Some of you posted is nothing more than bakwaas.
There is plenty of praise, and authentic virtues reported about Sayadina Mua'wiyah (RA). He is Jannah regardless of what took place with "Maula Ali".
I'm not going to spoon feed you with references, I'll let someone to do that. However, if you dig through some old threads on this forum, I'm sure you'll find opposing/refuting content much to your surprise.
No, I'm free from any Shia infested germs, Alhamdulillah unlike some.
You're delusional, and I urge you to put your transparent grudge for Sayadinah Mua'wiyah (RA) who is your superior to one side, and do some clinical research then you'll reach the right "balanced" view on this Sahabi. This prejudice is easy to fall prey to and a dastardly act of villainy to fleece lay people who to take the bait. May Allah Ta’ala protect the Ummah from these wolves in sheepskin who ravage, pillage and plunder the Imaan and the Akhlaaq of the ignorant and unwary.
Your research is devoid of all the facts, and is fit for the trash.
Interesting post, brother Fahad.
I have a couple of questions and I would like you to elaborate on some matters.
As you are aware, accepting someone as pious and just does not rely solely on hadiths. The merits of Muawiyah can be found from the tongues of his contemporaries and early scholars, which clearly illustrate that he had a lot of good in him. As you know, Omar saw him fit for ruling Sham. Ibn Abbas referred to him as a faqeeh. He is also praised by the likes of Ibn Al Mubarak, Ahmad, and Abu Zur'ah.
In light of that, what leads you to the conclusion that they "changed and left many sunnahs of Prophet (s.a.w.w) due to their hatred towards Maula Ali a.s, also adopted many prohibited things etc."
Perhaps your strangest statement was your view that "perhaps he is the only major reason of rift and conflits among shias and sunnies."
I can assure you that even if I were to hate Mu'awiyah, it will not save me from hellfire according to Shiasm since I reject the Imamah of the Imams.
And there are plenty of authentic ahadith against Muawiya.
Read the hadith from Abu Dawud properly. Nothing in that hadith suggests that it was a common occurrnce, in fact quite the opposite as it is recording a single incident and the Sahabi in the hadith as the narrator doesn't know who he's insulting (not cursing). If this was common he woukd not be surprised and probably would already have guessed who was being abused, this shows the strangeness of the event.
Not just that but theres nothing to say it was instigated by Mu'awiyah. Also there are many similar ahadith about those who insult mu'awiyah
Read the hadith from Abu Dawud properly. Nothing in that hadith suggests that it was a common occurrnce, in fact quite the opposite as it is recording a single incident and the Sahabi in the hadith as the narrator doesn't know who he's insulting (not cursing). If this was common he woukd not be surprised and probably would already have guessed who was being abused, this shows the strangeness of the event.
Not just that but theres nothing to say it was instigated by Mu'awiyah. Also there are many similar ahadith about those who insult mu'awiyah
@ Fahad: You said:QuoteAnd there are plenty of authentic ahadith against Muawiya.
I am not aware of any. Your original posts includes evidences of matters that suggest his fisq. However, you did not provide any authentic hadith in which the Prophet peace be upon him condemned Muawiyah. Therefore, it is your ijtihaad versus the ijtihaad of the scholars I mentioned in my first post.
Thank you brother, and there is no mention of Mu'awiyah (RA). What's even more bogus is he believes the narration is a representation of Imam Abu Dawood's (RA) view on Mu'awiyah (RA).
The same is the case with Imam Muslim (RA). Just because he's sharing this Hadith doesn't mean he holds Mu'awiyah (RA) in negative light. Quite on the contrary.
Allamah Nawawi (RA), the popular commentator of Sahih Muslim writes that this was not a command to Sa’d to revile ‘Ali (RA).
Mu’awiyah (RA) was merely asking Sa’d (RA) why he didn’t join in with the others who were reviling ‘Ali (RA).
It was to test him and enquire his reasons, rather than to spur him on.
(Sharhun Nawawi, Hadith: 6170)
One should be vigilant of mistranslations of Hadiths, especially those that apparently contradict the mainstream school of thought. This includes the likes of Fahad Sani.
Many a time, a review of the original text, and the commentary of the reliable scholars clears up the unfounded misrepresentations.
Authentic, and sound Ahadith on this great Sahabi.
1) Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam): "O Allah! Teach Mu’awiyah the Book and arithmetic, and protect him
from the Punishment".
اللهم علم معاوية الكتاب والحساب وقه العذاب
2) Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: "O Allah! Teach him (Mu’awiyah) the Book and arithmetic, and grant him authority over cities and protect him from the Punishment".
اللهم علمه الكتاب والحساب ومكن له في البلاد وقه سوء العذاب
3) Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: "O Allah! Make him a guide, guided (to the right path), and guide
(others) through him".
اللهم اجعله هاديا مهديا و اهد به
1) This Hadith is recorded by Imam Ahmad (rahimahullah) and others. Imam ibn Khuzaymah and Imam ibn Hibban (rahimahumallah) have declared the Hadith as authentic (sahih).
(Musnad Ahmad, vol. 4 pg. 127, Sahih ibn Khuzaymah, Hadith: 1938 and Sahih Ibn Hibban; Al Ihsan, Hadith: 7210. Also see: Al Muntakhab Minal ‘Ilal Lil Khallal of Hafiz Ibn Qudamah Al Maqdisi, pg. 234, Hadith: 141, Siyaru A’alamin Nubala, vol. 3 pg. 124 and Majma’uz Zawaid, vol. 9 pg.356)
2) This is a combination of two narrations. Imam Tabarani (rahimahullah) has recorded both (mursalan). Hafiz Haythami (rahimahullah) states that the narrators are declared reliable, although there is a difference of opinion regarding some of the narrators.
(Al Mu’jamul Kabir, Hadith: 1065 and 1066 -volume: 19-. Refer: Majma’uz Zawaid, vol. 9 pg. 356/7. Also see Siyaru A’alamin Nubala, vol. 3 pg. 124/5)
3) Imam Tirmidhi (rahimahullah) has recorded this narration on the authority of Sayyiduna ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Amirah (radiyallahu ‘anhu). He has declared this Hadith sound (hasan).
(Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 3842)
Thank you brother, and there is no mention of Mu'awiyah (RA). What's even more bogus is he believes the narration is a representation of Imam Abu Dawood's (RA) view on Mu'awiyah (RA).
The same is the case with Imam Muslim (RA). Just because he's sharing this Hadith doesn't mean he holds Mu'awiyah (RA) in negative light. Quite on the contrary.
Allamah Nawawi (RA), the popular commentator of Sahih Muslim writes that this was not a command to Sa’d to revile ‘Ali (RA).
Mu’awiyah (RA) was merely asking Sa’d (RA) why he didn’t join in with the others who were reviling ‘Ali (RA).
It was to test him and enquire his reasons, rather than to spur him on.
(Sharhun Nawawi, Hadith: 6170)
One should be vigilant of mistranslations of Hadiths, especially those that apparently contradict the mainstream school of thought. This includes the likes of Fahad Sani.
Many a time, a review of the original text, and the commentary of the reliable scholars clears up the unfounded misrepresentations.
I respect Imam Nawawi (RA) but I dont follow him blindly in everything. I am not his muqalid or of any other scholar. Whatever he has said about narration of Muslim is totally based on his assumptions (with due respect). He was not the eye witness of that incident. He was born centuries after that (631–676 A.H). What about scholars before him. No one else defend him with such lame excuses.
Quran and Hadith are authority, not their commentaries. Which are mostly based on author's own understanding and knowledge, which may or may not be true. Also if you analyze multiple commentaries you will see difference of opinions.
You quoted:
Mu’awiyah (RA) was merely asking Sa’d (RA) why he didn’t join in with the others who were reviling ‘Ali (RA).
It was to test him and enquire his reasons, rather than to spur him on.
(Sharhun Nawawi, Hadith: 6170)
BUT TEST FOR WHAT?
Instead of stoping those who were involved in cursing Ali. He is testing and insisting Saad that why he is not joining those people? Nice test?
And I am not the only one who is saying this. I am just following the true manhaj of Ahlul Sunnah about Muawiya bin Abu Sufiyan. Nothing else. No any personal desires.
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah , even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted. Surah Nisa – 135
Authentic, and sound Ahadith on this great Sahabi.
1) Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam): "O Allah! Teach Mu’awiyah the Book and arithmetic, and protect him
from the Punishment".
اللهم علم معاوية الكتاب والحساب وقه العذاب
2) Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: "O Allah! Teach him (Mu’awiyah) the Book and arithmetic, and grant him authority over cities and protect him from the Punishment".
اللهم علمه الكتاب والحساب ومكن له في البلاد وقه سوء العذاب
3) Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: "O Allah! Make him a guide, guided (to the right path), and guide
(others) through him".
اللهم اجعله هاديا مهديا و اهد به
1) This Hadith is recorded by Imam Ahmad (rahimahullah) and others. Imam ibn Khuzaymah and Imam ibn Hibban (rahimahumallah) have declared the Hadith as authentic (sahih).
(Musnad Ahmad, vol. 4 pg. 127, Sahih ibn Khuzaymah, Hadith: 1938 and Sahih Ibn Hibban; Al Ihsan, Hadith: 7210. Also see: Al Muntakhab Minal ‘Ilal Lil Khallal of Hafiz Ibn Qudamah Al Maqdisi, pg. 234, Hadith: 141, Siyaru A’alamin Nubala, vol. 3 pg. 124 and Majma’uz Zawaid, vol. 9 pg.356)
2) This is a combination of two narrations. Imam Tabarani (rahimahullah) has recorded both (mursalan). Hafiz Haythami (rahimahullah) states that the narrators are declared reliable, although there is a difference of opinion regarding some of the narrators.
(Al Mu’jamul Kabir, Hadith: 1065 and 1066 -volume: 19-. Refer: Majma’uz Zawaid, vol. 9 pg. 356/7. Also see Siyaru A’alamin Nubala, vol. 3 pg. 124/5)
3) Imam Tirmidhi (rahimahullah) has recorded this narration on the authority of Sayyiduna ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Amirah (radiyallahu ‘anhu). He has declared this Hadith sound (hasan).
(Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 3842)
Brother, all these are supplications of Prophet s.a.w.w. Its not necessary that every dua of Prophet must be accepted by Allah. there are evidences on that both from Quran and hadith.
Based on historical facts he was invloved in cursing Maula Ali and abandoned many sunnahs of Prophet.
Consider this narration:
He left Sunnah of Prophet just because of his hatred for Ali. Also forced others to do so.
It was narrated that Saeed bin Jubair said:
"I was with Ibn Abbas in Arafat and he said: 'Why do I not hear the people reciting Talbiyah?' I said: They are afraid of Muawiyah.' So Ibn Abbas went out of his tent and said: "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik, Labbaik! They are only forsaking the Sunnah out of hatred for Ali.'" SUNAN NASAI 3006
How he was guided? It means prayer was not accepted by Allah.
Brother, all these are supplications of Prophet s.a.w.w. Its not necessary that every dua of Prophet must be accepted by Allah. there are evidences on that both from Quran and hadith.
Based on historical facts he was invloved in cursing Maula Ali and abandoned many sunnahs of Prophet.
Consider this narration:
He left Sunnah of Prophet just because of his hatred for Ali. Also forced others to do so.
It was narrated that Saeed bin Jubair said:
"I was with Ibn Abbas in Arafat and he said: 'Why do I not hear the people reciting Talbiyah?' I said: They are afraid of Muawiyah.' So Ibn Abbas went out of his tent and said: "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik, Labbaik! They are only forsaking the Sunnah out of hatred for Ali.'" SUNAN NASAI 3006
How he was guided? It means prayer was not accepted by Allah.
It was common occurence from perspective of those who started and supported such innovation. That's why Sa'id bn Zaid said, Don't I see that the companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) are being abused, but you neither stop it nor do anything about it? Their silence was due to their hatred towards Ali. Said bin Zaid reacted due to his love and concern for Ali. Similarly you are reacting and showing support here due to your love and concern for Muawiya. There is no need to hide/defend the historical facts.
There are many other narrations which clarify who instigated all this. Cursing and showing hatred towards Ali was common tradition of Banu Ummayah.
It was narrated that Saeed bin Jubair said:
"I was with Ibn Abbas in Arafat and he said: 'Why do I not hear the people reciting Talbiyah?' I said: They are afraid of Muawiyah.' So Ibn Abbas went out of his tent and said: "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik, Labbaik! They are only forsaking the Sunnah out of hatred for Ali.'" SUNAN NASAI 3006
Prophet said: Only a hypocrite will hate Ali. Its very clear.
Zirr reported:
'Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me. SAHIH MUSLIM 78.
Not really. You'll never find a Hadith where it says Mu'awiyah told people to curse 'Ali. So you need to give evidence they were instigating it because you are using a guilty till proven innocent method by saying his silence is proof of instigation. In a court if your proof for the crime of slander is that they were silent when other people were slandering you, you'd be laughed at.well, there is that issue of Muawiya not accepting the caliphate of Ali and instigating a war against him and getting thousands of Muslims killed including Ammar Yasir and there is that hadith that Ammar will be killed by the "usurping" party.
Secondly quote the part in the hadith from sunnah.org or something which implies it being a regular occurrence. Also please dont try and insult me for loving Mu'awiyah because I'm proud I respect him and in his rule he achieved more for Islam than any Muslim leader who came after him. You are biased against Mu'awiyah because you"ve been reading too much rafidi material on the intermet.
I ask you to find me where Mu'awiyah shows any hatred of 'Ali in an authentic Hadith.
Refer to the reference for further details that will address, and/or clarify all your concerns.
Neither were any scholars who came before him were present in the time of Mu'awiyah (RA).
Imam Nawawai (RA) is renowned as the greatest commentator of Sahih Muslim, therefore his opinion holds more weight than a Rafidhi polluted viewpoint such as yours. If you do further research you'll find other Hadith scholar echo similar sentiments.
This Sahabi was referred to as the "uncle of the believers" by many of the Salaf.
It was narrated from Abu Taalib that he asked Abu ‘Abd-Allaah – Ahmad ibn Hanbal – about saying “Mu’aawiyah the maternal uncle of the believers” or “Ibn ‘Umar the maternal uncle of the believers”. He said: Yes, Mu’aawiyah was the brother of Umm Habeebah bint Abi Sufyaan, the wife of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him and may Allaah have mercy on her), and Ibn ‘Umar was the brother of Hafsah the wife of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him and may Allaah have mercy on her). I said: Can I say Mu’aawiyah the maternal uncle of the believers? He said: Yes.
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/433), Dar al-Raayah edition.
It was narrated from Haroon ibn ‘Abd-Allaah that he said to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah –Ahmad ibn Hanbal - : A letter came to me from al-Raqqah saying that some people say: We do not say that Mu’aawiyah was the maternal uncle of the believers. He got angry and said: Why are they objecting to this matter? They should be shunned until they repent.
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/434).
It was narrated from Muhammad ibn Abi Haroon and Muhammad ibn Abi Ja’far that Abu’l-Haarith told them: We sent a note to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah – Ahmad ibn Hanbal – saying: What do you say, may Allaah have mercy on you, about that who say: I will not say that Mu’aawiyah was the scribe of the revelation and I will not say that he was the maternal uncle of the believers, because he took the caliphate by the sword and by force? Abu ‘Abd-Allaah said: These are bad words and these people should be avoided and shunned, and we should warn the people about them.
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/434)
It was narrated that Abu Bakr al-Marwadhi said: I said to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah – Ahmad ibn Hanbal – Who is better, Mu’aawiyah or ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azeez? He said: Mu’aawiyah is better; we do not compare the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to anyone. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The best of mankind are my generation among whom I was sent.”
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/434).
All the isnaads of these reports are saheeh as you will see in the examination of the book by Dr. ‘Atiyah al-Zahraani.
Anyone who was worthy of an exclusive praise/du'a of the Prophet (SAW) means he was someone of virtuous fibre. The fact whether the du'a was accepted or not is irrelevant in this case as we're discussing whether Mu'awiyah (RA) had any virtues.
So, your understanding of the narrations are also fit for the trash.
That narration is not authentic, and has been refuted here:
http://jamiat.org.za/explanation-of-the-following-hadith-on-ali-muawiya-ra/
"Maula Mu'awiyah AS" is in Jannah. 8)
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 (ﷺ) saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition."
Sahih al-Bukhari 2924
The proof that Mu'awiya (RA) was the FIRST one.
Umm Haram said:
فَقَالَتْ : ادْع اللَّهَ أَنْ يَجْعَلَنِي مِنْهُمْ ، فَقَالَ : أَنْتِ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِينَ ؛ فَخَرَجَت مَعَ زَوْجِهَا عُبَادَة بْنِ الصَّامِتِ غَازِيًا أَوَّل مَا رَكِبَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ الْبَحْرَ مَعَ مُعَاوِيَةَ
"Invoke Allah to make me one of them." He said, "You are among the first batch." Later on it happened that she went out in the company of her husband 'Ubada bin As-Samit who went for Jihad and it was the FIRST TIME the Muslims undertook a naval expedition LED BY MU'AWIYA.
Sahih al-Bukhari 2799
More details can be found in Fateh al-Baree (6-127). :D
The point the brother was making was that the du'ah shows the Prophet not only intended for Mu'awiyah to be a ruler (showing that the prophet trusted him greatly) but that he wishes success for him.
Now how can the Prophet do this if he's a nasibi or someone who was tyrannical? This immature narrative of righteous 'Ali being slandered and oppressed by Evil Mu'awiyah makes no sense and is a very biased way of approaching history.
Notice how the Prophet gives du'a for Mu'awiyah but not the Tyrant Kuffar of the Mecca. He cannot be considered an enemy by the prophet then.
And about your comment that he left the Sunnah for hatred of 'Ali and forced others to do so. This contradicts your own evidences as Sa'd even according to your translation and view of the Hadith was not forced to allegedly curse 'Ali. There is not a single narration you can find to show Mu'awiyah forcing people to abuse 'Ali.
Ask yourself this. If Mu'awiyah hated 'Ali, how come according to Nahj al-Balagha he cries upon hearing of his death? And why did Mu'awiyah not disrupt 'Ali's funeral or burial? Could it be because both him and 'Ali were Muslims?
Not really. You'll never find a Hadith where it says Mu'awiyah told people to curse 'Ali. So you need to give evidence they were instigating it because you are using a guilty till proven innocent method by saying his silence is proof of instigation. In a court if your proof for the crime of slander is that they were silent when other people were slandering you, you'd be laughed at.
Secondly quote the part in the hadith from sunnah.org or something which implies it being a regular occurrence. Also please dont try and insult me for loving Mu'awiyah because I'm proud I respect him and in his rule he achieved more for Islam than any Muslim leader who came after him. You are biased against Mu'awiyah because you"ve been reading too much rafidi material on the intermet.
I ask you to find me where Mu'awiyah shows any hatred of 'Ali in an authentic Hadith.
"Maula Mu'awiyah AS" is in Jannah. 8)
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 (ﷺ) saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition."
Sahih al-Bukhari 2924
The proof that Mu'awiya (RA) was the FIRST one.
Umm Haram said:
فَقَالَتْ : ادْع اللَّهَ أَنْ يَجْعَلَنِي مِنْهُمْ ، فَقَالَ : أَنْتِ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِينَ ؛ فَخَرَجَت مَعَ زَوْجِهَا عُبَادَة بْنِ الصَّامِتِ غَازِيًا أَوَّل مَا رَكِبَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ الْبَحْرَ مَعَ مُعَاوِيَةَ
"Invoke Allah to make me one of them." He said, "You are among the first batch." Later on it happened that she went out in the company of her husband 'Ubada bin As-Samit who went for Jihad and it was the FIRST TIME the Muslims undertook a naval expedition LED BY MU'AWIYA.
Sahih al-Bukhari 2799
More details can be found in Fateh al-Baree (6-127). :D
NO COMMENTS :)
I dont know who will be in Jannah, I dont have knowledge of unseen.
Only Allah knows best.
Anyone who was worthy of an exclusive praise/du'a of the Prophet (SAW) means he was someone of virtuous fibre. The fact whether the du'a was accepted or not is irrelevant in this case as we're discussing whether Mu'awiyah (RA) had any virtues.
So, your understanding of the narrations are also fit for the trash.
That narration is not authentic, and has been refuted here:
http://jamiat.org.za/explanation-of-the-following-hadith-on-ali-muawiya-ra/
Following your logic Abu Jahl was also virtuous as Prophet also supplicated for his guidance. Infact Prophet supplicated Allah for everyone that they may be guided.
And what about Abdullah ibn Ubayi, Prophet leads his janazah prayer.
Abdullah b. Ubay was the leader of munafiqs but his son Abdullah was a very sincere and pious Muslim. It was a manifestation of the power and wisdom of God Almighty, “who brings out the living from the dead and brings out the dead from the living”. The father was the leader of munafiqs but the son was a mujahid...
When his father died, Abdullah went to the presence of the Messenger of God and said, “O Messenger of God! Will you give me your shirt? I want to enshroud my father in it.” Then, he said, “O Messenger of God! Will you lead his prayer and ask for his forgiveness?” Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, Vol. 2, p. 18.
It is very surprising that the Messenger of God took off his shirt and gave it to Abdullah to enshroud his father, who made plans against Islam and worked to realize those plans throughout his life, with it and said, “Inform me when the janazah is ready; I will lead his prayer.” Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, ibid, Vol. 2, p. 18; Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 2, p. 76; Tirmidhi, Sunan, Vol. 5, p. 280.
It means Abdullah bin ubayi has more and strong merits then Muawiya. Why you are not defending him when others call him munafiq?
Check this http://www.questionsonislam.com/article/death-abdullah-bin-ubayy
What scholars have said about this. Apply the same for Muawiya and do justice, keeping your emotions aside.
You said:
That narration is not authentic, and has been refuted here:
http://jamiat.org.za/explanation-of-the-following-hadith-on-ali-muawiya-ra/
But on what basis? only because Khalid bin Makhlad was a shia. (again excuses based on personal choice)
But you forgot that, Imam Abu Dawood has stated that he was a truthful person.
On this basis Albani has said hadith is HASAN. check this http://www.sunnah.com/urn/1081720
Grade : Hasan (Darussalam)
Reference : Sunan an-Nasa'i 3006
In-book reference : Book 24, Hadith 0
English translation : Vol. 3, Book 24, Hadith 3009
Shia does'nt mean always wrong and Sunni does'nt mean always right.
Brother, you are just following illusions backed by assumptions and lame excuses. Nothing else.
Now blame Albani before criticising me.
Refer to the reference for further details that will address, and/or clarify all your concerns.
Neither were any scholars who came before him were present in the time of Mu'awiyah (RA).
Imam Nawawai (RA) is renowned as the greatest commentator of Sahih Muslim, therefore his opinion holds more weight than a Rafidhi polluted viewpoint such as yours. If you do further research you'll find other Hadith scholar echo similar sentiments.
This Sahabi was referred to as the "uncle of the believers" by many of the Salaf.
It was narrated from Abu Taalib that he asked Abu ‘Abd-Allaah – Ahmad ibn Hanbal – about saying “Mu’aawiyah the maternal uncle of the believers” or “Ibn ‘Umar the maternal uncle of the believers”. He said: Yes, Mu’aawiyah was the brother of Umm Habeebah bint Abi Sufyaan, the wife of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him and may Allaah have mercy on her), and Ibn ‘Umar was the brother of Hafsah the wife of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him and may Allaah have mercy on her). I said: Can I say Mu’aawiyah the maternal uncle of the believers? He said: Yes.
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/433), Dar al-Raayah edition.
It was narrated from Haroon ibn ‘Abd-Allaah that he said to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah –Ahmad ibn Hanbal - : A letter came to me from al-Raqqah saying that some people say: We do not say that Mu’aawiyah was the maternal uncle of the believers. He got angry and said: Why are they objecting to this matter? They should be shunned until they repent.
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/434).
It was narrated from Muhammad ibn Abi Haroon and Muhammad ibn Abi Ja’far that Abu’l-Haarith told them: We sent a note to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah – Ahmad ibn Hanbal – saying: What do you say, may Allaah have mercy on you, about that who say: I will not say that Mu’aawiyah was the scribe of the revelation and I will not say that he was the maternal uncle of the believers, because he took the caliphate by the sword and by force? Abu ‘Abd-Allaah said: These are bad words and these people should be avoided and shunned, and we should warn the people about them.
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/434)
It was narrated that Abu Bakr al-Marwadhi said: I said to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah – Ahmad ibn Hanbal – Who is better, Mu’aawiyah or ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azeez? He said: Mu’aawiyah is better; we do not compare the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to anyone. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The best of mankind are my generation among whom I was sent.”
Al-Sunnah by al-Khallaal (2/434).
All the isnaads of these reports are saheeh as you will see in the examination of the book by Dr. ‘Atiyah al-Zahraani.
Yes. Imam Nawawi r.a was a great scholar no doubt about that, but sorry I am not his muqalid. I can not accept from him everything (specially assumptions/excuses). He was not a prophet. He can also be wrong in many things.
Yes not any scholar lived during the time of Muawiya but atleast consider those who were near his time. You are only fucusing on a scholar who came 6 centuries later. Who is only defending him with excuses from his mind, nothing else. Do justice. There are also narrations from Sahabah who lived with him. what about those narrations.
And why you are considering it a shia sunni issue. Did I quoted any shia narration or scholar's view.
Many salaf consider him uncle of believers. Really. you quoted from just single book and calling it many.
But whatever, regardless of whether the narrations you quoted authentic or not, calling him uncle is not any merit. It was by chance. As he was a brother of Umm ul Momineen. Does this save him from whatever he has done in his life. Nothing will help if their is no obedience to ALLAH. This applys to everyone including Muawiya.
Your logic is also fit for rubbish tip. This keeps on getting better.
Comparing Abdullah ibn Ubai/Abu Jahal to Sayadina Mu'awiyah (RA) Wow.
The difference is both were disgraced, and damned to hell in their very lifetime.
Abu Jahal was a first class knob who hated Islam, and the Prophet's (SAW) message from day 1. When Allah chose Umar (RA) to the champion of Islam he was doomed to eternal damnation. Besides, how was he virtuous before Islam, LMAO? He was well known to be at logger-heads with the other tribe leaders. He was a tribalistic deliquient as were the rest of the leaders of Quraish including Abu Talib which, is why he refused to accept Islam. That entire era was slated as jahliyah yet you're suggesting that Abu Jahul was virtuous? What have you been smoking, seriously? The ONLY exceptions were a handful of companions who never adopted the jahaliyah lifestyle, but an ethitical one and a handful of Hunafah namely the likes of Waraqah ibn Nawfal, Zaid ibn Nufayl etc.
Abdullah ibn Ubai was also renowned to be a Grade A scoundrel from the day the Prophet (SAW) arrived in Madinah. Qur'anic tafsir, and the authentic Sunnah is ripe of his treacherous nature, and how he was the king of hypocrites.
Mu'awiyah (RA) on the other hand wasn't described as being that sort of an individual by the Prophet (SAW), or the companions (RA) during the Prophet's (SAW) time, hence Farid's (RA) point to bring forward a sound/authentic Hadith that unequivocally confirms that Mu'awiyah (RA) was responsible for instigating the whole cursing of Ali (RA) ordeal. We have shared authentic, and sound narrations of the Prophet (SAW) giving exclusive du'as for Mu'awiyah (RA), but you've rejected them for reason that makes no sense as brother ibn Yahya highlighted. Typical trait of a Rafidhi.
The Hadith in question is problematic, and controversial therefore cannot be used as undisputed daleel to support your claim that Mu'awiyah (RA) was deviant. I've given references of two classical heavyweights Muhadithoon who confirmed the Hadith is weak. You've provided one reference of a contemporary who says otherwise - fair enough. However, you failed to comment on the authentic Hadiths in Bukhari where ibn Abbas (RA) considered Mu'awiyah (RA) to be a faqeeh. I wonder, why. :D
At best we can say this point you've provided very weak evidence rather than, nothing whatsoever. Either way you're claim altogether is bakwaas.
Bakwaas
Again, what does it matter WHEN a scholar was born? Your argument makes no sense. It's still going to be an opinion whether they came 100/600 years after his time. Medieval scholars are just defending because they came 600 years later, lol? How does that make any sense? You're rejecting Imam's Nawawai's analysis of the narration, and accussing of being personal bias rather than interpreting a narration as-is. Wow, how low can you stoop.
I also provided references of famous schola of the Salaf, and you even dismissed with disdain saying being regarded as "Uncle of the Believers" is not a merit. By your satanic logic then neither are the wives oo the Prophet (SAW) who were given the title "Mother of the Believers". If you re-read the quotes certain reasons were given to why he was/is regarded as "Uncle of the Believers" not just because of was a brother in law of the Prophet (SAW).
As far as I'm concerned you're not on the right aqeedah as Ahlus Sunnah when it comes to Mu'awiyah (RA). Anyone who has any ill feelings for any companion has a degree of deficiency in his Iman.
Again, what does it matter WHEN a scholar was born? Your argument makes no sense. It's still going to be an opinion whether they came 100/600 years after his time. Medieval scholars are just defending because they came 600 years later, lol? How does that make any sense? You're rejecting Imam's Nawawai's analysis of the narration, and accussing of being personal bias rather than interpreting a narration as-is. Wow, how low can you stoop.
I also provided references of famous schola of the Salaf, and you even dismissed with disdain saying being regarded as "Uncle of the Believers" is not a merit. By your satanic logic then neither are the wives oo the Prophet (SAW) who were given the title "Mother of the Believers". If you re-read the quotes certain reasons were given to why he was/is regarded as "Uncle of the Believers" not just because of was a brother in law of the Prophet (SAW).
As far as I'm concerned you're not on the right aqeedah as Ahlus Sunnah when it comes to Mu'awiyah (RA). Anyone who has any ill feelings for any companion has a degree of deficiency in his Iman.
My rejection of Imam Nawawi's analysis is because it is based on assumptions only. It is not based on any fact. Anyone can make such assumptions. Even you and I can interpret that particular narration in anyway we want. But you can not force anyone to accept your assumptions. this is wrong.
And That's the problem with you, I am giving evidences from hadith and from sahabah and in response you are providng me sayings and assumptions of scholars. for what?
All evidences that are mentioned in the main post are from most authentic books. your rejection on those is only on the basis of assumptions. Brother assumptions/excuses are not subsitute for truth. And last two says there is no any single authentic hadith in praise of muawiya from prophet s.a.w.w. I think thats why you are sharing views of scholars. Once again read all those evidences. There are many more to share but first understand and digest those.
Also you havnt answered to my very first question.
THis one:
You quoted:
Mu’awiyah (RA) was merely asking Sa’d (RA) why he didn’t join in with the others who were reviling ‘Ali (RA).
It was to test him and enquire his reasons, rather than to spur him on.
(Sharhun Nawawi, Hadith: 6170)
BUT TEST FOR WHAT?
Instead of stoping those who were involved in cursing Ali. He is testing and insisting Saad that why he is not joining those people? but why?
Now what are the assumptions on that?
Bakwaas
Are you a native urdu speaker. where from? which city?
May I know that?
Your logic is also fit for rubbish tip. This keeps on getting better.
Comparing Abdullah ibn Ubai/Abu Jahal to Sayadina Mu'awiyah (RA) Wow.
The difference is both were disgraced, and damned to hell in their very lifetime.
Abu Jahal was a first class knob who hated Islam, and the Prophet's (SAW) message from day 1. When Allah chose Umar (RA) to the champion of Islam he was doomed to eternal damnation. Besides, how was he virtuous before Islam, LMAO? He was well known to be at logger-heads with the other tribe leaders. He was a tribalistic deliquient as were the rest of the leaders of Quraish including Abu Talib which, is why he refused to accept Islam. That entire era was slated as jahliyah yet you're suggesting that Abu Jahul was virtuous? What have you been smoking, seriously? The ONLY exceptions were a handful of companions who never adopted the jahaliyah lifestyle, but an ethitical one and a handful of Hunafah namely the likes of Waraqah ibn Nawfal, Zaid ibn Nufayl etc.
Abdullah ibn Ubai was also renowned to be a Grade A scoundrel from the day the Prophet (SAW) arrived in Madinah. Qur'anic tafsir, and the authentic Sunnah is ripe of his treacherous nature, and how he was the king of hypocrites.
Mu'awiyah (RA) on the other hand wasn't described as being that sort of an individual by the Prophet (SAW), or the companions (RA) during the Prophet's (SAW) time, hence Farid's (RA) point to bring forward a sound/authentic Hadith that unequivocally confirms that Mu'awiyah (RA) was responsible for instigating the whole cursing of Ali (RA) ordeal. We have shared authentic, and sound narrations of the Prophet (SAW) giving exclusive du'as for Mu'awiyah (RA), but you've rejected them for reason that makes no sense as brother ibn Yahya highlighted. Typical trait of a Rafidhi.
The Hadith in question is problematic, and controversial therefore cannot be used as undisputed daleel to support your claim that Mu'awiyah (RA) was deviant. I've given references of two classical heavyweights Muhadithoon who confirmed the Hadith is weak. You've provided one reference of a contemporary who says otherwise - fair enough. However, you failed to comment on the authentic Hadiths in Bukhari where ibn Abbas (RA) considered Mu'awiyah (RA) to be a faqeeh. I wonder, why. :D
At best we can say this point you've provided very weak evidence rather than, nothing whatsoever. Either way you're claim altogether is bakwaas.
This comparison is only on the basis of supplication/dua. As you said dua for anyone from Prophet is itself a merit. Its not about what they have done in entire life. If you also want to consider that then list is big for Muawiya. He has commited many worse things after coming in power. So why you are not considering the same for Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Ubbayi. Prophet also made dua for them.
An I am not rejecting any dua made by Prophet for Muawiya. Allah himself has rejected. Which is clearly evident from the rulership of muawiya. From the evidences I provided in the main post. Only one hadith is enough to clarify this i.e he was first cruel ruler of this Ummah. He was not at all a guided caliph. Caliphate was only for 30 years. Remember. So stop comparing him with rightly guided caliphs that he has done nothing wrong in his life.
And hadith of Ibn abbas is not problematic. Reason of weakeing the hadith is based on emotions that narrator is shia, while Imam Zahbi is saying according to Imam Abu dawud he is truthful. And others are weakening him just because he is narrating against Muawiya. This is not a valid reason. Muawiya is not god. He can do mistakes and commit wrong things. Albani has said hadith is hassan. I am sure there must be more on it that why Albani said hassan. And I am sure similiar narration will also be in history books.
Now coming to your wonder. :D
Ibn Abi Mulaika narrates:
Somebody said to Ibn `Abbas, “Can you speak to the chief of the believers Muwaiyya, as he does not pray except one rak`a as witr?” Ibn `Abbas replied, “He is a Faqih (i.e. a learned man who can give religious verdicts).”
This is very simple to understand. Dont know why you are making a big deal out of it.
Firstly its only about witr. nothing else.
Secondly, praying 1 witr is sunnah of prophet as narrated by many sahabah. Its not only from muawiya we came to know that its sunnah.
Thirdly, what Ibn Abbas had said about him was with good intention but unfortunately it was proved totally wrong. There are no any correct verdicts from this faqih in any books. No any Imam of fiqh had accepted and narrated his rulings and verdicts. While there are many authentic narrations which says he was really misguided. Even he has no idea about what is haram and halal.
Fourthly, faqih does'nt mean he can never make mistakes. Even great faqih like Ibn Abbas was wrong concerning mutah. Isnt he? which shia use as big evidence for their belief on mutah.
It depends on situation and knowledge about the matter. IF muawiya had knowledge about 1 witr being sunnah it doesnt mean at all that he knows everything. Analyze his entire life before reaching a conclusion. specially what he did when he became first cruel ruler as per hadith mentioned in evidence 1 in the main post.
Your logic is also fit for rubbish tip. This keeps on getting better.
Comparing Abdullah ibn Ubai/Abu Jahal to Sayadina Mu'awiyah (RA) Wow.
The difference is both were disgraced, and damned to hell in their very lifetime.
Abu Jahal was a first class knob who hated Islam, and the Prophet's (SAW) message from day 1. When Allah chose Umar (RA) to the champion of Islam he was doomed to eternal damnation. Besides, how was he virtuous before Islam, LMAO? He was well known to be at logger-heads with the other tribe leaders. He was a tribalistic deliquient as were the rest of the leaders of Quraish including Abu Talib which, is why he refused to accept Islam. That entire era was slated as jahliyah yet you're suggesting that Abu Jahul was virtuous? What have you been smoking, seriously? The ONLY exceptions were a handful of companions who never adopted the jahaliyah lifestyle, but an ethitical one and a handful of Hunafah namely the likes of Waraqah ibn Nawfal, Zaid ibn Nufayl etc.
Abdullah ibn Ubai was also renowned to be a Grade A scoundrel from the day the Prophet (SAW) arrived in Madinah. Qur'anic tafsir, and the authentic Sunnah is ripe of his treacherous nature, and how he was the king of hypocrites.
Mu'awiyah (RA) on the other hand wasn't described as being that sort of an individual by the Prophet (SAW), or the companions (RA) during the Prophet's (SAW) time, hence Farid's (RA) point to bring forward a sound/authentic Hadith that unequivocally confirms that Mu'awiyah (RA) was responsible for instigating the whole cursing of Ali (RA) ordeal. We have shared authentic, and sound narrations of the Prophet (SAW) giving exclusive du'as for Mu'awiyah (RA), but you've rejected them for reason that makes no sense as brother ibn Yahya highlighted. Typical trait of a Rafidhi.
The Hadith in question is problematic, and controversial therefore cannot be used as undisputed daleel to support your claim that Mu'awiyah (RA) was deviant. I've given references of two classical heavyweights Muhadithoon who confirmed the Hadith is weak. You've provided one reference of a contemporary who says otherwise - fair enough. However, you failed to comment on the authentic Hadiths in Bukhari where ibn Abbas (RA) considered Mu'awiyah (RA) to be a faqeeh. I wonder, why. :D
At best we can say this point you've provided very weak evidence rather than, nothing whatsoever. Either way you're claim altogether is bakwaas.
This comparison is only on the basis of supplication/dua. As you said dua for anyone from Prophet is itself a merit. Its not about what they have done in entire life. If you also want to consider that then list is big for Muawiya. He has commited many worse things after coming in power. So why you are not considering the same for Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Ubbayi. Prophet also made dua for them.
An I am not rejecting any dua made by Prophet for Muawiya. Allah himself has rejected. Which is clearly evident from the rulership of muawiya. From the evidences I provided in the main post. Only one hadith is enough to clarify this i.e he was first cruel ruler of this Ummah. He was not at all a guided caliph. Caliphate was only for 30 years. Remember. So stop comparing him with rightly guided caliphs that he has done nothing wrong in his life.
And hadith of Ibn abbas is not problematic. Reason of weakeing the hadith is based on emotions that narrator is shia, while Imam Zahbi is saying according to Imam Abu dawud he is truthful. And others are weakening him just because he is narrating against Muawiya. This is not a valid reason. Muawiya is not god. He can do mistakes and commit wrong things. Albani has said hadith is hassan. I am sure there must be more on it that why Albani said hassan. And I am sure similiar narration will also be in history books.
Now coming to your wonder. :D
Ibn Abi Mulaika narrates:
Somebody said to Ibn `Abbas, “Can you speak to the chief of the believers Muwaiyya, as he does not pray except one rak`a as witr?” Ibn `Abbas replied, “He is a Faqih (i.e. a learned man who can give religious verdicts).”
This is very simple to understand. Dont know why you are making a big deal out of it.
Firstly its only about witr. nothing else.
Secondly, praying 1 witr is sunnah of prophet as narrated by many sahabah. Its not only from muawiya we came to know that its sunnah.
Thirdly, what Ibn Abbas had said about him was with good intention but unfortunately it was proved totally wrong. There are no any correct verdicts from this faqih in any books. No any Imam of fiqh had accepted and narrated his rulings and verdicts. While there are many authentic narrations which says he was really misguided. Even he has no idea about what is haram and halal.
Fourthly, faqih does'nt mean he can never make mistakes. Even great faqih like Ibn Abbas was wrong concerning mutah. Isnt he? which shia use as big evidence for their belief on mutah.
It depends on situation and knowledge about the matter. IF muawiya had knowledge about 1 witr being sunnah it doesnt mean at all that he knows everything. Analyze his entire life before reaching a conclusion. specially what he did when he became first cruel ruler as per hadith mentioned in evidence 1 in the main post.
Apply same above explanation for Abdullah bin Ubayyi. Or use the same excuses in favor of ibn Ubayyi which are used by scholars in defense of Muawiya.
Because Prophet did more for him on his death as comapred to Muawiya.
http://www.questionsonislam.com/article/death-abdullah-bin-ubayy
Do justice and be a witness on that.
Apply same above explanation for Abdullah bin Ubayyi. Or use the same excuses in favor of ibn Ubayyi which are used by scholars in defense of Muawiya.
Because Prophet did more for him on his death as comapred to Muawiya.
http://www.questionsonislam.com/article/death-abdullah-bin-ubayy
Do justice and be a witness on that.
What are you talking about? Have you lost your mind? How can the prophet do more for ibn Ubayy on his death bed than mu'awiyah when Mu'awiyah didnt die till decades after the Prophet?
Would the prophet pray that a taghut Munafiq becomes a leader of the muslims? I'm leaving it there
Not really. You'll never find a Hadith where it says Mu'awiyah told people to curse 'Ali. So you need to give evidence they were instigating it because you are using a guilty till proven innocent method by saying his silence is proof of instigation. In a court if your proof for the crime of slander is that they were silent when other people were slandering you, you'd be laughed at.
Secondly quote the part in the hadith from sunnah.org or something which implies it being a regular occurrence. Also please dont try and insult me for loving Mu'awiyah because I'm proud I respect him and in his rule he achieved more for Islam than any Muslim leader who came after him. You are biased against Mu'awiyah because you"ve been reading too much rafidi material on the intermet.
I ask you to find me where Mu'awiyah shows any hatred of 'Ali in an authentic Hadith.
If I show you more clear evidences on that, then what will you do?
Which verdict will you apply on Muawiya?
Its not a shia-suuni issue. Its about Islam, based on authentic Prophet's narrations from only Ahlul Sunnah books.
And I am not following any rafdi material, I am following these verses of Quran.
MAIDA-8: O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah , witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do.[/color]
Nisa -135: O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah , even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.
Again, what does it matter WHEN a scholar was born? Your argument makes no sense. It's still going to be an opinion whether they came 100/600 years after his time. Medieval scholars are just defending because they came 600 years later, lol? How does that make any sense? You're rejecting Imam's Nawawai's analysis of the narration, and accussing of being personal bias rather than interpreting a narration as-is. Wow, how low can you stoop.
I also provided references of famous schola of the Salaf, and you even dismissed with disdain saying being regarded as "Uncle of the Believers" is not a merit. By your satanic logic then neither are the wives oo the Prophet (SAW) who were given the title "Mother of the Believers". If you re-read the quotes certain reasons were given to why he was/is regarded as "Uncle of the Believers" not just because of was a brother in law of the Prophet (SAW).
As far as I'm concerned you're not on the right aqeedah as Ahlus Sunnah when it comes to Mu'awiyah (RA). Anyone who has any ill feelings for any companion has a degree of deficiency in his Iman.
My rejection of Imam Nawawi's analysis is because it is based on assumptions only. It is not based on any fact. Anyone can make such assumptions. Even you and I can interpret that particular narration in anyway we want. But you can not force anyone to accept your assumptions. this is wrong.
And That's the problem with you, I am giving evidences from hadith and from sahabah and in response you are providng me sayings and assumptions of scholars. for what?
All evidences that are mentioned in the main post are from most authentic books. your rejection on those is only on the basis of assumptions. Brother assumptions/excuses are not subsitute for truth. And last two says there is no any single authentic hadith in praise of muawiya from prophet s.a.w.w. I think thats why you are sharing views of scholars. Once again read all those evidences. There are many more to share but first understand and digest those.
Also you havnt answered to my very first question.
THis one:
You quoted:
Mu’awiyah (RA) was merely asking Sa’d (RA) why he didn’t join in with the others who were reviling ‘Ali (RA).
It was to test him and enquire his reasons, rather than to spur him on.
(Sharhun Nawawi, Hadith: 6170)
BUT TEST FOR WHAT?
Instead of stoping those who were involved in cursing Ali. He is testing and insisting Saad that why he is not joining those people? but why?
Now what are the assumptions on that?
This is getting boring.
You're intake on the narration is also mere assumptions, but it's riddled with prejudice which, is the truth is too hot for you.
I'm not going to spoon feed you. Refer to the reference provided to read a "full blown" explanation of the narration. If you decide to utilise your brain properly then you might just accept it.
Bakwaas
Are you a native urdu speaker. where from? which city?
May I know that?
It doesn't matter, nor is it any of your business.
This is getting boring.
You're intake on the narration is also mere assumptions, but it's riddled with prejudice which, is the truth is too hot for you.
I'm not going to spoon feed you. Refer to the reference provided to read a "full blown" explanation of the narration. If you decide to utilise your brain properly then you might just accept it.
Firstly, please do not refer to me as brother as I don't consider someone like you a bredrin.
It's probelmatic because it is not unanmiously accepted among many Muhaditeen. You're adding your own bias spice to why they weakened the Hadith. Besides who gave you the authority to decide on what premise a Hadith can be accepted, or rejected?
On the other hand the Bukhari Hadith which, is accepted by everyone is a clear-cut virtue of Mu'awiyah (RA). ibn Abbas (RA) would've had to heard, or come across a certain amount of fatwas to proclaim that he is a faqeeh. Faqeeh is no oridinary station as the Prophet (SAW) offered an exclusive du'a for such people. By extension that includes Mu'awiyah (RA).
Suggesting the remote possibility that he could've been mistaken because of his error declaring Mu'tah permissable is just further proof to how your deviant mind spins. That was an innocent error on his part, but to make a blunder of this sort is very unlikely. Perhaps if it in his nature for ibn Abbas (RA) to make mistakes then perhaps, but something of this magnitude? Hell naw'. Me, and Farid had a real chuckle over this one, lol.
Apply some common sense. The Prophet (SAW) did du'a for had'ayah for the two of them. They were astute leaders, and if they had embraced Islam then more would've followed. The Prophet (SAW) did this du'a for the entire Ummah. The du'as for Mu'awiyah (RA) as per the narrations above was of great virtue. The Prophet (SAW) recognised potential in him, and hence prayed that Allah makes him a leader, and that others be guided through him. Anyone with half brain with functional cells can be deduce that's a du'a of virtue for someone of nobility stature.
None of your "evidences" conclusively prove that Mu'awiyah (RA) was a deviant Sahabi. None of the narrations explicitly confirm, or suggest that Mu'awiyah (RA) instigated, or encouraged others to reville Ali (RA). You're the following your desires, and have rejected praises (authenticated) by a plethora of scholars by the likes of the Prophet (SAW) himself, Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA), and Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal (RA) for Mu'wiyah (RA), and instead added your own warped plus rafidhi infected interpretations. Being titled as "Uncle of the Believers", being complimented as a faqeeh, and the Prophet (SAW) prayng that he ascends to heights of greatness is not praise worthy content, ROFL. Talk about upside-down. No doubt it'll give the viewers a right laugh.
I am done with this thread, and will leave more authentic Hadith confirming beyond doubt that Mu'awiyah (RA) was without the second greatest ruler in Islamic history in terms of the izza' he gave Islam. This in no way compares his status, or rein to any of the right guided Caliphs, or masks his shortcomings after the time of the Prophet (SAW). Having said that none of them undermine his status as a Sahabi likewise that of Talha, Zubair, and A'isha (RA). This is balanced view of the majority Ahlus Sunnah when it comes to the time of fitna'. We remain quiet about what happened, and speak only good about all these esteemed personalities.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:
One of the basic principles of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah is that they think of and speak of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the best terms, as Allah, may He be exalted, has described them (interpretation of the meaning):
“And those who came after them say: Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who have preceded us in Faith, and put not in our hearts any hatred against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed full of kindness, Most Merciful”
[al-Hashr 59:10].
And that is in obedience to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), who said: “Do not revile my Companions, do not revile my Companions, for by the One Whose hand is my soul, if one of you were to spend the equivalent of Uhud in gold [in charity], it would not be equivalent to the mudd [a unit of measure] of one of them or half of that.”
They accept what is said in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and are unanimously agreed on their virtues and status.
They do not believe that any of the Sahaabah are infallible and were protected from major or minor sins; rather it is possible that they may have committed sins in general, but they did a great deal of righteous deeds and attained virtues by means of which they were forgiven for whatever sins they committed, to such an extent that they were forgiven for bad deeds for which no one who came after them was forgiven, because they did good deeds that erased bad deeds, in a manner that was not granted to anyone who came after them.
Moreover, if one of them did commit a sin, then he would have repented from it, or done good deeds that erased it, or have been forgiven for it by virtue of his being one of the first to come to Islam, or by means of the intercession of Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) of which they are the most deserving of people, or by being tested with a calamity in this world by means of which it was expiated – if this is the case with regard to real sins, then how about the matters in which they based their actions on what they thought best (ijtihaad): if they got it right they will have two rewards and if they got it wrong they will have one reward and the mistake will be forgiven?
Moreover the amount of objectionable actions that some of them may have done is very little and insignificant in comparison to their virtues and good characteristics such as belief in Allah and His Messenger, jihad for the sake of Allah, migration (Hijrah), supporting (the religion of Allah), beneficial knowledge and righteous deeds.
Anyone who studies their biographies with knowledge and insight, and sees what Allah bestowed upon them of virtues, will realise for certain that they are the best of people after the Prophets; there never was and there will never be anyone like them. They are the elite of this ummah, which is the best of nations and the dearest of them to Allah, may He be exalted. End quote.
Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 3/152-153
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said:
Ahl as-Sunnah are unanimously agreed that it is obligatory to object to any slandering any of the Sahaabah because of what happened of that (disputes), even if ones knows which of them was in the right, because they did not fight in those wars except on the basis of what they thought was right (ijtihaad), and Allah, may He be exalted, has forgiven the one who is mistaken in his ijtihaad. Indeed it is proven that he will be given one reward, and the one who gets it right will be given two rewards. End quote
Fath al-Baari, 13/34
Narrations in praise of Mu'awiyah (RA) from companions, and scholars.
Saad bin Abi Waqas ra said: مَا رَأَيْتُ أَحَداً بَعْدَ عُثْمَانَ أَقْضَى بِحَقٍّ مِنْ صَاحِبِ هَذَا البَابِ -يَعْنِي: مُعَاوِيَةَ
"I Have not seen anyone who ruled according to the truth better than Muawiya ra after Uthman ra."
[Tareekh Damishq Ibn Asaakir 59/161 authenticated by Hafiz Abu Yahya Noorpoori]
Wow, the same person who was allegedly encouraged asked why he didn't curse Ali (RA) is now praising the villain?
Abu Darda ra said: مَا رَأَيْتُ أَحَدًا بَعْدَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، أَشْبَهَ صَلاةً بِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، مِنْ أَمِيرِكُمْ هَذَا ، يَعْنِي مُعَاوِيَةَ
"I have not seen anyone who prayed like Prophet peace be upon him after Prophet peace be upon him other than Muawiyahرضي الله عنه"
[ no: 67, Al Haythamee said in Majma az-Zawaid 4/285: "Narrated by at-Tabrani and its narrators are the narrators of Saheeh other than Qais bin al Harith al Munhaji, and he is trustworthy]
WOW, maybe he was a faqeeh after all?
Abi Hamlah said:
"I saw Muawiyah on the Mimbar in Damishq giving Khutbah to people, and his shirt was patched with other cloth."
[az-Zuhad no. 965]
Narrated by Imam Ahmad in Zuhad and Ibn Abi Asim with authentic chain from Abi Hamlah
[Kashf ash-Shubhaat wal Muftariaat 1/144]
Amazing.
أخبرتنا أم البهاء فاطمة بنت محمد قالت أنا أبو الفضل الرازي أنا جعفر بن عبد الله نا محمد بن هارون نا أبو كريب نا ابن المبارك عن محمد بن مسلم عن إبراهيم بن ميسرة قال ما رأيت عمر بن عبد العزيز ضرب إنسانا قط إلا إنسانا شتم معاوية فإنه ضربه أسواطا
Ibraheem bin Maysara said I have never seen Umar bin abdul Aziz beating anyone with the exception of the one who insulted Muawiyah RadhiAllahanho, He would hit him many lashes [Tareekh Damishq 39/211, Chain is authentic according to Shaykh Zubair Ali Zai in Fadaail al Sahaba according to authentic ahadeeth page 129]
Riyah bin al Jarrah said A person asked Mu`aafaa bin Imran (d 185 h)
يا أبا مسعود أين عمر بن عبد العزيز من معاوية بن أبي سفيان ؟ فغضب من ذلك غضبا شديدا ، وقال : لا يقاس بأصحاب رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - أحد ، معاوية صاحبه ، وصهره ، وكاتبه ، وأمينه على وحي الله ،
O Abu Masood “What is the role of Muawiyah compared to Umar bin Abdulaziz?”. Mu`aafaa bin Imran got furious and said “Nobody can be compared to the companions of Prophet peace be upon him. Muawiyah was companion of Prophet peace be upon him, Brother in law, scribe and his ameen regarding wahyy of Allah.” [Tareekh Baghdad 1/209 Authenticated by Sh Zubair Ali Zai in tahqiq of Fadail as-Sahaba page 129, see also الآجري 5/2466 واللالكائي 8/1445 وتاريخ بغداد 1/209 ومن طريقه الجورقاني 1/195]
These are people of the Salaf praising Mu'awiyah (RA).
A man asked Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal about what happened between ‘Ali and Mu‘aawiyah, and he turned away from him. It was said to him: O Abu ‘Abdullah, he is a man from Banu Haashim. He turned to him and said: Recite: “That was a nation who has passed away. They shall receive the reward of what they earned and you of what you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used to do” [al-Baqarah 2:134].
Manaaqib al-Imam Ahmad by Ibn al-Jawzi, p. 126
Imam Ahmad also said, after it was said to him: What do you say about what happened between ‘Ali and Mu‘aawiyah? He said: I do not say anything about them except what is best.
Manaaqib al-Imam Ahmad by Ibn al-Jawzi, p. 164
And, what bakwaas were you uttering in your initial post that Imam Ahmed's (RA) view on Mu'awiyah (RA)/
Al-Maymooni said: Ahmad ibn Hanbal said to me: O Abu’l-Hasan, if you see a man saying anything bad about any one of the Sahaabah, then be suspicious about his Islam. Al-Fadl ibn Ziyaad said: I heard Abu ‘Abdullah being asked about a man who criticized Mu‘aawiyah and ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas: can he be called a Raafidi? He said: He did not the audacity to criticise them except because he has some evil hidden in his heart. No one criticises any one of the Sahaabah but he is concealing some evil in his heart. End quote.
Al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah, 8/139
Before, you start barking how these are fabricated just because they're not from the usual sources we're all accustomed to hearing carry out some thorough research, and then prove how such narrations cannot be accepted.
May Allah grant Abu Sufyan, Mu'awiyah, and Yazid Jannah Al Firdaud, Ameen. :)
It was narrated that Sa`d bin Waqqas said:
"Mu`awiyah came on one of his pilgrimages and Sa`d entered upon him. They mentioned `Ali, and Mu`awiyah criticized him. Sa`d became angry and said: 'Are you saying this of a man of whom I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: "If I am a person's close friend, `Ali is also his close friend." And I heard him say: "You are to me like Harun was to Musa, except that there will be no Prophet after me." And I heard him say: "I will give the banner today to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger."
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو مُعَاوِيَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ سَابِطٍ، - وَهُوَ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ - عَنْ سَعْدِ بْنِ أَبِي وَقَّاصٍ، قَالَ قَدِمَ مُعَاوِيَةُ فِي بَعْضِ حَجَّاتِهِ فَدَخَلَ عَلَيْهِ سَعْدٌ فَذَكَرُوا عَلِيًّا فَنَالَ مِنْهُ فَغَضِبَ سَعْدٌ وَقَالَ تَقُولُ هَذَا لِرَجُلٍ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ يَقُولُ " مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلاَهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلاَهُ " . وَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ " أَنْتَ مِنِّي بِمَنْزِلَةِ هَارُونَ مِنْ مُوسَى إِلاَّ أَنَّهُ لاَ نَبِيَّ بَعْدِي " . وَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ " لأُعْطِيَنَّ الرَّايَةَ الْيَوْمَ رَجُلاً يُحِبُّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ " .
Grade : Sahih (Darussalam)
English reference: Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 121
Arabic reference : Book 1, Hadith 126[/b][/u][/color]
Some evidences from history books. Read carefully. And dont be slave of your emotions accept the truth.
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/comments/2j4xh1/the_history_of_tabari_english_40_volumes_pdf/
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Dont get too emotional. I think you havnt checked the link above. Prophet actually prayed for ibn ubbayi on his death bed. This is what mentioned there with sources.
Same way prophet made supplication for Muawiya in his life. Obviously not after his death.
BUT
ALLAH says:
Ask forgiveness for them, [O Muhammad], or do not ask forgiveness for them. If you should ask forgiveness for them seventy times - never will Allah forgive them. That is because they disbelieved in Allah and His Messenger, and Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people. Tauba -80
This applys to everyone including ibn ubbayi and muawiya and all of us. Dua/supplication is not any merit, that's what I am saying. Infact Prophet had supplicated for his entire ummah that they may be guided. Now its upto Allah, to accept in favor of whom He wants. Because only Allah knows what will happen in future, what everyone will do in future, what is inside the heart (intention).
Life of muawiya after the 3rd caliph is itself evidence that dua of Prophet was rejected by Allah in his favor. He was not a guided person. As he commited many sinful acts throughout his 20 years of rule. Its recorded in both hadith and history books.
Dont follow your emotions. Accept the truth.
Some evidences from history books. Read carefully. And dont be slave of your emotions accept the truth.
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/comments/2j4xh1/the_history_of_tabari_english_40_volumes_pdf/
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
You're a deluded fool. Tabari himself says a lot of what he narrated is questionable, authenticate it. Wallah you're following the same tactics as the Rafidah. We've shown you Hadith aftet Hadith in praise of Mu'awiyah, I"m getting quite bored of this
Dont get too emotional. I think you havnt checked the link above. Prophet actually prayed for ibn ubbayi on his death bed. This is what mentioned there with sources.
Same way prophet made supplication for Muawiya in his life. Obviously not after his death.
BUT
ALLAH says:
Ask forgiveness for them, [O Muhammad], or do not ask forgiveness for them. If you should ask forgiveness for them seventy times - never will Allah forgive them. That is because they disbelieved in Allah and His Messenger, and Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people. Tauba -80
This applys to everyone including ibn ubbayi and muawiya and all of us. Dua/supplication is not any merit, that's what I am saying. Infact Prophet had supplicated for his entire ummah that they may be guided. Now its upto Allah, to accept in favor of whom He wants. Because only Allah knows what will happen in future, what everyone will do in future, what is inside the heart (intention).
Life of muawiya after the 3rd caliph is itself evidence that dua of Prophet was rejected by Allah in his favor. He was not a guided person. As he commited many sinful acts throughout his 20 years of rule. Its recorded in both hadith and history books.
Dont follow your emotions. Accept the truth.
Tells everyone not to get emotional > is clearly getting emotional and desperate
Firstly your response was constructed poorly with regards to its English so thats literally what you wrote. Which to be honest speaks volumes about your research.
Secondly these are two totally different things. The Prophet is praying for him on his deathbed, which as any Muslim knows is a totally different scenario to the way the Prophet gave du'a for Mu'awiyah.
When the Prophet gave du'a for Mu'awiyah he prayed that he be successful in this world, not just to ask that he is forgiven for any vices and what not.
Not just this but how many narrations do we have of 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy being rebuked as a munafiq by the Sahabah? Find me a narration where a Sahabi calls Mu'awiyah a munafiq openly. You won't find one.
Thirdly you shamefully forget that the reason Mu'awiyah rose up was because 'Uthman's killers had not been found. If he was interested in power he would've joined with 'Aisha.
Not just this but like I said. If Mu'awiyah was a Munafiq it would've been clear from early on, so why would the Prophet do it in the first place. Also interestingly you forget that the Prophets du'a came true because Mu'awiyah woukd rule Sham then the whole Muslim world and his rule would also be successful.
So the Prophet's du'a was accepted.
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْجَعْدِ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا شُعْبَةُ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي مَنْصُورٌ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ رِبْعِيَّ بْنَ حِرَاشٍ، يَقُولُ سَمِعْتُ عَلِيًّا، يَقُولُ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم" لاَ تَكْذِبُوا عَلَىَّ، فَإِنَّهُ مَنْ كَذَبَ عَلَىَّ فَلْيَلِجِ النَّارَ "
Narrated Ali: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Do not tell a lie against me for whoever tells a lie against me (intentionally) then he will surely enter the Hell-fire."
Bukhari #106, Muslim #1Biggest Fraud That Was Done To Sunnies
On name of their love for Sahabah
No doubt, people of Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamah are the true followers and representatives of Islam but one big fraud has been done to them since 1st century Hijrah. Which resulted in their defending of Banu Umayyah specially of Muawiya bin Abu Sufiyan and the group. They have done whatever they have done, i.e they started biddah of cursing on Maula Ali a.s, changed and left many sunnahs of Prophet (s.a.w.w) due to their hatred towards Maula Ali a.s, also adopted many prohibited things etc. There is no need to hide these facts or defend them with false analogies and weak evidences. Many books have been written just to defend and support them. Unfortunately such books are circulating on the minds of most common sunnies and this is the thing which made many sunnies Nasibis. This was not at all originally the Manhaj of Ahlul Sunnah. A big fraud was done to muslims and fake books were written in merits of Muawiya by the devotees, missionaries, script writers of his time and later generations. In fact there is no any single sahih hadith in praise of Muawiya bin Abi Sufiyan from Rasoolullah (s.a.w.w) while against him there are so many authentic ahadith. Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim both have not included any single hadith as merits of Muawiya in their books. But they included ahadith which are against him. Also that was the belief of Imam Nasai and Imam Ahmed and many other prominent ahlul sunnah scholars. In fact Imam Nasai was martyred because of this reason. He was ordered by people of Syria to write a book in praise of Muawiya, same way as he had written a book in praise of Ali. Imam Nasai refused as there was no any merit for Muawiya, so they killed him, due to their hatred towards Ali. All the narrations which are present in praise of Muawiya are fabrications, comfirmed by Ahlul Sunnah ilm e rijal experts like Imam Ibn Hibban, Imam Jouzi, Imam Ibn Hajar and others.
Few evidences:
1. Musnad Ahmed: After Khilafat e Rashida there will be cruel rulership. http://islamandpsychology.blogspot.com/2011/02/future-of-islamkhilafah-returns.html. Khilafat e Rashida lasted for 30 years http://www.sunnah.com/abudawud/42/51. Then Muawiya became the first ruler of that category.
2. Sahih Muslim: Muawiya said to Sad bin Abi Waqqas to curse Ali. http://sunnah.com/muslim/44/50
3. Abu Dawud: Cursing Ali was a common thing during rule of Muawiya. http://sunnah.com/abudawud/42/55
4. Imam Ibn Jouzi said in Mozu’aat, Vol-2, P-24. http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-882#page-445
Nothing is true from Rasoolallah (s.a.w.w) in praise of Muawiya.
5. Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani in Fath ul Bari Vol-7, P-104, No. 3766,
Many manmade fabricated books were written in praise of Muawiya, Like book of Ibn Abi Asim, Abu Umar Ghulam of Thalib and Abu Bakr Al-naqash. Imam Ibn Jouzi, after mentioning few narrations from these books, said nothing is true in praise of Muawiya from Rasoolullah (s.a.w.w), all such merits that mentioned in books are falsely attributed to Prophet of Islam, all are fabrications, as confirmed by Ishaq bin Rahwiya (same was confirmed & followed by his students Imam Ahmed, Bukhari, Muslim & others). Also Imam Nasai, when he wrote a book Khasais Ali a.s, people of syria said him to write the same on Muawiya, he said what I write in prasie of Muawiya, there is nothing in his merit, people became angry and killed Imam Nasai due to their love for Muawiya and hatred towards Ali a.s. http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-1673/page-3845
The correct manhaj of Ahlul Sunnah about Muawiya Bin Abu Sufiyan is same as of Maula Ali a.s, that he did not call him kafir or munafiq but his brother in Islam. Maula Ali a.s accepted him as a Muslim, but at the same time he also mentioned and criticized his wrong acts, and guided him to the true teachings of Islam. Same is the manhaj of all prominent hadith and rijal scholars of Ahlul Sunnah, including Ishaq bin Rahwiya, Al-Hakim, Imam Ahmed, Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, Imam Nasai, Imam Ibn Jouzi, Imam Ibn Hibban and others. Follow true and correct Manhaj of Ahlul Sunnah regarding Muawiya bin Abi Sufiyan, not those weak and fabricated narrations just because some scholars are supporting it and you are emotionally connected with those narrations since your childhood.
Also it’s not the manhaj of Ahlul Sunnah to admire and support those who curse him. They are actually following the footsteps of Muawiya himself. As he was the first one who started biddah of cursing Maula Ali a.s. They not only curse Muawiya, but also curse many other true companions and wives of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w). We do not support this biddah of Muawiya. We are with Maula Ali a.s, on his manhaj. He did not abused or cursed any of his opponents, nor even the extremist Kharijites who called him Kafir on his face.REMINDERDon’t follow your emotions or personal desires, accept the evidences and be witness, even if it is against yourself or your parents/relatives or in favor of your enemies.َيَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ بِالْقِسْطِ شُهَدَاءَ لِلَّهِ وَلَوْ عَلَىٰ أَنْفُسِكُمْ أَوِ الْوَالِدَيْنِ وَالْأَقْرَبِينَ ۚ إِنْ يَكُنْ غَنِيًّا أَوْ فَقِيرًا فَاللَّهُ أَوْلَىٰ بِهِمَا ۖ فَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا الْهَوَىٰ أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا ۚ وَإِنْ تَلْوُوا أَوْ تُعْرِضُوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرًا
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah , even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted. Surah Nisa – 135يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ لِلَّهِ شُهَدَاءَ بِالْقِسْطِ ۖ وَلَا يَجْرِمَنَّكُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ عَلَىٰ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا ۚ اعْدِلُوا هُوَ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَىٰ ۖ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah , witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do. Surah Maida - 8
(1) This is the stongest evidence against him. Which I also mentioned in the main post. Musnad Imam Ahmed, Hadith #18430.
I ask you to find me where Mu'awiyah shows any hatred of 'Ali in an authentic Hadith.You may missed the Battle of Siffin.