Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama‘ah do not consider cursing any of the Sahabah permissible, but they do not mind cursing others, especially if they are the killers and enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet . Rather, their agreement has been reported on the permissibility to curse the one who killed Husain, ordered him to be killed, permitted it, or was pleased with it, without mentioning Yazid by name[1], and they have only differed on the permissibility to curse Yazid by name. However, the well-known view narrated from Ahamd ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH) is its permissibility; since he said to his son: «وَكَيْفَ لَا أَلْعَنُ مَنْ لَعَنَهُ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ فِي كِتَابِهِ؟!»; “And how can I not curse the one whom Allah the Exalted, the Majestic has cursed in His Book?!” His son said: «وَأَيْنَ لَعَنَ اللَّهُ يَزِيدَ فِي كِتَابِهِ؟»; “Where has Allah cursed Yazid in His Book?” Then Ahmad recited this verse: ﴿فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِنْ تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَنْ تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَتُقَطِّعُوا أَرْحَامَكُمْ ۝ أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فَأَصَمَّهُمْ وَأَعْمَى أَبْصَارَهُمْ﴾[2]; “Then is it possible that if you wield authority, you will spread corruption on the earth and sever your ties of kinship?! They are the ones whom Allah has cursed, so He has made them deaf and blinded their eyes.”[3] The judge Abu Ya‘la (d. 458 AH) has quoted it and then said: «هَذِهِ الرِّوَايَةُ إِنْ صَحَّتْ فَهِيَ صَرِيحَةٌ فِي مَعْنَى لَعْنِ يَزِيدَ»[4]; “This narration, if authentic, explicitly sates the permissibility to curse Yazid.” Therefore, ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) has said: «أَجَازَ الْعُلَمَاءُ الْوَرِعُونَ لَعْنَهُ»[5]; “The pious scholars have considered it permissible to curse him,” and ibn Khallikan (d. 681 AH) has said in his biography of Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Ali al-Tabari, called Imad al-Din and known as Kiya al-Harasi, the Shafi‘i jurist (d. 504 AH), that when he was asked about Yazid, he said: «فِيهِ لِأَحْمَدَ قَوْلَانِ تَلْوِيحٌ وَتَصْرِيحٌ، وَلِمَالِكٍ قَوْلَانِ تَلْوِيحٌ وَتَصْرِيحٌ، وَلِأَبِي حَنِيفَةَ قَوْلَانِ تَلْوِيحٌ وَتَصْرِيحٌ، وَلَنَا قَوْلٌ وَاحِدٌ التَّصْرِيحُ دُونَ التَّلْوِيحِ، وَكَيْفَ لَا يَكُونُ كَذَلِكَ؟! وَهُوَ اللَّاعِبُ بِالنَّرْدِ وَالْمُتَصَيِّدُ بِالْفُهُودِ وَمُدْمِنُ الْخَمْرِ، وَشِعْرُهُ فِي الْخَمْرِ مَعْلُومٌ»[6]; “About (how to curse) him, there are two views from Ahmad, one is implicit and the other is explicit, and two views from Malik, one is implicit and the other is explicit, and two views from Abu Hanifa, one is implicit and the other is explicit. However, there is one view for us, which is explicit without being implicit, and how can it not be so?! While he played backgammon, went hunting with cheetahs, was addicted to drinking, and his poetry about wine is famous,” and al-Taftazani (d. 793 AH) has said in Sharh al-Aqa’id al-Nasafiyyah: «الْحَقُّ أَنَّ رِضَا يَزِيدَ بِقَتْلِ الْحُسَيْنِ وَاسْتِبْشَارَهُ بِذَلِكَ وَإِهَانَتَهُ أَهْلَ بَيْتِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مِمَّا تَوَاتَرَ مَعْنَاهُ وَإِنْ كَانَ تَفَاصِيلُهُ آحَادًا، فَنَحْنُ لَا نَتَوَقَّفُ فِي شَأْنِهِ بَلْ فِي إِيمَانِهِ، لَعْنَةُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ وَعَلَى أَنْصَارِهِ وَأَعْوَانِهِ»[7]; “The truth is that Yazid’s satisfaction with the killing of Husain, his joy over it, and his insult to the Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) have tawatur in meaning, although its details are ahad (reports), so we do not stop at his dignity, but rather at his lack of faith. May Allah curse him and his helpers and accomplices,” and ibn Taghribirdi (d. 874 AH) has said: «لَا يَشُكُّ مَنْ لَهُ ذَوْقٌ وَعَقْلٌ صَحِيحٌ أَنَّ يَزِيدَ رَضِيَ بِقَتْلِ الْحُسَيْنِ وَسُرَّ بِمَوْتِهِ؛ فَهُوَ مَلْعُونٌ عَلَى كُلِّ حَالٍ وَبِكُلِّ طَرِيقٍ»[8]; “Whoever has good manners and sound intellect does not doubt that Yazid was pleased with killing Husain and became happy about his death, so he is cursed in any case and in any way,” and al-Saffarini (d. 1188 AH) has said: «أَكْثَرُ الْمُتَأَخِّرِينَ مِنَ الْحُفَّاظِ وَالْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ يُجِيزُونَ لَعْنَةَ يَزِيدَ اللَّعِينِ، كَيْفَ لَا؟! وَهُوَ الَّذِي فَعَلَ الْمُعْضِلَاتِ، وَهَتَكَ سِتْرَ الْمُخَدَّرَاتِ، وَانْتَهَكَ حُرْمَةَ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ، وَآذَى سِبْطَ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَهُوَ حَيٌّ وَمَيِّتٌ، مَعَ مُجَاهَرَتِهِ بِشُرْبِ الْخُمُورِ وَالْفِسْقِ وَالْفُجُورِ»[9]; “Most of the later memorizers of the Quran and theologians (from Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama‘ah) consider it permissible to curse Yazid the cursed. How can it not be so?! While he committed heinous acts, abused modest women, dishonored the Ahl al-Bayt, and hurt the grandson of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in his life and death, not to mention that he openly drank wine and committed sins and indecencies,” and ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) has written a book about the permissibility to curse Yazid, and named it as Ar-Radd Ala al-Muta‘assib al-Anid al-Mani‘ Min Dham al-Yazid, which means, “An answer to the stubborn fanatic who has prohibited reproaching Yazid,” in which he has responded to Abd al-Mughith al-Harbi (d. 583 AH) who prohibited it. Also, there is a detailed speech from ibn al-Wazir (d. 840 AH) in al-Awasim Wa al-Qawasim, in which he has responded to Abu Hamid al-Ghazali in many ways, and Amir Ali Shir Navayi (d. 906 AH) has also responded to him well when he composed in Persian:

ای که گفتی بر یزید و آل او لعنت مکن

زان که شاید حق تعالی کرده باشد رحمتش

آنچه با آل نبی کرد او اگر بخشد خدای

هم ببخشاید مرا گر کرده باشم لعنتش!

It means: “O you who said: ‘Do not curse Yazid and his family; because Allah may forgive him!’ If Allah forgives him for what he did to the family of the Prophet, He will also forgive me for cursing him.”