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

Sorah Noor Is About Aisha Ra, Not Maria Ra

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

It is proven logically that this Sorah is about Aisha RA, not Maria RA.

1. Aisha RA was Rasoolullah SAW's wife. Maria RA was a slave girl. A slave girl can be purchased from her master while a wife remains wife unless death or divorce occurs. In the case of divorce, still Allah allows to reconciliate.

24: 6 And those who accuse their wives [of adultery].......

2. Abu Bakr RA stopped helping his poor relative who took part in slander on Aisha RA. It is natural, a father may feel in the same way. But because he was a virteous person and Allah loves him to continue his virtues, He told him with kind, loving and respectful words to continue to support his poor relative.

It can't be Muqawqis, who sent Maria Qibtia as a gift to Rasoolullah SAW when Rasoolullah SAW sent him a letter to accept Islam. He did not accept Islam and sent the messenger back to Madina with some gifts including Maria Qibtia.

Muqawqis did not support Muslims financially, especially after the incident of Ifk. Because he did not have any blood relation with Maria RA.

24:22 And let not those of virtue (Ulul Fadhl) among you and wealth swear not to give [aid] to their relatives and the needy and the emigrants for the cause of Allah , and let them pardon and overlook. Would you not like that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful

(Indeed this is due to slander, the next verse explains).
24:23 Indeed, those who [falsely] accuse chaste, unaware and believing women are cursed in this world and the Hereafter; and they will have a great punishment.

24:24 On a Day when their tongues, their hands and their feet will bear witness against them as to what they used to do.

Ali RA reply and view of ifk

Ali RA said, “O Messenger of God! Once, you were leading the prayer. You took off your shoes. We took off our shoes following you. When you finished the prayer, you asked us why we had taken off our shoes. We said we had taken them off to follow you. Thereupon, you said, ‘Gabriel ordered me to take them off because they were not clean.’ Is it possible that you were informed about the dirt that polluted your shoes and you were ordered to take them off but you would not be ordered to remove something that blemished your honor?”

Halabi, Insanu’l-Uyun, Vol. 2, p. 624-625.

Quranic verse,

24:26 Evil women are for evil men, and evil men are [subjected] to evil women. And good women are for good men, and good men are [an object] of good women. Those [good people] are declared innocent of what the slanderers say. For them is forgiveness and noble provision.

 

Edited by Ramis Khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, it's about Aisha. According to authentic hadith she's the accuser of the chaste believing woman Maria the coptic (ra) which is why she's cursed in this world and the hereafter.

Edited by .equilibrium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this thread in Prophets and Ahlulbayt forum?

 

And Surah Noor talks about many things and not just about wives of the Holy Prophet or accusing people of immoral things.

Edited by HamzaTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No logical replies?

 

Maria was a slave? She was his 2nd favorite wife (after Khadija) .....

Yes she was a slave, as far as slave girls are permitted in Islam. If you search, you'll find that Rasoolullah SAW was allowed to marry only those slave girls which were war captives. Hence Maria Qibtia RA was not a war captive and she was a gift from Muqawqis, so Rasoolullah SAW did not marry her. Her sister Sirin was also sent with her, which was given to a Sahabi.
 

 

Why is this thread in Prophets and Ahlulbayt forum?

 

And Surah Noor talks about many things and not just about wives of the Holy Prophet or accusing people of immoral things.

Because according to Surah Ahzab, wives of Rasoolullah SAW ARE Ahlul Bait. Bait = House.

And first Ruku of Sorah Noor is about innocence of Aisha RA and graveness of slandering her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, the wives of the Holy Prophet are not included in Ahlulbayt. Both sunni and shia traditions clearly state that.

 

see: http://www.al-islam.org/nutshell/files/family.pdf

 

Secondly, what do you mean by first ruku? And if you mean certain aayat/verses in Surah al-noor, then I guess it should have been mentioned in the title. Because the whole chapter is not about the ifk incident. Neither do the reasons of revelations limit the meanings and messages of the verses in the Holy Quran.

 

Sunnis, shias, sufis, etc. all Muslims believe that Lady Aisha did not commit adultery or anything. And the related verses and traditions are about that. Yet, this does not mean Muslims should close their eyes to the mistakes which she did after the demise of the Holy Prophet, such as her leaving her house and leading an army against the commander of the faithful, etc. And this is not because Muslims seek a way to slander her. Rather it is that Muslims should study history (i.e. earlier Muslims) and see the truth, so as to follow their good deeds and avoid their mistakes.

Edited by HamzaTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, the wives of the Holy Prophet are not included in Ahlulbayt. Both sunni and shia traditions clearly state that.

 

If you read the verses IN context, you may get what I said.

 

33_33.png

 

33:33  And abide in your houses and do not display your beauty as [was] the display of the former times of ignorance. And establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet's] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification.

 

Points:

1. The word "qarna" is a feminine word. It is an order, given to women. Not to general public, neither to Ali RA, Hassan RA and Husain RA. Allah is ordering WIVES of Rasoolullah SAW (and other women respectively as far as wives of Rasoolullah SAW are example for Muslim women in woman related cases). Allah is not ordering Ali RA, Hassan RA and Husain RA to STAY AT HOME (most of the time) as far as it is against man's nature and duties.

2. It also states that "do not show your beauty like you used to show when you were not Muslims". This verse is also commanding hijab for women. The best way of hijab is to stay at home, but if they need to go outside, they should hide their charms and shall not beautify themselves, even not applying perfume. So this is again, not about Ali RA, Hassan RA and Husain RA.

3. After ordering to stay at home, Allah is ordering them to establish prayers, give zakah and obey Allah and his Rasool SAW (practice Islam, specifically mentioning women).

4. In the last part of verse, Allah says that if the wives continue the virtues deeds like establishing prayers, giving zakah and obey Allah and his Rasool SAW (practice rest of Islam, see the word "Aatina {obey}" again a feminine word), Allah will clean them, purify them.

 

 

 

Secondly, what do you mean by first ruku? And if you mean certain aayat/verses in Surah al-noor, then I guess it should have been mentioned in the title. Because the whole chapter is not about the ifk incident. Neither do the reasons of revelations limit the meanings and messages of the verses in the Holy Quran.

 

 

This incident of ifk was NOT a LIGHT matter for Allah. As far as Munafiqeen were slandering Aisha RA, ummul Momineen, it was very necessary to clear her status and also to warn those who slandered her.

The whole chapter is covering this issue. Including punishment of adultery, punishment of slandering, divorce between husband and wife if they accuse their spouses of adultery if they don't find witnesses.

Then to avoid means of adultery Allah explained Hijab in detail.

1. Stay at home,

2. Slaves and children near age of puberty taking permission before entering bed rooms, (24:27, 24:28, 24:29...24:58, 24:59)

3. To whom women should do hijab, (24:31)

4. Men and Women should lower their gaze, even in house, even to mehrams because staring a mehram is also not allowed, only to the spouses. (24:30, 24:31)

5. To marry the young people as soon as possible to preserve their modesty (24:32)

6. If a man does not have means to marry, shall take a slave girl if he can't keep his modesty. (24:33)

 

Sunnis, shias, sufis, etc. all Muslims believe that Lady Aisha did not commit adultery or anything. And the related verses and traditions are about that. Yet, this does not mean Muslims should close their eyes to the mistakes which she did after the demise of the Holy Prophet, such as her leaving her house and leading an army against the commander of the faithful, etc. And this is not because Muslims seek a way to slander her. Rather it is that Muslims should study history (i.e. earlier Muslims) and see the truth, so as to follow their good deeds and avoid their mistakes.

 

Brother, I have evidences in which it is made clear that Aisha RA was going to obey Ali RA but the trouble makers did not let them do so, they shot arrows from both parties during night so they might think that the other party has attacked, then the battle of Jamal started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is apparent from narrations of the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) wives and senior companions that the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33) are Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (a.s.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.). Reputed Sunni and Shiah scholars have documented this fact in their books.


However, certain fringe elements â” obviously with ulterior motives â” continue to challenge this well-established belief. They maintain that the Ahle Bait in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 refer to the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).


 


Doubt 1) Ikramahâs narration in favour of the wives


Reply: Those who say the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 are the wives of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) are giving their own opinion. No justification in terms of Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) hadith or incident or a historical reference is advanced as evidence. Their belief revolves mainly around Ikramahâs narration who has related on the authority of Ibn Abbas. However, as we will see, Ikramah has expressed his personal view which cannot be the basis for interpreting the Holy Quran. Those who take the Ahle Bait as Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (a.s.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.) are not doing so based on a personal whim or fancy, it is based on the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) declarations narrated by the wives themselves as also senior companions. Those who take the Ahle Bait as wives are either not aware of the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) assertion in this regard or have chosen to willfully neglect it.


If Ikramah has indeed faithfully related from Ibn Abbas, how does one explain the narrations on the authority of Ibn Abbas wherein he has categorically defined the Ahle Bait as Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.), Husain (a.s.) and counts it among their foremost virtues? Ibn Abbasâs narrations in favour of Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.), Husain (a.s.) as the Ahle Bait have been documented by Tafseer-e-Suyuti, Musnad-e-Ahmad, Khasais of Nisaai, Riyaaz al-Nadharah by Muhibb al-Deen Tabari, Majmaâ al-Zawaaid by Haithami.


Moreover, Ikramahâs animosity towards the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) Ahle Bait â” Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.) and her sons (a.s.) is well-known. This could only mean that Ikramahâs view is tainted with ignorance at best or prejudice at worst, especially since the wives who he claims are the Ahle Bait and Ibn Abbas, Ikramahâs main source, have themselves narrated incidents wherein the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) has left no doubt whatsoever as to the true implication of the Ahle Bait (a.s.).


 


Doubt 2) Preceding and succeeding verses refer to the wives


Reply: Skeptics advance the preceding and succeeding verses of Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 as evidence that the Ahle Bait referred to in the verse are the wives and not Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.) and her sons (a.s.).


This argument would have had merit if the verses under question had uniformity in context and syntax. But evidently, there is a lack of consistency on both parameters which tells the seeker of truth that there must be an explanation beyond the apparent.


The verses preceding and succeeding Ayat-e-Tatheer have addressed the wives varyingly, at times even warning them from committing indecency and forbidding them from reverting to the customs of the ignorance era. This is not consistent with the tone of addressing in Ayat-e-Tatheer where Allah expresses His total pleasure with the Ahle Bait and promises to purify them from all uncleanliness.


Itâs established that the wives were not free from uncleanliness â” neither in the physical context (menses, etc) nor the spiritual context (some of the wives like Umm Habibah bint Abi Sufyan, although faithful accepted Islam after practicing idol-worship).


Moreover, the mode of address in the verses changes from â” âO wives of the Prophetâ¦â in the preceding verses to âO Ahle Baitâ¦â indicating that the personalities addressed in the verses are different.


Just as strikingly, the syntax for Ayat-e-Tatheer is not in harmony with the preceding and succeeding verses. While all along the feminine gender has been employed, the 33rd verse of Surah Ahzaab specifically uses the masculine gender which tells the reader that the addressees in this particular verse are not the same as those in the preceding and succeeding verses.


 


Doubt 3) Ahle Bait refers to wife of Ibrahim (a.s.)


Reply: Those who consider wives as the Ahle Bait cite the 73rd verse of Surah Hud (11) as evidence that there is a precedence of a Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) wife forming part of his Ahle Bait.


It is important to note that this is not a general discussion on whether the wives of Prophets form part of their Ahle Bait. Likewise, we are also not interested in dwelling on the verse (Surah Tahreem (66): 10) wherein Allah has condemned the wives of Prophets like Nuh (a.s.) and Lut (a.s.), which obviously means that the wives are generally not the Ahle Bait and if they are, then being the Ahle Bait does not automatically become a virtue.


Here, we want to specifically address the 33rd verse of Surah Ahzaab (33) to determine whether the Ahle Bait referred to in the verse are the wives or not.


A general description on a subject cannot be used to repudiate a specific description. For example, Allah has referred to the wives of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) as Mother of Believers â” Ummul Momineen in the 6th verse of Surah Ahzaab (33).


In another place in the Quran â” the 2nd verse of Surah Mujaadilah (58), Allah describes the mother as â” ââ¦those who gave them birthâ¦â.


One cannot use the general description of the mother in Surah Mujaadilah (58): 2 to repudiate the specific description on Ummul Momineen in Surah Ahzaab (33): 6 by claiming that since the wives did not give birth to all the believers therefore they do not qualify as their mothers. The wives were Ummul Momineen specifically to dissuade the Muslims from marrying them after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). The general description of the mother as one who gives birth remains intact.


So, it is possible that Aaeshah who did not give birth to a single believer and therefore failed the general qualification of a mother can still be the mother of the believers according to a specific qualification. It is likewise possible for Aaeshah to be the Ahle Bait of the Prophet according to a general description and not be his Ahle Bait according to a specific description as pronounced in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 â” Ayat-e-Tatheer.


Ibn Katheer, a student of Ibn Taymiyyah, has concluded likewise in his Tafseer (vol. 6, p. 370) wherein after outlining Aaeshahâs merits he has concluded regardless of everything she is not the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33. As per the Holy Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) narration, Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.) are more deserving of the privilege.


Not just the wives, one finds others being included in the general description of the Ahle Bait of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Abbas, Aqeel and Jafar (all sons of Abu Talib (a.s.)) are referred to as the Ahle Bait because sadaqah (charity) was prohibited on them and their children. But even they do not qualify as the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33.


At the Battle of Khandaq (Ahzaab), when both the Muhaajir and Ansaar vied for Salmaan al-Faarsi, the proponent of the Khandaq, each group claiming Salmaan for itself, the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) stepped in and proudly proclaimed that Salmaan was neither a Muhaajir nor an Ansaar, rather he was from the Ahle Bait. Salmaan was a great companion whose faith was a benchmark for other believers, but even he does not qualify as the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33.


This shows that the Ahle Bait (in the general description not the specific description of Surah Ahzaab (33): 33) is not restricted to the Prophetâs relation (wives, cousins, etc). Any Muslim who leads a life advocated by the Quran and Sunnah can aspire to be from the Ahle Bait. But the fact remains no matter what level of piety and faith the person may achieve, he will never qualify as the Ahle Bait in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33; that is the sole privilege of Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.).


And peace be upon the one who follows the guidance!


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So ahlul bayt are wives but yet prophet (peace be upon him and his household took none of them for mubahila?

So ummul momineen ayesha was purified one? Who was despite being purified wasn't guided?

Allah purified her but didn't protect her from being misled? So she can be easily misled?

Edited by insearchoflight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ayesha is NOT the Mother of Believers

 

Some Muslims are adamant that Ayesha is the mother of all believing men and women and enjoys a very high status which gives her authority and privileges above all other Muslims including the caliph of the time. Some of these privileges include waging war against the caliph of the time, abandoning the confines of her home on a whim, divulging the secrets of Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

It is clear that these special privileges have more to do with Ayesha being the daughter of Abu Bakr than being the wife of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Because the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had many wives, but for some reason only one wife corners all attention.

While we do not wish to delve on these special privileges, we are keen to evaluate the basis for these privileges which stem from her status as Ummul Momineen. So the question that needs answering is:

Is Ayesha really the mother of all believers and if she is, then what’s the limit of this motherhood?

Reply

Let us examine Ayesha’s own view in this regard to understand whether she is indeed the mother of all believing men and women.

Ayesha denies being the mother of all believing women

One day one woman addressed Ayesha as ‘Ummul Momineen’.

Upon this Ayesha became enraged and declared – I am not your mother, but (only) of your men.

Celebrated Sunni scholar Muhyiddin Ibne Arabi – popular as Ibne Arabi asserts – This hadis is authentic (Sahih).

Other references include:

1. Qurtubbi under Tafsir of verse 6 of Surah al-Ahzaab (Surah 33: Verse 6)

2. Imam Baihaqi in his Sunnan (from الشعبيّ)

3. Tabaqaat Ibne Sa’d (from another chain than الشعبيّ)

4. Tafsir Mazhari (Urdu Edition, under Tafsir of Surah 33, Verse 6) by Qazi Sanaullah Panipati – the highly regarded scholar from the Indian sub-continent

Why did Allah declare Ayesha as Ummul Momineen

Since there is no contradiction in the Holy Quran, it is necessary to examine the verse that declares the wives as Ummul Momineen (Surah Ahzab (33): Verse 6) in the light of other verses.

We do not have to look far as the answer lies in Surah Ahzab itself in Verse 53:

‘…nor is it right for you that you should annoy Allah’s Messenger, or that you should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah’s sight an enormity.’

(Surah Ahzab (33): Verse 53)

So Ayesha and other wives were Ummul Momineen (mother of believing men) only so that Muslims would not marry them after the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise.

More than being an honour for the wives, the status of Ummul Momineen actually accords respect and honour to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) since his widows are off-limits for Muslims, while he (s.a.w.a.) was free to marry their women and widows.

To interpret this in any other way is to lower the position of the one (s.a.w.a.) Allah has raised and to raise the position of the one Allah has lowered.

All claims that the wives are Ummul Momineen due to their personal virtues, piety, worship, etc. are pure conjecture and have no basis in the Quran.

Abbas b. Abdul Muttalib was the uncle of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) but even he was captured like all other prisoners after the Battle of Badr and was released only on ransom although the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had the option to release him without a ransom as per the Quranic verse:

So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates

(Surah Muhammad (47): Verse 5).

This shows mere relation to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) even a blood relation does not give anyone the authority to disobey Allah and His Messenger (s.a.w.a.) and get away with it. Relationship through marriage counts for even less. Ultimately, those closest to Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.) are the ones with maximum piety:

…surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most careful (of his duty); surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware.

(Surah Hujaraat (49): Verse 13)

For this reason wives of previous Prophets (a.s.) were also marked for their apostasy and treachery notwithstanding their relation to the Prophet (a.s.). Deservedly, their place is in hellfire and the Quran mentions as much.

Allah sets forth an example to those who disbelieve the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut: they were both under two of Our righteous servants, but they acted treacherously towards them so they availed them naught against Allah, and it was said: Enter both the fire with those who enter.

(Surah Tahreem (66): Verse 10)

On the other hand, piety has saved the wife of an apostate and claimant of divinity like Firaun meriting special mention in the Quran.

And Allah sets forth an example to those who believe the wife of Firon when she said: My Lord! build for me a house with Thee in the garden and deliver me from Firon and his doing, and deliver me from the unjust people.

(Surah Tahreem (66): Verse 10)

Clearly, there is no merit in a position. The merit lies in the piety and action of individuals. Bad actions cannot salvage a person regardless of his proximity to the Prophet and piety and good actions elevate an individual to the highest status even she is married to Allah’s biggest enemy.

Therefore, beliefs like the wives are above criticism, cannot make intentional mistakes but can commit mistakes in ijtehaad (judgment) are baseless. The only thing that wives can do – rather cannot do – is marry other Muslims, because as the Noble Quran says, that would have annoyed the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.).

The moot point over here is the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and his pleasure and displeasure not the wives being Ummul Momineen. As far as the wives are concerned, anything that would have annoyed the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is prohibited, not just marrying other Muslims. These annoying actions include waging war against the Prophet’s self (Nafs-e-Rasool) and brother – Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.). If this can be dismissed as an ijtehaadi mistake, then any wife can marry a Muslim and call it an ijtehaadi mistake. In fact, such a mistake would have been preferable because at least it would not have resulted in the death of thirty thousand Muslims – including the Sahaabah and Taabe’een of the Holy Prophet s.a.w.a.) from ijtehaadi blunders.

It is clear that all arguments and theories about Ummul Momineen and their right to commit ijtehaadi blunders were coined to defend Ayesha’s many transgressions which do not even qualify as ijtehaad. This is a clear case of Sahaabah worship, which came into being to dilute the importance of Allah’s Messenger (s.a.w.a.) and his Ahle Bait (a.s.). The Muslims who accuse Shias of exaggerating the status of Ahle Bait (a.s.) need to first look closely at Ayesha’s exaggerated status and her many ijtehaadi misdemeanors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is apparent from narrations of the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) wives and senior companions that the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33) are Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (a.s.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.). Reputed Sunni and Shiah scholars have documented this fact in their books.

However, certain fringe elements â” obviously with ulterior motives â” continue to challenge this well-established belief. They maintain that the Ahle Bait in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 refer to the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

 

Doubt 1) Ikramahâs narration in favour of the wives

Reply: Those who say the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 are the wives of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) are giving their own opinion. No justification in terms of Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) hadith or incident or a historical reference is advanced as evidence. Their belief revolves mainly around Ikramahâs narration who has related on the authority of Ibn Abbas. However, as we will see, Ikramah has expressed his personal view which cannot be the basis for interpreting the Holy Quran. Those who take the Ahle Bait as Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (a.s.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.) are not doing so based on a personal whim or fancy, it is based on the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) declarations narrated by the wives themselves as also senior companions. Those who take the Ahle Bait as wives are either not aware of the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) assertion in this regard or have chosen to willfully neglect it.

If Ikramah has indeed faithfully related from Ibn Abbas, how does one explain the narrations on the authority of Ibn Abbas wherein he has categorically defined the Ahle Bait as Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.), Husain (a.s.) and counts it among their foremost virtues? Ibn Abbasâs narrations in favour of Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.), Husain (a.s.) as the Ahle Bait have been documented by Tafseer-e-Suyuti, Musnad-e-Ahmad, Khasais of Nisaai, Riyaaz al-Nadharah by Muhibb al-Deen Tabari, Majmaâ al-Zawaaid by Haithami.

Moreover, Ikramahâs animosity towards the Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) Ahle Bait â” Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.) and her sons (a.s.) is well-known. This could only mean that Ikramahâs view is tainted with ignorance at best or prejudice at worst, especially since the wives who he claims are the Ahle Bait and Ibn Abbas, Ikramahâs main source, have themselves narrated incidents wherein the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) has left no doubt whatsoever as to the true implication of the Ahle Bait (a.s.).

 

Doubt 2) Preceding and succeeding verses refer to the wives

Reply: Skeptics advance the preceding and succeeding verses of Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 as evidence that the Ahle Bait referred to in the verse are the wives and not Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.) and her sons (a.s.).

This argument would have had merit if the verses under question had uniformity in context and syntax. But evidently, there is a lack of consistency on both parameters which tells the seeker of truth that there must be an explanation beyond the apparent.

The verses preceding and succeeding Ayat-e-Tatheer have addressed the wives varyingly, at times even warning them from committing indecency and forbidding them from reverting to the customs of the ignorance era. This is not consistent with the tone of addressing in Ayat-e-Tatheer where Allah expresses His total pleasure with the Ahle Bait and promises to purify them from all uncleanliness.

Itâs established that the wives were not free from uncleanliness â” neither in the physical context (menses, etc) nor the spiritual context (some of the wives like Umm Habibah bint Abi Sufyan, although faithful accepted Islam after practicing idol-worship).

Moreover, the mode of address in the verses changes from â” âO wives of the Prophetâ¦â in the preceding verses to âO Ahle Baitâ¦â indicating that the personalities addressed in the verses are different.

Just as strikingly, the syntax for Ayat-e-Tatheer is not in harmony with the preceding and succeeding verses. While all along the feminine gender has been employed, the 33rd verse of Surah Ahzaab specifically uses the masculine gender which tells the reader that the addressees in this particular verse are not the same as those in the preceding and succeeding verses.

 

Doubt 3) Ahle Bait refers to wife of Ibrahim (a.s.)

Reply: Those who consider wives as the Ahle Bait cite the 73rd verse of Surah Hud (11) as evidence that there is a precedence of a Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) wife forming part of his Ahle Bait.

It is important to note that this is not a general discussion on whether the wives of Prophets form part of their Ahle Bait. Likewise, we are also not interested in dwelling on the verse (Surah Tahreem (66): 10) wherein Allah has condemned the wives of Prophets like Nuh (a.s.) and Lut (a.s.), which obviously means that the wives are generally not the Ahle Bait and if they are, then being the Ahle Bait does not automatically become a virtue.

Here, we want to specifically address the 33rd verse of Surah Ahzaab (33) to determine whether the Ahle Bait referred to in the verse are the wives or not.

A general description on a subject cannot be used to repudiate a specific description. For example, Allah has referred to the wives of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) as Mother of Believers â” Ummul Momineen in the 6th verse of Surah Ahzaab (33).

In another place in the Quran â” the 2nd verse of Surah Mujaadilah (58), Allah describes the mother as â” ââ¦those who gave them birthâ¦â.

One cannot use the general description of the mother in Surah Mujaadilah (58): 2 to repudiate the specific description on Ummul Momineen in Surah Ahzaab (33): 6 by claiming that since the wives did not give birth to all the believers therefore they do not qualify as their mothers. The wives were Ummul Momineen specifically to dissuade the Muslims from marrying them after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). The general description of the mother as one who gives birth remains intact.

So, it is possible that Aaeshah who did not give birth to a single believer and therefore failed the general qualification of a mother can still be the mother of the believers according to a specific qualification. It is likewise possible for Aaeshah to be the Ahle Bait of the Prophet according to a general description and not be his Ahle Bait according to a specific description as pronounced in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33 â” Ayat-e-Tatheer.

Ibn Katheer, a student of Ibn Taymiyyah, has concluded likewise in his Tafseer (vol. 6, p. 370) wherein after outlining Aaeshahâs merits he has concluded regardless of everything she is not the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33. As per the Holy Prophetâs (s.a.w.a.) narration, Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.) are more deserving of the privilege.

Not just the wives, one finds others being included in the general description of the Ahle Bait of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Abbas, Aqeel and Jafar (all sons of Abu Talib (a.s.)) are referred to as the Ahle Bait because sadaqah (charity) was prohibited on them and their children. But even they do not qualify as the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33.

At the Battle of Khandaq (Ahzaab), when both the Muhaajir and Ansaar vied for Salmaan al-Faarsi, the proponent of the Khandaq, each group claiming Salmaan for itself, the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) stepped in and proudly proclaimed that Salmaan was neither a Muhaajir nor an Ansaar, rather he was from the Ahle Bait. Salmaan was a great companion whose faith was a benchmark for other believers, but even he does not qualify as the Ahle Bait referred to in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33.

This shows that the Ahle Bait (in the general description not the specific description of Surah Ahzaab (33): 33) is not restricted to the Prophetâs relation (wives, cousins, etc). Any Muslim who leads a life advocated by the Quran and Sunnah can aspire to be from the Ahle Bait. But the fact remains no matter what level of piety and faith the person may achieve, he will never qualify as the Ahle Bait in Surah Ahzaab (33): 33; that is the sole privilege of Ali (a.s.), Faatemah (s.a.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.).

And peace be upon the one who follows the guidance!

 

 

These are NOT doubts but rather Quranic references which you are trying to malign.

Do you mean Allah addressed Wives of Rasoolullah (pbuh)  in preceding and succeeding verses but in the middle, he changed his topic and described Ali RA's family? Is not it ILLOGICAL?

 

 

So ahlul bayt are wives but yet prophet (peace be upon him and his household took none of them for mubahila?

 

Only one event does not degrade Ummhaatul Momineen RA.

 

So ummul momineen ayesha was purified one? Who was despite being purified wasn't guided?

Allah purified her but didn't protect her from being misled? So she can be easily misled?

Reality of Battle of Jamal.

Ayesha is NOT the Mother of Believers

 

Some Muslims are adamant that Ayesha is the mother of all believing men and women and enjoys a very high status which gives her authority and privileges above all other Muslims including the caliph of the time. Some of these privileges include waging war against the caliph of the time, abandoning the confines of her home on a whim, divulging the secrets of Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

It is clear that these special privileges have more to do with Ayesha being the daughter of Abu Bakr than being the wife of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Because the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had many wives, but for some reason only one wife corners all attention.

While we do not wish to delve on these special privileges, we are keen to evaluate the basis for these privileges which stem from her status as Ummul Momineen. So the question that needs answering is:

Is Ayesha really the mother of all believers and if she is, then what’s the limit of this motherhood?

Reply

Let us examine Ayesha’s own view in this regard to understand whether she is indeed the mother of all believing men and women.

Ayesha denies being the mother of all believing women

One day one woman addressed Ayesha as ‘Ummul Momineen’.

Upon this Ayesha became enraged and declared – I am not your mother, but (only) of your men.

Celebrated Sunni scholar Muhyiddin Ibne Arabi – popular as Ibne Arabi asserts – This hadis is authentic (Sahih).

Other references include:

1. Qurtubbi under Tafsir of verse 6 of Surah al-Ahzaab (Surah 33: Verse 6)

2. Imam Baihaqi in his Sunnan (from الشعبيّ)

3. Tabaqaat Ibne Sa’d (from another chain than الشعبيّ)

4. Tafsir Mazhari (Urdu Edition, under Tafsir of Surah 33, Verse 6) by Qazi Sanaullah Panipati – the highly regarded scholar from the Indian sub-continent

Why did Allah declare Ayesha as Ummul Momineen

Since there is no contradiction in the Holy Quran, it is necessary to examine the verse that declares the wives as Ummul Momineen (Surah Ahzab (33): Verse 6) in the light of other verses.

We do not have to look far as the answer lies in Surah Ahzab itself in Verse 53:

‘…nor is it right for you that you should annoy Allah’s Messenger, or that you should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah’s sight an enormity.’

(Surah Ahzab (33): Verse 53)

So Ayesha and other wives were Ummul Momineen (mother of believing men) only so that Muslims would not marry them after the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise.

More than being an honour for the wives, the status of Ummul Momineen actually accords respect and honour to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) since his widows are off-limits for Muslims, while he (s.a.w.a.) was free to marry their women and widows.

To interpret this in any other way is to lower the position of the one (s.a.w.a.) Allah has raised and to raise the position of the one Allah has lowered.

All claims that the wives are Ummul Momineen due to their personal virtues, piety, worship, etc. are pure conjecture and have no basis in the Quran.

Abbas b. Abdul Muttalib was the uncle of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) but even he was captured like all other prisoners after the Battle of Badr and was released only on ransom although the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had the option to release him without a ransom as per the Quranic verse:

So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates

(Surah Muhammad (47): Verse 5).

This shows mere relation to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) even a blood relation does not give anyone the authority to disobey Allah and His Messenger (s.a.w.a.) and get away with it. Relationship through marriage counts for even less. Ultimately, those closest to Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.) are the ones with maximum piety:

…surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most careful (of his duty); surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware.

(Surah Hujaraat (49): Verse 13)

For this reason wives of previous Prophets (a.s.) were also marked for their apostasy and treachery notwithstanding their relation to the Prophet (a.s.). Deservedly, their place is in hellfire and the Quran mentions as much.

Allah sets forth an example to those who disbelieve the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut: they were both under two of Our righteous servants, but they acted treacherously towards them so they availed them naught against Allah, and it was said: Enter both the fire with those who enter.

(Surah Tahreem (66): Verse 10)

On the other hand, piety has saved the wife of an apostate and claimant of divinity like Firaun meriting special mention in the Quran.

And Allah sets forth an example to those who believe the wife of Firon when she said: My Lord! build for me a house with Thee in the garden and deliver me from Firon and his doing, and deliver me from the unjust people.

(Surah Tahreem (66): Verse 10)

Clearly, there is no merit in a position. The merit lies in the piety and action of individuals. Bad actions cannot salvage a person regardless of his proximity to the Prophet and piety and good actions elevate an individual to the highest status even she is married to Allah’s biggest enemy.

Therefore, beliefs like the wives are above criticism, cannot make intentional mistakes but can commit mistakes in ijtehaad (judgment) are baseless. The only thing that wives can do – rather cannot do – is marry other Muslims, because as the Noble Quran says, that would have annoyed the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.).

The moot point over here is the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and his pleasure and displeasure not the wives being Ummul Momineen. As far as the wives are concerned, anything that would have annoyed the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is prohibited, not just marrying other Muslims. These annoying actions include waging war against the Prophet’s self (Nafs-e-Rasool) and brother – Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.). If this can be dismissed as an ijtehaadi mistake, then any wife can marry a Muslim and call it an ijtehaadi mistake. In fact, such a mistake would have been preferable because at least it would not have resulted in the death of thirty thousand Muslims – including the Sahaabah and Taabe’een of the Holy Prophet s.a.w.a.) from ijtehaadi blunders.

It is clear that all arguments and theories about Ummul Momineen and their right to commit ijtehaadi blunders were coined to defend Ayesha’s many transgressions which do not even qualify as ijtehaad. This is a clear case of Sahaabah worship, which came into being to dilute the importance of Allah’s Messenger (s.a.w.a.) and his Ahle Bait (a.s.). The Muslims who accuse Shias of exaggerating the status of Ahle Bait (a.s.) need to first look closely at Ayesha’s exaggerated status and her many ijtehaadi misdemeanors

 

Aisha RA had been slandered in Rasoolullah (pbuh)  life as far as Rasooullah's (pbuh) enemies (especially Hypocrites) wanted to tease Rasoolullah (pbuh) , so it is obvious that such enemies might target and slander Aisha RA again as far as they wanted to spread fitnah and enmity amongst Muslims, the chain started from Umar's RA martyrdom by Irani Abu Lulu Firoz, then they raised fitnah against Usman RA, then they troubled Ali RA and finally martyred him, poisoned his son Hassan RA and again martyred Husain RA, Iran took it's revenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Points:

 

Yet, the end part of the verse is related to Ahlulbayt. Because first part speaks to the wives of the Prophet with feminine words, and the second part which adresses Ahlulbayt uses masculine words; "ankom" and "yutahhirakum"

 

Brother, I have evidences in which it is made clear that Aisha RA was going to obey Ali RA but the trouble makers did not let them do so, they shot arrows from both parties during night so they might think that the other party has attacked, then the battle of Jamal started.

 

I know about the tradition on the dogs of haw'ab and how lady Aisha regretted about it when she heard them barking.

 

But the point is that she, unlike other wives of the Prophet, lived a life which caused her to leave her house and lead an army against the commander of the faithful, Imam Ali. And she did not realize her mistake until she remembered the hadith. So, it is not like, out of nowhere she found herself there.

 

Thus, one should not shape his religion according to the hadiths from her. 1- because unlike other wives of the Prophet she left her house and disobeyed God. Also she led an army against the Imam of the time. 2- because she did that, she could not stop people fabricating hadiths by using her name. But you can not many hadiths from the other wives of the Prophet. Because they did not leave their house, none could fabricate hadiths by using their names.

 

I hope I made myself clear.

 

Aisha RA had been slandered in Rasoolullah (pbuh)  life as far as Rasooullah's (pbuh) enemies (especially Hypocrites) wanted to tease Rasoolullah (pbuh) , so it is obvious that such enemies might target and slander Aisha RA again as far as they wanted to spread fitnah and enmity amongst Muslims, the chain started from Umar's RA martyrdom by Irani Abu Lulu Firoz, then they raised fitnah against Usman RA, then they troubled Ali RA and finally martyred him, poisoned his son Hassan RA and again martyred Husain RA, Iran took it's revenge.

 

What on earth are you talking about? You sound like a racist person who knows nothing about history.

 

I hope you study the following book to learn the truth:

 

http://www.al-islam.org/peshawar-nights-sultan-al-waadhim-sayyid-muhammad-al-musawi-ash-shirazi

 

Thank you. :) ma salam

Edited by HamzaTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aisha r.a.?

 

lol...

 

l.a. would be more suitable.

Yeah Aisha (ra) , her first engagement was broken when accepted Islam, then she was slandered with her ex-feonsay by Jews and Hypocrites of Madina. The Hypocrites used some "facts" against her to slander he, that because the man was her ex-feonsay, that is why they may have some attraction towards each other and that is why they stayed behind when the caravan went on.

She suffered such difficulties after becoming a Muslimah and wife of Rasoolullah (pbuh) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...