Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Wives of prophet are his ahlul bayt.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Let's have a debate on whether wives of the prophet are his ahlul bayt or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Wives can be classed as Ahlulbayt, however Alhlulbayt at different times can be in reference to different groups from among the Ahlulbayt. In Hadith al-Thaqalayn, i side with the T'aweel of al-Albani:
 

"If you hold onto them you will never go astray"

Al-Albani, one of the great modern day Sunni-Salafi scholars of Hadith : “What is specifically meant by the members of the household is the righteous scholars among them, who adhere to the Qur’an and Sunnah.  Imam Abu Ja‘far at-Tahhaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The “family” are the members of his household (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) who adhere to his religion and follow in his footsteps. Conclusion: the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…” Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).

 

Edited by In Gods Name
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

Wives can be classed as Ahlulbayt, however Alhlulbayt at different times can be in reference to different groups from among the Ahlulbayt. In Hadith al-Thaqalayn, i side with the T'aweel of al-Albani:
 

"If you hold onto them you will never go astray"

Al-Albani, one of the great modern day Sunni-Salafi scholars of Hadith : “What is specifically meant by the members of the household is the righteous scholars among them, who adhere to the Qur’an and Sunnah.  Imam Abu Ja‘far at-Tahhaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The “family” are the members of his household (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) who adhere to his religion and follow in his footsteps. Conclusion: the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…” Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).

 

Not can be, they are from ahlul bayt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Anyone in? 

Edited by sunnism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, sunnism said:

Anyone in? 

We've already established in Hadith at-Thaqalayn, according to the major Sunni scholars, it refers to the Ulema among the Ahlulbayt, firm in the Quran and Sunnah and not just any random family member.

We can't ignore a Muttawatir hadith , whereby we are clearly told to hold onto the Quran and Ahlulbayt as premier sources of guidance for the Sunnah.

Wallah even if i wanted to, i couldn't ignore something which even al-Albani agrees is like the command to follow his rightly guided Caliphs.

 

Edited by In Gods Name
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think the wives are a part of the ahlulbayt if you look at the first half of 33:33 as well as the verses before and after directly addressing the wives, as well as the wife of prophet ibrahim (عليه السلام) being referred to as part of his ahlulbayt in 11:73. However I think there is a preference to those related to the prophet (sawa) by blood if you look at hadith kisa. One variation is in hadith 3205 of Jami' at-tirmidhi:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ بْنِ الأَصْبَهَانِيِّ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ عُبَيْدٍ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ أَبِي رَبَاحٍ، عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، رَبِيبِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَةُ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلمَّ ‏:‏ ‏(‏ إنمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ‏)‏ فِي بَيْتِ أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ فَدَعَا فَاطِمَةَ وَحَسَنًا وَحُسَيْنًا فَجَلَّلَهُمْ بِكِسَاءٍ وَعَلِيٌّ خَلْفَ ظَهْرِهِ فَجَلَّلَهُمْ بِكِسَاءٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ اللَّهُمَّ هَؤُلاَءِ أَهْلُ بَيْتِي فَأَذْهِبْ عَنْهُمُ الرِّجْسَ وَطَهِّرْهُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ وَأَنَا مَعَهُمْ يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏"‏أَنْتِ عَلَى مَكَانِكِ وَأَنْتِ عَلَى خَيْرٍ

 

Here, Um Salamah asks about her own position after 33:33 was recited and the prophet (sawa) says أَنْتِ عَلَى مَكَانِكِ وَأَنْتِ عَلَى خَيْرٍ (you are in your place and you are in goodness)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
39 minutes ago, In Gods Name said:

We've already established in Hadith at-Thaqalayn, according to the major Sunni scholars, it refers to the Ulema among the Ahlulbayt, firm in the Quran and Sunnah and not just any random family member.

We can't ignore a Muttawatir hadith , whereby we are clearly told to hold onto the Quran and Ahlulbayt as premier sources of guidance for the Sunnah.

Wallah even if i wanted to, i couldn't ignore something which even al-Albani agrees is like the command to follow his rightly guided Caliphs.

 

No problem. Wives of the prophet were scholars. Ummul momineen aisha was a faqiha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim

Salam

The Quran has a definition which even a disbelieving wife can be included in the term "family" of a Prophet:

فَنَجَّيْنَاهُ وَأَهْلَهُ أَجْمَعِينَ | So We delivered him and all his family, | Ash-Shu'araa : 170

إِلَّا عَجُوزًا فِي الْغَابِرِينَ | except an old woman who remained behind. | Ash-Shu'araa : 171

ثُمَّ دَمَّرْنَا الْآخَرِينَ | Then We destroyed [all] the rest, | Ash-Shu'araa : 172

From another angle, Lut (a) who is a nephew of Ibrahim (a), belongs to the chosen family of the time and who unrighteous cannot be included in his family:

قَالَ يَا نُوحُ إِنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنْ أَهْلِكَ ۖ إِنَّهُ عَمَلٌ غَيْرُ صَالِحٍ ۖ فَلَا تَسْأَلْنِ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ ۖ إِنِّي أَعِظُكَ أَنْ تَكُونَ مِنَ الْجَاهِلِينَ | Said He, ‘O Noah! Indeed, He is not of your family. Indeed, he is [personification of] unrighteous conduct. So do not ask Me [something] of which you have no knowledge. I advise you lest you should be among the ignorant.’ | Hud : 46

Sarah (a) is a chosen lady that belongs to an Ahlulbayt of her time and so does the first Mariam (a), even though the latter is not a mother of chosen guides.  So the criteria of being a mother of chosen is not really there and sort of almost made up by Shiites. However, what does the family mean in terms of the one unrighteous don't belong to, the Quran further shows, not only are they all righteous, but that they are in fact all chosen:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَىٰ آدَمَ وَنُوحًا وَآلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ | Indeed Allah chose Adam and Noah, and the family of Abraham and the family of Imran above all the nations; | Aal-i-Imraan : 33

As this is held and elaborated by Quran, to see it not pertain to us, would be foolish.  Why elaborate a concept with no relevance?

Now in Surah Ahzab, there is two places that we can see more context to the flow of 33:33.   One is the Salawat verse is right after what?

لَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِنَّ فِي آبَائِهِنَّ وَلَا أَبْنَائِهِنَّ وَلَا إِخْوَانِهِنَّ وَلَا أَبْنَاءِ إِخْوَانِهِنَّ وَلَا أَبْنَاءِ أَخَوَاتِهِنَّ وَلَا نِسَائِهِنَّ وَلَا مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُنَّ ۗ وَاتَّقِينَ اللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدًا | There is no sin on them [in socializing freely] with their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or the sons of their sisters, or their own womenfolk, or what their right hands own. And be wary of Allah. Indeed Allah is witness to all things. | Al-Ahzaab : 55

The bold is female plural and addressed at the wives, then this verse comes up:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ ۚ يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا صَلُّوا عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا | Indeed Allah and His angels bless the Prophet; O you who have faith! Invoke blessings on him and invoke Peace upon him in a worthy manner. | Al-Ahzaab : 56

So we see the status of the Prophet (s) relates to why God is emphasizing on the wives to fear him, while everyone should fear God, they should be extra fearful, due to who they are married to. 

The other place is verses 33:6-8:

النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ ۖ وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ ۗ وَأُولُو الْأَرْحَامِ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلَىٰ بِبَعْضٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُهَاجِرِينَ إِلَّا أَنْ تَفْعَلُوا إِلَىٰ أَوْلِيَائِكُمْ مَعْرُوفًا ۚ كَانَ ذَٰلِكَ فِي الْكِتَابِ مَسْطُورًا | The Prophet is Awla to the faithful than their own souls, and his wives are their mothers and the blood relative, some of them are Awla then others in the book of God, from the believers and emigrants, only that you should towards your Awliya do goodness, that has been written in the Book. | Al-Ahzaab : 6

وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِنَ النَّبِيِّينَ مِيثَاقَهُمْ وَمِنْكَ وَمِنْ نُوحٍ وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ ۖ وَأَخَذْنَا مِنْهُمْ مِيثَاقًا غَلِيظًا | And when We took a pledge from the prophets, and from you and from Noah and Abraham and Moses and Jesus son of Mary, and We took from them a solemn pledge, | Al-Ahzaab : 7

لِيَسْأَلَ الصَّادِقِينَ عَنْ صِدْقِهِمْ ۚ وَأَعَدَّ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَذَابًا أَلِيمًا | so that He may question the truthful concerning their truthfulness. And He has prepared for the faithless a painful punishment. | Al-Ahzaab : 8

Per hadiths of Imams (a) verse 33:6 is about the Welayat of Ahlulbayt (a), that each will inherit the leadership one by one. The Awliya is in context of what?  It's in the context of the same Welayat of the Nabi (a), which the Ulul-Arham some have more of it then others, mainly, the Imam of time is to lead and be referred to, then others when their time comes.

So now let's look at Ayat tatheer:

وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا | And stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance and Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Indeed Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification. | Al-Ahzaab : 33

This can be saying to the wives, they are married to a person who God has repelled all uncleanness from and wishes to purify a thorough purification and so this is why God is emphasizing to them.  There also something else to consider, that reputation of purity is forbidden except for God to do so.  That is people are not to attribute purity to themselves.  God on other hand manifests who is pure and who is not. It maybe that this saying the intention of revealing Quran and sending Mohammad (s) even though it talks about purity of past Ahlulbayts, is in fact, to really make all uncleanness gone in the minds of people regarding Ahlulbayt and to make them have an ultimate purity status.

That is one possible meaning, another, can be the Inama limits what God desires to keep away from Ahlulbayt souls to be only uncleanness for the first part, and for the second part it means they are singled out for a ultimate purification. 

Now in Arabic, when words are doubled up, it means it's an ultimate form. So when Quran says "if the earth is shaken a shaking", it's not just repeating the word, but meaning, it's ultimate type shaking.  If it's not referring to that, it refers to the fact they are all purified a single purification. Both are possible.

Now lets for sake of proving by contradiction, assume it includes the wives and say the Inama refers to what God intended by such commands. 

(1) Does it make sense to emphasize they God wants to purify them a ultimate purity with an "Inama"?  It would diminish the status of the favor ultimate purity, so that already does not make sense. And them purified a single purification that the Nabi (s) is purified also doesn't make sense to diminish that with the "Inama".

(2) Both meanings, ultra purity or a single purity, is too high status for the wives.  That is because Mohammad (s) is way above them, but is this true with Ali (a) and Fatima (a) and holy chosen souls? 

(3) If it refers to wives included, it would make all talk of chosen family in the Quran meaningless, and make the Quran emphasize and elaborate something with no relevance to us.

So each of these points, make it abundantly clear, that wives are not included. I will mention one more.

(4) The wives if they obey God are promised honorable Risq in both worlds and heaven. It doesn't make sense to say God only wishes to purify them by these commands either nor address rest of relatives of Nabi (a) and say that to them via the wives.

The term Ahlulbayt is a holy term in the Quran used to emphasize on succession.  That Prophets come in groups. They don't come alone. 

The hadiths of Mubahila and kisa are also good proofs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
35 minutes ago, Guest111 said:

I think the wives are a part of the ahlulbayt if you look at the first half of 33:33 as well as the verses before and after directly addressing the wives, as well as the wife of prophet ibrahim (عليه السلام) being referred to as part of his ahlulbayt in 11:73. However I think there is a preference to those related to the prophet (sawa) by blood if you look at hadith kisa. One variation is in hadith 3205 of Jami' at-tirmidhi:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ بْنِ الأَصْبَهَانِيِّ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ عُبَيْدٍ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ أَبِي رَبَاحٍ، عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، رَبِيبِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَةُ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلمَّ ‏:‏ ‏(‏ إنمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ‏)‏ فِي بَيْتِ أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ فَدَعَا فَاطِمَةَ وَحَسَنًا وَحُسَيْنًا فَجَلَّلَهُمْ بِكِسَاءٍ وَعَلِيٌّ خَلْفَ ظَهْرِهِ فَجَلَّلَهُمْ بِكِسَاءٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ اللَّهُمَّ هَؤُلاَءِ أَهْلُ بَيْتِي فَأَذْهِبْ عَنْهُمُ الرِّجْسَ وَطَهِّرْهُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ وَأَنَا مَعَهُمْ يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏"‏أَنْتِ عَلَى مَكَانِكِ وَأَنْتِ عَلَى خَيْرٍ

 

Here, Um Salamah asks about her own position after 33:33 was recited and the prophet (sawa) says أَنْتِ عَلَى مَكَانِكِ وَأَنْتِ عَلَى خَيْرٍ (you are in your place and you are in goodness)

Maybe. But just because of preference, you cannot deny other members of ahlul bayt. By that logic, you should deny that zainab bint ali was also from ahlul bayt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, sunnism said:

Maybe. But just because of preference, you cannot deny other members of ahlul bayt. By that logic, you should deny that zainab bint ali was also from ahlul bayt. 

I agree, and don't deny that the ummuhatul mumineen are a part of the ahlulbayt. But I just mean when some people use the term ahlulbayt, they might be specifically referring to the five who were under the cloak in the hadith since it is a specific merit to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
5 hours ago, Guest111 said:

I think the wives are a part of the ahlulbayt if you look at the first half of 33:33 as well as the verses before and after directly addressing the wives,

If you look at the conjugation, it changes from feminine plural to masculine plural (also used for mixed groups) when referring to the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام), so this verse in itself wouldn't prove that the wives are included. The narrations, Shia and Sunni, related to the revelation of this verse also support the position that the wives are not included.

Interestingly the effort to include the wives is finally a futile exercise anyway in the context of Shia-Sunni polemics because neither directly claim to be followers of the wives specifically. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
On 2/19/2024 at 2:19 PM, sunnism said:

Let's have a debate on whether wives of the prophet are his ahlul bayt or not. 

"Sahih Muslim 2424: 'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) went out one morning 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)."
This hadith refers to Hadith Al-Kisa, where the Prophet only invited his ahlulbayt to be under the cloak with him, as denoted by his statement of "O people of the household". Notice how Aisha herself isn't listed. This is further compounded upon in the following hadith relating the same event.
 
Jami at-tirmidhi 3787: 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 them in a cloak, and 'Ali was behind him, so he 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.'"
As shown clearly in the hadith, the Prophets wives aren't included in the Ahlulbayt.
But, if still unconvinced, here's one clear cut hadith from Muslim 2408d:

"Yazid b. Hayyan reported:

We went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him. You have found goodness (for you had the honour) to live in the company of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and offered prayer behind him, and the rest of the hadith is the same but with this variation of wording that lie said: Behold, for I am leaving amongst you two weighty things, one of which is the Book of Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, and that is the rope of Allah. He who holds it fast would be on right guidance and he who abandons it would be in error, and in this (hadith) these words are also found: We said: Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren't the wives (of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his house hold? Thereupon he said: No, by Allah, a woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a certain period; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and to her people; the members of his household include his ownself and his kith and kin (who are related to him by blood) and for him the acceptance of Zakat is prohibited."
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Abu_Zahra said:

If you look at the conjugation, it changes from feminine plural to masculine plural (also used for mixed groups) when referring to the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام), so this verse in itself wouldn't prove that the wives are included. The narrations, Shia and Sunni, related to the revelation of this verse also support the position that the wives are not included.

Interestingly the effort to include the wives is finally a futile exercise anyway in the context of Shia-Sunni polemics because neither directly claim to be followers of the wives specifically. 

It changes from feminine plural to masculine plural because of the word 'ahlal bayt' is used there. The word 'ahlal bayt is a masculine noun, thus a masculine pronoun is used their. In arabic every noun is either masculine or feminine. Any noun which ends with  ة is a feminine noun. And them not included in kisa isn't a proof that they weren't from ahlul bayt. Zainab bint ali wasn't included there, would you then deny that is from ahlul bayt. The wives weren't included in the kisa because the verse is revealed for them and quran is directly addressing them. 

1 hour ago, A-ABBAS-Z said:

Sahih Muslim 2424: 'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) went out one morning 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)."
This hadith refers to Hadith Al-Kisa, where the Prophet only invited his ahlulbayt to be under the cloak with him, as denoted by his statement of "O people of the household". Notice how Aisha herself isn't listed. This is further compounded upon in the following hadith relating the same event.

Where does it says that wives are not included in ahlul bayt. 

 

1 hour ago, A-ABBAS-Z said:
Jami at-tirmidhi 3787: 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 them in a cloak, and 'Ali was behind him, so he 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

The hadith didn't say that umm salamah isn't from ahlul bayt. It just proves that prophet didn't included her in the kisa. That's because the verse is revealed for them and directly addresses them. 

 

1 hour ago, A-ABBAS-Z said:
Muslim 2408d:

"Yazid b. Hayyan reported:

We went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him. You have found goodness (for you had the honour) to live in the company of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and offered prayer behind him, and the rest of the hadith is the same but with this variation of wording that lie said: Behold, for I am leaving amongst you two weighty things, one of which is the Book of Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, and that is the rope of Allah. He who holds it fast would be on right guidance and he who abandons it would be in error, and in this (hadith) these words are also found: We said: Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren't the wives (of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his house hold? Thereupon he said: No, by Allah, a woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a certain period; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and to her people; the members of his household include his ownself and his kith and kin (who are related to him by blood) and for him the acceptance of Zakat is prohibited."

This is a weaker version of this narration. Muslim narrated this as a shawahid or a corroborating report. There is a narrator in their called hassan bin ibrahim who is saduq hasan ul hadeeth

Here is the more authentic version of this report. 

Yazid b. Hayyan reported, I went along with Husain b. Sabra and 'Umar b. Muslim to Zaid b. Arqam and, as we sat by his side, Husain said to him:

Zaid. you have been able to acquire a great virtue that you saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) listened to his talk, fought by his side in (different) battles, offered prayer behind me. Zaid, you have in fact earned a great virtue. Zaid, narrate to us what you heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). He said: I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that. He then said: One day Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khumm situated between Mecca and Medina. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family. He (Husain) said to Zaid: Who are the members of his household? Aren't his wives the members of his family? Thereupon he said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: 'Ali and the offspring of 'Ali, 'Aqil and the offspring of 'Aqil and the offspring of Ja'far and the offspring of 'Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. Zaid said: Yes.
حَدَّثَنِي زُهَيْرُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، وَشُجَاعُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ، جَمِيعًا عَنِ ابْنِ عُلَيَّةَ، قَالَ زُهَيْرٌ حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو حَيَّانَ، حَدَّثَنِي يَزِيدُ بْنُ حَيَّانَ، قَالَ انْطَلَقْتُ أَنَا وَحُصَيْنُ، بْنُ سَبْرَةَ وَعُمَرُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ إِلَى زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ فَلَمَّا جَلَسْنَا إِلَيْهِ قَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا رَأَيْتَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَسَمِعْتَ حَدِيثَهُ وَغَزَوْتَ مَعَهُ وَصَلَّيْتَ خَلْفَهُ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا حَدِّثْنَا يَا زَيْدُ مَا سَمِعْتَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم - قَالَ - يَا ابْنَ أَخِي وَاللَّهِ لَقَدْ كَبِرَتْ سِنِّي وَقَدُمَ عَهْدِي وَنَسِيتُ بَعْضَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أَعِي مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَمَا حَدَّثْتُكُمْ فَاقْبَلُوا وَمَا لاَ فَلاَ تُكَلِّفُونِيهِ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَالَ قَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا فِينَا خَطِيبًا بِمَاءٍ يُدْعَى خُمًّا بَيْنَ مَكَّةَ وَالْمَدِينَةِ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ وَوَعَظَ وَذَكَّرَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَمَّا بَعْدُ أَلاَ أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ فَإِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ رَسُولُ رَبِّي فَأُجِيبَ وَأَنَا تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ ثَقَلَيْنِ أَوَّلُهُمَا كِتَابُ اللَّهِ فِيهِ الْهُدَى وَالنُّورُ فَخُذُوا بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَاسْتَمْسِكُوا بِهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ وَمَنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ يَا زَيْدُ أَلَيْسَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ قَالَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ وَلَكِنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ مَنْ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ بَعْدَهُ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَمَنْ هُمْ قَالَ هُمْ آلُ عَلِيٍّ وَآلُ عَقِيلٍ وَآلُ جَعْفَرٍ وَآلُ عَبَّاسٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ كُلُّ هَؤُلاَءِ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ قَالَ نَعَمْ ‏.‏
Reference     : Sahih Muslim 2408a

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
5 hours ago, sunnism said:

It changes from feminine plural to masculine plural because of the word 'ahlal bayt' is used there. The word 'ahlal bayt is a masculine noun, thus a masculine pronoun is used their. In arabic every noun is either masculine or feminine. Any noun which ends with  ة is a feminine noun. And them not included in kisa isn't a proof that they weren't from ahlul bayt. Zainab bint ali wasn't included there, would you then deny that is from ahlul bayt. The wives weren't included in the kisa because the verse is revealed for them and quran is directly addressing them. 

Where does it says that wives are not included in ahlul bayt. 

 

The hadith didn't say that umm salamah isn't from ahlul bayt. It just proves that prophet didn't included her in the kisa. That's because the verse is revealed for them and directly addresses them. 

 

This is a weaker version of this narration. Muslim narrated this as a shawahid or a corroborating report. There is a narrator in their called hassan bin ibrahim who is saduq hasan ul hadeeth

Here is the more authentic version of this report. 

Yazid b. Hayyan reported, I went along with Husain b. Sabra and 'Umar b. Muslim to Zaid b. Arqam and, as we sat by his side, Husain said to him:

Zaid. you have been able to acquire a great virtue that you saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) listened to his talk, fought by his side in (different) battles, offered prayer behind me. Zaid, you have in fact earned a great virtue. Zaid, narrate to us what you heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). He said: I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that. He then said: One day Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khumm situated between Mecca and Medina. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family. He (Husain) said to Zaid: Who are the members of his household? Aren't his wives the members of his family? Thereupon he said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: 'Ali and the offspring of 'Ali, 'Aqil and the offspring of 'Aqil and the offspring of Ja'far and the offspring of 'Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. Zaid said: Yes.
حَدَّثَنِي زُهَيْرُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، وَشُجَاعُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ، جَمِيعًا عَنِ ابْنِ عُلَيَّةَ، قَالَ زُهَيْرٌ حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو حَيَّانَ، حَدَّثَنِي يَزِيدُ بْنُ حَيَّانَ، قَالَ انْطَلَقْتُ أَنَا وَحُصَيْنُ، بْنُ سَبْرَةَ وَعُمَرُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ إِلَى زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ فَلَمَّا جَلَسْنَا إِلَيْهِ قَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا رَأَيْتَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَسَمِعْتَ حَدِيثَهُ وَغَزَوْتَ مَعَهُ وَصَلَّيْتَ خَلْفَهُ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا حَدِّثْنَا يَا زَيْدُ مَا سَمِعْتَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم - قَالَ - يَا ابْنَ أَخِي وَاللَّهِ لَقَدْ كَبِرَتْ سِنِّي وَقَدُمَ عَهْدِي وَنَسِيتُ بَعْضَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أَعِي مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَمَا حَدَّثْتُكُمْ فَاقْبَلُوا وَمَا لاَ فَلاَ تُكَلِّفُونِيهِ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَالَ قَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا فِينَا خَطِيبًا بِمَاءٍ يُدْعَى خُمًّا بَيْنَ مَكَّةَ وَالْمَدِينَةِ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ وَوَعَظَ وَذَكَّرَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَمَّا بَعْدُ أَلاَ أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ فَإِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ رَسُولُ رَبِّي فَأُجِيبَ وَأَنَا تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ ثَقَلَيْنِ أَوَّلُهُمَا كِتَابُ اللَّهِ فِيهِ الْهُدَى وَالنُّورُ فَخُذُوا بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَاسْتَمْسِكُوا بِهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ وَمَنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ يَا زَيْدُ أَلَيْسَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ قَالَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ وَلَكِنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ مَنْ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ بَعْدَهُ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَمَنْ هُمْ قَالَ هُمْ آلُ عَلِيٍّ وَآلُ عَقِيلٍ وَآلُ جَعْفَرٍ وَآلُ عَبَّاسٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ كُلُّ هَؤُلاَءِ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ قَالَ نَعَمْ ‏.‏
Reference     : Sahih Muslim 2408a

 

Insha'Allah I will look into the question more thoroughly and respond later today, but can you provide any proof that 2408d is not an authentic report and that Hassan Ibn Ibrahim isn't a reliable narrator?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, A-ABBAS-Z said:

Insha'Allah I will look into the question more thoroughly and respond later today, but can you provide any proof that 2408d is not an authentic report and that Hassan Ibn Ibrahim isn't a reliable narrator?

It is a hasan report which contradict a sound hadith. Hasan bin ibrahim is hasan ul hadeeth. Type his name in arabic in Google and you will find out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim

Salam

The change before and AFTER to female plural makes it impossible that the Ayat tatheer refer to the wives. If they were addressed by it, the verse after would continue in plural male. This was stated by Ibn Hajjar as well.

There is also this book which is worth looking at: Hadith Al-Thaqalayn, the Deposed Will of the Last Prophet to Humanity | Al-Islam.org

And in Quran, same words are paraphrased differently to interpret each other. There's no reason to assume the Prophet (s) didn't repeat thaqalain message, in different wordings to interpret each other and emphasize on each other.

The whole assumption by current day e-scholars is that the Prophet (s) only said one version of all the versions that have been transmitted to us. There's no reason to assume this especially since paraphrasing same statement multiple times will interpret each other and emphasize on the true meaning, just as Quran does with words of Musa (a) regarding Haroun (a) for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Salam

The change before and AFTER to female plural makes it impossible that the Ayat tatheer refer to the wives. If they were addressed by it, the verse after would continue in plural male. This was stated by Ibn Hajjar as well.

There is also this book which is worth looking at: Hadith Al-Thaqalayn, the Deposed Will of the Last Prophet to Humanity | Al-Islam.org

And in Quran, same words are paraphrased differently to interpret each other. There's no reason to assume the Prophet (s) didn't repeat thaqalain message, in different wordings to interpret each other and emphasize on each other.

The whole assumption by current day e-scholars is that the Prophet (s) only said one version of all the versions that have been transmitted to us. There's no reason to assume this especially since paraphrasing same statement multiple times will interpret each other and emphasize on the true meaning, just as Quran does with words of Musa (a) regarding Haroun (a) for example.

The feminine plural and masculine plural is discussed above

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
24 minutes ago, sunnism said:

The feminine plural and masculine plural is discussed above

The verse after switches to plural female.  Why is that? If wives were addressed as "ahlulbayt" in the previous verse, it should stay plural male. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
25 minutes ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The verse after switches to plural female.  Why is that? If wives were addressed as "ahlulbayt" in the previous verse, it should stay plural male. 

Because of the word 'ahlal bayt' which is a masculine noun. You cannot use a feminine pronoun for a masculine noun. In the next verse, allah is not referring to them as ahlul bayt, so there is no need of masculine pronoun anymore. 

And secondly, we aren't obliged to give you any evidence from quran that his wives are from his ahlul bayt. The burden of proof is upon you. It is known that a man's wife is his ahlul bayt. Wouldn't you consider your mom a part of your father's family. If someone claim that wife of a specific individual isn't from his ahlul bayt then the burden of proof is upon him. The most you have is that prophet only calls people of kisa as his ahlul bayt. That is not a proof, because then you also have to accept that zainab bint ali isn't from ahlul bayt. You need to show us proof from quran and sunnah that allah Or his messenger ever said that my wives are not my family. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
20 minutes ago, sunnism said:

Because of the word 'ahlal bayt' which is a masculine noun. You cannot use a feminine pronoun for a masculine noun. In the next verse, allah is not referring to them as ahlul bayt, so there is no need of masculine pronoun anymore. 

Disagree here and so does Ibn Hajjar. There is a need because the last reference point would be "Ahlulbayt". For example, the verse 33:33 starts as female plural, because last reference point was Nisal Nabi right?  If you say they are addressed as Ahlulbayt, why isn't the start of 33:33 plural male?  So if the last reference point is them being referred to as Ahlulbayt, it would continue addressing them as such with plural male in verse 33:34.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
17 hours ago, sunnism said:

It is a hasan report which contradict a sound hadith. Hasan bin ibrahim is hasan ul hadeeth. Type his name in arabic in Google and you will find out. 

I can't find anything on Hasan Ibn Ibrahim being an unreliable narrator. And even if I could, the hadith is still considered authentic. 

Sahih Muslim 2408d | Hadith – Amrayn

Moreover, hadiths such as Hadith Thaqlayn say to hold on to the Ahlulbayt and the Qur'an, and you shall never go astray. However, we know that Aisha rebelled against Imam Ali AS in the Battle Jamal, having (by definition) gone astray. If Hadith Thaqlayn is true, then that means Aisha is outside the fold of the Ahlulbayt, even though she was a wife of the Prophet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
10 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Disagree here and so does Ibn Hajjar. There is a need because the last reference point would be "Ahlulbayt". For example, the verse 33:33 starts as female plural, because last reference point was Nisal Nabi right?  If you say they are addressed as Ahlulbayt, why isn't the start of 33:33 plural male?  So if the last reference point is them being referred to as Ahlulbayt, it would continue addressing them as such with plural male in verse 33:34.

 

Where did ibn hajr agree with you. And 33:34 is a different verse. Allah is no longer addressing to them as ahlul bayt. 

And it can also be explained from other perspective. Allah has decided that ali, hasan and hussain are also to be included in this verse. That is why, allah used masculine pronoun. 

Edited by sunnism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
1 hour ago, sunnism said:

And it can also be explained from other perspective. Allah has decided that ali, hasan and hussain are also to be included in this verse

Indeed, we agree that they are referred to in this verse. We also agree that the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) left behind two weighty things, the Quran and the Ahlulbayt (who you have named above). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
4 hours ago, sunnism said:

Allah has decided that ali, hasan and hussain are also to be included in this verse. That is why, allah used masculine pronoun. 

It still wouldn't solve the problem because as you said they can be addressed by plural male by the term Ahlulbayt. Why aren't wives addressed with plural male in the start and after.  You said they are addressed with it, so if they are referred to as "ahlulbayt", why isn't the line in 33:33 to them male plural and the line after male plural?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
10 hours ago, A-ABBAS-Z said:

I can't find anything on Hasan Ibn Ibrahim being an unreliable narrator. And even if I could, the hadith is still considered authentic. 

Sahih Muslim 2408d | Hadith – Amrayn

Moreover, hadiths such as Hadith Thaqlayn say to hold on to the Ahlulbayt and the Qur'an, and you shall never go astray. However, we know that Aisha rebelled against Imam Ali AS in the Battle Jamal, having (by definition) gone astray. If Hadith Thaqlayn is true, then that means Aisha is outside the fold of the Ahlulbayt, even though she was a wife of the Prophet.

When did I said the hasan bin ibrahim is a weak narrator. I said he is just saduq hasan ul hadith. More trustworthy narrators narrate what I mentioned earlier. And whether aisha is gone astray or not will be discussed later. And whether she did or not, you still have to accept that other wives are ahlul bayt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

It still wouldn't solve the problem because as you said they can be addressed by plural male by the term Ahlulbayt. Why aren't wives addressed with plural male in the start and after.  You said they are addressed with it, so if they are referred to as "ahlulbayt", why isn't the line in 33:33 to them male plural and the line after male plural?

 

Because they are not addressed as ahlul bayt at start. And you still have not provided evidence as to why wives are not ahlul bayt. Let's say they are not the ones addressed as ahlul bayt, does that mean that they are not ahlul bayt? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
4 hours ago, sunnism said:

When did I said the hasan bin ibrahim is a weak narrator. I said he is just saduq hasan ul hadith. More trustworthy narrators narrate what I mentioned earlier. And whether aisha is gone astray or not will be discussed later. And whether she did or not, you still have to accept that other wives are ahlul bayt

Prove that he is indeed a weak narrator. I sent above a different link to 2408d which states that it is a Sahih hadith.

And the issue relating to whether or not Aisha had gone astray (she was) is not something to be brushed off, either.

Think about it in a mathematical context.

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. That's the Transitive property.

However, if Aisha is a wife of the Prophet, and the Wives are supposed to be Ahlulbayt, and the Ahlulbayt are not to go astray, then Aisha should have not gone astray because of her status of being the Wife of the Prophet. Making the concession that "every other wife of the Prophet is fine but this wife, and only this wife, is flawed" is a weird nuance to make in the context of a debate where you are trying to prove that the wives are 100% part of the Ahlulbayt. It's a lot easier to admit that being a wife of the Prophet does not make you those of the Ahlulbayt.

Besides, many Shias only really care about the debate of whether wives are part of the Ahlulbayt or not because they want to dissociate the pure nature of the Ahlulbayt whom will not separate from the Qur'an until they arrive at the Cistern of the Day of Judgement, from someone who waged war on Imam Ali AS and got thousands of soldiers dead in the process. Aisha is held in such reverence in Sunni literature that accepting she is part of the Ahlulbayt would be putting her personality on par with the highly esteemed in Hadith Kisa and in the event of Mubahilla despite her many controversial hadiths and actions. So if you make this distinction then I don't think many Shias will care whether or not Wives are Ahlulbayt because the issue is mainly around Aisha (Hafsah notwithstanding).

Also, the original point of when I sent Hadith Al-Kisa was to show distinctly who is of the Ahlulbayt as per Sunni texts. In the first source I sent, the Prophet explicitly refers to those under the cloak as being of the "people of the household", or the Ahlulbayt, and of being the ones Allah desires to purify. Making the distinction that Umm Salamah cannot come under the cloak shows she is not part of the Ahlulbayt of whom the verse is sent because she is "in her place" as being a wife of the Prophet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
5 hours ago, sunnism said:

 Let's say they are not the ones addressed as ahlul bayt, does that mean that they are not ahlul bayt? 

There has to be a reason why plural male was not used and wives not included so obviously as they weren't included, there has to be a different way to recite the verse.  I've already suggested that the wives being married to Mohammad (s) causes them to need to be extra careful, and this flow appears with the verse of Salawat preceded with wives being emphasized to fear God.   So the meaning with Tatheer verse with wives is that they are married to an ultra purified soul and that God wishes to keep nothing away from this holy soul but uncleanness, and as such, this should encourage them to choose Mohammad (s) as that would be choosing God and the next world and gaining treasures from God and sustenance in a way they hardly can fanthom at this point.   I'm suggesting this puts the "Ahlulbayt" as higher level, as well, at the level that those married to the Imams (a) have to be extra careful, as well family members of the Imams (a) have to be extra careful.   As the burden is heavier so is the reward for those people. 

If the wives are not addressed and surely they are not, then there has to be some flow to the appearance of Ali (a), Fatima (a), Hassan (a) and Hussain (a).  I already suggested a recitation of 33:6 that emphasizes on Ulul-Arham having the same Welayat of the Nabi (s) and that we ought to do good to our Awliya with the Welayat being the same as the start of the verse   And this should not be strange as the blessing verse - Muslims are commanded to bless the family of Mohammad (S) with Mohammad (S).

There are many ways to see what is meant. The whole Quran is interwoven and contextualizes it's own verses and interprets them by similarity in some parts to others.   There other terms like "Ulul-Arham" "Dul-Qurba" "Al-Qurba" "Auli-Yaseen" "Ulul-Amr" "Ahlul Thikr"  as well as the verses talking about a witness, a guide, a leader, a driver, a caller of God,  that when all seen together are making a case.  There are other verses as well that expand and even clarify the number of successors. It's all interwoven.

This reminds me of conversations I've had with Bahais.  They don't believe in the day of judgment as we do for example. They believe their Prophet is the day of judgment of Mohammad (S) and that Mohammad (s) is the day of judgment of Isa (a) and Isa (a) the day of judgment of Musa (a) and all the way back to Adam (a). 

You bring verses and they come up with the most headache giving interpretations and will never acknowledge what the day of judgment obviously is if you keep in mind all the verses about it.  Where words totally nullify their concept, they will twist the language to mean what it's not as well.

What I've learned it's impossible to actually convince  a stubborn person regarding anything in the Quran they don't want to accept. 

If you recall all the verses emphasizing on succession in the past Prophets, and they came in groups and were branches going back to one root, then it becomes clear Quran is not going on about nothing and is talking about the past with relationship to this nation.

And as for the destructions, they were warnings for Mohammad (s) that were avoided, but many  verses are explicit in linking to the future Messenger - the Mahdi (a), who although is not a Nabi, is the biggest trial mankind will face.  The warnings we can wait passively and mockingly, or we can await them like Mohammad (s) awaited it, trying to steer the people away from catastrophe and for a good result.  There are more warning verses towards the Mahdi (a), then day of judgment verses.

But you are so use to the thinking of Messengers only in terms they are Nabis, but this is not the case. Over all Nabis were Rasools and Rasools were Nabis, but there are both non-Nabi Rasools and Non-Rasool Nabis.  It's two different jobs, although, because so interlinked in purpose, most were both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
7 hours ago, sunnism said:

When did I said the hasan bin ibrahim is a weak narrator. I said he is just saduq hasan ul hadith. More trustworthy narrators narrate what I mentioned earlier. And whether aisha is gone astray or not will be discussed later. And whether she did or not, you still have to accept that other wives are ahlul bayt

This is a silly way to approach the Thaqalain message. Just to pick one by that standard.  What's more likely, that your system of rijaal had it all correct of who is more trustworthy or that the vast majority of the hadiths on thaqalain are true and the version Muslim which is less "authentic"  is more authentic by due to being collaborated by more narrations then the one you picked.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 2/20/2024 at 1:19 AM, sunnism said:

Let's have a debate on whether wives of the prophet are his ahlul bayt or not. 

 The detailed discussion with both Shia and Sunni  views  can be seen and the logical conclusion accepted by a rational Sunni brother can also be seen in the end of link given below:

wasalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
On 2/23/2024 at 5:54 AM, A-ABBAS-Z said:

Prove that he is indeed a weak narrator. I sent above a different link to 2408d which states that it is a Sahih hadith

You have a reading problem, don't you? I never said he was a weak narrator, he is just hasan ul hadith. Which means if he narrates a hadith, that would be graded as hasan not sahih. The more authentic version states that they were ahlul bayt. 

On 2/23/2024 at 5:54 AM, A-ABBAS-Z said:

And the issue relating to whether or not Aisha had gone astray (she was) is not something to be brushed off, either.

Think about it in a mathematical context.

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. That's the Transitive property.

However, if Aisha is a wife of the Prophet, and the Wives are supposed to be Ahlulbayt, and the Ahlulbayt are not to go astray, then Aisha should have not gone astray because of her status of being the Wife of the Prophet. Making the concession that "every other wife of the Prophet is fine but this wife, and only this wife, is flawed" is a weird nuance to make in the context of a debate where you are trying to prove that the wives are 100% part of the Ahlulbayt. It's a lot easier to admit that being a wife of the Prophet does not make you those of the Ahlulbayt.

Besides, many Shias only really care about the debate of whether wives are part of the Ahlulbayt or not because they want to dissociate the pure nature of the Ahlulbayt whom will not separate from the Qur'an until they arrive at the Cistern of the Day of Judgement, from someone who waged war on Imam Ali AS and got thousands of soldiers dead in the process. Aisha is held in such reverence in Sunni literature that accepting she is part of the Ahlulbayt would be putting her personality on par with the highly esteemed in Hadith Kisa and in the event of Mubahilla despite her many controversial hadiths and actions. So if you make this distinction then I don't think many Shias will care whether or not Wives are Ahlulbayt because the issue is mainly around Aisha (Hafsah notwithstanding).

The issue whether aisha went astray or not will be brushed off easily. Because that will only prove that, she wasn't the part of ahlul bayt. It will not prove that other wives weren't part of ahlul bayt. 

On 2/23/2024 at 5:54 AM, A-ABBAS-Z said:

Also, the original point of when I sent Hadith Al-Kisa was to show distinctly who is of the Ahlulbayt as per Sunni texts. In the first source I sent, the Prophet explicitly refers to those under the cloak as being of the "people of the household", or the Ahlulbayt, and of being the ones Allah desires to purify.

That proves nothing. You have to show where did the prophet negated his wives being from ahlul bayt. By that logic, you shouldn't consider zainab bint ali as ahlul bayt either, because she wasn't addressed as ahlul bayt either. 

On 2/23/2024 at 5:54 AM, A-ABBAS-Z said:

 Making the distinction that Umm Salamah cannot come under the cloak shows she is not part of the Ahlulbayt of whom the verse is sent because she is "in her place" as being a wife of the Prophet.

Umm salamah wasn't includes because she was already purified in that verse. The verse was about the wives. And the statement 'in her place' means she was already the part of ahlul bayt, there are other authentic versions in which the prophet explicitely said 'yes you are inshallah'. 

Edited by sunnism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 2/23/2024 at 7:54 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

There has to be a reason why plural male was not used and wives not included so obviously as they weren't included, there has to be a different way to recite the verse

That's already addressed. The reason is because ali hasan and hussain are also to be included in that verse. That's why. 

 

On 2/23/2024 at 7:54 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

I already suggested a recitation of 33:6 that emphasizes on Ulul-Arham having the same Welayat of the Nabi (s) and that we ought to do good to our Awliya with the Welayat being the same as the start of the verse   And this should not be strange as the blessing verse - Muslims are commanded to bless the family of Mohammad (S) with Mohammad (S).

That is the shia interpretation of that verse. We don't agree with that interpretation. 

 

On 2/23/2024 at 7:54 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The whole Quran is interwoven and contextualizes it's own verses and interprets them by similarity in some parts to others.   There other terms like "Ulul-Arham" "Dul-Qurba" "Al-Qurba" "Auli-Yaseen" "Ulul-Amr" "Ahlul Thikr"  as well as the verses talking about a witness, a guide, a leader, a driver, a caller of God,  that when all seen together are making a case.  There are other verses as well that expand and even clarify the number of successors. It's all interwoven.

Why interwoven. Why doesn't the quran explicitely says ali and his 11 sons from his progeny are imams. Surely the imams must be more important than zaid bin haritha. Why is his name explicitely mentioned in the quran while the 12 imams are not. Why did the quran mentioned 12 months but not 12 imams. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
7 hours ago, sunnism said:

 Why doesn't the quran explicitely says ali and his 11 sons from his progeny are imams. 

The Quran is a book of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that defines the principle not the names.  There are only few names of the prophets selected by Alah for divine task of the prophet hood. As a Muslim we both there are about  1,24,0000 prophets but the names of only 26 prophets can be seen in the text of quran. the principle of Immamah of leaders selected by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has been defined in verses of quran.

wasalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Muslim2010 said:

The Quran is a book of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that defines the principle not the names.  There are only few names of the prophets selected by Alah for divine task of the prophet hood. As a Muslim we both there are about  1,24,0000 prophets but the names of only 26 prophets can be seen in the text of quran. the principle of Immamah of leaders selected by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has been defined in verses of quran.

wasalam

Atleast 26 of them are mentioned. Is one of the imams mentioned in the quran? Forget the names. Does the quran even say that there will be 12 imams in ummah? The fact that such a important principle of religion is absent from th quran really says a lot. 

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...