Deception in the Name of Allama Suyuti and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab:
You have already seen the arguments presented by Mirza Sahib from the books of Hadith, but Mirza Sahib never refrains from displaying duplicity. Therefore, in this matter, he often cites a weak historical narration using the name of Allama Suyuti Rahimahullah. There is an official video of Mirza Sahib on this. Before narrating the tradition, Mirza Sahib, as usual, straightens his owl by praising Allama Suyuti Rahimahullah, saying that he is an international elder, a reviver of Islam… and so on, then he states the narration attributed to him:
“So in this (book: History of the Caliphs), if you remove the chapter about Umar bin Abdul Aziz, this elder (Allama Suyuti) says, – he says after asking the elders and seniors – he has explicitly written in the chapter about Umar bin Abdul Aziz: The custom of the Umayyad rulers was that in their sermons they used abusive and inappropriate words against Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) (Note: words like abuse or inappropriate are not present in the Arabic text), but when he, may Allah have mercy on him, took over the caliphate, he strictly forbade this. Now, even mentioning Jalaluddin Suyuti’s name is avoided, but he is a great person, such a scholar can only be left alone by him, and he is an international figure, recognized not only in the subcontinent but all over the world. He wrote to his governors that in the protected countries, such things should not happen anymore and instead of the inappropriate words used against his honor, from now on these words should be spoken – Surah An-Nahl, verse number 90: إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْمُرُ بِالْعَدْلِ وَالْإِحْسَانِ وَإِيتَاءِ ذِي الْقُرْبَى وَيَنْهَى عَنِ الْفَحْشَاءِ وَالْمُنْكَرِ وَالْبَغْيِ يَعِظُكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ He included this verse: Allah commands you to do justice, kindness, and giving to relatives, and forbids immorality, bad conduct, and oppression. He admonishes you so that you may take heed. Because they were committing immorality, not about Hazrat Ali, meaning they were speaking these inappropriate words, God forbid. Therefore, since then until now, the last sentences of the sermons have been recited like this.”
60 Years of Evidence of Insults Against Mola Ali A.S
Here, the text of Siuti is greatly exaggerated, and about him it is said: “But he is a great man, only such a person can leave him, and he is an international figure, not only recognized in the subcontinent but all over the world.” But on the other hand, to see the ugly face of Mirza Sahib, watch his video (Ilmi wa Tehqeeqi Majlis No. 15, duration 2:40:20 and Ilmi wa Tehqeeqi Majlis No. 24, duration 31:00). He himself calls Allama Siuti, may Allah have mercy on him, a writer of false and unauthenticated narrations, yet here he cites the same unreliable book of Siuti to prove his false claims. And whatever history it may be, if it is unauthenticated, Mirza Sahib calls it rubbish. Remember! Engineer Sahib is a fair-minded person, he never changes his principles, and you are fulfilling Maududi’s deficiency with authentic narrations.
The second point is that Mirza Sahib deceives greatly by presenting this as the statement of Allama Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him, because it is not his own statement at all! It is not necessary that every phrase found in any book is the author’s own opinion or that he even endorses it. Rather, he may merely be a transmitter of that phrase. And here the matter is exactly like this: Allama Suyuti, before this phrase, narrates an incident from the time of Umar bin Abdul Aziz, may Allah have mercy on him, with reference to “Allama Dhahabi,” and then after that he says:
وقال غيره: كان بنو أمية يسبون علي بن أبي طالب في الخطبة فلما ولي عمر بن عبد العزيز أبطله، وكتب إلى نوابه بإبطاله، وقرأ مكانه: إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْمُرُ بِالْعَدْلِ وَالْإِحْسَانِ
، فاستمرت قراءتها في الخطبة إلى الآن.
“And besides them (Allama Dhahabi), no one said: The Banu Umayyah used to curse Hazrat Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, in sermons, so when Umar bin Abdul Aziz became Caliph, he ended this practice…………”
So it becomes absolutely clear from this that he is only a transmitter of this phrase and it is not his own statement, but Mirza Sahib, throwing dust in people’s eyes, presents it as the statement of Allama Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him.
، الآية
Now who supports this, or to which book does it refer? Its clarity is not present, therefore this statement is rejected due to lack of evidence; rather, in the style of Engineer Sahib, it is outright fabricated and rubbish. This is a historically unsupported tradition, and no historian has claimed that the narrations they transmit will be authentic and reliable; rather, truth and falsehood are all mixed together. In this regard, here are some statements of Mirza Sahib:
“As far as history is concerned, historians have worked very hard; they are our elders. But these same elders taught us not to accept a hadith without any chain of narration (isnad), and even if the hadith has a chain, one must differentiate between authentic, weak, and fabricated (man-made) hadiths. So, when hadiths are not accepted without isnad and without verifying the authenticity of the isnad, then how can statements about the event of Karbala, or about Yazid, or about the Umayyads be accepted without isnad? We do not accept the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, without isnad, even though we are told it is a hadith. So how can we accept the words of these other people, irrelevant people, without isnad? Never! This is exactly what our muhaddithin (scholars of hadith), may Allah have mercy on them, have taught us.”
In a video, it is said:
“The historical narrations need to be investigated for their chains of transmission; it is not that if any event suits one’s purpose and involves disrespect to a companion, it should be narrated without verifying whether it is proven or not. For example, the common narrators among the Shia, the ignorant type of Rafidis, during the days of Muharram, they narrate that Hazrat Umar threw a door on Hazrat Fatimah………. Now, since this story suited their purpose, those among the Shia who are of the Rafidi type, the extremist Rafidis, took it and narrated it…………”
Azmat e Sahaba r.a, Radd ul Munafiqeen aur Sunni Shia Ikhtelaf ka Jaizah – 1:37:17
But when it comes to Mirza Sahib himself, you become ignorant like those ignorant Shia reciters, and by narrating historical events according to your own interpretation, you also criticize the Companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them. So what is the difference between those Shia Rafidis, ignorant reciters, and Mirza Sahib?
Mirza Sahib, in response to a question about history books, says:
“Look, the history contains a mixture of lies and truth, right? Whether it is Tabaqat Ibn Saad, or Tarikh Ibn Kathir, or Tarikh Ibn Jarir, or Imam Tabari’s, or Tarikh Ibn Khaldun, or Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn Asakir, now in these, lies and truth are all written. Chains of narration have been mentioned, but no judgments of authentic or weak have been applied, so their authenticity as such does not remain. How can you separate the mixture of lies and truth in it? You cannot, it is a difficult task!”
History Books of Islam – Weak Ahadith & Narrations in Historical Books
The books that Engineer Sahib has mentioned are from centuries before Allama Suyuti’s Rahimahullah’s “Tarikh al-Khulafa,” so what will happen to the unsourced narration narrated by Suyuti? Mirza Sahib says: “In them, the chains of narration have been mentioned; no decision has been made regarding authentic or weak, therefore it is very difficult to distinguish between truth and falsehood.” So Mirza Sahib! What you are presenting with reference to Allama Suyuti does not even have its chain of narration!
You present to us an unsourced false narration as evidence in the name of Allama Suyuti Rahimahullah, while Allama Suyuti Rahimahullah himself, emphasizing the importance of chains of narration, writes:
قَالَ ابْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ: الْإِسْنَادُ مِنَ الدِّينِ، لَوْلَا الْإِسْنَادُ لَقَالَ مَنْ شَاءَ مَا شَاءَ، أَخْرَجَهُ مُسْلِمٌ۔
وَقَالَ سُفْيَانُ بْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ: حَدَّثَ الزُّهْرِيُّ يَوْمًا بِحَدِيثٍ ، فَقُلْتُ: هَاتِهِ بِلَا إِسْنَادٍ، فَقَالَ الزُّهْرِيُّ: أَتَرْقَى السَّطْحَ بِلَا سُلَّمٍ۔
وَقَالَ الثَّوْرِيُّ: الْإِسْنَادُ سِلَاحُ الْمُؤْمِنِ۔
Imam Abdullah bin Mubarak, may Allah have mercy on him, said: Chains of narration are part of the religion; if there were no chains, anyone could say anything they wished! Imam Muslim, may Allah have mercy on him, narrated this. Imam Sufyan bin Uyaynah, may Allah have mercy on him, stated that one day Imam Zahri, may Allah have mercy on him, narrated a hadith, and I said: Narrate it without a chain! Imam Zahri, may Allah have mercy on him, replied: Do you want to climb the roof without a ladder? And Imam Sufyan al-Thawri, may Allah have mercy on him, said: Chains of narration are the weapon of the believer.
Now, after this, how can we consider the chainless narration mentioned by them as authentic?
Alas, in the false historical narration presented by Mirza Sahib, there is neither mention of Hazrat Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him, nor that he gave such an order, nor any mention of curses or insults, nor the sixty years! So what is Mirza Sahib’s intention? It is unknown who the ignorant are that have been satisfied with Mirza Sahib’s references and consider him their leader.
Engineer Sahib! For your own purpose, you have exaggerated Imam Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him, but we know very well that you do all this just to add weight to your false argument that whoever says something in favor of their own purpose is the greatest Imam, Muhaddith, and Mujtahid. And this great person is only great to the extent of Mirza Sahib’s interests, and whatever positive aspects he has mentioned are never presented; rather, only selected things are taken that can be used to criticize the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them. So let us look at what is present in Imam Suyuti’s same book “Tarikh al-Khulafa” in favor of and regarding the virtues of Hazrat Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him:
وعن علي قال: لا تكرهوا إمرة معاوية، فإنكم لو فقدتموه لرأيتم الرءوس تندر عن كواهلها۔
“And it is narrated from Hazrat Ali رضي الله عنه that he said: Do not dislike the rule of Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه, because if you lose him, you will see heads being separated from bodies.”
وقال إبراهيم بن ميسرة: ما رأيت عمر بن عبد العزيز ضرب أحدًا في خلافته، غير رجل واحد تناول من معاوية، فضربه ثلاثة أسواط۔
“Ibrahim bin Maisarah narrates that I have never seen Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz رحمه الله punish anyone during his caliphate, except one person who spoke ill of Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه, and he was given three lashes.”
Its chain of narration is present in Tarikh Dimashq:211/59, and Sheikh Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer حفظه الله has classified it as Hasan:
وأخرج ابن عساكر عن الشعبي قال: دهاة العرب أربعة: معاوية، وعمرو بن العاص، والمغيرة بن شعبة، وزياد۔
“And Imam Ibn Asakir, may Allah have mercy on him, narrated the statement of Imam Shu’bi, may Allah have mercy on him, that: There are four insightful personalities among the Arabs: Sayyiduna Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him; Sayyiduna Amr ibn al-As, may Allah be pleased with him; Hazrat Mughirah ibn Shu’bah, may Allah be pleased with him; and Ziyad (ibn Abi Sufyan).”
It is in Tarikh Ibn Asakir:182/19 and Al-‘Ilal wa Ma’rifat al-Rijal by Ahmad: 1772: “There are four insightful persons in this Ummah…………” Honorable Ghulam Mustafa Amanpuri, may Allah preserve him, said “The chain is authentic.”
And Allama Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him, said regarding Sayyiduna Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him:
وكان يضرب بحلمه المثل، وقد أفرد ابن أبي الدنيا وأبو بكر بن أبي عاصم تصنيفًا في حلم معاوية۔
“And examples of your (Muawiyah’s) forbearance are given, and Imam Ibn Abi al-Dunya, may Allah have mercy on him, and Abu Bakr ibn Abi Asim, may Allah have mercy on him, wrote a dedicated book on your forbearance.”
And he said:
وكان من الموصوفين بالدهاء، والحلم، وقد ورد في فضله أحاديث قلما ثبتت۔
“You, may Allah be pleased with you, were characterized by wisdom and forbearance, and your virtues have been narrated in ahadith, some of which have been proven authentic.”
But Mirza Sahib, out of his enmity towards Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), denies all his virtues by saying that these are all false and fabricated hadiths. So here, do you not consider Allama Suyuti (may Allah have mercy on him), a great scholar, imam, and reformer? You eagerly narrate one unsound and false incident mentioned by him (in which Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) is not even mentioned), about which he himself did not claim authenticity. But when the same imam, muhaddith, and great reformer of Islam has narrated in the same book statements and sayings in favor of Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), which are present with authentic chains of narration, you do not even notice them. After all, when the authentic and established narrations are set aside and a false narration narrated by Allama Suyuti (may Allah have mercy on him) is publicized, is this not hypocrisy? Is this not concealment of the truth? Is this not enmity towards Muawiyah? Is this not the behavior of some ignorant Shia speakers who, according to Mirza Sahib, narrate false historical incidents to criticize the companions? Mirza Sahib directs all these taunts at others but never looks into the mirror himself.
Engineer Sahib, stop lying that I do not harbor enmity towards these companions; rather, I only point out mistakes, because you do not point out mistakes but attribute false accusations to them. And is merely pointing out mistakes the definition of truthfulness? If truthfulness were the goal, then positive aspects would also be mentioned. In fact, you even call us Nasibi for mentioning positive aspects.
And as for Allama Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on him (whom Mirza Sahib cited second in the same video), the situation is the same; he did not even mention the name of Hazrat Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him, nor did he say that all this happened during his era. And regarding the narration about “sixty years,” where is its chain of transmission? Did he claim that he would only transmit any historical narration after proving it authentic? And Allama Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on him, lived after Janab Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him. So when you declare the histories written by earlier hadith scholars as unreliable and false, and say that those historians did not declare those narrations authentic and reliable, then with what face do you present us with the chainless historical narrations narrated by Allama Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him, and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on him, as evidence?
Mirza Sahib took a false historical reference from the book of Allama Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on him, and presented it without claiming its authenticity at all, but listen to what he has quoted in the same book regarding those who speak nonsense about Hazrat Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him:
وأجمع أهل السنة على السكوت عما شجر بين الصحابة رضي الله عنهم، ولا يقال فيهم إلا الحسنى فمن تكلم في معاوية أو غيره من الصحابة فقد خرج عن الإجماع۔
“And the Ahl al-Sunnah have consensus that in matters of disagreements among the Companions, silence should be maintained, and only good should be spoken about them. Therefore, whoever mentions Hazrat Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him, or any other Companion in a bad way, is considered outside the consensus.”
Now tell me, is Mirza Sahib following the methodology and consensus of Ahl al-Sunnah, or the way of the Rafidah? In any case, Engineer Sahib’s claim was that if Maududi Sahib has collected historical narrations, then what harm is there if we prove all of that from the books of hadith and fill that gap as well. But we have presented all the arguments put forth by Mirza Sahib from beginning to end before you; not a single one contains any evidence according to your false claims. Then, out of habit, you present such unauthentic historical narrations which even Mirza Sahib himself once considered false and fabricated history, but today, out of enmity and opposition to Sayyiduna Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), those are considered authentic and valid. In summary, Mirza Sahib’s claim is also a false tale with no truth, and all of this is a conspiracy by the enemies of the noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them).
