This excerpt is taken from A Research Review of Mirza Muhammad Ali Engineer's Objections and Issues, authored by Haroon bin Shabbir Ahmad, may Allah preserve him, and revised by Fazilat al-Sheikh Maulana Muhammad Rafiq Tahir, may Allah preserve him.
If the life and style of governance of Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه are studied, it becomes clear that he was very compassionate and well-wisher of the common people; he cared for his subjects and was deeply concerned for them. In a narration from Sahih Bukhari, it is stated that Hasan Basri رحمه الله said:
اسْتَقْبَلَ وَاللهِ الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ مُعَاوِيَةَ بِكَتَائِبَ أَمْثَالِ الْجِبَالِ، فَقَالَ عَمْرُو بْنُ الْعَاصِ: إِنِّي لَأَرَى كَتَائِبَ لَا تُوَلِّي حَتَّى تَقْتُلَ أَقْرَانَهَا۔ فَقَالَ لَهُ مُعَاوِيَةُ، وَكَانَ وَاللهِ خَيْرَ الرَّجُلَيْنِ: أَيْ عَمْرُو، إِنْ قَتَلَ هَؤُلَاءِ هَؤُلَاءِ، وَهَؤُلَاءِ هَؤُلَاءِ، مَنْ لِي بِأُمُورِ النَّاسِ؟ مَنْ لِي بِنِسَائِهِمْ؟ مَنْ لِي بِضَيْعَتِهِمْ......؟
"When Hasan bin Ali رضي الله عنه arrived with an army like mountains, Hazrat Amr bin Aas رضي الله عنه said, 'I see an army that will not return without destroying its opponent.' Muawiyah رضي الله عنه said to him, 'By Allah, they were better than these two companions.' He said, 'O Amr رضي الله عنه! If these two armies fight each other, then who will take responsibility for the affairs of the people, who will assist me in looking after the women, children, and elderly of the people?'"
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari:2704)
This mentions the disagreement between Hazrat Hasan and Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنهما, but the same narration states that later, according to the prophecy of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, peace was established between these two great groups. In any case, the point to ponder here is: when the word "war" was heard, what was the first thought that came to Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه? So, a person who is so protective and concerned about the lives and wealth of the people, how could such a person order the unjust killing of people and the looting of their wealth? Hafiz Ibn Hajar رحمه الله writes in the commentary of this hadith:
......وَدَلَالَةٌ عَلَى رَأْفَةِ مُعَاوِيَةَ بِالرَّعِيَّةِ وَشَفَقَتِهِ عَلَى الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَقُوَّةِ نَظَرِهِ فِي تَدْبِيرِ الْمُلْكِ وَنَظَرِهِ فِي الْعَوَاقِبِ۔
"And this narration also indicates that Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه was very caring for his subjects, extremely compassionate towards Muslims, had deep insight into governmental affairs, and kept an eye on the consequences of all matters."
Reference: (Fath al-Bari:67,66/13)
And Hazrat Abu Maryam Azdi رضي الله عنه said:
دَخَلْتُ عَلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ فَقَالَ: مَا أَنْعَمَنَا بِكَ أَبَا فُلَانٍ وَهِيَ كَلِمَةٌ تَقُولُهَا الْعَرَبُ فَقُلْتُ: حَدِيثًا سَمِعْتُهُ أُخْبِرُكَ بِهِ، سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: "مَنْ وَلَّاهُ اللهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ شَيْئًا مِنْ أَمْرِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ، فَاحْتَجَبَ دُونَ حَاجَتِهِمْ وَخَلَّتِهِمْ وَفَقْرِهِم، احْتَجَبَ اللهُ عَنْهُ دُونَ حَاجَتِهِ وَخَلَّتِهِ وَفَقْرِهِ". قَالَ: فَجَعَلَ رَجُلًا عَلَى حَوَائِجِ النَّاسِ۔
"I went to meet Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه, and he said: O Abu So-and-so! How well you have come! — and this phrase (ما انعمنا بك) is said by Arabs as a form of welcome. I said that I have come to narrate a hadith to you, I heard the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم say: 'Whoever is appointed as a guardian and responsible for the affairs of the Muslims, and he does not meet their needs, necessities, and poverty (and closes his door to them), then Allah will also veil Himself from him while he is in need, destitute, and poor.' Accordingly, Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه appointed a person to look after the needs and necessities of the people."
Reference: (Sunan Abu Dawood:2948)
It is narrated from Abu Ishaq al-Subai’i that:
كَانَ جَرِيرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللهِ فِي بَعْثٍ بِإِرْمِينِيَةَ، قَالَ: فَأَصَابَتْهُمْ مَخْمَصَةٌ أَوْ مَجَاعَةٌ، قَالَ: فَكَتَبَ جَرِيرٌ إِلَى مُعَاوِيَةَ: إِنِّي سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: "مَنْ لَمْ يَرْحَمِ النَّاسَ لَا يَرْحَمْهُ اللهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ". قَالَ: فَأَرْسَلَ إِلَيْهِ، فَأَتَاهُ، فَقَالَ: أَنْتَ سَمِعْتَهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ؟ قَالَ: نَعَمْ۔ قَالَ: فَأَقْفَلَهُمْ وَمَتَّعَهُمْ۔
"Sayyiduna Jarir bin Abdullah رضي الله عنه was part of the army in Armenia. When famine struck the soldiers, Hazrat Jarir رضي الله عنه wrote a letter to Amir Muawiyah رضي الله عنه saying that I heard the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم say: 'Whoever does not have mercy on people, Allah Almighty will not have mercy on him.' Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه sent a message to Jarir رضي الله عنه, and when he came, Muawiyah رضي الله عنه asked him: Did you hear this hadith directly from the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم? He said yes! Then Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه provided him with military equipment and necessary supplies."
Reference: (Musnad Ahmad: 19194)
So, keeping all these narrations in view, decide: can a person who cares so much for his subjects shed their blood unjustly? And order their wealth to be looted? Why do the enemies of the Sahabah not see these things? For them, they become blind, deaf, and mute, and they highlight only the negative aspects. This behavior can only be aimed at criticizing the Sahabah; truthfulness is just a fraud.
Engineer Sahib, while speaking about Sayyiduna Husain رضي الله عنه’s uprising against Yazid, says:
"O brother, if he is the grandson of the Prophet, will he harbor ill feelings in his heart? Those who will be at the highest level of faith, whose genes will include the Prophet’s genes, whose blood will be the Prophet’s blood, how can they compromise? They will come forward! And then Sayyiduna Husain’s position was not that of an ordinary scholar; he was the grandson of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم! Now I read a verse from the Holy Quran which will illuminate our fourteen generations, Surah Al-Ma’idah, verse 63. Allah Almighty addressed the elders of the Jews and Christians, their great priests, their clerics: لَوْلَا يَنْهَاهُمُ الرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ عَنْ قَوْلِهِمُ الْإِثْمَ وَأَكْلِهِمُ السُّحْتَ لَبِئْسَ مَا كَانُوا يَصْنَعُونَ Why did not their elders stop them? The people of Allah were roaming around! Why did not their people of Allah and their clerics stop them from committing sins and eating forbidden things? How bad were their deeds! The clerics kept compromising; Allah gave a great rebuke to the Jews. O brother! If the Jews and Christians are being rebuked, will we not be rebuked? Was Sayyiduna Husain not to be questioned on the Day of Judgment that you were the grandson of the Prophet, and the Shariah of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم was being torn apart before you, why did you not stop it? He was definitely to be questioned, and praise be to Allah, he fulfilled his right; by doing this, he reformed us and saved his own hereafter."
61- Mas’alah, HUSAINIAT our Yazeediat ka TAHQEEQI Jaizah – 47:39
What Mirza Sahib means here is that the damage being done to Islam and the Islamic state by Yazid, the unjust killings and plundering, made Sayyiduna Husain رضي الله عنه’s uprising against him right and obligatory, and by standing against oppression, he fulfilled his duty. So our request is that keep Mirza Sahib’s cited verse and Sayyiduna Husain رضي الله عنه’s actions in mind, and from this, seek the answer to the question: if during Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه’s reign any unlawful killing had occurred or if he had ordered unjust killing and looting of people’s wealth, should Sayyiduna Husain رضي الله عنه have raised his voice against him or not? Should he have broken allegiance or maintained it? Should he have rebelled or, according to Mirza Sahib, should he have become the target of the rebuke given to the scholars and elders of Jews and Christians? (May Allah protect us!) Rather, according to Mirza Sahib, the grandson of the Prophet would harbor ill feelings in his heart? Those who will be at the highest level of faith, whose genes include the Prophet’s genes, whose blood is the Prophet’s blood, how could they compromise? They would come forward! And then Sayyiduna Husain’s position was not that of an ordinary scholar; he was the grandson of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم! So from the day Sayyiduna Hasan رضي الله عنه made peace with Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه and handed over the caliphate and authority to him, until his last breath, breaking allegiance or rebellion was out of the question; not even a word was proven from Sayyiduna Hasan and Husain رضي الله عنهما against Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه. So if such an incident had occurred during Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه’s reign, why did these personalities not raise their voices? Why did they not oppose? Why did they not break allegiance? Therefore, this is clear evidence that no such unlawful act occurred during his reign. If it had, the first to raise objections would have been the Sahabah themselves, but nothing like this is narrated from any Sahabi as Abdul Rahman bin Abd Rabb al-Ka’bah claims. Rather, the consensus of all Sahabah رضي الله عنهم including Hasan and Husain رضي الله عنهم contradicts his statement.
As for the letter written by Sayyiduna Husain رضي الله عنه to Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه, which Mirza Sahib presents citing Ibn Kathir’s history, whenever it is presented with an authentic chain, we will discuss it. For now, we have always heard from you that history is rubbish, and your case is based on Bukhari, Muslim, and authentic chains.
Anyway, none of the Muhaddithin accepted the statement of Abdul Rahman bin Abd Rabb al-Ka’bah رحمه الله, nor did anyone support him; rather, the Imams negate and refute it.
Imam Abu al-Abbas al-Qurtubi رحمه الله wrote in the commentary of the hadith under discussion in Sahih Muslim:
وما ذكره عبد الرحمٰن عن معاوية إغياءٌ في الكلام على حسب ظنه وتأويله، وإلا فمعاوية لم يعرف من حاله ولا من سيرته شيء مما قاله له۔
"And what Abdul Rahman said about Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه is only his conjecture and interpretation; otherwise, nothing is proven from Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه or his life that supports what he said about him."
Reference: (Al-Mufham lima Ashkala min Talkhees Kitab Muslim:53/4)
Imam Ibn Kathir رحمه الله says:
وأجمعت الرَّعَايَا عَلَى بَيْعَتِهِ فِي سَنَةِ إِحْدَى وَأَرْبَعِينَ كَمَا قَدَّمْنَا، فَلَمْ يَزَلْ مُسْتَقِلًّا بِالْأَمْرِ فِي هَذِهِ الْمُدَّةِ إِلَى هَذِهِ السَّنَةِ الَّتِي كَانَتْ فِيهَا وَفَاتُهُ، وَالْجِهَادُ فِي بِلَادِ الْعَدُوِّ قَائِمٌ، وَكَلِمَةُ اللهِ عَالِيَةٌ۔ وَالْغَنَائِمُ تَرِدُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ أَطْرَافِ الْأَرْضِ، وَالْمُسْلِمُونَ مَعَهُ فِي رَاحَةٍ وَعَدْلٍ، وَصَفْحٍ وَعَفْوٍ۔
"All the subjects agreed to pledge allegiance to Amir Muawiyah رضي الله عنه in 41 AH, and then until his death (60 AH), he remained the ruler. Jihad continued in the lands of the enemies of Islam, and the word of Allah was exalted. Booty was coming from all around the earth, and the Muslim subjects were provided comfort and justice by him, and he treated them with pardon and forgiveness."
Reference: (Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah:119/8)
Imam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله:
فَلَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ مُلُوكِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مَلِكٌ خَيْرٌ مِنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ........
"Among the kings of the Muslims, none was better than Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه."
Reference: (Minhaj al-Sunnah:232/6)
Imam Ibn Abi al-Izz Hanafi رحمه الله writes:
وأول ملوك المسلمين معاوية وهو خير ملوك المسلمين۔
"Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه is the first king of the Muslims, and he was a good king."
Reference: (Sharh al-Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah:722/2)
As for the claim of Abdul Rahman رحمه الله, sometimes it happens due to differences in understanding that we see a matter one way, but the other side of the picture is hidden from us. Even an ordinary person, let alone a Prophet, can err in understanding. The well-known incident in Surah Al-Kahf is that when Hazrat Musa عليه السلام met Hazrat Khidr عليه السلام, he requested to accompany him to learn the knowledge given to him. During this journey, among several incidents, one was that Hazrat Khidr عليه السلام killed a boy, and Hazrat Musa عليه السلام objected, considering it an unjust killing. The Quranic words are: فَانْطَلَقَا حَتَّى إِذَا لَقِيَا غُلَامًا فَقَتَلَهُ قَالَ أَقَتَلْتَ نَفْسًا زَكِيَّةً بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ لَقَدْ جِئْتَ شَيْئًا نُكْرًا "Then they proceeded until they found a boy, and he (Khidr) killed him. Musa said: Have you killed a pure soul without just cause? Indeed, you have done a terrible thing."
Reference: (Al-Kahf:74)
Later, Hazrat Khidr عليه السلام explained that he did not do it by his own will but by Allah’s command.Here, Hazrat Musa عليه السلام is a Prophet and witnessed the killing himself, yet he considered it unjust. So Abdul Rahman bin Abd Rabb al-Ka’bah رحمه الله is neither a Prophet nor a Sahabi; can he not err in understanding something? Is it not possible that he considered a killing unjust when in reality it was not? Therefore, without explicit evidence, it is not permissible to raise such matters and defame anyone.
See! There was a dispute between Sayyiduna Abbas رضي الله عنه and Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه, and Abbas رضي الله عنه even called him oppressor, liar, traitor, and betrayer.
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari:7305, Sahih Muslim:1757)
Is it permissible for any Muslim to blindly repeat these words and defame Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه? Rather, we say it was their mutual disagreement, and surely Abbas رضي الله عنه had some misunderstanding.There was a major dispute among the Sahabah regarding the retaliation for Uthman رضي الله عنه; it was such a fitnah that each party considered itself right and the other oppressor. At the Battle of Jamal, Sayyiduna Zubair رضي الله عنه said that either the oppressor will be killed today or the oppressed, and he feared he might be killed unjustly.
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari:3129)
And who was the opponent? Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه! They considered Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه oppressor, although it was an ijtihadi error of Sayyiduna Zubair رضي الله عنه. So is it permissible to label someone oppressor without understanding the background, statements, and opinions of both parties? Rather, when all details are examined, the conclusion is that it was an ijtihadi issue and Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه was right.In the same battle, Sayyiduna Talha رضي الله عنه was also martyred. When his son met Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه, he said: You killed my father and usurped my wealth unjustly.
Reference: (Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra:225/3, Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim:3348)
The same kind of reports as those of Abdul Rahman bin Abd Rabb al-Ka’bah; are these statements not of the same nature? Are such narrations also raised in the name of truthfulness to create doubts about Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه? Anyway, our request is only that no final statement should be made against anyone based on any claimant’s words without knowing the reality, details, and background of the matter. And here, there is no evidence, detail, or even a single incident supporting Abdul Rahman’s claim. Moreover, the hadith of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم contradicts his statement. There is also a general hadith, which is the first hadith in Engineer Sahib’s research paper: "My companions are a source of peace for the Ummah."
Reference: (Sahih Muslim:6466)
Then the statements of the Sahabah and other Tabi‘in are completely opposite. We have proven with evidence that Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه was extremely compassionate and kind to his subjects, protecting their lives, wealth, honor, and chastity, and taking special care of their needs.We have answered your objection according to all the principles of Mirza Sahib, and you are also witnessing the inconsistency of Mirza Sahib’s principles, that where he sets principles, elsewhere he contradicts them himself. Here, you have set a record of breaking principles and have butchered all demands of justice and fairness. If you had such a thirst for truthfulness, you would also mention positive aspects. Engineer Sahib, after saying all this, insults us by saying we hide the truth, whereas you have already known the reality of this truth. But does Engineer Sahib ever mention any of the hadiths in favor of Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه, or the sayings of the Sahabah and Tabi‘in that we present? Never! So then who is the real one hiding the truth? Presenting Abdul Rahman bin Abd Rabb al-Ka’bah’s statement against the sayings of the Sahabah and other Tabi‘in is one thing, but the extreme injustice is that you deny and reject the authentic hadith in favor of Hazrat Muawiyah رضي الله عنه (and the supplication of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم for him) which is mentioned in the virtues of Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه: "O Allah, make Muawiyah guided and guide people through him."
Reference: (Sunan Tirmidhi:3842)
This hadith was declared authentic by the early Muhaddithin, and similarly by Allama Nasiruddin al-Albani, Sheikh Zubair Ali Zai, Maulana Irshad ul Haq Athari, and Allama Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer Amnpuri, who have declared it good and authentic. And these are, according to Engineer Sahib, the great contemporary hadith scholars. In fact, you call Allama Albani رحمه الله the greatest Muhaddith of Saudi Arabia and Maulana Zubair Ali Zai رحمه الله the greatest Muhaddith of Pakistan. So when all these scholars agree on the authenticity of a hadith, yet Mirza Sahib is not ready to accept their words, what is the reason? You often target the character of Sayyiduna Muawiyah رضي الله عنه and this hadith, saying that the guided one’s deeds would be such? Then you quote the very Sahih Muslim narration under discussion. Indeed, we belong to Allah and to Him we shall return! Is that a verse? A hadith? Or testimony of the Sahabah رضي الله عنهم? So declaring an authentic hadith invalid on the basis of an unsupported statement is not the pinnacle of knowledge? Does any hadith need the commentary of a Tabi‘i such that if a person’s statement contradicts it, the hadith becomes invalid? This is Mirza Sahib’s trick, whereas it should be that if a hadith is weak according to the principles of Muhaddithin, the reason for weakness should be stated. And if the hadith is authentic—as we have proven in the light of evidence—then Abdul Rahman bin Abd Rabb al-Ka’bah’s statement should be considered erroneous, because our criterion is the hadith of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, not anyone’s statement. And then Engineer Sahib’s famous saying, "There is nothing new under my Prophet, nothing new under the sky," also teaches this lesson. But whether Engineer Sahib stands by this principle here or not, you can decide yourself.❀❀❀
