 |
|
 |
 |
A SUNNI PERSPECTIVE
THE AHLEL BAYT
How The Shi'ite (Shia) Abandoned The Ahlel Bayt
When the Prophet was alive, the disbelievers and hypocrites tried their utmost to hurt him and one of the methods they used to do this was to target those close to him (i.e. his family). One such famous incident is the event of Al-Ifk, in which they accused the Prophet’s wife of adultery. It was such attacks on his family members that prompted the Prophet to warn again and again about honoring his family. This warning was especially in regards to the females in his family, as it is well-known that Arabs would debase the women in a man’s family as a means to hurt the man himself. The women in a man’s life are his sensitive spot; a man will be less hurt about someone insulting his own honor and more hurt about someone insulting the honor of his wife.
The sayings of the Prophet made it clear that it was important to protect the honor of the Ahlel Bayt, especially the female members of his household. There were even Quranic injunctions in regards to honoring the Prophet’s wives, warning the Muslims to respect them by not entering the Prophet’s house and looking at them or even annoying them, referring to them as the Mothers of the Believers. The intensity with which the Quran and Hadith advocated the protection of the Prophetic Household prompted certain evil elements to devise new ways of harming Ahlel Bayt as a means to get at the Prophet of Islam. It was then that the founders of the Shia movement decided that the best way to turn the Muslims against the Prophetic Household (i.e. the Ahlel Bayt) was to change the very meaning of the word “Ahlel Bayt” in the eyes of the masses. So they went about this task, and they began to say that the Prophet’s wives were not part of the Ahlel Bayt and neither were three of his daughters.
So it was that the Shia masses began cursing the Prophet’s family members (i.e. his wives) and even denying the existence of his daughters, all in the name of honoring the Ahlel Bayt. The irony of this should not be lost on anybody. How is it that the imaginary Dajjal Muhammad ibn Hasan al-Askari (the so-called Hidden Imam) was a part of the Prophetic Household, whereas the people who actually lived in the Prophet’s house were cursed as traitors, including Aisha and Hafsa? How long can this farce continue? How long can the Shia masses operate under the silly assumption that they are the lovers of Ahlel Bayt, when they are the ones who curse members within the Ahlel Bayt?
The Shia say they follow the Sunnah as transmitted through the Ahlel Bayt. What kind of bold-faced lie is this? The Prophet’s wives were part of the Prophet’s family, and yet the Shia reject all of the Hadith narrated by them, declaring them to be fabricators of Hadith! It could be said that Abdullah Ibn Saba–the founder of Shi’ism–is laughing in his grave right now because he duped such a large portion of the Muslims, getting them to curse the very Ahlel Bayt that they claim to revere. Ibn Saba was a Jewish Rabbi who pretended to convert to Islam in order to start this deviant sect with the express intent of not only dividing the Ummah but to hurt the Prophet and his family specifically. He knew that it would be impossible for him to call the people towards harming the Ahlel Bayt, so he decided to change the meaning of the word so that his deviant followers would end up cursing the real members of Ahlel Bayt, all in the name of the Ahlel Bayt. What better methodology to bring someone’s family down than to pit some members of that family against others?
We ask Allah to send His Blessings down upon all of the Prophet’s wives, as well as all his family.
Who Are The Ahlel Bayt?
Question:
Who are the Ahlel Bayt?
Answer:
Primarily, the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt. After them, there are others who were also called that, but it should be remembered that the ones with the most right to be called Ahlel Bayt are first and foremost the Prophet’s wives.
Follow-up Question:
Can you please clarify: who else is a part of the Ahlel Bayt?
Answer:
The Ahlel Bayt refers to the Prophet’s family. Yes, it is true that the Prophet’s family are of an exalted status. However, the Shia opinion of who is Ahlel Bayt is discriminatory and ethically wrong. The rightly guided Ahlus Sunnah holds that the Ahlel Bayt does indeed refer to the Prophet’s family, but that the Prophet’s family includes all pious Muslims; the reason for this is that relations are based on Taqwa (piety) in the Islamic belief, not on blood. It was based on this fact that the Prophet referred to Salman al-Farsi as being Ahlel Bayt, even though Salman was Persian in ethnicity and completely unrelated to the Prophet by blood.
Anyone who is pious is part of the Ahlel Bayt; some of these people were specifically mentioned to be part of this group. These include:
- The Prophet’s wives
- The Prophet’s children
- The Prophet’s freed slaves
- Ahlel Kisa (People of the Cloak, i.e. Ali ibn Abi Talib’s family)
- The family of Aqil
- The offspring of Jafar
- The offspring of Abbas
- Salman al-Farsi
And perhaps some others we may have missed…
However, the Ahlel Bayt is not limited to these people. Included in the Ahlel Bayt is every God-fearing believer. The Prophet said:
“Do not come to me with your lineages on the Day of Resurrection! My Family is every God-fearing believer.”
and
“Every Prophet has a Family and carriage; my Family and carriage are the Believers.”
An appropriate analogy is the fact that the Prophet named ten Sahabah specifically by name as being promised Paradise, but this does not mean that they are the only ones to go to Paradise. Likewise, the Prophet specifically referred to certain people as being family, but this does not mean that others are not also part of it.
Islam does not support bigotry, discrimination, or racism. Instead, Islam is egalitarian and just.
Prophet’s Wives are Ahlel Bayt
The term “Medinatul-Nabi” translates to “the City of the Prophet.” This was eventually shortened to “Medinah” which although it translates technically to simply “city,” it is referring to the City of the Prophet (i.e. formerly Yathrib, and now the second most holy city of the Muslims).
The term “Ahle Bayt Muhammad” translates to “People of the House of Muhammad.” This phrase was also shortened to simply “Ahlel Bayt” but it is implicit that this refers to the House of the Prophet (ﷺ) and nobody else. It translates to “people of the house” with emphasis on “the” to denote the respect given to the Prophetic household.
Both the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia believe it is important to love the Ahlel Bayt. Now, the question is: who are the Ahle Bayt Muhammad (ﷺ) ? The answer to this question is quite simply that first and foremost the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt. The Prophet’s wives have the most right to be referred to as Ahlel Bayt, over and above all other individuals.
Dictionary Definition of “Ahlel Bayt”
Let us first define the words “Ahlel Bayt.” To establish absolute objectivity, we will not define it ourselves, but rather we will quote straight from the most popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org (emphasis is ours):
Al-Islam.org says
“The term “ahl” signifies the members of a household of a man, including his fellow tribesmen, kin, relatives, wife (or wives), children, and all those who share a family background, religion, housing, city, and country with him…“Bayt” refers to habitation and dwelling, including tents and buildings both. The “ahl-al-bayt” of any person refers to his family members and all those who live in his house.
source: http://al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=14ahlbayt.htm”
We encourage our readers to verify this defintion by picking up any Arabic dictionary. There are three words to look up: Ahl, Bayt, and Ahl-Al-Bayt. Let us reproduce what one such Arabic dictionary has to say, although the results will no doubt be virtually identical in any other dictionary.
Ahl: noun; relatives including wives, children, brothers, sisters, and other kinsmen, and sometimes used to refer to fellow tribesmen
Bayt: noun; house; place of residence
Ahl-Al-Bayt: noun; those people in relation to a man who live in his house, especially his wives and unmarried children that live under his roof and are provided for by him
In fact, the primary definition of Ahl Bayt is a man’s wives; in Arab culture, it is considered rude to call a man’s wives by their actual names, and hence people will refer to a man’s wives simply as his “Ahl Bayt”.
The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah
The Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah thus take the wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) to be the Ahlel Bayt. This is in accordance with the dictionary definition of the word as shown above. The Prophet’s wives are part of the Prophet’s Ahl, and they live in his Bayt. Therefore, Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) are included in the Ahlel Bayt.
The Shia
The Shia Ayatollahs do not have a positive viewpoint of the Prophet’s wives. In fact, the Shia Ayatollahs possess “baraa” (hatred) for Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها), and we shall examine this in later articles. It is because of this reason that the Shia Ayatollahs deny that the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt. In fact, many of our Shia brothers who do not speak Arabic are even unaware of the actual definition and usage of the term “Ahlel Bayt” since they simply listen to their Ayatollahs.
The Shia Ayatollahs say that only four people are part of the Ahle Bayt Muhammad, namely:
1). Ali (رضّى الله عنه),
2). Fatima (رضّى الله عنها),
3). Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), and
4). Hussain (رضّى الله عنه).
We would like to question the basis upon which they make this claim. This is not the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ), but rather this is the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). These were the four individuals who lived under the roof of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), not the roof of Muhammad (ﷺ). It is agreed upon by both the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) did not live in the Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ) but rather had his own place of residence, in which Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), and Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) also lived.
The Shia also include their Infallible Imams in the Ahlel Bayt. We wonder on what basis they do this as well, since none of these individuals (other than Ali [رضّى الله عنه], Hasan [رضّى الله عنه], and Hussain [رضّى الله عنه]) lived in the time of the Prophet (ﷺ), let alone in the Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ).
Common Usage of the Term “Ahl-Al-Bayt”
The Quran is an Arabic book that has been revealed to people whose language was Arabic. We will misinterpret the Quran if we attempt to understand its words in a way that was not (and could not be) understood by the primary addressees of the book. Today, if we ask an Arab friend to come to our house with his Ahl-Al-Bayt, the default is that he will come to our house with his wife and children who are staying in his house. He might bring his married children or he might not. He might even bring a friend if the friend is a permanent resident of his house. But primarily, an Arab will understand from this that he should bring his wives, since this is the central and primary definition of the phrase “Ahl-Al-Bayt”.
An Arab will be extremely shocked if he finds that by Ahl-Al-Bayt we meant his cousin, married children, and grandchildren, all of whom live in another house. He will be extremely shocked that we do not mean his wife who lives in his Bayt. This is because for any Arab, the word Ahl-Al-Bayt (which literally means those staying in the house) includes the wife (or wives) of a person. This was in no way any different at the time of the Prophet. It is the same in all Arab countries. It is interesting that even in Iran (being a Shia dominated country) people use the word Ahl-Al-Bayt to refer to the wife as well as children of a person. If we look at any popular book of Arabic words we will find that in the definition of Ahlel Bayt, wife is included. We would thus like to ask the Shia Ayatollahs why they proclaim a different definition of the word Ahlel Bayt? Why should it be that the Prophet’s wives are not part of Ahlel Bayt but rather the Infallible Imams are? In our opinion, this defies logic.
Logic and Common Sense
Ahlel Bayt means the family of a man living in his house. If we were to ask any Shia who is a part of his own family, he would most definitely include his mother (or his spouse) in his response. Mothers and wives are the basic foundation of a family. If we were to ask an unbiased third party as to who the family of Muhammad (ﷺ) was, the first names they would mention would be the Prophet’s wives.
The Quran Refers to the Prophet’s Wives as Ahlel Bayt
As Muslims, we believe in the absolute authority of the Quran. It is the highest source of legislation; in fact, it is the very speech of Allah. The Quran refers to the Prophet’s wives as the Ahlel Bayt. Allah Almighty Himself negates all those who dare argue that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) are not part of the Ahlel Bayt.
The Quran specifically refers to the wives of the Prophet as Ahlel Bayt in the following verse:
“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)
There is in fact not a single verse in the Quran which identifies Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), or Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) as the Ahlel Bayt. Not a single verse in the Quran mentions the 12 Infallible Imams of the Shia, let alone calling them Ahlel Bayt. The term “Ahlel Bayt” has been used twice in the Quran, and both times it is used to refer to the wives. And a similar term, Ahli Baytin is used in the Quran to refer to the wife of Imran (mother of Moses). And yet, not a single time is the word “Ahlel Bayt” used in the Quran for Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), or Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). Nowhere does the Quran say “O cousin of the Prophet” but rather the Quran says “O wives of the Prophet.” If following the Ahlel Bayt is the fundamental of belief as the Shia Ayatollahs claim, then why is it that the Quran never once mentions Ali (رضّى الله عنه) let alone mentioning him as the Ahlel Bayt? If we ask our Shia brothers to produce verses in the Quran about the Ahlel Bayt, they will be dissapointed to find that these verses are all in relation to the Prophet’s wives.
Second Time the Quran Uses the Word “Ahlel Bayt”
Ahlel Bayt is used another time in the Quran and again this time to refer to the wives:
In the verse above, Prophet Ibrahim’s wife asks the angels how can she have a son, and they respond back calling her and Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) as Ahlel Bayt. And again, the collective pronoun is used to refer to the Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) and his wife. Nobody else was in the room other than them, and the angels referred to them all as Ahlel Bayt, including Prophet Ibrahim’s wife.
The Quran declares that Wives are Part of the Family
Allah Almighty says that all of the members of Prophet Loot’s family will be saved aside from his wife. Allah says: “(All) except the family of Loot. Them all surely We are going to save (from destruction). Except his wife…” (Quran, 15:59-60)
The construction “except his wife” would be non-sensical unless the wife was included in the family of Loot (عليه السلم). Otherwise, why would Allah need to clarify that Loot’s wife was an exception to the rule that the family of Loot (عليه السلام) would be saved?
In Sahih Bukhari, the Prophet specifically refers to Aisha as part of Ahlel Bayt:
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 316
Narrated Anas:
A banquet of bread and meat was held on the occasion of the marriage of the Prophet to Zainab bint Jahsh. I was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), and so the people started coming (in groups). They would eat and then leave. Another batch would come, eat and leave. So I kept on inviting the people till I found nobody to invite.
Then I said, “O Allah’s Prophet! I do not find anybody to invite.”
He (the Prophet) said, “Carry away the remaining food.” Then a batch of three persons stayed in the house chatting. The Prophet left and went towards the dwelling place of Aisha and said, “Peace and Allah’s Mercy be on you, Ya Ahlel Bayt (O the people of the house)!”
She replied, “Peace and the mercy of Allah be on you too. How did you find your wife? May Allah bless you.”
Then he went to the dwelling places of all his other wives and said to them the same as he said to Aisha and they said to him the same as Aisha had said to him.
Sahih Bukhari is considered the most reliable book of Hadith, and therefore there is no doubt that this is an authoratative declaration that the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt.
Certain Shia Ayatollahs will often take Hadith out of context in order to “prove” that the Prophet’s wives are not part of the Ahlel Bayt. We shall examine all of these Hadith in later articles, and we shall see that the reality is that an unbiased view of the Hadith merely confirms the Quran, namely that the Prophet’s wives are part of the Ahlel Bayt.
It is narrated in Sahih Muslim by Zayd ibn Arqam (رضّى الله عنه) that the Prophet’s wives are part of the Ahlel Bayt. In Sahih Muslim (Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith-5920), Zayd says “His wives are among the people of his household.” He further emphasized: “His spouses are a fiber of his household.” If the wives are the fiber of Ahlel Bayt, it means that they are the fundamental unit of it.
In future articles, we shall–Insha-Allah–examine other Hadith, those that are commonly taken out of context by the Shia Ayatollahs.
Scholarly Opinion
Shaikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid says: “With regard to the wives of the Prophet…they are included among the members of the family of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).” This is the majority opinion of the Ulema.
One Last Argument
We ask our Shia brothers to ponder upon why the Quran and the Prophet (ﷺ) used the term “Ahl-al-Bayt” as opposed to simply “Ahl” which means “family.” By confining the Ahl with “Al-Bayt” this is restricting who is being referred to as the family living under the roof of the Prophet (ﷺ). Neither Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), nor Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) lived in the same house as the Prophet (ﷺ). On the other hand, the Prophet’s wives most definitely did.
If Allah was referring to the family of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) that did not live in his house, then surely the word “Ahl” would have been more appropriate to use; the additional specification of “Al-Bayt” would then be completely extraneous and in fact self-contradictory. The phrase “Ahl-Al-Bayt” confines the Ahl to those who live inside the Bayt, which consists of the Prophet’s wives. Any other explanation is nonsensical.
Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه)
The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah holds the Ahle Bayt Ali (رضّى الله عنه) in the highest regard. In fact, we believe that Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه)–along with the families of Aqeel (رضّى الله عنه) and Abbas (رضّى الله عنه)–are honorary members of the Prophetic Ahlel Bayt. Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه) is commonly referred to as Ahlel Kisa (People of the Cloak) and they are highly regarded by the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. However, we disagree with those who exploit the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to hurt and degrade the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ). We ask Allah to shower His Infinite Blessings upon both of these families.
Certain Shia propagandists might try to claim that we are insulting the family of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) by saying that they are “only” honorary members of the Ahlel Bayt, but this is not true at all. The Shia declare that Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه) was an honorary member of Ahlel Bayt. Is this insulting Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه)? No, it is in fact exalting him. Likewise, to say that Ali’s family (رضّى الله عنه) is an honorary part of the Ahlel Bayt is likewise an exaltation and not an insult at all. The Shia have called Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه) to be an honorary member of the Ahlel Bayt; therefore, if they accuse the Sunnis of hating Ali (رضّى الله عنه) for calling him an honorary member, then they are also guilty of hating Salman Al-Farsi (رضّى الله عنه).
Al-Islam.org says
“The reference to Salman Farsi as a member of the Ahlul-Bayt is honorary. Salman Farsi’s conversion to Islam left a great impression on the HolyProphet (S) and others. Throughout the years of the Holy Prophet’s mission, Salman Farsi was one of the companions most dedicated in the service, defence and propagation of Islam. His service to the household of the HolyProphet and his sincere love for them earned him great respect from all quarters of the Ahlul-Bayt. Thus, as an honor for him, the Prophet (S) referred to him as one of the Ahlul-Bayt (AS). We pray that he will be raised in the honorable company of the ones he loved so dearly.
source: http://al-islam .org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00450.html ”
Perhaps the reason that the Shia Ayatollahs love the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and not the Ahlel Bayt of the Prophet (ﷺ) has to do with how the faith of Shi’ism came into being. Indeed, the early ancestors of the Shia are the Saba’ites, followers of Abdullah Ibn Saba. These Saba’ites excessively praised Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and eventually even declared that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was superior to the Prophet (ﷺ). Today, the Shia adamantly deny this and they say that the Prophet (ﷺ) is superior to Ali (رضّى الله عنه). However, we wonder why then they praise the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and not the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ)? Is this not a remnant of the Saba’ite origin of Shi’ism?
Furthermore, there is absolutely no logic in calling the Infallible Imams of the Shia to be part of Ahlel Bayt and then deny that the Prophet’s wives are part of Ahlel Bayt. Surely, the Prophet’s wives have a much greater right to be part of Ahlel Bayt than people who did not even live in the Bayt of the Prophet (ﷺ).
CONCLUSION
The Prophet’s wives are the Ahlel Bayt. Many Shia Ayatollahs slander Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) with many baseless accusations (we shall examine these accusations in later articles). We ask our Shia brothers to ponder over the true nature of this love. The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah are lovers of Ahlel Bayt and certainly not Nasibis (haters of Ahlel Bayt). In fact the reality may be that the Ayatollahs are the ones who are Nasibis as they hate the Ahlel Bayt (i.e. Prophet’s wives) so much that they even deny that they are the Ahlel Bayt! In fact, the AhlelBayt.com website was primarily designed to defend the Ahlel Bayt, namely Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), from the slander uttered against her.
The fact that the Prophet’s wives are Ahlel Bayt is proven from the Quran, Hadith, scholarly opinion, dictionary, logic, common sense, and common usage of the word “Ahlel Bayt.” Those who care to argue so vehemently against the verses of the Quran can only be those who hate the Ahlel Bayt so much and so passionately that they must even reject the Word of Allah.
Prophet’s Daughters are Ahlel Bayt
The Shia accept Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) as part of the Ahlel Bayt, but we must analyze on what basis they do this. Do they honor Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) because she is the Prophet’s daughter, or rather because she is Ali’s wife? The answer, we hope, shall be made obvious: it seems to us that they do not honor the daughters of the Prophet (ﷺ), but rather they only honor Ali’s wife.
The Prophet (ﷺ) had four daughters, not just one. The Prophet (ﷺ) and Khadijah had five children: Qasim (رضّى الله عنه), Zaynub (رضّى الله عنها), Ruqayyah (رضّى الله عنها), Umm Kulthoom (رضّى الله عنها), and Fatima (رضّى الله عنها). And yet, the Shia Ayatollahs will say that only Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) is part of the Ahlel Bayt. We’d like to ask why the other three daughters are left out? Unfortunately, it seems that in order to maintain consistency, many Shia clerics go so far as to claim that the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter! This is an easily proven historical inconsistency, but it is trumpeted on many Shia websites, including the popular “Answering-Ansar” website. The Ahlus Sunnah love all the Prophet’s daughters equally and it pains us to see that the rights of three of our noble Prophet’s daughters are neglected. We wonder how our Shia brothers would feel if we said that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) was not the daughter of the Prophet (ﷺ), or that Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) was not the son of Ali (رضّى الله عنه)?
Every authoritative historical account affirms that the Prophet (ﷺ) had four daughters; even secular historians attest to this fact. We could provide numerous references here that would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Prophet had four daughters. However, in such discourses one will always find individuals who will quote from sources which may be objectively declared dubious, but will be touted by one party to be authoritatively factual. The argument will, in that case, be reduced to a tedious dispute between “our word” against “theirs”. Therefore we shall attempt to prove our claim from the Quran, something which our Shia brothers will admit is an accurate source, as a matter of creed.
The Quran Declares That the Prophet Has More Than One Daughter
Allah says in the Quran:
“O Prophet! Say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments; this will be more proper, that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.” (Quran, 33:59)
Here, Allah uses the plural word for daughters, not the singular form. Allah uses the term “banaatuka” which means “your daughters.” If it was one daughter only, it would be “bintuka.” This completely negates the claim that the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter. Had this been the case, then surely Allah would have not used the plural form, since Allah is above making grammatical mistakes. (We hope that the noble Sahabah will not be accused of doing Tahreef or tampering of the Quran!) We could provide more evidence to prove this fact of history, but it will certainly be a pointless endeavor if a Muslim cannot accept an evidence as ideologically authoritative as the Quran.
Why The Ayatollahs Deny Three Daughters of the Prophet
Let us return to the idea that Shi’ism originates from Abdullah Ibn Saba and his followers. Notice, how the Shia Ayatollahs do not care about the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ). They only care about the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). Notice how the Shia Ayatollahs deny that the Prophet’s wives are part of the Ahlel Bayt, but Ali’s wife is part of the Ahlel Bayt. Notice how Ali’s children–Hasan (رضّى الله عنه) and Hussain (رضّى الله عنه)–are considered by them to be in the Ahlel Bayt, but the Prophet’s three daughters are not. This again leads us to confirm the idea that Shi’ism originates from the Saba’ites. These Saba’ites excessively praised Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and eventually even declared that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was superior to the Prophet (ﷺ). Today, the Shia adamantly deny this and they say that the Prophet (ﷺ) is superior to Ali (رضّى الله عنه). However, we wonder why then they praise the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and not the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (ﷺ)? Is this not a remnant of the Saba’ite origin of Shi’ism?
Another reason why the Shia Ayatollahs must deny that the Prophet (ﷺ) had three daughters was because two of these daughters–namely Ruqayyah (رضّى الله عنها) and Umm Kulthoom (رضّى الله عنها)–married Uthman Bin Affan (رضّى الله عنه), the third Caliph. The Shia Ayatollahs base their entire belief on the repudiation of the first three caliphs; if the three caliphs were really evil as the Shia say they are, then why did the Prophet (ﷺ) marry two of his daughters to one of these three Caliphs? Again, this, in our opinion, questions the ideological foundation of Shi’ism.
The Shia revere the Nahjul Balagha, which they claim are the sermons and letters of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). It is one of the most sacred and authoratative of Shia books. The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah believes that many of the narrations in the Nahjul Balagha are forgeries; however, the Shia accept all of it, and thus we will quote straight from the Nahjul Balagha to prove that Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) married two of the daughters of the Prophet (ﷺ).
Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 163
Ali went to see Uthman and said to him:“You have seen as we have seen and you have heard as we have heard. You sat in the company of the Prophet of Allah as we did. (Abu Bakr) Ibn Abi Quhafah and (`Umar) ibn al-Khattab were no more responsible for acting righteously than you, since you are nearer than both of them to the Prophet of Allah through kinship, and you also hold relationship to him by marriage which they do not hold.”
(Source: http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/163.htm)
This proves that the Prophet (ﷺ) had two daughters who married Uthman (رضّى الله عنه). This revelation is troublesome the Shia Ayatollahs it would involve exalting the status of Uthman’s family (رضّى الله عنه). And most importantly, it shows that Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) was such a pious person that the Prophet (ﷺ) gave him two daughters.
Al-Islam.org
The popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org, finally rescinded the Shia claim that the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter. Let us see what Al-Islam.org has to say:
Al-Islam.org says
“Most reports (like those of Ibn Ishaq, al-Mas’udi) indicate that she [Khadaija] was the mother of all the Prophet’s children apart from Ibrahim (who was the son of Mary the Copt). She bore the following children to the Prophet: al-Qasim; Zaynab, Ruqqayya, Umm Kulthum and Hazrat Fatima (A.S). Bibi Fatima was the youngest daughter according to most reports. The daughters accepted Islam and migrated with the Prophet to Medina.
source: http://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00083.html”
And we also read the following:
Al-Islam.org says
“Khadija, peace be upon her, was the first woman who believed in the Prophet’s divine prophecy. She put all her wealth at his disposal to propagate and promote Islam. [39] Six children were born of his marriage: two sons named Qasim and Tahir who passed away as infants in Makkah and four daughers named Ruqiyah, Zaynab, Umm Kulsum, and Fatima, who was the most prominent and honoured of them all. [40]
source: http://www.al-islam.org/glance/4.htm”
It is distressing that the Shia exalt Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) by using the honorific “(A.S.)” as well as “Hazrat” but you will notice no such respect for the other beloved daughters of the Prophet (ﷺ). Nonetheless, we are pleased that they accept the Prophet’s daughters. We kindly ask Shia-Chat and Answering-Ansar to follow suit and also rescind their claims that the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter. How distressing it was to see an entire thread on Shia-Chat discussing how the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter. The Answering-Ansar moderator boldly declared: “The Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter, Bibi Fatima [A.S.].”
The Shia website Al-Islam.org has definitively refuted those who claimed that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) did not have four daughters. We read the following:
Al-Islam.org says
“Khadija gave birth to several children of whom only four daughters survived: Zainab, Umme Kulthum, Ruqiya, and Fatima-Zahra who was the youngest and most exalted of them all.
There is a difference between historians regarding the first two daughters, for some claim that they were the Prophet’s step-daughters; but the fact is that they were his direct daughters. This fact will be explained in the coming pages, if Allah wills. [1]
[1] The story of Khadija’s marriage was summarized and carried on from Bihar al-Anwar: v.6.
source: http://www.al-islam.org/gracious/5.htm ”
It should be noted that Bihar al-Anwar is a very authoratative book to the Shia.
We are pleased that Al-Islam.org has accepted the truth on this matter, and has admitted that the Prophet (ﷺ) had four daughters. However, we must ask then: if Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) is to be included in the Ahlel Bayt, then why aren’t the other three daughters of the Prophet (ﷺ)? Is this not unfair? Is this not illogical?
Al-Shia.com
Another popular Shia website, www.al-shia.com, contains the following Hadith compiled by Imam Kulayni in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four Shia books of Hadith. All of the below Hadith confirm that Umm Kulthoom, Ruqayyah, and Zaynub are direct daughters of the Prophet (ﷺ):
Al-Shia.com says
روى الصفار بسنده عن الامام الباقر (ع ) قال : ولد لرسول اللّه (ص )من خديجة : القاسم والطاهر , وام كلثوم , ورقية , وزينب وفاطمة ((642)) . وروى الصدوق بسنده عن الصادق (ع ) قال : ولد لرسول اللّه (ص )من خديجة : القاسم والطاهر ـ وهو عبداللّه ـ وام كلثوم , ورقية , وزينب وفاطمة ((643)) . وقـال الـكـليني : ولد له منها قبل مبعثه : القاسم , ورقية , وزينب وام كلثوم , وولد له بعد المبعث : الـطـيـب والـطـاهر وفاطمة وروى ايضا : ا ن ه لم يولد بعد المبعث الا فاطمة (ع ) , وان الطيب والطاهر ولدا قبل مبعثه ((644)) . وقـال الـشيخ الطبرسي : فاول ما حملت ولدت عبد اللّه بن محمد وهوالطيب ((الطاهر)) والناس يغلطون فيقولون : ولد له منها اربعة بنين القاسم وعبد اللّه والطيب والطاهر , وانما ولد له منها ابنان , الـثـانـي : الـقـاسـم , وقـيـل :ان القاسم اكبر , وهو بكره , وبه كان يكنى واربع بنات : زينب ورقية وام كلثوم وفاطمة ((645)) . وقال ابن شهر آشوب : اولاده : وله من خديجة : القاسم وعبد اللّه ,وهما الطاهر والطيب , واربع بنات : زينب ورقية وام كلثوم وفاطمة وفي (الانوار) , و(الكشف ) , و(اللمع ) , وكتاب البلاذري : ان زيـنب ورقية كانتاربيبتيه من جحش فاما القاسم والطيب فماتا بمكة صغيرين , مكث القاسم سبع ليال ((646)) . وروى المجلسي عن الكازروني عن ابن عباس قال : اول من ولدلرسول اللّه بمكة قبل النبوة القاسم وبه كان يكنى , ثم ولد له زينب , ثم رقية ,ثم فاطمة , ثم ام كلثوم , ثم ولد له في الاسلام عبد اللّه فـسـمي الطيب والطاهر وامهم جميعا خديجة بنت خويلد وكان اول من مات من ولده القـاسم ثم مات عـبداللّه بمكة , فقال العاص بن وائل السهمي قد انقطع ولده فهو ابتر , فانزل اللّه تعالى ( ان شانئك هو الابتر ) ((647)) .
source: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/maws…0014.htm#link72”
As for our English-only readers, we have the following quote from Imam Kulayni (which is actually a translation of one of the above Hadith):
“He [the Prophet] married Khadijah when he was twenty and some years old. Before recieving the Divine Commands, his children born to him from Khadijah were Qasim, Ruqayyah, Zaynub, and Umm Kulthoom. Of the children born after he recieved Divine Commands were al-Tayyib, al-Tahir, and Fatima (a.s.)”
(source: al-shia.com, http://www.al-shia.com/html/eng/lib/)
Authority of Shia Historical Accounts
The classical Shia scholars never argued that the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter. This was only a recent phenomena when the Ayatollahs realized that their position on the Ahlel Bayt did not make logical sense if the Prophet (ﷺ) really did have more than one daughter. It is unfortunate that this policy of denial is a prevalent tactic of debate today. It is adopted with many other topics as well, such as Abdullah Ibn Saba; they deny his existence just like they deny the existence of the Prophet’s daughters. We would like to ask how it is that Shia historical accounts can be taken seriously when they deny such basic facts such as how many daughters the Prophet (ﷺ) had and who Abdullah Ibn Saba was?
Such famous Shia scholars as Kulayni, Majlisi, Sadooq, Toosi, and Tabarsi have confirmed that the Prophet (ﷺ) had four daughters. Thus, when the modern day propagandists argue and say that the Prophet (ﷺ) had only one daughter, then we remind them that they are not only arguing with us, but also these classical scholars. This newfound Shia opinion is in fact 100% at variance with what the very founding fathers of Shia theology had to say, those who were the foundation pillar of knowledge for the later generations of the Shia.
CONCLUSION
It is a prevalent opinion of the Shia followers to say that the Sunnis dislike or are against the Ahlel Bayt. This is simply not true. We have just shown how it is the Shia who, in fact, deny the very existence of the Prophet’s daughters.
To us this denial is an insult and we kindly ask the Shia Ayatollahs to refrain from insulting the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad
(ﷺ) by denying their very existence. We urge our Shia brothers to think about the veracity of their beliefs and what reasons they have for denying the rights of three of our Prophet’s lovely daughters. It is clear that, contrary to much of what is disseminated, the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah indeed loves the entire family of the Prophet (ﷺ), including all his wives and all his daughters.
The Status of Ahlel Bayt
All Muslims believe in respecting the Ahlel Bayt. However, many Shia espouse a viewpoint that goes against the Islamic concepts of egalitarianism and is a rejection of Quranic exhortations. The Shia believe that the Prophet’s descendants will be automatically granted a high rank and status based on their familial connection to the Prophet (ﷺ). They believe that nobody can attain the rank of these “Syedis” simply because they were not born to the Prophet’s family, and this is why Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) to them is forever inferior to Ali (رضّى الله عنه). The Shia say that the only ones who are allowed to be the Imams and leaders of the Muslims are those who come from the lineage of the Prophet (ﷺ). It seems to us that it would not be an exaggeration to say that the Shia believe that the Prophet’s descendants are automatically superior to everyone else based on their lineage.
The reality, however, is that a person’s lineage and birth has no bearing on his rank and station on earth in the eyes of Allah. The only criterion which decides a person’s rank and station is a person’s Taqwa (piety). The Prophet (ﷺ) spoke well of the Ahlel Bayt and Ahlel Kisa (People of the Cloak) not because they were related to him, but rather because these people had great Taqwa. The Prophet (ﷺ) knew them personally and he experienced their dedication to Islam first-hand. As such, the Prophet (ﷺ) could vouch for them. The Prophet (ﷺ) also complimented his Sahabah (Companions), the Ansar (Helpers), Muhajiroon (Immigrants), and many other groups of people. When the Prophet (ﷺ) complimented the Muhajiroon, he did not do so simply because they were part of a certain Meccan tribe, but rather because they had great Taqwa. The same holds true for the Ansar, the Sahabah, and anyone else.
The Prophet (ﷺ) used Ahlel Bayt as a description to denote that these family members had great Taqwa. For example, if a person has a very pious uncle, he would say “my uncle has Taqwa; you should respect my uncle!” This does not mean that he has selected his uncle simply because he is a biological uncle, but rather because the uncle has Taqwa. Had his uncle been a sinful and distasteful person then he would have said that he has no relation to his uncle. Likewise, we are respecting the Ahlel Bayt not simply because they are related to the Prophet (ﷺ), but rather only because they had a great deal of Taqwa.
The Quran repeatedly holds each individual responsible for his or her own conduct. The actions of one soul cannot affect another, neither positively nor negatively. To do so would go against the egalitarian spirit of Islam, and would instead be a reflection of Jahiliyyah custom in which people thought they would be saved based on their familial connections as opposed to their Taqwa.
Quran
The Quran declares that on the Day of Judgement everyone’s familial connections will be cut off: “so now all relations between you have been cut off” (Quran, 6:94)
And then Allah says: “one soul shall not avail another” (Quran, 2:48) And again: “one soul shall not avail another” (Quran, 2:123)
The Quran categorically states that no soul shall have an effect on another: “no soul benefits except from its own work, and none bears the burden of another” (Quran, 6:164)
And again, Allah repeats it “that no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another–And that man shall have nothing but what he [himself] strives for” (Quran, 5:38-39)
As well as: “that every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts” (Quran, 6:70) Allah says “O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has Taqwa [piety].” (Quran, 49:13)
Hadith
The Prophet (ﷺ) declared that people were born inherently equal “except by piety and good action (Taqwa). Indeed the best among you is the one with the best character (Taqwa). Listen to me. Did I convey this to you properly?… Each one of you who is here must convey this to everyone not present.” (Excerpt from the Prophet’s Last Sermon as in Baihiqi)
Islam came and destroyed this concept of hereditary rank. The Quran declares that people are created inherently equal and differ only based on their Taqwa (piety): “Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous of you.” (Quran 49:13)
It is our hope that it has become clear that the Shia who believe in this are going against the Quran when they think that the Prophet’s family will be judged by another criterion or by a special lenience simply because they are the Prophet’s family, or that they will be automatically exalted based on something other than merit. They argue that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) had more of a right to the Caliphate than Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) because he was related to the Prophet (ﷺ) and the leadership could only be from a certain lineage of people [a concept not unfamiliar in the modern day context of the KKK and other discriminatory belief systems which raise people based on birth to a certain group as opposed to merit]. The Prophet (ﷺ) has condemned this attitude in no uncertain terms, calling it nothing less than a remnant of the pre-Islamic Time of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance).
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: “There are indeed people who boast of their dead ancestors; but in the sight of Allah they are more contemptible than the black beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose. Behold, Allah has removed from you the arrogance of the Time of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance) with its boast of ancestral glories. Man is but an Allah-fearing believer or an unfortunate sinner. All people are the children of Adam, and Adam was created out of dust.” [At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]
The Prophet (ﷺ) said further: “Undoubtedly Allah has removed from you the pride of arrogance of the age of Jahilliyah (ignorance) and the glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds. Either believers who are aware or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam and Adam was made of clay… If they do not give this up (i.e. pride in ancestors) Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through dung.” [Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi] And the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “The people of such and such a tribe are not my friends and supporters, rather my friends and supporters are the pious, no matter where they are.” .
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: “There is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a white man over a black man, or of a black man over a white man, except in terms of Taqwa (piety). The people come from Adam and Adam came from dust.”
The Prophets and their Families
After all, Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) was born of a family who were Mushriks (polythiests) so how can lineage possibly mean anything? Prophet Nuh (عليه السلام) had a son who was destined to Hell-Fire and his example is mentioned in the Quran, showing that not even if a person’s father is a prophet does this mean anything. Prophet Ibrahim’s father was a Mushrik and Ibrahim (عليه السلام) will disown him on the Day of Judgement. We see that ties of blood relation sever and the only real familial connection is through Taqwa. The Prophet Muhammad’s uncles were blood-related, but do we say that Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl will get any special privelage because of this?
People should not be accorded special rights simply because they were born to the right womb. People should be judged based on their Taqwa, not their birth. Bilal (رضّى الله عنه) was a slave, born to a slave woman, and today he is remembered as one of the noblest of Sahabah–despite his “lowly birth.” On the other hand, both Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab were from the same bloodline as the Prophet (ﷺ), and yet they are the two people for whom Allah has promised Hell-fire.
To take it even one step further: today, there are descendants of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab who are highly religious Muslims, and will Insha-Allah enter Paradise. Would it be proper and just of Allah to limit the greatness of such people simply because they come from a certain stock, and not another? Then why is it that the Shia say such things against the progeny of Yezid, as if the progeny of Yezid had any say in being born of his loins!
The point is simple: who a person is born to should not decide his status in the eyes of Allah or in the religion of Islam. It should only be one’s Taqwa which dictates a person’s station and rank. This is why it is discomforting that the Shia trace Imamah via the Prophet’s bloodline just like a hereditary kingship. Why didn’t Allah Almighty simply make all the prophets to be like a hereditary kingship? He instead chose from amongst the people the best of character and the ones with the most Taqwa. Prophet Musa (عليه السلام) came from people who were slaves, and yet his rank was raised far above the king of the country, Pharaon. In the words of Martin Luther King: people should be judged based upon the content of their character and nothing else. This is what defines a person’s rank on this earth.
The Ayatollahs will oftentimes retort that Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) asked for his progeny to be leaders. However, it should be noted that his sons were the ancestors of the entire Semite race and the only ones alive in the entire region. This argument is equivalent to saying that Allah chose Prophet Adam’s family (عليه السلام) and exalted them as leaders, and then using this as evidence against the idea that Allah judges only upon merit. Furthermore, we should all make du’a that our progeny is pious; this in no way means that we are saying our progeny is superior to the progeny of other people.
Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) is not the best because of his birth, but only because he was the best in Taqwa. And the Ahlel Bayt and Ahlel Kisa were complimented by the Prophet (ﷺ) not because of their birth but because the Prophet (ﷺ) knew of their great Taqwa. Why should the Prophet’s family be exalted just by virtue of being his family? Should they not be exalted for their righteousness, their piety, and their Taqwa?
And even if we take the view that the family of the Prophet (ﷺ) should be exalted above all others, then why is one section preferred above all others? Uthman’s father (رضّى الله عنه) was the Prophet’s second cousin, making Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) a nephew of the Prophet (ﷺ). If the lineage of the Prophet (ﷺ) is to be exalted above all others, then why is Uthman’s side of the family (رضّى الله عنه) neglected in this adulation? If this is countered by the fact that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was the husband of Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), the daughter of the Prophet (ﷺ), then what about Uthman (رضّى الله عنه)? The Prophet (ﷺ) gave Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) two of his daughters in marriage. Does that not mean that Uthman’s lineage (رضّى الله عنه) has twice the right to be exalted above Ali’s lineage (رضّى الله عنه)? No, this is contrary to the egalitarian spirit of Islam. Birthright does not mean anything. Only Taqwa does.
Syedi
Today, so many Shia claim to be “Syedi.” How exactly does one inherit the title of Syed? Just because the Prophet (ﷺ) called one person to be Syed, this does not mean that all his progeny magically become Syed as well. The Prophet (ﷺ) gave the title of Siddeeq to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه); does this mean that all of his progeny are also magically Siddeeq (i.e. truthful)? A person does not inherit such qualities or titles, but rather he/she must work for them and strive for them with their own actions and deeds.
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (رحمه الله) says:
“The idea that there are “sayyids” or “walis” (“saints”) whom Allaah has singled out from among mankind for some favour, or that they have a status which other people do not share, is an idea which is based on the Magian belief that Allaah is “incarnated” in people He chooses from among mankind. The Persians used to believe this of their kings (Chosroes), and that this spirit moved from one king to another, through his descendents. This Magian (Zoroastrian) idea spread to the Muslims via the Raafidi Shi’ah, whose origins are Magian – so this idea was introduced to the Muslims. This idea says that Allaah selects some of mankind, to the exclusion of others, for this status, which is the status of imaamah and wilaayah. So they believe in this idea with regard to ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and his descendents, and they add other positions to that, such as sayyid…They said that as this sayyid or wali has this position and status, then they know better what is in our best interests, so we should entrust our affairs to them, because they are better than us, and so they are more entitled…There can be no doubt that this is obviously a misguided notion.”
And perhaps the greatest irony of all is the fact that many of the people who claim to be “Syedi” today are of Iranian or Pakistani ethnicity. How can these people realistically claim descent from the Prophet (ﷺ) who was Arab? Their skin is not the same color as the Prophet (ﷺ), their facial structure is from another race altogether, and even their DNA would attest to the fact that they are anything but descendants of the Prophet (ﷺ)! And why is it that we find very few people in Arabia who claim to be Syedi, and yet every third person claims this rank in Iran and Pakistan?
The unfortunate truth is that these Syedis are misguided. The reasoning is simply that the position of “Syed” is respected in these lands and “being a Syedi” is in vogue, while anybody can easily claim to be Syedi. We find that in Iran there are many Ayatollahs who claim to be Syedi and thus they are exalted because of this. In Pakistan, many of the “saints” claim to be Syedi and they are thus exalted by the incredulous people for this. Historically, the Shia leaders have exploited the masses by collecting Khums (religious tax) from their followers, all because they are “Syedi.” This is no doubt exploiting the Prophet (ﷺ) and his family, all for materialistic gain.
It would be more accurate to say that Iranians are the descendants of fire-worshippers and Pakistanis are descendants of Hindu pagans. Likewise, most Arabs are the descendants of idol-worshippers, including the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. The writer of this article is most likely the descendant of a Hindu pagan, but he does not think that Allah would judge him any differently had he been born to another lineage!
CONCLUSION
Indeed, to cogitate that the Ahlel Bayt or Ahlel Kisa are special because of their familial connection as opposed to their Taqwa is to, in fact, diminish the status of the Ahlel Bayt.
To conclude, yes we must respect the Ahlel Bayt and Ahlel Kisa. But this is not because they are born of a certain lineage, but rather because they had a great deal of Taqwa. We reject all those who claim to be superior based on their lineage.
Furthermore, anyone who is pious and a believer becomes family to the Prophet (ﷺ). Allah says in the Quran: “The believers are nothing else than brothers.” (Quran, 49:10) In Islam, family is based not on blood but rather on faith. We are brothers and sisters in the Deen, and if our blood-relatives are of another faith, then they are not family in the eyes of Islam; faith is the marker for who is part of our family. Those who convert to Islam and who are pious are adopted into the Muslim family.
The evidence for this can be seen by the fact that even the supposedly lowly slaves were declared to be Ahlel Bayt. It was narrated that Mihraan, the freed slave of the Prophet (ﷺ), said: the Messenger of Allah said: “We are the family of Muhammad… the freed slave of a people is one of them.” (Narrated by Ahmad, no. 15152).
Anyone who is pious is included in the Ahl of Islam, the brotherhood and sisterhood of the Ummah. It is transmitted by at-Tabarani and al-Hakim that in one incident some people spoke very lowly about Salman al-Farsi. They spoke of the inferiority of Salman’s Persian ethnicity, and upon hearing this the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) declared, “Salman is from us, the Ahlel Bayt.” And with that did the Prophet (ﷺ) destroy the Jahiliyyah concepts of discrimination based on one’s birth. Suddenly, the Persian Kisra (King) became the most despicable whereas the lowly Muslim slave Bilal (رضّى الله عنه) became one of the highest in rank.
It was not the intent of the Prophet (ﷺ) to make a dynasty of rulers after him, nor did he mention this in any authentic report. On the contrary, the Prophet (ﷺ) stated that the most eligible to claim a right to the Prophet (ﷺ) are the most pious, regardless of their descent or the place they lived in.
The Prophet (ﷺ) turned to Medinah and said: “Those Ahlel Bayt of mine think that they have the most right (to me) and it is not like this. Rather those who have the most right to me from amongst you are the pious, whoever they are and wherever they are.” [Narrated by Ibn Abi Asim 2/689 and Al-Tabarani 20/121]
In another Hadith, the Prophet (ﷺ) condemns people of the future who would lay claim to power based on familial descent from the Prophet (ﷺ): “a man from the people of my house, who will assert that he belongs to me, whereas he does not, for my friends are only the God-fearing.” [Narrated by Abu Dawuud # 4230 and Ahmad # 5892 and others]
The Prophet (ﷺ) has shown that the true relationship to him is that of piety and religion and not of biological descent. Had the Prophet (ﷺ) indeed set a dynasty of rulers from his offspring, this would have cast doubt to the Prophet’s truthfulness and sincerity in conveying Allah’s word and then the Prophet (ﷺ) would have been like other kings who were after this Dunya (materialistic world) and founded kingdoms with dynasties from their offspring. Indeed, the Prophet (ﷺ) even forbade his progeny from inheriting wealth from him!
It is outside of our capabilities and inclinations to force people to leave concepts which the Prophet (ﷺ) himself condemned in the strongest of manner, but it should be noted, however, that this method of exaltation will not be seen as something praiseworthy by the Prophet (ﷺ) or his family, but rather they will view it as an abomination, much like a white person of good moral standards would find it offensive if someone else declared him superior simply because he was white. Most white people look down on Neo-Nazis, despite the fact that the Neo-Nazis are “praising” the white race. Likewise, the Prophet’s lineage will look down on those Shia who are “praising” them in such an exaggerated manner and based on criteria other than their merit.
Certain people may rationalize this discrimination by saying “Allah is God and God can do anything.” However, it is not God who is discriminating. Allah is clear in the Quran, in which He definitively states that Taqwa is the only criterion. If individuals decide to engage in discrimination based on birthright, then they should do it on their own accord and stop justifying it using Allah as an excuse. Thus, in our view it is unacceptable that the Shia reject the first Caliph on the basis of his lineage, and it is this bigotry that the Shia faith is based upon. It may be the case that this notion of discrimination was propagated by Abdullah ibn Saba and the Saba’ites, the founders of the Shia movement; ibn Saba was Jewish and he may well have carried over the notion of a chosen group of people, a concept of Judaism. This idea would then have been fostered by the Persian converts to Shi’ism who often came from Magian backgrounds.
We ask Allah to shower His Infinite blessings upon the Ahlel Bayt, the Ahlel Kisa, the Sahabah, the Muhajiroon, the Ansar, and the believing Muslims!
Mothers of the Believers
The Quran bestows the title of “Mother of the Believers” (Umm Al Mumineen) to Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها), and the rest of the Prophet’s wives:
“The Prophet is closer to the believers than their ownselves, and his wives are their mothers.” (Quran, 33:6)
Therefore, anyone who declares “baraa” (disassociation) from Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and says that she is not his mother, such a person is not a believer. In order to be a believer, a Muslim must accept all of the Prophet’s wives as his mothers as decreed in the quoted verse. He must treat Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) with the same respect that he treats his own mother with. Let us see what the Quran says about respecting one’s parents:
“Your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him, and that you be kind to parents. Whether one or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honor. And out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: ‘My Lord! bestow on them Your Mercy…’” (Quran, 17:23-24).
Allah says again: “And (there is one) who says to his parents ‘oof’ ! …for they are those in loss!” (Quran, 46:17-18)
If Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) is the mother of the believers, then the people who slander her, insult her, and criticize her are not believers. We wonder what will be the fate of those who speak of Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) with contempt, who repel Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), disassociate themselves from her [i.e. “baraa”], and call her an enemy of Islam? How can the mother of Muslims, as declared by Allah, be an enemy of the Muslims?
Why would Allah bestow this honor upon Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) if they were the enemies of the Muslims? Surely then Allah would have addressed them with the title of Umm Al Nasibioon (Mother of the Nasibis). Why would Allah try to confuse the believers by complimenting a supposed enemy of Islam? Was Allah trying to fool us? In another verse in the Quran, Allah addresses the Prophet’s wives (رضّى الله عنهم) as “Ahlel Bayt”:
“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)
Allah bestowed upon Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) the special honor of being addressed in the Quran as both Ahlel Bayt and Umm Al Mumineen, a position of double respect not given to anyone else other than the Prophet’s wives (رضّى الله عنهم). This is something for our Shia brothers to reflect upon. Do they really feel comfortable criticizing people who have been elevated to such a high status by Allah in the Quran? Can any Shia claim to be mentioned in the Quran in such a manner? No mainstream Muslim is mentioned in the Quran like this either. Based on this, everyone alive today should know their place in this world as inferior to the Prophet’s wives; and inferior people should not criticize those higher in rank than them (i.e. higher in the ranks of Allah). We ask: are any of the contemporary Shia Ayatollahs mentioned in the Quran and bestowed an honor like the Prophet’s wives? The answer is a resounding no: none of them are mentioned in the Quran, and so it is up to the Shia wether or not he chooses to follow those honored in the Quran (i.e. the Prophet’s wives) or those who malign those honored in the Quran.
Would our Shia brothers enjoy it if their local Ayatollahs delivered sermons denouncing their biological mothers? Would our Shia brothers enjoy it if Al-Islam.org or other Shia websites broadcasted slander against their biological mothers like they dedicate page after page denouncing Aisha (رضّى الله عنها)? Al-Islam.org has a whole page dedicated to the charge that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) was a jealous woman. Answering-Ansar has a page dedicated on their site to condemning the Prophet’s wife. Would believers find it acceptable and within religious protocolto insult their own biological mothers? Yet, an insult against Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) is a personal insult to all the believers. Recently, the Muslims rallied against the Denmark newspaper which insulted the Prophet (ﷺ); should we not also rally against the forces that insult his wives and the Mothers of all the Believers?
Should we not heed the word of Allah and lower the wing of humility to Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), the Mother of the Believers? Should we not, in fact, pray for her and the rest of the Prophet’s wives as mentioned in the Quran: “My Lord! bestow on them Your Mercy…” (Quran, 17:23-24)
Love for Ahlel Bayt and Sahabah
The Ahlel Bayt refers to the family of the Prophet (ﷺ). The Sahabah refers to the friends of the Prophet (ﷺ). The Shia claim to love the Ahlel Bayt only, and hate the Sahabah. The Nasibis, on the other hand, love the Sahabah but hate the Ahlel Bayt. Both groups are incorrect in their views. The correct position is to love both the Ahlel Bayt (Prophet’s family) and the Sahabah (Prophet’s friends).
Islam-qa.com says
“Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said:The way of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah is to love the family (ahl al-bayt) of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
The Naasibis love the Sahaabah but hate the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), hence they were called Naasibis because they set themselves up (nasb) as enemies of the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
The Raafidis [the Shia] are the opposite: they love the Prophet’s family (ahl al-bayt) – or so they claim, but they hate the Sahaabah, whom they curse, denounce as kaafirs and criticize.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, explaining the ‘aqeedah of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah: They (i.e., the Sunnis) love the people of the household of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him); they regard them with love and loyalty, and they heed the command of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning them… but they reject the way of the Raafidis [the Shia] who hate the Sahaabah and slander them, and they reject the way of the Naasibis who insult Ahl al-Bayt in words and deed…
Al-‘Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah, Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 3/154.
Undoubtedly rebelling and hating the Ahl al-Bayt and other Sahaabah is a serious kind of bid’ah (innovation) that implies slandering this religion which was transmitted to us via the Sahaabah, the Ahl al-Bayt and others.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: “With regard to Ahl al-Sunnah, they regard as friends all the believers. When they speak it is on the basis of knowledge and fairness, unlike those who are ignorant or follow their whims and desires; they reject the way of both the Raafidis [the Shia] and the Naasibis and they hold all of the early generations in high esteem, and they recognize status and virtue of the Sahaabah and respect the rights of Ahl al-Bayt as prescribed by Allaah…”
Among the books which speak of the Naasibis and refute them and their ideas, and discussed those who went to the other extreme, namely the Raafidis [the Shia], is Manhaaj al-Sunnah by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah. You can refer to this book or some of its abridged editions.
Logically, this is the only position that makes sense (i.e. to love both the Prophet’s family and friends). It would obviously anger the Prophet if we insulted his family or his friends, and this goes for any human being alive. Which of us today would accept that a person would attack our family or our friends? Even the least of us would defend our family and friends.
Al-Islam.org says: Do not name your daughter with the name “Aisha”
The depths of hatred that the Shia Ulema have for the Prophet’s family (i.e. the way in which they disassociate themselves from his wife Aisha) manifests itself in the following fatwa passed by the Aalim Network on the very popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org. The Shia are discouraged by their scholars to name their daughters by the beautiful name of “Aisha”–such is their hatred for the beloved of our beloved Prophet.
Al-Islam.org says
“QUESTION:
as salaam alaikum -
I have a brief question for you concerning the name A’isha. I am fairly new to Islam and me and my wife are expecting our first child. At any rate, I was wondering if such a name would be discouraged within the Shi’a Islamic community due to the association she had with rebelling against ‘Ali etc. or if it is a common enough name so as to not have relevence in such matters. Your advice will be much appreciated.
ANSWER:
Salaamun ‘alaykum,
Due to her actions against Imam Ali during the times of the Prophet and after his death (including the famous battle of the Camel), the followers of the ahl al-bayt are not encouraged to keep her name for their children.
Wasallamu ‘alaykum
source: http://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00711.html ”
Our Response:
Firstly, we should state that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) never rebelled against Ali (رضّى الله عنها) and this is a myth which the Shia propagandists have repeated so much that the masses just take it as an accepted fact. Ibn Khaldun said: “(The) more an incident becomes popular the more a network of unfounded tales and stories is woven around it.” This is the case with the Battle of the Camel, in which the Shia criminals attacked Aisha’s caravan and sought to blame her for that, and this tradition of slandering Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) continues up until this day to the point that even some lay-person Sunnis erroneously start accepting the Shia version of history in which Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) rebelled against Ali (رضّى الله عنها). In fact, this is not the case, and we invite you to read the following article on the Battle of the Camel: Battle of the Camel
It is only the Shia Ayatollahs who view Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) as a rebel against Ahlel Bayt and it is for this reason that they discourage their followers from naming their children with the name of “Aisha” and it is for this reason that you will never find a Shia who has a daughter with this name. What is unknown to the Shia masses is that their Ayatollah’s hatred for Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and the name “Aisha” is not shared by the Infallible Imams of the Shia. Indeed, the Shia Ayatollahs have flouted the Sunnah of the same Imams they claim to follow; whereas the Shia Ayatollahs say not to name daughters with the name of Aisha, in fact the Infallible Imams of the Shia very much did name their daughters with that name.
We shall hereby provide purely Shia sources to confirm the fact that the Infallible Imams of the Shia did in fact name their daughters with the name of “Aisha”:
- Aisha bint Musa al-Kadhim: This was the daughter of the seventh Infallible Imam of the Shia, namely Imam Musa al-Kadhim. The esteemed Shia scholar, Muhammad Taqi al-Tustari, states in Tawarikh al-Nabi wa al-Aal [p. 125-126] that Imam Musa al-Kadhim had seventeen daughters and they were named “Fatima al-Kubra, Fatima al-Sughra, Ruqayyah, Ruqayyah al-Sughra, Hakima…… Aisha, Zaynad and Khadijah.” Shaikh Mufid also mentions her in al-Irshad [p.303]. Two other strong Shia references are Umdat al-Talib of Ibn Anba [p. 266 {footnote}] and al-Anwar al-Nu`maniyya of Ni`mat Allah al-Jaza’iri [v.1, p.380]. The name of this daughter is also mentioned in Kashf al-Ghumma of Abu al-Hasan al-Irbili [v.2, p.90 and 217].
- Aisha bint Ali al-Rida: This was the daughter of the eight Infallible Imam of the Shia, namely Imam Ali al-Rida. The famous Shia Qadi, Ibn al-Khashab, said in Mawalid Ahl al-Bayt: “(Imam) Al-Rida had five sons and one daughter. They were Muhammad al-Qani, al-Hasan, Jafar, Ibrahim, al-Hussain and the daughter whose name was Aisha.” This is quoted by Muhammad Taqi al-Tustari in Tawarikh al-Nabi wa al-Aal [p.128].
- Aisha bint Ali Zayn al-Abidin: This was the daughter of the fourth Infallible Imam of the Shia, namely Imam al-Abidin. This fact is referenced in Kashf al-Ghumma of Abu al-Hasan al-Irbili [v. 2, p. 334].
- Aisha bint Jafar as-Sadiq: This was the daughter of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq, the sixth of the Infallible Imams of the Shia. This is also recorded in Kashf al-Ghumma of Abu al-Hasan al-Irbili [v. 2, p. 373]).
- Aisha bint Ali al-Hadi: This was the daughter of the tenth Infallible Imam of the Shia, namely Imam Ali al-Hadi. This is mentioned by Shaikh al-Mufid in al-Irshad [p.334] and also in Kashf al-Ghumma of Abu al-Hasan al-Iribli [v.2, p.334]
- Aisha bint Jafar ibn Musa al-Kadhim: This was the grand-daughter of the Infallible Imam of the Shia (i.e. the daughter of the Imam’s son, Jafar ibn Musa). This is stated by Abu al-Hasan al-Umari in al-Mujdi [p.109].
And there are many more such examples. The fact of the matter is that none of the eleven Imams of the Shia (the last one did not exist) ever disassociated themselves from the Prophet’s wives nor any of the Sahabah. This is a myth propagated by the Shia leaders who are the haters of Ahlel Bayt and who do not follow the Sunnah of the Imams, which is to love and adhere to the Prophet’s wives and the Sahabah. The eleven Imams never hated to name their daughters “Aisha” so why should the Shia Ayatollahs hate to do that? We ask our dear Shia brothers to turn away from their hateful leaders, reject the way of Shi’ism, and to instead accept the mainstream Islam which was practised by all eleven of the Imams.
Article Written By: Ibn Al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com
Fatwa: Kufr to Slander Bibi Aisha
Question:
Could you please answer my question about Shee‘ah (Shi‘a) Islam? Is it permissible for one to think badly of the Prophet’s wife ‘Aa’ishah?
Answer by Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid:
Praise be to Allaah.
…The punishment for apostasy (riddah) is well-known in Islaamic Sharee’ah. The one who leaves Islaam will be asked to repent by the Sharee’ah judge in an Islaamic country; if he does not repent and come back to the true religion, he will be killed as a kaafir and apostate, because of the command of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” (Reported by al-Bukhaari, 3017)…
The scholars of Sunni Islam are all agreed that whoever condemns ‘Aa’ishah for that of which Allaah has stated she is innocent is a kaafir, because he has rejected Allaah’s statement of her innocence in Soorat al-Noor.
Imaam Ibn Hazm quoted a report with an isnad going back to Hishaam ibn ‘Ammaar, who said: “I heard Maalik ibn Anas say: ‘…whoever curses ‘Aa’ishah should be killed.’ He was asked, ‘Why do you say that concerning (the one who curses) ‘Aa’ishah?’ He said, ‘Because Allaah says concerning ‘Aa’ishah, may Allah be pleased with her (interpretation of the meaning): “Allaah forbids you from it [slander] and warns you not to repeat the like of it forever, if you are believers.” [al-Noor 24:17]’”
Maalik said:
“Whoever accuses her goes against the Qur’aan, and whoever goes against the Qur’aan should be killed.”
Ibn Hazm said:
“This comment of Maalik’s is correct, and it is complete apostasy to reject Allaah’s words that clearly state her innocence.”
Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi said:
“Because the people who slandered ‘Aa’ishah accused a pure and innocent person of immorality, then Allah exonerated her. So everyone who accuses her of that of which Allah has stated she is innocent is rejecting what Allah says, and everyone who rejects what Allah says is a kaafir. This is the opinion of Maalik, and the matter is very clear to those who have insight.”
Al-Qaadi Abu Ya‘laa said:
“Whoever slanders ‘Aa’ishah by accusing her of that of which Allah stated her innocence is a kaafir, without doubt. More than one imam stated this ijmaa‘ (consensus) and gave this ruling.”
Ibn Abi Moosaa said:
“Whoever accuses ‘Aa’ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, of that of which Allaah stated she was innocent has left the religion (is no longer a Muslim) and has no right to marry a Muslim woman.”
Ibn Qudaamah said:
“It is a part of the Sunnah to say ‘May Allah be pleased with her’ after mentioning the wives of the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him), Mothers of the Believers who are pure and innocent of any evil. The best of them are Khadeejah bint Khuwaylid and ‘Aa’ishah al-Siddeeqah bint al-Siddeeq, whose innocence was stated by Allah; (they are) the wives of the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) in this world and the next. Whoever accuses her of that of which Allah has stated her innocence has rejected the words of Allaah All-Mighty.”
Imam al-Nawawi, may Allaah have mercy on him, said:
“‘Aa’ishah’s innocence of that of which she was accused is stated definitively in the Qur’aan. If anyone doubts that (may Allah protect us from such a thing), he becomes a kaafir and an apostate, by the consensus of the Muslims.”
Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allaah have mercy on him, said:
“The ummah is agreed that whoever slanders her is a kaafir.”
Al-Haafiz ibn Katheer said, in his Tafseer:
” The scholars, may Allah have mercy on them, all agreed that whoever accuses or slanders her after the revelation of this aayah is a kaafir, because he has rejected the Qur’aan.”
Badr al-Deen al-Zirkashi said:
“Whoever slanders her is a kaafir, because the Qur’aan clearly states her innocence.”
The scholars based their ruling on the one who slanders ‘Aa’ishah on the following evidence:
(1) The evidence that is derived from the verses in Soorat al-Noor that clearly state her innocence. So whoever accuses her after Allah has declared her innocent is rejecting the words of Allah, which is kufr beyond any shadow of a doubt.
(2) Slandering the family of the Prophet SAWS (peace be upon him) hurts and offends the Prophet himself, and there is no doubt that whatever hurts and offends the Prophet SAWS (peace be upon him) is kufr, by consensus (ijmaa‘). Evidence that the slander of his wife hurt and offended the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) is seen in the hadeeth of the slander (al-ifk) reported by al-Bukhaari and Muslim, in which ‘Aa’ishah says: “. . . The Messenger of Allaah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) stood up on that day and asked who would go and deal with ‘Abdullaah ibn Ubayy. He was on the minbar, and said: ‘O Muslims, who will deal with a man who I have heard is speaking in an offensive manner about my family? By Allaah, I know nothing but good about my family.’ . . .” What the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) meant was: who will be kind to me, and excuse me if I go and deal with him myself, and I give him what he deserves because I have heard that he is speaking in an offensive manner about my family. This proves that the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) was so deeply offended and hurt that he asked people whether they could deal with this person fairly.
Imaam al-Qurtubi said, in his Tafseer of the aayah “Allaah forbids you from it [slander] and warns you not to repeat the like of it forever, if you are believers.” [al-Noor 24:17]”: “This is concerning ‘Aa’ishah . . . because of the hurt and offence that the Messenger of Allah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) felt with regard to his honour and his family. This is kufr on the part of the one who does it.”
(3) Slandering ‘Aa’ishah implies insulting the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him), because Allah, may He be glorified, says (interpretation of the meaning): “Bad statements are for bad people (or bad women for bad men) and bad people for bad statements (or bad men for bad women). . . ” [al-Noor 24:26]
Al-Haafiz ibn Katheer, may Allah have mercy on him, said: “I.e., Allah would not have made ‘Aa’ishah the wife of the Messenger of Allah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) if she had not been good, because he is better than any good person. If she had been bad, she would not have been fit to marry him from a shar‘i point of view, and Allah would never even have decreed it..”
Finally, let us remember that the most beloved of all people to him (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) was ‘Aa’ishah al-Siddeeqah bint al-Siddeeq, as is proven in the report of ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas, who said: “The Messenger of Allaah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) put me in charge of an army during the ghazwah (campaign) of al-Salaasil. I came to him and asked him, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, who among the people is most beloved to you?’ He said, ‘Aa’ishah.’ I asked, ‘Who among men?’ He said, ‘Her father.’ I asked, ‘Then who?’ He said, ‘‘Umar,’ then he mentioned a number of others.”
So whoever feels hatred towards the beloved of the Messenger of Allaah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) will deserved to be despised by him on the Day of Resurrection. And Allaah knows best.
See ‘Aqeedat Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah fi’l-Sahaabah al-Kiraam by Naasir al-Shaykh, 2/781, and I‘tiqaad Ahl al-Sunnah fi’l-Sahaabah by Muhammad al-Wahaybi, p. 58).
The Shia say:
The verses in Soorat al-Noor apply only to the specific charges levied against Aa’ishah in the incident of Al-Ifk and not to any other accusations against her.
Rebuttal:
Allah (عز و جل) says: “Allah warns you to never repeat anything similar to this again, if you are indeed believers.” [al-Noor 24:17] By the words “anything similar”, we see that it cannot possibly refer only to the incident of Al-Ifk, but rather it applies to any similar slander against Aisha (رضّى الله عنها). Indeed, accusing her of fabricating Hadith, of being one of the Imams of Kufr, and other such things are even more egregious than Zinnah. Therefore, not only is this slander similar to that of those who criticized her in the incident of Al-Ifk, but it is in fact a far more reprehensible thing to utter against her.
More importantly, Allah (عز و جل) says in the same sequence of verses the following words: “Vile women are for vile men, and vile men for vile women. Good women are for good men, and good men for good women; such are innocent of that which people say: For them is pardon and a bountiful provision.” [Soorat al-Noor, 24:26] This is in reference to Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), meaning Allah (عز و جل) has declared her to be good. Therefore, anyone who says that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) is not good is rejecting this verse in the Quran and whoever rejects a single verse in the Quran is a disbeliever.
Shia Du’a (Saname Quraish) Curses Two of Prophet’s Wives
How is it that Shia missionaries can do Taqiyyah and deny that they hate the Prophet’s wives, when they have authentic du’as which condemn Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها), ask Allah to curse them, and to beat them. This is the depths of their hatred for the Prophetic Household, the Ummahatul Mu’mineen (Mothers of the Believers), and the Prophet’s lovers.
A very famous Shia du’a called “Saname Quraish” condemns Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and Umar bin Khattab (رضّى الله عنه), as well as their two daughters: Aisha bint Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa bint Umar bin Khattab (رضّى الله عنها), the two lovely wives of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). In this du’a, Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and Umar (رضّى الله عنه) are referred to as the “two idols of Quraish.” And their daughters are condemned alongside them. We do not know how the Shia can look us in the face and say that they don’t hate the Prophet’s wives.
That du’a is available on the following Shia site: http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm
Duas.org says
“In the name of Allah the Beneficent the Merciful.
O Allah! Curse the two idols of Quraish [Abu Bakr and Umar]…and their two daughters [Aisha and Hafsa]. Rebuke them, they have consumed Your sustenance and have denied Your obligations. Both have discarded Your commands, have rejected Your revelation, have disobeyed Your Prophet, have destroyed Your religion, have distorted Your book, have made Your laws ineffective, have declared Your obligatory actions as incorrect, have disbelieved in Your signs, have oppressed Your friends, have loved Your enemies, have spread corruption among Your people, [and] have made Your world incur losses.
O Allah! Send Your curses on them and their helpers as they have ruined the house of Your prophet, have dug the door of his house, broken the roof, have brought down the walls, have made the skies [into] the ground, have destroyed its inhabitants, have killed their supporters, have put to death their children, have deserted his pulpit…
O Allah, send Your chastisement on them to the extent of the [combined] sins of every disobedient person.
…and to the number of pious people whom they have troubled, and whom they have driven out of their cities and [thereby] helped the disbelievers, and the Imam on whom they were cruel…
…and [they] have changed the obligatory laws, and have destroyed the practise of the Holy Prophet.
…and whatever evils they have concealed, the blood which they have shed…
[They] have changed the goodness and have altered the commands, have created disbelief…
…the lie for which they have cheated, the inheritance which they have plundered…
…[they have] stopped the booties from [being given to] them, and [they] have consumed the prohibited wealth, and that ‘Khums’ (the fifth part) which they considered as permitted for them, and that evil whose foundation was put, and that cruelty which they made common, that oppression which they spread, those promises which they dishonored, those covenants which they broke, those lawful things which they termed as unlawful, and those unlawful things which they termed as lawful, that hypocrisy which they have concealed in their hearts…
…and to the amount of treachery which they bore in their hearts, and those stomachs which they have split open…and that door which they broke-open, and those gatherings which they dispersed and those degraded people whom they gave honor to, and those honorable people whom they insulted, and by the number of rights which they have usurped…
…and the order of the Imam which they opposed, bestow Your wrath on them to the extent of their atrocities!
O Allah! Your curses on them to the extent of alteration in the Quran and the covering of truth, rendering the will worthless, and breaking the promises, and declaring all the claims as void, refusing all allegiances, presenting excuses, introducing breach of trust…Bestow Your curses on them!
O Allah curse those two, secretly and openly, with such a beating which is forever continuous, nonstop and innumberable. Such a whipping which commences in the morning but does not end at night.*
Such a beating should be on those tyrants, and their helpers, their assistance, their friends and their lovers, those attracted to them and those who acknowledge their deeds, those who present proof for them, and those who follow their words, and those who approve their actions.
(Then recite four times).
O Allah! Send such a harsh chastisement upon them that the dwellers of Hell start screaming. O Lord of the Universe, accept this prayer from me.
source: http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm”
This is the Supplication of the Two idols of Quraysh, which the Shia bestowed a great importance to and the Shia scholars consider it as a valid supplication.
The Shia claim that Ali ibn Abi Talib used to recite Du’a Saname Quraish in the Qunoot of his prayers, and that he said:
“He who recites this Du’a is (in terms of reward) like a marksman who have shot 1000 arrows in the battle of Badr and Uhud beside the Prophet.”
- Mustadrak al-Wasa’il, v4, p405, Hadith #5021
- Bihar al-Anwar, v82/85, p260, Hadith #5
The Shia scholars who mentioned that supplication in their books are many and not limited to:
1. Al-Kaf’ami
2. Al-Kashani
3. Al-Nouri Al-Tubrisi
4. Asadallah Al-Haeiri
5. Murtada Hussain
6. Mandhoor Hussain
7. Al-Karkey
8. Al-damad Al-Hussaini
9. Al-Majlisi
10. Al-Tasaturi
11. Abu Al-Hassan Al-Amily
12. Abdullah Shubbar
13. Al-Haeiri
14. Mirza Habeeballah
15. and many more…
The above are all Ayatollahs, who have the highest rank in the Shia hierarchy. And perhaps the most powerful of them who accepted it was Ayatollah Khomeini.
In a book called “Tuhfat Al-Owam Maqbool”, the following scholars agreed on the authenticity of the du’a of the two idols of Quraish:
1. Ayatollah Sayyed Muhsin Hakeem Al-Tabtiba’ei
2. Ayatollah Sayyed Abu Al-Qasim Al-Kho’ei
3. Ayatollah Sayyed Rouhallah Khomenie
4. Ayatollah Sayyed Mahmoud Al-Shamroudi
5. Ayatollah Sayyed Muhamed Kazim Shari’atmdar
6. Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Al-Naqi Al-Naqari
The famous du’a is also mentioned in the esteemed Shia book, “Bihar Al Anwar” (p.260) by Allama Majlisi. You can see this here: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/behar/behar82/125.htm
In the following Shia Hadith, we read that the the two idols (al Lat and al Uza) are the code-names for Abu Bakr and Umar, on p.283 of Bihar Al Anwar:
- ك : السناني ، عن الاسدي ، عن سهل ، عن عبدالعظيم الحسني قال : قلت لمحمدبن علي بن موسى عليهم السلام : إني لارجو أن تكون القائم من أهل بيت محمد الذي يملا الارض قسطا وعدلا كما ملئت ظلما وجورا ، فقال عليه السلام : يا أباالقاسم ما منا إلا قائم بأمرالله عزوجل وهاد إلى دينه ، ولكن القائم الذي يطهر الله به الارض من أهل الكفر والجحود ، ويملا ها عدلا وقسطا هو الذي يخفى على الناس ولادته ويغيب عنهم شخصه ، ويحرم عليهم تسميته ، وهو سمي رسول الله وكنيه ، وهو الذي تطوى له الارض ، ويذل له كل صعب ، يجتمع إليه أصحابه عدة أهل بدر ثلاثمائة وثلاثة عشر رجلا من أقاصي الارض وذلك قول الله عزوجل ” أينما تكونوا يأت بكم الله جميعا إن الله على كل شئ قدير ” ( 2 ) . فإذا اجتمعت له هذه العدة من أهل الاخلاص أظهر أمره ، فإذا أكمل له العقد ، وهو عشرة آلاف رجل ، خرج بإذن الله عزوجل ، فلا يزال يقتل أعداء الله حتى يرضى الله عزوجل . قال عبدالعظيم : فقلت له : ياسيدي وكيف يعلم أن الله قد رضي ؟ قال : يلقي في قلبه الرحمة . فاذا دخل المدينة أخرج اللات والعز ى فأحرقهما
On page 284, you can read the Sharh by Allamah Majlissi about al Lat and al ‘Uza, in which Allamah Majlisi states that these are names for Abu Bakr and Umar:
بيان : يعني باللات والعزى صنمي قريش أبابكر وعمر
http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/behar/behar52/a29.html
Scan of the du’a:
* There are many Shia narrations which talk about the beating the Prophet’s wife will endure at the hands of Imam Mehdi:
“When the Twelvth Imam returns, Aisha will be raised from the dead so as to be whipped as due punishment.” (Al Shafi, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 108)
“When the Twelvth Imam returns, he will bring Aisha to life so as to torment her.” (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Page No. 139)
“Imam Mehdi will punish Aisha with stripes.” (Hayat-ul-Quloob, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 901)
“When Imam Mahdi arrives, Aisha will be resurrected so that she may be given a prescribed punishment and that Fatima be vindicated.” (Mullah Baqir Majlisi, Haqqul Yaqeen, p. 347)
