Answer to some questions in regards to Ahlelbayt raised on SC

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Answer to some questions in regards to Ahlelbayt raised on SC
« on: January 31, 2015, 12:05:09 PM »

One of our brother brought to my attention some questions raised by meember named "Al-Najashi" on SC regarding Ahlelbayt. So I felt like answering those questions raised here, because some of those doubts needed a response.

I'm a bit confused from what you and the author of that article are stating in regards to the timeline of the revelation of the verse. Are you affirming that Ayat Al-Tathir in it's full context has been revealed separately from the rest of the verses where Allahس addresses the wives of the prophetص? This seems to contradict the general Sunni opinion that I have seen in regards to the time of when it was revealed since from what I have seen, the Sunni belief is that the verses that address the wives as well as Ayat Al-Tathir have all been revealed TOGETHER for the SAME event(for example to warn the wives of the prophetص). Moreover, the verses were all revealed together but the event of Kisa took place later according to the Sunni position. For example:

"41The verses from here(verse 29) to 35 were sent down in the period contiguous to the Battle of the Trench and the raid on Bani Quraizah, whose background we have touched upon in the Introduction to this Surah. According to a tradition related in Muslim on the authority of Hadrat Jabir bin `Abdullah, "One day when Hadrat Abu Bakr and Hadrat 'Umar visited the Holy Prophet, they saw that his wives were sitting around him and he was quiet. Addressing Hadrat `Umar, he said: `They are sitting around me as you see: they are asking for money for household expenditure'." At this both the Companions rebuked their daughters and said, "Why do you embarrass the Holy Prophet and demand from him that which he does not have." This event shows how hard pressed the Holy Prophet was economically at that time and how distressed and embarrassed he was feeling at his wives' demand for domestic expenditure during the period when a bitter conflict was going on between Islam and paganism."

The view that verses from 29-35 where revealed during the Ghazwa Khandaq is the opinion of Mawdoodi, and opinions of a scholar could be wrong unless they are backed by any reliable evidence to support his opinion.

What we see is that this event talks about only two verses 28-29, not 30-35. For example refer Bukhari:
 Narrated `Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) when Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was ordered to give option to his wives, he started with me, saying, "I am going to mention to you something, but you shall not hasten (to give your reply) unless you consult your parents." The Prophet (ﷺ) knew that my parents would not order me to leave him. Then he said, "Allah says: 'O Prophet (Muhammad)! Say to your wives: If you desire the life of this world and its glitter........a great reward." (33.28-29) I said, "Then why I consult my parents? Verily, I seek Allah, His Apostle and the Home of the Hereafter." Then all the other wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) did the same as I did.(Sahih Bukhari, Book 65, Hadith 4786).

So unless the Shia bring any solid evidence that, verses 32-33 were revealed at Khandaq, their claim won't carry much weight.

Moreover, he doesn't excludes the portion of 33:33 which Shia use from the set of verses he mentioned, so obviously his opinion isn't even in the favour of Shias, as a whole.

To say that Ayat Tathir was revealed during a different time from the rest of the verses addressing the wives correlates with the Imami position. That is, the initial verses about the prophetsع wives were revealed during around the year 5AH to warn them. However, since Ayat Al-Tathir was not revealed with those verses about the wives, but rather much later, then it would mean that it's revelation was for a different event and not neccessarily for the wives.

Firstly, please keep in mind that, the verse you are talking about isn't an independent verse, its a part of verse(33) not the complete verse. Your claim would have been considered if it was in individual verse.

Secondly, though I disagree with Moudoodi's view, however even if for sake of argument we say that this portion was revealed later even then it can be said that, it was inorder for the wives of Prophet(Saw) know that, "why were they given instructions of Tazkiyyah(purification, like salah , zakat, ittiba, etc)" in specific, though these were already given to Muslims in general, so inorder to let them know the reason for this, Allah(swt) stated what he intends.

revelation of Ayat Al-Tathir and the event took place before the Mubahalah.
What is the evidence for this?

It also would not make sense for the event and the revelation to take place after the event of Mubahalah, since in the event of Mubahalah, the prophetص already affirmed that Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussain are part of his Ahlulbaytع. This means that the event of Al-Kisa must have happened before the Dhul Hujjah during the year 10AH.
This is actually the mis-understanding which Najashi and most Shias have, or may be some Sunnis too. We don't say that, the incident of Kisa is an evidence for Fatima(ra), Ali(ra), Hassan(ra), Hussain(ra), to be considered as Ahlelbayt. No, this is not true, they were AHlelbayt right from the  beginning. Even the family of Aqeel, and Jafar, etc were considered Ahlebayt.

However what is the specialty  of Verse 33 and Incident of Kisa is that, this shows us who were those Ahlelbayt, whom Allah intended to purify. These two things aren't a proof to know who are Ahlelbayt are, because Ahlelbayt were there much before these two events.

. Firstly, it's worth to mention that from a Sunni viewpoint, the essence of the event of Al-Kisa was so that the prophetع asks Allahس to enter his close relatives to be part of his Ahlulbayt based on the idea that after Allahس only revealed the verse of Al-Tathir to the wives in the first place and addressing only them as the Ahlulbayt. Hence, the prophetس wanted to include the rest of him close relatives as part of the Ahlulbayt as his wives are.
No, this is incorrect, refer the above answer. Ahlelbayt were there before these.

Now that being said, it seems to me that the author is limiting the members of the prophet'sص Ahlulbayt only to those whom his progeny survives through. In other words, this would imply that the other daughters of the prophet ص as well as the daughters Fatimaع are not part of the prophet'sص Ahlulbayt. Moreover, if we restrict our definition of Ahlulbaytع to mean only those whom the prophet's progeny survives through, then based on this, the prophet's wives cannot fulfill this requirement as well since they did not have any sons through the prophetص who passed on his lineage, hence they would not be considered part of the prophet's Ahlulbaytع based on the authors definition. So my question is, had the whole purpose of the event of Kisa being to include the prophet's ص close relatives as part of his Ahlulbayt as his wives were included(which means if they were not included, then they would not be part of his Ahlulbayt), then wouldn't it mean that the daughters of the prophetص if they would not have entered Al-Kisa, then they would not be part of his Ahlulbayt?
No no no! The incident of Kisa or Tatheer was NOT to MAKE certain individuals Ahlelbayt, rather to purify some selected members from AHlelbayt. That being wives of Prophet(saw), and then according to dua of Prophet(saw), even Ahl Kisa.


Re: Answer to some questions in regards to Ahlelbayt raised on SC
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2015, 01:29:27 PM »
I even noticed other members there raising arguments based on grammar, then those have been answered in this article. Alhamdulilah!


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
Last post October 18, 2015, 10:33:00 PM
by Hani
3 Replies
Last post February 07, 2016, 04:51:05 PM
by MuslimK
0 Replies
Last post July 18, 2016, 05:50:26 AM
by fgss
2 Replies
Last post March 12, 2020, 10:03:22 PM
by Soccer