How Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan came to Power?

How Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan one of the staunchest enemies of Prophet Mohammad (P) and of Islam came to power?

Muawiya was a staunch follower of the pre-Islamic polytheism like his known  father Abu Sufyan. He was after the Battle of Badr the heir-apparent to the pagan throne of Mecca which was occupied in effect by his father Abu Sofyan and mother Hind. After the defeat of his family following the fall of Mecca in 8 AH Muawiya, and most of the Meccans, including the Abd-Shams, formally submitted to Prophet Muhammad (P) and accepted Islam. General consensus among early Islamic historians is that Muawiyah, along with his father Abu Sufyan, became Muslims at the conquest of Mecca when further resistance to Muslims became an impossibility.

In the year 640, Umar ibn al-Khattab appointed Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan as governor of Syria when his brother died in an outbreak of plague. Muawiyah gradually gained mastery over the other areas of Syria, building wealth and politically instilling personal loyalty among his troops and the people of the region.

All these campaigns came to a halt with the accession of Imam Ali (AS) to the caliphate and removed Muawiyah's governorship of Syria. This resulted in Muawiyah refusing to acknowledge Imam Ali's caliphate and engaged him at the Battle of Siffin. Muawiyah proposed a cease-fire which Imam agreed to and it was decided to end the conflict through peaceful talks.

After Imam Ali (as) was assassinated in 661, Muawiyah signed a truce with Imam Ali's son Imam Hasan ibn Ali(as) and took over as the commander of the largest force in the Muslim Empire.

 Imam Hasan deemed Mu'awiya an unjust thief

We will prove this from the following Sunni works:

    Matalib al Seul, Volume 2 page 17, Dhikr Hasan
    Nazal al Abrar, page 81 Dhikr Hasan by Allamah Badkashani al-Harithi
    Tadhkirathul Khawwas al Ummah, page 113
    Nasa al Kifaya, page 58
    Sawaiqh al Muhriqa, page 81 Chapter 10, Part 1
    al Istiab, page 372 Dhikr Hasan
    Fusl al Muhimma, page 146 Dhikr Hasan

Shaykh Mufti Kamaluddin Ibn Talha Shafiyee recorded in Matalib al Seul:

When the battle came to an end Imam Hasan gave a sermon wherein he said'People of Allah! You know that Allah (swt) guided the people through my grandfather, and saved you from error and took you out of Jahiliyya. Mu'awiya has fought me over that matter which is my right not Mu'awiya's. I was worried about protecting the Ummah, and you gave me bayya on the condition that you make peace with whoever I make peace with and fight whosever I fight. I looked at the problems and made peace with Mu'awiya and put an end to war.

The comments of Imam Hasan (as) prove that Mu'awiya was not entitled to the Khilafath, rather he deemed him an unjust thief, and he made peace due to difficulties, and made peace like the Prophet (s) did with the Kufafr of Makka. In the same way objections and wrong interpretations cannot be brought for the Prophet (s) making peace with the Kuffar of Makka, the same is the case with Imam Hasan (as) making peace.

Imam Hasan (as) deemed the Khilafath to be his own right

    al Istiab, Volume 1 page 343 Dhikr Hasan
    Asad'ul Ghaba, Volume 2 page 15 Dhikr Hasan
    Tareekh Ibn Asakir, Volume 4 page 228 Dhikr Hasan
    Tadhkiratul Khawas al Ummah, page 113 Dhikr Imam Hasan
    Maqatil Husayn, page 134
    Dhakayr al Uqba, page 140
    Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 2 page 300 Dhikr Imam Hasan
    Seerat al Halbeeya, Volume 3 page 352

We read in 'Maqtal Hussain' and 'Asadul Ghaba' that Imam Hasan (as) said:

"Verily, the matter in which I and Muawiya disputed, either this is my right, and I left this in Muawiyah's favour in order to protect the Ummah, or this is the right of a person who is more deserving for this post, hence I left this on account of that person".

The words of Imam Hasan (as) prove that he (as) deemed caliphate to be his own right and did not deem Muawiyah to be eligible for that responsibility but since Muawiyah was a terrorist and wasnt hesitant in sheding the blood of innocents thus Imam Hassan (as) accepted the treaty which doesnt mean he accepted the caliphate of Muawiyah.

A Nasibi excuse and its reply

Here Nawasib may argue that Imam Hassan (as) mentioned 'right' (haq) through the words 'Imma' and 'Aw' which shows the possibility that he deemed the 'right' (haq) belonged to Muawiyah. To those Nawasib, we would like to remind them the verse of Holy Quran (34:24) which also contained the words 'Imma' and 'Aw'.
[Yusufali 34:24] Say: "Who gives you sustenance, from the heavens and the earth?" Say: "It is Allah; and certain it is that either we or ye are on right guidance or in manifest error!"


If we look at this verse, apparently this shows that (godforbid) Prophet [s] was not sure about Him (as) being on guidance but that was certainly not the required meaning. Sometimes the aspect of eloquence and rhetorical demands that the addressee is addressed in a manner that may show dual meanings/possibilities. The manner in which the Prophet [s] adopted an either-or question in his statement, Imam Hassan (as) likewise adopted the manner in his statement. The Prophet [s] was tactically taunting the misguidance of the infdels similarly Imam Hassan (as) was actually taunting the misguidance of Muawiyah.

By making peace Imam Hasan (as) was able to show the Ummah that Mu'awiya was a hypocrite

This will be evidenced from the following esteemed Sunni works.

    Fathul Bari Sharh Bukhari, Volume 13 page 65 Kitab al Fitan
    Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat, Volume 11 page 38 Bab Manaqib Ahl'l bayt
    al Bidayah wa al Nihaya, Volume 8 page 80 Dhikr 57 Hijri
    al Istiab, Volume 1 page 37 Dhikr Hasan

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalaini records in Fathul Bari:

اني اشترطت على معاوية لنفسي الخلافة بعده

"Hasan said:'I placed a condition on Mu'awiya that I will become leader after Mu'awiya"

al Bidaya:

وقد كان معاوية لما صالح الحسن عهد للحسن بالأمر من بعده

"When Mu'awiya made peace with Hasan, he made a promise that leadership would go to Hasan after him"

Sahih Bukhari makes it clear that a hypocrite is one who makes a promise and then breaks it.
The peace treaty exposed the hypocrisy of Mu'awiya, and his enmity to the family of Maula'Ali (as). The treaty was set up to show to the Ummah that he was a hypocrite and his breaking of this promise through the poisoning of Imam Hasan (as) made this absolutely clear. Allah (swt) says in Holy Quran (13:25)

But those who break the Covenant of Allah, after having plighted their word thereto, and cut asunder those things which Allah has commanded to be joined, and work mischief in the land;- on them is the curse; for them is the terrible home!

Mu'awiya's renaging on his promise proves that he was a accursed one and a hypocrite (munafiq). The peace treaty rather than prove the faith of Mu'awiya exposes him as a hypocrite.

 Mu'awiya was not well intentioned when he made peace with Imam Hasan (as)

If we read history, it becomes clear that Muawiyah's heart was (as usual) impure and was not clear of bad intentions at the time of making treaty with Imam Hassan (as). We shall prove this from the following Sunni sources:

    Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Imara, Book 20, Number 4553
    Miskhat al Msaabih, Volume 2 page 166 Bab ul Fitan
    Ash'at al Umaat, Volume 3 page 286 Kitab al Fitan
    Mirqat Sharh Mishqat, Volume 1 page 114 Kitab al Fitan
    Hujjatul Balagha, Volume 2 page 213
    al Nihaya, Volume 2 page 109
    Majm'a al Imthaal, Volume 2 page 386 Chapter 27
    Minhaaj al Sunnah, Volume 1 page 560
    Fatwa Meheriya, page 145 by Syed Meher Ali

We read in Sahih Muslim:

It has been narrated on the authority of Hudhaifa b. al-Yaman who said: People used to ask the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) about the good times, but I used to ask him about bad times fearing lest they overtake me. I said: Messenger of Allah, we were in the midst of ignorance and evil, and then God brought us this good (time through Islam). Is there any bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. I asked : Will there be a good time again after that bad time ? He said: Yes, but therein will be a hidden evil. I asked: What will be the evil hidden therein? He said: (That time will witness the rise of) the people who will adopt ways other than mine and seek guidance other than mine. You will know good points as well as bad points. I asked: Will there be a bad time after this good one ? He said: Yes. (A time will come) when there will be people standing and inviting at the gates of Hell. Whoso responds to their call they will throw them into the fire. I said: Messenger of Allah, describe them for us. He said: All right. They will be a people having the same complexion as ours and speaking our language. I said: Messenger of Allah, what do you suggest if I happen to live in that time ? He said: You should stick to the main body of the Muslims and their leader. I said: If they have no (such thing as the) main body and have no leader ? He said : Separate yourself from all these factions, though you may have to eat the roots of trees (in a jungle) until death comes to you and you are in this state.

Ibn Tamiyah al-Nasibi stated about this hadith:

والخبر الثاني اجتماع الناس لما اصطلح الحسن ومعاوية لكن كان صلحا على دخن

"The second news is about the people who gathered when al-Hassan and Mu'awiya made treaty, but the treaty was based on malice"

 Minhaaj al Sunnah, Volume 1 page 560

Mullah Ali Qari wrote:

وبالخير الثاني ما وقع من صلح الحسن مع معاوية والإجماع عليه وبالدخن ما كان في زمنه من بعض الأمراء كزياد بالعراق

"The second news refers to the treaty that took place between Mu'awiya and Hasan, and Dakhan refers to some of Mu'awiya's Governors like Ziyad in Iraq".

Mullah Ali Qari says the word 'Dakhan' refers to Ziyad but fails to include his teacher Mu'awiya under this definition/word. These Nawasib try to legitimise the reign of a leader who came to power my making a peace that he has no support for, and the Prophet (s) used the term for one that referring to a hypocritical agreement. Shah Abdul Haq Dehalvi in his Sharh Mishkat stated:

'Dakhan' refers to a treaty involving dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Nawawi said in 'Sharh Muslim' Volume 6 page 227 that:

'Dakhan' among animals refers to a colour that is black and in this hadith it refers to a heart which is not pure and its impurity doesnt erase.

Ibn Atheer stated in 'Al-Nihayah' that 'Hadna Ala Dakhan' refers to:

"A treaty about which hearts are not pure".

Shah Waliullah Dehalvi in 'Hujjuthul Balagha' stated:

"Dakhan refers to the peace treaty between Mu'awiya and Hasan"

Imam Hasan was the grandson of the Prophet, one of the members under the cloak of puritiy, the rightful leader and the master of the youth of paradise, He (as) was of pure intention when making peace, unlike Mu'awiya, later on proven by his flagrant violation of the conditions, killing of Imam Hasan (as) and showing happiness over His (as) murder. Thus, the fitlhy heart being referred to by the word 'Dakhan' was the heart of Muawiyah.

Imam Hasan (as) made peace on account of pressure

Ibn Asakir in his authority work 'Tareekh Damishq' and Imam Dhahabi in 'Siyar Alam Nubla' Volume 3 page 269 records:

إلا وان معاوية دعانا إلى أمر ليس فيه عز ولا نصفة فان اردتم الموت رددناه عليه وحاكمناه إلى الله جل وعز بظبا ( 5 ) السيوف وان اردتم الحياة قبلناه واخذنا لكم الرضا فناداه القوم من كل جانب البقية البقية ( 6 ( فلما افردوه امضى الصلح

Hasan said: "Be informed that Mu'awiya has called us to such a treaty that is neither honourable nor is based on justice. If you are ready for death then we will reject this offer, and answer the matter with our swords and leave the matter with Allah. If you like life then we can accept it. Upon saying this, the calls from all around were'Taqqiyyah, Taqqiyyah' when the people left Hasan, he made peace".

 Tarikh Ibn Asakir, Volume 13 page 268

Ibn Asakir has used to words 'Baqqiyyah Baqqiyah' but he said Dahabi has recorded it as 'Taqqiyah Taqqiyah' in 'Siyar Alam Nubla' Volume 3 page 269 hence we used it likewise.

We appeal to justice! The Taqiyyah mentioned above was the same Taqiyyah that a terrified / tearful Abu Bakr adopted in the cave, that the Prophet (s) adopted at Hudaibya where he had to delete the words 'Prophet of Allah' from the treaty doucment.

If you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit kill him (hadeeth)

We will cite this Prophetic Hadeeth from the following esteemed Sunni works:

    Mizan al-Itidal Volume 2 page 17; Volume 2 page 129 on the authority of Abu Said al Khudri; Volume 7 page 324 and Volume 8 page 74
    al Bidayah wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 133 Dhikr Mu'awiya
    Kunzul Haqaiq, Volume 1 page 18
    Tatheer al Janaan, columm on Sawaiqh al Muhriqa page 62
    Al Nasa al Kifaya page 35
    Maqatil al Husayn, page 175
    Tareekh Tabari, Volume 13 the events of 284 Hijri, the rule of Banu Ummayya
    Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 5 page 110 Dhikr Ubada bin Yaqoob
    Tareekh al Baghdad, Volume 12 page 181 Dhikr bin Ubayd
    Tabaqat by Ibn Sad, Volume 4 page 134-135
    al Kamil fi Safa al Rijal, Volume 2 page 146 hadith number 343,
    Ansab al Ashraf, Volume 5 page 136,
    Waqt Sifeen, page 216 and 221

We read the following hadith in the above cited books:

اذا رايتم معاوية على منبري فاقتلوه

"If you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit then kill him"

Sheikh Muhammad bin Aqeel al-Hadrami (d. 1350 H) said in his book 'al-Atab al-Jameel ala ahl al-Jarh wa al-Tadeel' page 63 that the hadith is Sahih. An interesting event in connection with this event can be located in 'Ansab al Ashraf' Volume 5 page 136:

"On one occasion an Ansari individual wanted to kill Mu'awiya, the people said, 'the sword can not be raised during the reign of Umar, they said that he should write to Umar and seek his consent. He replied ' I heard that Rasulullah had said: 'If you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit then kill him'. The people confirmed that they had also heard the hadith, but said we have not carried out this action, so let us write to Umar on the matter, which they did, but Umar did not write back to resolve the matter, until he died"

We read in Maqatil al Husayn:

"Hussain said to Marwan: 'My grandfather said: 'Khilafah in the family of Abu Sufyan is haraam, since they embraced Islam after the conquest of Makka'. My grandfather also said: 'When you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit then rip open his stomach'. The people of Madina failed to kill Mu'awiya, which is why Allah (swt) on account of His wrath gave them the leadership of Yazeed".

We appeal to justice. If Mu'awiya had not become Khalifa after making peace with Imam Hasan (as), the Prophet (s) would not have issued an order that he be killed. It is clear that when the Prophet (s) dreamt of the Banu Ummayya climbing his pulpit like monkeys it referred to Mu'awiya, which is why he (s) wanted him to be killed. The leadership of anyone who has to be killed when attaining power, is unacceptable. Imam Hasan (as) made peace, that was it. The Prophet (s) deemed the Khilafath of Mu'awiya to be so unpalatable that he said he had to be killed the moment he sat on his throne. That makes all the arguments of Nasibis that the son of Hind's reign was legitimate to sheer nonsense.

Muawiyah died on May 6, 680, from a stroke brought on by his weight.

UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB AND THE UMAYYADS

In order to prove our above mentioned discussions, it seems necessary to disclose the role of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB in consolidating the opinions of the Umayyad rulers as regards the religious laws. As he nominated Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan as the ruler of Syria after Yazid,(1) `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB fastened the steps of the Umayyads and helped them have control over the Muslim community. In the same way, he suggested to Abu-Bakr that he would allow Abu-Sufyan to keep the taxes that he had levied for himself and that he would appoint Yazid ibn Abi-Sufyan as the commander-in-chief of the Muslim army of Syria.(2) Moreover, `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB likened Mu`awiyah to Khosrow, the emperor of Persia, and said in this regard, "How do you mention Khosrow while Mu`awiyah is among you?"(3) Furthermore, `Umar said about Mu`awiyah, "Do not criticize the hero of Quraysh and the son of Quraysh's master. Surely, he is one of those who smile at rage, and those who cannot be convinced unless when he is satisfied, and those who cannot be overcome."(4)
Other narrations have confirmed that when Mu`awiyah was nominated by `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB as the ruler of Syria, he received two messages from his parents. His father's message reads, "O Son! In fact, these groups of the Muhajirun preceded us while we lagged behind. Hence, their precedence has elevated them while our lagging behind has delayed us. They therefore have become the leaders and the masters while we have become only fellows. As they have nominated you for a great matter, you must not violate them, for this is the outset of a perpetual authority. You should thus compete on this matter, and if you attain it, you should dedicate your intellect to it."
In her message, Mu`awiyah's mother said, "O Son! In fact, it is rarely that a free lady can give birth of one like you. As this man (namely `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB) has chosen you for this matter, you must obey him in all matters, whether you like or dislike."(5)
It has been also narrated that when `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB visited Syria, Mu`awiyah said to him, "I will carry out any order that you make to me."

---

1- Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq 5:456 H. 9770; Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab 2:625 H. 988; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:21; al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah 5:152 No. 8074.

 2- Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 2:44 as quoted from al-Jawhariy's Kitab al-Saqifah. 

3- Tarikh al-tabariy 6:184; Ibn `Abd al-Barr: Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab fi Ma`rifat al-Ashab 3:396. 

4- Al-Muttaqiy al-Hindiy: Kanz al-`Ummal 13:587; Ibn Kathir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:125; Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab fi Ma`rifat al-Ashab 8:397. 

5- Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:118.

`Umar answered, "I will never order you to do or not to do anything."(1)

Through this policy of "I will carry out any order that you make to me," Mu`awiyah could occupy `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB's heart. As a result, `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB appointed other Umayyad individuals in other governmental offices; he appointed `Amr ibn al-`as as the governor of Palestine and Jordan,(2) al-Walid ibn `Aqabah, who was one his dearest men,(3) as the tax collector of Banu-Taghlib,(4) Ya`liy ibn Umayyah as the governor of a part of the Yemen,(5) al-Mughirah ibn Shu`bah as the governor of Kufah,(6) `Abdullah ibn Abi-Sarh, `Uthman ibn `Affan's foster-brother, as the governor of Egypt,(7) and so on.
Obviously, `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB, during his reign, depended upon the Umayyads in the distribution of the offices. Meantime, he opposed the Hashimites absolutely. In this regard, it has been narrated that when `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB wanted to appoint `Abdullah ibn `Abbas as the governor of Hims, he said to him, "Listen, son of `Abbas! I am afraid that death will take me while you are still in this position, and then you will call people to follow you, the Hashimites, and to leave the others."(8)
The same thing can be said about the stipulation that `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf imposed upon Imam `Ali ibn Abi-talib when he said, "I will swear allegiance to you on the condition that you will not appoint anyone from the Hashimites in a position of leadership"'(9) It goes without saying that `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf was no more than a practicer of the policy of Abu-Bakr and `Umar.
When objections to `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB's decision of nominating

---

1- Tarikh al-tabariy 6:184; Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:125. 

 2- Tarikh Khalifah 1:155; Futuh al-Buldan 1:145; Tarikh Dimashq 46:157, 59:111. 

3- Al-Munta¨am 6:5; Tahdhib al-Kamal 31:54; Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 11:126; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:214. 4- Tarikh al-tabariy 5:59; Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:214. 

5- Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab fi Ma`rifat al-Ashab 3:664. 

6- Tarikh Khalifah 1:154; Futuh al-Buldan 1:297; Tarikh al-tabariy 2:516; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 5:350-351. 

7- Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' 3:43; al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah 4:110. 

8- Al-Mas`udiy: Muruj al-Dhahab 2:353 H. 454. 

9- Ibn Qutaybah: al-Imamah wa'l-Siyasah 1:31; Ibn Sa`d: al-tabaqat al-Kubra 3:344; Tarikh al-tabariy 2:560; Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq 5:481 H. 9776; Musannaf Ibn Abi-Shaybah 7:439 H. 37071; al-Bayhaqiy: al-Sunan al-Kubra 8:151. 

Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan as the governor of Syria increased, `Umar said to the masses, "Do not mention Mu`awiyah save in words of praise, for I have heard the Messenger of Allah saying about him: O Allah, guide him."(1)

I cannot tell whether this narration was fabricated by the Umayyads and their fans in order to justify the wrong policies of Mu`awiyah when he was both governor and ruler or by `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB in order to stop the people's objections to his decision. Of course, the Holy Prophet's "fabricated" supplication of guidance for Mu`awiyah is absolutely contradictory to the many narrations that have authentically reported the Holy Prophet's having cursed Mu`awiyah, Abu-Sufyan, and Yazid ibn Abi-Sufyan.
At any rate, Mu`awiyah benefited very much by the support of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB. Supporting this, it has been narrated that Mu`awiyah said to Sa`sa`ah ibn Sawhan, "I enjoy a priority to Islam although others have preceded me in this matter. However, none has been better than I am in holding this matter during my age. `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB noticed this. Had any other individual been more powerful that I was in holding this position, `Umar would have certainly chosen him… etc."(2)
Correspondingly, Muhammad ibn Abi-Bakr wrote a message to Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan mentioning the unmatched merits and virtues of Imam `Ali, saying,
"Woe to you! How dare you compare yourself to `Ali who is the inheritor and successor of the Messenger of Allah and the father of his sons and the first to follow him and the closest to him… etc."
Replying to this message, Mu`awiyah wrote,
"You have advanced as an argument against me the merit of one other than you and you have taken pride in one other than you. I thus thank the Lord Who has taken this merit away from you and made it to someone esle. Your father and I, during the lifetime of our Prophet, knew that the right of son of Abi-talib (i.e. Imam `Ali) incumbent upon us and knew that he was distinguished from us. However, when Allah chose for His Prophet what He

---

1- Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:123. Ibn `Asakir, in Tarikh Madinat Dimashq 59:85, has narrated on the authority of al-Sa'ib that when `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB appointed Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan as the governor of Aleppo, some people objected, for the latter was still young. On hearing this, `Umar said to them, "How dare you blame me for this, while I have heard the Messenger of Allah saying (about Mu`awiyah), 'O Allah! Make him guide and truly guided and guide him and make others be guided through him.'" 

 2- Tarikh al-tabariy 2:638; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 2:133; Ibn al-Athir: al-Kamil fi'l-Tarikh 3:35.

has in possession, and fulfilled His promise to him, and caused his promulgation to prevail, and proclaimed his argument and then took his soul to Him-when Allah did such to His Prophet, it was your father and his "faruq" (i.e. `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB) who preceded anyone else in usurping the right of `Ali and in violating him. They had already agreed on and planned to do this... It was your father who paved the way for him and established this realm. If that which we are experiencing is proved as true, then it is your father who started it; but if it is injustice, then it is your father who overwhelmed it and we are only his partners, since we have followed his path and pursued his example. Had it not for the past deeds of your father, we would not have mutinied against the son of Abu-talib and we would have certainly submitted to him. But as we saw your father committing that before us, we followed his example and took his deed as pattern for us. You should thus disgrace your father as you like or stop it. Peace be upon him who regrets and repents from errors."(1)

Similar words have been comprised by the missive of Yazid ibn Mu`awiyah to `Abdullah ibn `Umar who objected to him in the killing of Imam al-Husayn ibn `Ali. Yazid, in this missive, said,
"Listen, idiot! We have come to upholstered houses, furnished fixtures, and stuffed pillows. We therefore fought for these. If we are right, then we will have fought for the sake of our rights; and if the other party is right, then it was your father who began such violation and usurped these people their due."(2)
All these materials confirm the considerable role of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB in the strengthening of the Umayyad jurisprudence through making a large room for `Uthman ibn `Affan, Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan, and their likes to lead a course opposite to the trend of pure compliance with the sacred texts, and to establish a new jurisprudential trend with innovative principles in the Islamic legislation.

ACCEPTABILITY OF THE SAHABAH'S SAYINGS

In his book of al-Mustasfa, al-Ghazzaliy talks about the acceptability of the Sahabah's sayings as proof and presents the various opinions in this regard. He says that some scholars have argued that the Sahabah's sayings are

---

1-Ahmad Zaki Safwat: Jamharat Rasa'il al-`Arab 1:447 as quoted from al-Mas`udiy: Muruj la-Dhahab 2:600; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 1:284. 

2- Al-Anwar al-Nu`maniyyah 1:53; Bihar al-Anwar 45:328; al-Mahuziy: Kitab al-Arba`in 104. 

 3-Qawl al-Sahabiy (the Sahabah's sayings): According to some Sunnite jurisprudential schools, Qawl al-Sahabiy is one of the principles and sources upon which these schools depend in the deduction of religious laws from their sources.

generally and without any exception decided as acceptable proofs; other scholars have argued that they are decided as acceptable proofs even if they violate the principle of Qiyas; other scholars have argued that only can the sayings of Abu-Bakr and `Umar be decided as acceptable proofs because the Holy Prophet said, "Follow those who will come after me!"; other scholars have argued that only the sayings of the Rashidite caliphs can be taken as acceptable proofs in the questions about which they agree. After the presentation of these arguments, al-Ghazzaliy refutes them all, saying that it is illogic to accept as irrefutable proofs the sayings of those who are exposed to erring and inadvertence, since their sinlessness has not been proven. Furthermore, it is illogic to claim the sinlessness of such individuals without resting upon any uninterrupted evidence and it is also illogic to believe in the sinlessness of people who are exposed to disagreement! The Sahabah agreed upon the permissibility of violating the Sahabah's opinions. For instance, Abu-Bakr and `Umar did not criticize those who disagreed with them in matters of Ijtihad; rather they deemed obligatory upon each mujtahid to follow his personal conclusions. The absence of evidences on the sinlessness of the Sahabah, the incidences of disagreements among the Sahabah, and the Sahabah's statements of the permissibility of violating them in opinions-these are three decisive evidences on the invalidity of deciding the Sahabah's sayings as binding proof.

Mr. Abu-Zuhrah says,
If truth be told, it is untrue to decide the Sahabah's sayings as binding proofs, for Almighty Allah has not sent in this ummah anyone except our Holy Prophet, Muhammad-peace be upon him and his family-, and we, the Muslims, have only one Messenger. The Sahabah, following the Holy Prophet, are in the same degree commissioned with following the law of Almighty Allah as found in the Holy QUR'AN and Sunnah. Anyone who claims that a proof concerning a religious affair may be found in other than these two sources has in reality said an unproven thing about the religion of Almighty Allah and has also confirmed a matter that has not been decided by Almighty Allah.(1)
Dr. Husayn al-Hajj Hasan has written down nice words in this respect,
The companions of the Holy Prophet are ordinary human beings just like the others. Some of them were seduced by this world and its pleasures. The social values left influences on their behaviors. Anyone who claims that the Sahabah are angels and sinless is in reality... It was nothing but bad luck that caused Abu-Jahl to be killed during the Battle of Badr while having been in the line

---

1- Shaykh Muhammad Abu-Zahrah: al-Hadith wa'l-Muhaddithun 102.

of the polytheists. Had serendipity helped him, in the same way as it had helped others like him, and saved him from being killed during that battle to stay alive up to the day of the conquest of Makkah and to embrace Islam, he would certainly have been one of the grand Sahabah or the first-class Muslim leaders who claimed having raised the pennon of Islam. Thus, the question was no more than serendipity. Nothing but luck that played in the destinies of men so hugely. The examples of such serendipities are being openly experienced by us every day. We have very often seen how men belonging to the same class of Abu-Jahl are taken to the highest ranks by their lucks and are surrounded by reporters and traditionists who encompass them with haloes of greatness.(1)

Ibn Hazm says after quoting the following verses of the Holy QUR'AN, "And they say: We believe in Allah and the messenger, and we obey; then after that a faction of them turn away. Such are not believers. And when they appeal unto Allah and His messenger to judge between them, lo! a faction of them are averse. But if right had been with them they would have come unto him willingly. Is there in their hearts a disease, or have they doubts, or fear they lest Allah and His messenger should wrong them in judgmenta Nay, but such are evil-doers. The saying of (all true) believers when they appeal unto Allah and His messenger to judge between them is only that they say: We hear and we obey. And such are the successful. He who obeyeth Allah and His messenger, and feareth Allah, and keepeth duty (unto Him): such indeed are the victorious. They swear by Allah solemnly that, if thou order them, they will go forth. Say: Swear not; known obedience (is better). Lo! Allah is informed of what ye do. Say: Obey Allah and obey the messenger. But if ye turn away, then (it is) for him (to do) only that wherewith he hath been charged, and for you (to do) only that wherewith ye have been charged. If ye obey him, ye will go aright. But the messenger hath no other charge than to convey (the message) plainly. 24/47-54"
`Ali said, "These decisive verses have not left any opportunity to anyone to riot about them. Through these verses, Allah has exposed the characteristics of the people of our time. They claim that they are the only believers in Allah and His Messenger and they are the only obedient to them, but a party of them violates this confession and opposes what has been revealed to them from Almighty Allah and His Messenger. In the words of the law of Almighty Allah, these are surely not believers. When they are called to apply to themselves verses from the Holy QUR'AN or a Hadith from the Messenger that violate their accursed imitation, they will certainly loath it. Some of them will claim that they are not included with these verses, others will claim that these

---

1- Dr. Husayn al-Hajj Hasan: Naqd al-Hadith 1:350-351. The quoted words have been originally quoted from Dr. `Ali al-Wardiy: Wu``a¨ al-Salatin, pp. 118.

verses are dedicated to a certain occasion, others will claim that acting upon these verses has been decided as repealed, others will claim that so-and-so has not acceded to these, and others will claim that these verses violate Qiyas. But as soon as they find in the Hadith or the Holy QUR'AN a matter that conforms to what they follow, they propagate it to all sides and come to it willingly, as has been exactly described. Woe to them! What has happened to thema Is their hearts full of disease and doubta Or do they fear lest Almighty Allah and His Messenger would wrong thema Most certainly, these are the actual wrongdoers as has been described by Allah, Lord of the worlds. Away with those who do wrong!(1)

However, Ibn Hazm then attempts to justify the deeds of the grand Sahabah who violated the Hadith of the Holy Prophet and claims that lies have been fabricated against them as regards these deeds. This is because Ibn Hazm has carried for these Sahabah enormous haloes of greatness. He further says,
Abu-Muhammad says that some people argue that groups of the Sahabah and Tabi`un neglected carrying out many of the instructions that they had known from the Hadith of the Holy Prophet; hence, they neglected these Hadiths either on account of having belittled them or because they had an amount of knowledge due to which they knew the actual purpose of these Hadiths. Of course, it is better to think of them excellently and choose for the second option. `Ali says that this argument is inaccurate for many reasons. First, if one claims that it is probable that the Hadith whose instruction was neglected by the Sahabah has been forged or made-up, this can be answered that it is also probable that the narration, which reported the Sahabah having not carried out the instruction of a Hadith has been made-up. Nothing gives preference to the claim that forgery occurred to the reporting from the Holy Prophet over the claim that the Sahabah neglected acting upon the contents of these Hadiths. Similarly, some of the Sahabah acted upon a Hadith while others neglected. He also differentiated between those who claim that the Sahabah who neglected acting upon a Hadith must have had knowledge due to which they neglected and those who claim that the Sahabah who acted upon a Hadith must have had knowledge due to which they acted upon that Hadith. In fact, any claim that is not supported by a proof is worthless. As has been previously cited, do not feel an aversion for him who neglects acting upon the right, whether his neglect has been due to an excused idea or to an act of disobedience; and do not care about him who carries out the right deed no matter who that person was and whether he carried out or did not carry out that deed. At any rate, it is obligatory upon anyone who hears about it to carry

---

1- Ibn Hazm: al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam 1:100-101.

it out. Similarly, the Hadiths which have been reported that some of the past generation neglected acting upon them are, in most cases, not the same as those Hadiths neglected by those who objected to the Sahabah for having neglected acting upon them; rather these objectors neglected acting upon the Hadiths which had been adopted by those Sahabah and acted upon the Hadiths which had been neglected by those Sahabah. Hence, the previous Sahabah's having neglected acting upon a certain Hadith cannot be accepted as proof for these objectors, because they have been the first to violate the acts of these Sahabah and the first to decide the Sahabah's negligence as unacceptable. Nothing is worse than presenting as a pretext that which does not materialize that pretext; rather it annuls it in the same way, or even tenser, of annulling the one who presents it as pretext.

Also, if their forgery that the Sahabah neglected carrying out the instructions mentioned in some Hadiths because they had had knowledge due to which they neglected acting upon that Hadith; we seek Almighty Allah's protection against such forgery and seek Him to protect all those who think well of Him against any response to such false ascriptions to the most virtuous people of this sacred ummah-if this forgery had been true, all those who hid such knowledge would have been accursed by Almighty Allah Who says: Those who conceal the clear Signs We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse. 2/159
Our answer is that may Almighty Allah curse him whoever carries knowledge from Him and His Messenger but conceals it from people. Anyone who ascribes such a thing to the Sahabah-may Allah's pleasure be with them-has in fact ascribed them to forging lies against the religion and planning plots against the Islamic legislation. Of course, such matter are more catastrophic than infidelity.
Using similar conception, I have objected to the words of al-Layth ibn Harfash al-`Abdiy in the session of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn Bishr-may Allah have mercy upon him-during a great celebration of the Malikkiyyah jurisprudents; yet, none of them could answer me with any word; rather they all kept silent except a few number of them who showed acceptance to my argument. During that session, I said to al-Layth,
"You have ascribed to Malik ibn Anas a matter that would make him the most wicked of all people if your words were true. You are claiming that Malik presented to the people the doubtful, uncertain, and repealed narrations and concealed the authentic, sound, and repealing narrations and he departed life without telling anybody about these narrations. Of course, this thing can be

done by none except those who intend for ruining Islam and cheating its people. Almighty Allah has protected Malik against such. In our conception, he is surely one of the master scholars who guided this nation to the right path although he sometimes made mistakes in the same way as he had been right. Like the other scholars, he exerted his efforts in the conclusion of religious laws. Almighty Allah has imposed promulgation for Him upon all scholars. The Holy Prophet said, 'Verily, one who conceals any item of (religious) knowledge about which he is asked shall be bridled with a rein of fire on the Resurrection Day.'...etc."(1)

The abovementioned discussion reveals that pluralism in opinions opposes the unity of doctrine. Similarly, the conception of the Sahabah's ultimate decency opposed the deeds of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB with Sa`d ibn `Abadah when he shouted, "Kill Sa`d! May Allah kill Sa`d,"(2) and with Tamim al-Dariy when he whipped him,(3) and with `Amr ibn al-`as when he accused him of treason and of having stolen the spoils of war,(4) and with Khalid ibn al-Walid when he decided that he must be sentenced to stoning penalty.(5) All these incidents prove that the conception of the Sahabah's ultimate decency was not found during the reigns of Abu-Bakr and `Umar and even `Uthman; rather it was invented afterwards. In fact, this conception is baseless and is not supported by any tradition. All the reports that were ascribed to the Holy Prophet in this respect are carrying more than one sense and can be easily refuted. The same thing is applicable to the unfounded haloes of sacredness that were given to the Sahabah in addition to their having been regarded as sinless experts of the Holy QUR'AN. If truth be told, all such things were invented by the rulers and their fans.
Elaborately, let us quote the following text from al-Taftazaniy's Sharh al-Maqasid:
The disputes, disagreements, and arguments that occurred between the Sahabah, as is written in the books of history, indicate undoubtedly that some of them went astray and exceeded all limits in oppression and licentiousness whose motives must have been malice, stubbornness, envy, enmity, seeking of authorities and official positions, and tendency towards lusts and whims. Of

---

1- Ibn Hazm: al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam 2:251. 

2- Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq 5:444 H. 9758; Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal 1:55 H. 391; Ibn Sa`d: al-tabaqat al-Kubra 3:616; Tarikh al-tabariy 2:235. 

3- Al-tabaraniy: al-Mu`jam al-Kabir 2:58 H. 1281; Ibn Hazm: al-Muhalla 2:274. 

4- Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 20:21. 

5- Tarikh al-tabariy 2:274; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 6:323; Ibn Habban: al-Thuqat 2:169.

course, not all the Sahabah are sinless and not all those who met the Holy Prophet are virtuous. Nevertheless, due to their good opinions about the companions of the Holy Prophet, the scholars have had to find excuses and justifications for them. They have also believed these Sahabah as having been divinely protected against deviation and wickedness so as to preserve the Muslims' doctrines from deviation and movement away as regards the personalities of the grand Sahabah, especially the Muhajirun and the Ansar as well as those predicted to be rewarded on the Resurrection Day. However, after the age of the Sahabah, the Household of Allah's Messenger (i.e. the Ahl al-Bayt) were oppressed and persecuted so harshly that none can deny and none can find any justification. Even the inanimate and the deaf can witness the oppression that was inflicted upon the Ahl al-Bayt-such an insensitive oppression that even the heavens and the earth wept for them; and even the mountains and the rocks were about to split. The evil of these deeds shall incessantly chase those who committed it all over ages. May the curse of Almighty Allah be upon all those who practiced and participated in these crimes and those who accepted it. "And certainly the chastisement of the hereafter is severer and more. 20/127" In any case, it may be said that some master scholars have not permitted cursing Yazid although they have known for sure that Yazid deserved more than mere cursing. We answer that those scholars have decided so in order that the other Sahabah would not be cursed, as is done by the Rafidah.(1)

The most important reason of the invention of such erroneous and baseless principles and fundamentals has been the decision of the prevention from reporting and recording the Hadith. This decision granted a big room for the authorities who adopted Opinionism to rule over the sacred texts.
In his Sharh al-Arba`in, Sulayman ibn `Abd al-Qawiy, a Hanbalite scholar died in AH 716, says,
The reason of disputes among the scholars is the contradiction of the narrations and reported texts. Some people allege that the reason beyond such dispute was `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB; when the Sahabah asked him to permit them writing down the Holy Sunnah, he prevented them although he knew that the Holy Prophet had ordered the Muslims to record the Hadith for Abu-Shat and had said, "Record the knowledge by means of writing it." Had `Umar let the Sahabah record what they had heard from the Holy Prophet, the Sunnah would have certainly been verified and no barrier would have stopped between the last generation of the Islamic nation and the Holy Prophet except

---

1- Al-Taftazaniy: Sharh al-Maqasid 5:310.

the Sahabah whose narrations would have been written down because these records were uninterruptedly reported from the Sahabah in the same way as they were uninterruptedly narrated by al-Bukhariy.(1)

Shaykh Muhammad Abu-Zuhrah says,
Some of the Sahabah refrained from recording the Hadith and prevented the others from recording it not because the Holy Prophet warned them against writing down his traditions, for the traditions that are reported from the Sahabah as regards the prevention of or the refraining from recording the Hadith have not carried this justification at all; rather they used to present as pretext that they anticipated that people would occupy themselves with these traditions and disregard the Holy QUR'AN... etc.(2)
In so doing, many of the Holy Prophet's traditions wiped out and many more fabricated matters were ascribed to him and the Prophetic heritage was confused with the personal opinions and conclusions. In view of that, al-Bukhariy decided to pick for his book from among six hundred thousand Hadiths. A similar thing was decided by Muslim, al-Nassa'iy, and other compilers of Hadith.
The previously mentioned discussions have been lengthy, explicative presentation of the ordeal of the Holy Prophet's reported texts as well as the inconveniences of the decision of preventing the reporting and recording of the Hadith so as that the gentle reader will be acquainted with the confusions of the Islamic legislations as well as some of the reasons of disagreement among the Muslims. Nothing but truth has been our purpose-the truth that has been concealed from the Muslims for long ages and that has been besieged for about fourteen centuries.

---

1- This statement has been quoted by Asad Haydar in his famous book of 'al-Imam al-Sadiq wa'l-Madhahib al-Arba`ah (Imam al-Sadiq and the Four Schools of Muslim jurisprudence)'. 

 2- Shaykh Muhammad Abu-Zahrah: al-Hadith wa'l-Muhaddithun 234.

Thus the person responsible for all these tragic events in the history of Islam is Umar ibn Khattab, who knowing appointed Muawiya son of Abu Sufyan, the governor of Syria

Categories: English