Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Aabiss_Shakari

Hazrat Ali (as) Versus Shaikhain Before Quran

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(salam)

(bismillah)

Therefore hold fast to that which has been revealed to you; surely you are on the right path. (Surah az-Zukhruf Ayat 43)

Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari reports that after returning from hajjatul wida (the last pilgrimage) the Holy Prophet used to admonish and warn the people to remember and adhere to the command of Allah he conveyed to them at Ghadir Khum . This tradition is also mentioned in Manaqib ibn Maghazali and Fiqh al Shafi-i.

The last portion of verse 43 indicates that to acknowledge Ali as the successor of the Holy Prophet is the only right course.

According to Minhajul Sadiqin Imam Muhammad bin Ali al Baqir and Imam Jafar bin Muhammad as Sadiq said:

"Dhikr is the Quran and we are those about whom the people will be questioned, regarding their duties and obligations unto us."

Verse 24 of Saffat also refers to "questioning".

Ibn Hajar, in his Sawa-iq al Muhriqah Chapter II, has enumerated this verse among the verses that refer to the Ahl ul Bayt and has commented upon it at great length and recorded several traditions in support of his comments. Besides, Al Dayami relates from Abu Sa-id Khudri that the Holy Prophet said that in this verse the expression "they must be questioned" means that they shall be questioned concerning the love of Ali, and Wahidi interprets this verse to mean that they shall be questioned concerning the love of Ali and the Ahl ul Bayt, since Allah commanded His messenger to declare to the people that he did not ask any reward for his preaching except the love of his Ahl ul Bayt.

According to Thalabi the Holy Prophet said:

"At the time of mi-raj when I was among the prophets and the angels, I asked the prophets as to what purpose they were sent into the world. They all replied in one voice: 'For your love and the love of Ali ibn abi Talib'."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

786-92-110

Salam Bros !

I do know you have already dealt with the ansar's garbage on trying to justify the unjustifiable, but just to get your view I wanted to post their picture of the map of the event of ghadir according to sura 12:26

and a witness of her own family bore witness:

gadeer.jpg

The Exact place of GHADIR KHUM is just at the middle distance between Makkah and MADINA according to their Map ! So I thought about the verse of SURA AL BAQARAH

2:143

And thus We have made you a medium (just) nation that you may be the bearers of witness to the people and (that) the Messenger may be a bearer of witness to you; and We did not make that which you would have to be the qiblah but that We might distinguish him who follows the Messenger from him who turns back upon his heels, and this was surely hard except for those whom Allah has guided aright; and Allah was not going to make your faith to be fruitless; most surely Allah is Affectionate, Merciful to the people. (143)

Qiblah : From Prophethood to IMAMAT ?!

And The Verse of those who performs Pilgrimage and returns to their homes by their backs :

2:189

They ask you concerning the new moon (s). Say: They are times appointed for (the benefit of) men, and (for) the pilgrimage; and it is not righteousness that you should enter the houses at their backs, but righteousness is this that one should guard (against evil); and go into the houses by their doors and be careful (of your duty) to Allah, that you may be successful. (189)

Sound like GHADIR is the Just Middle, the Place of the appointment of New "Qiblah" with the 12 Months ( moons ) and 12 ( people of the) House to be enterred by their doors !

They also said :

The meaning of ( Mawla )

Ibn Al-Atheer says that the word (mawal) in the Arabic language could only mean:

rabb = Lord (in sura yussuf we have a Human refered to as Rabb, Why not ALI ???)

malik = owner ( Malik = King and ALI is THE PRINCE of the KINGS OF BELIEVERS, ALMIGHTY GOD AND HOLY PROPHET ref Sura Al Hadid N° 57 )

mun`im = benefactor ( ISN'T ALI THE BENEFACTOR OF THE PROPHET'S MERCY (4:113)) ?

9:61

And there are some of them who molest the Prophet and say: He is one who believes every thing that he hears; say: A hearer of good for you (who) believes in Allah and believes the faithful and a mercy for those of you who believe; and (as for) those who molest the Messenger of Allah, they shall have a painful punishment. (61)

I May Err, but I do Guess that the Best Ear who listens to the words of Allah and the holy prophet is surely the Ear of the Gate of knowledge : IMAM ALI (as), A MERCY FOR THE BELIEVERS ! ALLAHU AALAM.

mu'tiq = liberator ( ISN'T ALI THE LIBERATOR OF THE PROPHET'S UMMA LIKE AT KHAYBAR?)

naser = helper ( ISN'T ALI THE HELPER OF THE PROPHET IN THE BATTLE FIELDS LIKE IN UHUD?)

muheb = lover ( ISN'T ALI THE ONE WHO LOVED THE MUST THE PROPHET TO THE EXTENT OF SACRIFICING HIS LIFE THE NIGHT OF THE HIJRA IN HIS HOLY BED?)

haleef = ally ( ISN'T ALI THE ALLY OF THE PROPHET ?)

aabd = slave (for example: Zaid ibn haretha was the mawla of the prophet ( peace be upon him )) ( ( ISN'T ALI THE SLAVE OF THE SLAVES THE HOLY PROPHET ?)

sihr = brother-in-law ( ISN'T ALI THE "MUSLIM BROTHER" OF THE PROPHET AND HIS SON IN LAW THROUGH FATIMA ?)

ibn al `am = cousin ( ISN'T ALI THE COUSIN OF THE PROPHET ?)

Why these Ansaris are so DUMB about the QUR'AN ??? but they agree to call the Salafi nasibi taliban leader with the title of MAWLA OMAR , and FBI "WANTED" warrant Titles of USAma BIN LAA DEENE displays MAWLA !!!

HUWA ALLAHU LAA YAHDIL GHAWMAL ZAALEMEENE, HUWA ALLAHU LAA YUHIBBU KULLU MUKHTAALIN FAKHUR !!!

Just sharing an opinion !

66-92-110 ( Salawat )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was purely inherited then what was Sulaiman's as.gif intellectual capacity before his father passed away? Zero?

Also did Sulaiman as.gif NOT inherit his father's Kingdom?

Who said that it was purely inherited ?

As for your statement about Hazrat Zakariya as.gif , poor men ask Allah for heirs every day.

Of course, poor men ask Allah for heirs. But, is it for inheriting their meagre wealth?

Those hadith you've quoted indicate that the Prophets were not men who hoarded wealth. However, to deprive their offspring of the little they owned is "zulm".

Is it your own interpretation of the hadiths?

I see you're leaning on the Hazrat Fatima as.gif being wrong side. Good luck on Qiyamat.

We don't consider that Fatima (ra) was on the WRONG side as u exaggerate. We only believe that she might have been ignorant of it. Ahlus Sunnah doesn't accuse, hate or criticize her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

æóáóãøóÇ ÖõÑöÈó ÇÈúäõ ãóÑúíóãó ãóËóáðÇ ÅöÐóÇ Þóæúãõßó ãöäúåõ íóÕöÏøõæäó {57}

And when a description of the son of Marium is given, lo! your people raise a clamor thereat. [surah Zukhuruf Ayat 57]

Isa was a man and a prophet. Some of the churches, founded after him, worshipped him as God and as the son of God. The pagans of Makka who worshipped their own false gods did not like the idea of referring to Isa who was introduced to them by the Christians as God, an alien God to them. So they ridiculed him; but they did not know that Isa was neither God nor the son of God, he was one of the great prophets, and had a limited mission to reform the children of Israil.

The Holy Prophet said:

"0 Ali, you are like Isa. Many have gone astray in his love or in his hostility."

The hypocrites among those present there said: "Is there no better example than this?". Thereupon these verses were revealed. Ahmed bin Hambal in his Musnad and Ibn Hajar in his Sawa-iq al Muhriqah have confirmed this tradition.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

"He" in verse 61 refers to Isa. According to Sahih Muslim the Holy Prophet said:

"When Isa will descend from the heaven among you, the leader (of mankind) will be a man from among you."

Refer to the commentary of Bara-at: 32, 33 for the reappearance of Imam Muhammad bin Hasan al Qa-im along with whom Isa will also come.

"Jesus said: 'Begone, Satan! Scripture says: you shall worship the Lord your God and worship Him alone'." (Matthew 4: 10)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

Rules of the thread

Please follow the following rules while this thread progresses.

1. First paste a holy verse of holy Quran which you believe is in the praise of Ali (as) or Shaikhain (ra).

2. Then paste any reference "Sunni" or "Shia" which proves your point. I have intentionally allowed this to both schools of thought because Shia may present many references from Sunni sources but it will be difficult for Sunnis to present from Shia sources so it is allowed to them to rely on their own sources for proving that Shaikhain were higher in status than Ali (as) from their own sources of interpretation of Holy Quran.

3. Please start from the very beginning of Holy Quran meaning thereby from Surah Al-hamd or Surah Al-baqra to prove their point and then the next poster will post from the subsequent ayat of the same surah or any verse of very next surah.

4. Please avoid name calling only prove your point through Quranic verses and sayings of Holy Prophet (sawaw).

Inshallah this thread will continue while making many pages. At last we shall analyze than whose status was higher Hazrat Ali (as) or "Shaikhain" (ra). That also from both sources. As i said earlier i am not posing condition on Sunnis to present Shia sources. They can present both :)

Thank you and enjoy this thread

========================================================

ok in sha'aa LLAH :)

1- VERSE ABOUT ABU BAKER(RA):

Abu Bakr was a rich merchant and was able to ease the suffering of many slaves by buying them from their masters and setting them free.

Among the slaves set free by Abu Bakr was Bilal , the man destined to become the first man to call the faithful to prayer. Bilal’s master would make him lie on burning sand and have large slabs of rock placed on his chest, but he refused to give up his new faith. When Abu Bakr heard of Bilal’s condition, he raced to free him. In all, Abu Bakr freed eight slaves, four men and four women. Although the buying and freeing slaves was not unknown in Meccan society, it was usually done for far less altruistic reasons. Once a slave was freed, he was honour bound to offer his protection to the one who freed him, and for this reasons the rich Meccans would free slaves that were physically fit and strong. Abu Bakr feed slaves for the sake of God, not for himself.

“Those who spend their wealth for increase in self-purification; And have in their minds no favour from any one For which a reward is expected in return, But only the desire to seek the Countenance, Of their Lord, Most High; And soon they shall attain complete satisfaction.” (Quran 92:18-21)

Sunni believe Allah showed that HE is pleased with SAHABA(RA)including the 4 caliphs:

Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And the foremost to embrace Islam of the Muhaajiroon and the Ansaar and also those who followed them exactly (in Faith). Allaah is well-pleased with them as they are well-pleased with Him. He has prepared for them Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise), to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success”

[al-Tawbah 9:100]

2- there are many ahadith praising Ali(ra) and many praising Omar(ra) and abu baker(ra):

-Ali(ra):

Undoubtedly the noble Sahaabi ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib was one of the wisest and most determined of people. He is well known for his courage and bravery. He was the first youth to enter Islam, then he stayed close to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) before the Hijrah. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) left Makkah, accompanied by Abu Bakr, he stayed behind and slept in the Prophet’s bed (thus fooling the mushrikeen who wanted to kill the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)). Among his virtues are those mentioned in the hadeeth narrated by Sahl ibn Sa’d (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say, on the day of Khaybar, “I will give the flag to a man at whose hands Allaah will grant victory.” They got up, wishing to see to whom the flag would be given, each of them hoping that he would be given the flag. Then he said, “Where is ‘Ali?” He was told that he was suffering from eye-trouble. He ordered that ‘Ali should be called to him, then he spat in his eyes and he was healed immediately, as if he has never had any problem in his eyes.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2942; Muslim, 2406.

Omar(ra):

And it was narrated from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) climbed Uhud with Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan, and it trembled beneath them. He said, ‘Stand firm, O Uhud, for there is no one on you but a Prophet, a Siddeeq and two martyrs.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3675.

abu baker(ra):

* Volume 5, Book 57, Number 8: bukhari

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

The Prophet said, "If I were to take a Khalil, I would have taken Abu Bakr, but he is my brother and my companion (in Islam)."

3- who said that the sahaba(ra) i mean the first 2 caliphs....thats a lie against Sunni and hey ppl u should check ur info before speaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

========================================================

ok in sha'aa LLAH :)

1- VERSE ABOUT ABU BAKER(RA):

Abu Bakr was a rich merchant and was able to ease the suffering of many slaves by buying them from their masters and setting them free.

Among the slaves set free by Abu Bakr was Bilal , the man destined to become the first man to call the faithful to prayer. Bilal’s master would make him lie on burning sand and have large slabs of rock placed on his chest, but he refused to give up his new faith. When Abu Bakr heard of Bilal’s condition, he raced to free him. In all, Abu Bakr freed eight slaves, four men and four women. Although the buying and freeing slaves was not unknown in Meccan society, it was usually done for far less altruistic reasons. Once a slave was freed, he was honour bound to offer his protection to the one who freed him, and for this reasons the rich Meccans would free slaves that were physically fit and strong. Abu Bakr feed slaves for the sake of God, not for himself.

“Those who spend their wealth for increase in self-purification; And have in their minds no favour from any one For which a reward is expected in return, But only the desire to seek the Countenance, Of their Lord, Most High; And soon they shall attain complete satisfaction.” (Quran 92:18-21)

This is the relevant portion of your post. I am talking about Quranic verses in praise of Shaikhain or Hazrat Ali (as). That also those verses which are referred by Prophet (pbuh) as in the praise of Shaikhain or Ali (as) [This is important aspect of this topic]. Though you have mentioned three verses of holy Quran which you or Sunni believe to be in the praise of Hazrat Abu Bakar. But the question is not what you believe. The question is Did prophet (pbuh) said that these verses are in the praise of Hazrat Abu Bakar? If yes then please cite the reference of that hadith.

Wasalam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'To all my "Sunni" brothers...I am "sunni" and I have been doing my research for the past year and 2 months.....PLEASE READ! I HOPE this helps everyone! look at the verses in the Qu'ran and relate them back to our hadith...and trust me you'll find the truth!

Salaam' Alaikum, I have no bad intentions in sharing the knowledge that is in "Our Books of Sahih" because if i had used any other sources it would not have been trusted and would be used against me..Inshallah by doing our research in our own books we can come to the truth that is so hidden from us that have to deeply look into our books ourselves; it deeply hurts me that even the holy Qu'ran states these truths...but we as muslims never look into it...and hopefully this can make us more closer to Allah and to follow the true way of the Prophet Mohammad (S.A.W.)

The following are some hadith that I have done my research on and found also in the Qu'ran...please give me your feedback!

I have also listed my sources for each and everyone of the hadith and Qu'ranic verses...I did this so we can see this for ourselves...

After reading this why do we follow other than that of the Prophet's family because it is clearly stated in the Qu'ran (it states that they are pure....The Holy Quran, (4:59): O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you.. “Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House (Ahl al-Bayt), and to purify you a thorough purifying. (33:33).”) ?..

Who where the people that were truly vested with authority amongst us by our Prophet (S.A.W.)??

ÅöäøóãóÇ íõÑöíÏõ Çááøóåõ áöíõÐúåöÈó Úóäúßõãú ÇáÑøöÌúÓó Ãåá ÇáúÈóíúÊö æóíõØóåøöÑóßõãú ÊóØúåöí.

Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House (Ahl al-Bayt), and to purify you a thorough purifying. (33:33).”

Sahih Muslim, Vol. 7, p. 130:

Úóä ÚÇÆöÔóÉó ÞÇáóÊ: ÎóÑÌó ÇáäÈí Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã ÛÏÇÉ æÚóáóíå ãöÑØñ ãõÑÌøóáñ ãöä ÔÚÑ ÃÓæóÏó¡ ÝÌÇÁ ÇáÍÓäõ Èä Úóáíøò ÝÃÏÎóáóåõ Ëãøó ÌÇÁó ÇáÍõÓíäõ ÝóÏÎáó ãÚå Ëãø ÌÇÁóÊ ÝÇØöãÉõ ÝÃÏÎóáóåÇ Ëãø ÌÇÁó Úóáíøñ ÝÃÏúÎóáóåõ¡ Ëãø ÞÇáó: ﴿ÅöäøóãóÇ íõÑöíÏõ Çááøóåõ áöíõÐúåöÈó Úóäúßõãú ÇáÑøöÌúÓó Ãåá ÇáúÈóíúÊö æóíõØóåøöÑóßõãú ÊóØúåöíÑðÇ.﴾

Aishah says: One morning, the Holy Prophet (a.s) came out of his house wearing a cloak made of black hair. Hasan (a.s) came in and the Prophet (a.s) placed him under the cloak. Then Husayn (a.s) came and went in there. Then came Fatimah (a.s) who was placed there by the Prophet (a.s). Next Ali (a.s) came and the Prophet took him under his cloak and recited, Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House (Ahl al-Bayt), and to purify you a thorough purifying. (33:33).”

Sahih Muslim:

Book 31, Number 5920:

Yazid b. Hayyan reported, I went along with Husain b. Sabra and 'Umar b. Muslim to Zaid b. Arqam and, as we sat by his side, Husain said to him: Zaid. you have been able to acquire a great virtue that you saw Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) listened to his talk, fought by his side in (different) battles, offered prayer behind me. Zaid, you have in fact earned a great virtue. Zaid, narrate to us what you heard from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). He said: 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 (may peace be upon him), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that. He then said: One day Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khumm situated between Mecca and Medina. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family. 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 Ja'far 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, Number 5919:

Salama b. Akwa' reported that it was 'Ali whom Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) left behind him (in the charge of his family and the Islamic State) on the occasion of the campaign of Khaibar, and his eyes were inflamed and he said: Is it for me to remain behind Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him)? So he went forth and rejoined Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and on the evening of that night (after which) next morning Allah granted victory. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I will certainly give this standard to a man whom Allah and His Messenger love. or he said: Who loves Allah or His Messenger and Allah will grant him victory through him, and, lo, we saw 'Ali whom we least expected (to be present on that occasion). They (the Companions) said: Here is 'Ali. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon hin) gave him the standard. Allah granted victory at his hand.

WHY THE WIVES OF THE PROPHET (AISHA OR UMM SALAMA) ARENT PART OF THE "AHLUL-BAYT" --->> HERE IS YOUR CLEAR ANSWER FOR ANYONE WHO ASKS THIS QUESTION

Sahih Muslim, Kitab Fadha’il Al-Sahabah, No. 4425.

Pay considerable attention to the fact that the honorable Prophet (a.s) has separated Ummu-Salamah, his wife, from his Household (a.s). Hence when Zayd Ibn Arqam was asked, “Who are the Ahl al-Bayt? Are the Prophet’s wives among them?” He answered, “No! A wife lives with her husband for a while, then her husband divorces her and she returns to her father’s and her tribe.”

Sahih Muslim:

Book 31, Number 5920:

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 Ja'far and the offspring of 'Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. Zaid said: Yes.

Sahih Muslim on Aisha'

Book 9, Number 3510:

Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) is reported to have said: I intended to ask Umar about those two ladies who had pressed for (worldly riches) during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him), and I kept waiting for one year, but found no suitable opportunity with him until I happened to accompany him to Mecca.And as he reached Marr al Zahran he went away to answer the call of nature, and he said (to me): Bring me a jug of water, and I took that to him.After having answered the call of nature, as he came back, I began to pour water (over his hands and feet), and I remembered (this event of separation of Allah's Apostle [may peace be upon him] from his wives).So I said to him: Commander of the Faithful, who are the two ladies (who had pressed the Holy Prophet [may peace be upon him] for providing comforts of life) and I had not yet finished my talk when he said:They were 'A'isha and Hafsa.

The Holy Qur'an also addresses Ladys:'A'ishah and Hafsa exclusively: "If you two (wives of the Prophet) turn in repentance to Allah - but your hearts are so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet likes). But if you help one another against him, then verily Allah is his Protector - and Jibril, and the righteous among the believers, and the angels are also his helpers. It may be that if he divorced you, his Lord would give him, instead of you, wives better than you - Muslims submitting to Allah, believers, women obedient to Allah, who turn to Allah in repentance, worship Allah sincerely, given to fasting, or emigrants (for the cause of Allah) - previously married and virgins."(66:4-5)These verses of the Holy Qur'an prove that the wives of the Holy Prophet (pbuh&hf) were not the best of the companions. However, for political, social, and economic causes as well as to spread the word of Allah, the Holy Prophet (pbuh&hf) married this number of wives and was patient with their mischief and rebellion.

Sahih Al-Tirmidhi, Kitab Al-Manaqib:

Úóä Ããø ÓóáóãóÉ: Ãäø ÇáäÈíø Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã Íóáøóáó Úóáì ÇáÍóÓóäö æÇáÍõÓíäö æóÚóáöíøò æóÝÇØöãóÉó ßöÓÇÁð Ëãø ÞÇá: Çááøåõãø åÄáÇÁö Ãåáõ ÈóíÊí æóÎÇÕøóÊíº ÃÐúåöÈú Úóäåãõ ÇáÑøÌúÓó æóØóåøÑåõã ÊóØåíÑÇð. ÝÞÇáóÊ Ããøõ ÓóáóãÉ: æÃäÇ ãóÚóåõã íÇ ÑóÓæáó Çááå¿ ÞÇá: Åäøß Åáì ÎóíÑò.

Ummu-Salamah has quoted that the Holy Prophet (a.s) covered Hasan, Husayn, Ali and Fatimah (a.s) with his cloak and then stated: “O Lord! These are my Household (Ahl al-Bayt) and my chosen ones. Take wickedness away from them and make them pure!”

Ummu-Salamah says, “I asked the Prophet (a.s), ‘O Messenger of Allah! Am I among them?’ He replied, ‘You are into goodness (but not among them).’”

Tirmidhi writes under this tradition: “This tradition is true and well-documented and the best one quoted in this regard.”

Ÿ Sahih Al-Tirmidhi, Vol. 13, p.200:

…áãøÇ äóÒóáóÊú åÐå ÇáÂíóÉõ Úáì ÇáäøÈí Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã : ﴿ÅöäøóãóÇ íõÑöíÏõ Çááøóåõ áöíõÐúåöÈó Úóäúßõãú ÇáÑøöÌúÓó Ãåá ÇáúÈóíúÊö æóíõØóåøöÑóßõãú ÊóØúåöíÑðÇ.﴾ Ýí ÈóíÊö Ãõãøö ÓóáóãÉó ÏóÚÇ ÇáäøÈíøõ Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã ÝÇØöãóÉó æóÍÓóäÇð æóÍõÓíäÇð æÚóáíøñ ÎóáÝó ÙóåúÑöå ÝóÌóáøóáóåõã ÈößöÓÇÁò¡ Ëãøó ÞÇá: Çááøåõãø åÄáÇÁö Ãåáõ ÈóíÊí ÝóÃÐúåöÈú Úóäåãõ ÇáÑøÌúÓó æóØóåøÑåõã ÊóØåíÑÇð. ÞÇáóÊ Ãõãøõ ÓóáóãÉ: æÃäÇ ãóÚóåõã íÇ äóÈíøó Çááå¿ ÞÇáó: ÃäúÊö Úóáì ãóßÇäößö æÃäúÊö Åáì ÎóíÑò.

Umar Ibn Salamah, the Holy Prophet’s stepchild, says: The honorable verse of “Purification” was revealed in the house of Ummu-Salamah, the Holy Prophet’s wife. The Holy Prophet (a.s) called Fatimah, Hasan and Husayn (a.s), and Ali (a.s) was behind him. Then he covered them with a cloak (kisa’) and stated: “O Allah! These are my Household, so banish wickedness from them and make them pure!” At this moment, Ummu-Salamah asked: “O Prophet of God! Am I among them?” He answered, “You are in your own place and you are into goodness, too.”

12 Imams/leaders/caliphs in Sahih Bukhari...Sahih Muslim...Sahih Tirmidhi

Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 4.p. 168:

ÓãÚÊõ ÇáäÈíø Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã íÞæá: íóßæäõ ÇËúäÇ ÚóÔÑó ÃãíÑÇð¡ ÝÞÇáó ßóáãóÉð áã ÃÓúãóÚúåÇ¡ ÝÞÇá ÃÈí Åäøå ÞÇá: ßõáøõåõã ãöä ÞõÑíÔ

Jabir says: I heard the Prophet (a.s) saying: “There will be twelve leaders and Caliphs.” Then he added something I could not hear. My father said that the Prophet said: “All of them are from Quraysh.”[33]

Ÿ Sahih Muslim, Vol. 6, p. 3:

ÞÇá ÇáäÈí Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã : Åäøó åÐÇ ÇáÃãúÑó áÇ íóäúÞóÖí ÍóÊìø íóãÖí Ýíåã ÇËäÇ ÚóÔóÑó ÎóáíÝóÉð. ÞÇá: Ëã Êßáã ÈßáÇã ÎÝöíó Úáíø¡ ÝÞáÊõ áÃÈí: ãÇ ÞÇá¿ ÞÇá: ßõáøõåõã ãöä ÞõÑóíúÔò.

Jabir narrates: My father and I went to the Prophet (a.s). We heard him saying: “This issue (Caliphate) will not be completed until twelve Caliphs come.” Then he added something I did not get. I asked my father what the Prophet had said. He said: “All are from Quraysh.”[34]

Ÿ Sahih Muslim, Vol. 6, p.4 (Nawawi’s exposition):

ÓãÚÊõ ÑÓæá Çááå Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã íÞæá: áÇ íóÒÇáõ ÇáÏøíä ÞÇÆöãÇð ÍÊìø ÊóÞæãó ÇáÓøÇÚóÉõ Ãæ íóßæäó Úóáíßõã ÇËúäÇ ÚóÔóÑó ÎóáíÝóÉð ßõáøõåõã ãöä ÞõÑíÔò.

The Holy Prophet (a.s) has said: The religion (Islam) remains established until twelve Caliphs, all of whom from Quraysh, rule over you.[35]

Again the same tradition is quoted in “Sahih Muslim” in different words.

Ÿ Sahih Muslim, Vol. 6, p. 3:

ÓãÚÊõ ÑÓæá Çááå Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã íÞæá: áÇ íóÒÇáõ ÇáÅÓáÇãõ ÚóÒíÒÇð Åáì ÇËäóí ÚóÔÑó ÎóáíÝóÉð. Ëãø ÞÇáó ßóáãóÉð áã ÃÝúåóãúåÇ¡ ÝÞõáÊõ áÃÈí: ãÇ ÞÇá¿ ÝóÞÇáó: ßõáøõåõã ãöä ÞõÑíÔò.

Jabir narrates: I heared the great Prophet (a.s) saying: “Islam will always remain mighty until twelve Imams come.” Then he said something I did not understand. I asked my father: “What did he say?” He replied: “All are from Quraysh.”

Ÿ Sahih Al-Tirmidhi, Vol 2, p. 45 :

ÞÇá ÑÓæá Çááå Õáøì Çááåõ Úáíåö æÓáøóã : íóßæäõ ãöä ÈóÚÏöí ÇËúäÇ ÚóÔÑó ÃãíÑÇð. Ëãø Êóßóáøã ÈöÔíÁò áã ÃÝåóãúå¡ ÝÓÃóáúÊõ ÇáÐí íóáíäí ÝÞÇá: ßõáøåõã ãöä ÞõÑíúÔò.

Jabir says that the Prophet (a.s) said: “There will be Twelve Imams and leaders after me.” Then he said something I did not get. I asked the person beside me about it. He said: “All of them are from Quraysh.”[36]

Tirmidhi writes after this tradition, “This is a fine and true tradition which is narrated from Jabir in different chains.”

i am a sunni and what u said about aisha(ra) not being from ahlul bayt(Ra) is a shiaa lie.

even quran prove that....ur search is based on nothing, u wasted ur time for ignorance thats it.

Allaah says, after commanding the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to observe hijaab (interpretation of the meaning):

“Allaah wishes only to remove Ar-Rijs (evil deeds and sins) from you, O members of the family (of the Prophet), and to purify you with a thorough purification”

[al-Ahzaab 33:33]

And the angels said to Saarah the wife of Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Mercy of Allaah and His Blessings be on you, O the family [of Ibraaheem (Abraham)]”

[Hood 11:73]

And because Allaah excluded the wife of Loot from the family of Loot (peace be upon him) with regard to survival, when He said (interpretation of the meaning):

“(All) except the family of Loot. Them all we are surely, going to save (from destruction). Except his wife…”

[al-Hijr 15:59-60]

This indicates that the wife is part of the family.

Included among the Ahl al-Bayt are Banu Haashim ibn ‘Abd Manaaf, who are the family of ‘Ali, the family of ‘Abbaas, the family of Ja’far, the family of ‘Aqeel and the family of al-Haarith ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib. This was stated in the report narrated by Imaam Ahmad from Zayd ibn Arqam (may Allaah be pleased with him), in which he said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stood up and addressed us one day at a well called Khum, between Makkah and Madeenah. He praised Allaah and exhorted and reminded us. Then he said: ‘O people, I am a human being; soon the messenger of my Lord [i.e., the Angel of death] will come to me and I will answer his call. I am leaving among you two important things: the first of which is the Book of Allaah, in which there is guidance and light, so adhere to it and follow it’ – and he urged us to adhere to the Book of Allaah, then he said: ‘And the people of my household (ahl bayti). I remind you of Allaah with regard to the people of my household, I remind you of Allaah with regard to the people of my household, I remind you of Allaah with regard to the people of my household.’” Husayn said to him [Zayd], “Who are the people of his household, O Zayd? Are not his wives among the people of his household?” Zayd said: “His wives are among the people of his household, but the people of his household are those who are forbidden to receive sadaqah (charity) after his death.” He (Husayn) said: “Who are they?” He said: “They are the family of ‘Ali, the family of ‘Aqeel, the family of Ja’far and the family of ‘Abbaas.” Husayn said: “Are all of these forbidden to receive sadaqah?” Zayd said, “Yes.”

(Narrated by Ahmad, no. 18464)

=======================================================

The Twelve Caliphs Cannot be the Shia Imams

The Hadith in question declares that the Imams will be from the Quraish. It is in fact this part that negates both the Shia and Ibaadi claims. It is well-known that amongst the three groups (i.e. Sunnis, Shia, and Ibaadis), it is only the Sunnis that necessitated that the leadership be confined to the Quraish after the Prophet’s death. The Sunnis argued that the leadership of the Muslims must always be given to that party which makes up the majority group. Based upon the principle of majority rule, it was only fair that the leadership be given to the Quraishis who at the time of the Prophet’s death made up the majority group from amongst the Muslims.

On the other hand, the Shia claim that the leadership must be confined to the Ahlel Bayt whereas the Ibaadis claim that the leadership can be given to any Muslim regardless of if he belongs to a minority group un-representative of the majority desire. Therefore, if this Hadith were truly in relation to the Shia Imams, then it should have stated that the twelve Caliphs would be from the progeny of the Prophet (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) instead of using the term “from Quraish”. Indeed, this is a fact that the Shia were well-aware of and it was based upon this that they blamed the Sunnis for having “distorted” the Hadith of the twelve Caliphs, accusing the Sunnis of altering it from “Ahlel Bayt” or “Bani Hashim” to “Quraish.” Some Shia even refer to the Sunni Hadith of the twelve Caliphs as a “censored” or even “chopped up” version of the Prophet’s real words. The Shia then refer us to the “un-censored” version of the Hadith which is available in Shia books, as follows:

“(There will be) from my descendants eleven leaders (who will) be noble and receive and understand (knowledge). The last of them will be al-Qa’im, who will fill the world with justice after it had been filled with tyranny.”

So we see that while the Shia have historically used Sunni Hadith to back their claims, they end up having to distort these Hadith in order to make them apply more correctly to the Shia paradigm. The fact that the Shia need to “mend” the Hadith of the twelve Caliphs in order for it to work for the Shia belief is proof enough that the Hadith cannot be used as a proof against the Sunnis.

A lay-person may argue that the Bani Hashim are within the clan of Quraish and therefore the Hadith still supports a Shia view. But such a person would be altogether ignorant of Arabic Balagha which necessitates that ascribing the Caliphs to the Quraish means that not all of them are from one particular clan of Quraish but rather they are from different groups from amongst the Quraish; otherwise, there was absolutely no reason that the Prophet (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) did not say that the Caliphs will be from Bani Hashim.

Having stated that, ignorant Shia youth arguing over the internet will insist that the Hadith can still be applied to the twelve Imams of the Shia since Bani Hashim is part of the Quraish. We simply ask these youths to be honest with themselves: why did the Prophet (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) use the vague wording that the Caliphs will be from the Quraish, as opposed to clearly stating that the twelve Imams would be from his descendants of the Ahlel Bayt? Common sense dictates that there is no reason that the Prophet (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) would have used the word “Caliph” as opposed to “Imam”, when in fact the Shia literature always refers to the twelve Imams, not the twelve Caliphs. Additionally, only two of the Imams served as Caliphs whereas the rest never became Caliphs. Furthermore, if the Prophet (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) was willing the leadership to his descendants, then should he not state that specifically instead of saying that it was a position open to all the Quraish?

We see that the Shia paradigm can only be forced upon this Hadith through brute intellectual force. A similar approach do we see from Qadianis who take our collection of Sunni Hadith and try to prove that their leader is the Mehdi. The truth of the matter is that the Shia would only have a clear argument if the Hadith stated that there would be twelve Imams from the Prophet’s descendants. Instead, the Shia have an “obscure Hadith” in which they are trying to force upon it their own interpretation, much in the same way that Qadianis do with many a Hadith.

============================

Perhaps the best guess is that the twelve Caliphs refers to al-Khulafaa al-Rashidoon (the Rightly Guided Caliphs). There is Ijma (consensus) on the fact that the first four Caliphs were Rightly Guided Caliphs and the term is most often used for them. However, in addition to these four, we say that Ali’s son, Hasan (ÑÖøì Çááå Úäå), was one of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. The Prophet (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) said:

“The Caliphate of Prophecy will last thirty years; then Allah will give the rule of His Kingdom to whomever He wills.”

(Sunan Abu Dawood)

Indeed, the rule of the first four Caliphs lasted twenty-nine years and six months; Hasan (ÑÖøì Çááå Úäå) ruled for another six months bringing the rule of the Rashidoon to thirty years in conformity to the Prophet’s prophecy.

Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (ÑÖøì Çááå Úäå) is also included amongst the Rightly Guided Caliphs. Therefore, the twelve Caliphs refer to:

1. Abu Bakr As-Siddiq

2. Umar ibn al-Khattab

3. Uthman bin Affan

4. Ali ibn abi Talib

5. Hasan ibn Ali

6. Umar ibn Abdul Aziz

This means that six of the twelve have come to pass, and six more will come to pass before the Day of Judgment, the last of whom will likely be Imam Mehdi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am a sunni and what u said about aisha(ra) not being from ahlul bayt(Ra) is a shiaa lie.

even quran prove that....ur search is based on nothing, u wasted ur time for ignorance thats it.

The difference between you and us is that we interpret Holy Quran as per the sayings of Prophet (pbuh) and Ahl ul bait (as) and we are not literalistic like you. At one time you call your hadith books Sahih and at other point you refuse to accept the authentic narrations which prove clearly that wives are not ahl ul bait (as).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Nice thread.

"...say (0' Muhammad unto mankind): I do not ask of you any reward for it (preaching the message), but love for my near relatives Ahlul-Bait'; and whoever earns good, we give him more of good therein;... Holy Our'an (42:23)

The Prophet (s.a.w.) explicitly told the Muslims that this verse refers to his Ahlul-Bait that is Au, Fatima, Hasan, and Husain and urged them to obey and follow these illustrious personalities after him.

All commentators, traditionists and biographers are unanimous that the Prophet while explaining this verse, said that the word near relatives' as used here refers exclusively to his Ahlul-Bait that is Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain.

The renowned Scholar, Zamakhshari, in his commentary Kashshaf, says "... it is narrated that the idolators gathered at a meeting and said to each other: Will Muhammad ask us for a reward for what he is preaching?' It was then that Allah revealed this verse to the Prophet as an answer'. "Say (0 Muhammad, unto mankind): I do not ask of you any reward for it (for preaching the message), but love form v near relatives (Ahlul-Bait); and whoever earns good, we give him more of good therein..." (1)

Zamakhshari adds: It is also narrated that on the revelation of the said verse, the Messenger of Allah was asked: Who are your near relatives whom we must love? He said: Ali Fatima and their two sons (Hasan and Husain)'.

Allama Bahrani, refers to Imam Ahmad ihn Hanhal's Musnad', who - through a chain of narrators - on the authority of Said ibn Jubair quotes ihn Ahhas: "When Allah's words were revealed:

"Say (0' Muhammad) I do not ask of you any' reward for it (preaching the message), but love for my near relatives Ahlul- Bait'...".

The Messenger of Allah was asked as to who his near relatives were whose love has been made obligatory for the Muslims? The Prophet replied:

"Ali, Fatima and their two sons (Hasan and Husain). (2)

Fakhruddin Razi in his al-Tafsir al-Kabir'. after citing Zamakhshari's above narration says:

"I state aal' Muhammad (s.a.w.) are those whose affairs are completely interwined with his the (Prophet's)... And without doubt no one was so near to the Prophet than Fatima, Ali, Hasan and Husain. This is a well-known fact of all chains of narrations, and these are they who are his 'aal [Anyone well-versed in the Arabic language will vouch that Aal cannot be misinterpreted for the umma or people naas as some later misinformed writers have suggested. (t')]

Thus it is an undisputed fact that the words Ahlul-Bait or aal Muhammad (s.a.w.) refer only to the immediate family of the Prophet; his daughter Fatima. son-in-law' Ali and grandsons Hasan and Husain and no one else besides.

We have already cited some instances of the Prophet's love for his family. No doubt being his only surviving child. Fatima was intensely loved by her father. The Prophet's famous words are a testimony to this fact. "Fatima is a part of me and whoever hurts Fatima, hurts me.

Fatima was so dear to him that the Prophet spurned offers for her hand from many wealthy Arabs and gave her in marriage to his own cousin, Ali ibn Ahi Talib, whom he himself had brought up. On several occasions the Prophet singled out Ali's preeminence as well as the position of his grand-children Hasan and Husain.

The traditions also confirm this and also confirm his natural inclination towards Au who and his grand-children Hasan and Husain.

Therefore it becomes a duty for all those who claim to be part of the Prophet's nation to follow the Prophet's traditions in respect to his Ahlul-Bait. Moreover Allah Himself has commanded the Muslims to do so, as is evident by the following verses: "Say (0' Muhammad say unto mankind) if you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you... Holy Qur'an (3:3 1)

"….and follow him (the Prophet) so that you may be guided. "~ Holy Qur'an (7:158)

"…therefore let those beware who go against his (Prophet's) instructions..." Holy Qur'an (24:63)

"Certainly you have in the Apostle of Allah an excellent examplar... (to copy and follow) Holy Qur'an (31:21)

Besides the above mentioned verses another proof of the superiority of the AhluI-Bait over the rest of the Muslims are the blessings, a Muslim invokes on Muhammad (s.a.w.) and his aal (family) when he recites the Tashahud in each of the five daily prayers:

"0 Allah, shower Your blessings upon Muhammad and aal' Muhammad".

No less a personality than Imam Shafi'i regarded as a founding father of a school of jurisprudence in Islam, in a famous ode in praise of the AhluI-Bait has not only stressed their love to be a synonym for faith but has categorically rebuked those who deny their pre-eminence: 0 rider stand on the stony ground of Mina. And cry to those stopped at Khif and those bestirring. When the pilgrims come at dawn to Mina. Moving like the rolling of the waves of the surging Euphrates. If love for Muhammad's aal' is Rafdh (heresy). Then Jinn and Men bear witness lam a Rafidhi (heretic) (3)

Muhibuddin Tabari in his book Dhakhai'r aI-Uqba fi Manaqib Dhawi aI-Ourba' quoting Ibn Abbas, the Prophet's cousin and companion says: "On the revelation of ayat al-Ma wadda people asked the Prophet as to who were his relatives whom they were required to love. The Prophet replied: Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain. (This is also stated by Ahmad in al-Manaqib'). (4)

Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatam, Ibn Mardawaya and Taharam in Mu'jam al-Kabir', have also quoted the same words from Jbn Abbas, regarding this verse.

Jalaluddin Suyuti relates that the Prophet's elder grandson Imam Hasan ibn Ali (a.s.) said in one of his sermons: "I am of the Ahlul-Bait' whose love Allah has made obligatory for every Muslim .

And then he recited this same verse: "Say (0' Muhammad) I do not ask of you any reward for it (preaching the message), but love for my near relatives (Ahlul-Bait)…". Holy Qur'an (33:33)

It should however be noted that the Qur'an does not mean mere sentimental ties of the Muslim communities with the Prophet's Household but stresses a deep and heartfelt love, the true expression of love by the Muslims can best be displayed by following the high examples set by the Ahlul-Bait, applying their teachings and guidelines in our daily behaviour ant acknowledging them as leaders after the Holy Prophet.

By placing this verse on the Prophet's tongue, and enjoining him to inform the Muslims that he does not want any fee or reward for communicating the divine Message, except the love for his immediate relatives, Allah was making clear to the Muslims that loyalty towards the Ahlul-Bait and acceptance of their leadership is the only way for their progress and development in this world and their salvation in the hereafter.

The very emphasis on the word near relatives' by Almighty Allah in the Holy Qur'an and the subsequent command to the Muslims, is a concrete proof of the Ahlul-Bait's right to leadership; otherwise Allah would not have revealed the verse at all and neither would the Prophet had stressed its significance.

Thus how beautifully the Qur'an reminds us of our gratitude towards the Prophet's task of enlightening us with the message of Islam. In other words it means that we will be considered ungrateful wretches, not deserving to be called Muslims, if we do not adhere to the path of the Ahlul-Bait. The Qur'an also tells us that we must adhere to the path of the Ahlul-Bait and take them as models, so as to mould our own lives and characters in accordance with such attributes as purity and cleanliness.

Thus it is clear from the various interpretations, narrations and traditions cited from scholars of different doctrinal leanings that the Prophet minced no words when interpreting this blessed verse.

1 Fakhruddin Razi, 'al-tafseer al-Kabeer', interpretation of Shura Chapter, verse no. 23.

2 'Ghayat al-Muram', interpretation of the verse.

3 Fakhruddin Razi, 'al-tafseer al-Kabeer', interpretation of Shura Chapter, verse no. 23.

4 Muhubuddin Tabari, 'Dhakha'ir al-Uqba fi manaqib dhawi al-Qurba, p.25.

Bro! some sunni commentaries have different interpretation of the above verse(42-33). Just read it also:

"The word qurba in the original has been interpreted differently by the different commentators. One section of them takes it in the meaning of kinship and has given this meaning to the verse "I do not ask of you any reward for this service, but I do desire that you (O people of Quraish) should show some regard tar the kinship that there is between me and you. You should have accepted my invitation. but if you do not accept it, you should not be so hard-hearted as to Become my bitterest enemies in the entire land of Arabia. " This is the interpretation given by Hadrat 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas, which has been cited by lmam Ahmad, Bukhari. Muslim. Tirmidhi, Ibn Jarir, Tabarani, Baihaqi. Ibn Said and others on the authority of many reporters and the same commentary has been given by Mujahid. 'Ikrimah, Qatadah, Suddi, Abu Malik, 'Abdur Rehman bin Zaid bin Aslam, Dahhak. 'Ata bin Dinar and the other major commentators.

The other section takes qurba in the meaning of nearness and interprets the verse to mean: "I do not seek from you any other reward than this that you should develop in yourselves a desire for attaining nearness to Allah. That is; you should be reformed. That is my only reward. " This commentary has been reported from Hasan Basri and a saying of Qatadah also has been cited in support of this: so much so that in a tradition by Tabarani this saying has also been attributed to Ibn 'Abbas. In the Qur'an itself, at another place, this same subject has been treated, thus: "Tell them: I do not seek of you any reward for this work: I only ask of the one who will. to adopt the way of his Lord.' (AI-Furqan: 57).

The third group takes qurba in the meaning of the kindred, and interprets the verse to mean this: "I do not seek from you any other reward than this that you should love my near and dear ones." Then, some of the commentators of this group interpret 'the kindred" to mean alt the children of 'Abdul Muttalib, and some others restrict it to Hadrat 'AIi and Fatimah and their children. This commentary has been reported from Said bin Jubair and 'Amr bin Shu'aib, and in some traditions it has been attributed to Ibn 'Abbas and Hadrat 'AIi bin Husain (Zam al-'Abedin), but this interpretation cannot be accepted for several reasons. Firstly. when Surah Ash-Shura was sent down at Makkah, Hadrat 'AIi and Fatimah had not yet been married and, therefore, there could be no question of their children. As for the children of 'Abdul Muttalib, they were not all following the Holy Prophet but some of them had openly joined with his enemies, and the enmity of Abu Lahab is too well known. Second, "the kindred" of the Holy Prophet were not only the children of 'Abdul Muttalib but he had his kindred among all the families of the Quraish through his mother and his father and his wife. Hadrat Khadijah. In all these clans he had his best supporters as well as his staunch enemies 'Third, and this is the most important paint, in view of the high position of a Prophet from which he starts his mission of inviting the people towards Allah, it does not seem fitting that he would ask the people to love his kindred in return for his services in connection with his great Mission. No person of fine taste could imagine that Allah would have taught His Prophet such a mean thing, and the Prophet would havc uttered the same before the Quraish. In the stones that have been narrated of the Prophets in the Qur'an, we find that a Prophet after a Prophet stands up before his people sad says: "I do not ask of you any reward: my reward is with Allah, Lord of the worlds." (Yunus: 72; Hud: 29, 51; Ash-Shu'ara': 109, 127, 145, 164, l80). In Surah Ya Sin the criterion given of a Prophet's truthfulness is that he gives his invitation without any selfish motive. (v. 21). In the Qur'an the Holy Prophet himself has been made to say again and again words to the effect: "I demand no reward from you for this message. " (Al An'am: 90, Yusuf: 104, Al-Mu'minun: 72, Al-Furqan: 57, Saba: 47, Suad: 86, At-Tur; 40, AI Qalam: 46). After this, what could be the occasion for the Holy Prophet to tell the people that in return for his service of inviting them to Allah, they should lout his relatives. Then it seems all the more irrelevant when we state that the addressees here are the disbelievers and not the believers. The whole discourse, from the beginning w the end, is directed to them. Therefore, there could be no question in this regard of asking the opponents for any reward, for a reward is asked of those who show some appreciation for the services that a person has rendered for them. The disbelievers were not at all appreciative of the Holy Prophet's services: on the contrary, they regarded them as a crime and had turned bitterly hostile to him."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

Our brother mansab.Jafri has dealt with different commentaries of Ayat e Muwaddat in different topics. Following was one of the best of his posts on the subject.

Ðóáößó ÇáøóÐöí íõÈóÔøöÑõ Çááøóåõ ÚöÈóÇÏóåõ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇ æóÚóãöáõæÇ ÇáÕøóÇáöÍóÇÊö Þõá áøóÇ ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ÃóÌúÑðÇ ÅöáøóÇ ÇáúãóæóÏøóÉó Ýöí ÇáúÞõÑúÈóì æóãóä íóÞúÊóÑöÝú ÍóÓóäóÉð äøóÒöÏú áóåõ ÝöíåóÇ ÍõÓúäðÇ Åöäøó Çááøóåó ÛóÝõæÑñ ÔóßõæÑñ

"That is of which Allah gives the good news to His servants' date=' (to) those who believe and do good deeds. Say: I do not ask of you any AJR (wage/reward) for it but love FIL-QURBA; and whoever earns good, We give him more of good therein; surely Allah is Forgiving, Grateful." (42:23)[/size']

Ýöí ÇáúÞõÑúÈóì ("fil-Qurba") means literally "for the sake of nearness", "in those near of kin" or "in close relatives". But there is a deeper reality which this verse points to.

The Shi'a unanimously hold firm the belief that the household of the Prophet (a.s.) are the ones referred to in this verse, and that this verse clearly says that Ahlul'bayt (People of the House) are the straight path, and are the true representatives of Islam in its purest form.

Some Sunni commentators also hold the view that the Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) are the Qurba here, but it is arguable that they do not interpret this verse in its true essence. Leaving such an interpretation aside, there are many famous and popular Sunni commentators who have said that the kinship mentioned in this verse means the kinship between the Prophet and the disbelievers of the tribe of Quraish.

Here are two such commentaries:

___________________________

1) al-Mahalli and al-Suyuti in their Tafseer Jalalayn give the exegesis of this verse as follows:

"That is the good tidings (read yubshiru or yubashshiru, from bishāra, ‘good news’) which God gives to His servants who believe and perform righteous deeds. Say: ‘I do not ask of you any reward for it, for delivering the Message, except the affection for [my] kinsfolk (illā, ‘except’: this represents a discontinuous exception, in other words, ‘but I do ask of you that you show affection for my kinship [with you], which at the same time is your kinship’; for he [the Prophet] had kinship ties with all the subdivisions of the [tribe of] Quraysh). And whoever acquires a good deed, an act of obedience, We shall enhance for him its goodness, by multiplying [the reward for] it. Surely God is Forgiving, of sins, Appreciative, [even] of little [good], and so He multiplies it [manifold]."

2) Similarly, ibn Kathir gives the Tafseer of this verse as follows:

"(Say: "No reward do I ask of you for this except to be kind to me for my kinship with you.")

Means, 'Say, O Muhammad, to these idolators among the disbeliever of Quraysh: I do not ask you for anything in return for this message and sincere advice which I bring to you. All I ask of you is that you withhold your evil from me and let me convey the Messages of my Lord.. If you will not help me, then do not disturb me, for the sake of the ties of kinship that exist between you and I."

___________________________

The aforementioned view suggests that this verse was revealed to tell the polytheists among the Quraish to at least leave Rasoolullah (a.s.) alone if they weren't going to accept Islam. This interpretation, therefore, means that if the disbelievers weren't going to accept Islam, then they should at least allow the Prophet to continue his ministry and they should love him for the reason that he had family members amongst them.

This interpretation is objectionable on many grounds, as you can appreciate in the exegesis given on this Ayah in Al-Mizan. First of all, the Qur'an explicitly states that Allah does not accept the love of the disbeliever in 60:4, when Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) is praised by Allah when he tells the people that hate and enmity are between him and the disbelievers forever until they accept Allah. Allah praises him and says that there is a "goodly pattern for you in Abraham and those with him". How, then, can anyone suggest that Allah is telling the Quraishi disbelievers to love the Prophet when the fact is that Allah does not accept the love of disbelievers?

Secondly, the word ÇÌÑ ("AJR"), which means "reward/wage/recompense", truly indicates that this sort of "wage" is given in return for the Prophet's guidance of mankind and his service to humanity. The verse says: "I do not ask you a wage", and this is referring to the wage for the actual message and guidance of his Prophethood! After all, Rasoolullah (a.s.) brought the religion of Islam as a supreme guidance to mankind. However, I can only benefit from such guidance when I actually follow the guidance and believe in it. Only then will I be affected positively. Then I can give compensation to the one who gave me the guidance. So how can the disbelievers among the Quraish give a wage for something that has affected them only negatively from their viewpoint? This clause can only be complete if these disbelievers believed in the message and were guided to Islam, but we find that this is not the case, because according to the aforementioned viewpoint, this verse is referring to the disbelievers to give recompense to the Messenger, and that they had not been guided yet. There remains that difficulty which the aforementioned view has not expounded further. Also, this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that this verse is speaking to the believers, and not the disbelievers.

The third objection is, as you will appreciate later, that the wage cannot refer to anything which will benefit the Prophet. It can only be for the guidance of our own souls.

Because of these three objections, we cannot accept the exegesis presented above. As you can see, the exegesis has not been dealt with through the Qur'an itself. It is a very narrow-minded view which is easily shown to be in conflict with other verses in the Qur'an relating to the recompense of the ministry of the Messenger.

Allamah al-Tabataba'i (r.a.) in Tafseer al-Mizan presents a set of eloquent and beautiful arguments from the Qur'an. He shows that in order to understand this Ayah, we must examine other Ayahs which further elucidate the meaning of "ajr", which the aforementioned commentators did not sufficiently do.

We can see that the term "AJR" is really in reference to a reality which can be understood through the rest of the Qur'an. In order to grasp the true essence of this verse, we have to use other related verses of the Qur'an to under this reality. Allah has spoken about the wage further:

Þõáú ãóÇ ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ãöäú ÃóÌúÑò ÅöáøóÇ ãóä ÔóÇÁ Ãóä íóÊøóÎöÐó Åöáóì ÑóÈøöåö ÓóÈöíáðÇ

Say: "No AJR (wage/reward) do I ask of you for it except that who wants to may take a path to his Lord" (25:57)

We find here in 25:57 that the only "ajr" (wage/reward) is that we take ourselves to the Sirat al-Mustaqeem, the Straight Path towards God. Therefore, those which are the "fil-Qurba" in 42:23 must be the same as the Straight Path to the Lord. These are none other than the "close kin" of the Prophet, or more specifically, Ahlul'bayt. Also, this "ajr" only affects us, and not the Prophet, for the Qur'an says:

Þõáú ãóÇ ÓóÃóáúÊõßõã ãøöäú ÃóÌúÑò Ýóåõæó áóßõãú Åöäú ÃóÌúÑöíó ÅöáøóÇ Úóáóì Çááøóåö æóåõæó Úóáóì ßõáøö ÔóíúÁò Ôóåöí

"Say: Whatever AJR (wage/reward) I have asked of you, that is for yourselves; surely my AJR (wage/reward) is with Allah, and He is a witness of all things." (34:47)

We find here in 34:47 that the wage unto the Prophet is only from Allah. We realize through this verse that the "ajr" is only beneficial to us, and not Rasoolullah. When we reconcile this verse with 42:23, we come across the reality that "fil-Qurba" refers to those whom we must be guided by in order to be led to the Sirat al-Mustaqeem.

Þõá áÇøó ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ÃóÌúÑðÇ Åöäú åõæó ÅöáÇøó ÐößúÑóì áöáúÚóÇáóãöíäó

"Say: I do not ask you for any AJR (wage/reward) for it; it is nothing but a reminder to the nations." (6:90)

If you read Ayahs 88-89 before reading this one, the reminder is the message of the Prophet (a.s.). The Qur'an is commanding the people to follow the guidance that was given to them by Rasoolullah (a.s.).

Look at it like this: Allah says in 25:57 that the only "ajr" is that we take to the Straight Path. In Verse of Muwaddah, He says that it is love of Ahlul'bayt. There can be no conflict or contradiction in the Qur'an. Therefore, Ahlul'bayt are equal to the Sirat al-Mustaqeem, and that they are the way unto the Straight Path that Allah is talking about in 25:57. They are also equal to the reminder in 6:90, and are therefore the reflections of the Sirat al-Mustaqeem. When Allah says "al-muwaddata fil-qurba", he is speaking about the same category of love (muwaddah) that belongs to Him, because when we say we LOVE Allah, we love Him in the sense that we blend with His commands and we follow Him unconditionally. This is the sort of LOVE being described in 42:23, otherwise the rest of the Ayahs will contradict each other and will not make any sense to a rational mind.

It is also absurd that the same people who argue in other areas in the Qur'an that "the position of a verse always denotes its context" are now saying that this Ayah of Muwaddah is referring to the disbelievers, when the sentences around "Say: I ask....except the love of my close kin" are addressed to the believers! Such a hypocritical interpretation. It seems that certain principals of exegesis advocated by a group are only used in the places where it benefits their creed!

There can only be one conclusion: that "al-Qurba" in the Verse of Muwaddah refers only to the Ahlul'bayt, whom are the guides of mankind and are the ones whom Allah commands us to follow so that we should be on the Right Path. Also, this verse strengthens the belief of the Shi'i that the Ahlul'bayt are infallible. Is there a way that the Sirat al-Mustaqeem is fallible? Therefore, how can those who are defined as the Sirat al-Mustaqeem in these verses be considered as mere fallibles like you and I? The fact remains that only the pure and sinless can truly take you to Allah. The purity and infallibility of Aal'Muhammad is shown in many verses, including the Verse of Mubahila (3:61), Verse of Wilayah (5:55), Verse of Purification (33:33), etc.

Through this exposition, it has been made clear that the Ahlul'bayt are equal in weight and stature to the bringing of the Message of Islam. Verse 42:23 is asking a very deep question to mankind: Who can be more worthy of leadership than the Household of the Prophet?

Now, a tafseer of an important Ayah such as this is meaningless unless we realize its practical meaning. We should ask ourselves this: We proudly call ourselves the Shi'a of Ali (a.s.), but are we doing justice to such a sacred title? Are we at the level where we can say to Imam al-Hujjah (a.s.) that the world is ready for his glorious return? Are we following this verse by following Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) in all their actions? If we are not honestly following them, then we are trying to take the guidance of this religion without paying the price - we are intending nothing more than thievery. And thievery from the Messenger (a.s.) is a ticket to the fire. You have two options: the first one is to accept disbelief and become a slave of sin, and the second is to accept the true path. But if you choose the second option, then you must follow the Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) in all their realities in order to truly follow the totality of the Message of Islam. Your benefit from the guidance of Allah is limited to what you give as a wage. If I follow Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) in some things, then I will be guided only somewhat. But if I follow Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) in every aspect, then it is as if I have followed every command of Allah, and therefore the wage is now complete and I have become engulfed by the straight path. This is the true meaning of the command "love my Ahlul'bayt". Ponder deeply on this aspect of reality. It is absolutely amazing.

FURTHER DISCUSSION

I received a few responses by various people wishing to debate on the points made above. Insha'Allah, let us comment on the issues raised.

1) A brother commented on the article and said that there exist verses in al-Qur'an where the Prophets and Messengers spoke to the disbelievers about the wage. For example:

Prophet Hud says to the disbelievers:

æóãóÇ ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ãöäú ÃóÌúÑò Åöäú ÃóÌúÑöíó ÅöáøóÇ Úóáóì ÑóÈøö ÇáúÚóÇáóãöíäó

"And I do not ask you any AJR (wage/reward) for it; surely my AJR (wage/reward) is only with the Lord of the worlds." (26:227)

Or, for example, Prophet Salih says to the disbelievers:

æóãóÇ ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ãöäú ÃóÌúÑò Åöäú ÃóÌúÑöíó ÅöáøóÇ Úóáóì ÑóÈøö ÇáúÚóÇáóãöíäó

"And I do not ask you any AJR (wage/reward) for it; my AJR (wage/reward) is only with the Lord of the worlds." (26:145)

Another example is the speech of Prophet Noah:

æóíóÇ Þóæúãö áÇ ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ãóÇáÇð Åöäú ÃóÌúÑöíó ÅöáÇøó Úóáóì Çááøåö æóãóÇ ÃóäóÇú ÈöØóÇÑöÏö ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇú Åöäøóåõã ãøõáÇóÞõæ ÑóÈøöåöãú æóáóÜßöäøöíó ÃóÑóÇßõãú ÞóæúãðÇ ÊóÌúåóáõæäó

"And, O my people! I ask you not for wealth in return for it; my AJR (wage/reward) is only with Allah and I am not going to drive away those who believe; surely they shall meet their Lord, but I consider you a people who are ignorant." (11:29)

No doubt, the Prophets here are speaking about AJR with the disbelievers. But what is being completely ignored is the fact that the meaning of the verses quoted is as follows: "I ask you to come to believe in Allah and his religion, and I ask you no wage if you follow me in this cause." The verses have been quoted blindly without pondering upon their significance and their context. The reality is that these verses have all shown clearly that the Prophets will not be asking a wage from them in return for this guidance that they have given. One proof of this fact lies in the commands of the Prophets relating to this mentioning of AJR. For example, if you read 11:28 before reading 11:29, you will be able to put 11:29 into its proper context and see the meaning of the wage and what it is for:

ÞóÇáó íóÇ Þóæúãö ÃóÑóÃóíúÊõãú Åöä ßõäÊõ Úóáóì ÈóíøöäóÉò ãøöä ÑøóÈøöíó æóÂÊóÇäöí ÑóÍúãóÉð ãøöäú ÚöäÏöåö ÝóÚõãøöíóÊú Úóáóíúßõãú ÃóäõáúÒöãõßõãõæåóÇ æóÃóäÊõãú áóåóÇ ßóÇÑöåõæäó

"He said: O my people! tell me if I have with me clear proof from my Lord, and He has granted me mercy from Himself and it has been made obscure to you; shall we constrain you to (accept) it while you are averse from it?" (11:28)

Therefore, the statement of not asking for a wage is only applicable after one becomes a believer. If someone remains a disbeliever, then the topic of AJR does not even begin to apply to him. There is a causality of actually believing in the guidance that the Prophets are bringing. Otherwise, the above verses would have no logical meaning whatsoever. It is just as meaningless as someone advocating a certain view, and having the people reject the view, but even then, that advocate is saying: "I ask of you no AJR (wage/reward) for the false position you have taken in which you have not benefited from me." It is completely nonsensical, and logic contradicts such a weak attempt to discredit the true meaning of 42:23. Of course, that is being said with all due respect to the opponent who raised this objection.

2) A brother put forward the argument that the love being described in this verse is the love for attaining nearness to Allah.

If we take this as a possibility, then it would have to be said that the verse is extremely general, and can include polytheistic acts of worship. It would create a logical fallacy, for Allah describes the disbelievers as also trying to attain nearness to Allah:

"...those who take guardians besides Him, (saying), 'We do not serve them save that they may make us nearer to Allah'..." (39:3)

How can such a command be the true identity of 42:23? We have shown in the original article that this verse cannot refer to the disbelievers in any sense. Therefore, this interpretation cannot serve the purpose of the Ayah.

Everyone should seek the nearness to Allah - but how do we get there? The Sirat al-Mustaqeem has a powerful meaning. Had it been sufficient to say that the wage was the love for nearness to Allah, Rasoolullah (a.s.) would not have needed to clarify and establish in other verses that the wage will not benefit him and that it is for ourselves (34:47, 25:57), and he also establishes that this wage is indeed a weighty measure on par with the message of Islam (6:90).

3) Some people have said that the Muwaddah (love) mentioned in this verse is the love for the kin of the believers themselves. For example, this explanation would mean that in compensation to the Messenger (a.s.) for bringing this great guidance to me, I should love my family members and those who have blood relations with me.

This explanation is profoundly weak. The quickest way to shatter this argument is to say that it is not always the case that all of your family members can be considered believers. For example, if I am the son or brother of an enemy of Islam, is love for him going to be a true "AJR" (wage/reward/compensation) for the message of Islam? It cannot be so when the Qur'an says:

"O you who believe! do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends: would you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of the truth." (60:1)

Love for a disbeliever cannot be the focus of 42:23. It would make much more sense that al-Qurba be those whom are the same 'weight', so to speak, as the 'weight' of bringing the Message of Islam; otherwise, the AJR (wage/reward) remains unbalanced. Therefore, it is quite clear that the kin of the believers cannot be considered in this verse as representing al-Qurba.

Another point is that this defense again brings up the contradiction relating to the verses which deny compensation to the Messenger (i.e. 35:57). He cannot ask for a wage unless it is for the sublime guidance and benefit of the believers themselves. Moreover, the true love for al-Qurba has to be equal to the Straight Path (25:57). Surely, love for your own family members cannot be the same weight as that of the bringing of the message of Islam. The wage is therefore incomplete.

4) A brother referenced Tafhim al-Quran, an exegesis written by the Sunni exegete al-Maududi, where he argues that 42:23 cannot refer to the Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) because (as he claims) that during the revelation of this verse, Imam Hasan (a.s.) and Imam Hussein (a.s.) were not yet born. He claims that the verse was revealed in Mecca.

Such a response is very strange. Al-Maududi has completely ignored one of the most important and fundamental aspects of the Qur'an: that a verse can be applied wherever it is deemed appropriate; it is not only limited to its time of revelation. For example,

ÅöäøóãóÇ æóáöíøõßõãõ Çááøóåõ æóÑóÓõæáõåõ æóÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó íõÞöíãõæäó ÇáÕøóáóÇÉó æóíõÄúÊõæäó ÇáÒøóßóÇÉó æóåõãú ÑóÇßöÚõæäó

"Only Allah is your Wali, and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow." (5:55)

If al-Maududi is correct, then we have no Awliyya except for those believers at the TIME of the revelation of this verse who keep up prayers while giving zakat in ruku. It was only Ameer al-Momineen (a.s.) who did this. Regardless of what the word "Wali" means here, Ahlul'sunnah and Shi'a agree upon the context of revelation. So why has al-Maududi claimed that the verse 42:23 must only be about the close kin who were already born and living in this world? Why can't it be about future grandchildren who are loved by Allah and Rasoolullah (a.s.)?

Another verse is:

íóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇ ÃóØöíÚõæÇ Çááøóåó æóÃóØöíÚõæÇ ÇáÑøóÓõæáó æóÃõæáöí ÇáúÃóãúÑö ãöäúßõãú ۖ ÝóÅöäú ÊóäóÇÒóÚúÊõãú Ýöí ÔóíúÁò ÝóÑõÏøõæåõ Åöáóì Çááøóåö æóÇáÑøóÓõæáö Åöäú ßõäúÊõãú ÊõÄúãöäõæäó ÈöÇááøóåö æóÇáúíóæúãö ÇáúÂÎöÑö ۚ Ðóٰáößó ÎóíúÑñ æóÃóÍúÓóäõ ÊóÃúæöíáðÇ

"O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end." (4:59)

This verse is directed towards the believers to obey Ulul'amr (those in authority) from amongst us. It is impossible to restrict this clause to the Ulul'amr for only that time of revelation, because the verse is directed towards all the believers for all time (of course, we Shi'a believe that Ulul'amr are the infallible A'immah of Ahlul'bayt (a.s.), but this is not relevant to this discussion).

The most powerful refutation lies in the verse: "They said: Do you (Sarah) wonder at Allah's bidding? The mercy of Allah and His blessings are on you, Ahlul'bayt..." (11:73) The lineage of Sarah (a.s.) included in the Ahlul'bayt of Ibrahim (a.s.) was not even born, yet Allah has called them Ahlul'bayt, and no one can challenge Allah's verdict here. Even if Muhammad (a.s.), Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.), and Fatima Zahra (a.s.) were the only members of the household alive, how can any sane human being reject the idea that Allah is All-Knowing and All-Powerful, and can include unborn members into the chosen household? Therefore, the fallacy is exposed. The argument presented by Maududi is, unfortunately, an example of bad taste and poor logic.

Moreover, there are many authentic ahadith that clearly show that this verse was revealed in Medina AFTER the births of Imam Hasan (a.s.) and Imam Hussein (a.s.), and NOT in Mecca as claimed by some people. We will not use up time and energy in quoting such ahadith, as sufficient Qur'anic evidence has been brought forth to shatter the implication of the original claim.

5) A brother asked: "Why can't this verse refer to all the blood relations of the Prophet (a.s.)? Why have the Shi'a constricted the meaning of al-Qurba to only Ahlul'bayt (a.s.)?"

Similar to what was alluded to in response #3, the blood relatives of Rasoolullah (a.s.), if we take into account all of them, included violent enemies of Islam; i.e. people like Abu Jehl or Abu Lahab. Allah says in the Qur'an:

íóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇ áóÇ ÊóÊøóÎöÐõæÇ ÚóÏõæøöí æóÚóÏõæøóßõãú ÃóæúáöíóÇÁ ÊõáúÞõæäó Åöáóíúåöã ÈöÇáúãóæóÏøóÉö æóÞóÏú ßóÝóÑõæÇ ÈöãóÇ ÌóÇÁßõã ãøöäó ÇáúÍóÞøö íõÎúÑöÌõæäó ÇáÑøóÓõæáó æóÅöíøóÇßõãú Ãóä ÊõÄúãöäõæÇ ÈöÇááøóåö ÑóÈøößõãú Åöä ßõäÊõãú ÎóÑóÌúÊõãú ÌöåóÇÏðÇ Ýöí ÓóÈöíáöí æóÇÈúÊöÛóÇÁ ãóÑúÖóÇÊöí ÊõÓöÑøõæäó Åöáóíúåöã ÈöÇáúãóæóÏøóÉö æóÃóäóÇ ÃóÚúáóãõ ÈöãóÇ ÃóÎúÝóíúÊõãú æóãóÇ ÃóÚúáóäÊõãú æóãóä íóÝúÚóáúåõ ãöäßõãú ÝóÞóÏú Öóáøó ÓóæóÇÁ ÇáÓøóÈöí

"O you who believe! do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends: would you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of the truth, driving out the Messenger and yourselves because you believe in Allah, your Lord? If you go forth struggling hard in My path and seeking My pleasure, would you manifest love to them? And I know what you conceal and what you manifest; and whoever of you does this, he indeed has gone astray from the straight path." (60:1)

This verse further proves the view that 42:23 cannot refer to all the kin of the Prophet. It must be a specific group; one that, when followed, will be equal to compensating the Messenger for his guidance. This group must be equal to the Sirat al-Mustaqeem, as the Qur'an says that the members are the ways unto Allah (25:57), and equal to the reminder (6:90).

An interesting note is that Allah did not use the word "Arham" (blood relatives) to specify who to love. He used "al-Qurba", which is indicative of a group near to the Prophet (a.s.) not only by blood relationship, but in character and spiritual perfection. Only a specific group can claim such relationship, and this group is none other than Ahlul'bayt (a.s.).

6) A brother asked: "Can you present more proof from the Qur'an showing that this verse cannot refer to the Quraishi disbelievers easing up on the Prophet and allowing him to preach the Message of Islam?"

In answering this, it should first be stated that we have already shown sufficient evidence that if we say 42:23 is about the Quraishi disbelievers leaving the Prophet alone and allowing him to preach without any obstacle, then it goes against many decisive verses of the Qur'an (i.e. 25:57, 34:47, etc.). Refer to the original article.

Here is more proof from al-Qur'an:

Ãóáóåõãú ÃóÑúÌõáñ íóãúÔõæäó ÈöåóÇ Ãóãú áóåõãú ÃóíúÏò íóÈúØöÔõæäó ÈöåóÇ Ãóãú áóåõãú ÃóÚúíõäñ íõÈúÕöÑõæäó ÈöåóÇ Ãóãú áóåõãú ÂÐóÇäñ íóÓúãóÚõæäó ÈöåóÇ Þõáö ÇÏúÚõæÇú ÔõÑóßóÇÁßõãú Ëõãøó ßöíÏõæäö ÝóáÇó ÊõäÙöÑõæäö

"Have they feet with which they walk, or have they hands with which they hold, or have they eyes with which they see, or have they ears with which they hear? Say: Call your associates, then make a struggle (to prevail) against me and give me no respite." (7:195)

Such a verse is clear proof that it is of no concern to the Prophet (a.s.) what the disbelievers will do to him in trying to stop him from spreading Islam.

CONCLUSION:

Ayah Muwaddah, like the other verses of al-Qur'an, requires a thorough exegesis. Allah says in al-Qur'an:

"He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it their own interpretation." (3:7)

Ayah Muwaddah is a verse of conflict, because a proper Tafseer al-Qur'an (i.e. when we refer 42:23 to the other verses of al-Qur'an for further analysis) shows clearly the true status of Ahlul'bayt (a.s.) which only the Shi'a hold on to. No other schools in Islam can claim true following of Allah and Rasoolullah (a.s.) in light of such a clear exegesis. There is no challenging such a Tafseer, and Allah has given proof of the Wilayah of Aal'Muhammad (a.s.) all over Kitab Allah. We just have to look deeper and appreciate the fact that the Qur'an is something truly profound and deserving of thorough study. The examinations of Ayah Muwaddah presented here have only begun to scratch the surface.

Wa'salaam.

- Syed Mansab Ali Jafri

For further explanation of the subject read the following topics set by our learned brother mansab.Jafri.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Wasalam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

Our brother mansab.Jafri has dealt with different commentaries of Ayat e Muwaddat in different topics. Following was one of the best of his posts on the subject.

For further explanation of the subject read the following topics set by our learned brother mansab.Jafri.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Wasalam.

According to your quoted interpretation, the addressees of 42:23 are believers. Just have a look, all the following verses containing the same subject ‘not asking ajr’ are being address to non-believers:

10:72 "But if ye turn back, (consider): no reward have I asked of you: my reward is only due from Allah, and I have been commanded to be of those who submit to Allah's will (in Islam)."

11:29 "And O my people! I ask you for no wealth in return: my reward is from none but Allah. But I will not drive away (in contempt) those who believe: for verily they are to meet their Lord, and ye I see are the ignorant ones!

11:51 "O my people! I ask of you no reward for this (Message). My reward is from none but Him who created me: Will ye not then understand?

26:127 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds.

26:109 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds:

26:145 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds.

26:164 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the lord of the Worlds.

26:180 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds.

34:47 Say: "No reward do I ask of you: it is (all) in your interest: my reward is only due from Allah. And He is witness to all things."

But when the verse 42:23 comes, you claim that it is addressed to believers. Why?

And if you attach this verse to some other verses such as (25:57), as is quoted in your post as following: "al-Qurba" in the Verse of Muwaddah refers only to the Ahlul'bayt, whom are the guides of mankind and are the ones whom Allah commands us to follow so that we should be on the Right Path.”

Then the proper understanding of the verse 42:23 is as following:

What Rasool Allah(saw) is conveying is that I don’t ask any reward from you but that you love ahlul bait (because they are the guides of mankind and are the ones whom Allah commands us to follow so that we should be on the Right Path).

If we take the ayah in the same sense then one point comes to mind: In the presence of Rasool Allah(saw) what was the need to follow ahlul bait which at that time consisted of Fatimah(ra) only, and latter Ali(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) were to be a part of it(as sunni commentaries claim that the verse was revealed in Makkah before the marriage of Ali(ra) and Fatimah(ra). It means that this ayah was revealed for future only and had no relevance to present time (at that time when it was revealed). Is it? It means the key to guidance is being delivered to mankind through this ayah but it will works only when Ali(ra) would marry Fatimah(ra) and Ali(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) would become Imams.

Can you clear this point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to your quoted interpretation, the addressees of 42:23 are believers. Just have a look, all the following verses containing the same subject ‘not asking ajr’ are being address to non-believers:

10:72 "But if ye turn back, (consider): no reward have I asked of you: my reward is only due from Allah, and I have been commanded to be of those who submit to Allah's will (in Islam)."

11:29 "And O my people! I ask you for no wealth in return: my reward is from none but Allah. But I will not drive away (in contempt) those who believe: for verily they are to meet their Lord, and ye I see are the ignorant ones!

11:51 "O my people! I ask of you no reward for this (Message). My reward is from none but Him who created me: Will ye not then understand?

26:127 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds.

26:109 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds:

26:145 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds.

26:164 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the lord of the Worlds.

26:180 "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds.

34:47 Say: "No reward do I ask of you: it is (all) in your interest: my reward is only due from Allah. And He is witness to all things."

Salam

For 34:47, It can be translated as follows "Whatever wage I have asked for you, it is for yourselves". Therefore this would clarify that the Nabi (saw) is not seeking anything for his own benefit, but rather it's for ourselves. This must be the meaning of the verse because 25:57 can't be translated but that their is a wage. It would break all rules of conventional language to assume otherwise which is why I don't understand why Sunnis don't accept the wage is for taking a path to God.

But when the verse 42:23 comes, you claim that it is addressed to believers. Why?

Ok, say it applies to disbelievers only... what would it mean, no wage asked for what? a message they don't believe in. So in the context of disbelievers, it means, if you accept the message, there is no wage but this. As far it applies to believers, it means they owe that wage. So therefore it can be referring to everyone.

It's not very complicated.

So Prophets (as) are telling all the people, they are not saying that in accepting their message, they have to give money/reward.

But in the case of the Final Prophet (saw), it is clarified there is a fee, but it's not for us, not for the sake of the Nabi (so not a wage in the self rewarding sense), and it's for who wants to take a path to God, and that is infact a reminder to the worlds (love of light is an obligation and makes one remember Haq).

And if you attach this verse to some other verses such as (25:57), as is quoted in your post as following: "al-Qurba" in the Verse of Muwaddah refers only to the Ahlul'bayt, whom are the guides of mankind and are the ones whom Allah commands us to follow so that we should be on the Right Path.”

Then the proper understanding of the verse 42:23 is as following:

What Rasool Allah(saw) is conveying is that I don’t ask any reward from you but that you love ahlul bait (because they are the guides of mankind and are the ones whom Allah commands us to follow so that we should be on the Right Path).

If we take the ayah in the same sense then one point comes to mind: In the presence of Rasool Allah(saw) what was the need to follow ahlul bait which at that time consisted of Fatimah(ra) only, and latter Ali(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) were to be a part of it(as sunni commentaries claim that the verse was revealed in Makkah before the marriage of Ali(ra) and Fatimah(ra). It means that this ayah was revealed for future only and had no relevance to present time (at that time when it was revealed). Is it? It means the key to guidance is being delivered to mankind through this ayah but it will works only when Ali(ra) would marry Fatimah(ra) and Ali(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) would become Imams.

Our hadiths say they were revealed after Ahlul-Kisaa were born so we don't accept this being revealed before. As far as Surahs are concerned, as far as I know Sunnis and Shias are in agreement the Mecca Surahs can have later Madina verses added. So there is real no problem here.

But let's entertain this is a valid argument, it would not change anything, because in any language, and in Arabic, you can refer to people in generic sense, and it would apply to everyone whom makes that description, and it would stay gramiccaly correct even if it was one person. For example, "Nisaana" in mubahila verse meant "our women", so whomever would be in our women, would be included. As no one but Fatima (as) was a member of Ahlebayt (as), at that time, it was her specifically. But if others were included in that, then he would be obligated to bring them.

Therefore it can refer to generic and be only Ali (as) (or Ali (as) and Fatima (as)) in the same way. These are basic rules of grammar. When rest are born, they would be included in the obligation to love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

For 34:47, It can be translated as follows "Whatever wage I have asked for you, it is for yourselves". Therefore this would clarify that the Nabi (saw) is not seeking anything for his own benefit, but rather it's for ourselves. This must be the meaning of the verse because 25:57 can't be translated but that their is a wage. It would break all rules of conventional language to assume otherwise which is why I don't understand why Sunnis don't accept the wage is for taking a path to God.

Ok, say it applies to disbelievers only... what would it mean, no wage asked for what? a message they don't believe in. So in the context of disbelievers, it means, if you accept the message, there is no wage but this. As far it applies to believers, it means they owe that wage. So therefore it can be referring to everyone.

It's not very complicated.

So Prophets (as) are telling all the people, they are not saying that in accepting their message, they have to give money/reward.

But in the case of the Final Prophet (saw), it is clarified there is a fee, but it's not for us, not for the sake of the Nabi (so not a wage in the self rewarding sense), and it's for who wants to take a path to God, and that is infact a reminder to the worlds (love of light is an obligation and makes one remember Haq).

Our hadiths say they were revealed after Ahlul-Kisaa were born so we don't accept this being revealed before. As far as Surahs are concerned, as far as I know Sunnis and Shias are in agreement the Mecca Surahs can have later Madina verses added. So there is real no problem here.

But let's entertain this is a valid argument, it would not change anything, because in any language, and in Arabic, you can refer to people in generic sense, and it would apply to everyone whom makes that description, and it would stay gramiccaly correct even if it was one person. For example, "Nisaana" in mubahila verse meant "our women", so whomever would be in our women, would be included. As no one but Fatima (as) was a member of Ahlebayt (as), at that time, it was her specifically. But if others were included in that, then he would be obligated to bring them.

Therefore it can refer to generic and be only Ali (as) (or Ali (as) and Fatima (as)) in the same way. These are basic rules of grammar. When rest are born, they would be included in the obligation to love.

The concept of 'not asking ajr' is simple. Rasool is saying that he is not asking anything from the (disbelievers), since the responsibility of rasool is to convey Allah’s message and nothing else and no worldly gain and his reward is from Allah. So as the responsibility of a Rasool is to deliver Allah’s message, so they(disbelievers) should embrace Islam. And if they embrace Islam, it would benefit to themselves and would be their own ajr. So this is the concept which is appropriate as far as disbelievers are concerned. For that reason, all such 10, 11 ayah are addressed to disbelievers.

Now if we assume that 10 ayahs r addressed to disbelievers and the one ayah 42:23 is being addressed to believers then there comes a logical flaw in it. Because the 'believers' who have already embraced Islam and they are on the right path, what is the need to ask them to follow ahlul bait(in other words to follow Imams)? Does it mean this ayah was revealed for future and not for that time?

Sunnis don't accept the wage is for taking a path to God

I accept that the wage is for taking a path to God. For that reason I m arguing that the people(if you claim that the verse is addressed to believers) who have already took the path of God, what is the relevance of the verse 42:23 for them?

As par your concept, imamat comes after risalat. And it is logical also because in the presence of Rasool Allah, we don’t need any other source of guidance. It could be logical only after risalat. Even if we believe that at that time, Ali(ra) got married to Fatimah(ra) and Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) were born even(though they were kids then), but what makes it illogical is that, in the presence of Rasool Allah(pbuh) the believers are being asked to follow ahlul bait. Does this verse not undermine the concept of Risalat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[2.11] And when it is said to them, Do not make mischief in the land, they say: We are but peace-makers.[2.12] Now surely they themselves are the mischief makers, but they do not perceive.

[2.13] And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.

you know, every time i read this im reminded so forcefully of abu bakr and umar. heres why

- both claimed to be peace makers, yet both caused no end of mischief by things like usurping the caliphate, denying fadak, burning of the house, disobeying the prophet, innovating their own religion and draft dodging. (all can be sourced if anyone thinks im lying)

- the second ayat reminds me of a story i heard from a sunni site how umar converted, wasnt that his first response before he tried to kill the prophet as an idol worshipper?

heres my proof - once again from tafsir al mizan

if that isnt a direct reference to abu bakr, umar and usman (take a look at their "leadership" as an EPITOME of "groping in the dark") then please, someone prove me wrong by all means.

Oh my God! Abu bakr and umar did:

1)caused mischief

2)usurping the caliphate

3)burning of the houses

4)DISOBEYING Prophet

5)innovating their own religion

What was the savior of Islam (Ali ra) was doing at that time?

Why did not he try to save Islam from them who ruled for more than 20 yrs?

Why did he not raise his sword to fight the mischief?

Why did he remain silent when burning of the houses was going on?

Why did he take bait from those who were munafiq when imam hussain(ra) refused to take bait from yazid?

And it all happened when Allah had told that 'i have completed your religion' and when Islamic govt had been established.

Today's Muslims have given their fatwa about Ahmadiya that they r non-Muslims. Why did Ali(ra) keep silence over the damage of Islam from two sheikhain?

In the campaign of damaging the image of two sheikrain, What image you r portraying of Ali(ra)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the people of Musa violated their oath of loyalty to Harun and followed Samayri the magician, the ummah of Muhammad also turned their back upon Ali and pursued their own fancies. In this way the iman of the people was tested, and they were found doing injustice to themselves. As stated in verse 3 of this surah a true believer must believe in the unseen. In view of the limitations of human wisdom, reliance upon the divinely chosen guides is the surest way to the right path. If one does not follow the Holy Prophet and his divinely chosen holy Imams, it is the deviator who suffers the consequences by being unjust to himself because the guides remain independent of the mischief of the deserters.

What did the people of Musa do? Allah does mention it in Quran:

[Pickthal 2:51] And when We did appoint for Moses forty nights (of solitude), and then ye chose the calf, when he had gone from you, and were wrong-doers.

Now see Allah is not complaining that you people violated your oath of loyalty to Harun, what Allah is saying is that:

Those who took the Calf (for god), the wrath from their Lord and abasement shall overtake them in this world; and so We recompense the forgers.(7:152)

It simply means that Allah’s wrath for them was due to the ‘shirk’ which they started after Mosa.

Now what kind of comparison you intend to do with the ummah of Muhammad?

Did they start ‘shirk’? Did they make a Calf and start worshiping of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did the people of Musa do? Allah does mention it in Quran:

[Pickthal 2:51] And when We did appoint for Moses forty nights (of solitude), and then ye chose the calf, when he had gone from you, and were wrong-doers.

Now see Allah is not complaining that you people violated your oath of loyalty to Harun, what Allah is saying is that:

Those who took the Calf (for god), the wrath from their Lord and abasement shall overtake them in this world; and so We recompense the forgers.(7:152)

It simply means that Allah’s wrath for them was due to the ‘shirk’ which they started after Mosa.

Now what kind of comparison you intend to do with the ummah of Muhammad?

Did they start ‘shirk’? Did they make a Calf and start worshiping of it?

Irrespective of the fact that What the nation of Mosus (as) did and what Allah complained, Was non obedience of Aaron (as) and disobeying of him (as) was justified?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrespective of the fact that What the nation of Mosus (as) did and what Allah complained, Was non obedience of Aaron (as) and disobeying of him (as) was justified?

Harun was the prophet of Allah and a prophet is sent to convey Allah’s message.so his disobedience simple means the disobedience of Allah.

Now the question is not whether the disobedience of Harun was justified or not(though I have cleared this point above), the question is in which matter disobedience was done. And what is the point Quran does mention in the story. And the point is ‘shirk’.

They started shirk by disregarding Harun’s warning.So Allah revealed it: Those who took the Calf (for god), the wrath from their Lord and abasement shall overtake them in this world; and so We recompense the forgers.(7:152)

Now how can you compare it with the ummah of Muhammad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concept of 'not asking ajr' is simple. Rasool is saying that he is not asking anything from the (disbelievers), since the responsibility of rasool is to convey Allah’s message and nothing else and no worldly gain and his reward is from Allah. So as the responsibility of a Rasool is to deliver Allah’s message, so they(disbelievers) should embrace Islam. And if they embrace Islam, it would benefit to themselves and would be their own ajr. So this is the concept which is appropriate as far as disbelievers are concerned. For that reason, all such 10, 11 ayah are addressed to disbelievers.

I already explained. Also don't mix the verses with what other Prophets (as) said (that they ask no wage, (to what the Prophet (saw) said))...

Now if we assume that 10 ayahs r addressed to disbelievers and the one ayah 42:23 is being addressed to believers then there comes a logical flaw in it. Because the 'believers' who have already embraced Islam and they are on the right path, what is the need to ask them to follow ahlul bait(in other words to follow Imams)? Does it mean this ayah was revealed for future and not for that time?

The verse has to apply for that time and for all time.

So loving Ali (as) and Hassan (as) and Hussain (as) and Fatima (as) at that time would mean what? It would be loving the same light of Mohammad (pbuh)..... So it's showing if they love Ali (as), they would be taking a path to God, since the love of light would manifest into action. In other words, they are to be attracted to their spirit and also it implies this love would keep them on the path to God.

Now I want to bring an important issue regarding that and it may revolve around the Harun (as) issue. The people of Musa (as) obeyed Musa (as) when he came back, because of a reverence they had for him. But Harun (as) was not give that same reverence... in fact, it's obvious they loved Musa (as) at a whole different level then Harun (as)... This is despite them both being Anbiya (as), walking the same path, and both being leaders of the community. Now I think this type of love had nothing to do with the light in Musa (as).. it had to do with hero type appreciation...something that is common among all people towards different heroes, it had more to do with the love of world because it had to do with their identity...in other words, their love of Musa (as) was really a worldly love that came out of self-love, if it was real love, then it would have applied to Harun (as).

If it was for the love of the goodness/honor/dignity/soul purely, then that love would have been same to Harun (as).

Now it's the same with the case of Ali (as). Therefore, it's emphasizing in accepting the Message, one must be ready to love Ahlebait (as) for that is the fee of the message. In other words, you would be not really loving the Ideals of the message and certainly not the Path it brings and not in reality Mohammad (pbuh) if you don't love his pure exalted family.

So this how it applies at that time, that if they recognize Ali (as) and Hassan (as) and Hussain (as) and Fatima (as) and love them, they would be taking a path to God, because then there love for Islam, God and Mohammad (pbuh) would be pure, and it would not be that of supposive love and reverence the people of Musa (as) had for Musa (as).... It's rather an illusion. If their love and respect where on Haq, then it would apply to Harun (as). So here it's the same. This is how it applies to people already following Mohammad (pbuh)...

If someone was not following Mohammad (pbuh), then the verse also implies to him, and that implies that loving Qarba implies loving their way, which would translate in following Mohammad (pbuh).

I accept that the wage is for taking a path to God. For that reason I m arguing that the people(if you claim that the verse is addressed to believers) who have already took the path of God, what is the relevance of the verse 42:23 for them?

So why do you deny their is wage? And where does the Quran clarify that wage? 42:23 is obviously clarifying the wage, that else where has been said to be a reminder to the worlds, for our sake, and for taking a path to God.

As par your concept, imamat comes after risalat. And it is logical also because in the presence of Rasool Allah, we don’t need any other source of guidance. It could be logical only after risalat. Even if we believe that at that time, Ali(ra) got married to Fatimah(ra) and Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) were born even(though they were kids then), but what makes it illogical is that, in the presence of Rasool Allah(pbuh) the believers are being asked to follow ahlul bait. Does this verse not undermine the concept of Risalat?

No it doesn't...

During time Musa (as) is leading, obviously there is only one person to follow, but is this true following of God and loving of light, if that love and loyalty is not at the same time given to Harun (as)...

Also loving them means they are all Ideals, and at any rank of any of the umma of Mohammad (pbuh), loving the Qarba would be a means of achieving a higher rank. Another way to think of this is during the time of Isa (as) and Yahya (as) and Zakaria (as) and Mariam (as), loving all of them is ideal and means of taking a path to God. If someone didn't love Mariam (as), then there love for the rest is not really based on loving light and Haq, because that would make them love Mariam (as)....

Also following the example of all at the same time is ok as far as I understand. And another thing you can think of is the twelve Naqeebs of Musa (as). You would obey them and follow them and love them and this would not undermine Musa (as) leadership, but in fact, goes hand to hand with it.

So it doesn't undermine the message...

As for when Imamate was declared, these verses are obviously implicit and only explicit when all combined. When you put all the verses of the wage, it points to Imamate. But you have to think about it. It's the same with verse 5:55 and 4:59...

Therefore Imamate was already in Quran, but it needed to clear declaration, and this is why God commands Mohammad (pbuh) to convey it in 5:67. So there is no conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems you r confused in your thinking….

Ok let’s argue further….

I already explained. Also don't mix the verses with what other Prophets (as) said (that they ask no wage, (to what the Prophet (saw) said))...

Ok you and your commentators can compare verse 42:23 with the verse 25:57, but I m forbidden to do that. What kind of rule is it????

So why do you deny their is wage? And where does the Quran clarify that wage?

Quran mentions the ajr in the following verse:

"No AJR (wage/reward) do I ask of you for it except that who wants to may take a path to his Lord" (25:57)

Ok see it with the following verse:

Say: I do not ask of you any AJR (wage/reward) for it but love fil-qurba.(42:23)

You people claim that :

Love fil-qurba(42:23) = take a path to his Lord(25:57)

But the addressee of the first part of verse (42:23) are non-believers and (25:57) are believers.

Ok if the meaning of the verse would be simple that ‘love my family’, then it is ok coz we should love Prophet’s family. But the questions arise because your interpreters claim that love for ahlul bait in the verse = Follow them.

So my question is same that the people who are called believers after they believe in the oneness of God, His angels, the day of judgment, all the prophets, finality of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and who r definitely following the path of Prophet(pbuh), what is the need to follow ahlul bait or imamat at that time? Was the presence of Prophet (pbuh) not enough for the believers of that time? Was Prophet’s guidance when he was alive not sufficed? And then you say that it does not undermine the concept of prophethood, neither does it make this concept ambiguous.

Another way to think of this is during the time of Isa (as) and Yahya (as) and Zakaria (as) and Mariam (as), loving all of them is ideal and means of taking a path to God. If someone didn't love Mariam (as), then there love for the rest is not really based on loving light and Haq, because that would make them love Mariam (as)....

I don’t know what do you want to prove by it. But ok just exclude Maryam(as) from the list for a moment to understand a simple concept i.e. why believing in all prophets (in other words as you say loving all prophets) is mandatory without which we cant be called believers and why we cant skip a single prophet. All prophets have the same task i.e. they deliver Allah’s message. If you don’t love one prophet and reject him then it means you reject Allah’s message, so you can not be called believers.

Now let me know how do you compare this concept with verse 42:23?

and also it implies this love would keep them on the path to God.

The believers who r already on the path to God, then?

Now I want to bring an important issue regarding that and it may revolve around the Harun (as) issue. The people of Musa (as) obeyed Musa (as) when he came back, because of a reverence they had for him. But Harun (as) was not give that same reverence... in fact, it's obvious they loved Musa (as) at a whole different level then Harun (as)...

It was not the matter of love or reverence but it was the matter of ‘shirk’ which is mentioned in Quran. Can you quote any verse arguing that the matter was about giving more or less reverence to Musa(as) or Harun(as)? But I can quote the verse that the whole matter was about ‘shirk’.

Those who took the Calf (for god), the wrath from their Lord and abasement shall overtake them in this world; and so We recompense the forgers.(7:152)

one must be ready to love Ahlebait (as) for that is the fee of the message.

You mean to say that Rasool Allah is saying that since I have shown you the light of Islam so you will have to pay a fee for it… service requires charges…does it make sense??? And again the question is not only loving ahlul bait but to follow them in the presence of Rasool Allah.

PPS: And please be clear coz Quran cannot be interpreted by putting platonic philosophies. We go for interpretations to understand Quran in the easiest way and not to make it more complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harun was the prophet of Allah and a prophet is sent to convey Allah’s message.so his disobedience simple means the disobedience of Allah.

Now the question is not whether the disobedience of Harun was justified or not(though I have cleared this point above), the question is in which matter disobedience was done. And what is the point Quran does mention in the story. And the point is ‘shirk’.

They started shirk by disregarding Harun’s warning.So Allah revealed it: Those who took the Calf (for god), the wrath from their Lord and abasement shall overtake them in this world; and so We recompense the forgers.(7:152)

Now how can you compare it with the ummah of Muhammad?

The committing of Shirk by the nation of Mosus (as) was one of the consequence of the disobedience of Prophet Haroon (as).

And We appointed for Mûsa (Moses) thirty nights and added (to the period) ten (more), and he completed the term, appointed by his Lord, of forty nights. And Mûsa (Moses) said to his brother Hârûn (Aaron): "Replace me among my people, act in the Right Way (by ordering the people to obey Allâh and to worship Him Alone) and follow not the way of the Mufsidûn (mischief-makers)." [Quran 7:142]

And this was the duty performed by Aaron (as).

And Hârûn (Aaron) indeed had said to them beforehand: "O my people! You are being tried in this, and verily, your Lord is (Allâh) the Most Gracious, so follow me and obey my order." [Quran 20:90]

This verse further proves that by disobeying Aaron (as) the nation of Mosus (as) committed Shirk.

And when Mûsa (Moses) returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said: "What an evil thing is that which you have done (i.e. worshipping the calf) during my absence. Did you hasten and go ahead as regards the matter of your Lord (you left His worship)?" And he threw down the Tablets and seized his brother by (the hair of) his head and dragged him towards him. Hârûn (Aaron) said: "O son of my mother! Indeed the people judged me weak and were about to kill me, so make not the enemies rejoice over me, nor put me amongst the people who are Zâlimûn (wrong-doers)." [Quran 7:150]

Similarly, the nation of Prophet (pbuh) disobeyed and left alone Ali bin Abi Talib (as) as a result of which they lost the right path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

25:57 did not say "I ask you no wage for it but to take a path to God"...this is what I think you are taking it to mean. Rather it says "I ask you no wage for it but that whom wants to may take a path to God"

"whom wants to may take a path to God", is not an instruction...therefore it's not a wage. Unless you can show how that itself is a wage.

At any rate, it shows there is a wage either way you see it.

Now you brought a point, one is addressed to believers and one is addressed to disbelievers...

I told you there can't be a difference... If you tell disbelievers that asks no wage for the message, it means that if they accept the message, they would not have to pay a due for it. So this means once they become believers, they don't owe anything to the Messenger as a fee. So it would be contradicted if he asked the believers... because a wage only makes sense to be paid once believed... when told to the disbelievers it means that in believing the message, there will be no wage...

To make it more clearly, he asking disbelievers to believe, and if he asks believers for a wage... he would be asking them for a wage...

A->B

B->C

Then A->C. Basic rules of logic.

But we see there is no wage for it but love of the kin... and that was not asked except that whom wants to may take a path to God.

As for the other objection it's already been explained and the issue of Shirk or not is irrelevant. My point was that there love and reverence Musa (as) was not due to Haq... why would they not obey Harun (as) to stop Shirk but Obey Musa (as)?

That is the whole point of the discussion and it very well explains why it would be taking a path for everyone.

Edited by Awakened

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The committing of Shirk by the nation of Mosus (as) was one of the consequence of the disobedience of Prophet Haroon (as).

And Hârûn (Aaron) indeed had said to them beforehand: "O my people! You are being tried in this, and verily, your Lord is (Allâh) the Most Gracious, so follow me and obey my order." [Quran 20:90]

You have raised the same point which I have cleared in my previous post.

You need to understand the same topic in different words.

What was the ACT OF DISOBEDIENCE to Harun(as)?

What was he preventing his people from?

What his people did by not following him?

Quran clears these questions:

“7:148. The people of Moses made, in his absence, out of their ornaments, the image of calf, (for worship): it seemed to low: did they not see that it could neither speak to them, nor show them the way? They took it for worship and they did wrong.”

They did SHIRK which increased Allah’s wrath and Allah said:

“Those who took the Calf (for god), the wrath from their Lord and abasement shall overtake them in this world; and so We recompense the forgers.(7:152)”

"Replace me among my people, act in the Right Way (by ordering the people to obey Allâh and to worship Him Alone) and follow not the way of the Mufsidûn (mischief-makers)." [Quran 7:142]

What was the right way they deviated from??????????

‘To obey Allâh and to worship Him Alone’.

What wrong they did?

Quran mentions this fact clearly IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND:

“7:148. The people of Moses made, in his absence, out of their ornaments, the image of calf, (for worship): it seemed to low: did they not see that it could neither speak to them, nor show them the way? They took it for worship and they did wrong.”

So Holy Quran cleared this fact without ambiguity that Harun (as) was preventing his people from shirk but which they continued.

Again see what Musa is saying while his return:

And when Mûsa (Moses) returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said: "What an evil thing is that which you have done (i.e. worshipping the calf) during my absence. Did you hasten and go ahead as regards the matter of your Lord (you left His worship)?"

‘What an evil thing’? It was ‘worshipping the calf’ and ‘left Allah’s worship’.

Similarly, the nation of Prophet (pbuh) disobeyed and left alone Ali bin Abi Talib (as) as a result of which they lost the right path.

What the nation of Muhammad did and doing right now?????

Did they start ‘SHIRK’? Are they doing ‘shirk’ for the last 1400 years??

It is insult to the nation of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

25:57 did not say "I ask you no wage for it but to take a path to God"...this is what I think you are taking it to mean. Rather it says "I ask you no wage for it but that whom wants to may take a path to God"

"whom wants to may take a path to God", is not an instruction...therefore it's not a wage. Unless you can show how that itself is a wage.

At any rate, it shows there is a wage either way you see it.

Now you brought a point, one is addressed to believers and one is addressed to disbelievers...

I told you there can't be a difference... If you tell disbelievers that asks no wage for the message, it means that if they accept the message, they would not have to pay a due for it. So this means once they become believers, they don't owe anything to the Messenger as a fee. So it would be contradicted if he asked the believers... because a wage only makes sense to be paid once believed... when told to the disbelievers it means that in believing the message, there will be no wage...

To make it more clearly, he asking disbelievers to believe, and if he asks believers for a wage... he would be asking them for a wage...

A->B

B->C

Then A->C. Basic rules of logic.

But we see there is no wage for it but love of the kin... and that was not asked except that whom wants to may take a path to God.

As for the other objection it's already been explained and the issue of Shirk or not is irrelevant. My point was that there love and reverence Musa (as) was not due to Haq... why would they not obey Harun (as) to stop Shirk but Obey Musa (as)?

That is the whole point of the discussion and it very well explains why it would be taking a path for everyone.

I have raised some simple questions and need simple answers(without philosophy):

The people who are called believers after they believe in the oneness of God, His angels, the day of judgment, all the prophets, finality of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and who r definitely following the path of Prophet(pbuh), what is the need to follow ahlul bait or imamat at that time? Was the presence of Prophet (pbuh) not enough for the believers of that time? Was Prophet’s guidance when he was alive not sufficed?

the issue of Shirk or not is irrelevant.

For me it is very important and not irrelevant because Allah has clearly mentioned it through His divine verses regarding Musa's story, which cannot be considered irrelevant at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

æóáóÇ íóãúáößõ ÇáøóÐöíäó íóÏúÚõæäó ãöä Ïõæäöåö ÇáÔøóÝóÇÚóÉó ÅöáøóÇ ãóä ÔóåöÏó ÈöÇáúÍóÞøö æóåõãú íóÚúáóãõæäó {86}

And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession, but he who bears witness of the truth and they know (him).

[surah Zukhuruf Ayat 86]

According to this verse he who bears witness to the truth has the power of intercession. Refer to the Hud : 17 and Rad : 43 according to which Ali ibn abi Talib (as) is the witness. As the greatest witness (shahid) Imam Husayn (refer to the commentary of Saffat: 107 for dhibhin azim) has the power of intercession.

Surah Hud:

Is he then who has with him clear proof from his Lord, and a witness from Him recites it and before it (is) the Book of Musa, a guide and a mercy? These believe in it; and whoever of the (different) parties disbelieves in it, the Fire will be their promised meeting-place. Be not then in doubt thereon: surely it is the truth from your Lord, but most men do not believe. [surah Hud Ayat 17]

There are several traditions reported on the authority of Ahl ul Bayt, and also narrated by well-known Muslim scholars like Jalal al Din al Suyuti in Durr al Manthur, Muhammad bin Ahmad Qartabi in Tafsir Qartabi, Sayyid Hashim Bahrayni in Tafsir Burhan, Abd Ali bin Jumah Hawyazi in Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, Abu Ali al Tabrasi in Tafsir Majma al Bayan, Abu Ishaq al Thalabi in Tasir al Kabir, and Abu Nu-aym in Hilyatul Awliya that shahid in this verse refers to Ali ibn abi Talib, just as shahid in verse 43 of ar Rad also refers to Imam Ali.

In reply to a question Imam Ali said that in "Is he then (like unto him) who has a clear proof from his Lord, and a witness, from Him, follows him," the Holy Prophet is the divine "bayyanah" and I am the witness, guide and mercy.

Allah has declared Ali to be the Imam who alone testifies the truth about Allah and His Prophet, and like the Holy Prophet who is "mercy unto the world", he is also "mercy'? because both of them are from one and the same divine light, therefore, Ali is the only true successor of the Holy Prophet whom all the Muslims should follow if they have truly and sincerely surrendered themselves to the will of Allah.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

In this verse yatlu means to follow, and to translate it "to recite" is incorrect as there is no mention of anything to be recited. On the contrary a "person" has been mentioned, who is with clear evidence from his Lord. Therefore "to recite" is meaningless. It is clearly said that there is a person who has come with clear evidence from Allah and there is another who immediately follows and bears witness to the truthfulness of the first; and before him the book of Musa had borne witness.

All commentators agree that the person with the clear evidence from Allah is the Holy Prophet.

The person who follows him is next to him, none come between these two.

The Holy Prophet is the first person. His witness is the second person.

The same testimony was borne by the book of Musa before.

Both are "Imam" and "Rahmah" (also refer to Ahqaf: 12).

The witness is Ali ibn abi Talib as has been mentioned by a large number of Muslim scholars mentioned above.

Surah Raad:

And those who disbelieve say: You are not a messenger. Say: Allah is sufficient as a witness between me and you and whoever has knowledge of the Book. [surah Ra'ad Ayat 43]

Surah ar Rad deals with the sovereignty, power, authority and wisdom of Allah. He is the creator of the universe and all that which is in it, the laws which govern and operate it, and the laws which (must) govern and operate the human life, individually as well as collectively. The disbelievers, instead of deriving advantage from the respite, are hastening unto the ultimate and eternal loss and deprivation (punishment) by refusing to believe in the day of judgement.

To every nation one or more messengers of Allah came as warners, and after the last messenger of Allah, there is a divinely appointed guide in every age to administer the affairs of the human society, as a true successor of the prophet .

Allah knows the seen and the unseen. Nothing is hidden from Him.

Angles are deputed to take care of and keep watch over every human being.

Bounties and favours, bestowed on any individual, are not withdrawn unless there are valid reasons.

Everything obeys Allah's commands, praises Him and glorifies Him.

The blind disbelievers and the knowing believers are not equal.

Those who establish salat, spend in the way of Allah and exercise self-control earn Allah's pleasure.

Those who do not fulfil the covenants made with Allah through His prophet are hypocrites, condemned for ever.

Allah is the rabbul alamin - the sustainer and cherisher of all that which has been created by Him.

Instead of receiving guidance from the (events of) history which has recorded the fact that people of yore witnessed the signs or miracles of Allah yet did not believe and were destroyed, the people in the times of the Holy Prophet, like their ancestors, again want to repeat history, but miracles are not demonstrated to provide enjoyment to the disbelievers.

Allah's plan is His will which takes immediate effect. The preserved tablet or the mother book contains the will of Allah-His decrees.

The messengers of Allah lived among the people as human beings, subject to the laws made by Allah.

Imam Ali ibn abi Talib is "he who has the knowledge of the book", and is therefore, along with Allah, a witness of the prophethood of the Holy Prophet.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

æóáóÞóÏú ÂÊóíúäóÇ Èóäöí ÅöÓúÑóÇÆöíáó ÇáúßöÊóÇÈó æóÇáúÍõßúãó æóÇáäõøÈõæóøÉó æóÑóÒóÞúäóÇåõã ãöøäó ÇáØóøíöøÈóÇÊö æóÝóÖóøáúäóÇåõãú Úóáóì ÇáúÚóÇáóãöíäó {16}

And certainly We gave the Book and the wisdom and the prophecy to the children of Israel, and We gave them of the goodly things, and We made them excel the nations.[surah Al-Jaathiya Ayat No. 16]

Similarly Surah Baqarah Ayat No. 47 says :-

O children of Israel! call to mind My favor which I bestowed on you and that I made you excel the nations. [surah Baqra Ayat No. 47]

Surah Younas Ayat NO. 93 says :-

And certainly We lodged the children of Israel in a goodly abode and We provided them with good things; but they did not disagree until the knowledge had come to them; surely your Lord will judge between them on the resurrection day concerning that in which they disagreed. [surah Younas Ayat 93]

The Quran is a guidance and a mercy from the lord to the sincere believers, but as Aal e Imran: 138 says it is only a narration to the ordinary people. In view of Baqarah: 2, 177; Ahzab: 33, read with Waqi-ah: 77 to 99 and hadith al thaqalayn, guidance can only be had from the men of assured faith, the Ahl ul Bayt, because ignorant men are of no use or service to the cause of Allah. They have no power at all to guide people. Only the man of assured faith is a guide and a mercy.

The Holy Prophet said

"My Ahl ul Bayt are like the ark of Nuh. Whosoever sails on it is safe, and whosoever holds back is drowned and lost for ever."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

æóáóÇ ÊóÏúÚõ ãóÚó Çááóøåö ÅöáóåðÇ ÂÎóÑó áóÇ Åöáóåó ÅöáóøÇ åõæó ßõáõø ÔóíúÁò åóÇáößñ ÅöáóøÇ æóÌúåóåõ áóåõ ÇáúÍõßúãõ æóÅöáóíúåö ÊõÑúÌóÚõæäó {88}

And call not, besides Allah, on another god. There is no god but He. Everything (that exists) will perish except His own Face. To Him belongs the Command, and to Him will ye (all) be brought back. [surah Qasas Ayat No. 88]

Imam Ridā (a.s.) said: “The prophet of Allah and His Authorities on the earth are /wajhullāh/ by whom Allah, religion, and His cognition are paid attention to.” [ Tauhīd-i-Sadūq, P. 117]

We recite in Nudbah Supplication about the Expected Imam (May Allah hasten his glad advent): “Where is the Authority of Allah that will come?” And also we read in it: “Where is the Authority of Allah who pays attention to the saints?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

I read this on wikipedia about hanafi school of thought:

As the fourth Caliph, 'Ali, had transferred the Islamic capital to Kufa and the fact that many of the companions of the Prophet had settled there, the Hanafi School had based many of its rulings on Prophetic narrations (Hadith) transmitted by companions residing in Iraq, thus it came to be known as the Kufan or Iraqi school in earlier times. Hence 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud formed much of the base of the school, as well as other personalities from the household of the Prophet with whom Abu Hanifa had studied such as Muhammad al-Baqir, Ja'far al-Sadiq, and Zayd ibn 'Ali.

Is this true? Is Nahj ul Balagha a requirement for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

ÃóÝóãóä ßóÇäó ãõÄúãöäðÇ ßóãóä ßóÇäó ÝóÇÓöÞðÇ áóøÇ íóÓúÊóæõæäó {18}

Is he then who is a believer like him who is a transgressor? They are not equal.[surah Sajda Ayat No. 18]

These verses were revealed concerning the Ahl ul Bayt and their enemies.

All commentators and compilers of the traditions are unanimous that these verses relate to Ali ibn abi Talib on the one hand and Walid ibn Aqbah ibn Mu-it on the other. Wahidi relates in his book Asbab al Nuzul from Sa-id ibn Jubayr, who relates from Ibn Abbas that Walid said to Ali: "My spear is much sharper than yours, my speech is much more eloquent than yours and my army is larger than yours." Ali said: "Keep quiet. You lead an evil life." "Believer" refers to Ali, and "he who is a transgressor" refers to Walid.

Wallahu Alam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...