The status of Yazid ibn Muawiya’s leadership and understandings of Imam al-Hussain's stance against him
29th May 2021
Shaykh Ladak outlined the Shia stance on Yazid and Imam al-Hussain’s rising, and that the Shia hold Yazid directly accountable for the killing of al-Hussain. He outlined the Shia theological stance towards Yazid’s status in the hereafter and justifications for why it is permitted to curse him. The practice of cursing, according to Shaykh Jafar, is a positive means of staying away from sins and should not be taken as something negative.
The discussion amongst scholars saw a few points being raised, such as the notion of how the Khalifa doesn’t have to be of superior moral character (This point of superiority (afḍalliya) is also touched on in the CIMS discussion on Saqifa) which would allow for a corrupt individual to be a Khalifa, a position of worldly power. The notion of Khalifa as worldly leader was further discussed, although modern Sunni theorists see the role as devoid of theological value, the early Khalifa was and is still clearly held by many as an office standing in place of the Prophet and therefore engrained with theological notions in Islam.
Also discussed were how modern geo-political influences have an impact on how history is read such as contemporary revisionism by loud voices amongst Sunni Muslims to justify Yazid’s action as a reaction to modern Shiism and to reaffirm a sense of absolute obedience to the ruler. This also led to the discussion of how political theory amongst the Shia has changed post 1979 in influencing and framing the discussion amongst some Shia’s as to the political role of the Imam.
 al-Alūsī, Rūḥ al-Ma‘ānī fī Tafsīr al-Qur’an al-‘Aẓīm (Cairo, 1927), 26:73
 See Ibn al-Jawzī, Al-radd ʻalá ʻal-Mutaʿasib al-ʿanīd. (Beirut: Dar al Kutub al ʿilmiyya, 2005) where he refutes Abdul Mughit al-Baghdadi who views Yazid positively.
 From this strand would be Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (see Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, Shihab al-Dīn Abū al-ʻAbbās Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad, al-Ṣawāʻiq al-muḥriqah (Beirut: Mu’assasat al Risala, 1997) 2:635; al-Qāḍī Abū Yaʿlā, Ibn Asakir Ibn al-Jawzī, Ibn Hajar al Asqalani, Taftazani and others
 This stance maybe down to the position that cursing per se is an unbefitting action or that cursing a Muslim is prohibited. See al-Ghazzali (see Ibn Khallikān. Wafayāt ʼal-ʼaʻyān 3:288), Ibn Taymiyyah (see Ibn Taymīyah, Aḥmad ibn ʻAbd al-Ḥalīm, Muḥammad ʻUzayr Shams, and Bakr ibn ʻAbd Allāh Abū Zayd, al-masāʼil. (Makkah al-Mukarramah: Dār ʻĀlam al-Fawāʼid, 2001) 5: 139)
 Such as in the case of the Mufti of Saudia Arabia Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alN-r1sv3z0) & Shaykh ʻUthmān Khamīs (see ʻUthmān Khamīs. Ḥiqbah min al-tārīkh: mā bayna wafāt al-nabī ilá maqtal al-Ḥusayn 1:227)
 Since Hussain’s stance was revolting against the caliph, one could see this as a legitimate reason for rising up against a leader one sees as corrupt.
 Quran 13:25 & 48:10
 See Ayatollah Ni’matullah Salihi Najaf Abadi, al-Shahid al-Khalid al-Hussain bin Ali (Beirut: al-Intishar al-Arabi, 2013)
 See Muhammad Rayshahri, Chronicles of the Martyrdom of Imam Husayn (London: ICAS Press, 2020,) 37-53