayb al-Waasiti, who made a lot of mistakes in narration. ‘Ali ibn al-Madeeni said concerning him: ‘Ali ibn ‘Aasim made a lot of mistakes, but if he made a mistake and someone pointed it out, he would not repeat it. This was the verdict of all the critics concerning him.
End quote from Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (7/348) 
Thirdly: 
Conclusion: the oath of allegiance of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) which is proven is that which is mentioned in the Saheehs of al-Bukhaari and Muslim. As for the earlier oath of allegiance which is mentioned in the hadith of Abu Sa‘eed al-Khudri, there is some doubt as to whether it is proven. 
With regard to the claim of the Raafidi liars, that the oath of allegiance given by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) was sworn under compulsion, this is a false and fabricated claim that stems from obvious stubbornness and wilful blindness to the facts narrated with sound isnaads. If someone is like this, you cannot debate with him, because he is ignoring all rational, logical principles that you should both agree on as a reference point. And Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “and turn away from the ignorant” [al-A ‘raaf 7:199]. And Allah knows best. 
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
It is known from mutawaatir reports that no one refrained from swearing allegiance to him – namely Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq (may Allah be pleased with him) – except Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubaadah. As for ‘Ali and Banu Haashim, all of them swore allegiance to him, according to scholarly consensus, and none of them died without having sworn allegiance to him. However it was said that ‘Ali delayed his oath of allegiance for six months; it was also said that in fact he swore allegiance to him on the second day. Whatever the case, they swore allegiance to him without being forced to do so. End quote. 
Minhaaj as-Sunnah (8/232) 
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.
Firstly: 

The Yazidis are a deviant sect that began in 132 AH following the demise of
the Umayyad state. In the beginning, it was a political movement to restore
the glory of the Umayyads, but ignorance continued to prevail among them,
and their innovations and misguidance developed until they went beyond the
pale of Islam altogether. 

The roots of this sect go back to the time after the battle of Karbala’,
during the reign of Yazid ibn Mu‘aawiyah and the martyrdom of al-Husayn ibn
‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and many of Aal al-Bayt (may Allah be
pleased with them). 

The Shi‘ah began to curse Yazid and accuse him of heresy and drinking
alcohol. 

After the demise of the Umayyad state, the Yazidis began in the form of a
political movement. They loved Yazid and objected to the cursing of him in
particular, then they objected to cursing in general, to the extent that
they objected to the cursing of Iblees. They turned their attention to the
Book of Allah, and erased every mention in it of curses or devils or seeking
refuge, on the grounds that these words had not existed in the original
Qur’an, and that that was something that had been added to it by the
Muslims. Then they began to venerate Iblees who is cursed in the Qur’an. 

Their beliefs:

-Their belief that Iblees is the peacock of the angels lead them to venerate
statues of peacocks made of copper in the form of a rooster the size of a
clenched fist. They take these statues around the villages to collect
money. 

-In their declaration of faith they say: “I bear witness that One is Allah
and Sultan Yazid is the beloved of Allah.” 

-Fasting: they fast three days of every year in December, which coincides
with the birthday of Yazid ibn Mu‘aawiyah. 

-Alms are collected by means of the peacock and that is done by chanting and
given to the leaders of the sect. 

-Pilgrimage: on the tenth day of Dhu’l-Hijjah, they stand on a mountain in
al-Marjah an-Nooraaniyyah in Lalish in Iraq. 

-Prayer: they pray on the night of the fifteenth of Sha‘baan, and claim that
it makes up for the prayers of an entire year. 

-Resurrection and gathering after death: this will occur in the village of
Baatat on Mount Sinjar, where the balance will be set up in front of Shaykh
‘Adiyy ibn Musaafir, who will bring the people to account and he will take
his followers and admit them to Paradise. 

They frequent graves and shrines like those of Shaykh ‘Adiyy, Shaykh Shams
ad-Deen, Shaykh Hasan and ‘Abd al-Qaadir al-Jilaani. Each shrine has
servants who use oil and candles to light it. 

They regard it as prohibited to marry between classes, and it is permissible
for a Yazidi to marry up to six wives. 

They prohibit the colour blue because it is one of the most prominent
colours of the peacock. 

They regard it as prohibited to eat lettuce, cabbage, squash, beans, and
turkey, as well as the flesh of the peacock which is regarded by them as
holy, because it is a reminder of Iblees, who is the angel peacock,
according to their views. They also prohibit chicken, fish, venison and
pork. 

The Yazidi prays facing towards the sun when it rises and when it sets, then
he kisses the ground and rubs his face on it. There is also a supplication
that is recited before sleeping. 

They have their own festivals, such as the Gregorian New Year, and the
festivals of Marba‘aaniyyah, Qurbaan and Jamaa‘ah, the festival of Yazid,
the festival of Khadr Ilyaas, and the festival of Balandah. They have a
night that they call the “black night”, when they extinguish all lights and
regard it as permissible during that night to do prohibited actions and
drink alcohol. 
In
their book it says: “Obey and listen to my servants in what they tell you to
do and do not speak of that in front of strangers, such as the Jews and
Christians and people of Islam, because they do not understand what it is,
and do not give them any of your books lest they change them without you
realising.” 

They respect the Christians, to the extent that they kiss the hands of
priests and share communion with them, and they believe that the wine is
truly the blood of Christ. 

They took from the Christians the practice of baptism, whereby they take the
infant to a spring called ‘Ayn al-Bayda’ and immerse him in it. When the
child reaches the age of one week, they bring him to the shrine of Shaykh
‘Adiyy, where he is immersed in water and they shout his name out loud,
asking him to make the child a Yazidi and a believer (in the angel peacock),
i.e., Iblees. 

When Islam entered the Kurdistan region, most of the inhabitants followed
the religion of Zoroastrianism; some of the teachings of this religion were
passed down to the Yazidis. 

Their beliefs are mixed with Magian and idolatrous teachings, and they
raised Yazid to the level of divinity. In their view the hierarchy is: Allah
– Yazid – ‘Adiyy. 

See: al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Muyassarah fi’l-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib wa’l-Ahzaab
al-Mu‘aasirah (1/371-376). 

For more information on their beliefs and misguidance, see the following: 

Al-Yazeediyyoona fi Haadirihim wa Maadeehim
by ‘Abd ar-Razzaaq al-Hasani 

Al-Yazeediyyah: Ahwaaluhum wa Mu‘taqadaatuhum
by Dr Saami Sa‘eed al-Ahmad 

Al-Yazeediyyah wa Asl ‘Aqeedatihim
by ‘Abbaas al-Ghazzaawi 

Ma Hiya al-Yazeediyyah? Wa Man Hum al-Yazeediyyoon
by Mahmoud al-Jundi 

From the above it is clear that the Yazidis are a deviant and misguided sect
who are beyond the pale of Islam. If this is a person’s religion, there is
no doubt that he is a disbeliever whose religion is contrary to the religion
of Islam that was brought by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be
upon him). 

Based on that, it is not permissible for a Muslim to marry a Yazidi woman,
just as it is not permissible to marry a mushrik (polytheist) or Magian
woman, and the like. No exception is made regarding disbelievers who are
outside the pale of Islam, with regard to marriage, except in the case of
the Jews and Christians, because they are originally People of the Book. As
for the Yazidis and others, they have no Book in the first place; rather
they are an apostate sect who combine all kinds of disbelief in one
religion. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And
do not marry Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses, etc.) till they believe (worship
Allah Alone)” [al-Baqarah
2:221]. 

Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said in al-Mughni
(7/102): 

With regard to all the disbelievers, apart from the People of the Book,
there is no dispute among the scholars concerning the prohibition on
marrying their women or eating meat slaughtered by them. With regard to an
apostate woman, it is prohibited to marry her no matter what religion she
follows. End quote. 

See also the answers to questions no. 13808,
20884 and 132478 

And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.

Firstly: 

The
scholars have divided knowledge of the stars into two categories: 

1.Astronomy

this
refers to knowledge of the names of stars, when and where they rise and set,
and how they may be used for the purposes of measuring time and for
navigation, and other visible things which observation and experience have
proven what each star could be used for (working out directions, measuring
the passage of time and so on). 

There
is nothing wrong with learning and teaching this type of knowledge, and
there is no evidence to suggest that it is forbidden or makrooh to study it.
In fact, in the Holy Qur’an there is evidence to suggest that it is
permissible and this knowledge is a blessing that Allah, may He be glorified
and exalted, has bestowed upon people, as Allah, may He be glorified and
exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“It is He Who has set the stars
for you, so that you may guide your course with their help through the
darkness of the land and the sea. We have (indeed) explained in detail Our
Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, Revelations, etc.) for
people who know”

[al-An‘aam 6:97]

“It is He Who made the sun a
shining thing and the moon as a light and measured out its (their) stages,
that you might know the number of years and the reckoning. Allah did not
create this but in truth. He explains the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses,
lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) in detail for people who have knowledge”

[Yoonus 10:5]. 

2.Astrology

this
refers to interpreting the locations and movements of the stars and the 
(supposed) influence they have on worldly developments and events such as
death, birth, epidemics, disasters, attaining happiness and other matters
for which there is no rational, empirical basis for connecting these
developments to the movements of heavenly bodies. Rather this is mere
conjecture and speculation for which there is no proof or evidence. 

This
is what the shar‘i evidence definitively forbids; it is haraam to learn it,
teach it or study it. 

Shaykh
al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

The
craft of astrology which seeks to establish the influence and impact of
heavenly bodies, and to find out about future earthly events or developments
on the basis of celestial events, and to make a connection between celestial
movements and earthly influence, is a prohibited craft according to the
Qur’an and Sunnah, and the consensus of the ummah. In fact it is forbidden
by all the Messengers to their communities.

Allah,
may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“and the magician will never be
successful, no matter whatever amount (of skill) he may attain”

[Ta-Ha 20:69]

“Have
you not seen those who were given a portion of the Scripture? They believe
in Jibt [sorcery] and Taghoot [evil]”

[an-Nisa’ 4:51].

‘Umar
and others said that Jibt (sorcery) refers to magic or witchcraft. 

Abu
Dawood narrated in his Sunan with a hasan isnaad from Qubaysah ibn
Mukhaariq that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said:
“Augury (observing omens in birds etc.), superstition and geomancy come
under the heading of jibt (magic).” 

If
geomancy, which is akin to astrology, comes under the heading of jibt
(magic), then how about astrology itself? That is because in geomancy they
refer to shapes on earth, because astrology is based on shapes in the
heavens.

 Ahmad, Abu Dawood, Ibn Maajah and others narrated with a saheeh isnaad from
Ibn ‘Abbaas that he said: “Whoever learns astrology learns a branch of
magic; the more he learns (of the former) the more he learns (of the
latter).” The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
clearly stated that astrology comes under the same heading as magic. Allah,
may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“and the magician will never be
successful, no matter whatever amount (of skill) he may attain”

[Ta-Ha 20:69].

And
this is how it really is. From studying the situation of astrologers, we see
that they never prosper either in this world or in the hereafter. 

Ahmad,
and Muslim in his Saheeh, narrated from Safiyyah bint ‘Ubayd, from
one of the wives of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him),
from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he said:
“Whoever goes to a fortune teller and asks him about something, no prayer
will be accepted from him for forty days.” The astrologer is the same as the
fortune teller according to some of the scholars; according to others he
comes under the same category. If this is the case with regard to the one
who asks, then how about the one who is asked? 

He
also narrated in his Saheeh that Mu‘aawiyah ibn al-Hakam as-Sulami
said: I said: O Messenger of Allah, there are some men among us who go to
soothsayers. He said: “Do not go to them.” 

The
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade going to
soothsayers, and astrologers are the same as soothsayers according to
al-Khattaabi and other scholars, and this was also narrated from the Arabs.
According to others, they come under the same category as soothsayers and
are worse than them. 

More
than one of the scholars has narrated that there is consensus on the
prohibition of astrology, such as al-Baghawi, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad and others. 

In
as-Saheehayn it is narrated from Zayd ibn Khaalid al-Juhani that he
said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) led
us in praying Fajr at al-Hudaybiyah, after it had rained at night. When he
finished, he turned to the people and said: “Do you know what your Lord
said?” They said: Allah and His Messenger know best. He said: “He said:
‘This morning some of My slaves believe in Me and some disbelieve. As for
the one who said, we got rain by the bounty and mercy of Allah, he is a
believer in Me and a disbeliever in the stars. But as for the one who said,
We got rain by virtue of such and such a star, he is a disbeliever in Me and
a believer in the stars.’” 

Leading astrologers of the earlier and later generations have admitted that
in the case of the believers who worship Allah and turn to Him in
supplication, Allah removed from them – by virtue of the blessing of their
worship, supplication and trust in Allah – that which the astrologers said
on the basis of their astrological calculations would inevitably befall
them. They have also admitted that those who worship Allah, call upon Him
and put their trust in Him will be given reward in this world and in the
hereafter that no astrological power could ever bring them. 
Who has made the best of this world and the Hereafter in
following the Messengers, and has made the best nation those who enjoin what
is good and forbid what is evil.

End
quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 35/192-196 

Secondly: 

However, we do not deny that some of what the astrologer says about future
events may sometimes be correct and may sometimes happen as he foretold; but
that does not mean that the path he is following is valid. Rather what he
happens to get right is baseless and comes about by pure coincidence. What
he gets right is very little in comparison to the lies that accompany it. 

Do you
not see that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) has told
us that the jinn who eavesdrop (on the angels) may hear something of what
the angels talk about of future events, and the jinni may send down what he
has heard to the soothsayer on earth, or the jinni may be burned before he
can do that? Yet despite that, soothsaying is a major sin, because it deals
with matters of the unseen without any shar‘i basis. 

It was
narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), the wife of the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that she heard the
Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: 

“The
angels come down in the clouds and discuss matters that have been decreed in
heaven, and the devils may eavesdrop and hear it, then they convey it to the
soothsayers, and they tell along with it one hundred lies that they have
fabricated by themselves.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 3210 

Hence
al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Allah
may create in this type – meaning the astrologers – some kind of power, but
their lies are what predominates. End quote. 

Quoted
from Sharh an-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim, 14/223 

Shaykh
Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

It may
so happen that the divine decree is in accordance with a person’s need, so
the poor man thinks that it is because of this astrologer, or because of
this soothsayer, that this thing happened. Or it may be that a person
prescribes a regular remedy other than what the astrologer claims, and that
the person who prescribes it knows that it is good for this sickness, but
the sick person thinks that healing comes about only because of the
astrologers looking at the stars, and so on. The point is that if healing
occurs sometimes after going to soothsayers or astrologers or geomancers and
their ilk, that does not prove that their way is sound. The mushrikeen
themselves – who worship idols – may come to an idol and ask of it, then
what they wanted happens by Allah’s leave, as a coincidence and for reasons
known to Allah in His wisdom, or it may come about by means of the devils,
and thus becomes a trial and test. But it does not come from the idol,
because the idol did not do anything, and the jinni who is with him did not
do anything. Rather the divine decree may dictate that this sickness should
go away or this calamity should be alleviated after this poor man went to
the idol and asked of it or offered a sacrifice to it. Thus that comes about
as a test and trial in itself, without that being the result of any action
on the part of the magician, the idol, the jinn and so on. This made the
mushrikeen even more attached to their idols, and thus they worshipped them
instead of Allah. 

The
wise person should never be deceived by what happens at the hands of these
astrologers, soothsayers, fortune tellers or magicians; rather he must keep
away from them and not believe in them.

End
quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 8/89-90 

Thirdly: 

Once
the above is clearly understood, there will be no confusion from a
scientific or shar‘i point of view about the story of the astrologers at the
time of Nimrood and Ibraaheem (peace be upon him), if the story is even
sound in the first place. It is not unlikely that the words of the
astrologers may have turned out to be correct, although lies are more
prevalent in their case and the type of knowledge they have is corrupt. 

Yet we
should point out that the story is not proven with any saheeh isnaad; rather
it was narrated by some of the historians as just a story with no real
proof. 

See:
al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah by Ibn Katheer, 1/200 

And
Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.
When the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) migrated from Makkah to Madinah, there were
three Jewish tribes in Madinah: Banu Qaynuqaa‘, Banu an-Nadeer and Banu
Qurayzah. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) invited
them to Islam, but most of them insisted on disbelieving. He drew up a
covenant with them (i.e., a binding contract) then they waged war against
him. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

All three (Jewish tribes) waged
war against him. He let off Banu Qaynuqaa‘, expelled Banu an-Nadeer, and
killed Banu Qurazah and took their women and children captive. Soorat al-Hashr
was revealed concerning Banu an-Nadeer, and Soorat al-Ahzaab was revealed
concerning Banu Qurayzah.

Zaad al-Ma‘aad
(3/59) 

Secondly: 

To sum up what the scholars of
seerah and maghaazi (Prophet’s biography and military campaigns) said about
Banu Qurayzah: 

When the Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) finished digging the trench,
Quraysh came with ten thousand of their ahaabeesh (a group of people
who did not belong to any one tribe) and those who followed them of Banu
Kinaanah and the people of Tihaamah, and Ghatafaan came with those who
followed them of the people of Najd. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) and the Muslims came out until they put their
backs towards Sal‘ – a mountain in Madinah – with three thousand Muslims. He
set up his camp there, and the trench was between him and the enemy. He
issued orders that the children and women be taken up into the forts, and he
appointed Ibn Umm Maktoom in charge of Madinah. 

Huyayy ibn Akhtab al-Nadari set
out and went to Ka‘b ibn Asad al-Qurazi, who was the one who had made a
treaty and covenant (with the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him)) on behalf of Banu Qurayzah. When Ka‘b heard about that, he shut the
door of his fort in Huyayy’s face. He asked permission to enter, but he
refused to open the door to him, so he called out to him: Woe to you, O Ka‘b!
Open the door! Ka‘b said: Woe to you, O Huyayy! You are a man of ill omen
and I have made a treaty with Muhammad; I will not break the treaty between
me and him, for I have not seen anything from him but faithfulness and
truthfulness. Huyayy said: Woe to you! Open the door so that I may speak to
you. And he kept on him until he opened the door, then he kept pleading with
him until he agreed to break his treaty with the Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), on condition that Huyayy give
him a solemn pledge by Allah that if Quraysh and Ghatafaan went back without
having killed Muhammad, he would enter his fort with him and share his fate.
Thus Ka‘b ibn Asad broke his treaty and freed himself from the covenant that
had been between him and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him). 

When the news reached the
Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and the
Muslims, he sent Sa‘d ibn Mu‘aadh, who was the chief of al-Aws at that time,
and Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubaadah, who was the chief of al-Khazraj, along with ‘Abdullah
ibn Rawaahah and Khawwaat ibn Jubayr, who went to them, to call them to make
peace and renew the alliance. They said: Now after you have weakened us and
has expelled them, meaning Banu an-Nadeer?! And they spoke disparagingly of
the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him. Sa‘d ibn
‘Ubaadah began to trade insults with them, then Sa‘d ibn Mu‘aadh called out
to them: You know what there is between us and you, O Banu Qurayzah, and I
fear for you a fate like that of Banu an-Nadeer or even worse. But they
reviled him and spoke disparagingly of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him). They said: Who is the Messenger of Allah? There
is no covenant or agreement between us and Muhammad. So Sa‘d ibn Mu‘aadh
traded insults with them, and he was a hot tempered man. 

They went back to the Messenger
of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and told him what had
happened, and the situation became serious and fear was everywhere. Their
enemy came at them from above and below until the believers thought all
sorts of things and hypocrisy rose to the surface. 

The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stood on guard, and the
mushrikeen continued to besiege him for twenty-odd days, nearly a month, but
there was no fighting between them apart from some shooting with arrows. 

The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and his Companions remained as
Allah described it, in a state of hardship and fear, because their enemy
gathered together against them and came at them from above and below. 

Then Nu‘aym ibn Mas‘ood came to
the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said:
O Messenger of Allah, I have become Muslim and my people do not know that I
have become Muslim; instruct me as you wish. The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “You are just one man among
us; try to stir up division among them so as to weaken their resolve if you
can, for war is deceit.” Nu‘aym ibn Mas‘ood went out and came to Banu
Qurayzah, as he had been a friend of theirs during the Jaahiliyyah. He said
to them: Quraysh and Ghatafaan have come to fight Muhammad and his
Companions, and you have supported them against him, and their land, their
women and their wealth are elsewhere, so they are not like you. If they see
an opportunity, they will take it, otherwise they will go back to their own
country and leave you alone with the man in your country, and you will not
be able to stand up to him if you are left alone. So do not fight with these
people until you take hostages from among their leaders, who will be in your
hands as a guarantee so that you will fight Muhammad with them until you
defeat him. And they said: You have given good advice. 

Then he went to Quraysh and said
to Abu Sufyaan ibn Harb and the men of Quraysh who were with him: You should
know that the Jews regret what has happened between them and Muhammad, and
they have sent word telling him: We regret what we did; will it please you
if we capture some of the leaders of the two tribes, Quraysh and Ghatafaan,
and give them to you so that you may strike their necks, then we will be
with you against whoever among them is left until we eradicate them? And he
has sent word to them agreeing to that. So if the Jews send anyone to you,
asking you for hostages from among your men, do not give them even one man. 

Then he went out and came to
Ghatafaan and said something similar to them as he had said to Quraysh, and
issued a similar warning to them. 

Then Allah created dissent among
them. And Allah sent a wind on an intensely cold winter’s night, which
overturned their cooking pots and tents. 

And Allah, may He be exalted,
revealed the words (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Remember
Allah’s Favour to you, when there came against you hosts, and We sent
against them a wind and forces that you saw not [i.e. troops of angels
during the battle of AlAhzab (the Confederates)]. And Allah is Ever All-Seer
of what you do… .

And Allah drove back those who
disbelieved in their rage, they gained no advantage (booty, etc.). Allah
sufficed for the believers in the fighting (by sending against the
disbelievers a severe wind and troops of angels). And Allah is Ever
All-Strong, All-Mighty.

And those of the people of the
Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allah brought them down from
their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them)
you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

And He caused you to inherit
their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had
not trodden (before). And Allah is Able to do all things.”

[al-Ahzaab 33:9-27]. 

That is, Allah diverted their
enemy from them by means of the wind that He sent against them and the
troops of angels and others whom Allah sent to them. “Allah sufficed for
the believers in the fighting” means: they did not need to engage in
fighting with them; rather the Most Strong, the Almighty, diverted them by
His might and power. 

Al-Bukhaari (4114) and Muslim
(2724) narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There is no god but Allah alone, He
granted victory to His troops, supported His slave and defeated the
confederates alone, and there is nothing after Him.” 

When the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) returned from the battle of the Trench, and laid
down his weapon and did ghusl – as narrated by al-Bukhaari (4117) – Jibreel
(peace be upon him) came to him and said: Have you laid down your arms? For
by Allah, we (angels) have not laid down ours; go out to them. He said:
“Where to?” He said: Over there – and he pointed in the direction of Banu
Qurayzah. So the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) went out
to them, and besieged them with detachments of Muslims for umpteen days.
Allah cast fear into their hearts and the siege became intense, until they
agreed to accept the ruling of Sa‘d ibn Mu‘aadh, as they had been his
allies. His verdict concerning them was in accordance with the ruling of
Allah: their fighters were to be killed and their women and children taken
captive. 

The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) detained them in Madinah, then he
went out to the marketplace of Madinah and dug trenches in it, then he sent
for them and struck their necks in those trenches as they were brought out
to him in batches. They said to Ka‘b ibn Asad as they were being taken to
the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in
batches: O Ka‘b, what do you think will be done to us? He said: Will you
never understand? Don’t you see that the caller does not stop and that
whoever among you is taken away does not return? By Allah it is death. And
this went on until they were finished with. 

The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) issued instructions to execute
every one of them who had grown pubic hair, and whoever had not grown pubic
hair was left alone. Abu Dawood (4404) narrated with a saheeh isnaad from
‘Atiyyah al-Qurazi (may Allah be pleased with him) he said: I was among the
captives of Banu Qurayzah, and they examined (us). Those whose pubes had
started to grow were executed and those whose pubes had not started to grow
were not executed. I was among those whose pubes had not started to grow. 

According to another report:
They uncovered my private part and saw that my pubes had not yet started to
grow, so they put me with the captive women and children. 

See: al-Bidaayah
wa’n-Nihaayah (6/34-94); Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’ (1/470-480);
Tareekh al-Islam (2/307-318); ar-Rawd al-Unuf (6/262-294) 

Thus the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) put an end to the Jews of Banu Qurayzah who
broke the treaty and formed an alliance with the mushrikeen to eradicate
Islam and its people. So their plot backfired and they themselves were
eradicated to the last man. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. 

For more information, please see
the answers to questions no. 84308 and
178689

And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.Before Islam, the Arabs used different names for the lunar months that were known at that time, until those names changed and became standardised throughout Arabia, and took their final forms at the end of the fifth century CE, during the era of Kilaab, who was the great-great-great-great-great-grandfather of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).
The naming of these lunar months with the names that are known today is based on certain reasons and meanings from which the names of the months were derived, as was mentioned by the scholars. Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Shaykh ‘Alam ad-Deen as-Sakhaawi stated in a book that he compiled, entitled al-Mashhoor fi Asma’ al-Ayyaam wa’sh-Shuhoor, that Muharram is so called because it is a sacred (muharram) month. I think that it was so called to affirm its sanctity, because the Arabs used to change it, making it not sacred one year and making it sacred another year. He said: The plural form of Muharram is Muharramaat or Mahaarim or Mahaareem.
Safar is so called because their houses would be devoid of them when they went out to fight or to travel, and it would be said “safira al-makaan (the place has become empty)” when people left. The plural form of Safar is Asfaar.
Rabee‘ al-Awwal is so called because they did not travel during that month (the word irtibaa‘, derived from the same root, means “not travelling”). The plural form is Arbi‘aa’, like the word naseeb (pl. ansibaa’), or Arbu‘ah like the word ragheef (pl. arghufah). The same may be said concerning Rabee‘ al-Aakhir as was said concerning Rabee‘ al-Awwal.
Jumaada is so called because water froze during that month (jumood means freezing).
And he said: In their calculations, the months did not rotate through the seasons, although there is some doubt concerning that, because their months were connected to lunar cycle, so they would inevitably rotate through the seasons. Perhaps they called Jumaada by this name the first time, when water froze because of the cold. The plural form of Jumaada is Jumaadiyyaat, like the word hubaara (pl. hubaariyyaat). The word may be either masculine or feminine, so one may say Jumaada al-Oola or al-Awwal, and Jumaada al-Aakhir or al-Aakhirah.
The name of Rajab comes from the word tarjeeb, which means veneration. The plural form is Arjaab or Rijaab or Rajabaat.
The name of Sha‘baan comes from the word tasha‘‘ub (scattering), as the tribes would scatter and disperse to raid others. The plural form is Sha‘aabeen or Sha‘baanaat.
The name of Ramadan comes from the word ramda’, which refers to intense heat. Another word from the same root is used to refer to the thirst of camels when they become thirsty. The plural form is Ramadaanaat or Ramaadeen or Armidah.
The name of Shawwaal comes from a word referring to camels raising their tails for the purpose of copulation. The plural form is Shawaawil or Shawaaweel or Shawwaalaat.
The month of Dhu’l-Qa‘dah – or, in my view, Dhu’l-Qi‘dah – is derived from the word qu‘ood (rest), as during this month they would rest from fighting and travelling. The plural form is Dhawaat al-Qa‘dah.
Dhu’l-Hijjah – or, in my view, Dhu’l-Hajjah – is so called because they performed Hajj during this month. The plural form is Dhawaat al-Hijjah.
End quote from Tafseer Ibn Katheer (4/128-129)
See also: al-Mufassal fi Tareekh al-‘Arab qabl al-Islam by the historian Jawaad ‘Ali (16/91ff)
There is nothing wrong with mentioning the names of the months, explaining their meanings and the sources from which they were derived, and the reasons why they are so called, as explained by the historians and linguists, especially if there is an educational purpose behind that, even though the origin may have been forgotten and no longer has anything to do with the names of the months, because they rotate through the seasons, as is well known, and therefore the meaning has nothing to do with the well-known shar‘i rulings on the months.
For more information, please see the answer to question no. 170242
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.Abrahah made preparations to enter Makkah; he mobilised his army and prepared his elephant. Then when he was in Wadi Muhassir, between Muzdalifah and Mina, the elephant knelt down and would not get up to advance towards the Ka‘bah.
It was said that when they made the elephant face towards Makkah, Nufayl ibn Habib al-Khath‘ami came up to the elephant and stood beside it, then he took hold of its ear and said: Sit down, Mahmoud, for you are in the sacred land of Allah. Then he let go of its ear, and the elephant knelt down. Nufayl left, running up to the top of the mountain. They beat the elephant to make it stand up, but it refused. So they struck its head to make it stand up, and it refused. They turned it around as if to go back to Yemen, and it got up and ran in that direction. They turned it to face towards Syria, and it did the same thing; they turned it to face towards the east, and it did the same thing; but when they turned it to face towards Makkah, it knelt down.
Whilst they were like that, Allah, may He be exalted, sent against them birds in flocks from the sea. Each bird was carrying three stones, one in its beak and one in each of its feet; the size of the stones was like the size of chickpeas or lentils. None of the army were struck but his limbs were cut off and he died, but not all of them were struck; those who were spared fled, rushing towards the road by which they had come.
See: al-Lu’lu’ al-Maknun by al-‘Azimi (1/61).
As-Salihi said: When the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came to the bottom of Wadi Muhassir, he made his she-camel speed up and run quickly. This was his habit in places where the punishment of Allah had come down upon His enemies, and that was the place where there happened to the people of the elephant that which Allah has told us about.
Hence that wadi was called Wadi Muhassir, because the elephant halted (hasara) there and did not proceed any further.
Muhassir is an area between Mina and Muzdalifah; it does not belong to either of them.”(Subul al-Huda wa’r-Rashad  8/474).
Al-Fayyumi said: Wadi Muhassir is between Mina and Muzdalifah.
It is named thus because the elephant of Abrahah grew tired there and could not proceed any further, which caused sorrow (hasarat) to its owners.”(Al-Misbah al-Munir  1/135).
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.
Firstly: 

The Muslims are still faced with troubles and challenges
because of the narration of fabricated reports in historical books. If the
wise person reflects upon the words of Allah, may He be exalted
(interpretation of the meaning): “That
was a nation who has passed away. They shall receive the reward of what they
earned and you of what you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used
to do” [al-Baqarah 2:134],
then holds his tongue and refrains from discussing the hadiths that speak of
tribulation, disavows wrongdoing before his Lord, and believes that he
should love the family of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) and hate those who show enmity towards them, that will be better for
him before his Lord and will be safer in terms of protecting his religious
commitment. 

Many of the reports which have been narrated about
tribulations that occurred among the Muslims were narrated via single
narrators (as opposed to a large number of narrators at each stage of the
chain of transmission) who were either dubious, liars or unknown. It is not
permissible for anyone to rely upon any of the reports narrated by such
people, because they do not meet the standards of good character (that are
required of narrators). Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of
the meaning): “O
you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news,
verify it, lest you harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become
regretful to what you have done”
[al-Hujuraat 49:6].

Among these false reports is that which was narrated by at-Tabari
in his Tareekh (5/461) and Ibn ‘Asaakir in Tareekh Dimashq
(69/176), via Abu Makhnaf, from al-Haarith ibn Ka‘b, from Faatimah bint
‘Ali, who said: 

When we were brought before Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah, he felt
sorry for us, issued instructions that something (food) be brought to us,
and spoke gently to us. Then a ruddy-faced man from Syria stood up and said
to Yazeed: O Ameer al-Mu’mineen, give me this one – meaning me, for I was a
pretty young girl. I got scared, because I thought that they would not
refrain from such a thing, and I held onto the garment of my sister Zaynab.
My sister Zaynab was older and wiser than me, and she knew that that would
not happen, so she said (to that man):

You are lying by Allah, you vile man! That is not for you or
him. Yazeed got angry and said (to her): You are lying, by Allah! I may do
that, and if I want to do it, I will do it. She said: No, by Allah. Allah
has forbidden that for you, unless you leave our religion and follow some
religion other than ours. Yazeed got angry and lost his temper, and he said:
Are you speaking to me like that? Rather it is your father and your brother
who have left the religion! 

Zaynab said: Rather you, your father and your grandfather
were guided by virtue of the religion of Allah, the religion of my father,
the religion of my brother, the religion of my grandfather. He said: You are
lying, O enemy of Allah! She said: You are a tyrant, who slanders people
wrongfully and suppress them. By Allah, it was as if he felt ashamed, so he
fell silent. Then the Syrian said again: O Ameer al-Mu’mineen, give me this
girl. He said: Get out; may Allah strike you dead! 

This was also narrated by Ibn Katheer in al-Bidaayah
wa’n-Nihaayah (11/562) via Abu Makhnaf. 

Abu Makhnaf’s full name is Loot ibn Yahya. Adh-Dhahabi said:
He is a worthless narrator of stories; he is not to be trusted; he was
ignored by Abu Haatim and others. Ad-Daaraqutni said: He is weak. Ibn Ma‘een
said: He is not trustworthy. And he said, on one occasion: He is nothing.
Ibn ‘Adiyy said: He is a fanatical Shi‘i, a narrator of their reports. 

Mizaan al-I‘tidaal. 

So this report is a lie and is not sound. 

The same applies to what they say about Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah
poking the teeth of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) with a stick
[after he had been killed and beheaded]. 

Zaynab said to him: 

Do you think, O Yazeed, after you have gained control over us
and we have ended up being driven as slave women are driven, that we are
insignificant to Allah and that you are honoured by Him, and that this was
because you are of high status before Him, so you began to behave in an
insolent manner and began to look at yourself with jubilant self-admiration?
Is it fair, O son of the freed ones [people of Quraysh who were let off by
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) when they surrendered
following the conquest of Makkah, despite their years of enmity towards
him], to keep your womenfolk and slave women out of sight and to drive the
daughters of the Messenger of Allah like prisoners of war, after you have
torn their veils and forced them to show their faces, and their enemies
drive them from one land to another? 

This is something for which there is no basis in the books of
the scholars; rather it is something that was narrated only by the Raafidis
who are known for lying. 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said:

What is proven in Saheeh al-Bukhaari is that the head
of al-Husayn was brought and placed in front of ‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyaad, who
started poking at the teeth with a stick in the presence of Anas ibn Maalik. 

In al-Musnad it says that this happened in the
presence of Abu Barzah al-Aslami. 

But some people narrated with an interrupted isnaad that this
poking of the teeth happened in the presence of Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah. This
is false. End quote. 

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa
(27/469) 

He also said: 

Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah was in Syria, and was not in Iraq at
the time of the killing of al-Husayn. Whoever narrated that he poked his
teeth with a stick in the presence of Anas and Abu Barzah, in front of
Yazeed, is definitely lying, and his lie is well known on the basis of
mutawaatir reports. End quote. 

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa
(27/4 70) 

Secondly: 

The well-known view is that Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah did not
issue orders for the killing of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him)
and did not approve of it. He cursed Ibn Ziyaad for killing him, and he
honoured the family of al-Husayn who had been with him during that march of
his, and during their march back to Madinah. He did not detain them and keep
them with him. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said: 

Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah was born during the caliphate of
‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan (may Allah be pleased with him) and was not one of
those who were well-known for religious commitment and righteousness. He was
one of the Muslim youth, and he became caliph after his father’s death
despite the objections of some of the Muslims and with the approval of
others. He was courageous and generous, and he did not openly commit
shameful deeds as his opponents said concerning him. During his reign
several significant events occurred, one of which was the killing of al-Husayn
(may Allah be pleased with him). 

He did not issue orders that al-Husayn be killed, and he did
not express joy at his killing, and he did not poke the teeth of al-Husayn
(may Allah be pleased with him) with a stick or carry the head of al-Husayn
(may Allah be pleased with him) to Syria. But he did issue orders that al-Husayn
(may Allah be pleased with him) be resisted and his efforts to become caliph
were to be hindered, even if that meant fighting him. 

His deputies went too far in following his commands, and ash-Shamar
ibn Dhi’l-Jawshan incited ‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyaad to kill him, so ‘Ubaydullah
ibn Ziyaad attacked him. Al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) asked
them to let him come to Yazeed, or go and guard the Muslim border, or to go
back to Makkah. 

But they did not allow him (may Allah be pleased with him) to
do any of these things, and the only choice they gave him was to surrender
to them, and Ziyaad ordered ‘Umar ibn Sa‘d to fight him, and they killed him
unlawfully, him and a number of his family members (may Allah be pleased
with them). 

The killing of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) was
a great calamity, for the killing of al-Husayn and of ‘Uthmaan before him
were two of the greatest causes of tribulation in this ummah. They were
killed by the worst of people before Allah. 

When his family (may Allah be pleased with them) came to
Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah, he honoured them and let them go to Madinah. It was
narrated that he cursed Ibn Ziyaad for killing him and said: I would have
been content with the obedience of the people of Iraq, without the killing
of al-Husayn. Yet despite that, he did not take any action to show
disapproval of his killing or to avenge him, when he should have done that.
So the Muslims criticised him for not doing what he should have done, in
addition to other things. 

As for his opponents, they added other lies and fabrications
about him. End quote. 

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa
(3/410) 

It was narrated that after that he regretted the killing of
al-Husayn and he used to say: What could have happened if I had put up with
some annoyance and let him come to my house, and let him have what he
wanted, even if that led to weakening of my power and authority, for the
sake of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
and in showing due respect to him and to the members of his household? 

Then he would say: May Allah curse Ibn Marjaanah [i.e.,
‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyaad], for he attacked him and forced him to fight, when
he had asked him to let him go and let him come to me, or to go and guard
one of the borders of the Muslims until Allah, may He be exalted, took his
soul in death. But he did not do that, and he refused to let him do (any of
those things), and he killed him, and by killing him he made me hateful to
the Muslims and instilled enmity in their hearts against me, so that both
righteous and evildoers hate me, because of what people think of the
seriousness of my having killed Husayn. I wish I had never had anything to
do with Ibn Marjaanah, may Allah curse him and be angry with him. 

Al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah
(11/651); Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’ (4/370)

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Yazeed ibn Mu‘aawiyah: the worst of his deeds for which he
may be criticised is drinking alcohol and committing some shameful deeds. As
for the killing of al-Husayn, he – as his grandfather Abu Sufyaan had said
on the day of Uhud [regarding the mutilation of Hamzah (may Allah be pleased
with him) and others who had been killed during the battle] – did not issue
orders to that effect, nor did it upset him. 

We have seen above that he said: If it were me, I would not
have done to him what Ibn Marjaanah – meaning ‘Ubaydullah ibn Ziyaad – did.
And he said to the envoys who brought al-Husayn’s head to him: Less than
this would have been sufficient obedience. He did not give them any reward,
and he honoured the family members of al-Husayn and restored to them
everything that had been
taken from them, and many times more, and he sent them back to Madinah in a
very dignified and honourable manner. His family in his house mourned for
al-Husayn with al-Husayn’s family – who were lodged with them – for three
days. End quote. 

Al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah
(11/650) 

This is not a defence of Yazeed or siding with him. The
moderate view concerning him is that he comes under the same ruling as other
bad and unjust rulers, so he is not to be regarded as an ally or as an
enemy, and he is not to be loved or reviled. 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said:

Hence the view of those who follow the beliefs of Ahl as-Sunnah
and the leading scholars of the ummah is that he is not to be reviled or
loved. Saalih ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: I said to my father: Some people
say that they love Yazeed. He said: O my son, would anyone who believes in
Allah and the Last Day love Yazeed? 

I said: O my father, why do we not curse him? He said: O my
son, when did you ever see your father curse anyone? End quote. 

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa
(3/4 12) 

He also said: 

Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi said, when he was asked about Yazeed
– according to what I heard: He is not to be reviled or to be loved. I also
heard that our grandfather Abu ‘Abdullah ibn Taymiyah was asked about Yazeed
and he said: Do not underestimate his misdeed and do not exaggerate about
it. 

This is the most equitable and best of the opinions
concerning him and others like him. End quote. 

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa
(4/483) 

For more information about the correct attitude concerning
Yazeed, please see fatwa no. 23116 

And Allah knows best.