Al-Baladhuri writes: “Mu`awiya sent an empty sealed paper to al-Hasan (a) to write what he wants. This is how he wrote: This is the peace treaty between al-Hasan b. Ali and Mu`awiya b. Abi Sufyan. I declare peace between us and hand over the caliphate to him on the condition that, by Allah, Al-Hasan bin Ali led great battalions like mountains against Muawiya. Amr bin Al-As said: “I certainly see battalions that will not back down before killing their opponents. Muawiya, who was truly the best of the two men, said to him, “O`Amr! If those who were killed, who would be left for work to the public, who would leave me for their wives, who would remain for their children? Then Muawiya sent two quraishi of the tribe of Abd-i-Shams called `Abdur Rahman bin Sumura and Abdullah bin`Amir bin Kuraiz to Al-Hasan, and said to them, “Go see this man (al-Hasan) and negotiate peace with him, speak and call.” So they went to Al-Hasan, and they spoke and called on him to accept peace. Al-Hasan said: “We, descendants of Abdul Muttalib, have wealth and people have engaged in death and corruption (and money will only appease them).” They said to Al-Hasan: “Muawiya offers you one way or another, and appeals to you to accept peace.” Al-Hasan said to them: Who will be responsible for what you said? They said, “We will be responsible for that.” No matter what Al-Hasan said: “We will be responsible for you.” Al-Hasan has therefore reached a peace agreement with Muawiya. Al-Hasan (Al-Basri) said: I heard Abu Bakr say: “I saw the apostle of Allah on the pulpit and Al-Hasan bin `Ali was by his side. The prophet once looked at the people and once Al-Hasan bin`Ali said, “This son of mine is a saiyid (i.e.
a nobleman) and may Allah make peace between two great groups of Muslims through him.”  By the supposed misunderstanding, he wants to give the impression that if Muawiya did not meet the conditions of Imam Hasan (as), his reason was not a violation of the agreement, but reciprocal disputes in which, in a certain way, the two were correct. However, there is no other historical indication that all the issues had not been resolved before the agreement between the two parties, as Zuhri stated. Some criticize the Shiites who say that Imam Hasan made peace with Mu`awiya (the first caliph of the Umayyads) and ended the conflict between them, and that he did not listen to his companions who wanted to involve him in the arrest. For them, this indicates that the policy of the Prophet`s family towards his companions was not at all a hostile policy, as the Shiites assert. Mu`awiya despite the winning saw in Imam Hasan (as) a huge opponent. As Abu Sulaiman admits, Mu`awiya Yazeed wanted to succeed him. This contradicted one of the conditions stipulated in the agreement with Imam Hasan (as), namely that in the event of Mu`awiya khilafath`s death would return to Hasan. See: Hidayah contains the fatwa that Mu`awiya and Hajjaj were unfair, and that Sahaba would accept the position of a judge of unjust leaders. We appeal to justice. When the Sahaba made peace agreements with the unjust Mu`awiya and Hajjaj, did they become unfair? If they have done so, we congratulate you on being followers of the unjust mass of companions. If they did not, the Sahaba did not become transgressions/sinners for the conclusion of such agreements, there was nothing wrong with Imam Hasan (as) making peace with unjust mu`awiya.
This fatwa will be an eternal slap in the face for the Nasibis. Imam Hasan (as) felt that it was advisable not to shed the blood of Muslims for the caliphate and made the agreement, although he gave himself much more favor to the caliphate. Allama Ibn. Abdul Barr cites many accounts that make it very clear about the state of the government`s return to Imam Hasan (as).