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.
Argument Number: 3
عَنِ ابْنِ سَابِطٍ وَهُوَ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ سَعْدِ بْنِ أَبِي وَقَّاصٍ، قَالَ: قَدِمَ مُعَاوِيَةُ فِي بَعْضِ حَجَّاتِهِ، فَدَخَلَ عَلَيْهِ سَعْدٌ، فَذَكَرُوا عَلِيًّا، فَنَالَ مِنْهُ، فَغَضِبَ سَعْدٌ، وَقَالَ: تَقُولُ هَذَا لِرَجُلٍ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلَاهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلَاهُ وَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ: أَنْتَ مِنِّي بِمَنْزِلَةِ هَارُونَ مِنْ مُوسَى، إِلَّا أَنَّهُ لَا نَبِيَّ بَعْدِي، وَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ: لَأُعْطِيَنَّ الرَّايَةَ الْيَوْمَ رَجُلًا يُحِبُّ اللهَ وَرَسُولَهُ۔
"Abdur-Rahman bin Sabit narrates from Hazrat Saad bin Abi Waqqas (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: Once Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) came for Hajj, so Hazrat Saad (may Allah be pleased with him) went to meet him. People mentioned Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) said some critical words about him. Hazrat Saad (may Allah be pleased with him) became angry and said: You are speaking about a person about whom I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say: Whomsoever I am the master (Mawla) of, Ali is also his master. And I heard you (peace be upon him) say (to Hazrat Ali): Your relation to me is like that of Harun (Aaron) to Musa (Moses), except that there is no prophet after me. And I also heard you say (at the occasion of Khyber): Today I will give the flag to the one who loves Allah and His Messenger. (Then the flag was given to Hazrat Ali)."
Reference: (Sunan Ibn Majah:121)
This is Mirza Sahib's second major argument which he presents to prove his claim, and the relation of this narration to your claim will be mentioned later, but first, look at the status of this fundamental argument:
It is stated that this narration is weak; it is narrated by Abdur-Rahman bin Sabit from Hazrat Saad (may Allah be pleased with him), but Abdur-Rahman did not hear anything from him!
Imam Yahya bin Ma'in (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Abdur-Rahman bin Sabit did not hear anything from Hazrat Saad (may Allah be pleased with him).
Imam Yahya bin Ma'in's student Abbas ad-Duri says: Imam Ibn Ma'in's position is that Abdur-Rahman did not hear from these companions, rather he transmits from them without hearing (isrāl).
Reference: (Tarikh Ibn Ma'in:87/3)
Imam Ibn Abi Hatim (may Allah have mercy on him) also mentioned Imam Yahya bin Ma'in's statement regarding Abdur-Rahman bin Sabit's narration in "Al-Marasil".
Reference: (Al-Marasil Ibn Abi Hatim: 459)
Maulana Zubair Ali Za'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said about this narration:
"It is weak due to a broken chain, and calling this broken narration 'authentic chain' is very strange."
Reference: (Monthly Al-Hadith:100, p. 20)
This is a refutation of Allama Albani (may Allah have mercy on him), who mistakenly considered it authentic.
Allama Albani's very famous and capable student "Allama Abu Ishaq Al-Huwaini" also considers it weak.
Reference: (At-Tiryāq bi-Ahadith Qawāhā Al-Albani wa Da'fah Al-Huwaini Abu Ishaq:152)
Sheikh Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer Amnpuri (may Allah preserve him) also wrote about this narration: "اسناده ضعيف لانقطاعه"
Reference: (Takhrij Khawas Ali (may Allah be pleased with him): p.44)
Allama Muqbil bin Hadi (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
هذا الحديث إذا نظرت إلى سنده وجدتهم ثقات، ولكن يحيى ابن معين يقول: إن عبد الرحمن بن سابط لم يسمع من سعد بن أبي وقاص كما في جامع التحصيل۔
"When you look at the chain of this hadith, you will find its narrators trustworthy, but (the defect is that) Imam Ibn Ma'in (may Allah have mercy on him) said that Abdur-Rahman bin Sabit did not hear from Hazrat Saad bin Abi Waqqas (may Allah be pleased with him), as mentioned in 'Jami' at-Tahsil' (therefore this narration is weak due to a broken chain)."
Reference: (Ahadith Mu'alla Zahiruha as-Sihha:146)
Allama Muhammad Zia-ur-Rahman Al-A'zami (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
وإسناده منقطع، لأن عبد الرحمٰن بن سابط لم يسمع من سعد بن أبي وقاص، قاله ابن معين۔
"Its chain is broken because Abdur-Rahman bin Sabit did not hear from Hazrat Saad bin Abi Waqqas (may Allah be pleased with him), and this was stated by Imam Ibn Ma'in (may Allah have mercy on him)."
Reference: (Al-Jami' Al-Kamil:69/9)
Therefore, this narration is fundamentally weak, and scholars have also declared it weak, but Mirza Sahib does not care about any of this; wherever he finds something supporting his point, even if weak, he considers it acceptable. He is so obsessed with objecting to the companions of the Prophet that he loudly presents even weak narrations against them. Mirza Sahib greatly supports Maududi because they have a very close relationship, and Maududi Sahib also did not spare any effort in speaking ill and making false accusations against the companions. Anyway, Maududi Sahib presented false historical narrations and said that for sixty years Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was cursed and insulted. Mirza Sahib claimed in support of him that he has completed Maududi Sahib's deficiency and proved this claim from the books of hadith! So what arrow have you shot, Mirza Sahib? Referring to hadith books is of no use; rather, those narrations should be proven with authentic chains, otherwise, what is the difference between weak narrations in historical reports and those in hadith books?
Secondly, your claim was that Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) used to insult and curse Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and even ordered it, and this continued on pulpits for sixty years. But among the narrations you presented against Maududi Sahib's baseless arguments, in which narration is this explicitly mentioned? This narration neither mentions any insult nor curse, nor any pulpit, nor sixty years. It is regrettable that even in the weak narration you presented, there is no evidence for your claim.
