Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Wives Are Part Of Household Of Prophet

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

one thing i can prove here

that ummul momineen ayesha is not part of the ahlul bayt(as)

did she inherit the house

if she did then it must be sadaqa

as abu bakr had said

so is it ummul momineen ayesha siddiqua

or abu bakr siddique

another fabrication

(wasalam)

Edited by haideriam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 364
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

(bismillah)

(salam)

one thing i can prove here

that ummul momineen ayesha is not part of the ahlul bayt(as)

did she inherit the house

if she did then it must be sadaqa

as abu bakr had said

so is it ummul momineen ayesha siddiqua

or abu bakr siddique

another fabrication

(wasalam)

What fabrication u r talking about!

In arabic Siddiqua is used for married women.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Sayeda Khadija (as) was the most beloved wife of the Prophet (pbuh). And haideriam, what fabrication are you talking about?

(bismillah)

(salam)

fabrication - the hadith by which janabe fatima(sa) was denied fadak

that prophets' do not leave inheritance and what they leave is sadaqa to be distributed

i thought that was a given

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

one thing i can prove here

that ummul momineen ayesha is not part of the ahlul bayt(as)

So atleast you agree that other wives were?

did she inherit the house

No she didn't.

Because her house was her own property, prophet(saw) made the house of his wives as their own properties on their names, like hujre ayesha(ra) etc.....

No, where is it mentioned that the wives got the houses as inheritance, its our poor understanding and lack of basics.

And even in quran Allah says stays in your houses(33:33), Allah didn't say stay in prophets houses.

if she did then it must be sadaqa

as abu bakr had said

so is it ummul momineen ayesha siddiqua

or abu bakr siddique

another fabrication

(wasalam)

When a person lacks even in simple basics these foolish doubts are bound to rise...

So again the same advice, that atleast learn some basics....it will atleast help you answer your own arguments. Unless that neither the one answering you will take you seriously because whatever he will answer that will go above your head , nor you will understand it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

fabrication - the hadith by which janabe fatima(sa) was denied fadak

that prophets' do not leave inheritance and what they leave is sadaqa to be distributed

i thought that was a given

(wasalam)

Abu Bakr (ra) erred in his ijtihad. That makes the hadith a fabrication?!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Abu Bakr (ra) erred in his ijtihad. That makes the hadith a fabrication?!?

Sorry, but this is way beyond your status and proves your utmost ignorance of the DÎn. How can a non-mutjahid, non-scholar but a pure ignorant layperson like you determine a "ijtihâd mistake" of a Mujtahid like a Sâhabi Abu Bakr al-Siddîq (ÑÖí Çááå Úäå)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Sorry, but this is way beyond your status and proves your utmost ignorance of the DÎn. How can a non-mutjahid, non-scholar but a pure ignorant layperson like you determine a "ijtihâd mistake" of a Mujtahid like a Sâhabi Abu Bakr al-Siddîq (ÑÖí Çááå Úäå)?

(bismillah)

(salam)

bro fadl

come here for me to explain to you as to why it was not khata e ijtehad, but first answer my question

An invitation to Bro Ab'l Fadl

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

one thing i can prove here

that ummul momineen ayesha is not part of the ahlul bayt(as)

did she inherit the house

if she did then it must be sadaqa

as abu bakr had said

so is it ummul momineen ayesha siddiqua

or abu bakr siddique

another fabrication

(wasalam)

aysha is not part of the Ahlul Bayt because the aya talks about the highest form of purification (ie infallibility), and she is not just NOT infallible, she rose against the Imam of her time. And according to ummayad islam who like to apply the saying of the prophet (whoever rises against the Imam of his time, hit his neck...), her rise against the Imam of HER time, ie Imam Ali, who just happens to be one of the 4 ''rightly-guided'' khalifs, the same law should apply to her, as was applied on Imam Hussein when rising against Yazid.

Edited by thecontentedself
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but this is way beyond your status and proves your utmost ignorance of the DÎn. How can a non-mutjahid, non-scholar but a pure ignorant layperson like you determine a "ijtihâd mistake" of a Mujtahid like a Sâhabi Abu Bakr al-Siddîq (ÑÖí Çááå Úäå)?

1) Some of our 'ulema have agreed that Verse 7 of al-Hashr was revealed, Allah (swt) ordered the Prophet (pbuh) to honor the rights of his closest relatives over him. As such, he gifted Fadak to Sayeda Fatima (as). Those same scholars agree that anyone who denied her (as) this right after the Prophet's (pbuh) passing had committed a sin.

2) Stop assuming things about me. I never indicated that I actually believed Abu Bakr (ra) had erred in ijtihad. In fact, I have no position on this issue.

aysha is not part of the Ahlul Bayt because the aya talks about the highest form of purification (ie infallibility), and she is not just NOT infallible, she rose against the Imam of her time. And according to ummayad islam who like to apply the saying of the prophet (whoever rises against the Imam of his time, hit his neck...), her rise against the Imam of HER time, ie Imam Ali, who just happens to be one of the 4 ''rightly-guided'' khalifs, the same law should apply to her, as was applied on Imam Hussein when rising against Yazid.

1) You're referring to the general assumptions that Shi'i make when they try to define Ahlul Bayt.

2) Sunnis do not restrict Ahlul Bayt to just Imam Ali (as), Imam Husayn (as), Imam Hasan (as) and Sayeda Fatimah (as). The broadest definition of Ahlul Bayt was presented by Imam Shafi'i who said that all of Bani Hashim and the wives of Rasulullah are part of Ahlul Bayt.

3) Sunnis affirm that Imam Ali (as), Imam Husayn (as), Imam Hasan (as) and Sayeda Fatimah (as) make up a special part of Ahlul Bayt. This DOES NOT mean that they are infallible.

4) Sunnis DO NOT affirm or deny infallibility for anyone after the Prophet (pbuh).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1) Some of our 'ulema have agreed that Verse 7 of al-Hashr was revealed, Allah (swt) ordered the Prophet (pbuh) to honor the rights of his closest relatives over him. As such, he gifted Fadak to Sayeda Fatima (as). Those same scholars agree that anyone who denied her (as) this right after the Prophet's (pbuh) passing had committed a sin.

2) Stop assuming things about me. I never indicated that I actually believed Abu Bakr (ra) had erred in ijtihad. In fact, I have no position on this issue.

1) You're referring to the general assumptions that Shi'i make when they try to define Ahlul Bayt.

2) Sunnis do not restrict Ahlul Bayt to just Imam Ali (as), Imam Husayn (as), Imam Hasan (as) and Sayeda Fatimah (as). The broadest definition of Ahlul Bayt was presented by Imam Shafi'i who said that all of Bani Hashim and the wives of Rasulullah are part of Ahlul Bayt.

3) Sunnis affirm that Imam Ali (as), Imam Husayn (as), Imam Hasan (as) and Sayeda Fatimah (as) make up a special part of Ahlul Bayt. This DOES NOT mean that they are infallible.

4) Sunnis DO NOT affirm or deny infallibility for anyone after the Prophet (pbuh).

your assumptions are not an argument against us. ALL parties agree this aya is dictating that there is a certain group that is infallible. disprove that, then we can talk about who those people are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

your assumptions are not an argument against us. ALL parties agree this aya is dictating that there is a certain group that is infallible. disprove that, then we can talk about who those people are.

This is not true. In fact, the Twelver Shi'ites are alone in claiming this.

I literally quoted you saying it. Stop saying things you don't mean.

My apologies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Difference between "Normal Ahl-e-Bait" and "Ahlebait-e-Taharah" (also known as Ahlebait-e-Nabuwah)

I don't know why Shia brothers fight with Sunni brothers upon the world "Ahlebait"? According to Arabic Language, even the cat of house is also known as member of Ahlebait. Therefore, it is very wrong approach from Shia brothers to make Discussion about the word "Ahlebait" which indeed could include wives in it.

No, the dispute is not upon the word "Ahlebait", but the dispute is this that:

1. Either Wives are part of those Ahlebait, who were Promised by
Allah
to be made "Perfectly Purified"?

2. Or it were only the FIVE who came under the Blanket, and Rasool (saw) prayed for them and then
Allah
(saw) sent this Verse of "Perfect Purification" only and only for these 5 members of Ahlebait. Thus, they were known as "Ahlebait-e-Taharah" or the "Ahlebait-e-Nabuwah".

Therefore, correct Shia Aqeedah is this that:

1. Wives were only "Ahlebait-e-Muhammad"

2. But they were not "Ahlebait-e-Taharah/Nabuwah". This "Perfect Purification" is reserved by
Allah
(swt) only & only for these Five.

Challenge to Sunnies

Please bring a Single Sahih Tradition, where any of wife of Rasool (saw) ever claimed that she is part of Ahlebait-e-Taharah and has been "Perfectly Purified" in light of this Verse of Quran?

For the last 1400 years, you have not brought any such Tradition. But how strange is this that still you people claim that Wives are included in this Verse of "Perfect Purification".

Conclusion:

More than Sunnies, it is our Shia Community who needs to understand the REAL Issue. The Issue is not of wives being Ahlebait or Not, but the Issue is if wives are included in Ahlebait-e-Taharah or not, the Issue is if this Promise of being "Perfectly Purified" extends to "WHOLE Ahlebait of Muhammad" or this "Perfect Taharah" is limited only to these 5 special members of Ahlebait (as)".

First our own Shia community needs to understand this Issue and then Sunni brothers will follow. There is no Sunni (except for Nasibies like 'Ikramah, the slave of Ibn abbas) who claims that this verse of "Perfect Purification" is not revealed for these 5, but for wives.

Remember, Salman Farsi (alaihis Salam) was also part of Ahlebait of Muhammad as wives were, but he was also not included in "Ahlebait-e-Taharah" which was reserved only for those 5.

Two Different "Historical Events" in one Verse (according to Sunni Sahih Hadith)

Sunni brothers have only one argument (better to say "Conjecture"): "First part of Verse 33:33 refers to wives, therefore this 2nd part of Verse is also talking about wives"

But this argument is refuted by none other but "SAHIH" Sunni Ahadith themselves. These Sahih Sunni Ahadith themselves testify that:

1. There were "
Two
" Historical Events.

2. Both of them happened at "
Two
" different "
Timings
"

3. And both of them have no "
Connection
" with each other.

First Historical Incident (till first part of verse 33:33): In this incident, wives of Rasool (saw) made severe mistake and Allah (swt) threatening them. Quran telling us about this incident:

[
Shakir
33:28
]
O Prophet! say to your wives: If you desire this world's life and its adornment, then come, I will give you a provision and allow you to depart a goodly departing

[
Shakir
33:29
]
And if you desire
Allah
and His Messenger and the latter abode, then surely
Allah
has prepared for the doers of good among you a mighty reward.

[
Shakir
33:30
]
O wives of the prophet! whoever of you commits an open indecency, the punishment shall be increased to her doubly; and this IS easy to
Allah
.

[
Shakir
33:31
]
And whoever of you is obedient to
Allah
and His Messenger and does good, We will give to her her reward doubly, and We have prepared for her an honorable sustenance.

[
Shakir
33:32
]
O wives of the Prophet! you are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in (your) speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word.

[
Shakir
33:33
(only First Part)
]
And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey
Allah
and His Messenger.

There are many Sunni Ahadith which are telling about this Incident when these verses of Quran were revealed, which happened at certain "Time" when wives of Rasool (saw) demanded more Money and comfort of life.

2nd Historical Event (described in 2nd part of Verse 33:33): Sahih Sunni Hadith telling us that this is another "Historical Event", which happened at "another Time" and it has "No Connection" with the first Historical Event.

[
Shakir
33:33
(only Second Part)
]
....
Allah
only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.

Here is the testimony of Sahih Sunni Hadith that this 2nd Part of Verse has nothing to do with the 1st part of Verse as both Parts are referring to TWO different Incidents, which happened at TWO different times and these TWO have no connections with each other.

Narrated Aisha:

One day the Prophet (PBUH&HF) came out afternoon wearing a black cloak (upper garment or gown; long coat), then al-Hasan Ibn Ali came and the Prophet accommodated him under the cloak, then al-Husain came and entered the cloak, then Fatimah came and the Prophet entered her under the cloak, then Ali came and the Prophet entered him to the cloak as well. Then the Prophet recited: "Verily
Allah
intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O' People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification (the last sentence of Verse 33:33)."

Sunni reference:

  • Sahih Muslim, Chapter of virtues of companions, section of the virtues of the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1883, Tradition #61.

Challenges to Sunnies:

* Prove us that these are not TWO Different Historical Incidents, which did not happen at TWO different Times?

And if you accept the existence of these 2 Different Historical Incidents, then:

* Prove us (any Sahih Sunni Hadith) that 2nd Part of Verse 33:33 was revealed for Wives?

And if you could not prove it, then tell us how in world you are bringing this Argument (/Conjecture) for the last 14 Centuries that Wives are the Part of this 2nd Part of Verse and have been "Perfectly Purified" by Allah?

* Your own so called "Sahih Ahadith" are telling that both these Parts of same one Verse 33:33 were revealed for Two Different Incidents.

* Your own so called "Sahih Ahadith" are telling that from Verses 33:28 till 1st Part of Verse 33:33 were revealed for wives, where
Allah
(swt) threatening them for demanding worldly life.

*And then your own so called other "Sahih Hadith" are telling that 2nd Part of Verse 33:33 was revealed at Different Occasion, at Different Time, for Different Incident where 5 Special ones were collected under that Blanket and for them this 2nd part of Verse 33:33 was revealed.

So, either you stop claiming that 2nd part of verse 33:33 is revealed for wives. Or you should first DENY your so called "Sahih Ahadith" which are proving the opposite.

It is really funny and show the "Double Standards" that neither you deny your so called "Sahih Ahadith" nor you stop claiming that thing which is totally against your own "Sahih Ahadith".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Difference between "Normal Ahl-e-Bait" and "Ahlebait-e-Taharah" (also known as Ahlebait-e-Nabuwah)

I don't know why Shia brothers fight with Sunni brothers upon the world "Ahlebait"? According to Arabic Language, even the cat of house is also known as member of Ahlebait. Therefore, it is very wrong approach from Shia brothers to make Discussion about the word "Ahlebait" which indeed could include wives in it.

No, the dispute is not upon the word "Ahlebait", but the dispute is this that:

1. Either Wives are part of those Ahlebait, who were Promised by
Allah
to be made "Perfectly Purified"?

2. Or it were only the FIVE who came under the Blanket, and Rasool (saw) prayed for them and then
Allah
(saw) sent this Verse of "Perfect Purification" only and only for these 5 members of Ahlebait. Thus, they were known as "Ahlebait-e-Taharah" or the "Ahlebait-e-Nabuwah".

Therefore, correct Shia Aqeedah is this that:

1. Wives were only "Ahlebait-e-Muhammad"

2. But they were not "Ahlebait-e-Taharah/Nabuwah". This "Perfect Purification" is reserved by
Allah
(swt) only & only for these Five.

Challenge to Sunnies

Please bring a Single Sahih Tradition, where any of wife of Rasool (saw) ever claimed that she is part of Ahlebait-e-Taharah and has been "Perfectly Purified" in light of this Verse of Quran?

For the last 1400 years, you have not brought any such Tradition. But how strange is this that still you people claim that Wives are included in this Verse of "Perfect Purification".

Conclusion:

More than Sunnies, it is our Shia Community who needs to understand the REAL Issue. The Issue is not of wives being Ahlebait or Not, but the Issue is if wives are included in Ahlebait-e-Taharah or not, the Issue is if this Promise of being "Perfectly Purified" extends to "WHOLE Ahlebait of Muhammad" or this "Perfect Taharah" is limited only to these 5 special members of Ahlebait (as)".

First our own Shia community needs to understand this Issue and then Sunni brothers will follow. There is no Sunni (except for Nasibies like 'Ikramah, the slave of Ibn abbas) who claims that this verse of "Perfect Purification" is not revealed for these 5, but for wives.

Remember, Salman Farsi (alaihis Salam) was also part of Ahlebait of Muhammad as wives were, but he was also not included in "Ahlebait-e-Taharah" which was reserved only for those 5.

Two Different "Historical Events" in one Verse (according to Sunni Sahih Hadith)

Sunni brothers have only one argument (better to say "Conjecture"): "First part of Verse 33:33 refers to wives, therefore this 2nd part of Verse is also talking about wives"

But this argument is refuted by none other but "SAHIH" Sunni Ahadith themselves. These Sahih Sunni Ahadith themselves testify that:

1. There were "
Two
" Historical Events.

2. Both of them happened at "
Two
" different "
Timings
"

3. And both of them have no "
Connection
" with each other.

First Historical Incident (till first part of verse 33:33): In this incident, wives of Rasool (saw) made severe mistake and Allah (swt) threatening them. Quran telling us about this incident:

[
Shakir
33:28
]
O Prophet! say to your wives: If you desire this world's life and its adornment, then come, I will give you a provision and allow you to depart a goodly departing

[
Shakir
33:29
]
And if you desire
Allah
and His Messenger and the latter abode, then surely
Allah
has prepared for the doers of good among you a mighty reward.

[
Shakir
33:30
]
O wives of the prophet! whoever of you commits an open indecency, the punishment shall be increased to her doubly; and this IS easy to
Allah
.

[
Shakir
33:31
]
And whoever of you is obedient to
Allah
and His Messenger and does good, We will give to her her reward doubly, and We have prepared for her an honorable sustenance.

[
Shakir
33:32
]
O wives of the Prophet! you are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in (your) speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word.

[
Shakir
33:33
(only First Part)
]
And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey
Allah
and His Messenger.

There are many Sunni Ahadith which are telling about this Incident when these verses of Quran were revealed, which happened at certain "Time" when wives of Rasool (saw) demanded more Money and comfort of life.

2nd Historical Event (described in 2nd part of Verse 33:33): Sahih Sunni Hadith telling us that this is another "Historical Event", which happened at "another Time" and it has "No Connection" with the first Historical Event.

[
Shakir
33:33
(only Second Part)
]
....
Allah
only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.

Here is the testimony of Sahih Sunni Hadith that this 2nd Part of Verse has nothing to do with the 1st part of Verse as both Parts are referring to TWO different Incidents, which happened at TWO different times and these TWO have no connections with each other.

Narrated Aisha:

One day the Prophet (PBUH&HF) came out afternoon wearing a black cloak (upper garment or gown; long coat), then al-Hasan Ibn Ali came and the Prophet accommodated him under the cloak, then al-Husain came and entered the cloak, then Fatimah came and the Prophet entered her under the cloak, then Ali came and the Prophet entered him to the cloak as well. Then the Prophet recited: "Verily
Allah
intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O' People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification (the last sentence of Verse 33:33)."

Sunni reference:

  • Sahih Muslim, Chapter of virtues of companions, section of the virtues of the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1883, Tradition #61.

Challenges to Sunnies:

* Prove us that these are not TWO Different Historical Incidents, which did not happen at TWO different Times?

And if you accept the existence of these 2 Different Historical Incidents, then:

* Prove us (any Sahih Sunni Hadith) that 2nd Part of Verse 33:33 was revealed for Wives?

And if you could not prove it, then tell us how in world you are bringing this Argument (/Conjecture) for the last 14 Centuries that Wives are the Part of this 2nd Part of Verse and have been "Perfectly Purified" by Allah?

* Your own so called "Sahih Ahadith" are telling that both these Parts of same one Verse 33:33 were revealed for Two Different Incidents.

* Your own so called "Sahih Ahadith" are telling that from Verses 33:28 till 1st Part of Verse 33:33 were revealed for wives, where
Allah
(swt) threatening them for demanding worldly life.

*And then your own so called other "Sahih Hadith" are telling that 2nd Part of Verse 33:33 was revealed at Different Occasion, at Different Time, for Different Incident where 5 Special ones were collected under that Blanket and for them this 2nd part of Verse 33:33 was revealed.

So, either you stop claiming that 2nd part of verse 33:33 is revealed for wives. Or you should first DENY your so called "Sahih Ahadith" which are proving the opposite.

It is really funny and show the "Double Standards" that neither you deny your so called "Sahih Ahadith" nor you stop claiming that thing which is totally against your own "Sahih Ahadith".

(bismillah)

(salam)

jazakallah behaqe masoomeen(as) sister

fro the last 3/4 days i have been trying to find this article of yours, because this clears up the false concepts

which people have and which even our PC appeasing brownie pointer brothers do not understand

and i will inshallah link you to a nice lecture, maybe look under ayatullah khameini(ra) in iran section

it is the very first lecture by the sheikh

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
LoveAli, on 06 April 2010 - 05:14 PM, said:

Aisha was most beloved wive of prophet. And for pure men they get pure women.

Why was Asiya married to Firaun?

Please change your name, we can not call upon deads or martyers.

Pliz explain

I want Shia to Prove me from Quran that Ali, Fatimah, Hassan, and Hussein are part of Ahle Bayte?????

I want you to prove from Quran how to pray namaaz?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

It's "to remove away" not "keep away".

(bismillah)

(salam)

the master of arabic language and grammer abul fadl

bro putting ' in your name does not signify you are

this is more show

imagine from a whole article the only thing you could understand

the matn of the article you lost

now you are clutching at straws

pathetic!

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

you can prove using hadith al thaqlayn that the wives of the prophet are not part of the household...

the hadiths that say otherwise can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and they are narrated by the liar (according to sunni sources) 'ikramah, and others that are not sahih.

and of course, there is NOT ONE hadith by the WIVES themselves that claim they WERE part of the household......

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

People of the house, God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you and to purify you thoroughly. (33:33)

http://quran.al-shia.org/en/translation/1/33.htm

(shia translator and shia website......

(bismillah)

(salam)

we guys will do anything and everything to prove that we are nasibis

wallahi, cannot even tolerate , let alone rejoice in the merits of the ahlul bayt(as)

you have lost the meaning of salah(salawat)

at least umar congratulated ali(as) at ghadir e khum

but i remember there was someone who was killed also

because he thought that the holy prophet (pbuh) had made this up on his own

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

the hadiths that say otherwise can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and they are narrated by the liar (according to sunni sources) 'ikramah.

Nasai said: Thiqat.

Ibn Muin said: Thiqat.

Ahmad Ijli said: Thiqat.

Buhari said: There is no one from our companions who wouldn't rely on Ikrima.

Abu Khatim said: Thiqat and to be rely on.

Ibn Hibban mentioned in "Thiqat". "Tahzib at-tahzib" 7/239

If you try to weaken Ikrima, or to describe him like a liar, answer me a single question, who narrated "Khutba ash-shiqshiqiya" from ibn Abbas?

and of course, there is NOT ONE hadith by the WIVES themselves that claim they WERE part of the household......

Hazrat Aisha(ra) did consider herself among Ahlal Bayt

35 – (1995) æÍÏËäÇ ÒåíÑ Èä ÍÑÈ æÅÓÍÇÞ Èä ÅÈÑÇåíã. ßáÇåãÇ Úä ÌÑíÑ. ÞÇá ÒåíÑ: ÍÏËäÇ ÌÑíÑ Úä ãäÕæÑ¡ Úä ÅÈÑÇåíã. ÞÇá:

ÞáÊ ááÃÓæÏ: åá ÓÃáÊ Ãã ÇáãÄãäíä ÚãÇ íßÑå Ãä íäÊÈÐ Ýíå¿ ÞÇá: äÚã. ÞáÊ: íÇ Ãã ÇáãÄãäíä! ÃÎÈÑíäí ÚãÇ äåì Úäå ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã Ãä íäÊÈÐ Ýíå. ÞÇáÊ: äåÇäÇ¡ Ãåá ÇáÈíÊ¡ Ãä ääÊÈÐ Ýí ÇáÏÈÇÁ æÇáãÒÝÊ

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=4760

Ibrahim reported: I said to Aswad if he had asked the Mother of the Believers (in which utensils) he (the Holy Prophet) disapproved the preparation of Nabidh. He (Aswad) said: Yes. I said: Mother of the Believers, inform me about the utensils in which) Allah’s Apostle forbade to prepare Nabidh. She (Hadrat ‘A’isha) said: He forbade us, the members of his family [Ahlal Bayt], to prepare Nabidh in gourd, or varnished jar. I said to him: Do you remember green pitcher, and pitcher? He said: I narrated to you what I have heard; should I narrate to you which I did not hear?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

bro wellwisher

just read the article and see if you can digest it

i know it is difficult, but please try

if you had read and understood the article

none of these questions from either you or fadl would have come up

you know the true ahlul sunnah, not the fake taqqiya type,

they call imam ali(as) - karam Allah wajihu - now there must be a reason for this

and then did some nasibi write this, Allah(swt) lanat be on the nasibis

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 230:

وعلي يقاتل ليطاع ويتصرف في النفوس والأموال فكيف يجعل هذا قتالا على الدين

“Ali fought to secure obedience and rule the people and money, so how can that be deemed as fighting for sake of religion?”

We read in Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 205:

وأما إسلام علي فهل يكون مخرجا له من الكفر على قولين

There are two opinions as to whether Ali's conversion to Islam released him from kufr or not"

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 137:

وعلي رضي الله عنه كان قصده أن يتزوج عليها فله في أذاها غرض

“Ali intended to marry so as to hurt her (Fatima) on purpose.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 7 page 172:

وقد أنزل الله تعالى في على يا أيها الذين آمنوا لا تقربوا الصلاة وأنتم سكارى حتى تعلموا ما تقولون لما صلى فقرا وخلطوا

“Allah had revealed for Ali {O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter,} when he prayed and recited and then got mixed up.”

(wasalam)

Edited by haideriam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

bro wellwisher

just read the article and see if you can digest it

i know it is difficult, but please try

if you had read and understood the article

none of these questions from either you or fadl would have come up

you know the true ahlul sunnah, not the fake taqqiya type,

they call imam ali(as) - karam Allah wajihu - now there must be a reason for this

and then did some nasibi write this, Allah(swt) lanat be on the nasibis

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 230:

æÚáí íÞÇÊá áíØÇÚ æíÊÕÑÝ Ýí ÇáäÝæÓ æÇáÃãæÇá ÝßíÝ íÌÚá åÐÇ ÞÊÇáÇ Úáì ÇáÏíä

“Ali fought to secure obedience and rule the people and money, so how can that be deemed as fighting for sake of religion?”

We read in Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 205:

æÃãÇ ÅÓáÇã Úáí Ýåá íßæä ãÎÑÌÇ áå ãä ÇáßÝÑ Úáì Þæáíä

There are two opinions as to whether Ali's conversion to Islam released him from kufr or not"

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 137:

æÚáí ÑÖí Çááå Úäå ßÇä ÞÕÏå Ãä íÊÒæÌ ÚáíåÇ Ýáå Ýí ÃÐÇåÇ ÛÑÖ

“Ali intended to marry so as to hurt her (Fatima) on purpose.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 7 page 172:

æÞÏ ÃäÒá Çááå ÊÚÇáì Ýí Úáì íÇ ÃíåÇ ÇáÐíä ÂãäæÇ áÇ ÊÞÑÈæÇ ÇáÕáÇÉ æÃäÊã ÓßÇÑì ÍÊì ÊÚáãæÇ ãÇ ÊÞæáæä áãÇ Õáì ÝÞÑÇ æÎáØæÇ

“Allah had revealed for Ali {O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter,} when he prayed and recited and then got mixed up.”

(wasalam)

sorry brother but i dont want to waste my time after frustrated morons...

Just refer this if it doesnt goes down your throat then i cant help it, because you are renowned for pathetic arguments.....

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f15/defense-imam-ibn-taymiyyah-rahimahullah-31669/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

sorry brother but i dont want to waste my time after frustrated morons...

Just refer this if it doesnt goes down your throat then i cant help it, because you are renowned for pathetic arguments.....

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f15/defense-imam-ibn-taymiyyah-rahimahullah-31669/

(bismillah)

(salam)

very childish and pathetic arguments from ibn taymiya(la)

but then what would you expect from a nasibi

so in defending a wrong or whatever i belittle a right just to prove a point

how sad and pathetic

i am surprised at the people who buy these kinds of arguments

Allah(swt) gave us all aql for a purpose

what about karam Allah wajahu

(wasalam)

Edited by haideriam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

if only you 2 birds of the same feathers took time out to read the post

which you still wont be able to understand

because right answers come with clarity

which is a very difficult thing , especially for bro ninja,

which comes about by being with justice and truth and honesty

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple a trick to derail the thread, when left answerless......

But unfortunately the OP had to taste dust in both the issues..

And the frustration of OP is proof of that.....(smile)

Well, I pretty much gave an answer, the exact answer that would satisfy the Shi'ites. The wives of Rasoolullah (ra) are not part of Ahlul Bayt at-Tahireen (as), but they are part of Ahlul Bayt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Well, I pretty much gave an answer, the exact answer that would satisfy the Shi'ites. The wives of Rasoolullah (ra) are not part of Ahlul Bayt at-Tahireen (as), but they are part of Ahlul Bayt.

sorry to contradict you but the verse of purification was revealed for azwaj e mutahharat....

And do you find anywhere in quran tha i special reward being promised to members of ahlebayt(excluding azwaj e rasool saw).. Or that special rulings being set for them unlike other muslims?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Why is ibn Taymiyyah being dragged into every single thread?!

(bismillah)

(salam)

holy quran, "as to those who disbelieve, their guardians are shaytan, who take them out of the light into the darkness"

disbelievers has a deeper meaning than just salah or fasting etc for there is sura e munafiqoun as well

defending a wrong is zulm and is further adding to the sins, but then this is what is said above in the aya

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to contradict you but the verse of purification was revealed for azwaj e mutahharat....

And do you find anywhere in quran tha i special reward being promised to members of ahlebayt(excluding azwaj e rasool saw).. Or that special rulings being set for them unlike other muslims?

I disagree with you, and I've asked many local and well-known scholars about this issue. They've affirmed what I've said, but we'll leave those disagreements aside. :-)

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.


×
×
  • Create New...