This excerpt is taken from Dr. Hafiz Muhammad Zubair's book "Engineer Muhammad Ali Mirza: Thoughts and Ideas" .
Mirza Sahib has accused Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) of committing forbidden acts after embracing Islam, meaning in simple words, in his view, he was a sinful and immoral person because a person who commits major sins is called sinful and immoral. Mirza Sahib, in the third chapter of his booklet "The True Background of the Event of Karbala," under Hadith number 31, while translating a narration from Sunan Abu Dawood, gives the impression that forbidden items such as silk, gold, and animal skins were used as carpets in the house of Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him). Mirza Sahib narrates that Muqaddam bin Maadi Karb (may Allah be pleased with him) said to Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him):
"O Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him)! If I speak the truth, then confirm it, and if I lie, then deny it." Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "Okay." Then Muqaddam (may Allah be pleased with him) asked: "I ask you by Allah, have you yourself heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) forbidding the wearing of gold?" Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "Yes." Then Muqaddam (may Allah be pleased with him) asked: "I ask you by Allah, have you yourself heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) forbidding the wearing of silk?" Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "Yes." Then Muqaddam (may Allah be pleased with him) asked: "I ask you by Allah, have you yourself heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) forbidding the wearing of animal skins and sitting on them as carpets?" Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "Yes." Then Muqaddam (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "By Allah, O Muawiya! I have seen all these forbidden items being used in your house."
Reference: (Muhammad Ali Mirza, The True Background of the Event of Karbala: In the Light of 72 Authentic Chains of Hadith, p. 15)
The first point is that Mirza Sahib, in the research of this hadith, has quoted from Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) and Sheikh Zubair Ali Zai (may Allah have mercy on him) that they called this narration "Isnad Sahih" (authentic chain).
Reference: (Also)
And when hadith scholars say "Isnad Sahih" about a hadith, it does not mean that the hadith itself is "Sahih" (authentic). This is Mirza Sahib's fundamental mistake that he does not know the difference between "Sahih al-Isnad" and "Sahih" hadith. Due to this ignorance, he titled his booklet "The True Background of the Event of Karbala: In the Light of 72 Authentic Chains of Hadith."The second point is that according to hadith scholars, "Isnad Sahih" does not necessarily mean the hadith is "Sahih." It only means that out of the five conditions of a "Sahih" hadith (all narrators in the chain are just, all narrators are precise, the chain is continuous, the chain or text is not anomalous, and it is free from hidden defects—the last two mostly relate to the text), the first three conditions related only to the chain have been verified in this narration. The remaining two conditions related to the chain and text have not been examined due to lack of time and are left for others to verify. In simple words, half of the research on this narration has been completed, and the rest is left to other researchers. This difference between the two terms has been explained by Hafiz Ibn al-Salah (may Allah have mercy on him).
Reference: Their statement: "This is a hadith with an authentic chain or a good chain without saying: this is a Sahih or Hasan hadith, because it may be said: this is a hadith with an authentic chain but it is not authentic due to being anomalous or defective." (Ibn al-Salah, Uthman bin Abdur Rahman, Knowledge of the Types of Hadith Sciences, Dar al-Fikr al-Mu'asir, Beirut, 1986, p. 13)
Later, other scholars like Hafiz Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) also quoted this.
Reference: Authenticity of the chain does not necessarily imply the authenticity of the hadith. He said: Judging a hadith as authentic or good based on the chain does not necessarily mean the text is also authentic, as it may be anomalous or defective. (Ibn Kathir, Ismail bin Umar, Al-Ba'ith al-Hathith ila Ikhtisar 'Ulum al-Hadith, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut, p. 43)
So you are using a hadith whose research is incomplete as evidence for your claim! You should have completed its research first, then it would have been acceptable.The third point is that Mirza Sahib, in his booklet, has used the research of some scholars for hadith verification because he himself does not know much and admits that studying religious sciences taught in madrasas is of no benefit since everything is available in Urdu. The scholars whose research Mirza Sahib has mentioned include Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him), Sheikh Shu'ayb Arna'ut (may Allah have mercy on him), Sheikh Zubair Ali Zai (may Allah have mercy on him), etc. But surprisingly, when there is a difference of opinion among these scholars regarding a hadith, Mirza Sahib shows no principle other than personal preference to accept one scholar's research and reject another's. For example, Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) called this narration "Isnad Sahih," but Sheikh Shu'ayb Arna'ut (may Allah have mercy on him) called the same narration "Isnad Da'if" (weak chain).
Reference: (Abu Dawood, Sulaiman bin Al-Ash'ath Al-Sijistani, Sunan Abi Dawood, edited by Shu'ayb Al-Arna'ut, Dar al-Risalah al-'Alamiyyah, Beirut, 2009, 219/6)
That means its chain is weak, but Mirza Sahib did not quote Sheikh Shu'ayb Arna'ut's research because it contradicted his preconceived conclusions, and he wanted to hide it from his readers. So, in summary, there is a difference of opinion regarding the authentication and weakening of this narration, so how can you use a disputed hadith as a fundamental proof when the scholars who differ are also among your sources? Secondly, even if we trust Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) and Sheikh Zubair Ali Zai (may Allah have mercy on him), this narration is not of the "Sahih" grade but a lower grade, i.e., "Isnad Sahih," which is between authentic and weak. Therefore, this accusation against Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) is not proven, and authentic narrations are against it.The fourth point is that although Mirza Sahib has quoted Allama Albani's research on this narration in this booklet, in some places in the same booklet, he has abandoned Allama Albani's opinion on some hadiths because it contradicted his fabricated conclusions. Mirza Sahib's entire research is based on the principle of pick and choose and is highly biased. Similarly, Imam Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) also rejected this narration.
Reference: (Ibn Kathir Ismail bin Umar, Al-Bidaya wa'l-Nihaya, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, 1986, 36/8)
Although Imam Ibn Kathir is not among Mirza Sahib's sources, Sheikh Shu'ayb Arna'ut (may Allah have mercy on him) is. Yet, Mirza Sahib does not fully quote him, only citing what suits his conclusions, whether it is Allama Albani, Sheikh Shu'ayb Arna'ut, or Sheikh Zubair Ali Zai. So Mirza Sahib has cooked a mixture from various scholars' research that suits his conclusions and astonishingly gives the impression that all these scholars support it.The fifth point is that in a narration from Mu'jam al-Tabarani, Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) gave a sermon saying: "O people! The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) forbade nine things, and I also forbid you from these nine things: lamentation, poetry, women adorning themselves and going out like in the age of ignorance, pictures, animal skins, music, gold, adultery, and silk."
Reference: (Al-Tabarani, Sulaiman bin Ahmad, Al-Mu'jam al-Kabir, Maktabat Ibn Taymiyyah, Cairo, 2nd edition, 1994, 373/19)
Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) declared this narration "Sahih."
Reference: (Al-Albani, Nasir al-Din, Sahih al-Jami' al-Saghir wa Ziyadatuh, Al-Maktab al-Islami, Beirut, 1163/2-1164)
But Mirza Sahib did not include this narration in his booklet because it goes against his purpose, which is to defame Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him). Moreover, Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) called this narration not just "Isnad Sahih" but "Sahih," and Allama Albani is among the sources of Mirza Sahib's booklet. So why did Mirza Sahib not take the "Sahih" narration from the same scholar on the same topic but took a lower grade "Isnad Sahih" narration instead?The sixth point is that when Mirza Sahib brings a narration on a topic, honesty demands that if there is any narration against it, it should also be mentioned and the truth should not be hidden. Therefore, on the first page of this booklet, Mirza Sahib accuses scholars of hiding the truth, but the study of this booklet clearly shows that Mirza Sahib himself has done the same shamelessly throughout the booklet. So on what principles of research is this booklet compiled? There is only one principle: to defame Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) and his companions, the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), in any way possible. Therefore, he hides every good thing narrated about them or distorts it with fabricated interpretations, even though it is proven by authentic narrations, and he is eager to narrate every vile thing about them, even though those narrations are not authentic or are weak.
Another notable point about this booklet is that whenever Mirza Sahib mentions Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) or his companions, such as Amr bin al-As (may Allah be pleased with him), he does not write the word "Sayyiduna" (our master) with their names. But whenever he mentions any other Companion of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), he adds "Sayyiduna" with their names everywhere, even though in his previous booklet "Rafidah, Nasbiyyah, and Yazidiyyah: A Research Study," he used to write "Sayyiduna" for Amir Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) and called his mistake an ijtihadi error. He also wrote that those companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) who opposed Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) in the Battle of Jamal and the Battle of Siffin will receive a reward of one sin.
Reference: (Muhammad Ali Mirza, Rafidah, Nasbiyyah, and Yazidiyyah: A Research Study, Nojawan-e-Ahl-e-Sunnat Islamabad, Islamabad, 2012, p. 3)
This four-page research paper is called Research Paper (5a), but in the second part of the same research paper, i.e., (5b) titled "The True Background of the Event of Karbala: In the Light of 72 Authentic Chains of Hadith," his stance had changed, and "Sayyiduna" Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) was no longer just Muawiya but a drunkard, innovator, sinful and immoral person committing major sins, a rebel, and even deserving of death. It is true that a thinking and understanding person’s stance evolves, but a sensible person openly retracts his previous stance and then says he is adopting a new stance. There is no such thing in his Research Paper (5b) that he retracted (5a); rather, the titles themselves indicate that in his view, the second is a continuation of the first. But comparing the positions presented in both reveals contradictions. The point is that if a person is so foolish that he does not even realize that his first stance was one thing and the second is another, and he treats the first as a summary and the second as a detailed version, even though both are contradictory, then what level of research can he have!
