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

Why does the Qur’an mention irrelevant details about the Prophet’s life?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

:salam:

I have been heard some people use this argument against Islam where they say the Qur’an is supposed to be the final guide for all of humanity and yet it contains many redundant details that shouldn’t be in “the final guide for all of humanity”.

Some verses they claim are useless include:

[33:53] O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, not waiting for its cooking being finished-- but when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken the food, then disperse-- not seeking to listen to talk; surely this gives the Prophet trouble, but he forbears from you, and Allah does not forbear from the truth And when you ask of them any goods, ask of them from behind a curtain; this is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts; and it does not behove you that you should give trouble to the Messenger of Allah, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is grievous in the sight of Allah.

The verse where the Qur’an “could have said” that marrying your adopted son’s wife is halal instead of ordaining the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to actually marry Zaid’s wife:
[33:37] And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed.

This verse in Surah Tahrim talking about either the “honey incident” (mentioned in Tafsir Pooya) or the “maria al qibtiyyah” incident in which the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is said to have been with his wife Maria while Hafsa was gone out, for her to return and be mad that he did this “on my day and only my bed!”, and him to take an oath that he shall never sleep with Maria again.

[66:1] O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Also details of who the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) can and cannot marry from 33:50-52.

Essentially the argument being made is that these verses are useless. Of course, as Muslims we believe that every letter is meaningful within the Qur’an, and so I was after some guidance on how to respond to such claims, especially with regard to the above verses I have quoted.

Barakallah Fik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

History is never useless. Even from a basic perspective it sets a backdrop of the people place and culture of the time.

But history can't tell us what's in the hearts of man.

The Qur'an is unique in that it provides history from a position of complete knowledge. 

Take the above verses it not only gives a historical example but also gives the inner desires of people. That combined with the Qur'an as a whole gives valuable lessons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

[33:53] O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, not waiting for its cooking being finished-- but when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken the food, then disperse-- not seeking to listen to talk; surely this gives the Prophet trouble, but he forbears from you, and Allah does not forbear from the truth And when you ask of them any goods, ask of them from behind a curtain; this is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts; and it does not behove you that you should give trouble to the Messenger of Allah, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is grievous in the sight of Allah.

The prophet used to answer the call of freeman, slave, maid servant and destitute alike, shortening his prayer anytime someone would visit his open house so much so that his opponents spread it as a form of weakness and credulity while the prophet knew very well who to trust 9:61. They would literally reproach him of being "an ear" because of his empathy and readiness to patiently listen to what anyone had to say.

But although at first glance that seemingly gave the impression of being credulous it in fact reveals a great leadership quality of keeping cohesion within a group. He knows very well the liars or people with ill intentions but does not immidiately expose them to the rest of the community so as to leave them the chance to reform themselves, as is commanded within the Quran itself. This passive attitude should however not leave any ambiguity as regards the prophet's intellectual and spiritual stance, as denoted in the rest of the verse.

Sometimes as reflected in 33:53, his leniency, kindess and forbearance to his folks would often lead to abuse. People would enter his house at anytime, preventing him and his wives from their spiritual duties and basic privacy requirements. This injunction taught them certain rules of behaviour bearing on the life of such particular society, based on a true feeling of brotherhood, mutual consideration, and respect for the sanctity of each other's personality and privacy.
 

This is the timeless lesson, applicable for all times, and which is now enshrined in the Quran through incidents that concerned the prophet. The Quran is full of such moral lessons, although illustrated through temporal situations, some of them related and others unrelated to the prophet. 
 
Here are a few other examples 
24:62-63"surely they who ask your permission are they who believe in Allah and His Apostle". 
In the prophet's time, the sincerity of a person's belief in God and the one representing His will on earth, was measured by their obedience to the prophet. None could dare claim to submit to Allah while rejecting the means by which He was actively comunicating with the people. They could obviously not communicate with God directly and had thus to seek the messenger's guidance to know the divine will. This guidance from the messenger is still found both in the Quran and the sunna he left behind. The timeless application of the verse is thus in consulting both sources of guidance. See also 4:64.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

The verse where the Qur’an “could have said” that marrying your adopted son’s wife is halal instead of ordaining the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to actually marry Zaid’s wife:

This particular marriage led to many crucial societal reforms as regards the position of adopted children and orphans. These reforms were at first introduced through admonishment in sura Ahzab 33:4-5 and then with the practical example of the prophet's marriage proposal to Zaynab, now ex-wife of an adopted son (whom society viewed as equals to blood children). This clearly drew a distinct line from any biological connection with the adoptive family. Nothing could strike harder and clearer at the root of that deeply ingrained belief other than a union one would consider incestuous precisely due to that notion. And none other than the most eminent member of a community, one whom an entire nation looks up to as the epitome of morality could do a better job at setting the example.

The point of the marriage of the prophet and Zaynab was therefore to implement a social reform, and the prophet, being the moral authority of his comunity as well as last transmitter of divine law 33:40, was the most apt in enforcing it. It is in that reform of principles that Muslims are obliged and commanded to follow the prophet's example. Marrying the ex-wives of their adoptive sons is neither a command nor necessity since the reform was already implemented by the prophet. But it shoud however never be hindered by all the false notions of preislamic times as regards adopted children, and which the Quran came to reform, hence the statement that

"there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Also details of who the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) can and cannot marry from 33:50-52.

The prophet, despite being absolved from strict obligations towards his multiple wives would nevertheless feel saddened whenever he delayed his appointed time with one of his wives

33:51"You may put off whom you please of them, and you may take to you whom you please, and whom you desire of those whom you had separated provisionally; no blame attaches to you".
This ordinance made sure that no reproach would be cast upon him, and neither would he be hindered by social pressures or customs. So although he had the peace of mind from a spiritual viewpoint that he would never be blameworthy, he still felt uneasy emotionally towards his wives whom he loved. And he did his utmost to spend as much time as he could with them all equitably.
 
Besides absolving the prophet, the ordinance also put all the wives and potential concubines on the same level as it concerned them all from God's perspective.

Through it, they find the inner peace that the emotional sacrifice they shall endure, and which they all were fully aware of before accepting to marry the prophet, is for the accomplishment of a higher objective. Their merit with God will naturally be higher given their wordly sacrifices

"this is most proper, so that their eyes may be cool and they may not grieve, and that they should be pleased, all of them with what you give them".

The verse ends with an affectionate message to the prophet's household in general, stressing that God is aware of the difficulties in all levels of life that they must endure, and their toll on their feelings

"and Allah knows what is in your hearts; and Allah is Knowing, Forbearing."


Then through 33:52, the prophet was specifically told not to marry more women or divorce anyone from the wives he already had, if it is for purely physical motives. Here is a man who is supposedly lustful for women, forbidden from taking wives on the basis of their beauty only, which is precisely what is supposed to satisfy his alleged lusts. And besides, the ones leveling this type of mindless arguments, mainly Christians nowadays should ask themselves; how does having multiple or young/beautiful wives stain his truthfulness as a prophet, considering the marital and concubinal history of the prophets of the Hebrew Bible?

33:52 was an answer to the hypocrites' annoying talk and unjust provocations the likes that were directed at other righteous men and women 33:48,57-58. The prophet is not here being denied the right to divorce. He is denied to do it for purely physical motives. He could divorce a woman if she misbehaved, then replace her with one regardless of her age or marital history, whose selection would strictly be on the basis of high morality and spiritual qualities 66:5. His divorces therefore would be dictated not by whims or lust but by righteousness and uprightness in conduct. That is based on the notion that

24:26"corrupt women are for corrupt men, and corrupt men, for corrupt women - just as good women are for good men, and good men, for good women".

This negates the charges and calumnies raised by modern critics, mainly from a Judeo-Christian background, concerning the motives behind the prophet's marriages and these critics should rather turn attention towards their own scriptures where "divine ordinances" regulate whom is to marry whom, strictly on a physical basis

Ezek44:22"And neither a widow nor a divorced woman may they (the high priests) take for wives, but they shall take virgins from the descendants of the House of Israel".

Such calumnies werent reserved to Muhammad, in the prophetic history, the likes of Moses were slandered to such an extent that the HB portrays YHWH wrathfully descending on the culprits Numb12,Ex2:21,Quran33:69. Despite these talks, the prophet is consoled that he is under constant spiritual blessings by God and His angels. These blessings in themselves will bring to naught all such imputations levelled against him or the believers in general, while a grievious sin will be written upon the culprits 33:56-8.

What is very interesting is that the verse, although restricts any future marriage, allows him still to have as many right hand possessions as he would like to have and establish concubine relationships with them. And yet, here again is a man supposedly lustful, taking only 1 such women although he had the possibility of having much more, even as many as he would have liked.

Again, we see a clear pattern from the prophet, abiding by all the restrictions imposed on him but not taking advantage of the legal relaxations. That right hand posession that was in addition his concubine was the noble Maria the Copt, who wasnt even a war captive, meaning the prophet didnt even go out of his way to find a woman that pleased him. She was given to him out of reverence by an Egyptian notable. It is interesting to note that there are at least 2 similar precedents in prophetic history, of a prophet's union with the Egyptian daughter of royalty.

First Hagar who was given to Abraham, and then Solomon's unnamed Egyptian wife 1Kings3. The Egyptian notable wanted to establish political relations with the prophet, and this gesture was considered normal as per the decorum of ancient societies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As is obvious until now these kinds of verses related to the prophet's personal matters serve us today in many ways one can think of, including exposing the prophet's lofty character in a time where people raise all sorts of calumnies so as to slander him and his household.

Your final example is the beginning of surah tahrim and the occasions of revelation.

The issue of sura Tahrim is a very interesting one, obviously with implications far surpassing the superficial reading of those critics.
 
In Islam, certain oaths must as a duty be broken because they create an injustice through the prohibition of a lawful thing for the benefit of another party, and prevents one from acting according to God's directives. In addition, it may be that one takes an oath but because of changing circumstances later on, a more righteous course of action must be taken in opposition to the oath, then the oath must be broken and atoned for.
 
What is interesting is that he would not readily break an oath when it would be to his advantage, even if he, per the Quran, would be totally justified doing so. Sura Tahrim alludes to an oath the prophet had taken, to forbid something lawful for himself for the sake of pleasing his wives 66:1-2.
 
In the previous sura the Quran teaches to remain conscious of the bounds of God in situations of hate. This sura, on the other hand, teaches how these bounds should not be violated in situations of love. What also transpires is that Muhammad was a chosen one of sublime morality like the past messengers 3:161,9:128,68:4,33:21 ahead of his time in these matters, not abusing from his social position, taking into consideration the emotions and needs of his wives, as well as full of tact and magnanimity towards them as will be shown later on. 
 
The manner in which he embodied universal and Quranic principles and moralities led his closest entourage to be among his earliest followers, contrary to other prophets including Jesus. He basically was as a walking Quran. This means that whatever is stated in the Quran such as kindness towards women, prayers and charity, love and respect for poor, needy, orphans etc. can all be found in his life. 
 
As already pointed, previously to the incident in the opening verses of Sura Tahrim, God sanctionned the expiation of oaths when it is something lawful. 
 
Nothing can be forcefully forbidden when God made a thing lawful 5:87, even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else, as in the prophet's case who sought to please his wives. Sometimes a human being under the influence of emotions without full consciousness of the seriousness of the undertaking, makes an oath and forbids to himself something permissible as was the case with the prophet, and in such cases the oath should be broken 2:225 and then atoned for 5:87-89. The first part of the verse
"why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you"
has a compassionate tone, because the prophet did it out of compassion. This however does not mean that he was justified in making something that is otherwise lawful, as forbidden. That authority has never been delegated to the Prophet, not to speak of any other man. The second part of the verse

"you seek to please your wives"

indirectly warns those who benefit from such act, not to knowingly take advantage of that situation. The position of a Prophet, and by extension that of any respected leader, is very delicate. Such eminent individual does not solely belong to himself but to a nation transcending time and space. The higher the person, the smallest sins are enlarged as if they were enormous. A minor incident experienced by an ordinary man in his life may not be of any consequence, but it assumes the status of law when experienced by a Prophet with a large a devout following looking up to him as the epitome of good manners and spirituality. The life of such a person must remain in line with the divine will, and openly explained to present the right example to follow

62:2"He it is who has sent unto the unlettered people an apostle from among themselves, to convey unto them His messages, and to cause them to grow in purity, and to impart unto them the divine writ as well as wisdom - whereas before that they were indeed, most obviously, lost in error".

Similarly, the prophet's pious wives too are to become an example for all women of the ummah, more than any other woman, they should be mindful of God's limits. The Quran often alludes to these notions in regards to the prophet, his wives and the leaders of a community in general, hence God's will to

33:33"remove from you all that might be loathsome, O you members of thehousehold, and to purify you to utmost purity".

Had the fine details of the prophet's oath and of the betrayal inside his household 66:1-3 been of any importance to the general message of the verses, then the Quran would have mentionned them but disclosing them was entirely irrelevant to the point and could even distract the audience's attention from it. The secret shared by the prophet and then disclosed by the wives, has thus been altogether ignored. What has been disapproved and pointed out in particular is the very fact that the secret was disclosed to another. The point of the passage is that the violation of the spouse's secrets violates the sacred law. And this applies whether to the husband or the wife. 

It is interesting to note the tact of the prophet in such tense situation. When the disloyalty towards him from within his household was uncovered, he informed the guilty wife of SOME of what she had revealed, just enough so as to make his point, but refrained from informing her of it all to prevent her further abasement and shame

"he made known part of it and avoided part".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Thank you Br. @Nad_M. I think you have explained most of my concerns. 

Would you be able to also explain the purpose of 33:50?

Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, Nad_M said:

62:2"He it is who has sent unto the unlettered people an apostle from among themselves, to convey unto them His messages, and to cause them to grow in purity, and to impart unto them the divine writ as well as wisdom - whereas before that they were indeed, most obviously, lost in error".

Salam!

If we view the first verse of tehrim in light with this verse of chapter jumma, and what you have explained in detail in your 3rd post. It appears that perhaps prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) still need purification for himself (na'uzobillah):

7 hours ago, Nad_M said:

Sometimes a human being under the influence of emotions without full consciousness of the seriousness of the undertaking, makes an oath and forbids to himself something permissible as was the case with the prophet

This specific paragraph, I have highlighted the words, portrays as Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) came under the influence of emotions and forgot the seriousness of his undertaking. 

At another verse mentioned in the OP where Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentions this:

17 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

(33:37) and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him.

Does Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) also forgot here the seriousness of the undertaking? And he start fearing people or start worrying about what people might think, perhaps forgetting (na'uzobillah) that he should have fear God??? 

These points are very sensitive I think and we need to go through them slowly and with caution while doing the tafseer or understanding the tafaseer. 

Isn't it strange that at one place, we find in Quran about Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that he don't even speak out of his desires, that your companion neither errs not got misguided (Najm). At another place (Insaan/Dahr) we find the statement "wama tasha'oona illa an yasha Allah" (you only wills except that God wills), yet you are explaining these cases as Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), under the influence of emotions, forgot the seriousness of the undertaking. 

I would like to request you to explain these issues as well.

Wassalam!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Cool said:

33:37) and you feared men

وَتَخْشَى النَّاسَ وَاللَّهُ أَحَقُّ أَنْ تَخْشَاهُ

Salam Brother!!! 

If you just go to one verse after this i.e., verse 39 of the same chapter, you will find this:

الَّذِينَ يُبَلِّغُونَ رِسَالَاتِ اللَّهِ وَيَخْشَوْنَهُ وَلَا يَخْشَوْنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا اللَّهَ ۗ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا {39}

[Shakir 33:39] Those who deliver the messages of Allah and fear Him, and do not fear any one but Allah; and Allah is sufficient to take account.

Now we need to be careful in understanding the "fear of people" mentioned in the 37th verse. 

Ayatullah Kamal Al-Hydari  have tried to explain this in this video:

Now similarly the case of verse of Tehrim:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ ۖ تَبْتَغِي مَرْضَاتَ أَزْوَاجِكَ ۚ وَاللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ {1}

[Shakir 66:1] O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Agha Poya has said in his tafseer:

"To make a vow to do a thing which one has the option to do or not to do is permissible in Islam if there is good in it.

A husband can accommodate his wife's legitimate desires to a reasonable extent. Ma-idah: 89 gives details of expiation for cancelling the oath.

The recommendation in verse 2 to the Holy Prophet to dissolve his oath is put forward in view of the insolent behaviour of A-isha and Hafsa described in verse 3. The tone of the first two verses is like Bara-at: 43 wherein hypocrites have been blamed for falsehood."

Now what is meant by "prohibition" here? Did the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) declared (or legislated, in fiqhi terminology) the honey haram for himself while God has declared (legislated) it halal for him? No

Can a person quit eating something which is permissible for him for a reason or for no reason? 

Is it forbidden to do that? 

It is neither forbidden nor a group of sins.. although it may be said to the one who abandons the supererogatory, why did you not do it even though it is a supererogatory act?

Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) simply said to them (Aisha & Hafsa) that he will not use honey onwards & taken the oath for it. The reason for doing that is the plot of both the wives. 

It appears that the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did something that God permitted to him, so some of his wives abused him and put pressure on him and resorted to him in order to please them to swear to them to leave it and not to do it after that.

The responsibility in this, is directed to the wives in fact, they are the ones who made him do what they do not have the right to do. This is supported by the saying of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى):

إِنْ تَتُوبَا إِلَى اللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا

If you two turn in repentance to Him, your hearts are indeed inclined; 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Cool said:

Salam!

If we view the first verse of tehrim in light with this verse of chapter jumma, and what you have explained in detail in your 3rd post. It appears that perhaps prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) still need purification for himself (na'uzobillah):

This specific paragraph, I have highlighted the words, portrays as Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) came under the influence of emotions and forgot the seriousness of his undertaking. 

At another verse mentioned in the OP where Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentions this:

Does Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) also forgot here the seriousness of the undertaking? And he start fearing people or start worrying about what people might think, perhaps forgetting (na'uzobillah) that he should have fear God??? 

These points are very sensitive I think and we need to go through them slowly and with caution while doing the tafseer or understanding the tafaseer. 

Isn't it strange that at one place, we find in Quran about Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that he don't even speak out of his desires, that your companion neither errs not got misguided (Najm). At another place (Insaan/Dahr) we find the statement "wama tasha'oona illa an yasha Allah" (you only wills except that God wills), yet you are explaining these cases as Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), under the influence of emotions, forgot the seriousness of the undertaking. 

I would like to request you to explain these issues as well.

Wassalam!!

Alaykum assalam wa rahmatulla

 

Of course the prophet felt fear. This does not mean the delivery of the message was compromised. And yes he misjudged a private matter and the Quran came to correct him in sura Tahrim. That mistake had nothing to do with sin or moral failure.

 

As is explicit in the Quran, the divine protection of the carriers of the revelation pertains strictly to the revelation itself.

 

But in everyday affairs, the messengers, who are still humans endowed with freewill and thus the potential, if not to sin due to their heightened level of spiritual awareness, to make mistakes, they are left to their own devices in their everyday lives to fight off the assaults of evil forces.

 

No prophet was in a constant state of communication with the divine realm. The hadith and Quran itself speak of long periods where revelation had stopped, and the subsequent tauntings of his enemies on the issue, the questions of his followers and his anxious anticipation.

 

The Quran never came to correct the prophet's worldviews in terms of knowledge of nature and general causality, neither of his contemporaries but rather guide him and the rest of humanity through him, to the most complete, advanced human spiritual knowledge. The divine protection  therefore only pertained to the Quran which is the source of that perfect spiritual knowledge.

The Quran says, throughout their missions, the prophets, including the prophet Muhammad, felt the emotions of anger, mercy, apprehension, sorrow but Allah, by keeping a continuous relationship with them, revealing His word progressively during their prophetic career, comforted them with peace 37:181 increased their supreme character, spiritual awareness, protected them and the revelation from deviation and transgression.

 

Many verses testify to the prophets' moral infaillibility and ability to transmit the message perfectly. The prophets are mukhlasin "purified ones" 38:45-48, protected from all perspectives 72:26-28,22:52-54, guided by Allah 6:84-90,39:36-37,18:17 and no such person can be led astray by any misleading agency. After being chosen and guided the prophets are bestowed with favors from Allah. The Quran praises them for their highest degree of obedience and humility before Allah and draws a clear line of seperation between them as a praiseworthy group deserving to be honored by Allah and those who follow their low desires and go astray 19:58-59,4:69,1:5-7.

 

Prophets never went astray in their communication, implementation of the divine will. That is why Allah in the Quran has unconditionally ordered the believers to obey and fully trust their prophet, and this requires tremendous responsibility hence the necessity of moral infaillibility. The divine protection, allows them to clearly distinguish good and evil, much easier than an average person. But they are not compelled in their choices, human emotions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Cool said:

Isn't it strange that at one place, we find in Quran about Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that he don't even speak out of his desires, that your companion neither errs not got misguided (Najm)

Sure. That is in relation to the revelation.

3 hours ago, Cool said:

At another place (Insaan/Dahr) we find the statement "wama tasha'oona illa an yasha Allah" (you only wills except that God wills),

This is not addressed to the prophet specifically but all of humanity.

Human will is dependent on the will of Allah who sustains the system of causality at all moments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Nad_M said:

Of course the prophet felt fear.

Thanks for your detailed response brother. Please allow me to ask some more questions.

So he felt fear of people instead of feeling the fear of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)?

Interestingly a verse of Quran mentions this:

"Say. Surely my prayer and my sacrifice and my life and my death are (all) for Allah, the Lord of the worlds;" (6:162) 

This includes everything, every breath, every action. So how can it be the case that Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) somehow started fearing people and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) reminded him that it is He who is more worthy of being feared? 

I will ask few questions about the verse of Tehrim too with reference to your following comment:

20 minutes ago, Nad_M said:

And yes he misjudged a private matter and the Quran came to correct him in sura Tahrim.

 

Edited by Cool
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The fear of Allah never departed from the prophet. However for that particular revelation, he feared the people as well. The verse tells him that Allah is to be feared above anything, so he should make this sensitive revelation known regardless of the people's reaction. The point is, as already said, the prophets felt all the natural human emotions and weaknesses. Allah however kept a close watch over them so as to keep them on the right path and make sure the revelation is properly conveyed.

Quote

17:74"And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little"

Moses was hesitant to face the mighty Pharao alone, as anyone in a similar situation would be. He was complexed by his oratory capabilities, as anyone about to make an important and public address would also be. He feared he might not properly convince his audience and in addition, that he might be arrested for the crime they accused him of, but he never declined the mission and instead asked God to strengthen his speech, fill his heart with courage and appoint his brother Aaron as a helper and associate in prophecy 20:25-36,26:12-15,28:34-5 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Cool said:

"Say. Surely my prayer and my sacrifice and my life and my death are (all) for Allah, the Lord of the worlds;" (6:162)

This is a prayer that every Muslim should utter, and live by. It does not however negate the possibility of misjudgements in matters unrelated to religion, that cause no moral harm, nor result in sin.

Edited by Nad_M
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Posted (edited)
On 7/28/2021 at 11:10 AM, 313_Waiter said:

:salam:

I have been heard some people use this argument against Islam where they say the Qur’an is supposed to be the final guide for all of humanity and yet it contains many redundant details that shouldn’t be in “the final guide for all of humanity”.

Some verses they claim are useless include:

[33:53] O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, not waiting for its cooking being finished-- but when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken the food, then disperse-- not seeking to listen to talk; surely this gives the Prophet trouble, but he forbears from you, and Allah does not forbear from the truth And when you ask of them any goods, ask of them from behind a curtain; this is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts; and it does not behove you that you should give trouble to the Messenger of Allah, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is grievous in the sight of Allah.

The verse where the Qur’an “could have said” that marrying your adopted son’s wife is halal instead of ordaining the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to actually marry Zaid’s wife:
[33:37] And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed.

This verse in Surah Tahrim talking about either the “honey incident” (mentioned in Tafsir Pooya) or the “maria al qibtiyyah” incident in which the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is said to have been with his wife Maria while Hafsa was gone out, for her to return and be mad that he did this “on my day and only my bed!”, and him to take an oath that he shall never sleep with Maria again.

[66:1] O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Also details of who the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) can and cannot marry from 33:50-52.

Essentially the argument being made is that these verses are useless. Of course, as Muslims we believe that every letter is meaningful within the Qur’an, and so I was after some guidance on how to respond to such claims, especially with regard to the above verses I have quoted.

Barakallah Fik

I won't go into the details too much because the have already been addressed by the posts above. The only thing I wanted to add is that these are not useless issues because society is still dealing with these issues today. For example,

33:53 is addressing the believers with regards to Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) but it is a mistake to think that 'Since Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) is not amoung us anymore, therefore this verse is irrelevant'. The verses in the Quran that address Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) are also speaking of others besides him. There are a few ayat that are an exception to this, and are only speaking of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h), such as the Ayat when Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) addresses him as 'Khatim An Nabiyyeen' (The Seal of the Prophets), as this only applies to him because all Muslims agree that there is only one Khatim An Nabeyeen and this is obvious from the phrase itself. But most of the ayat in which Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) is the object of the statement also have other meanings. 

This is one of the many verses in the Quran that talk about Aklaq (good behaviour and manners) specifically. These verses are relevant, but unfortunately mostly ignored by Muslims so that other people and even the Muslims themselves believe them to be irrelevant. The general meaning of this verse is that when you are invited to someone's house as a guest for dinner(or just in general), and the person who invited you is a pleasant, nice person, (like Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) was, there is a tendency in people to 'take advantage' of the situation by staying a long time, talking alot, eating alot, etc, because they are comfortable. This is human nature. When you are in a situation where apparently the person is happy with you doing this, you will do it if you are comfortable. At the same time, a person, because they have good Aklaq, is not going to tell you, 'Hey you guys, you have to leave, I'm tired and I'm running out of food'. A person with good aklaq would never say that, even if they were tired and even if they were running out of food. 

So as a guest, you must be sensitive and aware of this and not stay so long as to burden the host, in the case they are a person with good aklaq (a person with bad aklaq would just ask people to leave, explicitly so this is not an issue with them). There are terms for this in probably every language. In English they say 'Don't overstay your welcome'. There are also similar phrases. So this is what the verse was talking about. It is still relevant today, and still an issue today. 

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Nad_M said:

The verse tells him that Allah is to be feared above anything, so he should make this sensitive revelation known regardless of the people's reaction.

Thanks brother, for clearing up the things to me.

2 hours ago, Nad_M said:

Moses was hesitant to face the mighty Pharao alone, as anyone in a similar situation would be.

Interestingly, Quran mentions the fear of Prophet Musa (عليه السلام) in different places. 

قَالَ خُذْهَا وَلَا تَخَفْ سَنُعِيدُهَا سِيرَتَهَا الْأُولَى

20:21 

This is the point where God turned his staff into Serpent. 

وَلَقَدْ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَى مُوسَى أَنْ أَسْرِ بِعِبَادِي فَاضْرِبْ لَهُمْ طَرِيقًا فِي الْبَحْرِ يَبَسًا لَّا تَخَافُ دَرَكًا وَلَا تَخْشَى

20:77

The point where he was about to show the miracle i.e., parting the river.

قَالَ لَا تَخَافَا إِنَّنِي مَعَكُمَا أَسْمَعُ وَأَرَى

20:46 

When going to see Fir'on

قُلْنَا لَا تَخَفْ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْأَعْلَى

20:68

When facing the magicians. And finally the verse:

وَأَلْقِ عَصَاكَ ۚ فَلَمَّا رَآهَا تَهْتَزُّ كَأَنَّهَا جَانٌّ وَلَّىٰ مُدْبِرًا وَلَمْ يُعَقِّبْ ۚ يَا مُوسَىٰ لَا تَخَفْ إِنِّي لَا يَخَافُ لَدَيَّ الْمُرْسَلُونَ

27:10 And cast down your staff. So when he saw it in motion as if it were a serpent, he turned back retreating and did not return: O Musa! fear not; surely the messengers shall not fear in My presence

We again reached to the first stage 20:21, here God made him clear that messengers shall not fear in My presence. Yet Prophet Musa (عليه السلام) feared while parting the sea, while facing the magicians. 

So I am agreed with you that:

2 hours ago, Nad_M said:

the prophets felt all the natural human emotions and weaknesses

Perhaps you can add some more explanation with reference to above quoted verses.

1 hour ago, Nad_M said:

This is a prayer that every Muslim should utter

It is a dua & we recite this dua while starting to offer the prayers (salah). Difference is that we don't say "Qul" in that dua. 

This verse starts with Qul that means whatever Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is going to say, is as per the direct command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), may it be surprising for us. So that verse in itself, is not a dua, rather a fact about the very being of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

1 hour ago, Nad_M said:

It does not however negate the possibility of misjudgements in matters unrelated to religion, that cause no moral harm, nor result in sin.

I beg to differ here. 

As stated, the verse started with command "Qul" means say. Now after the Qul, the content of the verse could possibly mean that the whole life, his every actions to his death, rather the whole being of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is for the Lord of the worlds, in His obedience he lived & died. His every action, if I am correct here to say, including the act of taking oath for not using honey, are in accordance with the divine will & in His submission. 

This view point would create a totally different picture.

I am expecting your views about it.

Wassalam!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
27 minutes ago, Cool said:

O Musa! fear not; surely the messengers shall not fear in My presence

 ۚ يَا مُوسَىٰ لَا تَخَفْ إِنِّي لَا يَخَافُ لَدَيَّ الْمُرْسَلُونَ

27:10 

لَدَيَّ My presence,  this is another point to reflect on. Quran says (Chapter Al-Hadid) "He is with you, wherever you are (و هو معكم اين ما كنتم)", now keeping this in mind, every messenger should have not feared anywhere because of the continuous presence (rather company) of God. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Cool @Nad_M

Really good discussion from you both about infallibility and error.

I'll just give the zaidi perspective directly related to the discussion for anyone interested.

Taken from.sublime answers by Imam Qassim :

Infallibility, according to us, pertains to the major sins. To them, it pertains to major and minor

sins. Our argument is that the prophets, may the blessings of Allah be upon them, are infallible because

Allah described them as loathing sin. The Exalted says: {so that Allah might show His forgiveness of all

thy faults, past as well as future} (Q. 48:2). He says concerning Moses: {“O my Lord! Verily, I have sinned

against myself! Grant me, then, Thy forgiveness!”} (Q. 28:16). He says concerning Jonah: {“There‟s no

Allah but You! Glorified be You! Verily I am from the wrongdoers!”} (Q. 21:87). He says concerning

David: {so he asked his Lord to forgive him his sin, fell down in prostration, and turned unto Him in

repentance} (Q. 38:24). He says concerning Solomon: {We had tried Solomon by placing upon his throne a

[lifeless] body; and thereupon he turned [towards Us]} (Q. 38:34). He says concerning Adam: {Adam

disobeyed his Lord and erred} (Q. 20:121).

Infallibility, according to us, is a subtlety (`a latāf) and enlightenment in which its owner chooses

to avoid the prohibitions and perform the obligations without being coerced. The exception for its owner is

what pertains to advantage and virtue; thus, the earning of reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
On 7/28/2021 at 8:10 PM, 313_Waiter said:

"....do not enter the houses of the Prophet..."

I think we have to understand what the word "houses" actually means in this verse. 

Abu Bakar and Umar have been burried in the house of the Prophet(s). That means they have "entered" into the Prophet's house. Did the Prophet give them the permission to enter and be buried there? No. 

Abu Bakar and Umar themselves and those who forcefully buried their bodies in the Prophet's house are violaters of Allah's command. 

The houses of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) and their shrines are also "houses" of the Prophet (s). That's why we have to take permission from them when we enter their shrines - the Izn-e-dakhool

 

Edited by Maisam Haider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Infallibility, 

Quote

I am leaving among you the Two Weighty Things: the Book of Allah and my `Itrat (Progeny), my Ahlul Bayt. So long as you (simultaneously) uphold both of them, you will never be misled after me; so, do not go ahead of them else you should perish, and do not lag behind them else you should perish; do not teach them, for they are more knowledgeable than you.1

From our perspective - we are looking up (not sideways or down/ They are not our equals nor below us). Looking up wards - The Hadith of the Two Weighty Things mentions "do not teach them, for they are more knowledgeable than you.1 "

They are Allah(عزّ وجلّ) Representatives. ( Period) NOT OUR's( Our appointed leaders). We are Not the Judge of Allah(عزّ وجلّ) Representative. By Definition, Allah(عزّ وجلّ) Representative is Above and beyond our Intellect. We can't possibly judge their infallibility. We are not equipped to perform such task. (Read the story of Prophet Musa(as)/Khidr). Allah(عزّ وجلّ) Representatives are under HIS(عزّ وجلّ) Command, which implies we Do NOt have that kind of security clearance / above our paygrade/ mental capabilities. 

Quote
وَأَمَّا الْجِدَارُ فَكَانَ لِغُلَامَيْنِ يَتِيمَيْنِ فِي الْمَدِينَةِ وَكَانَ تَحْتَهُ كَنْزٌ لَهُمَا وَكَانَ أَبُوهُمَا صَالِحًا فَأَرَادَ رَبُّكَ أَنْ يَبْلُغَا أَشُدَّهُمَا وَيَسْتَخْرِجَا كَنْزَهُمَا رَحْمَةً مِنْ رَبِّكَ ۚ وَمَا فَعَلْتُهُ عَنْ أَمْرِي ۚ ذَٰلِكَ تَأْوِيلُ مَا لَمْ تَسْطِعْ عَلَيْهِ صَبْرًا {82}

[Shakir 18:82] And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them, and their father was a righteous man; so your Lord desired that they should attain their maturity and take out their treasure, a mercy from your Lord, and I did not do it of my own accord. This is the significance of that with which you could not have patience.
[Pickthal 18:82] And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them, and their father had been righteous, and thy Lord intended that they should come to their full strength and should bring forth their treasure as a mercy from their Lord; and I did it not upon my own command. Such is the interpretation of that wherewith thou couldst not bear.
[Yusufali 18:82] "As for the wall, it belonged to two youths, orphans, in the Town; there was, beneath it, a buried treasure, to which they were entitled: their father had been a righteous man: So thy Lord desired that they should attain their age of full strength and get out their treasure - a mercy (and favour) from thy Lord. I did it not of my own accord. Such is the interpretation of (those things) over which thou wast unable to hold patience."

 

Layman view/understanding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

This thread has been very interesting and helpful.  Seeing the events in the life of the prophet of Islam as examples for our own life in society gives clues to how to live together in community.

My question is why are there not more of these examples in the Qur'an?  Also why are the ones that are there so hiden and obscure?  So much background and knowledge of the Hadith and the Sira is needed to make use of these verses.

When you read the stories of the prophets in Genesis, the kings and people in the history books of the Old Testament and the life of Jesus the Messiah in the Holy Injil the background and context is clearly stated in the text so drawing conclusions for our daily life is more direct.

May we all take the examples God has given and learn the lessons so we can live to please him.

Link to comment
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...