There is a narration in Sahih Bukhari,4/179

3500 – حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو اليَمَانِ، أَخْبَرَنَا شُعَيْبٌ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، قَالَ: كَانَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ جُبَيْرِ بْنِ مُطْعِمٍ يُحَدِّثُ أَنَّهُ بَلَغَ مُعَاوِيَةَ وَهُوَ عِنْدَهُ فِي وَفْدٍ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ: أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عَمْرِو بْنِ العَاصِ يُحَدِّثُ أَنَّهُ سَيَكُونُ مَلِكٌ مِنْ قَحْطَانَ، فَغَضِبَ مُعَاوِيَةُ، فَقَامَ فَأَثْنَى عَلَى اللَّهِ بِمَا هُوَ أَهْلُهُ، ثُمَّ قَالَ: أَمَّا بَعْدُ، فَإِنَّهُ بَلَغَنِي أَنَّ رِجَالًا مِنْكُمْ يَتَحَدَّثُونَ أَحَادِيثَ لَيْسَتْ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ، وَلاَ تُؤْثَرُ عَنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَأُولَئِكَ جُهَّالُكُمْ، فَإِيَّاكُمْ وَالأَمَانِيَّ الَّتِي تُضِلُّ أَهْلَهَا، فَإِنِّي سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ «إِنَّ هَذَا الأَمْرَ فِي قُرَيْشٍ لاَ يُعَادِيهِمْ أَحَدٌ، إِلَّا كَبَّهُ اللَّهُ عَلَى وَجْهِهِ، مَا أَقَامُوا الدِّينَ»

Narrated by Muhammad bin Jubair bin Mut’im while he was with a delegation from Quraish to Muawiyya, the latter heard the news that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin Al-‘As said that there would be a king from the tribe of Qahtan. On that Muawiyya became angry, got up and then praised Allah as He deserved, and said, “Now then, I have heard that some men amongst you narrate Ahadeeth (يَتَحَدَّثُونَ أَحَادِيثَ ) which are neither in the Holy Book, nor have been told by Allah’s Apostle. Those men are the ignorant amongst you. Beware of such hopes as make the people go astray, for I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, ‘Authority of ruling will remain with Quraish, and whoever bears hostility to them, Allah will destroy him as long as they abide by the laws of the religion.’ “

This narration is also present in Musnad Ahmad, 28/64-65; and authenticated by Sheikh Shoaib al-Arnawut

Question is: Was Muawiyya not aware of the fact that all Sahaba are Just/Adil? Why charge a Sahabi with “ignorance”? Why charge him with “narrating Ahadeeth which are neither in Quran nor told by Holy Prophet (asws)”?

Please keep in mind that this is not a minor accusation. Let us see what Scholars of AhluSunnah say about a person who lies upon Holy Prophet (asws). IslamQA gives this fatwa

“Telling lies about the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is a great evil and a serious sin, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else. Whoever tells lies about me deliberately, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1229. It was also narrated by Muslim in the Introduction to his Saheeh, without the phrase “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else.”

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not tell lies about me, for whoever tells lies about me will enter Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 106. And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Whoever narrates a hadeeth from me that he thinks is false is one of the liars.” Narrated by Muslim (1).

A number of scholars are of the view that the one who deliberately tells lies about the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is a kaafir.”

Interestingly, the kept this Fatwa under the heading

Basic Tenets of Faith » Shirk and its different forms.

Though interestingly, this rejection pointed to his lack of knowledge. And we find Scholars of AhluSunnah  not paying much attention to his statement. For example, Waheed-uz-Zaman writes in Taiseer-ul-Bari, 4/540

“عبداللہ ابن عمرو نے جو حدیث بیان کی، وہ اس کے خلاف نہیں۔ اس حدیث کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ قیامت کے قریب ایک قحطانی عرب کا بادشاہ ہو گا۔ ابو ہریرہ سے بھی ایسا ہی مروی ہے، اور ذی مخر حبشی سے مرفوعا مروی ہے کہ قریش سے پہلے بادشاہت حمیر میں تھی اور پھر ان میں چلی جائے گی۔ اس کو احمد اور طبرانی نے نکالا۔ معاویہ نے جو ایسے الفاظ سخت برتے اس کی کوئی وجہ نہیں تھی۔ عبداللہ ابن عمرو معاویہ سے کہیں زیادہ افضل اور راست باز، عابد، صادق القول تھے

The narration presented by Abdullah bin Amr is not contradictory to this one. It means there will be a Qahtani King near end of times. Abu Huraira also mentioned similar to this, and Dhi Makhr Habshi had said that kingdom was with Himeer before Quraish, and will go back to them. Ahmad and Tabarani narrated that. And there was no reason for Muawiyya to use such harsh words. Abdullah ibn amr was far greater, pious, worshipper and truthful than Muawiyya.

But the point is, if he was not aware, why he rejected the Hadeeth narrated by a Sahabi? Is this not the entire basis of Sunni I’lm-ur-Rijal, which was smashed by Muawiyya?

Though a typical Sunni may hide behind the excuse that he was Mujtahid, and he got a reward for this even.

But point would be: Should an ignorant person be a Mujtahid in the first place? Let alone being a “Hadi”…………………..

Advertisements