Monday 24 July 2017
Was “Muawiyah” the writer of revelation?
ID: 559 Publish Date: 15 May 2017 - 11:43 Count Views: 118
Question & Answer » Sunni
Was “Muawiyah” the writer of revelation?

Response:

What is gotten from narrative and historical books is that people like commander of the faithful [AS], “Ubay ibn Ka’b”, “Zeid ibn Thabit” and … were the writers of revelation; but it’s not provable that “Muawiyah ibn abu Sufyan” was the writer of revelation and Sunni elders believe that this matter is made by “Banu Umayya”.

 Studying narratives related to writing revelation by “Muawiyah”:

The most important narrative that is written in Sunni books proving writing revelation by “Muawiyah” is a narrative that “Muslim bin Hajjaj Nishapuri” is written in his “Sahih”:

حدثني عَبَّاسُ بن عبد الْعَظِيمِ الْعَنْبَرِيُّ وَأَحْمَدُ بن جَعْفَرٍ الْمَعْقِرِيُّ قالا حدثنا النَّضْرُ وهو بن مُحَمَّدٍ الْيَمَامِيُّ حدثنا عِكْرِمَةُ حدثنا أبو زُمَيْلٍ حدثني بن عَبَّاسٍ قال كان الْمُسْلِمُونَ لَا يَنْظُرُونَ إلي أبي سُفْيَانَ ولا يُقَاعِدُونَهُ فقال لِلنَّبِيِّ صلي الله عليه وسلم يا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ ثَلَاثٌ أَعْطِنِيهِنَّ قال نعم قال عِنْدِي أَحْسَنُ الْعَرَبِ وَأَجْمَلُهُ أُمُّ حَبِيبَةَ بِنْتُ أبي سُفْيَانَ ازوجكها قال نعم قال وَمُعَاوِيَةُ تَجْعَلُهُ كَاتِبًا بين يَدَيْكَ قال نعم قال وَتُؤَمِّرُنِي حتي أُقَاتِلَ الْكُفَّارَ كما كنت أُقَاتِلُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ قال نعم قال أبو زُمَيْلٍ وَلَوْلَا أَنَّهُ طَلَبَ ذلك من النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم ما أَعْطَاهُ ذلك لِأَنَّهُ لم يَكُنْ يُسْأَلُ شيئا إلا قال نعم

“Ibn Abbas” says: Muslims would ignore “Abu Sufyan” and were reluctant to accompany him, he said to Prophet Muhammad [PBUH]: I ask you three things, please accept them messenger of Allah accepted:

1: the most beautiful Arabian girl, “Umm Habibah” is with me, I want you to marry her.

2: let “Muawiyah” be the writer of revelation.

3: I want to be commander to fight infidels as I fought Muslims. Prophet [PBUH] accepted.

“Abu Zumail” says: if “Abu Sufyan” hadn’t discussed his requests, he’d have never reached them; because messenger of god wouldn’t reject requests.

“Muslim Nishapuri” – Sahih Muslim – vol. 4 – p 1945

“Nouvi” writes about this narrative:

واعلم أن هذا الحديث من الاحاديث المشهورة بالاشكال ووجه الاشكال أن أبا سفيان إنّما أسلم يوم فتح مكة سنة ثمان من الهجرة وهذا مشهور لا خلاف فيه وكان النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم قد تزّوج أم حبيبة قبل ذلك بزمان طويل.

قال أبو عبيدة وخليفة بن خياط وإبن البرقي والجمهور: تزّوجها سنة ست وقيل سنة سبع ... .

قال القاضي: والذي في مسلم هنا أنّه زوّجها أبو سفيان غريب جدّاً وخبرها مع أبي سفيان حين ورد المدينة في حال كفره مشهور ولم يزد القاضي علي هذا .

وقال ابن حزم هذا الحديث وهم من بعض الرواة ؛ لأنّه لا خلاف بين الناس أنّ النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم تزّوج أم حبيبة قبل الفتح بدهر وهي بأرض الحبشة وأبوها كافر وفي رواية عن ابن حزم أيضاً أنّه قال: موضوع. قال: والآفة فيه من عِكْرِمَة بن عمار الراوي عن أبي زميل ...

This hadith is amongst hadiths that its fault is quite clear and well-known; because “Abu Sufyan” certainly converted to Islam during conquering “Mecca” in 8 AH, while Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] had gotten married with “Umm Habiba” several years earlier, “Abu Ubaydah” and other, but all say that this marriage occurred in 6 or 7 AH. So, this quotation from “Muslim bin Hajjaj” is weird; because it’s well-known that “Abu Sufyan” was infidel when he entered “Medina”. “Ibn Hazm” has said: quoting this narrative by some of narrators is wrong; because all believe that messenger of Allah [PBUH] married “Umm Habiba” before conquering “Mecca”. There is another quotation from “Ibn Hazm” that this hadith is faked and problem is a person named “Akrama ibn Ammar” that has quoted it from “Abu Zumayl”.

“Al-Nouvi” – Mizan al-I’tidal fi Naqd al-Rijal – vol. 5, p 116

“Shams al-Din Dhahabi” writes in “Mizan al-I’tidal”:

وفي صحيح مسلم قد ساق له أصلا منكرا عن سماك الحنفي عن ابن عباس في الثلاثة التي طلبها أبو سفيان وثلاثة أحاديث أخر بالإسناد

In the main part of “Sahih Muslim” this hadith and three other hadiths which are faked have been quoted….

“Al-Dhahabi” – Mizan al-I’tidal – vol. 5, p 116

“Ibn Mulghan Shafi’i” writes about this narrative:

هذا من الأحاديث المشهورة بالإشكال المعروفة بالإعضال ، ووجه الإشكال : أنّ أبا سفيان إنّما أسلم يوم الفتح ، والفتح سنة ثمان ، والنبي كان قد تزّوجها قبل ذلك بزمن طويل . قَالَ خليفة بن خياط : والمشهور علي أنّه تزّوجها سنة ست ، ودخل بها سنة سبع . وقيل : تزّوجها سنة سبع ، وقيل : سنة خمس

Fault in this hadith is very well-known; because “Abu Sufyan” converted to Islam on the day of taking “Mecca” in the eighth year of Hegira and messenger of god had married “Umm Habiba” before that in the sixth year of Hegira; but wedding ceremony held in the seventh year; however, some have quoted that they married in the fifth or seventh year of Hegira.

“Ansari Shafi’i” – al-Badr al-Munabbar fi Takhrij al-Ahadith a wa al-Athar al-Waqia – vol. 6 – p 731

“Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya”, disciple of “Ibn Taymiyyah” and publisher of his thought and Ideas, says about this narrative:

وقد أشكل هذا الحديث علي الناس فإنّ أم حبيبة تزّوجها رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم قبل إسلام أبي سفيان كما تقدم. زوّجها إيّاه النجاشي ، ثم قَدِمَت علي رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم قبل أن يسلم أبوها فكيف يقول بعد الفتح أزوّجك أم حبيبة .

فقالت طائفة : هذا الحديث كذب لا أصل له. قال ابن حزم: كذبه عكرمة بن عمار وحمل عليه .

واستعظم ذلك آخرون وقالوا : أنّي يكون في صحيح مسلم حديث موضوع وإنما وجه الحديث أنه طلب من النبي (ص) أن يجدد له العقد علي ابنته ليبقي له وجه بين المسلمين وهذا ضعيف؛ فإنّ في الحديث أن النبي (ص) وعده وهو الصادق الوعد ولم ينقل أحد قط أنه جدّد العقد علي أم حبيبة. ومثل هذا لو كان، لنقل ولو نقل واحد عن واحد فحيث لم ينقله أحد قط، علم أنّه لم يقع ولم يزد القاضي عياض علي استشكاله فقال: والذي وقع في مسلم من هذا غريب جدّاً عند أهل الخبر وخبرها مع أبي سفيان عند وروده إلي المدينة بسبب تجديد الصلح ودخوله عليها مشهور .

وقالت طائفة لم يتفق أهل النقل علي أنّ النبي (ص) تزّوج أم حبيبة رضي الله تعالي عنها وهي بأرض الحبشة بل قد ذكر بعضهم أن النبي (ص) تزّوجها بالمدينة بعد قدومها من الحبشة حكاه أبو محمد المنذري وهذا من أضعف الأجوبة لوجوه :

أحدها : أنّ هذا القول لا يعرف به أثر صحيح ولا حسن ولا حكاه أحد ممن يعتمد علي نقله .

الثاني: أن قصة تزويج أم حبيبة وهي بأرض الحبشة قد جرت مجري التواتر كتزويجه (ص) خديجة بمكة وعائشة بمكة وبنائه بعائشة بالمدينة وتزويجه حفصة بالمدينة وصفية عام خيبر وميمونة في عمرة القضية ومثل هذه الوقائع شهرتها عند أهل العلم موجبة لقطعهم بها فلو جاء سند ظاهره الصحة يخالفها عَدُّوه غلطا ولم يلتفتوا إليه ولا يمكنهم مكابرة نفوسهم في ذلك .

الثالث: أنه من المعلوم عند أهل العلم بسيرة النبي (ص) وأحواله أنه لم يتأخر نكاح أم حبيبة إلي بعد فتح مكة ولا يقع ذلك في وهم أحد منهم أصلا .

الرابع: أن أبا سفيان لما قدم المدينة دخل علي ابنته أم حبيبة فلما ذهب ليجلس علي فراش رسول الله (ص) طَوَتْه عنه، فقال: يا بنية ما أدري أرغبت بي عن هذا الفراش؟ أم رغبت به عني؟ قالت: بل هو فراش رسول الله (ص). قال: والله لقد أصابك يا بنية بعدي شرّ. وهذا مشهور عند أهل المغازي والسير.

الخامس: أن أم حبيبة كانت من مهاجرات الحبشة مع زوجها عبيد الله بن جحش ثم تَنَصَّر زوجها وهلك بأرضالحبشة ثم قدمت هي علي رسول الله (ص) من الحبشة وكانت عنده ولم تكن عند أبيها ، وهذا مما لا يشك فيه أحد من أهل النقل ومن المعلوم أن أباها

لم يسلم إلا عام الفتح فكيف يقول: عندي أجمل العرب أُزوّجك إياها؟ وهل كانت عنده بعد هجرتها وإسلامها قط؟ فإن كان، قال له هذا القول قبل إسلامه، فهو محال؛ فإنها لم تكن عنده ولم يكن له ولاية عليها أصلا وإن كان قاله بعد إسلامه فمحال أيضا؛ لأن نكاحها لم يتأخر إلي بعد الفتح ... .

وقال أبو الفرج بن الجوزي: في هذا الحديث هو وهم من بعض الرواة لا شك فيه ولا تردد وقد اتهموا به عكرمة بن عمار راوي الحديث.

قال: وإنما قلنا إن هذا وهم؛ لأن أهل التاريخ أجمعوا علي أن أم حبيبة كانت تحت عبيد الله بن جحش وولدت له وهاجر بها وهما مسلمان إلي أرض الحبشة ثم تنصر وثبتت أم حبيبة علي دينها فبعث رسول الله (ص) إلي النجاشي يخطبها عليه فزوجه إياها وأصدقها عن رسول الله (ص) أربعة آلاف درهم وذلك في سنة سبع من الهجرة وجاء أبو سفيان في زمن الهدنة فدخل عليها فثنت بساط رسول الله (ص) حتي لا يجلس عليه ولا خلاف أن أبا سفيان ومعاوية أسلما في فتح مكة سنة ثمان ولا يعرف أن رسول الله (ص) أمر أبا سفيان آخر كلامه...

وقالت طائفة منهم البيهقي والمنذري رحمهما الله تعالي يحتمل أن تكون مسألة أبي سفيان النبي (ص) أن  يزوجه أم حبيبة وقعت في بعض خرجاته إلي المدينة وهو كافر حين سمع نعي زوج أم حبيبة بأرض الحبشة والمسألة الثانية والثالثة وقعتا بعد إسلامه فجمعها الراوي .

وهذا أيضا ضعيف جدا فان أبا سفيان إنما قدم المدينة آمنا بعد الهجرة في زمن الهدنة قبيل الفتح وكانت أم حبيبة إذ ذاك من نساء النبي (ص) ولم يقدم أبو سفيان قبل ذلك إلا مع الأحزاب عام الخندق ولولا الهدنة والصلح الذي كان بينهم وبين النبي (ص) لم يقدم المدينة فمتي قدم وزوج النبي (ص) أم حبيبة فهذا غلط ظاهر .

وأيضا فإنه لا يصح أن يكون تزويجه إياها في حال كفره إذ لا ولاية له عليها ولا تأخر ذلك إلي بعد إسلامه لما تقدم فعلي التقديرين لا يصح قوله أزوجك أم حبيبة

وأيضا فإن ظاهر الحديث يدل علي أن المسائل الثلاثة وقعت منه في وقت واحد وانه قال ثلاث أعطنيهن الحديث ومعلوم أن سؤاله تأميره واتخاذ معاوية كاتبا إنما يتصور بعد إسلامه فكيف يقال بل سأل بعض ذلك في حال كفره وبعضه وهو مسلم وسياق الحديث يرده ... .

وبالجملة فهذه الوجوه وامثالها مما يعلم بطلانها واستكراهها وغثاثتها ولا تفيد الناظر فيها علما بل النظر فيها والتعرض لابطالها من منارات العلم والله تعالي اعلم بالصواب

فالصواب أن الحديث غير محفوظ بل وقع فيه تخليط والله اعلم

This hadith has caused problem for people; because “Umm Habiba” married Prophet Muhammad before “Abu Sufyan” converted to Islam; so how is that possible that after conquering “Mecca”, “Abu Sufyan” says that I want you to marry my daughter.

A group has said: this hadith is quite lie. “Ibn Hazm” says: “Akrameh ibn Ammar” has forged it.

But another group has defended it and said: there isn’t faked hadith in “Sahih Muslim” that’s why they’ve justified it and said: “Abu Sufyan” asked messenger of Allah [PBUH] to renew his marriage with his daughter to be a credibility for him with Muslims; but this justification is incorrect; because Prophet Muhammad accepted his request, and no one has said that he remarried her, and if it happened, it’d have been quoted.

Another group has said: historians don’t accept that Prophet [PBUH] and “Umm Habiba” got married in “Habasha”; but he married her In “Medina” after returning from “Habasha”.  It has been quoted from “Abu Muhammad Munzari” that is amongst the weakest responses justifying the hadith, because:

1: this response and justification hsven’t been seen in anywhere and a trustworthy person hasn’t quoted it.

2: the story of Umm Habiba’s marriage in “Habasha” is successive, like prophet’s marriage with “Aisha” and “Khadija” in “Mecca” and with “Hafsah” and “Safiyyah” in “Medina”, and it’s so well-known that has reached to certain, and if there is document against it, it’ll be ignored.

3: those who are familiar with the history of Prophet’s life and his manner, know that marriage with “Umm Habiba” didn’t happen after conquering “Mecca”.

4: “Abu Sufyan” came to “Medina” and went to his daughter “Umm Habiba”; but when he wanted to sit in Prophet’s place; his daughter removed the carpet, he said: I don’t know if you believe that this carpet isn’t worth it that I sit on it or I don’t deserve sitting on it? She answered? This is the carpet that messenger of Allah steps on it {allusion to this fact that since you’re infidel, you don’t have to sit in Prophet’s place}. He said: after me you face evil.

5: “Umm Habiba” and his spouse “Abdullah bin Jahsh” were amongst migrants to “Habasha” and because her spouse had become Christian and died in there, after returning, “Umm Habiba” went to Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and wasn’t in her father’s house, no one has doubt about this story, on the other hand “Abu Sufyan” converted to Islam in the year of conquering “Mecca”, so why does this hadith say: “Abu Sufyan” said to Prophet Muhammad [PBUH]: the best and the most beautiful girl is with me that I’d like her to be your spouse? And were “Umm Habibah” with her father after immigration and when her father became Muslim or not? It’s impossible that he offered Prophet [PBUH] to marry his daughter before converting to Islam, because his daughter wasn’t with him and didn’t have custody of his daughter, and  it’s also impossible to accept that he’s offered Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] after becoming Muslim, ; because her marriage occurred before conquering “Mecca” and “Abu Sufyan” became Muslim after taking “Mecca”.

“Ibn Jawzi” says: this narrative is certainly a mistake from some of hadith narrators and that’s “Akramah ibn Ammar”.

But as for this saying of mine that it’s a mistake from some of narrators; because all historians have consensus that “Umm Habiba” was married to “Abdullah bin Jahsh” and had a child and they migrated to “Habasha”; but “Abdullah” became Christian and “Umm Habiba” remained Muslim, messenger of Allah [PBUH] conveyed a message to “Najashi” to marry “Umm Habiba” off to Prophet Muhammad [PBUH], and he set four thousand dirhams as her dowry, this incident occurred in the seventh year of Hegira; but “Abu Sufyan” entered “Mecca” in peace period and went to his daughter’s house and she removed the carpet that Prophet would sit on it so that her father doesn’t sit on it, both “Abu Sufyan” and “Muawiyah” converted to Islam in the eighth year of Hegira during conquering “Mecca” and there is no evidence that he was appointed commander.

Some other people such as; “Beihaghi” and “Munzari” have said: it might that “Abu Sufyan” offered Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] to marry his daughter “Umm Habiba” during one of his trips to “Medina” after he heard that her husband is dead in “Habasha”, and his two offers were made after converting to Islam that narrator has quoted them this way.

But this saying is baseless; because “Abu Sufyan” entered “Medina” during peace and after Immigration and before conquering “Mecca” and in that date “Umm Habibah” was in Prophet’s house as one of his spouses and “Abu Sufyan” hadn’t come to “Mecca” before that unless in battle of “Ahzab”.

On the other hand because “Abu Sufyan” was infidel’ he couldn’t have married his Muslim daughter off to Prophet; because infidel has no guardianship toward Muslim; so Abu Sufyan’s request from Prophet marring his daughter is lie and void.

Moreover, the text of hadith says that “Abu Sufyan” discussed his three requests simultaneously, and from another side, asking Prophet [PBUH] to appoint him as commander and letting “Muawiyah” to write revelation must have been after their converting to Islam, while hadith says that some of requests were made when he was infidel, Aren’t these issues in contradictory?

Thus, what were said about justifying this hadith is worthless and void and scientifically it has not profit and we should say:

This hadith is filled with error.

“Ibn Qayyimm al-Jawziyya” – vol. 1, p 243 to 249

Sunni scholars and writing revelation by “Muawiyah”:

“Muawiyah” was the writer of ordinary letters:

Many Sunni elders believe that “Muawiyah” would only write Prophet Muhammad’s [PBUH] ordinary letters to others. “Shams al-Din Dhahabi” writes in “Siyar al-A’lam al-Nubala” book, vol. 3, p 123:

ونقل المفضل الغلابي عن أبي الحسن الكوفي قال كان زيد بن ثابت كاتب الوحي وكان معاوية كاتبا فيما بين النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم وبين العرب

“Zayd ibn Thabit” would write revelation and “Muawiyah” used to write Prophet Muhammad’s letters to Arab.

“Ibn Hajar Asqalani” writes:

وقال المدائني كان زيد بن ثابت يكتب الوحي وكان معاوية يكتب للنبي صلي الله عليه وسلم فيما بينه وبين العرب

“Mada’ini” says: “Zayd ibn Thabit” would write the revelation and “Muawiyah” used to write Prophet Muhammad’s letters to Arab.

“Al-Asqalani” – Al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba – vol. 6 – p 153

“Ibn abi al-Hadid Shafi’i” writes:

واختلف في كتابته له كيف كانت ، فالذي عليه المحققون من أهل السيرة أن الوحي كان يكتبه علي عليه السلام وزيد بن ثابت ، وزيد بن أرقم ، وأن حنظلة بن الربيع التيمي ومعاوية بن أبي سفيان كانا يكتبان له إلي الملوك وإلي رؤساء القبائل ، ويكتبان حوائجه بين يديه ، ويكتبان ما يجبي من أموال الصدقات وما يقسم في أربابها

Those who are familiar with Prophet’s Sira, say: “Ali bin abi Talib” [AS] and “Zayd bin Thabit” and “Zayd ibn Arqam” would write the revelation and “Hanzalah ibn Rabi” and “Muawiyah” would write Prophet’s letters to leaders of nations and tribes as well as the way of dividing public property in Prophet’s presence.

 “Ibn Abi‘l-Hadid” – Comments on the Peak of Eloquence – vol. 1 – p 201 – 202

“Mahmoud Abu Riyah {died in 1385 AH} -one of Sunni famous authors- writes:

ذلك أنهم أرادوا أن يزدلفوا إلي معاوية فجعلوه من ( كتاب الوحي ) وأمعنوا في هذا الازدلاف ، فرووا أنه كتب آية الكرسي بقلم من ذهب جاء به جبريل هدية لمعاوية له من فوق العرش ، وقد فشا هذا الخبر بين كثير من الناس علي حين أنه في نفسه باطل ، تأباه البداهة ويدفع من صدره العقل ! إذ كيف يأمن النبي صلي الله عليه وآله لمثل معاوية علي أن يكتب له ما ينزل في القرآن ! وهو وأبوه وأمه ممن أسلموا كرها . ولما يدخل الايمان في قلوبهم ! إن هذا مما لا يمكن أن يقبله العقل السليم ! وأما من ناحية النقل فإنه لم يأت فيه خبر صحيح يؤيده ، ولقد كان علي الذين ( وضعوا ) هذا الخبر أن يسندوه ببرهان يؤيده وذلك بأن يأتوا ولو بآية واحدة قد نزلت في القرآن وكتبها معاوية ! علي أننا لا نستعبد أن يكون قد كتب للنبي صلي الله عليه وآله في بعض الاغراض التي لا تتصل بالوحي ، لان هذا من الممكن ، أما أن يكتب شيئا من القرآن فهذا من المستحيل . قال المدائني كان زيد بن ثابت يكتب الوحي وكان معاوية يكتب للنبي صلي الله عليه وآله فيما بينه وبين العرب

To get close to “Muawiyah”, some faked the title of writer of revelation for him and thought that he’s written “Ayat al-Kursi” {the verse of throne} by golden pencil gifted to him by “Gabriel”.

This story spread amongst people while it’s quite lie and mind denies it either; because how Prophet [PBUH] can trust someone like “Muawiyah” and let him to write the revelation while both him and his parents converted to Islam because they had to and Islam had never penetrated to their heart. And intact mind doesn’t accept such thing.

And there isn’t authentic narrative to prove it; and those who claim that “Muawiyah” would do so should bring one verse written by him.

Of course, it’s not unlikely that he’d write for Prophet [PBUH] some of letters that had got nothing to do with revelation; but that he wrote some Quran verses is impossible.

“Mada’ini” says: “Zayd ibn Thabit” would write the revelation and “Muawiyah” used to write Prophet Muhammad’s ordinary letters to Arabs.

“Mahmoud abu Riyah” – Shaikh al-Muzirah Abu Hurayrah – p 205

Writing revelation doesn’t cause infallibility:

The apostasy of the writer of revelation:

Assuming that “Muawiyah” was the writer of revelation, it can’t be a virtue for him and won’t bring him infallibility; because “Abdullah bin Sarh” who would write the revelation got apostate in time of Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and messenger of god ordered him to be killed even if he’s hanging on “Kiswa” {cloth that covers Kaaba}.

Many Sunni elders have quoted that:

عن مصعب بن سعدٍ عن أَبِيهِ قَالَ : لَمَّا كَانَ يَوْمُ فَتْح مَكَّةَ أَمَّنَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ النَّاسَ إِلاَّ أَرْبَعَةَ نَفَرٍ وَامْرَأَتَيْنِ وَقَالَ : أُقْتُلُوهُمْ وَإِنْ وَجَدْتُمُوهُمْ مُتَعَلقِينَ بِأَسْتَارِ الْكَعْبَةِ : عِكْرِمَةَ بْنَ أَبي جَهْلٍ ، وَعَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ خَطْلٍ ، وَمَقِيسَ بْنَ صُبَابَةَ ، وَعَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ سَعْدِ بْنِ أَبي سَرْحٍ ... .

During conquering “Mecca” messenger of Allah [PBUH] ordered people not to assault people of “Mecca” other than four men and women and said: kill them even if they’re hanging on “Kiswa” including: “Akramah ibn Abu Jahl”, “Abdullah ibn Khatl”, “Muqis ibn Sababah” and “Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn abi Sarh… .

“Ibn Abi Shaybah al-Kufi” – al-Kitab al-Musannaf fi Ahadith wa al-Athar – vol. 7 – p 404/// “Al-Nisa’I” – al-Muhnaba men al-Sunan – vol. 7 – p 105 // “Al-Dhahabi” – Tarikh al-Islam – vol. 2 – p 552 /// “Ibn Kathir al-Qurashi” – al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah – vol. 4, p 298

“Samarqandi” writes about Surah al-Anaam, verse 93:

«وَ مَنْ قالَ سَأُنْزِلُ مِثْلَ ما أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ» يعني عبد الله بن أبي سرح كان كاتب الوحي فكان النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم إذا أملي عليه «سميعاً عليماً» يكتب عليماً حكيماً وإذا أملي عليه «عليماً حكيماً» كتب هو سميعاً بصيراً وشك وقال إن كان محمد صلي الله عليه وسلم يوحي إليه فقد أوحي إلي وإن كان ينزل إليه فقد أنزل إلي مثل ما أنزل إليه فلحق بالمشركين وكفر

“He who says: I can reveal the like of what Allah has revealed”. The one who said it, was “Abdullah bin Sarh” who was the writer of revelation. He’s the one that when Prophet Muhammad told him: write “سميعا عليما”, he wrote: “سميعا حكيما”, and when he told him: write “عليما حكيما”, he wrote: “سميعا بصيرا”, and to justify it, he said: if something is sent down to Muhammad, it’s sent down to me either, then he joined idolaters and became infidel.

“Al-Smarqandi” – Tafsir al-Samarqandi – vol. 1, p 487

Ground rejected the corpse of the writer of revelation:

What interesting is that one of Prophet’s writers got apostate and refuged to people of the book, after he died, people wanted to burry his body but ground rejected his body.

حدثني محمد بن رَافِعٍ حدثنا أبو النَّضْرِ حدثنا سُلَيْمَانُ وهو بن الْمُغِيرَةِ عن ثَابِتٍ عن أَنَسِ بن مَالِكٍ قال كان مِنَّا رَجُلٌ من بَنِي النَّجَّارِ قد قَرَأَ الْبَقَرَةَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ وكان يَكْتُبُ لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلي الله عليه وسلم فَانْطَلَقَ هَارِبًا حتي لَحِقَ بِأَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ قال فَرَفَعُوهُ قالوا هذا قد كان يَكْتُبُ لِمُحَمَّدٍ فَأُعْجِبُوا بِهِ فما لَبِثَ أَنْ قَصَمَ الله عُنُقَهُ فِيهِمْ فَحَفَرُوا له فَوَارَوْهُ فَأَصْبَحَتْ الْأَرْضُ قد نَبَذَتْهُ علي وَجْهِهَا ثُمَّ عَادُوا فَحَفَرُوا له فَوَارَوْهُ فَأَصْبَحَتْ الْأَرْضُ قد ن

َبَذَتْهُ علي وَجْهِهَا ثُمَّ عَادُوا فَحَفَرُوا له فَوَارَوْهُ فَأَصْبَحَتْ الْأَرْضُ قد نَبَذَتْهُ علي وَجْهِهَا فَتَرَكُوهُ مَنْبُوذًا.

“Anas ibn Malik” says: a man from “Bani Najjar” who has read Surah “Al-Baghara” and “Al-E-Imran” and would write for Prophet, ran away and joined people of the book, asylum of such person was useful for them that’s why they cherished him and gave him a position, after a short while he died, they dug a grave and buried him’ but his body would appear immediately and in fact, ground rejected his body, it was repeated three times and eventually, they left his body.

“Muslim bin Hajjaj” – Sahih Muslim – vol. 4, p 2145

Muwayah’s enmity toward “Ali ibn abi Talib” [A.S]

When being the writer of revelation can’t be profitable for “Abdullah ibn Sarh” and can’t save him from hell, how can it bring impunity for “Muawiyah” and remove his sins.

Can the writer of revelation be permission to fight against imam and caliph of messenger of Allah [PBUH] and if it can compensate killing more than hundreds of thousand Muslims and …?

Isn’t it that cursing commander of the faithful [A.S], is cursing messenger of Allah [PBUH]? Can writing revelation remove his cursing toward “Ali” [A.S]?

“Ibn Taymiyah Harani” admits that “Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan” ordered “Sa’d ibn abi Waqqas” to curse commander of the faithful Ali [A.S]:

وأما حديث سعد لما أمره معاوية بالسب فأبي فقال ما منعك أن تسب علي بن أبي طالب فقال ثلاث قالهن رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم فلن أسبه لأن يكون لي واحدة منهن أحب إلي من حمر النعم الحديث فهذا حديث صحيح رواه مسلم في صحيحه

“Muawiyah” ordered “Sa’d ibn abi Waqqas” to swear at “Ali” [A.S]; but he avoided doing so. “Muawiyah” said: why don’t you swear at him? “Sa’d” said: I heard three virtues about “Ali” [A.S] from messenger of Allah, that’s why I never swear at him and if I had one of them I’d be more valuable to me than red camels.

It’s an authentic hadith that “Muslim ibn Hajjaj” has quoted it in his “Sahih” book.

“Ibn Taymiyah” – Minhaj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyah – vol. 5 – p 42

“Ahmad ibn Hanbal”, “Nisai’i”, “Dhahabi” and … have quoted with authentic document that swearing at commander of the faithful Ali [A.S] is swearing at messenger of Allah [PBUH]:

عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْجَدَلِيِّ قَالَ : دَخَلْتُ عَلَي أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ فَقَالَتْ لِي أَيُسَبُّ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّي اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِيكُمْ قُلْتُ مَعَاذَ اللَّهِ أَوْ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ أَوْ كَلِمَةً نَحْوَهَا قَالَتْ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّي اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ مَنْ سَبَّ عَلِيًّا فَقَدْ سَبَّنِي

“Abdullah Jadali” says: I went to “Umm Salama”, she said: is there anyone amongst you who swears at Prophet Muhammad [PBUH]? I said: refuge to god… she said: I heard of messenger of Allah [PBUH] who said: those who swear at “Ali” have in fact, sworn at me.

“Ahmad bin Hanbal” – Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal – vol. 6, p 323 /// “Al-Nisai’i” – qualities of commander of the faithful Ali bin abi Talib – vol. 1, p 111 //”Al-Dhahabi” – The History of Islam – vol. 3, p 643

After quoting this narrative “Hakim Nishapuri” says:

هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد ولم يخرجاه

The document of this narrative is authentic; but “Bukhari” and “Muslim” haven’t said it.

Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Shihayn – vol. 3, p 130

And “Haythami” says:

رواه أحمد ورجاله رجال الصحيح غير أبي عبد الله الجدلي وهو ثقة

“Ahmad ibn Hanbal” has quoted it and its narrators are the narrators of “Sahih Bukhari”, other than “Abdullah Jadali” who is trustworthy either.

“Al-Hayhami” - Majma’ al-Zaw’id wa Manba’ al-Fawa’id – vol. 9, p 130

“Muawiyah”, higher than Hadrat “Jesus”:

“Banu Umayya” publicity about “Muawiyah” and their made virtues about him were so much that people of “Sham” would know him even higher than Prophets!

“Abu Sa’d al-‘Abi” and “Al-Seirafi” write:

أن ثلاثة من المشايخ حضروا الجامع . فقال واحد لآخر : جُعلت فداك ، أيهما أفضل : معاوية بن أبي سفيان أم عيسي بن مريم ؟ فقال : لا والله ما أدري . فقال الثالث : يا كشخان ، تقيس كاتب الوحي إلي نبيّ النصاري ؟ .

Three of elders were sitting in principle mosque, one of them said: is “Muawiyah” better or “Jesus” son of “Maryam”, another one said: I don’t know, third person said: are you comparing the writer of revelation with Christians’ Prophet?

Al-‘Abi – Nathr al-Dur fi Muhazirat – vol. 7, p 209 /// “Al-Seirafi al-Hanbali” – al-Tayouriyat men Intikhab al-Sheikh abi Tahir al-Salafi – vol. 1, p 113

“Naqi al-Din Hamoui” writes:

ومن ذلك أن رجلاً سأل بعضهم وكان من الحمق علي الجانب عظيم فقال أيما أفضل عندك ؟ معاوية أو عيسي بن مريم ؟ فقال ما رأيت سائلا أجهل منك، ولا سمعت بمن قاس كاتب الوحي إلي نبي النصاري !!!

A fool guy asked another one: Is “Muawiyah” better or “Jesus”? He said: I’ve not ever seen a moron like you, because I’ve not ever heard that someone compares Christians’ Prophet with the writer of revelation.

“Tayyib al-Mazaq men Thamarat al-Awraq” – vol. 1, p 157

“Taqi al-Din Hamoy” writes in “Tayyib al-Mazaq” book:

“Muawiyah”, eternal creature:

There were a lot of publicity about “Muawiyah” that people thought that he’s eternal and isn’t creature, “Abu al-Qasim Isfahani” writes:

Some of ignorant “Nasibi” and enemy of “Ali” [A.S] would say: “Muawiyah” wasn’t created? It was asked why? They said: he was revelation writer and because revelation wasn’t creature; so its writer shouldn’t be creature.

“Isfahani” – Muhazirat al-Odaba’ – vol. 2, p 500

“Abu Ishaq Burhan” writes:

وسئل بعضهم ما تقول في خلق القرآن ؟ فقال : دعونا من القرآن وهو مخلوق غير مخلوق . وسئل آخر وكان ناصبياً عن معاوية ؟ فقال : معاوية ليس بمخلوق لأنه كاتب الوحي والوحي ليس بمخلوق وكاتب الوحي من الوحي .

Some were asked about Quran that if it’s creature or not? They said: it’s not our concern. It’s either creature or not. One of enemies of “Ali” [A.S] was asked about “Muawiyah”, he said: “Muawiyah” isn’t creature; because he was revelation writer, and because revelation wasn’t created; so its writer is not creature.

“Abu Ishaq Burhan” – Ghurar al-Khasa’is al-Waziha– vol. 1, p 124

Nazarenes and writing revelation:

Assuming that Prophet assigned “Muawiyah” with the task of writing revelation, it can’t be virtue for him too, because according to Sunni idea, messenger of god [PBUH] even said to Nazarenes to write revelation due to shortage of literate people.

“Abu al-Ghasim Baghwi” writes in this regard:

وسأل رجل أحمد وأنا أسمع ، بلغني أن نصاري يكتبون المصاحف فهل يكون ذلك ؟ قال : نعم ، نصاري الحيرة كانوا يكتبون المصاحف . وإنما كانوا يكتبونها لقلّة من كان يكتبها.

A man asked “Ahmad”, I’ve heard Nazarenes would write Quran, is that true? He said: Yes it is, elite Nazarenes would write Quran; they weren’t enough literate guys.

“Al-Baghwi” – Juz’ fi Masa’il – vol. 1, p 21

“Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyah” and “Shams al-Din Zarkushi” write:

وقال رجل لأحمد بلغني أن نصاري يكتبون المصاحف فهل يكون ذلك؟ قال: نعم، نصاري الحيرة كانوا يكتبون المصاحف وإنما كانوا يكتبون لقلة من كان يكتبها فقال رجل: يعجبك ذلك؟ فقال لا يعجبني.

A man asked “Ahmad”, is that true that Nazarenes would write revelation? He said: Yes it is, elite Nazarenes would write it due to shortage of literate people, another person asked: were you surprised of this response? He said: No I wasn’t.

“Ibn Qayyim Jawzi” – Badayi’ al-Fawa’id – vol. 4, p 851 /// “Shams al-Din Zarkashi” – Sharh al-Zarkashi ala Mukhtasar – vol. 1, p 49

So, if writing revelation is a virtue for “Muawiyah” and “Abu Sufyan”, it should be great privilege for “Abdullah ibn abi Sarh” too!

The date that “Muawiyah” became Muslim

Sunni and Shia believe that “Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan” was idolater and ardent enemy of Islam in the first twenty years that messenger of Allah [PBUH] had announced his prophecy and after conquering “Mecca” in the eighth year of Hegira, he along with some other ardent enemies of Islam converted to Islam by force. Messenger of Allah gave them the title of طلقاء"" and didn’t kill them. Commander of the faithful Ali [A.S] believed that they didn’t become Muslim; but they surrendered. “Ali” [A.S] says in “Nahj al-Balagha” letter No. 16:

فَوَ الَّذِي فَلَقَ الْحَبَّةَ وَ بَرَأَ النَّسَمَةَ مَا أَسْلَمُوا وَ لَكِنِ اسْتَسْلَمُوا وَ أَسَرُّوا الْكُفْرَ فَلَمَّا وَجَدُوا أَعْوَاناً عَلَيْهِ أَظْهَرُوه .

Swear to god who split the seed and created creatures, they didn’t accept Islam and expressed their blasphemy when they became powerful.

“Ammar” says:

فقال واللّه ما أسلموا ، ولكن استسلموا وأأَسَرُّوا الْكُفْرَ فَلَمَّا رأوا عليه أَعْوَاناً عَلَيْهِ أَظْهَرُوهُ

Swear to god they didn’t become Muslim; but they pretended and showed their blasphemy after getting powerful.

“Al-Haythami” – Majma’ al-Zawa’id wa Manba’ al-Fawa’id – vol. 1, p 113

“Ibn Abi 'l-Hadid“ writes:

لما نظر علي عليه السلام إلي رايات معاوية وأهل الشام ، قال : والذي فلق الحبة ، وبرأ النسمة ، ما أسلموا ولكن استسلموا ، وأسروا الكفر ؛ فلما وجدوا عليه أعواناً ، رجعوا إلي عداوتهم لنا.

After seeing the flag of “Muawiyah” and people of “Sham”, “Ali” [A.S] said: swear to god who split the seed and created human that these people didn’t become Muslim; but they converted to Islam in appearance and hid their blasphemy and after finding some force they’ll express their blasphemy and resumed their enmity toward Islam and Muslims.

“Ibn Abi 'l-Hadid“- Comments on the Peak of Eloquence – vol. 4, p 18

Thus, how can messenger of Allah [PBUH] trust a person like “Muawiyah” and let him to write the revelation?

Moreover, “Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan” converted to Islam after conquering “Mecca” and remained in “Mecca” and messenger of Allah returned to “Medina”, so there was little bit opportunity for him writing revelation.

Writing revelation by “Muawiyah” in Shia books:

There are narratives in Shia books that according which “Muawiyah” has written things for messenger of Allah [PBUH], but it’s not gotten from these narratives that what he’d write was revelation.

Shaikh “Saduq” writes in “Ma’ani al-Akhbar”:

عَنْ أَبِي حَمْزَةَ الثُّمَالِيِّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا جَعْفَرٍ (عليه السلام) يَقُولُ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ (صلي الله عليه وآله وسلم) وَ مُعَاوِيَةُ يَكْتُبُ بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَ أَهْوَي بِيَدِهِ إِلَي خَاصِرَتِهِ بِالسَّيْفِ مَنْ أَدْرَكَ هَذَا يَوْماً أَمِيراً فَلْيَبْقُرْ خَاصِرَتَهُ بِالسَّيْفِ فَرَآهُ رَجُلٌ مِمَّنْ سَمِعَ ذَلِكَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص يَوْماً وَ هُوَ يَخْطُبُ بِالشَّامِ عَلَي النَّاسِ فَاخْتَرَطَ سَيْفَهُ ثُمَّ مَشَي إِلَيْهِ فَحَالَ النَّاسُ بَيْنَهُ وَ بَيْنَهُ فَقَالُوا يَا عَبْدَ اللَّهِ مَا لَكَ فَقَالَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ع يَقُولُ مَنْ أَدْرَكَ هَذَا يَوْماً أَمِيراً فَلْيَبْقُرْ خَاصِرَتَهُ بِالسَّيْفِ قَالَ فَقَالَ أَ تَدْرِي مَنِ اسْتَعْمَلَهُ قَالَ لَا قَالُوا أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ عُمَرُ فَقَالَ الرَّجُلُ سَمْعاً وَ طَاعَةً لِأَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِين

“Abu Hamazah al-Thumali” says: I heard of imam “Baqir” [A.S] who said: “Muawiyah” was writing something, messenger of god [PBUH] mentioned Muawiyah’s side by sword and said: if someone sees this man as commander, he should pierce his side by sword, one of those who had heard it from Prophet saw “Muawiyah” in “Sham” lecturing people. He drew his sword and went to “Muawiyah”, people stopped him and said: why are you doing it? He said: I heard of Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] who said: if someone sees him commanding people, he should pierce his side by sword. They said: do you know who’s appointed him? He said: No, I don’t, they said: commander of the faithful Umar, he said: so, I obey commander of the faithful with my heart and soul.

“Al-Saduq” – Ma’ni al-Akhbar – p 347

Conclusion:

Firstly: not only it’s not been proved through narratives that Mauawiyah was the writer of revelation, but it’s been rejected decisively.

Secondly: even if this matter is proved, I can’t be privilege for him; because his obscene acts toward “Ahl al-Bayt” [A.S] and created “Bid’ah” by him {innovation in religion} remove the value of being the writer of revelation.

Good Luck.

 



Share
* Name:
* Email:
* Comment :
* Security code:
  

Latest Articles
Most Comments
Most viewed
Index | Contact us | Archive | Search | Link | List Comments | About us | RSS | Mobile | urdu | فارسی | العربیة |