I am not disrespecting him just praising his leadership qualities. Please read again my first sentence.
Correct !
Sunnis don’t do Bad’gumani about historical personalities. Which is why I wholeheartidley support this attitude :k:
**But, sunni folks do too much khush’gumani about historical personalities. which is not good for health.
I do Acknowledge that sunni scholar give due precedence to merit and historical facts and thus I respect their research work. ‘Khilafat our Malookiat’ is a good example. It is beyond my comprehension, why Taqi Usmani sahab felt the need of defending Mr. Muawiya 's political hegemony by hook or by crook ?
I am strongly against disrespect of historical figures
But Why we have to praise these folks with so much effort of hiding dead bodies of thousands of sahaba who got killed while fighting against a rightly guided Caliph and then we somehow find a note that this dude used to send gifts to some of his old friends *
Saying that he founded monarchy is actually a factually misleading, loaded statement.
What he did was to secure succession before his death, by having the leader amongst the Muslims pledge to make his son khalif after his death. Given how close the Muslim world came to civil war after Hazrat Ali's (RA) murder because Hazrat Ali (RA) did not have his succession clearly established and agreed during his lifetime, this can only be described as good government.
Of course, the problem is that Hazrat Muawiya (RA) and the Muslim leadership made the mistake of selecting and agreeing on one of the worst amongst the ummah to lead. But most fathers do tend to try and ignore and overlook the faults of their children. If anything, the greater fault lay with those Muslim leaders who agreed to accept Yazid as khalif.
He must have ignored something in Yazid who in the first year of his reign killed the grandson of the Prophet (and made the other family members of the Prophet saw, including women and children, to march to him as captives). In the 2nd year his forces, fighting against Abdullah b Zubayr, slinged fireballs at Kaaba destroying it during the battle. In the final year his forces attacked Madina killing many common Muslims (inc. raping Muslim women because they had "failed to pay allegiance to the Caliph") as well as Sahaba and in the process destroyed Masjid un Nabbawi which his army used as a stable for their horses. Thank goodness he lasted only 3 years.
Can you describe monarchy ? It was definitely not Anarchy but effectively a kingdom where absolute bloodline gets preference.
Hazrat Abu Bakar and Hazrat Umar both had options in the form of Muhammad bin Abu Bakar and Abdullah bin Umar, respectively. They preferred opinions of shura , merit and ruled out monarchy.
I just want to understand her life long contribution towards Islam and her virtues and companionship with Prophet (Pbuh) so that I can praise her. What is wrong with it ???
Why are you getting angry.
I am just a student and want to learn more about islamic history. Whats wrong in it ??
please stop saying zindiq things, slow down acknowledge the merits you have already been shown. its crystal clear that you are skipping them
you even steamrolled QURAN AND SUNNAH as the guiding point
I care less about the controversies belong to Hazrat Ameer Muawaiya . We consider him companion of Rasool :saw: which makes him sahabi and for Sahabas, Allah SWT said that he is pleased with them, hence we call them .
I am shocked by the title and by the content of this thread. The people that Allah and his prophet was pleased with, we are trying to find fault with them. The people that Allah said he is pleased with, we are demoting them to the level of Mr. and Sahab.
What is next? Calling Prophet - Mr. Muhammad (naoozobillah).
[mod]Any posts containing defamation of, insults, ridicule or making a mockery of any other religious practices, personalities, places, items etc are will not be tolerated. Showing any disrespect towards them is not acceptable under any circumstances. Therefore, refrain passing such comments and stay on topic[/mod]"
Brother please talk to me. This is my thread and I want discussion on subject matter only. Not wayward side topics of 1000 dimensions.
The topic is Mr. Muawiya’s life, his personality.
The only person who answered my questions with reference is Bao Bihari. I appreciate his response
If anyone is interested then please answer my other questions or quote any reference material for study. thanks in advance.
One more question :
**I want to know what Amir Muwiya did when militants put a siege on house of Hazrat Usman and it remained there for months. As per my info, Muwiya was Governor of Syria and other regions for more than a decade and history tells us that he commanded various battles on ground and inducted a naval force in that era too. He was virtually 2nd in command in that period and had mighty army behind him. Apart from that he was considered a political genius with a long experience of governing people. Did he try to distract militants (khwarji) from their line of action and resultant anarchy and martyrdom of Hazrat Usman ??? **
Simply being alive during the time of the Prophet doesn’t give you some automatic near infallibility protection (did it ever for the times of prophets before that time? what does the book of Allah say about the Banu Israel during the time of Musa for instance?), nor does being a wife of the Prophet guarantee that you are above criticism (what does the Quran say about the wives of Lut and Nuh ?), so every individual is held to account for their own deeds. This is as true then as it is now. If any individual or group within the Sahaba did wrong then they were rebuked by Prophet saww. There are many examples in the Quran itself. The concept of see-nothing say-nothing idea does not make sense at all.
Prophet Mohammad’s stature unparalleled to anybody so your comparision is invalid. Every Muslim must believe that each word and act of the Prophet is by the approval of God.
Khawaraj first appeared years after the brutal murder of Hazrat Usman so I am not sure why you have mentioned them in connection with the murder of the caliph. Unless you mean they were ‘Khariji’ in general terms. But then in that case there were many prominent Sahaba that played a role in the murder of Hazrat Usman. And a large number of people who besieged the palace of caliph were ordinary Kufans, Basrans, Egyptians and even Medinans who had had guts-full of Ummawi corruption and nepotism.
As for the role of Muawiya in relation of the rebellion against the caliph then there are slightly varying accounts (as is the case with almost any piece of history). From Tarikh e Madina, a report from Harb bin Khalid bin Yazid (Muawiya’s great grandson) suggests that Muawiya had sent a force of 4,000 Syrians to aid the caliph but they were en route when the news of the murder of caliph reached them and they turned back to Syria. Tabari and Baladhuri also record this report. Another report by Juawayriya bint b Asma is to the effect that Muawiya deliberately delayed to answer call of help from Madina in order to claim the future caliphate for himself. Ibne Asakir and Waqidi have recorded reports to this effect.
and Hazrat Umar 
I read somewhere that Hinda got divorce from Abu Sufiyan and became an independent business woman.