Tuesday, 28 December 2010

THE HADITH OF THE CITY OF CAESAR




DETAILED ANALYSIS OF
THE HADITH OF THE CITY OF CAESAR
Part2
---

Quote:

Ibn Taymiyyah Said ,

"And the hadeeth of Bukhaari states the first army to wage Jihaad against Constantinople is forgiven and the first army to do Jihaad against Constantinople, their Ameer was Yazeed ibn Mu’waiyyah and the word army entails a specific number and every member of this army is included in this forgiveness. "
(Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah Fee Naqdh Kalaam ash-Shee’ah Wal-Qadariyyah (2/252), al-Muntaqa Minhaaj al-Ei’tidaal Fee Naqdh Kalaam ar-Rafdh Wal-Ei’tizaal (pg.290).
---

Al-Dhahabi said:

"he was the commander of that army during the campaign against Constantinople, among which were people such as Abu Ayyoob al-Ansaari.
Yazeed was appointed by his father as his heir, so he took power after his father died in Rajab 60 AH at the age of thirty-three, but his reign lasted for less than four years."
---------




It is said about Yazid that because he participated in first siege of the city of Caesar i.e.Constantinople (Urdu–Qustuntuniya), he is worthy of being forgiven and he has already been forgiven. To prove this, a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari is quoted.
---


IN THE FOLLOWING LINES, A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF
THIS HADITH IS BEING PENNED
There is a Hadith in Sahih Bukhari,
Vol 1, Pg No. 409, 410
(Hadith No. 2924)

It has been narrated on the authority of Hadhrat Umme Haraam (May Allah SWT be well pleased with her) that she heard the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) say:
The army from My Ummah, who will first perform jihad through the water (sea), has made Jannah obligatory for itself. Hadhrat Umme Haraam (May Allah SWT be well pleased with her) entreated, "O Prophet of Allah SWT, Am I among them? He (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said: Yes. Then the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said: The army from My Ummah, who will first attack the city of Caesar is forgiven. I entreated: Am I among them, O Prophet of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)? He (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said: No."

If the collections of Hadith, the books of Rijal and the canons of history are honestly gone through, then the falsity of the aforementioned deduction (including Yazid in this Hadith) will be understood easily. Using the above Hadith to include Yazid among those who have been forgiven is incorrect for many reasons.



FIRST INTERPRETATION OF THIS HADITH
In regard to this Hadith, the Hadith-Masters have given a opinion that the "city of Caesar" mentioned in the Hadith is not Constantinople, but Hims, which was the capital of Roman Empire in the days of the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam).

It is given in Fath ul Bari in the interpretation of this Hadith.

Translation: "Some interpreters have said that the city of Caesar means the city which was the capital of the Roman Empire in the blessed era of the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam). That city is Hims. At that time, it was the capital of the Roman Empire."
(The Castle of Hims)

This interpretation is all the more significant, because in Sahih Bukhari and in all other books, the word "Constantinople" is not used!
Only "the city of Caesar" is mentioned. Caesar was the Emperor of the Roman Empire. The city in which he lived or was his capital will only be termed as "city of Caesar."


According to the wording of the Hadith, that city is Hims1.
In the caliphate of Hadhrat Umar Al Faruq (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him), in 15A.H.(636CE) an army under the command of Hadhrat Abu Ubaidah bin Jarrah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) attacked Hims.
Muslims laid siege to Hims in harsh winter and the end of winter, they conquered it.
In this battle, Hadhrat Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him), Hadhrat Bilal (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him), Hadhrat Miqdaad (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) and many other Sahabah participated.
Imam Ibn Atheer (May Allah SWT shower His Mercy on him) has mentioned among the incidents of 15A.H, in Tarikh Kamil, Vol 2, Pg No. 339:
Translation: When Hadhrat Abu Ubaidah bin Jarrah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) finished the campaign of Damascus, he took the route of Ba'albak to Hims."
At that time Yazid was not even born let alone participating in the battle.
Yazid was born in 26A.H.
as Imam Ibn Atheer wrote in Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 9, Pg No. 76:
Translation: "Yazid bin Mu'awiyah was born in 26 A.H."

A possible objection against this Hadith might be that in the Hadith mentioned, first the Jihad by sea is mentioned, in which Hadhrat Umme Haraam (May Allah SWT be well pleased with her) is a participant, then the siege of the city of Caesar is mentioned. If the city of Caesar is Hims, then it should have been mentioned first but it is not so.
The Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)
first mentioned the Jihad by sea and then the siege of the city of Caesar.
It should be remembered that the order of incidents might be according to what is being said or might be according to the order of occurrence.
In this Hadith, it is according to what is said, not in the order of occurrence.

SECOND INTERPRETATION OF THIS HADITH

Other interpreters have opined that "the city of Caesar" means Constantinople.
Still Yazid is not included in the ambit of the said Hadith as Muslims attacked Constantinople a number of times and the glad tidings of forgiveness are only for those who participated in the first siege.
Now, what is to be seen is that, when did Muslims attack Constantinople for the first time and which is the first army?

FIRST ATTACK ON CONSTANTINOPLE
It is written in Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 7, Pg No. 179 about the first army which attacked Constantinople.
Translation: Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) attacked Rome in 32A.H. and fought battles after battles till he reached the city of Constantinople :
It is given in Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg No. 25.


This shows that Constantinople was first attacked by Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him). There is no mention of Yazid participating in this siege!
According to Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 9, Pg No. 76:
Yazid was born in 26 A.H., so in 32A.H, he was a kid of 6 years old.


SECOND ATTACK ON CONSTANTINOPLE

It is written in Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 7, Pg No. 179 about the first army which attacked Constantinople.

Translation: Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) attacked Rome in 32A.H. and fought battles after battles till he reached the city of Constantinople :
It is given in Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg No. 25.

This shows that Constantinople was first attacked by Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him). There is no mention of Yazid participating in this siege. According to Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 9, Pg No. 76.

Yazid was born in 26 A.H., so in A.H. 32, he was a kid of 6 years old.

THIRD ATTACK ON CONSTANTINOPLE

The third attack on Constantinople was in 44 A.H. or 46 A.H. It is written in Tarikh Kamil in the incidents of the year of 44A.H:

Translation: In 44 A.H. Muslims, with Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them) entered Rome and spent winter there only and Hadhrat Basar bin Artaah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) fought through the sea."
Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg no. 298

It is given in the same book in the incidents of 46A.H.,

Translation: Hadhrat Malik bin Abdullah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) remained in the kingdom of Rome and it has been said that Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them) and returned to Hims the same year and passed away into the presence of Allah SWT."

The Commander of third army to attack to Constantinople was Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them). This attack has been mentioned not only in the books of history, but also in Sunan Abu Dawood, which is a reliable book from the Sihah Sittah (the 6 most authentic and reliable books of Hadith).
It is given in Sunan Abu Dawood, Vol 1, Kitabul Jihad, Pg No. 340 (Hadith No: 2151),
"Muslims attacked Constantinople and in this battle, Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) was the commander.

Translation:
It has been narrated on the authority of Hadhrat Abu Imran (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him): We left Madina with the intention of attacking Constantinople. The commander of the army was Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him). The Romans had their backs to the ramparts. A person readied himself for attack. The people said:
La ilaha illallah, he is taking himself to death. Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) said: This verse has been revealed about us, when Allah SWT helped the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and made Islam dominant, then we said, 'Come let us remain with our property and wealth and set them right,' then Allah SWT sent this command:
And spend in the way of Allah SWT and do not put yourself in mortal danger.”Surah Baqra- 195 and so to take oneself to death is to remain with our property, busy oneself in setting them right and abandon Jihad.
Hadhrat Abu Imran says that Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) used to perform Jihad for the sake of Allah SWT, to the extent that he was buried in Constantinople."

According to the above mentioned details, the army, which attacked Constantinople under Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) in 32 A.H. is the first army and this is the army, which according to Sahih Bukhari, is forgiven.

It is made clear by the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawood, that the Commander of the army, which attacked Constantinople was Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them), who passed away in either 46 A.H. or 47 A.H, as given in Tarikh Kamil in the incidents of 46 A.H.

Sunan Abu Dawood is from among the Sihah Sittah (the six most authentic books of Hadith). It is by all standards more preferable than the books of history. This proves beyond doubt that under the leadership of Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them) Constantinople was attacked before 46A.H. or 47 A.H., as the canons of history and Rijal establish that Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them) passed away in 46 or 47 A.H.

In 32 A.H, 43 A.H, 44 A.H. or 46 A.H.
Yazid did not participate in any of these 3 sieges.


IN WHICH SIEGE DID YAZID PARTICIPATE?
To find out whether Yazid is included in the glad tidings of forgiveness given in the Hadith, it should be found in which attack of Constantinople did Yazid participate and in which year?

There are 4 opinions in this regard.

He(Yazid) participated in the battle of Rome in 49 A.H.(Yazid 23/24 years old) and he reached Constantinople as given in Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 8, Pg. No. 34:
Translation:
“In 49 A.H. Yazid bin Mu'awiyah attacked the kingdom of Rome and reached Constantinople.
Yazid participated in the attack of 50 A.H., as given in Umdatul Qari, Vol 5, Pg No. 558:

Translation:
Muslims reached Constantinople in this attack and laid siege to it and Yazid was the commander on the behalf of his father."
“Yazid participated in the attack of 52 A.H.
Imam Badruddin 'Aini Hanafi (May Allah SWT shower His Mercy on him) preferred this opinion and said that this opinion is to be preferred that Yazid participated in the 52 A.H.(Yazid 26/27 years old) attack of Constantinople, as given in Umdatul Qari, Vol 10, Kitab ul Jihad, Pg No. 244.

Hadhrat Mu'awiyah
(May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) sent Yazid in 55 A.H.(Yazid 29/30 years old) to attack Constantinople, as given in: Al Isabaa fi marifati Sahabah.

Whichever opinion is preferred, it does not prove that Yazid participated in the first siege of Constantinople, because Constantinople had been attacked multiple times before it.

About the opinions of Yazid's participation, the first one according to chronological order is 49 A.H, when before this in
32 A.H. Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) and after him in
43 A.H. Hadhrat Basar bin Artaah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him), then in
44 A.H or 46 A.H., Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him), had all attacked Constantinople.
Neither the books of Hadith nor the books of Rijal mention Yazid's participation in any of these attacks nor has any historian mentioned it.
Therefore saying that yazid participated under the Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with them) and is therefore forgiven is not supported by any of the books of Rijal or history. Instead by reconciling the books of Rijal and history, we come to know that this is a fabrication. Believing in this without any support from the canons of history is akin to changing the history of Islam.

A DOUBT AND ITS ANSWER

There can be a question about the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawood that Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) passed away in the battle which had been fought under Yazid, as given in Sahih Bukhari, Vol 1, Pg No. 158:

Translation: Mahmood bin Rabe'e says that I described this to the people, in which the Sahabi Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) was present on the occasion of this battle. He passed away in this battle and Yazid bin Mu'awiyah was the commander of this army in Rome."

In the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawood, Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) is mentioned. It is also mentioned in the same Hadith that Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) performed Jihad continuously to the extent that he passed away.

It may seem that Yazid was present in the army of Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid, but this is incorrect because Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) did not pass away when he was under the command of Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him).
Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) led the attack on Constantinople in 44 or 46 A.H. and he passed away in 46 or 47 A.H. Constantinople has been attacked after that, in 49 A.H. under the command of Hadhrat Sufyan bin 'Auf (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) and in 52 under the command of Yazid bin Mu'awiyah.

Hadhrat Abu Ayyub (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) participated in both the battles that took place after the passing away of Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him). In the attack of 52 A.H., he passed away and this is the army, which has been mentioned in Sahih Bukhari.

According to the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawood, Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid's (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) commanding the army and his passing away in 46 or 47 A.H., Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) participation in the battles of 49 and 52 A.H. and his passing away in 52 A.H. and Yazid's participation in this particular battle, all this prove that Yazid did not participate in the battle that was fought under the command of
Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him). It has also been proved that the siege in which Yazid participated, was not the first siege, but before this in 32, 43 and 46 A.H., Constantinople had been attacked.
When Yazid did not participate in the first siege of Constantinople, he is not included in the forgiveness referred to in the Hadith, because the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) never said that all the armies which attack Constantinople are forgiven, but He (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said that only the first army to attack Constantinople is forgiven.



YAZID DID NOT

PARTICIPATE SINCERELY IN THE LATER BATTLES

History proves that even in the later battles, Yazid did not participate sincerely. Instead he participated only on the insistence of Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him, as given in Tarikh Kamil Vol 3, Pg No. 314, under the incidents of 49 A.H and 50 A.H.

Translation: Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) sent a huge army to Rome in 50 A.H. Hadhrat Sufyan bin 'Auf (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) was appointed as the commander of the army and Yazid was ordered to go with the army.
Yazid started making excuses cited illness and did not go. Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) also did not go. In this journey, the Mujahideen faced hunger, thirst and a host of other difficulties.
When Yazid was told about this, he recited some couplets, in which he said:
“ I don't care about the fever, difficulties which the army faces at the Firqodona (place name), at der murran, I am sitting on a high mattress and Umme Kulthoom (Yazid's wife) is with me.”
When Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah came to know of this, he said with an oath, that Yazid should be definitely sent to the commander Hadhrat Sufyan bin 'Auf (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him), so that he understands the difficulties of the Mujahideen. Umdatul Qari Vol 10, Kitab Ul Jihad.

These details of Umdatul Qari and Tarikh Ul Kamil show the character of Yazid that to save himself from jihad, he made excuses. When the Mujahideen faced difficulties, fell ill, he expressed his happiness, which is in not allowed in the light of the Shariah. The Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) has prohibited against expressing happiness on the difficulties of Muslims. There is a Hadith in Shu'abul Iman (Hadith No: 2507)

Translation: It has been narrated on the authority of Hadhrat Syeduna Waathila bin Asqa'a (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) that the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said:
You should not express happiness on the difficulty of your brother, lest Allah SWT has mercy on him and embroils you in that difficulty."

Yazid did not obey his father's command
which is a major sin (Gunaah Kabira). He feigned illness, even when he was healthy, which is lies and deception. Later, when Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) put him under oath to go, he reluctantly joined the army. Can it be hoped that when he joined the army reluctantly, he would be rewarded for Jihad, when the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) has said,

Translation: Verily, acts are rewarded according to the intentions."

Imam Badruddin 'Aini
(May Allah SWT shower His Mercy on him)
Translation: What excellence can be there for Yazid, when his state is so well known."

Even if it is said that Yazid participated in Jihad with all his heart and is forgiven according to the Hadith, then does it mean that all his later sins are also forgiven?

In the interpretation of the Hadith of the city of Caesar, the interpreters:
Imam 'Aini, Imam Ibn Hajar 'Asqalani, Imam Qustulani (May Allah SWT shower His Mercy on them), all have written in the interpretation of this Hadith, that the forgiveness mentioned in this Hadith is only when the person is worthy of being forgiven.

It is written in Umdatul Qari, Vol 10, Pg No. 244:

Translation: Even if Yazid did join the army, even then because of his later crimes, he has been excluded from this glad tiding. For this reason, the 'Ulama (scholars) of the Ummah agree that the words, "they are forgiven" implies that provided they are worthy of being forgiven.
If after participating in that battle, someone leaves Islam, turns into a defector (Murtad) and then dies, then that person is not included in that glad tiding. This shows that the Hadith of the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) means that the person joining in the army will be forgiven, only when the eligibility is found in that person.", Umdatul Qari, Vol 10, Pg No. 244.

A QUESTION FOR THE SUPPORTERS OF YAZID

Those people who support Yazid and claim that he participated in the siege of Constantinople and is therefore forgiven, even when the facts have been brought out can they bring forth any proof from the Quran or the Sunnah?
Even if he had participated, will all his later sins be forgiven and Allah SWT will not take him to account for them?

There are other acts also for which forgiveness has being declared. There is a Hadith in Sunan Ibn Majah, Bab Majaa fil Ghusl, Pg No. 105:

Translation:
Whoever washes a dead body, enshrouds it, perfumes it, carries the Janazah, offers its Salaat ul Janazah, and does not reveal if he sees anything in the dead body, that person is as free of sins on that day as if his mother gave birth to him on that day.

In the same way, there is a Hadith about Hajj: Syeduna Abu Hurairah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) relates: I heard the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) say:
Whoever performs a Hajj, uttered no obscenities, did nothing bad, he will return that day in such a state as if his mother has given birth to him.–Sahih Bukhari, Vol 1, Pg No. 206

There is a Hadith in Sahih Muslim:

Translation: It has been narrated on the authority of Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) that the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said: Whoever bears the responsibility of an orphan or makes someone responsible for the orphan, I (i.e. the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)) and that person will be like 2 fingers (i.e. so close), Imam Malik (May Allah SWT shower His Mercy on him) gestured with the first and the middle finger.

There are many Hadith in which glad tidings of forgiveness have been given.

Does the forgiveness mentioned in the above Hadith and in other Hadith mean that a person after performing the above acts can leave Fardh Salaat, drink wine, steal, persecute somebody, hurt somebody, murder somebody, even then because of the past virtuous acts, all his later sins will be forgiven? No, what it means is that
because of the virtuous acts, the earlier sins are forgiven and not the later sins.
Otherwise, it should be said that if any person performs a Hajj, washes a dead body, or bears the responsibility of an orphan, that person can leave Salaat, drink wine, steal, persecute somebody, hurt and murder somebody but these sins will not affect him, only because that person has performed some virtuous acts. No sane person will accept that. This is a castle in the air. If this is accepted as correct, then the society cannot be kept free of oppression.
SUMMARY

The Hadith-Masters have interpreted the Hadith, "the first army from My Ummah to attack Caesar is forgiven in many ways. One of them is that the city if Caesar mentioned in the Hadith is not Constantinople, but Hims, which was the capital city of the Roman Empire in the era of the Prophet, as given in Fath Ul Bari. This city was conquered in the caliphate of Hadhrat Umar (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him).


Even if it is accepted as Constantinople according to the opinion given by other interpreters, Yazid is still not included in the forgiveness, as Yazid did not participate in the first siege of Constantinople.
The first siege of Constantinople took place in 32 A.H. under Hadhrat Ameer Mu'awiyah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him).
The second siege took place in 43 A.H. under the command of Hadhrat Basar bin Artaah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him).
The third siege took place in 44A.H or 46 A.H. under the command Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him). Yazid did not participate in any of these attacks. There are 4 opinions about Yazid's participation in the attack on Constantinople–in 49, 50, 52 or 55 A.H. Even if any of them is accepted as true, then Yazid cannot be said to have participated in the first siege as the first siege took place in 32 A.H.. Therefore, Yazid is not included in the forgiveness mentioned in the Hadith.

May Allah SWT implant the love of the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) in our hearts and bless it with the love of the Ahle Bait, the elders of our Deen, the Auliya and the virtuous people (saliheen) and protect our faith from all kinds of trial tribulations and make us follow the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam).
----------------------------------------------------------------
---

1Homs or Hims (Arabic: حمص, Homs or Hims; previously Greek: Ἔμεσα, Emesa) is a city in western Syria
---
“...when 'Umar b. al-Khattab entered Jerusalem in 636 CE,
and eventually settled in Hims.”

(The Qur'an: an encyclopedia,page323, By Oliver Leaman)
---
---



Ibn yazid Zakir Nalayik (LA)


“Hadith of Constantinople”:
Dr Zakir said, “Yazid was the leader of that first siege of Constantinople”:

-----------------

Also watch video of
Shaykh Tahir - ul - Qadri:
(Yazid was on the 8th Lashkar (8th Siege of Constantinople):
----------


The Wahhabi/Salafi and their brothers the Deobandis claim:

“Yazid was part of that first army”
?


The wording of the Hadith are :
"awwalu jaishin min ummati yaghzoona madinata Qaisara maghfurullahum"
(Hadith No. 8668).

Thus, it could be any city of Byzantine Empire

You read any Islamic History book written by any well known Islamic historian (including Salafi scholar Al-Dhahabi, Ibn Katheer etc.) it is mentioned that the first Muslim invasion of Constantinople, Byzantine empire took place in 42 H in which Yazid was not there.

The second invasion of Muslims on Byzantine Empire was in43H under the command of Bu'sr bin Abi Arta, and the Army reached the city of Constantinople.
Yazid was not part of this Army.

The third invasion of Muslims took place in 44 H under the command of Abd ar-Rahman bin Khaled bin Walid. In this invasion, Busr bin Abi Arta also participated and attacked Constantinople from Sea.

Yazid was not part of this Army.

The fifth invasion of Constantinople was in 46 H under the command of Malik bin Abdullah. Yazid was not part of this Muslim Army.
The sixth invasion of Byzantine Empire was undertaken in 47 H under the command of Malik bin Hubaira.
Yazid was not part of this Army.

Three invasions took place on Byzantine empire in 49 H under the commands of (i) Malik bin Hubaira and (ii) Fazala bin Ubair.
Fazala bin Ubair captured many cities of Byzantine Empire.
The third invasion of Byzantine Empire took place in the same year under the command of Yazid bin Shajara Ar-Rahawi, who hailed from Syria.
It is wrongly, may be deliberately claimed by Wahhabis and their like minded Groups that the commander of this Army was Yazid bin Mu'awia, which is not true.

We invite our readers to read any History books of Islam, (including the history books written by Salafi Scholars) they will find the truth in this context.
The 8th invasion of Byzantine empire took place in 50H and in this invasion, some scholars claim that Yazid bin Mua'wia was part of this Army.

Thus Yazid was part of the Army of 8th invasion of Byzantine Empire.
The Hadith says that the “first Muslim Army” who will invade Byzantine empire is Jannati. Then how come he is claimed to be Jannati?

The Salafis mention Hadith Guide book Fatahul Bari written by Ibn Hajar Asqalani in which it is written that 'the invasion of Constantinople took place in 52 H and the commander of this Army was Yazid.
Even if we take this date as authentic, then this will be the ninth invasion of that city, and not the first one.
Because, as we have mentioned earlier with authentic sources that 8 invasions had already taken place before this date. Therefore, Yazid cannot be part of the people who are declared Jannati by The Holy Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم).
It is also mentioned in many Islamic History books that at the time of 8th invasion of Byzantine empire, Hazrat Muawiah(RA) wanted Yazid(LA) to participate, but he refused.
We do not understand why these sects want to favor Yazid against Imam Hussain (AS)? They should know the result of their favor and wrath of Allah (SWT) they will face on the Day of Judgment!
---
Narrated Khalid bin Madan:
That 'Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi told him that he went to 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was staying in his house at the sea-shore of Hims with (his wife) Um Haram.
'Umair said. Um Haram informed us that she heard the Prophet saying,
"Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition."
Um Haram added, I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Will I be amongst them?' He replied, 'You are amongst them.' The Prophet then said, 'The first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins.'
I asked, 'Will I be one of them, O Allah's Apostle?' He replied in the negative."
---

continue to:
---
27-Dec-2010
ADHM