Muawiya

The 'virtues' Possessed By One Born Illegitimately

Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Qutubadeen Shirazi in his book "Nizhaath Quloob Munkool az Isthakhsa al Fahm" page 981 states:

"A child born out of fornication is better due to the fact that a man does so with complete effort and enjoyment, whilst a child conceived legitimately only pleases his wife. A child born from fornication is more clever, that is why Amr bin Aas and Mu'awiya bin Abu Sufyan were great politicians and are counted as amongst the people of deception, the greatest politician from this group was Ziyad bin Ubayya".

One born illegitimately can not be a Khalifa

Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah al Muhaddith Shah Waliyullah Dehlavi in his Hujjutul Balaghtha Volume 2 page 149 "Dhikr Khilafath" states: "To be a Khalifa one must satisfy the following six requirements, he must be wise mature Free a Man Brave Possess good ancestry" On this issue of ancestry Shah states:

"The Khalifa should be such an individual that people recognise him on account of his good family, and not the opposite where the people would show him disrespect".

The combined nikah, its merits and Hinda's fornication has now been presented faithfully from the texts of Ahl'ul Sunnah. Mu'awiya may indeed have been a master of deception and a great politician, but as Shah Waliyullah states, one born illegitimately can not attaint the position of Khalifa, you need to possess a good ancestry - something that Mu'awiya did not possess, his mother entered the pre jahiliyya system of Nikah sleeping with four different men.

Mu'awiya the politician and khalifa dedicated 5 years of his life fighting the Imam of Guidance 'Ali ibne Abi Talib (as), he poisoned Imam Hasan (as), he introduced the ugly bidah of cursing Imam 'Ali (as) during the Friday Sermon. He murdered the supporters of 'Ali (as), introduced practices that contradicted the Qur'an and Sunnah, made his alcoholic son Yazeed Khalifa over the nation.

Hinda's suckling and the combined Nikah may well have indeed created a great politician but, one of the signs of being illegitimate is hatred of Imam 'Ali (as) - and Mu'awiya through his actions confirmed the authenticity of this hadith.

One who fights the rightful Imam is a Fasiq

In al-Nasa'ih al-Kaafiyah page 130, Muhammad din Aqeeal Shaafi whilst discussing the justice of the companions states:

"prior to the murder of Hadhrath Uthman all the Sahaba were Adil (Just). After his murder, fitnah arose and a viewpoint developed that those who fought against Hadhrath 'Ali were fasiq because they rebelled against the rightful Imam".

One who turns his back on the right path is a Zaalim and Fasiq

In Sharh al Maqasid Volume 2 page 306 Allamah Taftazani states that:

"The battles between the Sahaba are proof that some companions left the right path and became Zaalim and Fasiq because they became affected by jealousy, hatred, hypocrisy, a desire for power and indulgence because not all the companions were just, not was every individual who saw Rasulullah (s), good". Sharh al Maqasid Volume 2 page 306

Clearly the right path was to attach themselves to 'Ali (as). By turning their backs on him and fighting him, proves that Mu'awiya and his party had gone astray. He fought 'Ali and caused the death of prominent companions. Thereafter as a Khalifa he adopted a policy of oppression against the lovers of Hadhrath 'Ali and cursed him during the Friday Sermons.

Do we need any further proof to demonstrate that Mu'awiya had gone astray and hated Imam 'Ali (as)? Mu'awiya continued to act in the way of descendants. His brother, maternal grandfather and uncle were killed at the hands of Maula 'Ali (as) at Badr. Mu'awiya was hence motivated by hatred and dedicated his life to fighting Imam 'Ali (as).

Mu'awiya's Conquests

Some advocates of Mu'awiya commonly highlight the fact that the Muslim Empire was expanded under his rule with Sahaba under his helm, as was not the case under Imam Ali (as)'s khilafath. It should be pointed out that empire expansion means little in the eyes of Allah (swt). One will be questioned on the day of judgement on his 'personal deeds' and Mu'awiya despite his advocate's poor defences, will indeed have a great deal to answer for. In any case, his conquests mean nothing, as Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah 'Abu Bakr al Jassas states in Ahkaam ul Qur'an Volume 3 page 119:

"Following the four khalifas the Sahaba participated in Jihad under the helm of Fasiq's and Faajirs, 'Abu Ayub Ansari participated in Jihad under the Leadership of Yazeed".

Mu'awiya's Government compared by Hadhrath Ayesha to Firawn (Pharoah) and other Kaafirs (Pagans) Shaykh ul Mudira page 165 al Bidaya 131 Volume 8 Mukhtasar Ta'reekh al-Dimishk Volume 25 page 42

Aswat bin Yazeed said to Hadhrath Ayesha: 'Aren't you surprised that this Mu'awiya is from Tulaqa (freed captive) and in Khilafath he fought the companions? Ayesha replied 'this Government and Kingdom, Allah (swt) gives Leadership to both just and tyrannical, for 400 years in Egypt the enemies of God, Phiraun ruled as did other Kaafir Kings".

Hadhrath Ayesha's comparing of Mu'awiya to Firawn and other kaafirs is in fact a reference to the Qur'an, where Allah (swt) states in Surah Hud verses 96-99:

"And we sent Moses, with Our Clear (Signs) and an authority manifest, Unto Pharaoh and his chiefs: but they followed the command of Pharaoh and the command of Pharaoh was no right (guide). He will go before his people on the Day of Judgment, and lead them into the Fire (as cattle are led to water): But woeful indeed will be the place to which they are led! And they are followed by a curse in this (life) and on the Day of Judgment: and woeful is the gift which shall be given (unto them)!" (Taken from Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation).

Mu'awiya's declaration that Ziyad was the son of 'Abu Sufyan is proof that he was a fasiq In Tarikh Kamil Volume 3 page 225 we are informed:

"Mu'awiya's declaring that Ziyad was his brother, was the first act that was in open contradiction to the laws of Sharia because Rasulullah (s) said that the legitimate child is one born from wedlock"

Moreover Al Hafidh Jalaluddeen Suyuti also acknowledges this in Tareekh ul Khulafa page 185:

"Mu'awiya's declaring Ziyad to be the son of Abu Sufyan was the first act that contradicted an order of Rasulullah".

For further Sunni references on this clear bidah please see the following links:

al Qawkib al Dhuree by Allamah Mahmood Ayubi page 327 Musalman kai aruj aur zawaal, by Professor Ahmad Akbar Abadai page 54

A Fasiq is one who acts in violation to the Word of Allah (swt) and his Messenger. Mu'awiya through this act proves that he was a fasiq. For his die hard Nasibi advocates we would like to know how they explain this declaration of Mu'awiya? No doubt the ijtihad defence may be shouted out but as we have consistently proven throughout this article, you cannot exercise ijtihad where you have nass (text), which was present here via the words of Rasulullah (s). Despite this, Mu'awiya sought fit to make a declaration that contravened the words of Rasulullah (s).

It is a religious duty to expose the deeds of a fasiq

No doubt the advocates of Mu'awiya, like Abu Sulaiman, will seek to protect their Imam from harm, but to highlight the faults of a fasiq of the likes of Mu'awiya, is a religious obligation. Hasan Basri stated that:

"The testimonies of three people should be rejected:

The individual who openly indulges in bad acts.

A Zaalim Ruler One who practices bidath" (References: Sharh Muslim, by Nawawi Volume 2 page 322; Tafsir Ibn Katheer Volume 4 page 214; Ahkam al Qur'an by 'Abu Bakr Jassas; Tafseer Fathul Qadeer)

Abu Sulaiman can feel free to choose whatever category he likes because Mu'awiya fits at the helm of each one. His bad acts were evident from his declaring a bastard as his brother. As ruler, his harsh treatment of the likes of Hujr bin Adi as we have demonstrated, speaks for itself. With regards to his bidah of cursing Imam Ali (as), it has been discussed at length previously.

Famous deobandi scholar and former chief of Jamaat-e-Islami, Sayyid Abu'l Ala Maudoodi, after citing the words of Hasan Basri in Tahfim ul Qur'an Volume 5 page 87, makes these relevant comments:

"It is imperative that we highlight such individuals to prevent the risk of running in to danger (from such individuals) if narrators, witnesses and writers display such faults then such weaknesses should not be hidden, rather they should be conveyed"

Praising a fasiq leads to incurring the wrath of Allah (swt)

Whilst Abu Sulaiman and his Nasibi advocates have dedicated their life to defending Mu'awiya and heaping praise on him, no matter what the cost, we would urge our Ahl'ul Sunnah brothers not to get roped in to their actions, for the consequences are simply too great. The Sunni scholar al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi in Tuhfa Ithna Ashariyya page 191 Chapter 7 states:

"It is recorded in Sahih hadith that when someone praises a bad character person, Allah (swt) gets upset with him".

Clearly one who is a momin is one that has love for Hadhrath 'Ali (as). Why would such an individual risk incurring the wrath of Allah (swt) by showering praise on an individual who was an enemy of 'Ali (as), fought and cursed him? The modern day Nasibis are trying their utmost to recruit people into their obnoxious cult by declaring their affiliation with Imam 'Ali (as).

The reality is very different as one can see from their passionate defence of Mu'awiya which as is the case with Abu Sulaiman, in fact turns in to an attack on Imam 'Ali (as). No rational lover of Ahl'ul Sunnah would ever wish to praise those that cursed Maula 'Ali (as). Let us leave the Nasibi's to wallow in their hypocrisy. They made their own bed let them lie in, to join them on their road to Hell.

"It is little wonder that Hanafi scholar Maulana 'Abdul Hakeem Chishti in his biography of Maulana Waheed uz Zaman cited his comments from "Waheed ai Lughath":

"To say radhinathallanho after Mu'awiya's names takes a considerable amount of courage". Hayaath Waheed uz-Zaman page 109

Mu'awiya was a Nasibi

In "Lisan al Arab" page 762 by Ibn Manzur states:

"Nawasib are those who hate Hadhrath Ali, and embrace that hatred as part of their faith" If this is the definition of a Nasibi then Mu'awiya was the practical definition of one. If his fighting against Imam Ali (as) is not clear evidence in itself, then his introducing the practice of cursing 'Ali (as) in all mosques throughout the territories, serves as unequivocal proof that he had a deep seated hated of Imam 'Ali (as) in his heart.

Mu'awiya sought to institutionalize this hatred, by making the ritual cursing a part of the Friday Sermon, by doing so he in effect sought to convince the masses that this was a part of the Deen. It is little wonder that modern day Pakistani Hanafi scholar Maulana Sayyid Lal Shah Bukhari in "Isthakhlaaf ai Yazid" page 216 admitted:

"The founder of Nasibi ideology was Mu'awiya".

Fatwa of Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah, Shah Abdul Aziz that Nasibis are equal to dogs and pigs Al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi declared in "Tuhfa Ithna Ashariyya" page 6: "The Ulema of Ahl'ul Sunnah regard the enemies of Ali, the Nasibis as the worst party that recites the Shahada. We regard them as equivalent to dogs and pigs"

Imam Shafi'i stated that the testimony of Mu'awiya is to be rejected We learn in Rawdah-al-Manazir fi al-Awai'l wa al 'Awakhir Volume 11 page 133 that: Imam Shafi'I said that the testimony of four companions will not be accepted and those four are Mu'awiya, Amr bin Aas, Mugheera (bin Shuba) and Ziyad (bin Abi)"

This view of Imam Shafi'i has also been attributed to him by his student Hadhrath Rabi in Tareekh Abul Fidah Volume 1 under the chapter addressing the events of 45 Hijri:

It can also be located in:

Kitab Mukhthasar fi Ahbar al Bashar Vol. 1 page 100 Imam Ali (as) did not deem Mu'awiya to be a momin Hafidh Sulayman bin Ibraheem al Hanafi in "Yanabi' al Mawaddah" page 190 Chapter 53 quotes "Nasr bin Muzahim who heard from Abu Ishaq Ihsani who states that after the "Tahkeem Incident" he read a manuscript in the possession of Said bin Abi Burdah. In it, it was written that when the people asked Hadhrath 'Ali whether or not his opponents were Momin he replied, with regards to Mu'awiya and his companions 'I do not regard them as Mu'min or Muslim, and I care little about what Mu'awiya thinks".

Other Sunni authorities have also recorded these words of Imam 'Ali (as): al-Nasa'ih al-Kaafiyah page 199 Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 233 Al Bidaya Volume 7 page 259 Rasulullah (s) cursed Mu'awiya's stomach We read in Sahih Muslim hadith number 6298, a tradition narrated by Ibn Abbas:

"I was playing with children and Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) happened to pass by (us). I hid myself behind the door. He (the Prophet) came and he patted upon my shoulders and said: Go and call Mu'awiyah. I returned and said: He is busy in taking food. He again asked me to go and call Mu'awiyah to him. I went (and came back) and said that he was busy in taking food, whereupon he said: May Allah not fill his belly! Ibn Muthanna said: I asked Umm Umayyah what he meant by the word Hatani. He said: It means "he patted my shoulders".

Rasulullah (s) cursed Mu'awiya, his brother and father We read in Ahl'ul Sunnah's Mukthul Husayn page 117 part 4:

"Imam Hasan reminded Mu'awiya of the occasion "when your father was riding a red camel you was in front of him and your brother Utbah was dragging the camel by its nose? On that occasion Rasulullah (s) cursed your father, brother and you"

Rasulullah's cursing of these three individuals on this specific occasion can also be located in Waq'at Sifeen Volume 8 page 185. Hadhrath Ayesha cursed Mu'awiya and Amr bin Aas We read in Tadhkira ul Khawass page 62, Tar'ikh Ibn al Wardi Voume 1 page 245 and Tarikh Kamil Volume 3 page 180 in connection with Mu'awiya's killing of Hadhrath Ayesha's brother as follows:

"Following the death of Muhammad bin 'Abu Bakr the people of Egypt gave bayya to Mu'awiya. It was following this (event) that Ummul Mu'mineen 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 Rasulullah (s) cursed Mu'awiya and Amr bin Aas al-Dhahabi in Mizan al-Itidal, 3:311 and Haythami in Majma al-Zawa'id, 8:121 both record that:

"The Prophet (s) overheard the sound of 'ghina' (singing) and found Amr b. al-Aas and Muawiya indulging themselves by singing. He (s) the supplicated that they be thrown in to the Fire"

Mu'awiya shall die a kaafir

We read in Waq'at Sifeen page 217 and Tareekh Tabari Volume 8 page 186 that Abdullah ibne Umar narrates that he heard Rasulullah say: "Mu'awiya shall not die on the path of Islam". Both the above books on the same pages also record a similar hadith, this time narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah who testified that he heard Rasulullah (s) say:

"At the time of his death, Mu'awiya shall not be counted as member of my Muslim Ummah" Mu'awiya shall be raised with a different Ummah on the day of Judgement We read in Ansab al Ashraf Volume 5 page 132 that Rasulullah (s) said:

"From this door shall enter a man from my Ummah who shall be raised with another Ummah on the Day of Judgement, at that point Mu'awiya came through the door"

Mu'awiya shall be in the deepest part of Hell Fire

It is recorded in Lisan al Mizan Volume 1 page 284 that Rasulullah (s) said:

"Verily Mu'awiya shall be in the deepest part of Hell from where he shall shout 'Ya Hanan, Ya Manan' verily I have sinned and spread fitnah throughout the earth".

Similarly find in Ansab al Ashraf Volume 5 page 132 that Rasulullah (s) said:

"Mu'awiya has a coffin in the deepest part of Hell, one that has a lock on it".

In addition, in Waq'at Sifeen page 217, we learn that Abdullah ibne Umar had also condemned Mu'awiya as follows: "Verily Mu'awiya's coffin is in the deepest part of Hell, Had Firawn not declared that he was the most superior God, nobody would have been in a deeper part of Hell than Mu'awiya".

Mu'awiya and his people are the sign of Hell Fire

We are citing this tradition from two authority works of Ahl'ul Sunnah al-Haythami, Majma al-Zawa'id, 9:406 Kanz al-ummal, 7:63 (Haydarabad) "Rasulullah (s) said that Ali and his people (qawm) are the sign of paradise while Muawiya and his people are the sign of the Fire" Now we know which direction 'Abu Sulaiman and his Nasibi brethren are heading.

We suggest they abandon their support of their baghi Imam before it is too late. Abu Sulaiman can plead clemency for his baghi Imam all he likes but it will be of no avail. His hatred of Imam 'Ali (as) will stand against him on the Day of Judgment and whilst Allah (swt) is All Forgiving the All Merciful, hatred of 'Ali (as) is one of those great sins where there is no opportunity to advance any mitigating reasons. In that there is no doubt, as we have the guarantee of Rasulullah (s) who said:

"Hatred of 'Ali is such a thing that no good deeds will benefit, whilst love of 'Ali is such a thing that no bad deeds will harm you". (taken from Ahlul Sunnah book, al-Nasa'ih al-Kaafiyah page 67).