more regarding Muawiyah....

When Mu'awiya went for hajj, he held the hand of Saad bin Abi Waqas and said to him: 'Oh Abi Ishaq! We are the people who abandoned hajj because of wars till we almost forgot some of its laws, so we performed Tawaf (circumambulation) to imitate your Tawaf'. When they completed (hajj), he (Muawiya) entered him (Saad) to a conference room and sat with him on his sofa, then he (Muawiya) mentioned Ali bin Abi Talib and cursed him. He (Saad) said: 'You brought me to your house and made me sit on your sofa and then you begun to curse Ali?'

Al Bidayah wa al Nahayah, Volume 7 page 341, Chapter: The virtues of Ali

In Sunan Ibn Majah, Volume 1 page 45

On his way to Hajj, Sa'd met Mu'awiya and his companions mentioned 'Ali upon which Mu'awiya showed disrespect towards Ali, Sa'd got angry and asked 'why do you say such things?'

One of the esteemed figures among Salafies/Wahabies, Shaykh Albani has decalred the above cited Hadith to be 'Sahih', see
Sahih Sunan Ibn Majah by Albani, Volume 1 page 26

Muawiya's attempts at character Assassination of the Prophet PBUH and his family.

Ever wondered why some hadith seem so idiotic, lewd or sm*tty? Well read on.


History, it has been said, is the propaganda of the victorious party.

What this means is that in any conflict, the victor can manipulate history just as it pleases him, and there is nothing that the vanquished can do about it. The victorious party can cook up a story and broadcast it as the absolute truth without any fear of being challenged by anyone. It has not only the power to cook up its own story, it also has the power to spike the story of an opposing party.

M. Shibli, the dean of India's Sunni historians of Islam, writes in his famous biography of Prophet Muhammad, Sira tun Nabi, volume I, 4th printing, published by Maarif Printing press, Azamgarh, UP, India in 1976:


Among all those extraneous forces which affect and influence the writing of history, none are more powerful than the government. But it will always be a source of pride for the Muslims that their pen was never subdued by the sword. Work on the compilation and collation of hadith was begun in the times of the Bani Umayya. For full 90 years, from Sindh in India to Asia Minor and Andalusia in Spain, Ali and the children of Fatima were cursed from every pulpit in every mosque after every Friday sermon. Thousands and thousands of hadith, glorifying Muawiya, were manufactured, and were put in circulation. In the times of the Abbasis, hadith were invented foretelling the birth and excellence of each Abbasi khalifa by name. What was the result of all this stupendous effort? The traditionalists declared publicly at the same time that all these hadith were spurious, and they rejected them. Today, we are proud to say that the science of hadith is free from all that filth and garbage.

Almost, but not quite!

In the case of innumerable hadith, the attempt to excise a false report from hadith literature, or to correct it, never caught up with the original untruths.

Even after expurgation, if there was one, that part of the hadith literature which relates to the personal life of Muhammad, the blessed Prophet of Islam, is full of the quaint, the curious, the fanciful and the false. There are many hadith which make him appear as lustful and licentious, vindictive and cruel, opportunistic and unprincipled, and treacherous and unethical.

Then there are some other traditions which can only be called sm*tty.

But the evidence of history runs counter to such characterization of Muhammad. He could have been all these things but he was not. It is important, therefore, for Muslims and non-Muslims alike, to separate bunk and junk from fact and truth in studying the history of Islam.

How did such traditions, which defy common sense and logic insinuate their way into the hadith literature, and how were the deed and statements which can only be called shocking, attributed to the man whose real life was the epitome of all purity, truthfulness, sincerity and simplicity?

Shibli has made a rather perfunctory attempt to answer this question in the passage quoted above. He says that the most powerful extraneous agent that influenced the writing of history in the times of the Ummayds and the Abbasis was the government. The government in those days had the power to get history written to its own specifications. Both dynasties felt they were free to distort history or to suppress history, and whenever they believed it was in their interested to dos o, to invent history Whereas many hadith were invented for political reasons, there were also those hadith which were invented for sensual reasons. The sybarites of the courts of Damascus and Baghdad sought sanctions for their own pleasures in these hadith.

A hadith means a statement. If a man saw the Prophet doing something or he heard him saying something, and then he reported it to others, it would be called hadith or a tradition. The companions considered it their duty to preserve all the traditions of the prophet for the benefit of the Muslim Ummah for all time.

A hadith could also be a comment of the Prophet on some person. If he paid a compliment to any of his companions or if he criticized someone his remarks gained wide publicity among the Muslims. During the khilafat of Muawiya, many of these hadith were in circulation. He was quick to grasp their importance, and he decided to make them a political weapon in his campaign against Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Banu Hashim.

Muawiya, who was the founder of the Umayyad dynasty, won for himself another distinction: He founded the cottage industry for the production of hadith. His successors, and after them, the Abbasi khalifas, patronized the industry for which a long time was busy churning out hadith. Though Shibli claims that hadith was expurgated by highly critical, perceptive and an*lytic censors, there was much that escaped detection by them, and is accepted today as genuine by a vast majority Muslims.

Muawiya appointed a team of men to make up statements favorable to himself and to the other enemies of Ail, and t attribute them to the Apostle of God as his own hadith. AT the same time, he suppressed or tried to suppress the genuine hadith which were complementary to Ali, and ordered his team to manufacture hadith derogatory to him. The members of this team concocted hadith of both varieties, and he put them into circulation.

After the death of Muawiya, this campaign was carried on by his successors. Their ghost writers, public relations personnel, and image makers skillfully blended fake hadith with genuine hadith, and synthetic history with factual history, hoping that the mix would jell, as part of the sacred lore of the Muslims.

Muawiya had one more reason for going into the business of hadith production. He knew that the generations of the future would judge every Muslim ruler against the ideal ruler, Muhammad. He knew too that if they did, they would find him poles apart from Muhammad. Hew as also aware that no matter what he did, he could never rise as high as Muhammad, he knew in fact that he could not reach the heights attained even by the slaves of Muhammad.

But it occurred to him that though it was not possible for him to reach the sublime plane on which Muhammad, stood, it was possible for him to bring Muhammad down to the plane on which he stood by the simple process of tarnishing Muhammads reputation, so that he too would look like other mortals.

Muawiya hoped that the indictment of the historians against him would be less sever if it was shown tot hem that even the most perfect man, Muhammad, Gods own messenger, was not altogether free from blemishes of character. Clearly, much of the content of hadith literature was a conspiracy for the character assassination of Muhammad, the Messenger of God.

Muawiya and the other entrepreneurs of this cottage industry were successful in their attempt at the character assassination of Muhammad. They interspersed hadith literature with countless stories, anecdotes, and incidents, the intent of all of which was to make Muhammad look, in the eyes of posterity, less than Prophetic.

For the compilation of hadith, Muawiya had given the following orders:

1. All the traditions of the Prophet in praise of Ali or upholding his superiority in any way, should be suppressed.

2. Any man narrating the virtues of Ali or quoting the hadith of the Prophet in this regard would do so at his own risk. His subsidies and stipends would be withheld from him. His house and other property would be confiscated. Hiss testimony as a witness would not be accepted in the courts, and he would be ostracized by other Muslims.

3. On the other hand, every conceivable virtue should be attributed to Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and of course, to Muawiya himself. People should be encouraged to make up hadith of the Prophet in praise of these four men, and their friends. Whoever invents such hadith, would become a favorite at the royal court, and would receive rich rewards in rank or cash or estates etc.

Concurrently with the founding of his cottage industry: for manufacturing hadith of the Prophet, Muawiya also set up a brain laundry for the Muslims. He instituted the practices of anathematizing the memory of Ali and his children from the pulpit in every mosque in his empire so that the Muslim children were born, they grew up, and they died hearing curses upon Ali, and not knowing who he was. Whole generations lived and died in ignorance. Falsehoods were put into circulation by the government on a scale so vast that they became the staple of their lives. Muawiya and his successors kept heir brain laundries just as busy as their cottage industry.

Muawiya mobilized every means for waging propaganda war against Ali and the Banu Hashim. The momentum of the blitz he launched against them has lasted down to our own times. He waged his war from the mosques. The prayer-leaders in them were paid to put weird and fantastic interpretation upon the verses of the Quran in an attempt show Ali at a disadvantage. They tried to convince the rank and file Muslims that it would be in their interest in both worlds if they supported Muawiya against Ali and the Banu Hashim.

If any hadith of the Prophet of Islam was complimentary to Ail, its narration was placed under proscription by Muawiya. This proscription was not lifted when he died in 680. It was not lifted even when his dynasty, the Ummayads, perished in 750, and it was not lifted even through the long centuries of the caliphate of the Abbasis.

The Abbasis exterminated the Ummayads but they shared with them their animosity to Ali and to the children of Muhammad. In this matter, the aims and interests of the governments of Saqifa, and Ummayds, and the Abbasis converged, there was ideological compatibility among them all.

As noted before, M. Shibli, the Indian historian, pointed out that the Shia Muslims did not write any history. Whatever history we have, has therefore, come down to us from the non-Shia or the anti-Shia sources. It has come down to us from the archives of the governments of Saqifa, the Ummayds, and the Abbasis.

May Allah Almighty give us the wisdom and intellect to discern truth from falsehood.

May Allah curse the inventors of lies and falsehood against the Prophet PBUH and his family.

May Allah utterly destroy those who invent lies and false allegations against the believers and create divisions in their ranks.

Ameen.



[This message has been edited by alizadeh2000 (edited July 14, 2001).]

.heres more proof from Sunni books:- 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:

''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 books:
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

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)

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
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 defense of Mu'awiya , they 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.