BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
Know well that the narrations that have been mentioned in criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu are either authentic but do not give the meaning inferred by the people who quote them as criticism, or they are clear in criticism of Muawiyah but are unreliable.
Imam al Nawawi[1] rahimahu Llah, in his commentary of Sahih Muslim, said:
The scholars have said: “Those narrations that have come in which the apparent meanings indicate a negative view of any Sahabi, it is obligatory to interpret them [appropriately].” They have further said: “It has not occurred in the narrations of the reliable narrators except that there is a plausible explanation.”[2]
Abu al ‘Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Llah, in the collection of his Fatawa[3] and his “reply to the question of the people of al Rahabah”[4], said:
… and Abu Musa al Ash’ari, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As and Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan are all from the Sahabah. They have many merits and virtues and much of what is said of them is a lie, and the truth of it — if it is indeed true — then they were people of scholarly discretion; and such a person if his scholarly judgement is correct he receives twice the reward and if he errs he still receives a reward and his mistake is forgiven.
In al Manar al Munif[5], Ibn al Qayyim rahimahu Llah has clearly stated that there is no reliable narration in criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
Hasan Farhan al Maliki [6] and others have mentioned narrations in criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu which can be sub-divided into reliable narrations, weak narrations, and fabricated narrations.
We shall begin with the weak, unreliable, and fabricated narrations before dealing with the reliable narrations that have been collected and then misrepresented.
[1] Abu Zakariyya,Yahya ibn Sharaf al Nawawi al Shafi’i (d. 676 A.H / 1278 CE)
[2] Al Minhaj, Sharh al Nawawi ‘ala Sahih Muslim (15/175)
[3] 4/431
[4] Pg. 106
[5] Pg. 94
[6] Hassan ibn Farhan al Maliki is a Saudi journalist and media writer
BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
Know well that the narrations that have been mentioned in criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu are either authentic but do not give the meaning inferred by the people who quote them as criticism, or they are clear in criticism of Muawiyah but are unreliable.
Imam al Nawawi[1] rahimahu Llah, in his commentary of Sahih Muslim, said:
The scholars have said: “Those narrations that have come in which the apparent meanings indicate a negative view of any Sahabi, it is obligatory to interpret them [appropriately].” They have further said: “It has not occurred in the narrations of the reliable narrators except that there is a plausible explanation.”[2]
Abu al ‘Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Llah, in the collection of his Fatawa[3] and his “reply to the question of the people of al Rahabah”[4], said:
… and Abu Musa al Ash’ari, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As and Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan are all from the Sahabah. They have many merits and virtues and much of what is said of them is a lie, and the truth of it — if it is indeed true — then they were people of scholarly discretion; and such a person if his scholarly judgement is correct he receives twice the reward and if he errs he still receives a reward and his mistake is forgiven.
In al Manar al Munif[5], Ibn al Qayyim rahimahu Llah has clearly stated that there is no reliable narration in criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
Hasan Farhan al Maliki [6] and others have mentioned narrations in criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu which can be sub-divided into reliable narrations, weak narrations, and fabricated narrations.
We shall begin with the weak, unreliable, and fabricated narrations before dealing with the reliable narrations that have been collected and then misrepresented.
[1] Abu Zakariyya,Yahya ibn Sharaf al Nawawi al Shafi’i (d. 676 A.H / 1278 CE)
[2] Al Minhaj, Sharh al Nawawi ‘ala Sahih Muslim (15/175)
[3] 4/431
[4] Pg. 106
[5] Pg. 94
[6] Hassan ibn Farhan al Maliki is a Saudi journalist and media writer