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

Abu Bakr hits Aisha

Rate this topic


Guest Shia by nature

Recommended Posts

Guest Shia by nature

(bismillah) (pbuh)

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 828:

Narrated Aisha:

Abu Bakr came to towards me and struck me violently with his fist and said, "You have detained the people because of your necklace." But I remained motionless as if I was dead lest I should awake Allah's Apostle although that hit was very painful.

Ali

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

If anyone says anything bad about Aisha (MOM) from historical facts, they are termed as Kafirs, why do not the Sunnis now call Abu Bakr a Kafir now who hurted their mother so badly? And if Sunnis do not call him a Kafir, they have no right on us to use that word.

Edited by Mehek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
duh!! genius.........she was the daughter of the Abu Bakr....and the father has every right to discipline his daughter be it mother of believers or not!!!......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fathers relinquish ALL rights over their daughters when they get married.

A wifes duty is to her husband- first and foremost- not her father. Thats what Allah SWT and Islam says.

"Duh". :squeez:

More proof, that Aisha certainly was not a mother to anyone- considering she was (thankfully) barren by the grace of Allah SWT. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fathers relinquish ALL rights over their daughters when they get married

really...so a father is not a father anymore????...as long as a father is alive he has rights over his childeren...God knows where you come up w/ this.

More proof, that Aisha certainly was not a mother to anyone

It's quite ironic that you call yourself muslim and say the Quran is lying.....seems like you're intense hatred for anyone and anything makes you deny the word of God himself..

The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, and his wives are their mothers; and the possessors of relationship have the better claim in the ordinance of Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other) believers, and (than) those who have fled (their homes), except that you do some good to your friends; this is written in the Book.

(Chapter #33, Verse #6)

p.s. she is only the mother of the faithful...nobody is asking you to accept her as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Fathers relinquish ALL rights over their daughters when they get married

really...so a father is not a father anymore????...as long as a father is alive he has rights over his childeren...God knows where you come up w/ this.

More proof, that Aisha certainly was not a mother to anyone

It's quite ironic that you call yourself muslim and say the Quran is lying.....seems like you're intense hatred for anyone and anything makes you deny the word of God himself..

The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, and his wives are their mothers; and the possessors of relationship have the better claim in the ordinance of Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other) believers, and (than) those who have fled (their homes), except that you do some good to your friends; this is written in the Book. 

(Chapter #33, Verse #6)

p.s. she is only the mother of the faithful...nobody is asking you to accept her as such.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

so ,she was the mother of the faithful means by this way she was also mother of abubakr so why did he hit his mother (in islam)she was his daughter before marriage but at that time according to the quran she was his mother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shia by nature

(bismillah) (salam)

really...so a father is not a father anymore????...as long as a father is alive he has rights over his childeren...God knows where you come up w/ this.

Are you dumb??? It is HARAM to hit your own daughter in Islam, so much so that she gets a bruise. PROOF to me that Muhammad(saw) allowed HITTING your daugter so that she gets a bruise. You are allowed to slap your daughter ONLY to teach her ADAAB and only with minor force. (This is in SHIA SCHOOL of THOUGHT)

Our beloved Prophet(saw) used to GET UP when Fatima (as) came to meet him, and this was to show the UMMAH how much respect we have to give our daughters!

Also the Shariaa orders a father that his RIGHTS are finished as soon as his daughter has been married. it is now hir husband that decides! Hitting a wife is also haram. According to Sistani the verse in Quran means that one should not hit her PHYSICALLY but ignore her or use a light feather.

HOW CAN HE THEN HIT HER????

ASTARGHFURULLAH! ESCAPEONEDAY is dumb aswell for complimenting such a STUPID answer!

Ali

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
really...so a father is not a father anymore????...as long as a father is alive he has rights over his childeren...God knows where you come up w/ this.

You misinterpreted: A wifes duty is to her husband, not her father. Theres a distinct difference which you didnt grasp. I take it you're not married. When you have a wife, you'll see what I mean. I pray that you also be wed to a dutiful wife as I have.

It's quite ironic that you call yourself muslim and say the Quran is lying.....seems like you're intense hatred for anyone and anything makes you deny the word of God himself..

I for one, would like to see the entire Shahada in the Quran, in one piece, that states I have to believe in the wives of the Prophet (pbuh). Last time I personally checked, there is no complete Shahada in the Quran, nor does the Shahada require a person to submit to anyone except Allah SWT and hold that Rasool (pbuh) is His last messenger on Earth (I wont include Wali-Allah because Im sure you do not subscribe to that- but we do agree on the former two).

And please: I never once stated that the Quran lied- so please dont attribute lies when I have said nothing of the sort= that sin of "lying" will befall you, not me.

The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, and his wives are their mothers; and the possessors of relationship have the better claim in the ordinance of Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other) believers, and (than) those who have fled (their homes), except that you do some good to your friends; this is written in the Book. 

(Chapter #33, Verse #6)

p.s. she is only the mother of the faithful...nobody is asking you to accept her as such.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That verse was for people like Talha and Zubair (PPEKLA's) who had hoped to ask for Aishas hand in marriage after the departure of our Rasool (pbuh) if Im not mistaken- or is bakri hadeeth lying again? That verse simply forbade the wives remarrying. I wont debate on that side issue because that issue has been refuted more times that bakris have circumambulated the Kaaba.

Edited by poiuyt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salam Alaikum

duh!! genius.........she was the daughter of the Abu Bakr....and the father has every right to discipline his daughter be it mother of believers or not!!!......

Abu Bakr could discipline his daughter even though she was his mother in another sense.

If you take this notion further, you will realise the true meaning of "ummuhat-ul-momineen" - that it doesn't mean we do not question her and it doesn't give her blanket immunity.

A father may have the right to discipline the daughter, and so does the ummah have the right to admonish her and do tabarrah from her when she chooses to take on the position of leading the people into battle on camel-back. Abu Bakr's right over his daughter has priority over treating her as a metaphoric "mother", then so should the ummah have their relationship with her in leading to battle given priority over any "motherly love" that Sunnis claim existed at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
(bismillah)  (pbuh)

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 828:

Narrated Aisha:

Abu Bakr came to towards me and struck me violently with his fist and said, "You have detained the people because of your necklace." But I remained motionless as if I was dead lest I should awake Allah's Apostle although that hit was very painful.

Ali

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which book of Hadith is this found in? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The Prophet (pbuh) was the one who raised the status of women of the Ummah by saying not to humiliate them either by burrying them or torturing them etc. Has his (pbuh) so called companion not introduced a new bidah by humiliating his daughter from this Sahi Bukhari hadith?

Edited by Zurich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Fathers relinquish ALL rights over their daughters when they get married

really...so a father is not a father anymore????...as long as a father is alive he has rights over his childeren...God knows where you come up w/ this.

More proof, that Aisha certainly was not a mother to anyone

It's quite ironic that you call yourself muslim and say the Quran is lying.....seems like you're intense hatred for anyone and anything makes you deny the word of God himself..

The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, and his wives are their mothers; and the possessors of relationship have the better claim in the ordinance of Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other) believers, and (than) those who have fled (their homes), except that you do some good to your friends; this is written in the Book. 

(Chapter #33, Verse #6)

p.s. she is only the mother of the faithful...nobody is asking you to accept her as such.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you're saying Abu Bakr wasn't one of the faithful? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
duh!! genius.........she was the daughter of the Abu Bakr....and the father has every right to discipline his daughter be it mother of believers or not!!!......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

mother of believer being disaplined by a PAINFUL SPANK? while she was married to the Prophet of Allah?

sunnis are sounding like hindus.. !!!!! I think they stole alot of ideas from the hindus..

This is turning into BHAGWAGYA GITA .. mythology book of Hindus. Sita is GODDESS and her husband, and Ram is GOD. hindus believe they were both good and they are Gods.

Rama doubts Sita's character and exiles her. but they are both gods.. and they are both are infallable sinless perfect. but why is Rama doubting Sita?

Same here, Ayesha is mother of faithful, and Abubakr is the father of the mother of faithful and his the companion of the prophet. Abubakr doubts Ayesha's delay and PUNISHES her by SPANKING HER while she is married to the greatest human being the Prophet of Islam (SA) ... and they are both good.

Ayesha the mother of faithfuls fought with the commander of faithfuls Ali ibn Abi Talib.. and they are both good... sounds like hindu mythology sunnis believe in.

post-2454-1137296127_thumb.jpg

Zanadine.

Edited by Zanadine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
(bismillah)  (salam)

Are you dumb??? It is HARAM to hit your own daughter in Islam, so much so that she gets a bruise. PROOF to me that Muhammad(saw) allowed HITTING your daugter so that she gets a bruise. You are allowed to slap your daughter ONLY to teach her ADAAB and only with minor force. (This is in SHIA SCHOOL of THOUGHT)

Our beloved Prophet(saw) used to GET UP when Fatima (as) came to meet him, and this was to show the UMMAH how much respect we have to give our daughters!

Also the Shariaa orders a father that his RIGHTS are finished as soon as his daughter has been married. it is now hir husband that decides! Hitting a wife is also haram. According to Sistani the verse in Quran means that one should not hit her PHYSICALLY but ignore her or use a light feather.

HOW CAN HE THEN HIT HER????

ASTARGHFURULLAH! ESCAPEONEDAY is dumb aswell for complimenting such a STUPID answer!

Ali

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Abubakr was an abusive father who used to HIT HER!!!! we should'nt blame Ayesha for her rebiollous nature.. she probably had ADD.. attention dificient disorder..since she was being physically abused by her father .. thats why she rode out on a camel to fight wars with the Ameeral Momeneen Ali ibn Abi Talib. when the Quran to the wives of the prophet "....Stay in your houses and do not display your finery as the ignorance of yours"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

poiuyt do you accept that the Quran was sent down to the entire ummah...to every single muslim that lived or ever lived till qiyamah?.....if you soo agree than you would not have made such a claim

That verse was for people like Talha and Zubair (sorry...but i had to remove the curse...even though it means i have not quoted properly) who had hoped to ask for Aishas hand in marriage after the departure of our Rasool if Im not mistaken

it's irrelevant as to why the verse was revealed; the fact is that the Quran was not only sent down to Talha and Zubair but to all humanity thus it is relevant to all humanity as well.

why do you not use your common sense....if God in his wisdom only meant for us not to marry the wives then he should have said just that ....but why did he of all statments state in the quran that they are ummahat-muslimeen???....

keeping in mind the high status that is bestowed upon the mother by Islam.

I for one, would like to see the entire Shahada in the Quran, in one piece, that states I have to believe in the wives of the Prophet .

i never claimed that the shahadah requires you to say that Ayesha was our mother...but it is the fundamental article of belief in Islam ...ie to be a muslim you must accept the Quran as the flawless word of God. And if God says that Ayesha (who happens to be one of the wives of the prophet) is your mother then the shi'as must accept it as such regardless of what their internal hate brings them to say.

so here is my challenge to you ......i want poiuyt to say this:

Ayesha who was one of the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is my (poiuyt) mother in the context in which the Quran describes it.

I make such a challenge b/c you have plenty of times made to look like that verse of the quran is untrue.... astaghfirullah.

Edited by alibaba1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
So Allah revealed the Divine Verses of Tayammum. So they all performed Tayammum. Thank Ayesha for it "

post-2454-1137365845_thumb.jpg

Actually Thank Allah for getting the Muslims out of trouble for the wait and for the Tayammum ayath so they could pray. Thank Allah for recuing the Muslims and getting them out of trouble at that time because since the prophet was alive... that is why we received the holy revelation. If the prophet had not been there.... she would have made the whole muslim ummah die with thirst without wudu and without prayers for her neckless and her selfishness..

After the Prophet passed away.. Ayesha again became RECKLESS.. which resulted in more then 40,000 muslim's death by getting them killed in the battle of Jamal.. . this time no tayammum ayath came to save muslims.. only death because of her RECKLESSNESS FOR HER NECKLESS-SELFISHNESS!!!

Zanadine

Edited by Zanadine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
poiuyt do you accept that the Quran was sent down to the entire ummah...to every single muslim that lived or ever lived till qiyamah?.....if you soo agree than you would not have made such a claim

Not sure what tree you're barking up, but from here its the wrong one.

it's irrelevant as to why the verse was revealed; the fact is that the Quran was not only sent down to Talha and Zubair but to all humanity thus it is relevant to all humanity as well.

why do you not use your common sense....if God in his wisdom only meant for us not to marry the wives then he should have said just that ....but why did he of all statments state in the quran that they are ummahat-muslimeen???....

keeping in mind the high status that is bestowed upon the mother by Islam.

The verse is irrelevant now? Wow! Yet, in your next couple of lines you say this:

if God in his wisdom only meant for us not to marry the wives then he should have said just that

He (SWT) did state that quite clearly. Which man goes around marrying his mother? :lol: So contradictory, its hilarious. :lol: I think its you who needs to grasp common sense- not me. ^_^

i never claimed that the shahadah requires you to say that Ayesha was our mother...but it is the fundamental article of belief in Islam

So which is it? I dont recall anywhere in hadeeth or Quran that states belief in the wives is a "must". Your statement again contradicts itself. It may be an "article" in your faith, not mine.

Before Quran comes Shahada- and without reciting that *first*, of what use is Quran? And the Shahada doesnt say squat about *any* mother, much less the barren Aisha. :squeez:

...ie to be a muslim you must accept the Quran as the flawless word of God.

No, its the Shahada. Thats what is required to be a Muslim. You dont even know that? :lol:

And if God says that Ayesha (who happens to be one of the wives of the prophet) is your mother then the shi'as must accept it as such regardless of what their internal hate brings them to say.

....in the sense that she could not remarry, that I accept. Not your takfir. I have no need to hate a person like Aisha when her own husband (pbuh) admonished her :lol:

so here is my challenge to you ......i want poiuyt to say this:

Ayesha who was one of the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is my (poiuyt) mother in the context in which the Quran describes it.

I make such a challenge b/c you have plenty of times made to look like that verse of the quran is untrue.... astaghfirullah.

If its a challenge you "want"- start a new thread- I'd rather stick to this particular topic where Bakr abuses/assaults his own mother of his beliefs. What beliefs he must have held to have hit another mans wife= shame on him. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
mother of believer being disaplined by a PAINFUL SPANK? while she was married to the Prophet of Allah?

sunnis are sounding like hindus.. !!!!! I think they stole alot of ideas from the hindus..

This is turning into BHAGWAGYA GITA .. mythology book of Hindus.    Sita is GODDESS and her husband, and Ram is GOD.  hindus believe they were both good and they are Gods. 

Rama doubts Sita's character and exiles her.  but they are both gods.. and they are both are infallable sinless perfect.  but why is Rama doubting Sita?

Same here,  Ayesha is mother of faithful, and Abubakr is the father of the mother of faithful and his the companion of the prophet.  Abubakr doubts Ayesha's delay and PUNISHES her by SPANKING HER while she is married to the greatest human being the Prophet of Islam (SA) ...  and they are both good.

Ayesha the mother of faithfuls fought with the commander of faithfuls Ali ibn Abi Talib.. and they are both good... sounds like hindu mythology sunnis believe in.

post-2454-1137296127_thumb.jpg

Zanadine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mashallah v good point.

Sunnis must decide between right and wrong.

They cant follow both right as well as wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my quotes were taken completely out of context and by doing so...completely changed what i was asking you........

unless your IQ is so low that you really did not understand the context from which i was coming from .... i refuse to reply to any of your insulting and meaningless posts.....

i wonder why aliya loves you soo much.....you are insulting, irrational and immature.....i won't be surprised if you're 13 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
my quotes were taken completely out of context and by doing so...completely changed what i was asking you........

unless your IQ is so low that you really did not understand the context from which i was coming from .... i refuse to reply to any of your insulting and meaningless posts.....

i wonder why aliya loves you soo much.....you are insulting, irrational and immature.....i won't be surprised if you're 13 years old.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No need to get your pants in a twist- you misconstrued and took what I said out of context and I corrected you. Using common sense, to which you now wont reply to :lol:

And if you look at my last, or indeed any post in this thread, Ive replied to each of your queries- if you choose not to reciprocate, thats your prerogative.

And Im also sorry to disappoint you that Im not "13". And with regards to Sis Aliya, I suggest you direct that question at her, since Im in no position to speak on her behalf.

Oh, the quote I highlighted of yours in red, shows which of the two of us is "insulting, irrational & immature", since you cannot or do not have the knowledge to debate on religion, you pull out the bakri book of Shia swear words and resort to personal insults.

Everyone is able to deduce who is the bigger fool, and right now, its the one whose words are quote in red. ^_^

Edited by poiuyt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sahih Bukhari

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 828:

Narrated Aisha:

Abu Bakr came to towards me and struck me violently with his fist and said, "You have detained the people because of your necklace." But I remained motionless as if I was dead lest I should awake Allah's Apostle although that hit was very painful.

The correct translation would be A correct translation would be:

-- He poked me hard (lakazani lakzatan shadidatan) and said [...] but I remained dead motionless due to the proximity of the Messenger of Allah [...] .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
as far as I know the hadith is Bukhari only use the word The used is the trisyllabic verb w-j-' or waja'a, yaji'u. It means to jab or poke. Not hit, not beat.

I could be wrong.

Allahu Alam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you agree that Bukhairi is a fabricator then? Either he is lying, or the sunni mother of believers is-

SO which is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
whether he jabbed, poked or slapped HARD, isn't it still WRONG?!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

it is well known that it is custom and in some cases permissible to hit your child (such as not praying as per hadiths of the Prophet saw).

Secondly these events have passed so what would be the use of discussing them?

We are aware the Companions are not infalliable but it is IJMA that they are the best community and the best people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

is it correct to reprimand your child who is MARRIED (thus baligh) and living in the home of ther HUSBAND? Isn't it the husband's responsibility to reprimand the wife, not the wife's father?

and if you don't want to discuss events that are in the past, why did you join in the thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
is it correct to reprimand your child who is MARRIED (thus baligh) and living in the home of ther HUSBAND? Isn't it the husband's responsibility to reprimand the wife, not the wife's father?

and if you don't want to discuss events that are in the past, why did you join in the thread?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Took the words outta my mouth!

Spoken like a true sis! :wub:

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...