How Many Daughters Did The Prophet Have?

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

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.....

So if it wasn't his biological daughters, then according to you he is unjust. SInce he doesn't care about someone elses daughters.

P.S. - before ba`thah, it wasn't haraam, so you can't use that.

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

Once again, love the Qiyaas. once again khabar is backed up mutawaatirly showing 3:61.

Please provide ONE saheeh hadeeth from the Shee`ah books that state these daughters were not BIOLOGICAL daughters, please just one. is that so hard to ask? Or is your whole theory based upon going to shaadh sunni sources?

(salam)

[Abu Abdullaah]

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)

Did you just say BEFORE be'sat?! HOW MANY MUSLIMS WERE THERE BROTHER!?!!!

The Prophet (pbuh) had a great deal of Muslim suitors for his daughters before Be'sat! :wacko: UGH...

YOU need to think brother.

Also, there wasn't a taHreem against marrying them before be'sat because the LAW didn't come down to prohibit such a thing.

Bro, your argument just got wacked.

Also, you can say that it was used to bring relationships together and family. Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee is from the clan Banu Abd-Shams. The clan takes its name from Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf the Quraish tribe and abdu shams clan. It's called having family ties or building relationships with other tribes.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Abu Abdullaah

[Abbas.]

(salam)

(bismillah)

So if it wasn't his biological daughters, then according to you he is unjust. SInce he doesn't care about someone elses daughters.

P.S. - before ba`thah, it wasn't haraam, so you can't use that.

No, you are wrong. Accorging to me, he adopted them after marrying Bibi Khadija. Whether they were Bibi Khadija's biological daughters or her sister's daughters is debatable.

Once again, love the Qiyaas. once again khabar is backed up mutawaatirly showing 3:61.

Please provide ONE saheeh hadeeth from the Shee`ah books that state these daughters were not BIOLOGICAL daughters, please just one. is that so hard to ask? Or is your whole theory based upon going to shaadh sunni sources?

Why don't you answer my question if you are truthful? Afterall I am contradicting your views from a Quranic verse.

As for your allegations, no I am not relying on sunni references. I've got a shia book in front of me (History of Islam by Allama Farogh Qazmi). Once we have upload feature back on, I will show you my references.......

[Abu Abdullaah]

As for your allegations, no I am not relying on sunni references. I've got a shia book in front of me (History of Islam by Allama Farogh Qazmi). Once we have upload feature back on, I will show you my references.......

?

Edited January 7, 2011 by Abu Abdullaah

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

As for your allegations, no I am not relying on sunni references. I've got a shia book in front of me (History of Islam by Allama Farogh Qazmi). Once we have upload feature back on, I will show you my references.......

HUH?! Who is that?! What is his status in terms of scholarship compared to the scholars I've mentioned in the article?

Please quote me the hadeeth he quotes from shee`ah books, I don't want tabari or ibn hajr, you might think the world of them and their scholarly work, but as the imaams have stated "they are to me as a wall".

(salam)

[Abbas.]

(salam)

Did you just say BEFORE be'sat?! HOW MANY MUSLIMS WERE THERE BROTHER!?!!!

The Prophet (pbuh) had a great deal of Muslim suitors for his daughters before Be'sat! :wacko: UGH...

YOU need to think brother.

Also, there wasn't a taHreem against marrying them before be'sat because the LAW didn't come down to prohibit such a thing.

Bro, your argument just got wacked.

Also, you can say that it was used to bring relationships together and family. Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee is from the clan Banu Abd-Shams. The clan takes its name from Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf the Quraish tribe and abdu shams clan. It's called having family ties or building relationships with other tribes.

(salam)

Your argument is like that of wahabi muslims. You are keen to believe that the Prophet was just another human being who happened to hear Jibrael in the cave of Hira at the age of 40. But if you read the shia ahadith regarding Prophethood, you will realise that He and His Progeny were way more than just laymen before and after ba'sat.

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

For future users who reading this post, before replying to this thread. Please read the article I have made, carefully from cover-to-cover.

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

(salam)

[mehdi soldier]

(salam)

(bismillah)

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.

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

so Umar threatened Imam Ali (as) that he will forge a case of theft against Imam Ali (as) and go on to cut off his hand (as the hadith you cited says) and then Imam Ali was scared and coerced and he gave his daughter to a tyrant.

Imam Ali it seems never heard/known/understood the saying "Hayhat Minnazzillah"!!!!

Imam Hussain never paid allegiance and chose death over humiliation.ok,we can say for argument's sake that Imam Ali may have paid allegiance to Abu Bakr for known reasons.but to give his honor and blood to a tyrant because he was too scared to refuse umar,the tyrant?

its just too unbelievable to even think about it.

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?

i dont take sunni sources as hujjah.if the source can be reliable based on our standards then there is nothing wrong in accepting them.Imam Ali (as) says:know the truth and you will know those who follow it.

so lets take the content and examine it and not the name.i am no expert but we surely know there is dispute over Aisha's age.this is a shia site even you quoted and it does say the same thing and also quotes tabari (see the note at the end part of the page):

http://www.al-islam.org/polygamy-marriages-prophet/

Edited January 7, 2011 by mehdi soldier

[Abbas.]

HUH?! Who is that?! What is his status in terms of scholarship compared to the scholars I've mentioned in the article?

Please quote me the hadeeth he quotes from shee`ah books, I don't want tabari or ibn hajr, you might think the world of them and their scholarly work, but as the imaams have stated "they are to me as a wall".

(salam)

I was expecting you to say that so I will wait till I gather acceptable references and till we have upload feature back on..........

By the way, he has quoted two refereces: Kitab ul Istighasa P:69 & Naqoosh e Asmat P:167 - 168

[Nader Zaveri]

so Umar threatened Imam Ali (as) that he will forge a case of theft against Imam Ali (as) and go on to cut off his hand (as the hadith you cited says) and then Imam Ali was scared and coerced and he gave his daughter to a tyrant.

How is that unbelievable? If you believe in the incident of the door, then you must admit that Imaam `Alee (as) did nothing while all those bad things happened to Sayyidah FaaTimah (SA). Imaam `Alee (as) did nothing while his right was usurped in front of his eyes. There is a thing called taqiyyah that Imaam `Alee (as) had to implement.

Speaking about the Prophet's Marriages book by Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi, sure he is Shee`ah, but he is not getting any of his information regarding the age of `Aa'ishah from Shee`ah books.

Please provide saheeh hadeeth from our shee`ah books that goes against the hadeeth presented in the article.

(salam)

(salam)

(bismillah)

Kitab ul Istighasa P:69 & Naqoosh e Asmat P:167 - 168

OMG! HILARIOUS! I can tell you didn't read my article. Brother, please read the article fully, and the last section on "one daughter theory". Read that carefully, I have talked about this book, and the author of this book in depth. For a "shee`ah scholar" to take that book out, shows how much scholarship he has.

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Abbas.]

OMG! HILARIOUS! I can tell you didn't read my article. Brother, please read the article fully, and the last section on "one daughter theory". Read that carefully, I have talked about this book, and the author of this book in depth. For a "shee`ah scholar" to take that book out, shows how much scholarship he has.

Erm I said it in my very first post that I havn't read your entire article, neither do I have the time to do so. But when I do bother ......... I will get back to you. As for now I was just arguing the very first point of yours..

Read that carefully, I have talked about this book, and the author of this book in depth. For a "shee`ah scholar" to take that book out, shows how much scholarship he has.

Umm yeh ........ you have claimed many point of views in the past............but when I contacted the scholars, I received different answers and realised that it is dangerous for people like you to have little knowledge. And I specifically updated shiachat with the right scholarly answers in case people fall for ure nonsense.

[Socrates]

How is that unbelievable? If you believe in the incident of the door, then you must admit that Imaam `Alee (as) did nothing while all those bad things happened to Sayyidah FaaTimah (SA).

This is precisely the argument that Sayyid Fadhlullah uses to cast doubt on the incident of the door.

You don't have a clue about the incident of the door, please try reading some history for once.

Edited January 7, 2011 by Socrates

[mehdi soldier]

How is that unbelievable? If you believe in the incident of the door, then you must admit that Imaam `Alee (as) did nothing while all those bad things happened to Sayyidah FaaTimah (SA). Imaam `Alee (as) did nothing while his right was usurped in front of his eyes. There is a thing called taqiyyah that Imaam `Alee (as) had to implement.

Speaking about the Prophet's Marriages book by Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi, sure he is Shee`ah, but he is not getting any of his information regarding the age of `Aa'ishah from Shee`ah books.

Please provide saheeh hadeeth from our shee`ah books that goes against the hadeeth presented in the article.

(salam)

there is limit to taqiyyah.if Imam Hussain (as) refused to give bay'ah to the tyrant in order not to legitimize the oppression,how can our first Imam give his daughter to a tyrant?

taqiyya is meant to save our lives from persecution when threatened.it is not meant for us to ignore the truth and accept the tyrant when threatened.also,doing taqiyya have nothing to do with what the tyrant does or does not do.for example Imam Ali did taqiyya and did not fight for the caliphate and that did no personal or physical harm.and he did not retaliate even when his life is threatened.but the Imams will choose death than humiliation when it amounts to that.Imam Ali giving his daughter to the tyrant amounts to death of humiliation in itself.he was losing and sacrificng a life.i will not stand and see my sister forced into a marriage out of intimidation by someone so detestable as umar,that ba$tard.dont you think brother?!!!

umar could have proposed and the issue whether or not the marriage took place is disputable.but from even logic it is impossible that the Imam gave his daughter to the tyrant.Imam Ali afterall died for islam and sacrificed his life and even went to war.

Imam Ali could have done taqiyya because of the caliphate and not fight for it and cause civil war.but individually he could have stood up for his daughter.i maybe wrong and the story did happen or maybe did not happen.

i believe shiachat should invite scholars to participate in the forum and add their explantions to issues that are controversial like it used to be before with Sayyed Qazwini.

as for the marriage of aisha,we need history and not hadith to settle that.we apply the same when the issue of Ashura is brought up.the sunnis have fabricated hadiths to relegate the matyrdom of Imam Hussain and give more importance to other events.but when calculation is done we see that the Prophet was never present in medinaduring muharram in the first year of hijra and the jewish fast never conincided with the 10th of muharram.

Edited January 7, 2011 by mehdi soldier

[Abu Abdullaah]

there is limit to taqiyyah.if Imam Hussain (as) refused to give bay'ah to the tyrant in order not to legitimize the oppression,how can our first Imam give his daughter to a tyrant?

(bismillah)

(salam)

Right there just shows you don't know anything about Islaam.

Taqiyyah can be used ANYTIME EXCEPT for three circumstances.

1) Drinking Alcohol or Intoxicants

2) Wiping the Khuff in WuDoo

3) Mut'a of the Hajj

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنْ حَمَّادٍ عَنْ حَرِيزٍ عَنْ زُرَارَةَ قَالَ قُلْتُ لِأَبِي جَعْفَرٍ ع فِي الْمَسْحِ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ تَقِيَّةٌ قَالَ لَا يُتَّقَى فِي ثَلَاثَةٍ قُلْتُ وَ مَا هُنَّ قَالَ شُرْبُ الْخَمْرِ أَوْ قَالَ شُرْبُ الْمُسْكِرِ وَ الْمَسْحُ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ وَ مُتْعَةُ الْحَجِّ

I said to Abee Ja`far (عليه السلام) about wiping upon the khuffayn (socks) (under) taqiyyah. He (عليه السلام) said: ‘There is no taqiyyah in three (circumstances)’. I said: ‘And what are they?’ He (عليه السلام) said: ‘Drinking wine or He (عليه السلام) said: Drinking intoxicant, wiping upon the khuffayn (socks) and mut`a of the hajj’

• Source:
  
• Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 6, pg. 415, hadeeth # 12
  Grading:
  
• Al-Majlisi said that this hadeeth is Hasan (Good)
  --> Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 22, pg. 275

(salam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by Abu Abdullaah

[Muhammed Ali]

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

Is it not possible that the giving of Fadak to Lady Fatimah (a) was an exception or is it not possible that something else was given to the other daughters?

[Socrates]

Is it not possible that the giving of Fadak to Lady Fatimah (a) was an exception or is it not possible that something else was given to the other daughters?

I'm interested to know whether other daughters were given anything at all.

[Muhammed Ali]

I'm interested to know whether other daughters were given anything at all.

Here I am merely speculating. Is it also not possible that Fadak was gifted after the other daughters died? I.e. Prophet Muhammad (s) kept Fadak as his own property for a couple of years and then gave it to Fatimah [a]?

[haideriam]

Is it not possible that the giving of Fadak to Lady Fatimah (a) was an exception or is it not possible that something else was given to the other daughters?

(bismillah)

(salam)

bro muhammed ali, the only exception in islam is for the holy prophet (pbuh) , correct me if i understand this wrong bro

bro nader zaveri, marriage confers no honour as in the case of asiya(sa) with firoun(la)

i need to read more, for it does not make sense that the holy prophet (pbuh) could have ever treated his daughters not equally

their being masoom or non masoom is a gift from AllahÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì

but their being treated not equally is an action of rasool Allah (pbuh)

which he(sawws) can never be guilty of

(wasalam)

Edited January 7, 2011 by haideriam

[bi_ithnillaah]

(salam)

(bismillah)

How many daughters did the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) 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 (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), and now we are having ikhtilaaf (differences) on how many daughters he had?

..............

(bismillah)

(wasalam)

I haven't read the above replies, this is a comment I was working on earlier and came back to and will post now:

The first verse of the Qur'an you pasted you sourced it wrong. It is not verse 33:33 it is verse 33:59.

You also said "yours daughters" instead of "your daughters" - small typo but it makes a difference in presentation (especially since you bolded and colored it).

In your hadeeth 5, not a big deal, but you didn't fully translate it / a better translation would say:

"then born to the Messenger of Allaah from Umm Ibraaheem was Ibraaheem, and she was Maariyah Al-QibTiyyah"

I noticed in a few other places (such as from Al-Kulayni on page 16, and above in hadeeth #5) that you translate "wulida li- / min" as a noun (child or children), rather than the passive verb that is actually in the Arabic statements meaning born to/from (depending if the laam or min comes next). I think it is better to stay to what is being said in the Arabic rather than changing the words around to something else, even with the small difference in meaning it is still a change that I don't see as necessary in translation. Do you have a reason for doing it the way you have been doing it in this pdf?

Other than the above brief statements, I think you did a very good job in collecting the evidence of the ahadeeth and the scholarly input. I don't agree with some of your personal arguments though, or all the methods of argument, including one you make in the very beginning: to believe that rasulullaah had only one daughter - Fatimah - is bid'ah. To say it is incorrect, wrong, a misconception, is understandable based on your findings. But I don't fully agree that to hold the belief that rasulullaah didn't have 3 other daughters is "bid'ah." I don't think that you fully support that statement. I think you should start by defining it and supporting the definition of bid'ah with substantial evidence so that your audience can reach the same conclusions that you do by the end of your pdf. "Bid'ah" is not a small word to throw around so it's important that everyone who reads your work understands how or why you define bid'ah in the way you do.

So yeah, overall it looks like you put a lot of work into it mashaa Allaah.

EDIT--------------------------------------------------------

After reading the comments, I would say that it would be interesting to discuss the sayed status, and that should be done in another pdf. It seems that the object of Nader's pdf was simply to prove that rasulullaah had 4 daughters and not just one, it was not meant towards answering those other side questions. Maybe he can make another pdf with the assumption that rasulullaah did have 4 daughters that answers all these other questions that arise.

The later commenters should read what was already said because your questions are probably already answered or addressed in the thread.

Also, you brothers should calm down on the emotion. No need for name calling or accusations from either side. Just approach your arguments from a logical perspective instead of an emotional one. And y'all say women are emotional..

Edited January 8, 2011 by bi_ithnillaah

[mehdi soldier]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Right there just shows you don't know anything about Islaam.

brother,you dont have to be rude.

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

(salam)

(bismillah)

For future users who reading this post, before replying to this thread. Please read the article I have made, carefully from cover-to-cover.

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

(salam)

Salam all,

nader has worked very hard on this article and I have few things to say.

1. What is the status of the father in terms of wilayat; if he adopts daughters? I don't want to know about sons.

2. What is the difference between daughter of mohammad and daughter of rasool Allah saww? As it has been used in ur article at different places

3. Do you also believe that rasool Allah saww was sent wahi and nabuwat after some 40 years? U quoted some scholars including kulayni who I respect a lot however his opinion is not hujja. Are u planning to write an article on this too.

Look bro, u have right to expose biddah but do you have a hadis where any imam a.s said that not believing that rasool Allah saww had four daughters is a biddah?

Thanks for the ahadis; this issue and imam Ali a.s's daughter's issue is unclear to me so I am not denying the ahadis but returning them to imam ajf for explanation.

Why was it such a ghulu to say Salman ibnu Islam a.s and the other three are the pillars of Islam and because of momineen Allah azwj doesn't destroy this world and feeds everyone. If a momin has ism azam then with the will of Allah azwj what can't he do?

Anyway, I can never understand rijalists nor rilm ur rijal or u explain rijal some other time through ahadis which should state sahih, zaeef, Hasan , muwathiq, Hasane kal sahih and all other categories?

I am desperately in need of Imam ajf as I don't have answers to many questions.

Ya Ali Madad

[ShiaAnswers]

Bismihi Ta'ala,

You claim that it is Bid'ah to believe that the Prophet (S) only had one daughter. That is not the case. A Bid'ah is when someone invents something new in the religion that has no basis whatsoever. This is a historical discussion that does not have any baring on any religious aspect at all. Why is discussing it bid'ah? Obviously there are some questions regarding it even back to the time of Sh. Almufeed (why else would people ask him “we heard they were not his daughters..”? If this is a historical issue and there is discussion among the Ulama about it, who are you to say it is Bid'ah to hold the other position? Please be careful in the words you use. You will be responsible in front of Allah (SWT) for things you have said. (If you claim that you are following the quote in your article, the quote said that that person MADE SOME bid'ahs, not that this one of them.)

The Argument for One Daughter

I was going to write an article about this but I decided not to because I don't believe there is a strong argument for the four daughter theory. The strongest evidence is the repetition seen in our books by some Ulama and my research for this answer actually made me believe more that that is not to be trusted because it lacks support and analysis and relies only on what is famous.

The article is written by Almohaqqiq Alalamah Sayyid Ja'far Mortadha Alaamili. He is the author of the book “The authentic from the history of the Prophet (S)” which won awards in Iran and other places. He is highly regarded by many of our Maraji' and the late Marji' Shaikh Bahjat (ra) said about him: “If his amamah fell, the angels would fight over who picks it up” because of his work for AhlulBayt (A) and his extensive research and writing. Here is the article/book: http://www.aqaed.com/book/108/indexs.html

If you are really seeking the answer and is objective about your analysis, read the book and post your objections to it.

Quranic Proofs:

You say that the fact that the verse said “daughters” in the plural certainly means that there was more than one. When plenty of the brothers pointed out the obvious flaw with this argument you started throwing the word “Qiyass” around. Well do you even know what Qiyass means? Qiyass simply means using a logical argument. Therefore, naturally there is proper Qiyass and improper Qiyass. The simple fact that someone is doing Qiyass doesn't mean they are doing something wrong unless they are doing it improperly. Stop calling things haram and Bid'ah when you yourself cannot classify when they are proper or not. It is haram to do Qiyass in Fiqh and against the clear text. Not all Qiyass is haram as you claim.

Furthermore, who said this is Qiyass? The question is does using the plural term in the verse CERTAINLY indicate that there was more than one? Well to answer this question you must look at the rest of the verses of the Quran to see if Allah (SWT) used a plural term to mean a single person and there are different verses that fall under that category as the others indicated. This is not Qiyass, we are not saying because it happened in one verse IT MUST happen here, we are saying it leaves the possibilities open. This is not evidence that the Prophet (S) did not have more than one daughter, however, it is not evidence that he had many. It COULD mean that he had more than one and it COULD mean that he only one, further evidence is needed for either position.

Hadeeths:

You mentioned 12 Hadeeths. 2 were authentic, 1 was good, 1 was reliable, and the rest were either weak or not analyzed. Yet you continue to say “countless upon countless Hadeeths”. You should at least be objective in your evaluation so that people can take your words seriously.

The hadeeths that you provided only said "bint nabiyik" which means "daughters of your Prophet". Hadeeth 2 and 3 talk about the daughter of Zainab from Abi Alaas who is moshrik. It would have been impossible for her to have been married to him and to have a daughter from him before the Prophethood was announced. Since the evidence does supports the impossibility of their existence after the prophethood was announced and the "saheeh" hadeeths say they were referred to as "daughters of the prophet", so the most logical way to solve the issue to say that they were not biological daughters of the Prophet but raised by him and called that.

Scholars:

General statement: This is a historical issue and not a central issue to the religion or any of the major beliefs or branches of the religion. In these matters the scholars or the narrators usually narrate what is famous among them and they do not go into deep analysis on the issue. It is not that they are giving a fatwa which is being followed by the people like prayer or wudoo'. Also this is not a matter that is important to the roots of the religion or the positions of ahlulbayt to warrant that much attention and research from them. Therefore, the mentioning of scholars without any historical research from them or writings on the topic is not governing although it does hold its weight.

1. Ibn Rooh: You said he is not given a scholarly opinion.

2. Alkulayni: He is giving a summary based on what is famous and he even says “it was narrated” in some of his sentences, meaning he has not checked himself and analyzed the issue.

3.Almufeed: He is perhaps one of the top 5 scholars in Shia history and his word carries much weight. However, there is no evidence that he did any analysis or research on this topic and did not give the opinion of what is famous among the scholars. He even says “whoever differs is going against the famous opinion”, that doesn't mean it's wrong. This is countered by the fame at the time of the Prophet (S) that they were not his daughters and I will mention that after inshallah. Also his words are inconsistent with the facts of the time since he claimed that Othman married the wrong daughter (Zainab).

4.Alshareef: No doubt about his status, however, I am not able to find the book for review. I question whether he made his own analysis or just took the story from others.

5.Altoosi: Right after the quote which you had the next words are “and he said: if there was a third one we would have married her to him.” The Prophet (S) would say that about his own daughter? There is no chain of narration for the Hadeeth. Also the shaikh is just using these as examples in a book of Fiqh, this not his analysis on the issue, and it falls under what we said about them repeating what is famous.

6.Altabarsi: Actually your page was wrong, it was on page 275. He is just mentioning what is famous again and he mentions the marriage to the son of Abu Lahab which could not have happened if you read the article I gave.

7.Ibn Shahrashoob: N/A

8.Shaheed Thani: N/A

9.Alfaydh Alkashani: There is nothing about the topic in the page you mentioned. Maybe you put the wrong citation.

10.Almajlisi: From the scan you provided there is no source or analysis.

11.Almazindirani: N/A

12.Kashif Alghita': N/A

13.Alqummi: He only says that it has been narrated and then he mentions Hadeeth 5 which you admitted is weak.

14.Dr. Shari'ati: He is a misguided individual with strange ideas that are not in line with the beliefs of the AhlulBayt (A) school of thought according to many Maraji'. Please visit this link for more details: http://al-meshkah.com/maaref_show.php?id=24

15.Alsheerazi: No source for the claim. He also mentioned that all of the daughters died from beating? I'm not sure what this is about.

16.Almuddarisi: N/A

17.Alsubhani: N/A

(the N/A means I did not get a chance to review these books)

Summary of Scholars:

Any scholar who mentioned the story of a daughter marrying Abu Lahab's son, their story is defeated by the article I provided. The article proves that there is no possibility they were his daughters from Khadeeja and that they would be old enough to get married before the revelation of the Surah.

The rest of the scholars are most likely going from the opinion of Shaikh Almufeed and he is using the famous opinion and nothing more. I say likely because most of the ones you mentioned, if not all, just say the claim and move on. There is no analysis, hadeeth or anything that proves your point. We are left with just a line in a book repeating the same names with nothing more to go from.

Source of the theory:

You claim that he is the first source, where is the evidence of the claim? The people you mentioned all said that he has some good books and some bad books, who is to say this one is a bad one? None of them mentioned it as bad. Besides, per the article I posted, the evidence is from other sources as well.

Notes about your general philosophy:

- You did not do it in this article much but this whole idea of just picking up a saheeh hadeeth and running with it is dangerous. It is very dangerous for people to think they can just read a bunch of “saheeh” hadeeths and develop religious opinions based on that. If that was the case, each one of us would buy a copy of Wasa'il Alshi'a with an index of what has been labeled saheeh by our scholars and we would make our fatwas.

The truth is some hadeeths are saheeh but are limited by other hadeeths. Some hadeeths are saheeh but contradict the Quran. Some hadeeth are saheeh but were said using taqiyya. The point is there are many considerations to go through before adapting a Hadeeth's content other than just it's saheeh or not. These considerations require studying Usool, Rijal, Kalam, Tafseer and many of the other subjects studied in Hawza, they don't just require an extensive library and books of Hadeeth. When we want to pick a Marji' we look for the most knowledgeable, we don't look at who has the biggest library.

- Please be careful in accusing people and making everyone that goes counter to your historical analysis out of the religion. This is not the way to do it. It is good to assertive and confident in your position but also respect other people's opinions.

- You have great drive and you put a lot of effort into your work, however, you should focus your work on defending and protecting the image of AhlulBayt (A) since you know they are the ones chosen by Allah (SWT) to guide us. Instead of trying to prove that biological daughters of the Prophet (S) married kuffar and then married Othman, why not focus on things more relevant and more problematic? Things that will bring people closer to AhlulBayt (A) than raise unnecessary and unimportant doubts. Just my humble suggestion.

Allah knows best.

[Gypsy]

(salam)

Nader has spent many weeks to complete it. At least please be appreciative of his effort even if you disagree with his conclusion.

Other than addressing few comments and criticism of the original article (done by ShiaChat reviewers/members), few things that can be worked on

- There are way to many spelling typos: Allaah, Islaam, Imaams, Qur’aan, It would be better if you can use standard latin spelling that is agreed to be used as a written form for Arabic when used in latin/written form. It’s always best not to come up with your own spelling for these words.

Page 4:

- Incorrect usage of the word biddah.

just to show how mutawaatir (widely narrated) this belief was that it is impossible for this to be wrong. Denying these aHaadeeth would essentially be denying the Imaams

What do you mean denying Imaams? This is an incomplete sentence and unsubstantiated.

Page 5:

- As pointed out by others, glaring mistake with translating “yours daughters” to “your daughters”. It changes the meaning of the words completely and hence cannot be used by you to support your argument.

Also, you said

Allaah cannot tell the Prophet “your daughters” because He himself has went against calling another person’s child your own in the Qur’aan.

This is not correct because in the verse of Mubahila, Hassan (as) and Husayn (as) has been referred to as sons of the Prophet.

- Please spend more time writing about why Allah swt allows sons of Fatima being referred as his sons and not Zaid.

- Some of the things in page 5 will need to be rewritten again due to incorrect assumption made about verses of the Quran.

Page 6:

You explanation about Surah al-Kawthar is very weak. You basically dismiss the whole verse in three sentences

Also, some might try to bring out Surah Al-Kawthar (108), when Allaah says “abtar”, they say this refers to the lack of children that he had. This is wrong, since the word was used in connotation with the Prophet having no male sons living, since all of them died at a very young age having no male sons living, since all of them died at a very young age.

This sentence is completely incomprehensible.

- What do you mean here? Are you saying Allah swt is using the word incorrectly or we are misunderstanding this word?

This will need some major rework. Here are some suggestions on how you can improve this portion

- Define the word “abtar”. Define the context how the word can be used. What is the context of the word here?

- Look into historical evidences as to how this word is considered an “insult”. Who was throwing this word to make the Holy Prophet upset.

- See Quranic tafsirs on the revelations of this verse.

- It’s best if you do not inject any personal opinions on the verses of the Quran. To give more credibility to your writing, please quote from heavyweights such as Allamah Muhammad Hussain Tabatabai and others.

I have to stop here/running out of time. I’ll probably look again later.

[Basim Ali]

(salam),

Just finished reading the article.

Excellent effort; may Allah reward all those who made this possible.

What I found missing would be adding the bit about (and rejecting) the belief that the daughters were from previous husbands of Sayyida Khadija (as). That's one major point of view, among the Sunnis today.

Thank you again. Jazakallah Khayr.

wa (salam)

[Abdullah88]

jazakallah khair nader zaveri. good article

2 quick questions.

1) Did the other daughters of the prophet (S) procreate? and are their children considered Sayyed?

2) What was the reason behind the marriage of Uthman with the 2 daughters of the prophet? In case of Umar, we know he threaten; can the reason be the same as nuh (A) offering his daughters to the accursed?

3)

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

First off, I would like to apologize for my akhlaaq not being the best, I am sorry for that. Please forgive me if I offended anyone. I want you ask for your forgiveness before I ask Allaah's (SWT) for forgiveness.

This whole issue of 1 daughters was stemmed from that ghuluww guy, as I have provided the source for our scholars saying such a thing. That is why people went up to Mufeed and asked him if this was true, because that guy's theory must've spread. He wasn't a small guy, he has authored over 40 books, so it would seem as if his words held weight to people at that time. The way Al-Mufeed dismisses this claim as being shaadh, should show how much he was opposed to this.

Brother, from taking a look at the book you've provided, the author uses sources from the mukhaalifeen, and not from the Ahl Al-Bayt (as). Those sources have no binding upon the Shee`ah, well it shouldn't have any binding upon us, but it seems as if the shee`ahs hold these books very high as if it were the words of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) themselves.

1. Ibn Rooh: You said he is not given a scholarly opinion.

2. Alkulayni: He is giving a summary based on what is famous and he even says “it was narrated” in some of his sentences, meaning he has not checked himself and analyzed the issue.

3.Almufeed: He is perhaps one of the top 5 scholars in Shia history and his word carries much weight. However, there is no evidence that he did any analysis or research on this topic and did not give the opinion of what is famous among the scholars. He even says “whoever differs is going against the famous opinion”, that doesn't mean it's wrong. This is countered by the fame at the time of the Prophet (S) that they were not his daughters and I will mention that after inshallah. Also his words are inconsistent with the facts of the time since he claimed that Othman married the wrong daughter (Zainab).

4.Alshareef: No doubt about his status, however, I am not able to find the book for review. I question whether he made his own analysis or just took the story from others.

5.Altoosi: Right after the quote which you had the next words are “and he said: if there was a third one we would have married her to him.” The Prophet (S) would say that about his own daughter? There is no chain of narration for the Hadeeth. Also the shaikh is just using these as examples in a book of Fiqh, this not his analysis on the issue, and it falls under what we said about them repeating what is famous.

6.Altabarsi: Actually your page was wrong, it was on page 275. He is just mentioning what is famous again and he mentions the marriage to the son of Abu Lahab which could not have happened if you read the article I gave.

7.Ibn Shahrashoob: N/A

8.Shaheed Thani: N/A

9.Alfaydh Alkashani: There is nothing about the topic in the page you mentioned. Maybe you put the wrong citation.

10.Almajlisi: From the scan you provided there is no source or analysis.

11.Almazindirani: N/A

12.Kashif Alghita': N/A

13.Alqummi: He only says that it has been narrated and then he mentions Hadeeth 5 which you admitted is weak.

14.Dr. Shari'ati: He is a misguided individual with strange ideas that are not in line with the beliefs of the AhlulBayt (A) school of thought according to many Maraji'. Please visit this link for more details: http://al-meshkah.com/maaref_show.php?id=24

15.Alsheerazi: No source for the claim. He also mentioned that all of the daughters died from beating? I'm not sure what this is about.

16.Almuddarisi: N/A

17.Alsubhani: N/A

Brother, Your attempts to dismiss our scholars quotes time and time again because you just "assume" that they have not done analysis is very dangerous claim. What you are essentially saying is that our scholars talked from their whims and desires and didn't research this issue, or just because you didn't see a thorough analysis of their research, you think they haven't done it.

None of my sources are cited wrong, I double and triple checked everything, just because it isn't in your certain edition, doesn't mean I citing them wrong. There is a reason why I have put the Arabic to each source, that way if you see the sources don't match up with your edition, you can always go through the book yourself. Another reason why I make sure to put the arabic is so it adds more yaqeen (certainty) to the readers, so that I am not merely "making it up".

Source of the theory:

You claim that he is the first source, where is the evidence of the claim? The people you mentioned all said that he has some good books and some bad books, who is to say this one is a bad one? None of them mentioned it as bad. Besides, per the article I posted, the evidence is from other sources as well.

Brother, if you read the article carefully brother I do provide the sources from our classical scholars that the theory originated from him. Also, he lived in 352 AH, very early, everyone else stemmed their theory from him. Unless you have a scholar who is earlier than 352

The scholars said his books have ghuluww and confusion. Also if you notice, Al-Toosee mentions the books that he authored in the time of him being "good", and that specific book wasn't mentioned. Which would lend it to believe that it was authored in the course of his ghuluww and confusion years. Also, are you willing to take a chance on a "Maybe", instead of our great scholars totally dismissing this guy and this claim of only 1 daughter? That does not make sense.

In Hadeeth sciences when you cannot distinguish whether the person narrated the hadeeth or wrote his books in the course of his years of ghuluww years, you must reject it as accepting this would be based on a "maybe".

Notes about your general philosophy:

- You did not do it in this article much but this whole idea of just picking up a saheeh hadeeth and running with it is dangerous. It is very dangerous for people to think they can just read a bunch of “saheeh” hadeeths and develop religious opinions based on that. If that was the case, each one of us would buy a copy of Wasa'il Alshi'a with an index of what has been labeled saheeh by our scholars and we would make our fatwas.

The truth is some hadeeths are saheeh but are limited by other hadeeths. Some hadeeths are saheeh but contradict the Quran. Some hadeeth are saheeh but were said using taqiyya. The point is there are many considerations to go through before adapting a Hadeeth's content other than just it's saheeh or not. These considerations require studying Usool, Rijal, Kalam, Tafseer and many of the other subjects studied in Hawza, they don't just require an extensive library and books of Hadeeth. When we want to pick a Marji' we look for the most knowledgeable, we don't look at who has the biggest library.

- Please be careful in accusing people and making everyone that goes counter to your historical analysis out of the religion. This is not the way to do it. It is good to assertive and confident in your position but also respect other people's opinions.

- You have great drive and you put a lot of effort into your work, however, you should focus your work on defending and protecting the image of AhlulBayt (A) since you know they are the ones chosen by Allah (SWT) to guide us. Instead of trying to prove that biological daughters of the Prophet (S) married kuffar and then married Othman, why not focus on things more relevant and more problematic? Things that will bring people closer to AhlulBayt (A) than raise unnecessary and unimportant doubts. Just my humble suggestion.

- To be honest, I have a copy of Wasaa'il Al-Shee`ah at home. But I am not aware of a wasaa'il al-shee`ah in which it has the gradings of our scholars in them, if such a wasaa'il exist, let me know.

I am well aware of what constitutes a saheeh hadeeth and what doesn't brother. If you notice it isn't me who is saying "SaHeeH", majority of my posts and this article I am quoting `Allaamah Al-Majlisi. Shouldn't the a`lam (most knowledgeable) scholar have the biggest library, because he has read "every" book and has seen "every" viewpoint? Unless, you believe the a`lam marja` is divinely given his knowledge then that is a different story. If you don't, then he should have the biggest library.

- Brother, please read all the posts on my blog before saying I am not focusing my efforts on bringing people closer to the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) . Actually using hadeeth only from shee`ah books, that have been stated by our Ahl Al-Bayt (as) is bringing them closer to them, instead of using sources by Mr. Bukhaaree, Tabari, and the rest of the mukhaalifeen. Also, this post was in defense of the Family of the Prophet (pbuh). I am defending the daughters of the Prophet (pbuh) whom have been neglected and rejected. If someone neglected my daughters, I would be extremely hurt, as I am sure the Prophet (pbuh) is extremely hurt since his daughters are rejected. This is also in defense of FaaTimah (sa) , we have neglected and rejected her sisters, I know I would be really hurt if someone rejected my brothers.

The whole point of the blog was to focus on the word of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) , from the sources of the followers of the Ahl Al-Bayt (as) . If people really wanted to read sources from the mukhaalifeen, they could easily go to al-islam.org or maaref-foundation, as majority of those books by scholars quote the mukhaalifeen sources.

(salam)

Edited January 8, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Qa'im]

(salam)

Excellent research brother Nader.

Some people here think that having multiple daughters is somehow a threat to Imamah and the unique status of Fatima (as). However, this is untrue - the other daughters of the Prophet (pbuh), may Allah be pleased with them, did not even have a continuous tree of descendents. Ruqayya (ra) didn't have any children, and died long before the Prophet. Umm Kulthum (ra) too died before the Prophet, and had no children. Zaynab (ra) had two children - Ali and Umayma - Ali died in infancy, and Umayma ended up becoming a wife of Imam `Ali (as), and they bore the child Hilal, who died before having children. Fatima (as) is the only daughter that had a continuous tree of descendents, and thus Imamah is only befitting for her. Allah of course knew this in advance.

As for those who believe this is a threat to Fatima's (as) rank, Fatima is clearly uplifted in our hadiths and books, as well as the books of Ahl al-Sunna as she is regarded as the only daughter that is a member of Ahl al-Kisa'.

And for those who believe the Prophet (pbuh) wouldn't marry his daughters to `Uthman ibn `Affan, the Qur'an makes clear that some of the hypocrites are known by Muhammed (pbuh), and others are not. `Uthman may have been corrupt during his Caliphate, but I haven't seen a reason to believe that the Prophet (pbuh) knew this would happen in the future. He doesn't have access to all `ilm al-ghayb, only a portion of it.

Otherwise, the above is just logical reasoning. The fact that the Prophet (pbuh) had four daughters was quite clearly the position of the classical scholars, and the opinion that Fatima (as) was the only daughter was an early position of the ghulat, which unfortunately made its way into Shi`ite circles. And from the strong hadiths brother Nader has compiled, the multiple-daughters position is most likely the position the Imams (as) themselves took on this issue. Be careful of what you deny blatantly are crticize - this position is the stronger position according to our books and the books of all other sects, and what you criticize and curse may indeed be the truth.

Edited January 8, 2011 by Qa'im

[Socrates]

Nader you have still not addressed the objections that have been raised by many people in this thread mainly:

1) Suratul Kawthar (your dismissal is very weak)

2) Daughters of the Prophet (pbuh) being married to kuffar and then to an enemy of Ahlul Bayt (as)

3) For someone so concerned with sahih hadiths, you've quoted a fair amount of dhaeef (by your standards) ones to try and prove this point. Given how easily you reject dhaeef hadiths, why are you accusing people of doing something that you routinely do?

[Ya Baqiyatullah (aj)]

(salam)

From AA:

Shaykh Baqar Majlisi records in Mirat al-Uqool, Volume 5 page 179:

Ýí ßÊÇÈí ÇáÃäæÇÑ æÇáÈÏÚ Ãä ÑÞíÉ æÒíäÈ ßÇäÊÇ ÇÈäÊí åÇáÉ ÃÎÊ ÎÏíÌÉ

“According to the books Anwar and Bida Ruqiyyah and Zainab were daughters of Hala, the sister of Khadija”

We read in Kashf al-Ghita by Jaffar Kashef al-Ghitta, Volume 1 page 5:

æÐßÑ ÈÚÖ ÃÕÍÇÈäÇ Ýí ÑÞíÉ æÒíäÈ ÇäåãÇ ÈäÊÇ ÊÈäí áÇ ÅÈäÊÇä Úáì ÇáÍÞíÞÉ æÇäåãÇ ÈäÊÇ åÇáÉ ÇÎÊ ÎÏíÌÉ

“Some of our scholars have said that Ruqiyyah and Zainab were adopted daughters not biological daughters and they were the daughters of Hala the sister of Khadija”

From Nader:

Al-Majlisi, Hayaah Al-Quloob, vol. 2, Ch. 7, pg. 6

Chapter V: Account of Khadeejah: Muhammad is employed by her in a Mercantile Expedition to Syria: He marries her and

has by her Kasim, Abdullah, Rokeeah, Zaynab, Ummkulsoom and Fatimah.

On the authority of Imam jafer-e-saduk )ÇáÓÇáã Úáíå(: “…God be gracious to Khadeejah, from whom by me pure and

sacred were born Abdullah, Kasim, Fatimah, Rokeeah, Zaynab, and Ummkulsoom…

Kaashif Al-GhiTaa’, Kashf Al-GhiTaa’, vol. 1, pg.

“And he had 8 children?? that was born from Khadeejah )ÇáÓÇã åÇñÚá(. (The Children) before revelation were Al-Qaasim,

Ruqayyah, Zaynab, and Umm Kulthoom.

Confusing, much?

[Nader Zaveri]

From AA:

There is many things wrong with this quote, I will give them the benefit of the doubt and that they did this out of ignorance, because if they did not do this out of ignorance they are lying. May Allaah forgive them, inshaa'Allaah. Aameen.

1. First and most important issue is that this is NOT Al-Majlisi's quote, rather he is quoting Ibn Shahr Ashoob. Ibn Shahr Ashoob has brought out this point, and dismisses it and says he (pbuh) had 4 daughters from khadeejah on page 161. This is how scholars works, they bring about all the viewpoints, then they dismiss them, and give their own viewpoint.

Here is the full quote from Al-Majlisi in his Mir'aat Al-`Uqool. This is NOT the words of Al-Majlisi, but he is quoting Shahr Ashoob. In blue is what they quote.

قال ابن شهرآشوب رحمه الله في المناقب: تزوج أولا بمكة خديجة بنت خويلد قالوا: و كانت عند عتيق بن عائذ المخزومي ثم عند أبي هالة، و روى أحمد البلاذري و أبو القاسم الكوفي في كتابيهما و المرتضى في الشافي أن النبي صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم تزوج بها و كانت عذراء، و يؤكد ذلك ما ذكر في كتابي الأنوار و البدع أن رقية و زينب كانتا ابنتي هالة أخت خديجة

• Source:
  
• Al-Majlisi, Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 5, pg. 179

Here is the original quote from Ibn Shahr Ashoob, Al-Manaaqib, vol. 1, pg. 159:

.أن النبي ص تزوج بها و كانت عذراء يؤكد ذلك ما ذكر في كتابي الأنوار و البدع أن رقية و زينب كانتا ابنتي هالة أخت خديجة

"The the Prophet (pbuh) married her and she was a virgin, they claim that what is mentioned in the books of Al-Anwaar and Al-Bid` that Ruqayyah and Zaynab were the daughters of Haalah, sister of Khadeejah."

• Source:
  
• Ibn Shahr Ashoob, Al-Manaaqib, vol. 1, pg. 159

2. What I quote is Majlisi's ACTUAL words, he made a WHOLE chapter in his Hayat Al-Quloob, vol. 2.

3. Notice the name of the books. Al-Balaadhuree = Sunnee, so we don't care. MurtaDa has a quote going against this theory as I have cited. And Mr. Ghuluww himself, Aboo Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, the originator of this theory. Also, please notice the book Ibn Shahr Ashoob quotes, Al-Bid`, this is another name of the book by Aboo Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, as I have already pointed out in the article, I have a quote from Muhaddith Al-Nooree saying this.

Now out of the whole section in Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 5, pg. 181, the only TRUE words of Al-Majlisi about the children in Mir'aat Al-`Uqool is this:

و أقول: هذا القول الأخير أوفق بالرواية التي رواها المصنف و كأنه إشارة إلى ما سيأتي في الروضة في حديث إسلام علي عليه السلام في حديث طويل عن علي بن الحسين عليهما السلام قال: و لم يولد لرسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم من خديجة على فطرة الإسلام إلا فاطمة عليها السلام.

Basically he says the ONLY child of the Prophet (pbuh) that was born from Khadeejah after the advent of Islaam was FaaTimah (sa).

The quote I provided is majlisi's OWN words. If you label a WHOLE chapter saying 4 daughters, that means that is his belief.

The Kashf Al-GhiTaa' quote is him once again quoting other opinions, then he rejects them later on as I quoted. Once again, I hope this is out of their ignorance.

(salam)

Edited January 8, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[Yasoob Al Deen]

Assalamu alaykum wa rahmetu Allahi wa barekato to everyone. Assalamu alaykum wa rahmetu Allahi wa barekato to everyone.

Read these points:

1) When the majority of the Ulema, including giants from the classical scholars, say that the correct interpretation of the matter is that the Prophet had four biological daughters, then we should follow the majority of the Ulema, especially when these include giants from the classical scholars. You think you're something compared to thiqat al-Islam ash-shaykh al-Kulayni? You think the words of some random person, regardless of who they are, are higher than the words of the chosen representative of Imam al-Mahdi?

2) On what basis are you guys disputing this? Almost nothing we Shia consider valid and authorative. The works of a Sunni scholar or a Sunni source have NO authority for the Shia. So if a Sunni scholar says that the Prophet only had one biological daughter, then he is wrong. Why? Because OUR Shia scholars, including classical scholars, said otherwise. So if you believe that the Prophet did not have four daughters based on a Sunni source, then you should be ashamed of yourself for believing this, when our Ulema testify otherwise.

3) Just because a few "scholars" who are in the minority say otherwise, and these scholars are minor in status too, it does not make the vast majority of Ulema, including giants from the classical scholars such as al-Kulayni and at-Tusi others, wrong and misguidance on this issue. For example, let me remind that you at-Tusi has been called "ash-shaykh at-Taa'ifa".

4) Please do not comment if you have not read the article. It is seriously stupid to comment when you have not read the article. You cannot object to what Nader has concluded when you have not read the article. It's like rejecting Islam, without reading the Quran. Comments such as...:

I was expecting you to say that so I will wait till I gather acceptable references and till we have upload feature back on..........By the way, he has quoted two refereces: Kitab ul Istighasa P:69 & Naqoosh e Asmat P:167 - 168

...are dumb. As Nader put it, this particular comment is "friggin hilarious". Anyone who has read the article will know why.

5) Just because someone thinks up of a question or attempts to raise a (non-existent) issue, it does not make the fact that the Prophet had four daughters wrong. Remember, we, especially in this day and age, do not know everything in Shia Islam. Our knowledge is low, and we are not even Ulema for crying out loud. We are not worth the shoes that al-Kulayni or al-Mufeed or at-Tusi wore, let alone the dirt under Ameer al-Mu'mineen's feet. These believed that the Prophet had four daughters. So just because you say "oh, but what about the inheritance?" - so just because you have a question, that you think pokes a whole in this fact, it makes it wrong? No! Ignorance on an issue does not make the issue wrong. That would be as stupid as saying the Quran has a contradiction because in one verse it says the angel Gabriel visited Maryam, aleyha assalam, and in another verse it says the "Holy Spirit" visited Maryam, aleyha assalam. Saying: "oh but what about one verse saying it was Gabriel and another saying it was the Holy Spirit? This makes the Quran wrong because it's a contradiction". No! Just because you are ignorant on a matter, it does not make the matter wrong. So just because you've wrecked your brains to raise a dumb question such as "why weren't they taken in the event of Mubahila" or "but how come they aren't mentioned much in history", this does not make the majority of the Ulema, including the giants, wrong.

6) You can try to argue with Nader's reasoning. But the fact is that the Ulema agreed with the conclusion. It doesn't matter about the reasoning ultimately. It matters about what the Ulema said.

7) "Bidah" means innovation. Yes, it used most of the time in reference to an innovation in belief or practice, but it does generally mean innovation. Nader said that the idea of the Prophet only having one daughter is a bidah. Why? Well, read the article!

8) Nader made an irrefutable argument. See the bold and enlarged part of my post somewhere below.

Answering a couple of posts

Answering ShiaAnswers

You claim that it is Bid'ah to believe that the Prophet (S) only had one daughter. That is not the case. A Bid'ah is when someone invents something new in the religion that has no basis whatsoever. This is a historical discussion that does not have any baring on any religious aspect at all. Why is discussing it bid'ah?

Do you even know what bidah means? It means innovation. Therefore it can be used in reference to anything, whether it be an innovation in Salaat or an innovation in belief.

Obviously there are some questions regarding it even back to the time of Sh. Almufeed (why else would people ask him "we heard they were not his daughters.."?

What terrible reasoning. There have been a number of Sunni scholars that have said (or so it is claimed although I would love to see a list of the names with evidence because I doubt this theory of only 1 daughter is that prominent amongst the Sunnis although I could be wrong) the Prophet had only 1 daughter. So al-Mufeed answered this issue. Just like Ulema answered other issues. For example, just because there was a debate over whether the Quran is created or eternal, it does not mean that this debate has some basis in truth! (It is said to be a bidah and forbidden to discuss it, if I remember correctly).

If this is a historical issue and there is discussion among the Ulama about it, who are you to say it is Bid'ah to hold the other position?

Please bring names of prominent Ulema of the Shia, with respective book and page number, that rejected the Prophet's other daughters when the majority of the Ulema supported the daughters.

Please be careful in the words you use. You will be responsible in front of Allah (SWT) for things you have said. (If you claim that you are following the quote in your article, the quote said that that person MADE SOME bid'ahs, not that this one of them.)

How ironic. Seriously.

The Argument for One Daughter: I was going to write an article about this but I decided not to because I don't believe there is a strong argument for the four daughter theory. The strongest evidence is the repetition seen in our books by some Ulama and my research for this answer actually made me believe more that that is not to be trusted because it lacks support and analysis and relies only on what is famous.

.....Are you serious?! Who do you think you are?! Let me quote your own words "Please be careful in the words you use. You will be responsible in front of Allah (SWT) for things you have said" You think our Ulema were dumb? You think al-Mufeed was careless? You think he just said any random thing without careful analysis of ahadeeth and other evidence? This is what you are implying! May Allah, azza wa jalla, protect the Imamis from you! How can you trust ANY of this religion (Shia Islam) when it is the classical scholars who preserved it? For example, don't you know that without the three Muhammeds (al-Kulayni, as-Sadooq, and at-Tusi) we would have lost most of the words of the Aimmah?

The article is written by Almohaqqiq Alalamah Sayyid Ja'far Mortadha Alaamili. He is the author of the book "The authentic from the history of the Prophet (S)" which won awards in Iran and other places. He is highly regarded by many of our Maraji' and the late Marji' Shaikh Bahjat said about him: "If his amamah fell, the angels would fight over who picks it up" because of his work for AhlulBayt (A) and his extensive research and writing. Here is the article/book: http://www.aqaed.com...108/indexs.html

Firstly, so because some random book was supposedly highly praised by nobodies in comparison to at-Tusi, this makes it good? Harry Potter is more praised than this book. Saheeh al-Bukhari is more praised than this book. Secondly, what are his sources for disagreeing with a giant like ash-shaykh at-Taa'ifa?

The question is does using the plural term in the verse CERTAINLY indicate that there was more than one? Well to answer this question you must look at the rest of the verses of the Quran to see if Allah (SWT) used a plural term to mean a single person and there are different verses that fall under that category as the others indicated. This is not Qiyass, we are not saying because it happened in one verse IT MUST happen here, we are saying it leaves the possibilities open. This is not evidence that the Prophet (S) did not have more than one daughter, however, it is not evidence that he had many. It COULD mean that he had more than one and it COULD mean that he only one, further evidence is needed for either position.

No no no. Please don't repeat an argument which was refuted two pages ago. As Nader pointed out, there are ahadeeth that support the Prophet having four daughter. And no hadeeth that says otherwise. You cannot randomly do tafseer of a verse according to a personal opinion - an opinion held by a nobody and a personal opinion which contradicts the vast majority of Ulema.

You mentioned 12 Hadeeths. 2 were authentic, 1 was good, 1 was reliable, and the rest were either weak or not analyzed. Yet you continue to say "countless upon countless Hadeeths".

This counts as many ahadeeth. Wait a second, why am I arguing about the muttwaatir status of the Prophet having four daughters? Do you reject authentic ahadeeth from the Aimmah? 2 were saheeh.

It would have been impossible for her to have been married to him and to have a daughter from him before the Prophethood was announced.

Why? The laws forbidding marrying a kaffir had not been revealed. The Prophet did not given Adhaan before he was 40 years old. Go attack him for that. The Prophet (probably) called Zayd his son before the revelation of the forbidding of this. Go attack him for that by your logic.

Since the evidence does supports the impossibility of their existence after the prophethood was announced

What evidence?!

and the "saheeh" hadeeths say they were referred to as "daughters of the prophet", so the most logical way to solve the issue to say that they were not biological daughters of the Prophet but raised by him and called that.

There is no hadeeth that supports them not being the daughters of the Prophet refuting this ridiculous argument.

Scholars: General statement: This is a historical issue and not a central issue to the religion or any of the major beliefs or branches of the religion. In these matters the scholars or the narrators usually narrate what is famous among them and they do not go into deep analysis on the issue.

Please show me your source for this. Please show me where you got this ridiculous and fanciful idea that the Ulema were careless, just because it was history.

It is not that they are giving a fatwa which is being followed by the people like prayer or wudoo'.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Thiqat al-Islam, as an example, rarely talks himself in al-Kafi. Yet he said that the Prophet had four daughters. What do you think this means? Why do you think he said this?

Also this is not a matter that is important to the roots of the religion or the positions of ahlulbayt to warrant that much attention and research from them.

You are now being insulting to history. Just because an issue doesn't deal with Aqeeda or Fiqh or whatever, it means that history was disregarded?

1. Ibn Rooh: You said he is not given a scholarly opinion.

Do you even know who he is? He is the representative of the Imam. The Imam, and therefore probably GOD, chose him to represent the Imam. He is an official representative. You think he would be allowed to say something incorrect? We should stop here. His words on the matter are all that are needed.

2. Alkulayni: He is giving a summary based on what is famous and he even says "it was narrated" in some of his sentences, meaning he has not checked himself and analyzed the issue.

Are you serious?! Based on this, I will not bother responding to the rest of ridiculous and disrespectful post.

Answering WineOfLove

1) Did the other daughters of the prophet (S) procreate? and are their children considered Sayyed?

Google it. The daughters died in the Prophet's lifetime and this includes the Prophet's grandchildren (or grandchild) did not survive.

2) What was the reason behind the marriage of Uthman with the 2 daughters of the prophet? In case of Umar, we know he threaten; can the reason be the same as nuh (A) offering his daughters to the accursed?

1) Uthman had not yet committed those crimes. You cannot pre-condemn someone. There is nothing wrong with a Muslim man marrying the Prophet's daughters. Only Fatima, alayha assalam, had to marry someone very special, because she herself is very special.

2) In any case, the marriage of these two to Uthman does not take away from the daughters' status. Your question is based on the idea that someone "bad" cannot marry someone "good" morally. Actually, the Prophet Lut, aleyhis salam, married two women who were very bad. In the end, after they committed their evil deeds, he rejected and left them. But not before. And he still married them. Does this make Lut, aleyhis salam, lower? No!

Answering Zareen

Allaah cannot tell the Prophet "your daughters" because He himself has went against calling another person's child your own in the Qur'aan.

This is not correct because in the verse of Mubahila, Hassan and Husayn has been referred to as sons of the Prophet.

You did not understand what he was saying. Allah, azza wa jalla, forbade the calling of a person who is not your son, but someone else's son, as your son. This in reference to those not related to you. It has nothing to do with grandsons who are directly related to you. Zayd was not related to the Prophet therefore it was revealed that it is forbidden to call him the Prophet's son. This law applies here to this case. It is wrong to call them the Prophet's daughters, if he adopted them. This is one of the arguments Nader is making which is irrefutable. If you acknowledge that the Imams, aleyhum assalam, have called the 3 other daughters as "daughters of the Prophet" as they did in reliably-authentic ahadeeth, then either 1) they are doing wrong or 2) they were also indirectly implying that the 3 are the daughters of the Prophet through his blood.

Answering Socrates

1) Suratul Kawthar (your dismissal is very weak)

It doesn't matter even if it is. Read points 2, 5, 6, 8.

2) Daughters of the Prophet being married to kuffar and then to an enemy of Ahlul Bayt

See my response to WineOfLove.

3) For someone so concerned with sahih hadiths, you've quoted a fair amount of dhaeef (by your standards) ones to try and prove this point. Given how easily you reject dhaeef hadiths, why are you accusing people of doing something that you routinely do?

He was making the point that there are many ahadeeth which support this. If there are many ahadeeth, which include weak ones, which say something, then it's true. Although one saheeh was enough. See the enlarged and bold part of my post.

May God open our hearts toward the truth. Peace.

Edited January 8, 2011 by Perseverance

[Socrates]

In any case, the marriage of these two to Uthman does not take away from the daughters' status. Your question is based on the idea that someone "bad" cannot marry someone "good" morally. Actually, the Prophet Lut, aleyhis salam, married two women who were very bad. In the end, after they committed their evil deeds, he rejected and left them. But not before. And he still married them. Does this make Lut, aleyhis salam, lower? No!

Nothing to do with bad marrying good. Its to do with the Prophet's judgement. As it is going to become a sunnah, this is a very important point. Your example of the wife of Lut (as) is therefore irrelevant.

Please stop being emotional. Nader himself admits to using weak hadiths to prove his point. Disagreeing with his conclusions doesn't mean one is rejecting the scholars or the Imams. This is a historical issue and it doesn't necessarily mean that the scholars of fiqh are the best to comment on this issue.

Edited January 8, 2011 by Socrates

[Ya Baqiyatullah (aj)]

There is many things wrong with this quote, I will give them the benefit of the doubt and that they did this out of ignorance, because if they did not do this out of ignorance they are lying. May Allaah forgive them, inshaa'Allaah. Aameen.

1. First and most important issue is that this is NOT Al-Majlisi's quote, rather he is quoting Ibn Shahr Ashoob. Ibn Shahr Ashoob has brought out this point, and dismisses it and says he (pbuh) had 4 daughters from khadeejah on page 161. This is how scholars works, they bring about all the viewpoints, then they dismiss them, and give their own viewpoint.

Here is the full quote from Al-Majlisi in his Mir'aat Al-`Uqool. This is NOT the words of Al-Majlisi, but he is quoting Shahr Ashoob. In blue is what they quote.

ÞÇá ÇÈä ÔåÑÂÔæÈ ÑÍãå Çááå Ýí ÇáãäÇÞÈ: ÊÒæÌ ÃæáÇ ÈãßÉ ÎÏíÌÉ ÈäÊ ÎæíáÏ ÞÇáæÇ: æ ßÇäÊ ÚäÏ ÚÊíÞ Èä ÚÇÆÐ ÇáãÎÒæãí Ëã ÚäÏ ÃÈí åÇáÉ¡ æ Ñæì ÃÍãÏ ÇáÈáÇÐÑí æ ÃÈæ ÇáÞÇÓã ÇáßæÝí Ýí ßÊÇÈíåãÇ æ ÇáãÑÊÖì Ýí ÇáÔÇÝí Ãä ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æ Âáå æ Óáã ÊÒæÌ ÈåÇ æ ßÇäÊ ÚÐÑÇÁ¡ æ íÄßÏ Ðáß ãÇ ÐßÑ Ýí ßÊÇÈí ÇáÃäæÇÑ æ ÇáÈÏÚ Ãä ÑÞíÉ æ ÒíäÈ ßÇäÊÇ ÇÈäÊí åÇáÉ ÃÎÊ ÎÏíÌÉ

• Source:
  
• Al-Majlisi, Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 5, pg. 179

Here is the original quote from Ibn Shahr Ashoob, Al-Manaaqib, vol. 1, pg. 159:

.Ãä ÇáäÈí Õ ÊÒæÌ ÈåÇ æ ßÇäÊ ÚÐÑÇÁ íÄßÏ Ðáß ãÇ ÐßÑ Ýí ßÊÇÈí ÇáÃäæÇÑ æ ÇáÈÏÚ Ãä ÑÞíÉ æ ÒíäÈ ßÇäÊÇ ÇÈäÊí åÇáÉ ÃÎÊ ÎÏíÌÉ

"The the Prophet (pbuh) married her and she was a virgin, they claim that what is mentioned in the books of Al-Anwaar and Al-Bid` that Ruqayyah and Zaynab were the daughters of Haalah, sister of Khadeejah."

• Source:
  
• Ibn Shahr Ashoob, Al-Manaaqib, vol. 1, pg. 159

2. What I quote is Majlisi's ACTUAL words, he made a WHOLE chapter in his Hayat Al-Quloob, vol. 2.

3. Notice the name of the books. Al-Balaadhuree = Sunnee, so we don't care. MurtaDa has a quote going against this theory as I have cited. And Mr. Ghuluww himself, Aboo Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, the originator of this theory. Also, please notice the book Ibn Shahr Ashoob quotes, Al-Bid`, this is another name of the book by Aboo Al-Qaasim Al-Koofee, as I have already pointed out in the article, I have a quote from Muhaddith Al-Nooree saying this.

Now out of the whole section in Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 5, pg. 181, the only TRUE words of Al-Majlisi about the children in Mir'aat Al-`Uqool is this:

æ ÃÞæá: åÐÇ ÇáÞæá ÇáÃÎíÑ ÃæÝÞ ÈÇáÑæÇíÉ ÇáÊí ÑæÇåÇ ÇáãÕäÝ æ ßÃäå ÅÔÇÑÉ Åáì ãÇ ÓíÃÊí Ýí ÇáÑæÖÉ Ýí ÍÏíË ÅÓáÇã Úáí Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã Ýí ÍÏíË Øæíá Úä Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓíä ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã ÞÇá: æ áã íæáÏ áÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æ Âáå æ Óáã ãä ÎÏíÌÉ Úáì ÝØÑÉ ÇáÅÓáÇã ÅáÇ ÝÇØãÉ ÚáíåÇ ÇáÓáÇã.

Basically he says the ONLY child of the Prophet (pbuh) that was born from Khadeejah after the advent of Islaam was FaaTimah (sa).

The quote I provided is majlisi's OWN words. If you label a WHOLE chapter saying 4 daughters, that means that is his belief.

The Kashf Al-GhiTaa' quote is him once again quoting other opinions, then he rejects them later on as I quoted. Once again, I hope this is out of their ignorance.

(salam)

(wasalam)

JazaKallah Khair, guess the allegation of AA picking the quotes/section they like is true. Or, they paint not a 100% accurate picture. Thanks for bringing the full Majlisi comment.

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

Imam Ali a.s said: people become enemy of what they did not know.

Bro Nader;

I am requesting again

1. What is the wilaya of father on adopted daughters? Not sons.

2. Are there any ahadis which say it is biddah not to believe that prophet had four daughters.

About the ghulu thing; according to scholars from Qum; the first step of ghuluw is believing that mohammad wa Aale mohammad asws cannot make mistakes. By this all past and present Shias were ghali.

3. What percentage of ahadis speak about prophet saww granted prophethood at some point of his life? Bcos u have mentioned that the children were born before prophethood and Fatima s.a was born after grant of prophethood.

Ya Ali Madad

[Muhammed Ali]

bro muhammed ali, the only exception in islam is for the holy prophet (pbuh) , correct me if i understand this wrong bro

No one was allowed to go to the mosque in a state of impurity except him and Imam Ali [a]. Thus exceptions can be made for more than just him .