They even dared to say such words to Imam Hussain:
‘We are calling upon your help today!
If you do not come to our aid, we shall lodge a complaint against you to the Prophet (s) on the Day of Reckoning!
We shall say, ‘’We called him but he refused to come’’’.
Do you think Imam Hussain was eager for the caliphate?
The Woeful History of Islam
The history of Muslims… our history is quite tragic.
The trouble with most Muslims today is that they are a shameless nation.
Believe me.
Our nation is the nation
with which the beloved daughter of Prophet Muhammad (s), Syeda Bibi Fatima Zahra became utterly displeased.
And before her demise, she strongly advised Maula Ali
‘not to let the Muslims hear of my passing and burial, for I am extremely displeased with them’.
Later, the Shias concocted a story about this,
‘it was due to the issue of modesty hence her funeral was conducted at night’.
This is not true whatsoever.
She was aggrieved.
The Garden of Fidak that the Prophet (s) had lovingly gifted his daughter
was seized by the Muslims.
They set her house on fire.
She was impaled by a rusty nail,
its poison spread throughout her body
which then caused her demise a few months later.
The first caliph, Abu Bakr Siddiq (rh) died of natural causes.
Then, Umar bin Khattab was murdered.
Usman e Ghani was murdered.
Maula Ali was martyred.
After Maula Ali, his son Imam Hassan was killed by poison.
Imam Hussain and all his companions
were brutally slain on the grounds of Karbala by the Muslims.
And then, the swords continued to slay, and slay, and slay.
From the beginning till now, Islam has been subjected to mischief,
due to two types of people,
1) the hypocrites and 2) the scholars of Islam.
Yazid, the son of Muawiya, did not have the audacity
to dispatch an entire army to murder Imam Hussain.
18,000 scholars had issued a verdict against Imam Hussain.
18,000 scholars issued a verdict.
What was the verdict?
​​Before you hear the verdict, you must understand the principles.
The caliph of the Muslims
had to be be selected upon a consensus
based on the entire Muslim population.
Okay?
When Usman e Ghani was martyred,
a rift became prominent in the Muslim nation
and Bibi Aisha was made to join Amir Muawiya
and they waged a war against Hazrat Ali.
Hazrat Ali held half the sultanate
and Amir Muawiyah held the other half.
After the martyrdom of Hazrat Ali,
Imam Hassan led Hazrat Ali’s sultanate and ruled as caliph
for six months.
He felt that the unity of the Muslims was in disrepair.
He did not approve of this division in the Islamic sultanate.
He was from the Prophet's lineage, pure from inside and out,
he was not interested in fame and leadership.
So, he decided that if Amir Muawiya takes oath
that the succeeding caliph will not be chosen by Amir Muawiya,
rather by a consensus based on the Muslim nation.
The nation would decide,
‘If he takes this oath, I will resign’ (Imam Hassan).
So, Amir Muawiya took an oath, ‘Alright, I take oath’.
So, he relinquished the caliphate,
leaving Amir Muawiya in control of the entire sultanate.
What is the law of caliphate?
That the entire nation must come to a unanimous decision
to choose their next caliph.
So, whoever would be elected caliph
would be chosen by the nation
this is real democracy.
What else is democracy? What is democracy?
The decision of the majority.
Now, if the nation chooses an individual as their caliph -
- pay heed to my words, it is very important.
Let’s say the nation has come to a decision and selected an individual as their caliph -
- there is a hadith of the Prophet (s) for this very scenario.
'If the Muslims select someone as caliph
and then a Muslim rebels and declares they do not accept the caliph,
such a person should be killed'.
This is a hadith.
Do you know what the scholars of Syria have been saying?
The scholars of Syria have been saying for 1,400 years
that the Shariah of the Muhammad (s)
took the life of the grandson of Muhammad (s).
Because this is in the hadith.
Before the Wahhabis can mislead you,
I am informing you of this so that you may not fall prey to their misguidance.
You know what the Wahhabis say, right?
The Wahhabis say that Yazid is heaven-bound.
Upon what basis do they say this?
What is the strongest proof they have for this?
This hadith.
However, you must ponder on one other thing.
This hadith of the Prophet (s) is applicable upon one
who has been chosen as a caliph by the consensus of the Muslim nation.
This is not applicable upon Muawiya’s son Yazid.
Why not?
He was not chosen by the Muslim nation.
He was appointed as caliph by his father.
This is when Amir Muawiya introduced monarchy in Islam.
What is monarchy? Kingdom.
Just like we have a kingdom here.
Our Queen has now passed
so her son Prince Charles has become King Charles.
When Prince Charles passes,
he will be succeeded by his eldest son, Prince Wiliam.
This is monarchy.
What happens in Pakistan in the political groups -
- for instance, Muslim League N and People’s Party.
What are these groups?
Let’s take People’s Party for instance.
The first leader was Bhutto.
When he died, his daughter, Benazir Bhutto became the leader.
Didn’t she?
Then she was assassinated by Zardari
who then became the next leader and now his son is being prepared.
The rest of the organisation is just a formality.
This is monarchy.
And Muslim League N?
Nawaz Sharif, Shahbaz Sharif and Maryam Sharif.
All the sharifs (nobles) are in charge, none of the disonourable people will get a chance!
They have established a kingdom
and it is this very kingdom that Amir Muawiya brought to Islam.
Now, 18,000 scholars passed verdicts based on this tradition.
God forbid, they said, 'in light of this tradition of the Prophet (s), Imam Hussain must be executed'.
The clergymen passed this verdict.
18,000! 18,000 clergymen issued this verdict!
And yet you express your adoration towards these clergymen?
These wretched people that destroyed the religion?
And based on what? This hadith.
They said, ‘Yazid is our caliph’.
And what word did they use for Imam Hussain? Rebel.
These are the atrocities this land has witnessed.
They called him a rebel!
It can very easily be said
that if someone is already a caliph
and someone comes and challenges their caliphate,
then they should be executed.
That is understandable.
But what is the issue here?
The issue is that the Prophet (s) made this statement
for a caliph that was chosen by the consensus of the nation
because the Muslim nation cannot have a problem with him
as they selected him.
But [Yazid] was not chosen by the nation,
he was appointed by his father -
- the degenerate son of a degenerate father.
And thousands of Muslims,
within a very short period of time,
summoned Imam Hussain with 10,000 letters,
saying: 'Come and save us,
we do not accept this tyrant as our caliph!’
They even dared to say such words to Imam Hussain:
‘We are calling upon your help today!
If you do not come to our aid, we shall lodge a complaint against you to the Prophet (s) on the Day of Reckoning!
We shall say, ‘’We called him but he refused to come’’’.
Do you think Imam Hussain was eager for the caliphate?
The one who used to sit atop the shoulders of the Prophet (s)?
Whose lips were kissed by the Prophet (s)?
The one whose purity is testified by the Qur’an!
Why would he be interested in governance?
He only stepped out of his house to repair the damage done to his grandfather’s nation.
Do you think that he intended to wage war?
If he intended to wage war, would he take his wife, his children as well as his child of six months?
Absolutely not.
These are the same clergymen that have been coming in sequence till date.
500 clergymen issued verdicts against Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jilani.
Have the clergymen ever spared anyone?