Biggest fraud that was done to SUNNIES on their love for sahabah.

[ShiaMan]

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.

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.

[fgss]

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.

[fgss]

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.

[fgss]

"Maula Mu'awiyah AS" is in Jannah. 

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).

NO COMMENTS 

I dont know who will be in Jannah, I dont have knowledge of unseen.

Only Allah knows best.

[fgss]

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?

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.

[fgss]

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.

[Optimus Prime]

"Maula Mu'awiyah AS" is in Jannah. 

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).

NO COMMENTS 

I dont know who will be in Jannah, I dont have knowledge of unseen.

Only Allah knows best.

Exactly because the truth hurts.

Allah, is pleased with Mu'awiyah (RA).

[Optimus Prime]

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.

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.

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.

[Optimus Prime]

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.

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.

[fgss]

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.

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. 

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.

[fgss]

Bakwaas

Are you a native urdu speaker. where from? which city?
May I know that?

[fgss]

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?

[Optimus Prime]

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.

[Optimus Prime]

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.

[Optimus Prime]

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.

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. 

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.

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. 

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.

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.

[Ibn Yahya]

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

[fgss]

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

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.

[fgss]

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.

You not answered my this question.

Answer while keeping in mind above two verses.

[fgss]

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.

Again you didn’t answered my above mentioned question.

Since you are getting bore now, so let me finish the matter for you.

In my main post I shared 5 evidences. You picked only one out of 5 and started doing copy paste in support of assumption of Imam Nawawi (r.a) while you did not pay more attention to other 4 evidences. Here are those.



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.

Comment: Muawiya was not among those who were rightly guided caliphs. If he was really guided as you quoted supplications of Prophet s.a.w.w for him then why he was not among rightly guided caliphs. Caliphate was only 30 years. Prophet is saying there will be cruel rulers after rightly guided caliphs. Muawiya was the first lucky person who came after them. Only this hadith is enough to prove muawiya was not at all a rightly guided person. He was the first cruel king of this ummah, as said by Prophet s.a.w.w.
 
2.   Sahih Muslim: Muawiya said to Sad bin Abi Waqqas to curse Ali. http://sunnah.com/muslim/44/50

Comment: In response to this you quoted Imam Nawawi’s assumption and called it manhja of Ahlul Sunnah. This is blindness. There are many other narrations which confirms the same that muawiya used to curse Ali even after his death. And in this narration Muawiya is insisting Saad to curse Ali because he appointed saad as governor and every governor of muawiya used to curse Ali as per orders of muawiya. It was common thing for muawiya and all of his governors and followers.
I will share other related narrations in my next post. In sha ALLAH. Which will clarify the matter for you and for those scholars whom you are blindly following.

3.   Abu Dawud: Cursing Ali was a common thing during rule of Muawiya. http://sunnah.com/abudawud/42/55

Comment: Cursing Ali was the main task of Banu Ummayah which was started and established by Muawiya. There are also other narrations related to this fact. You will see that in next post.

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.

Comment: This is ibn jouzi, the great expert of ilm rijal, who is confirming this. Not me.

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

Comment: This is the correct manhaj of AHlul Sunnah about Muawiya. There is nothing in his praise except the fact that he was a muslim and remained in the company of Prophet for many years. But after that till his death he committed and adopted many wrong and haram things. He was not only a hater of Ali but also disobedient to ALLAH and Prophet s.a.w.w. There are also many narration to confirm this.

[fgss]

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.

Very sad. You are even unable to answer this very basic question about yourself.
But now Its very clear from your posts and responses. I got it.

Watch this video. This is not about anything personal muawiya did to himself. But this is about what damaged he did to Islam.

And Don’t look at the person who is talking but see what he is saying and what are his sources on that. This video will show you how Muawiya hijacked the Islam and ruined it. He was a cruel ruler. Not a rightly guide caliph. As Prophet s.a.w.w said in Musnad Ahmed Hadith #18430. You will find many evidences here both from hadith and history books along with verdicts of prominent ahlul sunnah scholars about muawiya.