I came across something extremely dangerous written by the biggest of their scholar al-Sheikh al-Mufid, this man wanted to refute Ahlul-Sunnah and his argument is that: “Why do you Sunnies say that Abu Bakr and `Umar and `Uthman are more worthy of caliphate? if these men fought and spent in the cause of Allah then there are also others who were much better than they are, others who spent more and fought harder, there are others who served Islam much more than they did.”
So he is teaching his Shia what to tell the Muslims when they debate with them, in his book “al-Ifsah fi Imamat Ameer al-Mumineen” pages 153-154-155:
م يقال لهم: إن كان لأبي بكر وعمر وعثمان الوعد بالثواب، لما ادعيتموه لهم من الإنفاق والقتال، وأوجب ذلك عصمتهم من الآثام، لأوجب ذلك لأبي سفيان ويزيد بن أبي سفيان ومعاوية(2) وخالد بن الوليد وعمرو بن العاص أيضا، بل هو لهؤلاء أوجب، وهم به أحق من أبي بكر وعمر وعثمان وغيرهم ممن سميتموه، لما نحن مثبتوه في المقال.
وذلك أنه لا خلاف بين الأمة أن أبا سفيان أسلم قبل الفتح بأيام، وجعل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله الأمان لمن دخل داره تكرمة له وتمييزا عمن سواه، وأسلم معاوية قبله في عام القضية(1) وكذلك كان إسلام يزيد بن أبي سفيان(2).
وقد كان لهؤلاء الثلاثة من الجهاد بين يدي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ما لم يكن لأبي بكر وعمر وعثمان، لأن أبا سفيان أبلى يوم حنين بلاء حسنا، وقاتل يوم الطائف قتالا لم يسمع بمثله في ذلك اليوم لغيره، وفيه ذهبت عينه، وكانت راية رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله مع ابنه يزيد بن أبي سفيان، وهو يقدم بها بين يدي المهاجرين والأنصار.
وقد كان أيضا لأبي سفيان بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وآله مقامات ومعروفة في الجهاد، وهو صاحب يوم اليرموك، وفيه ذهبت عينه الأخرى، وجاءت الأخبار أن الأصوات خفيت فلم يسمع إلا صوت أبي سفيان، وهو يقول: يا نصر الله اقترب. والراية مع ابنه يزيد، وقد كان له بالشام وقائع مشهورات(3).
ولمعاوية من الفتوح بالبحر وبلاد الروم والمغرب والشام في أيام عمر وعثمان وأيام إمارته وفي أيام أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وبعده ما لم يكن لعمر
وأما خالد بن الوليد وعمرو بن العاص فشهرة قتالهما مع النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وبعده تغني الإطالة بذكرها في هذا الكتاب، وحسب عمرو بن العاص في فضله على أبي بكر وعمر تأمير رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله إياه عليهما في حياته(1) ولم يتأخر إسلامه عن الفتح فيكون لهما فضل عليه بذلك، كما يدعى في غيره.
وأما خالد بن الوليد فقد أمره رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله في حياته، وأنفذه في سرايا كثيرة(2).
[Then you(Shia) would say to them(Sunnies): If Abu Bakr and `Umar were promised the reward, because of what you had claimed for them from spending(in the cause of Allah) and fighting( in the cause of Allah), and that this necessities their safety from the sins, then this also should be applied to abu Suffian, and Yazid(bin abu Suffian), and Mu`awiyah, and Khalid bin al-Walid and `Amro bin al-`Aas, but rather they have more right to it and they are more worthy of it than Abu Bakr and `Umar and `Uthman and the others which you have named, and we shall prove this to you.
This is because there is no disagreement between this nation that abu Suffian embraced Islam a few days before the Fath(of Makkah), and the Prophet (SAWS) promised safety to all those who entered his house in order to honor him and distinguish him from the rest, and Mu`awiyah embraced Islam one year before him during the year of al-Qadiyyah(al-Hudaybiyah), and as such was the Islam of Yazid bin abu Suffian. These three men had done more Jihad alongside the prophet (SAWS) than Abu Bakr and `Umar and `Uthman, because abu Suffian did really good in the battle of Hunayn, and he (also) fought on the day of al-Ta’ef like we never heard any man fight on that day, and in it he lost his eye, and the flag of Rassul-Allah (SAWS) was with his son Yazid bin abu Suffian, and he was holding it and leading the Mouhajirun and the Ansar.
Abu Suffian also had many well-known stances in Jihad after the prophet (SAWS), he is the man of (the battle of) al-Yarmouk, and in it he lost his other eye, and it was reported that all the voices disappeared (on that day) and none were heard except the voice of abu Suffian as he said “Come closer O victory of Allah!” and the flag was held by his son Yazid, he also had (other) famous battles in al-Sham.
As for Mu`awiyah he had naval expeditions and he had his conquests of al-Roum(Christians) and of al-Maghrib(north Africa) and of al-Sham, during the caliphate of `Umar and `Uthman and his own Emirate and the caliphate of Ameer al-Mumineen (as) and after him, but `Umar never had this.
As for Khalid bin al-Walid and `Amro bin al-`Aas their battles alongside Rasul-Allah (SAWS) and after him are too famous and too numerous to collect in this book, it is enough to prove the superiority of `Amro bin al-`Aas that the Prophet (SAWS) had appointed him as Ameer(leader) over them both during his life (1), and his Islam was not later than al-Fath so that they(Abu Bakr & `Umar) would have a virtue over him as is claimed in other cases.
As for Khalid bin al-Walid the Prophet (SAWS) appointed him as Ameer(leader of an army) during his life and sent him in numerous battalions(armies).]
(1) – During Ghazwat That-ul-Salasil.
By this al-Mufid wanted to refute the claim of Ahlul-Sunnah that Abu Bakr (ra) and `Umar (ra) were superior and more deserving when it comes to Caliphate, what is more interesting is that al-Mufid regardless of his evil intentions, mentioned the virtues and good deeds of the Sahaba which the Shia hate the most.
So he’s telling us that Mu`awiyah (ra) served Islam more than the first two Caliphs, so if we declare their superiority then Mu`awiyah (ra) is more deserving of this, because of these good deeds which he testifies that he had.
But I don’t want this to be just another topic in which we attack the deviants, there should be benefits here for us all.
Now if we ask the Shia or any Muslim layman regarding the famous pro-Palestinian English MP, we ask: “Do you like George Galloway?” he will say: “Certainly, he speaks the truth and supports the cause and defends us.” So then we ask: “Do you like George Galloway’s `Aqeedah and beliefs?” Surely the answer would be: “No, I hate his Kufr and blasphemy.” This shows that you can like some things about a person and hate other things about that same person, and if this was the case with a Kafir like Galloway then how would it then be for a Muslim like Mu`awiyah (ra) who accompanied Rassul-Allah SAWS) and made Jihad alongside him and made the conquests and the expeditions?
This is the same when it comes to the Muslims, we make Du`ah for Mu`awiyah (ra) because of all of his great good deeds, but we do not praise him for Siffin in fact we condemn it and ask Allah to forgive those who took part in it, and we say `Ali (ra) is closer to the truth and the opposing team transgressed and strayed from the path because of their wrong Ijtihad.
As for Khalid bin al-Waleed (ra), he did a great mistake in the time of the prophet (SAWS):
Narrated Ibn ‘Umar: The Prophet sent (an army unit under the command of) khalid bin Al-Walid to fight against the tribe of bani Jadhima and those people could not express themselves by saying, “Aslamna(We have submitted)” but they said, “Saba’na! Saba’na! ” khalid kept on killing some of them and taking some others as captives, and he gave a captive to everyone of us and ordered everyone of us to kill his captive. I said, “By Allah, I shall not kill my captive and none of my companions shall kill his captive!”
so what did he say to him? did he make Takfeer or Tafseeq? how did he handle the situation? The Hadith continues:
Then we mentioned that to the Prophet and he said, “O Allah! I am free from what khalid bin Al-Walid has done,” or “I disassociate myself from what Khalid had done.” and repeated it twice.
So as you can see the sin was great, but the prophet (SAWS) did not disown Khalid and make Takfeer on him, but he disassociated himself from the sinful act that Khalid (ra) committed and still appointed him to other matters.
And we as Muslims say “O Allah, we are free from and we disassociate ourselves from any act committed by any Sahabi, any scholar, any Muslim that contradicts the wisdom of the Quran and the Sunnah.”