A Scientific Dialogue Regarding Incident Of Kisa (revealing some facts)

This entry was posted on 2010/12/20, in Discussion of ahadeth, Our belief explained, Refuting shia doubts. Bookmark the permalink. 17 Comments

A Scientific Dialogue Regarding Incident Of Kisa (revealing some facts)

In The Name of Allah, The Most Beneficent, The Most Merciful.

The incident of kisa(blanket) has been one of the most debated issue over years, Its one of the most misunderstood incident because many people think that this incident is proof that wives of prophet(Saw) were not included in the verse of tatheer. And because of this misunderstanding they reject many other proofs which apparently show that wives of prophet(Saw) are also included in ahlebayt of prophet(Saw) and were included in verse of tatheer(33:33). So in this article Inshallah with the help of Allah we will try to clear all the misconceptions and misunderstanding people have regarding the incident of Kisa, by giving the correct understanding to this incident supported by scholarly, as well as logical views.

What is the incident of Kisa ?

Since the purification verse(33:33) was revealed in regards to the wives of the Allah’s Messenger(saw) and Allah Almighty affirmed to make them pure and spotless, Messenger of Allah(saw) was eager to pray for his immediate and other relatives to be included in the verse of purification, in order to achieve the same as his spouses were promised, thus Messenger of Allah(saw) gathered his closest kith and kin and invoked Allah Almighty to include them also in his(swt) wish which was made for wives of prophet(Saw).

We read:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي حدثنا أبو النضر هاشم بن القاسم حدثنا عبد الحميد يعني ابن بهرام قال حدثني شهر بن حوشب قال سمعت أم سلمة زوج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم حين جاء نعي الحسين بن علي لعنت أهل العراق فقالت: قتلوه قتلهم الله غروه وذلوه لعنهم الله فإني رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جاءته فاطمة غدية ببرمة قد صنعت له فيها عصيدة تحمله في طبق لها حتى وضعتها بين يديه فقال لها: أين ابن عمك قالت: هو في البيت قال: فاذهبي فادعيه وائتني بابنيه قالت: فجاءت تقود ابنيها كل واحد منهما بيد وعلي يمشي في أثرهما حتى دخلوا على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأجلسهما في حجره وجلس علي عن يمينه وجلست فاطمة عن يساره قالت: أم سلمة فاجتبذ من تحتي كساء خيبريا كان بساطا لنا على المنامة في المدينة فلفه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عليهم جميعا فأخذ بشماله طرفي الكساء وألوى بيده اليمنى إلى ربه عز وجل وقال: اللهم أهلي اذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا اللهم أهل بيتي اذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا اللهم أهل بيتي أذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا. قلت يا رسول الله ألست من أهلك قال بلى فادخلي في الكساء قالت: فدخلت في الكساء بعد ما قضى دعاءه لابن عمه علي وابنيه وابنته فاطمة رضي الله عنهم.
Shahr narrated to us, he said: I heard Umm Salamah, curse the people of Iraq, when the news of the death of Al-Hussien ibn Ali came to her, she said: They killed him, May Allah kill them, and they humilated him, May Allah curse them. For I saw the Messenger of Allah [Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam] and Fatima had come to him one day with a Burmah (a pot, pan, or jar … was made from stone in the past) of hers from which she made a ‘Asida (a dish made by mixing flour with ghee, butter, etc and then cooked) carrying it in a plate of hers, until she placed it in front of him. He told her: «Where is your cousin?» She said: He is at home. [So] he said: go and call him, and bring forth your sons. She (i.e. Um Salama) said: she came leading her sons each one of them, and Ali walking on their trail, until they entered upon the Messenger of Allah [Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam]. He sat them (i.e Al-Hasan & Al-Husien) on his lap, and Ali sat on his right, and Fatima sat on his left. Umm Salama said: he pulled a cloak (a Kisa) from under me … and then he [Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam] wrapped it around them all, taking the edges of the Cloak by his left hand, and pointing with his right hand towards his Lord [Exalted and Glorified is He] and said: “O Allah, remove from them the Rijs (evil deeds and sins, etc.), and purify them with a thorough purification”, three times. She said: [So] I said: O Messenger of Allah, am I not [also] from your Ahl? [So] he said: Yes, Indeed, [you are]. He said: So enter the Kisa (the cloak) [too]. She said: So I entered after he completed his supplication to his cousin Ali, his sons, and his daughter Fatima [‘Alaihim Al Salam]. (Musnad ibn Hanbal, v6,p298)

Prophet(Saw) thus said in his supplication: ( O Allah ! those are my kith and kin, remove all abomination from them and make them pure and spotless ). Since this verse was revealed in the house of hz umm salama(ra) (as proved from authentic reports), she saw that the Messenger of Allah(saw) made a supplication for Ali(ra), Fatima(ra), Hasan(ra) and Hussein(ra) , she requested him earnestly to include her among the people he(saw) supplicated for. The Messenger of Allah informed her undoubtedly that there was no need for him to include her in his(saw) SUPPLICATION since she was one of his wives, and the verse was revealed in regard to the wives, as this is evident from some authentic reports. This is sound evidence that states categorically the fact that the verse was not revealed in regard of the Prophet’s kith and kin but rather it was addressing his wives. Had it been addressing also his kith and kin there would be no need for him to gather his daughter, son -in-law and his grandsons to invoke Allah to include them among his spouses who were promised to be purified.

The Kisa(cloak) was used for prayer and supplication by Prophet Muhammad(saw)

(i).

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الرُّزِّيُّ ، قثنا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَطَاءٍ الْخَفَّافُ ، عَنْ ثَوْرِ بْنِ يَزِيدَ ، عَنْ مَكْحُولٍ ، عَنْ كُرَيْبٍ مَوْلَى ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ، قَالَ : دَعَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْعَبَّاسَ ، فَقَالَ : ” إِذَا كَانَ غَدَاةَ الاثْنَيْنِ فَائْتِنِي أَنْتَ وَوَلَدُكَ ” ، قَالَ : فَغَدَا وَغَدَوْنَا مَعَهُ ، قَالَ : فَأَلْبَسَنَا كِسَاءً لَهُ ، ثُمَّ قَالَ : ” اللَّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِلْعَبَّاسِ وَلِوَلَدِهِ مَغْفِرَةً ظَاهِرَةً بَاطِنَةً لا تُغَادِرْ ذَنْبًا ، اللَّهُمَّ أُخْلُفْهُ فِي وَلَدِهِ ” .

Imam Ahmad in his Fada’el: `Abdullah told us, he said: abu Ja`far Muhammad bin `Abdullah al-Razzi told me: `Abdul-Wahhab bin `Ata’ al-Khaffaf told us: From Thawr bin Yazid, from Makhoul from Kurayb Mawla ibn `Abbas, from `Abdullah ibn `Abbas (ra) that he said: The Prophet (SAWS) called on al-`Abbas and said: “Tomorrow on Monday, come to me with your son.” So the next day we came and he surrounded us with his cloak and said: “O Allah, forgive al-`Abbas and his son their outward sins and inward sins and leave no sin, O Allah take care of his child after he passes away.”
Source: Fada’el al-Sahaba.
Grading: Hasan.

Comment: We find from this report that, the Kisa(cloak) was used by Prophet(saw) to make supplication to Allah, similar to the supplication(dua) he made gathering Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussain, May Allah be pleased with them.

(ii). Hudhaifa said : The Messenger of Allah(saw) wrapped me in a blanket that he had in excess to his own requirement and with which he used to cover himself while saying his prayers. ( Sahih Muslim #1788 ).

Comment: So we find that Prophet(saw) used to cover himself with a sheet, while saying his prayers, it was his habbit, as he did the similar thing gathering Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussain, May Allah be pleased with them, and supplicating for them to Allah.

A logical view of Incident of kisa

The incident of Kisa itself is very strong proof that the verse of tatheer(33:33) was revealed only for wives of prophet(saw) because had it been that the verse was revealed for hz ali(ra), hz Fatima(ra), hz hassan(ra) and hz hussain(ra) then there wouldn’t have been any need for prophet(Saw) to MAKE A SUPPLICATION FOR THEM AFTER ALLAH HAD ALREADY INTENDED TO PURIFY THEM, THAT TOO SUPPLICATING ON MULTIPLE TIMES ON DIFFERENT OCCASIONS.

Imam Ibn qayyim(rah) defined “dua” as: Asking what is of benefit to the person and asking the removal of what is harming him or repelling of it.(bada’i al-fawa’id 3/2), So first and foremost thing is that dua(supplication) is done to ask for something, If Allah had already wished to purify the Ahle kisa, then repeatedly asking for to Allah to purify Ahle kisa would have been non-sensical. The only sensible reason behind this was that because prophet(Saw) wanted hz ali(ra), hz fatima(ra), hz hassan(ra) and hz hussain(ra) also to be included in the wish of Allah which he(swt) made for wives of prophet(Saw), that is why prophet(Saw) made the dua(supplication) just AFTER the verse was revealed, and that too multiple times.

And if prophet(Saw) would have made these supplications(dua) for Ahle kisa before the verse was revealed and then if Allah would have revealed the verse(33:33) at that time people could have used the incident of kisa as a proof to exclude wives from Ahlebayt, but nothing of such manner is reported in any authentic reports, And all the authentic reports show us that prophet(Saw) made this dua for Ahlekisa AFTER the verse of tatheer was revealed, which in itself is a proof that they were not the ones for whom the verse of tatheer was revealed, and it was revealed for wives of prophet(Saw) as the context of verses itself supports that fact.

Moreover the shias believe that the wish of Allah(swt) mentioned in (33:33) took place then and there, so why would prophet(saw) need to keep on supplicating to Allah at different occasions to purify Ahle kisa, if at all this was the case.

What further supports our view are two traditions, where we read:

Then he surrounded them with his cloak and brought out his hand towards the sky and said: “O Lord! These are my Ahlulbayt (a.s) and my chosen ones. Remove uncleanliness from them, and purify them a thorough purification. O Lord! These are my Ahlulbayt (a.s) and my chosen ones. Remove uncleanliness from them, and purify them, a thorough purification”. Umm Al-Salama (r.a) said: then I entered my head into the room and asked: “O Messenger of Allah (saw) am I also with you?” He replied: “ You are toward a good ending, you are toward a good ending.” [Source: Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Vol. 44, Pg. # 118-119].

From this report we find that, it was Prophet(saw) who chose them, it wasn’t Allah, which again goes in the line with what we explained, that Allah intended to purify wives of Prophet(saw), but Prophet(saw) chose those members from his family from whom his progeny would survive and made dua(supplicated) for them, that even they be included in the favour of Allah(swt).

Some people might try to argue by saying that prophet(saw) wanted to clarify before the people that who were the purified ones that is why he(Saw) supplicated Allah multiple times on different occasions, but this answer is irrational because if it was to clarify to the people then why would prophet(Saw) ask DUA TO ALLAH, he(Saw) would have given a sermon gathering all the people. And he(Saw) wouldn’t have done this supplications(dua) inside his house, it would have been done in public gathering where all the muslims would be present, but nothing as such occurred. Lastly, atleast prophet(Saw) would have addressed the people that “o muslims these are the purified ones and my Ahlebayt”, after the supplication if at all it was to clarify before muslims. Imagine its to clarify the muslims yet prophet(Saw) didn’t address anything to the muslims on that occasion, but only asked ALLAH, because it was only to ask Allah for including even those members in Allah’s wish of purification.

Prophet(saws) using the wording in his dua(supplication), “O Allah these are my Ahlelbayt…”, if the reason to make dua was to ask Allah to maintain the purification, which he had already intended for Ahlelbayt, then there was no need to tell to Allah that “O Allah these are my Ahlelbayt…”, There was no need for the usage of these words, Allah already knew who Ahlelbayt were. Prophet(saws) would have only said, O Allah keep them purified, or O Allah maintain their purification. But the usage of the words in dua “O Allah these are my Ahlelbayt…”, after Allah had intended purification for Ahlelbayt, is a clear sign that, Prophet(saws) was introducing those members, whom the wish of Allah didn’t cover, that is why Prophet(saws) had to say “O Allah these are my Ahlelbayt”.

Incident of Kisa from the view of scholars.

1. Maulana mawdoodi: The view of those people also is not correct, who, on the basis of the above-cited Ahadith(of kisa), regard the wives of the Holy Prophet as excluded from his ahl al-bait. In the first place, anything which has been clearly stated in the Quran cannot be contradicted on the basis of a Hadith. Secondly, these Ahadith also do not have the meaning that is put on them. As related in some traditions that the Holy Prophet did not cover Hadrat ‘A’ishah and Hadrat Umm Salamah under the sheet of cloth which he put on the four members of his family, does not mean that he had excluded those ladies from his “household.” But it means that the wives were already included in ahl al-bait, because the Qur’an, in fact, had addressed them as ahl al-bait..(tahfeem ul quran, maudoodi, tafseer for verse 33:33)

2. Imam ibn Katheer(rah):

وجمعاً أيضاً بين القرآن والأحاديث المتقدمة إِن صحت، فإِن في بعض أسانيدها نظراً، والله أعلم، ثم الذي لا يشك فيه من تدبر القرآن: أن نساء النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم داخلات في قوله تعالى: { إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ ٱللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُـمُ ٱلرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ ٱلْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيـراً } فإِن سياق الكلام معهن، ولهذا قال تعالى بعد هذا كله: { وَٱذْكُـرْنَ مَا يُتْـلَىٰ فِى بُيُوتِكُـنَّ مِنْ ءَايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ وَٱلْحِكْــمَةِ } أي: واعملن بما ينزل الله تبارك وتعالى على رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم في بيوتكن من الكتاب والسنة،

And combining also between the Qur’an and the earlier mentioned Hadeeth(of kisa), if it were authentic, because there is, in some of it’s isnad, question marks, and Allah knows best. Then there is not doubt for one who understands the Qur’an that the wives of the prophet (pbuh) are entered in the Aya “Allah wants to only remove the Rijs from you people of the house and cleanse you cleansing” because the context of the passage is with them and that is why Glorified is he said after all this “And remember what is recited in your homes of Allah’s signs and the wisdom” meaning work by what Allah brings down upon his messenger (pbuh) in your homes of the Kitab and Sunna. (tafseer ibn katheer, for verse 33:33).

3. Imam al-Qurtubi said after quoting Hadeeth Kisa:
قال القرطبي بعد أن ذكر الحديث :
فهذه دعوة من النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لهم بعد نزول الآية أحب أن يدخلهم في الآية التي خوطب بها الأزواج فذهب الكلبي ومن وافقه فصيرها لهم خاصة وهي دعوة لهم خارجة من التنزيل

After the verse(33:33) was revealed, Prophet(saws) called them(Ahl al-Kisa) and wanted to included them in the verse which was addressed to the wives of Prophet(saws). Al-Kalbi and those who agreed with him, held the view that it was specific for these people(Ahl al-Kisa), however Prophet(saws) making supplication(dua) for them excludes them from those for whom the verse was revealed. (Tafseer Qurtubi, for verse 33:33)

4. Shaykh Ali Muhammad Sallabi stated:

Hence it says in the hadith that when the Prophet(saws) wrapped them in the cloak, he said: “O Allah, these are the people of my household, remove from them ar-rijs.” The supplication of the Prophet(saws) settles the matter. If there was any indication in the verse of purification that purification of the people of the cloak had already taken place, the Messenger of Allah(saws) would not have covered them with the cloak and prayed for them by saying, “O Allah, these are the people of my household, remove from them ar-rijs.” This is clear evidence that the verse was revealed concerning the wives of the Prophet(saws) the Messenger of Allah(saws) wanted the people of the cloak to be included in this divine revelation of purification, so he gathered them and covered them with the cloak and prayed for them. [Ali Ibn Abi Talib, vol 2, page 365 – 366 ].

The narrations which explains us the Incident of Kisa:

The reports of this incident comes under the category of al-mutawaatirul ma’nawee(mutawaatir in meaning)( for eg: the hadeeth of raising hands in dua which is reported in about a hundred ahadeeth , all of them stating that he(Saw) raised his hands in dua, but referring to different occasions , so the mention of each case is not mutawaatir but the common factor , that he(saw) raised his hands in dua.)

Prophet(Saw) also made supplications for Ahlekisa, but multiple times and at different occasions, which will be seen later in the article. But its also a fact that there also exists many weak narrations regarding the incident of kisa, or for incidents similar to it. So here we will see the different occasions when prophet(Saw) performed this supplication(dua) from authentic reports.

The different occasions when the incident of kisa took place(.i.e different occasions when prophet made supplication)

1. At the house of Umm salama(ra) :

في بيتي أنزلت : ? إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا ? قالت : فأرسل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى فاطمة وعلي والحسن والحسين ، فقال : هؤلاء أهل بيتي ، وفي حديث القاضي والسمي : هؤلاء أهلي ، قالت : فقلت : يا رسول الله ! أما أنا من أهل البيت ؟ قال : بلى إن شاء الله تعالى
الراوي: أم سلمة المحدث: الحاكم – المصدر: السنن الكبرى للبيهقي – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/150
خلاصة حكم المحدث: صحيح سنده ثقات رواته

a. Umm Salmah said: in my house these verses were revealed ” God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt and to purify you thoroughly.” So the Prophet PBUH called for Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Hussein and then said: These are Ahlu-Bayti, In the Hadith of al Qadi and al Summi: They are Ahly. So I said: O Messenger of Allah! aren’t I also from your Ahlul-Bayt? He said: yes you are Inshallah.

Muhaddith: Al Hakim from al Sunan al kubrah for Bayhaqi.
Hadith rank: Isnad SAHIH narrators all trustworthy.

عن أم سلمة قالت : في بيتي أنزلت { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت } قالت : فأرسل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى فاطمة وعلي والحسن والحسين ، فقال : هؤلاء أهل بيتي . قالت : فقلت : يا رسول الله أما أنا من أهل البيت ؟ قال : بلى إن شاء الله
الراوي: أم سلمة هند بنت أبي أمية المحدث: البغوي – المصدر: شرح السنة – الصفحة أو الرقم: 7/204
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

b. Umm Salmah said: in my house it was revealed ” God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt ” So the Prophet PBUH then sent after Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Hussein. He said: these are my Ahlul-Bayt. So Umm Salamah said: O Messenger of Allah? am I not also from your Ahlul-Bayt !? He said: yes Inshallah.

Narrator: Umm Salamah Hind bint Abu Umayyah.
Muhaddith: Al baghawi. in Sharh al Sunnah.
Hadith rank: Isnad SAHIH

And in another authentic version (but without Um Salama asking any question) he says: ”These are my Ahlul bayt, O Allah my ahlul Bayt have more right”.

عن عمر بن أبي سلمة ربيب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: لما نزلت هذه الآية على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم
(إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا) في بيت أم سلمة، فدعا فاطمة و حسنا و حسينا
رضي الله عنهم فجللهم بكساء وعلي خلف ظهره فجلله بكساء، ثم قال: اللهم! هؤلاء أهل بيتي فأذهب عنهم الرجس
وطهرهم تطهيرا
Umar bin Abi Salamah (RA) who was brought up by the Prophet (SAW) narrates that when the verse, “Allah only desires to keep away (all kinds of) impurity from you, O ‘people of the house!’ (the Prophet’s family) and to totally purify you,” (al-Ahzab 33:33), was revealed to the Holy Prophet (SAW) at the home of Umm Salamah (رضي الله عنها), he (SAW) called Fatimah (سلام اللہ علیھا), Hasan (RA) and Husain (RA) and covered them with a cloak. Ali(كرم الله وجهه) was behind him (SAW), the Holy Prophet (SAW) also covered him under the same cloak and then said, “Oh Allah! These are my ahl-ul-bait (‘people of the house’) so keep impurity away from them and totally purify them.”

References: Tirmidhi, al-Jami-us-sahih (5:351,663#3205,3787) sheikh Albani said it’s saheeh.

2. In the house of hz ali(ra)

جئت أريد عليا رضي الله عنه فلم أجده ، فقالت فاطمة رضي الله عنها : انطلق إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يدعوه فاجلس ، قال : فجاء مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فدخلا ، فدخلت معهما ، قال : فدعا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حسنا وحسينا فأجلس كل واحد منهما على فخذه ، وأدنى فاطمة من حجره وزوجها ، ثم لف عليهم ثوبه وأنا منتبذ ، فقال : ? إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا ? اللهم هؤلاء أهلي ، اللهم أهلي أحق ، قال واثلة : قلت : يا رسول الله ! وأنا من أهلك ؟ قال : وأنت من أهلي ، قال واثلة رضي الله عنه : إنها لمن أرجى ما أرجو
الراوي: واثلة بن الأسقع الليثي أبو فسيلة المحدث: البيهقي – المصدر: السنن الكبرى للبيهقي – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/152
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

a. Wathilah narrated: I came seeking Ali but never found him so Fatima said: he went to the Prophet PBUH, sit until they come back. Then he came with the Prophet PBUH and they both entered and I entered with them, then the Prophet PBUH called for Hassan and Hussein and he made each one sit on a side of his lap and he came closer to fatima and her husband while I stood alone. Then he surrounded them with a cloak and said: “God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt and to purify you thoroughly.” O Allah they are my Ahel and my Ahel are more deserving. I said: O prophet of Allah! am I not from your Ahel? He said: And you are from my Ahel. Wathilah said: this is what I had always wished for.

Source: Bayhaqi in Sunan al kubrah.
hadith rank: Isnad is SAHIH.

حدثنـي عبد الكريـم بن أبـي عمير، قال: ثنا الولـيد بن مسلـم، قال: ثنا أبو عمرو، قال: ثنـي شدّاد أبو عمار قال: سمعت واثلة بن الأسقع يحدّث، قال: سألت عن علـيّ بن أبـي طالب فـي منزله، فقالت فـاطمة: قد ذهب يأتـي برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، إذ جاء، فدخـل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ودخـلت، فجلس رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم علـى الفراش وأجلس فـاطمة عن يـمينه، وعلـياً عن يساره وحسناً وحسيناً بـين يديه، فلفع علـيهم بثوبه وقال: ” { إنَّـمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِـيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرّجْسَ أهْلَ البَـيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيراً } اللَّهُمَّ هَؤلاءِ أهْلـي، اللَّهُمَّ أهْلـي أحَقُّ ” قال واثلة: فقلت من ناحية البـيت: وأنا يا رسول الله من أهلك؟ قال: ” وأنت من أهلـي ” ، قال واثلة: إنها لـمن أَرْجَى ما أرتـجي.

Ibn Hajar al-Heythami authenticated this hadith from Wasila ibn Asqa in “Sawaiq” (2/423).

وفي رواية صحيحة قال واثلة وأنا من أهلك قال وأنت من أهلي قال واثلة إنها لمن أرجى ما أرجو

b. Shidaad Abu Ammaar narrated to me: I heard Waathilah bin al-Asqa’ narrating: I asked about Alii bin Abii Taalib in his home, then Faatimah said: He has already left to see the Messenger of Allah SAWS. When he arrived, the Messenger of Allah SAWS entered, and I entered. So the Messenger of Allah SAWS sat upon the couch, Faatimah sat upon his right, Alii upon his left, Hasan and Husayn in front of him, then he threw his thawb over them and said: “{Allah only wishes that impurity be removed from the people of the household, and to purify you completely} Oh Allah! These are my household. Oh Allah! My people have the most right”. Waathilah said: So I said from the direction of the house- ‘and am I, oh Messenger of Allah, from your people?’ He said: “And you are from my people”. Waathilah said: ‘Indeed it is for whoever hopes for what I hope for”.

It was also reported by ibn Hibban in “Sahih” and chain authenticated by Shuayb Arnaut:

6976 – أخبرنا عبد الله بن محمد بن سلم حدثنا عبد الرحمن بن إبراهيم حدثنا الوليد بن مسلم و عمر بن عبد الواحد قالا : حدثنا الأوزاعي عن شداد أبي عمار : عن واثلة بن الأسقع قال : سألت عن علي في منزله فقيل لي : ذهب يأتي برسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إذ جاء فدخل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم ودخلت فجلس رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم على الفراش وأجلس فاطمة عن يمينه و عليا عن يساره و حسنا وحسينا بين يديه وقال : ( { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا } [ الأحزاب : 33 ] اللهم هؤلاء أهلي ) قال واثلة : فقلت من ناحية البيت : وأنا يارسول الله من أهلك ؟ قال : ( وأنت من أهلي ) قال واثلة : إنها لمن أرجى ما أرتجي
قال شعيب الأرنؤوط : إسناده صحيح

Already translated above.

3. Infront of the house of hz ayesha(ra)

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَك’رِ ب’نُ أَبِي شَي’بَةَ وَمُحَمَّدُ ب’نُ عَب’دِ اللَّهِ ب’نِ نُمَي’رٍ وَاللَّف’ظُ لِأَبِي بَك’رٍ قَالَا حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ ب’نُ بِش’رٍ عَن’ زَكَرِيَّاءَ عَن’ مُص’عَبِ ب’نِ شَي’بَةَ عَن’ صَفِيَّةَ بِن’تِ شَي’بَةَ قَالَت’ قَالَت’ عَائِشَةُ خَرَجَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَي’هِ وَسَلَّمَ غَدَاةً وَعَلَي’هِ مِر’طٌ مُرَحَّلٌ مِن’ شَع’رٍ أَس’وَدَ فَجَاءَ ال’حَسَنُ ب’نُ عَلِيٍّ فَأَد’خَلَهُ ثُمَّ جَاءَ ال’حُسَي’نُ فَدَخَلَ مَعَهُ ثُمَّ جَاءَت’ فَاطِمَةُ فَأَد’خَلَهَا ثُمَّ جَاءَ عَلِيٌّ فَأَد’خَلَهُ ثُمَّ قَالَ

A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out one morning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel’s hair that there came Hasan b. ‘Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came ‘Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

Reference: Sahih Muslim, Book 031, 5955 – Kitab Al-Fada’il Al-Sahabah; Page 946, #(2424)-61 (Arabic version)

Note:In all these versions, only the version of hz umm salama(ra) specifically mentions that the verse was revealed in her house. No other version mentions that the verse was revealed at that time infront of them. So the claim of those who may say that this verse was revealed multiple times, holds no base at all .

Categorization of narrations of kisa:

Now in this section we would like to bring some well known narrations found regarding the incident of kisa and we would categorize them in three(3) categories.

1. Weak narrations (which cant be relied)

2. Authentic narrations.

3. Controversial narrations (either their authenticity is disputed or the some which though are authentic but which are misunderstood by people)

1. Weak narrations(which are unreliable)

All the narrations here are collected from shia websites.

Narration 1:

al-Tabari quotes Umm Salama saying: I said, “O Prophet of Allah! Am I not also one of your Ahlul-Bayt?” I swear by the Almighty that the Holy Prophet did NOT grant me any distinction and said: “You have a good future.” Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Tabari, v22, p7 under the commentary of verse 33:33

Answer:

Here is the arabic text:

حدثنا ابن حميد، قال: ثنا عبد الله بن عبد القدوس، عن الأعمش، عن حكيـم بن سعد، قال: ذكرنا علـيّ بن أبـي طالب رضي الله عنه عند أمّ سلـمة قالت: فـيه نزلت: { إنَّـمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِـيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرّجْسَ أهْلَ البَـيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيراً } قالت أمّ سلـمة: جاء النبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم إلـى بـيتـي، فقال: «لا تَأْذَنِـي لأَحَدٍ»، فجاءت فـاطمة، فلـم أستطع أن أحجبها عن أبـيها، ثم جاء الـحسن، فلـم أستطع أن أمنعه أن يدخـل علـى جدّه وأمه، وجاء الـحسين، فلـم أستطع أن أحجبه، فـاجتـمعوا حول النبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم علـى بساط، فجللهم نبـيّ الله بكساء كان علـيه، ثم قال: ” هَؤُلاءِ أهْلُ بَـيْتِـي، فَأذْهِبْ عَنْهُمُ الرّجْسَ وَطَهِّرْهُمْ تَطْهِيراً ” ، فنزلت هذه الآية حين اجتـمعوا علـى البساط قالت: فقلت: يا رسول الله: وأنا، قالت: فوالله ما أنعم وقال: ” إنَّكِ إلـى خَيْرٍ ”

It’s not authentic, but weak. Hadith most likely fabricated.

In it (عبد الله بن عبد القدوس) “Abdullah ibn Abdulqudus”: Yahya said: He’s nothing, rafidi habis. Nasai said: Not truthful. Daraqutni said: Weak.Mizan (2/457).

Narration 2:

Here is another variation of “The Tradition of Cloak” which is related to Safiyya who was another wife of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). Ja’far Ibn Abi Talib narrated: When the Messenger of Allah noticed that a blessing from Allah was to descent, he told Safiyya (one of his wives): “Call for me! Call for me!” Safiyya said: “Call who, O the Messenger of Allah?” He said: “Call for me my Ahlul-Bayt who are Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husain.” Thus we sent for them and they came to him. Then the Prophet (PBUH&HF) spread his cloak over them, and raised his hand (toward sky) saying: “O Allah! These are my family (Aalee), so bless Muhammad and the family (Aal) of Muhammad.” And Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, revealed: “Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a thorough purification (Quran, the last sentence of Verse 33:33)”. Sunni references: al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, Chapter of “Understanding (the virtues) of Companions, v3, p148. The author then wrote: “This tradition is authentic (Sahih) based on the criteria of the two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim).” Talkhis of al-Mustadrak, by al-Dhahabi, v3, p148 ; Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v3, p33)

Answer:

Chain is extremely weak.

Here quote from arabic Mostadrak:

4709 – حدثني أبو الحسن إسماعيل بن محمد بن الفضل بن محمد الشعراني ثنا جدي ثنا أبو بكر بن شيبة الحزامي ثنا محمد بن إسماعيل بن أبي فديك حدثني عبد الرحمن بن أبي بكر المليكي عن إسماعيل بن عبد الله بن جعفر بن أبي طالب عن أبيه قال : لما نظر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى الرحمة هابطة قال : ادعو لي ادعو لي فقالت صفية : من يا رسول الله ؟ قال : أهل بيتي عليا وفاطمة والحسن والحسين فجيء بهم فألقى عليهم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كساءه ثم رفع يديه ثم قال : اللهم هؤلاء آلي فصل على محمد وعلى آل محمد وأنزل الله عز وجل { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا }
هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد ولم يخرجاه وقد صحت الرواية على شرط الشيخين أنه علمهم الصلاة على أهل بيته كما علمهم الصلاة على آله K المليكي ذاهب الحديث

Dhahabi said: Maliki (yane Abdurrahman ibn Abu Bakr – narrator) was dhahibul hadith.

“Abdurrahman ibn Abu Bakr al-Maliki”. ( عبد الرحمن بن أبي بكر المليكي) In “Mizan” (2/550)قال البخاري: ذاهب الحديث. وقال ابن معين: ضعيف. وقال أحمد: منكر الحديث. وقال النسائي: متروك

Bukhari said: Wasted in ahadeth. Ibn Maeen said: Weak. Ahmad said: Munkar al-hadith. Nasai said: Abandoned.

Narration 3:

Also the wording reported by al-Suyuti and Ibn al-Athir is as follows Umm Salama said to the Holy Prophet: “Am I also one of them?” He replied: “No. You have your own special position and your future is good.” Sunni reference: * Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v2, p289, * Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti,v5, p198

Answer:

Translation is a blatant lie and this narration was taken from the shia website al-islam.org encyclopedia.

Here ahadeth from Durr:

وأخرج الطبراني عن أم سلمة رضي الله عنها أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لفاطمة ٌرضي الله عنها‏”‏ائتني بزوجك وابنيه، فجاءت بهم، فالقى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عليهم كساء فدكيا، ثم وضع يده عليهم، ثم قال‏:‏ اللهم ان هؤلاء أهل محمد – وفي لفظ آل محمد – فاجعل صلواتك وبركاتك على آل محمد كما جعلتها على آل إبراهيم انك حميد مجيد‏.‏ قالت أم سلمة رضي الله عنها‏:‏ فرفعت الكساء لأدخل معهم، فجذبه من يدي وقال انك على خير‏”‏‏.‏

وأخرج ابن مردويه عن أم سلمة قالت‏”‏نزلت هذه الآية في بيتي ‏{‏إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا‏}‏ وفي البيت سبعة‏.‏ جبريل، وميكائيل عليهما السلام، وعلي، وفاطمة، والحسن، والحسين، رضي الله عنهم، وأنا على باب البيت، قلت‏:‏ يا رسول الله ألست من أهل البيت‏؟‏ قال‏:‏ انك إلى خير، انك من أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم‏”‏‏.‏

وأخرج ابن مردويه والخطيب عن أبي سعيد الخدري رضي الله عنه قال‏:‏ كان يوم أم سلمة أم المؤمنين رضي الله عنها، فنزل جبريل عليه السلام على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بهذه الآية ‏{‏إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا‏}‏ قال‏:‏ فدعا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بحسن، وحسين، وفاطمة، وعلي، فضمهم اليه، ونشر عليهم الثوب‏.‏ والحجاب على أم سلمة مضروب، ثم قال ‏”‏اللهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي، اللهم أذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا‏.‏ قالت أم سلمة رضي الله عنها‏:‏ فإنا معهم يا نبي الله‏؟‏ قال‏:‏ أنت على مكانك، وانك على خير‏”‏‏.‏

The word “NO” is not present in this narration.

Most likely the translator inserted the word “NO” in the narration which says: أنت على مكانك، وانك على خير‏

You are on your place (position) and you are upon good.

Narration 4:

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri: I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: “This verse(33:33) has been revealed about five individuals: Myself, Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husain, and Fatimah.”

Abu Bakr al-Harithi informed us> Abu Muhammad ibn Hayyan> Ahmad ibn ‘Amr ibn Abi ‘Asim> Abu’l-Rabi‘ al-Zahrani> ‘Ammar ibn Muhammad> al-Thawri> Sufyan> Abu’l-Jahhaf> ‘Atiyyah> Abu Sa‘id [al-Khudri] who said regarding the verse (Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household…): “It was revealed about five people: the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, may Allah be well pleased with all of them”.
Sunni references:
– Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p5, under the verse 33:33
– Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p24
– al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p221
– Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami

Answer:

All narrations with such text were reported via Atiya Awfe, and are weak.

“Atiyyah ibn Sad al-Awfe al-Koofe” : Scholars of Islam almost agreed upon his weakness. Dhahabi, Abu Hatim, Nasai, Ahmad said he’s weak (“Mizanul itidal” 3/79/#5667). He was also weakned by Sufyan Thawri and Ibn Adi (“Tahzib al-kamal” 20/#3956). Heythami in “Majmau zawaid” #11125 said Atiyyah weak, abandoned.

Shaykh Muhammad Albani in his book on tawasul discussed ‘Atiyyah : “‘Atiyyah is weak as declared by an -Nawawee in al-Adhkaar, Ibn Taimiyyah in al-Qaa’idatul-Jaliyyah and adh-Dhahabee in al-Meezaan; indeed in ad-Du’afaa (88/1) he says: “They are agreed upon his weakness.” Also by al-Haafidh al-Haithamee in various places in Majma’uz-Zawaa’id from them (5/236). He is also mentioned by Aboo Bakr ibn al-Muhibb al-Ba’labakee in ad-Du’afaa wal-Matrookeen, and by al-Boosayree.

Narration 5:

The grand Salafi hadithist, al-Mubarakfuri, records in his Tuhfah al-Ahwazi, vol. 9, p. 48:

وقال أبو سعيد الخدري ومجاهد وقتادة وروي عن الكلبي أن أهل البيت المذكورين في الاية هم علي وفاطمة والحسن والحسين خاصة ومن حججهم الخطاب في الاية بما يصلح للذكور لا للإناث وهو قوله عنكم وليطهركم ولو كان للنساء خاصة لقال عنكن

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, Mujahid, Qatadah and al-Kalbi said that the Ahl al-Bayt mentioned in the verse (33:33) are ONLY Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, and part of their proofs was that the verse is masculine in its grammatical form, and not feminine.

Answer:

This narration from Abu Saeed al-Hudri isn’t established, rather it’s extremely weak.

It was narrated by Tabari in his tafsir with chain:

حدثنـي مـحمد بن الـمثنى، قال: ثنا بكر بن يحيى بن زبـان العنزي، قال: ثنا مندل، عن الأعمش، عن عطية، عن أبـي سعيد الـخدريّ، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: ” نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَةُ فِـي خَمْسَةٍ: فِـيّ، وفِـي علـيّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، وَحَسَنٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، وَحُسَيْنٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، وَفـاطِمَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْها ” { إنَّـمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِـيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرّجْسَ أهْلَ البَـيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيراً }.

There are problems in the chain. First that’s Bakr ibn Yahya ibn Zaban. Ibn Hajar said he’s maqbul in “Taqrib”. There is uncertainty in him, Abu Hatim said he’s shaykh, ibn Hibban mentioned in “Thiqat”. I couldn’t find anyone from critics of jarh and tadil, which would praise him. Second problem is Mundal ibn Ali al-Kufi. Weak as said ibn Hajar in “Taqrib” (#6883). Abu Zurah said he was soft, Ahmad said he’s weak. (“Mizanul itidal” 4/180). Third problem al-Amash, truthful, but know mudalis, and this hadith he narrated in muanan form, without making clear if he heard it himself or not. The last problem is Atiyah al-Awfi. We talked about him, and his narrating from Abu Saeed al-Hudri before in details. It was also narrated by Tabarani in “Saghir” and Abu Shaikh in “Tabaqat” via Atiyah again, and by Tabarani in “Awsat” where Atiyah accompanied by Sulaiman ibn Qarm. We talked about him before.

Other quoted from Mubarakpuri, was Kalbi, That’s Muhammad ibn Saeeb al-Kalbi, dajal, liar, abandoned narrator in accordance to agreed opinion.

Narration 6:

al-Kharazmi has quoted this very narration in his Maqtal in the following words: When, after the martyrdom of (Imam) al-Husain the grandson of the Holy Prophet, (Imam) Zain al-Abideen and other prisoners belonging to the House of the Holy Prophet were carried to Damascus and stationed in a jail located by the side of the Grand Mosque of Damascus, an old man approached them and said: “Praised be Allah who killed you and annihilated you and relieved the people from your men and provided the Commander of the Faithful (Yazid) with authority over you.” Ali Ibn al-Husain said: “O old man! Have you read the Holy Quran?” He replied: “Yes.” Then the Imam said: “Have you read the verse: Muhammad! ‘Say, I do not ask you of any reward for my preaching except the love of my kinsfolk’?” The old man said: “Yes. I have read it.” The Imam said: “Have you read the verse: ‘So give what is due to the near ones, the needy and that wayfarer.’ and the verse: ‘Know that whatever (income) you gain, one fifth belongs to Allah, the Messenger, his near ones, orphans the needy and the wayfarers, if you believe inAllah and what We revealed to Our servant in the Holy Quran’?” The old man replied: “Yes. I have read them.”The Imam said: “I swear by Allah that the word ‘near ones’ refers to us and these verses have been revealed about us. (The Imam added): And have you also read this verse in the Holy Quran wherein Allah says: ‘O people of the Prophet’s House…’ (33:33)?” The old man said: “Yes. I have read it”. The Imam said: “What is meant by people of the Prophet’s House! It is we whom Allah has especially associated with the verse of Tat’hir (purification).” The old man said: “I ask you by Allah! Are you of the same family?” The Imam replied: “I swear by my grandfather the Prophet of Allah that we are the same people.” The old man was stunned and expressed regret for what he had said. Then he raised his head towards the sky and said: “O Allah! I ask forgiveness for what I have said, and forsake enmity against this family and hate the enemies of the progeny of Muhammad.” Sunni reference: Maqtal al-Husain, by al-Khateeb al-Kharazmi

Answer:

Khawarezmi was from students of motazele Zamahshari.

Here sufficient info on him:(refer this)

It’s enough to say that in Zariya stated that: THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT HE (KHAWAREZMI) HOLD ALI UPON ALL OTHER COMPANIONS. So student of mutazela and with shia beliefs. So his book is unreliable.

Narration 7:

أخبرنا الشيخ الإمام الزاهد صدر الدين شيخ الشيوخ أبو القاسم عبدالرحيم بن إسماعيل بن أبي سعد الصوفي والشيخ الإمام أبو أحمد عبد الوهاب بن علي بن علي بن الأمين قالا أنا أبو القاسم هبة ( الله ) بن الحصين أنا أبو طالب محمد بن محمد غيلان أنا أبو بكر محمد بن عبدالله بن إبراهيم ( 48 ب ) الشافعي نا إسحاق بن ميمون الحربي نا أبو غسان نا فضيل عن عط عن أبي سعيد الخدري عن أم سلمه رضي الله عنها قالت
نزلت هذه الاية في بيتي إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا قلت يارسول الله ألست من أهل البيت قال إنك إلى خير إنك من أزواج رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم قالت
وأهل البيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم وعلي وفاطمة والحسن والحسين رضي الله عنهم أجمعين
هذا حديث صحيح
– Manaqib Ummuhat Al’mumineen

“Brought down this verse in my house, “Allay only.. (ayat tatheer)” I said O Messenger of Allah, Am I not from Ahlul-Bayt, He said verily you are on good verily you are from the Wives of the Messenger of Allah (Salalahu Alayhi wa salam) She said “And Ahlel Bayt of Rasoolallah (salalahu Alayhi wa salam) are Ali, and Fatima, and Hassan, and Hussain (Allah be pleased with them all together)” This hadith is Authentic.

Answer:

Narrated ibn Asakir and Abu Bakr ash-Shafei from the way – Fudail – Atiyah – Abu Saeed – Umm Salamah.

This narration is weak.

Fudail :saduq, yatashayu was criticized.
Atiyah: weak almost per ijma, shia.

Narration 8:

Abu Sa‘id al-Nasruyiyy informed us> Ahmad ibn Ja‘far al-Qati‘i> ‘Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal> his father> Ibn Numayr> ‘Abd al-Malik> ‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah who said: “Some of those who heard Umm Salamah related to me that she mentioned that the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, was in her house when Fatimah, may Allah be well pleased with her, came with a pot containing a meat dish. The Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, said to her: ‘Call for me your husband and your sons!’ ‘Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn came in and sat down to eat from the meat dish while the Prophet was sitting on his place of sleep and he had under him a garment made in Khaybar. Umm Salamah said: ‘I was praying in my room when Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse (Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household…). He grabbed the extension of the garment and covered them with it. Then, he got his hands out, raised them toward heaven and said: ‘O Allah, these are the folk of my household and my closest family members, please remove uncleanness from them and cleanse them with a thorough cleansing’. I put my head inside and said: ‘And I am with you, O Messenger of Allah!’ And he answered: ‘You will gain good! You will gain good!’ ’

Answer:

This chain is weak because who was the narrator next after Ata wasn’t mentioned.

Narration 9a :

حَدَّثَنَا فَهْدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ كَثِيرِ بْنِ عُفَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ لَهِيعَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي صَخْرٍ، عَنْ أَبِي مُعَاوِيَةَ الْبَجَلِيِّ، عَنْ عَمْرَةَ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةِ قَالتْ: أَتَيْتُ أُمَّ سَلَمَةَ فَسَلَّمْتُ عَلَيْهَا فَقَالَتْ: مَنْ أَنْتِ ؟ فَقُلْتُ: عَمْرَةُ الْهَمْدَانِيَّةُ فَقَالَتْ عَمْرَةُ: يَا أُمَّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَخْبِرِينِي عَنْ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ الَّذِي قُتِلَ بَيْنَ أَظْهُرِنَا فَمُحِبٌّ وَمُبْغِضٌ تُرِيدُ عَلِيَّ بْنَ أَبِي طَالِبٍ قَالَتْ أُمُّ سَلَمَةَ أَتُحِبِّينَهُ أَمْ تُبْغِضِينَهُ ؟ قَالَتْ: مَا أُحِبُّهُ وَلَا أُبْغِضُهُ، فَقَالَتْ: أَنْزَلَ اللهُ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ: { إنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللهُ } [التوبة: 55] إلَى آخِرِهَا وَمَا فِي الْبَيْتِ إلَّا جِبْرِيلُ وَرَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، وَعَلِيٌّ، وَفَاطِمَةُ، وَحَسَنٌ، وَحُسَيْنٌ عَلَيْهِمُ السَّلَامُ، فَقُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللهِ، أَنَا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْبَيْتِ ؟، فَقَالَ: ” إنَّ لَكِ عِنْدَ اللهِ خَيْرًا ” فَوَدِدْتُ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: نَعَمْ، فَكَانَ أَحَبَّ إلَيَّ مِمَّا تَطْلُعُ عَلَيْهِ الشَّمْسُ وَتَغْرُبُ

Mushkil al-Athar, al-Tahawi has quoted Umrah al-Hamdaniyyah as saying: I went to Umm Salama and greeted her. She inquired: “Who are you?” I replied: “I am Umrah Hamdaniyyah.” Umrah says, “I said O mother of the Faithful! Say something about the man who has been killed among us today. One group of the people like him and another group is inimical towards him,” (He meant Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib).Umm Salama said, “Do you like him or are you hostile to him?” I replied, “I neither like him nor I am hostile to him.” [Here the narrative is defective and thereafter it is like this:] Umm Salama began to tell about the revelation of the verse of Tat’hir and said in this behalf: “Allah revealed the verse: O People of the Prophet’s House… There was none in the room at that time, except Gabriel, the Holy Prophet, Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husain. I said: ‘O Prophet of Allah! Am I too one of the people of the House?’ He replied: ‘Allah will reward you and recompense you.’ I wished that he might have said ‘Yes’ and would have valued such a reply much more than anything else in the world.'”reference: Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v1, p336

Answer:

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)]

Also Amrah is Majhool al-haal(anonymous).

And the addition in this weak hadeeth goes against the authentic version of the hadeeth present in Sunan Tirmidhi and also the authentic narration from Wathilah(ra) where he was given a positive response, why won’t the wife of Prophet(saws) get a positive response. Hence this report is Munkar.

Narration 9b :

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

Answer:

The hadeeth is weak and Munkar as it goes against the other reports from Umm Salama(ra) and even the report from Wathila(ra).

This chain is Disconnected. Narrator Ammar bin Muawiya, himself admitted that, He didn’t hear anything from Sa’eed ibn Jubair(rah).
عمار بن معاوية الدهني
قال أحمد بن حنبل: لم يسمع من سعيد بن جبير.
قلت: وسأله أبو بكر بن عياش: سمعت من سعيد بن جبير؟ فقال: لا.
Ahmad said: He (Ammar) didn’t hear from Sa’eed bin Jubair anything.

Abu Bakr bin Ayyash asked him: Did you hear from Sa’eed bin Jubair? He (Ammar) replied: No. [Tuhfat Al Tahseel by Al Iraqi p. 236].

This can also be found in Al-Dua’fa of Uqayli, vol 3, page 323.

(1341) عمار بن أبي معاوية الدهني حدثنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثنا عبيد الله بن عمر القواريري قال سمعت أبا بكر بن عياش يقول مر بي عمار الدهني فدعوته فقلت يا عمار تعال فجاء فقلت سمعت من سعيد بن جبير قال لا
[Al-Dua’fa of Uqayli, vol 3, page 323.]

Secondly, The major problem in this chain is that narrator Amrah is Majhool, and has Tawtheeq from Ibn Hibban and Ijli, who were criticized by Sunni scholars for being lenient(Mutasahil) in giving Tawtheeq to Majhool(anonymous) narrators. And the addition in this weak hadeeth goes against the authentic version of the hadeeth present in Sunan Tirmidhi and also the authentic narration from Wathilah(ra) where he was given a positive response, why won’t the wife of Prophet(saws) get a positive response.

Even two muhaqqiqs of the al-Sharia by Ajuri, that is (A). Sheikh Abdullah bin Umar bin Sulaiman Dameej AND (B). Waleed bin Muhammad Nabih Saif al-Nasir, page 260-261], weakened this hadeeth. Sheikh Waleed bin Muhammad Nabih Saif al-Nasir weakened the chain of this hadeeth, he pointed out one of the reason that Amrah is Majhool, even though Ibn Hibban gave her tawtheeq, since ibn Hibban is Mutasahil.

Scholars who weakened the random reports pointing the anonymity of Amrah as one of the reason:

(i). Shuaib Arnaut:

Shiekh Shuaib Arnaut declared the chain of a hadeeth weak, in Sharh Mushkil Athaar Tahawi – vol 2, p 238 , H 765, he pointed out one of the reason that, No one narrated from Amrah except Ammar, and ibn hibban gave her tawtheeq, which implies that it is insufficient.

(ii). Shaykh Hamdi Abdul Majeed Salafi:

Shaykh Hamdi Abdul Majeed Salafi weakened a different hadeeth in Mu’ajm al-Kabeer Tabarani-vol 23, p 372-373 , and he pointed out “one of the reason” as chain having Majhool narrator, i.e Amrah. He mentioned that Ibn Hibban gave her Tawtheeq, but he said that, doesn’t make a difference because ibn hibban was known for strengthening weak and Majhool narrators.

(iii). Two Rijal websiites such Islamweb Library mentions that Amrah is Majhool . [Islamweb Library] and [Islam Narrators].

If it’s argued that Ibn Hibban And al-Ijli gave Tawtheeq to Amrah then, it should be mentioned that both of these scholars were known for being Mutasahil(leniet) in giving tawtheeq to Majhool(anonymous) narrators.

ON IBN HIBBAN BEING MUTASAHIL

Following Scholars mentioned the Tasahul of Ibn Hibban:

(1). Hafiz Ibn Hajr said:
قلت وهذا الذي ذهب إليه ابن حبان من أن الرجل إذا انتفت جهالة عينه كان على العدالة إلى أن يتبن جرحه مذهب عجيب والجمهور على خلافه وهذا هو مساك ابن حبان في كتاب الثقات الذي ألفه فإنه يذكر خلقاً من نص عليهم أبو حاتم وغيره على أنهم مجهولون وكان عند ابن حبان جهالة العين ترتفع برواية واحد مشهور وهو مذهب شيخه بن خزيمة ولكن جهالة حاله باقية عند غيره
“I say : and towards this went Ibn Hibban, that when the Jahalah al-Ayn of a person is finished, then he is trustworthy until negative criticism is proven against him, and this is a strange opinion, and the majority (Jamhoor) are opposing this, and this is the methodology of Ibn Hibban in his book “al-Thiqat” that he composed, and he mentions in it people that Abu Hatim and others have certified to be Majhool, as if for Ibn Hibban the Jahalah al-Ayn is removed with narration of one Mashoor [narrator], and this is the view of his teacher Ibn Khuzaymah, but the Jahalah al-Hal remains according to others than him.” (Lisan al-Mizan 1/6).

(2). Shiekh Al-Albani.

Discussing a narrator Shaykh Albani wrote:

وأما ابن حبان فقد ذكره في ” الثقات ” ، وهذا منه على عادته في وثيق المجهولين كما سبق التنبيه عليه مرارا، توثيق ابن حبان هذا هو عمدة الهيثمي حين قال في ” المجمع … التوثيقات التي لا يعتمد عليها لضعف مستندها
“As to Ibn Hibban for he mentioned him in “al-Thiqaat” this is from his habit of authentication of Majhool narrators as we have warned earlier over and over. And authentication (“tauthiq“) of Ibn Hibban was accepted by al-Haithmi as he says in al-Majma’ … authentications that are not valid for their [own] weakness.” (Silsala Da’ifa 1/381 under Narration 213)

Here Shaykh Albani rejected al-Haithmi’s authentication because he merely accepts the controversial authentication of Ibn Hibban. The same rule ought to be applied elsewhere too.

Sheikh Al-Albani said:
ولهذا نجد المحققين من المحدثين كالذهبي والعسقلاني وغيرهما لا يوثقون من تفرد بتوثيقه ابن حبان
Rough Trans: “And that is why we find the muhaditheen like Al-Thahabi and Ibn Hajar and others, not strengthening those that Ibn Hibban strengthens alone.” [Al-Rawd Al-Dani fil Fawa’id Al-Hadeethia, p. 18].

Sheikh Albani in Irwa al Galil j3 pg 309 number 824 declared Imam ibn hibban aur Imam Ijli as mutasahil.

(3). Shaikh Muqbil was asked in Al-Muqtarah (p. 47):
السؤال: ابن حبان معروف أنه يوثق المجاهيل، فإن كان الراوي غير مجهول وقد روى عنه أكثر من واحد، وقال ابن حبان: هذا مستقيم الحديث أو قال هذا ثقة هل نتوقف في توثيقه أم نعتبره؟
الجواب: من أهل العلم كما في التنكيل بما في تأنيب الكوثري من الأباطيل من قال فيه: إنه يقبل. وهو إختيار المعلمي.
أما (ثقة) فالغالب أنه عرف هو نفسه بالتساهل، فيتوقف لأنه قد عرف هو بالتساهل في توثيق المجاهيل، فإذا وثق غير مجهول يقبل منه، أما المجهولون فقد عرف منه التساهل في هذا.
Question: Ibn Hibban is known for strengthening anonymous(majhool) narrators, so if the narrator wasn’t unknown, and has more than one student, and Ibn Hibban said: mustaqeemul hadith or thiqa, do we still not accept him or do we?
Answer: Some of the scholars, like Al-Mu’allami in Al-Tankeel accepted this. As for the term thiqa, in most cases, he is known for being lenient, so we stop, because he was lenient in strengthening unknown narrators. However, if he strengthened someone that is known, then we accept it.

(4). Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani:

Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani discussing the well known compilations of Hadith and issues around them writes;

“To Ibn Hibban if a Majhool narrator’s teacher and student (means person from whom he is narrating and who is narrating from him) are well known and trustworthy then his Jahalah is not a problem, rather his narration is Sahih according to him. However, other scholars of Hadith reject the narration due to Jahalah of a narrator. This principle of Ibn Hibban even runs through his book “al-Thiqaat” as his definition of “Thiqa” is about the absence of negative criticism. Because of this he has counted many Majhool narrators among “thiqaat”. For this very reason generally scholars of Hadith do not authenticate a narrator merely because Ibn Hibban counted him among “thiqaat” except that his being other than Majhool is proved otherwise.” (Dars Tirmidhi 1/67).

(5). Shaikh Abu abdurrahman fauzi:

Shaikh Abu abdurrahman fauzi in his book “mashoor waqiyat ki haqeeqat” pg 65,92,93 and 119 declared ibn hibban to be mutasahil.

(6). Shaykh Gazi Aziz Mubarakpuri:

Shaykh Gazi Aziz Mubarakpuri states “Imam Ijli and Imam ibn Hibban(In regards to Tawtheeq of Majhool narrators) are very lenient(Mutasahil)”. (Zaef hadees ki marifat aur unki sharayi haisiyat pg 47).

(7). Hafiz Mohammad gondalvi:

Hafiz Mohammad gondalvi states about a narrator: Ibn hibban mentioned him in Thiqaat but the tasahhul of Ibn Hibban is well known. (Khairul kalam pg 252).

(8). Maulana Abdul Salam Abdul rauf bin Abdul Hannan:
Maulana Abdul rauf states about a narrator: Imam Ijli in Tareeq al Thiqaat(186) and Imam Ibn hibban in Kitaab al Thiqaat vol 8, page 261 mention him, but they both are Mutasahil in giving Tawtheeq. (Al qaul al maqbool fi Sharh wa Ta’aleeqh Salawaat ar-rasool, pg 272).

(9). Shaikh Irshad al haq athari:

Shaikh Irshad al haq athari states: Ibn hibban is mutasahil in Zawabit jarh wa tadeel pg 34.

(10). Hafiz Abdul mannan noorpuri

Hafiz Abdul mannan noorpuri states : The Tasahul of ibn khuzaimah and ibn hibban is famous .(Tadad e rakat taraweeh pg 34, Maqalat e Noorpuri pg 330).

(11). Shaykh Abu Ishaq al Huwaini:

Shaykh Abu Ishaq al Huwaini states that both Ijli and Ibn Hibban are Mutasahil. (See naslul bab majmua rijal huwaini pg 497).

(12). Imam Sakhaavi Rh. has called Ibn Hibban Mutasahil. (Fathul Mughees page 24 )

(13). Imam Ibn Salaah also stated him as Mutasahil. (Muqaddamah Ibne Salaah page : 9 )

(14). Shaykh Mubarakpuri wrote, “There is no doubt that ibn hibban is Mutasahil.” (Tehqeequl Kalaam vol 1, page 77)

(15). Maulana Mohammad Gondalvi decalred him Mutasahil. (Khairul Kalaam page 346)

ON IJLI BEING MUTASAHIL:

(1). Shaikh Nasiruddin Albani :

Shiekh Albani mentions in Irwa galeel vol 5 pg 289 that Imam Ijli is mutasahil in giving tawseeq.

Shaikh Nasiruddin albani in Gayatul maraam pg 240, mentions that Ijli is mutasahil in giving tawseeq like Ibn Hibban.

(2). Shaikh Abdurrehman Muallami al Yamani:

Shaikh Abdur rehman muallami al yamani deemed Imam Ijli Mutasahil in giving tawtheeq to Majhool narrators, and near to ibn hibban in Tasahul.(See At tankeel vol 1,pg 255 and Anwar al kashif vol 1,pg 108).

In his other book Allama Muallami Al nukat al jiyaad pg 588 states that the Tasahul of Imam Ijli is too much , specially, in the category of Tabaein, the Tabai who is Majhool, he declares him Thiqa.

(3). Shaykh Abu Ishaq al Huwaini

Shaykh Abu Ishaq al Huwaini declared Imam Ijli Mutasahil in several places in his book. In page 497 he states that both Ijli and Ibn Hibban are Mutasahil. (See naslul bab majmua rijal huwaini pg 46,393,408,497).

(4). Shaikh Muqbil ibn Haadi al Wadi:

Shaikh Muqbil ibn Haadi al Wadi also deemed Imam ijli mutasahil at many places. In page 187 of Al muktarih, he deems both Ibn Hibban and Ijli as Mutasahil in giving tawtheeq to Majhool narrators. (See Al durrur fi masail al mustalah wal aasar pg 19 and Al muktarih pg 46,47,187).

Similarly, he says Imam Ijli is near from Ibn Hibban in being Mutasahil for giving tawtheeq to Majhool narrators. (Tehqiq Mustadrak al Hakim vol1,pg 525).

(5). Shaykh Zakariya Ghulam Qadir Pakistani:

Shaykh Zakariya Ghulam Qadir Pakistani in his book Tankeeh al kalaam pg 345 mentioned that Imam Ijli is mutasahil.

(6). Shaykh Dr. Qasim ali saad:

Shaykh Dr. Qasim ali saad wrote a book on the “Manhaj of Imam Nasai on Jarh wa Tadeel” on pg 1521 he states that Imam Ijli is mutasahil in giving tawseeq.

(7). Shaykh Dr. Akram Zia umri:

Shaykh Dr. Akram Zia umri states that Imam Ijli is Mutasahil in giving Tawtheeq to Majhool narrators.(Al buhoosun fee taarikh is sunnatil musharraqa pg 118).

(8). Shaykh Mohammad Nuaym al arkasusi:

Shaykh Mohammad Nuaym al arkasusi states that Imam Ijli is mutasahil in Musnad ahmad risala vol 6,pg 248.

(9). Shaykh Ibrahim zaibak:

Shaykh Ibrahim zaibak states that Imam Ijli is mutasahil in Musnad ahmad risala vol 6,pg 248.

(10). Maulana Abdul Salam Abdul rauf bin Abdul Hannan:

Maulana Abdul rauf states about a narrator: Imam Ijli in Tareeq al Thiqaat(186) and Imam Ibn hibban in Kitaab al Thiqaat vol 8, page 261 mention him, but they both are Mutasahil in giving Tawtheeq. (Al qaul al maqbool fi Sharh wa Ta’aleeqh Salawaat ar-rasool, pg 272).

(11). Shaikh Abu abdurrahman fawzi:

Shaikh Abu abdurrahman fawzi in his book “mashoor waqiyat ki haqeeqat” pg 92,93 stated that Imam Ijli is Mutasahil.

(12). Shaikh Dr Hatim sharif al Awni

Shaikh Dr Hatim sharif al Awni in his book Izaa’aat bahesiya fi uloom al-sunnah pg no 68 to 85 discussed the Tawtheeq of Imam Ijli and deemed him Mutasahil. ( إضاءات بحثية في علوم السنة).

(13). Shaikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdul Latif:

Shaikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdul Latif deemed Imam Ijli mutasahil in (Zawabit Jarh wa Tadeel pg 65). At other place he states “والعجلي قريب منه في توثيق المجاهيل من القدماء” The Qadeem(early) narrators who are Majhool, in giving them Tawtheeq Imam Ijli is near to Ibn Hibban.

(14). Shaykh Gazi Aziz Mubarakpuri:

(15). Shaikh Abdul Alim Abdul Azim Bastawi:

In the footnotes, Shaikh Abdul Alim Abdul Azim Bastawi states about the Tasahul of Imam Ijli that:

ويظهر تساهل العجلي في الأمور التالية:

أولاً: إطلاق (ثقة) على الصدوق فمن دونه.

ثانياً: إطلاق (لا بأس به) على من هو ضعيف.

ثالثاً: إطلاق (ضعيف) على من هو ضعيف جداً أو متروك.

رابعاً: توثيق مجهولي الحال ومن لم يرو عنه إلّا راو واحد. تحقيق كتاب معرفة الثقات 1/125 ـ 127.

The Tasahul of Imam Ijli can be seen below:

First: He deemed those narrators who are Sadooq or below this level as Thiqa.
Second: Those who are weak, he mentions them as “Laa baasa bihi”.
Third: Those who are very weak or Matrook, he just mentions them as Daeef(weak).
Fourth: Those who are Majhool(anonymous) from whom only one narrator narrates, he mentions them as Thiqa.

(Tehqiq kitab marifat al siqat vol 1 pg 125-127”).

On tawtheeq of ijli and Ibn hibban and Ibn hajar calling a narrator MaqBool. In Tehreer Taqreeb-ut-Tehzeeb, a book by Sheikh Shoaib Arnawut and Bashar Awad Ma’roof in which they gave worked on opinions of Ibn Hajr, they rejected this opinion of Ibn Hajr, and said:-

بل : مقبول في المتابعات والشواهد، فقد روى عنه اثنان فقط، ووثقه العجلي على ما هو معروف من تساهله في توثيق الكوفيين، وذكره ابن حبان في الثقات

Rather: He is Maqbool/accepted only if He has following or supporting evidence. Only two narrated from Him. Ijli termed him Trustworthy and He is famous in leniency for authenticating Narrators from Kufa; and Ibn Hibban mentioned him in al-Thiqaat.

Narration 10:

Another question, this is the hadith that is right underneath the one i posted, from ibn Kathir’s tafsir of 33:33…
وقال السُّدِّي، عن أبي الديلم قال: قال علي بن الحسين لرجل من أهل الشام: أما قرأت في الأحزاب: ( إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ) ؟ قال: نعم، ولأنتم هم؟ قال: نعم.
Basically it says that Zayn al-‘Abideen9as) said to a man from Shaam: Have you read (and then he quotes 33:33)? So the man says, “Yes, and they belong to you (plural)? He (Ali bin al-Husayn) said: Yes.

Answer:

First of all, the narration has arrived to us through Al-Subah bin Yahya Al-Muzani. Refer to Tafseer Al-Tabari. Ibn Hajar has brought him up in Lisan Al-Mizan and said that he is accused of being a liar. Al-Bukhari also said: feehi nathar, which is one of the strongest forms of jarh by Al-Bukhari. We even had a very hard time figuring out who is Al-Daylam.

There is narration is very weak and unreliable.

And, If Shias want to quote random weak reports, then even we can post weak reports proving the verse was revealed for wives of Prophet(saws). Imam Suyuti quotes this hadith:

وأخرج ابن سعد عن عروة رضي الله عنه { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت } قال: يعني أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم نزلت في بيت عائشة رضي الله عنها

Imam Ibn S’ad (ra) narrates from Urwa (ra) who said: Ahlul Bayt in (33:33) refers to wives of Prophet (Peace be upon him). This verse was revealed in house of Aisha (ra). (Tabaqat, Ibn Sad narrated in volume 8, p 199)

Note: We would have stopped this part here but we would like to end this by showing to people another side of the coin, because we know that many shias are so biased and ignorant that they won’t mind even checking the authenticity of the above narrations about incident of kisa in sunni books nor will they bother about the authenticity of the above narrations. So this is for such people.

Here are few narrations and we are not going provide takhreej of all narrations , we don’t bother for doing their takhreej because we already have authentic narrations in support of our view.

Narration 1:
حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي حدثنا أبو النضر هاشم بن القاسم حدثنا عبد الحميد يعني ابن بهرام قال حدثني شهر بن حوشب قال سمعت أم سلمة زوج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم حين جاء نعي الحسين بن علي لعنت أهل العراق فقالت: قتلوه قتلهم الله غروه وذلوه لعنهم الله فإني رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جاءته فاطمة غدية ببرمة قد صنعت له فيها عصيدة تحمله في طبق لها حتى وضعتها بين يديه فقال لها: أين ابن عمك قالت: هو في البيت قال: فاذهبي فادعيه وائتني بابنيه قالت: فجاءت تقود ابنيها كل واحد منهما بيد وعلي يمشي في أثرهما حتى دخلوا على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأجلسهما في حجره وجلس علي عن يمينه وجلست فاطمة عن يساره قالت: أم سلمة فاجتبذ من تحتي كساء خيبريا كان بساطا لنا على المنامة في المدينة فلفه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عليهم جميعا فأخذ بشماله طرفي الكساء وألوى بيده اليمنى إلى ربه عز وجل وقال: اللهم أهلي اذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا اللهم أهل بيتي اذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا اللهم أهل بيتي أذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا. قلت يا رسول الله ألست من أهلك قال بلى فادخلي في الكساء قالت: فدخلت في الكساء بعد ما قضى دعاءه لابن عمه علي وابنيه وابنته فاطمة رضي الله عنهم.
Shahr narrated to us, he said: I heard Umm Salamah, curse the people of Iraq, when the news of the death of Al-Hussien ibn Ali came to her, she said: They killed him, May Allah kill them, and they humilated him, May Allah curse them. For I saw the Messenger of Allah [Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam] and Fatima had come to him one day with a Burmah (a pot, pan, or jar … was made from stone in the past) of hers from which she made a ‘Asida (a dish made by mixing flour with ghee, butter, etc and then cooked) carrying it in a plate of hers, until she placed it in front of him. He told her: «Where is your cousin?» She said: He is at home. [So] he said: go and call him, and bring forth your sons. She (i.e. Um Salama) said: she came leading her sons each one of them, and Ali walking on their trail, until they entered upon the Messenger of Allah [Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam]. He sat them (i.e Al-Hasan & Al-Husien) on his lap, and Ali sat on his right, and Fatima sat on his left. Umm Salama said: he pulled a cloak (a Kisa) from under me … and then he [Salah Allah ‘Alaihi wa Salam] wrapped it around them all, taking the edges of the Cloak by his left hand, and pointing with his right hand towards his Lord [Exalted and Glorified is He] and said: “O Allah, remove from them the Rijs (evil deeds and sins, etc.), and purify them with a thorough purification”, three times. She said: [So] I said: O Messenger of Allah, am I not [also] from your Ahl? [So] he said: Yes, Indeed, [you are]. He said: So enter the Kisa (the cloak) [too]. She said: So I entered after he completed his supplication to his cousin Ali, his sons, and his daughter Fatima [‘Alaihim Al Salam]. (Musnad ibn Hanbal, v6,p298)

Answer: تعليق شعيب الأرنؤوط : إسناده ضعيف لضعف شهر بن حوشب

Shuayb Arnawut said: “Chain is weak due to weakness of Shahr ibn Hawshab”.

This narrations shows that hz umm salama(ra) was included into the kisa and was considered ahl of prophet(Saw) and after the dua of prophet(Saw), because she asked the question after prophet(Saw) completed the dua.

Narration 2:

حدثنا أبو كريب، قال: ثنا خالد بن مخـلد، قال: ثنا موسى بن يعقوب، قال: ثنـي هاشم بن هاشم بن عتبة بن أبـي وقاص، عن عبد الله بن وهب بن زمعة، قال: أخبرتنـي أمّ سلـمة أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جمع علـياً والـحَسنـين، ثم أدخـلهم تـحت ثوبه، ثم جأر إلـى الله، ثم قال: ” هؤلاء أهل بـيتـي ” ، فقالت أمّ سلـمة: يا رسول الله أدخـلنـي معهم، قال: ” إنَّكِ مِنْ أهْلِـي

On authority of Abd Allah bin Wahb bin Zam’ah, Umm Salamah informed me that the Messenger of Allah SAWS assembled Alii and the two Hasan’s (Husayn and Hasan), he brought them under his thawb, then supplicated to Allah and said: “These are the people of my household”. Then Umm Salamah said: ‘Oh Messenger of Allah, bring me in with them’. He said: “Indeed you are from my household”. (Tabari in “Tafsir”)

Narration 3:

Tabarani in “al-Kabir”:

حدثنا بكر بن سهل الدمياطي ثنا جعفر بن مسافر التنيسي ثنا ابن أبي فديك ثنا موسى بن يعقوب الزمعي عن هشام بن هاشم عن وهب بن عبد الله بن زمعة : عن أم سلمة أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم جمع فاطمة و حسنا و حسينا رضي الله عنهما ثم أدخلهم تحت ثوبه ثم قال : اللهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي قالت أم سلمة : قلت يا رسول الله أدخلني معهم قال : إنك من أهلي

2663 On authority of Wahb bin Abd Allah bin Zam’ah (this name is flipped from the previous chain), on authority of Umm Salamah that the Messenger of Allah SAWS assembled Faatimah, Hasan, and Husayn, then brought them under his thawb, and said: “Oh Allah, these are the people of my household”. Then Umm Salamah said: ‘Oh Messenger of Allah, bring me in with them’. He said: “Indeed you are from my household”.

Narration 4:
ومن حديث هاشم بن هاشم بن عتبة بن أبي وقاص ، عن عبد الله بن وهب ابن زمعة قال : أخبرتني أم سلمة رضي الله عنها ، أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جمع وفاطمة ، والحسن ، والحسين ، رضي الله عنهم ، ثم أدخلهم تحت ثوبه ، ثم جأر إلى الله تعالى وقال : « « هؤلاء أهل بيتي . فقالت أم سلمة : يا رسول الله أدخلني معهم ، قال : إنك من أهلي »

Umm Salamah رضي الله عنها reported to me that the Messenger of Allâh (صلى الله عليه وسلم) collected Fâtimah, al-Hasan, al-Husayn رضي الله عنهم then he entered them under his cloak, then he called upon Allâh Most High and said: “These are the members of my household”. Then Umm Salamah رضي الله عنها said: O Messenger of Allâh enter me with them, he said: Verily, you are form my family”. [Maqrizi Fadail ahlalbayt p 26]

Narration 5:

Abu’l-Qasim ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad al-Sarraj informed us> Muhammad ibn Ya‘qub> al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Affan> Abu Yahya al-Hamani> Salih ibn Musa al-Qurashi> Khusayf> Sa‘id ibn Jubayr> Ibn ‘Abbas who said: “This verse was revealed about the wives of the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace (Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing)”.

Narration 6:

Imam Suyuti (rah) quotes this hadith:

Imam Ibn S’ad (ra) narrates from Urwa (ra) who said: Ahlul Bayt refers to wives of Prophet (Peace be upon him). This verse was revealed regarding Hadrat Aisha (ra). (Tabaqat, Ibn Sad narrated in volume 8, p 199)

Answer: Ibn Sad in his book from his sheikh Muhammad ib Umar al-Waqidi who was weak and accused in lie.

Narration 7:

This narration shows that prophet(Saw) made a similar supplication for hz abbas(ra) as he made for Ahlekisa, reciting the verse of tatheer in his supplication.

إن الله قسم الخلق قسمين فجعلني في خيرهما قسما فذلك قوله { وأصحاب اليمين } { وأصحاب الشمال } فأنا من أصحاب اليمين وأنا خير أصحاب اليمين ثم جعل القسمين أثلاثا فجعلني في خيرها ثلاثا فذلك قوله { فأصحاب الميمنة } { وأصحاب المشأمة } { والسابقون السابقون } فأنا من السابقين وأنا خير السابقين ثم جعل الأثلاث قبائل فجعلني في خيرها قبيلة وذلك قوله { وجعلناكم شعوبا وقبائل لتعارفوا إن أكرمكم عند الله أتقاكم } وأنا أتقى ولد آدم وأكرمهم على الله ولا فخر ثم جعل القبائل بيوتا فجعلني في خيرها بيتا فذلك قوله { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا } فأنا
وأهل بيتي مطهرون من الذنوب

Ibn ‘Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah said, “Allah divided people into two groups, and He put me in the best group. Allah talks of ‘The Companions of the Right’ and ‘the Companions of the Left.’ I am among the Companions of the Right and I am the best of the Companions of the Right. Then He divided the two groups into three and put me in the best of the three. He says, ‘The Companions of the Right and the Companions of the Left and the Outstrippers, the Outstrippers.’ (56:9) I am among the Outstrippers and I am the best of the Outstrippers. Then He divided the three into tribes and He put me in the best tribe. Allah says, ‘We have appointed you races and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed the noblest among you is the most god fearing. Allah is Knowing, Aware.’ (49:13) I am the most god fearing of the sons of Adam and the noblest in the sight of Allah, and it is no boast. Then He divided the tribes and put me in the best house. He says, ‘Allah only desires to remove impurity from you, People of the House, and to purify you. (33:33) (Hadith from at-Tabarani and al-Bayhaqi.)

Answer: This one is fabrication. Silsila ad daeefa 5495. But it shows that prophet(saw) even prayed for hz ibn abbas(ra) reciting the verse of tatheer(33:33).

Authentic narrations

Narration 1:

Umm Salmah said: in my house these verses were revealed ” God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt and to purify you thoroughly.” So the Prophet PBUH called for Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Hussein and then said: These are Ahlu-Bayti, In the Hadith of al Qadi and al Summi: They are Ahly. So I said: O Messenger of Allah! aren’t I also from your Ahlul-Bayt? He said: yes you are Inshallah.
Muhaddith: Al Hakim from al Sunan al kubrah for Bayhaqi.
Hadith rank: Isnad SAHIH narrators all trustworthy.

Comment: In this narration prophet (pbuh) clearly links a wife to inshallah because it is contingent upon her staying his wife. Whereas the others will remain his family. So, the wife is ahl bayt as long as she is wife and she stops being so when and if they are divorced. Moreover, Saying inshallah does not have to mean doubt. There is an occurrence in the Qur’an of this term where clearly it is not doubt.

Narration 2:

Umm Salmah said: in my house it was revealed ” God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt ” So the Prophet PBUH then sent after Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Hussein. He said: these are my Ahlul-Bayt. So Umm Salamah said: O Messenger of Allah? am I not also from your Ahlul-Bayt !? He said: yes Inshallah.

Narrator: Umm Salamah Hind bint Abu Umayyah.
Muhaddith: Al baghawi. in Sharh al Sunnah.
Hadith rank: Isnad SAHIH

And in another authentic version (but without Um Salama asking) he says: ”These are my Ahlul bayt, O Allah my ahlul Bayt have more right”.

Narration 3:

4705 – حدثنا أبو بكر أحمد بن سلمان الفقيه و أبو العباس محمد بن يعقوب قالا : ثنا الحسن بن مكرم البزار ثنا عثمان بن عمر ثنا عبد الرحمن بن عبد الله بن دنيار عن شريك بن أبي نمر عن عطاء بن يسار عن أم سلمة Y قالت : في بيتي نزلت { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت } قالت فأرسل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إلى علي و فاطمة و الحسن و الحسين فقال : هؤلاء أهل بيتي
هذا حديث صحيح على شرط البخاري و لم يخرجاه K على شرط البخاري
Umm Salama [r]: In MY HOUSE ‘Allah only wishes to keep away uncleanliness from you Ahlul Bayt’ was revealed… Prophet gathered Ali and Fatima and Hasan and Hussain and said: these are my Ahlulbayt.
من كتاب المستدرك الجزء 3 صفحة 158

Narration 4:

Wathilah narrated: I came seeking Ali but never found him so Fatima said: he went to the Prophet PBUH, sit until they come back. Then he came with the Prophet PBUH and they both entered and I entered with them, then the Prophet PBUH called for Hassan and Hussein and he made each one sit on a side of his lap and he came closer to fatima and her husband while I stood alone. Then he surrounded them with a cloak and said: “God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt and to purify you thoroughly.” O Allah they are my Ahel and my Ahel are more deserving. I said: O prophet of Allah! am I not from your Ahel? He said: And you are from my Ahel. Wathilah said: this is what I had always wished for.

Source: Bayhaqi in Sunan al kubrah.
hadith rank: Isnad is SAHIH.

Narration 5:

Some additional narrations which are not regarding kisa incident but where prophet(saw) called his wives as Ahlebayt or the wives considered themselves as Ahlebayt.

1. Anas(ra) 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, how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state ‘How do you find your family? He would say: In good state. (sahi muslim Bk 8, Number 3328)

(Similar narration is present in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 316)

Comment: In the above narration prophet(saw) terms his wives as ahlebayt as Prophet [saw] greeted his wives as “Assalamu’alaikum. Kaifa antum ya Ahlal Bayt“

وهو على المنبر: (يامعشر المسلمين، من يعذرني من رجل قد بلغني أذاه في أهل بيتي، فوالله ما علمت على أهلي إلا خيرا، ولقد ذكروا رجلا ما علمت عليه إلا خيرا، وما كان يدخل على أهلي إلا معي

2. Sahi bukhari (Volume 6 hadith 274)…“So Allah’s Apostle got up (and addressed) the people an asked for somebody who would take revenge on ‘Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul then. Allah’s Apostle, while on the pulpit, said, “O Muslims! Who will help me against a man who has hurt me by slandering my family(ahli bayti)? By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family, and people have blamed a man of whom I know nothing except good, and he never used to visit my family except with me,”…

Comment: In the above narration prophet(saw) terms one of his wife as ahlebayt. Prophet (S.A.W.) said to one of his wife “Ahli Baytee” (my family) on pulpit, during the incident of Ifk.

وحدثنا زهير بن حرب وإسحاق بن إبراهيم. كلاهما عن جرير. قال زهير: حدثنا جرير عن منصور، عن إبراهيم. قال:

قلت للأسود: هل سألت أم المؤمنين عما يكره أن ينتبذ فيه؟ قال: نعم. قلت: يا أم المؤمنين! أخبريني عما نهى عنه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أن ينتبذ فيه. قالت: نهانا، أهل البيت، أن ننتبذ في الدباء والمزفت

3. Sahi muslim (Bk 23, Number 4918) Ibrahim reported: I said to Aswad if he had asked the Mother of the Believers (in which utensils) he (the Holy Prophet) disapproved the preparation of Nabidh. He (Aswad) said: Yes. I said: Mother of the Believers, inform me about the utensils in which) Allah’s Apostle forbade to prepare Nabidh. She (Hadrat ‘A’isha) said: He forbade us, the members of his family [Ahlal Bayt], to prepare Nabidh in gourd, or varnished jar. I said to him: Do you remember green pitcher, and pitcher? He said: I narrated to you what I have heard; should I narrate to you which I did not hear?

Comment: In the above narration wife of prophet(saw) too considers herself to be ahlebayt.

4. أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لها يا عائشة هذا جبريل يقرأ عليك السلام فقلت وعليك السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته وذهبت تزيد فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى هذا انتهى السلام فقال رحمة الله وبركاته عليكم أهل البيت
الراوي: عائشة المحدث: الهيثمي – المصدر: مجمع الزوائد – لصفحة أو الرقم: 8/36
خلاصة حكم المحدث: رجاله رجال الصحيح‏‏

The Prophet PBUH told Aisha RAA: “This is Gabriel and he delivers Salam to you” she said: “Wa Aleykum el Salam wa rahmatu Allah wa Barakatuhu” (And she wanted to Say much more) The prophet PBUH then said: “Until here the Salam ends” he PBUH told her ” He(Gabriel) said The Mercy of Allah and his blessings be upon you O AhlulBayt”.

Muhaddith: Al haythami from Mujama’a al Zawa’id
Hadith Rank: Rijal of Sahih.

Controvertial narrations:

Narration 1:

al-Tirmidhi records:
حدثنا قتيبة حدثنا محمد بن سليمان الأصبهاني عن يحيى بن عبيد عن عطاء بن أبي رباح عن عمر بن أبي سلمة ربيب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لما نزلت هذه الآية على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا } في بيت أم سلمة فدعا فاطمة وحسنا وحسينا فجللهم بكساء وعلي خلف ظهره فجللهم بكساء ثم قال اللهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي فأذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا قالت أم سلمة وأنا معهم يا نبي الله قال أنت على مكانك وأنت على خير

Narrated Umar ibn Abi Salamah who was brought up by the Prophet, peace be upon him: When the verse, Allah only desires to keep away from you all blemishes (al-rijz), O Ahl al-Bayt, and to purify you absolutely (Qur’an 33:33), was revealed to the Prophet at the home of Umm Salamah he called Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn and covered them with a cloak. Ali was behind him, the Prophet also covered him under the same cloak and then said, “O Allah! these are my Ahl al-Bayt, so keep away from them all blemishes (al-rijz) and purify them absolutely.” Umm Salamah said, “Am I one of them, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You have your separate place. But, you are unto a good ending.”
al-Jami’ al-Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi) [annotators: Ahmad Muhammad Shakir and others] vol. 5, p. 351, Number 3205
Shaykh al-Albani says:
صحيح
Sahih

Answer:

According to this narration the verse of tatheer was revealed before prophet(Saw) made the supplication for Hz ali(ra), fatima(ra), hassan(ra) and hussain(ra) under the cloak. If we keep this in mind, then it is illogical for the Prophet(saw) to make supplication for the Ahle kisa to be purified AFTER the verse was revealed, because the verse states that Allah had ALREADY intended to purify Ahlebayt. It would only make sense when we say that 33:33 is for the wives since he(saw) tells his wife, “Inti ala khair.” The Prophet(saw) knew that this verse was originally revealed about the wives and he is the one who placed the verses 33:33 in context with the other verses in Surat al Ahzab, So he knew that she was already purified that’s why he told her to not worry since she is already on goodness, but He now wanted Allah to purify Ali(ra) And Fatima(ra), hz hassan(ra) and hz hussain(ra) whom he loved and considered from his ahlul-bayt, So he invited them under the cloak and made Dua for all of them so that Allah may purify them also.

Regarding this narration where hz umm salama(ra) was asked not to enter, then this falls under the narration of the hadith according to the meaning: Al-riwaya bil ma’ana. Without even filtering out the weak from the authentic in those narrations, we can assume that they all mean the same thing, which is that Um Salama(ra) was always from Ahlul Bayt(that 33:33 refers to the wives) and that she is not in need of the dua’a of the Prophet(saw) while the other four are in need of it.

The point people should ponder over is that why is dua made ? If at all Allah would have revealed this verse for Ahle kisa then there wouldn’t have been any need for a supplication from prophet(Saw) to purify them, because Allah had already wished to purify Ahlebayt(wives). Prophet(Saw) asking dua itself is a proof that this verse was not revealed for Ahlekisa.

Moreover as a whole I found, based on my personal observation, that all of the report which talks about Hz Um Salama’s (ra) question and reply of the Prophet (pbuh), has some disputed narrator, though that doesn’t make the narration weak(in some narrations) but they are not stronger than other narrations in which there is no mentioning of hz umm salama(ra) asking any question. And many a time different words are being narrated through a single route. However we find that scholars have authenticated these narrations, because the scholars show some leniency while authenticating narrations related to virtues(fadhail).

Anyways regardless of the authenticity this narration, it still is in favour of wives of prophet(Saw) and this narration and narrations similar to this in no way could be used to exlclude wives of prophety(Saw), based on the non-sensical argument that why didn’t prophet(Saw) allow hz umm salama(ra) in, or why didn’t prophet(Saw) made a similar supplication(dua) for wives, to which we give a sensible and logical reply that because the verse was revealed for the wives there was no need for prophet(Saw) to make dua for them, Dua was/is done for those who were/are not included not for those who were already included.

Another reasonable reply that was given regarding objections raised using this narration to exclude wives of prophet(Saw) from Ahlebayt by Shaykh Al-Saloos [May Allah reward him] was:”how can the Messenger of Allah enter his wife in his cloak at the same time with his cousin?!”. Moreover we have some other authentic narrations which we have provided in this article under the subtitle “authentic” narrations and they shows us that prophet(Saw) replied in affirmative to hz umm salama(ra) when she asked the question.

Narration 2:

mustadrak al-hakim volume 2 page 451:
– حدثنا أبو العباس محمد بن يعقوب ثنا العباس بن محمد بن الدوري ثنا عثمان بن عمر ثنا عبد الرحمن بن عبد الله بن دينار ثنا شريك بن أبي نمر عن عطاء بن يسار عن أم سلمة رضي الله عنها أنها قالت : في بيتي نزلت هذه الآية { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت } قالت : فأرسل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إلى علي و فاطمة و الحسن و الحسين رضوان الله عليهم أجمعين فقال : اللهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي قالت أم سلمة : يا رسول الله ما أنا من أهل البيت ؟ قال : إنك أهلي خير و هؤلاء أهل بيتي اللهم أهلي أحق

^ dhahabi agreed with hakim that hadith is upon condition of bukhari i.e hadith is sahih.
Abu al Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’aqoob said: Al Abbas bin Muhammad bin al Doori from Uthman bin Umar from AbduRahman bin abdullah bin Deenar from Shareek bin Abu Nimr from Ata’a bin yasar fro umm Salamah may Allah be pleased with her that she said: In my house this verse was revealed ” God wants to remove uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt ” She said: The Prophet PBUH then called for Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Hussein may Allah be pleased with all of them and he said: O Allah these are my Alul-bayt. Umm Salamah said: O Apostle of Allah am I not from your Ahlul-Bayt? The Prophet PBUH replied: You are my Good Ahel and they are my Ahlul-Bayt, O Lord my Ahel are more deserving “have more rights”.

Answer:

Firstly, Some of the narrators of this narration have slight weaknesses. We’re not saying that the chain is weak. However, this version of the hadith is weaker than the others.

Abdulrahman bin Abdullah bin Dinar:

Yahya bin Ma’een said: I find weakness in his hadith.
Abdulrahman bin Mahdi didn’t narrate his hadith.
Abu Hatim said that he is soft. His hadith can be written down, but he cannot be used.
Ibn Adi said that he narrates munkar narrations, and his opinion is similar to the opinion of Abu Hatim. Abu Hatim said he shouldn’t be rely on. (Mizan 2/572)
As for Shareekk ibn Abi Namr, most scholars said, “laysa bihi ba’s”, Nasai said he’s not strong. Abu Dawud said thiqat

As We’ve said before, it isn’t too big of a weakening, but the stronger versions of the hadith are narrated differently.

As a whole I found, based on my personal observation, that all of the report which talks about Hz Um Salama’s (ra) question and reply of the Prophet (pbuh), has some disputed narrator. And many a time different words are being narrated through a single route. Take for example the report which in question, Bayhaqi narrates it through the same route of Abdur-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Deenar – Shuraik bin Abi Nimr – Ata bin Yasar – Um Salama (ra), but with the wording in which Ummul Mumineen(ra) asked, “am i not from Ahlul Bayt?” to that Prophet (pbuh) replied, “of course (balaa), Insha Allah”. Thus we can see the difference.

Now the thing is that these narrations of Kisa’a (Cloak) are conflicting and contraditcing each other and the only reason the scholars grade them as Sahih is because they are narrations of virtues. But if these odd narrations are going to be used by some biased and ignorant people, neglecting the other narrations in support of wives of prophet(Saw), then it will not be tolerated. Ahlesunnah believes in respecting and honoring the complete Ahlebayt, not just a part of it. We are the lovers of complete Ahlebayt so we don’t tolerate any sort of injustice being done to a main part of Ahlebayt.

Secondly some of the wordings of this narration (i.e إنك أهلي خير و هؤلاء أهل بيتي ) are odd, because here we see that there is some slight distinction between “ahel and ahlul-bayt” although in reality the arabs never made a distinction between these as they are the same thing, this is illustrated by many of the most authentic Hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim:

ففي الحديث الشريف قال سيدنا أنس
” فخرج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فانطلق إلى حجرة عائشة فقال السلام عليكم أهل البيت ورحمة الله فقالت وعليك السلام ورحمة الله كيف وجدت أهلك بارك الله لك فتقرى حجر نسائه كلهن يقول لهن كما يقول لعائشة ويقلن له كما قالت عائشة ”
صحيح البخاري ج4/ص1799
صحيح مسلم ج2/ص1046

and this one:

وفي حديث الإفك
” فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من يعذرنا من رجل بلغني أذاه في أهل بيتي فوالله ما علمت من أهلي إلا خيرا ”
صحيح البخاري ج2/ص932
صحيح مسلم ج4/ص2133

Moreover even some of the shias acknowledge that wives of prophet(Saw) are Ahlebayt in general sense, but they are not special Ahlebayt. So they just dispute over the issue that wives of prophet(Saw) are general(aam) ahlebayt, while ahlekisa are special(khaas) Ahlebayt. Now we don’t find anything of such manner in this odd part of the narration, prophet(Saw) didn’t say to his wife that you are my general(aam) Ahlebayt, and these are my special(khaas) Ahlebayt. So this odd part is “shaadh” since other strong reports shows us that prophet(Saw) called his wives as Ahlebayt. [ “shaadh” means that what was narrated is in contradiction to other hadith narrated by a man who is more trusted and reliable and of higher rank]

Also, this narration even comes under the category of “mudtaribul matan”. Al-mudtarib linguistically means “that causing disturbance” and technically means “that which is reported in contradictory forms all of equal strength”.

Example of “mudtaribul matan”: the hadeeth of fatimah bint qays in at-tirmidhee: “verily there is a right due upon wealth other than zakat.” However Ibn maajah’s narration from her(same narrator) is:”there is no right due upon wealth other than zakat”. Al-iraaqee says: So this is an idtiraab which cannot be explained anyway.

From whom does idtiraab occurs ?

1. It may occur from single narrator who reports the hadeeth in the different ways or

2.It may occur due to a group of people each narrating something contradictory.

The reason for its weakness: This is because it shows that its narrators have not been precise in what they were narrating .

Lastly , even this narration weakens the shia argument because Prophet(saw) said to Um Salama(ra) that she was his “AHL” and those four were his “AHLUL BAYT”, and then he said, “O Allah my “AHL” is more deserving”. He(Saw) didn’t say “my ahlulbayt is more deserving” but he(saw) said “my AHL is more deserving” which even included hz umm salama(ra) in it.

Conclusion: If at all some ignorant and biased people try to use this narration inorder to exclude wives of prophet(Saw) from Ahlebayt then it will be rejected because of the reasonining we gave in the answer, and more over this narration contradicts the narration from the same route of Abdur-Rahman bin Abdullah bin Deenar – Shuraik bin Abi Nimr – Ata bin Yasar – Um Salama (ra), but with the wording in which Ummul Mumineen asked, “am i not from Ahlul Bayt?” to that Prophet (pbuh) replied, “of course (balaa), Insha Allah”, so this narration will be given preference over the narration with odd wordings because it goes against quran as well as many other narrations.

Narration 3:

References: Tirmidhi, al-Jami-us-sahih (5:351,663#3205,3787) sheikh Albani said it’s saheeh.

So some people argue that : when the verse was revealed this was said and demonstrated by the Noble Prophet(saw) to EXPLAIN who are the Ahlebayt he said اللهمّ هؤلاء أهل بيتي

O Allah! These are my Ahl al-bayt Only.

In ilm al-ma’ni it is clearly stated to understand Qur’an and sunnah that when Ism ishara is musnad alai then musnad is mahsur in musnad alai. this basicly means that when ism e ishara: هؤلاء is musnad alai then أهل بيتي

is mahsur; which means it is restricted to only THOSE to whom this pointed towards. in Quran we have saying Ulaika ashabunnaar… Only THose are the people of hell. there are countless such examples in the Qur’an.

So present an example where haulai is musnad ilai/mubtada.

Answer:

Though this narration is authentic but a phrase from this narration is misinterpreted and mistranslated by many people i.e “اللهمّ هؤلاء أهل بيتي”

The word ”only’‘ doesn’t exist in the the arabic text.

And we don’t see the argument here. “Haa ula’i” is ishara no doubt… and when it is used it means only specific people are referred by the speaker. So when Prophet [saw] said that ”these are my ahlul bayt” during the incident of kisa, then no doubt he was particularly referring to Ali(ra), Fatima(ra) and their two sons(ra). No sunni denies that, But that doesn’t mean there couldn’t be other Ahlul Bayt as well.

And if its so, then we want to ask shias if their other 9 Imams are Ahle Bayt or not. If they are, then why can’t Prophet’s wives be. And the arguments they give for 9 Imams inclusion in Ahle bayt, also applies to the Mothers of believers.

Getting back to what was demanded:

Here is an example of what was asked for related to the day of Arafah. Allah(swt) says to the angels: Ha ulao ibadi= Those are my servants and it is in mubtada. No one will claim that those people of Arafa are the only servants of Allah, but that He was talking about them specifically.
وفيمصنف عبد الرزاق من حديث ابن عمر رضي الله عنهما، في حديث الرجليناللَّذينجاءا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، يسألانه عن أمر دينهم، وكانمن جوابهلهما: ( وأما وقوفك بعرفة، فإن الله تبارك وتعالى ينـزل إلى سماءالدنيا،فيباهي بهم الملائكة، فيقول: هؤلاء عبادي جاؤواشعثًاغبرًا من كل فج عميق، يرجون رحمتي، ويخافون عذابي، ولم يروني، فكيفلورأوني، فلو كان عليك مثل رمل عالج، أو مثل أيام الدنيا، أو مثل قطرالسماءذنوبًا، غسلها الله عنك ) .

Haulai ibadi= those are my servants. They came unkempt, dusty from every deep crevice. They hope for my mercy and fear my wrath and they have not seen me. So, how about if they saw me?

This is one of example from many where the Ism ul-Ishaarah is Mu’ayyan/restricted but in a general way and it does not absolutely exclude the possibility of the Ghaa’ib/absent from entering into the meaning. Taking this narration into consideration no one can claim that there were no servants other than them(who are being addressed) in previous day of arafah who possessed the similar attributes. Because in the day of Arafah which came previous years there were servants of Allah who possessed the similar attributes.

Now in the case of this narration in question, we know that wives of prophet(Saw)were ahlebayt as mentioned by Allah in 33:33 but in the hadees , prophet(Saw)was specifically showing those Ahlebayt who were in need of the dua , so that they could also be purified. At that time they were the only ones from Ahlebayt who needed dua of prophet(Saw) to be purified, because Allah had already wished to purify wives of prophet(Saw).

Since we know that generally Ahlebayt includes all those who cant receive zakat, but prophet(Saw) specifically wanted only 4 members to be purified as itwas done by Allah for wives of prophet(Saw). So at that time only four members from Ahlebayt were in need of dua and no other members of ahlebayt.

Moreover as we have said above that, prophet(Saw) making dua(supplication) AFTER Allahs revealed the verse and when Allah already had intended to purify Ahlebayt itself is a proof that Ahle kisa were not the reason for the revealation of the verse of tatheer.

Narration 4:

عن أنس بن مالك رضي الله عنه: أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كان يمر بباب فاطمة ستة أشهر إذا خرج إلى
صلاة الفجر، يقول: الصلاة! يا أهل البيت: (إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا

Anas ibn Maalik(ra) reported that for six months Allah’s Messenger (SAW). passed by the door of Sayyidah Fatimah(ra) when he went out for the salah of fajr. He would call, “The salah” (and recited): “Allah only desires to take away from you all abomination, O people of the household (of Muhammad), and to purify you with a thorough purifying.” (33:33)[Sunan al-Tirmidhi #3206 (‘Dar ihya’ at-Thurath al-Arabi’ publication)]

Answer:

It has three chain of narrations and is present in different books and some versions have slightly different wordings. But all of them are weak ahadeeth

a) First chain of narration

1) al-Thayalisi (الطيالسي) in al-Musnad – no: 2059 (Kitab isnad Anas bin Malik al-Anshori, Bab ‘Ali bin Ziyad bin Jud‘an)

2) Ibn Abi Syaibah in al-Musannaf – no: 32262

3) ‘Abd bin Humaid (عبد بن حميد) in al-Musnad – no: 1223 (Musnad Anas bin Malik)

4)Ahmad in al-Musnad – no: 13728 & no: 14040 (Musnad Anas bin Malik)

5)al-Tirmizi in al-Sunan – no: 3206 (Kitab tafsir, Bab tafsir surah al-Ahzab)

6)Abu Ya’la in al-Musnad – no: 3978 (Musnad Anas bin Malik)

7) Ibn Jarir al-Thabari in Jami’ al-Bayan – no: 21729 (tafsir ayat 33 surah al-Ahzab),

8. al-Thahawi in Musykil al-Atsar – no: 784

9)al-Thabarani in al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, vol. 3, pg. 56, no: 2671 & vol. 22, pg. 402, no: 1002

10) al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak – no: 4748 (Kitab Ma’rifah sahabat, Bab manaqib family of Rasulullah)

11) al-Hafiz al-Haskani in Syawahid al-Tanzil li Qawa‘id al-Tafdhil – no: 637, 638, 639, 640, 641, 643, 644 & 773 (Asbab al-Nuzul no: 130).

All the isnad is connected to ‘Ali bin Ziyad bin Jud‘an from Anas bin Malik.

‘Ali bin Ziyad bin Jud‘an Abu al-Hasan al-Quraisy, Ahmad bin Hanbal said: He is not strong and people narrated from him

Yahya bin Ma‘in and Abu Zar‘ah said : Cannot be taken as hujjah.

Berkata Abi Hatim al-Razi: He is not strong, his hadith is written but not taken as hujjah

Source: Ibn Abi Hatim al-Razi – al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil, jld. 6, ms. 186, biography no: 1021.

b) Second chain of narration

1) ‘Abd bin Humaid in al-Musnad – no: 475 (Bab Abu al-Hamra’ maula Nabi)

2) Ibn Jarir al-Thabari in Jami’ al-Bayan – no: 21731 (tafsir ayat 33 surah al-Ahzab)

3) al-Thahawi in Musykil al-Atsar – no: 785

4) al-Thabarani in al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, vol. 3, pg. 56, no: 2672 & vol. 22, pg. 200, no: 525

5) al-Tsa’labi in al-Kasyf wa al-Bayan, vol. 8, pg. 44 (tafsir ayat 33 surah al-Ahzab)

6) al-Hafiz al-Haskani in Syawahid al-Tanzil – no: 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699, 701, 702, 703, 766, 771 & 772 (Asbab al-Nuzul no: 130).

All narration are connected to Abu Daud, which connected to Abi al-Hamra’ radhiallahu ‘anh

Abu Daud which the actual name is Nafi’ bin al-Harits al-Hamdani al-A’m is from Kufah, as mentioned by Abu Ja’far al-Thahawi dan al-Hafiz al-Haskani.

He is matruk and Yahya bin Mai’n consider him as liar

Source: Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani – Taqrib al-Tahzib – biografi no: 7207

c) Third chain of narrators

1) al-Thabarani in al-Mu’jam al-Ausath – no: 8127

2) al-Tsa’labi in al-Kasyf wa al-Bayan, vol. 8, pg. 42 (tafsir ayat 33 surah al-Ahzab)

3)al-Hafiz al-Haskani in Syawahid al-Tanzil – no: 665, 666, 667 & 668 (Asbab al-Nuzul no: 130).

All narrations are connected to ‘Athiyah from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri radhiallahu ‘anh

‘Athiyah is ‘Athiyah bin Sa‘ad Abu al-Hasan al-‘Aufiy, a Shi’e from Kufah.

He is consider weak according to Hisyam, Yahya bin Sa‘id al-Qathan, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Sufyan al-Tsauri, Abu Zar‘ah al-Razi, Ibn Ma‘in, Abu Hatim al-Razi, al-Nasa’i, al-Jauzajani, Ibn ‘Adiy, Abu Daud, Ibn Hibban, al-Daruquthni and others. He is famous with doing of tadlis.

Source: al-‘Uqaili – al-Dhu‘afa’ al-Kabir – biografi no: 1392; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani – Thabaqat al-Mudallisin – biografi no: 122 dan Syu‘aib al-Arna’uth (الأرنؤوط) & Basyar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf – Tahrir Taqrib al-Tahzib, biografi no: 4616.

Therefore, this hadeeth is weak.

d) Error in a chain.

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَفِيدُ ، ثنا الْحُسَيْنُ بْنُ الْفَضْلِ الْبَجَلِيُّ ، ثنا عَفَّانُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ ، ثنا حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ ، أَخْبَرَنِي حُمَيْدٌ ، وَعَلِيُّ بْنُ زَيْدٍ ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ، أَنّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ يَمُرُّ بِبَابِ فَاطِمَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا سِتَّةَ أَشْهُرٍ إِذَا خَرَجَ لِصَلاةِ الْفَجْرِ ، يَقُولُ : ” الصَّلاةُ يَا أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ ، إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا سورة الأحزاب آية 33 ” .

(Al-Mustadrak of Haakim, V3, P172).

In the chain of al-Hakim, Hammaad narrates from Humaid as well along with Ali bin Zaid. This was most probably a mistake from Husain bin Fadhl, the narrator from Hammad in this case. He was opposed by Ahmad bin Hanbal, Abd bin Humaid and many other thiqah narrators. As pointed out of Shaykh Shu’ab al-Arna’ut’s comment in (Musnad Ahmad Hadeeth #14040). Hence this report is weak as well.

Even if this narration is considered to be authentic(for sake of argument), then it can be explained in this way:

Whenever the Messenger Of Allah went to perform the daily obligatory prayer, he used to pass by the house of his cousin and son-in-law, Ali(ra) and his spouse Fatima(ra), reminding them of the obligation of prayer by saying:( Stick to the mandatory prayers, O members of the family!)

After this exhortation, he used to recite to them the following verse: “ Allah so wills to remove all abomination from you O members of the family, and to make you pure and stainless.” As stated before in the same verse. By this, he was reminding them, of performing Obligatory prayers. For if one observes all obligatory acts of worship and obey Allah fully, then his reward will be to purify him from all abomination and stains.

We see that prophet(Saw) used to remind ahle kisa the command they had to follow so that Allah may remove the rijs from them indicating that even their purification was conditional and the means to acquire purification for Ahle kisa was salat(prayer), similar to wives of prophet(Saw) as mentioned in 33:33. And salat is a means of purification as mentioned in quran 11:114 establishing prayer was a command given to people if they want their sins to be removed(i.e to attain purification). And there was no need for prophet(Saw) to do this for the wives because their means of purification were already mentioned in quran, but the means of purification for ahle kisa was not mentioned in quran and as they were included in the wish of Allah to purify Ahlebayt of prophet(Saw) by the special dua(supplication) of prophet(Saw). He(saw) had to keep on reminding Ahlekisa that they have to stick to mandatory prayers, as it was the means for purification for them.

If the Shias disagree that, the purification of Ahle-Kisa was conditional/legislative as stated by Sunni Scholars such as as-Sallabi, then let us quote what Shia scholar stated:

Shia Marja’ – Ayatullah Mohammad Asif Mohsini admits that Ayat al-Tatheer is Tashrini(conditional/legislative) not Takwini(creational) :

يمكن ان يقال ان مفعول قوله‌ «أَنَّما يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ» محذوف وقوله‌ «لِيُذْهِبَ‌ …» وقوله و «لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ» ليسا بمفعولين ومتعلقين للارادة بل غايتان للارادةعلى هذا، فلا طريق الى اثبات أن الارادة في الآية تكوينية بل لعلّها تشريعية وهي بمعنى الطلب وكأن اللَّه طلب من اهل البيت وظائف مذهبة للرجس وتطهيرهم عن الشك فلا بدمن لفت النظر الى أنّهم هل فعلوها أم لا، فدقق النظر
(Mu’jam al-Ahadith al-Mu’tabara , vol 1, page 477).

Shia Scholar Ja`far Murtada al-`Amili stated:

ويظهر من كلام العلماء الأبرار ( رضوان الله عليهم): أن الإرادة الإلهية المعبر عنها بقوله تعالى: (إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ..) قد تعلقت أولاً وبالذات بإذهاب الرجس، وبالتطهير ولكننا نقول:إن الظاهر هو أنها قد تعلقت أولاً وبالذات بأمر آخر، وهو نفس الأوامر والزواجر التي توجهت إلى زوجات النبي

Translation: And it appears from the saying of the righteous scholars (ra): that the divine will that is expressed in his saying “Allah only intends to remove from you the foul…” is linked primarily and exclusively with removing the foul and with purifying, but we say: That what is apparent is that it is linked primarily and exclusively to another matter, it is linked to the same orders and prohibitions that were aimed at the Prophet’s(saw) wives. [Ja`far Murtada al-`Amili, Ahlul-Bayt fi Ayatul-Tathir: pg 66].

Some people might try to argue that prophet(saw) actually wanted to clarify before the people that who were the purified ones that is why he(Saw) used to do this act for couple of months, but this answer is irrational because if it was to clarify to the people then why would prophet(Saw) do this for couple of months on daily basis? As if he was reminding them of something. It could have been done in one time why would prophet(saw) need to do this for 8 months daily for every prayer? And how many people would have heard this if prophet(saw) said this infront of hz ali(ra)’s house daily. Surely not everyone muslim was present there. And if it was to make it clear then daily instead of doing that infront of hz ali(ra)’s house, he would have said that in the mosque where majority of the companions used to gather. Or in the Friday khutbah or at the farewell pilgrimage of hajj. He(Saw) would have given a sermon gathering all the people and would have declared that these are my Ahlebayt, like as the shias say prophet(Saw) did on ghadeer but what he did on ghadeer was not done repeatedly. Moreover he(saw) would atleast have gathered all the muslims before doing this if at all this was to show people that who Ahlebayt were, but nothing of such manner occurred.

Lastly, if it was to make clear to people, then there was no Need to make DUA TO ALLAH, he would have just brought them under the kisa and told people, these are Ahlulbayt about whom this verse was revealed. BUT this didn’t happen, what happened is that Prophet(saws) addressed his DUA TO ALLAH, he didn’t address people, like O people these are my ahlulbayt about whom this verse was revealed. Rather the addressed one was Allah(swt). Which clearly proves to any objective person that, Prophet(saws) made that DUA TO ALLAH because verse was not revealed about them, hence he made Dua to Allah, so that they be included in it

Counter Argument of Shia:

Prophet Mohammad(saw) recited the verse of purification at the door of the House of Fatimah and Ali before every prayer and he continued this practise for several months to show people that these are the members of the family in whose honour this verse was revealed. Prophet(s) called ‘SALAH’ to wake them up for prayers and then recited the verse of purification which was revealed in their honour to show people the status of the members of this house. Moreover, Prophet Mohammad(saw) didn’t gather all people in one place and then declare them that ‘THESE ARE MY AHLULBAYT’ because “actions speak louder than words”.

Answer:

Firstly, as explained this hadeeth itself is weak, even if for sake of argument we consider this report then we answer the Shia argument, that their argument is irrational, because if it was to show people who are Ahlelbayt, then that can be done at one moment, or twice or thrice or maximum ten times. There is absolutely no, need to daily for five time do this act for months, just to show people, but the way it was done, shows that it wasn’t for the purpose the Shia claims, but it was for the purpose to remind the people in the house, the condition they need to fulfill.

Secondly, if it was to awaken the people in the house, then it implies that, all the Muslims used to gather for Salah, and Family of Ali(ra) didn’t even wake up from sleep, and Prophet(saw) had to awaken them up, on a daily basis. isn’t this an insult and dishonor to Ahlelbayt? Infact the Shias inorder to justify their faulty argument, always ended dishonoring Ahlelbayt. Muslims would gather in mosque after Adhaan(call for prayer), and those who are sleeping too, would wake up with Adhaan, So, Prophet(Saw) waiting till people gather after Adhaan, would go and wake family of Ali(ra), who were still asleep even after Adhaan. Is this sensible view?.

Thirdly, we don’t find in these reports anywhere the Muslims being addressed, rather repeatedly the addressee were people of cloak(kisa), if it was a kind of declaration, then Prophet(saw) would have just made a clear statement and addressed the Muslim directly, Prophet(saw) was always clear and direct in his speech whenever he would make a declaration and this is the way of the Prophets, they can’t keep things unclear and expect people to understand things from their own. That is why the hadeeth is easily interpreted as a reminder to people of Kisa, and Prophet(saw) would call salah, indicating that the condition to their purification was Salah. Moreover, if it was a declaration then after calling Salah and reciting the verse, Prophet(saw) would have addressed the Muslims stating, have you understood who Ahlelbayt are? Or would have said, O Muslims these are my Ahlelbayt. This could have been done once gathering all Muslims, and taking their witness upon it, Like on the day of Arfah. But the Shia argument is that, Prophet(saw) was daily repeating the same thing, but didn’t even once gathered the Muslims and informed them who Ahlelbayt are, nor did he(saw) after this act addressed the Muslims, about who Ahlelbayt were, this is truly a non-sensical argument. The fact is that He(saw) was reminding the people in the house of their duty, that is why they were addressed instead of the Muslims. Anyways these reports are weak, the Shias will need to first establish their authenticity before speculating over these reports.

Narration 5:

O Allaah! send prayers on Muhammad, and on his household(ahlebaytihi), and on his wives(Azwajihi) and progeny(dhurayatihi), as you sent prayers on the family(aale) of Ibraaheem; You are indeed Worthy of Praise, Full of Glory. And send blessings on Muhammad, and his household, and his wives and progeny, as you sent blessings on the family of Ibraaheem; You are indeed Worthy of Praise, Full of Glory. Source: Ahmad & Tahaawi with a saheeh sanad.

Answer:

This narration shows us a kind of durood and is misunderstood by people, they think that this narrations shows that, the wives of prophet(Saw) were different and his household(ahlebayt) were different. But this is wrong understanding of this narration.

Here is what Imam ibn qayyim(rah) said regarding this durood: By mentioning wives, progeny and household collectively he(saw) have clarified that there being from Ahlebayt is established and they are not excluded from Ahlebayt, on the contrary they are the most deserving of this honour. And regarding they being addressed specifically even after ahlebayt was mentioned, then its specific declaration of their superiority and honour. The mentioning of general(aam ) with special(khaas) and special(khaas) with general(aam) is very renowned style.(Jalaa Al-Afhaam by Ibn Al-Qayim page 338)

Another example for this can be seen in this verse:

إِنَّ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمَاتِ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْقَانِتِينَ وَالْقَانِتَاتِ وَالصَّادِقِينَ وَالصَّادِقَاتِ وَالصَّابِرِينَ وَالصَّابِرَاتِ وَالْخَاشِعِينَ وَالْخَاشِعَاتِ وَالْمُتَصَدِّقِينَ وَالْمُتَصَدِّقَاتِ وَالصَّائِمِينَ وَالصَّائِمَاتِ وَالْحَافِظِينَ فُرُوجَهُمْ وَالْحَافِظَاتِ وَالذَّاكِرِينَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا وَالذَّاكِرَاتِ أَعَدَّ اللَّهُ لَهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًا

Surely the men who submit and the women who submit, and the believing men and the believing women, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and the truthful women, and the patient men and the patient women and the humble men and the humble women, and the almsgiving men and the almsgiving women, and the fasting men and the fasting women, and the men who guard their private parts and the women who guard, and the men who remember Allah much and the women who remember– Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a mighty reward.(33:35)

In this verse the rest after muslimeen and muslimaat doesn’t mean that they are not from muslimeen and muslimaat, they too come under muslimeen and muslimaat, as the words muslimeen and muslimaat encompass all the other categories mentioned but they were mentioned to specify and to clarify.

Similarly though Ahlebayt encompasses wives of prophet(Saw) and his progeny, but in the narration they were mentioned to clarify that who were the Ahlebayt on whom blessing were send in the durood.

Moreover we find in another authentic narration which teaches us durood we find that prophet(Saw) didn’t mentioned Ahlebayt, but just mentioned wives(azwaj) and progeny(dhuriat) So does that mean that from this durood Ahle kisa are excluded? No not at all, because they come under the category of progeny(dhuriat).

(Sahi muslim Bk 4, Number 0807) Abu Humaid as−Sa’idi reported: They (the Companions of the Holy Prophet) said: Apostle of Allah, how should we bless you? He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Say:” O Allah! bless Muhammad, his wives and his offspring as Thou didst bless Ibrahim, and grant favours to Muhammad, and his wives and his offspring as Thou didst grant favours to the family of Ibrahim; Thou art Praiseworthy and Glorious.”

Narration 6:

أن الحسن بن علي حين قتل علي استخلف فبينا هو يصلي بالناس إذ وثب إليه رجل فطعنه بخنجر في وركه فتمرض منها أشهرا ثم قام فخطب على المنبر فقال يا أهل العراق اتقوا الله فينا فإنا أمراؤكم وضيفانكم ونحن أهل البيت الذين قال الله عز وجل { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا } فما زال يومئذ يتكلم حتى ما ترى في المسجد إلا باكيا

It has been narrated in Majma’ al-Zawa’id and Tafsir Ibn Kathir that: After his father’s martyrdom when (Imam) al-Hasan attained the Caliphate, one day while he was performing his prayers, a man attacked him and thrust a sword in his thigh. He remained confined to bed for some months. Thereafter, he recovered and delivered a sermon and said: “O People of Iraq! Fear Allah. We are your Amirs (leaders) and your guests and belong to the family about whom Almighty Allah has said: ‘And we are the People of the House for whom Allah (awj) said: “Verily we only seek to remove uncleanliness from you, Oh People of the House, and purify you through a purification”. Imam al-Hasan dwelt on this subject so much that all those present in the Mosque began to cry.” Sunni references: * Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p172

Also

Imam al-Hasan (as) said:

أنا من أهل البيت الذين أذهب الله عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا

I am from that Ahl al-Bayt from whom Allah KEPT away ALL blemishes and PURIFIED absolutely.

Al-Haythami said:

ورواه أحمد باختصار كثير وإسناد أحمد وبعض طرق البزار والطبراني في الكبير حسان

Ahmad has narrated it in a highly summarized manner, and the chain of Ahmad and some of the chains of al-Bazzar and al-Tabarani are hasan.

Answer:

The chain is technically weak, due to narrator Maysara Abu Jameela. The only tawtheeq provided to him is by Ibn Hibban, which isn’t sufficient according to hadithists since he includes unknown(majhool) narrators in his book Al-Thiqaat

In “Taqrib” mentioned narrator Maysarah ibn Yaqub, Abu Jamilah. Ibn Hajar said he’s maqbul, and that is mean there is uncertainty in him. Mizzi gave his bio in “Tahzib al kamal” and noticed that he narrated from Hasan, and from him narrated Hasin ibn Abdurrahman as-Sulami. Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned him in “Jarh wa tadil” without any note regarding his reliability .

Al-Albani said (Al-Rawd Al-Dani fil Fawa’id Al-Hadeethia, p. 18):
ولهذا نجد المحققين من المحدثين كالذهبي والعسقلاني وغيرهما لا يوثقون من تفرد بتوثيقه ابن حبان
Rough Trans: “And that is why we find the muhaditheen like Al-Thahabi and Ibn Hajar and others, not strengthening those that Ibn Hibban strengthens alone.”

Shaikh Muqbil was asked in Al-Muqtarah (p. 47):
السؤال: ابن حبان معروف أنه يوثق المجاهيل، فإن كان الراوي غير مجهول وقد روى عنه أكثر من واحد، وقال ابن حبان: هذا مستقيم الحديث أو قال هذا ثقة هل نتوقف في توثيقه أم نعتبره؟
الجواب: من أهل العلم كما في التنكيل بما في تأنيب الكوثري من الأباطيل من قال فيه: إنه يقبل. وهو إختيار المعلمي.
أما (ثقة) فالغالب أنه عرف هو نفسه بالتساهل، فيتوقف لأنه قد عرف هو بالتساهل في توثيق المجاهيل، فإذا وثق غير مجهول يقبل منه، أما المجهولون فقد عرف منه التساهل في هذا.
Question: Ibn Hibban is known for strengthening anonymous narrators, so if the narrator wasn’t unknown, and has more than one student, and Ibn Hibban said: mustaqeemul hadith or thiqa, do we still not accept him or do we?
Answer: Some of the scholars, like Al-Mu’allami in Al-Tankeel accepted this. As for the term thiqa, in most cases, he is known for being lenient, so we stop, because he was lenient in strengthening unknown narrators. However, if he strengthened someone that is known, then we accept it.

Therefore, we have Al-Thahabi, Ibn Hajar, Al-Mu’allami, Al-Albani, and Shaikh Muqbil all hold the opinion that Ibn Hibban’s strengthening of unknown narrators is not acceptable.

Regarding text of this report then it says “WE”, which can even include WIVES OF PROPHET(SAW), Hassan(ra) didn’t say Ahle kisa.. he just said WE. Therefore, this report doesn’t support the shias, because Ahlesunnah do consider hz hassan(ra) and the ahlekisa to be part of Ahlebayt mentioned in quran in verse of tatheer(33:33). But we also believe that the verse of tatheer in quran was revealed for the wives of prophet(saw) and hz hassan(ra) and the ahle kisa were included in it because of the special dua(supplication) of prophet(saw). And these narrations in no way go against the understanding of Ahle sunnah.

Narration 7:

sahi muslim Bk 31, Number 5923:Yazid b. Hayyan reported: We went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him. You have found goodness (for you had the honour)to live in the company of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and offered prayer behind him, and the rest of the hadith is the same but with this variation of wording that lie said:Behold, for I am leaving amongst you two weighty things, one of which is the Book of Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, and that is the rope of Allah. He who holds it fast would be on right guidance and he who abandons it would be in error, and in this (hadith) these words are also found: We said: 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, a woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a certain period; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and to her people; the members of his household include his ownself and his kith and kin (who are related to him by blood) and for him the acceptance of Zakat is prohibited.

Answer:

Firstly and most importantly the answer of Zaid(ra) was his own mawqoof(opinion) as signified by imam ibn katheer(rah) in his tafseer for verse 33:33. And he had based this view from a general perspective for women because of his own reasoning, but here it was not a general case because Allah said, wives of prophet(saw) are not like other women(33:32), So the ruling which are ment for wives of people in general cannot be applied to wives of prophet(saw) as they were special ones.

Imam ibn qayyim(rah) in his book discusses this issue in a great detail clearing the doubts who believed that wives of prophet(Saw) were allowed sadaqa. He said that, the relation of wives of prophet(Saw) was similar to nasab(lineage) because the wives of prophet(saw) remained haram on other men even after the death of prophet(Saw) and they were his wives even in his life and will be his wives even in hereafter, so their relation to prophet(Saw) was like of nasab(lineage). That is why sadaqa was even haram for the wives of prophet(Saw). Then he said that even Imam Ahmed(rah) was from the madhab who held this same belief. And he refuted all the arguments and claims of the people who denied that wives of prophet(Saw) were eligible to receive sadaqa in an satisfactory. So for detailed answer refer the book (Jila al afhaam by imam ibn qayyim page 331-333.)

Moreover the wives of prophet(Saw) were given a share from Khumms since they were not eligible to receive sadaqa and also there is an authentic narration where hz ayesha(ra) returned a thing which was given to her in sadaqa saying that sadaqa was haram on aal e Muhammad(saw). Here is that narration from Musannaf ibn abi shaybah (chapter Laa tahillu al-sadqa ala bani hashim)

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 (the family) of Muhammad(saw) the sadaqah is not permissible for us.

Moreover we know from reports that there were times when there wasn’t sufficient food in the houses of wives of Prophet(Saw). Yet we don’t find that muslims used to send sadaqa for the wives of Prophet(Saw). We just know of gifts that were sent to them, but no hint of sadaqa. We read in “Saheeh” al-Bukhari (#2620) :“The wives of Allah’s Apostle were in two groups. One group consisted of ‘Aisha, Hafsa, Safiyya and Sauda; and the other group consisted of Umm Salama and the other wives of Allah’s Apostle. The Muslims knew that Allah’s Apostle loved ‘Aisha, so if any of them had a gift and wished to give to Allah’s Apostle, he would delay it, till Allah’s Apostle had come to ‘Aisha’s home and then he would send his gift to Allah’s Apostle in her home.

As for a more explicit evidence then here it is, in this Hadith prophet(saw) is talking to ‘Aisha (ra) regarding her female servant, this is how it goes:

Narrated ‘Aisha: I intended to buy buraira but her masters stipulated that her Wala should be for them. When the Prophet was told about it, he said to me, “Buy and manumit her, as the Wala’ is for the liberator.” Once buraira was given some meat, and the Prophet asked, “What is this?” I said, “It has been given to buraira in charity.” He said, “It is sadaqa for her but a gift for us.” buraira was given the option (to stay with her husband or to part with him). [Sahi bukhari, Book #47, Hadith #752]

Comment: Now notice Prophet(saw) was talking with ‘Aisha (ra) and he told her “For us it is a gift” which means that for the Prophet(saw) and ‘Aisha (ra) both, he’ll consider it a gift since they do not take Sadaqah, but for Buraira it is a Sadaqah. He didn’t say for me its gift, but for you and buraira its Sadaqa.

Thus the view of Zaid(ra) is to be rejected, because wife of prophet(Saw) knew better than Zaid(ra) that what was forbidden for her and what was not. And Ayesha(ra) was known for her vast knowledge in Islamic fiqh she used to be a teacher for some of the companions and in one of the report (sahi muslim, Bk 31, Number 5920) hz zaid said that:”I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that.” So this was not a marfu narration from hz zaid(ra) but his own mawqoof so this will be rejected.

Secondly we will now through some light on what comes right before the narration in question, namely Hadith-5920, 5921, and 5922. All of these are part of the same narration and event as Hadith-5923. Hadiths 5921, 5922, and 5923 are all abridged versions of Hadith 5920, which is the entire Hadith. For example, Hadith 5922 simply says:

“This hadith [5920] has been transmitted on the authority of Abu Hayyan but with this addition: ‘The Book of Allah contains right guidance, the light, and whoever adheres to it and holds it fast, he is upon right guidance and whosoever deviates from it goes astray.’”

This means that Hadith 5922 cannot stand alone without Hadith 5920, which is the entire Hadith, whereas Hadiths 5921, 5922, and 5923 are abridged versions with minor additions and the words of additional narrators.

In fact, it is stated in Hadith 5923 (the one often quoted by Shia) that it cannot stand alone without Hadith 5920. Notice the bolded part below:

Yazid b. Hayyan reported: We went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him: “You have found goodness (for you had the honour) to live in the company of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and offered prayer behind him…”, and the rest of the Hadith is the same [as Hadith 5920] but with this variation of wording that he said…

(Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Chapter 4, Hadith 5923)

So we see that Hadith 5923 (as quoted by the Shia) cannot stand alone without the un-abridged version of Hadith 5920.

Let us now look at Hadith 5920 which is the un-abridged version:

“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)

In perhaps the clearest version of this Hadith, Zaid ibn Arqam(ra) says:“His wives are among the people of his household, but the people of his household who are forbidden to receive sadaqah (charity) after his death are the family of ‘Ali, the family of ‘Aqeel, the family of Ja’far and the family of ‘Abbaas. All of these are forbidden to receive sadaqah.”

So though the mawqoof of hz zaid(ra) was incorrect , yet he(ra) didn’t deny that wives of prophet(Saw) are from the Ahlebayt of prophet(Saw). Moreover it shows us that Ahlebayt is not restricted to only five people, or 14 infallible as shias claim. But it includes several families as said by hz zaid(ra).

Narration 8:

Well instead of quoting narration which are irrelevant to the current topic let us include the disputed word, to which people give different interprepations. So the actual question is: Who are “itratu ahlebayti” and are wives of prophet(Saw) included among them?

Answer:

4/536 Lisan ul-Arab by Ibn Manthur

والمشهور المعروف أَن عتْرتَه أَهلُ بيته وهم الذين حُرّمَت عليهم الزكاة والصدقة المفروضة وهم ذوو القربى الذين لهم خُمُسُ الخُمُسِ المذكور في سورة الأَنفال

“And what is famously recognized is that his ‘Atrah’ are the People of his Household, and they are those upon whom Zakaah and the mandatory Sadaqah is prohibited; and they are the relatives (Thuw al-Qurbaa) who are due a fifth of the spoils of war, mentioned in Surat al-Anfal.”

They are the people of Alee, Ja’far, Abbas, and Aqeel, and the People of Knowledge added all of Bani Hashim to that as well, which is the above 4 plus the people of al-Harith. This is reported by Ibn Abd al-Barr in his Sharh of the Muwata of Imam Malik, Ibn Qudamah of the Hanbalis, and Ibn Raslan declared a consensus on it.

Ash-Shawkani in his Nayl al-Awtar states the agreement of the majority of Hanafis, the most authentic statement of the Shafi’ees and Hanbalis, and the majority of the Zaydis, that any Sadaqah that is given to his household as Sadaqat ut-Tatawwu, or voluntary charity, is permissible to them. Some said that it is prohibited the same as Zakah, as transmitted from Abu Yusuf.

In terms of the wives of the Prophet being included in the prohibition, then Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his Fath al-Bari reports that Ibn Battal transmitted the agreement of the Fuqaha on their not entering into that prohibition, and ash-Shawkani says that this should be investigated. Ibn Qudamah reports the Athar on authority of A’ishah that Sadaqah was prohibited to her since she is from the people of Muhammad, demonstrating the wives entering into the prohibition as well. Ibn Hazm reports in his book of Ijma, that it is Zakah that is not permitted to Bani al-Abbas and Abu Talib, their men and women. There appears to be a difference of opinion on this.

This is the authentic narration which proves that wives of prophet(Saw) are also forbidden to receive sadaqa:Musannaf ibn abi shaybah (chapter Laa tahillu al-sadqa ala bani hashim)

As for a more explicit evidence then here it is, in this Hadith prophet(saw) is talking to ‘Aisha (ra) regarding her female servant, this is how it goes:

Moreover, Imam ibn qayyim(rah) in his book discusses this issue in a great detail clearing the doubts who believed that wives of prophet(Saw) were allowed sadaqa. He said that, the relation of wives of prophet(Saw) was similar to nasab(lineage) because the wives of prophet(saw) remained haram on other men even after the death of prophet(Saw) and they were his wives even in his life and will be his wives even in hereafter, so their relation to prophet(Saw) was like of nasab(lineage). That is why sadaqa was even haram for the wives of prophet(Saw). Then he said that even Imam Ahmed(rah) was from the madhab who held this same belief. And he refuted all the arguments and claims of the people who denied that wives of prophet(Saw) were eligible to receive sadaqa in an satisfactory. So for detailed answer refer the book Jila al afhaam by imam ibn qayyim page 331-333.)

So since wives of prophet(Saw) are also not eligible to receive sadaqa, they too are from “itratu ahlebayti”.

Narration 9:

sahi bukhari 6.352: Narrated Yusuf bin Mahak: Marwan had been appointed as the governor of Hijaz by Muawiya. He delivered a sermon and mentioned Yazid bin Muawiya so that the people might take the oath of allegiance to him as the successor of his father(Muawiya). Then `Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr told him something whereupon Marwan ordered that he be arrested. But Abdur−Rahman entered `Aisha’s house and they could not arrest him. Marwan said, “It is he (`AbdurRahman) about whom Allah revealed this Verse:−− ‘And the one who says to his parents: ‘Fie on you! Do you hold out the promise to me..?'” On that, Aisha said from behind a screen, “Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur’an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander).

Answer:

Some people try to use this narration , in order to portray that nothing was revealed in quran regarding hz ayesha(ra) except the verses connected with the declaration of the innocence of ayesha(ra). This means verse of tatheer was not revealed for wives of prophet(Saw). But they fail to understand a simple narration or they deliberately try to fool people by misinterpreting this narration. If we give a closer look this narration we will find that it speaks about the verses of quran which wererevealed specifically for the offspring of abubakar(ra). Since marwan said a particular verse was revealed for Abdur rahman ibn abubakar(who was brother of ayesha(ra)), he didn’t intend to address this to hz ayesha(ra)) or any wife of the prophet. But hz ayesha(ra) replied him saying that for offspring of hz abubakar(ra) only the verse of innocence was revealed.

Moreover, the verse of purification encompassed even other wives of prophet(Saw).. not only hz ayesha(ra), that is why she didn’t include this verse while responding to Marwan.

Secondly we know that verses of surah ahzab (i.e “o wives of prophet(33:32)”) was revealed for wives including hz ayesha(ra).. then why didnt she say that? But the fact is that the reply of hz ayesha(ra) was only specific to the verses of Quran which were revealed specifically for the children of hz abubakar(ra)

The variations in the narrations of kisa reported from umm salama(ra):

Version 1:

References: Tirmidhi, al-Jami-us-sahih (5:351,663#3205,3787) sheikh Albani said it’s saheeh.

Comment: This version shows us that hz umm salama(ra) didn’t ask any question to prophet(Saw). And this is different from the rest of other versions.

Version 2:

Abu al Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’aqoob said: Al Abbas bin Muhammad bin al Doori from Uthman bin Umar from AbduRahman bin abdullah bin Deenar from Shareek bin Abu Nimr from Ata’a bin yasar fro umm Salamah may Allah be pleased with her that she said: In my house this verse was revealed ” God wants to remove uncleanliness from you Ahlul-Bayt ” She said: The Prophet PBUH then called for Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Hussein may Allah be pleased with all of them and he said: O Allah these are my Alul-bayt. Umm Salamah said: O Apostle of Allah am I not from your Ahlul-Bayt? The Prophet PBUH replied: You are my Good Ahel and they are my Ahlul-Bayt, O Lord my Ahel are more deserving “have more rights”.

Comment: In this version we find some odd words, i.e prophet(Saw) making distinction between ahel and ahlul-bayt although in reality the arabs never made a distinction between these as they are the same thing, this is illustrated by many of the most authentic Hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim, and even agreed by the shias. So this part of the narration is “shaadh” as explained before. Moreover this version shows that Prophet(Saw) said, “O Allah my “AHL” is more deserving”. He(saw) didn’t say my ahlebayt is more deserving, but my “AHL” which even included his wives, even after the distinction made. Thus this version is contradictory to other versions.

Version 3:
عن أم سلمة قالت : في بيتي أنزلت { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت } قالت : فأرسل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى فاطمة وعلي والحسن والحسين ، فقال : هؤلاء أهل بيتي . قالت : فقلت : يا رسول الله أما أنا من أهل البيت ؟ قال : بلى إن شاء الله
الراوي: أم سلمة هند بنت أبي أمية المحدث: البغوي – المصدر: شرح السنة – الصفحة أو الرقم: 7/204
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

Narrator: Umm Salamah Hind bint Abu Umayyah.
Muhaddith: Al baghawi. in Sharh al Sunnah.
Hadith rank:Isnad SAHIH

Comment: In this version we find that umm salama(ra) knew that she was from his ahlulbayt which is why she asks while she is surprised “Aren’t I also from your Ahlul-bayt?” Of course she knew this, imagine that his wife doesn’t know a piece of basic information such as this especially since he always called her Ahlul-bayt in several Sahih hadiths, and that prophet(saw) answered her in affirmative manner. This version contradicts with the other versions.

Version 4:

Comment: This version shows us that umm salama(ra) did ask a question, and since the verse was already revealed for wives prophet(Saw) , he(saw) said to her that she was towards good ending. The answer in this version is conflicting with some other versions.

Conclusion:

The narrations of Kisa’a (Cloak) are all conflicting and contraditcing each other and the only reason the scholars grade them as Sahih is because they are narrations of virtues and the scholars used to be linient when it came to narrations of virtues. Great hadith experts such as Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn al-Mahdi, ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak said, “When we narrate in regards to the lawful [halal] and unlawful [haram] we exercise extreme strictness and when we narrate in regards to virtuous and the like (stories and narratives) then we are more lenient. (See Suyuti’s Tadrib al-rawi).

But if any of these versions is used to exclude other members of Ahlebayt(i.e wives of prophet) then in no way that version will be accepted, because this will be against the quran and even there are other versions and many authentic narrations which proves that wives of prophet(Saw) were Ahlebayt. So any person who is just and unbiased cannot take one version of these and try to use it as a proof to exclude wives of prophet(Saw) from Ahlebayt. If they do such it will be considered as deception.

And the best way to deal with these conflicting versions is to use the rule we had set from the shia ahadees, taught by the shia imams (refer the rule). Which says that the ahadees which goes against quran are to be rejected. So from these different versions the versions which goes against quran(since quran explicitly proves wives to be ahlebayt) are to be rejected, and those versions which can be reconciled by quran which doesn’t show that wives of prophet(Saw) are not part of Ahlebayt, are to be accepted.

This is a Book which We have sent down to you, full of blessings, that they may ponder over its Verses, and that men of understanding may remember. Quran (38:29)

It is not for any person to believe, except by the leave of Allah, and He will put the Rijs on those who do not reason. Quran (8:100)

Decisive Fact:

As we know that the whole dispute is based on the verse of tatheer(33:33) and even the incident of kisa is related to it. But the fact which will end this controversy that, was the verse of tatheer revealed for Ahle kisa or wives of prophet(saw) is that: THERE IS NO SINGLE AUTHENTIC NARRATION connected to prophet(saw) or any companion which explicitly and in a clear manner states that the verse of tatheer(33:33) was revealed for Ahle kisa.

And the illogical claims that the narrations of kisa are a proof that verse of tatheer was revealed for them, then they have been thoroughly answered and refuted in this article, since these narrations are infact a proof that the verse of tatheer was not revealed for them, had it been so then there wouldn’t been any need for prophet(Saw) to make dua AFTER the verse was revealed.

And the most important fact is that there is an authentic narration which explicitly and in a clear manner states that that verse of tatheer was revealed for the wives of prophet(Saw).

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.

So this authentic narration is a decisive proof which shows that the verse of tatheer was revealed for wives of prophet(Saw) , and it cannot be rejected since there is no authentic report which clearly mentions that the verse of tahtheer was revealed for Ahle kisa or which states that it was not revealed for wives of prophet(Saw).

However we know that some pathetic bigots inorder to deceive people try to portray that one of the sub-narrator of this reports was weak, how ever this is incorrect. Regarding the critisim on ikrima, then Ibn Hajar did comment on some of those reports in which he was critcized in the beginning of Al-Fath, but what some notorious people do is that they only take those reports on critisicm of Ikrima but not the answers and comments of hadees scholars on them. What is clear that a lot of these statements of criticism are falsely attributed to the scholars. Take for example the statement of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyad that Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas used to beat Ikrimah. Yazeed is weak and Ibn Hibban rejected this statement by him. Yahya bin Ma’een is known to have referred to Ikrimah as trustworthy in more than one occasion.We will also notice that Imam Malik quoted Ikrimah in Al-Muwatta, and he usually only quotes narrators he finds to be trustworthy.

We will also notice that the majority of the hadith scholars have said that he is trustworthy. His hadiths are of course in the Saheehain(bukhari and muslim) as well.

And for a summarized view of scholars on ikrima refer this link:Ikrima mawla ibn Abbas

And this one has some collection of refutation of allegations against ikrima.(english) (Answering allegations against Ikrima)

And this link( in arabic) refutes some criticism on ikrimah: يان حال عكرمة مولى ابن عباس – ملتقى أهل الحديث

But this doesn’t satisfies the shias then let us do a fair deal with them, If shias want to weaken one of our Thiqa(trustworthy) narrator, just because there are some WEAK and UNPROVED, allegations against him(ikrima). Then they should be the foremost in criticizing one of the greatest shia narrator like Zurarah ibn A’yan. A shia narrator regarding whom it was said that: Had it not been for Zurarah, the ahadith of al-Baqir would have been lost. (Ikhtiyar Ma’rifat ar-Rijal vol. 1 p. 345).

But on the other hand we find that al-Kashi records that Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq cursed Zurarah. The following quotation is but one of several places where his(imam jafar) cursing of Zurarah is on record: By Allah, he has ascribed lies to me! By Allah, he has ascribed lies to me! By Allah, he has ascribed lies to me! May Allah curse Zurarah! May Allah curse Zurarah! May Allah curse Zurarah! (Ikhtiyar Ma’`rifat ar-Rijal, vol. 1 p. 361)

زرارة شر من اليهود والنصارى، ومن قال: إن مع الله ثالث ثلاثة
رجال الكشي: ص160. رواية رقم 267
Zurarah is worse than jews and Christians, and those who say: With Allah is 3 from 3.

More criticism on zurarah from shia books have been collected here (Some shia narrators) . So if the shias want sunnis to reject narrations of Ikrima, then we ask them to first reject narrations of Zurarah.(They will not dare to do so, because if they do so nothing will be left in their Madhab).

Refutation of Arguments:

Argument 1:

Some people might say that, In surah fatiha, the verse says:”Guide us to the straight path” now did the Noble Messenger(Saw) not make that Dua for Himself in every salah, If yes does that mean he was NOT on guidance before??? If he was on guidance yet made dua to Allah then can the same can be said for prophet(Saw) making dua for Ahlebayt after the tatheer verse was revealed.

Answer:

It seems to us that the one who raises this question whether it be shia or sunni have never read the tafseer of surah fatiha by his own scholars.

Let us first present before you what the shia tafseer says regarding first part of the question:

” Why must we always ask Allah for guidance to ‘the Straight Path’, as if we are being misguided ? ” Besides, supposing the statement is true about us, the ordinary believers, but what about the holy Prophet and sinless Imams (p.b.u.th.) who were the examples of complete human beings ?

In answer to this question, we may say : Firstly, the fact is that Man is liable to deviate from the Right Path with each step that he takes as he is walking along the path of guidance. So, he should rely on Allah and ask Him to keep him firm on the ‘Straight Path’.

We must not forget that our existence, our being, and all the bounties which always come to us, are from His Origin. To clarify the matter, we cite a simple example : All creatures, including human beings, (from one point of view) resemble an electric lamp. We see that the light of a lamp, when it is on, appears to be constant and monotonous. The reason is that the electrical current flows constantly from a generator to the lamp. The generator continuously produces some new electrical power, a part of which reaches the lamp by some connective wires. Our being is similar

to the lamp. Although it appears as a sustained being, it is, in fact, a continually renewed being that flows ceaselessly to us from the Original Being, the Bountiful Creator.

Therefore, as the continually new being reaches us, we need constant new guidance, too. It is natural that if something wrong or some barriers manifest themselves in our spiritual connective wires with Allah; the vices, injustice, wrong doings, etc., will disrupt our connection with the Origin of guidance. At that moment, we may deviate from the ‘ Straight Path ‘.

So, it is no wonder that even the prophets and sinless Imams (p.b.u.th.) ask Allah to guide them to the ‘ Straight Path ‘, because the Absolute Perfection is Allah and all of us, without any exception, are on the path of perfection, then it is acceptable that they, too, ask Him for higher promotions. (The Light of The Holy Qur’an by Ayatullah Sayyid Kamal Faghih Imani and A Group of Muslim Scholars, under explanation of surah fatiha , verse 6)

Sunni tafseer:

Question: If someone asks, “Why does the believer ask Allah for guidance during every prayer and at other times,while he is already properly guided Has he not already acquired guidance”?

Answer: The answer to these questions is that if it were not a fact that the believer needs to keep asking for guidance day and night , Allah would not have directed him to invoke Him to acquire the guidance. The servant needs Allah the Exalted every hour of his life to help him remain firm on the path of guidance and to make him even more firm and persistent on it . The servant does not have the power to benefit or harm himself , except by Allah’s permission. Therefore, Allah directed the servant to invoke Him constantly, so that He provides him with His aid and with firmness and success. Indeed, the happy person is he whom Allah guides to ask of Him.(tafseer ibn katheer, for surah fatiha, verse 6)

Thus from the tafseer of both sunnis and well as shias the answer we get to the first part of the question is that though prophet(Saw) was guided but to keep him firm on straight path he had to keep praying to Allah. As affirmed by shia commentary(tafseer). This is because Allah haven’t made a promise that he has kept the believers always on the straight path(without any condition). Thus to remain firm on the straight path one needs to keep praying to Allah to keep him firm on the straight path.

Now coming back to the second part of the question related to verse of tatheer and hadees kisa, we find that this reasoning cannot be applied to verse of tatheer by the shias. Because the shias believe that Allah said : “Verily Allah intends but to keep off from you”. (shia tafseers) . This is the translation the shias believe is correct for the verse of tatheer, since shias reject the other translation which is from Ahlesunnah which has the wordings similar to “Verily Allah intends to remove/wipeoff from you”. Thus when Allah had already wished to KEEP AWAY rijs from Ahlebayt(according to shia interpretation), then there seems to be no sensible reason for again making such dua.

Moreover shia scholars explain the phrase of ayat e tatheer we quoted above by saying: “its not only the will of Allah but the declaration of its effect. Since the Ahl ul Bayt have been thoroughly purified, they remain thoroughly purified for ever”.(tafseer of quran, Aqa Mahdi puya )

Thus when Allah had already promised to keep ahlebayt away from rijs and they remained purified(as per shia scholar), then there was no need to ask prophet(Saw) again to purify them. Unlike as for the case in surah fatiha.

The sunni view regarding the second partof the question is that, because to remain purified one needs to keep asking for purification AS WELL act upon certain commands which would be means for purification, since even if one makes dua to Allah to be kept firm on straight path.. he also needs to keep doing certain acts which would be means for him to remain on straight path. But this understanding of purification of Ahlebayt is unacceptable in the sight of shias, since they consider the purification of Ahle kisa to be creational purification and and it was non conditional purification. They believe that the Allah had already kept way all impurities from them and there was no condition for them to abide inorder to keep them selves purified.

But if we read the verses of quran in context (33:32-33) we will find that Allah first gave wives of prophet(Saw) certain commands which were means for purification then they were purified through it. And for Ahle kisa their means of purification was salah as evident from ahadees where prophet(Saw) would go infront of door of hz ali(ra)’s house and would say assalat assalat and would recite 33:33. Without the means of purification there is no purification, and without performing acts (like offering salaah etc) one can’t remain on straight path. Just mere supplication(dua) cannot make anyone purified nor can make anyone firm on straight path, unless those individuals adhere to certain means through which they can get purified and can remain firm on straight path, and it has to be a continuous process.

Reply 2:

The Prophet(saws) , as well as the true believers are on straight path. Prophet(saws) said:
ضَرَبَ اللَّهُ مَثَلا صِرَاطًا مُسْتَقِيمًا ، وَعَلَى جَنْبَيِّ الصِّرَاطِ سُورٌ فِيهِ أَبْوَابٌ مُفَتَّحَةٌ ، وَعَلَى الأَبْوَابِ أُرَاهُ ، قَالَ : سُتُورٌ مُرْخَاةٌ ، وَعَلَى بَابِ الصِّرَاطِ دَاعٍ : يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ، ادْخُلُوا الصِّرَاطَ جَمِيعًا وَلا تَتَعَوَّجُوا
Allah has set an example: a Sirat (straight path) that is surrounded by two walls on both sides, with several open doors within the walls covered with curtains. There is a caller on the gate of the Sirat who heralds, ‘O people! Stay on the path and do not deviate from it…(Musnad Ahmad, Kitab Sunnah by Marwazi)

But we ask Allah to keep us on the straight path, because we all are always in need of Allah’s guidance.

Moreover shia scholar explain the phrase of ayat al-tatheer saying:

“Innama implies the determined decision or will of Allah. Although the decision of a created being may not take effect at all, but the will of Allah takes immediate effect. There cannot be a slightest gap of time or space in the will of Allah taking effect. When He commands: “Be”; it becomes. Refer to Baqarah: 117; Nahl: 40 Maryolm: 35; Ya Sin 83; Mumin: 68 and Qamar 50. It is not only the will of Allah but the declaration of its effect. Since the Ahl ul Bayt have been thoroughly purified, they remain thoroughly purified for ever. (Tafseer of quran for 33:33, Aqa Mahdi pooya).

Thus when Allah had already promised to keep ahlebayt away from rijs and they remained purified, as per shia scholar, then there was no need to ask prophet(Saw) again to purify them. Unlike as for the case in surah fatiha, where we all are in need of Allah’s guidance all the time.

Moreover, if the purification of Ahlelbayt was Takweeni(creational), and it was willed by Allah himself, then there was no need to even ask Allah to maintain this wish, as it was Takweeni, asking to maintain it again proves it was Tashreehi.

Point to ponder:

The fallacy of the shias inorder to prove that hadeeth al kisa proves that the verse of tatheer was revealed for five people can be found out if one notices the action of prophet(Saw). We know that in the incident of kisa, After the verse of tatheer was revealed and while making dua to Allah, Prophet(saw) said “o Allah these are my ahlebayt” , this was said in different versions of incident of kisa we have already read. Now the questions arises is that, why would prophet(Saw) say: o Allah these are my ahlebayt? Because Allah already knew who ahlebayt were, infact Allah very well knew who Ahlebayt were, that is why He(swt) revealed the verse which contained the message of His wish towards Ahlebayt, so there seems to be no reasonable reason for Prophet(saw) saying to Allah “O Allah these are my Ahlebayt” . Are Shias trying to imply that Prophet(saws) was dictating to Allah(swt), that who were his Ahlelbayt.(Ma’azAllah)? There can only be one plausible reason for Prophet(Saw) stating, “O Allah these are my Ahlebayt” , and it is that since Allah had not included those members in his wish to purify certain members of Ahlebayt(wives of Prophet), Prophet(saw) had to bring forth hz ali(ra), fatima(ra), hassan(ra), hussain(ra), saying , “O Allah these are my Ahlebayt” which meant that, O Allah even these are my Ahlebayt, then Prophet(saw) supplicated for them to be included in the wish of Allah.

Argument 2:

Prayer(Dua) of Prophet(saw) was not for inclusion, but for the elevation of status, the prayer of Holy Prophet (saw) does not mean that they were not in Ahlulbait before. No, but this Dua means only for the elevation of status. Let us see the prayer after Adhan (holy call for prayers)
Sahih Bukhari, book of Adhkar:
“o Allah! Who is the lord of this call and lord of the prayers which have been erected. Give wasila to Holy Prophet (saw) on the day of qayamat, and give them the grand status and place of praise (maqam-e-mahmood) which you have already promised”

So, we see that Allah has already promised to give that to him, but still we recite this prayer. So do we have this doubt that Allah will not fulfill his promise (naudobillah)? This prayer is just to increase the status.

Answer:

We agree with Shias to an extent in their claim that, that the prayer was for elevation of Status, but we disagree with them over their view that the dua of Prophet(saw) was not for inclusion because, primarily the dua was for inclusion of Ahle Kisa among the Ahlelbay(who were intended by Allah to be purified in 33:33) which would elevate their status.

Secondly, Shias seem to have misunderstood the Sunni view, Ahlesunnah doesn’t say that this incident made someone Ahlelbayt who weren’t Ahlebayt before, no this is not the case, Close relatives of Prophet(saw) were his Ahlelbayt from starting, however verse 33:33 is about Ahlelbayt who were intended by Allah to be purified. And Allah intended this favor for wives of Prophet(saw), and Prophet(saw) made supplication for Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussein(May Allah be pleased with them) so even they be included in this favor of Allah.

Thirdly, Out of ignorance Shias put forth examples which doesn’t support their purpose, the hadeeth from Sahi Bukhari which they quoted is misunderstood by them, this is explained correctly by a more detailed hadeeth from Sahi Muslim.

Muslim Book 4 , Hadith 747 Abdullah b. Amr b. al-As reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: When you hear the Mu’adhdhin, repeat what he says, then invoke a blessing on me, for everyone who invokes a blessing on me will receive ten blessings from Allah; then beg from Allah al-Wasila for me, which is a rank in Paradise fitting for only one of Allah’s servants, and I hope that I may be that one. If anyone who asks that I be given the Wasila, he will be assured of my intercession.

Imam Badr al-Din al-`Ayni (Allah have mercy on him) explains this hadith in his commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari, `Umdat al-Qari:

(Mediation – wasila) Its linguistic sense is the means of drawing closer to another, and a rank with a king… A hadith in Sahih Muslim explained this as being a rank in Paradise… ‘Then ask Allah to grant me the mediation (wasila), for it is a rank in Paradise that none but a single servant of Allah’s servants deserves, and I hope that it be me, so whoever asks Allah that he grant me the mediation shall have my intercession.’ …

This hadeeth shows that, one servant of Allah is promised to be given Wasila, And Prophet(saw) hoped that he may be that servant, that is why he asked his followers to make supplication for him.

Fourthly, Allah(swt) had already intended to purify Ahlelbayt, which is itself an elevation of status, so why would Prophet(saw) just after revelation of verse and knowing the wish of Allah, He(saw) quickly gather those people for whom supposedly Allah had already intended, and pray for the elevation of their status? Wasn’t Prophet(saw) satisfied with the status already intended by Allah for those people? These points shows the fallacy of the shia view and it being irrational, because the correct and apparent understanding is that, dua(supplication) was done for them to be included in the favor of Allah, which was initially for wives of Prophet(saw).

Argument 3:

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-Tathir talks, said that O Allah these are my Ahl Al-Bayt.

Answer:

Some argue that Prophet(saws) wanted to clarify before the people that who were the purified ones that is why he(Saw) supplicated Allah multiple times on different occasions, but this answer is irrational because if it was to clarify to the people then why would prophet(Saw) ask DUA TO ALLAH, he(Saw) would have given a sermon gathering all the people. And he(Saw) wouldn’t have done this supplications(dua) inside his house, it would have been done in public gathering where all the muslims would be present, but nothing as such occurred. Lastly, atleast prophet(Saw) would have addressed the people that “o muslims these are the purified ones and my Ahlebayt”, after the supplication if at all it was to clarify before muslims. Imagine its to clarify the muslims yet prophet(Saw) didn’t address anything to the muslims on that occasion, but only asked ALLAH, because it was only to ask Allah for including even those members in Allah’s wish of purification.

Argument 4:

A similar dua is also there in Quran

[Quran 3:194] Our Lord! And give us that which Thou hast promised to us by Thy messengers. Confound us not upon the Day of Resurrection. Lo! Thou breakest not the tryst.

This prayer shows that who have faith in the fact that Allah does not break his promise, yet the pray. Same is the case for prayer of Holy Prophet (saw).

Answer:

Even this supplication has been misunderstood by Shias, Let us cite some scholars of tafseer to clear the misunderstanding of Shias, that why would people make such supplication, and we will find that it doesn’t support the Shia claim in anyway.

Maulana Mowdoodi says:

Such people do not doubt the fact that God will fulfil His promises. What they do doubt is whether they will be reckoned among those for whom those promises were made. Hence they pray to God to make them worthy of His promised rewards. They are afraid lest they remain targets of slander and ridicule by the unbelievers in this world, and then be disgraced in the Hereafter before the same unbelievers who may mock them once again saying that their faith has been of no avail to them.(Tafheem ul Quran).

Mufti Shafi Uthmani says :

The purpose is to say: O Allah, enable us to become deserving, and a beneficiary of this promise (made by You), and enable us to remain steadfast so that we breath our last in this world with faith in our heart and busy doing what is good in Your sight. (Ma’ariful Qur’an).

These correct explanations shows that those people, make the supplication, so that they be included in the promise of Allah(swt), due to the uncertainty of them being included in the promise of Allah.

Argument 5:

Was the prayer of prophet(Saw) to include these members into wish of Allah accepted?

Answer:

From the best of your knowledge we say yes it was, that is why prophet(Saw) daily used to go to infront of the door of hz fatima(ra)’s house and used to remind them of salah(indicating it to be a condition for purification) and then used to recite the verse of purification. And another proof is that there are several narrations where hz hassan(ra), few years after the death of prophet(Saw) while addressing to people of Iraq, said that he was from the family to which Allah wished to purify.

Argument 6:

In the narrations you provided at one place umm salama(ra) is considered ahl al-bayt and in other wathila bin asaqa(ra) is considered ahl al-bayt. Both did not have the claok around them. But the question is, if umm salama(ra) is included in the ayah of tatheer then why is not wathila bin asqa(ra) included in the ayah of tatheer?

Answer:

It seems that some people have failed to understand the simple reason that why we brought the different versions of Hadith Kisa. We don’t claim that the narration of umm salama(ra) where prophet(Saw) said: “yes you are ahlebayt”, is a proof for wives being purified ahlebayt, no this is not the case, our proof is quran that wives of prophet(saw) are Ahlebayt. So neither it is to be understood FROM THESE narrations that wathila(ra) was from purified ahlebayt, nor umm salama(ra).. but wives being AHlebayt is a proof from quran.

And the reason we used the narration where prophet(Saw) said his wives that, “yes you are ahlebayt”(though he(saw) didn’t do dua for her under the cloak) is because some people try to use the narrations where prophet(Saw) answered umm salama(ra), saying “you remain in your position , you are towards good ending” , portraying that it was a negative answer given to the wives which meant that they were not included in Ahlebayt, so inorder to refute that misunderstanding we used this narration which proved that the answer in another version of Hadith Al kisa was not a negative answer from prophet(saw).

Argument 7:

I’m a bit confused from what 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 Allah(swt) addresses the wives of the prophet(saw)? 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 prophet(saw). 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.”(Tafhim al-Qur’an, by Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi)]

The initial verses about the prophet’s(saw) wives were revealed during around the year 5AH to warn them.

Answer:

The view that verses from 29-35 where revealed during the Ghazwa Khandaq is the opinion of Maududi, his opinion is incorrect. And this view is contradicted by the view of Dr. Ali Muhammad Sallabee, who states in his book:

Authentic Hadeeth narrations confirm that these two verses were revealed after Prophet(saw) secluded himself from his wives for an entire month. We also know that these verses were revealed in the year 9H. Refer to Qadaayah Nisaa An-Nabee wal-Mo’minaat page 67. (Noble Life of The Prophet, by Ali Muhammad Sallabee, page 1191).

Also, the view of Dr. Ali Muhammad Sallabee is supported by the view of Ibn Ishaaq.

Ibn Ishaaq said: The Messenger of Allah(saw) married her(Fatima bint Al-Dahak) after the death of his daughter Zaynab. He then made her choose when the verses of choice(33:28-29) were revealed. [Al-Istee’aab by Ibn Abd al-barr page 913]. So He(saw) ended up divorcing her.

Moreover, we see that, the evidence based on which Maududi based his view, that mention about only two verses 28-29, not 30-35. For example we read Narrated `Aisha: (the wife of the Prophet) when Allah’s Messenger(saw) 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(saw) 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 (saw) did the same as I did.(Sahih Bukhari, Book 65, Hadith 4786).

So we find that, Maududi’s view was based on speculation, which was contradicted by the view of Dr. Ali Muhammad Sallaabi, and Ibn Ishaaq.

Thirdly, Maududi doesn’t exclude the verse of tatheer(33:33) which Shia use from the set of verses he mentioned, so his opinion isn’t even in the favour of Shias, as a whole.

Argument 8:

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 prophet’s 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 necessarily for the wives.

Answer:

Firstly, please keep in mind that, the verse the Shia is talking about isn’t an independent verse, its a part of verse(33) not the complete verse. The Shi’ee claim would have been considered if it was an individual verse.

Secondly, even though the view of Maududi was an incorrect speculation, however even if for sake of argument, we say that this portion was revealed later even then it can be said that, it was revealed for the wives of Prophet(Saw) to let them 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.

Argument 9:

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 prophet(saw) already affirmed that Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussain are part of his Ahlulbayt(as). This means that the event of Al-Kisa must have happened before the Dhul Hujjah during the year 10AH.

Answer:

This is actually the mis-understanding which most Shias have, and even 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 weren’t to make some individuals Ahlelbayt, because Ahlelbayt were there much before these two events.

Argument 10:

Why didn’t prophet(Saw) call any of his daughter or the daughter of Fatima(ra) – Zaynab bint Ali – under the blanket when the verse 33:33 was revealed.

Answer:

Reply 1:

Ruqayyah died in 2 H., [at the time of the battle of Badr]; Zainab died in 8 H.; and Um Kulthoom died in Sha’ban 8th, yr 9 H. [As-Sirah an Nabawiya by Ibn Kathir (4\74)].

So the incident of kisa most likely took place after the death of these 3 daughters of prophet(Saw), after verse (33:33) was revealed.

The most stronger view is that the other daughters of prophet(Saw) weren’t alive by that time, when the incident of kisa took place. Because we know from some weak reports that prophet(Saw) used to go infront of house of hz fatima(ra) and used to recite the verse of purification(after it was revealed) for 9 months… and it seems this ended after his(saw) death. Which proves that this verse was revealed just before 9 months before the death of prophet(Saw).. and by that time the rest of the daughters were not in this world.

Reply 2:

Even if supposedly for the sake of argument if we assume that they were alive even then it can be a said that prophet(Saw) didn’t gather them and their family under the blanket because he just wanted to gather the ones from whom his progeny would have survived and persisted. The ones whose progeny would be linked to prophet(Saw). And neither the 3 daughters nor even the daughters of hz Fatima(ra) were eligible for this.

We read in a version of Hadeeth Thaqalayn:

The other daughters of prophet didn’t have any son alive by that time. As for the daughters of hz Fatima(ra) and other grand daughter then they were not the ones from whom the progeny of prophet(saw) would have persisted, and they were not the ones whose progeny would be linked to prophet(Saw). Prophet’s progeny survives through his daughter Fatima(ra) and her two sons Hasan(ra) and Husayn(ra) only, who are the ancestors of all ‘Seyyids’ (descendants of the Prophet) which is not the case with daughters of hz Fatima(ra) , as their progeny would be linked to their Husbands not prophet(Saw). Because other than Prophet (s)’s progeny the progeny of all other daughters is linked to their Husbands. That is why he didn’t gathered any grand daughter.

We are aware that, the Shia try to give their incorrect interpretations based on conjecture, that in this event the daughter of Fatima(ra) was not included because she wasn’t going to an Imam, however this conjecture is refuted from the simple fact that, Fatima(ra) was included in it, even though she wasn’t going to be an Imam, which shows the fallacy of Shi’ee conjecture.

Argument 11:

It seems to me that the author is limiting the members of the prophet’s(saw) Ahlulbayt only to those whom his progeny survives through. In other words, this would imply that the other daughters of the prophet(saw) as well as the daughters Fatima(as) are not part of the prophet’s(saw) Ahlulbayt. Moreover, if we restrict our definition of Ahlulbayt 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 prophet(saw) who passed on his lineage, hence they would not be considered part of the prophet’s Ahlulbayt(as) based on the authors definition. So my question is, had the whole purpose of the event of Kisa being to include the prophet’s 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 prophet(saw) if they would not have entered Al-Kisa, then they would not be part of his Ahlulbayt?

Answer:

Firstly, this argument is based on the misunderstanding of the Shia, because we are not limiting the Ahlulbayt only to those from who progeny of Prophet(saw) survives, but rather we are saying that the reason Prophet(saw) made dua(supplication) for Fatima(ra), Ali(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) so that they be included in the favour of Allah(swt) which was to be on wives of Prophet(saw) – i.e purification, is because from these individuals the progeny of Prophet(saw) was going to survive.

Therefore, the incident of Kisa or Tatheer was NOT to MAKE certain individuals Ahlelbayt, rather it was to purify some selected members from Ahlelbayt. That being wives of Prophet(saw), and then according to dua of Prophet(saw), even Ahl Kisa. However Ahlelbayt of Prophet(saw) existed much before these two events, which even included all his wives, all daughters, etc. So Prophet’s progeny not surviving through his other wives, or his other daughters, has not relevance to their inclusion or exclusion from Ahlelbayt.

Argument 12:

The entire hypothesis of our sunni brothers is that the verse 33:33 was revealed exclusively for the wives of the Prophet and that the inclusion of Fatima, Ali, Hassan and Hussain (s) was only after a supplication made by the Prophet. They also state that the purity mentioned in the ayat refers only to the spiritual elevation in term of piousness etc attained through the guidelines mentioned in the preceding ayat such as : Stay in the homes, offer salat etc.

The fallacy in their argument is that if the verse provides only the guidelines to achieve purity then the need to formally include Fatima in the Ahl al Bayt does not arise because the inclusion of anybody on its own does not mean anything. Following from their argument, one can attain purity even when one is not part of Ahl al Bayt i.e. through attending to prayers, giving alms etc. So why did the Prophet gather the five relatives of his and prayed (according to sunnis) to include them in the Ahl al Bayt?

Answer:

The wish of Allah mentioned in 33:33 was for Ahlebayt that too wives, in specific but for not muslims in general. So even if people do all the commands which were mentioned in 33:33 even then they will not be included in the wish of Allah since he made it khas(exclusive), that is why Quran doesn’t says “Allah only wishes to purify you O BELIEVERS” , Quran just says “Allah only wishes to purify you O AHLEBAYT”. And for others to be included in that verse, which was revealed for wives of prophet(Saw), it needed a special supplication from prophet(Saw).

Argument 13:

Imam Muslim (the Author) did not put any other tradition in this section (section of the virtues of Ahlul-Bayt). If the author of ‘Sahih Muslim’ believed that the wives of the Prophet were included in Ahlul-Bayt, he would have quoted some traditions about them in this section.

Answer:

Ahlul Bayt is a general term which includes many people, including Prophet’s(SAW) wives. Wives of the Prophet(Saw) had their own esteemed status as Azwaj An-Nabi, which is mentioned in the Quran. So scholars, when they talk about Wives of the Prophet (saw), they mention them in special category as Azwaj An-Nabi or in a different chapter. Every member of Ahlul Bayt aren’t of same status.

So, if the Shia are trying to imply that Imam Muslim, didn’t consider wives of Prophet(saw), Ahlelbayt, then that is their ignorance. Imam Muslim, himself brings in his book hadeeth which he considered authentic, where wives of Prophet(saw) were called Ahlelbayt.

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. يا رسول الله ! كيف وجدت أهلك ؟ فيقول “بخير
Anas(ra) 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, how are you? They said: Messenger of Allah, we are in good state ‘How do you find your family? He would say: In good state. (Sahi Muslim Bk 8, Number 3328)

In the above narration Prophet(saw) terms his wives as Ahlel-bayt as Prophet(saw) greeted his wives as “Assalamu’alaikum. Kaifa antum ya Ahlal Bayt”, and Imam Muslim considered it authentic which proves that he believed that wives of Prophet(saw) are Ahlelbayt.

Moreover Rudani in his “Jamiul fawaid” in chapter “Merits of ahlalbayt and matchmakers of prophet”, #9020, narrated from ibn Abu Awfa, that prophet said:

قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم سألت ربي عز و جل أن لا أزوج أحدا من أمتي و لا أتزوج إلا كان معي في الجنة فأعطاني

Prophet(saw) said: I asked from Allah that all women which married me would be with me in the heaven, and He granted to me that.

This shows that, other scholars did include the narrations about wives of Prophett(saw) in the chapter on virtues of Ahlelbayt.

Argument 14:

It is interesting to see that Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (S) is the narrator of the above tradition, and she herself is testifying that Ahlul- Bayt are the above-mentioned individuals (i.e., Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, may the blessing of Allah be upon them all).

Answer:

As explained in this article, this hadeeth has been misunderstood by Shia. The hadeeth of Kisa doesn’t show that only they are Ahlelbayt, but rather it shows that Prophet(saw) made a dua(supplication) for them to be included in the wish of Allah.

Moreover, Ayesha(as) even narrated the hadeeth, where she considers herself as Ahlelbayt, which disapproves the incorrect Shia interpretations.

Sahi muslim (Bk 23, Number 4918) Ibrahim reported: I said to Aswad if he had asked the Mother of the Believers (in which utensils) he (the Holy Prophet) disapproved the preparation of Nabidh. He (Aswad) said: Yes. I said: Mother of the Believers, inform me about the utensils in which) Allah’s Apostle forbade to prepare Nabidh. She (Hadrat ‘A’isha) said: He forbade us, the members of his family [Ahlal Bayt], to prepare Nabidh in gourd, or varnished jar. I said to him: Do you remember green pitcher, and pitcher? He said: I narrated to you what I have heard; should I narrate to you which I did not hear?

Allah knows the best.

Note: We have covered some reports related to hadeeth al-Kisa which were quoted in Shiite Encyclopedia, in another article. Please refer this link. {Click here}.

“Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.” (17:81).

Article by Ibn Ahmad al-Hindi

17 thoughts on “A Scientific Dialogue Regarding Incident Of Kisa (revealing some facts)”

Pingback: Answering Ansar’s clear deception about Ahlelbayt « Answering-Ansar Unveiled
Adil says:

2011/10/26 at 16:03

Another deception of Shia website regarding this topic is exposed here:

Answering Ansar’s clear deception about Ahlelbayt

Reply
amir says:

2011/12/09 at 23:07

this is most most beautifull and logical side ,,Allah will help you in doing more and more good job ,,inshallah never stop this work ,,,\\
some shia freinds circled arround me and i was help less now i m feeling so healthy in knowledge of true islam
regards amir mughal

Reply
- youpuncturedtheark says:
  
  2012/01/11 at 13:02
  
  Its Allah who helps us, and guides us to the straight path. So we thank Allah(swt) for guiding us to the straight path, and we pray to Allah guide all the deviated people towards straight path. (Ameen). Please remember us in your supplications brother.
  
  Reply
batool says:

2012/10/25 at 11:30

وقال العلامة يوسف بن موسى الحنفي (ابو المحاسن):

(روي أن رسول الله (ص) لما نزلت هذه الآية: { إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيراً } دعا علياً وفاطمة وحسناً وحسيناً فقال: اللهم هؤلاء أهلي، وروي أنه جمع (علياً)(2) وفاطمة والحسن والحسين، ثم أدخلهم تحت ثوبه ثم جأر إلى الله تعالى، رب هؤلاء أهلي، قالت أم سلمة: يا رسول الله فتدخلني معهم؟ قال: أنت من أهلي يعني من أزواجه كما في حديث الإفك: من يعذرني من رجل بلغني أذاه في أهلي، لا أنها أهل الآية المتلوة في هذا الباب

Reply
- Slaves of Allah says:
  
  2012/10/26 at 18:22
  
  Firstly, we checked the book you quoted and it is without a chain. There is no chain(Isnad) for that hadeeth, and for Ahlesunnah a report without a chain is like a body without a head, which is worthless and of no use. Thus in no way could that chain-less report become hujjah for any rational person. Secondly the word in this narration a “ya’ni” يعني , which translates as “meaning” is a sign of idraaj(interpolation). This shows that this narration contains additions of sub narrators too. And we have brought authentic narrations which don’t include a “ya’ni” يعني and which are free from interpolation and they show that wives of Prophet(Saw) are from Ahlulbayt, as even the verse of Quran clear shows.
  
  Reply
  - batool says:
    
    2012/10/28 at 00:41
    
    Assalam alaykom,
    
    You not knowing this alim is not my fault. Please check further. His book where he talks about this ayat is : معتصر المختصر second volume pg: 266 +
    Further we have to admit the fact that there have been ulemas from the sunni school of thought, who do acknowledge the fact that this ayat (al-tatheer) is referring to the people of the cloak only and NOT the wives of the prophet, for instance:
    
    في هامش ص 657 من صحيح شرح العقيدة الطحاوية الشيخ حسن السقاف وهو يرد على الشيخ الألباني في قوله: (وتخصيص الشيعة أهل البيت في الآية بعلي وفاطمة والحسن والحسين رضي الله عنهم دون نسائه (ص) من تحريفهم لآيات الله تعالى انتصاراً لأهوائهم كما هو مشروح في موضعه)
    فقال رداً عليه:
    وهذا من تلبيساته وتمحله في رد السنة الثابتة في تفسيره لأهل البيت، وهو بهذا أراد أن يلبس على القارىء بأن من قال أن أهل البيت هم أهل الكساء أنهم الشيعة! والحق أن من قال ذلك جميع أهل السنة والجماعة وقبلهم الذي لا ينطق عن الهوى صلى الله عليه وآله، ولكن هذا هو النصب الذي يفضي بصاحبه إلى ما ترى كما شرحنا في موضعه
    
    Or take for instance :
    
    العلامة الشوكاني في ” إرشاد الفحول إلى تحقيق الحق في علم الأصول البحث الثامن من المقصد الثالث
    قال وهو يرد على من قال بأن الآية في نساء النبي صلى الله عليه وآله: (ويجاب عن هذا بأنه ورد بالدليل الصحيح أنها نزلت في علي وفاطمة والحسنين
    
    There are many others. Before I can go on further, I need you to at least admit that there are Sunni scholars who believe that this ayat is NOT related to the wives of the prophet . Will you or anyone admit this point?
  - Slaves of Allah says:
    
    2012/11/06 at 18:49
    
    Wa’alaykumsalam.
    
    Firstly, the report you posted in your previous comment is chain-less thus its worthless, its like a body without a head. And the answer to this has been updated in our previous comment.
    
    Secondly, we have proven that verse of tatheer is for wives of Prophet(saw) from Quran and authetic ahadeeth, And there is consensus among Ahlesunnah regarding this, you may refer our article on this issue(click this link), and even if someone held an odd view then it would be considered their mistake because we don’t consider scholars to be infallible. What is hujjah upon people is Quran and authentic ahadeeth, and we have proven our case from these two sources. We believe you too will argue the same if we ask you about some esteemed Shia classical heavy weight scholars who believed in tahreef of Quran.
    
    Thirdly, you quoted Allama Shawkani, but either you were misled or you tried to mislead people by quoting that. Since we like to give you a benefit of doubt, we take it as some other Shia tried to mislead you, but please be advised that if you blindly follow such Shias then you will end up in hellfire, So please think of your destiny and beware of such Shias because lying is from the religious teachings of Shiism. Now coming back to the quote of Shawkani then here is that quote in context, what you quoted was out of context.
    
    وذهب الجمهور أيضا إلى أن إجماع العترة وحدها ليس بحجة ، وقالت الزيدية والإمامية هو حجة ، واستدلوا بقوله تعالى : إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا والخطأ رجس فوجب أن يكونوا مطهرين عنه .
    
    [ ص: 263 ] وأجيب : بأن سياق الآية يفيد أنه في نسائه صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم .
    
    ويجاب عن هذا الجواب : بأنه قد ورد الدليل الصحيح أنها نزلت في علي وفاطمة والحسنين ، وقد أوضحنا الكلام في هذا في تفسيرنا الذي سميناه فتح القدير فليرجع إليه ،
    jamhoor(ahl-sunnah) believed that ijma of itrah alone is not hujja but zaidia and imamia said, “it is hujja” and they used as proof “ayat tatheer and rijz meaning error” so they believed (itrah) is free of error. And I(Shawkani) answer that, “the context of the verse means the wives of the prophet(saw). And they(zaidiya and Imamiya) answer this reply(of shawkani) that: there’s authentic proof that it was revealed about ali and fatima and hasanain. And we(shawkani talking about himself )explained this talk in our tafseer called fath alqadeer, so check that.
    
    If we check Fath al qadeer of Allama Shawkani it becomes more apparent that al-Shawkani believes verse of tatheer was revealed for the wives of Prophet(Saw) because of the context, THEN for `Ali’s family because of the hadith. Below is the quote from Fath ul Qadeer.
    ثم عمم فأمرهنّ بالطاعة لله ولرسوله في كل ما هو شرع { إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ ٱللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُـمُ ٱلرّجْسَ أَهْلَ ٱلْبَيْتِ } أي إنما أوصاكنّ الله بما أوصاكنّ من التقوى، وأن لا تخضعن بالقول، ومن قول المعروف، والسكون في البيوت وعدم التبرّج، وإقامة الصلاة وإيتاء الزكاة، والطاعة ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت، والمراد بالرجس: الإثم والذنب المدنسان للأعراض الحاصلان بسبب ترك ما أمر الله به، وفعل ما نهى عنه، فيدخل تحت ذلك كل ما ليس فيه لله رضا
    
    وقد اختلف أهل العلم في أهل البيت المذكورين في الآية، فقال ابن عباس وعكرمة وعطاء والكلبي ومقاتل وسعيد بن جبير: إن أهل البيت المذكورين في الآية هنّ زوجات النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم خاصة. قالوا: والمراد بالبيت بيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ومساكن زوجاته لقوله: { وَٱذْكُـرْنَ مَا يُتْـلَىٰ فِي بُيُوتِكُـنَّ }. وأيضاً السياق في الزوجات من قوله: { يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّ قُل لأَزْوٰجِكَ } إلى قوله: { وَٱذْكُـرْنَ مَا يُتْـلَىٰ فِى بُيُوتِكُـنَّ مِنْ ءَايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ وَٱلْحِكْـمَةِ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ لَطِيفاً خَبِيراً }. وقال أبو سعيد الخدري ومجاهد وقتادة، وروي عن الكلبي: أن أهل البيت المذكورين في الآية هم: عليّ وفاطمة والحسن والحسين خاصة، ومن حججهم الخطاب في الآية بما يصلح للذكور لا للإناث، وهو قوله: { عنكم } و { ليطهركم } ولو كان للنساء خاصة لقال عنكنّ ويطهركنّ. وأجاب الأولون عن هذا أن التذكير باعتبار لفظ الأهل كما قال سبحانه:
    { أَتَعْجَبِينَ مِنْ أَمْرِ ٱللَّهِ رَحْمَتُ ٱللَّهِ وَبَرَكَـٰتُهُ عَلَيْكُمْ أَهْلَ ٱلْبَيْتِ }
    [هود: 73] وكما يقول الرجل لصاحبه: كيف أهلك؟ يريد زوجته أو زوجاته، فيقول: هم بخير
    وقد توسطت طائفة ثالثة بين الطائفتين، فجعلت هذه الآية شاملة للزوجات ولعليّ وفاطمة والحسن والحسين، أما الزوجات فلكونهنّ المرادات في سياق هذه الآيات كما قدّمنا، ولكونهنّ الساكنات في بيوته صلى الله عليه وسلم النازلات في منازله، ويعضد ذلك ما تقدّم عن ابن عباس وغيره.
    وأما دخول عليّ وفاطمة والحسن والحسين فلكونهم قرابته وأهل بيته في النسب، ويؤيد ذلك ما ذكرناه من الأحاديث المصرّحة بأنهم سبب النزول، فمن جعل الآية خاصة بأحد الفريقين فقد أعمل بعض ما يجب إعماله وأهمل ما لا يجوز إهماله
    
    So its clear that someone deceived you by mis-quoting Shawkani. So from mext time please verify what you bring before blindly copy pasting, as we said earlier that lying is from the religious teachings of Shias, so its quite obvious that every next quote they give is a lie.
    
    Fourthly, you quoted Hassan Saqqaf, this guy is a zindeeq he is not a Sunni in our view, he has Rafidi, Jahmi, Sufi, inclinations and on the top he is a shameless and a blatant LIAR. So any view of a liar doesn’t holds even a weight of grain in the sight of Ahlesunnah. Here are some lies of this Zindeeq. (Click link).
Slaves of Allah says:

2013/08/20 at 11:55

If supposedly for sake of argument even if we agree that Ikrima was Khariji but Thiqa(trusthworthy), then too it is not a problem, because Khawarij hated Ayesha(as), and they wanted Ali(as) to take Ayesha(as) as captive of War, for which Ibn Abbas(as) rebuked them thoroughly. So even if supposedly Ikrima is Khariji then too he is narrating something that isn’t inviting towards his innovation, rather its against it.

Reply
salafi says:

2015/01/16 at 07:00

shiatul dajjah says ;marwan killed talha…is it true?

Reply
- Slaves of Allah says:
  
  2015/01/16 at 07:10
  
  We haven’t come across any reliable report regarding this claim, although there are reports which state this, but they are weak and unreliable.
  
  Allah knows the best!
  
  Reply
isa Sulaiman says:

2016/01/06 at 13:56

This eduçated me

Reply
gift2shias says:

2016/09/02 at 01:02

Excellent article, mashaallah tabarakallah, really enjoyed reading it and learnt alot.

Reply
Slaves of Allah says:

2017/08/09 at 17:48

The divine will referred to in the verse is His legislative will, which is different from His universal decree…Undoubtedly Allah removed ar-rijs from Fatimah, al- Hasan, al-Husayn, ‘Ali and the wives of the Prophet (may Allah be pleased with them all), but the divine will referred to in this verse is the legislative will. Hence it says in the hadith that when the Prophet(saws) wrapped them in the cloak, he said: “O Allah, these are the people of my household, remove from them ar-rijs.”

The supplication of the Prophet(saws) settles the matter. If there was any indication in the verse of purification that purification of the
people of the cloak had already taken place, the Messenger of Allah(saws) would not have covered them with the cloak and prayed for them by saying, “O Allah, these are the people of my household, remove from them ar-rijs.” 292 This is clear evidence that the verse was
revealed concerning the wives of the Prophet(saws) the Messenger of Allah(saws) wanted the people of the cloak to be included in this divine revelation of purification, so he gathered them and covered them with the cloak and prayed for them, and Allah accepted his supplication for them 3 and purified them as He(swt) purified the wives of the Prophet, as indicated by the text of the verse. [Ali Ibn Abi Talib, vol 2, page 365-366, by Ali Muhammad Sallabi]

Reply
Slaves of Allah says:

2018/02/15 at 19:18

http://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/499/response-atabek-ikrimah-mawl-ibn#ixzz4EZJK4ckB

http://asmaur-rijaal.blogspot.com/2013/02/ikrimah-mawla-ibn-abbaas.html

Reply
Slaves of Allah says:

2018/02/15 at 19:33

Al-Fawa’id al-Muntaqah li ibn abi al-Fawaris:

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ، ثنا عَلِيُّ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، ثنا زَيْدُ بْنُ الْحُبَابِ، حَدَّثَنِي حُسَيْنُ بْنُ وَاقِدٍ، عَنْ يَزِيدَ النَّحْوِيِّ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ: ” إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَنْ يُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ “، قَالَ: نَزَلَتْ فِي أَزْوَاجِ النَّبِيِّ خَاصَّةً

`Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Ziyad (Thiqah) -> abu al-Hasan `Ali bin Harb (Thiqah) -> Zayd bin al-Habbab(Saduq Hasan); Husayn bin Waqid (Saduq Hasan) -> Yazid bin abi Sa`id al-Nahawi (Thiqah) -> `Ikrimah (Thiqah) -> ibn `Abbas.

Ibn Athaker reported it in “Tareekh madinatul dimashq” 69/150::

أخبرنا أبو القاسم بن السمرقندي أنا أبو الحسين بن النقور أنا أبو طاهر المخلص نا عبد الله بن محمد بن زياد نا علي بن حرب نا زيد بن الحباب حدثني حسين بن واقد عن زيد النحوي عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس ” إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت قال نزلت في أزواج النبي ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) خاصة قال عكرمة ومن شاء باهلته أنها نزلت في نساء النبي

Isma`il bin Ahmad al-Samarqandi (Thiqah) -> Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Naqqour (Thiqah) -> abu Tahir Muhammad bin `Abdul-Rahman (Thiqah) -> Abu Bakr `Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Ziyad al-Faqih (Thiqah) -> abu al-Hasan `Ali bin Harb (Thiqah) -> Zayd bin al-Habbab al-Tamimi (Thiqah or Saduq hasan) -> Husayn bin Waqid (Saduq Hasan) -> Yazid bin abi Sa`id al-Nahawi (Thiqah) -> `Ikrimah (Thiqah) -> ibn `Abbas.

Similarly, In Siyar alam al Nubala by Imam Dhahabi, vol2, page 208 :

قال زيد بن الحباب : حدثنا حسين بن واقد ، عن يزيد النحوي ، عن عكرمة ، عن ابن عباس : إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت قال : نزلت في نساء – النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم . ثم قال عكرمة : من شاء باهلته ، أنها نزلت في نساء النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم خاصة
[Grading: Sheikh Shuaib Arnaut said: Isnad Hasan]

Reply
Slaves of Allah says:

2018/02/28 at 21:40

Imam Qurtubi said after quoting Hadeeth Kisa
قال القرطبي بعد أن ذكر الحديث :
فهذه دعوة من النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لهم بعد نزول الآية أحب أن يدخلهم في الآية التي خوطب بها الأزواج فذهب الكلبي ومن وافقه فصيرها لهم خاصة وهي دعوة لهم خارجة من التنزيل
(Tafseer Qurtubi, for verse 33:33)

Tafseer Qurtubi, vol 7, page 566 , explanation of hadeeth kisa

Reply