Hazrat Muawiya and Sayyidina Ali

[Katsa]

Salam...
Munafikin at the time of war of jumal and war of suffin were all shia...
They made the fight among the sahabis (ra)...
Yet shia is the nation who is responsible for every fitnah in islam...
Since the death of hazrat Mohammad Mustafa (saw)...
And are responsible in present...
And will be responsible in future also...

Does anyone has some good sites refuting the shia beliefs? In arabic and english? In detail?

www.kr-hcy.com
Insh Allah coming soon...

[abeer_xyz]

Muawiya did not rebel against Ali…
Ammar ibn Yasar was not killed by Muawiya's army…
Muawiya was not sacked out of his office of Governor of Syria by Ali…
Muawiya did not send back the replacing Governor…
Muawiya’s army did not spear the Koran on their swords while at the verge of complete defeat by Ali’s army…
Amr ibn al-Aas did not betray Musa al-Ashari at Dumatul Jandal…
Hujr ibn Adi and his friends were not killed during Muawiya's regime...
Sahabas can not kill each other…
The battle of Siffin did not occur…
These all are fictions fabricated by Shias…

[Muawiyah]

It might be pertinent to mention here that to criticize any companion of Rasoolullah sallalaahu `alyhi wa Sallam is the height of fisq.

Rasoolullah sallalaahu `alyhi wa Sallam said:

إذا رأيتم الذين يسبون أصحابي فقولوا‏:‏ لعنة الله على شركم‏

"If you see those who criticize my companions, say to them "May the curse of Allah be on the evil of you"

and He sallalaahu `alyhi wa Sallam said:

إذا رأيتم الذين يسبون أصحابي فالعنوهم

"If you see those who criticize my companions, curse them"

and He sallalaahu `alyhi wa Sallam said:

لا تسبوا أصحابي فوالذي نفسي بيده لو أن أحدكم أنفق مثل أحد ذهباً ما بلغ مد أحدهم ولا نصيفه

Do not criticize by companions for by the one in whose hands is my life, was any one of you to spend in charity a quantity of gold equal in size to the Uhud mountain, it would not reach the reward of a mudd or a naseefah of any of them

and He sallalaahu `alyhi wa Sallam said:

إن مثل أصحابي في أمتي كالملح في الطعام لا يصلح الطعام إلا بالملح

The example of my companions in the ummah is that of salt in a meal. A meal is not right if it does not have salt in it.

Shaikh ul Islaam Ibn Hajr al-'Asqalaani Rahimahullah in the preface of al Isaabah quotes Imam Abu Zura'h ar-Razi Rahimahullah (d.264 H) he said:

اذا رأيت الرجل ينقص أحد من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فاعلم أنه زنديق, وذلك أن الرسول حق, والقرآن حق, وما جاء به حق, وانما أدّي إلينا ذلك كله الصحابة, وهؤلاء يريدون أن يجرحوا شهودنا, ليبطلوا الكتاب والسنة, والجرح بهم أولى, وهم زنادقة
(الإصابة: ص 10, ج 1)

When you see a man who criticizes any one of the companions of Rasoolullah (Sallalaahu Alyhi wa Sallam) then know that he is a zindeeq (Disbeliever who claims to be Muslim). The reason is that the Rasoolullah (Sallalaahu Alyhi wa Sallam) is Truthful and the Quraan is Truthful and what Rasoolullah (Sallalaahu Alyhi wa Sallam) was sent with is the Truth, and these things have been brought to us by the Sahaabah (Radhi Allaahu Ta'ala 'anhum). The Sahaabah (Radhi Allaahu Ta'ala ‘anhum) are our witnesses to this therefore whosoever discredits or ridicules any one of them intends to discredit the Quraan and the Sunnah. Therefore these people are themselves worthy of criticism and they are Zanaadeeq.

[abeer_xyz]

I beg most respectfully a rational and sound answer to the following question.

Why do Sunnis not include Muawiya in the list of Khulafa-e-Rasheda?

['Abd al-Mustafa]

assalama alaikum

our Ahlusunnah wal jama'a elders have warned us laymen, to not to discuss this issue in public or among ourselves

the issue is solved and in the books of the Imams of Ahlusunnah

the refutation of any shi'a is already there

there is no need to refute them to show off arrogance, just a reminder, not intended towards anybody

[Muawiyah]

The list of the Khulafaa ar-Rashideen , whose sunnah we have been commanded to follow, is based on wahi, not on ijtihaad. That's why Hasan, Muawiyah and `Abdullah ibn Zubayr Radhi Allaahu `anhum are not included in it, not because the aren't from the sahaabah radhi Allaahu `anhum.

Brothers might refer to Aqeedat ut Tahawi for how the ahl us sunnah feel about those who speak ill of the sahaabah Radhi Allaahu `anhum

[ahl-e-bayt]

salam wa alaikum

Isnt there a difference between wahi and ilham ?
How could the sahaba have wahi? Did you mean to say Ilham ? I am confused.
And what makes Imam Hasan lesser ? I mean he was the inheritor of knowledge from both the Prophet S.A.W. and in turn Hz Ali R.a , I am sure he had the ilham too.

And another question for those who know, Did Imam Jafar Sadiq r.a. really start a school of fiqh, that the shias follow ? Or do they "claim" that it is Imam Jafar's school of thought. And if Imam Jafar did do that then why dont we sunnis follow it?

[Muawiyah]

The term of the 4 khulafaa ar-Rashideen is known from the wahi of Rasoolullah sallalaahu `alyhi wa sallam.

The Ahl us Sunnah hold Abu Bakr and then Umar Radhi Allaahu `anhuma to be the most virtuous of the ummah and after them Uthmaan and `Ali Radhi Allaahu `anhuma.

The fiqh of Imam Ja`far ibn Muhammad rahimahullahu Ta'ala has not reached us through any reliable means. Much of what the rawafidh attribute to him has been narrated through known liars and evil people who attribute all sorts of vile things to the Imaam. Therefore this fiqh is not followed. Imam Abd us Shakoor Lakhnawi rahimahullah has spoken of this in the appendix to Tanbeeh ul Haireen, titled "40 Masail of the Shi'a".

[ahl-e-bayt]

that made things clearer.

[salman]

Salamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah

The Messenger of Muawiyah then came to them with orders to release six and to kill eight, telling them:

We have been ordered to let you disavow Ali and curse him. If you do so, we shall release you, and if you refuse, we shall kill you.

Sunni reference: History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, v18, p149

The above narration passes through Abu Mikhnaf Lut ibn Yahya, who actually narrates the majority of the events relating to Sayyidina Hujr ibn 'Adis killing.

Regarding Abu Mikhnaf, Shaikh Al Islam Ibn Hajar Asqalani states in his Lisan al Mizan:

[ 1568 ] لوط بن يحيى أبو مخنف اخبارى تالف لا يوثق به تركه أبو حاتم وغيره وقال الدارقطني ضعيف وقال يحيى بن معين ليس بثقة وقال مرة ليس بشيء وقال بن عدى شيعى محترق صاحب اخبارهم قلت روى عن الصعق عن زهير وجابر الجعفي ومجالد روى عنه المدايني وعبد الرحمن بن مغراء ومات قبل السبعين ومائة انتهى وقال أبو عبيد الآجري سألت أبا حاتم عنه ففض يده وقال أحد يسأل عن هذا وذكره العقيلي في الضعفاء

That he has been abandoned. He was stated as being weak by Daraqtuni, Abu Hatim, 'Uqayli and others. He was also a Shia.

Thus such a narration does not carry any wait to us.

In her letter, Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet (saw) wrote to Muawiyah: "...You are cursing Allah and His messenger on your minbar, and that is because you are cursing Ali Ibn Abi Talib and whomever loves him, and I am a witness that Allah and His messengerloved him." But no one paid any attention to what she said.

1. This is not a valid source to quote historical events from.

2. This narration - like much of 'Iqd Al Farid - has no chain of transmission.


As for the narrations present in the Sunan of Abu Dawud - I will check them up Insha'Allah.

Remember that at most such discussions with the people of innovation are useless and I strongly advise you not to go or to participate in discussions taking place on that forum. Regardless of whether we laymen can prove a point or not is irrelevant, because on the whole we do know we are correct. Our scholars are well aware of these hadith - do not be fooled by these people for they do not possess an iota of knowledge regarding Sunni Islam. People like "NoorFatima" and "Hezbullahi", whom i know on a personal level, are as ignorant of Sunni Islam as a 2nd grader with no prior Islamic education. Manipulation on their part is common, it has been witnessed before and it will be witnessed again and again - Allah guide them.

Wasalam