TwelverShia.net Forum

Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

confusedshia

Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« on: August 01, 2017, 10:13:53 PM »
Assalamu alaykum.

I'm Shia but after reading some of the posts and watching some videos on here, I feel like I may be in the wrong sect. You seem to be very knowledgeable on here, so I would appreciate if some of you could take a few minutes of your time to answer two of my sincere questions:

1. What was the purpose of preventing Umm Salama from coming under the cloak in the hadith al-kisa and what was the purpose of this event/dua in the first place?

2. What was the purpose of Ghadir al-Khum if it wasn’t to appoint Ali ibn Abu Talib?

Disclaimer: I'm not here to debate, just find out the truth.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2017, 10:19:05 PM by confusedshia »

Hadrami

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2017, 03:33:09 PM »
Assalamu alaykum.

I'm Shia but after reading some of the posts and watching some videos on here, I feel like I may be in the wrong sect. You seem to be very knowledgeable on here, so I would appreciate if some of you could take a few minutes of your time to answer two of my sincere questions:

1. What was the purpose of preventing Umm Salama from coming under the cloak in the hadith al-kisa and what was the purpose of this event/dua in the first place?

وعليكم السلام

If you read the complete verses prior and including no 33, those were about the wives. If the verses were about wives including Umm Salama ra, then there is no point to include her again under the cloak. Rasulullah shallallahu alayhi wasallam only needed to include non wives in the cloak for everyone to know they are also included.

2. What was the purpose of Ghadir al-Khum if it wasn’t to appoint Ali ibn Abu Talib?

Disclaimer: I'm not here to debate, just find out the truth.
Long story short, there are heaps of articles about it. This article below is few years old, but still one of my fav
https://gift2shias.com/2013/10/24/hadith-of-ghadir-khumm-a-sunni-perspective/
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 03:38:10 PM by Hadrami »

Hani

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2017, 05:34:15 PM »
Salam `Alaykum,

1- The event of the cloak is an event used by Shia for two purposes: A- To limit the number of the members of the household to five. B- To declare the household as infallible and immune to error.

Both of these conclusions are wrong, first of all the text of the narration of Kisa' is VERY shaky, meaning some versions of it conflict with other versions. Long story short, the verses were revealed for the sake of the wives as is clearly highlighted by the Qur'anic text itself and as announced by `Abdullah ibn `Abbas in the report. After the revelation of those verses, the Prophet (saw) was sitting in Umm Salamah's house, Fatimah coincidentally sent the Prophet (saw) some food she made and he seems to have liked it, so he (saw) called on Fatimah's kids and husband and covered them with a cloak then supplicated: "O God, they're my household so O Lord purify them thoroughly."

Through this Du`a', these four members were included with the wives in the verse as well. Umm Salamah was not a Mahram for `Ali so she couldn't even get under the cloak with him.

More on that here:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/a-scientific-dialogue-regarding-incident-of-kisa-revealing-some-facts/

2- Regarding Ghadir Khum, I have a video that explains it thoroughly here but it's long:
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2017, 05:58:12 PM »
وعليكم السلام

If you read the complete verses prior and including no 33, those were about the wives. If the verses were about wives including Umm Salama ra, then there is no point to include her again under the cloak. Rasulullah shallallahu alayhi wasallam only needed to include non wives in the cloak for everyone to know they are also included.
Salamun Alaykum.

The part of the verse 33 which is about Ahlul Bayt (as) was revealed seprate from the verses which are about the wives of the Prophet (s). There are evidences from Quran and Sunnah (Sunni authentic Hadiths) which prove this issue.

1.Quran itself proves that the verse is not about the wives of Prophet (s):

A) In the verses which are about the wives, there are the pronouns 'كن' which is used only for a group of women [أمتعكن , أسرحكن , منكن , بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (as), the pronouns clearly change to 'كم' which is used for a group of men, or a group which includes both men and women. So, because the pronoun in the verse of At-Tat_hir which is about Ahlul Bayt is كم and not كن, so Ummi Salama (ra) who was a woman needed to be enter under the cloak to be considered as Ahlul Bayt. If the verse was انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكن الرجس ... ويطهركن تطهيرا you were right. But the vesre is not like this!

B) In the verses which are about the wives, the plural form of the word house [البيت], i.e., بيوتكن is used [وقرن في بيتكن and واذكرن ما يتلى في بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (صلوات الله وسلامه عليهم اجمعين), the sigular form of that [i.e., البيت] is used [ليذهب عنكم الرجس اهل البيت]. So, only one house is the house of Ahlul Bayt and that is the house of Lady Fatima. Because he was under the cloak and also, according to Hadiths in your books, after revelation of the verse of At-Tat_hir [33:33], for 6 months Prophet Muhammad (s) used to go to the house of Lady Fatima (as) at the time of the Salat Al-Fajr and say الصَّلَاةَ يَا أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ {إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا}, It is the time of the Salat, O Ahl Al-Bayt,  Indeed Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O Ahl Al-Bayt, and purify you with a thorough purification.
Tirmidhi has narrated this Hadith and has said that it is Hasan (Sahih At-Tirmidhi, V5, P31). Hakim has narrated this Hadith in Al-Mustadark and said that it is Sahih [هذا حديث صحيح على شرط مسلم ولم يخرجاه] (Al-Mustadrak Ala As-Sahihayn, V3, P158). Ahmad ibn Hmbal has also narrated this Hadith in his Musnad, V3, P259. Others has also narrated this Hadith in their books.

2.Sunnah
I mentioned previousely one of the evidences from Sunnah. Also, Muslim has narrated in his Sahih that it was asked from Zeyd ibn Arqam: 'Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren't the wives (of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his house hold? ' Thereupon he said: No, by Allah.(Sahih Muslim, V7, P123)

The wives of Prophet (s) are not between Ahlul Bayt, so that we can not find a Hadith in which Ummi Salama (ra), Aisha or other wives have claimed that they are between Ahlul Bayt (as). Instead, At-Tahhavi has narrated in his book a Hadith from Ummi Salama (ra) that she wished that when she asked Prophet that is she between Ahlul Bayt, he (s) answered 'Yes' [أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ هذه الآيَةَ إنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ إلَى آخِرِهَا وما في الْبَيْتِ إِلاَّ جِبْرِيلُ وَرَسُولُ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَلِيُّ وَفَاطِمَةُ وَحَسَنٌ وَحُسَيْنٌ عليهم السلام فَقُلْت يا رَسُولَ اللهِ أنا من أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ فقال إنَّ لَك عِنْدَ اللهِ خَيْرًا فَوَدِدْتُ أَنَّهُ قال نعم فَكَانَ أَحَبَّ إلَيَّ مِمَّا تَطْلُعُ عليه الشَّمْسُ وَتَغْرُبُ.] (Sharh Mushkil Al-Athar by At-Tahhavi, V2, P244). This strongly proves that Ummi Salam did not believe that she is between Ahlul Bayt (as).

But why the part which is about Ahlul Bayt is between the verses which are about the wives?
This is because when a person reads the verses, may think that Ahlul Bayt (as) are like the wives of Prophet capable of doing sins, and the impurity has not repel from them. So, Allah ordered Prophet to place the sentences which are about Ahlul Bayt between the verses which are about the wives to clear the minds from this mistake.
Allah has placed the sentences which are about Ahlul Bayt (as) and have the pronoun كم, to exit the wives from being between Ahlul Bayt.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 06:10:17 PM by Mojtaba »

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2017, 06:27:45 PM »


1. What was the purpose of preventing Umm Salama from coming under the cloak in the hadith al-kisa and what was the purpose of this event/dua in the first place?
Walaikumsalam

The purpose of this dua was to include the Fatima(ra), Ali(ra) , Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) in the wish of Allah(swt) which was initially for the wives of Prophet(saws).

Umm Salama(ra) was prevented because the wish of Allah(swt) was for wives of Prophet(saws) and she was already included in that wish, hence there was no need to include her in the cloak.



Quote
2. What was the purpose of Ghadir al-Khum if it wasn’t to appoint Ali ibn Abu talib
A Shia author defined the Sunni perspective about ghadeer in a fair manner.

The Shia author, Syed Husain Mohammad Jafri, writes:

The Sunnis, on the other hand, interpret the word mawla in the meaning of a friend, or the nearest kin and confidant. No doubt the richness of meaning of many an Arabic word and the resulting ambiguity does render both the interpretations equally valid. The Sunnis, while accepting the tradition, assert that in that sentence the Prophet simply meant to exhort his followers to hold his cousin and the husband of his only surviving daughter in high esteem and affection. Further, the Sunnis explain the circumstance which necessitated the Prophet’s exhortation [at Ghadir Khumm] in that some people were murmuring against Ali due to his harsh and indifferent treatment in the distribution of the spoils of the expedition of Al-Yaman, which had just taken place under Ali’s leadership, and from where he, along with his those who participated in the expedition, directly came to Mecca to join the Prophet at the Hajj. To dispel these ill-feelings against his son-in-law, the Prophet spoke in this manner. (The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam, by SHM Jafri, p.21-22).


For details about the understanding of ghadeer event, please refer this article.

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/the-ghadeer-khumm-event-as-understood-by-ahlelbayt-sahaba-ahlus-sunnah/

Hani

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2017, 06:32:51 PM »
^ All brother Mojataba wrote above is inaccurate and really OLD, these inaccuracies and weak arguments have been refuted thoroughly all over the internet.

What you're claiming as authentic is most likely not authentic, you cherry picked the version you liked, your grammatical argument is weak, you cherry picked a Hadith from Zayd, you disregarded a ton of solid evidence then you went and built an unreasonable conclusion and Madhab.

You're way behind brother Mojtaba. Here's a few solid refutations to name a few:

Our articles proving Wives of Prophet(Saw) being part of Aal and Ahlelbayt of Prophet(saw):
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/our-articles-proving-wives-of-prophetsaw-being-part-of-aal-and-ahlelbayt-of-prophetsaw/
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Abu Muhammad

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2017, 06:35:06 PM »

1.Quran itself proves that the verse is not about the wives of Prophet (s):

A) In the verses which are about the wives, there are the pronouns 'كن' which is used only for a group of women [أمتعكن , أسرحكن , منكن , بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (as), the pronouns clearly change to 'كم' which is used for a group of men, or a group which includes both men and women. So, because the pronoun in the verse of At-Tat_hir which is about Ahlul Bayt is كم and not كن, so Ummi Salama (ra) who was a woman needed to be enter under the cloak to be considered as Ahlul Bayt. If the verse was انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكن الرجس ... ويطهركن تطهيرا you were right. But the vesre is not like this!

If that what you claimed, how do you explain the usage of masculine pronoun that was clearly meant for woman ONLY in these Sunni and Twelver hadiths:

From Sahih Muslim:

قال أنس: وشهدت وليمة زينب. فأشبع الناس خبزا ولحما. وكان يبعثني فأدعوا الناس. فلما فرغ قام وتبعته. فتخلف رجلان استأنس بهما الحديث. لم يخرجا. فجعل يمر على نسائه. فيسلم على كل واحدة منهن “سلام عليكم. كيف أنتم يا أهل البيت؟” فيقولون: بخير.

Anas said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their heart’s content, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as-Salamu ‘alaikum to every one of them and said: Members of the household(Ahl-Al bayt), how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state. (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Hadith 3328)


In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith of ‘Ali(ra) talking about marriage:

عن علي ( عليه السلام ) ، قال : ” من أراد منكم التزويج إلى أن قال فإذا زفت زوجته ودخلت عليه ، فليصل ركعتين ثم ليمسح يده على ناصيتها ، ثم ليقل : اللهم بارك لي في أهلي و بارك لهم في ، وما جمعت بيننا فاجمع بيننا في خير ويمن وبركة ، وإذا جعلتها فرقة فاجعلها فرقة إلى خير ، فإذا جلس إلى جانبها فليمسح بناصيتها۔ مستدرك الوسائل – الميرزا النوري ج 41 ص 220۔

Translation: From ‘Ali (as): …So when his wife is wed to him and she entered on him, he should pray two Raka’at then wipe his hand on her forelock, then he should say: “O Allah bless my Ahel for me and bless me for them, if you have gathered us then gather us for goodness and if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness.” then if he sits by her side he would wipe her forelock.

Abu Muhammad

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2017, 06:47:02 PM »
Assalamu alaykum.

I'm Shia but after reading some of the posts and watching some videos on here, I feel like I may be in the wrong sect. You seem to be very knowledgeable on here, so I would appreciate if some of you could take a few minutes of your time to answer two of my sincere questions:

The brothers here are very knowledgeable with regard to Sunni/Twelver issues. I myself learnt a lot by following their discussions (as well as their articles).

May Allah guide you and me to the truth always... Aamiin...

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2017, 07:15:13 PM »
^ All brother Mojataba wrote above is inaccurate and really OLD, these inaccuracies and weak arguments have been refuted thoroughly all over the internet.

What you're claiming as authentic is most likely not authentic, you cherry picked the version you liked, your grammatical argument is weak, you cherry picked a Hadith from Zayd, you disregarded a ton of solid evidence then you went and built an unreasonable conclusion and Madhab.

You're way behind brother Mojtaba. Here's a few solid refutations to name a few:

Our articles proving Wives of Prophet(Saw) being part of Aal and Ahlelbayt of Prophet(saw):
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/our-articles-proving-wives-of-prophetsaw-being-part-of-aal-and-ahlelbayt-of-prophetsaw/
They are completely accurate. This is Muslim who has narrated in two places of his Sahih that Zayd said that the wives of Prophet are not between Ahlul Bayt.
Also, Ummi Salama (ra) herself said that she wished that Prophet said that she was between Ahlul Bayt. The Hadith is Sahih. The chain of the narrators of the Hadith is as the following:

حدثنا فَهْدٌ حدثنا سَعِيدُ بن كَثِيرِ بن عُفَيْرٍ حدثنا ابن لَهِيعَةَ عن أبي صَخْرٍ عن أبي مُعَاوِيَةَ الْبَجَلِيِّ عن عَمْرَةَ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةِ قالت أَتَيْتُ أُمَّ سَلَمَةَ فَسَلَّمْتُ عليها فقالت من أَنْتِ فقلت عَمْرَةُ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةُ فقالت عَمْرَةُ يا أُمَّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَخْبِرِينِي عن هذا الرَّجُلِ الذي قُتِلَ بين أَظْهُرِنَا فَمُحِبٌّ وَمُبْغِضٌ تُرِيدُ عَلِيَّ بن أبي طَالِبٍ قالت أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ أَتُحِبِّينَهُ أَمْ تُبْغِضِينَهُ قالت ما أُحِبُّهُ وَلاَ أُبْغِضُهُ فقالت أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ هذه الآيَةَ إنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ إلَى آخِرِهَا وما في الْبَيْتِ إِلاَّ جِبْرِيلُ وَرَسُولُ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَلِيُّ وَفَاطِمَةُ وَحَسَنٌ وَحُسَيْنٌ عليهم السلام فَقُلْت يا رَسُولَ اللهِ أنا من أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ فقال إنَّ لَك عِنْدَ اللهِ خَيْرًا فَوَدِدْتُ أَنَّهُ قال نعم فَكَانَ أَحَبَّ إلَيَّ مِمَّا تَطْلُعُ عليه الشَّمْسُ وَتَغْرُبُ.

1.فهد بن سليمان: He was ثقة i.e., reliable

فهد بن سليمان أبو محمد الكوفيّ الدّلاّل النّحّاس . نزيل مصر ... وعنه : أبو جعفر الطَّحاويّ ، وعليّ بن سراجّ المصري... قال ابن يونس : كان دلاّلاً في البَزّ . وكان ثقة ثبتاً .

(الذهبي ، تاريخ الإسلام، ج 20 ص 89 ، تحقيق د. عمر عبد السلام تدمرى،دار الكتاب العربي بيروت: Tarikhul Islam by Az-Zahabi)

2.سعيد بن كثير بن عفير, who is from the narrators of the Sahih of Al-Bukhari and Muslim: صدوق: honest

سعيد بن كثير بن عفير بالمهملة والفاء مصغر الأنصاري مولاهم المصري وقد ينسب إلى جده صدوق عالم بالأنساب وغيرها.

تقريب التهذيب ج 1 ص 240، رقم: 2382: Taqrib At-Tahzib by Al-Asqalani

3. عبد الله بن لهيعة , who is between the narrators in Hadiths of Sahih Muslim, Sunan of At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, etd.: صدوق: honest

عبد الله بن لهيعة بفتح اللام وكسر بن عقبة الحضرمي أبو عبد الرحمن المصري القاضي صدوق من السابعة خلط بعد احتراق كتبه ورواية بن المبارك وابن وهب عنه أعدل من غيرهما وله في مسلم بعض شيء مقرون مات سنة أربع وسبعين وقد ناف على الثمانين م د ت ق .

تقريب التهذيب ج 1 ص 319، ح3563. Taqrib At-Tahzib by Al-Asqalani

4. ابو صخر حميد بن زياد, who is between the narrators in Hadiths of Sahih Muslim and other Sihah As-Sitta: Ahmad ibn Hambal has said that he does not have any problem (قال أحمد ليس به بأس):

حميد بن زياد أبو صخر المدني الخراط عن أبي سلمة وأبي صالح السمان وعنه بن وهب والقطان مختلف فيه قال أحمد ليس به بأس م د ت ق

الكاشف ج 1 ص 353، رقم: 1249: Al-Kashif by Az-Zahabi

5. ابو معاوية البجلي, who is between the narrators in Hadiths of Sahih Muslim, Sunans of At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Nisa'i and Abu Dawood: موثق (relaible)

عمار بن معاوية الدهني أبو معاوية عن أبي الطفيل ومجاهد وعدة وعنه شعبة والسفيانان شيعي موثق مات 133 م 4

الكاشف ج 2 ص 52، ح3998

Also, Shu'ayb Al-Arna'oot has garded a Hadith that البجلي is between its route of the narrators, as Sahih.

مسند أحمد بن حنبل ، ج 6، ص 319، ح26755

6. عمرة الهمدانية: She was between the relaible Tabeins.

عمرة الهمدانية كوفية تابعية ثقة.

العجلي، معرفة الثقات ، ج 2 ص 457، رقم: 2345، تحقيق: عبد العليم عبد العظيم البستوي، ناشر: مكتبة الدار - المدينة.

So, according to this Sahih Hadith, Ummi Salama herself believed that she is not between Ahlul Bayt (as).

Prophet Muhammad himself said that only Imam Ali, Hasan, Husain and Lady Fatima are his Ahlul Bayt.
Narrated Umm Salamah:
"The Prophet (s) put a garment over Al-Hasan, Al-Hussain, 'Ali and Fatimah, then he said: 'O Allah, these are my Ahlul Bayt and the close ones to me, so remove the Rijs from them and purify them thoroughly." So Umm Salamah said: 'And am I with them, O Messenger of Allah?' He said: "You are upon good."'

Sunan At-Tirmidhi, V5, P361, At-Tirmidhi says that the Hadith is Sahih.
Al-Albani says that the Hadith is Sahih (Sahih Sunan At-Tirmidhi by Al-Albani, V3, P306).

Prophet did not say, O Allah these are between my Ahlul Bayt. Instead, he (s) said, O Allah, these are my Ahlul Bayt.

My dear brother, the issue is clear, exept that you do not want to accept the truth.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 07:20:36 PM by Mojtaba »

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2017, 07:29:12 PM »

Salamun Alaykum.

1.Quran itself proves that the verse is not about the wives of Prophet (s):

A) In the verses which are about the wives, there are the pronouns 'كن' which is used only for a group of women [أمتعكن , أسرحكن , منكن , بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (as), the pronouns clearly change to 'كم' which is used for a group of men, or a group which includes both men and women. So, because the pronoun in the verse of At-Tat_hir which is about Ahlul Bayt is كم and not كن, so Ummi Salama (ra) who was a woman needed to be enter under the cloak to be considered as Ahlul Bayt. If the verse was انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكن الرجس ... ويطهركن تطهيرا you were right. But the vesre is not like this!
Walaikumsalam


This argument is made due to ignorance of Arabic grammar. The word Ahlulbayt is actually a collective noun, and a collective noun is always addressed with a masculine plural pronoun(KUM), regardless of who is being addressed, male or female and their number. And example of this can also be found in Quran itself , 11:73 where Hz. Sarah(as) was referred was Ahlulbayt, but the pronoun used was KUM(masculine plural).

Anyone who is objective and wants to study more about this issue, should refer this article.

Why did KUM(Masculine plural) come in 33:33 instead of KUNNA(feminine plural)?
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/ahlahlebayt-a-collective-noun-and-its-usage/

Quote
B) In the verses which are about the wives, the plural form of the word house [البيت], i.e., بيوتكن is used [وقرن في بيتكن and واذكرن ما يتلى في بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (صلوات الله وسلامه عليهم اجمعين), the sigular form of that [i.e., البيت] is used [ليذهب عنكم الرجس اهل البيت]. So, only one house is the house of Ahlul Bayt and that is the house of Lady Fatima.

This argument is again out of ignorance of Arabic language. It is being referred to family of just one person, that it is why it is called Ahlelbayt not Ahlelbuyoot.

The incorrectness of this argument which is based on ignorance, can be understood from the hadeeth which you used, from Zaid Ibn Arqam(ra), he used the term Ahlelbayt for different families , like family of Jafar, family of Aqeel, etc, these people lived in different houses(buyoot).

To find a detailed response on this issue refer the response to Argument 1 in this article.


https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/usage-of-word-ahlahlebayt-in-quran/
 

Quote
2.Sunnah
I mentioned previousely one of the evidences from Sunnah. Also, Muslim has narrated in his Sahih that it was asked from Zeyd ibn Arqam: 'Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren't the wives (of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his house hold? ' Thereupon he said: No, by Allah.(Sahih Muslim, V7, P123).
A lot of people fail to understand this hadeeth of Thaqalayn and they incorrectly use it in relation to 33:33.

Firstly, what one must keep in mind that hadeeth thaqalayn has NO RELATION with verse 33:33. The Ahlelbayt addressed in hadeeth Thaqalayn and 33:33 are not all same. In fact as per Shia belief, Hadeeth Thaqalayn doesn't include Fatima(ra), it only include their 12 Imams, where as 33:33 does include Fatima(ra) too. So you see, even as per Shia belief 33:33 and hadeeth thaqalayn have no relation.

Secondly, as for the view of Zaid(ra) then look at this hadeeth:

“He (Husain) said to Zaid: ‘Who are the members of his household? Aren’t his wives the members of his family?’ Thereupon he said: ‘His wives are the members of his family but here the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden.’ And he said: ‘Who are they?’ Thereupon he said: ‘Ali and the offspring of Ali, Aqil and the offspring of Aqil and the offspring of Jafar and the offspring of Abbas.’ Husain said: ‘These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden?’ Zaid said: ‘Yes.’”
(Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith 5920)

So you see, Zaid(ra) agreed that in general wives of Prophet(saws) are Ahlulbayt, but the Ahlelbayt mentioned in hadeeth thaqalayn are those members on whom acceptance of charity(sadaqa) is forbidden.

However, Zaid(ra) wasn't aware that acceptance of sadaqa was also forbidden for wives of Prophet(saws). Which implies wives of Prophet (saws) are also included in Ahlelbayt mentioned in hadeeth thaqalayn. 

ابن أبي مليكة أن خالد بن سعيد بعث إلى عائشة ببقرة من الصدقة فردتها وقالت إنا آل محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم لا تحل لنا الصدقة
Narrated with sahi sanad From Ibn Abu Malika [narrated] that: Khaled Ibn Saeed sent a cow from the Sadaqah to Aisha, so she sent it back and said: We are the Aal of Muhammad(saw) the sadaqah is not permissible for us.[This hadees(narration) is authentic. Which was even said by sheikh Abdul Muhsin bin Hammad Al-’Abbad Al-Badr in his book the status of Ahlebayt in the sight of Ahle Sunnah, page 12 ]


Quote
The wives of Prophet (s) are not between Ahlul Bayt, so that we can not find a Hadith in which Ummi Salama (ra), Aisha or other wives have claimed that they are between Ahlul Bayt (as). Instead, At-Tahhavi has narrated in his book a Hadith from Ummi Salama (ra) that she wished that when she asked Prophet that is she between Ahlul Bayt, he (s) answered 'Yes' [أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ هذه الآيَةَ إنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ إلَى آخِرِهَا وما في الْبَيْتِ إِلاَّ جِبْرِيلُ وَرَسُولُ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَلِيُّ وَفَاطِمَةُ وَحَسَنٌ وَحُسَيْنٌ عليهم السلام فَقُلْت يا رَسُولَ اللهِ أنا من أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ فقال إنَّ لَك عِنْدَ اللهِ خَيْرًا فَوَدِدْتُ أَنَّهُ قال نعم فَكَانَ أَحَبَّ إلَيَّ مِمَّا تَطْلُعُ عليه الشَّمْسُ وَتَغْرُبُ.] (Sharh Mushkil Al-Athar by At-Tahhavi, V2, P244). This strongly proves that Ummi Salam did not believe that she is between Ahlul Bayt (as).
You lack knowledge about this topic. Seems you haven't researched about them at all. Refer this article for proofs, where wives of Prophet(saws) were called Ahlelbayt.

Quran and several sahi narrations explicitly shows  that wives of prophet(Saw) are Ahlelbayt.

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/quran-explicitly-shows-that-wives-of-prophetsaw-are-ahlebayt/


Quote
But why the part which is about Ahlul Bayt is between the verses which are about the wives?
The wives of Prophet(saws) were given certain commands, which are a "means of purification", adhering to these means of purification wives of Prophet(saws) were to be purified.

This article gives a logical and rational response to this question.

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/for-whom-the-verse-of-purificationtatheer-was-revealed-and-what-is-the-concept-of-purification-let-the-quran-answer/

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2017, 07:32:16 PM »

1.Quran itself proves that the verse is not about the wives of Prophet (s):

A) In the verses which are about the wives, there are the pronouns 'كن' which is used only for a group of women [أمتعكن , أسرحكن , منكن , بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (as), the pronouns clearly change to 'كم' which is used for a group of men, or a group which includes both men and women. So, because the pronoun in the verse of At-Tat_hir which is about Ahlul Bayt is كم and not كن, so Ummi Salama (ra) who was a woman needed to be enter under the cloak to be considered as Ahlul Bayt. If the verse was انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكن الرجس ... ويطهركن تطهيرا you were right. But the vesre is not like this!

If that what you claimed, how do you explain the usage of masculine pronoun that was clearly meant for woman ONLY in these Sunni and Twelver hadiths:

From Sahih Muslim:

قال أنس: وشهدت وليمة زينب. فأشبع الناس خبزا ولحما. وكان يبعثني فأدعوا الناس. فلما فرغ قام وتبعته. فتخلف رجلان استأنس بهما الحديث. لم يخرجا. فجعل يمر على نسائه. فيسلم على كل واحدة منهن “سلام عليكم. كيف أنتم يا أهل البيت؟” فيقولون: بخير.

Anas said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their heart’s content, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as-Salamu ‘alaikum to every one of them and said: Members of the household(Ahl-Al bayt), how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state. (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Hadith 3328)


In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith of ‘Ali(ra) talking about marriage:

عن علي ( عليه السلام ) ، قال : ” من أراد منكم التزويج إلى أن قال فإذا زفت زوجته ودخلت عليه ، فليصل ركعتين ثم ليمسح يده على ناصيتها ، ثم ليقل : اللهم بارك لي في أهلي و بارك لهم في ، وما جمعت بيننا فاجمع بيننا في خير ويمن وبركة ، وإذا جعلتها فرقة فاجعلها فرقة إلى خير ، فإذا جلس إلى جانبها فليمسح بناصيتها۔ مستدرك الوسائل – الميرزا النوري ج 41 ص 220۔

Translation: From ‘Ali (as): …So when his wife is wed to him and she entered on him, he should pray two Raka’at then wipe his hand on her forelock, then he should say: “O Allah bless my Ahel for me and bless me for them, if you have gathered us then gather us for goodness and if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness.” then if he sits by her side he would wipe her forelock.

Well. But what about the difference between البيت and بيوتكن?
Only the people of one house ars the Ahlul Bayt and as I have showed, Prophet in different ways identified this house.

Also, please show me a Hadith in which the wives has claimed that they are between Ahlul Bayt (as). While I have brought a Sahih one according to which Umm Salama believed that she was not between Ahlul Bayt (as).
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 07:33:51 PM by Mojtaba »

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2017, 07:36:49 PM »

1.Quran itself proves that the verse is not about the wives of Prophet (s):

A) In the verses which are about the wives, there are the pronouns 'كن' which is used only for a group of women [أمتعكن , أسرحكن , منكن , بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (as), the pronouns clearly change to 'كم' which is used for a group of men, or a group which includes both men and women. So, because the pronoun in the verse of At-Tat_hir which is about Ahlul Bayt is كم and not كن, so Ummi Salama (ra) who was a woman needed to be enter under the cloak to be considered as Ahlul Bayt. If the verse was انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكن الرجس ... ويطهركن تطهيرا you were right. But the vesre is not like this!

If that what you claimed, how do you explain the usage of masculine pronoun that was clearly meant for woman ONLY in these Sunni and Twelver hadiths:

From Sahih Muslim:

قال أنس: وشهدت وليمة زينب. فأشبع الناس خبزا ولحما. وكان يبعثني فأدعوا الناس. فلما فرغ قام وتبعته. فتخلف رجلان استأنس بهما الحديث. لم يخرجا. فجعل يمر على نسائه. فيسلم على كل واحدة منهن “سلام عليكم. كيف أنتم يا أهل البيت؟” فيقولون: بخير.

Anas said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their heart’s content, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as-Salamu ‘alaikum to every one of them and said: Members of the household(Ahl-Al bayt), how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state. (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Hadith 3328)


In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith of ‘Ali(ra) talking about marriage:

عن علي ( عليه السلام ) ، قال : ” من أراد منكم التزويج إلى أن قال فإذا زفت زوجته ودخلت عليه ، فليصل ركعتين ثم ليمسح يده على ناصيتها ، ثم ليقل : اللهم بارك لي في أهلي و بارك لهم في ، وما جمعت بيننا فاجمع بيننا في خير ويمن وبركة ، وإذا جعلتها فرقة فاجعلها فرقة إلى خير ، فإذا جلس إلى جانبها فليمسح بناصيتها۔ مستدرك الوسائل – الميرزا النوري ج 41 ص 220۔

Translation: From ‘Ali (as): …So when his wife is wed to him and she entered on him, he should pray two Raka’at then wipe his hand on her forelock, then he should say: “O Allah bless my Ahel for me and bless me for them, if you have gathered us then gather us for goodness and if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness.” then if he sits by her side he would wipe her forelock.

Well. But what about the difference between البيت and بيوتكن?
Only the people of one house ars the Ahlul Bayt and as I have showed, Prophet in different ways identified this house.

Also, please show me a Hadith in which the wives has claimed that they are between Ahlul Bayt (as). While I have brought a Sahih one according to which Umm Salama believed that she was not between Ahlul Bayt (as).

Refer my last response for this. Reply # 9.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2017, 07:52:10 PM »
^ All brother Mojataba wrote above is inaccurate and really OLD, these inaccuracies and weak arguments have been refuted thoroughly all over the internet.

What you're claiming as authentic is most likely not authentic, you cherry picked the version you liked, your grammatical argument is weak, you cherry picked a Hadith from Zayd, you disregarded a ton of solid evidence then you went and built an unreasonable conclusion and Madhab.

You're way behind brother Mojtaba. Here's a few solid refutations to name a few:

Our articles proving Wives of Prophet(Saw) being part of Aal and Ahlelbayt of Prophet(saw):
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/our-articles-proving-wives-of-prophetsaw-being-part-of-aal-and-ahlelbayt-of-prophetsaw/
They are completely accurate. This is Muslim who has narrated in two places of his Sahih that Zayd said that the wives of Prophet are not between Ahlul Bayt.
Also, Ummi Salama (ra) herself said that she wished that Prophet said that she was between Ahlul Bayt. The Hadith is Sahih. The chain of the narrators of the Hadith is as the following:

حدثنا فَهْدٌ حدثنا سَعِيدُ بن كَثِيرِ بن عُفَيْرٍ حدثنا ابن لَهِيعَةَ عن أبي صَخْرٍ عن أبي مُعَاوِيَةَ الْبَجَلِيِّ عن عَمْرَةَ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةِ قالت أَتَيْتُ أُمَّ سَلَمَةَ فَسَلَّمْتُ عليها فقالت من أَنْتِ فقلت عَمْرَةُ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةُ فقالت عَمْرَةُ يا أُمَّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَخْبِرِينِي عن هذا الرَّجُلِ الذي قُتِلَ بين أَظْهُرِنَا فَمُحِبٌّ وَمُبْغِضٌ تُرِيدُ عَلِيَّ بن أبي طَالِبٍ قالت أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ أَتُحِبِّينَهُ أَمْ تُبْغِضِينَهُ قالت ما أُحِبُّهُ وَلاَ أُبْغِضُهُ فقالت أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ هذه الآيَةَ إنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ إلَى آخِرِهَا وما في الْبَيْتِ إِلاَّ جِبْرِيلُ وَرَسُولُ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَلِيُّ وَفَاطِمَةُ وَحَسَنٌ وَحُسَيْنٌ عليهم السلام فَقُلْت يا رَسُولَ اللهِ أنا من أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ فقال إنَّ لَك عِنْدَ اللهِ خَيْرًا فَوَدِدْتُ أَنَّهُ قال نعم فَكَانَ أَحَبَّ إلَيَّ مِمَّا تَطْلُعُ عليه الشَّمْسُ وَتَغْرُبُ.

1.فهد بن سليمان: He was ثقة i.e., reliable

فهد بن سليمان أبو محمد الكوفيّ الدّلاّل النّحّاس . نزيل مصر ... وعنه : أبو جعفر الطَّحاويّ ، وعليّ بن سراجّ المصري... قال ابن يونس : كان دلاّلاً في البَزّ . وكان ثقة ثبتاً .

(الذهبي ، تاريخ الإسلام، ج 20 ص 89 ، تحقيق د. عمر عبد السلام تدمرى،دار الكتاب العربي بيروت: Tarikhul Islam by Az-Zahabi)

2.سعيد بن كثير بن عفير, who is from the narrators of the Sahih of Al-Bukhari and Muslim: صدوق: honest

سعيد بن كثير بن عفير بالمهملة والفاء مصغر الأنصاري مولاهم المصري وقد ينسب إلى جده صدوق عالم بالأنساب وغيرها.

تقريب التهذيب ج 1 ص 240، رقم: 2382: Taqrib At-Tahzib by Al-Asqalani

3. عبد الله بن لهيعة , who is between the narrators in Hadiths of Sahih Muslim, Sunan of At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, etd.: صدوق: honest

عبد الله بن لهيعة بفتح اللام وكسر بن عقبة الحضرمي أبو عبد الرحمن المصري القاضي صدوق من السابعة خلط بعد احتراق كتبه ورواية بن المبارك وابن وهب عنه أعدل من غيرهما وله في مسلم بعض شيء مقرون مات سنة أربع وسبعين وقد ناف على الثمانين م د ت ق .

تقريب التهذيب ج 1 ص 319، ح3563. Taqrib At-Tahzib by Al-Asqalani

4. ابو صخر حميد بن زياد, who is between the narrators in Hadiths of Sahih Muslim and other Sihah As-Sitta: Ahmad ibn Hambal has said that he does not have any problem (قال أحمد ليس به بأس):

حميد بن زياد أبو صخر المدني الخراط عن أبي سلمة وأبي صالح السمان وعنه بن وهب والقطان مختلف فيه قال أحمد ليس به بأس م د ت ق

الكاشف ج 1 ص 353، رقم: 1249: Al-Kashif by Az-Zahabi

5. ابو معاوية البجلي, who is between the narrators in Hadiths of Sahih Muslim, Sunans of At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Nisa'i and Abu Dawood: موثق (relaible)

عمار بن معاوية الدهني أبو معاوية عن أبي الطفيل ومجاهد وعدة وعنه شعبة والسفيانان شيعي موثق مات 133 م 4

الكاشف ج 2 ص 52، ح3998

Also, Shu'ayb Al-Arna'oot has garded a Hadith that البجلي is between its route of the narrators, as Sahih.

مسند أحمد بن حنبل ، ج 6، ص 319، ح26755

6. عمرة الهمدانية: She was between the relaible Tabeins.

عمرة الهمدانية كوفية تابعية ثقة.

العجلي، معرفة الثقات ، ج 2 ص 457، رقم: 2345، تحقيق: عبد العليم عبد العظيم البستوي، ناشر: مكتبة الدار - المدينة.

So, according to this Sahih Hadith, Ummi Salama herself believed that she is not between Ahlul Bayt (as).

This narration is very weak

In the Isnad of the report Ibn Lahee’ah (Abdullah bin Lahee’ah) was weak with the agreement of scholars as none of the three Abdullah, who were aware of actual narrations of Ibn Lahee’ah, are the narrator of this report. And those three Abdullah were: Abdullah bin Mubarak, Abdullah bin Wahb and Abdullah bin Yazeed Al-Muqree.

Ibn Sa’d said: People used to read Ahadith which were not from his narrations, and he did not say anything. (and it was taken as his narration). When it was asked to him, he replied: “What is my sin? They come to me reading narrations from books and then leave. If they had asked me, I would have said that it was not my Hadith”.[Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d]

Abdur-Rahman Ibn Mahdi said: I do not count anything which I heard from among the narrations of Ibn Lahee’ah, except what was narrated by Ibn Mubarak and his likes.

Yahya ibn Mu’een said: He was nothing, regardless of whether his conditions were changed or not.

And in another report Ibn Mu’een said: “He was nothing in all of what he narrates”. Abu Zar’ah was asked regarding those people who heard him earlier, he replied: “Hearing of early and later narrators are equal (in terms of authenticity). However, Ibn Mubarak used to look for his Asl (books etc) and they wrote from it. And all others used to took from Shaykh, and Ibn Lahee’ah didn’t hold (remember) his narrations, and he was from among those who are not to be taken as proof”. Ibn Abi Hatim said: I asked my father, “Is Ibn Lahee’ah to be taken as proof when Ibn Mubarak and Ibn Wahb narrates from him?” He replied, No. [Al-Jarh wa At-Ta’deel (5/147)]

Imam Ibn Hibban said: “I studied narrations of Ibn Lahee’ah narrated by early narrators and later narrators, so I found Takhleet (confusion, mix up between different narratons) in his later narrations, and many narrations which did not narrated by early narrators. So I back to check it for support, so I found him performing Tadlees from weak narrators from those whom Ibn Lahee’ah considered to be trustworthy. And in that way those fabrication were attributed to him.” [Al-Majrooheen (2/12)]

Moreover Saaid ibn Kathir ibn Ufayr was saduq.

Abu Muawiyah al-Bajali. It was said that he’s Ammar ad-Duhani. And he’s majhool al-hal.


Quote
Prophet Muhammad himself said that only Imam Ali, Hasan, Husain and Lady Fatima are his Ahlul Bayt.

Prophet did not say, O Allah these are between my Ahlul Bayt. Instead, he (s) said, O Allah, these are my Ahlul Bayt.
Why would Prophet(saws) say to Allah that these were his Ahlulbayt, when the were was ALREADY revealed , and Allah had already wished?

The only rational answer would be that, Prophet(saws) meant, these are ALSO his Ahlelbayt, so he made dua to Allah to include them in His wish, which HE made for wives of Prophet(saws).

عن ابن عباس : ?إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ( [ الأحزاب : 33 ] . قال : نزلت في أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم خاصة .
الراوي: عكرمة المحدث: الذهبي – المصدر: سير أعلام النبلاء – لصفحة أو الرقم: 2/221
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صالح

Ibn Abbas RAA: “Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet’s] household,” He said: It was revealed especially about the wives of the prophet PBUH.

Siyar A’alam al nubalaa
Rank: Good Isnad.

Abu Muhammad

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2017, 08:40:47 PM »

1.Quran itself proves that the verse is not about the wives of Prophet (s):

A) In the verses which are about the wives, there are the pronouns 'كن' which is used only for a group of women [أمتعكن , أسرحكن , منكن , بيوتكن]. But in the part which is about Ahlul Bayt (as), the pronouns clearly change to 'كم' which is used for a group of men, or a group which includes both men and women. So, because the pronoun in the verse of At-Tat_hir which is about Ahlul Bayt is كم and not كن, so Ummi Salama (ra) who was a woman needed to be enter under the cloak to be considered as Ahlul Bayt. If the verse was انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكن الرجس ... ويطهركن تطهيرا you were right. But the vesre is not like this!

If that what you claimed, how do you explain the usage of masculine pronoun that was clearly meant for woman ONLY in these Sunni and Twelver hadiths:

From Sahih Muslim:

قال أنس: وشهدت وليمة زينب. فأشبع الناس خبزا ولحما. وكان يبعثني فأدعوا الناس. فلما فرغ قام وتبعته. فتخلف رجلان استأنس بهما الحديث. لم يخرجا. فجعل يمر على نسائه. فيسلم على كل واحدة منهن “سلام عليكم. كيف أنتم يا أهل البيت؟” فيقولون: بخير.

Anas said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their heart’s content, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as-Salamu ‘alaikum to every one of them and said: Members of the household(Ahl-Al bayt), how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state. (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Hadith 3328)


In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith of ‘Ali(ra) talking about marriage:

عن علي ( عليه السلام ) ، قال : ” من أراد منكم التزويج إلى أن قال فإذا زفت زوجته ودخلت عليه ، فليصل ركعتين ثم ليمسح يده على ناصيتها ، ثم ليقل : اللهم بارك لي في أهلي و بارك لهم في ، وما جمعت بيننا فاجمع بيننا في خير ويمن وبركة ، وإذا جعلتها فرقة فاجعلها فرقة إلى خير ، فإذا جلس إلى جانبها فليمسح بناصيتها۔ مستدرك الوسائل – الميرزا النوري ج 41 ص 220۔

Translation: From ‘Ali (as): …So when his wife is wed to him and she entered on him, he should pray two Raka’at then wipe his hand on her forelock, then he should say: “O Allah bless my Ahel for me and bless me for them, if you have gathered us then gather us for goodness and if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness.” then if he sits by her side he would wipe her forelock.

Well. But what about the difference between البيت and بيوتكن?
Only the people of one house ars the Ahlul Bayt and as I have showed, Prophet in different ways identified this house.

Also, please show me a Hadith in which the wives has claimed that they are between Ahlul Bayt (as). While I have brought a Sahih one according to which Umm Salama believed that she was not between Ahlul Bayt (as).

Good… From your respond, I conclude that the view of 33:33 was revealed for Prophet's (saw) wives ONLY cannot be refuted by means of arabic grammar as per your attempt.

With regard to singular "Bayt" and not plural "Buyoot", then why Prophet (saw) addressed his wives as "Ahl Al-Bayt" and not "Ahl Al-Buyoot" in the same hadith:

From Sahih Muslim:

قال أنس: وشهدت وليمة زينب. فأشبع الناس خبزا ولحما. وكان يبعثني فأدعوا الناس. فلما فرغ قام وتبعته. فتخلف رجلان استأنس بهما الحديث. لم يخرجا. فجعل يمر على نسائه. فيسلم على كل واحدة منهن “سلام عليكم. كيف أنتم يا أهل البيت؟” فيقولون: بخير.

Anas said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their heart’s content, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as-Salamu ‘alaikum to every one of them and said: Members of the household(Ahl-Al bayt), how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state. (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Hadith 3328)


And also, the last part of hadith thaqalayn that you quoted in ealier post, why did Zaid use "Ahl Al-Bayt" when he referred to more than one family i.e. families of Ali, Aqil, Jaafar and Abbas and not plural "Buyoot".

 قال نساءه من اهل بيته ولكن اهل بيته من حرم الصدقة بعده.قال من هم؟ قال هم ال على وال عقيل و ال جعفر و ال عباس قال كل هؤلاء حرم الصدقة؟ قال نعم

Zayd replied: “His wives are part of his Ahl al-Bayt but his Ahl al-Bayt also includes those upon whom zakah is forbidden.” Husayn asked: “Who are they?” Zayd replied: “They are the family of `Ali, the family of `Aqil, the family of Ja`far and the family of `Abbas.” Husayn asked: “Is zakah forbidden for all of them?” Zayd replied: “Yes.”


For the rest of your syubhah, refer to brother Noor-us-Sunnah's excellent posts and the links provided by him.

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2017, 02:05:32 PM »
Walaikumsalam

This argument is made due to ignorance of Arabic grammar. The word Ahlulbayt is actually a collective noun, and a collective noun is always addressed with a masculine plural pronoun(KUM), regardless of who is being addressed, male or female and their number. And example of this can also be found in Quran itself , 11:73 where Hz. Sarah(as) was referred was Ahlulbayt, but the pronoun used was KUM(masculine plural).

Anyone who is objective and wants to study more about this issue, should refer this article.

Why did KUM(Masculine plural) come in 33:33 instead of KUNNA(feminine plural)?
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/ahlahlebayt-a-collective-noun-and-its-usage/
Salamun Alaykum wa Rahmatollah.

Dear brother, the verse 11:73 never makes any sense. In that verse, the angels addressed the whole of family of the Abraham (as). When Sara amazed, the angels said to her that she should not marvel, because the blessings of Allah have always embraced them. For example, it was His blessing when He saved Abraham from burning in the fire, etc. So, they addressed all the family, not only Sara herself. You should note this point.

11:73
They said: Do you wonder at Allah's bidding? The mercy of Allah and His blessings are on you, O people of the house, surely He is Praised, Glorious.

This argument is again out of ignorance of Arabic language. It is being referred to family of just one person, that it is why it is called Ahlelbayt not Ahlelbuyoot.

The incorrectness of this argument which is based on ignorance, can be understood from the hadeeth which you used, from Zaid Ibn Arqam(ra), he used the term Ahlelbayt for different families , like family of Jafar, family of Aqeel, etc, these people lived in different houses(buyoot).

To find a detailed response on this issue refer the response to Argument 1 in this article.

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/usage-of-word-ahlahlebayt-in-quran/
Yes. The wives of Prophet (s) are between his household (Ahlul Bayt) and family, in general. No one can reject this issue. But according to the Sahih Hadiths from Prophet Muhammad (s), Umm Salama (ra), Imam Al-Hasan (as), Imam As-Sajjad (as) and also Aisha, the term 'Ahlul Bayt' that is used in the verse of At-Tat_hir is a special term and only refers to the Prophet himslef, Lady Fatima, Imam Ali, Al-Hasan and Al-Husain and the other Imams from the progeny of Imam Al-Husain (peace be upon them all):

1.As I brought the Sahih Hadiths previousely, Prophet Muhammad (s) recited the verse of At-Tat_hir at the time of Salats Al-Fajr for 6 months only to the house of Lady Fatima, and not other houses.

2.As I brought the Sahih Hadiths previousely, Prophet Muhammad (s) siad at the time of revelation of that verse that only they are his Ahlul Bayt, not his wives [(O Allah, these are my Ahlul Bayt) not (O Allah, these are also between my Ahlul Bayt)].

3.Imam Al-Hasan said that they are the Ahlul Bayt that the verse of At-Tat_hir refers to [Source, Majma'uz Zawa'id by Al-Haythami, 9/146 Al-Al-Haythami says that the Hadith is authentic : Al-Hasan after the martirdom of Ali, declared a Khotbah in which he said: "We are the Ahlul Bayt for whom Allah has revealed: Only Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification"].

4.Imam As-Sajjad (as) said to a man who was from Ash-Sham: "Have not you read in the Chapter of Al-Ahzab: 'Only Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification'?" Then the man said: Are you those [Ahlul Bayt]? Then Imam As-Sajjad replied: 'Yes'. (See, Tafsir At-Tabari, V22, P12/ Tafsir Ibn Kathir V3, P495).

5.Al-Bukhari has narrated in his Sahih that Aisha said: Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur'an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence [of the slander] (Sahih Al-Bukhari, V6, P42). So the verse of At-Tat_hir has no relation to Aisha and the other wives.

6.As I said, according to a Sahih Hadith, Umm Salama (ra) said: I wished that Prophet said to me, 'Yes' [when I asked him that am I between Ahlul Bayt about whom the verse of At-Tathir revealed]! So, she believed that she was not between the Ahlul Bayt to which the verse of At-Tat_hir refres.

So, it is clear that the verse of At-Tat_hir is irevelant to the wives of the Prophet (s). Yes, they are between the household of Prophet, but as it has become clear, the Ahlul Bayt which is in the verse of At-Tat_hir only refers to Prophet himself, Lady Fatima and 12 Imams.

A lot of people fail to understand this hadeeth of Thaqalayn and they incorrectly use it in relation to 33:33.

Firstly, what one must keep in mind that hadeeth thaqalayn has NO RELATION with verse 33:33. The Ahlelbayt addressed in hadeeth Thaqalayn and 33:33 are not all same. In fact as per Shia belief, Hadeeth Thaqalayn doesn't include Fatima(ra), it only include their 12 Imams, where as 33:33 does include Fatima(ra) too. So you see, even as per Shia belief 33:33 and hadeeth thaqalayn have no relation.

Secondly, as for the view of Zaid(ra) then look at this hadeeth:

“He (Husain) said to Zaid: ‘Who are the members of his household? Aren’t his wives the members of his family?’ Thereupon he said: ‘His wives are the members of his family but here the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden.’ And he said: ‘Who are they?’ Thereupon he said: ‘Ali and the offspring of Ali, Aqil and the offspring of Aqil and the offspring of Jafar and the offspring of Abbas.’ Husain said: ‘These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden?’ Zaid said: ‘Yes.’”
(Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith 5920)

So you see, Zaid(ra) agreed that in general wives of Prophet(saws) are Ahlulbayt, but the Ahlelbayt mentioned in hadeeth thaqalayn are those members on whom acceptance of charity(sadaqa) is forbidden.

However, Zaid(ra) wasn't aware that acceptance of sadaqa was also forbidden for wives of Prophet(saws). Which implies wives of Prophet (saws) are also included in Ahlelbayt mentioned in hadeeth thaqalayn. 

ابن أبي مليكة أن خالد بن سعيد بعث إلى عائشة ببقرة من الصدقة فردتها وقالت إنا آل محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم لا تحل لنا الصدقة
Narrated with sahi sanad From Ibn Abu Malika [narrated] that: Khaled Ibn Saeed sent a cow from the Sadaqah to Aisha, so she sent it back and said: We are the Aal of Muhammad(saw) the sadaqah is not permissible for us.[This hadees(narration) is authentic. Which was even said by sheikh Abdul Muhsin bin Hammad Al-’Abbad Al-Badr in his book the status of Ahlebayt in the sight of Ahle Sunnah, page 12 ]
As I said and proved, the wives of Prophet are between his households, but the Ahlul Bayt which is in the verse of At-Tat_hir is irrevelant to them.
Also, according to the Hadith of Thaqalain, Ahlul Bayt and Quran never separate from each other. But, Aisha disobeyed Quran, so that she separated from it, because Quran ordered the wives of Prophet: Stay in your houses [33:33]. But Aisha exit from his house and fought Imam Ali (as). Also, Prophet frequentely warned her not to fight Imam Ali, but she ignored the clear orders of Allah and His Prophet and did what she did! Al-Albani has confessed that Aisha made a mistake in this doing of her (Silsilatul Ahadith As-Sahihah by Al-Albani, V1, P. 854, ولا نشك أن خروج أم المؤمنين كان خطأ من أصله).

Also, according to the Hadiths that At-Tirmidhi has grated as Hasan and Al-AlBani has grated as Sahih (Sahih Al-Jami' Al-Saqir, V1, P482), Hakim has grated as Sahih (Al-Mostadrak Aala As-Sahihayn by Al-Haakim, V 4, P 72), Al-Asqalani has grated as Sahih (Al-Matalibul Aliyyah by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, V16, P142) and Al-Haythami has grated as Sahih (As-Sawa'iq, V2, P438), too, we must follow and obey Ahlul Bayt (as) for being guided to the straight way and not to go astray [إِنِّي تَارِك فِيكُم مَا إِن تمسكتم بِهِ لن تضلوا بعدِي أَحدهمَا أعظم من الآخر كتاب الله عز وَجل حَبل مَمْدُود من السَّمَاء إِلَى الأَرْض وعترتي أهل بَيْتِي وَلنْ يفترقا حَتَّى يردا عَليّ الْحَوْض فانظروا كَيفَ تخلفوني فيهمَا]. So that, I am wondering If we consider Aisha as the Ahlul Bayt to which the verse of At-Tat_hir refers, while she ignored the orders of Allah and His Prophet in his battle against Imam Ali (as), we had to follow her if we were in that time?!
The Hadith of Thaqalain says that we must follow Ahlul Bayt and they never separate from Quran, because Allah has purified them with a throught purification. So, the wives can not be considered as the Ahlul Bayt which are mentioned in Aya At-Tat_hir and Hadith Ath-Thaqalain.

Certainly the term Ahlul Bayt in the verse of At-Tat_hir never refers to the wives.

You lack knowledge about this topic. Seems you haven't researched about them at all. Refer this article for proofs, where wives of Prophet(saws) were called Ahlelbayt.

Quran and several sahi narrations explicitly shows  that wives of prophet(Saw) are Ahlelbayt.

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/quran-explicitly-shows-that-wives-of-prophetsaw-are-ahlebayt/
As I said, the wives are the household of Prophet in general. No one can reject that the wives of a man are his household. But, as I proved by different Sahih Hadiths, the term Ahlul Bayt in the verse of At-Tat_hir is a special term that as Prophet introduced to us, it only refers to special family and progeny of him, i.e., Prophet himself (s), Lady Fatima (as) and 12 Imams (as).

Differente eminent Sunni scholars have also siad that Ahlul Bayt in the verse of At-Tat_hir refers to Ali, Fatima, Al-Hasan, Al-Husain (as), but does not refer to the wives:

1.Ibn Hajar Al-Haythami: The majority of the Mufassireen have believed that it [i.e., Aya At-Tat_hir] was revealed for Ali, Fatima, Al-Hasan, Al-Husain (As-Sawa'iq by Al-Haythami, V2, P421)

2.Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani after narrating the Hadith of Aya At-Tat_hir from Umm Salama (ra) says: The Ahl Al-Bayt in this case refers to the Khadija, because Al-Hasan and Al-Husain are from Fatima and Fatima is her duaghter, and Ali grew in her house while he was little. So it is obvious that the term Ahl Al-Bayt of Prophet refers to Khadija, and not others (Fath Al-Bari by Al-Asqalani, V7, P138).

3.Allama Al-Azizi: Ahlul Bayt are Ali, Fatima Al-Zahra and the descendants of them (Al-Siraj Al-Monir, V1, P46).
The wives of Prophet(saws) were given certain commands, which are a "means of purification", adhering to these means of purification wives of Prophet(saws) were to be purified.

This article gives a logical and rational response to this question.

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/for-whom-the-verse-of-purificationtatheer-was-revealed-and-what-is-the-concept-of-purification-let-the-quran-answer/
The word إنما (only) in the first of the verse reject your saying. Contrary to what you think, the will of Allah in this verse is Takwinniyya, not Tashri'iyya (purifying by giving some commands). Because, the Tashri'iyya will of Allah is to purify all people, not only the wives of Prophet (s). But this verse has إنما which restricts the will of Allah to Ahlul Bayt. So, this will can not be Tashri'iyya.
Because of this Takwiniyya will of Allah, Prophet Muhammad (s) said: Allah placed the tribes in different houses and placed me in the best of them, this is because of His saying: "Only Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification." So my Ahl Al-Bayt and myself are pure from the sins.
Ash-Shookani has said that it is permisible to refer to this Hadith [وَقَدْ ذَكَرْنَا هَاهُنَا مَا يَصْلُحُ لِلتَّمَسُّكِ بِهِ دُونَ ما لا يَصْلُحُ] (Fath Al-Ghadir, V4, P323). Hakim At_Tirmidhi, At-Tabarani, Al-Bayhaqi and Ibn Mardowayh have narrated this Hadith in their books.

Waffaqakumullah.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2017, 02:10:59 PM by Mojtaba »

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2017, 04:54:33 PM »
This narration is very weak

In the Isnad of the report Ibn Lahee’ah (Abdullah bin Lahee’ah) was weak with the agreement of scholars as none of the three Abdullah, who were aware of actual narrations of Ibn Lahee’ah, are the narrator of this report. And those three Abdullah were: Abdullah bin Mubarak, Abdullah bin Wahb and Abdullah bin Yazeed Al-Muqree.

Ibn Sa’d said: People used to read Ahadith which were not from his narrations, and he did not say anything. (and it was taken as his narration). When it was asked to him, he replied: “What is my sin? They come to me reading narrations from books and then leave. If they had asked me, I would have said that it was not my Hadith”.[Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d]

Abdur-Rahman Ibn Mahdi said: I do not count anything which I heard from among the narrations of Ibn Lahee’ah, except what was narrated by Ibn Mubarak and his likes.

Yahya ibn Mu’een said: He was nothing, regardless of whether his conditions were changed or not.

And in another report Ibn Mu’een said: “He was nothing in all of what he narrates”. Abu Zar’ah was asked regarding those people who heard him earlier, he replied: “Hearing of early and later narrators are equal (in terms of authenticity). However, Ibn Mubarak used to look for his Asl (books etc) and they wrote from it. And all others used to took from Shaykh, and Ibn Lahee’ah didn’t hold (remember) his narrations, and he was from among those who are not to be taken as proof”. Ibn Abi Hatim said: I asked my father, “Is Ibn Lahee’ah to be taken as proof when Ibn Mubarak and Ibn Wahb narrates from him?” He replied, No. [Al-Jarh wa At-Ta’deel (5/147)]

Imam Ibn Hibban said: “I studied narrations of Ibn Lahee’ah narrated by early narrators and later narrators, so I found Takhleet (confusion, mix up between different narratons) in his later narrations, and many narrations which did not narrated by early narrators. So I back to check it for support, so I found him performing Tadlees from weak narrators from those whom Ibn Lahee’ah considered to be trustworthy. And in that way those fabrication were attributed to him.” [Al-Majrooheen (2/12)]

Moreover Saaid ibn Kathir ibn Ufayr was saduq.

Abu Muawiyah al-Bajali. It was said that he’s Ammar ad-Duhani. And he’s majhool al-hal.
Salamun Alaykum.

Dear brother, how much easy you rate this Sahih Hadith as weak!

1.Ibn Lahee’ah

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani has said that he was honest. Also, Ibn Habban has mentioned him in Ath-Thiqat.

Anyway, this Hadith has also another route of the narrators in which there is not Ibn Lahee'a. See Ash-Shari'a by Al-Ajori, V4, P2095.
وَحَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي دَاوُدَ أَيْضًا قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ دَاوُدَ الْمَهْرِيُّ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ وَهْبٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو صَخْرٍ , عَنْ أَبِي مُعَاوِيَةَ الْبَجَلِيُّ , عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ , عَنْ أَبِي الصَّهْبَاءِ , عَنْ عَمْرَةَ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةِ قَالَتْ: قَالَتْ لِي أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ: أَنْتِ عَمْرَةُ؟ قَالَتْ: قُلْتُ: نَعَمْ يَا أُمَّتَاهْ , أَلَا تُخْبِرِينِي عَنْ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ الَّذِي أُصِيبَ بَيْنَ ظَهْرَانَيْنَا , فَمُحِبٌّ وَغَيْرُ مُحِبٍّ؟ فَقَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ: أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ {إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا} [الأحزاب: 33] وَمَا فِي الْبَيْتِ إِلَّا جِبْرِيلُ وَرَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَعَلِيٌّ وَفَاطِمَةُ وَالْحَسَنُ وَالْحُسَيْنُ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا وَأَنَا فَقُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَنَا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ؟ قَالَ: «أَنْتِ مِنْ صَالِحِي نِسَائِي» قَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ: يَا عَمْرَةُ , فَلَوْ قَالَ: «نَعَمْ» كَانَ أَحَبَّ إِلَيَّ مِمَّا تَطْلُعُ عَلَيْهِ الشَّمْسُ وَتَغْرُبُ

This route of the narrators is also Sahih.

2.Abu Muawiyah al-Bajali

Dear brother, why do you say that he is unknown?!

Different Imams of Hadiths has said that he is relaible: See Seyr 'A'lam An-Nubala by Az-Zahabi:
عمار الدهني
الإمام المحدث أبو معاوية ، عمار بن معاوية بن أسلم البجلي ثم الدهني ، الكوفي ، وفي بني عبد القيس أيضا دهن بن عذرة .
وثقه أحمد بن حنبل وجماعة . توفي سنة ثلاث وثلاثين ومائة قاله مطين .

So, certainly this Hadith is Sahih.

Why would Prophet(saws) say to Allah that these were his Ahlulbayt, when the were was ALREADY revealed , and Allah had already wished?

The only rational answer would be that, Prophet(saws) meant, these are ALSO his Ahlelbayt, so he made dua to Allah to include them in His wish, which HE made for wives of Prophet(saws).
Prophet for making clear that only Imam Ali, Lady Fatima, Imam Al-Hasan and Al-Husain are the Ahlul Bayt about whom the verse of At-Tat_hir talks, said that O Allah these are my Ahl Al-Bayt. Your saying does not make any sense. Indeed, Prophet used from the cloak and directly addressed the Ahlul Bayt about whom the verse was revealed to remove any misunderstandings. Dear brother, see the different emphases of Prophet for making clear the meaning of the verse.

At here, mentioning the Hadith of Mubahila is also useful:
Sa'd (ra) narrated:
when the following verse was revealed: "say, Come! Let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, our souls and your souls, then let us pray earnestly, and call down Allah’s curse upon the liars." Allah's Messenger (s) called 'Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain and said: O Allah, these are my Ahl [family].

Sahih Muslim, V4, P1871
Sunan At-Tirmidhi, V5, P225 (Shakir)

عن ابن عباس : ?إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ( [ الأحزاب : 33 ] . قال : نزلت في أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم خاصة .
الراوي: عكرمة المحدث: الذهبي – المصدر: سير أعلام النبلاء – لصفحة أو الرقم: 2/221
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صالح

Ibn Abbas RAA: “Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet’s] household,” He said: It was revealed especially about the wives of the prophet PBUH.

Siyar A’alam al nubalaa
Rank: Good Isnad.
'Akrama attributed this saying to Ibn Abbas (ra). But who was 'Akrama?

1.
إبراهيم بن سعد ، عن أبيه ، عن سعيد بن المسيب أنه كان يقول لغلام له : يا برد ، لا تكذب علي كما يكذب عكرمة على ابن عباس

Ibrahim bin Sa'd, from his father that Sa'eed bin Mosayyib used to say to one of his slaves: "O Bord, do not attribute lies to me, as 'Akrama who attributes lies to Ibn Abbas!"

Al-Ilal by Ibn Hambal, V2, P71 (رواية ابنه عبد الله)
Seyr 'A'lam An-Nubala by Az-Zahabi, V5, P22

2.
وقال أبو خلف عبد الله بن عيسى الخزاز عن يحيى البكاء سمعت بن عمر يقول لنافع اتق الله ويحك يا نافع ولا تكذب علي كما كذب عكرمة على بن عباس

Abu Khalaf Abdullah bin Isa Al-Khazzaz from Yahya Al-Bakka' who said: "I heard that Ibn Umar used to say to Nafi': 'O Nafi', fear God and don't attribute lies to me, as 'Akrama who attributes lies to Ibn Abbas.'."

Tahzib At-Tahzib by Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, V7, P267
Seyr 'Alam An-Nobala by Az-Zahabi, V5, P22

3.
جرير بن عبد الحميد ، عن يزيد بن أبي زياد قال : دخلت على علي بن عبد الله بن عباس ، وعكرمة مقيد على باب الحش ، قال : قلت : ما لهذا كذا ، قال : إنه يكذب على أبي

Jarir bin Abd Al-Hamid from Yazid bin Abi Ziyad who siad: I went to Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas [i.e., son of Ibn Abbas (ra)], while 'Akrama was fastened to the gate of the garden of palm trees. So, I said [to Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas]: "Why is this man in this position?!" He replied: "Because he attribute lies to my father!"

Tahzib At-Tahzib by Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, V7, P268
Seyr 'A'lam An-Nobala by Az-Zahabi, V5, P23
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because 'Akrama is who has attributed this saying to Ibn Abbas (ra), so those who has intelligence can not accept it.

Best wishes!
« Last Edit: August 03, 2017, 05:05:26 PM by Mojtaba »

Abu Muhammad

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #16 on: August 03, 2017, 06:04:40 PM »
Brother Mojtaba,

Just want a minor clarification. Do you mean "between my Ahl Al-Bayt" is "among my Ahl-Bayt"?

Abu Muhammad

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2017, 06:52:46 PM »
Yes. The wives of Prophet (s) are between his household (Ahlul Bayt) and family, in general. No one can reject this issue. But according to the Sahih Hadiths from Prophet Muhammad (s), Umm Salama (ra), Imam Al-Hasan (as), Imam As-Sajjad (as) andalso Aisha, the term 'Ahlul Bayt' that is used in the verse of At-Tat_hir is a special term and only refers to the Prophet himslef, Lady Fatima, Imam Ali, Al-Hasan and Al-Husain and the other Imams from the progeny of Imam Al-Husain (peace be upon them all):

So, it is clear that the verse of At-Tat_hir is irevelant to the wives of the Prophet (s). Yes, they are between the household of Prophet, but as it has become clear, the Ahlul Bayt which is in the verse of At-Tat_hir only refers to Prophet himself, Lady Fatima and 12 Imams.

And suddenly, coming out from nowhere, ahl al-bayt (as intended by Twelvers definition) were extended to the other 9 men. How convenient! And you claimed it on sahih hadiths.

Please show us the hadiths.

By the way, never ever ayat at-tatheer proves the imamah as believe by Twelvers (in fact, not a single ayat al-muhkamat about imamah in the Quran). It was all about proving the infallibility of the Imams. But when you studied incidents/history of the Imams (for instant, incident between Hasan (ra) and Muawiyyah (ra)), you immediately come into realization that the Twelver's concept of infallibility is not so "infallible" as claimed.

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2017, 05:18:37 AM »
Brother Mojtaba,

Just want a minor clarification. Do you mean "between my Ahl Al-Bayt" is "among my Ahl-Bayt"?
Yes.

Mojtaba

Re: Confused Shia considering becoming Sunni
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2017, 07:00:13 AM »

And suddenly, coming out from nowhere, ahl al-bayt (as intended by Twelvers definition) were extended to the other 9 men. How convenient! And you claimed it on sahih hadiths.

Please show us the hadiths.

By the way, never ever ayat at-tatheer proves the imamah as believe by Twelvers (in fact, not a single ayat al-muhkamat about imamah in the Quran). It was all about proving the infallibility of the Imams. But when you studied incidents/history of the Imams (for instant, incident between Hasan (ra) and Muawiyyah (ra)), you immediately come into realization that the Twelver's concept of infallibility is not so "infallible" as claimed.
Dear brother, Abu Muhammad,

As I mentioned, Imam As-Sajjad (as) said that he is among Ahlul Bayt about whom the verse of At-Tat_hir was revealed (See, Tafsir At-Tabari, V19, P106 or V20, P266/ Tafsir Ibn Kathir V6, P416 or V7, P183)

Also, Haakim has narrated a Sahih Hadith [هذا حديث صحيح على شرط مسلم ، ولم يخرجاه]according to which Imam Al-Mahdi (as) is also of Ahlul Bayt (as) [مهدي منا أهل البيت ؛ أشم الأنف أقنى أجلى ، يملأ الأرض قسطا وعدلا كما ملئت جورا وظلما ].

Also, based on the verse of At-Tat_hir which says that Ahlul Bayt are purified with a throught purification and Allah has repeled the impurity from them, we can conclude that they never separate from Quran by doing sins and disobeying the orders of Allah in Quran and the orders of Prophet (s). Also, note that doing sins unintentionally and making mistakes are also a kind of impurity.
Prophet Muhammad (s) said: I leave two Successors after myself among you: The book of Allah and my progeny, my Ahl Al-Bayt. Indeed, they [Quran and the progeny of Prophet, i.e., Ahlul Bayt] will never separate until they meet me at the Pool." (إني تارك فيكم الخليفتين من بعدي: كتاب الله وعترتي , أهل بيتي , وإنهما لن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض). See 1.Mosannaf Ibn Abi Shayba, V6, P.309/ 2.As-Sunnah Li Ibn Abi Asim, V2, P351/ 3.Al-Mo'jam Al-Kabir,  V5, P.154, etc.
Al-Albani and Al-Haythami has said that this Hadith is Sahih (Sahih Al-Jami' As-Saqir wa Ziyadatihi by Al-Albani, V1, P 482/ Majma' Az-Zawa'id by Al-Haythami, V9, P163 and V1, P170).
This Hadith proves that those 12 Successors of Prophet (s) about whom he (s) talked, are progeny/Ahlul Bayt of him (peace be upon him and his pure progeny) [e.g., Prophet (s) said: The religion will continue until the Hour has been established, and there would be twelve Successors upon you, all of them being from the Quraish (Sahih Muslim, V3, P1453, H1822)].
« Last Edit: August 04, 2017, 07:04:28 AM by Mojtaba »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
779 Views
Last post September 11, 2015, 10:32:39 AM
by Abu Z.
6 Replies
941 Views
Last post March 11, 2016, 12:58:40 PM
by al-kulayni
0 Replies
488 Views
Last post November 10, 2016, 12:40:49 AM
by MuslimK
3 Replies
169 Views
Last post June 30, 2017, 10:45:43 PM
by ZulFiqar