Imam Ali (a.s) fighting Muawiya

[Ijtaba]

I want to know on what basis did Imam Ali (a.s) fight against Muawiya & Syrians according to Ahlul Sunnah's point of view?

Prophet (s.a.w.w) openly has forbidden Muslims from fighting one another by stating that fighting Muslim is Kufr.

It was narrated from 'Abdur-Rahman bin 'Abdullah, from his father, that: The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: "Defaming a Muslim is evildoing and fighting him is Kufr. Sunan an-Nasai: 4113

Sahabi Usama b. Zayd (r.a) avoided Battle of Jamal and Siffin by saying that he had made a promise not to strike a person who pronounces the testimony of "There is no god except Allah".

Ahlul Sunnah believes Muawiya and Syrians were Muslims and according to authentic hadiths Muslim's blood, wealth and honor is sacred.

The Prophet (PBUH) said:

“Every sin may be forgiven by Allah except a man who kills a believer deliberately, or a man who dies as a disbeliever.” (An-Nisai 3989).

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

I want to know on what basis did Imam Ali (a.s) fight against Muawiya & Syrians according to Ahlul Sunnah's point of view?

Prophet (s.a.w.w) openly has forbidden Muslims from fighting one another by stating that fighting Muslim is Kufr.

Sahabi Usama b. Zayd (r.a) avoided Battle of Jamal and Siffin by saying that he had made a promise not to strike a person who pronounces the testimony of "There is no god except Allah".

Ahlul Sunnah believes Muawiya and Syrians were Muslims and according to authentic hadiths Muslim's blood, wealth and honor is sacred.

Don't forget the report which says Hassan(RA) will make peace two group of Muslims, the other was Syrians.

Ali(RA) fought because he viewed Muawiya(RA) in rebellion against him. I guess Ali(RA) made istidlal on this verse.

If two parties of believers fall to fighting, make peace between them. But if one of them aggressively encroaches the rights of the other, then fight you all against the aggressive side until they comply with God's decree (concerning the matter). If they comply, then make peace between them with justice and be scrupulously equitable. Surely God loves the scrupulously equitable. [Quran 49:9]

[Ijtaba]

Don't forget the report which says Hassan(RA) will make peace two group of Muslims, the other was Syrians.

Yes, I know about that report. The question is why did Imam Ali (a.s) choose bloodshed over peace with the other group of Muslims (i.e. Syrians)?

Ali(RA) fought because he viewed Muawiya(RA) in rebellion against him. I guess Ali(RA) made istidlal on this verse.

So you're saying Imam Ali (a.s) fighting with Muawiya was because Imam Ali (a.s) considered Muawiya as a rebel and thus his (Muawiya's) blood, wealth & honor were no longer sacred. This is in align with Shi'a view.

Over here I like to ask one question. We as Shias believe Imam Ali (a.s) to be infallible and thus on haqq i.e. Imam Ali (a.s) viewing Muawiya as a rebel & fighting him & his army to be correct. However, Ahlul Sunnah believes Imam Ali (a.s) to fallible, so I want to know whether Ahlul Sunnah considers Imam Ali (a.s) ijtihaad or istidlal of viewing Muawiya and his army as rebels to be correct? 

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Yes, I know about that report. The question is why did Imam Ali (a.s) choose bloodshed over peace with the other group of Muslims (i.e. Syrians)?

So you're saying Imam Ali (a.s) fighting with Muawiya was because Imam Ali (a.s) considered Muawiya as a rebel and thus his (Muawiya's) blood, wealth & honor were no longer sacred. This is in align with Shi'a view.

Over here I like to ask one question. We as Shias believe Imam Ali (a.s) to be infallible and thus on haqq i.e. Imam Ali (a.s) viewing Muawiya as a rebel & fighting him & his army to be correct. However, Ahlul Sunnah believes Imam Ali (a.s) to fallible, so I want to know whether Ahlul Sunnah considers Imam Ali (a.s) ijtihaad or istidlal of viewing Muawiya and his army as rebels to be correct?

Ahl as-Sunnah are in agreement that Ali(ra) was correct in all his battles during his Caliphate.

[Rationalist]

Over here I like to ask one question. We as Shias believe Imam Ali (a.s) to be infallible and thus on haqq i.e. Imam Ali (a.s) viewing Muawiya as a rebel & fighting him & his army to be correct. However, Ahlul Sunnah believes Imam Ali (a.s) to fallible, so I want to know whether Ahlul Sunnah considers Imam Ali (a.s) ijtihaad or istidlal of viewing Muawiya and his army as rebels to be correct? 

Did Imam Ali (as) accept bayah from those who considered him fallible? Did he tell people they can only give him bayah if they accept him as the first Calipah and that they later have to give bayah to the remaining 11 Imams?

[Ijtaba]

Ahl as-Sunnah are in agreement that Ali(ra) was correct in all his battles during his Caliphate.

Thanks for the answer.

While I was looking at Sunni point of view on Battles of Jamal and Siffin, I came to know that according to Ahlul Sunnah three groups of Muslims were created during this time period of Fitnas and they were all saved (i.e. all three groups were believers and going to Paradise) but only one group (i.e. Imam Ali a.s) was more closer to the truth than other two groups (i.e. Muawiya & Abu Musa). But I found an authentic hadith which contradicts this view. According to this hadith two groups (i.e. Imam Ali a.s and Muawiya) would go in hell and only one group would be saved (i.e. Abu Musa)

Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6898:

Ahnaf b. Qais reported: I set out with the intention of helping this person (Hadrat 'Ali) that Abu Bakra met me. He said: Ahnaf, where do you intend to go? I said: I intend to help the cousin of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), viz. 'Ali. Thereupon he said to me: Ahnaf, go back, for I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: When two Muslims confront one another with swords (in hands) both the slayer and the slain would be in Fire. He (Ahnaf) said: I said, or it was said: Allah's Messenger, it may be the case of one who kills. but what about the slain (why he would be put in Hell-Fire)? Thereupon he said: He also intended to kill his companion.

Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6899:

Ahnaf b. Qais reported on the authority of Abu Bakra that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: When two Muslims confront each other with their swords, both the slayer and the slain are doomed to Hell-Fire.

Is there any authentic hadith which states otherwise i.e. all three groups were going to Paradise and Abu Bakra held wrong/incorrect opinion?

*By Imam Ali (a.s), I mean Imam Ali (a.s) & his army
by Muawiya, I mean Muawiya & his army
and by Abu Musa, I mean Abu Musa and those people who did not participate in Battle of Jamal nor Siffin

[Ijtaba]

Did Imam Ali (as) accept bayah from those who considered him fallible? Did he tell people they can only give him bayah if they accept him as the first Calipah and that they later have to give bayah to the remaining 11 Imams?

No, he (a.s) accepted bayah from Muhajirun and Ansar when they gave him (a.s) bayah willingly without there being any coercion.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Thanks for the answer.

While I was looking at Sunni point of view on Battles of Jamal and Siffin, I came to know that according to Ahlul Sunnah three groups of Muslims were created during this time period of Fitnas and they were all saved (i.e. all three groups were believers and going to Paradise) but only one group (i.e. Imam Ali a.s) was more closer to the truth than other two groups (i.e. Muawiya & Abu Musa). But I found an authentic hadith which contradicts this view. According to this hadith two groups (i.e. Imam Ali a.s and Muawiya) would go in hell and only one group would be saved (i.e. Abu Musa)

These ahadeeth are not applicable in this case. Because Sahaba wouldn’t have fought each other in the first place if this they thought that these ahadeeth were applicable to their case. These ahadeeth should be applicable in the scenario where there is no reason/excuse for the Muslim to fight/kill his fellow Muslim. But in other scenarios it won’t be applicable. For example,

Abu Huraira reported: A person came to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah, what do you think if a man comes to me in order to appropriate my possession? He (the Holy Prophet) said: Don't surrender your possession to him. He (the inquirer) said: If he fights me? He (the Holy Prophet) remarked: Then fight (with him). He (the inquirer) again said: What do you think if I am killed? He (the Holy Prophet) observed: You would be a martyr. He (the inquirer) said: What do you think of him (Messenger of Allah) If I kill him. He (the Holy Prophet) said: he would be in the Fire. [Sahih Muslim #140]

You see in this scenario it wasn’t applicable. So the Sahabi Abū Bakra made an incorrect ijtihad from this report on that occasion.

Wallahu Alam. 

[Ijtaba]

These ahadeeth are not applicable in this case. Because Sahaba wouldn’t have fought each other in the first place if this they thought that these ahadeeth were applicable to their case. These ahadeeth should be applicable in the scenario where there is no reason/excuse for the Muslim to fight/kill his fellow Muslim. But in other scenarios it won’t be applicable...

But majority of the Sahabah did refrain from participating in the conflict between Imam Ali (a.s) and Mu’awiyah because they saw internal fighting as Fitna and cause of weakening of Muslim Ummah.

http://www.twelvershia.net/2018/09/10/did-the-sahabah-all-fight-each-other/

If Sahabas had thought that participating in Battle of Siffin would make them martyr and their opponent to be hell-bound then almost all Sahabas would had willingly participated in Battle of Siffin. The reason which stopped majority of Sahabas from participating in Battle of Siffin was their fear of being in hell (as Abu Bakrah had feared of going in hell by particpating in such internal battles)

[fgss]

But majority of the Sahabah did refrain from participating in the conflict between Imam Ali (a.s) and Mu’awiyah because they saw internal fighting as Fitna and cause of weakening of Muslim Ummah.

http://www.twelvershia.net/2018/09/10/did-the-sahabah-all-fight-each-other/

If Sahabas had thought that participating in Battle of Siffin would make them martyr and their opponent to be hell-bound then almost all Sahabas would had willingly participated in Battle of Siffin. The reason which stopped majority of Sahabas from participating in Battle of Siffin was their fear of being in hell (as Abu Bakrah had feared of going in hell by particpating in such internal battles)

Those who participated and those who refrained, all were right in their ijtehad because it was based on Prophetic narrations. As there is a reward for honest ijtehad and Allah knows best.

Moreover the reason for not participating was'nt the same for all sahabah, like Usamah bin Zayd's reason, which was also due to a saying of Prophet (s.a.w.w).

I have a question.

Why did companions of Imam al-Baqir and Imam al-Sadiq not joined and supported Imam Zayd bin Ali despite of his many virtues, like his resemblance to Imam Ali and verses of Quran which relate to him etc. And despite of the order of support issued by Imam al-Sadiq?

From uyun akhbar Reza...

I swear by God that Zayd was one who was addressed by the following verse, ‘And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive, (with sincerity and under discipline). He has chosen you…

‘O my uncle! Do this if you are pleased with being killed and your corpse being hung up from the gallows in the al-Konasa neighborhood.’ After Zayd left, As-Sadiq (a.s.) said, “Woe be to those who hear his call but do not help him!’”

Then I heard the Imam (a.s.) say, ‘O God! Please give me a share of the reward for this battle. I swear by God that my uncle and his companions were martyrs just like Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) and his companions.’”
 

[Ijtaba]

Those who participated and those who refrained, all were right in their ijtehad because it was based on Prophetic narrations. As there is a reward for honest ijtehad and Allah knows best.

Ijtihad can only be exercised by Hakam (i.e. Ruler) If you have come across any hadith stating otherwise (i.e. ijtihad can be done by any Sahaba) then please provide that hadith. During battles of Jamal & Siffin, Muslim Ummah became into three groups. There exists authentic ahadith supporting the views of two groups but not for the third group.

1st Group

Hadith (and Quranic verse) exists which says Imam should be supported against rebels.

2nd Group

Hadith exists which forbids Muslims to fight against one another as both killer and killed will be in hell.

3rd Group

No Hadith exists which states to rebel against the Caliph/Imam of Muslim Ummah. On the contrary, there are authentic hadiths forbidding Muslims to rebel against Caliph/Imam of Muslim Ummah (even if Caliph be unjust) until the Caliph is offering prayers.

*Even if rebels had not given bayah to Imam Ali (a.s) then also they could not fight Imam Ali (a.s) because at that time there was no other Caliph/Imam/Ruler in Muslim Ummah besides him (a.s) i.e. Muawiya, Talha & Zubair did not proclaim to be Caliphs/Imams of Muslims. If any one of them had done so, then there would had been benefit of doubt for him to fight Imam Ali (a.s) on the pretext that he would say that he is true Caliph/Imam as he was chosen/made as Caliph first and Imam Ali (a.s) is the contending Caliph and there does exist authentic hadith in case of two Caliphs existing in Muslim Ummah which allowed Muslims to fight the latter (i.e. second) Caliph by joining the forces of first Caliph.

Moreover the reason for not participating was'nt the same for all sahabah, like Usamah bin Zayd's reason, which was also due to a saying of Prophet (s.a.w.w).

The reason of Usamah bin Zayd not participating is due to an incident which occurred in the lifetime of Prophet (s.a.w.w) after which Usamah bin Zayd promised not to fight those who proclaim Tawhid. Usamah had killed a person who proclaimed Kalima when he was about to be killed by Usamah. According to Prophet (s.a.w.w) a person who proclaims Tawhid and becomes Muslim then his blood, wealth and honor is sacred.  Nonetheless Usamah falls in second group.

I have a question.

Why did companions of Imam al-Baqir and Imam al-Sadiq not joined and supported Imam Zayd bin Ali despite of his many virtues, like his resemblance to Imam Ali and verses of Quran which relate to him etc. And despite of the order of support issued by Imam al-Sadiq?

From uyun akhbar Reza...

I swear by God that Zayd was one who was addressed by the following verse, ‘And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive, (with sincerity and under discipline). He has chosen you…

‘O my uncle! Do this if you are pleased with being killed and your corpse being hung up from the gallows in the al-Konasa neighborhood.’ After Zayd left, As-Sadiq (a.s.) said, “Woe be to those who hear his call but do not help him!’”

Then I heard the Imam (a.s.) say, ‘O God! Please give me a share of the reward for this battle. I swear by God that my uncle and his companions were martyrs just like Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) and his companions.’”
 

Imam al-Baqir (a.s) and Imam al-Sadiq (a.s) did not join Zayd bin Ali (a.s) because both Imams (a.s) have stated to have specific number of Muttaqi Shias for them (a.s) to do Kharooj (خروج) On the other hand Zayd bin Ali (a.s) revolted against Ummawi Caliph due to reasons known to him (a.s). It may be that Zayd bin Ali (a.s) did not consider Hisham as legitimate caliph due to cursing of Prophet (s.a.w.w) on Hakam bin Al-Aas. I haven't studied on this topic but will in near future study about it, In sha ALLAH.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

But majority of the Sahabah did refrain from participating in the conflict between Imam Ali (a.s) and Mu’awiyah because they saw internal fighting as Fitna and cause of weakening of Muslim Ummah.

My response was specific to the hadeeth of both killer and killed going to hell. Here you have changed the subject to it being Fitnah, where in I don’t disagree that it was Fitnah.

I would also like to add a point to my previous response that, in the case of hadeeth it could be interpreted to mean that when two Muslims confront each other with the intention to kill each other. While in the case Ali(as) and Muawiya(as), their intentions were different Ali demanded that Muawiya gives him pledge , while Muawiya was demanding qisas for uthman. So both fought for these intentions. Their intention wasn’t to murder each other.

If Sahabas had thought that participating in Battle of Siffin would make them martyr and their opponent to be hell-bound then almost all Sahabas would had willingly participated in Battle of Siffin. The reason which stopped majority of Sahabas from participating in Battle of Siffin was their fear of being in hell (as Abu Bakrah had feared of going in hell by particpating in such internal battles)

I don’t think so, they refrained from it because they remembered the direct advice of Prophet(saws) to remain aloof from Fitnah.

Secondly, I dislike the selective usage of some general reports by people and trying to make judgement using them, like what you did. These matters should be look in a holistic manner, instead of cherry picking certain general reports and jumping to conclusions.

Because there are many possibilities, like forgiveness from Allah, etc. otherwise one could just use this general report and declare every person who prayed two units prayer to be jannati, as if there aren’t any probabilities for this to not occur.

'Uqba b. 'Amir reported: We were entrusted with the task of tending the camels. On my turn when I came back in the evening after grazing them in the pastures, I found Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stand and address the people. I heard these words of his: If any Muslim performs ablution well, then stands and prays two rak'ahs setting about them with his heart as well as his face, Paradise would be guaranteed to him. I said: What a fine thing is this![Sahih Muslim 234].

So it’s not appropriate to say about people that they did this hence they will enter hell, basing your view on some general reports, Especially in the case of those Sahaba who have khaas(specific) glad-tiding about them entering paradise. Such as Ali(as) and Muawiya(as).

[fgss]

Ijtihad can only be exercised by Hakam (i.e. Ruler) If you have come across any hadith stating otherwise (i.e. ijtihad can be done by any Sahaba) then please provide that hadith. During battles of Jamal & Siffin, Muslim Ummah became into three groups. There exists authentic ahadith supporting the views of two groups but not for the third group.

1st Group

Hadith (and Quranic verse) exists which says Imam should be supported against rebels.

2nd Group

Hadith exists which forbids Muslims to fight against one another as both killer and killed will be in hell.

3rd Group

No Hadith exists which states to rebel against the Caliph/Imam of Muslim Ummah. On the contrary, there are authentic hadiths forbidding Muslims to rebel against Caliph/Imam of Muslim Ummah (even if Caliph be unjust) until the Caliph is offering prayers.

*Even if rebels had not given bayah to Imam Ali (a.s) then also they could not fight Imam Ali (a.s) because at that time there was no other Caliph/Imam/Ruler in Muslim Ummah besides him (a.s) i.e. Muawiya, Talha & Zubair did not proclaim to be Caliphs/Imams of Muslims. If any one of them had done so, then there would had been benefit of doubt for him to fight Imam Ali (a.s) on the pretext that he would say that he is true Caliph/Imam as he was chosen/made as Caliph first and Imam Ali (a.s) is the contending Caliph and there does exist authentic hadith in case of two Caliphs existing in Muslim Ummah which allowed Muslims to fight the latter (i.e. second) Caliph by joining the forces of first Caliph.

The reason of Usamah bin Zayd not participating is due to an incident which occurred in the lifetime of Prophet (s.a.w.w) after which Usamah bin Zayd promised not to fight those who proclaim Tawhid. Usamah had killed a person who proclaimed Kalima when he was about to be killed by Usamah. According to Prophet (s.a.w.w) a person who proclaims Tawhid and becomes Muslim then his blood, wealth and honor is sacred.  Nonetheless Usamah falls in second group.

My response was only for the first two groups you mentioned. That their ijtehad (selecting one way or the other) was right as both options were based on Prophetic narrations.

As for the 3rd group so it was on the wrong side. No ifs and buts. Their matter is with Allah (swt). Repentance is also a factor among others.

And that is why I said, the reason to refrain wasn't the same for all sahabah.

Imam al-Baqir (a.s) and Imam al-Sadiq (a.s) did not join Zayd bin Ali (a.s) because both Imams (a.s) have stated to have specific number of Muttaqi Shias for them (a.s) to do Kharooj (خروج) On the other hand Zayd bin Ali (a.s) revolted against Ummawi Caliph due to reasons known to him (a.s). It may be that Zayd bin Ali (a.s) did not consider Hisham as legitimate caliph due to cursing of Prophet (s.a.w.w) on Hakam bin Al-Aas. I haven't studied on this topic but will in near future study about it, In sha ALLAH.

So, Zayd bin Ali was not their mutaqqi shia? And he did revolt on his own without Imam's approval?

BTW, my question was about their companions that why did they not join zayd's revolt.

Despite Imam's words...

That woe be to those who hear his call but do not help him.

Later on hearing the news of his death, Imam Sadiq called Zayd bin Ali and his companions martyrs and compared them to Imam Ali and his compaions. And also prayed to Allah for the share of reward from this battle for himself.

Imam Abu Hanifa and others also supported Zayd's revolt, so it wasn't any hidden thing at that time.
 

[Ijtaba]

My response was specific to the hadeeth of both killer and killed going to hell. Here you have changed the subject to it being Fitnah, where in I don’t disagree that it was Fitnah.

I would also like to add a point to my previous response that, in the case of hadeeth it could be interpreted to mean that when two Muslims confront each other with the intention to kill each other. While in the case Ali(as) and Muawiya(as), their intentions were different Ali demanded that Muawiya gives him pledge , while Muawiya was demanding qisas for uthman. So both fought for these intentions. Their intention wasn’t to murder each other.

Imam Ali (a.s) and Muawiya's intention was not to murder each another. For the sake of argument, lets agree with this statement. Now the most important question is: who is responsible for the murders of Muslims on both side of the armies? It is a fact that both parties lost their men. The combatant from Imam Ali's (a.s) army who killed Muawiya's combatant (and vice versa), is he saved from hell? If no, then is it just that combatant who on the orders of his leader fought and killed opponent's combatant would go to hell but his leader (who ordered him to fight and kill) would go to heaven?

Muslim lives were lost in this battle. 1 Muslim life means 1 Muslim family. Each Muslim who was killed in this battle had a father, mother, brother, sister, wife, son, daughter. Battle of Siffin was not a sport. It was a war which caused huge loss as many Muslim lives were lost and Muslim Ummah was weakened.

If Imam Ali (a.s) ordered his troops to kill Muawiya's men and Muawiya ordered his troops to kill Imam Ali's (a.s) men, then intention of both Imam Ali (a.s) and Muawiya was to kill Muslims and the hadith (narrated by Abu Bakra) applies on both of them. 

*However, Imam Ali (a.s) had advantage over Muawiya of fighting & killing him and his men due to verse of al-Quran (which you quoted) ordering to do Qital on Rebelling Party.

I don’t think so, they refrained from it because they remembered the direct advice of Prophet(saws) to remain aloof from Fitnah.

and they also remembered the reason given by Prophet (s.a.w.w) to remain aloof from Fitnah (i.e. Both killer and killed going to Hell) 

Secondly, I dislike the selective usage of some general reports by people and trying to make judgement using them, like what you did. These matters should be look in a holistic manner, instead of cherry picking certain general reports and jumping to conclusions.

Because there are many possibilities, like forgiveness from Allah, etc. otherwise one could just use this general report and declare every person who prayed two units prayer to be jannati, as if there aren’t any probabilities for this to not occur.

'Uqba b. 'Amir reported: We were entrusted with the task of tending the camels. On my turn when I came back in the evening after grazing them in the pastures, I found Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stand and address the people. I heard these words of his: If any Muslim performs ablution well, then stands and prays two rak'ahs setting about them with his heart as well as his face, Paradise would be guaranteed to him. I said: What a fine thing is this![Sahih Muslim 234].

So it’s not appropriate to say about people that they did this hence they will enter hell, basing your view on some general reports, Especially in the case of those Sahaba who have khaas(specific) glad-tiding about them entering paradise. Such as Ali(as) and Muawiya(as).

I also agree in holistic approach rather than cherry-picking. I have not yet come across any hadith stating that both killer and killed will enter heaven. In Jamal and Siffin both parties were Muslims i.e. killer and killed were both Muslims. Ahlul Sunnah believes that both killer and killed will be in Jannah but all hadiths state otherwise.

01. There exists hadith stating to support Caliph and not to fight or rebel against him.
02. There exists hadith stating a Muslim may protect his property from other Muslim and in protecting his property if he is killed then he is martyr. (Killer in hell, Killed in heaven)
03. There exists hadith stating Muslims not to fight each other. (Both Killer and Killed in Hell)

Following holistic approach, I am only asking to provide authentic hadith which supports Ahlul Sunnah claim that both Muslim killer and Muslim killed will enter Heaven. If such hadith is provided then I will wholeheartedly accept such hadith.

[Ijtaba]

So, Zayd bin Ali was not their mutaqqi shia? And he did revolt on his own without Imam's approval?

Zayd bin Ali (a.s) is one muttaqi shia. Imam Baqir (a.s) and Imam Sadiq (a.s) needed more than one muttaqi shia i.e. they needed 313 muttaqi shias like Zayd bin Ali (a.s) to revolt against unjust government.

If Zayd bin Ali (a.s) considered Imam Jafar Sadiq (a.s) as his Imam, and Imam Jafar Sadiq (a.s) considered Zayd bin Ali (a.s) as martyr then I think your question has been answered.

BTW, my question was about their companions that why did they not join zayd's revolt.

Despite Imam's words...

That woe be to those who hear his call but do not help him.

Later on hearing the news of his death, Imam Sadiq called Zayd bin Ali and his companions martyrs and compared them to Imam Ali and his compaions. And also prayed to Allah for the share of reward from this battle for himself.

Imam Abu Hanifa and others also supported Zayd's revolt, so it wasn't any hidden thing at that time.

If you mean Companions of Imam Baqir (a.s) and Imam Sadiq (a.s) then yes they should had joined Zayd bin Ali (a.s).

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Imam Ali (a.s) and Muawiya's intention was not to murder each another. For the sake of argument, lets agree with this statement. Now the most important question is: who is responsible for the murders of Muslims on both side of the armies? It is a fact that both parties lost their men. The combatant from Imam Ali's (a.s) army who killed Muawiya's combatant (and vice versa), is he saved from hell? If no, then is it just that combatant who on the orders of his leader fought and killed opponent's combatant would go to hell but his leader (who ordered him to fight and kill) would go to heaven?

Muslim lives were lost in this battle. 1 Muslim life means 1 Muslim family. Each Muslim who was killed in this battle had a father, mother, brother, sister, wife, son, daughter. Battle of Siffin was not a sport. It was a war which caused huge loss as many Muslim lives were lost and Muslim Ummah was weakened.

If Imam Ali (a.s) ordered his troops to kill Muawiya's men and Muawiya ordered his troops to kill Imam Ali's (a.s) men, then intention of both Imam Ali (a.s) and Muawiya was to kill Muslims and the hadith (narrated by Abu Bakra) applies on both of them. 

*However, Imam Ali (a.s) had advantage over Muawiya of fighting & killing him and his men due to verse of al-Quran (which you quoted) ordering to do Qital on Rebelling Party.

and they also remembered the reason given by Prophet (s.a.w.w) to remain aloof from Fitnah (i.e. Both killer and killed going to Hell) 

I also agree in holistic approach rather than cherry-picking. I have not yet come across any hadith stating that both killer and killed will enter heaven. In Jamal and Siffin both parties were Muslims i.e. killer and killed were both Muslims. Ahlul Sunnah believes that both killer and killed will be in Jannah but all hadiths state otherwise.

01. There exists hadith stating to support Caliph and not to fight or rebel against him.
02. There exists hadith stating a Muslim may protect his property from other Muslim and in protecting his property if he is killed then he is martyr. (Killer in hell, Killed in heaven)
03. There exists hadith stating Muslims not to fight each other. (Both Killer and Killed in Hell)

Following holistic approach, I am only asking to provide authentic hadith which supports Ahlul Sunnah claim that both Muslim killer and Muslim killed will enter Heaven. If such hadith is provided then I will wholeheartedly accept such hadith.

Firstly I have responded to the your usage of the hadeeth both the slain and slayer will go to hell. That it’s inapplicable in this scenario.

You try to argue back using “ifs”, but that’s not a strong way to argue. Moreover, Ahlusunnah believe to remain silent over these matters, in case if you didn’t know. We don’t pass judgements over Sahaba in these disputes of theirs.

You claim that, Ai(as) had some strong reasons to fight Muawiya(as) , that was his ijtihad, which was correct. While even Muawiya(as) too believed that he had reasons to defend back and demand the right for Uthman(as), this was his ijtihad, even if correct.

واعلم أن على القول الأول والثاني ظهر أن المقتول وولي دمه يكونان منصورين من عند الله تعالى وعن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما أنه قال : قلت لعلي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام وأيم الله ليظهرن عليكم ابن أبي سفيان ، لأن الله تعالى يقول : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } وقال الحسن : والله ما نصر معاوية على علي عليه السلام إلا بقول الله تعالى : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } ، والله أعلم

For the tafseer of this verse Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, quran(17:33) Imam fakruddin razi writes , It is reported from hz ibn abbas(ra): I said to hz ali(ra) , by Allah (Muawiya)ibn abu sufyan(ra) will surely overcome you because Allah said Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir. And hasan basri(ra) said that because of this verse Hz muawiya(ra) was successful compared to hz ali(ra). Wallahu alam.[ Tafseer al kabeer vol 4, page 397)]

In ijtihadi matters one can’t pass down the blame or judgement on someone.

For example:
It is narrated on the authority of Usama b. Zaid: The Messenger of Allah may peace be upon him) sent us to Huraqat, a tribe of Juhaina. We attacked that tribe early in the morning and defeated them and I and a man from the Ansar caught hold of a person (of the defeated tribe). When we overcame him, he said: There is no god but Allah. At that moment the Ansari spared him, but I attacked him with my spear and killed him. The news had already reached the Apostle (peace be upon him), so when we came back he (the Apostle) said to me: Usama, did you kill him after he had made the profession: There is no god but Allah? I said. Messenger of Allah, he did it only as a shelter. The Prophet observed: Did you kill him after he had made the profession that there is no god but Allah? He (the Holy Prophet) went on repeating this to me till I wished I had not embraced Islam before that day. [Sahih Muslim 177]

You see a non-Muslim recited Shahadah, yet the Muslim killed him based on his ijtihad. Now was this person doomed to hell-fire by Prophet(saws)? Even though prophet(saws) strongly rebuked such an action, yet did he apply hadd nor declare the killer to be in hell.

Moreover, you have misunderstood my view to look the matter in a holistic manner, I meant to say that look at the complete life events of a person, instead of look at just one event. There were others achievements of that person, which could over weight his mistake in one.
Secondly aren’t you aware of Allah pardoning the sins and mistakes of people , so there remains scope for this possibility that’s why I say it’s not proper to make judgements over general reports , while there exist Khaas(specific) reports for such person to enter Jannah. I.e Muawiya(as).

[Ijtaba]

Firstly I have responded to the your usage of the hadeeth both the slain and slayer will go to hell. That it’s inapplicable in this scenario.

You try to argue back using “ifs”, but that’s not a strong way to argue. Moreover, Ahlusunnah believe to remain silent over these matters, in case if you didn’t know. We don’t pass judgements over Sahaba in these disputes of theirs.

You claim that, Ai(as) had some strong reasons to fight Muawiya(as) , that was his ijtihad, which was correct. While even Muawiya(as) too believed that he had reasons to defend back and demand the right for Uthman(as), this was his ijtihad, even if correct.

واعلم أن على القول الأول والثاني ظهر أن المقتول وولي دمه يكونان منصورين من عند الله تعالى وعن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما أنه قال : قلت لعلي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام وأيم الله ليظهرن عليكم ابن أبي سفيان ، لأن الله تعالى يقول : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } وقال الحسن : والله ما نصر معاوية على علي عليه السلام إلا بقول الله تعالى : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } ، والله أعلم

For the tafseer of this verse Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, quran(17:33) Imam fakruddin razi writes , It is reported from hz ibn abbas(ra): I said to hz ali(ra) , by Allah (Muawiya)ibn abu sufyan(ra) will surely overcome you because Allah said Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir. And hasan basri(ra) said that because of this verse Hz muawiya(ra) was successful compared to hz ali(ra). Wallahu alam.[ Tafseer al kabeer vol 4, page 397)]

Had Uthman bin Affan no children that Muawiya became his heir? If Uthman bin Affan did have children who were his true heirs then it was duty of Uthman's children to go to the Muslim Caliph of their time to avenge their father's blood as only Muslim Caliph has authority to avenge their father's blood.

In ijtihadi matters one can’t pass down the blame or judgement on someone.

For example:
It is narrated on the authority of Usama b. Zaid: The Messenger of Allah may peace be upon him) sent us to Huraqat, a tribe of Juhaina. We attacked that tribe early in the morning and defeated them and I and a man from the Ansar caught hold of a person (of the defeated tribe). When we overcame him, he said: There is no god but Allah. At that moment the Ansari spared him, but I attacked him with my spear and killed him. The news had already reached the Apostle (peace be upon him), so when we came back he (the Apostle) said to me: Usama, did you kill him after he had made the profession: There is no god but Allah? I said. Messenger of Allah, he did it only as a shelter. The Prophet observed: Did you kill him after he had made the profession that there is no god but Allah? He (the Holy Prophet) went on repeating this to me till I wished I had not embraced Islam before that day. [Sahih Muslim 177]

You see a non-Muslim recited Shahadah, yet the Muslim killed him based on his ijtihad. Now was this person doomed to hell-fire by Prophet(saws)? Even though prophet(saws) strongly rebuked such an action, yet did he apply hadd nor declare the killer to be in hell.

There can be NO Ijtihad where there exists clear commandments in Quran and Hadiths. A person cannot go against clear injunctions laid down in Quran and Hadiths by using his own Ijtihad. For e.g. I cannot pray 5 rakats of Fajr Salat based on my ijtihad or consider four sips of Wine to be halal based on my ijtihad.

Usamah bin Zaid (r.a) killed a man in ignorance (he thought that a person wasn't Muslim in true sense as he professed Tawhid by his tongue but never believed in Tawhid by his heart). When Usamah (r.a) was rebuked by Prophet (s.a.w.w) he (r.a) felt regret for his (r.a) action and promised never to strike anyone who professed Tawhid.

In case of unintentionally killing a believer, ALLAH (SWT) has said following:

“It is not for a believer to kill a believer except (that it be) by mistake; and whosoever kills a believer by mistake, (it is ordained that) he must set free a believing slave and a compensation (blood money, i.e. Diya) be given to the deceased’s family unless they remit it. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing slave (is prescribed); and if he belonged to a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance, compensation (blood money — Diya) must be paid to his family, and a believing slave must be freed. And whoso finds this (the penance of freeing a slave) beyond his means, he must fast for two consecutive months in order to seek repentance from Allaah. And Allaah is Ever All‑Knowing, All‑Wise”
[al-Nisa’ 4:92]   

But in Battle of Jamal & Siffin, believers were not killed in ignorance, unintentionally or by mistake.

Moreover, you have misunderstood my view to look the matter in a holistic manner, I meant to say that look at the complete life events of a person, instead of look at just one event. There were others achievements of that person, which could over weight his mistake in one.
Secondly aren’t you aware of Allah pardoning the sins and mistakes of people , so there remains scope for this possibility that’s why I say it’s not proper to make judgements over general reports , while there exist Khaas(specific) reports for such person to enter Jannah. I.e Muawiya(as).

According to Ahlul Sunnah, Iblees a.k.a Shaitaan is a person who had worshipped ALLAH (SWT) thousand of years. He (l.a) had attained such a rank that he (l.a) was placed among Angels. Iblees (l.a) never prostrated to anyone besides ALLAH. Even Angels prostrated to Ghair-ALLAH (Adam a.s) but Ibless (l.a) never prostrated to Adam (a.s). Shaitaan's (l.a) imaan in ALLAH is as such that Abu Hanifa used to say that Abu Bakr's imaan and Shaitaan's imaan are one. (http://www.twelvershia.net/2016/04/02/response-to-faith-of-abu-bakar-and-faith-of-satan-are-one-abu-hanifa/)

So I guess there is possibility of Shaitaan being saved as there is clear hadith that any person who does not worship Ghair-ALLAH will be in Paradise.

[Ijtaba]

For the sake of argument, if it is to be believed that there exists khaas reports of Muawiya entering in Jannah... then what about his troops who killed the believers? Does there exist khaas reports of them also entering in Jannah after killing the believers in Battle of Siffeen?

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Had Uthman bin Affan no children that Muawiya became his heir? If Uthman bin Affan did have children who were his true heirs then it was duty of Uthman's children to go to the Muslim Caliph of their time to avenge their father's blood as only Muslim Caliph has authority to avenge their father's blood.

There is no evidence which negates that, the ones who deserved to demand the Qisas of Uthman(as), didn't demand that from Ali(as). But as we know that Ali(as) was delaying that matter due to which people the problem started.

What proves the fact that, Muawiya(as) had the right to demand for Qisas of Uthman's(as) Murder is that a large number of Sahaba demanded it from Ali(as), and Ibn Abbas said this:

واعلم أن على القول الأول والثاني ظهر أن المقتول وولي دمه يكونان منصورين من عند الله تعالى وعن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما أنه قال : قلت لعلي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام وأيم الله ليظهرن عليكم ابن أبي سفيان ، لأن الله تعالى يقول : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } وقال الحسن : والله ما نصر معاوية على علي عليه السلام إلا بقول الله تعالى : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } ، والله أعلم

For the tafseer of this verse Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, quran(17:33) Imam fakruddin razi writes , It is reported from hz ibn abbas(ra): I said to hz ali(ra) , by Allah (Muawiya)ibn abu sufyan(ra) will surely overcome you because Allah said Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir. And hasan basri(ra) said that because of this verse Hz muawiya(ra) was successful compared to hz ali(ra). Wallahu alam.[ Tafseer al kabeer vol 4, page 397)]

There can be NO Ijtihad where there exists clear commandments in Quran and Hadiths. A person cannot go against clear injunctions laid down in Quran and Hadiths by using his own Ijtihad. For e.g. I cannot pray 5 rakats of Fajr Salat based on my ijtihad or consider four sips of Wine to be halal based on my ijtihad.

True as for the example you gave for Salat, but there are other cases where there is scope of ijtihad, and the matter of dispute between Ali(as) and Muawiya(as) was one of them. The learned scholars that's why counted it to be ijtihadi issue, so if a commoner who doesn't have basic Islamic knowledge can't grasp it, then his objection holds no weight. I can give you examples where Ali(as) directly heard the command of Prophet(SAWS) yet made his ijtihad, because he knew there was scope for it in that matter.

Usamah bin Zaid (r.a) killed a man in ignorance (he thought that a person wasn't Muslim in true sense as he professed Tawhid by his tongue but never believed in Tawhid by his heart). When Usamah (r.a) was rebuked by Prophet (s.a.w.w) he (r.a) felt regret for his (r.a) action and promised never to strike anyone who professed Tawhid.

He misjudged that person and made an incorrect ijtihad.

But in Battle of Jamal & Siffin, believers were not killed in ignorance, unintentionally or by mistake.

These battles were itself due to mistake in understanding.

So I guess there is possibility of Shaitaan being saved as there is clear hadith that any person who does not worship Ghair-ALLAH will be in Paradise.

You are repeating the same mistake again, trying to take general text and applying on individuals, your case is same to a person who declares a person Jannati just because he offered two units of Nafil prayer.

What mistake you repeated did in this case is that, you tried to apply a general text over Shaitaan, while there is Khas evidence present that he will be sent to hell.

Allah says in Quran:
That I will fill Hell with you (Iblees (Satan)) and those of them (mankind) that follow you, together."(Quran 38:85).

For the sake of argument, if it is to be believed that there exists khaas reports of Muawiya entering in Jannah... then what about his troops who killed the believers? Does there exist khaas reports of them also entering in Jannah after killing the believers in Battle of Siffeen?

As I told you, we should refrain from making judgements over people based on general reports, and when there is no Khaas(specific) evidence. Even though there are weak reports which state that both will be in paradise, that makes me stick to the Ijmai Sunni view of maintaining silence and not commenting over these matters.
وعن يزيد بن الأصم قال : لما وقع الصلح بين علي ومعاوية ، خرج علي فمشى في قتلاه فقال : هؤلاء في الجنة ثم خرج إلى قتلى معاوية فقال : هؤلاء في الجنة ، وليصير الأمر إلي وإلى معاوية
Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates in his Musanaf, that after the treaty between Ali and Mu’awiya [May Allah be pleased with them], Ali walked between those who died from his party and saying: “Those are in Jannah”, then he walked to those side of those who died from the side of Mu’awiya and said: “And those are in Jannah [Musanaf ibn abi shaybah


Also I would like to bring it to your attention some reports, since you even brought upon the matter of Jamal too, and you even asked what about the soldiers in the army, and I can't comment on each individual, but for those about whom there is Khaas reports then see these.


بشر قاتل ابن صفية بالنار سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يقول : لكل نبي حواري و إن حواري الزبير

هذه الأحاديث صحيحة عن أمير المؤمنين علي و إن لم يخرجاه بهذه الأسانيد
تعليق الذهبي قي التلخيص : هذه أحاديث صحاح

Ali bin Abi talib (RA) said ‘Give the news of hellfire to the one who killed Ibn Safiya ( al-Zubair bin al-Awwam RA) because I heard the Prophet(saw) saying :’ Every prophet used to have a Hawari (i.e. disciple who supports him), and my Hawari(i.e disciple who supports me) is Az-Zubair bin Al-’Awwam.

It was narrated by Imam Ahmad in his “Fadailu sahaba” (#1057) narrated that Ali said: “I hope that I, Uthman, Talha and Zubair from people regarding whom Allah said: “(15:47) And We shall remove from their breasts all spite that they had (in the world against one another due to misunderstanding). They shall be brothers seated on couches face to face (in Paradise).” Then be said: “Who are they if not us? Who are they if not us?” And he kept repeating it until the narrator wished that he would fall silent.

[Ijtaba]

There is no evidence which negates that, the ones who deserved to demand the Qisas of Uthman(as), didn't demand that from Ali(as). But as we know that Ali(as) was delaying that matter due to which people the problem started.

What proves the fact that, Muawiya(as) had the right to demand for Qisas of Uthman's(as) Murder is that a large number of Sahaba demanded it from Ali(as), and Ibn Abbas said this:

واعلم أن على القول الأول والثاني ظهر أن المقتول وولي دمه يكونان منصورين من عند الله تعالى وعن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما أنه قال : قلت لعلي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام وأيم الله ليظهرن عليكم ابن أبي سفيان ، لأن الله تعالى يقول : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } وقال الحسن : والله ما نصر معاوية على علي عليه السلام إلا بقول الله تعالى : { وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيّهِ سلطانا } ، والله أعلم

For the tafseer of this verse Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, quran(17:33) Imam fakruddin razi writes , It is reported from hz ibn abbas(ra): I said to hz ali(ra) , by Allah (Muawiya)ibn abu sufyan(ra) will surely overcome you because Allah said Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir. And hasan basri(ra) said that because of this verse Hz muawiya(ra) was successful compared to hz ali(ra). Wallahu alam.[ Tafseer al kabeer vol 4, page 397)]

Large number of Sahabas demanded Qisas of Uthman's murder from Imam Ali (a.s) but large of number sahabas did not participate in the battle of siffeen.

Lets assume, on demanding of Qisas by Muawiya, Talha and Zubayr, Imam Ali (a.s) rejects their demand and tells them he (a.s) isn't willingly to punish Uthman's murderers but is considering to give protection to the murderers. In this situation can Talha, Zubayr or Muawiya rebel against the Imam Ali (a.s) keeping in mind clear authentic hadith forbidding Muslims not to rebel against Muslim Caliph (even if the Caliph be unjust) but to bear patiently?

True as for the example you gave for Salat, but there are other cases where there is scope of ijtihad, and the matter of dispute between Ali(as) and Muawiya(as) was one of them. The learned scholars that's why counted it to be ijtihadi issue, so if a commoner who doesn't have basic Islamic knowledge can't grasp it, then his objection holds no weight. I can give you examples where Ali(as) directly heard the command of Prophet(SAWS) yet made his ijtihad, because he knew there was scope for it in that matter.

For me as a Shia, I don't believe Imam Ali (a.s) did ijtihad because for me he (a.s) is infallible like Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w). For e.g. Nabi Musa (a.s) and Nabi Haroon (a.s) during Bani Israel's worship of calf. Nabi Haroon (a.s) did not do ijtihad by disobeying Nabi Musa (a.s) orders and letting Bani Israel to follow Samiri.

He misjudged that person and made an incorrect ijtihad.

Usamah bin Zaid did ijtihad and killed the person who had professed Tawhid. Now my question is, after this incident could Usamah bin Zaid kill another person who has professesed Tawhid (i.e. Muslim) by exercising ijtihad? If no, then why are other people still allowed to exercise ijtihad on this matter (killing the believer) after the incident of Usamah killing Muslim?

These battles were itself due to mistake in understanding.

No matter what the situation, is there any leeway available to Muslims to rebel against Muslim Caliph? 

You are repeating the same mistake again, trying to take general text and applying on individuals, your case is same to a person who declares a person Jannati just because he offered two units of Nafil prayer.

What mistake you repeated did in this case is that, you tried to apply a general text over Shaitaan, while there is Khas evidence present that he will be sent to hell.

Allah says in Quran:
That I will fill Hell with you (Iblees (Satan)) and those of them (mankind) that follow you, together."(Quran 38:85).

In same way there is Khas evidence present that anyone who kills a believer will be sent to hell.

ALLAH (SWT) says in Quran:
"But whoever kills a believer intentionally - his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment." (Quran 4:93)

As I told you, we should refrain from making judgements over people based on general reports, and when there is no Khaas(specific) evidence. Even though there are weak reports which state that both will be in paradise, that makes me stick to the Ijmai Sunni view of maintaining silence and not commenting over these matters.
وعن يزيد بن الأصم قال : لما وقع الصلح بين علي ومعاوية ، خرج علي فمشى في قتلاه فقال : هؤلاء في الجنة ثم خرج إلى قتلى معاوية فقال : هؤلاء في الجنة ، وليصير الأمر إلي وإلى معاوية
Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates in his Musanaf, that after the treaty between Ali and Mu’awiya [May Allah be pleased with them], Ali walked between those who died from his party and saying: “Those are in Jannah”, then he walked to those side of those who died from the side of Mu’awiya and said: “And those are in Jannah [Musanaf ibn abi shaybah

I will stick with authentic and strong reports instead of weak reports.

Also I would like to bring it to your attention some reports, since you even brought upon the matter of Jamal too, and you even asked what about the soldiers in the army, and I can't comment on each individual, but for those about whom there is Khaas reports then see these.


بشر قاتل ابن صفية بالنار سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يقول : لكل نبي حواري و إن حواري الزبير

هذه الأحاديث صحيحة عن أمير المؤمنين علي و إن لم يخرجاه بهذه الأسانيد
تعليق الذهبي قي التلخيص : هذه أحاديث صحاح

Ali bin Abi talib (RA) said ‘Give the news of hellfire to the one who killed Ibn Safiya ( al-Zubair bin al-Awwam RA) because I heard the Prophet(saw) saying :’ Every prophet used to have a Hawari (i.e. disciple who supports him), and my Hawari(i.e disciple who supports me) is Az-Zubair bin Al-’Awwam.

It was narrated by Imam Ahmad in his “Fadailu sahaba” (#1057) narrated that Ali said: “I hope that I, Uthman, Talha and Zubair from people regarding whom Allah said: “(15:47) And We shall remove from their breasts all spite that they had (in the world against one another due to misunderstanding). They shall be brothers seated on couches face to face (in Paradise).” Then be said: “Who are they if not us? Who are they if not us?” And he kept repeating it until the narrator wished that he would fall silent.

Taking into account number of people involved in Battle of Jamal (50,000) and Battle of Siffin (200,000) there exists khaas reports for only six people (i.e. Imam Ali a.s, Uthman, Talha, Zubayr, Ayesha & Muawiya.)