Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Saracen21stC

Ahl Ul Bayt And The Shias

Recommended Posts

Prophet’s Wives are Ahlel Bayt




 

The
term “Medinatul-Nabi” translates to “the City of the Prophet.” This was
eventually shortened to “Medinah” which although it translates technically to
simply “city,” it is referring to the City of the Prophet (i.e. formerly
Yathrib, and now the second most holy city of the Muslims).



The term “Ahle Bayt Muhammad” translates
to “People of the House of Muhammad.” This phrase was also shortened to simply
“Ahlel Bayt” but it is implicit that this refers to the House of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and nobody else. It translates to “people of the house”
with emphasis on “the” to denote the respect given to the Prophetic household.



Both the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia
believe it is important to love the Ahlel Bayt. Now, the question is: who are
the Ahle Bayt Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)? The answer to this question is quite
simply that first and foremost the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt. The
Prophet’s wives have the most right to be referred to as Ahlel Bayt, over and
above all other individuals.



Dictionary Definition of “Ahlel Bayt”



Let us first define the words “Ahlel
Bayt.” To establish absolute objectivity, we will not define it ourselves, but
rather we will quote straight from the most popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org
(emphasis is ours):



Al-Islam.org says



“The
term “ahl” signifies the members of a household of a man, including his fellow
tribesmen, kin, relatives, wife (or wives), children, and all those who
share a family background, religion, housing, city, and country with him…“Bayt”
refers to habitation and dwelling, including tents and buildings both. The
“ahl-al-bayt” of any person refers to his family members and all those who
live in his house.



source: http://al-Islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=14ahlbayt.htm



We encourage our readers to verify this
defintion by picking up any Arabic dictionary. There are three words to look
up: Ahl, Bayt, and Ahl-Al-Bayt. Let us reproduce what one such Arabic
dictionary has to say, although the results will no doubt be virtually
identical in any other dictionary.



Ahl: noun; relatives including wives,
children, brothers, sisters, and other kinsmen, and sometimes used to refer to
fellow tribesmen



Bayt: noun; house; place of residence



Ahl-Al-Bayt: noun; those
people in relation to a man who live in his house, especially his wives and
unmarried children that live under his roof and are provided for by him



In fact, the primary definition of Ahl
Bayt is a man’s wives; in Arab culture, it is considered rude to call a man’s
wives by their actual names, and hence people will refer to a man’s wives
simply as his “Ahl Bayt”.



The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah



The Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah thus take
the wives of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to be the Ahlel Bayt. This is in
accordance with the dictionary definition of the word as shown above. The
Prophet’s wives are part of the Prophet’s Ahl, and they live in his Bayt.
Therefore, Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى
الله عنها
) are included in
the Ahlel Bayt.



The Shia



The Shia Ayatollahs do not have a
positive viewpoint of the Prophet’s wives. In fact, the Shia Ayatollahs possess
“baraa” (hatred) for Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى
الله عنها
), and we shall
examine this in later articles. It is because of this reason that the Shia
Ayatollahs deny that the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt. In fact, many of our
Shia brothers who do not speak Arabic are even unaware of the actual definition
and usage of the term “Ahlel Bayt” since they simply listen to their
Ayatollahs.



The Shia Ayatollahs say that only four
people are part of the Ahle Bayt Muhammad, namely Ali (رضّى الله عنه),
Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), and Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). We
would like to question the basis upon which they make this claim. This is not
the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
), but rather this is
the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). These were the four individuals who
lived under the roof of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), not the roof of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). It is agreed upon by both the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia that
Ali (رضّى الله عنه) did not live in the Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
but rather had his own place of residence, in which Fatima (رضّى الله عنها),
Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), and Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) also lived.



The Shia also include their Infallible
Imams in the Ahlel Bayt. We wonder on what basis they do this as well, since
none of these individuals (other than Ali [رضّى
الله عنه
], Hasan [رضّى الله عنه],
and Hussain [رضّى الله عنه]) lived in the time of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم),
let alone in the Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
).



Common Usage of the Term “Ahl-Al-Bayt”



The Quran is an Arabic book that has
been revealed to people whose language was Arabic. We will misinterpret the
Quran if we attempt to understand its words in a way that was not (and could
not be) understood by the primary addressees of the book. Today, if we ask an
Arab friend to come to our house with his Ahl-Al-Bayt, the default is that he
will come to our house with his wife and children who are staying in his house.
He might bring his married children or he might not. He might even bring a
friend if the friend is a permanent resident of his house. But primarily, an
Arab will understand from this that he should bring his wives, since this is
the central and primary definition of the phrase “Ahl-Al-Bayt”.



An Arab will be extremely shocked if he
finds that by Ahl-Al-Bayt we meant his cousin, married children, and
grandchildren, all of whom live in another house. He will be extremely
shocked that we do not mean his wife who lives in his Bayt. This is because for
any Arab, the word Ahl-Al-Bayt (which literally means those staying in the
house) includes the wife (or wives) of a person. This was in no way any
different at the time of the Prophet. It is the same in all Arab countries. It
is interesting that even in Iran (being a Shia dominated country) people use
the word Ahl-Al-Bayt to refer to the wife as well as children of a person. If
we look at any popular book of Arabic words we will find that in the definition
of Ahlel Bayt, wife is included. We would thus like to ask the Shia Ayatollahs
why they proclaim a different definition of the word Ahlel Bayt? Why should it
be that the Prophet’s wives are not part of Ahlel Bayt but rather the
Infallible Imams are? In our opinion, this defies logic.



Logic and Common Sense



Ahlel Bayt means the family of a man
living in his house. If we were to ask any Shia who is a part of his own
family, he would most definitely include his mother (or his spouse) in his
response. Mothers and wives are the basic foundation of a family. If we were to
ask an unbiased third party as to who the family of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was, the first names they would mention would be the Prophet’s
wives.



The Quran Refers to the Prophet’s Wives
as Ahlel Bayt



As Muslims, we believe in the absolute
authority of the Quran. It is the highest source of legislation; in fact, it is
the very speech of Allah. The Quran refers to the Prophet’s wives as the Ahlel
Bayt. Allah Almighty Himself negates all those who dare argue that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها)
and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) are not part of the Ahlel Bayt.



The Quran specifically refers to the
wives of the Prophet as Ahlel Bayt in the following verse:



“O wives of the Prophet! You
are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not
soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a
good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display,
like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and
give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes
to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and
to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)



The transliteration reads:



“Ya nisa al-nabiyi
lastuna kahadin mina alnisa-i ini itaqaytuna fala takhdaAAna bialqawli
fayatmaAAa allathee fee qalbihi maradun waqulna qawlan maAAroofan Waqarna fee
buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja aljahiliyyati al-oola waaqimna alssalata
waateena alzzakata waatiAAna Allaha warasoolahu innama yureedu Allahu
liyuthhiba AAankumu alrrijsa Ahlul Bayt-i wayutahhirakum tatheeran” (Quran,
33:32-33)



There is in fact not a single verse in
the Quran which identifies Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Fatima (رضّى
الله عنها
), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه),
or Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) as the Ahlel Bayt. Not a single verse in the Quran mentions
the 12 Infallible Imams of the Shia, let alone calling them Ahlel Bayt. The
term “Ahlel Bayt” has been used twice in the Quran, and both times it is used
to refer to the wives. And a similar term, Ahli Baytin is used in the Quran to
refer to the wife of Imran (mother of Moses). And yet, not a single time is the
word “Ahlel Bayt” used in the Quran for Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
), Fatima (رضّى الله عنها),
Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), or Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). Nowhere does the Quran say “O cousin of
the Prophet” but rather the Quran says “O wives of the Prophet.” If following
the Ahlel Bayt is the fundamental of belief as the Shia Ayatollahs claim, then
why is it that the Quran never once mentions Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) let alone
mentioning him as the Ahlel Bayt? If we ask our Shia brothers to produce verses
in the Quran about the Ahlel Bayt, they will be dissapointed to find that these
verses are all in relation to the Prophet’s wives.



Second Time the Quran Uses the Word
“Ahlel Bayt”



Ahlel Bayt is used another time in the
Quran and again this time to refer to the wives:



She said: ‘O wonder!
shall I bear a son when I am an extremely old woman and this my husband an
extremely old man? Most surely this is a wonderful thing.’ They said: ‘Do you
wonder at Allah’s decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings on you, o you
Ahlel Bayt (People of the House)
! for He is indeed worthy of all praise,
full of all glory!’” (Quran,
11:72-73)



The transliteration reads:



“Qalat Ya Waylata ‘A’alidu Wa
‘Ana `Ajuzun Wa Hadha Ba`li Shaykhaan ‘Inna Hadha Lashay’un `Ajibun. Qalu
‘Ata`jabina Min ‘Amri Allahi Rahmatu Allahi Wa Barakatuhu `Alaykum ‘Ahlul-Bayt-i
‘Innahu Hamidun Majidun.”
(Quran, 11:72-73)



In the verse above, Prophet Ibrahim’s
wife asks the angels how can she have a son, and they respond back calling her
and Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) as Ahlel Bayt. And again, the collective
pronoun is used to refer to the Prophet Ibrahim (عليه
السلام
) and his wife.
Nobody else was in the room other than them, and the angels referred to them
all as Ahlel Bayt, including Prophet Ibrahim’s wife.



The Quran declares that Wives are Part
of the Family



Allah Almighty says that all of the
members of Prophet Loot’s family will be saved aside from his wife. Allah says:
“(All) except the family of Loot. Them all surely We
are going to save (from destruction). Except his wife…” (Quran,
15:59-60)



The construction “except his wife” would
be non-sensical unless the wife was included in the family of Loot (عليه السلم).
Otherwise, why would Allah need to clarify that Loot’s wife was an exception to
the rule that the family of Loot (عليه السلام) would be saved?



Hadith



In Sahih Bukhari, the Prophet
specifically refers to Aisha as part of Ahlel Bayt:



Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number
316



Narrated Anas:



A banquet of bread and meat
was held on the occasion of the marriage of the Prophet to Zainab bint Jahsh. I
was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), and so the people started
coming (in groups). They would eat and then leave. Another batch would come,
eat and leave. So I kept on inviting the people till I found nobody to invite.



Then I said, “O Allah’s
Prophet! I do not find anybody to invite.”



He (the Prophet) said, “Carry
away the remaining food.” Then a batch of three persons stayed in the house
chatting. The Prophet left and went towards the dwelling place of Aisha and
said, “Peace and Allah’s Mercy be on you, Ya Ahlel Bayt (O the people of the
house)!”



She replied, “Peace and the
mercy of Allah be on you too. How did you find your wife? May Allah bless you.”



Then he went to the dwelling
places of all his other wives and said to them the same as he said to Aisha
and
they said to him the same as Aisha had said to him.



Sahih Bukhari is considered the most
reliable book of Hadith, and therefore there is no doubt that this is an
authoratative declaration that the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt.



Certain Shia Ayatollahs will often take
Hadith out of context in order to “prove” that the Prophet’s wives are not part
of the Ahlel Bayt. We shall examine all of these Hadith in later articles, and
we shall see that the reality is that an unbiased view of the Hadith merely
confirms the Quran, namely that the Prophet’s wives are part of the Ahlel Bayt.



It is narrated in Sahih Muslim by Zayd
ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) that the Prophet’s wives are part of the Ahlel Bayt. In Sahih
Muslim (Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith-5920), Zayd says “His
wives are among the people of his household.” He further emphasized: “His spouses are a fiber of his household.” If the
wives are the fiber of Ahlel Bayt, it means that they are the fundamental unit
of it.



In future articles, we
shall–Insha-Allah–examine other Hadith, those that are commonly taken out of
context by the Shia Ayatollahs.



Scholarly Opinion



Shaikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid says: “With regard to the wives of the Prophet…they are included
among the members of the family of the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
).” This
is the majority opinion of the Ulema.



One Last Argument



We ask our Shia brothers to ponder upon
why the Quran and the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) used the term
“Ahl-al-Bayt” as opposed to simply “Ahl” which means “family.” By confining the
Ahl with “Al-Bayt” this is restricting who is being referred to as the family
living under the roof of the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
). Neither
Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), Hasan (رضّى
الله عنه
), nor Hussain (رضّى الله عنه)
lived in the same house as the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
). On the
other hand, the Prophet’s wives most definitely did.



If Allah was referring to the family of
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) that did not live in his house, then
surely the word “Ahl” would have been more appropriate to use; the additional
specification of “Al-Bayt” would then be completely extraneous and in fact
self-contradictory. The phrase “Ahl-Al-Bayt” confines the Ahl to those who live
inside the Bayt, which consists of the Prophet’s wives. Any other explanation
is nonsensical.



Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه)



The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah holds the
Ahle Bayt Ali (رضّى الله عنه) in the highest regard. In fact, we
believe that Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه)–along with the families of Aqeel (رضّى الله عنه)
and Abbas (رضّى الله عنه)–are honorary members of the Prophetic Ahlel Bayt. Ali’s family
(رضّى الله عنه) is commonly referred to as Ahlel Kisa (People of the Cloak)
and they are highly regarded by the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. However, we
disagree with those who exploit the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to
hurt and degrade the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
). We
ask Allah to shower His Infinite Blessings upon both of these families.



Certain Shia propagandists might try to
claim that we are insulting the family of Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) by saying that
they are “only” honorary members of the Ahlel Bayt, but this is not true at
all. The Shia declare that Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى
الله عنه
) was an honorary
member of Ahlel Bayt. Is this insulting Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه)?
No, it is in fact exalting him. Likewise, to say that Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه)
is an honorary part of the Ahlel Bayt is likewise an exaltation and not an
insult at all. The Shia have called Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه) to
be an honorary member of the Ahlel Bayt; therefore, if they accuse the Sunnis
of hating Ali (رضّى الله عنه) for calling him an honorary member, then
they are also guilty of hating Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى
الله عنه
).



Al-Islam.org says



“The
reference to Salman Farsi as a member of the Ahlul-Bayt is honorary.
Salman Farsi’s conversion to Islam left a great impression on the HolyProphet
(S) and others. Throughout the years of the Holy Prophet’s mission, Salman
Farsi was one of the companions most dedicated in the service, defence and
propagation of Islam. His service to the household of the HolyProphet and his
sincere love for them earned him great respect from all quarters of the
Ahlul-Bayt. Thus, as an honor for him, the Prophet (S) referred to him as one
of the Ahlul-Bayt (AS). We pray that he will be raised in the honorable company
of the ones he loved so dearly.



source: Error!
Hyperlink reference not valid.



Perhaps the reason that the Shia
Ayatollahs love the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله
عنه
) and not the Ahlel
Bayt of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) has to do with how the faith of Shi’ism
came into being. Indeed, the early ancestors of the Shia are the Saba’ites,
followers of Abdullah Ibn Saba. These Saba’ites excessively praised Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
and eventually even declared that Ali (رضّى الله
عنه
) was superior to the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Today, the Shia adamantly deny this and
they say that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) is superior to Ali
(رضّى الله عنه). However, we wonder why then they praise the Ahlel Bayt of Ali
(رضّى الله عنه) and not the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)?
Is this not a remnant of the Saba’ite origin of Shi’ism?



Furthermore, there is absolutely no
logic in calling the Infallible Imams of the Shia to be part of Ahlel Bayt and
then deny that the Prophet’s wives are part of Ahlel Bayt. Surely, the
Prophet’s wives have a much greater right to be part of Ahlel Bayt than people
who did not even live in the Bayt of the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
).



Conclusion



The Prophet’s wives are the Ahlel Bayt.
Many Shia Ayatollahs slander Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى
الله عنها
) with many
baseless accusations (we shall examine these accusations in later articles). We
ask our Shia brothers to ponder over the true nature of this love. The Ahlus
Sunnah wal Jama’ah are lovers of Ahlel Bayt and certainly not Nasibis (haters
of Ahlel Bayt). In fact the reality may be that the Ayatollahs are the ones who
are Nasibis as they hate the Ahlel Bayt (i.e. Prophet’s wives) so much that
they even deny that they are the Ahlel Bayt! In fact, the AhlelBayt.com website
was primarily designed to defend the Ahlel Bayt, namely Aisha (رضّى الله عنها),
from the slander uttered against her.



The fact that the Prophet’s wives are
Ahlel Bayt is proven from the Quran, Hadith, scholarly opinion, dictionary,
logic, common sense, and common usage of the word “Ahlel Bayt.” Those who care
to argue so vehemently against the verses of the Quran can only be those who
hate the Ahlel Bayt so much and so passionately that they must even reject the
Word of Allah.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds


 

Prophet’s Daughters are Ahlel Bayt

 

 



The
Shia accept Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) as part of the Ahlel Bayt, but we must
analyze on what basis they do this. Do they honor Fatima (رضّى الله عنها)
because she is the Prophet’s daughter, or rather because she is Ali’s wife? The
answer, we hope, shall be made obvious: it seems to us that they do not honor the
daughters of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), but rather they only honor Ali’s wife.



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
had four daughters, not just one. The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
) and
Khadijah had five children: Qasim (رضّى الله عنه), Zaynub (رضّى
الله عنها
), Ruqayyah (رضّى الله عنها),
Umm Kulthoom (رضّى الله عنها), and Fatima (رضّى
الله عنها
). And yet, the
Shia Ayatollahs will say that only Fatima (رضّى
الله عنها
) is part of the
Ahlel Bayt. We’d like to ask why the other three daughters are left out?
Unfortunately, it seems that in order to maintain consistency, many Shia
clerics go so far as to claim that the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
) had
only one daughter! This is an easily proven historical inconsistency, but it is
trumpeted on many Shia websites, including the popular “Answering-Ansar”
website. The Ahlus Sunnah love all the Prophet’s daughters equally and it pains
us to see that the rights of three of our noble Prophet’s daughters are
neglected. We wonder how our Shia brothers would feel if we said that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها)
was not the daughter of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
), or that
Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) was not the son of Ali (رضّى الله
عنه
)?



Every authoritative historical account
affirms that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had four daughters; even secular
historians attest to this fact. We could provide numerous references here that
would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Prophet had four daughters.
However, in such discourses one will always find individuals who will quote from
sources which may be objectively declared dubious, but will be touted by one
party to be authoritatively factual. The argument will, in that case, be
reduced to a tedious dispute between “our word” against “theirs”. Therefore we
shall attempt to prove our claim from the Quran, something which our Shia
brothers will admit is an accurate source, as a matter of creed.



The Quran Declares That the Prophet Has
More Than One Daughter



Allah says in the Quran:



“O Prophet! Say to your wives
and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let
down upon them their over-garments; this will be more proper, that they may be
known, and thus they will not be given trouble; and Allah is Forgiving,
Merciful.”
(Quran, 33:59)



Here, Allah uses the plural word for daughters,
not the singular form. Allah uses the term “banaatuka” which means “your
daughters.” If it was one daughter only, it would be “bintuka.” This completely
negates the claim that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
) had only one
daughter. Had this been the case, then surely Allah would have not used the
plural form, since Allah is above making grammatical mistakes. (We hope that
the noble Sahabah will not be accused of doing Tahreef or tampering of the
Quran!) We could provide more evidence to prove this fact of history, but it
will certainly be a pointless endeavor if a Muslim cannot accept an evidence as
ideologically authoritative as the Quran.



Why The Ayatollahs Deny Three Daughters
of the Prophet



Let us return to the idea that Shi’ism
originates from Abdullah Ibn Saba and his followers. Notive, how the Shia
Ayatollahs do not care about the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).
They only care about the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
). Notice how the
Shia Ayatollahs deny that the Prophet’s wives are part of the Ahlel Bayt, but
Ali’s wife is part of the Ahlel Bayt. Notice how Ali’s children–Hasan (رضّى الله عنه)
and Hussain (رضّى الله عنه)–are considered by them to be in the Ahlel Bayt, but the
Prophet’s three daughters are not. This again leads us to confirm the idea that
Shi’ism originates from the Saba’ites. These Saba’ites excessively praised Ali
(رضّى الله عنه) and eventually even declared that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was
superior to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Today, the Shia adamantly deny this and
they say that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) is superior to Ali
(رضّى الله عنه). However, we wonder why then they praise the Ahlel Bayt of Ali
(رضّى الله عنه) and not the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)?
Is this not a remnant of the Saba’ite origin of Shi’ism?



Another reason why the Shia Ayatollahs
must deny that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) had three daughters
was because two of these daughters–namely Ruqayyah (رضّى الله عنها)
and Umm Kulthoom (رضّى الله عنها)–married Uthman Bin Affan (رضّى الله عنه),
the third Caliph. The Shia Ayatollahs base their entire belief on the
repudiation of the first three caliphs; if the three caliphs were really evil
as the Shia say they are, then why did the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
marry two of his daughters to one of these three Caliphs? Again, this, in our
opinion, questions the ideological foundation of Shi’ism.



The Shia revere the Nahjul Balagha,
which they claim are the sermons and letters of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). It
is one of the most sacred and authoratative of Shia books. The Ahlus Sunnah wal
Jama’ah believes that many of the narrations in the Nahjul Balagha are
forgeries; however, the Shia accept all of it, and thus we will quote straight
from the Nahjul Balagha to prove that Uthman (رضّى
الله عنه
) married two of
the daughters of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
).



Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 163 Ali went to see
Uthman and said to him:



“You have seen as we have seen
and you have heard as we have heard. You sat in the company of the Prophet of
Allah as we did. (Abu Bakr) Ibn Abi Quhafah and (`Umar) ibn al-Khattab were no
more responsible for acting righteously than you, since you are nearer than
both of them to the Prophet of Allah through kinship, and you also hold
relationship to him by marriage
which they do not hold.”



(Source: http://www.al-Islam.org/nahjul/163.htm)



This proves that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had two daughters who married Uthman (رضّى الله عنه).
This revelation is troublesome the Shia Ayatollahs it would involve exalting
the status of Uthman’s family (رضّى الله عنه). And most importantly, it shows that
Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) was such a pious person that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
gave him two daughters.



Al-Islam.org



The popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org,
finally rescinded the Shia claim that the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
) had
only one daughter. Let us see what Al-Islam.org has to say:



Al-Islam.org says



“Most
reports (like those of Ibn Ishaq, al-Mas’udi) indicate that she [Khadaija] was
the mother of all the Prophet’s children apart from Ibrahim (who was the son of
Mary the Copt). She bore the following children to the Prophet: al-Qasim;
Zaynab, Ruqqayya, Umm Kulthum and Hazrat Fatima (A.S). Bibi Fatima was the
youngest daughter according to most reports. The daughters accepted Islam and
migrated with the Prophet to Medina.



source: http://al-Islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00083.html



And we also read the following:



Al-Islam.org says



“Khadija,
peace be upon her, was the first woman who believed in the Prophet’s divine
prophecy. She put all her wealth at his disposal to propagate and promote
Islam. [39] Six children were born of his marriage: two sons named Qasim and
Tahir who passed away as infants in Makkah and four daughers named Ruqiyah,
Zaynab, Umm Kulsum, and Fatima, who was the most prominent and honoured of them
all. [40]



source: http://www.al-Islam.org/glance/4.htm



It is distressing that the Shia exalt
Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) by using the honorific “(A.S.)” as well as “Hazrat” but you
will notice no such respect for the other beloved daughters of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Nonetheless, we are pleased that they accept the Prophet’s
daughters. We kindly ask Shia-Chat and Answering-Ansar to follow suit and also
rescind their claims that the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) had only
one daughter. How distressing it was to see an entire thread on Shia-Chat
discussing how the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) had only one
daughter. The Answering-Ansar moderator boldly declared: “The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had only one daughter, Bibi Fatima [A.S.].”



The Shia website Al-Islam.org has
definitively refuted those who claimed that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
did not have four daughters. We read the following:



Al-Islam.org says



“Khadija
gave birth to several children of whom only four daughters survived: Zainab,
Umme Kulthum, Ruqiya, and Fatima-Zahra who was the youngest and most exalted of
them all.



There
is a difference between historians regarding the first two daughters, for some
claim that they were the Prophet’s step-daughters; but the fact is that they
were his direct daughters. This fact will be explained in the coming pages, if
Allah wills. [1]



[1]
The story of Khadija’s marriage was summarized and carried on from Bihar
al-Anwar
: v.6.



source: http://www.al-Islam.org/gracious/5.htm



It should be noted that Bihar al-Anwar
is a very authoratative book to the Shia.



We are pleased that Al-Islam.org has
accepted the truth on this matter, and has admitted that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had four daughters. However, we must ask then: if Fatima (رضّى الله عنها)
is to be included in the Ahlel Bayt, then why aren’t the other three daughters
of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)? Is this not unfair? Is this not illogical?



Al-Shia.com



Another popular Shia website, www.al-shia.com, contains the following Hadith compiled by Imam
Kulayni in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four Shia books of Hadith. All of
the below Hadith confirm that Umm Kulthoom, Ruqayyah, and Zaynub are direct
daughters of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم):



Al-Shia.com says






  • روى الصفار بسنده عن الامام الباقر (ع ) قال : ولد لرسول اللّه (ص )من خديجة : القاسم والطاهر , وام كلثوم , ورقية , وزينب وفاطمة ((642)) .

    وروى
    الصدوق بسنده عن الصادق (ع ) قال : ولد لرسول اللّه (ص )من خديجة : القاسم والطاهر ـ وهو عبداللّه ـ وام
    كلثوم
    , ورقية , وزينب وفاطمة ((643))
    .

    وقـال
    الـكـليني
    : ولد له منها قبل مبعثه :
    القاسم ,
    ورقية ,
    وزينب وام كلثوم , وولد له بعد المبعث : الـطـيـب
    والـطـاهر وفاطمة وروى ايضا
    : ا ن ه لم يولد بعد المبعث الا فاطمة (ع ) , وان الطيب والطاهر ولدا قبل مبعثه ((644)) .

    وقـال
    الـشيخ
    الطبرسي
    : فاول ما حملت ولدت عبد اللّه بن محمد وهوالطيب ((الطاهر)) والناس يغلطون
    فيقولون
    : ولد له منها اربعة بنين القاسم وعبد اللّه والطيب والطاهر , وانما ولد له
    منها ابنان
    , الـثـانـي : الـقـاسـم ,
    وقـيـل :ان القاسم اكبر ,
    وهو بكره ,
    وبه كان يكنى واربع بنات : زينب ورقية وام كلثوم وفاطمة ((645)) .

    وقال اب
    ن شهر
    آشوب
    : اولاده : وله من خديجة :
    القاسم وعبد اللّه ,وهما الطاهر والطيب , واربع بنات : زينب ورقية وام
    كلثوم وفاطمة وفي
    (الانوار) , و(الكشف ) , و(اللمع ) , وكتاب البلاذري :
    ان زيـنب ورقية كانتاربيبتيه من جحش فاما القاسم والطيب
    فماتا بمكة صغيرين
    , مكث القاسم سبع ليال ((646)) .

    وروى
    المجلسي عن الكازروني عن ابن عباس قال : اول من ولدلرسول اللّه بمكة قبل النبوة
    القاسم وبه كان يكنى
    , ثم ولد له زينب , ثم رقية ,ثم فاطمة , ثم ام كلثوم , ثم ولد له في
    الاسلام عبد اللّه فـسـمي الطيب والطاهر وامهم جميعا خديجة بنت خويلد وكان اول من
    مات من ولده القـاسم ثم مات عـبداللّه بمكة
    , فقال العاص بن وائل السهمي قد انقطع
    ولده فهو ابتر
    , فانزل اللّه تعالى (
    ان شانئك هو الابتر ) ((647)) .


source: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/maws…0014.htm#link72



As for our English-only readers, we have
the following quote from Imam Kulayni (which is actually a translation of one
of the above Hadith):



“He [the Prophet] married
Khadijah when he was twenty and some years old. Before recieving the Divine
Commands, his children born to him from Khadijah were Qasim, Ruqayyah, Zaynub,
and Umm Kulthoom. Of the children born after he recieved Divine Commands were
al-Tayyib, al-Tahir, and Fatima (a.s.)”



(source: al-shia.com, http://www.al-shia.com/html/eng/lib/)



Authority of Shia Historical Accounts



The classical Shia scholars never argued
that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had only one daughter. This was only a
recent phenomena when the Ayatollahs realized that their position on the Ahlel
Bayt did not make logical sense if the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
really did have more than one daughter. It is unfortunate that this policy of
denial is a prevalent tactic of debate today. It is adopted with many other
topics as well, such as Abdullah Ibn Saba; they deny his existence just like
they deny the existence of the Prophet’s daughters. We would like to ask how it
is that Shia historical accounts can be taken seriously when they deny such
basic facts such as how many daughters the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
had and who Abdullah Ibn Saba was?



Such famous Shia scholars as Kulayni,
Majlisi, Sadooq, Toosi, and Tabarsi have confirmed that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had four daughters. Thus, when the modern day propagandists
argue and say that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) had only one
daughter, then we remind them that they are not only arguing with us, but also
these classical scholars. This newfound Shia opinion is in fact 100% at
variance with what the very founding fathers of Shia theology had to say, those
who were the foundation pillar of knowledge for the later generations of the
Shia.



Conclusion



It is a prevalent opinion of the Shia
followers to say that the Sunnis dislike or are against the Ahlel Bayt. This is
simply not true. We have just shown how it is the Shia who, in fact, deny the
very existence of the Prophet’s daughters.



To us this denial is an insult and we
kindly ask the Shia Ayatollahs to refrain from insulting the Ahlel Bayt of
Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) by denying their very existence. We urge
our Shia brothers to think about the veracity of their beliefs and what reasons
they have for denying the rights of three of our Prophet’s lovely daughters. It
is clear that, contrary to much of what is disseminated, the Ahlus Sunnah wal
Jama’ah indeed loves the entire family of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم),
including all his wives and all his daughters.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Word Games With Verse 33:33



 


 

From:
Zain ******** To: admin[at]ahlelbayt.com



Verse 33:33 in the Quran is the Verse of Purification. The Ahlel
Bayt–namely Ali, Fatima, Hasan, Hussain, and the Infallible Imams including the
Mehdi–were made infallible by verse 33:33 in which Allah says: “And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you,
you Ahl al-Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (33:33)
The Prophet placed a cloak underneath all four of these people and then made
them infallible by this verse in the Quran.

Response From: AhlelBayt.com Admin



Dear Brother Zain,



Thank you for your correspondence.



When we read verses of the Quran, we
should read the entire passage and not just isolated parts of it. We must see
the context of what is being said. Otherwise, we will be misled. We are afraid
that many people, either knowingly or unknowingly, are taking the Quran and
Hadith out of context simply to win debates. Insha-Allah we should read the
Quranic verses in their entirity and with an open heart.



Brother Zain, you have mentioned Verse
33:33 of the Quran. Let us now read to whom this verse in the Quran is
addressed to; let us read the entire sentence, starting from verse 33:32 all
the way to verse 33:34.



“O wives of the Prophet! You
are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft
in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good
word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like
that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give
regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to
remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House),
and to make you pure and spotless. And recite what is rehearsed to you in your
homes, of the Signs of Allah and His Wisdom: for Allah understands the finest
mysteries and is well-acquainted (with them).” (Quran, 33:32-34)



Allah Almighty clearly addresses the
wives of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). If we were to argue that this verse is
the verse of purification and that it makes certain people infallible, then we
would have to conclude that it is Aisha (رضّى الله
عنها
) and the rest of the
Prophet’s wives which were made infallible. We base this on the simple fact
that the verse was revealed with the heading “O wives of the Prophet.” Brother
Zain, how can we say that this verse refers to Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and
the Infallible Imams when none of them are mentioned here, but only the wives
are addressed? We understand that it is a popular concept that this verse makes
the Ahlel Bayt infallible. However, it is also the same people who spread such
conceptions who believe that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) hated Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
). It seems to us
that, if anything, it is Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) who is made infallible, and if indeed
that is the case shouldn’t the Shia side with her over Ali (رضّى الله عنه)?



There is actually not a single verse in
the Quran which identifies Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Fatima (رضّى
الله عنها
), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه),
or Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) to be Ahlel Bayt. Not a single verse in the Quran mentions the
12 Infallible Imams of the Shia, let alone mentioning them as the Ahlel Bayt.
Nowhere in the Quran does it refer to the Hidden Imam as the Ahlel Bayt. How is
it then that a very fundamental aspect of the Shia faith is not in the Quran,
which is supposed to be the ultimate guide to truth? How can the ultimate guide
be devoid of the essence of belief, as the Shia claim that following their
Ahlel Bayt is? The term Ahlel Bayt has been used twice in the Quran, and both
times to refer to the wives. The Quran does not say “O cousin of the Prophet”
but rather it says “O wives of the Prophet.”



In conclusion, the verse you have
mentioned, Verse 33:33, was addressed to the Prophet’s wives.



Thank you for writing to us, and feel
free to ask any more questions.



Sincerely,

Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com



———————————————–



RE: from Zain ******** To:
admin[at]ahlelbayt.com



You have said that the verse 33:33 is
referring to Aisha.



How can Aisha
possibly be infallible when she hated Ali and she went out to fight against
him?



Response From: AhlelBayt.com Admin



Dear Brother Zain,



Thank you again for writing and giving
us the opportunity to further clarify our position.



Firstly, Aisha (رضّى الله عنها)
did not hate Ali (رضّى الله عنه) nor did she leave her house to fight
against Ali (رضّى الله عنه). This is a myth and it is slander, very much like the slander
against Ali (رضّى الله عنه) when people accused him of killing Uthman (رضّى الله عنه).
Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) went out to seek reconciliation with Ali (رضّى الله عنه) in
order to prevent bloodshed. This was her intention, and she was not the one who
started the Battle of the Camel, no moreso than Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
was. We shall disclose more information on this topic in a future article.



Secondly, the verse 33:33 does not make
anybody infallible. Nobody is infallible, not even the prophets. This idea of
making people infallible is alien to Islam and it is akin to what the
Christians have done with Prophet Isa (i.e. making him infallible). This is an
exaggeration that leads to Shirk, since an attribute of the Creator is given to
the creation. We will discuss infallibility in relation to verse 33:33 in a
future article, Insha-Allah.



Sincerely,

Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com



———————————————–



From: Nabeel ***********

To: admin[at]ahlelbayt.com



I am curious as to what the Shia say
about Tahreef of the Quran, especially in regards to Verse 33:33. Can you
please shed some light on this matter?



Response From: AhlelBayt.com Admin



Dear Brother Nabeel,



The very ideological foundation of
Shi’ism comes falling down when we read the Quran and find out that the
Prophet’s wives are referred to as Ahlel Bayt. To deal with this inconsistency,
certain Shia Ayatollahs claim that the Quran has been tampered with. Observe
what the popular Shia website Al-Islam.org has to say on this issue; Allamah
Sharaf al-Din says:



“…it is quite possible that
the purification verse concerning the People of the House was revealed
separately and then, when the verses of the Quran were being assembled, was
placed in the middle of the verses relating to the wives of the Prophet, either
in error or deliberately.” (Al-Islam.org, Lesson 19, http://www.al-Islam.org/leadership/)



It is clear that the Shia first make up
their beliefs and then read the Quran, as opposed to first reading the Quran
and then deriving their beliefs from it. When verses of the Quran conflict with
Shia doctrine, then possibilities are sought to explain away discrepancies.
This is clearly an unnecessary complication. Therefore, it makes sense to read
the Quran as is and then decide upon one’s beliefs, rather than deciding on a
belief first and then manufacturing a “Quranic proof” in the realm of
“possibilities”.



Such a belief that the verses in the
Quran were manipulated by being arranged in a certain way is very much in line
with the classical Shia opinion that the Quran has had Tahreef (tampering) and
has been changed by the Sahabah. How can the Shia believe in Tahreef Bit
Tarteeb (tampering in the order of verses) when Allah Almighty has promised in
the Quran that He Himself will protect the Quran from any tampering or
manipulation. Allah Almighty says in the Quran:



“Absolutely, we have revealed
the Reminder [the Quran], and, We verily are its Guardian; we will preserve
it.”
(Quran, 15:9)



“This is an honorable Quran in
a protected book, well-guarded. A revelation from the Lord of the universe.” (Quran,
56:77-80)



“Indeed, it is a glorious
Quran, in a preserved master tablet.” (Quran, 85:21-22)



Allah has promised that He will protect
and perserve the Quran from any and all tampering. In fact, this is a central
belief of Islam, without which the entire faith of Islam topples. Indeed, many
Western orientalists and evangelical Christians have labored hard to convince
people that the Quran has been tampered with. If the Quran were tampered with,
then Islam has been changed and altered, just like the Muslims claim that the
Bible was changed and altered. To doubt the veracity and integrity of the Quran
is to doubt all of faith, and this is Kufr Akbar (Major Disbelief). We ask our
Shia brothers not to throw their religious book and their entire faith into the
garbage can simply because they wish to hate Aisha (رضّى الله عنها)
and want so desperately to exclude her from the Ahlel Bayt. This is a very poor
reason to destroy one’s faith.



We cannot really have intelligent
dialogue with our Shia brothers if we do not both agree on the Quran as the
gold standard. We can never prove to the Shia anything when they claim that the
subject in the sentence has actually changed. A Non-Muslim could easily claim
that the verse talking about Abu Lahab was placed in the wrong place and it
should in reality be placed before the verse about following the Messenger!
Suddenly, Abu Lahab is the messenger of Allah! How can we seriously argue with
people when they play word games with the Quran, using cut and paste to make it
mean whatever they want it to mean? This would turn the Quran into a jigsaw
puzzle and makes it meaningless as a book of guidance.



It is quizzical that certain Shia
Ayatollahs of today say that they don’t believe in Tahreef of the Quran, but at
the same time they claim that verse 33:33 was placed deliberately next to the
verse about the Prophet’s wives; they say that the meaning of the Quran was
thus manipulated and the integrity of the Quran lost. In fact, most Shia
scholars believe in Tahreef bit Tarteeb, which is the idea that the order of
verses in the Quran were tampered with.



Even if we look at verse 33:33 in
isolation, we see clearly that the verse is talking about the wives:



“And stay quietly in your
houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of
Ignorance;
and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey
Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from
you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:33)



Surely, the Quran is not referring to
Ali (رضّى الله عنه) when it commands to stay quietly in the house and not make a
dazzling display. Rather this can only be referring to the Prophet’s wives.



Sincerely,

Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com



———————————————–



From: Zain *********

To: admin[at]ahlelbayt.com



In verse 33:33, the Quran switches
tenses and changes from feminine form to masculine form. This clearly means
that the group being referred to has changed and that it is not being addressed
to the Prophet’s wives any more. Allah switched tenses which is His way of
making it obvious that the special position of Ahlel Bayt is not for the
Prophet’s wives.



Response From AhlelBayt.com Admin



Dear Brother Zain,



Thank you for writing to us. May Allah
guide you and guide us both to the Straight Path.



We would like to proclaim at the outset
that if Allah wished to exclude the Prophet’s wives from Ahlel Bayt, nothing
prevented Him from saying this in the Quran; nobody–not even the supposedly
“evil Sahabah”–could force Allah to reveal the Verse of Purification in the
middle of the commands to the Prophet’s wives.



The term “Ahl” is masculine, no matter
if it is referring to men or women. When an Arab refers to a man’s Ahlel Bayt
and by this he means his wives, he will still make use of the masculine form,
because Ahlel Bayt is a masculine construction even though it refers to the
wives. Ahlel Bayt cannot be used in the feminine, simply speaking from a
grammatical standpoint. So we should not be surprised when Allah uses the masculine
term for Ahlel Bayt. If, for example, this website were in Arabic, then we
would use the masculine form for Ahlel Bayt even if we were only referring to
the Prophet’s wives. If you were to tell an Arab man to bring his wives to your
house, you would say “please bring your Ahlel Bayt” and this would be said in
the masculine tense despite the fact that you are referring to his wives. It is
considered rude in Arab-Islamic culture to ask a man “how is your wife” and
instead the more culturally appropriate question is: “how is your Ahlel Bayt?”
It is the polite way to refer to a man’s wives, and indeed, any time you refer
to a man’s Ahlel Bayt, the masculine form is used. This is the Arabic language,
and only an ignoramus and non-Arabic speaker would claim otherwise.



The verse was revealed to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and was referring to his wives, and thus the term Ahlel Bayt
was used, in reference to the Prophet and his wives, thereby necessitating the
usage of the collective masculine tense. If there is even one male in a group
of females, then the collective masculine tense becomes necessary. It is
impossible to exclude the Prophet’s wives from this verse because it is
addressed to them.



To completely end any possible confusion
on this matter, we shall provide proof from the Quran itself. Ahlel Bayt is
used another time in the Quran and again this time to refer to the wives, using
the collective masculine tense:



“She said:
O wonder! shall I bear a son when I am an extremely old woman and this my
husband an extremely old man? Most surely this is a wonderful thing. They said:
Do you wonder at Allahs decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings on you, o
you Ahlel Bayt
(People of the House)! for He is indeed worthy of all
praise, full of all glory!” (Quran, 11:72-73)



The transliteration reads: “Qâlat Yâ WaylatâA’alidu Wa Anâ `Ajûzun Wa Hadhâ Ba`lî
Shaykhâan Inna Hâdhâ Lashayun `Ajîbun. Qâlû Ata`jabîna Min Amri Allâhi Ramatu
Allâhi Wa Barakâtuhu `Alaykum Ahlul-Bayt-i Innahu amîdun Majîdun.”
(Quran, 11:72-73)



In this verse of the Quran, the
masculine form is being used for Ahlel Bayt even though the Ahlel Bayt in
question is only one single woman. Again, this is the norm of the Arabic
language, and indeed this is why the classical Shia scholars never made this
argument about tense switching since to an Arab, it makes no sense whatsoever.



If Allah was purposefully switching
tenses and this so clearly showed Allah’s intention, why then do the Shia
Ulema–-as shown by Al-Islam.org–-argue that there had been Tahreef bit Tarteeb
(i.e. tampering in the order of verses) of the Quran? How was Allah
purposefully switching tenses when it was supposedly the Sahabah who
manipulated the Quran’s order and it was they who decided the order, not Allah?
This, to us, does not make any logical sense. How can the Shia further two
contradictory claims, on the one hand claiming that the Sahabah may have
purposefully placed the purification verse in the middle of the verses to the
Prophet’s wives, and on the other hand claiming that this was Allah who was
purposefully switching tenses to prove some point?



Furthermore, we’d like to state that
Allah has mentioned it many times in the Quran that it is a Book of clear
guidance, and that it is written in an easily understandable form. Allah
Almighty says in the Quran: “These are the signs of the
clear book.” (12:1) How clear is the Quran if an unbiased reader will
think that it is the Prophet’s wives who are being referred to but in reality
it is supposed to be Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه)? What prevented Allah from simply ending
this confusion and instead clearly saying “O cousin of the Prophet and his
family” instead of “O wives of the Prophet?” Why this confusion? Why did Allah
place this verse of purification in the middle of commands directed towards the
Prophet’s wives? Wouldn’t this mean that this is far from a clear book but
rather it is a cryptic and confusing book?



Brother, you should read the Quran with
an open mind and a receptive heart, without manipulating verses to mean what
you want them to mean. Before and after Allah talks about being pure and
spotless, the Quran is addressing the Prophet’s wives. Even after the pure and
spotless part, Allah continues by saying “and recite
what is rehearsed to you in your homes…” This is still referring to the
wives of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) since it is telling them to recite the
Quran in their homes, not in the Masjid like men do. The entire verse 33:32-34
was revealed to caution the Prophet’s wives to stay inside their homes so that
Allah could keep them pure and spotless. Why is it that before and after the
pure and spotless part, the Shia say these refer to the Prophet’s wives? How
come all of the Quran’s warnings refer to the Prophet’s wives, but any praise about
being pure and spotless automatically belongs to Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه)?
Is this really a fair reading of the Quran?



Indeed, certain Shia Tafseer of the
Quran say that virtually every praise in the Quran is given to Ali (رضّى الله عنه),
and every condemnation to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and Umar (رضّى
الله عنه
). This is not a
fair and balanced way to read the Quran, but rather it is a manipulation of the
Word of Allah. If Allah wanted to condemn Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and
Umar (رضّى الله عنه) in the Quran, then nothing prevented Him from mentioning their
names like He mentioned Abu Lahab’s name. If Allah wanted to praise Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
in the Quran, then nothing prevented Him from mentioning him as the “cousin of
the Prophet” like Allah mentioned the Prophet’s wives. We cannot manipulate the
speech of Allah to suit our own desires.



Perhaps the greatest manipulation of all
is to say that this verse was revealed in reference to the Infallible Imams;
where does Allah say any of this? Instead, He says “O wives of the Prophet.”
What could prevent a Bahai from claiming that the verse is actually addressing
Bahaiullah instead of the Prophet’s wives? We do not mean to be insulting or
callous, but we need our Shia brothers to understand how the Ayatollahs’
interpretations are highly suspect.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

Half Hadith-ing (Zaid ibn Arqam)
 

 



From:
Zain ********

To: admin[at]ahlelbayt.com



The following verse in the Quran
declares that the Ahlel Bayt have become infallible: “And
Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt
(People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.”



The Prophet’s wives are not part of
Ahlel Bayt. This is mentioned in your Sahih Muslim, narrated by Zaid ibn Arqam.
Please see Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith-5923.



Response From: AhlelBayt.com Admin



Dear Zain,



Thank you for writing to us.



We are afraid that you are doing
something we like to call “Half Hadith-ing.” What do we mean by this? We mean
that you are only posting half of a Hadith, much like you only posted half of
the Quranic verse. This is not the proper way to read the Quran or the Hadith
and can lead to misinterpretations and misconceptions.



You posted verse 33:33 of the Quran, but
only half of it. Let us look at the rest of it:



“O wives of the Prophet! You
are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not
soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a
good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display,
like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and
give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes
to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the
House), and to make you pure and spotless. And recite what is rehearsed to you
in your homes, of the Signs of Allah and His Wisdom: for Allah understands the
finest mysteries and is well-acquainted (with them).” (Quran,
33:32-34)



When we post the entire verse, numerous
things become clear among which is the fact that the verse, in fact, is
addressed to the Prophet’s wives (رضّى الله عنهم)!



Similar clarifications become apparent
if we read the entire narration of Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى
الله عنه
), namely what
comes before and after it. If we do so we shall see that Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه)
categorically declares that the Prophet’s wives are most definitely part of the
Ahlel Bayt.



You have asked us to look at Sahih
Muslim, Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith-5923. We will now kindly ask you to
read what comes right before it, namely Hadith-5920, 5921, and 5922.
All of these are part of the same narration and event as Hadith-5923. Hadiths
5921, 5922, and 5923 are all abridged versions of Hadith 5920, which is
the entire Hadith. For example, Hadith 5922 simply says:



“This hadith [5920] has been
transmitted on the authority of Abu Hayyan but with this addition: ‘The Book of
Allah contains right guidance, the light, and whoever adheres to it and holds
it fast, he is upon right guidance and whosoever deviates from it goes
astray.’”



This means that Hadith 5922 cannot stand
alone without Hadith 5920, which is the entire Hadith, whereas Hadiths 5921,
5922, and 5923 are abridged versions with minor additions and the words of
additional narrators.



In fact, it is stated in Hadith 5923
(the one often quoted by Shia) that it cannot stand alone without Hadith 5920.
Notice the bolded part below:



Yazid b. Hayyan reported: We
went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him: “You have found goodness (for you
had the honour) to live in the company of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon
him) and offered prayer behind him…”, and the rest of the Hadith is the same
[as Hadith 5920] but with this variation of wording
that he said…



(Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Chapter 4,
Hadith 5923)



So we see that Hadith 5923 (as quoted by
the Shia) cannot stand alone without the un-abridged version of Hadith 5920.



Let us now look at Hadith 5920 which is
the un-abridged version:



“He (Husain) said to Zaid: ‘Who are the members of his household?
Aren’t his wives the members of his family?’ Thereupon he said: ‘His wives are
the members of his family but here the members of his family are those for whom
acceptance of Zakat is forbidden.’
And he said: ‘Who are they?’ Thereupon
he said: ‘Ali and the offspring of Ali, Aqil and the offspring of Aqil and the
offspring of Jafar and the offspring of Abbas.’ Husain said: ‘These are those
for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden?’ Zaid said: ‘Yes.’”



(Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Chapter 4,
Hadith 5920)



In perhaps the clearest version of this
Hadith, Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) says:



“His wives are among
the people of his household, but the people of his household who are forbidden
to receive sadaqah (charity) after his death are the family of ‘Ali, the family
of ‘Aqeel, the family of Ja’far and the family of ‘Abbaas. All of these are
forbidden to receive sadaqah.”



So of course the Prophet’s wives are
part of the Prophetic family, but Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى
الله عنه
) was simply
talking about those members of the family who were forbidden Zakat. Here he was
only talking about a specific sub-group within Ahlel Bayt. This is why he said
“his wives are the members of his family but here the members of his family
are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden.”



An example of this is if a dying woman
tells her friend: “Please take care of my children after I am dead.” The friend
replies: “You have five children–two of them are already married. Do you mean
them too?” Then, the dying woman responds: “No, they will be taken care of by
their husbands, so I am only (here) talking about the three children of mine
who are not married.” This does not mean that the two married children are not
still part of her family, but all it means is that she is right now
specifically worried about those members of her family who will have no means
of support. Likewise, in the Hadith narrated by Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه),
a group of Muslim soldiers had criticized Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) and the Prophet
(صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) reprimanded these men and warned them to take care of his
Ahlel Bayt (i.e. referring to Ali who was an honorary member of the Ahlel
Bayt). To this, the people asked: But doesn’t Ahlel Bayt equal wives? And to
this, Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) made the clarification that here
the Ahlel Bayt was in regards to those parts of the Ahlel Bayt who could not
recieve Zakat: the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) was about to die
and he worried about those parts of his family who would not have the luxury of
being supported by Zakat. This is similar to the analogy of the dying woman:
there is more concern for those members of the family who have no other source
of financial support.



This Hadith narrated by Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه)
is also narrated in Musnad Ahmad (Hadith no. 18464). Hence, there should be
absolutely no confusion on this issue since we can find this same narration in
more than one book. In Musnad Ahmad (Hadith no. 18464), Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه)
says:



“His wives are the members of
his family but here the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of
Zakat is forbidden.”
(Ahmad, Hadith no. 18464)



Zaid (رضّى
الله عنه
) says “His wives are among the people of his household.” He
further emphasized: “His spouses are a fiber
of his household.”



Furthermore, since when has Zaid ibn
Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) turned into the authorative source of the Islamic belief
system? Since when has the word of Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى
الله عنه
) become superior
to the speech of Allah, namely verse 33:32-34 in which Allah Almighty addresses
the Prophet’s wives as Ahlel Bayt? Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى
الله عنه
) was not even
narrating the word of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
) when he was
conjecturing on who is and who is not part of the Ahlel Bayt; rather, he was
speaking of his own accord.



Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه)
said in the same narration that along with Ali (رضّى
الله عنه
) and his family
there are other families included in the Prophetic household, including the
family of Aqil (رضّى الله عنه), the offspring of Jafar (رضّى الله عنه),
and the offspring of Abbas (رضّى الله عنه). It is our understanding that the Shia do
not accept these individuals and their offspring as part of the Ahlel Bayt. So
then how can this Hadith be used as proof for the Shia? With this logic, it may
seem that the verse 33:33 was actually revealed to all of these families.
Contrary to the expectations of many Shia, this Hadith actually helps elucidate
the status of the wives of the Prophet (رضّى الله
عنهم
) as part of the Ahlel
Bayt and helps discredit the idea that they are somehow distinct from the Ahlel
Bayt.



The same Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه)
says in the preceeding part of Sahih Muslim:



“I have grown old and have
almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered
in connection with Allah’s Messenger.”



How then can we take this Hadith, appear
to change its meaning, and place it above the Word of Allah in the Quran in
which He specifically addresses the Prophet’s wives (رضّى الله عنهم) as
Ahlel Bayt. Not a million Hadith or Tafseer or Fatawa could change this fact.



Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) was
only talking about that portion of the Prophetic family which could not accept
Zakat. The reason why the wives were exempted from this rule is also stated by
Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) in the very same Hadith. He said that a
wife can be divorced and “she goes back to her parents
and to her people.” At this point in time, she is no longer cared for by
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Let us remember that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was given special money in the form of the Khums, or the
one-fifth tax of which a part was reserved for the family of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). It would thus not be necessary for the Prophet’s family to
need Zakat since they were always provided for by the state. (The Zakat is
considered the filth of the Muslim masses [through the removal of which one’s
wealth is purified] not befitting the Prophetic Family, whereas the Khums is
considered an honor befitting the Prophetic Household.) However, if a wife
divorces, then she is no longer given this Khums nor is she provided for by the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), and therefore she may need the Zakat if
she has no other support.



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
did divorce some of his wives. These wives ceased being part of Ahlel Bayt upon
divorce, and thus the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) stopped providing
for them financially. As such, the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
could not promise their financial well-being and they may even need Zakat to
maintain themselves as single divorced women. Furthermore, after the Prophet’s
death, his widows were forbidden to re-marry (this injunction is in the Quran).
Thus, it would be unfair to them to prohibit them from Zakat since they have no
husband to care for them. Obviously, the option of Zakat in dire need could
then not be taken away from them.



It should be noted that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) never divorced Aisha (رضّى الله
عنها
) or Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها).
This should be something for our Shia brothers to ponder upon since it is a
testament to how much the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
) loved these
women and how loyal he was to them–the same women that the Shia Ayatollahs
slander.



Let us read what Sunni Path has to say:



SunniPath.com says



Question:



Can
you please explain this following hadith found in Muslim about ahlul bayt. Why
does the narrator state that the our mothers are not part of ahlul bayt?
Clearly this is the opinion of the narrator and not what the Prophet (s) but
why did Imam Muslim add this hadith to his collection? However i wanted to know
if you could please explain this hadith and why does the narrator state that
our mothers are not part of Ahlul Bayt.



Sahih
Muslim



Book
031, Number 5923:



Answer:



Salamu
‘Alaykum wa Rahmatullah



I
pray this finds you in the best of health and Iman. May Allah grant you all
good in this life and the next.



In
order to answer your question, I will address the issue in two parts.



[1]
Regarding why Imam Muslim mentioned this narration in his collection, it was to
show the variant wordings and chains of the hadith. It was not uncommon for the
scholars of hadith to mention these variations.



Amongst
the reasons for this was to compare the different texts (mutun) of the same
hadith in order to find possible discrepancies, hidden defects, and also due to
the principle that separate chains count as separate ahadith regardless of
whether the actual text of the narration is the same.



Since
Imam Muslim was primarily interested in hadith and its chains (unlike his
teacher Bukhari who was more interested in the fiqh aspect of hadith) one will
see that Imam Muslim adduces, under a given chapter-title, all the hadith on
that patricular issue/event - sometimes even stating preferences and strengths
of individual chains.



[2]
Secondly, regarding whether the wives of the Prophet (May Allah be pleased with
them all) are part of the Ahly al Bayt then indeed they are. The primary
evidence for this is the Qur’anic verse 33:33



However,
the question arises: Why then did Sayyidina Zayd ibn Arqam (Allah be pleased
with him) state that the wives were not included?



To
understand this one must understand the context under which the term Ahly al
Bayt was being employed. The context of this narration is in regards to those
for whom zakat is forbidden. This relates to a very specific, textually-defined
relationship.



Under
this condition (i.e. those for whom zakat is forbidden) the wives will not be
included since they are lawfully entitled to zakat according to the consensus
of the scholars as Ibn Hajar states in his Fath al Bari. This is clearly
evident from the narration of Sayyidina Zayd, which Imam Muslim cites prior to
the one being discussed, wherein he states:



قال نساؤه من أهل بيته ولكن أهل بيته من حرم الصدقة



“He
(Zayd) said, ‘His wives are from his house (ahl baytihi) but the members of his
house [in this context] are those for whom charity is forbidden.”



Imam
Nawawi, commenting on this narration states that in terms of standing, respect,
rights and high regard preached by the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him
peace) towards his family, the wives do indeed enter . However, they do not
enter into those for whom zakat is forbidden.



Further,
as Sayyidi Gibril Haddad stated, one should know that it is one of the
Prophetic characteristics that the wives that survived him are his wives
forever as he himself said to Umm Salama when she asked to be under the mantle:
“Are you not pleased to be my wife here and in the hereafter?” They cannot
remarry nor inherit from him, so the analogy drawn by Sayyidina Zayd is
inapplicable to them except for the ruling of zakat.



Thus,
to conclude, the wives are part of the Ahly al Bayt. There are numerous
narrations to attest to this such as the one narrated by Imam Bukhari from Anas
ibn Malik wherein the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) entered
upon Sayyidah A’isha and greeted her “Peace be upon you People of my house”
(assalamu ‘alaykum ahly bayti). Sayyidina Zayd (Allah be pleased with him) does
not negate this but merely states that those for whom zakat is forbidden are a
more specific group excluding the wives.



And
Allah knows best

Salman Ahmad Younas



Approved
by Faraz Rabbani





We shall take the opportunity to quote
another Hadith in Sahih Bukhari in which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
himself refers to Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) as being Ahlel Bayt. Therefore, even if
we accepted the Shia proposition that Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه)
denied that the Prophet’s wives were Ahlel Bayt, then his opinion would have to
be rejected because nobody’s word can be taken above that of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). In Sahih Bukhari, we see a narration in which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself addresses Aisha (رضّى الله
عنها
) as part of Ahlel
Bayt:



Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number
316



Narrated Anas:



A banquet of bread and meat
was held on the occasion of the marriage of the Prophet to Zainab bint Jahsh. I
was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), and so the people started
coming (in groups). They would eat and then leave. Another batch would come,
eat and leave. So I kept on inviting the people till I found nobody to invite.



Then I said, “O Allah’s
Prophet! I do not find anybody to invite.”



He (the Prophet) said, “Carry
away the remaining food.” Then a batch of three persons stayed in the house
chatting. The Prophet left and went towards the dwelling place of Aisha and
said, “Peace and Allah’s Mercy be on you, Ya Ahlel Bayt (O the people of the
house)!”



She replied, “Peace and the
mercy of Allah be on you too. How did you find your wife? May Allah bless you.”



Then he went to the dwelling
places of all his other wives and said to them the same as he said to Aisha and
they said to him the same as Aisha had said to him.



Therefore, we hope it becomes apparent
that the claim that Sunni Hadith exclude the Prophet’s wives (رضّى الله عنهم)
from Ahlel Bayt is incorrect.



In conclusion, the Shia
who use this Hadith of Zaid ibn Arqam (رضّى الله
عنه
) to “prove” their
claims are doing what we like to call “Half Hadith-ing.” You will notice this
same approach taken by the Shia with certain verses of the Quran as well. As a
side-note, it should be asked: why are the Shia so adamant in denying the
Prophet’s wives the position of Ahlel Bayt? Do they really hate the beloved of
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) so much? These are the women that the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was intimate with; not a single person
alive today can claim this honor. So why this undying hatred for the women in
the Prophet’s life? Why the need to go to such great lengths to misinterpret
seemingly straight-forward verses in the Quran?



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


The Status of Ahlel Bayt



 



All
Muslims believe in respecting the Ahlel Bayt. However, many Shia espouse a
viewpoint that goes against the Islamic concepts of egalitarianism and is a
rejection of Quranic exhortations. The Shia believe that the Prophet’s
descendants will be automatically granted a high rank and status based on their
familial connection to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه
وآله وسلّم
). They believe
that nobody can attain the rank of these “Syedis” simply because they were not
born to the Prophet’s family, and this is why Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) to
them is forever inferior to Ali (رضّى الله عنه). The Shia say that the only ones who are
allowed to be the Imams and leaders of the Muslims are those who come from the
lineage of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). It seems to us that it would not be an
exaggeration to say that the Shia believe that the Prophet’s descendants are
automatically superior to everyone else based on their lineage.



The reality, however, is that a person’s
lineage and birth has no bearing on his rank and station on earth in the eyes
of Allah. The only criterion which decides a person’s rank and station is a
person’s Taqwa (piety). The Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
spoke well of the Ahlel Bayt and Ahlel Kisa (People of the Cloak) not because
they were related to him, but rather because these people had great Taqwa.
The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) knew them personally and he experienced
their dedication to Islam first-hand. As such, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) could vouch for them. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
also complimented his Sahabah (Companions), the Ansar (Helpers), Muhajiroon
(Immigrants), and many other groups of people. When the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) complimented the Muhajiroon, he did not do so simply because
they were part of a certain Meccan tribe, but rather because they had great Taqwa.
The same holds true for the Ansar, the Sahabah, and anyone else.



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
used Ahlel Bayt as a description to denote that these family members had great Taqwa.
For example, if a person has a very pious uncle, he would say “my uncle has Taqwa;
you should respect my uncle!” This does not mean that he has selected his uncle
simply because he is a biological uncle, but rather because the uncle has Taqwa.
Had his uncle been a sinful and distasteful person then he would have said that
he has no relation to his uncle. Likewise, we are respecting the Ahlel Bayt not
simply because they are related to the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
), but
rather only because they had a great deal of Taqwa.



The Quran repeatedly holds each
individual responsible for his or her own conduct. The actions of one soul
cannot affect another, neither positively nor negatively. To do so would go
against the egalitarian spirit of Islam, and would instead be a reflection of
Jahiliyyah custom in which people thought they would be saved based on their
familial connections as opposed to their Taqwa.



Quran



The Quran declares that on the Day of
Judgement everyone’s familial connections will be cut off: “so now all relations between you have been cut off” (Quran,
6:94)



And then Allah says: “one soul shall not avail another” (Quran, 2:48) And
again: “one soul shall not avail another” (Quran,
2:123)



The Quran categorically states that no
soul shall have an effect on another: “no soul benefits
except from its own work, and none bears the burden of another” (Quran,
6:164)



And again, Allah repeats it “that no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another–And
that man shall have nothing but what he [himself] strives for” (Quran,
5:38-39)



As well as: “that
every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts” (Quran, 6:70)



Allah
says “O mankind! We have created you from a male and a
female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another.
Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has Taqwa
[piety].” (Quran, 49:13)



Hadith



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
declared that people were born inherently equal “except
by piety and good action (Taqwa). Indeed the best among you is the one
with the best character (Taqwa). Listen to me. Did I convey this to you
properly?… Each one of you who is here must convey this to everyone not
present.” (Excerpt from the Prophet’s Last Sermon as in Baihiqi)



Islam came and destroyed this concept of
hereditary rank. The Quran declares that people are created inherently equal
and differ only based on their Taqwa (piety): “Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is he who
is the most righteous of you.” (Quran 49:13)



It is our hope that it has become clear
that the Shia who believe in this are going against the Quran when they think
that the Prophet’s family will be judged by another criterion or by a special
lenience simply because they are the Prophet’s family, or that they will be
automatically exalted based on something other than merit. They argue that Ali
(رضّى الله عنه) had more of a right to the Caliphate than Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه)
because he was related to the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) and the
leadership could only be from a certain lineage of people [a concept not
unfamiliar in the modern day context of the KKK and other discriminatory belief
systems which raise people based on birth to a certain group as opposed to
merit]. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) has condemned this attitude in no
uncertain terms, calling it nothing less than a remnant of the pre-Islamic Time
of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance).



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
said: “There are indeed people who boast of their dead
ancestors; but in the sight of Allah they are more contemptible than the black
beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose. Behold, Allah has removed from
you the arrogance of the Time of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance) with its boast of
ancestral glories. Man is but an Allah-fearing believer or an unfortunate
sinner. All people are the children of Adam, and Adam was created out of dust.”
[At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
said further: “Undoubtedly Allah has removed from you
the pride of arrogance of the age of Jahilliyah (ignorance) and the
glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds. Either believers who
are aware or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam and
Adam was made of clay… If they do not give this up (i.e. pride in ancestors)
Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through
dung.” [Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi]



And
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “The people
of such and such a tribe are not my friends and supporters, rather my friends
and supporters are the pious, no matter where they are.”



.



The
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There is
no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of
a white man over a black man, or of a black man over a white man, except in
terms of Taqwa (piety). The people come from Adam and Adam came from
dust.”



The Prophets and their Families



After all, Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was born of a family who were Mushriks (polythiests) so
how can lineage possibly mean anything? Prophet Nuh (عليه السلام) had a
son who was destined to Hell-Fire and his example is mentioned in the Quran,
showing that not even if a person’s father is a prophet does this mean
anything. Prophet Ibrahim’s father was a Mushrik and Ibrahim (عليه السلام)
will disown him on the Day of Judgement. We see that ties of blood relation
sever and the only real familial connection is through Taqwa. The
Prophet Muhammad’s uncles were blood-related, but do we say that Abu Lahab and
Abu Jahl will get any special privelage because of this?



People should not be accorded special
rights simply because they were born to the right womb. People should be judged
based on their Taqwa, not their birth. Bilal (رضّى الله عنه) was
a slave, born to a slave woman, and today he is remembered as one of the
noblest of Sahabah–despite his “lowly birth.” On the other hand, both Abu Jahl
and Abu Lahab were from the same bloodline as the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم),
and yet they are the two people for whom Allah has promised Hell-fire.



To take it even one step further: today,
there are descendants of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab who are highly religious
Muslims, and will Insha-Allah enter Paradise. Would it be proper and just of
Allah to limit the greatness of such people simply because they come from a
certain stock, and not another? Then why is it that the Shia say such things
against the progeny of Yezid, as if the progeny of Yezid had any say in being
born of his loins!



The point is simple: who a person is
born to should not decide his status in the eyes of Allah or in the religion of
Islam. It should only be one’s Taqwa which dictates a person’s station
and rank. This is why it is discomforting that the Shia trace Imamah via the
Prophet’s bloodline just like a hereditary kingship. Why didn’t Allah Almighty
simply make all the prophets to be like a hereditary kingship? He instead chose
from amongst the people the best of character and the ones with the most
Taqwa. Prophet Musa (عليه السلام) came from people who were slaves, and yet
his rank was raised far above the king of the country, Pharaon. In the words of
Martin Luther King: people should be judged based upon the content of their
character and nothing else. This is what defines a person’s rank on this earth.



The Ayatollahs will oftentimes retort
that Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) asked for his progeny to be leaders.
However, it should be noted that his sons were the ancestors of the entire
Semite race and the only ones alive in the entire region. This argument is
equivalent to saying that Allah chose Prophet Adam’s family (عليه السلام)
and exalted them as leaders, and then using this as evidence against the idea
that Allah judges only upon merit. Furthermore, we should all make du’a that
our progeny is pious; this in no way means that we are saying our progeny is
superior to the progeny of other people.



Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
is not the best because of his birth, but only because he was the best in Taqwa.
And the Ahlel Bayt and Ahlel Kisa were complimented by the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) not because of their birth but because the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) knew of their great Taqwa. Why should the Prophet’s
family be exalted just by virtue of being his family? Should they not be
exalted for their righteousness, their piety, and their Taqwa?



And even if we take the view that the
family of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) should be exalted above all others, then
why is one section preferred above all others? Uthman’s father (رضّى الله عنه)
was the Prophet’s second cousin, making Uthman (رضّى
الله عنه
) a nephew of the
Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). If the lineage of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is to be exalted above all others, then why is Uthman’s side
of the family (رضّى الله عنه) neglected in this adulation? If this is countered by the fact
that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was the husband of Fatima (رضّى
الله عنها
), the daughter
of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), then what about Uthman (رضّى الله عنه)?
The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) gave Uthman (رضّى
الله عنه
) two of his
daughters in marriage. Does that not mean that Uthman’s lineage (رضّى الله عنه)
has twice the right to be exalted above Ali’s lineage (رضّى الله عنه)?
No, this is contrary to the egalitarian spirit of Islam. Birthright does
not mean anything. Only Taqwa does.



Syedi



Today, so many Shia claim to be “Syedi.”
How exactly does one inherit the title of Syed? Just because the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) called one person to be Syed, this does not mean that all his
progeny magically become Syed as well. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
gave the title of Siddeeq to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله
عنه
); does this mean that
all of his progeny are also magically Siddeeq (i.e. truthful)? A person does
not inherit such qualities or titles, but rather he/she must work for them and
strive for them with their own actions and deeds.



Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (رحمه الله)
says:



“The
idea that there are “sayyids” or “walis” (“saints”) whom Allaah has singled out
from among mankind for some favour, or that they have a status which other
people do not share, is an idea which is based on the Magian belief that Allaah
is “incarnated” in people He chooses from among mankind. The Persians used to
believe this of their kings (Chosroes), and that this spirit moved from one
king to another, through his descendents. This Magian (Zoroastrian) idea spread
to the Muslims via the Raafidi Shi’ah, whose origins are Magian – so this idea
was introduced to the Muslims. This idea says that Allaah selects some of
mankind, to the exclusion of others, for this status, which is the status of
imaamah and wilaayah. So they believe in this idea with regard to ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib
and his descendents, and they add other positions to that, such as sayyid…They
said that as this sayyid or wali has this position and status, then they know
better what is in our best interests, so we should entrust our affairs to them,
because they are better than us, and so they are more entitled…There can be no
doubt that this is obviously a misguided notion.”



And perhaps the greatest irony of all is
the fact that many of the people who claim to be “Syedi” today are of Iranian
or Pakistani ethnicity. How can these people realistically claim descent from
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) who was Arab? Their skin is not the same
color as the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), their facial structure is from another
race altogether, and even their DNA would attest to the fact that they are
anything but descendants of the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
)! And why
is it that we find very few people in Arabia who claim to be Syedi, and yet
every third person claims this rank in Iran and Pakistan?



The unfortunate truth is that these
Syedis are misguided. The reasoning is simply that the position of “Syed” is
respected in these lands and “being a Syedi” is in vogue, while anybody can
easily claim to be Syedi. We find that in Iran there are many Ayatollahs who
claim to be Syedi and thus they are exalted because of this. In Pakistan, many
of the “saints” claim to be Syedi and they are thus exalted by the incredulous
people for this. Historically, the Shia leaders have exploited the masses by
collecting Khums (religious tax) from their followers, all because they are “Syedi.”
This is no doubt exploiting the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) and his
family, all for materialistic gain.



It would be more accurate to say that
Iranians are the descendants of fire-worshippers and Pakistanis are descendants
of Hindu pagans. Likewise, most Arabs are the descendants of idol-worshippers,
including the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself. The writer of this article is
most likely the descendant of a Hindu pagan, but he does not think that Allah
would judge him any differently had he been born to another lineage!



Conclusion



Indeed, to cogitate that the Ahlel Bayt
or Ahlel Kisa are special because of their familial connection as opposed to
their Taqwa is to, in fact, diminish the status of the Ahlel Bayt.



To conclude, yes we must respect the
Ahlel Bayt and Ahlel Kisa. But this is not because they are born of a certain
lineage, but rather because they had a great deal of Taqwa. We reject
all those who claim to be superior based on their lineage.



Furthermore, anyone who is pious and a
believer becomes family to the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
). Allah
says in the Quran: “The believers are nothing else than
brothers.” (Quran, 49:10) In Islam, family is based not on blood but
rather on faith. We are brothers and sisters in the Deen, and if our
blood-relatives are of another faith, then they are not family in the eyes of
Islam; faith is the marker for who is part of our family. Those who convert to
Islam and who are pious are adopted into the Muslim family.



The evidence for this can be seen by the
fact that even the supposedly lowly slaves were declared to be Ahlel Bayt. It
was narrated that Mihraan, the freed slave of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم),
said: the Messenger of Allah said: “We are the family
of Muhammad… the freed slave of a people is one of them.” (Narrated by
Ahmad, no. 15152).



Anyone who is pious is included in the
Ahl of Islam, the brotherhood and sisterhood of the Ummah. It is transmitted by
at-Tabarani and al-Hakim that in one incident some people spoke very lowly
about Salman al-Farsi. They spoke of the inferiority of Salman’s Persian
ethnicity, and upon hearing this the Messenger of Allah (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
declared, “Salman is from us, the Ahlel Bayt.” And
with that did the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) destroy the
Jahiliyyah concepts of discrimination based on one’s birth. Suddenly, the
Persian Kisra (King) became the most despicable whereas the lowly Muslim slave
Bilal (رضّى الله عنه) became one of the highest in rank.



It was not the intent of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to make a dynasty of rulers after him, nor did he mention this
in any authentic report. On the contrary, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
stated that the most eligible to claim a right to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) are the most pious, regardless of their descent or the place
they lived in.



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
turned to Medinah and said: “Those Ahlel Bayt of mine
think that they have the most right (to me) and it is not like this. Rather
those who have the most right to me from amongst you are the pious, whoever
they are and wherever they are.” [Narrated by Ibn Abi Asim 2/689 and
Al-Tabarani 20/121]



In another Hadith, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) condemns people of the future who would lay claim to power
based on familial descent from the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
): “a man from the people of my house, who will assert that he
belongs to me, whereas he does not, for my friends are only the God-fearing.” [Narrated
by Abu Dawuud # 4230 and Ahmad # 5892 and others]



The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)
has shown that the true relationship to him is that of piety and religion and
not of biological descent. Had the Prophet (صلّى
الله عليه وآله وسلّم
)
indeed set a dynasty of rulers from his offspring, this would have cast doubt
to the Prophet’s truthfulness and sincerity in conveying Allah’s word and then
the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) would have been like other kings who were
after this Dunya (materialistic world) and founded kingdoms with dynasties from
their offspring. Indeed, the Prophet (صلّى الله
عليه وآله وسلّم
) even
forbade his progeny from inheriting wealth from him!



It is outside of our capabilities and
inclinations to force people to leave concepts which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself condemned in the strongest of manner, but it should be
noted, however, that this method of exaltation will not be seen as something
praiseworthy by the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله
وسلّم
) or his family, but
rather they will view it as an abomination, much like a white person of good
moral standards would find it offensive if someone else declared him superior
simply because he was white. Most white people look down on Neo-Nazis, despite
the fact that the Neo-Nazis are “praising” the white race. Likewise, the
Prophet’s lineage will look down on those Shia who are “praising” them in such
an exaggerated manner and based on criteria other than their merit.



Certain people may rationalize this
discrimination by saying “Allah is God and God can do anything.” However, it is
not God who is discriminating. Allah is clear in the Quran, in which He
definitively states that Taqwa is the only criterion. If individuals decide
to engage in discrimination based on birthright, then they should do it on
their own accord and stop justifying it using Allah as an excuse. Thus, in our
view it is unacceptable that the Shia reject the first Caliph on the basis of
his lineage, and it is this bigotry that the Shia faith is based upon. It may
be the case that this notion of discrimination was propagated by Abdullah ibn
Saba and the Saba’ites, the founders of the Shia movement; ibn Saba was Jewish
and he may well have carried over the notion of a chosen group of people, a
concept of Judaism. This idea would then have been fostered by the Persian
converts to Shi’ism who often came from Magian backgrounds.



We ask Allah to shower His Infinite
blessings upon the Ahlel Bayt, the Ahlel Kisa, the Sahabah, the Muhajiroon, the
Ansar, and the believing Muslims!



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Love for Ahlel Bayt and Sahabah

 

 

 

The

Ahlel Bayt refers to the family of the Prophet (صلّى

الله عليه وآله وسلّم). The

Sahabah refers to the friends of the Prophet (صلّى

الله عليه وآله وسلّم). The

Shia claim to love the Ahlel Bayt only, and hate the Sahabah. The Nasibis, on

the other hand, love the Sahabah but hate the Ahlel Bayt. Both groups are

incorrect in their views. The correct position is to love both the Ahlel Bayt

(Prophet’s family) and the Sahabah (Prophet’s friends).

 

Islam-qa.com says

 

“Shaykh

Saalih al-Fawzaan said:

 

The

way of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah is to love the family (ahl al-bayt) of the

Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

 

The

Naasibis love the Sahaabah but hate the family of the Prophet (peace and

blessings of Allaah be upon him), hence they were called Naasibis because they

set themselves up (nasb) as enemies of the family of the Prophet (peace and

blessings of Allaah be upon him).

 

The

Raafidis [the Shia] are the opposite: they love the Prophet’s family (ahl

al-bayt) – or so they claim, but they hate the Sahaabah, whom they curse,

denounce as kaafirs and criticize.

 

Shaykh

al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, explaining the ‘aqeedah of Ahl al-Sunnah

wa’l-Jamaa’ah: They (i.e., the Sunnis) love the people of the household of the

Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him); they regard

them with love and loyalty, and they heed the command of the Messenger of

Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning them… but they

reject the way of the Raafidis [the Shia] who hate the Sahaabah and slander

them, and they reject the way of the Naasibis who insult Ahl al-Bayt in words

and deed…

 

Al-‘Aqeedah

al-Waasitiyyah, Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 3/154.

 

Undoubtedly

rebelling and hating the Ahl al-Bayt and other Sahaabah is a serious kind of

bid’ah (innovation) that implies slandering this religion which was transmitted

to us via the Sahaabah, the Ahl al-Bayt and others.

 

Shaykh

al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: “With regard to Ahl al-Sunnah, they regard as

friends all the believers. When they speak it is on the basis of knowledge and

fairness, unlike those who are ignorant or follow their whims and desires; they

reject the way of both the Raafidis [the Shia] and the Naasibis and they hold

all of the early generations in high esteem, and they recognize status and

virtue of the Sahaabah and respect the rights of Ahl al-Bayt as prescribed by

Allaah…”

 

Among

the books which speak of the Naasibis and refute them and their ideas, and

discussed those who went to the other extreme, namely the Raafidis [the Shia],

is Manhaaj al-Sunnah by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah. You can refer to this

book or some of its abridged editions.

 

 

Logically, this is the only position

that makes sense (i.e. to love both the Prophet’s family and friends). It would

obviously anger the Prophet if we insulted his family or his friends, and this

goes for any human being alive. Which of us today would accept that a person

would attack our family or our friends? Even the least of us would defend our

family and friends.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


How the Shia Abandoned the Ahlel Bayt



 



When
the Prophet was alive, the disbelievers and hypocrites tried their utmost to
hurt him and one of the methods they used to do this was to target those close
to him (i.e. his family). One such famous incident is the event of Al-Ifk, in
which they accused the Prophet’s wife of adultery. It was such attacks on his
family members that prompted the Prophet to warn again and again about honoring
his family. This warning was especially in regards to the females in his
family, as it is well-known that Arabs would debase the women in a man’s family
as a means to hurt the man himself. The women in a man’s life are his sensitive
spot; a man will be less hurt about someone insulting his own honor and more
hurt about someone insulting the honor of his wife.



The sayings of the Prophet made it clear
that it was important to protect the honor of the Ahlel Bayt, especially the
female members of his household. There were even Quranic injunctions in regards
to honoring the Prophet’s wives, warning the Muslims to respect them by not
entering the Prophet’s house and looking at them or even annoying them,
referring to them as the Mothers of the Believers. The intensity with which the
Quran and Hadith advocated the protection of the Prophetic Household prompted
certain evil elements to devise new ways of harming Ahlel Bayt as a means to
get at the Prophet of Islam. It was then that the founders of the Shia movement
decided that the best way to turn the Muslims against the Prophetic Household
(i.e. the Ahlel Bayt) was to change the very meaning of the word “Ahlel Bayt”
in the eyes of the masses. So they went about this task, and they began to say
that the Prophet’s wives were not part of the Ahlel Bayt and neither were three
of his daughters.



So it was that the Shia masses began
cursing the Prophet’s family members (i.e. his wives) and even denying the
existence of his daughters, all in the name of honoring the Ahlel Bayt. The
irony of this should not be lost on anybody. How is it that the imaginary Dajjal
Muhammad ibn Hasan al-Askari (the so-called Hidden Imam) was a part of the
Prophetic Household, whereas the people who actually lived in the Prophet’s
house were cursed as traitors, including Aisha and Hafsa? How long can this
farce continue? How long can the Shia masses operate under the silly assumption
that they are the lovers of Ahlel Bayt, when they are the ones who curse
members within the Ahlel Bayt?



The Shia say they follow the Sunnah as
transmitted through the Ahlel Bayt. What kind of bold-faced lie is this? The
Prophet’s wives were part of the Prophet’s family, and yet the Shia reject all
of the Hadith narrated by them, declaring them to be fabricators of Hadith! It
could be said that Abdullah Ibn Saba–the founder of Shi’ism–is laughing in his
grave right now because he duped such a large portion of the Muslims, getting
them to curse the very Ahlel Bayt that they claim to revere. Ibn Saba was a
Jewish Rabbi who pretended to convert to Islam in order to start this deviant
sect with the express intent of not only dividing the Ummah but to hurt the
Prophet and his family specifically. He knew that it would be impossible for
him to call the people towards harming the Ahlel Bayt, so he decided to change
the meaning of the word so that his deviant followers would end up cursing the
real members of Ahlel Bayt, all in the name of the Ahlel Bayt. What better
methodology to bring someone’s family down than to pit some members of that
family against others?



We ask Allah to send His Blessings down
upon all of the Prophet’s wives, as well as all the 11 Imams.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 


Who are the Ahlel Bayt?



 



Question:



Who are the Ahlel Bayt?



Answer:



Primarily, the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel
Bayt. After them, there are others who were also called that, but it should be
remembered that the ones with the most right to be called Ahlel Bayt are first
and foremost the Prophet’s wives.



Follow-up
Question:



Can you please clarify: who else is a
part of the Ahlel Bayt?



Answer:



The Ahlel Bayt refers to the Prophet’s
family. Yes, it is true that the Prophet’s family are of an exalted status.
However, the Shia opinion of who is Ahlel Bayt is discriminatory and ethically
wrong. The rightly guided Ahlus Sunnah holds that the Ahlel Bayt does indeed
refer to the Prophet’s family, but that the Prophet’s family includes all pious
Muslims; the reason for this is that relations are based on Taqwa (piety) in
the Islamic belief, not on blood. It was based on this fact that the Prophet
referred to Salman al-Farsi as being Ahlel Bayt, even though Salman was Persian
in ethnicity and completely unrelated to the Prophet by blood.



Anyone who is pious is part of the Ahlel
Bayt; some of these people were specifically mentioned to be part of this
group. These include:



1. The Prophet’s wives

2. The Prophet’s children

3. The Prophet’s freed slaves

4. Ahlel Kisa (People of the Cloak, i.e. Ali ibn Abi Talib’s family)

5. The family of Aqil

6. The offspring of Jafar

7. The offspring of Abbas

8. Salman al-Farsi

And perhaps some others we may have missed…



However, the Ahlel Bayt is not limited
to these people. Included in the Ahlel Bayt is every God-fearing believer. The
Prophet said:



“Do not come to me with your lineages on
the Day of Resurrection! My Family is every God-fearing believer.”



and



“Every Prophet has a Family and
carriage; my Family and carriage are the Believers.”



An appropriate analogy is the fact that
the Prophet named ten Sahabah specifically by name as being promised Paradise,
but this does not mean that they are the only ones to go to Paradise. Likewise,
the Prophet specifically referred to certain people as being family, but this
does not mean that others are not also part of it.



Islam does not support bigotry,
discrimination, or racism. Instead, Islam is egalitarian and just.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Grand Ayatollah al-Kho’i Says Wife is Part of a Man’s “Ahl”
 

 



Grand
Ayatollah al-Kho’i, the former leader of the Hawzah of the holy city of Najaf,
wrote in his book “Sirat al-Najat” that the wife is a part of a man’s “Ahl”. It
should be noted that “Sirat al-Najat” is a very famous book which is referenced
on Al-Islam.org many times. Is it not clear from this that the Prophet’s wives
are a part of his “Ahl”?



Does this not expose the hypocrisy of
the Shia leaders when they include their own wives in their Ahl, but they then
rip the Prophet’s wives out of his Ahl? This is indeed indicative of the
two-faced attitude of the Shia Ayatollahs, whereby they will never tolerate a
man insulting their own wives, but they themselves will degrade the Prophet’s
wives! Aisha and Hafsa are a part of the Ahlel Bayt, and the Shia leaders lie
when they claim to be the lovers of Ahlel Bayt when in fact they are the
enemies and revilers of the Prophet’s wives (i.e. his Ahlel Bayt). We kindly
ask the Shia laypersons to disassociate themselves from their leaders and to
instead embrace the true lovers of Ahlel Bayt, i.e. the Ahlus Sunnah.



 



 



Q: There is a command to convey the
Haqq (Truth) to one’s “Ahl” as well as to forbid them from the evil things, so
in this command, who is “Ahl”? And is one’s wife included in this, and is this
command (to convey the truth) applicable to one’s wife?



Answer by al-Ko’i: Yes, the wife is
part of the “Ahl”, and this command is in regards to her too. And Allah knows
best.



(source: Sirat al-Najat, by Grand
Ayatollah al-Kho’i, p.426



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×