The callous killing of the Sahaba including Hujr
bin Adi (ra) and of other innocent Shias
References in relation to the killing of Hujr bin Adi al-Adbar can be located in the following Sunni texts:
al Bidaya wa al Nihaya, Volume 8 page 53 Dhikr 51 Hijri
Tarikh Kamil, Volume 3 page 249 Dhikr 51 Hijri
Tarikh ibn Asakir, Volume 12 page 227 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Tarikh ibn Khaldun, Volume 3 page 13 Dhikr 51 Hijri
al Isaba, Volume 1 page 313 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Asad’ul Ghaba, Volume 1 page 244 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Shadharat ul Dhahab, Volume 1 page 57 Dhikr 51 Hijri
Tabaqat al Kubra, Volume 6 page 217 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume 3 page 468-470 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Akhbar al Tawaal, page 186 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Tarikh Abu’l Fida, page 166 Dhikr 51 Hijri
Muruj al Dhahab, Volume 3 page 12 Dhikr 53 Hijri
Tarikh Yaqubi, Volume 2 page 219
We read in Al Isaba:
After the battle of Qudsiya Hujr ibn Adi participated in Jamal and Sifeen,
alongside Ali and was amongst his Shi’a. He was killed upon the orders of Mu’awiya in a village called Mriaj Adra near Damascus. At the time of his execution he requested: ‘Do not remove these
chains after I am killed, nor clean the blood. We will meet again with Mu’awiya and I shall petition my case against him’.
We read in Al Bidaya:
أن معاوية جعل يفرغر بالموت وهو يقول إن يومى بك يا حجر بن عدى لطويل قالها ثلاثا
When the time of death approached Mu’awiya, he said to himself thrice:
‘Hujr bin Adi! The day of answering for your murder is very lengthy’
We read in Tarikh ibn Asakir:
“Ayesha said: ‘Mu’awiya you killed Hujr and his associates, By Allah! The
Prophet told me ‘In the ditch of Adra seven men will be killed, due to this all the skies and Allah will be upset”.
We read in Asad’ul Ghaba:
فأنزل هو وأصحابه عذراء وهي قرية عند دمشق فأمر معاوية بقتلهم
“Hujr and his associates were arrested and taken to a ditch in Adra which
was near Damascus. Mu’awiya ordered that Hujr and his associates be executed in this ditch”
Hujr bin Adi al-Adbar was a pious lover of Maula Ali (as). Mu’awiya made his bastard brother the Governor of Kufa, he would disgrace the family of the Prophet (s) whilst standing on the pulpit,
Hujr as a true lover of Maula ‘Ali (as) was unable to tolerate such insults. He would praise Maula ‘Ali (as) and object to such insults. Ibn Ziyad through his usual deception fabricated
allegations to Mu’awiya who ordered that they be apprehended and sent to him. On route to Damascus Mu’awiya ordered their execution. This is a fact that the Nawasib cannot escape, a fact that has
even been vouched for by the Salafi scholar scholar Hasan bin Farhan al-Maliki who on page 170 of his book ‘Qeraah fi Kutub al-Aqaed’ said:
إذ لجأ بنو أمية إلى الفتك بمحبي أهل البيت وإذلالهم. فقتلوا حجر بن عدي صبراً في عهد معاوية لأنه أنكر سب علي على المنابر
“The Bani Umaya killed and humiliated the lovers of Ahlulbayt, and
ruthlessly killed Hujr bin Adi during Mu’awyia’s reign on account of his criticism of their act of cursing Ali from the pulpits”
Wasn’t Hujr (ra) a Sahabi?
Abu Sulaiman immediately begins this defence by seeking to deny that Hujr was a Sahabi (companion of the prophet), he states:
People disagreed on the companionship of Hijr bin Uday (the famous!). Al-Bukhari and others counted him as a follower (Tabe’ei), and some others as a companion”
Prominent Sunni Ulema have counted Hujr bin Adi al-Adbar amongst the Sahaba. Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr in his authority work ‘Al Istiab’ records under the biography of Hujr bin Adi al-Adbar:
Imam Hakim in ‘al-Mustadrak’ created a chapter called:
“Manaqib Hujr bin Adi (ra) wa wahu rahib Asahab
Muhammad” i.e. “Merits of Hujr bin Adi (May Allah be
pleased with him) and he is one of the companions of Prophet (s)”.
(Mustadrak Hakim, Volume 3 page 468)
Ibn Asakir recorded that Hujr bin Adi (ra) met Holy Prophet (s) and Ibn Kathir echoed the same in his book ‘Al–Bidayah wal Nihayah’ Volume 8 page 55 . He records:
قال ابن عساكر: وفد إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وسمع علياً وعماراً وشراحيل بن مرة، ويقال: شرحبيل بن مرة.
“Ibn Asakir has recorded that Hujr came to Holy Prophet (s) and he heard
(hadith) from Ali, Ammar, Sharajeel bin Marat and he is known as Sharjeel bin Marat”
Similarly while talking about Hujr bin Adi (ra), Hanafi scholar Kamaluddin Umar ibn al-Adeem (586-660 H/1191-1262) records in ‘Bughyat al-Talib fi Tarikh Halab’ Volume 2 page 298:
وكان من أهل الكوفة، وفد على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وحدث عن علي بن أبي طالب
“He was among the people of Kufa, he came to Prophet (s) as a delegate and
narrated from Ali bin abi Talib”
Likewise Imam Ibn Qutayba Dinwari (213-276 H) records in his famed work ‘Al-Maarif’ page 76:
وفد إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وأسلم وشهد القادسية وشهد الجمل وصفين مع علي، فقتله معاوية بمرج غدراء مع عدة
“He came to the Prophet (s) as a delegate and converted to Islam, he
attended the battle of al-Qadsiya, he attended the battles of Jamal and Sifeen with Ali then Mu’awiyah killed him in Adra along with his group”
While recording about the miracles possessed by the companions of Holy Prophet (s), Shafiyee scholar Allamah Hibatullah Lalkai (d. 418 H) records in his authority work ‘Sharh Usool Etiqad Ahl
Sunnah’ Volume 7 page 18:
ما روي من كرامات حجر بن عدي أو قيس بن مكشوح في جماعة أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم
“What have been narrated from the miracles of Hujr bin Adi or Qais bin
Makshooh who are the companions of Prophet (s)”
If still there remains any doubt in Nasibi minds, then let us complete the story by citing the words of the beloved scholar of the Nawasib, Imam Dhahabi who while recording details of Hujr bin
“He had companionship and he was a delegate”
Siyar alam an Nubla, Volume 3 page 463
Hujr was a great Sahabi and Abu Sulaiman al-Nasibi’s attempts to reject this are just shameless! It is indeed a sign of sheer hypocrisy by these people that they try their best to cast doubts on
the companionship of Hujr bin Adi (ra) just because he was a lover of Ali bin abi Talib (as) for which he was martyred by the Nasibi ancestors of Abu Sulaiman & Co. on the contrary are in
fact proud of the companionship of those Nawasib that would abuse Ali bin Abi Talib (as), that includes Mughira bin Shubah, Busr bin Irtat etc. Shame!
Even if for arguments sake Abu Sulaiman is correct and Mu’awiya killed a Tabi`i, the fact of the matter is that he killed a MUSLIM, unless of course Abu Sulaiman is now also going to suggest that
he had converted to Judaism at the time of his death!
Allah (swt)’s displeasure at those who killed Hujr (ra)
We shall prove this from the following Sunni works:
Tarikh ibn Asakir, Volume 12 page 227 Dhikr Hujr ibn Adi
Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad by Muhammad bin Yusuf al-Salehi al-Shami (d. 942
H), Volume 10 page 156
Kanz ul Ummal, Tradition Nos. 30887, 37510, 37511 and 36530
Dalail al-Bayhaqi, Volume 6 page 456
Khasais al Kubra, Volume 2 page 500
Allamah Mullah Muttaqi Hindi in ‘Kanz ul Ummal’ and Imam al-Bayhaqi in ‘Dalail’ have recorded:
It is narrated that Ali said: ‘Oh people of Kufa! The best seven people
amongst you will be killed, the likeness of them is as the likeness of the believers in the ditches’. Hujr bin al-Adber and his companions are among them and they are from the people of Kufa,
Mu’awiya killed them at Adra in the outskirts of Damascus’. Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 13 page 531 Tradition 36530
Allamah Mullah Muttaqi Hindi records the testimony from the tongue of Ayesha as well:
Abi al-Aswad reported that Mu’awya went to Aysha, and she asked him: ‘Why
did you kill the people of Adra, Hujr and his companions?’. He replied: ‘Oh mother of believers! I saw that their death was referring to the good for the nation and their lives refering to the
corruption of nation.’ She said: ‘I heard the messenger of Allah (pbuh) saying: ‘Some people will be killed in Adra, Allah and the people of heaven will become angry over that” Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 13 page 556 Tradition 37510
We further read in Kanz ul Umaal:
Saeed bin Hilal narrated that Mu’awiya went to pilgrimage (hajj) and
entered on lady Aysha then she said to him: ‘Oh Mu’awiya! You killed Hujr bin al-Adbar and his companions! By Allah! I heard that some people will be killed at Adra and Allah and the people of
heaven will get angry over that’ Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 13 page 556 Tradition 37511
al-Bayhaqi has dedicated a separate chapter in his book ‘Dalail’ called:
باب ما روى في إخباره بقتل نفر من المسلمين ظلما بعذراء من أرض الشام فكان كما أخبر صلى الله عليه وسلم
“Chapter about what he have narrated of some Muslims getting injusticely
killed in a land in Shaam namely Adra, and it was true as He (pbuh) had told”.
When Allah (swt) is angry over the killing of Hujr (ra) then how can Mu’awiya be referred to as ‘(ra)’?
If some low esteemed Nawasib cast doubts on the authenticity of the prediction
of Holy Prophet (s) regarding Allah’s wrath on the murderers of Hujr and his companions, we would like to mention that Imam Behaqqi accepted the version of this prediction narrated by Ali (as) by
stating: ‘I say: ‘Ali (ra) would never say such a thing unless he
heard it from the Prophet (s)” . Moreover, those pathetic Nawasib who might question the authenticity of the narrator Ibn Lahiyah in order to save their filthy father Muawiyah, let
us remind such lunatics that beside being the narrator of Sunan Abu Daud, Timirdhi and Ibn Majah, Ibn Lahiyah is one of the narrators of Sahih Muslim. Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani called him Seduq
(Taqreeb al Tahdeeb, v1 p536), Imam Ahmed stated: ‘The muhadith of
Egypt is only ibn Lahiyah’ (Tahdib al-kamal, v15, p496), Ahmad bin Saleh said: ‘Ibn Lahiyah is thiqah’ (Tahdib al Tahdib, v5, p331), Muhammad bin Yahya
bin Hasaan narrated from his father who said: ‘After Hushaim, I never
saw some one more preserved than Ibn Lahya’ (Al-jarh wa al-Tadeel, by al-Razi, v5 p148), Allamah Badruddin al-Aini stated in his esteemed sharah of Sahih
Bukhari: ‘Abdullah bin Lahiyah is considered thiqa according to Ahmad
and al-Tahawi’ (Umdat al-Qari, v7, p13), Umar bin Shahin counted him amongst the reliable narrators in his book Tarikh Isma al-Thuqat, page 125, moreover Ahmad Shakir wrote in the
margin of Ibn Hazam’s famed work ‘al-Muhala’ (v4, p82) that ‘Ibn Lahiyah
is Thiqa’. He has also been deemed Thiqa by Imam Ibn Khuzaima as he declared in his book that he only narrated from Thiqa narrators while hadiths having Ibn Lahiyah in the chains can be
read in the book. Imam Nawawi at one place in his commentary of Sahih Muslim (v12 p210) cited a traidtion and commented on its chain in the following words: “Narrated by Ibn Lahiya from Muslim bin Abi Mariam from Abi Salem al-Jeshani from Abu
Dar, al-Darqutni did not criticize it, so the hadith is Sahih as a chain and content” and last but certainly not the least, Imam of Salafies Naasiruddin Al-AlBaani decalred many
hadiths narrated by Ibn Lahiyah to be Sahih (see Sahih Ibn Majah, v1 p58 Hadith 258, v2 p8 H 1754, p20 H 1814, p39 H 1892, p7 H 2051, p116 H 2207, p120 H 2221, p132 H 2270, p133 H 2278, p232 H
2676, p240 H 2714, p363 H 3222, p399 H 3338, p404 H3359, p416 H 3418).
Was Hujr (ra) a troublemaker?
Abu Sulaiman then seeks to tactically select and water down the events behind Hujr’s killing so as to prevent Hujr as a troublemaker.
Mu’awiyah did not kill Hijr because he refrained from insulting Ali, and this is calumniation. What the historians mentioned about the reason behind killing Hijr bin Uday was that Ziyad, the
ruler of Al-Kufah appointed by Mu’awiyah, once gave a prolonged speech. So Hijr bin Uday called for the prayer, but Ziyad went along with his speech. So, Hijr and his group threw stones at
Ziyad. Ziyad wrote Mu’awiyah telling him what Hijr did and Ziyad reckoned that as corruption on earth. Hijr used to do this with the governor of Al-Kufah who preceded Ziyad. Mu’awiyah ordered
that Hijr be sent to him. When Hijr reached there, Mu’awiyah ordered to kill Hijr.
Reply One – Dishonesty committed by the author in order to absolve Muawiyah bin Hind
It is worthy to note that Abu Sulaiman fails to cite even a SINGLE reference to support this watered down event. He of course does so intentionally for he knows that his version of events does
NOT tally up with his self-defined version of history.
Maulana Sayyid Abul A’la Maudoodi in his book “Khilafat wa Mulukiyyat” cites several classical sources providing the reason behind the murder of Hujr bin Adi. Under the chapter 4 “the elimination
of freedom of speech”, he states:
“The implementation of this new policy was started during the reign of
Muawiyah (ra) with the murder of Hujr bin Adi (in 51 H), who was a pious Sahabi and was the man of a superior level in Ummah. During Muawiya’s reign when the custom of open cursing and abusing
Ali from the pulpits of Mosques began, hearts of the common Muslims were being wounded because of that but people bit their tongues fearing death. In Kufa, Hujr bin Adi could not remain silent
and he began to praise Ali (ra) and condemn Mu’awiya. Until Mughira (ra) remained the Governor of Kufa, he adopted a lenient attitude towards him, but when Ziyad’s Governorship of Basra was
extended to include Kufa, serious altercations arose. He would curse Ali (ra) during the sermon (khutba) and Hujr would stand and refute him. On one occasion he (Hujr) warned Ziyad for being late
for Jumma prayers. Ziyad then arrested him along with twelve of his companions and gathered witnesses to testify that “these people had formed a group, they openly slander the caliph, they invite
people to fight the Ameer al-Momineen, they claim that caliphate is not the task of anyone other than the progeny of Abi Talib, they created hue and cry in the city and exiled the Aamil of Ameer
al-Momineen, they support Abu Turab (Ali), invoke mercy on him while disassociated themselves from his enemies.”
From amongst those witnesses, Qadi Shudhri’s testimony was used. But he later wrote to Mu’awiya: ‘I have heard that among the testimonies that have been sent to you against Hujr bin Adi, there is
my testimony as well. My actual testimony regarding Hujr is that he is among those people who offer Salat, pay zakat, and perform Hajj and Umrah, call for good and forbid the evil, his blood and
property is Haram, however if you want to kill him so do it, otherwise forgive him.’
The accused were sent to Mu’awiya and he sentenced them to death. Prior to their murder, the executors put some conditions before them which were: ‘We have been instructed to pardon you on a
condition if you disassociate yourselves from Ali (ra) and curse him otherwise you are to be murdered’. They refused to accept that offer and Hujr said: ‘I cannot not say that thing from my
tongue that displease Allah’. Finally he and his seven companions were murdered. From amongst them, Abdur Rahman bin Hasaan was sent back to Ziyad with a written instruction that he be murdered
in the worst possible manner, hence Ziyad buried him alive. (Tarikh al Tabari, Volume 4 page 190 – 208, al Istiab by Ibn `Abdul Barr Vol I page 135, Tarikh by Ibn Athir Volume 3 page 234 – 242,
al Bidayah al Nihaya by Ibn Kathir, Volume 8 page 50 -55j, Ibn Khaldoon Volume 3 page 13).
Khilafat wa Mulukiyyat, pages 164-165 (published by Idara Tarjuman ul Quran)
Reply Two – Imam Hasan Basri’s testimones that Hujr was a great man and his maglining Muawiyah for the murder of Hujr (ra)
We read the following episode in Tarikh Ibn Wardi Volume 1, page 255 as well as the opinion of a great Tabyee and learned Sunni Faqih, Imam Hasan al-Basri regarding Hujr bin Adi (ra):
“Ziyad cursed Ali as it was their custom at that time. On hearing this
Hujr ibn ‘Adi stood and praised Ali, and so he (Ziyad) tied him up in chains and sent him to Muwaiya’ (1)
Footnote (1): And ibn Jawzi narrated the same from Hasan Al Basri…that Muwaiya killed Hujr and his companions, and Hujr was one of the greatest people.”
Tarikh Ibn Wardi Volume 1, page 255
We also learn that Imam Hasan al-Basri used to malign Muawiya for the murder of Hadrath Hujr bin al Adi al-Adbar. Imam of Nawasib, Ibn Kathir in his esteemed work Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu),
Vol 8 page 973 under the topic ‘reign of Muawiyah and his merits’ (Nafees Academy Karachi) records the condemnation of Muawiyah by the great Sunni faqih Hasan al Basri in this manner:
“It is narrated from Hassan Basri that he used to malign Muawiya for four
things, for fighting against Ali, for the murder of Hadrath Hujr Bin Adi, Mu’awiya’s declaring that Ziyad was his brother and for taking the bayah of his son Yazid”
Al Bidayah Wal Nihayah (Urdu), Vol 8 page 973
It is shameful that Abu Sulaiman is seeking to suggest an individual that lead the people in greatness was a troublemaker.
Reply Three- Imam Muhammad bin Sirin testified to Hujr (as) being virtuous
Allamah Ibn Atheer records the views of Imam of Ahle Sunnah, Muhammad bin Sirin (d. 110 H) about Hujr bin Adi (ra):
وسئل محمد بن سيرين عن الركعتين عند القتل، فقال: صلاهما خبيب وحجر، وهما فاضلان، وكان الحسن البصري يعظم قتل حجر وأصحابه.
Muhammad bin Syrin was asked about the two rakat prayers that is prayed
before being killed, he said: ‘Khabyb
and Hujr prayed likewise and they are virtuous, and Hasan Al Basri denounce the killing of Hujr and his companions’.
Usdal Ghaba, Volume 1 page 245- Hujr bin Adi
Reply Four– Imam Dhahabi, Imam Ibn Habban and Ibn Asakir’s testimonies that Hujr (ra) was an honorable, pious and worshiper
The filthy Nawasib i.e. the followers of Muawiyah have always sought to cast doubts on the good character of great Hujr bin Adi (ra) so as to absolve their spiritual father Muawiyah from the
grave sin of murdering an innocent Muslim. We shall refute this by presenting the character of Hujr bin Adi (ra) from the mouth of their esteemed Sunni scholars. Imam Abdur Rauf al-Munawi in his
famed work ‘Faidh al-Qadeer Sharha Jami’e al-Sagheer’ records about Hujr (ra):
قال ابن عساكر في تاريخه عن أبي معشر وغيره: كان حجر عابداً ولم يحدث قط إلا توضأ ولا توضأ إلا صلى
‘Ibn Asakir said in his book from Abi M’asher and others: ‘Hujr was a
worshipper and if he would get any ritual impurity, he used to immediately perform wudu and whenever he performed wudu he would then perform salat’
1. Faidh al-Qadeer Sharha Jami’e al-Sagheer, Tradition 4765
2. Tarikh Dimashq, Volume 12 page 212
3. Wafi bel wafyat by Safadi, Volume 11 page 247
Imam Dhahabi records in ‘Siyar alam alnubala’ Volume 3 page 462:
وكان شريفا أميرا مطاعا أمارا بالمعروف مقدما على الأنكار من شيعة علي رضي الله عنه شهد صفين أميرا وكان ذا صلاح وتعبد
‘He was an honorable man, commander with authority, he used to enjoin what
is right and forbid what is wrong, he was amongst the Shia of Ali (ra), he participated in the battle of Sifin as a commander, he was pious and worshipper’.
The fact that Hujr (ra) would enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, proves that his stance against the Nasibi ancestors of Abu Sulaiman was according to Islamic regulations. Imam Ibn
Habban in his book ‘Mashahir ulama al-Amsar’ page 144 counted Hujr (ra) among the Tabayeen but testified to him being a worshipper:
من عباد التابعين ممن شهد صفين مع علي بن أبي طالب
“He is amongst the worshippers of Tabiyeen and amongst those who
participated in the battle of Sifin with Ali bin Abi Talib”
Reply Five – The families of Abu Bakr and Umar condemning Mu’awiya for killing Hujr proves that he was not a trouble maker in their eyes
We shall evidence this from the following Sunni works:
al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, Volume 8 page 55
Kanz al Ummal, Volume 3 page 88
Tarikh al Islam by Dhahabi Volume 2 page 217
Tarikh ibn Khaldun, Volume 3 page 12
al Isaba, page 355 Dhikr Hujr
al-Istiab, Volume 1 page 97
In Tarikh ibn Khaldun, we read the opposition to the murder of Hujr (ra) by one of the popular figure from the family of Abu Bakar namely Ayesha:
أرسلت عبد الرحمن بن الحرث إلى معاوية يشفع فيهم ۔۔۔ أسفت عائشة لقتل حجر و كانت تثني
“Ayesha appointed and sent Abdur Rahman to intercede (save) Hujr… Upon his
death Ayesha expressed sadness and she used to praise him”
In Al-Isaba, we learn that when Mu’awiya arrived in Madina, Ayesha summoned him and the first thing she raised was the killing of Hujr. Ibn Kathir in ‘Al Bidaya’ Volume 8 page 55, under the
events of 51 H, records these words of Ayesha:
“Marwan narrated: ‘I along with Muawiyah went to Ayesha, so she said: ‘O
Muawiyah! You killed Hujr and his companions, you did what you had to do but did you not fear that upon coming to me I would arrange for a man to hide and kill you?’”.
So we came to know that such was the gravity of the case that Ayesha deemed it permissible to kill Mu’awiya for his killing Hujr bin al-Adbar. We further read:
“In another tradition it is narrated that Ayesha screened from Muawiyah
and said: ‘Don’t ever come to me’.
We further read:
“In another tradition it is stated that she used to threaten Muawiyah and
would tell him: ‘Had it not been my fear of these stupid people triumphing over us, there would have been disorder between me and Mu’awiya over the killing of Hujr”
That was the opinion of the family of Abu Bakr regarding the unjust killing of Hujr (ra), now let us look at the reaction of one of the famed figures from the family of Umer. In ‘Al-Istiab’ we
read the following reaction of Abdullah Ibn Umar to the murder of Hujr (ra):
كان ابن عمر في السوق فنعي إليه حجر فأطلق حبوته وقام وقد غلب عليه النحيب
“Ibn Umar was in the market when he heard of the news of Hujr’s murder, he
threw down his cloak and spontaneously cried” al-Istiab, Volume 1 page 97
Ayesha condemning Mu’awiya for this action has been reported in a similar vain by other Sunni Ulema. Ayesha deemed it permissible to kill Mu’awiya for his killing Hujr bin al-Adi. The testimony
of Ayesha deemed by the Ahl’ul Sunah ‘The truthful’ shall suffice to counter Abu Sulaiman Nasibi’s suggestion that Hujr had conducted an unlawful rebellion against Mu’awiya.
Reply Six – The Sahaba deemed the killer of Hujr (ra) to be worthy of being cursed
Qadhi Abi Bakar al-Arabi (468- 543 H) in his famed work ‘Awasim min al Qawasim’ page 341 records the reasoning for which the Sahaba used to criticize Ibn Ziyad. He first stated:
فإن قيل : فلم أنكر عليه الصحابة ؟
“If it is asked: Why the Sahaba object on him?
Then we further read along with the comments of the margin writer of the book Allamah Muhibuddin al-Khateeb (1303-1389 H):
إنما لعنه من لعنة لوجهين ۔۔۔ وكان زياد أهلاً ان يلعن – عندهم – لما حدث بعد استلحق معاوية ۔۔۔ وأهم ذلك – عندهم تسببه في قتل حجر بن عدى
“Those who cursed him, did so for two reasons… Ziyad deserved to be cursed
according to them (Sahaba) because of the deeds which were committed after joining Mu’awiya… and the most important reason for them (Sahaba who deemed Ziyad deserved to be cursed) is his role in
the killing of Hujr bin Adi” http://saaid.net/book/open.php?cat=1&book=19
We appeal to justice; the Sahaba cursed Ibn Ziyad for advising that Hujr be killed, so where does that leave Mu’awiya who actually ordered his killing? By the same token Mu’awiya should also be
cursed like Ibn Ziyad for theory and practice are two different things?
Reply Seven – Even the hardline Nasibi companion of Muawiyah was on saddened at the murder of Hujr (ra)
The callous killing of Hujr bin Adi (ra) by Muwiyah had left even the loyal Nasibi companions of Muawiyah dejected. The first person was Rabi’ bin Ziyad al-Harithi about whom Imam Ibn Hajar
“He was an employee of Mu’awiya in Khurasan and Hasan Al Basri was his
writer, when he heard about the death of Hjur and his companions, he said: “God! If you have something good for Al Rabi’ then call him immediately” so he died in the very gathering. The death of
Hjur and his companions was in year 51.” Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 3 page 211 Translation No. 469
Allamah Ibn Atheer records in Usad al Ghaba, Volume 1 page 245 – Hujr bin Adi :
Muhammad bin Sirin was asked about the two rakat prayers that is prayed
before being killed, he said: ‘Habyb and Hujr prayed likewise and they are virtuous, and Hasan Al Basri denounced the killing of Hujr and his companions’. When the news of Hujr’s killing reached
Al Rabi’ bin Ziad Al Harithi who was a worker for Mu’awiya in Khurasan, he said: “God! If you have something good for Al Rabi’ then take him immediately” so he didn’t leave his sitting before he
Also see Isitab, Volume 1 page 98, while Ibn Hajar Asqalani records the following words about Rabi’ bin Ziyad in his other famed work ‘Taqreeb al Tahdeeb’:
Al Rabi’ ibn Ziad Al Harithi al Basri, he resided in many areas, [and it
was said that he was a Sahabi, and was mentioned by Ibn Habban in the 'Thiqat al Tabieen']. The second, the author of ‘Al Kamal’ mentioned that he is Abu Firas who narrated from Umar ibn Al
Khattab. Taqreeb al Taqreeb, page 206 Translation No. 1890
Reply Eight – The Sunni Ulema’s recognition that Hujr was Shaheed (a martyr) proves that he was not a baghi (rebel)
Hanafi Imam Muhammad bin Ahmad Sarkhasi (d. 483 H) who enjoys the title of ‘Shams al-Aimah’ (Sun of Imams) in his esteemed and most acclaimed work al-Mabsut, Volume 1 page 131 testifies that Hujr
bin Adi was a martyr and then Imam Sarkhasi used “RA” that proves that Imam of Ahle Sunnah deemed Hujr bin Adi (ra) among the Sahaba and obviously not amongst the ‘troublemakers’ like the filthy
Nawasib of Ansar.org asserted.
ويصنع بقتلى أهل العدل ما يصنع بالشهيد فلا يغسلون ويصلى عليهم هكذا فعل علي – رضي الله عنه – بمن قتل من أصحابه وبه أوصى عمار بن ياسر وحجر بن عدي وزيد بن صوحان – رضي الله عنهم – حين استشهدوا
“And the treatment that should be given to the dead from amongst the
people of right path (Ahl al Adl) should be the same that is afforded to the martyrs, means they should not be given ghusl (ablution) and funeral prayers should be performed for them, this is
what Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) used to do with those who were killed from amongst his sahaba and this is what was left as a ‘will’ by Ammar
bin Yasir, Hujr bin Adi and Zaid bin Sohan (may Allah be pleased with them) at the time of their martyrdoms.” Online Al-Mabsut, Volume 6 page 138
Imam Sarkhasi counted Hujr amongst the martyrs, that proves that Mu’awiya was an oppressor since he killed Hujr and a killer of a martyr is deemed as an oppressor in Islam. Hence Muawiyah was an
oppressor and an unjust man that cannot be the khalifa of the Prophet (s) and such people are cursed in Holy Quran.
Reply Nine – Prophet’s prediction proves that Hujr bin Adbar (rh) and Malik bin Ashatar (rh) are amongst the Momineen
We are citing from the following famed Sunni works:
Al-Istiab, Volume 1 page 75, Dhkir Jandab
Usad al-Ghaba, Volume 1 page 258
Tabaqat al-Kubra, Volume 4 page 234, Dhkir Abu Dhar
Safwa tul Safwa, Volume 1 page 237, Dhkir Abu Dhar
Mustadrak al-Hakim, Volume 3 page 345, Dhkir Abu Dhar
Ibrahim bin Malik al-Ashtar has narrated from his father that when Abu
Zar’s death approached, his wife started to cry, at which he inquired about her weeping, to which she replied that she couldn’t arrange his funeral, and she didn’t have any sufficient piece of
cloth to use as shroud for him.
To this Abu Zar asked her not to cry and said that he had heard the Holy Prophet [saww] that one from amongst his companions would die in the desert and a group of believers would come to him,
and I know that I am that person, because its me that lives in the desert. By Allah! Neither did I lie, nor was I lied to, therefore keep observing and wait. She asked how that could be possible
when the pilgrim caravans had passed.
She, then would hike a mount and watch the path and return to look after her husband. She then saw a group who were moving very fast on their riding animals. She waved a cloth at them, which they
noticed and came to inquire about it. She said that a believer was dying and she didn’t have cloth for his shroud. When asked she told then that it was Abu Zar, to which they replied, may their
parents be sacrificed on him….
An Ansari youth came forward and offered a shroud saying it was from the clothes that he wore and was in his bag. He agreed and allowed him to shroud him. He said that the Ansari shrouded him and
all the others in the group also came to him. The group also included Hujr bin al-Adbar and Malik bin
Ashtar. They were all Cypriots.
Tabaqat ibn Sa’ad (Urdu), Volume 2, part 4, page 601-602 (Published by Daarul Ishaat, Karachi)
Abu Sulaiman defends the method of killing
”Muawiya’s severity in killing Hijr was because Hijr tried to transgress against the Islamic nation and to break the bond of the Muslims and Mu’awiyah considered it as an endeavor to
corrupt the earth especially in Kufah where some groups of the affliction first appeared against Uthman. If Uthman were lenient in this matter, which ultimately lead to his death and lead the
Islamic nation to the greatest affliction and caused blood to run like rivers, then Mu’awiyah wanted to cut this affliction from its roots by killing Hijr”
If Mu’awiya wanted to kill Hujr in this way to quell sedition, how is it that he was in effect willing to provide immunity to Hujr and his supporters if they cursed Ali. This ‘transgression’ and
attempt to corrupt the earth would have been eliminated by the act of cursing Ali (as)? This is the bond of the Muslims that Abu Sulaiman claims that Mu’awiya was trying to protect, a bond that
could only be maintained through the cursing of Ali (as)!
Now let us turn to the ‘method of punishment’ that of burying
the associate of Hujr – Abdur Rahman bin Hassan alive. Since Islamic Shari`a prescribes clear methods of penal punishment, could Abu Sulaiman cite a single verse of the Qur’an or hadith that
states the punishment for sedition is live burial?
If Hujr was indeed a troublemaker as Abu Sulaiman suggests then one assumes that this action would have received widespread support by the Sahaba and tabieen, and yet we find no such evidence. On
the contrary, we find clear condemnation. Maudoodi in “Khilfath wa Mulukiyyat” page 160, states:
“This incident shook the heart of the Ummah. Upon hearing the news Ibn
Umar and Ayesha were aggrieved. Ayesha had previously written a letter admonishing Mu’awiya. Later on when she met Mu’awiya she said `Mu’awiya did you not fear Allah even slightly when killing
Hujr?’. When Mu’awiya’s Governor of Khurusan Rabiya bin Ziyad heard this news he shouted `O Allah if in your knowledge there is anything good left on my part, take me from this
world’. [Khilafat wa Mulukiyaat, chapter 5, page, 165 citing Tabari vol 4, page 19 to 207, Ibn Athir, vol 3, page 234-242, Al bidaya wan Nihaya, vol 8, pages 50-55, Al-isti'aab, vol
1, page 135]
You can see the clear contradiction in the way Abu Sulaiman writes. If the Sahaba like Ayesha, Talha, Zubayr rebel against Khalifa Ali (as) it is on account of ijtihad for which they will be
rewarded, the same approach is NOT applied to Hujr. If he opposed Mu’awiya. Why is Abu Sulaiman condemning him? Can it also not be deemed that he exercised ijtihad for which he will be rewarded?
If not, why not? Is there one rule for those that oppose Ali (as) and another for those who oppose Mu’awiya? Or are those who oppose Mu’awiya more abominable in his eyes than those who oppose Ali
(as)? Clearly Abu Sulaiman’s Nasibi beliefs have been exposed.
Fortunately ‘true’ Sunnis have a love for Imam ‘Ali (as) and his adherents in their hearts and hence have been particularly critical of the killing of Hujr bin Adi (ra) and his supporters. Mufti
Ghulam Rasul (d. October 2010) was a modern day Hanafi scholar from Daar ul Uloom Qadiyah Jilaniyah London, in his biography of Imam Jafar Sadiq “Subeh al Sadiq” discusses a number of topics
including the slaughter of Hujr bin Adi. On pages 93-94 he makes these comments that one hopes will convince actual Sunnis that Hujr’s only ‘crime’ was his love for ‘Ali and that only Nasibis
(who are pretending to be Sunnis) would have the audacity to conclude otherwise:
“Hujr and his associates were killed in 51 Hijri and I pray that Allah
(swt) showers his mercy upon them. Verily they sacrificed their to protect the honour and dignity of the Lion of Allah, ‘Ali. Their murderers told them that they would be saved if they cursed
‘Ali – they refused saying ‘We shall not do that which shall cause the wrath of Allah (swt). This is because Hujr and his companions knew that the truth was with ‘Ali, he was the example of
Harun, he was the brother of the Prophet (s) in this world and the next, 300 verses had descended in his praise, ‘Ali was with the Qur’an and the Qur’an was with ‘Ali, to look at ‘Ali’s face was
an act of worship, to hate ‘Ali was an act of Kufr and to have love and faith in ‘Ali was a part of Iman. Rasulullah (s) said that the sign of a momin was love for ‘Ali and the sign of a munafiq
was hatred of ‘Ali. It was in light of these facts that Hujr and his companions refused to disassociate themselves from ‘Ali, they happily accepted death and willingly sacrificed their lives doe
to their love for ‘Ali”.
Subeh al-Sadiq, pages 93 & 94
We should also point out that Tareekh ibne Wardee Volume 1 page 55 also confirms that Mu’awiya killed Hujr on account of his love of Imam ‘Ali (as).
Mu’awiya killed Malik bin Ashthar (ra)
We shall evidence this from the following Sunni works:
Tadhirathul Khawwas, page 64
Muruj al Dhahab, Volume 3 page 420
Tarikh ibn Khaldun, Volume 2 page 191
Tarikh Kamil, Volume 3 page 179
Tarikh Tabari, English translation Volume 18 pages 144-146
Habib al Sayyar, Volume 1 page 72
Tabaqat al Kubra, Volume 6 page 213
“When ‘Ali returned from Siffin he had sent al Asthar back to his command
over the Jazirah and had said to Qays bin Sa’d ‘Stay with me in charge of my personal guards (shurat) until we have finished this business of the arbitration (hukumah) and then do to
Adharbayjan”. So Qays remained with ‘Ali over his personal guard and when the business of the arbitration was over, ‘Ali wrote to Malik b, al-Harith al-Asthar, who was at the time in Nasibin.
“Now you are one of those whose help I need in making the religion (din) effective, by whom I restrain the arrogance of the sinner, and by whom I fortify the dangerous fromtier district (thagir).
I have Muhammad b. Abu Bakr over Egypt, but the rebels (Khawarij) there came out aganst him and he is a raw youth with no experience of war and untested. Come to me so that we can consider what
is necessary regarding that, and leave behind over your province, those of your men who are trustworthy and sincere advisors. Salutations”.
Malik came ‘Ali and went in to him.’Ali told him the news about the men of
Egypt and gave him the reports about them, and he said, “You are the only man for it. Set out there, may God have mercy on you. If I do not tell you what to do about it, it is because I am
content with your own judgement. Ask for God’s help if anything worries you, and micx firmness with gentleness. Be mild so long as mildness is effective, but insist on firmness when you have to”.
So al-Ashthar left ‘Ali, went to the place where he had left his things, and got ready to set out for Egypt.
Mu’awiyah’s spies came and informed him of ‘Ali’s appointment of
Al-Asthar, and that weighed haveily on him for he coveted Egypt and knew that if Al-Asthar arrived there he would be a more difficult prospect than Muhammad b. Abu Bakr. He therefore sent to al
Jayastar, one of those subject to the Kharaj tax, and told him that al Asthar had been appointed over Egypt. And he said to him, “If you take care of him, I will not take any Kharaj from you as
long as I live; so do what you can to outwit him”. al Jayastar then went to al Qulzum and waited there. Al Asthar left Iraq for Egypt, and when he reached al Qulzum al Jayastar met him and said,
“Here is somewhere to stay and here is food and fodder. I am one of those subject to the Kharaj”. Al Asthar stayed there with him and the diqhan came with fodder and food. Then, when he had fed
him, he bought him a honeyed drink into which he had mixed poison. He gave it to him to drink and when he had done so he died.
Mu’awiyah proceeded to tell the Syrians, “Ali has sent Al-Asthar to Egypt
– Call on God that he will suffice you against him”. So everyday they implored God against Al-Asthar, and then he who had goven him the drink came to Mu’awiyah and told him of Al-Asthar’s death.
Mu’awiyah stood among the people and delivered a khutbah. He praised God and extolled Him and then said “Ali b. Abi Talib had two right hands; one of them was cut off on the day of Siffin
(meaning Ammar b. Yasir) and the other today (meaning Al-Asthar)”.
History of Tabari, Volume 18 pages 144-146
Ali’s enemy Muawiyah referring to Malik bin Ashtar as the right hand of Ali bin Abi Talib (as) proves the importance that Malik bin Ashtar had to Ali bin Abi Talib (as), hence those children of
Muawiyah who in their love of their father malign Malik bin Ashtar (ra) should realise that he was the right hand of their fourth ‘rightly guided caliph’. If still remains any doubt about Malik
bin Harith al Ashtar being amongst the believers then the incident of the funeral of Abu Dhar (ra) we cited above from Tabaqat Ibn Saad shall suffice to silence Nasibi hearts.
Mu’awiya killed the sahabi Amr bin al-Hamiq
The account of Amr bin Hamiq’s murder by Muawiya is recorded in the following Sunni books:
Al Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 52, death of Amro bin al-Hamiq al-Khazai
al Istiab, Volume 1 page 363
al Isaba, Volume 4 page 623, Translation No. 5822
Asadul Ghaba, Volume 1 page 846, Amr bin al-Hamiq al-Khazai
Tabaqat al Kubra, Volume 6 page 25
Tarikh Kamil, Volume 3 page 240 Dhikr 51 Hijri
Risala Abu Bakr Khawarzmi, page 122
Tarikh ibn Khaldun, Volume 3 page 12
al Maarif, page 127
History of Tabari, Volume 18 page 137
First of all let us cite a brief introdcution of this person as recorded by Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani:
“Amr Ibn Al Hamiq, Ibn Kahil and they also call him Ibn Kahin, Ibn Habeeb
Al Khuzai, a Sahabi who lived in Kufa then in Egypt, he was killed during the caliphate of Muawiya” Taqreeb al Tahdeeb, page 420 Translation No. 5017
So Ibn Hajar pointed out that the Sahabi Amr bin Hamiq was killed during Muawiya’s rule, Ibn Atheer records in Usdal Ghaba fi Mar’rafat Sahabah:
“Amr was hence arrested and murdered and his head was sent to Muawiyah in
Ibn Atheer has also recorded that:
“In Islam, the first head that was raised on a spear was the head of Amr
bin Hamiq which was sent to Muawiyah.”
History of Tabari provides details in relation to the arrest and murder of Amr bin al Hamiq:
“When the latter saw Amr bin al-Hamiq, he recognized him, and wrote to
Mu’awiyah with this information. Mu’awiyah wrote back ‘Amr claimed that he stabbed Uthman bin Affan nine times with a dagger that he had with him, so stab him nine times just as he stabbed
Uthman. At that, Amr was taken out and stabbed nine times, and he died from the first or second blow”
History of Tabari, Volume 18 page 137
As for his role in the murder of Uthman we shall also quote what Imam Sa’ad has written:
The Egyptians who attacked Uthman were 600 and were lead by Abdurehman ibn
Adees al Balawi, Kanana bin Bashar al Atab al Kindi and Amr ibn Hamiq al-Khuzai and those who came from Kufa were lead by Malik Ashtar.
Ibn Katheer also testified:
“He was amongst those four people who had entered in to the house of
The murder of a companion Amr bin al-Hamiq by Muawiya has put the present day Nawasib in deep trouble, it’s a thorn that they can neither swallow nor spit since these people claim that the Sahaba
were innocent of the agitation against Uthman and his murder while Muawiyah testified that a companion Amr bin Hamiq was amongst those Sahaba that took alliagienace under the tree which Nawasib
think is the greatest proof of the righteousness of the Sahaba, was actually involved in the murder of Uthman. The Nawasib are left with only two options, they either:
accept that the Sahaba were involved in the agitation and murder of Uthman
Muawiyah attributed the murder of Uthman to a Sahabi Amr b. Hamiq and unjustly murdered him.
Muawiya kept Shia women as prisoners in dungeons
This can be evidenced from the following Sunni works:
Al Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 52, death of Amro bin al-Hamiq al-Khazai
Asad’ul Ghaba Volume, 1 page 846, Dhikr Umro bin Hamiq
Tarikh Yaqubi, volume 2 page 200, 50 H
Ibn Katheer while recording about the death of Amro bin al-Hamiq stated:
“The head of Amr bin Hamiq was cut off and was sent to Mu’awiya and it was
displayed in in Syria etc. This was the first head that was displayed through the cities. The head was presesnted to the wife of Umro bin Hamiq, Amina bint Shareed who had been imprisoned in a
dungeon by Mua’wiya. The head was thrown into her lap. His wife laid his hand over his forehead and kissed the face and said: ‘You deprived me from him for such a long period of time and then you
sent it to me after killing him. Thus, I duly accept this gift”
During the battle of Uhud the Prophet did not order the Sahaba to mistreat the captive Kuffar women, yet Mu’awiya was such a violator of the Sunnah of the Prophet (s), that he would imprison
Shi’a women whose sin was their husbands love for Maula ‘Ali (as), as is proven from the horrific treatment of the wife of Umro, who was presented with the decapitated head of her husand whilst
imprisoned. This proves that Mu’awiya has an evil cold hearted man, whose treatment of women prisoners was no different to the American treatment of prisoners in Aby Gharaib.
Mu’awiya killed the two children of Ubaydullah ibn Abbas
Ubaydullah bin Abbas was the son of the Prophet’s uncle and was the ruler over Yemen during the reign of Ali bin abi Talib (as). In order to disturb the rulers from the family of Holy Prophet
(s), Muawiyah initiated a campaign of terrorism throught the country, and selected the notorious thugs of the Arab world Busar bin Irtat for this purpose. Muawiyah sent him to the provinces of
Yemen and Hijaz in order to do disturb the Shias and kill them. Amonsgt the murders by Busar during his terrorism campaign, he also killed two children of Banu Hashim. We are citing from the
following Sunni works:
وكان يقول فيه رجل سوء۔۔۔ ذبحه ابني عبيد الله بن العباس بن عبد المطلب وهما صغيران بين يدي أمهما وكان معاوية قد استعمله على اليمن أيام صفين
“Busar bin Irtat was a bad person… He slit the throats of the two children
of Ubadullah ibn Abbas bin Abdul Mutalib in the presence of their mother, Mua’waiya had sent him to Yemen during the days of Sifeen”
We read in Tarikh Ibn Asakir:
بعثه معاوية إلى اليمن فقتل بها ابني عبيد الله ( 1 ) بن العباس وصحب معاوية إلى أن مات
“Muawiya sent him (Busar) to Yemen, so he killed the two sons of
Ubaydullah bin Al Abbas, and he remained Muawiya’s companion till he died.”
Not even innocent children could evade the sword of Mu’awiya, Islam does not permit the killing of innocent children, in Sahih Bukhari, we find:
[4:52:257] Narrated ‘Abdullah: During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet
a woman was found killed. Allah’s Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.
Mu’awiya had no regard for the words of our Prophet (s) which is why when we witness al Qaida’s suicide bombers killing innocent women and children in Iraq, it because they get their inspiration
from their beloved Imam Mu’awiya. If Nawasib will seek to absolve their king Mu’awiya by saying that he did not personally kill the boys we will point out that in Surah Qasas, Allah deems Pharoah
responsible for the slaughter of the children of Banu Israeel even though he did not kill them by his own hands, rather his henchmen did as is the case with Mu’awiya.
Abdurehman bin Hasaan was buried alive by Muawiyah
Bidayah wal Nihayah, Volume 8 page 52, Murder of Hujr
Tarikh Kamil, Volume 3 page 245
History of Tabari, Volume 18 page 151
We read in Tarikh Kamil:
When Abdurehman bin Hasaan was arrested and presented before Muawiyah, he
asked Aburehman: ‘What is your notion about Ali?’. Abdurehman replied: ‘It is better for you not to ask me regarding my notion about him’. Muawiyah said: ‘By Allah, I will not spare you’.
Abdurehman stated: ‘I testify that Ali is amongst those people who do Dhikr of Allah copiously and establish justice in the world and pardon the mistakes/sins of the people’. Then Muawiyah asked:
‘What is your notion regarding Uthman?’. Abdurehman replied: ‘Uthman was the first person to open the gates of injustice and closed the gate of righeousness’. Muawiyah stated: ‘You killed
yourself’. Abdurehman said: ‘Rather you killed yourself’. Then Muawiyah sent him to Ziyad and ordered that he be executed brutally, thus Ziyad buried him alive’
Dear readers, now you can realize how worst oppressor was Muaiwyah that he made people buried alive just because they were blessed to have love for Ali bin Abi Talib (as) that according to Sunni
sources is the sign of belief. We want to ask those lunatics who praise the tyrants of Bani Ummayah that does Islam permits the punishment of burying one alive even for the biggest sin Islam
highlights? All the oppressors of the present world feel embarrass when they see the limits of oppression that Muawiyah had crossed in his Nasibism (hate of Ali (as)).
Mu’awiya gave an order to slaughter the Shi’a
We can evidence this from the following Sunni works:
We read the following in Asad’ul Ghaba about Busar bin Irtat (laeen):
وشهد صفين مع معاوية وكان شديدا على علي وأصحابه ۔۔ وكان معاوية سيره إلى الحجاز واليمن ليقتل شيعة علي ۔۔۔ وأغار على همدان باليمن وسبى نساءهم فكن أول مسلمات سبين في الإسلام
“He witnessed (battle of) Sifeen along side Muawiyah, he was aggressively
against Ali and his Sahaba…Mu’awiya sent him to kill the Shi’a of Ali in Hijaz and Yemen… In Yemen he attacked the famous tribe of Hamdan and captured their women. These were the first Muslim
women that were captured and made slaves”
وقال أبو عمرو الشيباني لما وجه معاوية بسر بن أرطاة الفهري لقتل شيعة علي رضي الله عنه۔۔۔ذكر أبو عمر الشيباني أغار بسر بن أرطاة على همدان وسبى نساءهم فكان أول مسلمات سبين في الإسلام
“Narrated by Abu Amro Al Shaybani that Muawiya sent Busar bin Irtat
Al-Fahri to kill the Shi’a of Ali… Abu Amro Al Shaybani says that Basr bin Arta’a attacked Hamdan, and took women as hostages, so they were the first women in Islam who were taken as
Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr in Al-Istiab has recorded:
“Abi al-Rabab and his friend reported that they heard Abi Dharr (may Allah
be pleased with him) invocate and seeking refuge during his prayers and he spent a long time bowing and prostrating in his prayers. They say that they asked him: ‘what do you you seek refuge from
and what are you invocating for?’ He said: ‘I seek refuge to Allah from the day of al-Bala and the day of al-Awrah’. We asked him: ‘What is it?’ He replied: ‘The day of al-Bala is the day on
which the Muslim youth will clash and kill each other. The day of al-Awrah is the day on which the Muslim women will be made captives and their legs will be disclosed, and who among them have a
great leg will be purchased according to the greatness of her leg. So I invocated not to make me live till that time, you two might live till that day’.
He (the narrator) said: ‘Then Uthman was killed, and then Mu’awiya sent
Busr bin Art’a to Yemen and he made the Muslim women as captives and took them into the market as slaves” Al-Istiab, Volume 1 page 49
Dhahabi in ‘Siyar alam an Nubla’ recorded the following about Busar:
Ibn Yunis said: ‘A companion testified to the conquest of Egypt, he owned
a house and a resort there. He ruled Hijaz and Yemen for Mu’awiya, he did many bad things and he got scruple (sickness) towards the end of his life’…He imprisoned Muslim women in Yemen and
brought them for selling’.
These were the ‘victories’ and ‘achievements’ of Bani Ummayah over which Nawasib are always excited. The tribe Hamdan under discussion was an Arab tribe rathe than the Iranian Hamdan. We want to
ask those of the Nawasib who extend their support for the oppressors of Bani Umayyad, if making Muslim women captives and selling them in the markets is not an example of injustice and oppression
then they need to define the definition of injustice and oppression. It was the very era about which Sunni scholar Muhammad ibn Aqeel al-Hadrami stated in his book ‘Al-atab al-Jameel ala ahl
al-Jarh wa al-Tadeel’ page 14:
“In some ages it was better for human beings to be accused of kufr and
other things, rather than be accused of loyalty to Ali and his household.”
The punishment for killing a Momin from the Qur’an
The killing of a mu’min is a clear violation of the Shari`a, and Allah (swt) sets out the punishment for such an individual:
“And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense shall be hell, he shall
abide therein and God’s wrath (Ghazibullaho) shall be on him and his curse (lanato), and is prepared for him a great torment” (Surah Nisa, v 93).
This is the punishment for killing one believer, whilst Mu’awiya was responsible for murdering thousands? Allah (swt) is not happy with such a person rather he has obtained the wrath of Allah