How Many Daughters Did The Prophet Have?

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

How many daughters did the Prophet (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã) have? Unfortunately, this has become the question. How can this be? The very reason why we are on this beautiful religion of Islaam, that being because of the Prophet (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã), and now we are having ikhtilaaf (differences) on how many daughters he had?

In this article, I will prove through Shee`ah books, that the Prophet (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã) did indeed have 4 daughters from Khadeejah (ÚáíåÇ ÇáÓáÇã), and not just one daughter as it is popularly circulated. The four daughters being Zaynab, Ruqayyah, Umm Kulthoom and FaaTimah, may peace be upon them all, the best of them being FaaTimah (ÚáíåÇ ÇáÓáÇã).

Click here for the article -> How Many Daughters did The Prophet (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã) have?

(salam)

[Socrates]

No need for Shia books, when a surah of Qur'an proves beyond doubt that he only had one [biological] daughter.

Read Suratul Kawthar, read when it was revealed. End of story.

As for 33:59, just look at 3:61 and there's your answer.

Besides, where are the details about the lives of these other women who were supposedly daughters of the Prophet? There's so much about Fatima (as) that you could fill hundreds of volumes, yet next to nothing about the lives of these other daughters? Isn't that strange?

Edited January 7, 2011 by Socrates

[guest 34193]

No need for Shia books, when a surah of Qur'an proves beyond doubt that he only had one daughter.

Read Suratul Kawthar, read when it was revealed. End of story.

As for 33:59, just look at 3:61 and there's your answer.

Besides, where are the details about the lives of these other women who were supposedly daughters of the Prophet? There's so much about Fatima (as) that you could fill hundreds of volumes, yet next to nothing about the lives of these other daughters? Isn't that strange?

Did you even read the article bro before commenting on it?

As to the details of the lives of the other daughters, a couple of points. Actually no, there is not _that_ much material about Fatima az-Zahra (as) in our books. Yes her status is great, but let's not exaggerate on how much we have. The fact we have more on her than the others though would be precisely because of her greater status. And next, how much material on Ja`far b. Abi Talib (ra), `Aqil b. Abi Talib and Talib b. Abi Talib do have compared to Amir al-Mu'mineen (as)? No one can claim they were not Abu Talib's (as) sons though as such.

[Socrates]

Did you even read the article bro before commenting on it?

I've skimmed through it, though as I say, when you have a Surah of the Qur'an (which the brother has attempted to answer but hasn't really done so), no amount of ahadith can turn that around. You can take the Sunni version that the Surah was revelation had nothing to do with Fatima Zahra (as) but Shia commentators are pretty much unanimous that it was revealed in the fifth year of revelation and shortly after its revelation, Fatima Zahra (as) was born.

As to the details of the lives of the other daughters, a couple of points. Actually no, there is not _that_ much material about Fatima az-Zahra (as) in our books. Yes her status is great, but let's not exaggerate on how much we have. The fact we have more on her than the others though would be precisely because of her greater status. And next, how much material on Amir al-Mu'mineen `Ali b. Abi Talib (as) do we have as compared to `Aqil b. Abi Talib and Talib b. Abi Talib. No one can claim they were not Abu Talib's (as) sons though as such.

I don't think the comparison is a valid one, mainly because we're talking about the daughters of the Prophet (pbuh). Most of the Muslim world is at pains to point out that Abu Talib was a kafir, so no details about his sons lives is not surprising. Moreover, Aqil and Talib grew up in the pre-Islamic era, of which history tells us very little, whereas these women grew up in an age where there were many more narrators. Apart from the fact that we know the names of these women and that they were allegedly daughters of the Prophet (pbuh), what else do we have? Not even an objection from any of them that the Prophet (pbuh) used to stand up in respect of Fatima (as) but none of the others?

Edited January 7, 2011 by Socrates

[Yahya2004]

I've skimmed through it, though as I say, when you have a Surah of the Qur'an (which the brother has attempted to answer but hasn't really done so), no amount of ahadith can turn that around. You can take the Sunni version that the Surah was revelation had nothing to do with Fatima Zahra (as) but Shia commentators are pretty much unanimous that it was revealed in the fifth year of revelation and shortly after its revelation, Fatima Zahra (as) was born.

I don't think the comparison is a valid one, mainly because we're talking about the daughters of the Prophet (pbuh). Most of the Muslim world is at pains to point out that Abu Talib was a kafir, so no details about his sons lives is not surprising. Moreover, Aqil and Talib grew up in the pre-Islamic era, of which history tells us very little, whereas these women grew up in an age where there were many more narrators. Apart from the fact that we know the names of these women and that they were allegedly daughters of the Prophet (pbuh), what else do we have? Not even an objection from any of them that the Prophet (pbuh) used to stand up in respect of Fatima (as) but none of the others?

Sayyed,

Wallahi, I mean no harm nor disrespect.

However have you considered asking the local 'Ulema about this, in Najaf?

All the evidence is against the one daughter position, I held for years and much of the sources used in the article by Nadir are ones I discovered whilst in Syria.

Plus, I'm in good company here, Sayyed Mohammed Taqi Shirazi (ra) agrees, as do the Giants of our Madhhab.

[MOHIB E AHLAYBAIT]

Where were they at Fidak?? N why did the caliph of the time just point out that they other daughters are not there because they know fidak doesnt belong to them...??

[Socrates]

Sayyed,

Wallahi, I mean no harm nor disrespect.

However have you considered asking the local 'Ulema about this, in Najaf?

All the evidence is against the one daughter position, I held for years and much of the sources used in the article by Nadir are ones I discovered whilst in Syria.

Plus, I'm in good company here, Sayyed Mohammed Taqi Shirazi (ra) agrees, as do the Giants of our Madhhab.

No disrespect taken.

I'm well aware that the vast majority of Iraqis and Iranians hold the view about four daughters. I still don't buy it though, and no one has yet given me satisfactory answers re: Suratul Kawthar.

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

I've skimmed through it, though as I say, when you have a Surah of the Qur'an (which the brother has attempted to answer but hasn't really done so), no amount of ahadith can turn that around. You can take the Sunni version that the Surah was revelation had nothing to do with Fatima Zahra (as) but Shia commentators are pretty much unanimous that it was revealed in the fifth year of revelation and shortly after its revelation, Fatima Zahra (as) was born.

Why are you taking an implicit qur'aanic verse as hujjah (proof), while you have an explicit qur'aanic verse that says he had more than one daughter (i.e. 33:59)? Either the Qur'aan is contradicting itself, which Allaah (SWT) had promised in 4:82, that it is impossible for that to happen, or your interpretation of "abtar" is wrong. Or please fine me one hadeeth from the shee`ah in which the "banaatika" referred in the Qur'aan in 33:59 is just FaaTimah (SA), because if this is indeed khaS for her, there should be hadeeth to state such a thing.

And please read the full article before commenting on it, you'll be surprised to see who says 4 daughters, and where did this one daughter theory originate from.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[guest 34193]

No disrespect taken.

I'm well aware that the vast majority of Iraqis and Iranians hold the view about four daughters. I still don't buy it though, and no one has yet given me satisfactory answers re: Suratul Kawthar.

bro, have you actually read what the classical tafasir and ahadith on the sura say?

[Socrates]

(salam)

(bismillah)

Why are you taking an implicit qur'aanic verse as hujjah (proof), while you have an explicit qur'aanic verse that says he had more than one daughter (i.e. 33:59)?

Why does 3:61 say abnana when there were only two sons in Mubahala? Why does 5:55 say waladheena aamanu when it was only Imam Ali (as) who gave the ring? The usage of the plural doesn't prove anything.

And if I were to believe that these were daughters of the Prophet (pbuh), then it would become sunnah to give your daughters to oppressors with no character which makes no sense at all.

bro, have you actually read what the classical tafasir and ahadith on the sura say?

As far as I'm aware, the vast majority of tafasir say that "Kawthar" refers to Fatima Zahra (as). I'm not claiming to be an expert though, so if there's something I'm missing, feel free to point it out...

Edited January 7, 2011 by Socrates

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

Why does 3:61 say abnana when there were only two sons in Mubahala? Why does 5:55 say waladheena aamanu when it was only Imam Ali (as) who gave the ring?

Love your Qiyaas brother!

And yet you have mutawaatir hadeeth from both Sunnee and Shee`ah books that say 3:61 and 5:55 were khaS for specific people. But you have yet to provide me with a Hadeeth from the Shee`ah books that says the "banaatika" referred here in the Qur'aan is only for FaaTimah (SA), if this is indeed the case there should be numerous hadeeth to state this since teh Qur'aan referred her in the plural form, which is a great praise.

As far as I'm aware, the vast majority of tafasir say that "Kawthar" refers to Fatima Zahra (as). I'm not claiming to be an expert though, so if there's something I'm missing, feel free to point it out...

Please quote these "tafaseer", that you are saying. From Classical to Modern.

Actually, so far as I've seen, none of them say that.

Ditto. Before making this article, I went through all the classical tafaaseer, and none of them said this is in reference to FaaTimah (SA).

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[guest 34193]

As far as I'm aware, the vast majority of tafasir say that "Kawthar" refers to Fatima Zahra (as). I'm not claiming to be an expert though, so if there's something I'm missing, feel free to point it out...

Actually, so far as I've seen, none of them say that.

[mehdi soldier]

(salam)

ever since we had the chat regarding this subject in the chatroom,i have read materials and come to more of the conlusion that the Prophet had only one daughter.

i went through the article but despite the fact that you did show evidence that the Prophet had 4 daughters,it is still a matter of doubt in the following areas:

1.) who were the children of the 4 daughters?are they "sayyids" also?

2.) what is the logic in usthman a usurper marrying two biological daughters of the Prophet (pbuh)?is this not a case the sunnis can hold against us that usthman was righteous?

3.) what inheritance was left for the other "daughters"? was the Prophet (sa) biased towards Sayyida Fatima (as) that he only gave her inheritance?when fadak was given to Sayyida Fatima,her other sisters were alive.

4.)what happened to the children of the other "daughters"?

5.) did the Prophet ever spoke about them?what did he say?

as more questions come into my mind i will ask them.but i hope brother Nader can answer the questions presented.

the below article denies that the Prophet had more than 1 daughter and it also presents evidence to back it up:

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/who_really_killed_uthman/en/chap7.php

[Socrates]

(salam)

(bismillah)

Love your Qiyaas brother!

You and your ilk use qiyas and bid'a far too liberally, so even though I should be offended, I'm not.

Besides, if you read the Qur'an you find that the sunnah of Allah does not change. Using a plural doesn't prove multiple daughters, especially as Suratul Kawthar proves only one. In those ayat, the usage of the plural when referring to specific people would have been obvious even without the ahadith, as it is in this case.

Besides, which tafaseer say that this verse means that the Prophet (pbuh) had more than one daughter? I'm geniunely curious. None of the hadith you quoted in the article refer to this, as far as I checked.

I'm also confused as to why you've quoted Ibn Shahr Ashoob as "one of our classical scholars" when he was Sunni?

[PeaceLoving]

It is funny that after 1400 years, Muslims still cannot decide how many daughters our Holy Prophet had ?

How can we trust the rest of the stuf in our history books ?

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

1.) who were the children of the 4 daughters?are they "sayyids" also?

There is very little about the daughters of these people in our books, but absence of information doesn't mean that they weren't the daughters.

2.) what is the logic in usthman a usurper marrying two biological daughters of the Prophet (pbuh)?is this not a case the sunnis can hold against us that usthman was righteous?

This is the reason why AA denies the marriage, because they are reactionary. And by the way, the 2 of the prophet's daughters married the sons of Abu Jahl.

3.) what inheritance was left for the other "daughters"? was the Prophet (sa) biased towards Sayyida Fatima (as) that he only gave her inheritance?when fadak was given to Sayyida Fatima,her other sisters were alive.

The other daughters were dead before the Prophet (pbuh) died. So there is no "inheritance".

4.)what happened to the children of the other "daughters"?

There are narrations that talk about the children, my concern in this article wasn't about them. As you can see the article is already fairly length, 35 pages long, putting information about the other daughters would just lengthen the article to a book.

5.) did the Prophet ever spoke about them?what did he say?

Brother, if you read the full article, you will see I have provided hadeeth upon hadeeth form the Prophet (pbuh) and Imaams (as) that talk about the other daughters.

At the end of the day, all of these are "speculation" and "what if"s, you cannot take that over clear cut explicit hadeeth, which many are saheeh.

(salam)

[guest 34193]

It is funny that after 1400 years, Muslims still cannot decide how many daughters our Holy Prophet had ?

How can we trust the rest of the stuf in our history books ?

Thing is, our history books and such are not really all ambiguous on this. It's just that a segment of our fellow Shi`a have decided to hold a different view regardless of what they say.

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

1.) who were the children of the 4 daughters?are they "sayyids" also?

There is very little about the daughters of these people in our books, but absence of information doesn't mean that they weren't the daughters. As Mac has pointed out not much is said about he life of FaaTimah (SA), the mother of the Imaams. Majority of hadeeth is just discussing her status.

2.) what is the logic in usthman a usurper marrying two biological daughters of the Prophet (pbuh)?is this not a case the sunnis can hold against us that usthman was righteous?

This is the reason why AA denies the marriage, because they are reactionary. And by the way, the 2 of the prophet's daughters married the sons of Abu Jahl.

3.) what inheritance was left for the other "daughters"? was the Prophet (sa) biased towards Sayyida Fatima (as) that he only gave her inheritance?when fadak was given to Sayyida Fatima,her other sisters were alive.

The other daughters were dead before the Prophet (pbuh) died. So there is no "inheritance".

4.)what happened to the children of the other "daughters"?

There are narrations that talk about the children, my concern in this article wasn't about them. As you can see the article is already fairly length, 35 pages long, putting information about the other daughters would just lengthen the article to a book.

5.) did the Prophet ever spoke about them?what did he say?

Brother, if you read the full article, you will see I have provided hadeeth upon hadeeth form the Prophet (pbuh) and Imaams (as) that talk about the other daughters.

At the end of the day, all of these are "speculation" and "what if"s, you cannot take that over clear cut explicit hadeeth, which many are saheeh.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Abbas.]

Salams Br Nader

Right now, I don't have time to go through your entire article (by the way, thankyou for sharing) but I will frankly discuss my view regarding your very first point.

Just cz the verse of Surah Ahzab says, "and your daughters" (Plural form) does not mean we have a confirmation that the Prophet literally had 4 biological daughters. Please note that there is no issue in believeing that the Prophet had 4 daughters as long as it is realised that the only biological daughter was Syeda Fatima s.a (Historial accounts also suggest that the other 3 were either adopted or the daughters of Bibi Khadija from her previous marriage - Allah knows best).

Anyways, consider verse 3:61 where we again have a plural form used i-e " daughters"........but we only had one daughter of the Prophet in the event of Mubahila. I understand that Syeda Fatima was the only daughter alive at that time, but then there was no need for Quran to use plural form.

Also, as an another example, Quran mentions Prophet Ibrahim's uncle (Azar) as his Father. Thats because he had adopted Him and was well known in the community to be his father. But the biological father is known to be someone else (Terah/ Tareh/Tarekh)

Remember when Abraham said to his father, Azar, "How can you take idols as gods? I see that you and your people have clearly gone astray." (Q 6: 74)

I will InshaAllah read your article further and get back to you .......

p.s I have also sent a query to our scholars regarding this issue. Await their response....

[Socrates]

This is the reason why AA denies the marriage, because they are reactionary. And by the way, the 2 of the prophet's daughters married the sons of Abu Jahl.

So you would be fine in giving your daughters to an oppressor, as it would be a sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) to do so according to your theory?

[mehdi soldier]

Also, as an another example, Quran mentions Prophet Ibrahim's uncle (Azar) as his Father. Thats because he had adopted Him and was well known in the community to be his father. But the biological father is known to be someone else (Terah/ Tareh/Tarekh)

Remember when Abraham said to his father, Azar, "How can you take idols as gods? I see that you and your people have clearly gone astray." (Q 6: 74)

from my little knowledge i believe that there are words used that do not necessarily mean that there is any biological connection.in the case of Prophet Ibraheem (as),the verse uses "abihi" (which can be translated as father,and guardian).infact arab christians use "abana" to refer to their clergy.also even in the english language the word "father" is a title and doesnt necessarily mean that the "father" must be biological.as the case of Jesus,christians are unanimous that Jesus is not the figurative son of God.rather they believe that he is the literal son of God and that is rejected.the bible itself does not say at all that Jesus is the literal son of God.many figurative sons of God are mentioned in the bible.this far,the christians have added an interpolation into John 3:16 and John 1:18 to make Jesus look as the literal son of God by adding the word "begotten"."begotten" is an interpolation.

also based on my little knowledge of arabic,had the verse used "walidihi" in reference to the guardian of Prophet Ibraheem (as),then that would show a biological connection.but the word "abana" or "abihi" doesnt state any biological connection at face value.

Edited January 7, 2011 by inshaAllah
Bro I don't disagree with you. I was actually trying to bring forth the same point....the point that Quran does not necessarily and literally refer to the Prophets' (biological) children......it has a context behind its stories.....

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

So you would be fine in giving your daughters to an oppressor, as it would be a sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) to do so according to your theory?

First of all, `Uthmaan wasn't an oppressor at the time of the Prophet, he didn't usurp the right of the Ahl Al-bayt (as) until after the Prophet (pbuh), which the two daughters were dead before the Prophet passed away.. Umm Kulthoom was married first to him she died before he consummated the marriage, so the Prophet gave him Ruqayyah both died before the prophet died.

So let me guess, you are also being reactionary. Sunnis claim faDeelah for `Uthmaan being married to two daughters thus being the title of Dhu Al-Noorayn, so what you and others do is since they claim fadeelah for that you just deny the daughters outrightly using shaadh sources from sunni books and not shee`ah books. Actually don't worry, if you read the article I show who was the starter of this theory. (please read full article)

By the way, the shee`ahs do the same thing with regards of Umm Kulthoom bint `Alee. Sunnees claim faDeelah and a stamp of approval from Imaam `Alee (as) because he married his daughter Umm Kulthoom, so what you and other followers of AA do is outrightly deny that it is even the daughter of Imaam `Alee (as). When it goes against clear and explicit hadeeth from our Imaams. I have made a blog post about that as well, proving that `Umar indeed did get married with Umm Kulthoom. Click here: http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/12/umars-marriage-to-umm-kulthum.html

Another reactionary theory. Sunnis claim fadeelah for `Aa'ishah being so young and marrying the prophet. What shee`ahs and some apologetic sunnis do is they totally deny that `Aa'ishah was young and make her much older. While we have saheeh hadeeth from a member of the ahl al-bayt (as) who explicitly stated the age of the `Aa'ishah. That is the only source in Shee`ah books that discussed the age of `Aa'ishah. I have made a blog post about that as well. Click here: http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/08/aaishah-was-married-with-prophet-at-10.html

P.S. - Please read the ENTIRE blog post, I give the saheeh hadeeth on the reason and how the marriage took place.

P.S.S. - Please stick with the knowledge that is given through the Ahl Al-bayt (as) and do not go to others for your knowledge.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Abu Abdullaah]

(salam)

ever since we had the chat regarding this subject in the chatroom,i have read materials and come to more of the conlusion that the Prophet had only one daughter.

i went through the article but despite the fact that you did show evidence that the Prophet had 4 daughters,it is still a matter of doubt in the following areas:

1.) who were the children of the 4 daughters?are they "sayyids" also?

2.) what is the logic in usthman a usurper marrying two biological daughters of the Prophet (pbuh)?is this not a case the sunnis can hold against us that usthman was righteous?

3.) what inheritance was left for the other "daughters"? was the Prophet (sa) biased towards Sayyida Fatima (as) that he only gave her inheritance?when fadak was given to Sayyida Fatima,her other sisters were alive.

4.)what happened to the children of the other "daughters"?

5.) did the Prophet ever spoke about them?what did he say?

as more questions come into my mind i will ask them.but i hope brother Nader can answer the questions presented.

the below article denies that the Prophet had more than 1 daughter and it also presents evidence to back it up:

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/who_really_killed_uthman/en/chap7.php

(bismillah)

(salam)

1) They all DIED in the Prophet's (pbuh) lifetime. This makes your points 1, 3, 4, and 5 flawed arguments.

2) So don't 'Aa`ishah and HafSa hold a distinguished position with the Ahl al-Sunnah? Why? Because, yes, they were the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) , but the Shee'ahs don't hold that as an honor. So brother this argument is weak. The Prophet Lut (salam) and Prophet NooH (salam) married two women who became evil, do we hold them as being great? No.

'Uthmaan wasn't bad right after conversion brother. He turned bad later on. On the issue of 'Umar's marriage to Umm Kulthoom bint 'Alee, it was a forced marriage.

'Uthmaan didn't have any children with Umm Kulthoom. She died early and was said to be the youngest.

'Uthmaan did have ONE child with Ruqayyah and his name was 'Abd Allaah bin 'Uthmaan, but he died very early.

Inshaa' Allaah I hope that answers THAT part of your argument. If ANYTHING this should show that Bibi FaaTimah has THE GREATEST HONOR! All of the children except for herself died early on. Even Ibraaheem from Mariyyah, which is said that according to sources he died before weaning.

3) Refer to point #1. They're dead.

4) Refer to point #1. They're dead.

5) Refer to point #1. They're dead.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Abu Abdullaah

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

Just cz the verse of Surah Ahzab says, "and your daughters" (Plural form) does not mean we have a confirmation that the Prophet literally had 4 biological daughters. Please note that there is no issue in believeing that the Prophet had 4 daughters as long as it is realised that the only biological daughter was Syeda Fatima s.a (Historial accounts also suggest that the other 3 were either adopted or the daughters of Bibi Khadija from her previous marriage - Allah knows best).

1.) That is considered Qiyaas

2.) We have akhbaar from both sunni and shee`ah sources making it mutawaatir that the only daughter taken was faaTimah

3.) there are 0 akhbaar saying this was specifically only for faaTimah

You must take the the dhaahir (apparent) meaning of the Qur'aan, unless you have khabar to make the dhaahir meaning a baaTin (hidden) meaning.

(salam)

[mehdi soldier]

(salam)

(bismillah)

First of all, `Uthmaan wasn't an oppressor at the time of the Prophet, he didn't usurp the right of the Ahl Al-bayt (as) until after the Prophet (pbuh), which the two daughters were dead before the Prophet passed away.. Umm Kulthoom was married first to him she died before he consummated the marriage, so the Prophet gave him Ruqayyah both died before the prophet died.

So let me guess, you are also being reactionary. Sunnis claim faDeelah for `Uthmaan being married to two daughters thus being the title of Dhu Al-Noorayn, so what you and others do is since they claim fadeelah for that you just deny the daughters outrightly using shaadh sources from sunni books and not shee`ah books. Actually don't worry, if you read the article I show who was the starter of this theory. (please read full article)

logical point that the Prophet (pbuh) gave his daughters to Usthman while usthman had not yet usurped the rights of the Ahlul-Bayt (as).and both daughters died before the Prophet's demise and did not survive to witness usthman's usurpation.its okay!

By the way, the shee`ahs do the same thing with regards of Umm Kulthoom bint `Alee. Sunnees claim faDeelah and a stamp of approval from Imaam `Alee (as) because he married his daughter Umm Kulthoom, so what you and other followers of AA do is outrightly deny that it is even the daughter of Imaam `Alee (as). When it goes against clear and explicit hadeeth from our Imaams. I have made a blog post about that as well, proving that `Umar indeed did get married with Umm Kulthoom. Click here: http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/12/umars-marriage-to-umm-kulthum.html

so what is the logical point of our great Imam Ali (as) that he gave his daughter to a usurper who assaulted the house of her mother.even if you dont agree umar actually broke the door,at least you should agree he threatened to burn the house.how can our imam give his daughter to such a mad man? if Imam Ali did then why do we who claim to be his followers still hold grudge against umar?are the sunnis not right then that we should not curse umar and we should love him? what is the logic?

do you recite ziarat ashura?if you do,when will you stop to recite it?

Another reactionary theory. Sunnis claim fadeelah for `Aa'ishah being so young and marrying the prophet. What shee`ahs and some apologetic sunnis do is they totally deny that `Aa'ishah was young and make her much older. While we have saheeh hadeeth from a member of the ahl al-bayt (as) who explicitly stated the age of the `Aa'ishah. That is the only source in Shee`ah books that discussed the age of `Aa'ishah. I have made a blog post about that as well. Click here: http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/08/aaishah-was-married-with-prophet-at-10.html

P.S. - Please read the ENTIRE blog post, I give the saheeh hadeeth on the reason and how the marriage took place.

P.S.S. - Please stick with the knowledge that is given through the Ahl Al-bayt (as) and do not go to others for your knowledge.

(salam)

again the issue of Aisha's age is disputed.based on historical sources (like tabari) she was no less than 15 and she could have being as old as 19 or even a bit older.its all based on matters of calculation and common sense than some fabricated hadiths or sources based on assumption.

Edited January 7, 2011 by mehdi soldier

[Socrates]

(salam)

(bismillah)

First of all, `Uthmaan wasn't an oppressor at the time of the Prophet, he didn't usurp the right of the Ahl Al-bayt (as) until after the Prophet (pbuh), which the two daughters were dead before the Prophet passed away.. Umm Kulthoom was married first to him she died before he consummated the marriage, so the Prophet gave him Ruqayyah both died before the prophet died.

Of course he was an oppressor during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) - he was allied to the kuffar even after he became a Muslim - and even if I take your argument that he wasn't, the Prophet (pbuh) knew fullwell what he was going to do afterwards, so it makes no sense that the Prophet (pbuh) would give his daughters to such a person especially when other righteous companions were available.

By the way, the shee`ahs do the same thing with regards of Umm Kulthoom bint `Alee. Sunnees claim faDeelah and a stamp of approval from Imaam `Alee (as) because he married his daughter Umm Kulthoom, so what you and other followers of AA do is outrightly deny that it is even the daughter of Imaam `Alee (as). When it goes against clear and explicit hadeeth from our Imaams. I have made a blog post about that as well, proving that `Umar indeed did get married with Umm Kulthoom. Click here: http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/12/umars-marriage-to-umm-kulthum.html

This marriage also makes no sense historically, no one ever protested in the court of Yazid that the widow of a caliph of Islam was being taken as a captive, and let alone anyone else, even Abdullah ibn Umar went to complain to Yazid, which is recorded in all the historical sources, he never mentioned that his step mother was being treated in this way. Some people have even denied that Umm Kulthum even existed, and that it was a title of Sayyida Zaynab (as), though I don't fully buy that view either.

With regards to the marriage of Aisha etc, the issue is boring and not really a matter of Shia interest. The Prophet (pbuh) married her for a specific reason, and that objective was achieved. End of story. However, these marriages (of Umm Kulthum and Ruqayya, as well as Umm Kulthum bint Ali) are more important as they are women of the household being married to oppressors.

Just because there is a hadith which has reliable narrators doesn't mean its the be all and end all. But you would never understand such a thing.

Edited January 7, 2011 by Socrates

[mehdi soldier]

(bismillah)

(salam)

'Uthmaan wasn't bad right after conversion brother. He turned bad later on. On the issue of 'Umar's marriage to Umm Kulthoom bint 'Alee, it was a forced marriage.

(salam)

who "forced" who and how and why?

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

so what is the logical point of our great Imam Ali (as) that he gave his daughter to a usurper who assaulted the house of her mother.even if you dont agree umar actually broke the door,at least you should agree he threatened to burn the house.how can our imam give his daughter to such a mad man? if Imam Ali did then why do we who claim to be his followers still hold grudge against umar?are the sunnis not right then that we should not curse umar and we should love him? what is the logic?

brother, please read that article on my blog regarding the marriage of Umm Kulthoom. I provide the reason how and why Umar married imaam `alee's daughter.

again the issue of Aisha's age is disputed.based on historical sources (like tabari) she was no less than 15 and she could have being as old as 19 or even a bit older.its all based on matters of calculation and common sense than some fabricated hadiths or sources based on assumption.

So you rather take sources Sunni sources over the words of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) ? How is that possible? Unless you think Tabaree and Bukhaaree is hujjah upon you over the Ahl Al-bayt (as) that is a different story. Didn't the Imaams says, all knowledge not through the Ahl Al-bayt (as) is considered to be baaTil?

who "forced" who and how and why?

Please the the full blog post brother your question is answered there. http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/12/umars-marriage-to-umm-kulthum.html

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Abbas.]

1.) That is considered Qiyaas

You must take the the dhaahir (apparent) meaning of the Qur'aan, unless you have khabar to make the dhaahir meaning a baaTin (hidden) meaning.

^

That is not a conjecture but a reasonable question. Belittling the Progeny of the Prophet like you folks do, is beyond my imagination. The Prophet said that Fatima s.a is a part of Him and whoever hurts Her hurts Him.......now either He was an unjust Father to the other 3 or there is another story ......

As for the Quranic verse you presented, I have already shown how your interpretation of that particular verse is dodgy ........

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

^

That is not a conjecture but a reasonable question. Belittling the Progeny of the Prophet like you folks do, is beyond my imagination. The Prophet said that Fatima s.a is a part of Him and whoever hurts Her hurts Him.......now either He was an unjust Father (to the other 3) or that the other three were (well known) daughters but not really (the biological) daughters of Him.

As for the Quranic verse you presented, I have already shown how your interpretation of that particular verse is dodgy ........

So I am a muqassir now? SubHanallaah! Let me let you in on a little secret, the Prophet's daughters were dead before 3:61 was revealed. Kind of hard to take dead daughters to a mubaahilah with the christains.

it is conjecture unless it is backed up with sources from the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) not from sources from your friends Al-Tabari, Al-Bukhaaree, and the rest of the guys of that school of thought.

By the way, don't argue with me, go take it up with the 17+ scholars whom I have quoted saying the prophet had 4 daughters. some of the scholars are alive, go send them your questions and ask them why are they said 4 daugthers.

Before anyone makes any comments related to this topic. Please read the article I have made, carefully from cover-to-cover.

Click here -> How Many Daughters did The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) have?

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Abu Abdullaah]

^

That is not a conjecture but a reasonable question. Belittling the Progeny of the Prophet like you folks do, is beyond my imagination. The Prophet said that Fatima s.a is a part of Him and whoever hurts Her hurts Him.......now either He was an unjust Father (to the other 3) or that the other three were (well known) daughters but not really (the biological) daughters of Him.

As for the Quranic verse you presented, I have already shown how your interpretation of that particular verse is dodgy ........

(bismillah)

(salam)

How is that belittling?

Do you realize that it gives Bibi Faatimah (as) more praise? She lived where as the other daughters died and most didn't even get to have children. Also, you will notice that the Prophet (pbuh) didn't even have any children with any of his wives except Khadeejah (e.g. Fatimah) and Mariyyah (e.g. Ibraaheem).

YOU BROTHER DON'T CARE FOR THE AHL Al-BAYT!

You are a person of bid'ah.

May Allaah (SWT) guide you to the truth. Aameen.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Abu Abdullaah

[Abbas.]

(salam)

(bismillah)

So I am a muqassir now? SubHanallaah! Let me let you in on a little secret, the Prophet's daughters were dead before 3:61 was revealed. Kind of hard to take dead daughters to a mubaahilah with the christains.

(salam)

I already mentioned that in one of my previous posts so don't try to teach me .......

[Socrates]

The other daughters were dead before the Prophet (pbuh) died. So there is no "inheritance".

The Prophet (pbuh) gave Fadak to Fatima (as) during his lifetime. Was he unjust (naudhobillah) to exclude his other daughters?

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

I already mentioned that in one of my previous posts so don't try to teach me .......

By the way, I love how I am a muqassir, and yet I take the words of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) as hujjah over me . While you are a "lover of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) ", but rather of the mukhaalifeen. Love it. Very logical indeed.

How have you answered that anyways? They are dead before 3:61 revealed, you can't take dead daughters to a mubaahilah, and there are khabar saying it was only faaTimah.

Oh, I forgot I can't teach you. You are much more knowledgeable than Hussayn bin rooH, Al-Mufeed, MurtaDa, Al-Toosee, Al-Tabarasee, Mazandaraanee, shaheed al-thaanee, majlisi, ja`far subhaanee and many more scholars, I forgot wayyyyyy more knowledgeable than them.

(salam)

[Abbas.]

(bismillah)

(salam)

How is that belittling?

Do you realize that it gives Bibi Faatimah (as) more praise? She lived where as the other daughters died and most didn't even get to have children. Also, you will notice that the Prophet (pbuh) didn't even have any children with any of his wives except Khadeejah (e.g. Fatimah) and Mariyyah (e.g. Ibraaheem).

YOU BROTHER DON'T CARE FOR THE AHL Al-BAYT!

You are a person of bid'ah.

(salam)

Dude how can you expect the biological daughters of the Prophet to marry the son of Abu Lehb and Abu Al aas bin rabei' before ba'sat? The Prophet was very careful regarding his cousin/brother, Maula Ali. And you think He would marry His daughters off to such folks ? Think.....

(salam)

(bismillah)

By the way, I love how I am a muqassir, and yet I take the words of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) as hujjah over me . While you are a "lover of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) ", but rather of the mukhaalifeen. Love it. Very logical indeed.

How have you answered that anyways? They are dead before 3:61 revealed, you can't take dead daughters to a mubaahilah, and there are khabar saying it was only faaTimah.

Oh, I forgot I can't teach you. You are much more knowledgeable than Hussayn bin rooH, Al-Mufeed, MurtaDa, Al-Toosee, Al-Tabarasee, Mazandaraanee, shaheed al-thaanee, majlisi, ja`far subhaanee and many more scholars, I forgot wayyyyyy more knowledgeable than them.

(salam)

You don't get it do u .... Mr wannabe Muqassir.

I was only hinting that the Quran is not necessarily supporting ure view. Quranic verses do not always use "plural form" for plural nouns. I gave you an example of 3:61 whereby Quran is reffering to plural noun but it's actual reference is towards only ONE person. My point being, your very first argument in your attachment is questionable.