Part 9: Nature of Relationship between Ahlebayt(ra) and Muawiya(ra)

Nature of Relationship between Ahlebayt(ra) and Muawiya(ra)

Note: Part 1 is a must read before reading this part. Please read Part 1. And please read all the comments mentioned in this article.


Muawiya(ra) acknowledged the superiority of Ali(ra) and his view towards Hassan(ra) and hussain(ra).

1. Al-Thahabi narrated in “Sayr A’alam Al-Nubala’a” from Ya’ali bin Ubayd from his father who says: (Abu Muslim Al-Khulani and some others went to Mu’awiyah and asked him: “Do you dispute Ali or are you equal to him? Mu’awiyah answered: “By Allah no. I know he is better than I am, and he has the right to rule, but do not you know that Uthman was killed as an innocent? And I am his cousin and the seeker of his revenge. Therefore go to Ali and tell him to send me Uthman’s murderers then I will obey him.” They went to Ali and talked to him, but Ali refused to hand in Uthman’s murderers to Mu’awiyah.) [ Sayr A’alam Al-Nubala’a, vol.3, p.140, the examiner of the book said that its narrators are trustworthy]

Comment: This was the true and real view of Muawiya(ra) regarding Ali(ra), which the shian e dajjal never try to bring up. Because it will uncover the false propagands against hz muawiya(ra) since the time of their Imams. Here we find that Muawiya(ra) considered ali(ra) better than him, because he clearly said that he was demanding Qisas for martydon of Uthman(ra), which was his right according to shariah. He even said that if Ali(ra) handovers the killers of Uthman(ra) he will obey him.

2. The same narration can be found in Shia sources. See Waq’at Siffeen by Nasr bin Muzahim:
وإن أبا مسلم الخولانى  قدم إلى معاوية في أناس من قراء أهل الشام، [ قبل  مسير أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام إلى صفين، ] فقالوا [ له ]: يا معاوية علام  تقاتل عليا، وليس لك مثل صحبته ولا هجرته ولا قرابته ولا سابقته ؟ قال  لهم: ما أقاتل عليا وأنا أدعى أن لى في الإسلام مثل صحبته ولا هجرته ولا  قرابته ولا سابقته، ولكن خبروني عنكم، ألستم تعلمون أن عثمان قتل مظلوما ؟  قالوا: بلى.
قال: فليدع إلينا قتلته فنقتلهم به، ولا قتال بيننا وبينه.
Rough translation: And Abu Muslim Al-Khawlani came to Mu’awiya with a group of qura’a from the people of Al-Shaam, before Ali went to Siffeen. They said, “Why do you fight Ali? You are not in his level of suhba or hijra or closeness or earliness (in Islam). He said, “I don’t fight Ali with the claim that I am like him in suhba, hijra,  closeness or earliness, but tell me, aren’t you aware that Uthman was  killed unjustly?” They said, “Yes.” He said, “They if he gives us the  killers, we’ll kill them, and there will be nothing between us and him  (Ali).”

Also, interestingly, the following, by Al-Tabari implies that Mu’awiyah was never seen as a caliph, until after the death of Ali, nor was he given bay’a:
(وفى هذه السنة) بويع لمعاوية بالخلافة بايلياء حدثنى بذلك موسى بن عبد الرحمن قال حدثنا عثمان بن عبد الرحمن قال أخبرنا اسماعيل بن راشد وكان قبل يدعى بالشأم أميرا وحدثت عن أبى مسهر عن سعيد بن عبد العزيز قال كان على عليه السلام يدعى بالعراق أمير المؤمنين وكان معاوية يدعى بالشأم الامير فلما قتل على عليه السلام دعى معاوية أمير المؤمنين
Rough translation: In this year, Mu’awiyah was given baya’a in Ilya’a. Musa bin Abdulrahman said that Uthman bin Abdulrahman said, Isma’eel bin Rashid told us that “he (Mu’awiyah) used to be called the ameer of Al-Shaam.” I was told that Abu Mushir that Sa’eed bin Abdulaziz said, “Ali used to be called Ameer Al-Mu’mineen in Iraq, and Mu’awiyah was called the ameer in Al-Shaam, but when Ali was killed, Mu’awiyah was later called Ameer Al-Mu’mineen.”

Also notice that Al-Tabari didn’t say that Mu’awiyah was given baya’a before this year. This implies that nobody gave Mu’awiyah a baya’a for the khilafa before this time.

Ibn Katheer also says, “When Ali died, the people of Al-Shaam pledged their allegiance to Mu’awiyah, as the Ameer Al-Mu’mineen, for there was nobody that could dispute them.”

A similar argument against Muawiya(ra) is made using the hadeeth of Sahih Bukhari. Please refer the answer for that argument in this article: Response to: Mu’awiyahs Testimony on the Khalifahs

3. Muawiyah Radhi Allaahu Ta’ala ‘anh said: “Ali is better and more virtuous than me and I differ from him only in the matter of qisaas of Uthmaan (Radhi Allaahu Ta’ala ‘anh) and if he takes the qisaas of the blood of uthmaan I will be the first of the people of syria to make bayah to him” [al-Bidayatu wan Nihaayah page 129,259 vol 7]

Comment: We find a similar narration here, where Muawiya(ra) himself testifies that Ali(ra) was more virtues than him. And if Ali(ra) handovers the killers of Uthman(ra) he would be the first person to make Bayah to him from people of Syria.


قال ابن كثير: « وقد ورد من غير وجه: أن أبا مسلم الخولاني وجماعة معه دخلوا على معاوية فقالوا له: هل تنازع علياً أم أنت مثله؟ فقال: والله إني لأعلم أنه خير مني وأفضل، وأحق بالأمر مني…).(1) الخبر
Ibn Katheer said that: Abu Muslim Al-Khawalani and a group with him, entered on Mu’awiyah and said to him: “Are you competing with Ali, or [do you think that] you are like him?” So he replied: “By Allah, I know that he is better than me, and more virtuous ...”.[Al bidaya wal nihaya 132/8]

مُعَاوِيَةَ يَقُوْلُ
لَوْ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً لَمْ يَفْعَلْ مَا فَعَلَ، ثُمَّ كَانَ فِي غَارٍ، لَذَهَبَ النَّاسُ إِلَيْهِ حَتَّى يَسْتَخْرِجُوْهُ مِنْهُ

Hisham bin Ammar reports that Muawiyah said on the virtues of Ali “Even if Ali had decided to seclude himself in a cave, people would have still sought him out and brought him back to the public. [Siyar A’lam an-Nabula’, 5/147]

Comment: This shows that how much important was the presence of Ali(ra) in ummah in the sight of Muawiya(ra), because if Ali(ra) didn’t help people in solving fiqh issues then it would have been very problematic for people.(since he was the best living jurist at that time). This is even evident from Muawiya(ra) specifically asking people to ASK ALi(ra) to clear his doubts in fiqh matters.


1893 – وأنبأنا ابن ناجية ، أيضا ، قال : حدثنا حسين بن مهدي الأبلي قال : حدثنا عبد الرزاق قال : أنبأنا معمر ، عن الزهري قال : لما قتل علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه وجاء الحسن بن علي رضي الله عنهما إلى معاوية فقال له معاوية : لو لم يكن لك فضل على يزيد إلا أن أمك امرأة من قريش وأمه امرأة من كلب لكان لك عليه فضل ، فكيف وأمك فاطمة بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

1893 From the way of Al-Zuhri, he said: When Ali ibn Abi Talib (Radiya Allah ‘Anh) was killed, Al Hasan ibn Ali (Radiya Allah ‘Anhuma) came to Mu’awiya. Mu’awiya said to him: If your only virtue over Yazeed was that your mother is a woman from Quraysh and his mother is a woman from [the tribe of] Kalb then that would have been a sufficient virtue for you over him, how then when your mother is Fatima daughter of the Messenger of Allah (Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam) [Al-Sharee’ah by Al-Ajurri, died in 360 AH]

Comment: Just see how Muawiyah(ra) respects and honors Hassan(ra). He himself proves how Hassan(ra) was superior to Yazeed. And Even declares that Fatima(ra) was superior to his wife.

7. Muawiya said to Yazeed: Do honor his (i.e Hussain’s) relation to the Prophet (s) because you should know that his father is better than your father and his mother is better than your mother. [shia book, Maqtal abi makhnaf p. 19.]

Comment: Here Hz muawiya(ra) himself testifies that Ali(ra) was better than Muawiya(ra) and Fatima(ra) was better than  wife of Muawiya(ra).

8. Here’s a report where Mu`awiyah tells Ka`b “How do you say that I shall relieve leadership when the companions of Rasul-Allah(saw)`Ali and al-Zubayr are present!?”

قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا وَكِيعُ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَأَبُو مُعَاوِيَةَ الضَّرِيرُ، قَالا: حَدَّثَنَا الأَعْمَشُ، عَنَ أَبِي صَالِحٍ، قَالَ: ” كَانَ الْحَادِي يَحْدُو بِعُثْمَانَ وَهُوَ يَقُولُ: إِنَّ الأَمِيرَ بَعْدَهُ عَلِيُّ وَفِي الزُّبَيْرِ خَلَفٌ رَضِيُّ قَالَ: فَقَالَ كَعْبٌ: لا، بَلْ هُوَ صَاحِبُ الْبَغْلَةِ الشَّهْبَاءِ.
قَالَ: يَعْنِي مُعَاوِيَةَ.
قَالَ: فَأُتِيَ مُعَاوِيَةُ فَقِيلَ لَهُ: إِنَّ كَعْبًا يَقُولُ كَذَا وَكَذَا، فَأَتَى كَعْبًا فَقَالَ: يَا أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ، وَأَنَّى يَكُونُ هَذَا وَهَهُنَا أَصْحَابُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَلِيٌّ وَالزُّبَيْرُ؟ قَالَ: أَنْتَ صَاحِبُهَا

[Source: Tabaqat al-Kubra by ibn Sa`d.]

و امـّا الحسين فـقـد عـرفـت حظّه مـن رسول الله و هو مـن لحم رسول اللّه و دمـه و قـد عـلمـت لا مـحالة انّ اءهل العراق سيخرجونه اليهم ثمّ يخذلونه و يضيّعـونه ، فـان ظفـرت به فـاعـرف حقـّه و مـنزلة مـن رسول اللّه و لا تـواءخـذه بفـعـله ، و مـع ذلك فـانّ لنا به خلطة و رحما و ايّاك ان تناله بسوء او يرى منك مكروها.
– بحار ج 44 / ص 311-. حيات الامـام الحسين ج 2، ص 236. كامل ابن اثير ج 4، ص 6. طبرى ج 7، ص 196 و 217. ينابيع الموده ص 333.

Muawiya(ra) said to his son:“You know what relation Imâm Husayn ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is to the Messenger of Allah. He is a part from the beloved Prophet’s blessed body. He is an offspring from the flesh and blood of that most honourable person. I understand that the inhabitants of Iraq invite him to go there and be with them. But they will not help him; they will leave him alone. If he should fall into your hands, behave in appreciation of his value! Remember the closeness and affection of the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ to him! Do not get back at him for his behaviour! Mind you don’t break the substantial ties I have established between him and us! Be extra careful lest you should hurt or offend him!” This advice of Hadrat Mu’âwiya’s to (his son) Yazîd is written in shia books like bihar al anwar, etc).]

10. First from Tabari

ت قال أحمد قال على عن جويرية بن أسماء أن بسر بن أبى أرطاة نال من
على عند معاوية وزيد بن عمر بن الخطاب جالس فعلاه بعصا فشجه فقال معاوية لزيد عمدت إلى شيخ من قريش سيد أهل الشأم فضربته وأقبل على بسر فقال تشتم عليا وهو جده وابن الفاروق على رءوس الناس أو كنت ترى أنه يصبر على ذلك ثم أرضاهما جميعا قال وقال معاوية إنى لارفع نفسي من أن يكون ذنب أعظم من عفوى وجهل أكثر من حلمي أو عورة لا أواريها بستري أو إساءة أكثر من إحساني قال وقال معاوية زين الشريف العفاف قال وقال معاوية ما من شئ أحب إلى من عين خرارة في أرض خوارة فقال عمرو بن العاص ما من شئ أحب إلى من أن أبيت عروسا بعقيلة من عقائل العرب فقال وردان مولى عمرو بن العاص ما من شئ أحب إلى من الافضال على الاخوان فقال معاوية أنا أحق بهذا منك قال ما تحب فافعل
Ahmed said that Ali bin Juwairya bin Asma said that Bisr bin abi Artaa said bad things about Ali in Muwaiya’s presence while Zaid bin Umar bin Alkhattab was sitting so he got up with a stick and hit his head. Then Muwaiya said to Zaid: you came to a Sheikh from Quraish, master of the people of Syria and hit him?! Then he went to Bisr and said: you verbally abuse Ali and he is his grandfather, and the son of Farooq (Umar) is above the heads of the people. did you believe that he be patient with that?! Then he reconciled between them. And Muwaiya said: It’s not fitting that a fault be greater than my forgiveness or ignorance greater than my forebearance, or a shame which I do not conceal with my veil, or malice greater than my benevolence, and Muawiya also said: The most noble person is the generous one. And he also said: nothing is more loved by me than a plentiful spring in a desert land. And Amru bin al Aas said: nothing is more beloved to me than to spend a night newly married by one of the Arab families. Wirdan the servant of Amro said: Nothing is more loved by me than being kind to the brothers. Then Muwaiya said: I have more right in this than you. He said: Is there anything you’d like so I can serve you? [(At-Tabari Vol. 4 Pg 248) & (Ibn Atheer Vol 4 Pg 5)]

Comment: Muawiya(ra) scolded the person who abused Ali(ra) and neither did he encourage that person to do that.

11. We read in the Shia book:

A person, after meeting Hazrat(Ali) , went to Muawiya and said: ” I’m coming from the weakest person in speech”. He(Muawiya) replied : ”you’re pitiful that you call him so. By Allah, The Quraish have not paved the way of eloquence to anyone except him, and the art of oratory has not been taught by anyone but him, And good-naturedness as well as affabilty are an aphorism/proverb for him, to an extent that his enemies used to defame him because of this. (Haqq-ul-yaqeen ,Urdu translation, Volume 1 , page 160 , by Allama Syed Mohemmed Baqir Majlisi,)

12. We read in the Shia book:

A hypocrite, got angry after meeting Hazrat(Ali), and went to Muawiya who was his biggest enemy, and used to try a lot to defame and malign him and said: “I’m coming from the most miserly person.” He(Muawiya) replied : “Woe to you, you call him miserly. He is the one who if keeps a room filled with gold & one with chaff, He gives away the gold in charity first, to the extent that nothing remains there. He is the one who gives away in charity, rooms filled with wealth, to the extent of him sweeping the same place and then offering prayer. He is the one who while addressing the worldly wealth said: ‘Deceive someone else, I have given you such a divorce which is totally irrevocable.’ Despite having the fortunes, he did not leave anything as inheritance when he passed away. His mildness and mercy was such that he was the most forbearing & forgiving person in this world.” (Haqq-ul-yaqeen ,Urdu translation, Volume 1 , page 159 , Author: Allama Syed Mohemmed Baqir Majlisi).


This is affirmed by this fact, that Muawiya(ra) used to ask Ali(ra) questions, during the Caliphate of Ali(ra).

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Said ibn al−Musayyab that a Syrian man called Ibn Khaybari found a man with his wife and killed him, or killed them both. Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan found it difficult to make a decision and he wrote to Abu Musa al−Ashari to ask Ali ibn Abi Talib for him about that. So Abu Musa asked Ali ibn Abi Talib and Ali said to him, “Is this thing in my land? I adjure you, you must tell me.” Abu Musa explained to him how Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan had written him to ask Ali about it. Ali said, “I am Abu Hasan. If he does not bring four witnesses, then let him be completely handed over,” (to the relatives of the murdered man). [Muawatta Book 36, Number 36.19.18]

Comments: This shows us the bonding of brotherhood in faith between Ali(ra) and Muawiya(ra) , because though they had differences in political issues, yet it didn’t stop Muawiya(ra) from asking hz ali(ra) a fiqhi question. Hz muawiya(ra) SPECIFICALLY SAID ABU MUSA TO ASK TO ALI(RA). Now had it been the conditions like the shian e dajjal often portray, then why would Muawiya(ra) ask question to Ali(ra), if he had hatred for him?  He  could have asked someone else for that  or could have sorted out the issue the way he wanted, who was there to stop him? Many of us might have experienced that, we often don’t ask for help, etc with people whom we hate, since our ego stops us from doing so. And yes there could be some situations that there is no other way expect to take help from our enemy(though even in those situations people avoid taking help from their enemies if that enemy of their is a staunch enemy whom they curse day and night), at that time people might take help, but just see here, was there no other way for Muawiya(ra)? He could have easily sorted that issue the way he wanted. Who was going to ask him? But see these great people, and their love for Islam and shariah. Could any true muslim bear enemity for such great people except the shian e dajjal?


What was the view of Ali(ra) regarding Muawiyah(ra)? And it also proves that Ali(ra) and Muawiya(ra) were both brothers in faith.

Many times Mu’awiyah emphasized that by saying: “I did not fight Ali but in the matter of Uthman.” As we have seen above. Ali(ra) also confirms this he said:

وَكَانَ بَدْءُ أَمْرِنَا أَنَّا الْتَقَيْنَا وَالْقَوْمُ مِنْ أَهْلِ الشَّامِ، وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ رَبَّنَا وَاحِدٌ (1) ، وَنَبِيَّنَا وَاحِدٌ، وَدَعْوَتَنَا فِي الْإِِسْلاَمِ وَاحِدَةٌ، لاَ نَسْتَزِيدُهُمْ (2) فِي الْإِيمَانِ باللهِ وَالتَّصْدِيقِ بِرَسُولِهِ، وَلاَ يَسْتَزِيدُونَنَا: الْأَمْرُ وَاحِدٌ، إِلاَّ مَا اخْتَلَفْنَا فِيهِ مِنْ دَمِ عُثْمانَ، وَنَحْنُ مِنْهُ بَرَاءٌ! فَقُلْنَا: تَعَالَوْا نُدَاوِ مَا لاَ يُدْرَكُ الْيَوْمَ بِإِطْفَاءِ النَّائِرَةِ (3) ، وَتَسْكِينِ الْعَامَّةِ، حَتَّى يَشْتَدَّ الْأَمْرُ وَيَسْتَجْمِعَ، فَنَقْوَى عَلَى وَضْعِ الْحَقِّ مَوَاضِعَهُ. فَقَالُوا: بَلْ نُدَاوِيهِ بِالْمُكَابَرَةِ (4) ! فَأَبَوْا حَتَّى جَنَحَتِ (5) الْحَرْبُ وَرَكَدَتْ (6) ، وَوَقَدَتْ (7) نِيرَانُهَا وَحَمِشَتْ (8) . فَلَمَّا ضَرَّسَتْنَا (9) وَإِيَّاهُمْ، وَوَضَعَتْ مَخَالِبَهَا فِينَا وَفِيهِمْ، أَجَابُوا عِنْدَ ذلِكَ إِلَى الَّذي دَعَوْنَاهُمْ إِلَيْهِ، فَأَجَبْنَاهُمْ إِلَى مَا دَعَوْا، وَسَارَعْنَاهُمْ (10) إِلَى مَا طَلَبُوا، حَتَّى اسْتَبَانَتْ عَلَيْهِمُ الْحُجَّةُ، وَانْق َطَعَتْ مِنْهُمُ الْمَعْذِرَةُ. فَمَنْ تَمَّ عَلَى ذلِكَ مِنْهُمْ فَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنْقَذَهُ اللهُ مِنَ الْهَلَكَةِ، وَمَنْ لَجَّ وَتَمَادَى فَهُوَ الرَّاكِسُ (11) الَّذِي رَانَ (12) اللهُ عَلَى قَلْبِهِ، وَصَارَتْ دَائِرَةُ السَّوْءِ عَلَى رَأْسِهِ

1. “In the beginning of our matter, the people of Sham(Muawiya and his supporters) and us met. It is obvious that our God is one, our Prophet is one, and our call in Islam is oneWe do not see ourselves more in faith in Allah or more in believing His messenger than them, nor they do. Our matter is one, except for our disagreement in Uthman’s blood, and we are innocent from his murder.“ [Nahjul Balagha, vol.3, p.648; letter 58]

Comment: Hence, Ali(ra) is confirming what Muawiya(ra) also said, that the conflict between him and Mu’awiyah(ra) is about the murder of Uthman, not for the sake of leadership or to take control of the Muslims. Moreover we find Ali(ra) confirmed that the beliefs  of both the groups was same. Which means that Ali(ra) considered Muawiya(ra) to be his brother in faith. we know that people of Shaam didn’t believe in divine Imamah of Ali(a). But Ali(ra) didn’t mention the greatest sin(in the sight of shian e dajjal) that Muawiya(ra) rejected the Imamah of Ali(ra). He didn’t mention that they differed in faith nor that Muawiya(ra) went against the Imam appointed by Allah, like the shian e dajjal always want to portray.

2. We have been with the Prophet in battles wherein those killed were fathers, sons, brothers and relations of one another. Nevertheless, every trouble and hardship just increased us in our belief, in our treading on the right path, in submission to (divine) command and in endurance of the pain of wounds.We now had to fight our brethren in Islam because of entry into Islam of misguidance, crookedness, doubts and (wrong) interpretation. However, if we find any way by which Allah may collect us together in our disorder and by which we may come near each other in whatever common remains between us we would accept it and would give up everything else.(Nahjul balagha sermon 121).

Comment: Here Hz ali(ra)  was displaying is displeasure in fighting his own muslims brothers, because of the misguidance that entered Islam, that was spread by shian e dajjal(saba’es). Since because of them Uthman(ra) was martyred and because of that the battle between two muslim brothers took place.

Another proof of this brotherhood:

Once when Ali(ra) and Muawiya(ra) were in opposition a huge Christian army was planning to attack on the easten provinces of Iran, which was under Ali’s(ra) rule and they wanted to take advantage of the disunity among the muslims. Ali(ra) was incapable of defending these places, which were targeted to come under attack by the Christians and if the Christians attacked, a large of part of Islamic territory would have been lost. The Christians were aware of the difficulties Ali(ra) was facing and therefore felt there would be no threat from Amir Muawiya(ra)’s side as the had been following the mutual opposition between Muawiya and Ali and their use of force against each other. They expected that Muawiya(ra) would like them to attack Ali(ra). However, as soon as Muawiya(ra) heard that news, he contrary to the expectations of the Christian emperor, wrote to the emperor, “You should not be deceived by our infighting, if you turn towards Ali(ra) the first chief who advances to punish you under Ali’s(ra) flag will be Muawiya”. The impact of that letter was far more than an army and the Chirstians gave up the idea. . ( History of Islam Vol 2 ,page 48-49 By Akbar Shah Najeebadi)

A similar report: The king of Byzantium had great hopes of attacking and defeating Mu’aawiyyah after  the latter having instilled fear in him and humiliating him, and routing his troops.  When the king of Byzantium saw that Mu’aawiyyah was preoccupied with fighting ‘Alee, he approached some cities (on the border) with a huge army, filled with hope of victory. But Mu’aawiyyah wrote to him saying, “By Allaah! If you do not stop and go back to your own land, O cursed one, I shall reconcile with my cousin and we will unite against you, and I shall certainly expel you from all of your land! I shall keep pursuing you, and the earth, vast as it is, will be striatened for you [at-Tawbah: 25]. At that the king was afraid, and he sent word seeking a peace treaty.”[al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah: 8/119]

Comment: Did you see how beautiful relationship did these two Sahaba shared. Muawiya(ra) wasn’t glad to find Ali(ra) in trouble, nor he tried to utilize that situation, like often enemies do. It is because Muawiya(ra) considered Ali(ra) his brother in faith, not his enemy and the only reason he fought was to demand Qisas of Uthman(ra). And for these reports a beautiful verse of Quran came into my mind. “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves( 48:29)”.


That’s why this was the view of Ahlebayt, for those who fought with them:

1. In Sunan Bayhiqi it is narrated that on the eve of the war of Jamal, Ali(ra) was asked about the opponents: “Are they Mushrikeen?” He replied:”They have run from shirk and come into Islaam” Then he was asked “Are they Munafiqeen?” He replied “Munafiqeen are those who don’t remember Allah, except a little (while the opponents do a lot of Zikr)” Then he was asked “Then what are they?” He replied:”They are our brothers who have rebelled from us” [Sunun Bayhiqi – Dairat ul Ma’arif edition page 173 vol 8]

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]

عن جعفر الصادق عن أبیه علیهما السلام أن علیا علیه السلام لم یكن ینسب أحداً من أهل حربة إلى الشرك ولا إلى النفاق، ولكنه كان یقول: هم إخواننا بغوا علینا
Jafar Sadiq narrates from his father (Baqir) that Ali never accused the ones with whom he fought of Shirk (i.e polytheism) or hypocrisy, rather he would say , they are our brothers who  rebelled against us. [(shia books) Wasail Shia, 15/83 , also Qurbul Asnad p. 45, Majleese reported in “Biharal anwar” 32/324]

Comment: These were the views of Ahlebayt regarding those who fought with them , they considered them muslims, unlike what the shian e dajjal want to portray,  Since you will find the shian e dajjal making takfeer of those who fought with Ahlebayt.

4. Sahi bukhari 4.823: Narrated Abu Bakra: Once the Prophet brought out Al−Hasan and took him up the pulpit along with him and said, “This son of mine is a Saiyid (i.e. chief) and I hope that Allah will help him bring about reconciliation between two Muslim groups.”

Comment: From this narration we find that the group of Ali(ra) as well as group of Muawiya(ra) were considered as Muslims. Prophet(saw) didn’t say just one of them will be muslim. But said both of the groups will be muslim. Now some of the notorious shian e dajjal might try to say that, the group of Muawiya(ra) was muslim but they were not momin(belivers), since muslim even encompasses hypocrites some times. To those shian e dajjal we want to say that, hypocrisy is something which is portraying the opposite which is in hearts. So when Muawiya(ra) fought Ali(ra) do you mean to say that he had love for him in his heart? which is opposite to his action? Secondly, if we read Islamic history we will find that there used to be hypocrites among the muslims as the quran says, but when they revealed their true faces and they joined the kuffar(disbelievers) during war, then you will never find that people still called them muslims. So when muawiya(ra) openly went against Ali(ra), yet prophet(Saw) said his group was Muslim, then it means that they all were believers(momineen). Unlike what shian e dajjal want to portray. And if shian e dajjal disagree with us, then we demand them to show us a single authentic narration where any hypocrite OPENLY went against prophet(Saw), and fought against him. Then even AFTER that prophet(Saw) called such a person Muslim. If you can’t then please stop fooling ignorant followers of yours.

فلقد كنا مع رسول الله صلى
الله عليه وآله وإن القتل ليدور على الآباء والابناء والاخوان والقرابات ،
فما نزداد على كل مصيبة وشدة إلا إيمانا ، ومضيا على الحق ، وتسليما
للامر ، وصبرا على مضض الجراح . ولكنا إنما أصبحنا نقاتل إخواننا
في الاسلام على ما دخل فيه من الزيغ والاعوجاج والشبهة والتأويل
Hz ali addressing his companions and his opponents said: We were with prophet(saw) , that time our fathers and sons were killed , our near one and brothers were killed ,but after every problem and calamity our eman used to get increase. We used to standstill on truth, We used to obey the commands, at times of difficulties we used to do sabr(patience). But now we are fighting our own muslim brothers. (nahjul balagha tahqeeq subhi saleh, page 179)

واوصيكم عباد الله بتقوى الله، فإنها خير ما تواصى به، وخير عواقب الأمور عند الله، وقد فتح باب الحرب بينكم وبين أهل القبلة
Hz ali said: O servants of Allah I suggest you of having taqwa.This is one of the best suggestion given to servants of Allah. With this you will achieve goodness and piousness. Between you and ahle qibla the door of battle have opened.(nahjul balagha tahqeeq subhi saleh, page 248, sermon 172).

Comment: similar explain as we find in last comment can be applied to these narrations of Nahjul balagha.

زياد بن الحارث ، قال : كنت إلى جنب عمار فقال رجل : كفر أهل الشام ، فقال عمار : لا تقولوا ذلك نبينا و نبيهم واحد و قبلتنا و قبلتهم واحدة، لكنهم قوم مفترون جاروا عن الحق ، علينا أن نقاتلهم حتى يرجعوا .
#38855- Ziyad bin al-Harith said: I was next to `Ammar ibn Yassir, so a man said: “The people of al-Sham have committed Kufr!” so `Ammar told him: “Do not say this! our Prophet and their Prophet is one, Our Qiblah and their Qiblah are one, but they are calumniators(Muftaroun), they transgressed against the truth, we must fight them until they return (to the truth).” [ Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah #38855]

Comment: So we see that according to Ammar ibn yasir(ra), they didn’t find people of Sham, considering the disbelievers, but rather they considered them the brothers in faith. But they just fought them to bring them back on the truth.

Shias shoud first decide that whether there Imams divinely appointed or not? Because if they were divinely appointed then who so ever fights with them,  should obviously declared as disbeliever(this has been done by many shia scholars). But if you say that they were muslims then it naturally exposes your home-made beliefs that your Imams weret divinely appointed from Allah.


That is why we find this reaction from Ahlebayt after the death of Muawiyah(ra)

صلح الله ذات بينكما فلم يجيباه في هذا بشئ ، وجاء حتى جلس ، فأقرأه الوليد الكتاب ونعى له معاوية ودعاه إلى البيعة ، فقال حسين : انالله وانا إليه راجعون ورحم الله معاوية وعظم لك الاجر

1. (Hussain said) may Allah make your situation better, but no reply was given , and than he sat down, than Walid read out thes message (of Yazid) and told him the news of the death of Muawiya and invited him to allegiance, than Hussain said “Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi raji’un’ and may Allah have mercy on Muawiya and give him great reward.
(shia book)مقتل الحسين صفحه5 أبو مخنف الازدي

Comment: praying for kaafirs/mushriks is not allowed in islam.[Quran 9:113], but we find Hussain(ra) praying for Muawiya(ra), this proves that indeed hussain(ra) considered muawiya(ra) a muslim, unlike what shian e dajjal try to portray that if anyone fights Ahlebayt that person becomes a kaafir.


That is why we find that Ali(ra) didn’t tolerate that Muawiyah(ra) should be cursed by his supporters:

وقد أنكر على من يسب معاوية ومن معه فقال: “إنّي أكره لكم أن تكونوا سبّابين، ولكنّكم لو وصفتم أعمالهم، وذكرتم حالهم، كان أصوب في القول، وأبلغ في العذر، وقلتم مكان سبّكم إياهم: اللّهم احقن دماءنا ودماءهم، وأصلح ذات بيننا وبينهم” [نهج البلاغة: ص323

1. Nahj Al-Balagha”, Ali is reported to have rejected the action of those who insult Mu’awiya and those with them, and told them:  “I hate for you to be from those who insult, but rather describe their deeds … and say instead of your insults: O Allah, preserve our blood and theirs, and bring peace between us and them“[Nahjul balagha page 323]


خرج حجر بن عدي وعمرو إبن الحمق يظهر أن البراءة واللعن من أهل الشام، فأرسل اليهما علي إن كفا عما يبلغني عنكما. فأتياه فقالا: يا أمير المؤمنين السنا محقين ؟ قال: بلا. قالا: أو ليسوا مبطلين ؟: قال بلا. قالا: فلم منعتنا من شتمهم ؟. قال (عليه السلام): كرهت لكم أن تكونوا لعانين شتامين تشتمون وتتبرؤن، ولكن لو وصفتم مساوي أعمالهم فقلتم: من سيرتهم كذا وكذا، ومن عملهم كذا وكذا، كان أصوب في القول، و (لو) قلتم مكان لعنكم أياهم وبراءتكم منهم: اللهم أحقن دماءنا ودماءهم، وأصلح ذات بيننا وبينهم

2. Hijr ibn Adi and Amr ibn Al-Hamq came out declaring dissociation from and curses upon the people of Shaam(muawiya and his supporters), so Ali sent for them telling them abstain from what I have heard you do. So they came to him and said: O Amir Al Moemineenm aren’t we upon the Truth? He said: Yes

They said: And aren’t they upon Falseness? He said: Yes

They asked: So why are you stopping us from insulting them?

He (‘Alaihi Al salam) said: I hated for you to be [from those who] curse, insult, but rather describe their wrongful deeds and say: from their seerah is so and so, and from their actions is so and so, it would have been more correct in speech, and had said instead of your curses and dissociation from them: O Allah, preserve our blood and theirs, and bring peace between us and them“.[( “Waqi`ah Siffeen” by NaSr bin MazaaHim Al-Minqaree, who is a shee`ah. Al-Najaashee said: “his path is striaight”);(al akbar al tawaal, page 165, under the heading battle of siffin)]

Comment: Now this was the command of Ali(ra) to his supporters , he HATED that his opponents(Ahle shaam , group of Muawiya) be cursed. But what we find that the shian e dajjal of present days, practicing what was hated by Ali(ra), in the name of supporting Ali(ra). Indeed Ali(ra) is free from such filthy practices of Shian e dajjal. And those of them who are ignorants should repent and follow the true teachings of Ali(ra) .

Now keeping in this command of Ahlebayt in mind, let us present to you a shia hadees, which exposes shiane dajjal of that time and even this era.

بحارالأنوار ج : 2 ص : 76 80- ني، ]الغيبة للنعماني‏[ بهذا الإسناد عن البطائني عن القاسم الصيرفي عن ابن مسكان عن أبي عبد الله ع قال قوم يزعمون أني إمامهم و الله ما أنا لهم بإمام لعنهم الله كلما سترت سترا هتكوه أقول كذا و كذا فيقولون إنما يعني كذا و كذا إنما أنا إمام من أطاعني
From Abu Abdullah said: a group of people claim that I am their imam, while by Allah I am not an imam for them, may Allah curse them, whenever I protect privacy of something they reveal it. I say this and that and they say he really means this and that. I am only Imam for those who obey me. (bihar al anwar, vol 2)

Comment: So we find that those shian e dajjal who curse Muawiya(ra) , which was HATED by Ali(ra) , though may claim that Ahlebayt were their Imams, but the fact is that Ahlebayt disassociated themselves from these shian e dajjal.


قال أبو نصر هبة الله بن محمد: حدثني أبو الحسن بن كبرياء النوبختي (1) قال: بلغ الشيخ أبا القاسم رضي الله عنه أن بوابا كان له على الباب الاول قد لعن معاوية وشتمه، فأمر بطرده وصرفه عن خدمته، فبقي مدة طويلة يسأل في أمره فلا والله ما رده إلى خدمته، وأخذه بعض الاهل فشغله معه
ghaibah by trusi(ra) page 385-386

3. narrated abu nasr hibat allah ibn muhammed , narrated abul hasan ibn kibrya al-nubakhti he said: it was reported to Sheikh abu Qasem (R) that a door guard of his had cursed Muwaiya and abused him with his tongue. So he ordered him tobe dismissed from his service. So he stayed a long time asking about his matter, but no by god he never returned him to his service, and others in the family took him and offered him work.[ghaibah by trusi(ra) page 385-386]

Comment: It seems that because of the above teachings of Ali(ra), the embassador of imam al-mahdi(as) sacked the man because of cursing muawiya(ra).


The bayah(allegiance) of Hassan(ra) and then the bayah of Muawiyah(ra).

Al-Hasan (ra) received his Bay’ah in Ramadhan 40 Hijri, the people have chosen their leader and he was not appointed by his father.

قيل لعلي ألا تستخلف قال ما استخلف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأستخلف عليكم وإن يرد الله تبارك وتعالى بالناس خيرا فسيجمعهم على خيرهم كما جمعهم بعد نبيهم على خيرهم

They said to Ali (ra): Will you not appoint a successor? He said: The Prophet PBUH did not appoint a successor so that I may do so, If Allah wishes that something good happens to you then he will make you all gather around the best (Man) amongst you just like he made them gather around the best Man (i.e Abu Bakr) after their prophet PBUH.
Narrator: Shaqeeq.
Source: al-Haythami in Majama’a al Zawa’ed.
Rank: All narrators are that of the SAHIH except Ismail bin Abi al Harith and he is Trustworthy.

So these people went to give al-Hasan (ra) their Baya’ah and this was his reply:

عَنْ رِيَاحِ بْنِ الْحَارِثِ قَالَ : قَامَ الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ بَعْدَ وَفَاةِ عَلِي ، فَخَطَبَ النَّاسَ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ ، ثُمَّ قَالَ : إِنَّ مَا هُوَ آتٍ قَرِيبٌ ، وَإِنَّ أَمْرَ اللهِ وَاقِعٌ وَإِنْ كَرِهَ النَّاسُ ، وَإِنِّي وَاللهِ مَا أُحِبُّ أَنْ إِلَيَّ مِنْ أَمْرِ أُمَّةِ مُحَمَّدٍ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَا يَزِنُ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ خَرْدَلٍ يُهْرَاقُ فِيهَا مِحْجَمَةٌ مِنْ دَمٍ مُنْذُ عَلِمْت مَا يَنْفَعُنِي مِمَّا يَضُرُّنِي ، فَالْحَقُوا بِمَطِيِّكُمْ .

Al-Hasan (ra) told the people after the death of ‘Ali (ra): “What is to come is near, the decree of Allah will pass even if the people hate it, by Allah I do not like to rule any part of the nation of Muhammad SAWS if a small drop of blood will be shed since I know what will benefit me and what will harm me, so follow your paths.”
Source: Fadhael al-Sahaba by Ibn Hanbal 2/773 #1364, Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah 15/94 #3851, Hadith SAHIH.

After al-Hasan (ra) prayed on his father then buried him in Kufa, the people started offering him their pledge of allegiance and they insisted on him just like they insisted on his father before him but he quickly placed his own condition on the people of ‘Iraq:

و الله ما إبايعكم إلا على ما أقول لكم: فقالوا: ما هو؟ قال: تسالمون من سالمت و تحاربون من حاربت

Al-Hasan (ra) said: By Allah I will not receive your Baya’ah unless you follow what I say, they said: what is it? He said: to make peace with whom I make peace and to fight whom I fight.
Source: al-tabaqat, researched by Dr. Muhammad al-Sulami 1/286-287.

We can see that from the moment al-Hasan (ra) agreed and received his Baya’ah he began paving the way for a peaceful resolution. It’s also good to mention that al-Hasan (ra) was against the Fitnah since the beginning, he had told his father before:

يا أبت دع هذا فإن فيه سفك دماء المسلمين و وقوع الاختلاف بينهم

“O dear father, leave this matter, it will spill the blood of the Muslims and cause division among them.”
Source: al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah 7/229-230 copied from al-Murtada for al-Nadwi pg198.

So al-Hasan (ra) always opposed fighting his Muslim brothers although he had the power to fight and he had control over Mecca and Madinah and he had a great army, Jubayr bin Nufayr says:

جبير بن نفير قال: قلت للحسن بن علي إن الناس يزعمون أنك تريد الخلافة. فقال: كانت جماجم العرب بيدي يسالمون من سالمت و يحاربون من حاربت، فتركتها ابتغاء وجه الله، ثم أبتزها بأتياس أهل الحجاز؟!
البلاذري في أنساب الأشراف (3/49)، و طبقات ابن سعد، الطبقة الخامسة (ص 258) بسند جيد

I told al-Hasan bin ‘Ali: “The people claim that you are running after the Caliphate.” Al-Hasan said: “The skulls of the ‘Arab were in my hands, they would make peace with whom I make peace and they would fight whom I fight, I left it all to seek the face of Allah.” [Source: al-Baladhuri in Ansab al-Ashraf 3/49, Tabaqat ibn Sa’ad, the fifth Tabaqah pg258 with a good Isnad.]

Some people had sensed that al-Hasan (ra) would pursue a peaceful reconciliation so the trouble makers from al-Kufa tried to assassinate him during his prayer, he was stabbed but he survived it.

In the beginning al-Hasan (ra) showed that he was following in his father’s footsteps in this matter; he prepared an army to march to al-Sham, when Mu’awiyah (ra) heard this he also prepared his army and headed to al-‘Iraq, Mu’awiyah (ra) was badly wounded from a previous assassination attempt and as for al-Hasan (ra) there was another attempt on his life from his so called followers.

Then both parties started their negotiations in order to achieve peace and unite the nation as stated by these Ahadith:

Narrated Al-Hasan Al-Basri: By Allah, Al-hasan bin Ali led large battalions like mountains against muawiya. Amr bin Al-As said (to muawiya), “I surely see battalions which will not turn back before killing their opponents.” muawiya who was really the best of the two men said to him, “O ‘Amr! If these killed those and those killed these, who would be left for the jobs of the public, who would be left for their women, who would be left for their children?” Then muawiya sent two Quraishi men from the tribe of ‘Abd-i-Shams called ‘Abdur Rahman bin Sumura and Abdullah bin ‘Amir bin Kuraiz to Al-hasan saying to them, “Go to this man (i.e. Al-hasan) and negotiate peace with him and talk and appeal to him.” So, they went to Al-hasan and talked and appealed to him to accept peace. Al-hasan said, “We, the offspring of ‘Abdul Muttalib, have got wealth and people have indulged in killing and corruption (and money only will appease them).” They said to Al-hasan, “muawiya offers you so and so, and appeals to you and entreats you to accept peace.” Al-hasan said to them, “But who will be responsible for what you have said?” They said, “We will be responsible for it.” So, what-ever Al-hasan asked of them they said, “We will be responsible for it.” So, Al-hasan concluded a peace treaty with muawiya. [Source: Sahih al-Bukhari.]

And this Hadith: Narrated Al-Hasan Al-Basri: When Al-hasan bin ‘Ali moved with army units against muawiya, ‘Amr bin AL-As said to muawiya, “I see an army that will not retreat unless and until the opposing army retreats.” muawiya said, “(If the Muslims are killed) who will look after their children?” ‘Amr bin Al-As said: I (will look after them). On that, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amir and ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Samura said, “Let us meet Muawaiya and suggest peace.”[Source: Sahih al-Bukhari.]

Sahi bukhari 6.367: Narrated Habib bin Abi Thabit: I went to Abu Wail to ask him (about those who had rebelled against `Ali). On that Abu Wail said, “We were at Siffin (a city on the bank of the Euphrates, the place where the battle took place between `Ali and Muawiya) A man said, “Will you be on the side of those who are called to consult Allah’s Book (to settle the dispute)?” `Ali said, ‘Yes (I agree that we should settle the matter in the light of the Qur’an).” ‘ Some people objected to `Ali’s agreement and wanted to fight.

جعل علي على مقدمة أهل العراق قيس بن سعد بن عبادة وكانوا أربعين ألفا بايعوه على الموت فقتل علي فبايعوا الحسن بن علي بالخلافة وكان لا يحب القتال ولكن كان يريد أن يشترط على معاوية لنفسه فعرف ان قيس بن سعد لا يطاوعه على الصلح فنزعه وأمر عبد الله بن عباس فاشترط لنفسه كما اشترط الحسن.[فتح الباري ج13/ص67-68] وقال الحافظ ابن حجر العسقلاني :أخرجه الطبري بسند صحيح.

‘Ali bin abi Talib appointed Qays ibn Sa’ad bin ‘Ubadah on the front to lead the army of ‘Iraq and they were forty thousand who gave him a pledge that they would obey until death, then ‘Ali died so they gave a Baya’ah to al-Hasan bin ‘Ali and he did not like fighting but he wanted to make a condition on Mu’awiyah for himself, he knew that Qays wouldn’t accept this reconciliation so he removed him and appointed ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas who also stated the same condition for himself as al-Hasan.
Source: Fath al-Bari 13/67-68 Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said: In al-Tabari with a Sahih chain.

أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ اللهِ بنُ بَكْرٍ[ثقة]، حَدَّثَنَا حَاتِمُ بنُ أَبِي صَغِيْرَةَ[ثقة]، عَنْ عَمْرِو بنِ دِيْنَارٍ[ثقة]:أَنَّ مُعَاوِيَةَ كَانَ يَعلَمُ أَنَّ الحَسَنَ أَكْرَهُ النَّاسِ لِلْفِتْنَةِ، فَلَمَّا تُوُفِّيَ عَلِيٌّ بَعثَ إِلَى الحَسَنِ، فَأَصْلَحَ مَا بَينَهُ وَبَينَهُ سِرّاً، وَأَعْطَاهُ مُعَاوِيَةُ عَهداً إِنْ حَدَثَ بِهِ حَدَثٌ وَالحَسَنُ حَيٌّ لَيُسَمِّيَنَّهُ، وَلَيَجْعَلَنَّ الأَمْرَ إِلَيْهِ.فلما توثق من الحسن،قَالَ ابْنُ جَعْفَرٍ: وَاللهِ إِنِّيْ لَجَالِسٌ عِنْدَ الحَسَنِ، إِذْ أَخذْتُ لأَقُوْمَ، فَجَذَبَ بِثَوْبِي، وَقَالَ: اقعد يَا هنَاهُ اجلِسْ!
فَجلَسْتُ، فَقَالَ: إِنِّيْ قَدْ رَأَيْتُ رَأْياً، وَإِنِّي أُحبُّ أَنْ تُتَابِعَنِي عَلَيْهِ!
قُلْتُ: مَا هُوَ؟
قَالَ: قَدْ رَأَيْتُ أَنْ أَعمَدَ إِلَى المَدِيْنَةِ، فَأَنْزِلَهَا، وَأُخَلِّيَ بَيْنَ مُعَاوِيَةَ وَبَيْنَ هَذَا الحَدِيْثِ، فَقَدْ طَالتِ الفِتْنَةُ، وَسقطت فيها الدِّمَاءُ، وَقُطعَتِ فيها الأَرْحَامُ وَ قطعت السُّبُلُ، وَعُطِّلَتِ الفُرُوْجُ-يعني الثغور-،قَالَ ابْنُ جَعْفَرٍ: جَزَاكَ اللهُ خَيراً عَنْ أُمَّةِ مُحَمَّدٍ، فَأَنَا مَعَكَ على هذا الحديث.
فَقَالَ الحسن: ادْعُ لِي الحُسَيْنَ،فبعث الى حسين فأتاه، فَقَالَ: أَيْ أَخِي!اني قَدْ رَأَيْتُ رأيا واني أحب أن تتابعني عليه .قال:ما هو؟قال:فقص عليه الذي قال لابن جعفر،قَالَ الحسين: أُعِيذُكَ بِاللهِ أَنْ تُكذِّبَ عَلِيّاً في قبره، وَتُصَدِّقَ مُعَاوِيَةَ.
فَقَالَ الحَسَنُ: وَاللهِ مَا أَردْتُ أَمراً قَطُّ إِلاَّ خَالَفْتَنِي الى غيره، وَاللهِ لَقَدْ هَمَمْتُ أَنْ أَقذِفَكَ فِي بَيْتٍ، فَأُطَيِّنَهُ عَلَيْكَ، حَتَّى أَقْضِيَ أَمْرِي.
فَلَمَّا رَأَى الحُسَيْنُ غَضَبَهُ، قَالَ: أَنْتَ أَكْبَرُ وَلَدِ عَلِيٍّ، وَأَنْتَ خَلِيفَتُهُ، وَأَمْرُنَا لأَمْرِكَ تَبَعٌ،فافعل ما بدا لك.
فَقَامَ الحَسَنُ، فَقَالَ: أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ! إِنِّيْ كُنْتُ أَكْرَهُ النَّاسِ لأَوِّلِ هَذَا الحديث، وَأَنَا أَصلَحْتُ آخِرَهُ لذي حق أديت اليه حقه أحق به مني،أو حق جدت به لصلاح أمة محمد،إِنَّ اللهَ قَدْ وَلاَّكَ يَا مُعَاوِيَةُ هَذَا الحَدِيْثَ لِخيرٍ يَعْلَمُهُ عِنْدَكَ، أَوْ لِشَرٍّ يَعْلَمُهُ فِيكَ: {وَإِنْ أَدْرِي لَعَلَّهُ فِتْنَةٌ لَكُمْ وَمَتَاعٌ إِلَى حِيْنٍ} [الأَنْبِيَاءُ: 111].ثُمَّ نَزَلَ.
طبقات ابن سعد[ج 6ص384-385] واسناده صحيح وعنه الذهبي في سير أعلام النبلاء (ج3 ص264-265) والمزي في تهذيب الكمال [ج6ص247] والطبراني في الكبير(ج 3ص26) و”أنساب الأشراف للبلاذري ج 1ص386″ وتاريخ دمشق ج13 ص275.

‘Amro bin Deenar said: Mu’awiyah used to know that al-Hasan hated this Fitnah the most, so when ‘Ali died he sent a letter to al-Hasan and they reconciled and he made peace with him secretly, Mu’awiyah made an oath to al-Hasan that if anything should happen to him while al-Hasan is alive he would be the one to succeed him, they agreed on this. Ibn Ja’afar said: By Allah I was with al-Hasan once and I decided to go but he grabbed my clothes and told me:
“Sit down for a short time, I have reached an opinion and I would love it if you were to follow me in this.”
I said: “What is it?” He said: “I decided to return to al-Madinah and leave this to Mu’awiyah because this Fitnah has to end and it has taken long enough, much blood has been spilled, relations were cut and Jihad was stopped.” Ibn Ja’afar said: “Jazak-Allah Khayr! You have done the nation of Muhammad(saw) good and I will follow you in this.” Al-Hasan said: “call my brother Husein for me.” So he came and he said to him: “My brother, I have seen an opinion and I would love for you to follow me in this.” And he repeated what he told Ibn Ja’afar but al-Husein said: “I seek refuge in Allah for you! You belie ‘Ali in his grave and believe Mu’awiyah!?”
Al-Hasan said: “By Allah I never wanted something unless you opposed me in it! I feel like leaving you in a house until I am done with this matter!” When al-Husein saw his brother’s anger he said: “You are the oldest of ‘Ali’s children, you are his successor, our affair is in your hands and we shall follow you, so do what seems right to you.”
Al-Hasan then announced it to the people and said: O people! I hated this matter since the beginning but I have fixed it and I do this for the nation of Muhammad, O Mu’awiyah! Allah has given you Wilayah(government) of this matter for the goodness he sees in you or for an evil he knows within you, (And I know not; perhaps it is a trial for you and enjoyment for a time.) [21:111]. [Source: Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad 6/384-385 with a Sahih chain.]

And this Hadith:

عن أنس بن سيرين قال: قال الحسن بن علي يوم كلم معاوية ما بين جابرس وجابلق : رجل جده نبي غيري وإني رأيت أن أصلح بين أمة محمد صلى الله عليه و سلم وكنت أحقهم بذاك ألا إنا قد بايعنا معاوية ولا أدري لعله فتنة لكم ومتاع إلى حين

From Anas bin Sireen: al-Hasan bin ‘Ali said on the day he spoke to Mu’awiyah between Jabirs and Jabulq: I am the one whose grandfather is a Prophet and I made up my mind to unify the nation of Muhammad SAWS and I am the most worthy of doing this, we had given Mu’awiyah a pledge of allegiance and I do not know perhaps it is a trial for you and enjoyment for a time. [Source: Fadael al-Sahaba for Ahmad ibn Hanbal 2/769, Hadith Sahih.]

In another Hadith:

-عن ابن سيرين أن الحسن بن علي رضي الله عنه قال : لو نظرتم ما بين جابرس إلى جابلق ما وجدتم رجلا جده نبي غيري وأخي وإني أرى أن تجتمعوا على معاوية { وإن أدري لعله فتنة لكم ومتاع إلى حين } .

Ibn Sireen: al-Hasan bin ‘Ali said: If you look between Jabirs and Jabulq you will never find one whose grandfather is a prophet except me and my brother, and I see that you must all be united around Mu’awiyah (I do not know perhaps it is a trial for you and enjoyment for a time). [Source: Musannaf ‘Abdul-Razzaq 11/452.]

عَنْ حَبِيبِ بْنِ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، قَالَ : أَتَيْتُ أَبَا وَائِلٍ فقال لي:اسْتَخْلَفَ النَّاسُ الْحَسَنَ بْنَ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا ، فَبَعَثَ الْحَسَنُ بِالْبَيْعَةِ إِلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ، وَكَتَبَ بِذَلِكَ الْحَسَنُ إِلَى قَيْسِ بْنِ سَعْدٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا ، فَقَامَ قَيْسُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ فِي أَصْحَابِهِ ، فَقَالَ : يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ، أَتَاكُمْ أَمْرَانِ ، لاَبُدَّ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَحَدِهِمَا : دُخُولٌ فِي فِتْنَةٍ ، أَوْ قَتْلٌ مَعَ غَيْرِ إِمَامٍ ، فَقَالَ النَّاسُ : مَا هَذَا ؟ فَقَالَ : الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ قَدْ أَعْطَى الْبَيْعَةَ مُعَاوِيَةَ ، فَرَجَعَ النَّاسُ ، فَبَايَعُوا مُعَاوِيَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ، وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِمُعَاوِيَةَ هَمٌّ إِلاَّ الَّذِينَ بِالنَّهْرَوَانِ ، فَجَعَلُوا يَتَسَاقَطُونَ عَلَيْهِ فَيُبَايِعُونَهُ ، حَتَّى بَقِيَ مِنْهُمْ ثَلاَثُمِائَةٍ وَنَيِّفٍ ، وَهُمْ أَصْحَابُ النَّخِيلَةِ .المطالب العالية بزوائد المسانيد الثمانية للحافظ احمد بن علي بن حجر العسقلاني[52/5]،قال ابن حجر العسقلاني: هَذَا الْإِسْنَادُ صَحِيحٌ،وقال البوصيري:رواه إسحاق بن راهويه بسند صحيح[اتحاف الخيرة المهرة بزوائد المسانيد العشرة 17/8].

Habib bin abi Thabit said: I came to Abu Wael who told me: the people gave the pledge to al-Hasan bin ‘Ali may Allah be pleased with them, then al-Hasan sent his Baya’ah to Mu’awiyah may Allah be pleased with him, al-Hasan then wrote to Qays bin Sa’ad may Allah be pleased with them who then stood between his companions and said: “O people! You are given one of two choices, entering a Fitnah or death without an Imam.” The people said: “What is that?” He replied: “al-Hasan bin ‘Ali has given his allegiance to Mu’awiyah.” Then the people returned and gave the Baya’ah to Mu’awiyah may Allah be pleased with him and he was deeply concerned about the people of Nahrawan, many of those came to him to offer him the pledge and only about three hundred remained, they were the people of Nakhilah. [Source: al-Matalib al-‘Aliyah bi Zawaed al-Masaneed al-Thamaniyah 5/52 and Ibn Hajar said SAHIH, al-Bousayri said in Ithaf al-Kheerah al-Maharah bi Zawaed al-Masaneed al-‘Asharah 8/17 “narrated by Ishaq bin Rahaweih with a Sahih chain.”].

We read in Shia books that Hasan(ra) gave pledge of allegiance to Muawiya(ra). [Manaqib Aal Abi Talib, vol 4, page 40] ; Similarly at another place we read that both Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) gave Muawiya(ra) pledge of allegiance. [Rijaal al-Kashi, page 86].

We read in Shia book, regarding the decision of Hassan(ra).

وروى الكليني عن أبى جعفر عليه السلام قال : والله ، للذى صنعه الحسن بن على عليهما السلام كان خيرا لهذه الامة مما طلعت عليه الشمس . ( الكافي 8 / 330 وراجع ايضا بحار الا نوار 44 / 25 )
Abi Ja’far (Muhammad Al-Baqir) said: ‘By Allah, what Al-Hassan Ibn Ali, peace be upon him, has done (given pledge to allegiance) was better, the best that could have happen to this Ummah‘ (Al-Kafi 330 / 8 and in Al-Bihaar 25 / 44)


How did some of the supporters(Shia) of Imam Hasan react after he intended to pledge allegiance to Muawiyah(ra).

We read in Shia book:

شيخ مفيد در اين مورد مىگويد: امام براى تشخصى ميزان فرمانبرى اصحابش خطبه اى خواند و تصميم خود به صلح را بيان داشت، زمزمه هايى بلند شد كه اين مرد كافر شده است از اينرو به خيمه امام هجوم آورده و آنرا غارت كردند و مرد تبهكارى به نام عبدالرحمان بن عبدالله بن جعال ازدى بر امام حمله كرد و عبا را از دوش ايشان برداشت، امام را از آنجا حركت دادند، چون امام به مظلم ساباط رسيد مردى از بنى اسد بنام جراح بن سنان دشنه اى بيرون كشيد و افسار قاطر امام را گرفت، و فرياد زد: الله اكبر اى حسن تو هم مانند پدرت به خدا شرك آوردى، و با دشنه اش ران امام را دريد
Shaikh Mufeed says at this point : The Imam (as) was giving sermon at this point that what should be the standard/criterion for my companions about my obedience, and mentioned his intention about peace treaty, than voices were raised from everywhere that this man has become kafir. Due to this, they ran towards the tent and looted it. They took off the cloak of the Imam and took Imam from there. When Imam reached Sabat, than a man from bani asad named Jaraah bin sanaan took out his sword and caught hold of the reins of his mule, and said : O Hasan, by God you have become kafir like your father. (naudhubillah) Then he stabbed him in the thigh. [
Sahifa Imam Hasan, by Jawad Qayumi Isfahani, p. 20]

We read in the Shia book that, Imam Hassan said :

به خدا قسم من معاويه را از اينها بهتر مىدانم كه خود را شيعه من شمارند، و آهنگ جانم را دارند، و خيمه ام را غارت مىكنند و اموالم را مىبرند، بخدا اگر بتوانم از معاويه پيمانى بگيرم كه خون ريخته نشود و پيروانم و خاندانم در امان بمانند، برايم بهتر است كه بدست اين مردم كشته شوم، و خاندانم نابود گردد

By God, I consider Muawiyah better than these people who claim to be Shias, and want to take my life. They plunder my tent and loot my wealth. By God, if  I took promise from Muwaiyah that he will not kill me, and that my family and followers will live in peace, it is better than that he kill me and my family is destroyed. [Sahifa Imam Hasan, by Jawad Qayumi Isfahani, p. 21]

فنزل دون جسرها مما يلي ناحية الكوفة ، فخطب الناس فقال: إني أرجو أن أكون أنصح خلف لخلقه، وما أنا محتمل على أحد ضغينة ولا حقداً ولا مريدٌ به غائلة ولا سوءاً . ألا وإن ما تكرهون في الجماعة خير لكم مما تحبون في الفرقة ، ألا وإني ناظر لكم خيراً من نظركم لأنفسكم ، فلا تخالفوا أمري ، ولا تردوا عليَّ ، غفر الله لي ولكم . فنظر بعض الناس إلى بعض وقالوا: عزم والله على صلح معاوية وضعف وخار ، وشدوا على فسطاطه فدخلوه وانتزعوا مصلاهُ من تحته وانتهبوا ثيابه ! ثم شد عليه عبد الرحمن بن عبد الله بن أبي جعال الأزدي ، فنزع مطرفه عن عاتقه فبقى متقلداً سيفه(فدهش ثم رجع ذهنه) فركب فرسه وأطاف به الناس فبعضهم يعجِّزه ويضعِّفه ، وبعضهم ينحِّي أولئك عنه ويمنعهم منه !
وانطلق رجل من بني أسد بن خزيمة من بني نصر بن الهون بن الحارث بن ثعلبة بن دودان بن أسد ، ويقال له الجرَّاح بن سنان وكان يرى رأي الخوارج ، إلى مظلم ساباط فقعد فيه ينتظره ، فلما مرَّ الحسن به دنا من دابته فأخذ بلجامها ، ثم أخرج مغولاً كان معه وقال: أشركت يا حسن كما أشرك أبوك من قبل ! وطعنه بالمِغْوَل في أصل فخذه فشق في فخذه شقاً كاد يصل إلى العظم ، وضرب الحسن وجهه ثم اعتنقا وخرَّا إلى الأرض ووثب عبد كلام بن الحمل الطائي وبعضهم يقول عبد الله بن الحصل فنزع المغول من يد الجراح ، وأخذ ظبيان بن عمارة التميمي بأنفه فقطعه، وضرب بيده إلى قطعة آجرة فشدخ بها وجهه ورأسه حتى مات

Al-Hasan (ra) told the people in his sermon: “I wish that I could be the best of Allah’s creations at giving advice to his creations, I bear no hatred or malice towards anyone and I wish no one any harm. What you people hate about the Jama’ah(Unity) is actually much better than what you love about Firqah(division). I see what is best for you better than what you see is best for yourselves so do not disobey me and do not reject my sayings, may Allah forgive us all.”
The people looked at each other and said: “By Allah he has made up his mind to make peace with Mu’awiyah, he has become weak and feeble!” So they all jumped at him and stole his belongings and then ‘Abdul-Rahman bin ‘Abdullah bin abi Ja’al al-Azdi tore away his robe, he managed to keep his sword and he mounted his horse but they surrounded him, some were trying to pull him down and some were trying to protect him by pushing them away. Al-Jarrah bin Sinan who was a man who saw the opinion of the Khawarij took out a sickle and laid in ambush for al-Hasan so when he passed by him the man said: “You have committed Shirk(Polytheism) O Hasan just your father before you committed shirk!” He stabbed him with the sickle in his thigh and it almost penetrated the bone, al-Hasan hit him on the face and grabbed him so they both fell down, ‘Abd-Kalam bin al-Hamal al-Taee jumped on the man and took away his sickle and Thabiyan bin ‘Imarah al-Tamimi grabbed the man’s nose and cut it then killed him, al-Hasan was then carried to al-Madaen…” [Source: Ansab al-Ashraf by al-Baladhuri (manuscript) copied from Marwiyat Khilafat Mu’awiyah pg142.]

We read that:

عن سفيان بن الليل قال : ” قلت للحسن بن علي لما قدم من الكوفة إلى المدينة : يا مذل المؤمنين ، قال : لا تقل ذلك فإني سمعت رسول الله (ص) يقول : لا تذهب الأيام والليالي حتى يملك معاويةفعلمت أن أمر الله واقع فكرهت أن تهراق بيني وبينه دماء المسلمين

From Sufian bin Allayl he said: “I said to Hasan bin Ali when he come from Kufa to Medina. O you who humiliated the believers. He said: do not say this for I heard the prophet of Allah (pbuh) say: the days and the nights will not go until Muwaiya becomes a king so I knew that the matter is happening and I hated the blood of the muslims be spilled between me and him. [Al bidaya , v. 8, p. 131]

Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn Jarir Al-Rustum Al-Tabari (the Shia scholar, not Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn Jarir Ibn Al-Yazeed Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari, the famous Sunni Muslim historian] says in his ‘Dalaa’il Al-Imamah’:

[…] ‘I have seen Al-Hassan Ibn Ali (Ibn Abi Talib) when he gave the authority to Mu’awiyah (pledged allegiance to Mu’awiyah!). Hujr Ibn ‘Adi approached (Al-Hassan) and said: “Peace be upon you who humiliated the believers.”Upon that Al-Hassan replied: “Whatever I am, I did not harmed them, rather I the one who honoured the believers […] [Dalaa’il Al-Imamah]

في رواية (شرح نهج البلاغة لابن أبي الحديد : 16 /15) نقلها السيد المرتضى ـ رحمة الله عليه ـ أنّ حجر بن عدي اعترض على الإمام (عليه السلام) بعد موافقته على الصلح وقال له : « سوّدت وجوه المؤمنين » فأجابه الإمام (عليه السلام) : « ما كلُّ أحد يحبُّ ما تحبّ ولا رأيه كرأيك ، وإنّما فعلتُ ما فعلتُ إبقاءً عليكم »
Al-Mortadha in his ‘Sharh’ of Nahj Al-Balagha (15 / 16) narrated that Hujr Ibn ‘Adi OBJECTED when Al-Hassan Ibn Ali (Ibn Abi Talib) gave the authority to Mu’awiyah (pledged allegiance to Mu’awiyah!). He said to him: You have BLACKNED (i.e. humiliated) the face of the believers.”

Ayatullat Al-Radhi  mentions a similar narration, with the difference that Hujr addressed Al-Hassan with “You who have BLACKENED the face of the believers.” (Source is ‘Bihar Al-Dhulamaat’ i.e. ‘Al-Anwaar’) [Screen shot]

At another place too we read that a Shia of Hassan(ra) insulted Hassan(ra) in the similar manner, because he gave pledge of allegiance to Muawiya(ra). [Manaqib Aal Abi Talib, vol 4, page 41] .


It was Muawiyah(ra) who approached to peace treaty and Hassan(ra) accepted it whole heartedly, even though he had power to deny it:

1. “Narrated Al-Hasan Al-Basri: (By Allah, Al-Hasan bin Ali led large battalions like mountains against Mu’awiyah. Amr bin Al-As said (to Mu’awiyah), "I surely see battalions which will not turn back before killing their opponents." Mu’awiyah who was really the best of the two men said to him, "O 'Amr! If these killed those and those killed these, who would be left with me for the jobs of the public, who would be left with me for their women, who would be left with me for their children?" Then Mu’awiyah sent two Quraishi men from the tribe of 'Abd-i-Shams called 'Abdur Rahman bin Sumura and Abdullah bin 'Amir bin Kuraiz to Al-Hasan saying to them, "Go to this man (i.e. Al-Hasan) and negotiate peace with him and talk and appeal to him." So, they went to Al-Hasan and talked and appealed to him to accept peace. Al-Hasan said, "We, the offspring of 'Abdul Muttalib, have got wealth and people have indulged in killing and corruption (and money only will appease them)." They said to Al-Hasan, "Mu’awiyah offers you so and so, and appeals to you and entreats you to accept peace." Al-Hasan said to them, "But who will be responsible for what you have said?" They said, "We will be responsible for it." So, whatever Al-Hasan asked they said, "We will be responsible for it for you." So, Al-Hasan concluded a peace treaty with Mu’awiyah. Al-Hasan (Al-Basri) said: I heard Abu Bakr saying, "I saw Allah's Apostle on the pulpit and Al-Hasan bin 'Ali was by his side. The Prophet was looking once at the people and once at Al-Hasan bin 'Ali saying, 'This son of mine is a Saiyid (i.e. a noble) and may Allah make peace between two big groups of Muslims through him." [Saheeh Al-Bukhari, Book of “Peacemaking,” vol.2, #2557]

2. It was Muawiyah (ra) who first offered Hasan (ra) for “Sulah” so that Civil War, Anarchy and Killing of Muslims by Muslims in the state came to an end. Hasan (ra) accepted this Sulah. [(Jama-ul-Fawaid Pg. 843, Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1 Pg. 372-373, Muqadma Ibn-e-Khildoon Pg. 458)]

3. It was narrated by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his “Isaba” (1/499) from the way: Yaqub ibn Sufyan – Saeed ibn Mansur– Awn ibn Musa from Hilal ibn Habbab, which said: “al-Hasan gathered chiefs of people of Iraq in this house – house of Madain. He said to them: “You have pledged allegiance to me. You gave me a word and pledged allegiance upon terms that you are going to make peace treaty with whom I would make such. And you would fight against those whom I would fight with. Now I am making pledge of allegiance to Muawiyah, listen to him, and obey him”. [Isaba” (1/499)]

Narrators: Abu Yusuf al-Fasawe al-Farisi, hafidh, thiqat. “Taqrib” #7817; Abu Uthman Saeed ibn Mansur ibn Shubah al-Khorasani, author of books and thiqat. “Taqrib” #2399.  Awn ibn Musa was thiqat.  “Tarih ibn Maeen – Rawayatu ad-Dure” #505, Darul Mamun lit Turas, Damascus; “Tarehul Asmau Thiqat” ibn Shahin #1094, Darus-Salafiyah, Kuveyt. Hilal ibn Habbab was saduq “Taqrib” #7334.

4. Suleman went to Hasan and said “Our surprise knows no bounds when we see that you have rendered allegiance to Muawiyah in face of the fact that you had a strong army from Kufa, of 40,000 men, and warriors from the people of Hijaz and Basrah. If I was in your place, I would not have done like this. Hasan replied “I am not going to say anything besides that God has blessed us with peace in unity. [shia books(Maqtal Abi Makhnaf, Page 13) (Imam Hasan, Muhammad Ali Al Haj Salmin , page 157)]

5. It is stated in Al Ash sharah , that Sadeer said that he went to Imam Baqir once and asked “How can it be possible in face of the fact that Hasan rendered allegiance to Muawiyah.” Baqir said “Keep silent, Sadeer. What Hasan did was good.”[ Imam Hasan, Muhammad Ali Al Haj Salmin, Page 166]

6. Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) paid allegiance(bayah) to Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) at 40 H, that is why it is called Aamul Jamaat (عام الجماعۃ – the year of jamaat)  , and Ibn Jarir and other scholars say that it happened at the beginning of 41 H. [Al Bidaya wa al nihaya, Volume 8, Page 26-27]

Comment: From these reports present in shia and sunni books we find that, Hassan(ra) gave bayah, to Muawiya(ra), even when he had all the power to fight. People have misconception that hassan(ra) just made a peace treaty but didn’t give bayah. But in the light of above reports we find that it’s a lie spread by shian e dajjal. Now the question arises is that how could Hassan(ra) accept Muawiya(ra) as his leaders, even if it was politically because shias say that even the poltical ruler is made Allah. So handing over the seat of Khilafah to muawiya(ra) when he had all the sources to fight and even doing his bayah proves that hassan(ra) considered Muawiya(ra) as muslim. Prophet(saw) also made peace treaty with kuffar but he never gave them authority to take decision for muslims regarding political issues of the Muslims, at that time Muslims were governed by Prophet(saw), so why then Hassan(ra) handed-over the governorship to Muawiya(ra)? And atleast the shias here can’t say that hassan(ra) was under taqiyyah at that time.


These conditions were set by Hassan(ra) and he not breaking this treaty proves that Muawiyah(ra) followed the conditions:

Shia book Kashaful ghummah

سم الله الرحمان الرحيم هذا ما صالح عليه الحسن بن على بن أبي طالب معاوية بن أبي سفيان صالحه على أن يسلم إليه ولاية أمر المسلمين على ان يعمل فيهم بكتاب الله تعالى وسنة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وسيرة الخلفاء الراشدين

The conditions of peace between Hasan and Muawiya are described: In the name of Allah , the beneficent, the most Merciful. These are the conditions of peace between Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Talib and Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan. The first condition is that you should follow Quran , Sunnah and the seerah of the righteous Caliphs.

Ali bin Esa Al-Arbili , Kashaful Ghumma vol. 2, p. 45

Same thing is also present in Ibn `Aqil, al-Nasa’ih al-Kafiya, p. 156.

Similar reports are present in Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 10, p. 115.. Jila ul Ayun, Page 232

Comment: Now these were the conditions of treaty, had it been that Muawiya(ra) would have violated it, then surely Hassan(ra) would have considered that th treaty was nullified and he would have either retaliated or would have fought him. For about 10 years Hassan(ra) remained alive after this treaty, he not complaining about conditions of treaty being violated and no action from him(if that happened) clearly shows that, Muawiya(ra) followed those conditions made in the treaty. We know that Prophet(saw) too made a treaty with kuffar, but everyone knows what happened when disbelievers violated the treaty.


That is why we find that Ahlebayt obeyed commands of Muawiya(ra):

Imam Hussain participated in the battle of Constantinople which took place in 51 AH in the era of Muawiyah . al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya vol. 8 p. 150

Comment: It was because muawiya(ra) ruled according to Quran, sunnah and seerah of rightly guided caliphs, that Hussain(ra) participated in the battles in the era of Muawiyah(ra).

تاريخ الإسلام، للذهبي، 5/ 104
وقال ابن عساكر : وفد الحسين على معاوية وغزا القسطنطينية مع يزيد .
“And Ibn Asakir says: Al-Hussein came to Mu’awiyah (who was the ruler) and fought under his leadership ALONG with Yazeed and opened constantinople”. [Tarikh Al-Islam by Al-Dhahabi, 104/5].


How Ahlebayt used to be treated in the rule of Muawiya(ra):


1890 – أنبأنا أبو محمد عبد الله بن محمد بن ناجية قال : حدثنا أبو عمرو عثمان بن عبد الله بن عمرو بن عثمان بن عفان قال : حدثنا عبد الله بن لهيعة قال : سمعت أبا الزبير ، يحدث عن جابر بن عبد الله قال : كنا يوما عند معاوية وقد تفرشت قريش وصناديد العرب ومواليها أسفل سريره وعقيل بن أبي طالب والحسن بن علي رضي الله عنهم عن يمينه ويساره

(1890)I heard Abu Zubair speak on behalf of Jaber bin Abdullah who said: We were with Mu’awiyah and the people of Quraish, other major Arabs, and their servants, were all gathered beneath his throne, with Aqeel bin abi Talib and Alhasan bin Ali on his right and left. [Al-Sharee’ah by Al-Ajurri, died in 360 AH]

Comment: We find here the treatment Ahlebayt used to receive during the rule of Muawiya(ra) , we see the major Arabs were beneath the throne of Muawiya(ra), but Hassan(ra) and Aqeel(ra) were on his right and left.

1891 – وأنبأنا ابن ناجية قال : حدثنا زيد بن أخزم الطائي أبو طالب قال : حدثنا محمد بن الفضل السدوسي عارم قال : حدثني مهدي بن ميمون ، عن محمد بن عبد الله بن أبي يعقوب قال : كان معاوية رحمه الله إذا لقي الحسين بن علي رضي الله عنهما ، قال : مرحبا بابن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وأهلا ، ويأمر له بثلاثمائة ألف ويلقى ابن الزبير رضي الله عنه فيقول : مرحبا بابن عمة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وابن حواريه (1) ويأمر له بمائة ألف
1891 From Muhammad b. Abdullah b. Abi Yakoub he said: whenever Mu’awiya (Rahimahu Allah) met Al-Husien b. Ali (Radiya Allah ‘Anhuma) he used to say: Welcome is the son of the Messenger of Allah (salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam) and Greetings to him. And then he orders for him 300,000.

And he meets Ibn Al Zubayr (Radiya Allah ‘Anhu) and says: Welcome is the son of the Aunt of the Messenger of Allah (salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam), and the son of his disciple, and orders for him 100,000. .[Al-Sharee’ah by Al-Ajurri, died in 360 AH]
1892 – وأنبأنا ابن ناجية قال : حدثنا ابن الأسود ، يعني : الحسين بن علي بن الأسود العجلي قال : حدثنا عبيد الله بن موسى ، عن إسرائيل ، عن ثوير ، عن أبيه قال : انطلقت مع الحسن والحسين رضي الله عنهما وافدين إلى معاوية رحمه الله فأجازهما فقبلا
1892 From Thuwayr, from his father that he said: I went with Al Hasan and Al Husien (Radiya Allah ‘Anhuma) to Mu’awiya (Rahimahu Allah), so he gave them and they accepted.[Al-Sharee’ah by Al-Ajurri, died in 360 AH]

4. The nature of the difference or opposition that existed between Ali(ra) and Amir Muwaiya(ra) was not as is conceived by the muslims of today, which is due to their ignorance and lack of understanding of the facts. In order to arrive at a correct judgement we must not forget the fact that Ali’s brother Aqil bin Abu talib(ra) was Muawiya’s friend. Aqil bin Abu talib used to admonish Muawiya(ra) in the open court yet the later always indulged him. And Zeyad bin Abi sufyan, ther brother of Amir muawiya was appointed governor of Iran by Ali(ra). Ali(ra) fully trusted Zeyad bin Abu sufyan. ( History of Islam Vol 2 ,page 49 By Akbar Shah Najeebadi)

Muawiya(ra)’s reaction on death of Ali(ra) and Hassan(ra)

1. Shia scholar  al-sadooq’s book amali:

حدثنا محمد بن موسى بن المتوكل (رضي الله عنه)، قال: حدثنا محمد بن يحيى العطار، قال: حدثنا محمد بن الحسين بن أبي الخطاب، قال: حدثنا محمد بن سنان، عن المفضل بن عمر، عن يونس بن ظبيان، عن سعد بن طريف، عن الاصبغ ابن نباتة، قال: دخل ضرار بن ضمرة النهشلي على معاوية بن أبي سفيان، فقال له: صف لي عليا. قال: أو تعفيني. فقال: لا، بل صفه لي. فقال له ضرار: رحم الله عليا، كان والله فينا كأحدنا، يدنينا إذا أتيناه، ويجيبنا إذا سألناه، ويقربنا إذا زرناه، لا يغلق له دوننا باب، ولا يحجبنا عنه حاجب، ونحن والله مع تقريبه لنا وقربه منا، لا نكلمه لهيبته، ولا نبتديه لعظمته، فإذا تبسم فعن مثل اللؤلؤ المنظوم. فقال المعاوية: زدني من صفته. فقال ضرار: رحم الله عليا، كان والله طويل السهاد، قليل الرقاد، يتلو كتاب الله آناء الليل وأطراف النهار، ويجود لله بمهجته، ويبوء إليه بعبرته، لا تغلق له الستور، ولا يدخر عنا البدور، ولا يستلين الاتكاء، ولا يستخشن الجفاء، ولو رأيته إذ مثل في محرابه، وقد أرخى الليل سدوله، وغارت نجومه، وهو قابض على لحيته، يتململ تململ السليم (1)، ويبكي بكاء الحزين، وهو يقول: يا دنيا، إلي تعرضت، أم إلي تشوقت، هيهات هيهات لا حاجة لي فيك، أبنتك ثلاثا لا رجعة لي عليك. ثم يقول: واه واه لبعد السفر، وقلة الزاد، وخشونة الطريق. قال: فبكى معاوية، وقال: حسبك يا ضرار، كذلك كان والله علي، رحم الله أبا الحسن (

Translation: Dirar bin dhamrah al nahshali entered upon Muwaiya so muwaiya asked him to describe Ali to him. Dirar said: please pardon me from it. Muwaiya said but please do. So he said: May Allah have mercy upon Ali, he was amongst us as one of us, he brought us nearer if we came to him and answered us if we asked him and treats us well if we visited him. His door is not closed for us and no one stays as a barrier between us and him. And we, despite his closeness to us and his making us close to him, do not speak to him for his greatness and presence. Whenever he smiles it is like pearls.

Then Muwaiya said: tell me more. Dirar said: May Allah have mercy upon Ali, he was staying up late at night. Did not sleep much, he read the book of Allah in the middle of the night and the edges of the day. He was generous with his eyes (tears) and expressive in returning to his Lord. And he would not close a door, nor find soft the leaning nor find hard being alone. If you find him in his mihrab, deep in the night, you find him touching his beard, crying the crying of a sad person and says: O this life, to me you presented yourself or did you miss me. I have no need in you. Then he says: Oh Oh for the distance of travel and the lack of provisions and the harshness of the road. Then Mu’awiyah weeped, and said: Sufficient is that O Dirar, verily, by Allah, that is how Ali was. May Allah shower Abu Al-Hasan with Mercy” [ Al-Amali by Al-Sadooq 2nd tradition in The 91st Majlis page 724] Also [bihar al anwar, 41/16]

Similar reports also present in other Shia books [Nahjul BalaghaManaqib Ahle bayt]

Similar report in sunni books:

Abu Salih narrated that once Dirar bin Damrah Al-Kinani visited Hadrat Muawiyah (may God be pleased with him) who asked him to narrate the good qualities of Hadrat Ali (may God be pleased with him). Dirar requested of Hadrat Muawiyah, O Amir of the believers! Please excuse me from this!. Hadrat Muawiyah said, I will not excuse you unless you narrate the good qualities of Ali. Dirar said, If I am compelled to do so then listen! By Allah! He was a man of great courage and strength. He used to talk decisively and govern justly. The knowledge flowed out of him copiously and the wisdom appeared upon his front teeth (he always talked wisely). He was averse to the worldly ends and renounced them, but loved the night and its darkness (loved to worship in the darkness of the night). I swear by Allah, he used to take admonition for the matters concerning the Hereafter very much, to contemplate the wonders of Allah’s creation for a long time, to turn his hand in surprise, and to address his own soul for admonition. He loved plain dress and simple food. I swear by Allah he treated himself like an ordinary person. When we visited him he drew us closer and when we put to him any question he replied to us. In spite of all this closeness with him, we did not dare to talk with him due to his natural dignity and awe. When he smiled, his teeth appeared like strung pearls. He esteemed the religious people and loved the poor. No one-however powerful he may be-would be successful to prove his false claim as the right one before him, and no one-however weak he may be- would lose hope to get justice from him. I declare Allah as my witness to the fact that I have seen him on certain occasions-in the darkness of the night when the stars were to disappear from the sky-sitting in the arch of the mosque holding his beard in his hand, in a restless condition- a condition similar to the person who has been bitten by a poisonous reptile, and weeping like a grieved man. His voice is still alive to me ‘O our Lord, O our Lord, then he supplicated to Him, and afterwards said ‘O world! Do you want to deceive me after being decorated? Get out from here and deceive some other person. I sever all of my relations from you for ever. Your age is short and your company is abject, and to be overtaken by misery here in this world is easier than in the Hereafter. Ah! The Provision is short and the journey is long and the way is dangerous’

Hearing this Hadrat Muawiya (may God be pleased with him) wept so much that his beard was wet with tears. When the tears overflowed he cleaned them with the sleeve of his shirt. The people around him also wept bitterly until they were suffocated. Then Hadrat Muawiyah remarked ‘No doubt, Abul Hassan (Ali) was such a manThen he asked Dirar ‘How do you feel after Ali’s death’? Dirar said ‘I feel like a woman whose only child has been killed in her lap. She cannot be consoled. Then he stood up and went out. [Abu Na’im ‘al Hilliyah’;Abd Al-Barr ‘Al Isti’ab’ Vol III p 44 (on the authority of Hirmazi, a man from Hamadan, who narrated from Dirar Al Suda’) (Sifatus-Safwah 1/66)  ]

Comment: Imam Al-Qurtubi comments on the weeping of Muawiya and his affirmation to the description of Dirar [taken from “Al-Intisar Lil Sahb wa Alaal ..” – referenced earlier]: “This narration shows the acholwledgment of Muawiya to the virtue of Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] and his rank, and his great due right, and level. At that point, it is far fetched to declare insults and slanders [on Ali], after what Muawiya was described by of intellect and piety, patience and generosity of manners. The majority of what was narrated of that are lies which are not authentic.

We would like to add that some ignorant shian e dajjal try to make silly excuses that the weeping of Muawiya(ra) over death of Ali(ra) and affirming his virtues was just a drama. But the point those ignorants forget while making these stupid excuses is that on one hand they say that Muawiya(ra) used to command people OPENLY, to curse Ali(ra) and it was well known fact and they even raise false allegations that Muawiya(ra) use to kill people just because they used to deny to curse Ali(ra). But now they contradict themselves by saying that Muawiya(ra) was doing drama to show that he loved Ali(ra). If Muawiya(ra) didn’t have problem in ordering people openly to curse Ali(ra) (mazallah), then why would he act before people to portray that he loves Ali(ra)? Indeed the shiatu dajjal have no brain at all. Either they should believe that Muawiya(ra) never ordered cursing of Ali(ra) or that the weeping of Muawiya(ra) over Ali(ra) was his natural action and out of true love.


ونقل ابن كثير أيضاً عن جرير بن عبد الحميد عن مغيرة قال: (لما جاء خبر قتل علي إلى معاوية جعل يبكي، فقالت له امرأته: أتبكيه وقد قاتلته؟ فقال: ويحك إنك لا تدرين ما فقد الناس من الفضل والفقه والعلم).
2. Ibn Katheer also narrates from the way of Jarir b. ‘Abdalhameed from Al-Mugheera that he said: When the news of the killing of Ali came to Muawiyah, he started weeping. His wife said to him: “You weep for his death, and you have fought him?”. So he said: “Woe unto you, you do not realize what the people lost [by his death] from virtue, Fiqh, and knowledge” [Nafs al Masdar 133/8  ( al bidaya wa nihaya, vol 8, page 129)]

Comment: This is the true relation Muawiya(ra) shared with Ali(ra). And the view he held regarding Ali(ra). Moreover Muawiya(ra) was not under any treat of life which made him say those things, nor were the Ahlebayt present there, which could have made him say that, it was his natural reaction to it. Well according to shias a person just by crying for hussain(ra) enter paradise, what about the person who cries for Ali(ra)?

3. We read in al-bidaya wa al-nihaya

ولما جاء الكتاب بموت الحسن بن علي اتفق كون ابن عباس عند معاوية فعزاه فيه بأحسن تعزية، ورد عليه ابن عباس ردا حسنا كما قدمنا

وبعث معاوية ابنه يزيد فجلس بين يدي ابن عباس وعزاه بعبارة فصيحة وجيزة، شكره عليها ابن عباس
And when the letter came announcing the death of Hasan bin Ali, since Ibn Abbas was with Muawiya, he gave him his condolences in the best way and Ibn Abbas responded in a nice way as mentioned earlier. And Muawiya send his son Yazeed who sat with ibn Abbas and gave him his condelnces in a short and clear statement for which Ibn Abbas thanked him.”] [Al bidaya wa al nihaya, volume 8, page 304]


Muawiyah’s(ra) care and concern for Hussain(ra)

Mulla Bâqir Mejlîsî,[shia scholar] whose name is mentioned above, relates Hadrat Mu’âwiya’s last advice to his son Yazîd as he was dying, as follows:
و امـّا الحسين فـقـد عـرفـت حظّه مـن رسول الله و هو مـن لحم رسول اللّه و دمـه و قـد عـلمـت لا مـحالة انّ اءهل العراق سيخرجونه اليهم ثمّ يخذلونه و يضيّعـونه ، فـان ظفـرت به فـاعـرف حقـّه و مـنزلة مـن رسول اللّه و لا تـواءخـذه بفـعـله ، و مـع ذلك فـانّ لنا به خلطة و رحما و ايّاك ان تناله بسوء او يرى منك مكروها.
– بحار ج 44 / ص 311-. حيات الامـام الحسين ج 2، ص 236. كامل ابن اثير ج 4، ص 6. طبرى ج 7، ص 196 و 217. ينابيع الموده ص 333.
“You know what relation Imâm Husayn ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is to the Messenger of Allah. He is a part from the beloved Prophet’s blessed body. He is an offspring from the flesh and blood of that most honourable person. I understand that the inhabitants of Iraq invite him to go there and be with them. But they will not help him; they will leave him alone. If he should fall into your hands, behave in appreciation of his value! Remember the closeness and affection of the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ to him! Do not get back at him for his behaviour! Mind you don’t break the substantial ties I have established between him and us! Be extra careful lest you should hurt or offend him!” This advice of Hadrat Mu’âwiya’s to (his son) Yazîd is written in shia books alike bihar al anwar, etc).]

Similar is mentioned History of Islam : During that illness when Amir Muawiya(ra) was sure that his time had come, he called for yazid…When Yazid came , he addressed him thus: O my son! Listen to my words attentively…”The Iraqis will certainly put Hussain bin Ali(ra) against you. If you gain victory over him, don’t slay him and give due regard for Kinship.( History of Islam Vol 2 ,page 47 By Akbar Shah Najeebabadi).

Comment: Just see how much love and care Muawiyah(ra) had for Ahlebayt. Until when innocent people will be deceived by the false propagandas of Shian e dajjal. Moreover the advice of Muawiya(ra) to his son was based on previous incidents that had occured, It may be possible that he got the news that people of Iraq are going to call Hussain(ra), thus since he knew the true nature of shias of Iraq, because we know what they did to Hassan(ra) and Ali(ra), Hz muawiya(ra) gave that advice of Yazeed.

Also we read in Shia book Nafasul Mahmoom Mu’awiyah’s(ra) will to his son Yazeed:

I do not fear anyone opposing or fighting with you on the question of Caliphate except four persons. Those being Husain bin Ali, Abdullah bin Umar, Abdullah bin Zubayr and Abdul Rahman bin Abu Bakr.[1] As regards Abdullah bin Umar, (excessive) worship has broken him, if no one remains to assist him, he shall succumb to you. As regards Husain bin Ali, he is light-minded person, and the people of Iraq will betray him until they force him to rebel. If he revolts and you gain victory over him, excuse him, for he is linked to us through relation and he keeps greater right while having relation and nearness of the Holy Prophet. [Nafasul mahmoom, by Abbas Qummi, p. 75] {Screen shot}.


Muawiyah’s(ra) love for Ahlelbayt.

In al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah 11/454 was mentioned the last sermon of Mu`awiyah (ra) when his sickness got worse:

“O people, he who planted has reaped in harvest, I have been given authority over you, all those who shall receive authority after me are worse than I, just like all those who received it before me were better than me. And O Yazid, if my time comes then allow a man of intellect to wash me, because those of intellect are of an exalted station in the sight of Allah, so let him wash me well and let him loudly announce the Takbeer. Then go to the closet and you shall find a bag therein, within it is a piece of clothing from the messenger of Allah (SAWS), and some of his hairs and nails, so fill my nose, my mouth, my ears and my eyes of them, after that place his clothing underneath my shroud so it can touch my skin. And O Yazid, respect the will of Allah with regards to the parents, and once you’ve placed me in my hole, then leave Mu`awiyah with the most Merciful.”

Comment: This report shows the love Muawiya(ra) had for Prophet Muhammad(saw).

قد روى الإمام أحمد في مسنده عن معاوية ما نصه : عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي عوف الجرشي،عن معاوية، قال: رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ” يمص لسانه – أو قال: شفته، يعني الحسن بن علي صلوات الله عليه – وإنه لن يعذب لسان أو شفتان مصهما رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم “. وقال الشيخ شعيب الأرناؤوط: إسناده صحيح.
‘Abdul-Rahman bin abi ‘Awf al-Jarshi that Mu’awiyah bin abi Suffian (ra) said about al-Hasan bin ‘Ali (ra): I saw the Prophet SAWS suck his tongue (or he said his lips) and these lips or the tongue can never be tortured(in hell). Grading: al-Arnaout said SAHIH.[Ahmad bin Hanbal in his Musnad]


View of Ahlebayt regarding Muawiyah(ra)

قال ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما : ما رأيت رجلاً كان أخلق للملك من معاوية ، كان الناس يردون منه على أرجاء واد رحب ، و لم يكن بالضيق الحصر العصعص المتغضب . رواه عبد الرزاق في المصنف (برقم 20985) بسند صحيح . وابن كثير في البداية ( 8 / 137 ) .

1. Ibn Kathir related from `Abdu’r-Razzaq b. Humam as-San`ani, one of the notable Imams and people who knew the Qur’an by heart (he was ascribed to the Shi`a) from Ma`mar b. Rashid, Abu `Urwa al-Basri, then al-Yamani, who was one of the notables from Humam b. Munabbih as- San`ani(who was reliable). He said, “I heard Ibn `Abbas say. “I have not seen a man more suited to rulership than Mu`awiya.” [Al Bidaya 8/137]

Comment: Here is the view of a member of Ahlebayt(ibn abbas), Now is there a man who is the most suited of people to rulership other than one who is just, wise, and forbearing and strong in defence of his kingdom and one who seeks help from Allah to spread the call of Allah in other domains and to undertake the trust in the community over which Allah has entrusted him? Ibn abbas(ra) saying that Muawiya(ra) was best for rulership proves that he had all these qualities. And Hassan(ra) not complaining that Muawiya(ra) violate the conditions of treaty nor rebelling against him further confirms this.


عن ابن جريج أخبرني عتبة بن محمد أخبرني كريب مولى ابن عباس أنه رأى معاوية صلى العشاء ثم أوتر بركعة واحدة لم يزد فأخبر ابن عباس فقال أصاب أي بني ليس أحد منا أعلم من معاوية

قال الأرناؤوط:رجاله ثقات

The servant of Ibn Abbas saw Muawiyah praying one witr in Isha prayer, so he informed Ibn Abbas ,who said to him.”Ibn abbas(ra) said :Whatever Hadhrat Muawiya has done is correct, for there is none amongst us more learned than him” [Siyyar Alam al niba, 3/152 ;Sunan al kubra, baihaqi, 3/26  (narrators are thiqa)]

3. Sahi bukhari 5.108: Narrated Ibn Abu Mulaika: Muawiya offered one rak`a witr prayer after the `Isha prayer, and at that time a freed slave of Ibn `Abbas was present. He (i.e. the slave) went to Ibn`Abbas (and told him that Muawiya offered one rak`a witr prayer). Ibn `Abbas said, “Leave him, for he was in the company of Allah’s Apostle.”

In sahi bukhari  5.109 : the last wording are: Ibn `Abbas replied, “He is a Faqih (i.e. a learned man who can give religious verdicts)

الشافعي : أنبأنا عبد المجيد ، عن ابن جريج ، أخبرني عتبة بن محمد ، أخبرني كريب مولى ابن عباس : أنه رأى معاوية صلى العشاء ، ثم أوتر بركعة واحدة لم يزد ، فأخبر ابن عباس ، فقال : أصاب . أي بني ! ليس أحد منا أعلم من معاوية . هي واحدة أو خمس أو سبع أو أكثر .

al-Shafi’i: ‘Abdul-Majeed told us: from ibn Jureij: ‘Utbah bin Muhammad told me: Kuraib the Mawla of ibn ‘Abbas told me: That he saw Mu’awiyah pray ‘Isha and then did Witr with one Raka’ah without adding, so he told ibn ‘Abbas, so he said: “He is correct! O Son! none of us is more knowledgeable than Mu’awyah. it is one or five or seven or more.”[Kitab al-Umm” 1/290]

4. Abi Mansoor Al-Tousi, one of their scholars says that Al-Hasan bin Ali said, “By Allah I see Mu’awiyah is better for me than the people who claim to be our supporters! These people wanted to kill me, stole whatever I had, and took my money. By Allah, if I make a peace with Mu’awiyah that would spare my blood and save my family is better than these people (the people who call themselves Shia) kill me and make my family get lost”!!!!! [Shia books (Al-Ehtijaj, by Al-Tabrasi, vol.2, p.290 );(Jila ul Ayun, p. 323)]

Comment: Well indeed Muawiya(ra) was better choice than relying on shian e dajjal. This is what said by Hassan(ra)


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)]


قال أمير المؤمنين علي رضي الله عنه بعد رجوعه من صفين : أيها الناس لا تكرهوا إمارة معاوية ، فإنكم لو فقدتموها ، رأيتم الرؤوس تندر عن كواهلها كأنها الحنظل

Ali said when he returned from Siffin: People! Do not loathe Muawiya’s leadership. If you were to lose him, you would see heads parting with their necks like the fruits of wild gourd tree break and drop down. [Al Bidaya 8/134] , [sharah Aqeedat ul Waasitiyah page 458]

Comment: Another example of the beauty of relationships between two brothers in faith, Ali(ra) and Muawiya(ra)


1894 – وأنبأنا ابن ناجية قال : حدثنا محمد بن مسكين قال : حدثنا يحيى بن حسان قال : حدثنا سليمان بن بلال ، عن جعفر بن محمد ، عن أبيه ، أن عقيل بن أبي طالب ، رضي الله عنه جاء إلى علي رضي الله عنه إلى العراق ليعطيه فأبى أن يعطيه شيئا ، فقال : إذن أذهب إلى رجل أوصل منك ، فذهب إلى معاوية رحمه الله فغرف له

1894  Aqeel ibn Abi Talib (Radiya Allah ‘Anh) came to Ali (Radiya Allah ‘Anh) in Iraq [so that he may] give him, but he refused to give him anything, so he said: Then I will go to a man more upholding to the ties of kinship than you (Arabic is Awsal mink). So he went to Mu’awiya (Rahimahu Allah) and he gave him.[Al-Sharee’ah by Al-Ajurri, died in 360 AH]


جرير : عن مغيرة ، قال : بعث الحسن وابن جعفر إلى معاوية يسألانه . فأعطى كلا منهما مائة ألف ، فبلغ ذلك عليا ، فقال لهما : ألا تستحيان ؟ رجل نطعن في عيبه غدوة وعشية تسألانه المال ! ؟ قالا : لأنك حرمتنا وجاد هو لنا

It is reported in Ibn Asaakir by Mughira that Al Hassan and Ibn Jaafar went to Muawiyah to ask for some money. Muawiyah then gave each of them 100,000 dirhams. When Ali heard of this he said “Aren’t you embarassed? You ask from a man whose indiscretion we mention day and night?” They said “It is because he was benevolent to us but you denied our request at the time” [Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala‘]

9. Abdullah ibn Abbas(ra) said about hz muawiya(ra): His patience was a antidote to anger and his generosity kept the people tongue tied. ( History of Islam Vol 2 ,page 30 By Akbar Shah Najeebadi)


حدثنا مروان بن جناح عن يونس بن ميسرة أن رسول الله استأذن أبا بكر وعمر في أمر فقالا الله ورسوله أعلم فقال أشيرا علي ثم قال ادعوا معاوية فقال أحضروه أمركم وأشهدوه أمركم فإنه قوي أمين

The Prophet (pbuh) once consulted Abu Bakr and Omar (may God be pleased with them) on some matter, who said to him “God and His Prophet know best” So the Prophet (pbuh) said “Go consult Ali”. Then he (pbuh) said “Bring Muawiyah and involve him, bring the matter to him and make him a witness for he has fortitude and is trustworthy” [Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala]

11. The mother of Believers, one of the core member of Ahlelbayt –Ayesha(as) said: My wish during the time of Fitnah used to be that, Allah increases the lifespan of Muawiya(ra) from my life span.[Tabaqat Abi Aruba , page 41; Isnad Sahih].


The financial help and gifts that Ahlebayt used to receive from Muawiyah(ra)


1895 – وأنبأنا ابن ناجية قال : حدثني محمد بن مسكين قال : حدثنا يحيى بن حسان قال : حدثنا سليمان بن بلال ، عن جعفر بن محمد ، عن أبيه ، أن الحسن ، والحسين ، رضي الله عنهما ، كانا يقبلان جوائز معاوية رحمه الله

1895 Hasan and Hussein (r) used to accept the gifts of Muwaiya[Al-Sharee’ah by Al-Ajurri, died in 360 AH]

2. “Imam Hasan came to Muawiya, and Muawiya gave him 4 hundred thousand dirhams.”[Al Isaba Vol. 2 , p. 330]

3. Ameer Muawiya would give 10 hundred thousand dirham annually to Imam Hasan, and Imam Hasan lived ten years after that. [Al Isaba Vol. 2 , p. 330]

4. Ameer Muawiya gifted 3 hundred thousand dirham, 1 thousand clothes , 30 slaves and 100 camels to Imam Hasan. [Ummadatul Qari, p. 283]


ولما توفي الحسن كان الحسين يفد إلى معاوية في كل عام فيعطيه ويكرمه ، وقد كان في الجيش الذين غزوا القسطنطينية
When Hasan [r.a] died, Hussain would visit Muawiyah [r.a] every year, who would give him lots of gifts and respect. And he participated in the battle of Constantinople (And that happened during the era of Muawiyah [r.a]) [Al bidaya, Vol. 8, p. 150]


وكان معاوية يبعث إليه ( أي إلى الحسين ) في كل سنة ألف ألف دينار سوى الهدايا من كل صنف

And he (Muawiya) would send gifts worth 1 hundred thousand dinar each year to him (Imam Hussain).[Shia book Maqtal Abi Makhnaf , p. 7]

7. Hasan made peace with Ameer Muawiya on the condition that he would give him everything present in the Baitul Maal. It was worth 50 hundred thousand.[Tabari, Vol. 6, p. 92]

8. Muawiya would send thousands of dirhams each year to Hussain. Aside from that, he would send lots of gifts to him also. [shia book Nasikh ut tawarikh , Vol. 6, p. 78]

9. Ameer Muawiya gave 3 hundred thousand dirham, 1 thousand clothes , 30 slaves and 100 camels to Hasan. [Fathul Bari, Vol. 13, p. 50]

10.Hasan took promise from Muawiya that he would give him 50 thousand dirham every year, which Muawiya accepted. [Manaqib Shehr Bin Ashub, Vol. 4, p. 33]

11. Once Imam Hasan went to Syria. Muawiya had received a huge war booty. Muawiya gave all of it to Hasan and honored him a lot. [Jila ul Ayun, p. 297]

12. Once Muawiya went to Madinah, and distributed 5 thousand to the nobles of Madina.  After them came Imam Hasan, Muawiya gave Hasan an amount equal to the amount he distributed to all the others before Hasan. [Jila ul Ayun , p. 297]

13. Ibn Asakir in his history narrated a very interesting story, it begins with such words:

أضاق الحسن بن علي وكان عطاؤه في كل سنة مئة ألف فحبسها عنه معاوية في إحدى السنين

(Once) Al-Hasan ibn Ali was in difficult financial position, and his salary each year was equal to 100 000 dirhams, and in one year Muawiyah didn’t pay it (in time).

After story tell us that al-Hasan (radi Allahu anhu) wanted to write to Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) regarding that, then he changed his mind. In his dream he seen prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) and he teached him a long duah. Then story continues by words of Hasan:

قال فوالله ما ألححت به أسبوعاً , حتى بعث إلى معاوية بألف ألف وخمسمائة ألف

By Allah didn’t pass the week after I prayed, and Muawiyah send me 1 500 000.

[Mukhtasar Tarih Madinatul Dimashk 1/895]

 14. We read in Shia book:

Hazrat Imam Jafar Sadiq(a.s) narrated from his forefathers that one day Hz Imam Hasan(a.s) said to his brother Hz Imam Hussain (a.s) and Abdullah bin Jafar : ”Muaviya has sent your fixed amount of money which will be delivered to you such and such day just after moon-sighting.” As per his statement, they received that amount the same day he told about, and moon was also sighted that very day. When each of them got their amounts, Imam Hasan(a.s) first paid off a large sum of money he owed, then distributed the remaining among his Ahlul bayt and slaves. After that, Imam Hussain(a.s) too first cleared his debt from that amount, then divided the remaining into three parts; one part for his Ahlul bayt and slaves while the rest was given to his family.” (Bihaar ul Anwaar , Page :166 Author: Mohemmed Baqir Majlisi)


Virtues of Muawiyah(ra) narrated by Ahlelbayt.

1. Muslim narrated in his Saheeh from Ibn Abbas that Abu Sufyan asked the prophet peace be upon him for three things: (He (Abu Sufyan) said to the prophet: “O’ Prophet of Allah, give me three things.” The prophet said: “yes.” ... Abu Sufyan said: “Mu’awiyah, make him a writer (of the revelation) under your hands.” The prophet answered: “Alright.”) [Muslim with explanation. Book of “Virtues of the Companions,” Chapter of “Virtues of Abu Sufyan,” vol.17, p.2501]

2. Ahmad narrated in his Musnad, and Muslim from Ibn Abbas who says: (Once I was a kid playing with other boys when I looked behind and I saw the prophet peace be upon him coming towards us. So I said: “The prophet did not come to anyone but to me.” So I went behind the door to hide. I did not feel until the prophet found me, grasped my neck, and pressed my shoulders gently. The prophet said: “Go and call Mu’awiyah for me.” And Mu’awiyah was his writer (of the revelation). So I went looking for Mu’awiyah and told him: “Go and answer the prophet of Allah peace be upon him because he needs you.”) [Musnad Ahmed, vol.1, Musnad Ibn Abbas #2651, and Muslim with explanation, Book of “Al-Birr wa Al-Silah,” #2604]

3. Imam Dhahabi says “And it is authentically reported from Ibn Abbas that he said “I was playing when the Prophet called upon me and said to me ‘Go and call Muawiyah’ and he was a scribe of Wahi” [Tarikh Islam by Dhahabi, vol. 2, p. 309]

We know that Prophet(Saw) is the head of Ahlebayt, so let us include his words for Muawiya(ra)

1. As it was reported by Tirmizi in “Sunnan” r4213:

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو مُسْهِرٍ عَبْدُ الأَعْلَى بْنُ مُسْهِرٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ، عَنْ رَبِيعَةَ بْنِ يَزِيدَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي عَمِيرَةَ، وَكَانَ، مِنْ أَصْحَابِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنَّهُ قَالَ لِمُعَاوِيَةَ ‏”‏ اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْهُ هَادِيًا مَهْدِيًّا وَاهْدِ بِهِ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ ‏.‏
Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) said to Muawiyah (r.a): “Allah, make him (Muawiya ) guided, a guider, and guide people through him”.

2. Muhammad Ameen Shinqiti in “Ahadeth an-nabawiya fi fadhail Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan” wrote:

أخرج الإمام البخاري بسند صحيح في التاريخ الكبير (5|240): عن أبي مسهر حدثنا سعيد بن عبد العزيز عن ربيعة بن يزيد عن (الصحابي عبد الرحمن) بن أبي عميرة قال: قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لمعاوية: «اللهم اجعلهُ هادِياً مَهديّاً واهده واهدِ به».

“It was transmitted by imam Buhari in his “Tareeh al-kabir” (5/240) via authentic chain: From Abu Musakhar, it was reported to me by Sayed ibn Abdulaziz from Rabiat ibn Yazid from (companion Abdurrahman) ibn Abu Umeyrat, which said: Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) said about Muawiyah: “Allah, make him (Muawiya) guided, a guider, and guide people through him”.

3. Al-Aarbad bin Sariyah as-Sulamee (ra) reported that he heard the Prophet (saw) saying as a du’aa : ” O Allah ! Teach Muawya the Book and Math, and protect him from the Punishment ” .
“اللهم علّم معاوية الكتاب والحساب ، وقِهِ العذاب

( Recorded by Imam Ahmad 17202, and verified to be authentic by Albani in Silsilat as-Saheehah 3227 )

4. Umm Haram al-Ansariyah(ra) reported that she heard the Prophet (saw) say : ” The first army of my ummah (nation) that invades tha sea, all there sins are forgiven ” .( Recorded by al-Bukhari 2924 )
Hafez Ibn hajar said in Fateh al-Baree (6-127) : ” Muhallab said : In this hadith there is a virtue of Muawya, because he was the first to invade the sea ” . Tabaree reported in his history that Muawiya (ra) first invaded the sea in the year 28 h .

5. Ibn Abbas (ra) reported that the Prophet (saw) told him : ” Go bring Muawya to Me “, because he wrote down Allah’s Revelation (Wahy) for the Prophet . ( Recorded by Imam Ahmad 2651 , and verified to be authentic by Albani in Silsilat as-Saheehah 1-164 )

6. Muawiyaah [May Allah be pleased with him] accompanied the Prophet in three battles [from: Shubahat 7awl Al-Sahaba wa Al-Rad 3alaiha]:
1) The battle of Hunayn, and Allah said of those who attended it: {Then Allah sent down His tranquillity upon His Messenger and upon the believers…}, which included Mu’awiyah [May Allah be pleased with him].
2) The Battle of Taaif
3) The Battle of Tabouk, and you can look the mercy Allah promised those who attended it.

(For more info regarding virtues of Muawiya(ra) (Refer this link)


Ahlebayt named their children Muawiya and maintained marital relationship with his relatives:

Muawiyah bin Abdullah bin ja’afar bin Abi Talib: one of the sons of Abdullah he called him Muawiyah, mentionned in Ansab el ashraf P60-68 and Umdat el Talib P56.

Yazid bin Muawiyah bin Abu Bakr bin Ja’far (his mother was Fatima Binte Husain bin Hasan bin Ail)

Shia website confirmed this:

But unfortunately the present shian e dajjal seems to be more intelligent than ahlebayt because they ridicule the name of Muawiya , giving it incorrect meanings.     Had it been so then why would have Ahlebayt named their children with similar name? And wouldn’t the shia Imams have changed the names of their companions(since shia Imams had close companions named Muawiya)?

Well here is the true meaning of the name Muawiya From (Islam qa #84304)

They are lying when they claim that the name Mu’awiyah means “bitch”, because it is the word al-mu’awiyah with the definite article that means “bitch”. As for the word mu’aawiyah without the definite article, it means strength of the arm, and abu’l-mu’aawiyah means the lynx. This also invalidates their slander against his father Abu Sufyaan (may Allaah be pleased with him).

Ibn al-Manzoor (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

If the word ‘awaa (the root of mu’aawiyah) is used of a man, it means that he has reached his thirties and his arm has become strong and he is able to twist (‘awaa) the arm of another.

Lisaan al-‘Arab (15/107).

Al-Fayroozabaadi said:

Al-mu’aawiyah means bitch or fox cub. Without the definite article it is the name of the son of Abu Sufyaan the Sahaabi. Abu mu’aawiyah means a lynx.

Al-Qamoos al-Muheet (p. 1967).

Moreover Ali Akbar , the son of Imam Husayn, who was martyred in Karbala, was the son of Umm Layla, who was the daughter  of Abu Sufyan’s daughter Maymuna, who was Muawiyah’s sister.

Comment: As we have seen the great bonding between Ahlebayt and Muawiya(ra) , this was the reason they didn’t hesitate in making relationship with Banu Umayya , specially the niece of Muawiya(ra).   Moreover they didn’t even hesitate in naming their children as Muawiya(ra) unlike the shian e dajjal of this era, who try to disort the meaning of this name and try to ridicule it. They hate naming their children with this name, which is opposite to what Ahlebayt did. On the contrary the shia Imams had several close companions named Muawiya(ra) and none of the shia Imam recommended to change their name. This shows us how different are the views of present day shia and the views of their Imams.


Some Misconceptions to be cleared:

Misconception 1:

There are several reports where we find Muawiya(ra) or banu umayya being cursed by Prophet(saw).


Here are scans from book “Manar al muneef fi sahih wa dhaif” by ibn Qayum al-Jawziyah.

In First quote it states: “And from that: Narrations with criticism of Muawiya, all narrations in his criticism are lie”. [Manar al muneef fi sahih wa dhaif, page 110]

Sheikh was talking about narrations elevated till prophet (SAWS).

In Second quote: “and all narration with criticism of Amr ibn al-As are lie. And all narrations with criticism of banu Umeyah are lie”. [Manar al muneef fi sahih wa dhaif, page 111]

In third quote: “and all narrations with criticism of Yazeed are lie, in the same way all narrations with criticism of Waleed and Marwan ibn al-Hakam”.[Manar al muneef fi sahih wa dhaif, page 112].


Misconception 2:

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 rutrned and told (the prophet). He (the prophet) said: ‘May Allah throw them in fitna (sedition) and push them towards hell’.


Imam Dhahabi says this account is spurious.


Misconception 3:

Shias quote Ishaq bin Rahwiyh

Imam Dhahabi records in his esteemed work ‘Siyar alam al Nubla’ Volume 3 page 132:

الأصم حدثنا أبي سمعت ابن راهويه يقول لا يصح عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في فضل معاوية شيء

Ishaaq Ibn Rehwiyh said: ‘There is not any Sahih hadith from the prophet (pbuh) about the merits of Muawiya’.


A.Thiyab Al-Ghamdi in his Tasdeed Al-Isaba, mentions that the statement that is often quoted about Ishaq bin Rahawaih in which he says, “There are no authentic hadiths that praise Mu’awiyah bin Abi Sufyan,” is weak.

Al-Asam is Mohammad bin Yaqoob bin Yusif bin Mu’qil. Born in 247 AH and died in 346 AH. However, when we searched a good amount for something about his father and we haven’t found anything. It seems be was majhool(unknown).

B. Reply is given by Ibn Athakir he said

وأصح ما رُوي في فضل معاوية حديث أبي حمزة عن ابن عباس أنه كاتِبُ النبيِّ منذ أسلم، أخرجه مسلم في صحيحه. وبعده حديث العرباض: اللهم علمه الكتاب. وبعد حديث ابن أبي عَميرة: اللهم اجعله هاديا مهديا”
And most authentic that was narrated in merits of Muawiya is the narration of Abu Hamza from ibn Abbas that he was scribe of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) after he embraced Islam,it was reported by Muslim in his Sahih, and after that narration of al-Irbad: O Allah teach him the book, and after that narration of ibn Abu Umeyrah: O Allah make him guided, a guider”.[Tareekh madinatul dimashq (59/106), Shaykh Nasir ud din al-Albani Quoted in Silsilah as-Saheeha Vol 7 Page 694 hadeeth no: 3227]


Did Muawiya(ra) used to curse Ali(ra) or Ordered Ali(ra) to be cursed?

The Issue of Reviling Ameerul Mu’mineen ‘Ali(ra)

Shiekh ‘Ali Muhammad as-Sallabi writes:

“The Shi’a accused Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra) of making people revile and curse Sayyiduna ‘Ali(ra) on the pulpits of the Mosques, but this claim is not true. What causes a great deal of annoyance is the fact that researchers picked up this fabrication, even though it is worthless, without subjecting it to critical analysis. Later historians accepted it as fact, seeing no need to discuss it, although there is no proof at all in any sound report. We cannot rely on what is narrated in in the books of ad-Dumayri, al-Ya’qoobi and Abul Faraj al-Isfahaani.

Moreover, it should be noted that the accurate history confirms something other than what these writers say, which is that Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra) respected Sayyiduna ‘Ali(ra) and his noble family and held them in high esteem. The story about Sayyiduna ‘Ali(ra) being cursed on the pulpits of the Umayyads is not in accordance with the nature of events or the nature of the disputing parties.

If we refer to books of history that were written at the time of the Umayyads, we do not find any such mention. We only find it in the books of later historians who wrote their histories during the time of the ‘Abbaasids with the aim of giving a bad image to the Umayyads in the eyes of the Muslim masses. That was written by al-Mas’ood in Murooj adh-Dhahab and by other Raafidi Shi’a writers.

These lies crept onto the history books of Ahlus Sunnah without a single sound report. The seriousness of such claims is known to scholars and researchers, especially when the claim comes from the Rawaafid. Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra) is far above such accusations because of his well-known virtues. His conduct was good, and he was praised by some of the Companions and the best of the Taabi’oon, who testified to his religious commitment, knowledge, justice, forbearance and other positive characteristics.

Once this is established, it seems most unlikely that he would make people curse Sayyiduna ‘Ali(ra) on the pulpits. That would imply that the early generation and the scholars after them who praised him so greatly must have supported his wrongdoing and must have agreed on this misguidance. This is a great lie and fabrication against the scholars among the Companions, Taabi’oon and those who sincerely followed them.

The one who studies Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah’s(ra) conduct as a ruler – the forbearance and patience for which he was well known, as well as his good conduct in running people’s affairs – will clearly see that this is one of the greatest lies against him. Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra) attained a high level of forbearance and set a sublime example for subsequent generations.

As the caliph, Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra) had a warm and friend relationship with Sayyiduna ‘Ali’s(ra)  sons; this is well known from the books of biography and history. For example, Sayyiduna al-Hasan(ra) and Sayyiduna al-Husayn(ra) went to Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah, and he gave them two hundred thousand dirhams, saying, “My predecessors never gave anyone such an amount.”

Sayyiduna Al-Husayn(ra) said to him, “And you never gave to anyone better than us.”

On another occasion, Sayyiduna al-Hasan(ra) visited Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra), who said to him, “Welcome to the son of the Messenger of Allaah’s(saw) daughter.” He ordered that a sum of three hundred thousand dirhams be given to him.

This clearly demonstrates that what is claimed about Sayyiduna Mu’aawiyah(ra) making the people revile Sayyiduna ‘Ali(ra) is false. How could this happen when there was love, friendship, warmth and respect between him and the sons of ‘Ali? Thus, the truth concerning this matter becomes quite obvious.

That society was generally restricted by the rulings of the Shari’ah and was keen to implement them. They were most unlikely to slander, curse or utter obscene offensive words. It was narrated from Sayyiduna Ibn Mas’ood(ra) in a hadeeth that is traced back to the Prophet(saw): “The believer is not the one who slanders or curses or speaks obscenity or is foul-mouthed.”

It was narrated from Ummul Mu’mineen ‘Aa’ishah(ra) in another hadeeth traced directly back to the Prophet(saw): “Do not revile the dead, because they have gone to what they sent on ahead.” (Bukhari)

[Source: Al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali: His Life & Times, pp. 318-323]

Answers to commonly raised Arguments:

Now, we will be examining some narrations which are often used by shian e dajjal inorder to accuse Muawiya(ra) for hating Ali(ra), though the above portion where we proved the beautiful relationship between muawiya(ra) and Ahlebayt is sufficient to discard these fabrications or misinterpretations by shian e dajjal, but to completely end this up , let us clear before you the reality of these narrations.

Argument 1: 

Did Muawiya(ra) used to curse Ali(ra) ?”

The tradition can be found in the Sahih of Imam Muslim, Bk 31, Number 5915:Amir b. Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas reported on the authority of his father that Muawiya b. Abi Sufyin appointed Sa’d as the Governor and said: What prevents you from abusing Abu Turab (Hadrat ‘Ali), whereupon he said: It is because of three things which I remember Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said about him that I would not abuse him and even if I find one of those three things for me, it would be more dear to me than the red camels…


This is the only authentic narration from which people get a misconception that, Muawiya(ra) ordered that Ali(ra) to be cursed. But it was not like that.

Imam Al-Qurtubi said: “The most authentic narration used is his (i.e. Mu’awiyah) saying to Sa’d b. Abi Waqas: What prevented you from insulting Abu Turab? And this is not [in any way] a declaration that he asked him to insult [him], rather it just was an inquiry about why he didn’t”.

Imam Al-Nawawi mentions something similar in his commentation on the tradition. He says:  “It might have been that Sa’d was among a group who used to insult Ali [ra], and So the inquiry of Mu’awiya [ra], according to this understanding would be: What prevented you, O Sa’d, from insulting Ali, when everyone around you was doing it.”

Rather we should ponder over that, what would have stopped Mu’awiya [ra] from putting a punishment on Sa’d [ra] if he had ordered for Ali [ra] to be insulted and Sa’d [ra] refused? Mu’awaiya [ra] was the Caliphate at the time, so what would stop him? And with this, no punishment or penalty was placed on Sa’d [ra].

Rather we see that Mu’awiya refered to Ali [ra] as Abu Turab, the most beloved Kunya to Ali [ra], since it was given to him by the Prophet of Allah. Let us present it to you, (Sahi bukhari 8.297): Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d: There was no name dearer to `Ali than his nickname Abu Turab (the father of dust). He used to feel happy whenever he was called by this name.

The confusion stems from the fact that it says:

أمر معاوية بن أبي سفيان سعدا فقال ما منعك أن تسب أبا التراب
Translation: Muawiya bin abi Sufyan commanded Saad, asking him: what prevented you from insulting Abu Turab?

Now a typical liar would translate this as “Muawiya ordered Saad to insult Abu Turab” but anyone can see that is not what is written, even though it could have very easily been written differently if Muawiya was truly commanding someone to insult someone.

And of course, Saad responds by saying all the great things about Ali (ra) and Muawiya (ra) doesn’t object at all. Also we read in a report whose chain is “Hasan”, that Sa’ad ibn Abi Waqqas(ra) praised Muawiya(ra).

Sa’ad ibn Abi Waqqas said: I haven’t seen anyone after Uthman(ra), judging justly more than Muawiya. [Tareekh Madinat Dimashq, vol 59, page 160161]

If Muawiya(ra) used to order people to curse Ali(ra), then it would have been unjust, and Sa’ad(ra) wouldn’t have praised Muawiya(ra) for judging justly.

Shaykh Zubair Ali Za’ee has discussed this hadeeth, and the allegation of Muawiya(ra) cursing Ali(ra), he said this is unproven from Muawiya(ra), and he said that the hadeeth in Sahih Muslim is unclear, and it doesn’t prove Muawiya(ra) ordered Saad(ra) to curse Ali(ra). Refer [al-Hadeeth, vol 100, page 18192021 , by Zubair Ali Zaee].

Lastly, Justice and Trustworthiness are high caliber qualities. Muawiya(ra) was also a highly political and intelligent person. Would he not realize that such of his statements(if he did say those supposedly) could be harmful to his political stability? Kufa was a den for Ali(ra). lovers. Even a lowly politician would not do something like this as it would be simply encouraging the lovers of Ali(ra) to rebel against his govt.

Moreover, If for sake of argument we agree with the Shia argument that, Muawiya(ra) did make Sabb of ‘Ali (ra) then we need to know why he did so? Did he feel that he was wronged maybe because he wasn’t given the right to Qisas for the martydom of his brother Uthman(ra)? If he thought so then such person has been granted exception by Allah. Allah said in Quran {Allaah does not like that the evil should be uttered in public except by him who has been wronged.}[Quran 4:148] So we see that Muawiya(ra) didn’t do something outside the Shariah. Though he was wrong, but it was his ijtihad which was wrong and Prophet(Saw) said that the one who did wrong ijtihad will get one reward.

Also, We don’t know what Mu’awiyah (ra) said to ‘Ali (ra), because the word Waqa’ah or Sabba can come in the sense of criticism and not necessarily the cursing Shias have in mind(i.e the way they curse Sahaba). Arabic word in the narrations “Sabb” which means to “abuse” and not to “curse”. curse means la’an and this word was not used in the narration. In the Hadith the Arabic word “سب” “Sabb” translated into English would be “abused” and this is not asking Allah to remove someone from his mercy such as “May Allah curse so and so” or “May Allah remove so and so from his mercy”, that would be “لعن” “La’ana” in Arabic and that would be a religious accusation. Sabb in this Hadith means abuse, and an example of this would be “He is an oppressor” “He is unjust” “He is stupid” ect. ]

Arabic mu`jam, Lisan al-`Arab to explain various expressions of criticism and abuse:

الشَّتْمُ: قبيح الكلام وليس فيه قَذْفٌ
والشَّتْمُ السَّبُّ، شَتَمَه يَشْتُمُه ويَشْتِمُه شَتْماً، فهو مَشْتُوم، والأُنثى مَشْتُومة وشَتِيمٌ، بغير هاء

في حديث هلال بن أَميّة: أَنه قَذَفَ امرأَته بِشَريكٍ؛ القَذْف ههنا رَمْيُ المرأَة بالزنا أَو ما كان في معناه، وأَصله الرّمْيُ ثم استُعْمل في هذا المعنى حتى غَلب عليه
والقَذْف السَّبُّ وهي القَذيفة

والسَّبُّ الشَّتْم، وهو مصدر سَبَّه يَسُبُّه سَبّاً: شَتَمَه؛ وأَصله من ذلك

والوَقِيعةُ في الناس: الغِيبةُ، ووَقَعَ فيهم وُقُوعاً ووَقِيعةً: اغْتابهم، وقيل: هو أَن يذكر في الإِنسان ما ليس فيه
وهو رجل وَقّاعٌ ووَقّاعةٌ أَي يَغْتابُ الناسَ
وقد أَظْهَرَ الوقِيعةَ في فلان إِذا عابَهُ
وفي حديث ابن عمر: فوَقَعَ بي أَبي أَي لامَنِي وعَنَّقَنِي. يقال: وقَعْت بفلان إِذا لُمْتَه ووَقَعْتُ فيه إِذا عِبْتَه وذَمَمْتَه؛ ومنه حديث طارقٍ: ذهَب رجل ليَقَعَ في خالد أَي يَذُمَّه ويَعِيبَه ويَغْتابَه

[Evidence from the Shia books, that the word Sabb/Shitam means to abuse, it doesn’t meanings cursing: Example 1 ; Example 2 ; Example 3 ; Example 4 ; Example 5 ; Example 6]

Secondly, We notice in the hadeeth that, Muawiya(ra) found it strange that Sa’ad didn’t do Sabb but it doesn’t show that he ordered or made Sabb, also important to note is that, Mua’wyah (ra) never denied the virtues of ‘Ali (ra) nor is it recorded that he made Sabb after-wards, because even if he supposedly did Sabb, then after he was corrected by Sa’ad(ra), then there is no proof he did this afterwards.

The prophet(saw) not only knew that ‘Ali (ra) was going to be verbally abused since it’s a Fitnah after-all, but he also knew that they were going to fight each-other with swords and as we know fighting with swords in the battle-field is TEN times worse than simply abusing, yet the Prophet (saw) said that the team CLOSEST to the truth is that of ‘Ali (ra), meaning the other team also has a part of the truth, and he said in the Sahih that they are both two great teams of Muslims.

Ibn Hajar explanation of hadith regarding hating Ali and Ansar

Taken from Tahzib at-Tahzib:
ثم ظهر لي في الجواب عن ذلك أن البغض ها هنا مقيد بسبب وهو كونه نصر النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم لأن من الطبع البشري بغض من وقعت منه إساءة في حق المبغض والحب بعكسه وذلك ما يرجع إلى أمور الدنيا غالبا والخبر في حب علي وبغضه ليس على العموم فقد أحبه من أفرط فيه حتى ادعى أنه نبي أو أنه إله تعالى الله عن إفكهم والذي ورد في حق علي من ذلك قد ورد مثله في حق الأنصار وأجاب عنه العلماء أن بغضهم لأجل النصر كان ذلك علامة نفاقه وبالعكس فكذا يقال في حق علي وأيضا فأكثر من يوصف بالنصب يكون مشهورا بصدق اللهجة والتمسك بأمور الديانة بخلاف من يوصف بالرفض فإن غالبهم كاذب ولا يتورع في الإخبار والأصل فيه أن الناصبة اعتقدوا أن عليا رضي الله عنه قتل عثمان أو كان أعان عليه فكان بغضهم له ديانة بزعمهم ثم انضاف إلى ذلك أن منهم من قتلت أقاربه في حروب علي

Ibn Hajar said: Then it appeared to me that the answer is that hatred is tied with a reason and that it is his support of the prophet(saw), because the human nature is that hatred is directed towards he who wronged the one who hates, and love is the opposite and this matter is because of worldly issues. As for the narration about loving ‘Ali then it is not to be taken in general because some loved him to the extent of making him a prophet or a god, this same Hadith was also directed towards al-Ansars but the scholars have replied that it is tied to hating them because of their support of the prophet(saw) and the same applies to ‘Ali and we see that most of those accused of Nasb are famous for their honesty and they are attached to the religion as opposed to those who are accused of Rafd because most of them are liars who fabricate stories. the origin of the Nawasib is that they believed that ‘Ali killed ‘Uthman or helped in this so they claimed that his hatred was like worship, add to it that some of them had their relatives killed in the wars with ‘Ali.

Comment: According to us the scholars that didn’t see the haters of Ali as munafiqeen did so for two reasons (other than the reason provided by Ibn Hajar). The first is that they don’t accept that hadith. An example of this is Al-Daraqutni who clearly rejected it in his Ilzamaat and Tatabu’. He says, “The narration of Al-A’amash from Adi bin Thabit.” This implies that the mistake is from one of them, or both. He doesn’t go into detail. With Al-A’amash it could be tadlees. As for Adi, it would be a tashayyu thing. Wallahu a’alam. The other possibility is that they saw it as a sign of nifaaq, like lying, breaking promises, etc. In other words, hating Ali is a sign of nifaaq, and not necessarily nifaaq.

From now onwards all the narrations which speak that Muawiya(ra) cursed Ali(ra) are weak and they seems to be the handywork of the Shian e dajjal of that era.

Argument 2:

“On his way to Hajj, Sa’d met Mu’awiya and his companions mentioned Ali upon which Mu’awiya cursed him, Sa’d got angry and asked ‘why do you say such things?’
Sahih Sunan Ibn Majah by Albani, Volume 1 page 26


Shaykh Zubair Ali Za’ee retracted the grading about this hadeeth in his Tahqeeq of Sunan ibn Majah. He considered this hadeeth as weak, due to disconnection in the chain, and said that his previous grading of authentication is abrogated. [al-Hadeeth, vol 100, page 1920 , by Zubair Ali Zaee].

Shaykh Albani was wrong in authenticating this hadeeth, as pointed out by Shaykh Zubair Ali Za’ee. This narration is actually weak and unreliable because the chain of this narration contains: “Abdulrahman b. Saabit” regarding whom, Imam Yahya ibn Maeen said: “He did not hear directly from Sa’d”, and in this narration he is narrating from Sa’d, so there is a disconnection between them, and him not being known weakens this narration.
حدثنا : ‏ ‏علي بن محمد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏أبو معاوية ‏ ، حدثنا : ‏ ‏موسى بن مسلم ‏ ‏، عن ‏ ‏إبن سابط وهو عبد الرحمن ‏ ‏، عن ‏ ‏سعد بن أبي وقاص ، قال : قدم ‏ ‏معاوية ‏ ‏في بعض حجاته فدخل عليه ‏ ‏سعد ‏ ‏فذكروا ‏ ‏علياً ‏ ‏فنال منه فغضب ‏ ‏سعد

قيل ليحيى بن معين سمع عبد الرحمن من سعد بن أبي وقاص؟
قال: لا. قيل: من أبي أمامة؟
قال: لا. قيل: من جابر؟
قال: لا؛ هو مرسل»
تهذيب التهذيب6/180 ترجمة رقم361

Abi Hatim ar-Razi, Al-Mizzi, ad-Dhabahi and others said he has many mursal(disconnected) narrations upon the authority of the Prophet(saw), Abu Bakr and Umar and Sa’d and A’ishah and others from the Sahabah.

Ibn Hajar said that bin Saabit was thiqah but had many irsaal.  He goes on to say that it is not true he heard from any sahabi (alhough ad-Dhabhabi said he heard from Jaabir bin Abdullah only).  And about Abu Mu’awiyah (another narrator in Ibn Majah’s chain) Ibn Hajar said there is حديثه إضطراب (idhthirab)associated with him

Another point to be mentioned is that we can even notice a difference between the two narrations of the encounter (the one in Muslim and the other). While this should be the encounter, we will notice that in the first Sa’d mentions the qualities of Ali after a direct question from Mu’awiya, while in the second he mentioned them from himself to rebuke Mu’awiya for his insults, which in itself would cast doubts in the other narrations other than the one in Sahih Muslim. [Refer too: Risalah Jawabiyah 3ala Risalat Ustad Shi3ee].


Argument 3:

The same is also reported in Musannaf of ibn abi shayba, the teacher of al-Bukhari:

حدثنا : أبو معاوية ، عن موسى بن مسلم ، عن عبد الرحمن بن سابط ، عن سعد قال : قدم معاوية في بعض حجاته فأتاه سعد فذكروا علياً فنال منه معاوية فغضب سعد


Here again hazrat sa’d bin abi waqas gets angry at muawiay bin abi sufyan for abusing Ali bin abi talib. Again the same problem in the chain like the above one which makes it unreliable


Argument 4:

A narration mentioned by Ibn ‘Asakir and Ibn Katheer, where Mu’awiya [ra] insults Ali [ra] so Sa’d rebukes him for that and then mentions the qualities of Ali mentioned in the narration in Muslim.

Answer: The chain of this narration is weak since it contains Ibn Ishaq and he used a ‘Ana’ana, and he is known to do Tadlees, which makes this narration weak and unreliable.


Argument 5:

حُكِيَ أَنَّ رَجُلًا قَالَ لِعَلِيٍّ كَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَجْهَهُ : إنِّي أُحِبُّك وَأُحِبُّ مُعَاوِيَةَ .
فَقَالَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ : أَمَّا الْآنَ فَأَنْتَ أَعْوَرُ ، فَإِمَّا أَنْ تَبْرَأَ وَإِمَّا أَنْ تَعْمَى


This text says It was narrated that a man said to Ali(ra): “I love you and I love Muawiya ” To this Ali replied that you are a ONE EYED MAN. The eye that loves me has vision and that loves muawiya is blind. If you persist with it then you will be total blind.[ ‘adb al-dunya wa deen’]

This narration was mentioned without any chain and it starts as “ it was narrated…” Which shows that its not known who narrated that and after discovering the beautiful relationship that Ali(ra) and Muawiya(ra) had between each other, its surely was narrated by one of the shian e dajjal. And even academically such narrations are rejected since the narrators are not known.(it doesn’t have any chain)


Argument 6:

al-iqd al-farid by Ibn abd Rabbihi (d. 328 AH), the Spanish muslim historian :

وأراد أن يَلْعن عليَّا على مِنبر رسول الله صلى عليه (وآله) وسلم‏.‏

when Imam Hasan died then Muwaiya came to do Hajj and wanted to do la’anah upon Ali on the mimber of Rasul Allah(s) but couldn’t because sa’d bin abi waqas was present there….but after sa’d’s death, muawiya ordered, the swearing and cursing of Ali, upon the pulpits, to all all his subordinates ….


This book is itself under much criticism, ” Iqd al-Fareed is not a history book at all, but rather it is a literary novel that contains elements of fiction in it. Perhaps tomorrow the Shia will quote from a few Nancy Drew novels or maybe Sidney Sheldon’s thrillers and claim that these are authentic history books. Furthermore, and this point cannot be stressed enough, the author of Iqd al-Fareed was Ibn Abd Rabuh who was well known for his pro-Shia inclinations.

Ibn Abu Rabuh’s book, Iqd al-Fareed, is a chain-less literary piece in which his inclusion criteria is only that the text be eloquent Arabic; the text in his book was chosen not for its historical accuracy or authenticity, but rather his book was a compilation of any text that was eloquent in nature. As such, the author of Iqd al-Fareed included texts from Shia sources so long as they were eloquently written. The Shia are well-known for their dedication to poetry so it is not at all strange that Ibn Abd Rabuh would include their texts.


Argument 7:

Imam al-Khawarzmi wrote maqtal al-hussain and in it he details the swearing and cursing by Muawiya of Ali!


khwarizmi is actually a shia, perhaps he wrote the book regarding imam in taqiyah, anyhow, his another book is a proof to his shiaism and the claims are getting weaker and weaker as the allegations goes on.

Here is more info on him (click here)


Argument 8:

Was Muawiya(ra) involved in the poisoning of Hassan(ra)?


Reply 1:

This claim is false for several reasons:

1. It is not proven, nor there is a clear evidence that Mu’awiyah poisoned Al-Hasan.

At those days, people were in an affliction, and their desires leading their instincts, each sect attributing bad things to other sects. If a story was told about that, then we ought not to accept it unless just and trustworthy people narrated it.

2. It is said that the person who poisoned Al-Hasan was not Mu’awiyah but Al-Hasan’s wife. It is also said her father, Al-Ash’ath bin Qays ordered her to do that. It is also said that it was Mu’awiyah who ordered her and some say it was Yazeed. These contradictory stories about who poisoned Al-Hasan weaken these stories because they lack the trustworthy narrators.

3. Intellect would accept shia arguments in a situation where Al-Hasan refuses to make peace with Mu’awiyah and wanted to fight Mu’awiyah for the leadership. But the truth is that Al-Hasan made peace with Mu’awiyah, and gave him the leadership and the allegiance. Therefore, for what reason would Mu’awiyah poison Al-Hasan? For these reasons we say that shia argument has no basis for truth.

4. The fact is that neither Imam Hasan nor Imam Hussain knew with certainty who were the real culprits. If they didn’t know it, than how anyone else came to know that who poisoned Imam Hasan?

When Sayyiduna Hasan lay on his deathbed, dying from poisoning, his brother, Sayyiduna Husayn came to him and asked him, “Brother, tell me who is the one who poisoned you.” Sayyiduna Hasan asked, “Why? That you may kill him?” Sayyiduna Husayn said, “Yes,” to which Sayyiduna Hasan responded, “I will not tell you anything. If it is the one I think it is, then Allah’s revenge is harsher. And if it is not he, then by Allah, no innocent person will be killed on account of me.” [al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah vol. 7 p. 41; Siyar A‘lam an-Nubala vol. 3 p. 273]

Reply 2:

This is a response to the narrations cited by Shia website Answering-Ansar.

Imam Dhahabi after quoting what is written in Istiab that some people say that Imam Hasan was poisoned by Ameer Muawiyah, says:

قلت هذا شيء لا يصح

I say this is not correct. [Tarikh Islam by Dhahabi, Volume 3, Page 40].

So this is because of the ignorance of Answering-Ansar’s team that they have claimed that he didn’t object it.

2. Tabarani in his book Mu’ajam al-Kabeer, Volume 3 page 119 Tradition 2628 has recorded a tradition
ﻋﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺑﻜﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺣﻔﺺ ، ﺃﻥ ﺳﻌﺪﺍ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺭﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ
ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻋﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﻣﺎﺗﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺯﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻭﻳﺔ ﺭﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻋﻨﻪ ، ﻓﻴﺮﻭﻥ
ﺃﻧﻪ ﺳﻤﻪ
“Muhammad bin Abdullah Al-Hadarmi narrated fromMuhammad bin Abdullah bin Numair from Yahyah bin AbiBakir from Shu’ba from Abu Bakr ibn Hafs who narrated that [Sa’ad and Hasan, son of Ali (may Allah be pleased with both of them) died during the reign of Muawiya, thus some people think that he (Muawiya) poisoned him (Hasan).]

So their evidence that Mu`awiyah killed him was because he died in his reign? That sounds more like conjecture and guesswork than evidence. Besides the report says at the end “And they see that he(Mu`awiyah) had poisoned him.”

We ask: Who is this “They”? This is not the author’s opinion nor the narrator’s opinion, he’s referring to a group of people whom he never specified

Also he did not witness this event as Abu Bakr bin Hafs is a late narrator, he narrates from the likes of `Abdullah bin al-Hasan al-Muthanna bin al-Hasan al-Sibt bin `Ali ibn abi Talib. There’s a large gap between him and al-Hasan bin `Ali or Sa`d or Mu`awiyah.

So what it actually says is that because Hasan died in the reign of Muawiyah , that is why some people think that he was poisoned by Muawiyah. Now this is not a proof at all. Secondly, who these people are? Thirdly, this tradition is munqata(disconnected).

3. After that, Ibn Asakir has narrated it without any chain of narration in Tarikh ibn Asakir, but he provided its chain in Tarikh Madina Damishq , volume 13, page 283-284

Its chain of narration is

Muhammad bin Sad – Muhammad bin Umar (al-Waqidi) – Abdullah bin Jafar – Abdullah bin Hasan

Al Waqidi is rejected and for this reason, this narration is not acceptable.

Muhammad bin Umar Al Waqidi

Abd Allah Ibn Ali al Madini and his father said: “Al-Waqidi has 20,000 Hadith I never heard of.” And then he said: “His narration shouldn’t be used” and considered it weak.
Yahya Ibn Muaen said: “Al-Waqidi said 20,000 false hadith about the prophet.”
Al-Shafi’i said, “Al-Waqidi is a liar.”
Ibn Hanbal said, “Al-Waqidi is a liar.”
Al-Bukhari said he didn’t write a single letter by Al-Waqidi. (Siar Aalam al nublaa – althagbi – biography of Al-Waqidi)

4. The author of Muruj al Dhahab is Masudi, a shiite.

Shaikh Abbas Qummi writes in his book, Tuhfatul Ahbab

ایں شیخ جلیل از اجلہ امامیہ است و بر بعضے از علماء اشتباہ شدہ و آنجناب را از علماء عامہ محسوب نمودہ اند

He is a great scholar of the Imamiyah and some scholars wrongly considered him to be a scholar of Sunnis. [Tuhfatul Ahbab, Shaikh Abbas Qummi, Page 227]  

5. Maqatil al Talibeen is not an esteemed work of Sunnis , rather its a Shia book, of Zaydi scholar.

Shia scholar Āqā Buzurg writes about Maqātil:

ويظهر من مواضع منه أنه شيعي زيدي المذهب

“It appears from several instances in it that he was a Shī`ī and adherent of the Zaydī school.” [al-Dharī`a ilá Taşānīf al-Shī`a, of Āqā Buzurg al-Ţihrānī (d. 1389), volume 21, page 376 [Beirut]

Kāžim al-Mužaffar, who went through Maqatil’s entire content and edited it, writes:

وظاهرة التشيع عند أبي الفرج واضحة الدلالة كل الوضوح في كتابه مقاتل الطالبيين

“The phenomenon of Shī`īsm upon Abū al-Faraj is completely obvious in terms of indication in his book Maqātil al-Ţālibiyyīn.” Maqātil al-Ţālibiyyīn {Introduction}, of Abū al-Faraj al-Aşfahānī (d. 356), page 15 [Najaf]

[For more detail refer this article]

6. In Al bidaya wa al nihaya, Imam Ibn Kathir has declared this story of him being poisoned by Muawiyah (ra) incorrect , right after quoting it. He says this is neither correct that Yazeed did it, nor is it correct  that his father did it. [al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah vol. 7 p. 41]

So once again, the answering-ansar team has shown its ignorance in claiming that Ibn Katheer didn’t object it.

7. In Tarikh Khamis , we don’t read anywhere that Muawiyah poisoned him.

8. In Siyar Alam an Nubla, it has been narrated while in its chain of narration is Waqidi, he has already been discussed, he was a liar.

9. Shawahid un Nubuwwat is a Shia manipulation and forgery. It also doesn’t contain any chain of narration.

10. Tadhkiratul Khawwas’s author is Sibt Ibn Al Jawzi who has been under criticism by eminent scholars of Hadith.

سبط ابن الجوزى. روى عن جده وطائفة، وألف كتاب مرآة الزمان، فتراه يأتي فيه بمناكير الحكايات، وما أظنه بثقة فيما ينقله، بل يجنف ويجازف، ثم إنه ترفض. وله مؤلف في ذلك. نسأل الله العافية. مات سنة أربع وخمسين وستمائة بدمشق.  قال الشيخ محيى الدين السوسى: لما بلغ جدى موت سبط ابن الجوزى قال: لا رحمه الله، كان رافضيا.

“He has authored (Miraat Al-Zaman) and included munkir narrations in it. I do not think he is reliable in things he reports rather he exaggerates and goes aside. He then converted to Rafidism , and authored a book to this effect. Shiekh Muhiydin said: When the news of Sibt Ibn Al-Jawzi’s death reached my grandfather, he said: “ May Allah not have mercy on him. He was a Rafidi”. [Mizan ul Aitdal  4/471]

Tadhkirat-ul-Khawas by Sibt ibn al-Jawzi who died in 654AH. Neither is the book reliable nor is the author reliable and no one takes Hadith from such late books. Besides there isn’t a chain for this report. Sibt ibn al-Jawzi never met “al-Sho`ubi” there’s like 400 years between them or something.

Similar is the case of the reference from Allamah Zamakshari’s book Rabi’ ul Abrar, Volume 4 page 208 .  There is no chain for it, the author died 538AH, so his words without a  proper chain cannot be accepted.

Even it is highly improbable that Jadah binte Ashas, the wife of Imam Hasan, was involved in it, if it ever happened. Because she was later married to Abdullah ibn Abbas, which puts a huge question on the all the allegations of Imam Hasan being poisoned by Muawiyah, or Yazeed or wife of Imam Hasan, Jadah binte Ashas. Atleast Abdullah ibn Abbas didn’t suspect her. she bore him a son, Muhammad and a daughter,Quraybah. [Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat al-Kubra vol. 5 p. 241]

al-Hasan gave Mu`awiyah Bay`ah, al-Hasan was the one to convince Husayn to stop fighting, al-Hasan gave legitimacy to Mu`awiyah’s reign and he abandoned Khilafah altogether and lived peacefully in Madinah, he never opposed Mu`awiyah nor did he ask anyone to rebel against Mu`awiah, on the contrary he stopped them from fighting against Mu`awiyah.

Al-Hasan died in 49AH after forty days of sickness, Mu`awiyah became Caliph around 40AH and his Caliphate ended in 60AH. So What does Mu`awiyah benefit from suddenly killing al-Hasan AFTER TEN YEARS  of his Caliphate?

We add, if some were to say “He killed him so his son may become Caliph” We say: This makes no sense, because al-Husayn was still alive and all of `Ali’s Shia would have simply went for al-Husayn if al-Hasan died, also there were other candidates such as ibn `Umar and ibn al-Zubayr and no one harmed any of them.

On the other hand, the Khawarij /(ex-Shia) of `Ali and al-Hasan had every reason to kill him as they viewed him as an apostate for making peace with Mu`awiyah. They didn’t have this hatred against Husayn because Husayn was against peace, nor did they have against other candidates for Caliphate such as ibn `Umar or ibn al-Zubayr as they didn’t care for this. On top of that there are precedents recorded in history books of his own Shia trying to kill him for what he did.

The fact is that neither Imam Hasan nor Imam Hussain knew with certainty who were the real culprits. If they didn’t know it, than how anyone else came to know that who poisoned Imam Hasan?

When Sayyiduna Hasan lay on his deathbed, dying from poisoning, his brother, Sayyiduna Husayn came to him and asked him, “Brother, tell me who is the one who poisoned you.” Sayyiduna Hasan asked, “Why? That you may kill him?” Sayyiduna Husayn said, “Yes,” to which Sayyiduna Hasan responded, “I will not tell you anything. If it is the one I think it is, then Allah’s revenge is harsher. And if it is not he, then by Allah, no innocent person will be killed on account of me.”

  • al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah vol. 7 p. 41
  • Siyar A‘lam an-Nubala vol. 3 p. 273
  • Tahdhib al-Kamal vol. 6 p. 251
  • al-Isabah vol. 2 p. 13
  • al-Isti‘ab vol. 1 p. 390

Also, Imam Hussain participated in the battle of Constantinople which took place in 51 AH in the era of Muawiyah while Yazeed ibn Muawiyah lead the Muslim army in the battle, and Imam Hassan had died in 50 AH, so again it weakens the authenticity of this story. [al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya vol. 8 p. 15]

According to an eye-witness, Umair bin Ishaaq, Al-Hasan, when asked by Al-Hussain asked for who his killer was, Al-Hasan responded, “If it is who I think, then Allah’s revenge will be greater, and if it is someone else, then I wouldn’t want you to kill someone innocent.” [See Tareekh Dimashq 7/389-390].

Umair bin Ishaaq was strengthened by Ibn Al-Barqi (p. 73).

Eminent scholars and historians like Ibn Khaldoon, Dhahabi, Ibn Katheer , Ibn Taymiyah and others have rejected this baseless accusation against Muawiyah(ra). The fact is that there is no evidence that Muawiyah poisoned Hasan, first of all , for it to be proven, there should be a chain of narration because a narration without chain is rejected altogether. Secondly this is no proof that someone says “I heard from some people” or “a group of people say” , such words actually shows the extreme weakness of the reliability of the narration. Just because a group of people says or just because someone heard from some xyz people, who are unknown to us, claimed that Imam Hasan was poisoned by Muawiyah, it would be extremely wrong to conclude that it was Muawiyah who did it. Hence it can be concluded that it is one of the lies which were perpetrated in the Abbasid era (750-1258) against the Umayyads (659-750) from whom the Abbasids had snatched power


Argument 9:

Did Muawiyah felt pleasure upon hearing the death of Hasan?


All the reports Shia website Answering-ansar mentioned from the Sunni references have no chain of narration, hence rejected, because a narration with a chain is like a body without a head. Anyone can attribute a lie to someone, if there isn’t a chain.

Al-Imam ash-Shafi‘i said: “The one who accepts the knowledge from somebody without the sanad(chain of transmission) is like a person carrying a bundle of wood with a snake in it and he does not know. It may bite him (anytime).”[al-Bayhaqi, al-Madkhal ila as-Sunan al-Kubra, p. 211.]

As for those reports quoted by Answering-Ansar, regarding Mu’awiya not considering the death of Imam Hasan (as) as a calamity and the Sunni Ulema’s acknowledgement that this demonstrated his hatred towards the family of’Ali (as). Then those narrations, whether in Abu Dawud or Musnad Ahmad, they contain the narrator Baqiyah bin Waleed , who has been criticized by the scholars.

قال ابن حبان: لا يحتجّ ببقيّة.

وقال أبو مسهر: أحاديث بقية ليست نقيّة، فكن منها على تقيّة.

وقال أبو حاتم: لا يحتجّ به.

وقال ابن عيينة ـ وقد سئل عن حديث من هذه الملح ـ: أنا أبو العجب، أنا بقية بن الوليد.

وقال ابن خزيمة: لا أحتجّ ببقية.

وقال أحمد: توهمّت أن بقية لا يحدث المناكير إلا عن المجاهيل، فإذ هو يحدّث المناكير عن المشاهير، فعلمت من أين أتى.

وقال وكيع: ما سمعت أحداً أجرأ على أن يقول: قال رسول الله، من بقية.

وقال شعبة: بقيّة ذو غرائب وعجائب ومناكير.

وقال ابن القطّان: يدلس عن الضعفاء ويستبيح ذلك وهذا مفسد لعدالته.

وقال الفيروزآبادي: بقيّة محدّث ضعيف.

قال الزبيدي: محدّث ضعيف يروي عن الكذابين ويدلّسهم، قاله الذهبي في الميزان.

وقال الذهبي: قال غير واحد: كان مدلّساً، فإذا قال: عن، فليس بحجّة

وقال ابن العربي المالكي بشرح الترمذي : حكم أبو عيسى بصحته، وفيه بقية بن الوليد، وقد تكلم فيه

وقال البوصيري في “الزوائد”   هو ابن الوليد، مدلس

قال المنذري : وفيه مقال

Hence the allegation is rejected on the ground that the narrations used in the books either have no chain of narration , or they have got serious defects in the chain of narration.

Moreover, we read in al-bidaya wa al-nihaya

ولما جاء الكتاب بموت الحسن بن علي اتفق كون ابن عباس عند معاوية فعزاه فيه بأحسن تعزية، ورد عليه ابن عباس ردا حسنا كما قدمنا

When Muawiyah was informed that Hasan bin Ali has died, Ibn Abbas was present with him, he did taziyah in a nice way, and Ibn Abbas also replied his taziyah in a nice (hasan) way as we have mentioned before.

Later he sent his son , Yazeed to Ibn Abbas who did taziyah in a very nice way, upon which Ibn Abbas thanked him.

وبعث معاوية ابنه يزيد فجلس بين يدي ابن عباس وعزاه بعبارة فصيحة وجيزة، شكره عليها ابن عباس

Al bidaya wa al nihaya, volume 8, page 304.


Argument 10:

Shia website Answering- Ansar stated:

This sermon of Imam ‘Ali was said at Sifeen and can be located in the followingtexts of Ahl’ul Sunnah – Waq’at Sifeen page 314, Jamarth Khattab al Arab Volume 1 page 353, Sharh Ibn al Hadeed Volume 5 page 245

“I made a promise with Rasulullah (s) that I shall never forego. Your enemies are approaching, you should know that their leader is a hypocrite son of a hypocrite. He is inviting his supporters to Hell Fire while you have the cousin of Rasulullah (s) in your midst, as you know, no one else performed Salat with Rasulullah (s) before me. I am from amongst the participants of Badr while Mu’awiya is the freed captive, son of a freed captive. By Allah! We are on the path of truth whilst Mu’awiya is on the path of falsehood”. [Mu’awiya, page 98]


As it is clear from the above, the Answering-Ansar team claims that Waq`at Şiffīn is an “esteemed Sunni” text and cites it during argumentation with Sunnīs.  By doing this, of course, they deceive their readers into thinking that this is a text accepted by Sunnīs and thus it is a proof against them.

The truth, however, is that Waq`at Şiffīn is a work of Naşr ibn Muzāĥim ibn Sayyār al-`Aţţār al-Minqarī al-Kūfī (d. 212), a known extremist Shī`ī. He has been described by Sunnīs as someone who is incredibly detested and an unreliable Shī`ī, much less a Sunnī whose work is “esteemed” according to them.

The Sunnī scholar and biographer, Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d.748), states in his work on criticized narrators known as Mīzān al-I`tidāl:

نصر بن مزاحم الكوفي عن قيس بن الربيع وطبقته رافضي جلد تركوه مات سنة اثنتي عشرة ومائتين حدث عنه نوح بن حبيب وأبو سعيد الأشج وجماعة قال العقيلي شيعي في حديثه اضطراب وخطأ كثير وقال أبو خيثمة كان كذابا وقال أبو حاتم واهي الحديث متروك وقال الدارقطني ضعيف

“Naşr ibn Muzāĥim al-Kūfī: He narrated from Qays ibn al-Rabī` and (others of) his category. He is an extremist Rāfiđī, and discarded. He died in the year two hundred and twelve. Nūĥ ibn al-Ĥabīb, Abū Sa`īd al-Ashajj, and a group related narrations from him. al-`Uqaylī said: ‘A Shī`ī; there are many inconsistencies and errors in his narrations.’ Abū Khaythama said: ‘He was a liar!’ Abū Ĥātim said: ‘He is flimsy in his narrations; discarded’ and al-Dāraquţnī said: ‘He is weak.’” [Mīzān al-I`tidāl fī Naqd al-Rijāl, of Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748), volume 4, page 253-254 [Beirut]]

On the other hand, one finds that Ithnā’ `Asharī scholars count this very same Naşr among their noteworthy Shī`ī figures and predecessors.

yat Allāh Ja`far al-Subĥānī, a contemporary Ithnā’ `Asharī intellectual and scholar, lists him in the following manner while mentioning “the elite of the Shī`a” in relating the biography of the Prophet (saws):

إمام علماء الاخبار والمغازي نصر بن مزاحم تتلمذ على لوط بن يحيى أبى مخنف وأنثى عليه النجاشي وشيخ الطائفة وأورد فهرس كتبه فراجع

Imām of the scholars of reports and chronicles of battles, Naşr ibn Muzāĥim: He learnt under Lūţ ibn Yaĥyá Abū Mikhnaf, al-Najāshī praised him and Shaykh al-Ţā’ifa [al-Ţūsī] indexed his books—so refer (to it).”Kashf al-Ghumma fī Ma`rifat al-A’imma {Introduction}, of Ja`far al-Subĥānī, volume 1, page  [Beirut]


Argument 11:

Shiawebsite Answering-Ansar stated:

If failing to believe in Hadhrath Ayesha is an act of Kufr what opinion should we hold with regards to her killer?
Hadhrath Ayesha was killed by Mu’awiya (Tarikh al Islam, by Najeeb Abadi, Vol 2 p 44)


By posing this question, the Answering-Ansar team is suggesting that the Companion Mu`āwiya (ra) should be condemned because he murdered the Mother of the Believers, `Ā’isha bint Abī Bakr (ra), and this is proven from al-Najībābādī’s Tārīkh-i Islām. It is also worthy to note that the exact page and volume is mentioned as well, implying that the reference is verified.

Now, let us see what al-Najībābādī has really written:

The Real Words of al-Najībābādī

What al-Najībābādī has actually written about the death of `Ā’isha (ra) is:

سنہ ٥٨ھ میں حضرت ام المومنین حضرت عائشہ صدیقہ رضی ﷲ عنہا فوت ہو کر البقیع میں مدفون ہوئیں آپ مروان کی مخالفت کیا کرتی تہیں کیونکہ اس کے اعمال اچھے نہ تھے مروان نے ایک روز دھوکے سے دعوت کے بہانے سے بلا کر ایک گڑھے میں جس میں ننگی تلواریں اور خنجر وغیرہ رکھ دیۓ تھے آپ کو گرا دیا تھا آپ بہت ضعیف اور بوڑہی تھیں زخمی ہوئیں اور انہیں زخموں کے صدمہ سے فوت ہو گئیں

“In 58 A.H., the respected Mother of the Believers `Ā’isha Şiddīqa (ra) passed away, and was buried in al-Baqī`. She used to oppose Marwān because his actions were not good. One day, Marwān deceitfully invited her for dinner as a pretense and threw her in a cavity, in which he had placed bare swords and daggers. She was very elderly and weak, became wounded and passed away due to the concussion caused by the wounds.” [Tārīkh-i Islām (Urdu), of Akbar Shāh al-Najībābādī (d. 1357), volume 2, page 42 [Lahore]

Subĥān Allāh. The quote above is crystal-clear.

There is absolutely no mention of Mu`āwiya (ra) in what al-Najībābādī relates about the demise of `Ā’isha (ra). Instead, he relates—without any proof—that it was Marwān ibn al-Ĥakam, someone not even regarded as a Companion of the Prophet (saws) by the Sunnīs, who allegedly murdered her. Answering-Ansar’s lie is evident and requires no explanation. Secondly, in the footnotes of [Tarikh Al Islam] , it has been written that this story is false and is not proven from authentic chain.

Here is a meeting of Ibn Abbas[ra] with Aisha[ra] in her final hours. which implies she died the natural death, she wasn’t killed.

Narrated Ibn Abu Mulaika: Ibn ‘Abbas asked permission to visit Aisha before her death, and at that time she was in a state of agony (the Arabic word used is Maghlouba). She then said: “I am afraid that he [came here to] praise me“.It was said to her: “He is the cousin of Allah’s Apostle and one of the prominent Muslims” Then she said: “Allow him to enter.” [When he entered] he said: “How are you?“ She replied: “I am Alright if I fear (Allah) (the Arabic is Bekhayr in Itaqayt)“ Ibn Abbas said, “Then you are Alright by the Will of Allah, you are the wife of Allah’s Apostle and he did not marry any virgin except you and proof of your innocence was revealed from the Heaven” Later on Ibn Az-Zubair entered after him and ‘Aisha said to him, “Ibn ‘Abbas came to me and praised me greatly, but I wish that I was a thing forgotten and out of sight.

In the narration in Musnad Al-Imam Ahmad, authenticated by Shaykh Ahmad Shakir, it states:

He said: Ibn Abbas asked permission to visit her as she was dying. [She did not wish to allow him at first, so] she was told: O Mother, Verily, Ibn Abbas is one of your righteous sons, and came to greet you and (give you farewell?). So she said: Then allow him if you wish. Ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] was allowed to enter. He said: Glad-tidings my mother, the only thing between you and meeting Muhammad Prayers and Peace of Allah upon him, and the loved ones [in another narration it adds ‘and for that tiredness and aching to go away’] is for your soul to leave your body. You were his most beloved wife, and verily he did not love except that which is pleasant and righteous … he mentions many other of her virtues, and adds that her innocence had been proclaimed in the Quran, so you would not find a Masjid were Allah is being mentioned except that these verses would be recited day and night. She said: Leave me alone O Ibn Abbas, By [Allah] who my soul is in His Hands, I wish I was something forgotten.

[Source: Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal, vol. 4 (Musnad of Ibn `Abbaas), pg. 297298, hadeeth # 2496

According to the Rijaal and Science of Hadeeth, this Hadeeth is considered Sahih.]


Argument 12:

Saeed bin Jubair said: ‘We were with ibn Abbas in Arafa and he said to me: ‘Oh Saeed, why don’t I hear the people performing talbya?’ I replied: ‘They are afraid of Muawiya’. Then ibn Abbas went out from his cottage and said: ‘I respond to your call, Oh Allah I respond to your call, they abandon the Sunnah for their hate towards Ali [ra].

Sunan Nasai, Volume 5 page 253 Tradition 3019
Sahih Ibn Khuzaima, Volume 4 page 260 Tradition 2830
Mustadrak al-Hakim, Volume 1 pages 364-365


In the chain of this first one – is Khalid ibn Mukhalad, which was shia. Abu Hatim said he shouldn’t be relied upon. Ahmad said he has manakeer. Ibn Sad said he was munkar al-hadith (Mizan 1/640. Hence this report is rejected.


Argument 13:

In the version of this episode recorded by Al-Bayhaqi in his authority work al-Sunnan al-Kubra , Volume 5 page 113, Ibn Abbas r.a actually cursed Muawiyah and his followers

“Thus ibn Abbas went out from his tent saying: “Labyak Allah huma Labayk” in defiance of Mu’awyiah, may Allah curse them, they abandon the Sunnah due to their hatred of Ali [ra]”.


It was narrated by Ahmad. Imam Ahmad Shakir said chain is weak.

Imam Albani said if (Ayub) heard from Sa’eed it is sound. But the narrator himself says that he can’t remember if he heard from Sa’eed or not. Technically, this is evidence against, which makes it weak and unreliable.


Argument 14:
حدثنا أبو معاوية عن الأعمش عن عمرو بن مرة عن سعيد بن سويد قال صلى بنا معاوية الجمعة بالنخيلة في الضحى ثم خطبنا فقال ما قاتلتكم لتصلوا ولا لتصوموا ولا لتحجوا ولا لتزكوا وقد أعرف أنكم تفعلون ذلك ولكن إنما قاتلتكم لأتأمر عليكم وقد أعطاني الله ذلك وأنتم له كارهون
Narrated Sa’eed b. Suwayd: Mu’aawiyah led us in the Jumu’ah prayer at al-Nakheelah AT THE TIME OF DUHAA (i.e. in the morning). After that, he delivered a sermon and said, “I did not fight you to make you offer Salaah, or to fast, or to make you perform Hajj or to pay Zakaah. I already knew that you were performing those duties. Rather, I FOUGHT YOU ONLY TO RULE OVER YOU, and Allaah has granted that to me, and you do not want it.”[al-Musannaf of Ibn Abee Shaybah, vol. 6, p. 187, # 30556]


This narration is weak and unreliable, hence rejected.

Narrator Amash was a Mudallis. Which is sufficient to weaken this report. And on the top of that, even the narrator sa’eed is also weak, Ibn adi included him in dhua’afa.

سعيد بن سويد: روى عنه عمرو بن مرة ذكر بن عدي مختصراً وقال البخاري لا يتابع في حديثه انتهى.lisan al-mizan
Which makes this report weak and unreliable.


Argument 15:

Ibn Hajar records:
المطالب العالية لابن حجر (12/379):
[ 4514 – قال مسدد ، حدثنا عبد الله ، عن زنيج ، عن أبي موسى ، عن عبد الله بن أبي سفيان قال : إن عليا قال : « إن بني أمية يقاتلونني ، يزعمون أنني قتلت عثمان ، وكذبوا ، إنما يريدون الملك ، ولو أعلم أنه يذهب ما في قلوبهم أني أحلف لهم عند المقام : والله ما قتلت عثمان ، ولا أمرت بقتله لفعلت ، ولكن إنما يريدون الملك . وإني لأرجو أن أكون أنا وعثمان ممن قال الله عز وجل : ونزعنا ما في صدورهم من غل الآية »].
Imam Ali made it clear that the “ONLY” DESIRE of BANI UMMAYAH was to have a RULER/KING/AUTHORITY and that he was aware of their intentions!


The narrator Abdullah bin abi sufyan is majhool(anonymous) as said by ibn al-Qattan. (Refer Tahtheeb), which makes the report weak and unreliable. Also it contradicts other established reports. For example:

Ali(ra) wrote in his letter:

“In the beginning of our matter, the people of Sham(Muawiya and his supporters) and us met. It is obvious that our God is one, our Prophet is one, and our call in Islam is one. We do not see ourselves more in faith in Allah or more in believing His messenger than them, nor they do.  Our matter is one, except for our disagreement in Uthman’s blood, and  we are innocent from his murder.“ [Nahjul Balagha, vol.3, p.648; letter  58]

So we find that Ali(ra) himself invalidates all the false reports used by the Rafidah, claiming Muawiya(ra) fought for authority.

Moreover, in Siyar A’alam Al-Nubala Muawiya(ra) says the same:
قال الجعفي: حدثنا يعلى بن عبيد، عن أبيه، قال: جاء أبو مسلم الخولاني  وأناس إلى معاوية، وقالوا: أنت تنازع عليا أم أنت مثله ؟ فقال: لا والله،  إني لاعلم أنه أفضل مني وأحق بالامر مني، ولكن ألستم تعلمون أن عثمان قتل  مظلوما، وأنا ابن عمه، والطالب بدمه، فائتوه، فقولوا له، فليدفع إلي قتلة  عثمان، وأسلم له.
فأتوا عليا، فكلموه، فلم يدفعهم إليه
Al-Ju’fi (Yahya bin Sulaiman, from his book  “Siffeen”): Ya’la bin Ubaid, from his father: Abu Muslim Al-Khawlani and  a group of people entered upon Mu’awiyah, and they asked, “Do you  dispute Ali? Are you his equal?” He replied, “No, I am not, and I know  that he is better than me, and deserves this (khilafa) more than me, but don’t you know that Uthman was killed unjustly, and  that I am his cousin, and that I ask for his blood? So go to him (Ali),  and tell him to bring forth the killers of Uthman, and I will submit to  him.” So, they went to Ali, and spoke to him, but he didn’t hand them  (the killers).

Ironically, the same narration can be found in Shia sources. See Waq’at Siffeen by Nasr bin Muzahim:
وإن أبا مسلم الخولانى  قدم إلى معاوية في أناس من قراء أهل الشام، [ قبل  مسير أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام إلى صفين، ] فقالوا [ له ]: يا معاوية علام  تقاتل عليا، وليس لك مثل صحبته ولا هجرته ولا قرابته ولا سابقته ؟ قال  لهم: ما أقاتل عليا وأنا أدعى أن لى في الإسلام مثل صحبته ولا هجرته ولا  قرابته ولا سابقته، ولكن خبروني عنكم، ألستم تعلمون أن عثمان قتل مظلوما ؟  قالوا: بلى.
قال: فليدع إلينا قتلته فنقتلهم به، ولا قتال بيننا وبينه.
Rough translation: And Abu Muslim Al-Khawlani came to Mu’awiya with a group of qura’a from the people of Al-Shaam, before Ali went to Siffeen. They said, “Why do you fight Ali? You are not in his level of suhba or hijra or closeness or earliness (in Islam). He said, “I don’t fight Ali with the claim that I am like him in suhba, hijra,  closeness or earliness, but tell me, aren’t you aware that Uthman was  killed unjustly?” They said, “Yes.” He said, “They if he gives us the  killers, we’ll kill them, and there will be nothing between us and him  (Ali).”

Also, interestingly, the following, by Al-Tabari implies that Mu’awiyah was never seen as a caliph, until after the death of Ali, nor was he given bay’a:
(وفى هذه السنة) بويع لمعاوية بالخلافة بايلياء حدثنى بذلك موسى بن عبد الرحمن قال حدثنا عثمان بن عبد الرحمن قال أخبرنا اسماعيل بن راشد وكان قبل يدعى بالشأم أميرا وحدثت عن أبى مسهر عن سعيد بن عبد العزيز قال كان على عليه السلام يدعى بالعراق أمير المؤمنين وكان معاوية يدعى بالشأم الامير فلما قتل على عليه السلام دعى معاوية أمير المؤمنين
In this year, Mu’awiyah was given baya’a in Ilya’a. Musa bin Abdulrahman said that Uthman bin Abdulrahman said, Isma’eel bin Rashid told us that “he (Mu’awiyah) used to be called the ameer of Al-Shaam.” I was told that Abu Mushir that Sa’eed bin Abdulaziz said, “Ali used to be called Ameer Al-Mu’mineen in Iraq, and Mu’awiyah was called the ameer in Al-Shaam, but when Ali was killed, Mu’awiyah was later called Ameer Al-Mu’mineen.”

Also notice that Al-Tabari didn’t say that Mu’awiyah was given baya’a before this year. This implies that nobody gave Mu’awiyah a baya’a for the khilafa before this time.

Ibn Katheer also says, “When Ali died, the people of Al-Shaam pledged their allegiance to Mu’awiyah, as the Ameer Al-Mu’mineen, for there was nobody that could dispute them.”

A similar argument against Muawiya(ra) is made using the hadeeth of Sahih Bukhari. Please refer the answer for that argument in this article: Response to: Mu’awiyahs Testimony on the Khalifahs


Argument 16:

Ibn Abbas [ra] in ‘Tarikh Islam’ Volume 4 page 94 which he [ra] spoke to Muawiyah and Amro bin al-Aas:
وإن أحق الناس  أن لا يتكلم في أمر عثمان لأنتما ، أما أنت يا معاوية فزينت له ما كان  يصنع حتى إذا طلب منك نصرك أبطأت عنه وأحببت قتله ، وأما أنت يا عمرو  فأضرمت المدينة عليه۔
Ibn Abbas said: ‘… those who do not deserve to talk  about Uthman’s issue the most, are both of you, you Muawiya, verily you  made his acts seem alluring to him until when he (Uthman) asked you for  your support, you let him down and liked him to be killed. And you Amro,  you incited the people against him.’


Ibn Asakir in his Tarikh Dimashq narrated it via Juwaybir ibn Asmai. He died in 173. So he cannot be a witness, because Ibn Abbas died approximately in 67 hijri. Therefore there is disconnection, which makes it weak and unreliable.

Infact, we read:

قال ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما : ما رأيت رجلاً كان أخلق للملك من معاوية ، كان الناس يردون منه على أرجاء واد رحب ، و لم يكن بالضيق الحصر العصعص المتغضب . رواه عبد الرزاق في المصنف (برقم 20985) بسند صحيح . وابن كثير في البداية ( 8 / 137 ) .

Ibn Kathir related with an authentic chain from `Abdu’r-Razzaq b. Humam as-San`ani, one of the notable Imams and people who knew the Qur’an by heart (he was ascribed to the Shi`a) from Ma`mar b. Rashid, Abu `Urwa al-Basri, then al-Yamani, who was one of the notables from Humam b. Munabbih as- San`ani(who was reliable). He said, “I heard Ibn `Abbas say. “I have not seen a man more suited to rulership than Mu`awiya. [Al Bidaya 8/137].


Argument 17:

The Holy Prophet(saw) said:
من سب علي فقد سبني
Whoever abuses Ali has abused me.


أما الحديث فهو منكر. رواه أحمد 6/323 والحاكم وصححه ولكن فيه إسحاق السبيعي كان اختلط، ولا يدري أحدث قبل الاختلاط أم لا. والراجح الثاني بأن إسرائيل وهو ابن يونس بن أبي أسحاق – حفيد السبيعي – إنما سمع منه متأخرا.

Hadith is Munkar. It contains Ishaaq Al Sabi’i. Detailed Takhreej can be read here: [Takhreej] .


Argument 18:

Rafidi Abdulhussain said:

Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, as quoted by Umm Salamah, “Whoever abuses `Ali abuses me, too,” which is recorded by al-Hakim at the beginning of page 121, Vol. 3, of Al-Mustadrak as ascertained by both Shaykhs, and it is narrated by al-Thahbi in his Talkhiswhere the author testifies to its authenticity. It is recorded by Ahmed among the ahadith narrated by Umm Salamah on page 323, Vol. 6, of his Musnad, and by al-Nisa’i on page 17 of Al-Khasa’is al-Alawiyya, in addition to many other traditionists.


Hakim narrated that in “Mostadrak” (#4615), Ahmad in “Mosnad” (#26791) and it’s in “Fadhail as-sahaba” (#1011), al-Heythami in “Zawaid al-Musnad”, Nasai in “Sunnan al-Kubra” (#8476) and “Khasais” (#91), ibn Asakir in “Tarih madinatul dimashk” (42/266), Ajurri in ‘Shariah” via chain: Israil from Abu Ishaq from Abu Abdullah Jadale.

There are several problems in this chain. Link Israil – Abu Ishaq. It’s well known fact that Abu Ishaq Sabei became confused in the end of his life (Abu Saeed al-Alai “Mukhtalitin” p93/#35). Imam Ahmad said: “Israil from Abu Ishaq, there is softness in it, he heard from him in the end (of his life)” (Mizzi “Tahzib al-kamal” 2/#402). Yaqub ibn Shayba said about Israil: “Salihul hadith, there is softness in him”. Ibn Sad noticed that some of the scholars weakened Israil. Ali ibn Madini and ibn Hazm Zahiri said he’s weak. However Bukhari and Moslem relied on him in matters of usool. Abu Hatim said he’s saduq, and Ahmad said he’s thiqat (“Mizanul itidal” 1/208/#820). So main problem isn’t in Israil himself, but in fact that he narrated from Abu Ishaq, when he already got confuse. Second problem in Abu Ishaq himself. He was known like mudalis (Ibn Hajar “Tabaqatul mudalisin” p 42/#91), and he narrated this hadith in /muanan/ form, without making clear did he hear it himself or not. Abu Abdullah al-Jadale, that’s Fulan ibn Abd, or Abd ibn Abd. Ibn Maeen said he’s thiqat (Ibn Shahin “Tarehu asmau thiqat” #925). Dhahabi in “Mizanul itidal” (4/544) noticed that he was shia.

There is second way of transmission of this hadith, and I believe they should be discussed together.

Hakim narrated it (#4616) with addition in the end: “Whoever abuses `Ali abuses me, too, and whoever abused me, abused Allah Taala” via chain: Jundal ibn Walq, which said: narrated to me Bukayr ibn Uthman al-Bajli, which said: I heard Abu Ishaq at-Tameme said: I heard Abu Abdullah Jadale. Here Abu Ishaq made clear, that he heard that hadith from Abu Abdullah. But here we have other problems. First of all as I mentioned before problem in fact that Abu Ishaq became confused, and it’s not clear when he narrated this. Second problem is Bukayr ibn Uthman. Ibn Abi Hatim gave his tarjuma in “Jarh wa tadil” (2/#1599) without mention of any praise or criticism. Most likely he’s unknown. Shaykh Albani said hadith is munkar (“Silsila ad-daeefa” #2310), and he said weak in “Saheeh wad daeef jamiu saghir” (#12393)

There is other way of transmission, it was narrated by Ali ibn Muhammad al-Himayre in his “Juzz” (#26) and ibn Asakir in his history (42/533), from Ali ibn Musahar from Abu Ishaq as-Sabei. Strange thing that Abu Ishaq narrated it directly from Umm Salamah, without mention of Abu Abdullah Jadale as intermediate.  Scholars differed in the date of death of Abu Ishaq. It could be 126, 127, 128. Same with Umm Salamah (radi Allahu anha). Waqidi said that she died in shawal of 59, and Abu Hurayra prayed upon her. And it was said that she died in 62. It’s very unlikely that Abu Ishaq met her. Allah knows best.

It was also narrated from Hussain ibn Ali, by ibn Asakir in his history (14/131) with wording: Don’t abuse Abu Bakr and Umar, they are masters of first and last elderly people in heaven, except messengers and prophets, and don’t abuse Hasan and Hussain, they are masters of youth in paradise, and don’t abuse Ali, because whoever abuses `Ali abuses me, too, and whoever abused me, abused Allah Taala, and whoever abused Allah, Allah would punish him”.

Defects of chain:

1) Haroon ibn Moslem. Hakim said he’s thiqat, Abu Hatim said there is softness in him (“Mizanul itidal” 4/286/#9172).

2) Muhammad ibn Yunus al-Qurashe. He was accused in lie (“Mizanul itidal” 4/74/#8353).

3) Al-Qasim ibn Abdurrahman al-Ansare. Ibn Maeen said he’s nothing. Abu Hatim said his ahadeth are weak, and mixed (“Jarh wa tadil” 7/#647).

4) Abu Muhammad al-Ansare, I couldn’t find information about him.


Argument 19:

Ayesha(ra) did curse Muawiya and Amro al Aas, due to their killing her brother, Muhammad ibn Abi bakr.

Arabic text of that report:

غالبا معترض کا اشارہ اس عبارت کی طرف ھے۔ البدایہ والنہایۃ 7:349
وقد ذكر ابن جرير وغيره
أن محمد بن أبي بكر نال من معاوية بن خديج هذا ومن عمرو بن العاص ومن معاوية ومن عثمان بن عفان أيضا،
فعند ذلك غضب معاوية بن خديج فقدمه فقتله ثم جعله في جيفة حمار فأحرقه بالنار،
فلما بلغ ذلك عائشة جزعت عليه جزعا شديدا وضمت عياله إليها،
وكان فيهم ابنه القاسم وجعلت تدعو على معاوية وعمرو بن العاص دبر الصلوات

Also we read:

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 Ayesha would curse Mu’awiya and Amr bin Aas after every Salaat”.
Tar’ikh Ibn al Wardi Voume 1 page 245
Tar’ikh Kamil Vol. 3 page 180


Ibn Katheer took his report from Tareekh Tabari(تاریخ طبری ج 4 ص77), and when we refer the chain in tareekh tabari, we find that this report was narrated from Abi Makhnif, this narrator was heavily criticized by scholars of Ahlesunnah, as a liar. Therefore, this report is unreliable and rejected.

Moreover, the one who killed Muhammad ibn Abi bakr was not Muawiya ibn abu sufyan, but rather it was Mu`awiyah ibn Hudayj as-Sakuni al-Kindi.

They differed concerning the way in which this Muhammad was killed. It was said that he was killed in battle, and that he was killed as a prisoner of war after the battle… The governor in question here was MU’AAWIYAH IBN HUDAYJ who killed Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr. (Refer Al-Siyar, 3/38).


Argument 20:

Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrated: Ali Ibn Ja’ad said, Muawiya died outside of Islam . [Kitab Masail of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol 2, page 154].


This is personal opinion of Ali ibn Ja’ad. This could be because he was inclided towards Tashayyu(Shiism) as said by Ibn Hajar in (Taqreeb).

Secondly, Ali ibn Ja’ad even made criticism on some other Sahaba too. For example, when the hadeeth of Prophet(Saw) regarding Hassan ibn Ali(ra) being a Sayyid was narrated in his presence, he taunted over it saying, “who made him a sayyid?” (Source: Tahzeeb al-kamaal).

Therefore, the personal opinions of Ali ibn Ja’ad  against any companion of Prophet Muhammad(saw) be it Muawiyah(ra) or Hassan(ra), it won’t be acceptable in the sight of Ahl us-sunnah.


Some other arguments raised by the deviants is that All of governors of Muawiya(ra) used to curse and that they would do on the order of Muawiya r.a

To authenticate such a claim we will need to have the list of all the Governors of Hazrat Muaawiyah R.A then look at each of them to deduce whether they did curse or not.. Here are two of the references which mention 2 Governors who would talk about Hazrat Ali(ra) These are:

a. Hazrat Mugheera bin She’ba R.A
b. Marwaan bin Al Hakam.

But before we begin, we would like to mention that, even if supposedly a governor of Muawiya(ra) did abuse Ali(ra), then that doesn’t mean that it was on the approval or order of Muawiya(ra). This is similar to the case of Uthman(ra) being abused in Kufa, that doesn’t mean that it was on the approval of Ali(ra). In the following reports we find that certain Sahaba like, Jarir bin Abdullah, Hanzala and Adi bin Hatim, left Kufa saying that they won’t like to live in a city where Uthman(ra) is abused.

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ الْمَزْرَفِيِّ ، نا أَبُو الْحُسَيْنِ بْنُ الْمُهْتَدِي . ح وَأَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ بْنُ السَّمَرْقَنْدِيِّ ، أنا أَبُو الْحُسَيْنِ بْنُ النَّقُّورِ ، أنا بْنُ عَلِيٍّ ، أنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ ، نا دَاوُدُ بْنُ عَمْرٍو ، نا جَرِيرٌ ، عَنْ مُغِيرَةَ ، قَالَ : تَحَوَّلَ جَرِيرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ، وَحَنْظَلَةُ ، وَعَدِيُّ بْنُ حَاتِمٍ مِنَ الْكُوفَةِ إِلَى قَرْقِيسِيَاءَ ، وَقَالُوا : لا نُقِيمُ بِبَلَدٍ يُشْتَمُ فِيهِ عُثْمَانُ

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو الحسن بْن قبيس ، وأبو منصور بْن خيرون ، أَنَا أَبُو بكر الخطيب ، أَنَا عَلِيّ بْن أَحْمَدَ الرزاز ، أَنَا مُحَمَّد بْن عَبْد اللَّهِ بْن إِبْرَاهِيم الشافعي ، نا مُحَمَّد بْن أَحْمَدَ بْن البراء ، ثنا عَلِيّ بْن المديني ، نا حريز بْن عَبْد الحميد ، عَنِ المغيرة ، قَالَ : خرج عدي بْن حاتم وجرير بْن عَبْد اللَّهِ البجلي وحنظلة الكاتب من الكوفة ، فنزلوا قرقيسيا ، وقالوا : لا نقيم ببلد يشتم فيه عُثْمَان قال الخطيب : قَالَ لي مُحَمَّد بْن عَلِيّ الصوري : أَنَا رأيت قبورهم بقرقيسيا .

(Tarikh Dimashq)

Argument 1. The naration regarding Hazrat Mugheera bin She’ba R.A:


The naration is originally narated by Allama Ibn Jareer Tabari from whome Ibn Atheer took it under his Tarikh Al Kamil.  At the same time, the narration mentions that Hazrat Muaawiya Asked Hazrat Mugheera R.A to talk ill {mudhammat} of Hazrat Ali R.A and his companions and further mentions at the end that Mughera R.A stayed for 7 years in Kufa and continued to say bad of Hazrat Ali R.A.

If we accept this naration, then we also have to accept the way this “mudhammat” {speaking ill} was done by Mugheera R.A. On the same page as this naration it says that, “…His words were that, O Allah have mercy upon Usman bin Affan R.A and pardon him and give him jazaa for his good deeds because he followed your deen anf followed your messenger sallllahu alayhi wassalam, and united us in one talk and saved us and died as an oppressed. Ya Allah help those who are his helpers, friends, lovers and seeker of his revenge and use to make dua against his killers

This is the way Mugheera used to make Mulaamat of those who had killed Uthman R.A and it is what the Shia Raawis(narrators) have interpreted as cursing Ali R.A. Clearly when a claim is first made that Mugheera used to curse and right after, these words are mentioned, then a seeker will only judge on those words directly established to the raawi(narrator), instead of indirect narrations of that narration.

Once it is understood, now let us see why we can not accept this narration in the first place.

Hafiz Ibn Jareer mentions as the narrators of this hadith :

1. Hisham bin l-Kalbi son of the famous Mohammad Saaib bin Al Kalbi : regarding him it is said “He is a Rafidi…” {Lisaan al Mizaan Pg 196} ; Ibn Abi Ya’qoob Hareemi Rehm. says, “He narrates extremely “Mathaalib” narrations”

2. Abu Mukhanaf Loot bin Yahyaa : Hafiz Ibn Addi Rehm. says “He is a burnt out Shia, and only narrates their narations” {ibid. Pg 197} We was matrook ul hadees.

3. Mujalid bin Sa’eed : He is known to be weak by Ijmaa’ of Aimma, Imam Yahya bin Saeed at one instance warned his friend not to take Seerat from Wahab bin Jareer who would tell seerah from narations of Mujalid, he said “you will only write lies (if you take narrations from him)” {Abu Haatim Ar Razi , Kitaab Al Jarah Wa Ta’deel Vol.4 Pg. 361}

4. Fudail bin Khadeej : Qawl of Abu Haatim as narrated by Hafiz Dhahabi and Ibn Hajjar Rehm. that he is Majhool. and whosoever narrated through him is Matrook. {Mizaan al Etidaal Vol 2 Pg 334}

From this it is understood that ALL the Raawis of this narration from first till the end are Shias, and some those who have made it their goal to ascribe filth to Sahaba R.A.
Thus finally let us list the reasons why this Rawayah is unacceptable
1. All the narrators of the Incident are Shias and in deducing the truthfulness of the incidents especially regarding Muaawiya R.A, is simply biasness.
2. All the narrators are either Dhaeef or Majhool
3. The rawayat does not come upto the category of Darayat because if Mugheera bin She’ba r.a maligned Ali radiAllahu anhu for seven years on the order of Muaawiyah r.a then
a. There should be many narators of such an incident. Then how come there is only on rawi and that too a shia who is known as a liar.
b. Was there no person of Gheera beside Hajr bin Addaddi Rehma who could stop such a makrooh biddat.
c. Justice and Trustworthiness are high caliber qualities. Muaawiya r.a was also a highly political and intelligent person. Would he not realize that his such statements could be harmful to his political stability? Kufa was a den for Ali r.a. lovers. Even a lowly politician would not do something like this as it would be simply encouraging the lovers of Ali r.a to rebel against his govt.

Narration from Mustadrak:

حدثنا أبو بكر محمد بن داود بن سليمان ثنا عبد الله بن محمد بن ناجية ثنا رجاء بن محمد العذري ثنا عمرو بن محمد بن أبي رزين ثنا شعبة عن مسعر عن زياد بن علاقة عن عمه : أن المغيرة بن شعبة سب علي بن أبي طالب فقام إليه زيد بن أرقم فقال : يا مغيرة ألم تعلم أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم نهى عن سب الأموات فلم تسب عليا و قد مات

The uncle of Ziyad bin Alaqa narrated that Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba abused Ali, so Ziyad bin Arqam stood up and said: “You know that the Prophet (saw) forbade abusing the dead, then why are you abusing Ali when he is dead?” [Silsalat Al-Hadeeth As-Saheeha. Vol. 5, Pg. # 520] ; [Similarly, Al-Hakim stated: This Hadeeth is Authentic by the conditions of Muslim and he hasn’t narrated it. Al-Dhahabi in Al-Talkhees: On conditions of Muslim. Source: Al-Mustadrak Alaa As-Sahihain. H. # 1419, vol 1, Pg. # 541].


Al-Albani authenticated this narration in his Silsila, but he is incorrect in doing so, since there is a hidden defect in the chain, as pointed out by Imam al-Daraqutni.

Al-Albani outlines the narrations:
The narration is by Sufyan, who narrates it from Ziyad bin Ilaqa from Al-Mugheera.
The narration from Mis’ar is from Ziyad, from his uncle from Zaid bin Arqam, in which Al-Mugheera cursed. However, Mohammad bin Bishr narrated it through Mis’ar from Al-Hajjaj the Mawla of bani Tha’laba from the uncle of Ziyad bin Ilaqa. Wakee’ narration from Mis’ar is the same as the previous one.

Imam Al-Daraqutni in Al-Ilal (#1249) when asked about these differences said that the narration of Shu’ba from Mis’ar is a mistake. In other words, the narrations of Sufyan and the narrations of Mis’ar that include the mawla of bani Tha’laba are the accurate versions of these narrations. With this in mind, we come to the conclusion that in the version by Sufyan, it is Al-Mugheera who is actually teaching people to not curse the dead, while the version of the Mawla of Bani Thalaba is weak since he is an anonymous (majhool) narrator.

Hence the report is actually weak and unreliable.

Argument 2 : The second naration that is quoted from Bidaya Wa Nihaya Vol 8 Pg 259:

When Marwaan was governer in Madina, he would malign Ali r.a while on the mimbar every Jummah. Hasan ibn Ali r.a once said to him “Allah had cursed your father Hakm through his Nabi sallallahu Aleyhi Wassalam’s tongue when you were still in his Salb. and had said that Allah’s curse be upon him and his progeny”


First and foremost, this whole narration is doubtful because,

a.This whole narration is missing in the original Bidaya Wa Nihaya Egyptian script.
b.The words that are attributed to Nabi Kareem sallallahu Alayhi Wassalam are doubtful.

However, An information of this sort is understood from many other sources as well that Marwaan ibn Hakam during his time at Madina used to say some words which were looked down by the lovers of Ali r.a. But we have to see what was the reality of the matter.

In Sahih Bukhari a narration comes which sheds light on this. Sahi bukhari 5.53: Narrated Abu Hazim: A man came to Sahl bin Sa`d and said, “This is so−and−so,” meaning the Governor of Medina, “He is calling `Ali bad names near the pulpit.” Sahl asked, “What is he saying?” He (i.e. the man) replied, “He calls him (i.e.`Ali) Abu Turab.” Sahl laughed and said, “By Allah, none but the Prophet called him by this name and no name was dearer to`Ali than this.”

In this the Ameer e Madina is Marwaan since the maligning in question is showing the relationship. And the most disrespect in this case then would be Marwan using Abu Turab in its Lughwi sense. And even if he did used to say more maligning statements, how can it be deduced that he did so on order of Muaawiyah r.a. The naration of Bidaya does not say in any way that Muaawiya r.a ordered it or that he was happy on the act.

A Note: 1.The reference of Al Bidaaya Pg. 80 is for Mohammad bin Yusuf Al Thaqafi who was the governor of Walid bin Abdul Malik and not Hazrat Muaawiya R.A . Similarly, Ibn Atheer’s reference talks about the Khulafa of Banu Ummayya in general. There is no mention of Hazrat Muaawiya R.A

2. The word Sabb o shetam in Arabic is mostly “Sabb” which means to abuse and not to curse.

Argument 3:

Ibn Sa’d said: Ali b. Muhammad told us, from Lout b. Yahya who said: The governors from Bani Ummaya before Umar b. Abdulaziz used to insult Ali on the Minbar.


“Ali b. Muhammad is Al-Madaeni and he is weak.
His Shaykh Lout b. Yahya is very fallen (weak). Yahya b. Maeen said about him: Not trustworthy. Abu Hatem said: His traditions are Matrouk”

Argument 4:

Another narration in Muslim:

Sahi muslim Bk 31, Number 5924: Sahl b. Sa’d reported that a person from the offspring of Marwan was appointed as the governor of Medina. He called Sahl b. Sa’d and ordered him to abuse Ali, Sahl refused to do that.

He (the governor) said to him: If you do not agree to it (atleast) say: May Allah curse Abu Turab. Sahl said: There was no name dearer to Ali than Abu Turab (for it was given to him by the Holy Prophet himself) and he felt delighted when he was called by this name. He (the governor) said to him: Narrate to us the story of his being named as Abu Turab. He said: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to the house of Fatima and he did not find ‘Ali in the house; whereupon he said: Where is your uncle’s son? She said: (There cropped up something) between me and him which had annoyed him with me. He went out and did not rest here. Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to a person to find out where he was. He came and said: Allah’s Messenger, he is sleeping in the mosque. Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to him and found him lying in the mosque and saw that his mantle had slipped from his back and his back was covered with dust and Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) began to wipe it away from him (from the body of Hadrat ‘Ali) saying: Get up, covered with dust; get up, covered with dust.


This is from the utmost ignorance, since Mu’awiya was from the offsprings of Sufyan, not the offsprings of Marwan! And then where is the name of Mu’awiya mentioned in this tradition?  Only a shian e dajjal will try to use this narration against Muawiya(ra).

Secondly, the one who gave that order is not a Companion of the Prophet(saw) nor what you call “Sunnah cursing Imam Ali” but a member of a fitna group about whom Abu Hurayra said: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, there will soon come a time upon people when the flock of sheep will be dearer to its owner than all the house of Marwan.” Imam Malik narrates it in al-Muwatta’.

Moreover if the shian e dajjal are willing to use this narration in any way, then we hope they will not show their double standards here. Because in this narration we find that, there used to be differences even in the life of Ali(ra) and Fatima(ra), such that Ali(ra) got angry with Fatima(ra) and left the house, as affirmed by the lover of Ali(ra).


Did Ali(ra) curse Muawiya(ra) ?


The Advice of Ali(ra) in Nahjul Balagha sermon where Ali(ra) showed his displeasure when people cursed/abused Muawiya(ra) and his supporters itself is sufficient to refute these fabrications of shian e dajjal.

وقد أنكر على من يسب معاوية ومن معه فقال: “إنّي أكره لكم أن تكونوا سبّابين، ولكنّكم لو وصفتم أعمالهم، وذكرتم حالهم، كان أصوب في القول، وأبلغ في العذر، وقلتم مكان سبّكم إياهم: اللّهم احقن دماءنا ودماءهم، وأصلح ذات بيننا وبينهم” [نهج البلاغة: ص323

Nahj Al-Balagha”, Ali is reported to have rejected the action of those who insult Mu’awiya and those with them, and told them:  “I hate for you to be from those who insult, but rather describe their deeds … and say instead of your insults: O Allah, preserve our blood and theirs, and bring peace between us and them“[Nahjul balagha page 323]

Anyway, let us elaborate this issue in brief: All the narrations that mention Ali(ra) CURSING Muawiya(ra) are weak most of them contain narrators like Hisham Al-Kalbi regarding whom Ibn ‘Asakir said: Rafidy Lays Bithiqa, ibn Hibban said: Yarwee Al-‘Ajaib wa Al-Akhbaar Alty la Usool Laha, and he was an extreme Shia moreover al-Kalbi narrations of this incident are mursal and he is known Mudalis. Secondly those narrations are narrated from a fanatic and highly criticized shia Abu Mikhnaf. Sunni scholar Hafiz Ibn Hajr Asqalani has summed up the attitude of Sunni scholars towards Abu Mikhnaf. He observes that he is an uncultured, unreliable and unveracious historian. Imam Abu Hatim etc, have called him obsolete and outdated. Imam Dar Kutni calls him a weak source. Yahya bin Mu’in considers him unauthentic and disparages him as if he is a nonentity. Ibn ‘Adi regards him an extremist Shia and a historian. Or the narrations which contain weak narrators or mudalliseen, there is absolutely no authentic narration which contains the phrase “cursing” where Ali(ra) cursed Muawiya(ra).

The authentic narrations which are present are regarding Qunoot, which are given an odd and ugly interpretation by shian e dajjal.

Take for example this narration:

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 “

Now the act of Qunoot that sunni talk about differ to type of qunoot that shia claim. This narration does not mention anything about cursing at all but shia assume its cursing We do not know based on what shian e dajjal think that. The narrations which talk about qunoot done by Ali(ra) shows that Ali(ra) explained the qunoot. He(ra) said that supplication, so that he becomes victorious against Muawiyah(ra) and so did Muwayah(ra) as each one thought that he was upon the right way concering that decession. Qunoot was not laanat(cursing), it was just a prayer to overcome the opponent:

حَدَّثَنَا حَدَّثَنَا هُشَيْمٌ ، قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا عُرْوَةُ الْهَمْدَانِيُّ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا الشَّعْبِيُّ ، قَالَ : ” لَمَّا قَنَتَ عَلِيٌّ فِي صَلَاةِ الصُّبْحِ أَنْكَرَ النَّاسُ ذَلِكَ ، قَالَ : فَقَالَ : إِنَّمَا اسْتَنْصَرْنَا عَلَى عَدُوِّنَا
امصنف ابن أبي شيبة
Sha’abi stated that, when Ali(ra) recited Qunoot in the morning prayer, the people objected to it, so he said, that we have sought help(from Allah) against our opponents.

So the authentic hadith does not include the phrase “cursing” and they just  say that Ali(ra) made a supplication to God to grant him victory over the forces of Muawiya(ra), which is not a big issue at all from a fair view, since every army general  to gain victory will do that. Its just like saying O Allah grant me victory in  race where my friend is competing against me. So obviously this supplication is against your friend since he will loose the race or will not get first position, but does it shows that you hate him?

قال الشيخ مقبل الوادعي –رحمه الله- في الهامش –متعقباً-: “أما اللعن فلم نجده في شيء من كتب السنة المعتمدة بعد البحث الطويل، وأما الدعاء عليهم فقد صح عنه رضي الله عنه: قال ابن أبي شيبه (2/137): حدثنا هشيم قال: أخبرنا حصين، قال: حدثنا عبدالرحمن بن معقل: قال: صليت مع علي صلاة الغداة؛ فقنت، فقال في قنوته: اللهم عليك بمعاوية وأشياعه، وعمرو بن العاص وأشياعه، وأبا الأعور السلمي وأشياعه، وعبدالله بن قيس وأشياعه، قال البيهقي (2/204) وقد أخرج بعضه: صحيح مشهور، وهو كما قال من حيث الصحة؛ فهو على شرط الشيخين” اهـ كلام الشيخ مقبل.

Both armies used to pray to God against the other army and to grant them victory. What a sad set of events to see two groups of righteous Muslims killing each other. Many people who abstained from these wars used to say “I looked at one side, and then the other, and both were saying “Allahu Akbar” and killing each other, so I left them both”.

A very beautiful quote is said here:

وما أجمل أن يقال هنا ما قاله الأعمش – رحمه الله – : ” حدثناهم بغضب أصحاب محمد الله صلى عليه وسلم فاتخذوه دينًا (2)

(2) سير اعلام النبلاء (2/394)

Al A’mash(rah) said: We told them about what angered the companions of the Prophet (pbuh) so they took it as their religion

Comment: This refers to those(shian e  dajjal) who base their religion on such events.

Similarly we find:

The Prophet (pbuh) said: A tribulation will fall between my companions, but God will forgive them on account of their companionship with me. Yet people will come after them who will base themselves on this tribulation, and for that they will enter Hellfire [Qurtubi, Altazkira]

The card of multiple chains:

Often the shian e dajjal inorder to deceive people argue that since the weak narrations which talk about Sahaba(ra) being cursed by other Sahaba have multiple chains(routes) thus their ranking should be upgraded from weak to Good(hasan). But in reality this rule is specific to the narrations which talk about VIRTUES of companions, in which there exists slight weakness. But in this issue we have extremely weak innovators(shias) as narrators in between the chain of narrators thus according to principles of hadeeth methodology no matter how much the innovators be in number who reports narrations againt companions of Prophet(saw) , they will be rejected and will be of no value. On the contrary even if an innovator was considered to be Thiqa(trustworthy) when narrates narrations in support of their beliefs then those will be rejected, like shias reporting narrations where sahaba are criticized or nasibis narrating reports where Ahlebayt are criticized.

So people shouldn’t be surprised by the existence of multiple chains. The scholars knew that the existence of a lot of chains was because the innovators really went out of their way to spread that propaganda.


Muawiya(ra) defends himself.

Beautiful response by Muawiyah (radiallahu anhu) against PROPAGANDA against Rulers. Urwa said
عَقِيْلٌ، وَمَعْمَرٌ: عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، حَدَّثَنِي عُرْوَةُ: أَنَّ المِسْوَرَ بنَ مَخْرَمَةَ أَخْبَرَهُ: أَنَّهُ وَفَدَ عَلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ، فَقَضَى حَاجَتَهُ، ثُمَّ خَلاَ بِهِ، فَقَالَ: يَا مِسْوَرُ! مَا فَعَلَ طَعْنُكَ عَلَى الأَئِمَّةِ؟
: دَعْنَا مِنْ هَذَا وَأَحْسِنْ.
: لاَ وَاللهِ، لَتُكَلِّمَنِّي بِذَاتِ نَفْسِكَ بِالَّذِي تَعِيْبُ عَلَيَّ.
قَالَ مِسْوَرٌ
: فَلَمْ أَتْرُكْ شَيْئاً أَعِيْبُهُ عَلَيْهِ إِلاَّ بَيَّنْتُ لَهُ.
: لاَ أَبْرَأُ مِنَ الذَّنْبِ، فَهَلْ تَعُدُّ لَنَا يَا مِسْوَرُ مَا نَلِي مِنَ الإِصْلاَحِ فِي أَمْرِ العَامَّةِ، فَإِنَّ الحَسَنَةَ بِعَشْرِ أَمْثَالِهَا، أَمْ تَعُدُّ الذُّنُوْبَ، وَتَتْرُكُ الإِحْسَانَ؟
: مَا تُذْكَرُ إِلاَّ الذُّنُوْبُ.
قَالَ مُعَاوِيَةُ
: فَإِنَّا نَعْتَرِفُ للهِ بِكُلِّ ذَنْبٍ أَذْنَبْنَاهُ، فَهَلْ لَكَ يَا مِسْوَرُ ذُنُوْبٌ فِي خَاصَّتِكَ تَخْشَى أَنْ تُهْلِكَكَ إِنْ لَمْ تُغْفَرْ؟
: نَعَمْ.
: فَمَا يَجْعَلُكَ اللهُ بِرَجَاءِ المَغْفِرَةِ أَحَقَّ مِنِّي، فَوَاللهِ مَا أَلِي مِنَ الإِصْلاَحِ أَكْثَرَ مِمَّا تَلِي، وَلَكِنْ وَاللهِ لاَ أُخَيَّرُ بَيْنَ أَمْرَيْنِ بَيْنَ اللهِ وَبَيْنَ غَيْرِهِ، إِلاَّ اخْتَرْتُ اللهَ عَلَى مَا سِوَاهُ، وَإِنِّي لَعَلَى دِيْنٍ يُقْبَلُ فِيْهِ العَمَلُ وَيُجْزَى فِيْهِ بِالحَسَنَاتِ، وَيُجْزَى فِيْهِ بِالذُّنُوْبِ إِلاَّ أَنْ يَعْفُوَ اللهُ عَنْهَا.
: فَخَصَمَنِي.
قَالَ عُرْوَةُ
: فَلَمْ أَسْمَعِ المِسْوَرَ ذَكَرَ مُعَاوِيَةَ إِلاَّ صَلَّى عَلَيْهِ

Miswar bin Makhrama ra went to Muawiyah ra in a delegation, and He (Muawiyah) helped him in his (Miswar`s) need, then met him alone and asked him, What is your issue with criticizing the rulers(i.e. Muawiyah)? Miswar said: Leave it, and do good. Muawiyah said: No By Allah you have to tell me about yourself, why do you criticize me? Miswar said: Then I mentioned all the problematic issues. Muawiyah replied: No one is free from sins, O Miswar do you know how I tried to correct matters of people? One good deed will be multiplied (minimum) 10, or you just see the wrong and leave the good? Miswar said: No. We just mention those sins which we see. Muawiyah replied: We accept our shortcomings before Allah, O Miswar do you have any sins which you fear, if Allah doesn’t forgive then you will be doomed? Miswar said: yes. Muawiyah replied: Then what is the matter with you? Do you think you will be forgiven and I will not be forgiven? By Allah I try my best to correct more than you, but I choose one thing between the two. I choose Allah against any partner, I am on a Deen where Allah accepts deeds. Allah rewards good and punishes sins which He doesn’t forgive. I hope that Allah rewards abundantly for a single good deed. I face issues which you and I can’t count. I have established the system of Salah, Jihaad in the cause of Allah and the matters which Allah legislated. There are lot more matters which I can’t describe and you can’t count, think about those matters. Miswar said: I came to know Muawiyah won the discussion, Urwa said after that it was NEVER heard that Miswar said something against Muawiyah, he always prayed for him. [ Tareekh Baghdad 1/208, It is mentioned in Majallah al Hadith 29 page 61 that its chain is authentic, Seyar Ailam an Nubala 3/151 and the Muhaqqiqqn said the narrators are trustworthy ]

Recommendation from Quran to shias:

O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do} [Al-Maeda 5:8]

Our Lord, forgive us and [forgive] our brethren who preceded us in faith. And do not put in our hearts rancour towards the Believers.(59:10)

This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did.(2:134)

Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.” Quran (17:81)

24 thoughts on “Part 9: Nature of Relationship between Ahlebayt(ra) and Muawiya(ra)

  1. Wonderful, Your job is Mindblowing and I am Garteful to you
    Jazak Allah
    Allah Aapko aur Kamiyab Kare

  2. I was looking for answers for my friend and it troubled me that if the Shias were right then there was so much unsurping poisnoisig murdering adultery during the time of the Prophet(PBUH) between his closest companions and if he was a prophet he shud have known and was beginning to have doubts about Islam but this article has strengthened my imam and further increased my love for The Prophet(PBUH) the sahabas the Ahlal Bayt (may Allah be pleased with them all) thank u so much

  3. Can you refute the claim of Tahirul Qadri (Barelwi Sufi) and Isfaqul Majid (Ahle Hadeeth) (besides Maududi) that Muawiyah himself instituted cursing of Ali (RA)?

    • Brother the claims of scholars you referred to were based on some reports, and in our article we have proven that those reports are weak(unreliable), therefore the claims of these scholars also turn out to be weak.

  4. Argument:
    Ishaq and Bakr bin Haytham from Abdurazaq bin Hamam from Mu’amar from Ibn
    Taous from Taous bin Kisan 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’awiyah came out. The Prophet (s)
    said: ‘He is the one’.
    Ansab al-Ashraf, Volume 2 page 120


    Imam al-Bukhari (Allah have mercy on him) declared this narration a forgery
    in his Tarikh al-Awsat (Luhaydan ed. 1:255-256) in the context of mentioning
    some forgeries disparaging Mu`awiya (Allah be well-pleased with him), as
    detailed in the below link:

  5. we take gift or allowance from someone whom you think rightful,legitimate or at least not-a-criminal.

    I have noticed some of narrations stating Ahlul Bays and descendants of Ali(r.a.) taking yearly allowance,gifts etc. from Muawiya(r.a.)

    1. Muwayia(r.a.) to Hasan(r.a.)
    وأجاز معاوية الحسن بن على بثلاثمائة ألف وألف ثوب وثلاثين عبدا ومائة جمل، وانصرف الحسن بن على إلى المدينة وولى معاوية الكوفة المغيرة بن شعبة، وولى البصرة عبد الله بن عامر، وانصرف إلى دمشق واتخذها دار مملكته.
    Ibn Battaal (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
    . Mu‘aawiyah bestowed upon al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali three hundred thousand dinars, a thousand garments, thirty slaves and one hundred camels, and al-Hasan ibn Ali left for Madinah. Mu‘aawiyah appointed al-Mugheerah ibn Shu‘bah as governor of Kufah, and he appointed ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Aamir as governor of Basrah, and he left for Damascus, which he took as the capital of his kingdom.
    شرح البخاري لابن بطال(15/105)
    fathul bari-

    2. to Hasan(r.a.)-

    ولما نزل لمعاوية عن الخلافة من ورعه صيانة لدماء المسلمين ، كان له على معاوية في كل عام جائزة ، وكان يفد إليه ، فربما أجازه بأربعمائة ألف درهم ، وراتبه في كل سنة مائة ألف ، فانقطع سنة عن الذهاب ، وجاء وقت الجائزة ، فاحتاج الحسن إليها – وكان من أكرم الناس – فأراد أن يكتب إلى معاوية ليبعث بها إليه ، فلما نام تلك الليلة رأى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام ، فقال له : ” يا بني ، أتكتب إلى مخلوق بحاجتك ؟ ! ” وعلمه دعاء يدعو به ، فترك الحسن ما كان هم به من الكتابة ، فذكره معاوية وافتقده ، وقال : ابعثوا إليه بمائتي ألف ، فلعل له ضرورة في تركه القدوم علينا . فحملت إليه من غير سؤال .
    Muawiya(r.a.) used to send gifts every year and Hasan(r.a.) used to got to him to get allowance. Sometimes it used to reach to the amount of 400 thousand dirhams, and 100 thousand yearly …..

    3. to Hasan(r.a.)-
    other narrations:

    ويقال : بل أرسل عبد الله بن الحارث بن نوفل إلى معاوية حتى أخذ له ما سأل ، فكتب إليه الحسن : أن أقبل ، فأقبل من جسر منبج إلى مسكن في خمسة أيام ، فسلم إليه الحسن الأمر ، وبايعه حتى قدما الكوفة . ووفى معاوية للحسن ببيت المال ، وكان فيه يومئذ سبعة آلاف ألف درهم ; فاحتملها الحسن ، وتجهز هو وأهل بيته إلى المدينة ، وكف معاوية عن سب علي والحسن يسمع . وأجرى معاوية على الحسن كل سنة ألف ألف درهم . وعاش الحسن بعد ذلك عشر سنين

    ابن أبي شيبة : حدثنا زيد بن الحباب ، عن حسين بن واقد ، حدثني عبد الله بن بريدة ; أن الحسن دخل على معاوية ، فقال : لأجيزنك بجائزة لم أجز بها أحدا ، فأجازه بأربعمائة ألف ، أو أربعمائة ألف ألف ، فقبلها .

    4. Abdullah bin Jafar ibn abi talib(r.a.)- he was a friend of MUawiya(r.a.), oftne used to visit and eat at his house and used to give huge amount of money as gift-

    فلما خرج معاوية أمر له بخمسين ألف دينار . وكان ابن جعفر صديقا لمعاوية ، وكان يفد عليه كل سنة فيعطيه ألف ألف درهم ، ويقضي له مائة حاجة ، ولما حضرت معاوية الوفاة أوصى ابنه يزيد به . فلما قدم ابن جعفر على يزيد قال له : كم كان أمير المؤمنين يعطيك كل سنة ؟ قال : ألف ألف . فقال له : قد أضعفناها لك . وكان يعطيه ألفي ألف كل سنة ، فقال له عبد الله بن جعفر : بأبي أنت وأمي ، ما قلتها لأحد قبلك ، ولا أقولها لأحد بعدك . فقال يزيد : ولا أعطاكها أحد قبلي ، ولا يعطيكها أحد بعدي
    in siyar-
    عن أبان بن تغلب ، قال : ذكر لنا أن عبد الله بن جعفر قدم على معاوية ، وكانت له منه وفادة في كل سنة ، يعطيه ألف ألف درهم ، ويقضي له مائة حاجة .

    5. Husayn(r.a.) also accepting gifts like his brother-
    al bidaya- 218-219 8th part]
    فلما استقرت الخلافة لمعاوية كان الحسين يتردد إليه مع أخيه الحسن ، فكان معاوية يكرمهما إكراما زائدا ، ويقول لهما : مرحبا وأهلا . ويعطيهما عطاء جزيلا ، وقد أطلق لهما في يوم واحد مائتي ألف ، وقال : خذاها وأنا ابن هند ، والله لا يعطيكماها أحد قبلي ولا أحد بعدي . فقال الحسين : والله لن تعطي أنت ولا أحد قبلك ولا بعدك رجلين أفضل منا . ولما توفي الحسن كان الحسين يفد إلى معاوية في كل عام فيعطيه ويكرمه

    By Muhammad Tazin

  6. Jafar Al Sadiq narrating from Mu’awiyah, and he believed in the veracity of Mu’āwiyah ibn Abī Sufyān.

    حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ ، عَنْ سُلَيْمَانَ بْنِ بِلَالٍ ، عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ الْقَاسِمَ بْنَ مُحَمَّدٍ يَقُولُ : قَالَ مُعَاوِيَةُ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : “ إِذَا صَلَّى الْإِمَامُ جَالِسًا ؛ فَصَلُّوا جُلُوسًا “ ، قَالَ : فَعَجِبَ النَّاسُ مِنْ صِدْقِ مُعَاوِيَةَ

    We were told by Khālid ibn Mukhallad from Sulāyman ibn Bilāl from Jā’far ibn Muḥammad (raḥimahullāh) who said: I heard al-Qāsim ibn Muḥammad (raḥimahullāh) say: Muāāwiyah (raḍiallāhu anhu) said: The Messenger Allāhs ﷺ said, “If the Imām prays seated, then pray while sitting.” Al-Qāsim said, “People were amazed by the veracity of Mu’āwiyah.

    [Muṣannaf fī al-Aḥādith wā’ al-Āthār no. 6979; Ṣaḥīḥ]

    Imām al-Ḥāfīḍh Abū’l-Abbās al-Būṣāyrī (raḥimahullāh) said:
    ذَا إِسْنَادٌ رِجَالُهُ ثِقَاتٌ
    The narrators in the chain are trustworth.
    [Itḥāf al-Khīrah al-‚Maharah bī‘ Zawā’id al-‚Masānīd al-‘Āsharah no. 1207]

    Imām al-Ḥāfīḍh Abū Bakr al-Bayhāqī (raḥimahullāh) commented:
    فَهَذَا جَعْفَرُ بْن مُحَمَّد الصَّادِقُ يَرْوِيهِ ، وَيُصَدِّقُ الْقَاسِمَ بْن مُحَمَّد بْن أَبِي بَكْرٍ الصِّدِّيقَ فِيمَا يَحْكِيهِ مِنْ تَصْدِيقِ النَّاسِ مُعَاوِيَةَ ، وَالنَّاسُ إِذْ ذَاكَ مَنْ بَقِيَ مِنَ الصَّحَابَةِ ، ثُمَّ أَكَابِرِ التَّابِعِينَ
    He is Jā’far ibn Muḥammad as-Ṣādīq, who narrated it from al-Qāsim ibn Muḥammad ibn Abū Bakr as-Ṣiddīq and he believes in what he (al-Qāsim) has reported about people’s belief in muāāwiyah(truthfulness). And these people were the remaining companions and big tabi’īn.
    [Ibn Asākīr, Tarīkḥ ad-Dimašhq no. 63867]

  7. عن جعفر الصادق عن أبیه علیهما السلام أن علیا علیه السلام لم یكن ینسب أحداً من أهل حربة إلى الشرك ولا إلى النفاق، ولكنه كان یقول: هم إخواننا بغوا علینا
    Jafar Sadiq narrates from his father (Baqir) that Ali never accused the ones with whom he fought of Shirk (i.e polytheism) or hypocrisy, rather he would say , they are our brothers who rebelled against us. [ Qurbul Asnad #318 p. 94]

  8. الهيثم بن عدي: ثنا إسماعيل، عن خالد، عن علقمة بن عامر، قال: سئل علي عن أهل النهروان أمشركون هم ؟ فقال: من الشرك فروا، قيل أفمنافقون ؟ قال: إن المنافقين لا يذكرون الله إلا قليلا: فقيل فما هم يا أمير المؤمنين ؟ قال: إخواننا بغوا علينا فقاتلناهم ببغيهم علينا.
    Al bidaya wal nihaya 7/321 or 300.

    ‘Alqamah b. ‘Amir asked ‘Ali “Where the people of Nahrawan Mushrikun?” He replied, “They escaped from Shirk”, “Where they Munafiqun?” He (‘Ali) said, “Indeed, the Munafiqin do not remember Allah, except little” He asked, “So what are they O ‘Amir al-Mu’minin?” He said, “They’re our brothers who transgressed against us, so we fought them for transgressing us.

  9. حَدَّثَنَا حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ آدَمَ ، ثَنَا مُفَضَّلُ بْنُ مُهَلْهِلٍ ، عَنِ الشَّيْبَانِيِّ ، عَنْ قَيْسِ بْنِ مُسْلِمٍ ، عَنْ طَارِقِ بْنِ شِهَابٍ ، قَالَ : كُنْتُ عِنْدَ عَلِيٍّ , فَسُئِلَ عَنْ أَهْلِ النَّهْرِ أَهُمْ مُشْرِكُونَ ؟ قَالَ : ” مِنَ الشِّرْكِ فَرُّوا ” , قِيلَ : فَمُنَافِقُونَ هُمْ ؟ قَالَ : ” إِنَّ الْمُنَافِقِينَ لَا يَذْكُرُونَ اللَّهَ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا ” , قِيلَ لَهُ : فَمَا هُمْ ؟ قَالَ : ” قَوْمٌ بَغَوْا عَلَيْنَا
    Ali(ra) was asked about the people of Naharwan(Khawarij): “Are they Mushrikeen?” He replied:”They have run from shirk” Then he was asked “Are they Munafiqeen?” He replied “Munafiqeen are those who don’t remember Allah, except a little (while the opponents do a lot of Zikr)” Then he was asked “Then what are they?” He replied:”People who have rebelled against us”
    [Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah #37239; Grading: Isnad Sahih by Muhaqqiq Usamah bin Ibrahim bin Muhammad]

  10. 506 – حدثنا إسحاق بن إبراهيم ، أنا يحيى بن آدم ، ثنا مفضل بن مهلهل ، عن الشيباني ، عن قيس بن مسلم ، عن طارق بن شهاب ، قال : « كنت عند علي حين فرغ من قتال أهل النهروان فقيل له : أمشركون هم ؟ قال : » من الشرك فروا « ، فقيل : منافقون ؟ قال : » المنافقون لا يذكرون الله إلا قليلا « ، قيل : فما هم ؟ قال : » قوم بغوا علينا فقاتلناهم

    507 – حدثنا إسحاق ، أنا وكيع ، عن مسعر ، عن عامر بن شقيق ، عن أبي وائل ، قال : قال رجل : « من دعا إلى البغلة الشهباء يوم قتل المشركين ؟ فقال علي : » من الشرك فروا « ، قال : المنافقون ؟ قال : » إن المنافقين لا يذكرون الله إلا قليلا « ، قال : فما هم ؟ قال : قوم بغوا (1) علينا فقاتلناهم فنصرنا عليهم »

    508 – وحدثنا وكيع ، ثنا ابن أبي خالد ، عن حكيم بن جابر ، قال : قالوا لعلي حين قتل أهل النهروان : أمشركون هم ؟ قال : « من الشرك فروا » ، قيل : فمنافقون ؟ قال : « المنافقون لا يذكرون الله إلا قليلا » ، قيل : فما هم ؟ قال : « قوم حاربونا فحاربناهم ، وقاتلونا فقاتلناهم »

    509 – حدثنا إسحاق ، أنا أبو نعيم ، ثنا سفيان ، عن جعفر بن محمد ، عن أبيه ، قال : سمع علي ، يوم الجمل أو يوم صفين رجلا يغلو في القول فقال : « لا تقولوا إنما هم قوم زعموا أنا بغينا عليهم ، وزعمنا أنهم بغوا علينا فقاتلناهم » ، فذكر لأبي جعفر أنه أخذ منهم السلاح ، فقال : ما كان أعناه عن ذلك «
    (isnad hasan till imam Baqir as per Farid, Hasan bin hakam was praised by scholars)

    510 – حدثنا محمد بن يحيى ، ثنا أحمد بن خالد ، ثنا محمد بن راشد ، عن مكحول ، أن أصحاب علي سألوه عن من ، قتل من أصحاب معاوية ما هم ؟ قال : « هم المؤمنون »

    511 – حدثنا محمد بن يحيى ، ثنا أحمد بن خالد ، ثنا عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن أبي سلمة ، عن عبد الواحد بن أبي عون ، قال : مر علي وهو متكئ على الأشتر على قتلى صفين ، فإذا حابس اليماني مقتول ، فقال الأشتر : إنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون ، حابس اليماني معهم يا أمير المؤمنين عليه علامة معاوية ، أما والله لقد عهدته مؤمنا ، فقال علي : « والآن هو مؤمن » ، قال : وكان حابس رجلا من أهل اليمن من أهل العبادة والاجتهاد «

    513 – حدثنا محمد بن يحيى ، ثنا محمد بن عبيد ، ثنا الحسن ، وهو ابن الحكم النخعي ، عن رياح بن الحارث ، قال : إنا بوادي الظبي ، وإن ركبتي لتكاد تمس ركبة عمار بن ياسر فأتى رجل فقال : كفر والله أهل الشام ، فقال عمار : « لا تقل ذلك قبلتنا واحدة ، ونبينا واحد ، ولكنهم قوم مفتونون فحق علينا قتالهم حتى يرجعوا إلى الحق »
    (isnad sahih as per Farid, Hasan bin hakam was praised by scholars)

    514 – حدثنا محمد بن يحيى ، ثنا قبيصة ، ثنا سفيان ، عن الحسن بن الحكم ، عن رياح بن الحارث ، عن عمار بن ياسر ، قال : « ديننا واحد ، وقبلتنا واحدة ، ودعوتنا واحدة ، ولكن قوم بغوا علينا فقاتلناهم »
    (isnad sahih as per Farid, Hasan bin hakam was praised by scholars).

    516 – حدثنا هارون بن عبد الله ، ثنا محمد بن عبيد ، ثنا مسعر ، عن ثابت بن أبي الهذيل ، قال : سألت أبا جعفر عن أصحاب الجمل ، فقال : مؤمنون أو قال : ليسوا كفارا ….. حدثنا هارون ، ثنا يعلى ، ثنا مسعر ، عن ثابت بن أبي الهذيل ، عن أبي جعفر ، نحوه

    517 – حدثنا محمد بن يحيى ، ثنا يعلى ، ثنا مسعر ، عن ثابت بن أبي الهذيل ، قال : سألت أبا جعفر عن أصحاب الجمل ، فقال : « مؤمنون وليسوا بكفار »

    (Taken from Ta’dhim Qadr As-Salat by Imam al-Maruzi ; Hard copy ahadeeth from #591-603)

  11. Ibn Taymiyyah:
    الْخَوَارِجُ الْمَارِقُونَ الَّذِينَ أَمَرَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بِقِتَالِهِمْ قَاتَلَهُمْ أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ أَحَدُ الْخُلَفَاءِ الرَّاشِدِينَ. وَاتَّفَقَ عَلَى قِتَالِهِمْ أَئِمَّةُ الدِّينِ مِنْ الصَّحَابَةِ وَالتَّابِعِينَ وَمَنْ بَعْدَهُمْ. وَلَمْ يُكَفِّرْهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ وَسَعْدُ بْنُ أَبِي وَقَّاصٍ وَغَيْرُهُمَا مِنْ الصَّحَابَةِ بَلْ جَعَلُوهُمْ مُسْلِمِينَ مَعَ قِتَالِهِمْ وَلَمْ يُقَاتِلْهُمْ عَلِيٌّ حَتَّى سَفَكُوا الدَّمَ الْحَرَامَ وَأَغَارُوا عَلَى أَمْوَالِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ فَقَاتَلَهُمْ لِدَفْعِ ظُلْمِهِمْ وَبَغْيِهِمْ لَا لِأَنَّهُمْ كُفَّارٌ.
    The Khawarij, the renegades whom the Prophet (May The Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him) commanded us to fight. Who the leader of the believers, one of the Khulafah ar-Rashidin, ‘Ali b. Abi Talib fought. It’s agreed upon to fight them by the scholars of this Din, from the Sahabah, the Tabi’in (successors) and those after them. Both ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and Sa’ad b. Abi Waqqas didn’t make Takfir (excommunication) of them, nor other than them from the Sahabah and they made the Muslims fight alongside them. And ‘Ali didn’t fight them until they spilled the blood which was prohibited for them (to spill) and started to take the wealth of the Muslims. So he fought them in defense of this oppression and transgression, not because they were Kuffar. [Majmu’ al-Fatawa (Vol. 3, Pg. 282)]

  12. Regarding Ali ibn Jaad who said: “By Allah – Muawiya died on a religion other than Islam.”

    This is because Imam Ali ibn al-Ja’ad used to be Shia Rafidi, however later he converted and became a Sunni. This is the reason we find two types of opinions about him from the Rijaal critics. Ali bin al-Ja’ad’s shiism was stated by Ibn Hajar.

    Hafidh al-Mizzi in “Tahzib al-Kamal” said:

    وقال أبو جعفر العقيلي قلت لعبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل لم لم تكتب عن علي بن الجعد فقال نهاني أبي أن أذهب إليه وكان يبلغه عنه أنه يتناول أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

    Abu Jafar al-Uqayli said: I asked from Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, why did not you write anything from Ali ibn al-Jaad? He said: My father prohibited to me to visit him, he was informed that (Ali) was speaking (ill) about companions of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam).

    This was the view of Ibn Jaad on Imam Hasan:

    However as said earlier, later Imam Ali ibn al-Ja’ad converted to Sunni and with that his evil views about Sahaba changed too. And after that he started considering Muawiya(R) a Sahabi, and we know that by definition , the Sahabi must die as Muslim, only then he will be counted as Sahabi. And Ali ibn al-Ja’ad after his conversion started considering Muawiya(R) a Sahabi, as can be seen below.

    Moreover, Ali ibn al-Ja’ad took couple of ahadeeth from Muawiya(ra) .

    He quoted report from Ali ibn Abi Talib(RA) wherein he considered Abu Bakr(R) and Umar(R) to be the best people after Prophet(SAWS) in this Ummah.

    He also quoted a beautiful hadeeth which was a defence of Muawiya(RA) by the noble Sahabi Abu Saeed al-Khudri. This report actually shows the lofty status of a random Sahabi, which was acknowledged by Umar(R), let alone Muawiya(R) who has number of merits.

  13. In Wasa’il Al-Shia (15/83), Al-Hurr Al-Ameli quoted an authentic report from Qurb Al-Isnad, which its author transmitted from: Harun b. Muslim, from Mas’adah b. Ziyad, from Ja’far (as), from his father: Ali never used to ascribe any of his enemies to shirk or hypocrisy. Rather, he used to say: “They are our brothers who have transgressed against us.”‘

  14. Musannaf urdu. 11/762-763 Ammar denied that ahl sham did kufr. 763 a Tabaee saw in dream that both some people from both groups of siffeen went to jannah. 764 Two different persons claimed to have killed Ammar, and Prophet(s) told Abdullah bin Amr bin A’as’ to obey his Father till death and that rebel group will kill Ammar. 764 Ali denied for kufr of people of shaam. 765 Umm salama reports Ammar will be killed by rebel group. 765 Alil regretted that he never that things will take such a turn, otherwise he woulddn’t have do so and asked Abu Musa to make peace. 765 after returning from siffeen Ali realized that he wouldnt be able to overcome hence he said dont dislike Imarah of Muawiya 766 and 767 Ali didnt make war prisoners in siffeen as slaves. 767 ten thousand people were killed in siffeen 768 Ali prayed for forgiveness of both groups. 770 A person said during liftime of prophet(s) matters were clear for us but in this matters we aren’t certain.771 Ibn Abbas refuted Khawarij from Quran. 772 Betterment is in reconciliation of two groups, and Uthman was killed due to envy for what blessing Allah rewarded him. 773 Amarah bin Khuzaimah realized that Ali was on truth only after martyrdom of Ammar, thus he fought along side ALi. And Ammar will be killed by rebel. 773 Ammar will be killed by rebel party. 773 Dhulfiqar broke into two. 774 Ali said members who were killed from both parties are in Jannah, matters remains between me and Muawiya, but this is weak report.

  15. Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said: O Allah, let there be love of these servants of yours, i.e. Abu Huraira and his mother, in the hearts of the believing servants and let their hearts be filled with the love of the believing servants. (Abu Huraira said: This prayer) was so well granted by Allah that no believer was ever born who heard of me and who saw me but did not love me. Sahih Muslim 2491

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s