First he lived with Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) for a year or two - indeed for more than two years, since he became a Muslim at the conquest of Makkah as is known that occured in the eighth year of Hijrah - (and) indeed he was one of those who wrote down the revelation for Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) - so even according to their conditions he is definitely a Companion.
Secondly, the correct definition for a Companion is: "One who saw Allaah' s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) even if only once - and died as a Muslim", and this is agreed upon by the scholars of hadeeth. And Mu'aawiyyah (may Allaah be pleased with him and have mercy upon Him), even if he made a mistake - and who does not make a mistake? - even if he made a mistake in fighting Alee and making his son hereditor - yes he made a mistake - but this does not put an end to his being a Companion. And if you opened for example 'Asadul-Ghaabah' of Ibn al-Atheer, or 'al-Istee'aab' of Ibn Abdil-Barr, or 'al-Isaabah fee Tamyeezis-Sahaabah' - these books tell us who are the Companions - do we find Mu'aawiyyah or not? The answer is we find him.
Some of them describe him as "the trustworthy writer of the Revelation and maternal-uncle of the Believers", since his sister Umm Habeebah was a Mother of the Believers, the Companion of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) . And Shaikh ul-Islaam [Ibn Taymiyyah] was asked: "Who is better Umar ibn Abdil-Azeez with his justice or Mu'aawiyyah?" So he answered: "Indeed a single day from the days of Mu'aawiyyah is better than the 'Umar and his family - his Companionship is enough for him - he is just without any need for enquiry, Allaah ta'aalaa has witnessed in their favour that they are just. Allaah subhaanahu wata'aalaa declared them good so they do not need the witness of anyone in their favour - but this is a branch departing from the Sunnah."
QUESTION. About the Beard, they say: "A Muslim gets reward for growing it but does not get punished if he does not", and some people say: "that the four distinguished scholars, like Maalik, Aboo Haneefah have agreed that letting the beard grow is waajib - and that this view is not correct because they never said it. On the other hand an-Nawawee, Ibn Qudaamah, Ibn ul-Hammaam, ash-Shawkaanee, Qaadee Ayyaad and so on never said that it is waajib. So whoever claims that ash-Shaafi'ee, Ibn Hanbal or Maalik said that it is an obligation, then they are wrong" - and that they challenge them to prove it.
A. What is correct from the sayings of the scholars of the four madhdhabs - on their books - in the old books of the Hanafees, in the books of the Shaafi'ees, the saying of Imaam Ahmad and Imaam Maalik is that it is waajib and that he who shaves is an open sinner (faasiq) who should be punished. Even to the extent that Imaam Maalik said about the one who shaves his moustache: "It is disfigurement which I think should be punished by beating" - so what do you think of the beard? It is worse.
Secondly, the Sharee'ah texts show that it is waajib. The first hadeeth, the saying of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) : "Leave the beard, shorten the moustache and act differently to the Mushriks". And the order here makes it obligatory. But to them - the HT - an order does not make something obligatory and principle of theirs if futile, false. To them an order is only a request and does not amount to an obligation. So we say to them: "Where does the order (amr) occur in the arabic landguage - from whom to whom? Usually it is given by the master to the servant, from the husband to the wife, from the father to his son. And this request from the father, husband or master - does it mean merely a request and hope for its fulfilment or that something has to be done? It is something which has to be done. And the saying of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) : "If it were not for causing hardship to my Ummah, I would have ordered them to use the Siwaak". This is a proof that the order amounts to an obligation. "I would have ordered them to use the Siwaak" and if he ordered them to use the siwaak it would have been waajib, but he did not order them, rather he recommended it for them. So the order means an obligation in the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and in the arabic language and in the Book of Allaah. For example, Allaah ta'aalaa says:
O you who believe! Establish the prayer
An order. (Or) is this merely a request? It is up to you - if you want to pray then do or if not then not?
So the order means an obligation in Ilm ul-Usool and if we apply this rule to the hadeeth we find that keeping a beard is an obligation. And the saying of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) to the two men who came from Kisraa - both of them having shaved their beards and let their moustache flow: "Who ordered you with this?" and he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) turned his face away from them, they replied: "Our Lord - meaning Kisraa - ordered us", so he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: "Rather my Lord ordered me to leave my beard and shorten my moustache."
QUESTION. They explain the hadeeth by saying that was not an order that was a request.