Library Chat #17- Some Historical Incidents in the Latter Part of the First Hijrī Century

Miss min Hill watchman.

He

said I'm Ali como rahmatullahi wa barakatuh, who All praise is due to Allah subhanho wa Taala, the one and the unique, it is he alone that we worship, and it is His blessings that we seek. He is the Lord of the oppressed, and the one who answers the call of the week. And that has been a long while since I've given a library chat. So I thought inshallah today, let me just do something that I was just recently looking up for another lecture that was giving elsewhere. And just, in general, to added benefit a group of people that are interested in this topic. Now, before I begin, I always like to make a disclaimer, the library test that I do, some of them are generic and for an open

audience, and some of them are really meant for those that have some background. And unfortunately, I do not have any way to sift through those who have the background or those who don't, I try my best to give library chats that will be beneficial, sometimes to specific niches, and sometimes to general audiences. When I do to specific niches, I put this disclaimer out here, not every single lecture is beneficial to every single person. And so this is a lecture that I would hope that anybody who's listening to it has a background information in the basics of Islamic theology and the basics of Islamic history has some knowledge about the various books that are out there in Islamic

history and inshallah then based upon that, this lecture will be of benefit if you do not have any such knowledge. This lecture is not really meant to boost your Eman or to increase your spirituality Alhamdulillah. I have lots of lectures online, that you can listen for that type of stuff. So I do need to give this disclaimer. And to be honest, I wish somehow that I had a platform other than YouTube that I could sift through and make sure that the people who were attending, they're going to benefit because sometimes some lectures are not beneficial to every person. So I want to just give a very clear disclaimer that these are dry facts of early Islamic history. Not all of them are Eamonn

building. Frankly, some sometimes some of these facts a little bit depressing or put you in a down mood because they deal with historical incidents. And so I'm just trying to say if you're not of the people that are having a background in early Islamic history, then this lecture is not the ideal to start off. This is a lecture that you do when you have studied a little bit and then inshallah some of these points that I'm going to raise, you're going to be useful in your own research. Also, this lecture is intermediate, it's not really advanced. But the goal is to help you as you journey in your own search in sha Allah, Allah, and in your own studies in early Islamic history. Now, with

that disclaimer, so please, once again, this is not a spiritual boost is not an introductory lecture. If you don't have the background, then please listen to something else that is going to be of benefit to you. So with that disclaimer, obviously, as you're aware, I personally I love the study of Islamic history.

And I feel that it is one of the most neglected topics amongst our roadmap and clergy. And it is something that if you don't really understand Islamic history, it's very easy to fall prey to misunderstandings or to notions that might even be harmful or dangerous. The study of history is so important because history, it shapes our politics, even our theological controversies. It has impacted our literature or adapt our poetry, our perception of the past. And really, if you want to be a successful leader, or a mover and a shaker or thinker, an academic, you must study the past, no matter what your discipline is, even if you're into business, or whatever it is that you need to

study, for example, even if doing medicine, you have to study past cases, don't you? Right? If you're doing business, you have to study, you know, past successful and unsuccessful enterprises and corporations and tactics so that you benefit. So how about if you want to be, you know, successful in our understanding of Islam and how to benefit the oma so that it is so important that we study our history, so that we learn from the mistakes and also we form a realistic understanding of the past. So then a shallow die, we're better equipped to make an impact on the future. Now, a number of questions arise. And of course, our topic today is the lecture titles, it says, it's going to be

some miscellaneous random topics, they're not causally linked together. But it's something that I was researching for the last few weeks and months. To be honest, these are areas typically my library tries to deal with things that I'm very interested in. And I'm especially interested in early Islamic history and especially the first century and the incidents that took place in that century, because they shaped a lot of our history and our theological controversies. they emerge from them already given a number of talks online. And by the way, if you're if you haven't heard those other talks, you should not be listening to this one. Those other talks were like the

I gave a whole talk on Qatar Bella. And that lecture was like basic level. So the cutterbar, the talk I gave was like that's you introduce the audience. It wasn't analytical, the way that you know it deserves for a deeper talk is basically an introduction that we need to understand. I've also given a talk on the revolt of Qatar, for example, that's a little bit more analytical. So these are topics that you should have listened to before you listen to this particular talk. And before I jump into the actual specific controversies that I particularly I'm interested in, for today's lecture, three basic questions that I want everybody to think about when they come to any aspect of history.

When you study history, you have to think of a number of things. First and foremost, how do you know what you know? How do you know what actually happened? And this is the branch of historical epistemology, right? How do you know the facts? How do you know exactly what happened in the year 50 100? All right, how are you going to or if you're studying the Civil War of America, or if you're studying the Spanish Inquisition, whatever you might be, you need to know, the sources and the pros and cons of every source and which source is weightier than other sources? And how you're going to sift through the biases of the authors of these sources. So you have a historical epistemology,

right? That is a study of the sources of that particular era, that particular incident and weighing which of these sources is more authoritative? Why is it more authoritative? What is to be done in the case of a clash? So a lot of times all of those sources will agree. For example, you know, her Sandra Viola one was master could have cut a betta Okay, we know what happened in the year 61 higit, on the 10th of Muharram. That is an undeniable fact. Okay. Now, how about if they don't agree? How about if the sources differ amongst themselves? So for example, one of the things we're going to discuss today was the head of her Sandra viola, who is transported to to Damascus and displayed to

xid. And did yazeed poke the head of her seine or the Ola one, that is something that is disputed? And some sources mentioned it? Some sources Don't mention it, how are we going to overcome this? Some later authorities denied this? So this the first major question that every researcher needs to ask himself or herself? How do I know what I know? Right? And that is a separate science altogether. And that and it varies from era to sources to, you know, whichever topic you're doing, and that is also a never ending a question. So that's the first point for after you've answered the first question. And you go through your sources, you as a researcher are going to have a skeletal line of

events, this happened, this happened, this happened, you now have a set of what you consider to be facts now do understand and do realize that your set of facts are going to be different from other researchers who have a different epistemology as they reach the same sources, or as they read the same sources, right? So you're going to have a narrative of what took place, and another researcher who has read the same books as you, but his epistemology is slightly different. He has waited the author's different than you. And so he might have a slightly different version of events, right. So before you even move to level two or three, you first have to see okay, what is my understanding of

history? What exactly happened? And how do I know that happened? So that is the first question historical epistemology. The second after you've done that, what you do after that, as a researcher, as an academic, as a thinker, what you do after that, is you do a historical analysis, or we can say, how do we interpret what happened? So the first question, how do we know what happened? These are a set of facts. The second question, how do we interpret what happened, okay? And this is an analysis of history, the causes, the effects, we connect the dots, we wonder about motives weren't wonder about influences internal or external. And these analyses are not facts, they are your or any

researchers interpretation of the facts. Okay. And here is again, we have to be very honest here is that our interpretation of the facts, a lot of times it stems from, or it is affected by our worldview, our paradigm. So again, let me be very simplistic, you will all understand, if a Sunni approaches the massacre of her sanral, the Allahu Eid versus a Shia, approaching the Master COVID has handled the law one, automatically, our theological inclinations are going to shape how we interpret and how we connect the dots and what we're going to read into, there's nothing wrong with that. It's human nature. And again, by now you should all know there is no such thing as a totally

unbiased person, you have biases, I have biases, and that's human nature. My bias is that I respect the Sahaba and it is a legitimate biases, a theological bias it is now others would say that, you know, that's not something you should have. That's their opinion, and my opinion rhodiola who I know model do I know it is something I'm bringing to the table, right? And it is a theological point that I cannot compromise. Now others are not approaching these same incidents with that type of faith or that type of quote, unquote bias and they have

have their own biases. So point is that the second question of how do we interpret the facts, right? This is going to depend very much on our own understandings, our own paradigm, our own worldview. And also, even if worldviews are exactly the same, in the end of the day, it is a bit of an extrapolation, like how do we know the motivations? How do we know maybe a cause was there and we're not aware of it, or we're making a cause that wasn't a cause over Krieg, creating an effect, that is not quite an effect. So there's going to be an element of one an element of you know, presumptions when it comes to interpreting historical events. Okay. Now, the third thing that we should all be

aware of, is that once you've done your interpretation, or you have fallen on authority in his interpretation, which is basically the beginning student of knowledge, right, obviously should not, you know, jump to stage two, even stage one and stage two, they take it from an authority. So you will read Ibn katheer, you will read Ibn taymiyyah, you will read albula theory, you will read eventually, hillicon, you will read, you know, whoever you read, atop or whatever, it is not quite analyzing, usually, but you will read these sources, and a lot of times they'll do the analysis for you, that's fine. That's dandy, and you are now but as you rise higher and higher, and you're gonna,

you know, maybe question maybe challenge the narrative, then you will reach level three, and level three is, if you like a type of historiography, ie the history of history, ie, how others have interpreted history, okay, how have you and others interpreted history, then you compare the various interpretations, you examine history through multiple lenses, you historicize history itself, you look at the trajectories of history, and you see how people have interpreted the same time or the same event or the same incident. And then you compare and contrast and you read with a critical eye. And what this helps you to do is to make you understand, what are the areas of convergence? What are

the areas of divergence? Where does everybody agree? Where does everybody disagree, and this is especially helpful to understand controversies, and especially if you wish to engage in constructive dialogue with the other with other trends or with other interpretations. And, again, in today's lecture, this is not a very advanced lecture, that will require and and to be honest, I don't even think even if I say it's a library chat, I don't think that type of advanced lecture is suitable for YouTube's.

I know we're somehow somewhere someday along the line, I can have a private a platform that I can vet every single person and then we can share our load data go into a lot more analytical detail that insha Allah, even those people will find interesting, if somebody has ideas how to do that, please leave them in the comments or otherwise conveyed them to In any case, today, inshallah I'm going to go over as much as time permits some various, some various examples. And I mean, we can begin, of course, we're talking about the latter half of the first century of the hedgerow, and there's no doubt that some of the most interesting and controversial events took place, and in

particular, in the reign of yazeed even more aware, despite the fact that the as it only was in power for three and a half years, a number of key incidents took place that shaped Islamic history, and that really are food for thought for all of us. And, most significantly, a one can say that his reign began with the shift in Islamic history of changing it from the era of qualifier Russia down to making it a hereditary line and succession of Caleb so rather than a shooter or however else the holy father decided, and so from the time of while we are the last one, that he nominated his son ewz. And then of course, it became a dynasty and it remained with yazeed son who is also called Wawa

and then it transferred over to marijuana even then heckum and marijuana of course, is a very, very interesting figure and character and a lot of you know, a lot of research should and has been done and more needs to be done on marijuana and the effects but then after use EADS line came to an end or the his son died at a very young age, it then reverted to mode one and then haccombe, who was a cousin of while we and then the marijuana dynasty became the rest of the whole of the omegas are from the marijuana dynasty. So you have the more are we are dynasty and that's only his son is eat and for very short time his grandson, and then Marwan is the father of four hollyford. Right. So

after mode one, of course, the Almighty dynasty was completely under him. But the point is that the did the the dynastic successions of Holika its began with the nomination of yazeed. And that is something that a number of interesting reports exist inside Bahati. And by the way, these historical controversies will help you even read the books of Hadith and the books of Tafseer and the books of literature, and you'll understand many things because of these historical controversies.

So, also of the things that occurred Of course, the the largest catastrophe or disaster is of course, in terms of Of course sack religious as well. And heinousness is the massacre of Kabbalah the massacre of her sandal the Allahu I'm barely six months into usines reign, the massacre of Kabbalah occurs in which the members of the family of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam, were brutally killed outside the city of Kufa. And I have spoken about that in my lecture that I gave a number of years ago, I think, five years ago, four years ago. And of course, that lecture, as I said, is an introductory level lecture. And at the time, by the way, I based it almost entirely on

even cathedra, the student has been Tamia, and that's fine No problem. Since then, I have done more research and, you know, I I might have, you know, differed slightly with what I have said in the previous lecture, but that is a good introduction. And it is a standard, you know, introduction, no problem with that you could listen to that. But that is the second major catastrophe that took place. The third is the infamous incident of the massacre of Alhambra, which took place the incident of how to rock which took place against the city of Medina, and many people died in that we'll talk a little about that today as well. And it happened at the very end of the reign of yazeed. And then

the same army that massacred the people of Medina, a massive,

brutal massacre took place there, the same army made its way to muck up surrounded Mecca, laid siege to Mecca through catapults into Makkah damaged the Kaaba. And as they are throwing their catapults into Mecca, the death of us is announced. And so the army retreats, and so Makkah remains under Abdullah Avenue bears territory. So these are some of the incidents that have taken place. If we have time, I might add another one, which is after the time of year z. And that is the revolt of events that took place against elegible Yusuf, which also is a very interesting series of incidents or lectures that we can give it again, this is all a summary. Now, very quickly, the incident of

God, but I've already spoken about the state. So to give you some examples, I talked about these three questions, right? How do we know what we know? How do we analyze and how have others analyzed to give you some simple examples? Again, very superficial, just this is level two, not even level three right now. We're still just just exploring the ideas. The areas of controversy are many of them. Did your xid give the command to kill her Sandra the law one or not? This is an area of controversy. Did he authorize Ibn Xia the general? Did he authorize him? Or did he give him carte blanche authority? So did he explicitly say kill us eat? Which is one narrative? Or did he simply

intentionally leave it open? And he gave Ibn Ziad carte blanche authority Do as you please no questions asked. Or did he tell him that prevent him from coming to Kufa and he didn't intend for Hussein to be massacred or killed? These are three scenarios you will find historians in all three camps and you will find people write about this from all three camps. Now the position that I follow. And again, this is something that is an area of controversy is that yazzie gave him carte blanche authority, but in all likelihood, there is no indication that he even insinuated or hinted that Hussein should be killed or the loved one that he gave him carte blanche, and he did not want

us eat Oh sorry, has handled the alarm to reach Karbala to reach Kufa. But there's nothing hidden or tacit that is that is telling Ibn Ziad to kill the family of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, this is my interpretation of events and you will find people across the spectrum. Another question that is up for debate, debates and grabs is and by the way, we're still at level one, what happened? based on how we interpret what happened, we then get to level two, analyzing what happened. Next question that is a very key significant one. Did he Express remorse at the death of her sandal the Illa Hawaiian, or did he Express happiness? Okay, because we have reports in the

earliest books of history where both of these are narrated. We have explicit reports. Now again, right now, we're not saying which one is right and wrong. We have reports in the earliest two books that he's happy when he gets the news that her sandal the loved one and his family and the men have been killed. And we also have reports that he got angry and irritated and he cursed even Ziad. So we have different and contradictory reports. And this has caused some people such as even Kathy or the historian, some people to reconcile these reports and to say, and this is the position that I think seems to make a lot of sense that initially he was happy this woman could hear says initially he was

happy. And then the enormity of what had occurred basically comes to him and so he then expresses regret, okay, so this

Then indicates again, so if you if you believe that he was happy when he heard of that of Hussein, obviously your view of yours will be very different then if you believe that he never intended it, and he's totally innocent, which is the view of a number of later medieval historians. Okay, as far as I'm aware, no early historian held this view, by the way, and I have read 20 or 30 of the classical books in the medieval books about this particular incident, as far as I'm aware, none of the earliest sources that we have, are is leaning towards exonerating us. This is a trend that begins in medieval times, and then in our times, it is now become common in one strand of those who

claim to follow the setup. So the point is that you have this this streak of historians who try to exonerate yazeed 100%. And then you have those that are kind of sort of like well, he, you know, he didn't intend it, but then he was happy when it happened. And then you have those who said he commanded it, for example, right. So we have all of these different narrations. Another point of controversy that we find in the earliest books of history is whether yazeed

played with the head of her same role the Allahu taala was brought to him in Damascus or not, because we know for a fact that the head of her sandal the Allahu IgM was presented to Ibn Ziad and in Kufa, agenzia dozen Kufa and even Ziad with a villa he mocked and he poked and he did what he did to the head, he poked it with the stick and whatnot, and under symptomatic rhodiola this Hudson body so we have no doubt about this. And so the Malik became enraged. And he said, Well, law he I saw the profitsystem kiss, you know that what you're playing with, he kissed and now you're doing this to this. So no doubt the head was presented to even Zia, by the way, in early omega times, presenting

heads to rulers and governors was the standard in the norm. If we read your history, again, one of the things about history is this eye opening, right? So you really understand the reality. Our religion is divine. Our history is very much human. Our religion is divine and perfect. Our history has a lot of ups and a lot of nobility and a lot of great things. But it also has things that are gut wrenching, and just saddening. And you know, the today's talk is going to do with some of the other sites for that, again, we learn from the reality so as we said, There is no doubt that the head of her saying, well, the last one was presented to even to even Ziad was it also then taken to

Damascus and presented to you xid once again, we find different reports in this regard. And people later on then denied or affirmed it. So for example, even Tamia is very, very adamant that he is he never

saw the head of Hussein, and that this is a bot to narration. It's simply not true. So even taymiyah denies this that he is he did not play with the head of Hussein, however, and he says that the chain is broken and the story is bolted. However, some other researchers have done a thorough analysis of all of the chains and have discovered or found reports in Mr. COVID how Kim and about Ronnie and other books of history and put together these researchers have concluded that the the the incident is authentic, it did happen. And also, it is common sense that even Zia wanted to impress and wanted to show what he's done. What would he do with the head so the head of Hussein ended up in Medina,

this is pretty much pretty much confirmed that the head of Hussein or the Allahu taala, and it was buried in books here, along with that plot of land. That is the plot that the little bit there buried in it is where eventually and of course, even taymiyah wrote an entire treatise on this, which is called the head of Hussein, the treaty is at the head of Hussein, there's eight opinions by the way, where did the head of Hussein end up? There's eight opinions and really, inshallah is very straight very, very clear that the head of Hussein was eventually buried in a very in Medina and the body of Hussein was buried in the regions outside of of Kufa. Now the point is that how would the

head of Hussein get to Medina, except via Damascus, right? The the the family of the process and that was still alive was in Kufa, and they were sent as prisoners by the way they were sent as prisoners to Damascus. Now the head would have been with them, or with the Army or with the true troops that are sent with them. When they are in Damascus. It is common sense and is the norm of the time the oma is we're infamous for doing this many of them they did this it was something well established in their in their timeframe that heads would be presented. And so, the notion of xid seeing the head and then using a stick to to poke it or what not. As I said, it has been narrated by

a number of different chains, not just one, and it seems to be a lesson on authentic incident. By the way, another point another important point to your history is this requires a much longer talk. Historical reports the bulk of them do not and should not have the same scrupulousness as books of Hadith. We don't look to historical reports to make the way that we look at is not narration.

have had the if we were to do so, our 1015 volumes of history would become 30 pages. And this is well known. Neither the Sierra nor the qualifier, Russia don't know, we don't look at the books of history. And then we apply the criterion of the snots of heavy to the books of history. Now, that doesn't mean that we ignore when the chain is weak. I'm simply saying the bulk of history, if you were to apply the standards of hygiene, you wouldn't have any history. And those people and researchers who do look at the reports of history from the science of Heidi's sides, when they write their sanitized histories, they pick and choose according to their preconceived notions, they cannot

and do not apply those strict standards to every single narration, or else they would not have a history worth writing. Rather what they do, when they find a report that doesn't fit into their worldview, they will apply the standards of the scholars of Hadith and say, Oh, this hadith is or this report is weak and will not accept it. But when they find a report that is in accordance with their worldview, they will simply ignore it completely, and put it in and life goes on. And that's not consistent. And it is something that is contradictory and not worthy of a true academic research. So the point being that we look to history with more than just is not if n is started this

week, okay, that's something we take into account. But just because then it's not as weak when it comes to history, the bulk of our history has broken chains, because the person narrating them might be a generation after, for example, he's heard it from his forefathers, and he doesn't mention who hears it from when you have three, four or five, early books all saying the same thing. When you have a number of chains going back to different authorities, when it comes to history, when you have literature, when you have poetry that all conforms to reality, then it is nonsensical to then say, Oh, the this particular chain is weak because it fits into the entire historical narrative that is

presented in multiple genres and multiple books. And there are many examples for this. And perhaps today, we'll get into one of them. So the point being that if you believe that you

poke the head of the sandal the logline, obviously, your your your view of ewz, there's going to be very different. And if you believe that he didn't do so, then your analysis is going to be very different. So based upon all of these questions, right, the question then comes, this has no historical analysis. So the previous questions was level one historical facts What happened? And each scholar has his own? Did he give the command? Did you express remorse? Was he happy? Did he play with the head of her saying all of these are things that happen that sorry, that are that are raw history, yes or no. And different scholars are going to come to different conclusions, based

upon your conclusions level one, we now move to level two, which is historical analysis, right. And we find an entire spectrum of people over here we have those that they view, Hussein as sorry, rhodiola, they view your xid as being outside the fold of Islam, Sunni, so we're not getting into the non Sunni historians. varla is just not Our focus today, Sudanese view him as being outside the fold of Islam. And then we have those that have viewed them as being a righteous, solid person. And these are the two extremes. And then we have the bulk of our listener who have a middle ground between these two. So this is now Level two, and then also level three. And of course, you know,

even Tamia is one of those who's very clear.

He's not quite centrist. He's like, more on right centrist, if you like, by right to you, I mean, the defenders of yours either for right, those who kicked us either, let's call them far left, for example. Even Tamia is centrist. Right. Okay, so he is, you know, one of the modern researchers shikamaru, pursuing a great scholar, read his works very interesting, or academic or intellectual person written a lot about the set if you move, but I've benefited also by reading his, his his articles and writings, and a lot of people have with the same trajectory, they were once upon a time upon a certain understanding. And then things became clear to them and they're going on a particular

trajectory. And so he's one of them. He's written, he's written a series of articles called in Arabic, and it's not an English called the oma wheat slant. Amongst modern selfies, this is what he wrote a number of articles on this. And so he's talking about how a certain segment of modern selfies have

slanted towards basically defending the omiya dynasty and especially as against the things that happened in his reign. And so he documents this he goes through historical analysis, which is very interesting about how earlier historians really had a very negative view of the Sunni historians and then slowly but surely, you know, the change begins and you see now a radical shift basically from left center to now right center of very few Sunni or gamma were far left very few or far right. Okay. What you had was the centrist approach for a middle centrist or in a slightly right to the left centrist slightly to the right centrist and he documents how this is taking place, and that is,

it is something that is incontrovertible. If you if you really read 3040 books of the classical history, you will see this without a

A doubt and by the way, another so another interesting point.

Um, the the, the of course, we're going to skip over the details of the nominations of yazeed. That's a very interesting topic in and of itself, because while we are the last one, he announced in his lifetime, probably around 50 hedgerow when many of the senior Sahaba were lived, he announced that he wants us to be the next Khalifa after him. And he sent a message to the governor of Medina, Matawan, if not haccombe, who was to eventually become the buddy for for a year, and then all of his children became the husband. But one, of course was the secretary as well of earth model the yellow one, and if you hear the history of what happened, many people blame certain things that but one

did, that were then blamed for the monitor the alarm and that he did certain things. And then people thought that Earth model the lock man who did them, but the point being that mattawan, this, this particular very interesting character marwadi haccombe, is of course, the cousin of Earth man and the cousin in rhodiola. One and the cousin and while we are the last one, he himself is most likely not to Sahabi he was born in the lifetime of the Prophet sallallahu wasallam. But he was in thought if and his father, Al hakam, a lot of controversy around him as well. Is he a companion? Or is he cursed because you have this controversy about his his father, you have a number of reports about

his father, and this is used in later in later books as well. So the point being that marijuana was the governor of Medina at the time, and while we wrote him a letter telling him that he should announce to the people that use EAD is going to be the next Khalifa and make sure and he listed specific individuals make sure that they agree to this and he mentioned the sons of Abu Bakar and Omar and Adil the Allahu I'm home. So Abdur Rahman, even even Viehbacher, Abdullah, even Omar and Al Hussein ibn Ali, these are the main people that he wanted to make sure and he said the Lebanese Zubaydah as well because this was the main source that he knew if they didn't agree this would be

problematic and Marwan didn't How come he gave a whole debate in the midst of the the prophecies and this hadith isn't it by the way this is in body you will read this in body and the details are found in soon Anasazi and in the midst of the recovered haccombe and barani, but the gist of it is in body it's very explicit in body you can read this and the chapter of the seer and the verse. Wonder the holiday holiday orfila como te dandini an okra Jawaharlal Nehru notably wahama is still Ethan Illa. Wait, wait like me, you look up this Hadith, you will find it in Marathi. And the Hadith goes as follows that Marwan gave a whole tuba in the masjid. And he said that the meaning has meaning more

out of the law, he has a good idea, and that is that he wants to make you see the next halifa and if he does so, then indeed Abu Bakar and Omar or the Allahu anhu have also nominated somebody before they passed away. A worker nominated Omar Omar Abdullah one now normally to six people. So marijuana is saying, Look, he is not the first person to nominate. And so while we are the law has nominated his son Yahtzee to be the next halifa like aboubaker and Omar now in the midst of the the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam Abdur Rahman, even abubaker the full brother of eyeshadow, the Allahu anhu, the son of Abu Bakar, right, he stood up, and he said, No, this is not the methodology of

obachan and Omar, this is the methodology of heraclius and of kisara, of of the assassinate Mara the Persians and he goes, do you want us to follow her properly? Yeah, you want us to follow up ironic methodology or Heraklion methodology or Roman methodology? Will bucha did not make it in his family when Omar did not make it in his family whereas more aware of the law he was putting it in his family so when I've got 100 Blue Book was stood up and said this Marwan haccombe said to the guards, go arrest him now go arrest him right now. And so the guards you know, rush towards the enemy buckle up the right man fled. Where is he going to flee? He doesn't have an army he doesn't have a, you

know, a place to go. Where is it going to flee from the masjid the prophet SAW Selim, he fled to the house of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam, who was living in that house, none other than his sister, his full sister, the same mother and father, his full Sister, I follow the law. Juana, our mother, she's still alive is 5050 when he or she passes away 5758 or so she's alive at this time. So she is there. She's listening to the football, and she sees what's happening. Her brother flees, runs into the house of Arusha. And when the guards reached the house of Arusha, now they're torn. What should we do? I mean, we're not allowed to enter this is the Quranic verse, right? That a job

this is what the verse of his I mean, you cannot enter you know that a house of Isaiah will be lined up and so the guard stopped there out of respect for Are you sure this is a generation at least that

Much respect is there, the next generation would happen and how that respect Oh the villa, you know, for the sons of the Sahaba is gone, but at least in this generation, they had enough respect to not enter the house of Arusha. And then, according to anessa, he and Al Hakim and others this is not in body according to these other books of Hadith, and books of history, Marwan himself goes to the door of a Chateau de La Hoya and Mr. Juan begins shouting back and forth, and our issues defending her brother, I will bucha and Marwan says, this is the one whom Allah revealed in the Quran will lay the order Diwali that he awful Akuma This is a longer story. I don't need to go there that some but the

one who says to his parents often look Mama, you know, Woe unto you. And he says, No one law he this has not revealed about him if I want to do I could mention the person whom this first came down from, and then in the version of Mr. COVID. How can I show allegedly says this is allegedly allegedly because there's a lot of controversy over this phrase, Ayesha allegedly said the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam cursed your father mattawan and he cursed him when you were still in his loins. And so you will get a share of that curse as well. Now, as I mentioned before, the cursing of the father of mode one is something that you will find lots of controversy over many scholars denied

the genders like at least seven eight Hadith in this regard. And they're all in the tertiary books. A group of scholars like a hallway and others in our times Advani. They said, these are all Boulton and Wonka, Hadith fabricated by the enemies or the other groups of scholars like even hijo. For example, even hedger says, in fact head body, he says that there are a number of Hadith about the cursing of an haccombe, the father of an heckum, the father of about one, sorry, and these are heavy, they're found in avani. And others, most of them he said, they are weak, and some of them are good with aldehyde j yet so the great scholar of Hadeeth, half of them in high school, he has a

different analysis. And again, as I said, point number one what actually happened what was said, Did the profitsystem say this or not, that's a area of controversy, if you believe he said it is going to shape how you view certain things, if you believe he didn't say it is going to shape other things. And in any case, you know, I said I'm not gonna talk about the the back of your seat, I might as well just finish up some points. It wasn't a part of the intended thing. But this is interesting to know. So Matawan was not able to secure the oath of allegiance of any of the Senior Companions, right? Even Omar refused, up there, have you ever refused, Hussein, even added to the

law 100 refused, Abdullah bin su Bay refused, none of them were able to, with none of them gave their oath of allegiance to tumor one to give it to easy so this is like when you see there's still a teenager or a young man or a teenager in his 20s. And while we is the halifa, or the Allahu, and so the senior Sahaba said, we're not going to give our oath to the future Caliphate of yours either refuse to do so more, or we have heard of this. And he decided to come down to Medina himself, and to secure their oath directly. So he traveled down to Medina, however, all of them fled Medina, and all of them moved to Makkah, and then what happened happened? And so none of them broke the this is

a very key point here, right? There's this notion that again, this modern trend of those who claim to follow this set of they say breaking away from what I'm going to break in what what what do you have to be critical here don't accept anything just because you're here it none of these senior Sahaba had actually agreed to the oath of yazeed. Anyway, what what are they breaking even so bear did not give the oath of allegiance, her sandal the law 190 with the oath of allegiance, none of these later on later on, in Omar was a tacit oath as well as another story altogether. He had been a model the law one, and it been a bustle the Allahumma they had a very different position. And that

was quietism we're not going to get involved in either side. They never supported any any one of the two. But in the end, they gave a tacit oath to yazeed and they didn't even though even abus lived with him in Israel, ironically, right? He lived in that Kappa, they've been so bad, but he didn't get involved in the military conflict, cuz that was their their motif in their philosophy. So the point being that how you understand the oath of

yazeed also is going to shape you know, how you're going to understand later events as well. And of course, perhaps the most, in some ways, the most traumatic in some ways, because, of course, khutbah nothing can overshadow Cotabato.

But the thing with Kabbalah is that there is a gray area did Hussein on the Allahu and did he is he intend for him to be massacred or not? There is a gray area in our so many books, it is unclear. Did you see explicitly command? Or did he give carte blanche authority which is the position I hold which he gave carte blanche, he does, you know because he could have said and here's the point. You're sending a brutal dictator, a brutal general you're sending somebody whose track record as well.

If you want to protect the life of her sandal doula one, you need to say it right then and there. You need to tell your general that, hey, prevent him from reaching the city but make sure you do not touch her hair on his head. If he had done this, the course of history might have been radically different. But he left it vague and he left it open, what happened happened? And then after that, even even Kathir says he rejoiced at the news, by the way, right? And it is, in my opinion, incontrovertible that the head was brought to him and he poked that head and a number of people objected to this, including a companion, it is said that he was there as well. He objected to this,

that there should not be done now. Whether he expressed regret later on or whatnot. Maybe he did. Okay. But the main point, again, by the way, again, we're not going down that road, but you know, the point is that he is xid forget whatever you want to say about the past, it is a fact that he did not reprimand, even demote or take away the salary even of those whose hands and whose whose hands were bloodied with the death of her sandal the law one what type of you know, I mean, the buck stops with his he that is, as I said in my lecture back then, and I'll say over here now even had been Tamia who overall as we said, is left centrist even had been Tamia said it was wajib upon he is eed

to reprimand the people who did this but he did not do so. So he failed in his watch. This is even Tamia who overall exonerates you for wanting to kill her Sandra Day long and he denies that he is he played with the head of her sandal the other one so that's coming from even taymiyah he said us he fell short and it was watching now, if you look at those who follow that strand in our times, they go even much more than this and they completely exonerate So, again, we see this promo we strange coming in, we'll get to this inshallah, before we conclude within it to Allah. So, the point being that in his lifetime, we have the issue of the Karbala, we have all these differences. Here, we have

the issue of his nomination and how we want to see what happened. We have of course, the issue of unhearable. And the issue of and how raw it is, as I said, going back to what I said, It is one of the most traumatic tragedies of early Islam, one of the most you Karbala, and how are both of them extremely painful, and each one is painful in its own way. The the incident of unhelpful wildcards will have what is called it took place in the year 63 hedgerow a year and a half after after a little bit more than a year after the incident of Kabbalah. And the story goes as follows that the the people of Medina when you Zeb came into power after the death and while we live the 11 years he

came to power and the people of Medina were not happy. So your xid said to his governor, send me the elite of the movers and shakers. Send me the creme de la creme as a delegation, let them come to my palace. Let them you know, come to Damascus as my VIP guests. And so a delegation came from Medina, all the way to Damascus and their leader was Abdullah ibn Helen vada. Who is humbler Humberto is the one whom the angels washed in the bottle of water. You remember that one? The one who the process in them asked his wife What's going on? Why are the angels watching him? And she told the story that you know how Baba, you know, just got married. Abdullah? Is that child of that marriage? Abdullah?

Is that the child of that marriage? Not that night, so don't get me wrong. You're the child of that. The humbler? Right so Abdullah is the son of Humberto and he was born now.

Sorry, I said he was not a product of that marriage. He was a product of that marriage. He was a product of their marriage, which means that literally the few nights that they were married, Abdullah was conceived in that point time timeframe. He was born in the fourth year of the hedra. And so he grew up seeing the prophecies and he was seven years old in the process of passed away. And Abdullah is a Sahabi. And Abdullah has narrated a hadith. And Abdullah grew up obviously you know, as a young child seeing the prophet SAW Salem, and now in the year 63 hedgerow he is considered to be the leader of the unser, the leader of the people of Medina, and other great Sahaba

went as well, including mapa de Vinci Nan, who was a companion of the Prophet sallallahu sallam. He was one of the standard flag bearers in the Battle of the conquest, Mark Rubinstein and is now a very old man, but he was one of the people who's carrying the flag in the conquest of Makkah. We have others of the great Sahaba the sons of the Sahaba Muhammad Abdullah has them and Abbas Sydneysider genocide, the famous beside his son abass. So we have a whole group of elite people going to going to Damascus to meet with Izzy and use z showered money upon them. He gave them gifts and luxury items. He gave 100,000 coins to Abdullah bin humbler and he gave 10,000 to everyone.

His sons that came with him and he gave fortunes to all of them right. And he thought he could win them over by his money. So they returned back to Medina. And by the time they came back, this is again in the early portion of usines timeframe. By the time they come back Kabbalah has occurred and the news of curbelo reaches them in Medina. And along with the catalyst of Kabbalah, they then publicly say, you know what we want to Damascus, and we want to publicly say that even though we took the money, we have no care to have use it as our halifa and we openly throw away our allegiance we break our allegiance, we have no allegiance to this person. And so for a year or so, you know,

they're eking out a separate principality, Abdullah Abu Zubaydah, has declared himself after the massacre of Cotabato, Abdullah bin Zuberi began taking the day off for himself. So have you ever been to zubaid? It took a few months, like one years he was Khadija became halifa. Abdullah is very did not take bait. He was simply in Makkah, after Karbala is when he began taking as as the leader and then after the death of us, he declared himself to be the hottie for so there was an interim frame that we're going to talk about right now. So you have here Medina separated from Damascus, you have here mcca separated from Damascus in its own ivans obey and Abdullah bin humbler are

sympathetic to one another, but they're not under each other. They are separate, breaking away. And then you have Kufa that is disgruntled and wants to break away as well. And that's where they're calling her saint to come. So they will make a dynasty was very much, you know, almost too big to be fragmented. Now. When yazeed heard that Abdullah bin humba and others had broken away from him. He became incensed and enraged, he took it personally. And you know,

one can understand from his perspective, not that I sympathize with him at all, but he spent millions of them of dollars or whatever you want to call it. He spent a fortune bribing and dining and whatnot, giving them the world treatment, and they took it all. And then they say we only took it so that we can use it against him. They literally said this, we took all of his money so that we can now finance a campaign against him. So you see became absolutely enraged. He as we say in English, he lost it he lost his marbles. And he said he sent a message to Ibn Ziad in Kufa, who had just killed you know, the grandson of the prophet SAW him and he says go from Kufa and attack

Medina, Ibn Ziad and then after that attack maka, so he wanted to attack Abdullah bin How about an even Zubair right he wanted to deal with them. Even Ziad whose hands are still read symbolically with the death of her sandal, the loved one unbelievably writes a message back to him saying that I cannot do it. I'm not going to go to Medina and Mecca. And then he says to his followers famously reported in the books of history that will law he I'm not going to combine for a fast silk to things. The faster here is easy. I'm not going to combine for a faster two things, killing the son of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam and waging war against Mecca and Medina. I'm not going to

do that I've done one for him. I'm not going to do the other. This has been Ziad, right, somewhere somehow I'm not defending him at all. But some things pinched his conscience twitched his conscience conscience and he said, I'm not going to go to Makkah and Medina and wage war against the cities of Mecca and Medina, the homes of Allah and His messenger and also I have killed you know, the son of the prophets of Allah send him for a 5g like a farcical like, easy. So he refused to do so. And he did not go Subhan Allah, he did not go. So he has he then sends his most brutal, his most brutal General, somebody that would go down in history as one of the worst and one of the most evil people.

Ironically, his name was Muslim Ibn. But he was then called most stiff and his title is mostly Muslim, we know what it means. Most of means the transgressor after the incident of how to refer the rest of his life. He was called Muslim. And the books of history a lot of times they call him Muslim bin Abdullah, meaning Muslim, a Muslim if I mean here, the Muslim here, and so he sent Muslim, a bin Akbar. And he said, and this is now Well, why the incident of how to raw becomes

significant because there is no ambiguity and there are no two opinions about this right? There are no two opinions, it is impossible to defend. He says to his governor or his military General, that camp outside the city, give them some time to decide whether they want to fight or whether they're going to surrender unconditionally like they have no no conditions. We're not going to take any, any any treaties, nothing. It must be upon my conditions and they don't know what the conditions are, or you will attack them and if they decide not to surrender your Ziad said to them. Once you are once you are done conquering them. You have three days and three nights to do as you please

To the people and the wealth and the belongings of Medina, then after three days, call your troops out of the city and then go and attack MK and attack Abdullah ibn Zubaydah, this is explicit, there are no two opinions about this. This is a factor that he literally said to his army for, you know, 72 hours. You can do whatever you want to do, you can do whatever you want to do, and nobody is going to say anything to you. And so the army came, camped outside the city in what is called How do you know, Medina has had a habit I'll show you how to lobby. So they can't that's what's called the walk guards will huddle and they camped outside and they demanded a surrender, unconditional

surrender. And the people of Medina refused to surrender. And so and in fact, the people in Medina they they dug up a trench like the Prophet sallallahu Sallam had done, you know, 60 years ago, they dug up a trench they had learned from the Battle of the trench, and they thought that they would win against the army of ewz and Subhan. Allah, on the one side, you had 1000s of children of the Sahaba. And at least two dozen of the Sahaba still alive, you had 1000s of the children of the Sahaba. And on the other side, you have a bunch of thugs and mercenaries and hired people than most of them were new converts or recent convert, these aren't, you don't have any significant Sahabi or some of the

Sahabi on the other side. And when they refuse to surrender, then Muslim are the forces of use IED attack to Medina, after a few battles, because you have an army versus you know, the people I mean, it's not that you can't win against an army, right? You just can't do that. And so it very shortly was not a large long battle. The the the army of 01 and the people of Medina were bought, especially the leaders, they were brought in chains, and they were brought in chains, and they were executed Abdullah bin humbler and all of his sons were ex were killed in the Battle of the hardrock. market, market even even seen and who is, as we said, one of the Sahaba of the Prophet sallallahu I think he

was sending them and he was the flag bearer in the conquest of maca. Mark Lubin Sinan was brought with his chains to his neck and Muslim caused him to sit down and mocked him and said What would you like to drink and he was thirsty who was tired it was some water with honey and whatnot. So he said Bring him the coldest the best, and then he gave it to him. And then he said will lie. This will be the last drink you have on earth and he commanded to be executed with his hands tied to his to his neck and some of the senior most sons of the Sahaba were also executed, including some of the family of the Prophet sallallahu Sallam one of the sons the great great grandsons of other mopa But father

David Buss was killed Abu Bakar even Abdullah Jeff would have never thought him so Abdullah had been job for the one whom the process them you know, he hugged him and he put his hand on his head Abdullah bin Jaffa Jaffa muttalib. His son Abu Bakar, was executed and killed. the grandson of workers to the Abdullah bin Mohammed even ever could have said was killed. A number of grandchildren of hubbub, including Abubakar Abdullah have neuroma. yBnL hardtop, the son of Paul had been originally pulled by Metallica. But how was of course, one of the 10 promised Jenna, one of the youngest brothers of Arusha from her mother was also killed. Almost all of the grandchildren of

humbler the son of obey have been carved, the grandson of his son had been tabet. And the list goes on and on. Remember, this is you know, 63 hedgerow. 6263 hedgerow, you know, the Sahaba sons, over 3000 deaths in the Battle of horror, over 3000 people died of them, as the books of history mentioned 300 of the nobility of the children of the Sahaba, Mahajan, and the unsought and at least three or four Sahaba were killed in this battle as well at the hands of yazeed. And there's a sad story of what was it the history as well, I will say the history Subhanallah I will say that, if you remember him from the Battle of an orchard, I will say that Audrey wanted to in front of the Prophet

So Sam, he was trying to put his chest up as he's a bigger man, and he's pushing yourself forward. And the process of asked him how old are you and he was rejected, he was too young. So he was rejected at Oxford because he was too young. And Subhanallah you know, so many years later in the Battle of how to rock. He did not participate in otros. In the Battle of Iraq, he fled to OSHA to protect himself for his life. Subhan Allah and he entered a cave with his sword as an old man, white beard, old man, he entered a cave and one of these young ruffians entered and he unsheath his sword, and I will tell you the history. When he saw this, he put his sword back in and he said, the verse

of the son of Adam, the imbecile de la yedikule talk to if you're going to kill me, then I'm not going to kill you back and I'm going to you know, leave your effort to Allah subhana wa Tada, the this ruffian he had some amount somewhere in his heart. He goes, who are you? He goes, I will say the history. He said the Abu Zubaydah hodari, the Companion of the Prophet system. He said, Yes, the abuse of the holy at this demand became ashamed, put his sword back and left the cave. So he did not

To execute abou sorry, the quality but well like, How sad is that you hear no this is this happened in the lifetime of the younger Sahaba are now older people and the children of the Sahaba. And then for the next three days, according to the command of yazeed, literally explicit, he told his troops Do as you please. And the amount of bloodshed and the amount of plunder and the amount of looting they destroyed and ravish the city of Medina and that is why the Sahaba to flee Abu Zubaydah to run away for his life. They're literally just rampaging and killing. And to this day when you go to book the agenda to book but there are a lot of good there is an entire section, an entire section he goes

the people of how to write were buried here. Why? Because they couldn't give them individual graves. And as cinematic said, over 100 of my own descendants were killed in the Battle of Hara over 100 of the grade children, grandchildren, great grandchildren of the descendants of innocent nomadic were killed in the Battle of Hydra. And now we get to one of those gray areas what happened, what didn't happen. So without a doubt, plunder without a doubt, killings without a doubt, lots of loot taken lots of bounties taken for outright stealing. These are the houses the literal houses that the Sahaba lived in the houses of the process, and we're still standing literally. And so how about some

of them are still alive, and you have the troops of us eat Come in, and they do what they do. So that is very clear. Now, there's a question I'm sure a lot of people's minds, you have this bunch of thugs and ruffians coming in. And they're all you know, army men. And this is a city. What happens when an army men enters a city like this? What happens? Obviously, you understand what happens here. And that is, and I'm sorry to be explicit, but it needs to be said here, you know, mass rape, it does happen. Now, did mass rape occur in Medina? Here's where we get to that.

This whole issue of analyzing and then counter analyzing.

The earliest historians, a number of them explicitly mentioned this, amongst them al Madani, who died to 32 hedra, who, who narrates with an authentic is not back to a tableta Barry, who lived the generation right after, right? So his name is Aisha, we've been we've been his son, he died for 148. So he's born around 70 hijiri at hyjal. So he's born in the generation after hetero with an authentic is not his job, even his son says that, you know, over 1000 ladies who are not married, gave birth after the Battle of how remaining the rape was so much that 1000 children were produced illegit illegitimately. And you have other historians, including even Josie, including even helicon,

including even hedger, even Ibn taymiyyah explicitly says, and the women were raped, he explicitly says this in his writings that in the Battle of hurrah, people were killed, money was looted and plundered and women were raped. He explicitly says this. And, you know, it is common sense when you have a group of people that are going to kill the descendants or the children of the Sahaba and the unsought they don't have enough Eman that they're Medina and it's sanctity. I remember what is Medina Medina is how long our Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said, look at the chapter of the blessings of Medina, whoever causes fear to the people of Medina, Allah will destroy him that allows

the profitsystem said whoever harms the people of Medina has the curse of thunder, Curse of the angels, and nothing will be accepted from him until the day of judgment. The ahaadeeth are so many and these bunch of ruffians and thugs are doing what they're doing. Why would they not do what other armies do when they conquer? And this is, as we said, reported in New Jersey reports it it is something that is you know, well documented. Now, what's going to happen? As I said to you before, we now have what is called the technical term is radical revisionism, sanitization mythology, trying to, to recuperate or recapture the image of museum so that it becomes a defense and you now have

groups of people that are sanitizing the image of your z, and they say, How can anybody you know, how can anybody believe that this took place? I mean, these were people that were Muslims, etc. And again, this is our problem. One of our problems of studying history is that we find you know, this romanticization that is simply based on emotions and not facts. These are people that are killing and mass the children of the Sahaba the grandchildren of our the sons of a workman are being killed the grandsons are called Bob, you know, Abdullah bin humbler mockery been seen and he's he is mocked and he's killed by Muslim directly the ex licit commands, he is mocked and brought in front of the

army and killed and then you're going to think that they have enough amount and taqwa to not do they they literally plunder the entire city destroyed and looted was included, he has to flee for his life into the the the mountain of water. And then people come along and say, Oh, how can we imagine an army would do this? And they believe in alone is Mr. God. if somebody were to tell you that how can you imagine? Let's not get political here, but how can you imagine groups of Muslims attacking a Masjid with protesters and

killing you know 400 people in the masjid in Cairo How can anybody believe this? Well it happens it's the reality when you have thugs and when you have ruffins is going to happen but the point being that and by the way even him I'm I'm an explicitly mentioned this as well. And in my Muhammad, when he was asked about your xid Mr. Mohammed said, How can anybody who believes in Allah and His Messenger have any love of yours eat and he did to the people of Medina what he did notice he linked that Hara incident directly to us eat? And he goes, how can anybody who believes in Allah His Messenger, you know, have any thing to do with your seat and that's why he refused to even narrate a

hadith from him, that he goes, this person cannot be narrated from, and, you know, that's again, the reality of how raw so the incidence of like how raw the incidence of Karbala and all of this, how we look at them, it depends very much as we said on the conclusions that we come to and you have a small sliver of people and they're really not that famous who are on the extreme right wing of defending your seat and there was a famous in not not a famous there was a mediocre scholar let's say abdomen believe elbows, a daddy died 583 Hydra, he wrote a book on the blessings of yazeed and this book generated a lot of controversy, he was a contemporary of Luna Josie and Emily Josie

refuted him very, very harshly. And Josie wrote a book refuting this this this character and this book is available in print the original book is not available. So you have on the far if you like you know right hand side that are defending is it you have on the far left people like even alcohol and humbly the great scholar, somebody whom I admire immensely if you read his biography, one of the intellectual giants of the Hammadi school and because he was such an intellectual giant, the other hand buddies did not like him at all. And they considered him to be invoked and deviant there was a trial against him until he, quote unquote, recant. I talked about him, when I gave my lecture about

the the fitting and the controversy, his reputation culture had been active was one of them, that they couldn't understand it and outdated and they think he's a deviant and what not even

considered

to be a cafard, the exact opposite side. And he goes, it's not possible this person believes in Allah as measured, that's a minority opinion.

Another person, I do see a great scholar of Tafseer, to read off the famous Allah Lucy, he also said that to the zero, sorry, you cannot be a Muslim. And he said that if somebody were to disrespect the most have, what would you say? Isn't this a Kaffir? So he goes, how can somebody who does what he does to the descendants of the prophets of Allah is Adam, and what he does to the people of Medina, how can this person be a believer? So this is his opinion? Again, I'm not taking my own opinion, I'm just telling you as it is. So you have a small group that completely defended him, you have a small group that made him a complete cafard.

The middle position itself is a spectrum. And the middle position is that neither is he a saint, nor is he occurs in the Upper cafard. But then what do you do with that? How guilty is he? This is where you get the spectrum. And so you have, you know, those that are? I would say,

basically, if we consider the right to be those who call him a Kaffir. You have those that are centrist. Right. And I would say from my analysis that the bulk of early scholars of Islam of Sunni Islam are centrist right. And that is that they despise your zeal, Mr. Mohammed explicitly allowed cursing him. In one opinion, his students and Hillel said this is what excuse me avoid as well. The great humble is called a Buddha also said Why can we not curse this person? The great chapter is scholar, aka Rossi, who died 5041 of the greatest shafr scholars of the of the fifth century, he was asked about whether it's permissible to curse us eat and he said, a madman has two opinions explicit

and implicit. A My mother has two opinions he

has to Binion's and ask for me, I have one opinion, we shall curse him and we're not going to we're not going to be implicit we will be explicit in this regard, also the famous historian asaka. In his study, he also seems to be very much in this right centrist position, which is extremely critical of us eat but not going to the extent of calling him a coffered yBnL Josie is definitely in this camp here even though the Josie is very, very critical. And he wrote an entire book about why we should be able to curse us eat and this book is available online or read diet and without Sybil I need a mercenary means me Is it that refuting this ignorant you know, arrogant, not not arrogant, but

ignorant and foolish person the blind person who prevents people from criticizing is he this is the this is the refutation of the earlier somebody scholar and he narrates in vivid detail the massacre of her saying he blames it on yazeed. And he talks about is he poking the head of Hussein. He mentions stories that are very, very

Again, you're not going to find this in the centrist left, you're going to find this in the center straight, that how, you know, evil yield was the fiscal views and whatnot. And that's again, very clear. By the way, if there's any Chinese scholar, he actually puts it a part of his data that yes, we curse us eat no problem, because of what he has done. He had been hijacked Alaska and he is also in this centrist right camp, even Hydra is very clear. In fact, in the famous hadith of Sahaba hottie that a prophet sallallahu Sallam said, the destruction of my oma will occur at the hands of a bunch of foolish young men of the Quraysh any of the hell, the real man or the group of young men

have the courage and half would have been Hydra and has no problem saying, This is his eat, this is us eat that this is the foolish young man of courage. This is a reference to his eat and those that came after him. So even Hydra is also centrist right in this regard. Now, that's one group of people, as we said, you have the centrist left as well, they they're not fans of easy, but they are reinterpreting or sanitizing or for whatever reasons, maybe even spiritual reasons not wanting to curse us. So xiety and ignore Salah, both of them, they don't get into politics. But they say that, you know, why should we curse anybody, let's be quiet about it, we shouldn't curse, you know, let's

leave as a fear to Allah subhanho wa Taala. And then we also get, as we said, the centrist left camp that begins to find excuses or to find things that are, you know,

try to minimize the blame against us. And of the people that that does, this is in our lobby, the Maliki scholar. In his famous book, I lost the middle class in which an entire book about the fitting of the Sahaba and whatnot. And he begins a trend that influenced many later authors. And overall, I mean, as an under Lucien he is very sympathetic to the ideas, remember, and the loose was ommaya territory for the longest time, he has high praise for while we are the last one, which is not a problem, we can, by the way, the whole issue of respecting more are we as a Sahaba, will be Allah one. That's definitely part of our appeal. But a lot of people don't understand. And this is

the theological point, respect does not mean we have to agree with his opinions. I mean, we can disagree with filthy opinions of the Sahaba. How about CRC or political opinion. But the problem comes once again, you have this reputation counter refutation that we're seeing in our times. And it's very difficult to talk about this era, without irking a lot of people. And that is why I myself did not give a biography of that timeframe, more of this individual, because I'm well aware of what is going to happen. I understand my theology, and I would never say anything about a Sahabi or the Allahu Germain, especially somebody whom the processes and chose to write a letter for him, as is

authentically reported, he was the cartoon. As for the cuts of what he or not, there's a controversy, what exactly did you write, but that doesn't mean we have to agree with the decisions that he did. And a lot of people don't understand this point. And also, the tensions that we have between

the hard core between both of these sectarian groups, the two main sects of Islam without mentioning names, you understand, I'm saying here that has convoluted to the problem. And it's almost impossible to have a fair discussion without, you know, getting emotional. So it's best to not even talk about that Euro in any type of public platform. Maybe in applied private platform, we can go over the actual Initial reports and do the analysis. That's something that should be done amongst those students that are qualified to do so anyway, back to my point of our seminal callosum, that even out to be the Maliki Judge of Andalus. Who who died 543 Hydra, he mentioned that look, we don't

even know for sure if xid was faster or not. Okay. We don't know for sure. We don't have two witnesses that can testify. And in fact, he goes all in all things indicate that your xid was a solid was a righteous person. Now this is a revisionist history. SubhanAllah This is really requires a stretch to do that, because even as obeyed Abdullah even humba Imam, I mean, everybody is telling us this, everybody is telling us, you know, I've never been humbler. When he came back to Medina. He basically said that he's doing things that are now again, from our perspective, drinking alcohol and doing this type of stuff or womanizing or something is utterly trivial compared to the rulers of our

times. But you have to understand, not just to become saying, look, you have to understand, these people have seen the falafel aboubaker earthmen idea of the law, I know they are the stun sons of the Sahaba. And to hear of a halifa that is doing these types of things and living a lifestyle that is an Islamic, they cannot fathom it. And ignorance. Zubair says the same thing, and personal The law says the same thing. And I believe the handler says the same thing. And there's a whole narrative around the lifestyle of this individual. Now 500 years later, somebody comes along and begins to revise us as Hey, we need two witnesses and who are you to tell us otherwise, somehow this

is called radical revisionism, right? It's like complete, trying to distort, look, you see is not a Sahabi we are not obliged to, to and by the way, a Sahaba. Even if he works out, he can commit sins, even everybody knows

Anyway, you see, there's also hobby, we don't have to have a special love for him, nor do we have to defend him. And when you see pretty much the geomar of the earlier scholars of Sunni Islam, forget other strands of Sunni Islam, you know, criticizing and chastising and talking about him, then somebody comes along fifth sixth seventh century and begins to, you know, revision and whatnot. And then in our times, I would say there's an, there's an blatant defense of this persona. This is historiography that we should all be aware of. I've been Tamia has written a lot about New Zealand, the conflict that took place and he says that people went to extremes regarding xid, some of them

considered to be a saint.

And a righteous ruler, and others considered to be outside the fold of Islam. It is in the event, Tamia says I'm going to follow the middle way. He says he is he is neither a companion, nor was he known for piety and knowledge. Rather, he was given leadership by his father accepted by some opposed by others. He goes, many things occurred in his lifetime, the killing of Hussein and even taymiyah says, Yes, he did not commanded nor was he happy at it. This has been taneous analysis. And even taymiyah says it is not true that he poked the head of person that had been 10 years analysis. It is not true. As I said others disagreed with Ibn taymiyyah and even taymiyah says that he is

either cursed even Ziad and got angry at him. And that is one narrative. Even Monica Thea says that initially he was happy and then he flipped, but even to him. He did not mention that point. Three it does mention that he did not reprimand even Zia, even though he should have done so. And he says even taymiyah says we should not have any special love for Xen. But neither does he deserve to be cursed. Rather, we let his leave his affair to Allah subhana wa Tada. Now, that's been Tamia. And I will call him in Tamia centrist, right. So he's within the mainstream spectrum, but more on this side of basically a defense because again, he has certain things that are a little bit more on the

defensive side, then let's say no, Josie, all you gotta do is read him know Josie and Samia, and you see the difference between them. Now, in our times as the the researcher, I'm going to assume he has pointed out that we now have a trend that is centrist. Right, right, that is even more, so I'm saying writing using my left hand, you got my point here, sorry, centrist, left, left, right and left. So right is the tech field. And left is the defense. Okay, so it is a centrist left, excuse me, yeah, so centrist Left, left, it is going even more, and that is now becoming a defense of yazeed. And we see this amongst many of the preachers and teachers and the movies and the roadmap of

that strand of Islam that, you know, claims to be following the setup. And they are very much almost an outright defense of yazeed. One of the Grand movies, you know, of the kingdoms, calls him the ameerul momineen. And he was the legitimate halifa. And nobody should have done hirogen. So what you get is really,

Hussein rhodiola one, nobody would dare criticize him. But it's like, they speak in the third person, no one should have done holdrege against him, right. So they go into the third person. He was legit legitimate Qatif and whatnot. And of course, we have to be clear here and again, you know, no matter how awkward this is to say, but you have to realize that this this narrative or this group of people, you know, they have their biases, and I'm not impugning their sincerity, I have studied with some of them. And I will be the first to say that they sincerely believe this, they sincerely believe that the ruler must be obeyed unconditionally. Right? And so part William becomes a theology

to them, and they need to then back project this theology to the earliest of generations. And this is ludicrous, because look, how can you say there was a schema of the set of that you don't make heroes against the faster ruler, when you have the majority of the Sahaba sons and the onside and the more hydrogen sons in Medina, all of them are basically saying we don't want this as the Ibanez obey her sandal, viola, Juan, Yanni look, you have the right to disagree and say, Hey, they did something that ended in things that have negative repercussions, but to call them deviants to call them hawan is to say there was a jamaa. Honestly, this is a delusional interpretation that is based

on a complete distortion of the reality. That's one of the reasons you study history, then you understand how, you know these types of things make no sense, how can you say that it is the theology of Sunni Islam? The thought with Ahmed is absolutely wajib. When you have the bulk of the early, you know, scholars, many of them now you can say it's not wise and I agree with that. Maybe it's not wise, you can say, you know, you have to think through repercussions, but to bring in theology, and to bring in deviancy and to say that people who do this are going against Islam or going against, you know, the Quran and Sunnah. Well, that's your words. That's your interpretation.

I wonder what you would have said to have been zubaid that Sahabi the son of this hobby, the son of a female Sahabi, the grandson of Booker's today, what would you say to him? What would you say to represent Well, the one that you don't know the Quran and Sunnah, what would you say to the groups of Sahaba and Medina, all of them, you know, Mark

They've been seen and I love it humbled that hey, we know the Quran sooner better than you. I mean, again, you have to be very careful here that every strand of Islam, you know has to reinterpret later tradition in light of his own tradition. And that's why it's so important to study history so that you're not fooled or deceived or misguided by sincere people. They're sincere people, but they have a narrative that they have to defend. And they believe in that narrative. Some of them and others know it's not true, but for whatever reason, they have to defend it. This is a constructed notion later on, you know, to actually hammer is it can be done without doing it the way they do it.

And in my humble opinion, you know, people like even Omar and Ibn Abbas are the role models for me. They never once supported us EAD Ibn Abbas wrote him a scathing letter read even a theoretical read l can be able to read what even Abbas wrote to her saying, sorry to use EAD after the death of Hussein will the long read what he wrote, and that is what you call ultimate wisdom, very angry, almost cursing is no support given to Z. But he felt unsheathing the sword is going to be problematic. This to me is a philosophy that I can very much sympathize with. But you're going to bend over backwards, you're going to justify tyranny, you're going to say, Well, you know what, you

can't criticize him and whatnot, and the stories of the Sahaba and tabula and are well known to you, I'm sorry, you're living in your own lala land or whatever. And you know, I'm sorry to be so blunt here. But this is the problem that we have a reconstruction of history based upon a fantasy that supports tyrannical regimes, you have to call them out. And you have to call a spade a spade and say, no, this is not the reality. You have your own constructed narrative events. Very quickly, just before we conclude, I know it's been a long time.

But another story that really or another incident that really demonstrates how disconnected that strand is, is the the revolt of a chef, a chef, and this did not take this and use these time, Z's time. We skipped over your seeds, order to attack the Kaaba, as we know this took place.

Under Muslim, even Obama he attacked the Kaaba. Because of the death of us either army was called back in the hubby says that you seeds rain began with the killing of Hussein. And it ended with the destruction of the Kaaba. And in middle in the middle of that was the rape and the plunder of Medina. Allah did not bless Cz than his life. This is a very happy speaking here. And now you have so many roula and movies and preachers and teachers of that strand of Islam, that in their hatred of one sect of Islam, please understand what I'm saying here in their animosity towards one sect. This causes them to defend the indefensible. And Allah has commanded us to be the middle nation. I do not

agree with Shiite interpretation or theology that doesn't make me justify the sins and the blunders of yazeed. He has to meet Allah azza wa jal with all that he has done, I don't see the point of getting to the point of cursing or whatnot, but I have no sympathy for that individual or his reign, or what that timeframe did. And at the same time, I am not sympathetic to theologies that are outside of Sunni Islam. In any case, Ahmed just went away very quickly mentioned as well, before we conclude the event of evening, as well, because again, it shows you the constructed narrative of this trend that says you have to obey the Emir and the halifa and whatnot. Oh, by the way, that's

the halifa. We're not talking about dynasties and kingdoms that has nothing to do with the halifa. Even the halifa you have interpretations, and overall, I am quietest and pacifist, but I'm not bootlicking I'm not saying we should, you know, justify the halifa that's where the halifa How about kings and dynasties and presidents of countries that have nothing to do with the Shetty to use these a hadith about what the number really is completely untenable. But even a shot very quickly, very briefly, before I conclude, was a military General, who had a big ego, frankly, and he was under a head judge, but he felt himself to be better than head judge. And so when head judge was harsh with

him in one manner, it broke away from head judge and had judge we all know how evil and how tyrannical he wasn't what a you know, person he was. And so when he broke away, a lot of people became encouraged that we now have the the opportunity to fight against a judge and the oma yet and so they began to join a bit of a shot. And people of the people who joined were some of the greatest scholars of the time, so much so that the revolution of the middle Arshad began being called the revolution of the scholars of the revolution of the era. And this is a very interesting incident that took place in the reign of a head judge Ibn Yusuf and some of the greatest of the scholars are

starting in the rain he was the governor of hydrogen manoussos and even as we said, attracted many people who wanted to just break away from the oma yet amongst them some of the greatest scholars of the time say they've been jubair one of the top tier of the tub your own the student ambassador but Omar, I thought I better be a robot Muslim even though you're Sol Mohammed even sided newbie will cause the side we will cause his son a shabby the great scholar a shabby Maliki

Do you know, even emulator In fact, even undisciplined Malik, you know, as an old man, 90 years old, even and asuna Malik, who was in Basra at the time, he was encouraging people to join the revolution of imminent Russia, even though he himself was too old to fight, over 150,000 people join this was the biggest revolution against the oma years and against Hajaj and against the medical marijuana. And it took place at the end of the first century of the hedgerow. And a number of battles took place three and a half months of battles between a head judge and between imminent shot. And at times, people felt good when and so more and more people joined. Eventually, even a child was, was

defeated by a head judge, and he won against even a shot and the the end of a shot and the the the demise of this revolution, it resulted in a huge Shockwave, like you can imagine, there was a genuine hope amongst the aroma and the scholars that our revolution would be successful and where they viewed to be the evil dynasty will be overthrown. And we would now have a better rule. And that's why so many Roma, including an SU demotic, was sympathetic to the revolution of inertia. Now, eventually had judges we said went over. And this caused a demoralization in the ranks of the rune ama, so much so that according to many scholars, the theological sect known as the Moto G, was

formed, the quietest stick, a political sect of the Moto G, was formed as a result of the loss of union that this resulted in a strand of Islam that is quiet autistic pacifistic, listening to the rulers, and we still have elements of this to our time. So look that up, as well. And it's really sad that at a Sydney medical, the loved one was mistreated by a judge because of this, and it's well known. You can read the books of history, that when a judge entered bussola, and as an attorney Malik was, of course, living there that

had judge was very harsh to unyson ematic. And I wouldn't be like he called him young, obese, or evil person or person who is inciting fitna one time you support it, and then you still put him in a debate and then just give them a shot. We'll law he If I had my way with you, I would eliminate and cut you off completely like a route is cut off from the trees is cut off from its root, and an A symptomatic said in Nadella, native Roger stone. And he went back to his family. And he said to his people and followers that were it not for the fact that I feared for my family, and who would take care of them, I would have said to him a word that I would have died right then and there. Then he

wrote a letter to the ready Cuban mod one. And he said to him, that, if they are who are the nosara had living amongst them, somebody who was a servant to Isa or to Moosa, they would honor Him, and they would kiss his feet or whatever they are using a flowery phrase, and yet here I am the servant of the prophets of Allah, why do you sell them and your hijab and use of has said to me such and such, what type of you know, respect is this and other American one became very angry at head judge and he wrote him a letter, you had better go and apologize to Anna symptomatic right now, or else I will deal with you. So hi, judge had to go and apologize to an assembly medic, in order to make

amends here. In any case, the point that we're winding down here, the point is that these are miscellaneous incidents in early Islamic history. And I wanted to mention that for a number of points, first and foremost, so that you understand so that when you read these incidents in the books of zero, not zero, I mean, Hadeeth, because all of these incidents are referenced in body by the way, the revolted, head judge, you know, marijuana, they're all references I bought easy, they're all referenced here. When you read the books of CFCs and whatnot, you understand? Secondly, so that you understand that, hey, our history is very human. It is problematic for us to romanticize

to to to mythologize really our early Islamic history. As I've said, so many times our religion is divine, our history is human. And we need to learn from the humanity of our early history. Because when you don't when you have these these idealistic or utopia, or mythological, mythological visions, you really have unrealistic standards, you know, and just to give you one simple reality, and I know this is going to cause a huge backlash as well, but all of these movements that are clamoring for the lava, lava lava, if we had a philosopher, there would be world peace, if we had a high level Not a single steef would be exist and not a single woman would be harmed, what books of

history or you're reading it was under the head of a that these things happen. It was caused by the halifa. Now I'm not saying a khilafah is nonsensical, but I'm saying your vision of the philosopher has to be rooted in reality. And that's one of the reasons why I frankly don't have a lot of respect for these movements because clearly they haven't read classical Islamic history. They have not even read a chapter in punica theory or the boundary or even how they can for them to have these unrealistic notions. Yes, there is benefit in how

political stability and a base of Islam. But don't believe that you're going to solve global poverty, you're not a single person is going to be harmed. No read and you will understand that even and the oma is by the way, we're in many ways more powerful than the buses, there was at least one Caliphate, it gets even worse when you go move on the point being that don't present our early history as if it was Jenna on Earth. Settle down, understand, we have lots of positives. We have lots of pros, but we also have lots of cons as well. And to be very clear here that even as I'm very critical of specific you know, policies and you know that you see them particular and whatnot and

sympathetic to the Great Grandma, and the grandson of the prophet SAW Selim administers obey, and Abdullah bin humbler. We also have to be clear here that generally speaking, evil tyrants, you know, people that we now consider to be the secularist rulers and whatnot, generally speaking, they're the ones who win politically. And historically, you know, their legacies live on politically, but the legacy of the Roma loves lives on intellectually. And so we should learn from this. Look at the Arab Spring, look at what happened. Look at the results. Look at what's happening in Syria and what not our hearts are with the roadmap, our hearts are with the people when they want to better and

whatnot. But let us also learn and I don't have the solution. All I'm saying is learned from history. This is not a call for pacifism. As much as it is a call for real politic as is saying, you know, learn from it being a boss in a better mode. You know, learn from an SNL boss 300 bosses, he was asked by many people to join him and he had his own students begged him to join imminent revolution at the time of head judge, and the time of hedger been usurped, right. But hasn't it just felt that this is not going to be successful and he was quietest in this regard. Even as he hated the oma years he was not pro omiya. And me personally, these are the role models, even to my heart

is with a lot of nose obey it. And I've also been humbled on her saying that in the long run home, you know, you can't help but sympathize with that. With that, with that sense of I want justice, but what happened to them in the end? And

there's, there's no there's no right answer here. You know, should we always just follow has an adversity and enable a bus? I don't have an answer, but we definitely need to study we definitely to benefit from that and understand that, generally speaking, generally speaking, unsheathing the sword, you know, against these tyrannical secularists or whatever, generally speaking, is going to have the backlash that Allah who had them Is it is it is it better or not to do in the long run Allah who are them at the same time, the main point with this, I conclude, we have to be super, super careful that the narrative of early Islamic history is not hijacked by groups of scholars

whose interests lie not in the protection of the oma, but with the protection of royal families and political interests, even if some of them are sincere, but naive in this regard that we don't be blind fools to this regard. They're odema and the Sahaba. And the sons of the Sahaba and the Tabby rune, they were not with the bill against Sunni Islam. They were not going against the doctrines of Sunni Islam. They knew Islam better than these orlimar, who claimed to follow them. And yet they realize and here's the point here, brothers and sisters, if you're still with me, after all this long, rambling and whatnot, and has another basally, even abass, even Omar and others, they avoided

the fitna, right, their hearts were with those who revolted. They lived amongst those who revolted. Their students were with that camp, none of them supported the tyrants. I'm sorry to be blunt here. But these people who claim to follow the self, they're supporting the tyrants, their hearts are not with the people. They're on one camp here. And so let's not this, be careful in this regard here. We cannot allow the memories of these great Redeemer of the past to this haven't grown to be hijacked. We cannot allow their legacies to be tainted by a modern revisionism in which we are told one thing, and history teaches us the other, even as we learn from history, we don't want to repeat it, we also

have to be careful that history is not hijacked by radical revisionist and taken to a level that it should not be taken for In any case, with this initial load data, I hope that there was of some benefit. So to summarize, we talked about a number of key incidents here. We talked about how do we know what we know how important it is to do that, we talked about the fact that analyzing is another reality. We talked about understanding different people's analysis and seeing where do you fall in this line? We talked about him being careful of radical revisionism, Subhanallah I've said this before, but I was gonna say this, I forgot to mention it, but normally have an Ibis, and these great

great Sahaba and Tabby rune who didn't revolt, who didn't join the revolt, they never criticize, or they not no, cause they never considered those who revolted to be deviants. They never said that you're against Islam, you're against Sunni Islam. They never said your Haji never said this. they disagreed from a political standpoint and they said, it's not the wisest

thing to do. They never invoked deviancy card. That's the key point I want you to take away with definitely in this regard and with this insha Allah to Allah, I hope there was of some benefit. I know what was rambling back and forth but I hope inshallah there was some benefit until next time, whatever the topic is going to be just like malachite or cinematic miraculous Allahu wa barakato Yeah, man.

He can't