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

Hazrat Ayesha And Ayah e Tatheer 33:33

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salam.

Sunnis claim that Ayah Tatheer was revealed specifically for Wives of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). but this view seems to contradict Words of Hazrat Ayesha.

Sahih al-Bukhari 4827

Narrated Yusuf bin Mahak:

Marwan had been appointed as the governor of Hijaz by Muawiya. He delivered a sermon and mentioned Yazid bin Muawiya so that the people might take the oath of allegiance to him as the successor of his father (Muawiya). Then `Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr told him something whereupon Marwan ordered that he be arrested. But `Abdur-Rahman entered `Aisha's house and they could not arrest him. Marwan said, "It is he (`AbdurRahman) about whom Allah revealed this Verse:-- 'And the one who says to his parents: 'Fie on you! Do you hold out the promise to me..?'" On that, `Aisha said from behind a screen, "Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur'an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander).

حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ، عَنْ يُوسُفَ بْنِ مَاهَكَ، قَالَ كَانَ مَرْوَانُ عَلَى الْحِجَازِ اسْتَعْمَلَهُ مُعَاوِيَةُ، فَخَطَبَ فَجَعَلَ يَذْكُرُ يَزِيدَ بْنَ مُعَاوِيَةَ، لِكَىْ يُبَايِعَ لَهُ بَعْدَ أَبِيهِ، فَقَالَ لَهُ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ أَبِي بَكْرٍ شَيْئًا، فَقَالَ خُذُوهُ‏.‏ فَدَخَلَ بَيْتَ عَائِشَةَ فَلَمْ يَقْدِرُوا ‏{‏عَلَيْهِ‏}‏ فَقَالَ مَرْوَانُ إِنَّ هَذَا الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ ‏{‏وَالَّذِي قَالَ لِوَالِدَيْهِ أُفٍّ لَكُمَا أَتَعِدَانِنِي‏}‏‏.‏ فَقَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ مِنْ وَرَاءِ الْحِجَابِ مَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فِينَا شَيْئًا مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِلاَّ أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَنْزَلَ عُذْرِي‏.‏

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 4827In-book reference : Book 65, Hadith 349USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 352 

Hazrat Ayesha says, no verse in Quran was revealed for her except for the one mentioned by her. If Ayah e Tatheer was for her, she wouldn't have denied or forgotten such a virtue lol.

So according to Hazrat Ayesha, Ayah e Tahteer wasn't revealed for her. 

Am I right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

There are other narrations confirming this too:

'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped hitn under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said:
Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)
Sahih Muslim: Book 44, hadith 91

 

 

Narrated 'Umar bin Abi Salamah - the step-son of the Prophet (ﷺ):
"When these Ayat were revealed to the Prophet (ﷺ): 'Allah only wishes to remove the Rijs from you, O members of the family, and to purify you with a thorough purification...' (33:33) in the home of Umm Salamah, he called for Fatimah, Hasan, Husain, and wrapped him in the cloak, then he said: 'O Allah! These are the people of my house, so remove the Rijs from them, and purify them with a thorough purification.' So Umm Salamah said: 'And am I with them O Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'You are in your place, and you are more virtuous to me.'"
Jami Al-Tirmidhi: Vol 1, Book 46, Hadith 3787
 
So 2 different wives confirmed that wives are not part of ayah-tatheer.
Edited by ShiaMan14
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Salam.

Sunnis claim that Ayah Tatheer was revealed specifically for Wives of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). but this view seems to contradict Words of Hazrat Ayesha.

Sahih al-Bukhari 4827

Narrated Yusuf bin Mahak:

Marwan had been appointed as the governor of Hijaz by Muawiya. He delivered a sermon and mentioned Yazid bin Muawiya so that the people might take the oath of allegiance to him as the successor of his father (Muawiya). Then `Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr told him something whereupon Marwan ordered that he be arrested. But `Abdur-Rahman entered `Aisha's house and they could not arrest him. Marwan said, "It is he (`AbdurRahman) about whom Allah revealed this Verse:-- 'And the one who says to his parents: 'Fie on you! Do you hold out the promise to me..?'" On that, `Aisha said from behind a screen, "Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur'an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander).

حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ، عَنْ يُوسُفَ بْنِ مَاهَكَ، قَالَ كَانَ مَرْوَانُ عَلَى الْحِجَازِ اسْتَعْمَلَهُ مُعَاوِيَةُ، فَخَطَبَ فَجَعَلَ يَذْكُرُ يَزِيدَ بْنَ مُعَاوِيَةَ، لِكَىْ يُبَايِعَ لَهُ بَعْدَ أَبِيهِ، فَقَالَ لَهُ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ أَبِي بَكْرٍ شَيْئًا، فَقَالَ خُذُوهُ‏.‏ فَدَخَلَ بَيْتَ عَائِشَةَ فَلَمْ يَقْدِرُوا ‏{‏عَلَيْهِ‏}‏ فَقَالَ مَرْوَانُ إِنَّ هَذَا الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ ‏{‏وَالَّذِي قَالَ لِوَالِدَيْهِ أُفٍّ لَكُمَا أَتَعِدَانِنِي‏}‏‏.‏ فَقَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ مِنْ وَرَاءِ الْحِجَابِ مَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فِينَا شَيْئًا مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِلاَّ أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَنْزَلَ عُذْرِي‏.‏

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 4827In-book reference : Book 65, Hadith 349USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 352 

Hazrat Ayesha says, no verse in Quran was revealed for her except for the one mentioned by her. If Ayah e Tatheer was for her, she wouldn't have denied or forgotten such a virtue lol.

So according to Hazrat Ayesha, Ayah e Tahteer wasn't revealed for her. 

Am I right?

Umm al-Mu’minin رضى الله عنها meant there was no Ayat that was revealed about her specifically apart from the Ayat regarding her innocence. Obviously, she is included in the other Ayat that mention the Prophet’s wives in general, especially Ayat al-Tathir.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

Umm al-Mu’minin رضى الله عنها meant there was no Ayat that was revealed about her specifically apart from the Ayat regarding her innocence. Obviously, she is included in the other Ayat that mention the Prophet’s wives in general, especially Ayat al-Tathir.

Ayah e Tatheer isn't general either. She said there is no verse revealed for her, except for once declaring her innocence. Umm Ul Momineen Hazrat Ayesha has denied that Ayah e Tatheer or any other was revealed for her.
 

Aisha said from behind a screen, "Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur'an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander)/

Umm ul Momineen Hazrat Ayesha said: Allah did not reveal anything from the Quran about us except for one.............................................

And then hadith of Hazrat Abu Saed Al-Khudri (رضي الله عنه) ( by Atiyah Al-Aufi) that this verse was revealed for five people is clear cut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Ayah e Tatheer isn't general either. She said there is no verse revealed for her, except for once declaring her innocence. Umm Ul Momineen Hazrat Ayesha has denied that Ayah e Tatheer or any other was revealed for her.
 

Aisha said from behind a screen, "Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur'an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander)/

Umm ul Momineen Hazrat Ayesha said: Allah did not reveal anything from the Quran about us except for one.............................................

And then hadith of Hazrat Abu Saed Al-Khudri (رضي الله عنه) ( by Atiyah Al-Aufi) that this verse was revealed for five people is clear cut.

Couple of points:

  1. when sayyidatuna A’ishah رضى الله عنها says “us” in the first person plural, she is only referring to the children of sayyidina Abi Bakr as-Siddiq رضى الله عنه and not to the category of Prophet’s wives, as the context of the Hadith makes clear when Marwan made a specific allegation that an Ayah in the Quran was revealed against Abd ur-Rahman b. Abi Bakr.

  2. Ayat al-Tathir is general in referring to the Prophet’s wives, and is not specifically regarding sayyidatuna A’ishah but all the Ummahat al-Mu’minin رضى الله عنهنّ

  3. The Hadith al-Kisa only proves that the Ahl al-Kisa عليهم السلام are included in the Ahl al-Bayt as mentioned in Ayat al-Tathir, it does not prove exclusion of the Ummahat al-Mu’minin. Exclusion can never be proven since the Ayah itself begins by addressing and mentioning them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cherub786 said:

when sayyidatuna A’ishah رضى الله عنها says “us” in the first person plural, she is only referring to the children of sayyidina Abi Bakr as-Siddiq رضى الله عنه and not to the category of Prophet’s wives, as the context of the Hadith makes clear when Marwan made a specific allegation that an Ayah in the Quran was revealed against Abd ur-Rahman b. Abi Bakr

I was waiting for this anyways.

If that's the case, then the ONE verse, she talked about in hadith wasn't revealed for Abdur Rehman Bin Abi Bakr either. It was specifically for Umm Ul Momineen Hazrat Ayesha as wife of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Therefore it was the best time to quote such an important virtue when Marwan tried to degrade them by fabricating.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

The Hadith al-Kisa only proves that the Ahl al-Kisa عليهم السلام are included in the Ahl al-Bayt as mentioned in Ayat al-Tathir, it does not prove exclusion of the Ummahat al-Mu’minin. Exclusion can never be proven since the Ayah itself begins by addressing and mentioning them.

Brother in your own hadith of Kissa, word "revealed" has been mentioned. And it refers specifically to five as per hadith of Abu Saed Al Khudri (رضي الله عنه). Plus According to Wajahat Hussein Al-Hanafi and Syed Husnain Bukhari, many scholors of tafseer of Ahle-Sunnah believed that this verse is specific for the five people.

You can go and check out those long lectures of Syed Husnain Bukhari.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Brother in your own hadith of Kissa, word "revealed" has been mentioned. And it refers specifically to five as per hadith of Abu Saed Al Khudri (رضي الله عنه). Plus According to Wajahat Hussein Al-Hanafi and Syed Husnain Bukhari, many scholors of tafseer of Ahle-Sunnah believed that this verse is specific for the five people.

You can go and check out those long lectures of Syed Husnain Bukhari.

There is no denial that Ahl al-Kisa are included in the revelation of Ayat al-Tathir, that is not the dispute.

The question is how does inclusion of a party necessitate exclusion of another?

The Ayah itself is plain in its meaning that Wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم are the primary addressees.

Even if, hypothetically, there was a narration that said the Ayah refers exclusively to Ahl al-Kisa and not Ummahat al-Mu’minin, such a narration would have to be rejected, as Quran stands in judgment over riwayat. Didn't your own Imams say "if our narration opposes the Quran then throw it against the wall"?

There is no need to consult the scholars you mentioned because we cannot take their interpretation over and above the plain meaning of the Verse itself, plus the overwhelming position of Ahlus Sunnati wal-Jama’ah is that the Ummahat al-Mu’minin are included in Ayat al-Tathir.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Narrated 'Umar bin Abi Salamah - the step-son of the Prophet (ﷺ):

"When these Ayat were revealed to the Prophet (ﷺ): 'Allah only wishes to remove the Rijs from you, O members of the family, and to purify you with a thorough purification...' (33:33) in the home of Umm Salamahhe called for Fatimah, Hasan, Husain, and wrapped him in the cloak, then he said: 'O Allah! These are the people of my house, so remove the Rijs from them, and purify them with a thorough purification.' So Umm Salamah said: 'And am I with them O Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'You are in your place, and you are more virtuous to me.'"
Jami Al-Tirmidhi: Vol 1, Book 46, Hadith 3787

I believe you already know this.

he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) called for Fatimah, Hasan, Husain, and wrapped him in the cloak, then he said: 'O Allah! These are the people of my house!

Its clear though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cherub786 said:

The Ayah itself is plain in its meaning that Wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم are the primary addressees.

Quran 3:7

It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

It doesn't contradict Quran. We just get when occasion of revelation of this verse from Hadith that's all.

1. Words of Abu Saed Al Khudri (رضي الله عنه) (That verse was revealed exclusively)

2. Words of Ummul Momineen Ayesha (That no verse except for one declaring her innocence was revealed for her)

3. Words of 'Umar bin Abi Salamah (عليه السلام) (The verse was revealed exclusively)

4. Words of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) (That these 5 are AhlulBayt in context of this verse and Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said to Umme Salmah (عليه السلام) that you are at Your place when she (عليه السلام) asked Am i with them)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that the Shi’ah scholar Hasan Allahyari claimed that sayyidina Uthman رضى الله عنه joined the part of Ayat at-Tathir which addresses the Prophet’s wives with the second part of the Ayah. Why would he make this allegation unless he believed that the Ayah as it is read in the present Quran gives the strong impression that the Prophet’s Wives are included in the Ahl al-Bayt?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ِAnother Ayah of the Quran makes it clear that the Prophet’s wives are included in Ahl al-Bayt. In the context of Prophet Abraham’s wife Sarah عليهما السلام:

رَحۡمَتُ اللّٰہِ وَ بَرَکٰتُہٗ عَلَیۡکُمۡ اَہۡلَ الۡبَیۡتِ

The mercy of Allah and His blessings are upon you, O people of the House (11:73)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

ِAnother Ayah of the Quran makes it clear that the Prophet’s wives are included in Ahl al-Bayt. In the context of Prophet Abraham’s wife Sarah عليهما السلام:

رَحۡمَتُ اللّٰہِ وَ بَرَکٰتُہٗ عَلَیۡکُمۡ اَہۡلَ الۡبَیۡتِ

The mercy of Allah and His blessings are upon you, O people of the House (11:73)

100% agreed.

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) chooses whom he wills.

We just need a nass.

Like Allah even excluded a son and a wife from Ahlulbayt (Lut (عليه السلام) and Noah (عليه السلام))

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest
2 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

ِAnother Ayah of the Quran makes it clear that the Prophet’s wives are included in Ahl al-Bayt. In the context of Prophet Abraham’s wife Sarah عليهما السلام:

رَحۡمَتُ اللّٰہِ وَ بَرَکٰتُہٗ عَلَیۡکُمۡ اَہۡلَ الۡبَیۡتِ

The mercy of Allah and His blessings are upon you, O people of the House (11:73)

I must admit, you are good with words. This is what you wrote in your blog about Ayat al-tatheer:

It is worth mentioning here that Allah Most High has said ankum and not minkum. The latter would mean that Allah wishes to remove from the Ahl al-Bayt any impurity. However, by saying ankum, Allah Most High expresses the fact that He intends to keep at a distance any impurity from coming even near the Prophet’s Household, and not that there is any impurity already present within them. Now if one reads the entire Ayah, it is clear that Allah Most High is initially addressing the wives of the Prophet, who are the “Mothers of the Believers”. Hence, the standard Sunni interpretation is that the Ahl al-Bayt mentioned in this Ayah is primarily a reference to the Prophet’s wives. The Rafidah Shiah, however, claim that this section of the Ayah was wrongly inserted by sayyidina Uthman ؓ, when he was compiling the Quran, into the Ayah addressing the Prophet’s wives, to give the false impression that the Ahl al-Bayt are the Prophet’s wives. The disgusting Rafidi, Hasan AllahyariLA, has openly expressed this baseless view. Based on my own research and insight, both views are erroneous. The fact of the matter is that in this section of the Ayah where Allah refers to the Ahl al-Bayt, He is primarily addressing the Ahl al-Kisaa, popularly known as the Panjtan Pak. This is evident from the Hadith al-Kisaa:

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Guest guest said:

I must admit, you are good with words. This is what you wrote in your blog about Ayat al-tatheer:

It is worth mentioning here that Allah Most High has said ankum and not minkum. The latter would mean that Allah wishes to remove from the Ahl al-Bayt any impurity. However, by saying ankum, Allah Most High expresses the fact that He intends to keep at a distance any impurity from coming even near the Prophet’s Household, and not that there is any impurity already present within them. Now if one reads the entire Ayah, it is clear that Allah Most High is initially addressing the wives of the Prophet, who are the “Mothers of the Believers”. Hence, the standard Sunni interpretation is that the Ahl al-Bayt mentioned in this Ayah is primarily a reference to the Prophet’s wives. The Rafidah Shiah, however, claim that this section of the Ayah was wrongly inserted by sayyidina Uthman ؓ, when he was compiling the Quran, into the Ayah addressing the Prophet’s wives, to give the false impression that the Ahl al-Bayt are the Prophet’s wives. The disgusting Rafidi, Hasan AllahyariLA, has openly expressed this baseless view. Based on my own research and insight, both views are erroneous. The fact of the matter is that in this section of the Ayah where Allah refers to the Ahl al-Bayt, He is primarily addressing the Ahl al-Kisaa, popularly known as the Panjtan Pak. This is evident from the Hadith al-Kisaa:

How does it contradict the position I expressed on this thread? Note the word “primarily” which does not mean “exclusively”, in fact, by writing “primarily” it is inferred and implied that there are others who are also addressed as and included in the Ahl al-Bayt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest
14 hours ago, Guest guest said:

 

 

8 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

How does it contradict the position I expressed on this thread? Note the word “primarily” which does not mean “exclusively”, in fact, by writing “primarily” it is inferred and implied that there are others who are also addressed as and included in the Ahl al-Bayt.

So, who among the wives have the characteristic that you have written ie "He intends to keep at a distance any impurity from coming even near the Prophet’s Household, and not that there is any impurity already present within them"?

Bring your evidence that wives are included in "O people of the House" mentioned in Quran[33:33]., if you are truthful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guest guest said:

So, who among the wives have the characteristic that you have written ie "He intends to keep at a distance any impurity from coming even near the Prophet’s Household, and not that there is any impurity already present within them"?

All of them رضى الله عنهنّ

1 hour ago, Guest guest said:

Bring your evidence that wives are included in "O people of the House" mentioned in Quran[33:33]., if you are truthful.

The proof is in the pudding. Just read the Verse from the beginning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

All of them رضى الله عنهنّ

Well, rijs has been kept away from the Ahlul Bayt but a verse of Quran itself providing evidence that rijs was remained there in some wives of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as we can cite the word "saghat quloobokuma" used for two of Prophet's wives. 

Another proof is the statement of Ummul Mo'mineen Aisha where she mentioned her envy/jelousy from Ummul Mo'mineen Khadija (عليه السلام). 

12 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

The proof is in the pudding. Just read the Verse from the beginning.

Yes, read the verse from the beginning & note the grammatical construction of verse and how pronouns & verbs switched from feminine to masculine. 

قَرْنَ, بُيُوتِكُنَّ, تَبَرَّجْنَ, أَقِمْنَ, آتِينَ, أَطِعْنَ, أَطِعْنَ

Then the mukhatab suddenly changed in the verse:

لِيُذْهِبَ, عَنْكُمُ

Now the mukhatab are majority males. And the very next verse again start addressing the wives:

وَاذْكُرْنَ, بُيُوتِكُنَّ, 

Chery-boy, if you can see, there are sufficient evidences. 

إِنْ تَتُوبَا إِلَى اللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا

(Deviated hearts)

 

قَالَ يَا نُوحُ إِنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنْ أَهْلِكَ 

Son of Prophet Noah (عليه السلام) was not mentioned as his Ahl.

 

ضَرَبَ اللَّهُ مَثَلًا لِّلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا اِمْرَأَةَ نُوحٍ وَاِمْرَأَةَ لُوطٍ كَانَتَا تَحْتَ عَبْدَيْنِ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا صَالِحَيْنِ فَخَانَتَاهُمَا

Wives of at least two Prophets were Kha'in. 

Similarly, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has mentioned that the two among Prophet's wives were not best:

عَسَىٰ رَبُّهُ إِنْ طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَنْ يُبْدِلَهُ أَزْوَاجًا خَيْرًا مِنْكُنَّ مُسْلِمَاتٍ مُؤْمِنَاتٍ قَانِتَاتٍ تَائِبَاتٍ عَابِدَاتٍ سَائِحَاتٍ ثَيِّبَاتٍ وَأَبْكَارًا

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) introduced by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) & Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are only those who are the bearers of the "minniyat" of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Rijs has been kept away only from those persons for whom Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said "innahum minni wa ana minhum". They are 12 Imams & Syeda Fatima s.a 

الله ایک ہے

پنجتن پانچ ہیں

امام بارہ ہیں

معصوم چودہ ہیں

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cool said:

Yes, read the verse from the beginning & note the grammatical construction of verse and how pronouns & verbs switched from feminine to masculine. 

قَرْنَ, بُيُوتِكُنَّ, تَبَرَّجْنَ, أَقِمْنَ, آتِينَ, أَطِعْنَ, أَطِعْنَ

Then the mukhatab suddenly changed in the verse:

لِيُذْهِبَ, عَنْكُمُ

Now the mukhatab are majority males. And the very next verse again start addressing the wives:

وَاذْكُرْنَ, بُيُوتِكُنَّ, 

That’s because the Arabic word اهل is masculine.

The fact that the next verse again reverts to feminine indicates that the Wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم are being addressed all along.

Furthermore, masculine pronoun is used whenever there is a mix of male and female, even if the male presence is a minority.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

That’s because the Arabic word اهل is masculine.

:hahaha:

13 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

The fact that the next verse again reverts to feminine indicates that the Wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم are being addressed all along.

Yes and that's why we say that the wives are not from the Ahlul Bayt. They are addressed separately from the Ahlul Bayt and are not part of those purified by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)

And its evidence is their acceptance of envy/jealousy which is considered as disease of heart as well as phrase  صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا of chapter 66. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 9/22/2020 at 1:00 PM, ShiaMan14 said:

There are other narrations confirming this too:

'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped hitn under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said:
Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)
Sahih Muslim: Book 44, hadith 91

 

 

Narrated 'Umar bin Abi Salamah - the step-son of the Prophet (ﷺ):
"When these Ayat were revealed to the Prophet (ﷺ): 'Allah only wishes to remove the Rijs from you, O members of the family, and to purify you with a thorough purification...' (33:33) in the home of Umm Salamah, he called for Fatimah, Hasan, Husain, and wrapped him in the cloak, then he said: 'O Allah! These are the people of my house, so remove the Rijs from them, and purify them with a thorough purification.' So Umm Salamah said: 'And am I with them O Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'You are in your place, and you are more virtuous to me.'"
Jami Al-Tirmidhi: Vol 1, Book 46, Hadith 3787
 
So 2 different wives confirmed that wives are not part of ayah-tatheer.

 

On 9/23/2020 at 4:33 AM, Cherub786 said:

Couple of points:

  1. when sayyidatuna A’ishah رضى الله عنها says “us” in the first person plural, she is only referring to the children of sayyidina Abi Bakr as-Siddiq رضى الله عنه and not to the category of Prophet’s wives, as the context of the Hadith makes clear when Marwan made a specific allegation that an Ayah in the Quran was revealed against Abd ur-Rahman b. Abi Bakr.

  2. Ayat al-Tathir is general in referring to the Prophet’s wives, and is not specifically regarding sayyidatuna A’ishah but all the Ummahat al-Mu’minin رضى الله عنهنّ

  3. The Hadith al-Kisa only proves that the Ahl al-Kisa عليهم السلام are included in the Ahl al-Bayt as mentioned in Ayat al-Tathir, it does not prove exclusion of the Ummahat al-Mu’minin. Exclusion can never be proven since the Ayah itself begins by addressing and mentioning them.

Whom to believe - Umm Al-Momineen or Cherry???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
×
  • Create New...