The meaning of Mu’awiya
The leading Ulema of Ahlul Sunnah are in agreement that Mu’awiya means “barking bitch”.
For those interested they can consult the following texts:
● Tarikh ul Khulafa by al Hafidh Jalaluddin Suyuti pg. 159
● Rabi’ ul Abrar by Allamah Zamakhshari Vol 2, pg. 72 - 73
● Tahzeeb ul Kamal fi Asma’ al-Rijal by Jamaluddin Mizzi pg. 371
Mohibudeen al-Tabari in Riyadh ul Nadhira, Vol 3 pg. 154 narrates this tradition from ‘Abu Bakr:
Rasulullah (s) said, “Love of Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain is a sign of one being legitimate, hatred of them is the sign of one being illegitimate.”
Similarly Imam of Ahlul Sunnah Ibn Athir in his ‘Nihayah’ Vol. 2 pg. 161 records that:
“Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq said that certain types of individuals will never have love towards us, those of illegitimate stock.”
In the case of Mu’awiya this tradition is accurate, as we shall present hadiths to prove this.
Sheikh Muhammad bin Qasim bin Yaqub (d. 940 H) records in his book Rawudh al-Akhbar al-Muntakhab min Rabi’ al-Abrar, pg. 341:
“Mu’awiya (ra) was famous for his cool temperament and no one could make him angry. Thus, one person claimed that he would make him angry. He went to him (Mu’awiya) and said: ‘I would like to ask you to marry your mother to me because she had a large butt.’ Mu’awiya replied, ‘That is why my father loved her’. Mu’awiya then ordered his treasurer to give him 1000 coins so that he might buy a slave girl for himself.”
We read in Sahih Bukhari Hadith 5127:
“Narrated Urwa bin Zubair: Aisha the wife of the Prophet told him that there were four types of marriage during the Pre-Islamic period of ignorance. One type was similar to that of the present day, i.e. a man used to ask somebody else for the hand of a girl under his guardianship or for his daughter’s hand, and give her dowry and then marry her. The second type was that a man would say to his wife after she had become clean from her period, “Send for so-and-so and have sexual relations with him.” Her husband would then keep away from her and would never sleep with her till she gets pregnant from the other man with whom she was sleeping. When her pregnancy became evident, her husband would sleep with her if he wished. Her husband did so (i.e. let her wife sleep with some other man) so that he might have a child of noble breed. Such a marriage was called Al-Istibda. Another type of marriage was that a group of less than ten men would assemble and enter upon a woman, and all of them would have sexual relations with her. If she became pregnant and delivered a child and some days had passed after her delivery, she would send for all of them and none of them would refuse to come, and when they all gathered before her, she would say to them, “You (all) know what you have done, and now I have given birth to a child. So, it is your child, O so-and-so!” naming whoever she liked, and her child would follow him and he could not refuse to take him. The fourth type of marriage was that many people would enter upon a lady and she would never refuse anyone who came to her. Those were the prostitutes who used to fix red flags at their doors as signs, and he who wished, could have sexual intercourse with them. If anyone of them got pregnant and delivered a child, then all those men would be gathered for her and they would call the Qaifs (persons skilled in recognizing the likeness of a child to his father) to them and would let her child follow the man (whom they recognized as his father) and she would let him adhere to him and will be called his son.
Ibn Abil al Hadid's Sharh Nahjul Balagha Vol. 1 pg. 336 tells us:
“Mu’awiya's parentage was attributed to four persons namely Abi Amar bin Musaafir, Abi Ammara bin Waleed, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib and Sabah the Ethiopian. Abu Sufyan was short and ugly whilst Sabah was young and handsome thus Hind offered him sex and from amongst the Arabs, it has also been stated that Abu Sufyan’s other son Utbah was also a product of this union”.
Allamah Zamakhshari recorded in Rabi’ul Abrar Vol. 4, pg. 275-276
“There were four people who were thought to be Mu’awiya's father, Abi bin Umar bin Musaafir, Abi Umar bin Walid, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib and Sabah”
Sibt Ibn Al Jawzi recorded in Tadhkirat al Khawwas, Vol 2 pg. 22 - 23:
“Sham bin Muhammad Kalbi in his book Kitab Mathalib notes that Imam Hasan said to Mu’awiya ‘Are you aware of the bed from which you was conceived?’ This means he was born from four fathers”.
We read In Sharh Nahjul Balagha by Ibn Abil al Hadid Vol. 16 pg. 182-183 that:
“Mu’awiya wrote a letter to Ziyad, the contents of which included the words ‘O son of Sumayya’ (amongst the Arabs there was a tradition that if one’s ancestry was questionable, then that individual would be called by their mother’s name. In the same way that Imam Hasan referred to Marwan as ‘Ibn Zurqa’- Mu’awiya sought to mock Ziyad by calling him the son of Sumayya…Ziyad replied to Mu’awiya with these words ‘Mu’awiya you called me by the name of my mother Sumayya, so as to mock me, well if I am the son of Sumayya then you are ‘Ibn Jamaat’ as you was a product of Nikah ijtima”.
We read in Kitab al Aghani Vol. 9 pg. 39:
Musafir was a handsome, generous man – he fell in love with the daughter of Utbah, and she fell in love with him. She became pregnant. Maarif Ibn Khurbooz states that when her signs of pregnancy became visible Hinda told Musafir to flee and he made his way out of the city. Naufal states that Musafir was one of those individuals that was killed on account of his love of Hinda.
We read in Tadhkirat al Khawass, Vol 1, pg. 445 - 446:
“When Mu’awiya's sister Umm Habiba received news about Muhammad bin Abu Bakr’s murder, she sent Aisha a cooked goat suggesting that the reason for his killing was his murder of Uthman. When this happened Aisha said “May Allah (swt) kill this daughter of a fornicating woman. By Allah! I shall never eat this meat again”.
Allama Ala'auddin Al Bukhari:
“We have seen that bastards (children born from Zina) are smarter and their benefit reaches more to public compare to child born from legitimate marriage”
Kashf al Asrar An Usoolil Fakhr Al Islam. Volume 1, Page 423
Allama Fannawi Al Rumi:
“Child born from Zina is smarter/ better than child born from legitimate marriage”
Fusool Al Badaya'e. Volume 1 page 45
Allama Taftazani (Author of their famous Aqeedah work) says:
“We have witnessed that bastard is better than legitimate child both in matters of Deen (Religion) and Dunya (worldly affairs)”
Taudheeh and Talweeh pages 351-352
Imam of Ahl’ul Sunnah al Muhaddith Shah Waliyullah Dehlavi in his Hujjutul Balaghtha Vol. 2 pg. 149 “Dhikr Khilafat” states:
“To be a Caliph one must satisfy the following six requirements, he must be
On this issue of ancestry, Shah states:
“The Caliph should be such an individual that people recognise him on account of his good family, and not the opposite where the people would show him disrespect”.
The combined nikah, its merits and Hinda’s fornication has now been presented faithfully from the texts of Ahlul Sunnah. Mu’awiya may indeed have been a master of deception and a great politician, but as Shah Waliyullah states, one born illegitimately can not attain the position of Caliph, you need to possess a good ancestry – something that Mu’awiya did not possess, his mother entered the pre jahiliyya system of Nikah sleeping with four different men.
Mu’awiya the politician and Caliph dedicated 5 years of his life fighting the Imam of Guidance Ali ibn Abi Talib (as), he poisoned Imam Hasan (as), he introduced the ugly bidah of cursing Imam Ali (as) during the Friday Sermon. He murdered the supporters of Ali (as), introduced practices that contradicted the Qur’an and Sunnah, and made his alcoholic son Yazid Caliph over the nation. Hinda’s suckling and the combined Nikah may well have indeed created a great politician but, one of the signs of being illegitimate is hatred of Imam Ali (as) – and Mu’awiya through his actions confirmed the authenticity of this hadith.
In al-Nasa’ih al-Kaafiyah pg. 215, Muhammad din Aqeel Shaafi whilst discussing the justice of the companions states:
“…prior to the murder of Uthman all the Sahaba were Adil (Just). After his murder, fitnah arose and a viewpoint developed that those who fought against Ali were fasiq because they rebelled against the rightful Imam”.
It is little wonder that Allamah Abdul Ali Muhammad Sahalwi al-Ansari al-Lucknawi in his authority work Fawateh al-Rehmut Ba-Sharah Musalam Al-Sabut, Volume 2 page 269:
بل الكلام في كونه مجتهدا، كيف و قد عده صاحب الهداية من السلاطين الجائرة مقابل العادلين و لو كان بالاجتهاد لما كان جورا و لم ينقل عنه فتوى على طريقة الاصول الشريعة هذا
Whether or not Muawiya bin Abi Sufiyan was a Mujtahid is debatable. How is it possible when the author of Al-Hidayah counted him amongst those kings that are oppressors as opposed to just rulers, can one who is not a just ruler be a Mujtahid? Had what was done by Muawiya been Ijtihad then the author of Hidayah would not have referred him as an oppressive ruler and the author of Hidayah would not have issued an edict (Fatwa) on the basis of Islamic principles regarding the permissibility of accepting the position of a judge from an unjust oppressive king.
Imam Badruddin al-Aini in his commentary of Sahih Bukhari namely Umadatul Qari Sharah Sahih Bukhari, Volume 24 page 286 criticized the defense of Ijtihad in relation to Muawiya made by Allamah Kirmani in the following words:
وَقَالَ الْكرْمَانِي: عَليّ، رَضِauي الله تَعَالَى عَنهُ، وَمُعَاوِيَة كِلَاهُمَا كَانَا مجتهدين، غَايَة مَا فِي الْبَاب أَن مُعَاوِيَة كَانَ مخطئاً فِي اجْتِهَاده وَنَحْوه. انْتهى. قلت: كَيفَ يُقَال: كَانَ مُعَاوِيَة مخطئاً فِي اجْتِهَاده، فَمَا كَانَ الدَّلِيل فِي اجْتِهَاده؟ وَقد بلغه الحَدِيث الَّذِي قَالَ وَيْح ابْن سميَّة تقتله الفئة الباغية، وَابْن سميَّة هُوَ عمار بن يَاسر، وَقد قَتله فِئَة مُعَاوِيَة، أَفلا يرضى مُعَاوِيَة سَوَاء بِسَوَاء حَتَّى يكون لَهُ أجر وَاحِد؟ وروى الزُّهْرِيّ عَن حَمْزَة بن عبد الله بن عَمْرو عَن أَبِيه قَالَ: مَا وجدت فِي نَفسِي من شَيْء مَا وجدت أَنِّي لم أقَاتل هَذِه الفئة الباغية كَمَا أَمرنِي الله. فَإِن قلت: كَانَ عبد الله بن عَمْرو مِمَّن روى الحَدِيث الْمَذْكُور وَأخْبر مُعَاوِيَة بِهَذَا، فَكيف كَانَ مَعَ فِئَة مُعَاوِيَة؟ . قلت: رُوِيَ عَنهُ أَنه قَالَ: لم أضْرب بِسيف وَلم أطعن بِرُمْح وَلَكِن رَسُول الله قَالَ: أطع أَبَاك فأطعته، وَقيل لإِبْرَاهِيم النَّخعِيّ: من كَانَ أفضل عَلْقَمَة أَو الْأسود؟ فَقَالَ: عَلْقَمَة، لِأَنَّهُ شهد صفّين وخضب سَيْفه بهَا،
Kirmani stated: ‘Ali (ra) and Muawiya both were Mujtahid and what can be said about at maximum is that Muawiya was wrong in exercising Ijtihad etc.’. I (Badurddin Al-Aini) say that how one can say that Muawiya was wrong in exercising Ijtihad as what evidence do we have regarding his exercising of Ijtihad while Muaywah was already familiar with the Hadith that ‘May Allah have mercy upon Ibn Sumaya i.e. Ammar bin Yasir, he will be killed by rebels' and Ammar was killed by the army of Muawiya. Will Muawiya not be happy for having a narrow escape let alone expecting one reward for him? Zuhri narrated from Hamza bin Abdullah bin Amro who narrated from his father: ‘I never regretted anything in my life but just one thing that I didn’t fight against the rebels whereas there was the direction of Allah to fight that rebellious group’. If you were to ask me as to whether Abdullah bin Amro bin al-Aas, who was the narrator of said Hadith, had informed Muawiya of the Hadith then how come he himself remained part of the army of Muawiya? I (Badurddin al-Aini) would reply that Abdullah bin Amro had stated; ‘Neither I will raise a sword nor will I use a spear. (I remained in Muawiya’s army) because I had heard the Prophet (s) directing us to obey our father therefore I obeyed my father Amr bin al-Aas.’. Similarly, when Ibrahim al-Nakhai was asked as to whether Alqama was superior or Aswad, pursuant to which Ibrahim replied: ‘Alqamah is superior because he fought at Sifeen and had his sword stained with blood’.
In Sharh al Maqasid Vol 2, pg. 306 Allama Taftazani states that:
“The battles between the Sahaba are proof that some companions left the right path and became Zaalim and Fasiq because they became affected by jealousy, hatred, hypocrisy, a desire for power and indulgence because not all the companions were just, not was every individual who saw Rasulullah (s), good”.
Clearly the right path was to attach themselves to Ali (as). By turning their backs on him and fighting him, proves that Mu’awiya and his party had gone astray. He fought Ali and caused the death of prominent companions. Thereafter as a Caliph he adopted a policy of oppression against the lovers of Ali and cursed him during the Friday Sermons. Do we need any further proof to demonstrate that Mu’awiya had gone astray and hated Imam Ali (as)? Mu’awiya continued to act in the way of descendants. His brother, maternal grandfather and uncle were killed at the hands of Maula Ali (as) at Badr. Mu’awiya was hence motivated by hatred and dedicated his life to fighting Imam Ali (as).
Some advocates of Mu’awiya commonly highlight the fact that the Muslim Empire was expanded under his rule with Sahaba under his helm, as was not the case under Imam Ali (as)’s khilafat. It should be pointed out that empire expansion means little in the eyes of Allah (swt). One will be questioned on the day of judgment on his ‘personal deeds’ and Mu’awiya despite his advocate’s poor defenses, will indeed have a great deal to answer for. In any case, his conquests mean nothing, as Imam of Ahlus Sunnah ‘Abu Bakr al Jassas states in Ahkam ul Quran Vol. 4 pg. 319:
“Following the four Caliphs the Sahaba participated in Jihad under the helm of Fasiqs and Faajirs, ‘Abu Ayub Ansari participated in Jihad under the Leadership of Yazid”.
Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti acknowledges the following in his book ‘Al-Debaj ala Muslim, Vol 1 pg. 84:
ادعي زياد بضم الدال مبني للمفعول أي ادعاه معاوية وألحقه بأبيه أبي سفيان بعد أن كان يعرف بزياد بن أبيه لان أمه ولدته على فراش عبيد وهذه أول قضية غير فيها الحكم الشرعي في الاسلام
“When Ziyad was attributed, as Mu’awiya attributed him to his father Abu Sufyan while he (Ziyad) was known as Ziyad bin Abihi because his mother had given birth to him on Ubaid’s bed, and this was the first Sharia law that was changed in Islam.”
Imam Suyuti also records in Tarikh ul Khulafa, pg. 186:
“Mu’awiya's attributed Ziyad bin Abihi and it was the first act that contradicted an order of Rasulullah as al-Thalabi and others narrated it”.
We read in Tarikh Kamil Vol. 3 pg. 41:
“They rejected the law of Rasulullah because Rasulullah (s) said that the legitimate child is one born from wedlock”
Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr records in his esteem work ‘al-Estidhkar’ Vol. 22 pg. 177:
Saeed bin al-Musayyab said: ‘The first law of messenger of Allah that was rejected was in the case of Ziyad’
Let us also read the views of Imam of Ahlul Sunnah Ahmad bin Hanbal:
Ahmad (bin Hanbal) said: ‘The first law of the Holy Prophet (s) that was rejected is the case of Ziyad’
Masael Ahmad bin Hanbal, pg. 89
For further Sunni references on this clear bidah please see the following links:
1. al-Kawkib al-Durri by Allamah Mahmood Ayyubi pg. 327
2. Musalman kai aruj aur Zawaal, by Professor Ahmad Akbar Abadai, pg. 54
3. al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Vol. 8 pg. 28
4. Tarikh ibn Asakir, pg. 412
5. Mizan al I'tidal Vol 2, pg. 86-87, Dhikr Ziyad
6. Tarikh Abu’l Fida Vol 1, pg. 185, Dhikr Mu’awiya
7. Tarikh ibn Khaldun, Vol. 3 pg. 8 Dhikr Mu’awiya
This action of Mu’awiya contravened the Qur’an, we read in Surah Ahzab verses 4-5:
YUSUFALI: Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body: nor has He made your wives whom ye divorce by Zihar your mothers: nor has He made your adopted sons your sons. Such is (only) your (manner of) speech by your mouths. But Allah tells (you) the Truth, and He shows the (right) Way.
Call them by (the names of) their fathers: that is juster in the sight of Allah. But if ye know not their father’s (names, call them) your Brothers in faith, or your maulas. But there is no blame on you if ye make a mistake therein: (what counts is) the intention of your hearts: and Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.
A Fasiq is one who acts in violation to the Word of Allah (swt) and his Messenger. Mu’awiya through this act proves that he was a fasiq. For his die hard Nasibi advocates we would like to know how they explain this declaration of Mu’awiya? No doubt the ijtihad defense may be shouted out but as we have consistently proven throughout this article, you cannot exercise ijtihad where you have nass (text), which was present here via the words of Rasulullah (s). Despite this, Mu’awiya sought to make a declaration that contravened the words of Rasulullah (s).
No doubt the advocates of Mu’awiya, like Abu Sulaiman, will seek to protect their Imam from harm, but to highlight the faults of a fasiq of the likes of Mu’awiya, is a religious obligation. Hasan Basri stated that:
“The testimonies of three people should be rejected: The individual who openly indulges in bad acts, an oppressive ruler, one who practices bid’ah.”
(References: Sharh Muslim, by Nawawi Vol. 2 pg. 322; Tafsir Ibn Kathir Vol. 4 pg. 214; Ahkam al Qur’an by ‘Abu Bakr Jassas; Tafseer Fathul Qadeer)
Abu Sulaiman can feel free to choose whatever category he likes because Mu’awiya fits at the helm of each one. His bad acts were evident from his declaring a bastard as his brother. As ruler, his harsh treatment of the likes of Hujr bin Adi as we have demonstrated, speaks for itself. With regards to his bidah of cursing Imam Ali (as), it has been discussed at length previously.
Famous deobandi scholar and former chief of Jamaat-e-Islami, Sayyid Abu’l Ala Maudoodi, after citing the words of Hasan Basri in Tafhim ul Quran Vol. 5 pg. 87, makes these relevant comments:
“It is imperative that we highlight such individuals to prevent the risk of running into danger (from such individuals) if narrators, witnesses and writers display such faults then such weaknesses should not be hidden, rather they should be conveyed”
Whilst Abu Sulaiman and his Nasibi advocates have dedicated their life to defending Mu’awiya and heaping praise on him, no matter what the cost, we would urge our Ahlul Sunnah brothers not to get roped into their actions, for the consequences are simply too great. The Sunni scholar al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi in Tauhfa Ithna Ashariyya pg. 191 Chapter 7 states:
“It is recorded in Sahih hadith that when someone praises a bad character person, Allah (swt) gets upset with him”.
Clearly one who is a momin is one that has love for Ali (as). Why would such an individual risk incurring the wrath of Allah (swt) by showering praise on an individual who was an enemy of Ali (as), fought and cursed him? The modern day Nasibis are trying their utmost to recruit people into their obnoxious cult by declaring their affiliation with Imam Ali (as). The reality is very different as one can see from their passionate defense of Mu’awiya which as is the case with Abu Sulaiman, in fact turns into an attack on Imam Ali (as). No rational lover of Ahlul Sunnah would ever wish to praise those that cursed Maula Ali (as). Let us leave the Nasibi’s to wallow in their hypocrisy. They made their own bed and let them lie in, to join them on their road to Hell.
“It is little wonder that Hanafi scholar Maulana ‘Abdul Hakeem Chishti in his biography of Maulana Waheed uz Zaman cited his comments from “Waheed ai Lughath”:
“To say ‘may Allah be pleased with him’ after Mu’awiya's name takes a considerable amount of courage.”
Hayaat Waheed uz Zaman, pg. 109 by Maulana Muhammad Abdul Haleem Chishti
In Nuzlul Abrar Vol. 3 pg. 94 by famed Salafi scholar Maulana Waheed uz Zaman Khan Hyderabadi made these very frank comments about Mu’awiya and his cohorts whilst attacking the character of his governor Walid:
“if an evil-doer comes to you with a report, look carefully into it“[49:6]. It was descended in Al Walid Ibn Uqba.
Also His (swt) saying: “Is he who is a believer like unto him who is a transgressor? They are not alike.” [32:18]
And from that we know that there were wicked persons among the Sahaba like Al Walid and his likes who are Mu’awiya, Amr bin Al-Ass, Mughira, and Samura.
And the meaning of the Sahaba are fair, means they are truthful in the narration and not that they are protected from being wicked.”
Allamah Waheed uz Zaman also refers to Mu’awiya having attained the wrath of Allah (swt):
And God Almighty said: “Those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah hath cursed them in the world and the Hereafter, and hath prepared for them the doom of the disdained.”
Mu’awiya, Yazid, Umro bin Al ‘Ass, Shimr, Umar bin Sa’ad, Sinan, Khawli annoyed Allah and His prophet, so everyone who was like them was cursed . For that some of our companions like Ahmad bin Hanbal have allowed us to curse Yazid and his likes .
Al Marshrab al Wardi Minal Fiqha e Muhammadi, pg. 251 by Maulana Waheed uz Zaman Khan Hyderabadi
Note: Both of these references have been deleted from the later versions of both of these books.
In “Lisan al Arab” pg. 762 by Ibn Manzur states:
“Nawasib are those who hate Ali, and embrace that hatred as part of their faith”
If this is the definition of a Nasibi then Mu’awiya was the practical definition of one. If his fighting against Imam Ali (as) is not clear evidence in itself, then his introducing the practice of cursing Ali (as) in all mosques throughout the territories, serves as unequivocal proof that he had a deep seated hatred of Imam Ali (as) in his heart. Mu’awiya sought to institutionalize this hatred, by making the ritual cursing a part of the Friday Sermon, by doing so he in effect sought to convince the masses that this was a part of the Deen. It is little wonder that modern day Pakistani Hanafi scholar Maulana Sayyid Lal Shah Bukhari in “Istikhlaf ai Yazid” pg. 216 admitted:
“The founder of Nasibi ideology was Mu’awiya”.
Al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi declared in “Tauhfa Ithna Ashariyya” pg. 6:
“The Ulema of Ahlul Sunnah regard the enemies of Ali, the Nasibis as the worst party that recites the Shahada. We regard them as equivalent to dogs and pigs''
Character references play a pivotal role in society. Having good character means that you have such admirable traits as honesty, responsibility and piety. It is important to have good character. The ability of someone to couch for the character of another is essential to attaining a place in university, work etc. From a religious context a good character of a person will help judge his suitability to take up religious posts such as an Imam, teacher etc. Let us now present the character reference of the Imam of the Nasabis namely Mu’awiya, from those that had the honor of meeting him.
We read in Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2604a, a tradition narrated by Ibn Abbas:
“I was playing with children and Allah’s Apostle (peace be upon him) happened to pass by (us). I hid myself behind the door. He (the Prophet) came and he patted upon my shoulders and said: Go and call Mu’awiya. I returned and said: He is busy taking food. He again asked me to go and call Mu’awiya to him. I went (and came back) and said that he was busy in taking food, whereupon he said: May Allah not fill his belly! Ibn Muthanna said: I asked Umm Umayyah what he meant by the word Hatani. He said: It means “he patted my shoulders”.
Anyone with the slightest honesty can recognize how severely Mu’awiya is being condemned in this Hadith. Unsurprisingly the Nawasib due to their absence of integrity offer an alternative interpretation, and seek to suggest that the Hadith should be recognized as an appraisal of Mu’awiya. Consider this the article ‘Hadith About Mu’awiya: “May Allah Not Fill His Belly” [A Sunni Perspective]’ wherein Ibn al-Hashimi stated:
The Shia will look within the Hadith collection of the Ahlus Sunnah in order to prove their viewpoint. However, the Shia will oftentimes need to make use of academic deceit when they quote such Hadith. One such example can be found when they procure Hadith about Mu’awiya.
It is recorded in the Hadith of the Ahlus Sunnah that the Prophet said of Mu’awiyah, “May Allah not fill his belly.” The Shia will then claim that the Hadith thereby condemns Mu’awiya. What these Shia fail to say is that there is an Arabic saying “may Allah not fill your belly” which means “may your sustenance be without end” (i.e. its end never come). In the Semitic cultures, this is a commonly used colloquialism: when someone is about to die, people say that so-and-so has reached his fill of food.
Oftentimes, Shia youth will go to various discussion forums and use simple “copy and pastes” in order to “prove” their point; they will duplicate this Hadith. These Shia propagandists do not have a grasp of the Arabic language and are thus liable to make such mistakes whereby they take things drastically out of context. The analogy of this is a man telling his son to “break a leg” before a soccer match. If we were to literally translate “break a leg” into Chinese, it would lose its intended meaning; a Chinese reader would think that this father actually wants his son to physically get hurt! If this same Chinese reader asked the Chinese police to arrest this man for child abuse, they would probably do so. But if this Chinese reader went to English-speaking police, they would probably laugh at him for misinterpreting English colloquialism. In the same manner do we laugh at the Shia who use the afore-mentioned Hadith to prove anything.
The truth is that the Shia scholars who first posted this Hadith about Mu’awiya were engaging in deceit in order to fool the masses and “prove” their point. In reality, the Hadith is in praise of Mu’awiya and not a condemnation of him. Unfortunately, this Hadith is now circulating the internet without proper context. We see that this is a recurring theme in the debate with the Shia.
Lets just for argument's sake accept this claim of Nawasib that we know nothing of Arabic – tell us one thing whose knowledge of the true meaning of this Hadith should we accept, yours or that of Imam Muslim? The Hadith that you suggest is an appraisal of Mu’awiya has been inserted by Muslim under this heading:
“He upon whom Allah’s Apostle (May Peace Be Upon Him) invoked curse whereas he in fact did not deserve it, it would be a source of reward and mercy for him”
Look carefully at the wording here, those that fall within this Hadith chapter are those that the Prophet (s) cursed, so how can this Nasibi suggest that it is an appraisal of Mu’awiya suggesting that he attains eternal sustenance. If Imam Muslim really wanted to evidence this as an appraisal of Mu’awiya then he could have placed this within the chapter dealing with the merits of the Sahaba but he did not, he placed it in the chapter dealing with those that the Prophet cursed! We are sure that Ibn al Hashimi is fully aware of the heading wherein this Hadith is found, but his love of Mu’awiya was such that he made a last ditch effort to defend his Imam before his Sunni audience, tragically the only thing that he achieved was to expose his intellectual dishonesty.
Face facts Ibn al-Hashimi, this Hadith is a clear condemnation of Mu’awiya which is why when Imam Nasai recited it in Damascus he was murdered. If (as Ibn al Hashimi and other Nasibi lawyers suggest) it was an appraisal of him then why did the Damascans not recognize it as such, and instead murder Imam Nasai for reciting it? Ibn al Hashimi suggests that the Shia debaters lack knowledge of Arabic as used by the Arab people, tell us are the Syrians not Arabs? Would they have been ignorant of this alleged praiseworthy term in Semitic culture? If they were aware of this praiseworthy saying, then rather than fill Imam Nisai’s pockets with sweets and Dirhams, why did they react by beating him so severely that he died of his injuries? Imam Nisai’s recital of this tradition and the violent reaction of the Syrians and the chapter wherein Imam Muslim records this Hadith proves that the Hadith is a severe condemnation of Mu’awiya. Mu’awiya's eating habits were a mirror reflection of the type of behavior that Allah (swt) has condemned in the Qur’an, stating that the kafirs eat like animals.
Here we deem it appropriate to also mention the excuse that was advanced by Ibn Katheer al-Nasibi in al Bidayah. He provided an interesting commentary of this Hadith suggesting that Rasulullah (s) had praised Mu’awiya via this supplication, by pointing out he would benefit from the blessing of Allah (swt). It’s the type of logic wherein someone says ‘Your house will burn down'' meaning no mouse will remain in the house.
Now we should also comment on the Sunni notion we read above in shape of the chapter name in Sahih Muslim. It tells us that the curse of Rasool (saw) becomes a blessing ONLY if he curses someone who didn’t deserve it, but it will certainly be a valid and applicable curse if the one being cursed is worthy of it . Now the key question is, whether the Prophet’s curse really hurt Mu’awiya or it was just a ‘friendly curse’ as Nawasib would like to suggest? The answer is that the Prophet’s curse acted as a major blow to Mu’awiya’s life as he would eat SEVEN times a day, and yet remained hungry, Ibn Kathir records in Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, Vol 8 pg. 448:
وقال مغيرة عن الشعبي: أول من خطب جالسا معاوية حين كثر شحمه وعظم بطنه .وكذا روى عن مغيرة عن إبراهيم أنه قال: أول من خطب جالسا يوم الجمعة معاوية .وقال أبو المليح عن ميمون: أول من جلس على المنبر معاوية واستأذن الناس في الجلوس
.
And Mughira reported from Sh’ubi: “And Mu’awiya was the first person who started giving sermons (of Friday prayer) while sitting. And this happened at that time when Mu’awiya acquired thick layers of fat and his stomach grew large.
Mughirah also reported Ibrahim: “The first individual that delivered the Friday sermon whilst seated was Mu’awiya”.
And Abu Malih also reported the same from Memoon that Mu’awiya was the first who sat on the Minbar.
We also read in Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, Vol. 11 pg. 402:
فإنه لما صار إلى الشام أميرا، كان يأكل في اليوم سبع مرات يجاء بقصعة فيها لحم كثير وبصل فيأكل منها، ويأكل في اليوم سبع أكلات بلحم، ومن الحلوى والفاكهة شيئا كثيرا ويقول والله ما أشبع وإنما أعيا، وهذه نعمة ومعدة يرغب فيها كل الملوك
“When he became the ruler of Syria, he used to eat SEVEN times a day. The bowl which was brought to him for eating was full of meat and onions. He would eat from the bowl seven times a day along with a lot of sweets and fruits. Despite this he would still say: “By God! my belly is not full, but I am tired and food is a form of blessing with which all Kings are interested.”
Mu’awiya’s poor physical health is also evidenced by the following report from Ibn Abil Hadid’s Sharh Nahj Al Balagha Vol 4, pg. 57:
لأنه كان موصوفا بالنهم وكثرة الأكل، وكان بطينا يقعد بطنه إذا جلس على فخذيه
He “Mu’awiya) was described as being insatiable and eating a lot, and he was obese, if he sat down his stomach would rest on his thighs.
The interesting thing is that Rasulullah (s) said that a believer does not eat excessively whilst a kaafir does. In this regards we read in Sahih Muslim 2060a:
Narrated Ibn ‘Umar: Allah’s Apostle said, “A believer eats in one intestine (is satisfied with a little food), and a kafir (unbeliever) or a hypocrite eats in SEVEN intestines (eats too much).”
One can now easily relate the habit of Mu’awiya eating seven times a day with this prediction of the Prophet (s) according to which only the Kuffar adhere to such eating habits. Moreover we read in Sahih Bukhari 5396:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “A Muslim eats in one intestine (i.e. he is satisfied with a little food) while a Kafir (unbeliever) eats in seven intestines (eats much).”
Here we see a difference between Muslim and Kuffar in eating habits. In his commentary on this Nawawi in Sharh said eating less is good etiquette whilst excessive eating is bad etiquette. We hence leave it to Mu’awiya's supporters to think about this. Rasulullah (s) said that excessive eating is the sign of a kafir and Allah (swt) compared this to an animal. With this in mind how can this Hadith be an appraisal of Mu’awiya?
It is down to Mu’awiya's lovers to issue the appropriate Fatwa on their Imam in light of this Hadith. When Rasulullah (s) raised his hands and supplicated “May Allah not fill his belly!” Will this benefit him in the next world? The example of Mu’awiya is like that of kafirs and animals, it is not the practice of the believer as is clear from the Seerah of Rasulullah (s).
If Nawasib argue that it was against the manner of the Prophet to believe that he would supplicate against a believer, we will respond that Mu’awiya was worthy of such condemnation, since Rasulullah (s) said a believer is he whose blood is protected from another Muslim, and killing a Muslim is Fisq and killing him is kufr and He (s) also said that loving Ali (as) is belief and hating Ali (as) is disbelief.
Concluding the Prophet (s)’s curse on Mu’awiya's stomach, we shall also mention the following prediction of our Holy Prophet (s) which is quite relevant to His (s) curse on the filthy stomach of Mu’awiya. Allamah Naeem bin Hamad al-Mirwazii (d. 229 H) records the following tradition in his esteemed work ‘Al-Fetan’ Vol 1, pg. 116 and Ibn Kathir records in Bidaya wal Nihaya Vol 9, pg. 211:
يجتمع أمر هذه الأمة على رجل واسع السرم ضخم البلعم يأكل ولا يشبع
Prophet (s) said: ‘This ummah will have Ijma on a man whose rectum’s hole will be as wide as the hole of his throat, he eats but doesn’t get filled’ (Ibn Kathir explicitly says its Mu’awiya)
We can now deduce why Mu’awiya’s stomach remained constantly empty. That is why Allamah Muhammad bin Aqeel Shaf’ee in his book ‘Nasai al-Kafia’ pg. 162 clearly stated that the person being talked about in the above prediction is Mu’awiya. As for words “Was’a Saram '' the Allamah Ibn Atheer in his book ‘Al-Nihayah’ Vol. 2 pg. 916 and Ibn Manzur in ‘Lisan al-Arab’ Vol. 12 pg. 286 have clearly mentioned their meanings.
So next time when the children of Mu’awiya want to use the tradition of Sahih Muslim as one of the merits of Mu’awiya rather than Prophet’s curse on his stomach, these people shall also mention the reason behind the always empty stomach of Mu’awiya i.e. “Was’a Saram” .
We will cite this Prophetic Hadith from the following esteemed Sunni works:
We read the following hadith in Baladhuri’s Ansab Al-Ashraf, Vol 5 pg. 137:
حدثني إبراهيم بن العلاف البصري قال، سمعت سلاماً أبا المنذر يقول: قال عاصم بن بهدلة حدثني زر بن حبيش عن عبد الله بن مسعود قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : “إذا رأيتم معاوية بن أبي سفيان يخطب على المنبر فاضربوا عنقه
Ibrahim Ibn Al-Alaaf from Salaam Ibn Sulayman from Isam Ibn Bahdalah from Zirr from Abdullah Ibn Masud from Rasoolullah (s) who said: ‘If you see Mu’awiya bin Abi Sufyan on my pulpit then strike his neck.’[1]
Sheikh Muhammad bin Aqeel al-Hadrami (d. 1350 H) said in his book ‘al-Atab al-Jameel ala ahl al-Jarh wa al-Tadeel’ pg. 100 that the hadith is Sahih.[2] An interesting event in connection with this event can be located in ‘Ansab al Ashraf’ Vol 5 pg. 136:
“On one occasion an Ansari individual wanted to kill Mu’awiya, the people said, ‘the sword can not be raised during the reign of Umar, they said that he should write to Umar and seek his consent. He replied ‘ I heard that Rasulullah had said: ‘If you see Mu’awiya on my pulpit then kill him’. The people confirmed that they had also heard the hadith, but said we have not carried out this action, so let us write to Umar on the matter, which they did, but Umar did not write back to resolve the matter, until he died”
Imam al-Dhahabi recorded in Mizan al-I’tidal, Vol 4, pg. 424 and Siyar a'lam al Nubala, Vol 3, pg. 132 that:
ابن فضيل حدثنا يزيد بن أبي زياد عن سليمان بن عمرو بن الأحوص عن أبي برزة كنا مع النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فسمع صوت غناء فقال انظروا ما هذا فصعدت فنظرت فإذا معاوية وعمرو بن العاص يتغنيان فجئت فأخبرته فقال اللهم أركسهما في الفتنة ركسا ودعهما في النار دعا
Abi Burza said: ``We were with the prophet (pbuh) then he heard someone singing, so He (s) said: ‘Go and see what is going on there’. Thus, I climbed and looked, I saw Mu’awiya and Amr bin al-Aas singing, then I returned and told (the prophet). He (the prophet) said: ‘May Allah throw them in fitna (sedition) and push them towards hell’.
According to the prediction of the Holy Prophet (s), the gathering of Mu’awiya and Amr bin al-Aas is the sign of evil as they can never gather for a good cause. We read the following episode in famed Sunni work al-Iqd al-Farid, Vol 5, pg. 93:
It is narrated that when Amro bin al-A’as went to Mu'awiya and stood beside him in Ali’s case after (Mu'awiya) gave him Egypt as a booty. He (Amro bin Al-A’s) said to him (Mu’awiya): ‘There is a honorable and well reputed man in your country, if he stands beside you, you will own the hearts of the people, he is Ubada bin al-Samit.’
Mu’awiya sent to him, so when he (Ubada) arrived, (Mu’awiya) made space for Ubada between him and Amro bin al-A’as, then he (Ubada) sat between them.
Then Mu’awiya praised Allah and then he mentioned the merits of Ubada and his vanguard of Islam, then he mentioned the merits of Uthman and whatever had happened to him, then he motivated (Ubada) to stand beside him. Ubada said: ‘I heard what you said, do you know why I sat between you in your place?’ They said: ‘Yes, because of your honor, virtue and your vanguard of Islam. He (Ubada) said: ‘By Allah, that is not why I sat between you, and I would never sit between you in your place, but when we were marching along with the Prophet (s) for Tabuk battle, he looked at both of you walking and talking. So He (s) looked at us and said: “If you see them gathered, separate them because they never gather for the good.”
Al-Baladhari recorded in Ansab Al-Ashraf. Vol. 5, pg. 136:
Narrated Khalaf from Abdul-Warith ibn Sa'id ibn Jumhan from Safina, the servant of Umm Salama (s.a), who said: The Prophet (saw) was sitting when Abu Sufyan passed by on a camel, accompanied by Mu’awiya and his brother, one of them was leading the camel and one of them was following from behind. Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "May Allah (swt) curse the rider, the leader and the follower."
Imam Ibn Jarir Tabari records in Tarikh Tabari, Vol 10, pg. 58 (English):
قول الرسول عليه السلام وقد رآه مقبلا على حمار ومعاوية يقود به ويزيد ابنه يسوق به لعن الله القائد والراكب والسائق
The prophet (pbuh) said: ‘May Allah curse the leader, the rider and the driver’ when He (s) saw him (Abu Sufyan) on a donkey Mu’awiya leading it and his son Yazid riding on it’
Allamah Ismail bin Abul Fida in his famed history work Tarikh Abul-Fida, Vol 2, pg. 57 also recorded:
ورأى النبـي (ص) أبـا سفيان مقبلاً ومعاوية يقوده ويزيد أخو معاوية يسوق به فقال : لعن الله القائد والراكب والسائق
The Prophet (s) saw Abu Sufyan coming and Mu’awiya leading him and Yazid (Mu’awiya's brother) driving him, so the Prophet (s) said: ‘May God curse the leader and the rider and the driver’.
Ibn Muzahim records in ‘Waqi’at Siffin’ pg. 217 - 218:
“Nasr narrated from Abdul Ghafar bin al Qasim who narrated from Adi bin Thabit who narrated from Bara bin Azib who said that Abu Sufyan came along with Mu’awiya, thus Holy Prophet (s) said: ‘May Allah curse the leader and the one being lead. Allah, send your wrath on Al-Aqi’as’. Ibn al-Bara’ asked his father: ‘Who is Al-Aqi’as?’. He replied: ‘Mu’awiya’.
Allamah Ali bin Abi Bakr al-Haythami in his esteemed work Majma uz Zawaid, Vol 1, pg. 148 Tradition: 438 also recorded a version of this hadith without naming the characters.
Narrated Safina: The prophet (s) was sitting, so a man on a mule passed and between his hands a leader, and behind him a driver, so Prophet (s): “May God curse the leader, the driver and the rider”. Narrated by Al Bazzar and his men are thiqat (authentic).
Al-Haythami also recorded in Majma Al-Zawa'id. Vol. 5, pg. 313-314, Tradition 9240:
Nasr ibn Asim Al-Laythi has narrated from his father who said: I entered in the mosque and heard people saying: "We seek refuge with Allah (swt) from the wrath of Allah (swt) and wrath of His Messenger (saw)," then I asked: "What is the matter?" They said: "The Messenger of Allah (saw) was preaching on the pulpit that a man (i.e. Abu Sufyan) took the hand of his son and went out of the mosque, then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "May Allah (swt) curse the one who stood up, woe to this Ummah from so and so (i.e. Mu’awiya) the owner of the big buttocks."[3]
Ibn Saad records in Tabaqat ibn Saad. Vol. 9, pg. 77, Tradition 3772:
Abi Malik Kathir ibn Yahya Al-Basri said: Narrated to us Ghassan ibn Madhar from Sa'eed ibn Yazid from Nasr ibn Asim Al-Laythi from his father who said: I entered in the mosque of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and the companions of the Prophet (saw) were saying: "We seek refuge with Allah (swt) from the wrath of Allah (swt) and wrath of His Messenger (saw)," I asked: "What is the matter?" They said: Mu’awiya walked out of the mosque holding the hand of his father walking in front of him, while the Messenger of Allah (saw) was preaching on the pulpit, then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said something about them.
Al-Ruyani recorded Musnad Al-Ruyani. Vol. 1, pg. 235, Tradition 335:
Narrated to us Muhammad ibn Ishaq from Ishaq ibn Ibrahim from Salama from Muhammad ibn Ishaq from Ibrahim ibn Al-Baraa ibn Azib from his father who said: Abu Sufyan ibn Harb walked away from the Messenger of Allah (saw) and Mu’awiya after him, while the Messenger of Allah (saw) was on the pulpit, and Mu’awiya was a man with big buttocks, then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Oh Allah (swt)! Curse the owner of the big buttocks."[4]
Al Tabarani recorded in his Mu’jam Al Kabir, Vol 13, pg. 485 - 486:
From Muhammad Ibn Ishaq Ibn Rehawayh from his father, from Abdurrazaq bin Humam from Mu’amar from Ibn Tawus from Tawus bin Kaisan from Abdullah Ibn Amr ibn Al-’as who stated: ‘I was sitting with the Prophet of Allah (s) when He (s) said: ‘A man will come out of this mountain pass, who will die and he will be outside my nation (Islam)’. I had left behind my father there for wudhu, and I feared, as if holding back my urine, that he would be the one to come, but a man came out. The Prophet (s) said: ‘He is the one’.
Tabarani concealed the name of the man, but luckily for us Baladhuri recorded it in Ansab al-Ashraf, Vol. 5 pg. 134:
وحدثني إسحاق وبكر بن الهيثم قالا حدثنا عبد الرزاق بن همام انبأنا معمر عن ابن طاوس عن أبيه عن عبد الله بن عمرو بن العاص قال: كنت عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال: يطلع عليكم من هذا الفج رجل يموت على غير ملتي، قال: وكنت تركت أبي قد وضع له وضوء، فكنت كحابس البول مخافة أن يجيء، قال: فطلع معاوية فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم : هو هذا
Ishaq and Bakr ibn Haytham from Abdurrazaq bin Humam from Mu’amar from Ibn Tawus from Tawus bin Kaisan from Abdullah Ibn Amr ibn Al-’as who stated: ‘I was sitting with the Prophet of Allah (s) when He (s) said: ‘A man will come out of this mountain pass, who will die and he will be outside my nation (Islam)’. I had left behind my father there for wudhu, and I feared, as if holding back my urine, that he would be the one to come, but Mu’awiya came out. The Prophet (s) said: ‘He is the one’.[5]
ِAbu Sa’ad Mansur Ibn Hussein Al Aabi also records the uncensored narration in Nathr Al Durr, Vol 2, pg. 70:
Abdullah Ibn Amr ibn Al ‘Aas stated: ‘I was sitting with the Prophet of Allah (s) when He (s) said: ‘A man will come out of this mountain pass, who will die and he will be outside my nation (Islam)’. I had left behind my father there for wudhu, and I feared, as if holding back my urine, that he would be the one to come, but Mu’awiya came out. The Prophet (s) said: ‘He is the one’.
We read in Waqi’at Siffin pg. 217 that Abdullah ibn Umar narrated that he heard Rasulullah say:
“Mu’awiya shall not die on the path of Islam.”
The above book on the same pg. also records a similar hadith, this time narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah who testified that he heard Rasulullah (s) say:
“At the time of his death, Mu’awiya shall not be counted as member of my Muslim Ummah.”
We find that this prophecy did indeed come true. Al Qadhi Numan records in his Sharh Al Akhbar, Vol. 2, pg. 153:
On the authority of Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, he said: Mu’awiya came down with the sickness that killed him. and so a Christian doctor walked in on him and he (Mu’awiya) said: "Woe to you, I do not see that your treatment has only increased my ailment and sickness?" He (the doctor) said: "By God I did not withhold any treatment which could improve your health, except for one. I have treated (the thing he kept away) a lot of people with it." He (Mu’awiya) said: "What is it?" So the doctor said: "A cross, which has never failed to cure a sick person on whose neck it was hung." Mu’awiya said: "Give it to me," and so the doctor brought it and put it around his neck. And so he died that night with the cross around his neck. In the morning of the next day, there were twigs hollowed out from the skin of his forehead. and everyone who saw it was able to read it. It said: Kafir (non-believer).
We read in Tarikh Tabari, Vol 10, pg. 622 (English) that Rasulullah (s) said:
“From this mountain pass, a man from my community is coming up who will be resurrected separate from my religious group." It was Mu’awiya who was coming up.”
It is recorded in Tarikh Tabari, Vol 10, pg. 622 (English) that Rasulullah (s) said:
“Verily Mu’awiya shall be in the deepest part of Hell from where he shall shout ‘Ya Hanan, Ya Manan’ verily I have sinned and spread fitnah throughout the earth”.
We similarly find in Ansab al Ashraf Vol 5, pg. 136 that Rasulullah(s) said:
“Mu’awiya has a coffin in the deepest part of Hell, one that has a lock on it”.
In addition, in Waq’iat Siffin pg. 217, we learn that Abdullah ibn Umar had also condemned Mu’awiya as follows:
“Verily Mu’awiya's coffin is in the deepest part of Hell, Had Pharoah not declared that he was the most superior God, nobody would have been in a deeper part of Hell than Mu'awiya ''.
We read the words of Umar as recorded in Ansab Al Ashraf Vol 5, pg. 155 and Al Bidaya wa Nihaya Vol 11 pg. 417 ‘Dhikr Mu’awiya’ contains the words of Umar :
“Mu’awiya is the Kisra of the Arabs”.
Umar compared Mu’awiya to kafir king, the same Umar said that the Tulqa cannot be Caliphs, and the words of Umar are enough to refute the Nasibi assertions that Mu’awiya's’ reign is correct according to the ijma of the Sahaba,
Baladhuri records in Ansab al-Ashraf, Vol 3 pg. 403:
حدثني الحسين بن علي بن الأسود، ثنا يحيى بن آدم عن وكيع عن إسماعيل بن أبي خالد عن شبيل اليحصبي قال: كانت لي حاجة إلى عمر بن الخطاب، فغدوت لأكلمه فيها، فسبقني إليه رجل فكلمه فسمعت عمر يقول له: لئن أطعتك تدخلني النار، فنظرت فإذا هو معاوية. أبو الحسن المدائني عن وكيع عن إسماعيل عن شبيل بمثله.
Al-Hussain bin Ali al-Aswad from Yahya bin Adam from Wakee’ from Ismail bin Abi Khalid from Shubail al-Yahsabi who said: ‘I had requisition from Umar bin al-Khattab, hence I went to him to ask him but a man reached to him before me and talked to him, then I heard that Umar was saying to him: ‘If I obey you, you will make me enter into hell.’ Then I looked and it was Mu’awiya’.[6]
We read in Rabi’ Al Abrar Vol 4, pg. 281 and in Tauhfa Ithna Ashari, pg. 308, Chapter Mathaein Uthman, Shah Abdul Aziz records these words of advice of Maula Ali (as) to Ziyad:
“Mu’awiya has written you a letter, be careful of him or you will get fooled as he is a devil”.
The Imam of truth Maula Ali (as) compared Mu’awiya to Shaytan, and there is no way that a Shaytan can be deemed the Caliph of Rasulullah (s), Nasibi such as Abu Sulaiman who espouses such a view are the enemies of Islam.
Nasr Ibn Muzahim al-Minqari in Waq’iat Siffin, pg. 509 and Shaykh Sulayman Qanduzi al-Hanafi in “Yanabi al Mawaddah” Chapter 53, pg. 188-189 quote:
“Nasr bin Muzahim who heard from Abu Ishaq Ihsani who states that after the “Tahkeem Incident” he read a manuscript in the possession of Said bin Abi Burdah. In it, it was written that when the people asked Ali whether or not his opponents were Momin he replied, with regards to Mu’awiya and his companions ‘I do not regard them as Mu’min or Muslim, and I care little about what Mu’awiya thinks”.
The fact that Imam Ali (as) supplicated in his prayers against his opponents is sufficient to water down the efforts of modern day Nawasib to prove that Imam Ali (as) held Muawiya and his acolytes in high esteem. We read in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Vol. 5 pg. 7 Tradition 7232 and Kanzul Ummal, Vol. 8 pg. 82 Tradition 21989:
حَدَّثَنَا هُشَيْمٌ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا حُصَيْنٌ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ مَعْقِلٍ، قَالَ: صَلَّيْتُ مَعَ عَلِيٍّ صَلَاةَ الْغَدَاةِ، قَالَ: فَقَنَتَ، فَقَالَ فِي قُنُوتِهِ: «اللَّهُمَّ عَلَيْكَ بِمُعَاوِيَةَ وَأَشْيَاعِهِ، وَعَمْرِو بْنِ الْعَاصِ وَأَشْيَاعِهِ، وَأَبِي السُّلَمِيِّ وَأَشْيَاعِهِ، وَعَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ قَيْسٍ وَأَشْيَاعِهِ
Abdulrahman bin Ma’qil said: ‘I prayed with Ali dawn prayer, then he (Ali) performed Qunoot and Ali made the following supplication in his Qunoot: ‘Oh Allah! Seize Muawiya and his adherents, Amro bin al-Aas and his adherents, Abu Salmah and his adherents and Abdullah Bin Qays and his adherents.”[7]
Ibn Kathir also mentioned in Al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah, Vol. 10 pg. 575:
فَذَكَرَ أَبُو مِخْنَفٍ، عَنْ أَبِي جَنَابٍ الْكَلْبِيِّ أَنَّ عَلِيًّا لَمَّا بَلَغَهُ مَا فَعَلَ عَمْرٌو كَانَ يَلْعَنُ فِي قُنُوتِهِ مُعَاوِيَةَ، وَعَمْرَو بْنَ الْعَاصِ، وَأَبَا الْأَعْوَرِ السُّلَمِيَّ، وَحَبِيبَ بْنَ مَسْلَمَةَ، وَالضَّحَّاكَ بْنَ قَيْسٍ، وَعَبْدَ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنَ خَالِدِ بْنِ الْوَلِيدِ، وَالْوَلِيدَ بْنَ عُتْبَةَ،
When Ali came to know as to what Amro bin al-Aas had actually done, Ali started to curse Muawiya , Amro bin al-Aas, Abu al-Aur al-Salami, Habib bin Muslimah, Dhahak bin Qays, Abdul Rehman bin Khalid bin Walid, Walid bin Utbah and their adherents in Qunoot.
Tabari mentioned in Tahdhib al-Athaar, Vol. 1 pg. 346 with a sahih chain:
حَدَّثَنِي عِيسَى بْنُ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ عِيسَى، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ عِيسَى، عَنِ الْأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ خَالِدِ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ مَعْقِلٍ، قَالَ: صَلَّيْتُ خَلْفَ عَلِيٍّ الْمَغْرِبَ، فَلَمَّا رَفَعَ رَأْسَهُ مِنَ الرَّكْعَةِ الثَّالِثَةِ، قَالَلَّيْتُ خَلْفَ عَلِيٍّ الْمَغْرِبَ، فَلَمَّا رَفَعَ رَأْسَهُ مِنَ الرَّكْعَةِ الثَّالِثَةِ، قَالَ: «اللَّهُمَّ الْعَنْ فُلَانًا وَفُلَانًا وَأَبَا فُلَانٍ وَأَبَا فُلَانٍ
Abdul Rehman bin Mu’qal stated that he offered prayer behind Ali and when Ali raised his head from the third Rakat, he supplicated using the following words: ‘Oh Allah! Curse such and such, such and such person and Abu (father of) such and such and Abu( father of) such and such’.
No matter how much attempts the present day cyber Nawasib make to cast doubts on the authenticity of these supplications made by their fourth rightly guided caliph against Muawiya and others, the fact remains that the said act was unanimously accepted by the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah for instance Al Bayhaqi stated in Al-Sunan Al Kubra, Vol. 2 pg. 290:
قنت عَلّي رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْه فِي الْفجْر) قَالَ الْبَيْهَقِيّ: هَذَا عَن عَلّي صَحِيح مَشْهُور
Ali (ra) recited Qunoot during his Fajar prayers regarding which Baihaqi stated that it is popularly proven through a Sahih chain.
وَرَوَى أَيْضًا بِسَنَدٍ صَحِيحٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَعْقِلِ بْنِ مُقَرِّنٍ قَالَ قَنَتَ عَلِيٌّ فِي الْفَجْرِ
Ibn Hajar Asqalani stated in Al-Talkhees al-Habeer, Vol. 1 pg. 444:
Ibn Maqal has narrated through a Sahih chain that Ali (ra) recited Qunoot during Fajar prayers.
It is pertinent to mention that finding no fault in the authenticity of reports regarding Qunoot having been recited by Imam Ali (as), the cyber Nawasib then often try to trivialize the words used by Imam Ali (as) i.e. ‘Allahumma Alaika’ [Oh Allah, seize them] against his (as) opponents by arguing that these words do not refer to curse per se but the fact remains that these words are used to supplicate for the death of someone and use thereof by the fourth rightly guided caliph against several Sahaba is sufficient to drill a fatal hole into boat of the Ahlul Sunnah that sails with the motto that all Sahaba loved each other and never thought ill of one another. Allamah Abu Ishaq bin Qarqol stated in Mutali’ al-Anwar, Vol. 1 pg. 423:
وقوله - صلى الله عليه وسلم -: "اللهُمَّ عَلَيْكَ بِقُرَيْشٍ" (7) أي: ألحق الهلاك بهم أو نقمتك بهم
The Holy Prophet’s supplication i.e. ‘Allahumma Alaika Bi Quraish’ [Oh Allah! Seize the Quraish] means, Oh Allah, kill them and punish them.
Similarly Allamah Shamsuddin al-Barmawi stated in Al-Lamie al-Sabih Ba Sharah al-Jamie al-Sahih, Vol. 9 pg. 266:
(عليك الملأ)؛ أي: خُذِ الجماعةَ، وأَهلِكْهم
The Holy Prophet’s supplication i.e. ‘Oh Allah! Seize this group’ means, Oh Allah, seize them and kill them.
Suyuti in his commentary of Sunan Nisai, Vol. 1 pg. 177 stated:
اللَّهُمَّ عَلَيْكَ بِقُرَيْشٍ أَيْ بِإِهْلَاكِ قُرَيْشٍ
The Holy Prophet’s supplication i.e. ‘Allahumma Alaika bi Quraish’ [Oh Allah! Seize the Quraish] means, Oh Allah, kill the Quraish.
Ibn Hajar Asqalani stated in Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 11 pg. 198:
وَقَالَ اللَّهُمَّ عَلَيْكَ بِأَبِي جَهْلٍ أَيْ بِإِهْلَاكِهِ
The Holy Prophet’s supplication i.e. ‘Allahuma Alaika Abi Jahal’ [Oh Allah! Seize Abi Jahal] means, Oh Allah, kill him.
The supplication of ‘Allahumma Alaika’ may not refer to curse (La’an) per se but when put into a certain context it can be understood as to curse someone and this is exactly how the darling figure of Ahlul Sunnah namely Abdullah Ibn Umar interpreted it. We read in Taghleeq al-Taleeq ala Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 5 pg. 149:
وَقَالَ اللَّهُمَّ عَلَيْك بِأبي جهل وَقَالَ ابْن عمر دَعَا النَّبِي صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي الصَّلَاة اللَّهُمَّ الْعَن فلَانا وَفُلَانًا حَتَّى أنزل الله {لَيْسَ لَكَ مِنَ الأَمْرِ شَيْءٌ}
The Holy Prophet’s supplication i.e. ‘Allahuma Alaika Abi Jahal’ [Oh Allah! Seize Abi Jahal] means, Oh Allah, kill him. Ibn Umar stated that the Holy Prophet supplicated against someone in the words ‘Oh Allah curse such and such person’ after which the following verse was revealed: ‘Not for thee, (but for Allah), is the decision’.
Averting back to the topic of supplication made by Imam Ali (as) against his opponents, we read in Musannaf Abdul Razzaq, Vol. 3 pg. 107:
وَقَالَ ابْنُ الْمُجَالِدِ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، عَنْ عَلْقَمَةَ، وَالْأَسْوَدِ، قَالَا: «مَا قَنَتَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي شَيْءٍ مِنَ الصَّلَوَاتِ إِلَّا إِذَا حَارَبَ، فَإِنَّهُ كَانَ يَقْنُتُ فِي الصَّلَوَاتِ كُلِّهِنَّ وَلَا قَنَتَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَلَا عُمَرُ وَلَا عُثْمَانُ حَتَّى مَاتُوا، حَتَّى لَا قَنَتَ عَلِيٌّ حَتَّى حَارَبَ أَهْلَ الشَّامِ، فَكَانَ يَقْنُتُ فِي الصَّلَوَاتِ كُلِّهِنَّ، وَكَانَ مُعَاوِيَةُ يَقْنُتُ أَيْضًا فَيَدْعُو كُلُّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا عَلَى صَاحِبِهِ»
Alqamah and Al-Aswad stated that the Prophet (s) never recited Qunoot in any of his prayers except in the prayers performed during battles and he (s) recited it during the prayers performed in each battle. Abu Bakar, Umar and Uthman didn’t recite Qunoot until they died. Ali also didn’t recite Qunoot but when battle of Siffeen occurred, he would recite it in each prayer and Mu’awiya likewise recited it and everyone used to supplicate against each other's opponents.
Imam Muhammad Bin Hassan al-Shaybani stated in Al-Athaar, pg. 229:
[قَالَ: إِبْرَاهِيمُ: وَإِنَّ أَهْلَ الْكُوفَةِ إِنَّمَا أَخَذُوا الْقُنُوتَ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَنَتَ يَدْعُو عَلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ حِينَ حَارَبَهُ، وَأَمَّا أَهْلُ الشَّامِ فَإِنَّمَا أَخَذُوا الْقُنُوتَ عَنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَنَتَ يَدْعُو عَلَى عَلِيٍّ كَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَجْهَهُ حِينَ حَارَبَهُ
Ibrahim stated that people of Kufa adopted the practice of reciting Qunoot from Ali (kr) as he would recite Qunoot for supplicating against Muawiya during the battle and people of Syria adopted the practice of reciting Qunoot from Muawiya as he would recite the Qunoot when supplicating against Ali (kr) during the battle.
Shaykh Muhammad Khudri Beik records in his book ‘Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamiyah, Vol. 2 pg. 67 records that Imam Ali (as) used to deem Mu’awiya to be of a much lower man because of his hate against Prophet Muhammad (s):
He (Ali) saw Mu’awiya much lower than him, why? Because he was from al-Tulaqa and the son of al-Tulaqa who used to show enmity and fight against the prophet (pbuh)”
No matter how hard the Nawasib try to portray love and respect between the two sides that fought at Siffen, the fact remains that Imam Ali (as) didn’t deem his opponents to be on the right path, rather the fact he considered those to be the remnants of the infidels from the battle of Ahzaab. We read in Musnad al-Bazzar Vol 1, pg. 191 and Majma Al Zawaed Vol 7 pg. 342:
حدثنا عباد بن يعقوب ، قال : نا السيد بن عيسى ، عن إسماعيل بن أبي خالد ، عن قيس بن أبي حازم ، قال : قال علي رضي الله عنه : انفروا بنا إلى بقية الأحزاب ، انفروا بنا إلى ما قال الله ورسوله ، إنا نقول : « صدق الله ورسوله ، ويقولون : كذب الله ورسوله » ، حدثنا عباد بن يعقوب ، قال : نا يونس بن أرقم ، عن الأعمش ، عن الحكم ، عن قيس بن أبي حازم ، عن علي ، رضي الله عنه بنحوه
Qays bin Abi Hatim stated that he heard Ali (ra) saying: ‘Come with us, so that we fight the remnants of Ahzab. Come with us as was directed by Allah and his Prophet. We say that Allah and his Prophet said the truth whereas they say that Allah and his Prophet lied’.[8]
We read in Imam Abdullah bin Ahmed’s Al-Sunnah Vol 1, pg. 565:
حدثني إسماعيل أبو معمر ، نا ابن نمير ، عن الأعمش ، قال : قيل لقيس بن أبي حازم : لأي شيء أبغضت عليا قال : لأني سمعته يقول : « انفروا معي إلى بقية الأحزاب إلى من يقول كذب الله ورسوله ونحن نقول صدق الله ورسوله
Qays bin Abi Hatim was asked as to why he bore a grudge against Ali (ra) to which Qays replied: ‘I had once heard Ali (ra) saying: ‘Come with us, so that we fight the remnants of Ahzab. Come with us as was directed by Allah and his Prophet. We say that Allah and his Prophet said the truth whereas they say that Allah and his Prophet lied’’.
Similarly Al Shahristani recorded in Al-Milal Wal Nihal Vol 1, pg. 138:
وقال قيس بن أبي حازم : كنت مع علي رضي الله عنه في جميع أحواله وحروبه حتى قال في يوم صفين انفروا إلى بقية الأحزاب انفروا إلى من يقول : كذب الله ورسوله وأنتم تقولون : صدق الله ورسوله فعرفت أي شيء كان يعتقد في الجماعة فاعتزلت عنه
Qays bin Abi Hatim stated that he remained with Ali (ra) on all occasions and battles to the extent that during the battle of Siffeen Ali said: ‘Come with us, so that we fight the remnants of Ahzab. Come with us as was directed by Allah and his Prophet. We say that Allah and his Prophet said the truth whereas they say that Allah and his Prophet lied’’.
Why do present day followers of Muawiya object if we the Shias of Ahlulbayt (as), while adhering to the stance of Imam Ali (as), deem Muawiya his supporters to be the Kafir remnants of Ahzaab and the one who considered Allah and his Prophet as liars.
Sixth Appraisal
This is for those ignorant ones who claim that Maula Ali bin Abi Talib (as) had love and affection towards his all time enemy Mu’awiya bin Hind. Imam Mawardi in his book Adab al-Dunya wa al-Deen, pg. 257 and Shamsuddin Abu al-Barakat al-Demashqi al-Shafiyee (d. 871 H) in Jawahir al-Matalib, Vol. 2 pg. 158 recorded:
“A man came to Ali and said to him : ‘I love you and I love Mu’awiya.’ He (Ali) may Allah be pleased with him replied: ‘Now you are one eyed, either to heal or get blind’.
The above mentioned reply from the door of knowledge is totally based on logic i.e. one cannot love an oppressed and the oppressor at the same time.
We read the following words of Imam Ali (as)as recorded in Tarikh Kamil Vol. 2 pg. 689:
“By Allah, if they (Mu’awiya and Amr Ibn Al Aas) come to rule over you they will rule over you like Chrosroes and Heraclius.”
Ali (as) is comparing the rule of Mu’awiya to the rule of two notorious Kaffir kings, how then can one claim he had affection for Mu’awiya?
We are quoting from the following books:
1. Siyar A'lam al-Nubala Vol. 3 pg. 143
2. Al-Bidayah Wal Nihaya Vol 11 pg. 430 - 431[9]:
3. Mukhtasar Ta’rikh al-Dimishq, Vol 25 pg. 42
Aswat bin Yazid said to Aisha: ‘Aren’t you surprised that this Mu’awiya is from Tulaqa (freed captive) and in Khilafat he fought the companions? Aisha replied ‘this Government and Kingdom, Allah (swt) gives leadership to both just and tyrannical, for 400 years in Egypt the enemies of God, Pharaoh ruled as did other Kafir Kings”.
Aisha’s comparing of Mu’awiya to Pharaoh and other kafirs is in fact a reference to the Qur’an, where Allah (swt) states in Surah Hud verses 96-99:
“And we sent Moses, with Our Clear (Signs) and an authority manifest, Unto Pharaoh and his chiefs: but they followed the command of Pharaoh and the command of Pharaoh was no right (guide). He will go before his people on the Day of Judgment, and lead them into the Fire (as cattle are led to water): But woeful indeed will be the place to which they are led! And they are followed by a curse in this (life) and on the Day of Judgment: and woeful is the gift which shall be given (unto them)!”
Taken from Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation.
It is sheer stupidity for the like of Abu Sulaiman to suggest a reign that Aisha compared to that of a Non Muslim to in fact be the Khilafat of the Prophet (s). If these stupid Nasabi uphold the khilafat of Mu’awiya, they are in effect deeming Aisha to be a liar which destroys their whole aqeedah.
In connection with Mu’awiya's killing of Aisha’s brother, we read as follows:
“Following the death of Muhammad bin ‘Abu Bakr the people of Egypt gave bayya to Mu’awiya. It was following this (event) that Ummul Mu’mineen Aisha would curse Mu’awiya and Amr bin Aas after every Salaat”.
1. Tarikh Ibn al Wardi Vol. 1 pg. 154
2. Tarikh Kamil Vol. 2 pg. 709
4. Tadhkirat Al Khawas, pg. 62
5. Al-Bidāya wal Nihāya by Ibn Kathīr Vol 10 pg. 660
Ibn Kathīr records this narration as follows:
قد ذكر ابن جرير وغيره أَنَّ مُحَمَّدَ بْنَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ نَالَ مِنْ معاوية بن خديج هذا وَمِنْ عَمْرِو بْنِالْعَاصِ وَمِنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ وَمِنْ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ عَفَّانَ أَيْضًا، فَعِنْدَ ذَلِكَ غَضِبَ معاوية بن خديج فَقَدَّمَهُ فَقَتَلَهُ ثُمَّ جَعَلَهُ فِي جِيفَةِ حِمَارٍ فَأَحْرَقَهُ بِالنَّارِ، فَلَمَّا بَلَغَ ذَلِكَ عَائِشَةَ جَزِعَتْ عَلَيْهِ جَزَعًا شَدِيدًا وَضَمَّتْ عِيَالَهُ إِلَيْهَا، وَكَانَ فِيهِمُ ابْنُهُ الْقَاسِمُ وَجَعَلَتْ تَدْعُو عَلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ وَعَمْرِو بْنِ الْعَاصِ دُبُرَ الصَّلَوَاتِ.
Ibn Jarir and others have said that Muhammad Bin Abi Bakr called Muawiyah Bin Hudayj, Amr Bin Aas, Muawiyah Bin Abi Sufyan and Uthman bin Affan evil. This angered
Muawiyah bin Hudayj, he pushed him back and killed him (Muhammad bin Abi Bakr, he then wrapped his dead body inside the rotting corpse of a donkey and set it on fire. When this news reached Aisha bint Abi Bakr, she became sad and cried. The sons of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr mourned with her. Amongst them was his son Qasim, and Aisha began cursing Muwaiyah and Amr Ibn Aas.
Sa'ad ibn Waqqas’s appraisal of Mu’awiya
We read these words of Sa’ad to Mu’awiya in Musannaf Abdul Razzaq, Vol 10, pg. 390 - 391, Ansab Al Ashraf Vol 5, pg. 31, Tarikh Kamil Vol 3 pg. 9, Al Fusul al Muhimma, pg. 155:
“Peace be upon you, o King!”
Sa’d is counted by the Ahlul Sunnah as one of the ten blessed with Paradise and he addressed Mu’awiya as a not a Caliph.
al-Bayhaqi narrates in Shu'ab al Iman, Volume 9 page 549:
أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللهِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللهِ الْحَافِظُ أنا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللهِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ الصَّنْعَانِيُّ، نا إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، نا عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، عَنْ مَعْمَرٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللهِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَقِيلِ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ، أَنَّ مُعَاوِيَةَ لَمَّا قَدِمَ الْمَدِينَةَ لَقِيَهُ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ الْأَنْصَارِيُّ، فَقَالَ مُعَاوِيَةُ: يَلْقَانِي النَّاسُ كُلُّهُمْ غَيْرَكُمْ يَا مَعْشَرَ الْأَنْصَارِ فَمَا مَنَعَكُمْ أَنْ تَلْقَوْنِي؟ قَالَ: لَمْ يَكُنْ لَنَا دَوَابُّ، فَقَالَ مُعَاوِيَةُ: وَأَيْنَ النَّوَاضِحُ؟ فَقَالَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ: عَقَرْنَاهَا فِي طَلَبِكَ وَطَلَبِ أَبِيكَ يَوْمَ بَدْرٍ، قَالَ: ثُمَّ قَالَ أَبُو قَتَادَةَ: إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ لَنَا:" إِنَّكُمْ سَتَرَوْنَ أَثَرَةً بَعْدِي" قَالَ مُعَاوِيَةُ: فَمَا أَمْرَكُمْ؟ قَالَ: أَمَرَنَا أَنْ نَصْبِرَ حَتَّى نَلْقَاهُ، قَالَ: فَاصْبِرُوا حَتَّى تَلْقَوْهُ فَقَالَ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ حَسَّانٍ حِينَ بَلَغَهُ ذَلِكَ:"
[البحر الوافر]
أَلَا أَبْلِغْ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنَ حَرْبٍ ... أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ بِنَا كَلَامِي
فَإِنَّا صَابِرُونَ وَمُنْظِرُوكُمْ ... إِلَى يَوْمِ التَّغَابُنِ والْخِصَامِ"
Abdullah Bin Mohammed says that when Muawiya came to Madina, he met Abu Qatada Ansari and said: ‘Each and every one came to meet me whereas you didn’t. O Ansars, what stopped you from meeting me?’ They replied: ‘We didn’t have transport’. Muawiya asked: ‘Where are your Camels?’ Abu Qatada replied: ‘We consumed them pursuing you and your father on the day of Badr’ Abu Qatada added: ‘The Prophet(s) had informed us that after him (s) we shall witness biased behavior’. Muwaiya said: ‘So what you ordered to do then?’. Abu Qatada replied: ‘The Prophet(s) ordered us to be patient until we meet him’. On this, Muawiya said: ‘So be patient until you meet him’. When Abdul Rehman Bin Hassan got to know about this incident he recited the following poetry:
"Deliver my writing to Muawiya bin Harb the Commander of the Faithful that we are patient and await you, until the day of gathering and when all matters will be settled”
In his commentary of this narration Muhammad Abd al-Ra'uf al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir Sharh al-Jami` al-Saghir, Volume 2 page 553-554 said:
(إنكم) أيها الأنصار كما دل عليه خبر عبد الله بن محمد بن عقيل أن معاوية قدم المدينة فتلقاه أبو قتادة فقال إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم قال إنكم إلخ قال فيم أمركم قال أمرنا بالصبر قال اصبروا إذن (ستلقون) وفي رواية للبخاري سترون (بعدي) أي بعد موتي من الأمراء (أثرة) بضم أو كسر فسكون وبفتحات إيثارا واختصاصا بحظوظ دنيوية يأثرون بها غيركم يفضلون عليكم من ليس له فضل ويؤثرون أهواءهم على الحق ويصرفون الفيء لغير المستحق قال الراغب: والاستئثار التفرد بالشيء من دون غيره وزاد في رواية البخاري وأمورا تنكرونها قالوا فما تأمرنا يا رسول الله قال (فإذا رأيتم ذلك فاصبروا) أي إذا وقع ذلك فاصبروا كما أمرت بالصبر على ما سامتني الكفرة فصبرت فاصبروا أنتم على ما يسومكم الأمراء الجورة (حتى تلقوني غدا) أي يوم القيامة (على الحوض) أي عنده فتنصفون ممن ظلمكم وتجازون على صبركم والخطاب وإن كان للأنصار لكن لا يلزم من مخاطبتهم به أن يختص بهم
A portion of the narration: O Ansar! Like the news of Abdullah Bin Muhammed Bin Aqeel exhibits that when Muawiya came to Madina, Abu Qatada met Muawiya and said that the Prophet (s) has said (portion of the Narration) so Muawiya asked what was the order about? Abu Qatada said that the order was to be patient, so Muawiya said “so be patient” (portion of the narration: will reach you soon) and as per Bukhari “you’ll witness/see it soon”(portion of the tradition: after me) which means the rulers after my death.(Portion of the tradition: اثرتہ)which means the signs and words being used at this specific place is for worldly benefits. This means that others will be given preference over you, the Ansar whereas they will not be afforded any superiority. And the desires of these people will be given preference over the truth, granting the good of Fai to those that were undeserving. Raghib says that الاستئثار is the quality of uniqueness amongst things, and Bukhari narrates that you will witness such matters that will be rejected so the Ansar asked the Prophet (s) what was the ruling for them to be done in such a scenario. So the Prophet(s) said (portion of the narration: when you witness such things, then be patient) means to be patient on such gruesome acts as I was a patient at the sufferings doled out by the disbelievers. So you should also be patient on matters that reach you from the oppressive rulers. (portion of the narration: until you meet me) means the Day of Judgment (portion of the narration: upon the Pond) means at the Pond so that those who were oppressed will be dealt with justly and you will be misused for your patience. Although this was addressed to the Ansar, this doesn’t necessarily mean that this ruling was only for them.
We learn three things from this narration:
We read the following episode in esteemed Sunni books like al-Mustadarak, Volume 3 page 520:
أَخْبَرَنِي أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحُسَيْنُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ أَيُّوبَ، ثَنَا أَبُو حَاتِمٍ الرَّازِيُّ، ثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ مُوسَى، ثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَنَسٍ، ثَنَا الْأَعْمَشُ، عَنِ الْحَكَمِ، عَنْ مِقْسَمٍ، أَنَّ أَبَا أَيُّوبَ، أَتَى مُعَاوِيَةَ فَذَكَرَ لَهُ حَاجَةً، قَالَ: أَلَسْتَ صَاحِبَ عُثْمَانَ؟ قَالَ: أَمَا «إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَدْ أَخْبَرَنَا أَنَّهُ سَيُصِيبُنَا بَعْدَهُ أَثَرَةٌ» قَالَ: وَمَا أَمَرَكُمْ؟ قَالَ: «أَمَرَنَا أَنْ نَصْبِرَ حَتَّى نَرِدَ عَلَيْهِ الْحَوْضَ» . قَالَ: فَاصْبِرُوا قَالَ: فَغَضِبَ أَبُو أَيُّوبَ، وَحَلَفَ أَنْ لَا يُكَلِّمَهُ أَبَدًا
Muqsim narrates that Abu Ayub approached Muawiya and mentioned his requirements, and asked “aren’t you with Uthman?” Abu Ayub then said that “I had heard the Prophet(s) say after him we will be dealt with in an prejudiced way” , Muawiya said so what’s the ruling for you? Abu Ayub said that we were ordered to be patient until we meet him at the Pond of Kawthar, so Muawiya in a mocking style said, “be patient!” The narrator says that Abu Ayub got angry and promised never to talk to Mu’awiya again.
This narration has been graded as authentic by Imam Hakim based on the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim, while Dhahabi in Talkhees also graded it as authentic. In the same book, Hakim has mentioned another narration on page 522:
حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْمُزَنِيُّ، ثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْمُخَرِّمِيُّ، ثَنَا أَبُو كُرَيْبٍ، ثَنَا فِرْدَوسٌ الْأَشْعَرِيُّ، ثَنَا مَسْعُودُ بْنُ سُلَيْمٍ، عَنْ حَبِيبِ بْنِ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَلِيِّ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّ أَبَا أَيُّوبَ خَالِدَ بْنَ زَيْدٍ الَّذِي كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَزَلَ فِي دَارِهِ غَزَا أَرْضَ الرُّومِ، فَمَرَّ عَلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ فَجَفَاهُ مُعَاوِيَةُ، ثُمَّ رَجَعَ مِنْ غَزْوَتِهِ فَجَفَاهُ، وَلَمْ يَرْفَعُ بِهِ رَأْسًا، قَالَ أَبُو أَيُّوبَ: «إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنْبَأَنَا أَنَّا سَنَرَى بَعْدَهُ أَثَرَةً» ، قَالَ مُعَاوِيَةُ فَبِمَ أَمَرَكُمْ؟ قَالَ: «أَمَرَنَا أَنْ نَصْبِرَ» ، قَالَ: فَاصْبِرُوا إِذًا،
Ibn Abbas narrated that Abu Ayub, at whose place the Prophet (s) had resided, left to conquer the lands of Rome, when he came to Muawiya, he mistreated him, when they returned from the battle, Muawiya mistreated him, he didn’t raise his head and said that “The Prophet (s) had informed us that after him, in the near future we would be dealt with in an prejudiced manner” Muawiya said: ‘What were you ordered to do then?’ Abu Ayub said: ‘Prophet (s) ordered us to be patient’ thus Muawiya mockingly said: “So be patient”.
Thus, we learnt:
We read the following opinion of Sahabi Abu Bakra regarding Muawiya and his companions recorded in Tarikh Dimashq Volume 62 page 217:
اخبرنا أبو عبد الله بن البنا قراءة عن أبي تمام علي بن محمد عن أبي عمر بن حيوية أنا محمد بن القاسم نا ابن أبي خيثمة نا هوذة بن خليفة نا عوف عن أبي عثمان النهدي قال كنت خليلا لأبي بكرة فقال لي يوما أترى الناس إني إنما عتبت على هؤلاء في الدنيا وقد استعملوا عبيد الله يعني ابنه على فارس واستعملوا روادا يعني ابنه على دار الرزق واستعملوا عبد الرحمن يعني ابنه على الديوان وبيت المال أفليس في هؤلاء دنيا كلا والله إنما عتبت عليهم لأنهم كفروا فذكر كلمة وكان في نسخة أخرى كفروا صراحة أو صراحا
Let’s present the original narration from Al-Tarikh Al-Kabir 975 by Ibn Abi Kaythayma:
حدثنا هوذة بن خليفة ، قال : حدثنا عوف ، عن أبي عثمان النهدي ؛ قال : كنت خليلا لأبي بكرة ، فقال لي يوما : أيرى الناس أني إنما عتبت على هؤلاء في الدنيا وقد استعملوا عبيد الله - يعني : ابنه - على فارس ، واستعملوا رواد - يعني : ابنه - على دار الرزق ، واستعملوا عبد الرحمن - يعني : ابنه - على الديوان وبيت المال ؟ فليس في هؤلاء دنيا ؟! كلا والله ؛ ولكن إنما عتبت عليهم لأنهم كفروا فذكر كلمة.
Abu Usman said that he was along with his friend Abu Bakra who said: ‘Did you see that these people think that I am angry over them pertaining to worldly affairs (which is incorrect) whereas they have utilized my son Obaidullah for the administration of Iran, my son Rawad for Dar Al Razak and my son Abdur Rehman for supervising courts and treasury. Aren’t these examples regarding affairs of this world? By Allah, rather I am angry with these people because of their Kufr’. Thereafter Abu Bakra said one more sentence. According to some transcripts, he said: ‘because of their committing open Kufr’.
Baladhuri in Ansab Al Ashraf Volume 2 page 641 has recorded more clearer version of the thoughts of Abu Bakra regarding Muawiya and Co. in the following manner:
حدثنى عبد الأعلى بن حماد الترسى، ثنا حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ عَوْفٍ، عَنْ أَبِي عُثْمَانَ أَنَّهُ قِيلَ لأَبِي بَكْرَةَ: إِنَّ النَّاسَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّكَ تَجِدُ عَلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ وَزِيَادٍ فِي أَمْرِ الدُّنْيَا. فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرَةَ: «وَأَيَّةُ دُنْيَا [1] أَعْظَمُ مِنِ اسْتِعْمَالِهِ عُبَيْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ أَبِي بَكْرَةَ عَلَى سِجِسْتَانَ وَأُمُورِ النِّيرَانِ، وَاسْتِعْمَالِهِ عَبْدَ الرَّحْمَنِ عَلَى كَذَا. لا وَاللَّهِ، وَلَكِنَّ الْقَوْمَ كَفَرُوا صُرَاحِيَةً» .
Abu Usman said that Abu Bakra was asked whether he had any worldly issues with Muawiya and Ziyad pursuant to which he replied: ‘How can it be a worldly issue when Obaidullah Bin Abi Bakra is managing Sajistan and others, services of Abdur Rahman Bin Abi Bakra are being used elsewhere? By Allah, no (it’s not the worldly matters) rather these people have committed open Kufr’.
We read in al Bidaya Wal Nihaya Vol. 11 pg. 355 “Dhikr Qays bin Sa’d bin Ubada” that he mocked Mu’awiya as follows:
فقال له قيس: وأنت يا معاوية كنت صنماً من أصنام الجاهلية
“O Mu’awiya! You are an idol from amongst the idols of jahiliyya”
We also read in Masudi’s Muruj al Dhahab Vol. 3 pg. 21:
“You are an idol worshipper and the son of an idol worshipper.”
These words suffice to destroy the Nasibi appraisals of Mu’awiya. Or should we question the truthfulness of the Sahaba?
We read in Sira Halabiya Vol 3 pg. 397 and Rabi’ul Abrar Vol. 3, pg. 227-228:
ولما وقع القتال بين علي ومعاوية رضي الله تعالى عنهما كان أبو هريرة رضي الله تعالى عنه يصلي خلف علي كرم الله وجهه ويحضر طعام معاوية وعند القتال يصعد على تل فقيل له في ذلك فقال الصلاة خلف على أقوم وطعام معاوية أدسم
“On the plains of Siffin Abu Huraira would pray Salat behind Ali and would eat with Mu’awiya. Someone asked why he did this, to which he replied “Salat behind Ali is better and food provided by Mu’awiya is better”.
In the eyes of Abu Huraira, Mu’awiya was not even worthy of leading the Salat, so what right did he have to rule the Muslim state?
We read in Muruj al Dhahab Vol. 3 pg. 17 - 18 that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr said to Mu’awiya:
“You are the accursed son of the accursed.”
We read the following words by one of a notorious Nasibi Sahabi namely Samura bin Jundub in Tarikh Tabari Vol 5, pg. 291 (English), and Ansab Al Ashraf Vol 5, pg. 248:
فقال سمرة لعن الله معاوية والله لو أطعت الله كما أطعت معاوية ما عذبني أبدا
“May Allah curse Mu’awiya, had I obeyed Allah in the same manner that I had obeyed Mu’awiya, God would never punish me.”
Look at the supplication of Mu’awiya's former governor; he gave the sort of du’a that he truly deserves.
We read in Tarikh Abul Fida Vol 1, pg. 192 - 193, Dhikr the death of Yazid:
“On one occasion I entered the house of Mu’awiya and Yazid’s mother was singing couplets about Mu’awiya:
“I preferred the house of my poor cousin To the house of a violent Elj”
No one knows of the character of a man better than his wife, and the word she used here to describe her husband is “Elj.” We read in Lisan al-Arab, Vol. 2 pg. 326:
ويقال للرجل القويّ الضخم من الكفار عِلْج
“The strong and huge man of the infidels is called Elj.”
We read in Tarikh Khamis Vol. 2 pg. 301, Hayat al Hayawan Vol. 1 pg. 93 - 94, Tarikh Ya’qubi Vol. 2 pg. 241, Sawaiq al Muhriqah Vol. 2 pg. 601 and Yanabi al Mawaddah Vol. 2 pg. 381 the khutbah of the Mu’awiya II i.e. Mu’awiya bin Yazid bin Mu’awiya, wherein he said:
“My grandfather fought over the Caliphate with than man more entitled to it, i.e. Ali ibn Abi Talib”
See how the grandson views the grandfather as unjust. Mu’awiya never sought forgiveness from Ali for the injustice that he perpetuated.
We read in Muruj al Dhahab Vol 4, pg. 34 - 35:
“During his reign Mamun ordered the cursing of Mu’awiya from the pulpits, stating it was revenge from Allah (swt) for his cursing the family of the Prophet (s).
It is recorded in Ibn Asakir’s Tarikh Dimashq Vol 59, pg. 154, Ibn Kathir's Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya Vol. 11 pg. 432 and Dhahabi’s Siyar A’lam Al Nubala Vol 3, pg. 148 that:
“In the year of Jamaa, Mu’awiya entered Medina and gave a sermon from the Mosque pulpit stating ‘I have become ruler over you. Although I know that you are unhappy with my rule and that your hearts bear enmity towards me, I have attained power via the sword”.
Any rule obtained via oppression cannot be deemed valid ijma. It is telling that the city wherein the great Sahaba and Tabi'een resided were unhappy with the rule of Mu’awiya.
We read in al Bidaya Wal Nihaya Vol. 11 pg. 143:
“It has been stated in the hadith that the Caliphate after him will be thirty years, then it will be kingdom, and the thirty years ended with Al Hassan Ibn Ali, and thus the days of Mu’awiya are the first days of kingdom, so he is the first of Islam’s kings and the best of them.”
These words are a real slap for these Nasibi who refer to Mu’awiya as the rightful Caliph.
Allamah Ismail Abul Fida records in Tarikh Abul Fida Vol 1, pg. 86:
“Imam Shafi’i said that the testimony of four companions will not be accepted and those four are Mu’awiya, Amr bin Aas, Mughira (bin Shu’ba) and Ziyad (bin Abi)”
Baladhuri records in Ansab al Ashraf Volume 5 page 137:
وحدثني الحسين بن علي بن الأسود عن يحيى عن عبد الله بن المبارك قال: ها هنا قوم يسألون عن فضائل معاوية، وبحسب معاوية أن يترك كفافاً.
Abdullah Bin Mubarak said: ‘People ask about the virtues of Muawiya, isn’t it enough for them that Muawiya is saved by inches’
To those Nawasib who try their utmost to find something to praise Mu’awiya over, Abdullah bin Mubarak a Sunni scholar who operated during the reign of the Umayyads intimated there was no virtue of Mu'awiya other than him being saved from Hellfire by a whisker!
Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310 AH) was a Sunni jurist that was so influential he even founded his own school of Fiqh (now extant). His most famed work was his historical chronicle called "Tarikh al-Tabari".
Writing about Jafar ibn Abi Sufyan that died in 80 Hijri he wrote:
"Ja'far died in the middle of the Caliphate of Mu'awiyah May God curse him" (History of Tabari (English translation), Volume 39 pages 62 - 63) / (Arabic)
Let us now reveal the testimony of great Sunni Imam al-Atiqi about whom Imam Dhahabi wrote about in Siyar a'lam al Nubala, Vol 17, pg. 602:
“The Imam the Muhadith, the Thiqah, Abu al-Hassan Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Mansor al-Baghdadi al-Atiqi”
Allamah Khateeb Baghdadi records about him Tarikh Baghdad, Vol 6, pg. 36-37:
“I wrote from him & he is Seduq (truthful)”
Now we read the following testimony of Imam al-Atiqi about Mu’awiya in Tarikh Baghdad, Vol 16, pg. 262 ‘Dhikr Yahya bin Abdul Hameed al-Hamani’:
“Atiqi said: ‘Mu'awiya did not die in the Islamic faith”.
For those who may cast doubt on the authenticity of Yahya bin Abdul Hameed Hamani we shall point out that he is one of the narrators of Sahih Muslim, moreover Imam Yahya bin Mueen declared him ‘Thiqa’ (Tahdib al-Kamal v16, p423), Ibn Numair and Muhammad al-Bushanji also declared him ‘Thiqa’ (Tahdib al-Tahdib v4 p 373) and Allamah Ibn Shaheen included him in his book of Thiqa narrators Tarikh Asma al-Thuqat’ page 270.
Is it not shameful for these Nasibis to tout the Caliphate of one that failed to die on the Islamic faith? These Nasabis are so thick, they deem one whose death on Iman is unproven to be the legitimate Caliph of the Prophet (s).
Imam Dhahabi in Siyar A'lam al-Nubala, Vol. 10 pg. 464 has recorded the statement of the Sheikh of Baghdad, Ali bin Ja’ad (d. 230 H) regarding Mu’awiya:
قال أحمد بن إبراهيم الدورقي قلت لعلي بن الجعد بلغني أنك قلت ابن عمر ذاك الصبي قال لم أقل ولكن معاوية ما أكره أن يعذبه الله
Ahmad bin Ibrahim al-Duraqi said: ‘I said to Ali bin al-Ja’ad: ‘I have been informed that you called Ibn Umar a kid.’ He replied: ‘I didn’t say such a thing but I don’t mind if Allah would punish Mu’awiya’.
Similarly we read in Masail Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, pg. 408:
وسمعت أبا عبدالله وقال له دلويه : سمعت علي بن الجعد يقول: مات والله معاوية على غير الإسلام
“I heard Aba Abdullah that Delweh said to him: ‘I heard Ali bin al-Ja’ad saying: ‘By Allah Mu’awiya had died as a non-Muslim’”.
In order to misguide naive Shias, some Nawasib try to make feeble attempts to prove that the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) thought well of Mu’awiya. Therefore, before ending the article, we deemed it appropriate to present the actual status of Mu’awiya in the eyes of Imams (as). We read the following statement of Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) in Usul al-Kafi, Vol. 8 pg. 234:
“Abu Abdullah (as) said: ‘Three things are the proud of a believer and decorate him in the world and hereafter, prayer in the end of night, to abstain from what is in the hand of the people and advocate the Imam from Muhammad’s (s) progeny.
And three are the most evil of creatures by whom the best of the creatures were afflicted with, Abu Sufyan is one of them who fought the messenger of Allah (s) and showed enmity towards Him (s), Mu’awiya who fought Ali (as) and showed enmity towards Him, and Yazid bin Mu’awiya may God curse him, who fought Hussain bin Ali (as) and showed enmity towards him till he killed Him (as).”
Allamah Majlesi in Mirat al-Uqool, Vol. 26 pg. 178 declared it to be a ‘Hasan’ narration while Sheikh Hadi Najafi declared it ‘Sahih’ in Mawsuat al Hadith al Ahl Albayt, Vol. 4 pg. 445.
Shaykh Saduq records in Al-Khisal, pg. 360:
Muhammad bin Fudhail al-Zerqi narrated that Abu Abdullah (as) said that his father [Imam Baqir (as)] who said that his father [Imam Sajjad (as)] said: ‘The hell got seven gates, gate will make enter into it Pharaoh, Haman and Korah. And gate will make enter into it the polytheists and the disbelievers who never believed in Allah. And gate will make enter into it Bani Umayyah because it is particularly for them, no one will compete them, and it’s a blazed gate, it’s the gate of Saqar and it is bottomless, they will remain there for seventy years and they will remain there eternally. And the gate will enter into it whoever hates us, fought us and disappointed us, verily it’s the most horrible and warm gate.’
Muhammad bin Fudhail al-Zerqi said: ‘I asked Abu Abdullah (as): ‘The gate which you mentioned from your father from your grandfather (as) that Bani Umayyah will enter into, will they be those of them who died as polytheist or those who attained Islam?’ Abu Abdullah (as) replied: ‘Didn’t you hear that he (Imam Sajjad) said: ‘And gate will make enter into it the polytheists and the disbelievers. So this gate will make enter into it every polytheist and disbeliever, who don’t believe in the day of judgment, while the other gate will make enter into it the Bani Umayyah, because it is made specially for Abi Sufian, Mu’awiya and al-Marwan, they will enter from that gate and hell fire will destroy them, no one will listen to them (to their begging).’
We have thus far cited the criticisms heaped upon Mu’awiya by Islamic figures, who recognized him for the shames trouble maker that he was. Whilst such a viewpoint is understandable due to the untold suffering his seditious conduct caused to Muslims when Imam Ali (as) took power, it is worthy to note that a critic of Islam was in awe of Mu’awiya for his activities that split the Muslims into two camps when Imam Ali (as) took power, a split that created a weaker Ummah less able to spread its teachings to other domains, in other word Mu’awiya was able to stop the spread of Islam in its tracks. Prominent Salafi scholar Rashid Reza in Mujalat al-Manar, Vol 30 pg 459 wrote:
قال أحد علماء الألمان المتعصبين لجنسيتهم أنه ينبغي لنا أن نقيم لمعاوية تمثالاً من الذهب في أعظم ساحة من عاصمتنا ( برلين ) وينبغي مثل ذلك لجميع شعوب أوربة ، إذ لولاه لكانت هذه الشعوب كلها عربية تدين بالإسلام
“One German scholar with bias in favor of his race stated that they should build a golden statue for Mu'awiya in best square in Berlin, and every nation should do so, because without him, all nations would have become Arab and Muslim nation”.
[1] Chain is Hassan. Abdullah bin Masud: Sahabi. Zirr bin Hubaysh: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p311). Asim bin Bahdalah: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p546). Salaam bin Sulayman Abu al-Munder: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p406). Ibrahim bin al-Alaf al-Basri: Imam Ibn Hibban included him among the Thiqa narrators (al-Thuqat, v8 p78).
[3] Al-Haythami: Al-Tabarani has narrated it and its narrators are trustworthy.
[4] The chain is Hassan
[5] This chain is Sahih: Ishaq bin Abi Israel: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p79), Dhahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Al-Kashif, v1 p234). Abdulrazaq bin Hamam: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p599), Dhahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Siar alam al nubala, v9 p563). Mu’amar bin Rashid: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah Thabt’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p202), Dahabi said: ‘Hujja’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p190). Abdullah bin Tawus: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p503), Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Siar alam al nubala, v6, p103). Taous bin Kisan: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p448), Dahabi said: ‘He had a great magnificence’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p90). Abdullah bin Amro bin al-Sas: A Sahabi. Moreover, Hafiz Ahmad bin al-Sidiq said about this tradition: ‘Sahih according to Muslim’s condition’ (Jawnat al-Attar, Vol. 2 pg. 154)
[6] Chain is Hassan. Al-Hussain bin Ali al-Aswad: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p216). Yahya bin Adam: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p296). Wakee: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p284). Ismail bin Abi Khalid: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p93). Shubail al-Yahsabi: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p412).
[7] Sahih al-Bukhari 520 For an example of the prophet using the same formula
[8]Haythami took issue with two narrators, Yunus Ibn Arqam, who is reliable according to Bukhari (see Ahmed Shakir’s commentary in Musnad Ahmed Ibn Hanbal Vol 2, pg. 22) and Sayyid Ibn Isa, who is Ibn Hibban’s kitab Al Thuqat, thus the chain is sahih.
[9] Also mentions the death of Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr
