The Story of the Martyrdom of Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) and Mirza Sahib’s Deception:
When Mirza Sahib has no evidence, he picks up one narration from here and another from there, and by arguing with his own logic he tries to give the impression that Hasan was poisoned by Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him). For this he combines the narration of Sunan Abi Dawud with the following narration and presents them together:
عَنْ عُمَيْرِ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ قَالَ دَخَلْتُ أَنَا وَرَجُلٌ عَلَى الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عَلِيٍّ نَعُودُهُ فَجَعَلَ يَقُولُ لِذَلِكَ الرَّجُلِ: سَلْنِي قَبْلَ أَنْ لَا تَسْأَلَنِي، قَالَ مَا أُرِيدُ أَنْ أَسْأَلَكَ شَيْئًا يُعَافِيكَ اللهُ قَالَ فَقَامَ فَدَخَلَ الْكَنِيفَ ثُمَّ خَرَجَ إِلَيْنَا ثُمَّ قَالَ: مَا خَرَجْتُ إِلَيْكُمْ حَتَّى لَفَظْتُ طَائِفَةً مِنْ كَبِدِي أُقَلِّبُهَا بِهَذَا الْعُودِ وَلَقَدْ سُقِيتُ السُّمَّ مِرَارًا مَا شَيْءٌ أَشَدُّ مِنْ هَذِهِ الْمَرَّةِ، قَالَ: فَغَدَوْنَا عَلَيْهِ مِنَ الْغَدِ فَإِذَا هُوَ فِي السُّوقِ، قَالَ وَجَاءَ الْحُسَيْنُ فَجَلَسَ عِنْدَ رَأْسِهِ فَقَالَ يَا أَخِي مَنْ صَاحِبُكَ؟ قَالَ تُرِيدُ قَتْلَهُ؟ قَالَ: نَعَمْ، قَالَ: لَئِنْ كَانَ الَّذِي أَظُنُّ لَلَّهُ أَشَدُّ نِقْمَةً، وَإِنْ كَانَ بَرِيئًا فَمَا أُحِبُّ أَنْ يُقْتَلَ بَرِيءٌ۔
“‘Umayr bin Ishaq narrates: I and another man came to visit Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) in his illness. He (may Allah be pleased with him) began to say to that man: Ask me something before the chance is gone. He said: I do not want to ask you anything; may Allah grant you well-being. Then he (may Allah be pleased with him) got up and went to the toilet. When he came back to us he said: I have just come to you after throwing out a piece of my liver; I was turning it over with this stick. I have been given poison to drink several times, but never has it been more severe than this time. (‘Umayr bin Ishaq says:) When we came to him again the next day, he (may Allah be pleased with him) was in the throes of death. Then Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) came and sat at his head and said: O my brother! Who gave you the poison? Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Do you want to kill him? Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) replied: Yes. Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) said: If he is the one I suspect (that it was he who gave the poison), then Allah is severe in retribution; and if he is innocent, then I do not want an innocent person to be killed.”
Yet it is clear in this narration that Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) himself had no certain knowledge of the killer, only a suspicion, and Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) too did not know the killer. Nor did he, like Mirza Sahib, conduct an “investigation” and accuse a Companion of the Messenger by asking who was pleased at his martyrdom, or who benefited (“beneficial”) from it. Nothing like this is reported from any other Companion either. This idea has occurred only today, to Mirza Engineer Sahib. Therefore these twisted arguments of Mirza Sahib are rejected and baseless.
After quoting this narration from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Mirza Sahib says that the great muhaddith of our city of Jhelum, Shaykh Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer, declared its chain of narration sahih (authentic). But Mirza Sahib, if he declared it sahih, then this same great muhaddith has declared the narration of Abu Dawud and Musnad Ahmad that you present da’if (weak) — the narration on the basis of which you falsely accuse Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) of insulting Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) or of being pleased at the martyrdom of Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him). And this same great muhaddith, under this narration of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, wrote a reply with evidences to this falsehood that Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) was poisoned by Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), and refuted in detail the false narrations that are presented against Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) in this regard. Then he said:
“This accusation that Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) was poisoned by Mu’awiyah bin Abi Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with them both) is baseless and without proof.”
Then he (may Allah preserve him) quotes on this the statements of the Imams and muhaddithin:
Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) Is Completely Innocent of the Martyrdom of Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) (Statements of the Salaf):
Imam Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
وَعِنْدِي أَنَّ هَذَا لَيْسَ بِصَحِيحٍ، وَعَدَمُ صِحَّتِهِ عَنْ أَبِيهِ مُعَاوِيَةَ بِطَرِيقِ الْأَوْلَى وَالْأَحْرَى۔
“When this incident is not established regarding Yazid, then it cannot be established, all the more so, regarding Yazid’s father, Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) (that he poisoned Sayyiduna Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him)).”
Allamah Ibn al-Arabi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
قلنا: هذا محال من وجهين: أحدهما أنه ما كان ليتقى من الحسن بأسًا وقد سلم الأمر، الثانى أنه أمر مغيب لا يعلمه إلا الله فكيف تحملونه – بغير بينة- على أحد من خلقه فى زمان متباعد لم نثق فيه بنقل ناقل، بين أيدى قوم ذوى أهواء، وفى حال فتنة وعصبية، ينسب كل واحد إلى صاحبه ما لا ينبغي، فلا يقبل منها إلا الصافى، ولا يسمع فيها إلا من العدل المصمم۔
“Our answer is that Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) poisoning Sayyiduna Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) is impossible for two reasons: Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) had no danger from Sayyiduna Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him), because Sayyiduna Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) had already handed the leadership over to him. (The second is that) this is a matter of the unseen; how can you impose it on anyone without evidence? In such unsettled circumstances, when we cannot even trust every narrator, because among the people there are many who follow their desires. In a time of turmoil, strife and partisanship, everyone keeps attributing improper things to his opponent; therefore only what is sound will be accepted from them, and only a firm and upright narrator will be relied upon.”
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
وَأَمَّا قَوْلُهُ: “إِنَّ مُعَاوِيَةَ سَمَّ الْحَسَنَ”. فَهَذَا مِمَّا ذَكَرَهُ بَعْضُ النَّاسِ، وَلَمْ يَثْبُتْ ذَلِكَ بِبَيِّنَةٍ شَرْعِيَّةٍ، أَوْ إِقْرَارٍ مُعْتَبَرٍ، وَلَا نَقْلٍ يُجْزَمُ بِهِ. وَهَذَا مِمَّا لَا يُمْكِنُ الْعِلْمُ بِهِ، فَالْقَوْلُ بِهِ قَوْلٌ بِلَا عِلْمٍ۔
“As for saying that Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) poisoned Sayyiduna Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him), there is no clear Shar’i evidence, no valid confession and no reliable narration about this. Knowledge about it is not possible, so this statement is a statement without knowledge.”
He also says:
وَبِالْجُمْلَةِ فَمِثْلُ هَذَا لَا يُحْكَمُ بِهِ فِي الشَّرْعِ بِاتِّفَاقِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ، فَلَا يَتَرَتَّبُ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرٌ ظَاهِرٌ لَا مَدْحٌ وَلَا ذَمٌّ۔
“In sum, by the agreement of the Muslims, a final ruling cannot be given in the Shari’ah on a matter of this kind (based on conjecture and without evidence), and no apparent ruling of praise or blame will apply either.”
Hafiz al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
قُلْتُ: هَذَا شَيْءٌ لَا يَصِحُّ فَمَنِ الَّذِي اطَّلَعَ عَلَيْهِ؟
“I say: Nothing is established about this, so who has the proof of it? (That Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) poisoned Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) or had him poisoned).”
The historian Ibn Khaldun (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
ما ينقل من أنّ معاوية دس إليهم السمّ مع زوجه جعدة بنت الأشعث فهو من أحاديث الشيعة وحاشا لمعاوية من ذلك۔
“That Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) and Ja’dah bint al-Ash’ath, the wife of Sayyiduna Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him), were involved in a plot of poison, these are the tales and stories of the Shia; may Allah keep Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) free from such an accusation.”
So whose syllabus is Mirza sahib teaching the public, in the name of Ahl al-Sunnah?
After these statements, Maulana Ghulam Mustafa (may Allah preserve him) writes:
“In sum: Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) poisoning Sayyiduna Hasan ibn Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both) is not established. This is a very great lie and accusation against Sayyiduna Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), because all the narrations in this regard are fabricated and self-made.”
Therefore, in the light of the statements of the Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah, the reality of all of Mirza sahib’s useless talk becomes clear. Now you may keep making a hundred thousand efforts about who was happy at the martyrdom of Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him), or whom his martyrdom benefited, and so on. All this is your deception, not scholarly evidence. Therefore, when nothing of this sort is established about Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) with a sahih (authentic) chain, then attributing such a thing to him or creating doubts and suspicions about him is completely impermissible. Mirza sahib is not performing any duty of speaking the truth; rather, following in the footsteps of the Rafidah, he is acting as their spokesman. The Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah declare Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) completely innocent of the martyrdom of Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him), and Imam Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi (may Allah have mercy on him) has declared even your self-made “beneficiary” principle completely false.
As for arrows being shot at the funeral of Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him), this too is unestablished and one of the false tales and stories. Narrating this kind of lie is Mirza sahib’s compulsion, because without relying on lies it is not possible to spread a negative impression about the noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Otherwise, until yesterday Mirza sahib himself used to admit that all this about arrows being shot at the funeral is a lie. I do not know when these things are lies and when they become true.
Here you are: a video of an hour and a half, and the subject of discussion is: who martyred Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him)? The evidence is before you; now decide for yourselves whether Mirza sahib’s aim is to speak the truth or to level accusations at the Companions. And is this what is called principle and fairness?
❀❀❀
