Muawiya

Abu Sulaiman's Plea of Clemency For Mu'awiya

Ansar.org states:About Mu'awiya's transgression, it is either Mu'awiyah thought that the truth lies with him or that he was deliberate in his transgression. In both cases, Mu'awiyah is not infallible from mistakes. Ahl Al-Sunnah do not refrain him from falling in sins, but they say that sins have reasons, and these sins could be removed by asking for forgiveness and repenting, or other than that.

Now rather than float around the periphery of the subject matter, does Abu Sulaiman have the courage to tell us "Was Mu'awiya's act of transgression, uprising and rebelling against the Khalifa of the time a sin? Does the Sharia apply to all Muslims or are the Sahaba exempt from sins? Clearly this cannot be the case and we have examples in the lifetime of Rasulullah (s) when he would implement Shari'a and punish companions that had committed sins.

Is he then who is a believer like he who is a transgressor (fasiq)? They are not equal.

(Qur'an: Surah al-Sajdah, verse 18)

Abu Sulaiman then cites this supplication of Mu'awiya showing his alleged 'piety':

Ansar.org states:By Allah, I have done good deeds for my people, established Islamic Law, went to Jihad for the sake of Allah, and a lot of great things I did that only Allah can count, but we do no count them more than our mistakes. And I am a believer in a religion where deeds are accepted; either rewarded by good, or rewarded by a guilt that Allah may forgives us. By Allah, if I were to choose between two matters, between Allah and anything else, I would chose Allah" [Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, vol.8, p.136-137]

Abu Sulaiman is seeking to plead clemency for his client on account that he would ask forgiveness for his sins. If sins can be removed by repentance then why do the Ahl'ul Sunnah condemn those that rebelled against Abu Bakr and incited insurgency against Uthman? They might have likewise repented and asked for Allah (swt)'s forgiveness, so why do the ulama insist on continuing to condemn such individuals? Rather than demand Qisas why did Mu'awiya not demand that the killers of Uthman repent for their sins?

Undoubtedly, Allah (swt) can pardon all sins but if we accept Abu Sulaiman's argument then what is the point in having a judiciary in Islam? Why have a penal code when all that transgressors need to do is ask for the forgiveness of Allah (swt)? Clearly this is not logical and the Sharia prescribes clear punishment for offences, particularly crimes against fellow human beings.

Interesting is the fact that Mu'awiya never sought forgiveness for his practice of cursing Ali (as), rather he introduced it throughout his Kingdom a tradition that did not end until it was repealed byUmar bin Abdul Aziz. On the issue of cursing, Rasulullah (s) said, "Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq (evil doing) and killing him is Kufr (disbelief)." [Sahih al-Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 197]. Abusing a momin is fisq; perhaps Abu Sulaiman should think about the momin that he was cursing. Now let us see the verdict on one who hates and curses Ali (as) and decide on where the truth lies.

Was Mu'awiya a Momin or Munafiq?

We have already presented to our objective readers the wonderful deeds of Mu'awiya, what should we say of his Iman?

The sign of a Munafiq is hatred of Hadhrath 'Ali (as)

As a starting pointing let us consider the words of Hadhrath 'Ali (as):

"By him who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessing be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me. - Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter XXXIV, p46, Tradition #141" Its is little wonder that we have the testimony of Abu Said al Khudri:

"We recognized the hypocrites by their hatred of Ali." (Fada'il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p639, Tradition 1086 - al-Isti'ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p47 - al-Riyad al-Nadirah, by al-Muhibb al-Tabari, v3, p242)

One wonders how Abu Sulaiman and his Nasibi brethren can prove that Mu'awiya loved Hadhrath 'Ali (as).

Let us look at some other traditions before concluding on Mu'awiya:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever hurts Ali, has hurt me"

Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, p483; al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p263 The Messenger of Allah said:

"Whoever curses Ali, cursed me"

1. al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p121, who mentioned this tradition is Authentic
2. Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p323
3. Mishkat al-Masabih, English version, Tradition 6092
4. Tarikh al-Khulafa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p173

Rasulullah (s) said:

"Whoever leaves Ali, leaves me, whoever leaves me, leaves Allah" [Kanz ul Ummal, hadith numbers 32974 - 32976, narrated by Abdullah ibneUmar {through two chains} and Abu Dharr Ghaffari (ra).

al Mustadrak al Hakim, Vol. 3, Page 146

As we have already cited earlier Rasulullah (s) also said:

"Whoever obeys 'Ali, obeys me, whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, whoever disobeys 'Ali disobeys me, whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah" [Kanz ul Ummal, hadith numbers 32973] So these hadith tell us:

The sign of a Munafiq is hatred of Ali (as)Whoever leaves, disobeys and curses 'Ali - in fact leaves, disobeys and curses Allah (swt) Having proven that Mu'awiya cursed Imam Ali (as), perhaps it is time that Abu Sulaiman breaks free from his Nasibi ideology and answers this: Did Mu'awiya leave, disobey and curse 'Ali?Is an individual who leaves, disobeys and curses Allah (swt) a Muslim?

This being the case could Abu Sulaiman kindly explain why it is that he has throughout the article insisted on giving Mu'awiya the title (ra)? Is Allah (swt) pleased with someone that disobeys and curses him?

Committing this sin of cursing Imam 'Ali (as) as an individual is bad enough, one wonders how Allah (swt) will deal with the fact that Mu'awiya introduced this practice through his empire thus leading thousands of Muslims (three generations) to commit this ijtimali (combined sin). Will Allah (swt) appreciate this innovation?

It is not permissible to refer to a Munafiq as Sayyidina

In al Adhab al Mufrad Muhammad, Muhammad bin Ismaeel Bukhari records on page 300 Chapter 325 we are told:

"Rasulullah (s) said 'Don't say Sayyidina to a munafiq, because that would make that munafiq your Chief (superior), and in the process you will be upsetting your Creator".

In al-Nasa'ih al-Kaafiyah page 111 this tradition of Rasulullah (s) is quoted:

Burayda narrates that the Prophet (s) said, "When you refer to a munafiq as ya sayyidina you incur the wrath of your Creator" One hopes that our readers are able to appreciate the consequences of using this title when describing Mu'awiya. We would urge our Sunni brethren to refrain from such actions.

Hadhrath 'Ali (as)'s testimony - Mu'awiya is my enemy

Despite the efforts of the Nasibis to limit the differences between Mu'awiya and 'Ali as nothing more than differences in thinking, Hadhrath 'Ali (as)'s views on Mu'awiya's iman gives us an insight into his thoughts. If enmity of 'Ali is a sign of a munafiq then consider these words of Hadhrath 'Ali (as), taken from Suyuti's "Tareekh ul Khulafa" rendered into English by Abdassamad Clarke as "The khalifas who took the right way". He records this sermon of Imam 'Ali (as) on page 184:

"Praise belongs to Allah Who made our enemy ask about something that had occurred to him in the matter of his deen. Mu'awiya wrote to me asking about the ambiguous hermaphrodite"

History of the Khalifas who took the right way (Part English translation of Suyuti's Tarikh'ul Khulafa" page 184) An enemy of 'Ali (as) is an enemy of Allah (swt)

We read in Riyadh al Nadira Volume 3 page 111 that Rasulullah (s) declared:

"O Allah, 'Ali is my beloved friend, and my beloved friend is a beloved friend of Allah. ['Ali] Your enemy is my enemy, and my enemy is Allah's enemy. O 'Ali destroyed are those that incur your wrath". Al Riyadh al Nadira, Page 111

One who fails to accept 'Ali as his Maula is not a Momin

In Sawaiq al Muhriqa page 177, Imam of Ahl ul Sunnah Ahmad Ibn Hajr al Makki records this event that took place during Hadhrath Umar's khilafath: "Once two land owners approached Umar with a dispute. Umar called 'Ali and asked that he resolve the matter. Imam 'Ali resolved the dispute, and one of the individuals said, 'This man ['Ali] is going to decide between us?' Upon hearing this Hadhrath Umar grabbed the individual by the collar and said 'Don't you know who this individual is? He is the Maula of me, you and all Momin's, and whoever does NOT take him to be his Maula is not a momin (believer)"

This incident has also been recorded in exactly the same way in Riyadh al Nadira, Volume 3, Page 115. Al Riyadh al Nadira, Vol. 3, Page 115

The key difference between Sunni and Shi'a on the topic of Imamate is in relation to the meaning of Maula used by Rasulullah (s) about Imam 'Ali (as). We do not intend to delve in to the matter here, suffice it to say Ahl'ul Sunnah deem Maula to mean friend Shia define it as Master. The question that we pose for Abu Sulaiman and his fellow advocates is, did Mu'awiya EVER deem Imam 'Ali (as) as his Maula?

If it means Master did he ever recognise Imam 'Ali (as) as his Master, rather he rejected his Leadership and openly rebelled against him, refusing to give bayya to him and as has already been mentioned, al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz had stated that in the eyes of Ahl'ul Sunnah from the khilafath of Imam 'Ali to peace with Imam Hasan, Mu'awiya was a baghi - i.e. he rebelled against the rightful Imam (did not accept Ali (as) as his Maula).

If we are to accept the definition as one of friend, then perhaps Abu Sulaiman could inform his flock as to what type of friendship he showed to Imam 'Ali (as). Was opposing Imam Ali (as), inciting sedition against him and then going to war against him proof that he deemed 'Ali (as) his friend?

Did he further endorse this friendship after Imam 'Ali (as)'s death by instituting his cursing throughout his empire? Do these actions prove that Mu'awiya deemed Ali (as) as his Maula as in friend? Clearly not! Rather than defend Mu'awiya, we would urge Abu Sulaiman to at least embrace the fatwa of their authority figure Hadhrath Umar, who stated, "One who does NOT deem 'Ali his Maula, is not a believer.

**The 'true' merits of Mu'awiya bin Hind

The meaning of Mu'awiya**

The leading Ulema of Ahl'ul Sunnah are in agreement that Mu'awiya means "barking bitch". For those interested they can consult the following texts: Tareekh ul Khulafa by al Hafidh Jalaluddin Suyuti (Urdu translation by Maulana Hakeem Nasree) page 253. Sharh ul Aqaid page 510

Rabi' ul Abrar by Allamah Zamakhshari page 700 Tahzeeb ul Kamaal fi Asma' al-Rijal by Jamaluddin Mizzi page 371 Love and hatred of 'Ali is the difference between one being legitimate and illegitimate Mohibuddeen al Tabari in Riyad ul Nadira Volume 3 page 117 Chapter 116 narrates this tradition from 'Abu Bakr:

Rasulullah (s) said, "Love of 'Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain is a sign of one being legitimate, hatred of them is the sign of one being illegitimate".

Similarly Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Ibn Atheer in his "Nihaya" Volume 5 page 155 records that: "Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq said that certain types of individuals will never have love towards us, those of illegitimate stock and those that possess an addiction to the anus (homosexual)"

In the case of Mu'awiya this tradition is certainly mist apt. Hadhrath Ayesha's testimony about methods of Nikah during the time of Jahiliyya We read in Sahih al Bukhari "Book of Nikah" - Chapter "Whoever said, a marriage is not valid except with the woman's relatives" - Hadhrath Ayesha narrates:

"there were four types of marriage during the Pre-Islamic period of ignorance. One type was similar to that of the present day, i.e. a man used to ask somebody else for the hand of a girl under his guardianship or for his daughter's hand. another type of marriage was that a group of less than ten men would assemble and enter upon a women, and all of them would have sexual relations with her.

If she became pregnant and delivered a child and some days had passed after her delivery, she would send for all of them and none of them could refuse to come, and when they all gathered before her she would say to them "You (all) know what you have done and now I have given birth to a child. So it is your child O so and so! Naming whoever she liked and her child would follow him and he could not refuse to take him.."

Although not translated in the English by Dr Muhsin Khan, the original Arabic text states Ayesha calling this "Nikah Ijtimah" (Combined Nikah). Mu'awiya bin Hind was the product of Nikah Ijtimah (Combined Nikah)

Ibn Abi al Hadeed in Sharh Nahjul Balagha notes the following in Volume 10 page 130:

"When Mu'awiya was born, four people were thought to have been his father Abi bin Umar bin Musaafir, Abi Umar bin Waleed, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib and Sabah the Ethiopian. 'Abu Sufyan was short and ugly whilst Sabah was young and handsome, Hinda offered him sex and amongst the Arabs there was also a view that 'Abu Sufyan's other son Utbah was also a product of this union".

Similarly in Rabi'ul Abrar by Allamah Zamakhshari Volume 3 page 551:

"There were four people who were thought to be Mu'awiya's father, Abi bin Umar bin Musaafir, Abi Umar bin Waleed, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib and Sabah" Rabi'ul Abrar by Allamah Zamakhshari Volume 3 page 551 In Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 114 Chapter 7 we read:

"Sham bin Muhammad Kalbi in his book Kitab Mushab notes that Imam Hasan said to Mu'awiya 'Are you aware of the bed from which you was conceived?' This means he was born from four fathers".

In Thanzeeya al Nasab fi Kubul al Arab we learn that:

"In relation to the birth of Mu'awiya, four men were viewed to have been his father Umr bin Waleed bin Mugheera, Musaafir Abi Umar, 'Abu Sufyan and a forth individual was also involved. Hinda was a prostitute and had sex with black men, if any children were born from such a union she would kill them."

We read Sharh Ibn al Hadeed Volume 4 page 94 under the Chapter "Mun Kitab Ziyad Ubayya" that:

"Mu'awiya wrote a letter to Ziyad, the contents of which included the words 'O son of Sumayya' (amongst the Arabs there was a tradition that if one's ancestry was questionable, then that individual would be called by their mother's name. In the same way that Imam Hasan referred to Marwan as 'Ibn Zurqa'- Mu'awiya sought to mock Ziyad by calling him the son of SumayyaZiyad replied to Mu'awiya with these words 'Mu'awiya you called me by the name of my mother Sumayya, so as to mock me, well if I am the son of Sumayya then you are 'Ibne Jamaat' as you was a product of Nikah ijtimah".

More on Mu'awiya's 'noble' birth

We read in Muasalib ibne Sa'man munkool uz thun'zeey al Nasab page 97 that:

"Research has established that Musafir was a handsome and generous man, he fell in love with Hinda and fornicated with her, she was unmarried and became pregnant, this came to the knowledge of the Quraysh and Musafir ran away. Hinda's father Utbah summoned Mu'awiya's father Abu Sufyan - bribing with a huge dowry, he married him to Hinda. Mu'awiya was born three months after the marriage." We read in al-Nasa'ih al-Kaafiyah page 85 we read:

Musafir was a handsome, generous man - he fell in love with the daughter of Utbah, and she fell in love with him. She became pregnant. Maarif Ibne Khurbooz states that when her signs of pregnancy became visible Hinda told Musafir to flee and he made his way out of the city. Naufal states that Musafir was one of those individuals that was killed on account of his love of Hinda.

Hadhrath Ayesha's testimony that Hinda committed Zina

We read in Tadkhira Khawass page 62 Chapter "Dhikr Khwaarij" we read that "when Mu'awiya's sister Umme Habeeba received news about Muhammad bin Abu Bakr's murder, she sent Ayesha a cooked goat suggesting that the reason for his killing was his murder of Uthman. When this happened Ayesha said "May Allah (swt) kill this daughter of fornicating woman. By Allah! I shall never eat this meat again".