Simple Proof that Abdul Muttalib was a Kafir

[Ijtaba]

@Ijtaba

I'm asking you to provide evidence for any prosecution exerted by musyrik Quraish onto Rasulullah (saw) and his followers for the first 3 years but didn't bring any.

I ask you: when was those prosecution you mentioned above started?
                                         
I ask you again: when was those prosecution you mentioned above started?

There you go. The answer finally came out. They were all started after Rasulullah (saw) openly proclaimed the message of Islam. And I add further, challenging the beliefs of Quraisy as well.

No need for me to answer. You have already answered it as above.

TO SUM UP:
WHEN YOU STARTED TO OPENLY PROCLAIM YOUR MESSAGE AND THAT MESSAGE CHALLENGES THE BELIEFS OF OTHERS, EXPECT OPPOSITION. IF YOU KEEP YOUR BELIEF TO YOUR OWN AND REFRAIN FROM MEDDLING OTHER PEOPLE BUSINESS, NOBODY WILL TOUCH YOU.

It's not hard to understand at all.

AKHIRUL KALAM:
PROSECUTION GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT YOU BELIEF IF YOU KEEP IT TO YOUR OWN SELF. WHEN YOU STARTED OPENLY PREACHING AND AT THE SAME TIME CHALLENGING OTHER PEOPLE BELIEFS THEN YOU COULD EXPECT RETALIATION (IN THIS CASE, PROSECUTION).

If you had read my post with open-mind you would had known that I had wrote my answer based on your following question:

Sorry to say that your reading is incomplete. How could you equate being prosecuted (boycotted or abandoned by ones family members or got cold-shoulder by loved-ones/relatives, etc.) as a sign someones holding to tawheed and absence of prosecution as a sign that someones accepting the shirki religion of Qurasy? They are totally unrelated.

Now, you have stated that persecution is related to Tawheed if he preached openly and if kept hidden then there is no persecution. I totally agree with you on this point.

Open Da'wah = Persecution
Hidden Da'wah = No Persecution

The only thing which I can't understand is how can a person live 40 years having a belief opposed & different to his own parents, family members, clan, tribe without anyone having a hint of his contrary belief?

Whenever a child is born there is some rituals, traditions, customs associated with new-born baby. For e.g. in Islamic society there is Adhan given in new-born's ear, male child is circumcised and there is `Aqīqah for new born baby. Pagan society they have their own rituals and traditions which involve invoking their pagan gods to bless the new born child and sacrificing offerings in the name of pagan gods to save their child from all harmful & evil things. As Prophet (s.a.w.w) was born in Mushrik household where his grandfather 'Abdul-Muṭṭalib (a.s), mother Bibi Aminah bint Wahb (s.a), uncles Abū Ṭālib and 'Abd al-'Uzzā were Mushriks so they would had naturally performed pagan rituals for their new born baby. Similar would be the case with Prophet Mohammed's (s.a.w.w) sons and daughters who were born prior to Waḥy (وحي). Pagan rituals would had been performed on their births and false idols would had been invoked for blessing them.

This could be said for every event a person has in his life. Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) lived in Jāhilīyah society for 40 years. He could not had remained isolated for 40 years. In Jāhilīyah period Prophet's (s.a.w.w) own people i.e. Quraysh were involved in praying to false gods, eating sacrificial meals offered to false gods, going around the Ka'bah nude, singing and dancing, drinking alcohol, burying their daughters, enslaving people, forcing their slaves into prostitution, etc.

Its strange that Prophet's (s.a.w.w) parents, grand-parents, uncles and cousins were all involved in shirki and jāhilīyah activities whereas somehow due to unknown reason(s) Prophet (s.a.w.w) remained aloof from those activities.

To add further, there were those who were not on the religion of musyrikin Quraisy before the start of Nubuwwah of Muhammad (saw). These people were called hunafa' (those who were on the path of the religion of Ibrahim (as)). 4 of them were the most famous:
       
1. Waraqa Ibn Naufal
2. Ubaidillah Ibn Jash
3. Uthmaan ibn Al-Huwayrith
4. Zayd Ibn Amar Ibn Nufayl

Out these 4, only Zayd Ibn Amar Ibn Nufayl had problem with his tribe. Because why? Because he was vocal in critizing the belief of musyrikin Quraisy. The rest, nobody touched.

All three of them i.e. Waraqa Ibn Naufal, Ubaidillah Ibn Jash and Uthmaan ibn Al-Huwayrith were Christians.

As for Zayd ibn Amr then yes he was vocal in criticizing the belief of mushrikūn Quraysh and did not observe taqiyyah unlike Prophet (s.a.w.w) who kept his monotheistic belief hidden for 40 years. Zayd became disillusioned with the traditional religion of Arabia, was not happy with Jewish and Christianity religion, modified his diet i.e. he did not eat carrion, blood or anything that had been slaughtered for an idol, he opposed infanticide i.e. he rescued infant girls who were about to be buried alive and brought them up in his own house, he was open about his monotheistic belief and rebuked Quraysh for their polytheistic belief. According to Asma bint Abi Bakr, she heard him declaring outside the Kaaba: "O Quraysh, none of you is following Abraham's religion except me." This declaration of Zayd shows that Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) monotheistic belief was not known to Quraysh as I guess Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) was observing taqiyyah at that time. Zayd had been harassed by Qurayshi people so severely that Zayd was forced to leave the city and was always driven out from his city whenever he returned in secret. No one helped Zayd during times of his persecution. No one came to his aid and before he reached Mecca, in the country of Lakhm, he was murdered.

[Abu Muhammad]

It was intresting to see how you posed a question and several paragraphs below, you answered it yourself (at least in accordance to your believe):

Question:

The only thing which I can't understand is how can a person live 40 years having a belief opposed & different to his own parents, family members, clan, tribe without anyone having a hint of his contrary belief?

Whenever a child is born there is some rituals, traditions, customs associated with new-born baby. For e.g. in Islamic society there is Adhan given in new-born's ear, male child is circumcised and there is `Aqīqah for new born baby. Pagan society they have their own rituals and traditions which involve invoking their pagan gods to bless the new born child and sacrificing offerings in the name of pagan gods to save their child from all harmful & evil things. As Prophet (s.a.w.w) was born in Mushrik household where his grandfather 'Abdul-Muṭṭalib (a.s), mother Bibi Aminah bint Wahb (s.a), uncles Abū Ṭālib and 'Abd al-'Uzzā were Mushriks so they would had naturally performed pagan rituals for their new born baby. Similar would be the case with Prophet Mohammed's (s.a.w.w) sons and daughters who were born prior to Waḥy (وحي). Pagan rituals would had been performed on their births and false idols would had been invoked for blessing them.

This could be said for every event a person has in his life. Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) lived in Jāhilīyah society for 40 years. He could not had remained isolated for 40 years. In Jāhilīyah period Prophet's (s.a.w.w) own people i.e. Quraysh were involved in praying to false gods, eating sacrificial meals offered to false gods, going around the Ka'bah nude, singing and dancing, drinking alcohol, burying their daughters, enslaving people, forcing their slaves into prostitution, etc.

Its strange that Prophet's (s.a.w.w) parents, grand-parents, uncles and cousins were all involved in shirki and jāhilīyah activities whereas somehow due to unknown reason(s) Prophet (s.a.w.w) remained aloof from those activities.

Answer:

As for Zayd ibn Amr then yes he was vocal in criticizing the belief of mushrikūn Quraysh and did not observe taqiyyah unlike Prophet (s.a.w.w) who kept his monotheistic belief hidden for 40 years.
.........
.........
This declaration of Zayd shows that Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) monotheistic belief was not known to Quraysh[/b] as I guess Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) was observing taqiyyah at that time. Zayd had been harassed by Qurayshi people so severely that Zayd was forced to leave the city and was always driven out from his city whenever he returned in secret. No one helped Zayd during times of his persecution. No one came to his aid and before he reached Mecca, in the country of Lakhm, he was murdered.

As for me, the presence of hunafa' who lived without engaging in any of musyrik rituals shows that the kind of life you claimed hard to understand is very much possible. Regardless they became Christians later or not, the point is that their belief is different from the musyrikin Quraisy.

Moreover, have you ever heard any of the musyrik Quraisy said to him (saw), during his (saw) prophetic mission, something like, "why do you against the religion you once practiced" or "why do you opposed gods that you once worshipped?"?

The answer is none.

[Ijtaba]

It was intresting to see how you posed a question and several paragraphs below, you answered it yourself (at least in accordance to your believe):

I was being sarcastic when I said that maybe Prophet (s.a.w.w) was practicing taqiyyah as Ahlul Sunnah do not believe that Prophets (a.s) did taqiyyah.

Zayd ibn Amr was real monotheistic in the sense he did not hide his belief and use to condemn Quraysh for their pagan activities whereas I do not find Prophet (s.a.w.w) in his 40 years (pre-Revelation) life condemning Quraysh for their Shirki rituals and activities. If Prophet's (s.a.w.w) monotheistic belief was openly visible like Zayd ibn Amr then...  Zayd would had declared, "O Quraysh, none of you is following Abraham's religion except me and Mohammed (s.a.w.w)."

As for me, the presence of hunafa' who lived without engaging in any of musyrik rituals shows that the kind of life you claimed hard to understand is very much possible. Regardless they became Christians later or not, the point is that their belief is different from the musyrikin Quraisy.

I would not call them ḥunafā' as they left one shirk (i.e. idols) and joined another shirk (i.e. Trinity). Their rejection of Qurayshi religion of worshiping of stones and idols isn't enough to make them Ḥanīf like Nabi Ibrāhīm (a.s) because after their rejection (of idols) they accepted Trinity whereas Nabi Ibrāhīm (a.s) believed in One True GOD.

We can find examples of their likes in this day and age also. There are people (such as Hindu) who would reject worshiping of idols but still do not embrace Islam as true religion but would become atheist, christian or join some new age religion. We would not call them Monotheist simply because of their rejecting of idol-worship.

Moreover, have you ever heard any of the musyrik Quraisy said to him (saw), during his (saw) prophetic mission, something like, "why do you against the religion you once practiced" or "why do you opposed gods that you once worshipped?"?

The answer is none.

To find the exact quotes you gave I need to study the books of Tareekh تاریخ, Seerah سيرة and Hadiths حديث.

At present I can only present two arguments in favor of Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) following the religion of  'Abdul-Muṭṭalib (a.s):

01. Abū Lahab marrying his two sons with Prophet Mohammed's (s.a.w.w) two daughters showing that Abū Lahab was content with Prophet Mohammed's (s.a.w.w) religion.

02. Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) was well-known as Amin (أمين) and Sadiq (صادق) among his people. It would be strange that people would call someone who rejected their religion as Truthful and Trustworthy.

[Farid]

^ So Abu Lahab was upon monotheism but became a polytheist when his nephew became a prophet?

[Hani]

One of the biggest classical Shia historians of all time Hisham bin Muhammad bin al-Sa'ib al-Kalbi quoted reports in his book of idols showing that Muhammad (saw) was following his father's pagan religion before getting guidance.

[Ijtaba]

^ So Abu Lahab was upon monotheism but became a polytheist when his nephew became a prophet?

Abu Lahab was never monotheist.

If he was upon monotheism then why did he oppose the Prophet (s.a.w.w)?

[Farid]

You said he was content with his nephew's religion, so I assumed you meant that he was upon a similar path.

Please try to be more clear. I am failing to understand your point.

[Ijtaba]

You said he was content with his nephew's religion, so I assumed you meant that he was upon a similar path.

Yes.

Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) was following religion of 'Abdul-Muṭṭalib (a.s) prior to Revelation.

[Optimus Prime]

Farid.

Check it out.

The source is: ibn Sa'd, I, 210-211.

Check the source. Does this story have a chain?

[Farid]

Of course there are evidences in the Seerah. However, that won't fly with Ijtaba who has already made his mind. When the person you are being with is not being reasonable then the conversation is over.

[Optimus Prime]

Of course there are evidences in the Seerah. However, that won't fly with Ijtaba who has already made his mind. When the person you are being with is not being reasonable then the conversation is over.

I still think it'd very interesting to see if that report has a chain?

[Farid]

I couldn't find it in Arabic.

If you are looking for a Sunni hadith that refers to Abdul Muttalib as a kaffir, then refer to the hadith of Al Musayyib, which is narrated in Musnad Ahmad, Bukhari, Muslim, and Nasa'ee.

It is the famous hadith in which Abu Talib is in his death bed and the Prophet peace be upon him is trying to push him to take his shahada. Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Ummayah tell Abu Talib: Will you take another religion than that of Abdul Muttalib? Al Musayyib then states: He died upon the religion of Abdul Muttalib and refused to say: La ilaha illa Allah.

Shias need to realize that they are speaking from their emotions. Sunnis have nothing to gain from believing that Abdul Muttalib was a kaffir. We accept clear cut reports like this and facts that he named his children after false idols.

If we brought evidence of Abdul Muttalib making sujood to an idol, they would say: It is sajda of respect. If we brought evidence that he called their names out in worship, they would say: Maybe they were named after good men who answered Du'a so it isn't shirk.

A Da'ees role is to bring forth the evidence. It is their choice to accept... and how can one accept when he chooses to be guided by his desires?

[Ijtaba]

I do not deny the fact that there exists reports in Ahlul Sunnah's authentic books where Prophet's (s.a.w.w) parents (a.s) and ancestors (a.s) are said to be in hell.

01. Hadhrat Abdullah (a.s) and Hadhrat Amina (s.a)

Anas reported:
Verily, a person said: Messenger of Allah, where is my father? He said: (He) is in the Fire. When he turned away, he (the Holy Prophet) called him and said: Verily my father and your father are in the Fire.

Reference : Sahih Muslim 203
In-book reference : Book 1, Hadith 408
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 1, Hadith 398

Abu Huraira reported:
The Apostle of Allah (ﷺ) visited the grave of his mother and he wept, and moved others around him to tears, and said: I sought permission from my Lord to beg forgiveness for her but it was not granted to me, and I sought permission to visit her grave and it was granted to me so visit the graves, for that makes you mindful of death.

Reference : Sahih Muslim 976 b
In-book reference : Book 11, Hadith 135
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 4, Hadith 2130

02. Hadhrat 'Abdul-Muṭṭalib (a.s) and Abū Ṭālib (a.s)

Narrated Sa`id bin Al-Musaiyab from his father:
When the time of the death of Abu Talib approached, Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) went to him and found Abu Jahl bin Hisham and `Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya bin Al-Mughira by his side. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said to Abu Talib, "O uncle! Say: None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, a sentence with which I shall be a witness (i.e. argue) for you before Allah. Abu Jahl and `Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said, "O Abu Talib! Are you going to denounce the religion of `Abdul Muttalib?" Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) kept on inviting Abu Talib to say it (i.e. 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah') while they (Abu Jahl and `Abdullah) kept on repeating their statement till Abu Talib said as his last statement that he was on the religion of `Abdul Muttalib and refused to say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' (Then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "I will keep on asking Allah's forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden (by Allah) to do so." So Allah revealed (the verse) concerning him (i.e. It is not fitting for the Prophet (ﷺ) and those who believe that they should invoke (Allah) for forgiveness for pagans even though they be of kin, after it has become clear to them that they are companions of the fire (9.113).

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 1360
In-book reference : Book 23, Hadith 114
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 2, Book 23, Hadith 442

However I want to know how can one reconcile the hadiths mentioned above with following:

- It is related by ʿUmar ibn Al-Khaṭṭāb that he heard Nabi (s.a.w.w) say, “Every tie of kinship, and every association will be cut off on the Day of Qiyamah, except my (s.a.w.w) kinship and my (s.a.w.w) association.”

- A person who is Ḥafīẓ will be allowed to intercede for ten family members, who were destined for Jahannam.

Sayyiduna ‘Ali (radiyallahu ‘anhu) reports that Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Whoever reads the Quran, memorizes it, regards it’s permissible as permissible and it’s impermissible as impermissible Allah Ta’ala will enter him into Jannah and allow him to intercede for ten family members, who were destined for Jahannam”.
(Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 2905, Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith: 216, Musnad Ahmad, vol. 1 pg. 147/149)
https://hadithanswers.com/a-hafiz-interceding-for-ten-family-members/
Despite it’s weakness, this Hadith is suitable to quote.

- Any authentic hadith or report stating that Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) prior to receiving Revelation never followed religion of 'Abdul-Muṭṭalib (a.s)

[Farid]

Reconcile by holding the view that the hadiths above are not for kuffar.

Specific narrations overlap general ones. This is Usool 101 bro. I am surprised you are making this point.

[iceman]

You absolutely and clearly believe that ABU TALIB was a disbeliever, so I'm not surprised about ABDUL MUTTALIB!

[Optimus Prime]

Absolutely.

Both of em' will be in the fire of Jahanam, and deservedly so.

Yazid is better than both of em'.

[iceman]

Absolutely.

Both of em' will be in the fire of Jahanam, and deservedly so.

Yazid is better than both of em'.

So when it comes to Abu Talib, you believe that your Prophet was raised/brought up by a kafir, a jahanami? You really need to get your faith and belief in order. My advice, go and do some homework!

[Hani]

So you're OK with prophets raising kids who are Kafir/Jahannami (a.k.a Nuh) but not OK if prophets were raised by Kafir/Jahannami (a.k.a Ibrahim)

[Optimus Prime]

Absolutely.

Both of em' will be in the fire of Jahanam, and deservedly so.

Yazid is better than both of em'.

So when it comes to Abu Talib, you believe that your Prophet was raised/brought up by a kafir, a jahanami? You really need to get your faith and belief in order. My advice, go and do some homework!

Yes, that's right. We do not, and cannot hold that against the Prophet (SAW), as it was not in his control.

The homework was done centuries ago, and we have ample evidence to confirm, that Abu Talib was a jahilistically racist person. His final comments on his deathbed confirm that fact. We have reports of his ol' man being no different considering he named his sons after the sons of idols.

Shiaism is run by emotional mechanism. You will not embrace the truth - no matter. It's you ninnies, that need to look in the mirror, wake up, and shake off Iblis.

[iceman]

Abu Talib’s loyalty to Muhammad did not waver before, during, or after the Prophet’s revelation. On his death bed, Abu Talib said

“I command you to be good to Muhammad. He is the most trustworthy of the Quraish and the most truthful of the Arabs. He brought a Message which is accepted by the heart and denied by the tongue for fear of hostility. By God, whoever walks in the way of Muhammad shall be on the right road and whoever follows his guidance shall have a joyous future.” (ref: balughul Adaab, v 1 p 327)