Part 2: Interpretation of Hadeeth Khalifatayn by RELIGIOUS DECEIVERS under Microscope

Exposing the deception of religious deceivers regarding Hadeeth Khalifatayn

In this part we would be focusing on the deception of the religious deceivers(shian e dajjal) by raising some stupid arguments, But lets us remind you before we proceed that the facts we have established (in Part 1 ) regarding the major problem in the Chain(Isnad) of this Hadeeth(narration) is sufficient to prove that this Hadeeth is worth nothing, moreover this Hadeeth also contradicts several authentic narrations which further proves that this Hadeeth is indeed unreliable.

What kind of people are we going to expose?

Before, we start our refutation we would like to again remind our readers that what kind of people are we going to refute and expose in this article. The ones to whom we are going to expose here have a lot of characteristics many of which are stated by their own Imams in their own books(eg: Hypocrites, etc), But some important characteristics which can’t be ignored before reading any argument raised by such people are : They are religious liars,  they consider deceiving and lying to be the teachings of their religion, and often they behave in a stupid manner like donkeys.

Here are the proofs on which we base our views that:

1. shiatu dajjal are religious liars and religious deceivers.

Shia infallible Imam in shia hadeeth states:

إذا رأيتم أهل البدع والريب – غير الشيعي أو الشيعي المهتدي – فأظهروا البراءة منهم وأكثروا من سبهم والقول فيهم والوقيعة ، وباهتوهم – اي ابهتوهم بالكذب والبهتان – كي لا يطمعوا في الفساد في الإسلام ويحذرهم الناس )[ تنبيه الخواطر ج 2 ص 162] .
[ وسائل الشيعة ج 11 ص 508] .
[ نهج الإنتصار ص 152] .

Imam Al-sajjad (as) said: If you see people of suspicion and innovation – other than shias or new shia – then show disownment from them and abuse them much, backbit them, make false accusations on them – that is, backbite them by attributing lies on them and make false accusations on them (‘Buhtaan’) …
[tanbiah al-khawatir v.2 p.162 – wasael al-shia v.11 p. 508 – Nahj al-intisaar p.152]

Here is another one:

مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْحُسَيْنِ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَبِي نَصْرٍ عَنْ دَاوُدَ بْنِ سِرْحَانَ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ص إِذَا رَأَيْتُمْ أَهْلَ الرَّيْبِ وَ الْبِدَعِ مِنْ بَعْدِي فَأَظْهِرُوا الْبَرَاءَةَ مِنْهُمْ وَ أَكْثِرُوا مِنْ سَبِّهِمْ وَ الْقَوْلَ فِيهِمْ وَ الْوَقِيعَةَ وَ بَاهِتُوهُمْ كَيْلَا يَطْمَعُوا فِي الْفَسَادِ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ وَ يَحْذَرَهُمُ النَّاسُ وَ لَا يَتَعَلَّمُوا مِنْ بِدَعِهِمْ يَكْتُبِ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ بِذَلِكَ الْحَسَنَاتِ وَ يَرْفَعْ لَكُمْ بِهِ الدَّرَجَاتِ فِي الْآخِرَةِ

“The Messenger of Allah (SAWAS) has said, ‘When you after me find people of bid’ah and doubt/suspicion, do disassociation from them and increase your insults to them and accuse them of false things, and oppose them so they may not become greedy in bringing corruption in Islam. You must warn people against them and against learning their bid’ah (innovations). Allah will reward you for this and will raise you darajaat (positions) in the next life.’”

Source: Al-Kulaynee, Al-Kaafee, vol. 2, ch. 159 “Sitting/Associating with Sinful People”, pg. 375, hadeeth # 4

& Majlisi has graded this hadeeth Saheeh in Mir’aat Al-’Uqool, vol. 11, pg. 77

(Shia scholars) al-Ansari and al-Roohani commented on the Hadith (Above) of Imam Abu Abdullah: “The words “Bahitouhum Kay La Yatma’ou” in the Hadith mean accusing them of things and thinking that they have ill intentions which is Haram in the case of dealing with a believer, so one cannot say about the believer things like: “He might be a Kaffir or a Zani”… And it could be left to its apparent form thus it would permissible to LIE to them for a certain benefit.” Shia sources (Kitab al-Makasib by al-Ansari 2/118), (
Minhaj al-Fuqahaa 2/228).

Intrestingly Giant shia scholars give fatawas(verdicts) based on these narrations for example Grand Ayatullah Al Khoei’i

سؤال 1245: هل يجوز الكذب على المبدع أو مروج الضلال في مقام الاحتجاج عليه إذا كان الكذب يدحض حجته ويبطل دعاويه الباطلة؟ الخوئي: إذا توقف رد باطله عليه جاز.

Question”1245″: Is it Possible to Lie or produce Arguments which contain Lies when Debating with a person who Is a Follower of Bida’a (Innovation/ they probably mean Sunnis) and a spreader or Dala’la (Ignorance/ us as well) If this Lie would Destroy my Opponent’s Arguments?

Imam Khoei’i Answers: If it will stop his Falsehood then it is Permissible to do So. (Imam Khoei’i, Sirat el Najat, Volume 1, Page 447) (online source)

A similar fatwa was issue by Grand ayatullah sistani:

السؤال: هل يعاقب الله الشخص اذا اجبر على الكذب في مواضع محرجة اذا سئل عنها خاصة اذا كان المقابل يسال كثيرا عن اشياء لاتخصه ؟

الجواب: لايجوز الكذب الا اذا كان لدفع ضرر.


2. Shiatu dajjal are donkeys:

Aboo ‘Abdillah bin Ahmad Muhammad bin Hanbal ash-Shaybaanee said in“as-Sunnah” (Volume 2/ 548 #1276): I was informed by Muhammad bin Yahyaa bin Abee Sameenah who was informed by Ibn Abee Zaaidha from Isma’eel meaning Aboo Khaalid and his father Zakariyaa bin Abee Zaaidha and Maalik ibn Mighwal from ash-Sha’bee: If the Shee’ah were birds they would be vultures and if they were animals they would be donkeys”

Comment: So the one who stated this reality was ash-Sha’bee ‘Aamir bin Sharaaheel al-Hamdaanee who was born in the caliphate of ‘Umar(ra)  and he is from the trustworthy of the Taabi’een and from the Fuqahaa who died in the year 103 AH.((Taqreeb))

Thus, in this article we will be exposing their lies and deceptions which they made in order to deceive innocent and lay muslims and we will be revealing before you that how they start behaving like donkeys and how they raise some foolish arguments just inorder to name it a refutation to Ahlesunah, So please don’t be surprised by seeing that how can people be so stupid and deceptive at the same time, because the fact is that such things are present in their blood. That is why you will find them least bothered even if their lies are exposed and they are caught red handed while trying to deceive people.


Deception (1)

Shiatu dajjal stated:

[Quote]Dajjali says, we have proved that:

1.         The Ahl al-Bayt are in TWO forms: general and special.

2.         All the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), and all of Banu Hashim, are part of the general Ahl al-Bayt.

3.         However, the chosen Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) are only the chosen ones from his relatives.

4.         Sometimes, the phrase “Ahl al-Bayt” refers to the general Ahl al-Bayt and sometimes it refers to the special Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام).

5.         In Hadith al-Thaqalayn, the phrase “Ahl al-Bayt” refers only to the special Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام), thereby EXCLUDING the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

6.         Hadith al-Khalifatayn shows that Hadith al-Thaqalayn is only about the Khalifahs from the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام). We proved from the Qur’an and Sunnah that these Khalifahs are only TWELVE in number, and there can be only one of them at a time.

7.         We proved through our authentic Hadiths that Sayyidah Fatimah is NOT part of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) mentioned in Hadith al-Thaqalayn or Hadith al-Khalifatayn because she is not a Khalifah! [Quote]

But the fact is that these arguments of shiatu dajjal were refuted long back and they weren’t able to produce any academic refutation to our article where we have exposed their deception in their categorization of Ahlebayt. Here is that article which covers in brief answers to the first five points the dajjali raised.(Click here) . So let us summarize that what will you find in our article with many examples and thought provoking questions which are unanswerable for shiatu dajjal.

1.  Ahlebayt of prophets are categorized in (a)”general family”(which includes non believers) [i.e General Ahlebayt] .  (b) “family members who were righteous believers”, [i.e Ahlebayt who are righteous] .

2. There is ABSOLUTELY NO such category of Chosen Ahlebayt. This Category is non-existent in reality, but only exists in Shia world of fantasies.

IMPORTANT: But the most absurd declaration we found in this regards from the religious deceivers was that THEY EXCLUDED FATIMA(ra) FROM  AHLEBAYT mentioned in Hadith Thaqalayn or Khalifatayn.

Well we have seen that Hadeeth Khalifatayn is Weak and Munkar narration in previous article but what about hadeeth Thaqalayn? These pseudo claimants of Ahlebayt are slowly uncovering their dajjali faces, Praise be to Allah. First they declared that Prophet Muhammad(Saw) is NOT our guide(refer this link), Now these dajjalis have excluded Fatima(ra) from the Ahlebayt mentioned in hadeeth Thaqalayn.

Well there is not much we can comment on this apparent insult towards the most important member of Ahlebayt from the shia of dajjal, Allah Almighty have given intellect to people they can judge themselves that who are the fake claimants of Ahlebayt and who are the true followers of Ahlebayt. The ones who are fighting for their rights or the ones who are keen to throw out most important members of Ahlebayt from some Important issues of Islam.

We want to make our readers know that the basic understandings of shiatu dajjal itself is incorrect that is why we find them making some absurd declarations one after the other because when they are being trapped by people of Sunnah(the true lovers and followers of Ahlebayt) they try to make an escape by using deceptive tactics and making such absurd claims. In regards, to their declaration that Fatima(ra) is not from Ahlebayt mentioned in Hadeth Thaqalayn, then know that dajjalis consider Fatima(ra) to be from CHOSEN AHLEBAYT in general, So the big and most important question that raises is that why was Fatima(ra) included in the CHOSEN AHLEBAYT?, Because according to dajjalis Fatima(ra) was not included in the chosen members of Ahlebayt mention in Hadith Thaqalayn, So why was she included among the chosen members of Ahlebayt in general?

The fact which every truthseeker and unbiased person can realize over here is that this absurd declaration from shiatu dajjal came just inorder to save their self made belief of Imamah and to save their deceptive interpretations which they give to Hadeeth Thaqalayn, that is why they crossed the limits of  stupidity and excluded Fatima(ra) from Ahlebayt mentioned in hadeeth Thaqalayn. This second declaration is another hard blow on them which shows the deception in their claims. Praise be to Allah who exposed them from their own writings.


It is true that according to shia beliefs Fatima(ra) is not from the Ahlebayt mentioned in hadeeth Thaqalayn as it is evident from shia narrations. But this absurd belief is non existent among Ahlesunnah, because Ahesunnah who are the true lovers and followers of Ahlebayt do not exclude Fatima(ra) from Ahlebayt mentioned in hadeeth Thaqalayn.

Now we know that whenever the issue that who are ahlebayt raises between a Sunni and Shia dialogue,  the shias always quote Hadeeth e Kisa. They quote this narration from books of Ahlesunnah as well as books of Shias and try to convince lay sunnis that Ahlebayt are ONLY these people. And we know that Fatima(ra) was included in hadeeth Kisa, She was also included in incident of Mubahila. We find that there is not a single instance when Prophet(saw) excluded Fatima(ra) from his Ahlebayt and included Ali(ra) and his offspring among them. But the shiatu dajjal believe that fatima(ra) is EXCLUDED from Ahlebayt mentioned in hadeeth thaqalayn. Thus respected readers whenever you find shias quoting any of narrations like that of Kisa or Mubahila to prove that who Ahlebayt are that are to be followed, Stop them then and there because its nothing but deception inorder to fool you, because the belief of Shias is that Fatima(ra) is not included among the  Ahlebayt mentioned in Hadeeth thaqalayn.

We hope that this declaration from shiatu dajjal will open the eyes of those misled people of Ahlesunnah, who think that Shias are also following Ahlebayt and that they have some truth in their call, and we think that many lay shias might also be shocked by knowing this belief of theirs, but know that this is the fact. And those ignorant shias who found this reality first time should also ask to themselves that why was Fatima(ra) included in Hadeeth Kisa, etc if she was not to be included in Hadeeth Thaqalayn?

This is one of the example that HOW SHIAS PUNCTURED THE ARK


Deception (2)

Shiatu dajjal stated:

[Quote] What we have stated above is confirmed by this Sunni fatwa:

Question: Can you please explain this following hadith found in Muslim about ahlul bayt. Why does the narrator state that the our mothers are not part of ahlul bayt? Clearly this is the opinion of the narrator and not what the Prophet (s) but why did Imam Muslim add this hadith to his collection? However i wanted to know if you could please explain this hadith and why does the narrator state that our mothers are not part of Ahlul Bayt.

Sahih Muslim Book 031, 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 household? 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 and for him the acceptance of Zakat is prohibited.

Answer: [Answered by Sidi Salman Younas]

However, the question arises: Why then did Sayyidina Zayd ibn Arqam (Allah be pleased with him) state that the wives were not included?

To understand this one must understand the context under which the term Ahly al Bayt was being employed. The context of this narration is in regards to those for whom zakat is forbidden. This relates to a very specific, textually-defined relationship.

Under this condition (i.e. those for whom zakat is forbidden) THE WIVES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED SINCE THEY ARE LAWFULLY ENTITLED TO ZAKAT ACCORDING TO THE CONSENSUS OF THE SCHOLARS as Ibn Hajar states in his Fath al Bari. This is clearly evident from the narration of Sayyidina Zayd, which Imam Muslim cites prior to the one being discussed, wherein he states:

قال نساؤه من أهل بيته ولكن أهل بيته من حرم الصدقة

“He (s: Zayd) said, ‘His wives are from his house (ahl baytihi) but the members of his house [s: in this context] are those for whom charity is forbidden.”

Imam Nawawi, commenting on this narration states that in terms of standing, respect, rights and high regard preached by the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) towards his family, the wives do indeed enter. However, They do not enter into those for whom Zakat is forbidden.

Further, as Sayyidi Gibril Haddad stated, one should know that it is one of the Prophetic characteristics that the wives that survived him are his wives forever as he himself said to Umm Salama when she asked to be under the mantle: “Are you not pleased to be my wife here and in the hereafter?” They cannot remarry nor inherit from him, so the analogy drawn by Sayyidina Zayd is inapplicable to them except for the ruling of zakat.

Thus, to conclude, the wives are part of the Ahly al Bayt. There are numerous narrations to attest to this such as the one narrated by Imam Bukhari from Anas ibn Malik wherein the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) entered upon Sayyidah A’isha and greeted her “Peace be upon you People of my house” (assalamu ‘alaykum ahly bayti). Sayyidina Zayd (Allah be pleased with him) does not negate this but merely states that those for whom zakat is forbidden are a more specific group excluding the wives.

And Allah knows best

Salman Ahmad Younas

Approved by Faraz Rabbani [Quote]

We would be discussing the flaws in fatwa later, before doing that let us expose some blatant lies and deception of shia of dajjal(religious liars and deceivers).

1. Firstly the dajjalis claim that “What we have stated above is confirmed by this Sunni fatwa” but this is a blatant lie. Stated above are seven(7) points which we quoted in Deception 1. However in point(3) dajjalis mentioned existence of Chosen Ahlebayt , where as there is no such thing mentioned in the Sunni fatwa cited by the shiatu dajjal.

2. In point (7) the dajjalis declared that Fatima(ra) is not from Ahlebayt mentioned in Hadith Thaqalayn, Where as  this view isn’t supported anywhere in the sunni fatwa. So how can the religious liars claim that “What we have stated above is confirmed by this Sunni fatwa”? Indeed its clear cut deception, because no scholar of Ahlesunnah could ever claim that Fatima(ra) is excluded from Ahlebayt mentioned in Hadith Thaqalayn. We Challenge shia of dajjal to bring us an explicit statement from any renowned sunni scholar who claimed that Fatima(ra) was excluded from Ahlebayt mentioned in Hadeth Thaqalayn. Respected readers rest assured that these shia of dajjal cannot bring any such statement because such things can only come out from the enemies of Ahlebayt(i.e Shia of dajjal) not the true lovers of Ahlebayt(i.e Ahlesunnah).

3. Please keep in mind that the website which issued sunni fatwa which the dajjali is referring to, even affirms that wives of Prophet(Saw) are from the Ahlebayt mentioned in verse of Tatheer(here is the link to that sunni fatwa), So we leave on the dajjalis to decide that whether Ahlebayt mentioned in verse of tatheer comes under special Ahlebayt or general Ahlebayt, and do they agree with this fatwa too or are they going to give us a classic example of double standards.


Deception (3)

Shiatu dajjal stated:

[Quote] This Sunni fatwa shows the Sahabi, Zayd ibn Arqam, EXCLUDING the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) from the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) mentioned in Hadith al-Thaqalayn. In his view, the Ahl al-Bayt there refers only to the Banu Hashim and nobody else. He did admit that the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were part of his general Ahl al-Bayt. But, the Ahl al-Bayt mentioned in Hadith al-Thaqalayn are a special group within the general Ahl al-Bayt.

Imam Shihab al-Din Mahmud ibn Abdullah al-Husayni al-Alusi, in Ruh al-Ma’ani, vol. 16, p. 116, also states:

وأنت تعلم أن ظاهر ما صح من قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” إني تارك فيكم خليفتين وفي رواية ثقلين كتاب الله حبل ممدود ما بين السماء والأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي وإنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا علي الحوض ” يقتضي أن النساء المطهرات غير داخلات في أهل البيت الذين هم أحد الثقلين لأن عترة الرجل كما في «الصحاح» نسله ورهطه الأدنون

And you know that the apparent meaning of what has been authentically Transmitted from the Prophet, viz “I will always leave among you TWO SUCCESSORS” and in some reports “Two weighty things” “The Book of Allah, which is a rope stretching between the heaven and the earth and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt. Both shall never separate till they return to me at the Lake Font” shows that the pure wives (of the Prophet) are not part of the Ahl al-Bayt who are one of the Two Weighty Things because the ‘itra of a man, As documented in the authentic sources, are his progeny and nearest kin.

You can see that Imam al-Alusi is NOT denying that the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are part of the Ahl al-Bayt. Rather, he is saying that the “Ahl al-Bayt” mentioned in Hadith al-Thaqalayn and Hadith al-Khalifatayn does NOT include the wives. This is because the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) himself has defined the Ahl al-Bayt in both Hadiths as his ‘itra – a term which means progeny and nearest kin. In our last refutation of al-Hindi al-Nasibi (لعنه الله) (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5), we have already dealt with the definition of ‘itra in greater detail. [Quote]

1. The Sunni Fatwa which the dajjali referred is based on incorrect Ijtihad, which we will be discussing in later points, but what is important to note from that fatwa(which dajjali quoted) is this statement: {as Sayyidi Gibril Haddad stated, one should know that it is one of the Prophetic characteristics that the wives that survived him are his wives forever as he himself said to Umm Salama when she asked to be under the mantle: “Are you not pleased to be my wife here and in the hereafter?” They cannot remarry nor inherit from him, so the analogy drawn by Sayyidina Zayd is INAPPLICABLE to them except for the ruling of zakat}. We find that the fatwa was based on a mawqoof narration from sayyiddina Zayd in which Hazrat Zayd made an assumption regarding wives of Prophet(saw) but interestingly Shiekh Gibril Haddad rejects the other analogy of Hz Zayd from the same narration except that of Zakat.

2. Importantly the answer of  hz zayd(ra) was his own mawqoof as signified by imam ibn katheer(rah) in his tafseer for verse 33:33. And Zayd(ra) had based this view from a general prospective for women because of his own reasoning and ANALOGY NOT AHADEES, but in the case of wives of Prophet(saw) it is not a general case because Allah said, wives of prophet(saw) are not like other women(33:32),  So the rulings which are meant for wives in general cannot be applied to wives of prophet(saw) as they were special ones. That is why the fatwa which the shia of dajjal himself quoted rejects other assumption of hz Zayd .

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). This authentic narration proves that wives of prophet(Saw) are also forbidden to receive sadaqa:

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.

Here is the info of narrators :

Narrator: Wakiya is a famous imam, Wakiya ibn al-Jarrah who needs no introduction. He was thiqat. See Taqrib 7414
Narrator: Muhammad ibn Sherik, Abu Uthman, he was thiqat(trustworthy). (“Taqrib” #5957).
Narrator: Ibn Abu Muleyka, that’s Abdullah ibn Ubeydullah. Thiqat(trustworthy). (“Taqrib” #3454).

Thus this hadees(narration) is authentic. Which was even said by sheikh Abdul Muhsin bin Hammad Al-’Abbad Al-Badr in his book the status of Ahlebayt in the sight of Ahle Sunnah, page 12 .

Thus we say that even though Zayd(ra) was correct in his understanding of who Ahlebayt in Hadeeth Thaqalayn were, but he wasn’t aware that even wives of Prophet(saw) come under that category.  The wife of prophet(Saw) knew, what was forbidden for her and what was not. And hz ayesha(ra) was known for her vast knowledge in Islamic fiqh she used to be a teacher for some of the companions, here is the proof:

ما أشكل علينا أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حديث قط فسألنا عائشة إلا وجدنا عندها منه علما.
Abu Musa al-Ash’ari said.”Whenever we (the Companions) of Prophet peace be upon him had any difficulty on hadeeth, of which we approached Aisha and (always) found that she had the knowledge of the hadith “. [SunanTirmidhi hadith no: 3883]

Scholars who considered that sadaqa was prohibited even on wives of Prophet(Saw)

مِمَّا ذكره ابن القيِّم في كتابه (( جلاء الأفهام )) (ص:331 – 333) للاحتجاج للقائلِين بدخول أزواجه صلى الله عليه وسلم في آل بيته قوله: (( قال هؤلاء: وإنَّما دخل الأزواجُ في الآل وخصوصاً أزواجُ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم تشبيهاً لذلك بالنَّسَب؛ لأنَّ اتِّصالَهُنَّ بالنَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم غيرُ مرتفع، وهنَّ محرَّماتٌ على غيرِه في حياتِه وبعد مَمَاتِه، وهنَّ زوجاتُه في الدنيا والآخرة، فالسَّببُ الذي لهنَّ بالنَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قائمٌ مقامَ النَّسَب، وقد نصَّ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم على الصلاةِ عليهنَّ، ولهذا كان القولُ الصحيح – وهو منصوص الإمام أحمد رحمه الله ـ أنَّ الصَّدقةَ تحرُمُ عليهنَّ ، لأنَّها أوساخُ الناسِ، وقد صان اللهُ سبحانه ذلك الجَنَابَ الرَّفيع، وآلَه مِن كلِّ أوساخِ بَنِي آدَم

“And as it has been related by Ibn Qayyim in his book “Jalaa al afham” page 331-333 as proof that his (pbuh) wives are part of Ahl al Bayt. “Wives are part of the Ahl, and specifically, the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) are Ahl al Bayt, because they are connected to the Prophet (pbuh) without disconnect, and because they are forbidden to others in marriage in this life and the next, and they are his wives in this life and the next, so the connection here is a fixed relationship, and the Prophet (pbuh) has said that one must send peace and blessings upon them, and that’s the correct position, and it’s related by Imam Ahmed that sadaqa is forbidden for them, because it is the refuse of people, and because God has protected the family of the Prophet (pbuh) from any filth.”


قال الحموي : وفي المغني عن عائشة رضي الله عنها : أنا آل محمد لا تحل لنا الصدقة

al Hamwee said: and in the Mughni from Aisha’ (may God be pleased with her) that she said: “We the family of the Prophet (pbuh) aren’t permitted Sadaqa” this is evidence that it is forbidden for them. [In the margin of Rad al Muhtar of Ibn Abidin, Volume 2, page 384.]


كشاف القناع – البهوتي ج 2 ص 337 :
في المغني والشرح عن ابن أبي مليكة : أن خالد بن سعيد بن العاص أرسل إلى عائشة بسفرة من الصدقة فردتها وقالت : إنا آل محمد لا تحل لنا الصدقة رواه الخلال . فهذا يدل على تحريمها عليهن . ولم يذكر ما يخالفه ، مع أنهم لم يذكروا هذا في الوصية والوقف . وهذا يدل على أنهن من أهل بيته في تحريم الزكاة . وذكر الشيخ تقي الدين : أنه يحرم عليهن الصدقة . وأنهن من أهل بيته في أصح الروايتين ورده المجد .

In the Mughni and explanation by Ibn Aby Malika: that Khalid bin Sa’eed bin Al Aas sent to Aisha some sadaqa but she returned it saying: We the family of the Prophet (pbuh) aren’t permitted sadaqa, narrated by Al Khalaal. And this is evidence that it is forbidden for them. And he didn’t mention what opposes this. Even though they didn’t mention this in Wills and Donations. And this is evidence that they are from his family in being forbidden zakat. And sheikh Taqee al Deen said: Sadaqa is forbidden for them. And they are from his Ahl al Bayt in the more correct of the narrations. Kashshaf al Fattah, Al Bahooti, volume 2, page 337


وقال السخاوي في القول البديع في بيان صيغة الصلاة في التشهّد: فالمرجع أنّهم من حرمت عليهم الصدقة، وذكر أنّه اختيار الجمهور ونصّ الشافعي، وأنّ مذهب أحمد أنّهم أهل البيت، وقيل: المراد أزواجه وذرّيّته… (عن هامش الصواعق المحرقة لعبد الوهاب عبد اللطيف: 146 ط. مصر 1385 هـ ).

Al Sakhawi says in “Al Qawl al badee fee bayaan Seeghat al Salaat fee altashahud”: and the conclusion is that they are those for whom charity is forbidden, and it has been mentioned that this is the opinion of the majority, and this is related from Al Shaf’ee, and in the school of Ahmed bin Hanbal that those are the Ahl al Bayt, and it was said: what is meant are his wives and his descendents.


وقال القسطلاني: ان الراجح أنّهم من حرمت عليهم الصدقة، كما نص عليه الشافعي واختاره الجمهور ويؤيده قوله صلّى الله عليه وسلّم للحسن بن عليّ: إنّا آل محمّد لا تحل لنا الصدقة، وقيل المراد بآل محمّد أزواجه وذرّيّته.

Al Qastalani said: the correct answer is that they are those for whom charity is forbidden, as was recorded by al Shaf’ee and what was selected by the majority and supported by what was said by al Hassan bin Ali: The family of Muhammad, charity is not permitted for us, and it was said that what is meant by the family of Muhammad are hiswives and descendents. [Al Kashf wal Bayaan by Al Thaalabi]

Note: The views we provided are not of any ordinary or contemporary scholars but these are the views of scholars who are Imams of Ahlesunnah.

So this proves that some scholars have erred in their Ijtihad when they gave their judgment basing their views on the narration of zaid ibn arqam who said that Sadaqa is not forbidden on wives of Prophet(Saw), but these were brilliantly refuted by Imam ibn Qayyim(rah) in his book Jila al afhaam, page 331-333). Now taking the view of those scholars who erred and forcing  us to believe in scholars who erred is indeed stupidity of Shiatu dajjal. Its something similar like someone quoting the great shia classical scholars who believed in corruption(tahreef) of Quran(for example see this), and claims that those few shias who reject the view of these scholars are wrong and people should follow these shia scholars who believed that Quran was corrupted. So will it be correct? We know that the shias will spin around wailing, and saying that they are free from the blasphemous beliefs of their classical scholars. So we ask now that why then should Ahlesunnah follow the scholars who erred?

Please keep in mind that the website which issued sunni fatwa which the dajjali is referring to, even affirms that wives of Prophet(Saw) are from the Ahlebayt mentioned in verse of Tatheer(here is the link to that sunni fatwa), So it’s the dajjalis to decide that whether Ahlebayt mentioned in verse of tatheer comes under special Ahlebayt or general Ahlebayt, and do they agree with this fatwa too or are they going to give us a classic example of double standards.


Deception (4)

Shiatu dajjal stated:

[Quote] Umar was a chieftain of Quraysh, especially on account of his historical caliphate. But many times when Quraysh is mentioned in Hadiths, it EXCLUDES them him. Shaykh al-Albani in his Sahih al-Jami’ al-Saghir, Number 4382 records that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said:

قدموا قريشا ولا تقدموها وتعلموا من قريش ولا تعلموها

Put the Quraysh in your front and do not lead them. Also, learn from Quraysh and never (attempt to) teach them.

Al-Albani says: Sahih.

In his Zilal al-Jannah 2/464, Shaykh al-Albani also records this Hadith:

لا تقدموا قريشا فتهلكوا ولا تخلفوا عنها فتضلوا

Never go ahead of Quraysh, otherwise you will perish. And never disagree with them, otherwise you will be misled.

In these Hadiths, what does “Quraysh” mean? Has it been used in the general sense? Is every Qurayshi included in that phrase in the above Hadiths? [Quote]

{then the dajjalis quote some narrations where Umar was corrected on some issues by people}

Dajjali drivel is never-ending and if we continue to lend them our ears, our lives would be wasted yet their shahawat would never be satisfied!

Not leading the Quraysh and not teaching them, not going ahead of them and not disagreeing with them is NOT a command but a basic principle which Muslims should respect, unless there is a need to do so and the one doing this is more knowledgeable on that particular issue. Being from a certain tribe or lineage, even from Quraysh, doesn’t bestow upon anyone any special knowledge or skills.

The important concept the dajjlis forgot is that not every statement of the Prophet (pbuh) is understood as a command. Some are commands and some are suggestions.

For example:

خالفوا اليهود ، صلوا في خفافكم ونعالكم ) رواه أبو داود)

The Prophet (pbuh) said: Be different from the Jews, pray in your shoes and slippers (Abu Dawud)

According to the dajjali logic , it must be understood as an obligation, so that it is haram to pray with anything but shoes or slippers, yet that is not the case. It’s just the damaged brain of donkeys which shiatu dajjal have in their skulls which makes them raise such stupid and ridiculous arguments.

If the stupid logic of dajjalis is supposed to be true then it proves that even Ali is not from Quraysh, and he himself attested this:

Ali[ra] said: Do not evade me as the people of passion are (to be) evaded, do not meet me with flattery and do not think that I shall take it ill if a true thing is said to me, because the person who feels disgusted when truth is said to him or a just matter is placed before him would find it more difficult to act upon them. Therefore, do not abstain from saying a truth or pointing out a matter of justice because I do not regard myself above erring. I do not escape erring in my actions but that Allah helps me in matters in which He is more powerful than I.[Nahjul balagha sermon 215]

Comment: So we see that Ali[ra] addressed all of his supporters and commanded them that they should point out if they find Ali[ra] erring in any matter, because he didn’t consider himself above erring.

Moreover, we know that Ali[ra] too was some times corrected by others for example : sahi bukhari 4.260: Narrated `Ikrima:Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn `Abbas, who said, “Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don’t punish (anybody) with Allah’s Punishment.’ No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’”

Comment: ibn abbas[ra] wanted to stop Ali[ra] from the mistake he committed, so does it mean that he was not from Quraysh or he didn’t hold a high rank among the Quraysh?

And here we see Ali[ra] acquiring a ruling on matter from other person: Sahi bukhari 1.134: Narrated `Ali: I used to get the emotional urethral discharge frequently so I requested Al−Miqdad to ask the Prophet about it. Al−Miqdad asked him and he replied, “One has to perform ablution (after it).”.

This incident is authentically reported even in shia books:

[731] ـ وبإسناده عن الحسين بن سعيد، عن صفوان، عن إسحاق بن عمار، عن أبي عبدالله (عليه السلام)، قال: سألته عن المذي؟ فقال: إن عليا (عليه السلام) كان رجلا مذاء، فاستحيى أن يسأل رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) لمكان فاطمة ( عليها السلام )، فأمر المقداد أن يسأله وهو جالس، فسأله، فقال له النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله): ليس بشيء.

[733] ـ وعن الحسين بن سعيد، عن محمد بن إسماعيل، عن أبي الحسن (عليه السلام)، قال: سألته عن المذي؟ فأمرني بالوضوء منه، ثم أعدت عليه سنة أخرى، فأمرني بالوضوء منه، وقال: إن عليا (عليه السلام) أمر المقداد أن يسأل رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) واستحيى أن يسأله، فقال: فيه الوضوء: قلت: وإن لم أتوضأ، قال: لا بأس.

(Wasael ash shia)

وعن اسحاق بن عمار في الصحيح عن الصادق (عليه السلام) قال: ” سألته عن المذي فقال ان عليا (عليه السلام) كان رجلا مذاء واستحيى ان يسأل رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) لمكان فاطمة (عليها السلام) فامر المقداد ان يسأله وهو جالس فسأله فقال له ليس بشئ “.


Comment: So Ali[ra] was taught this ruling by Miqdad, so does it mean that this excludes Ali from Quraysh? Indeed there is no end to stupidities of Shiatu dajjal. The shiatu dajjal might try to argue back in frustration that it was Prophet(saw) who taught Ali(ra) the ruling because Miqdad(ra) asked the question to Prophet(saw) and delivered the answer to Ali(ra), but those fools fail to realize that the Knowledge Sahaba(ra) had was from the Prophet(saw), So if someone taught umar(ra) then that too will mean he(ra) was was taught by Prophet(Saw), We just applied to the same answer that they might give for Ali(ra).

Also, we find that Imam Zainul abedin[ra] used to narrate ahadees from Abu huraira who was not from Quraysh and used to acquire knowledge from Zaid bin Aslam (servant of Umar.ra]. Zaid was from the Madinan tribe of Adawi and not from Quraysh. Imam Dhahabi records some reports according to which, Imam Zainul Aabideen used to sit in the majlis of Zaid bin Aslam. So once Nafe’ bin Jubayr said to him, ”you are Sayyid and you are sitting in the majlis of a slave.” to which Imam replied, ”knowledge is to be taken, no matter from where it comes”. Siyar (4/388).

We find that Imam Zainul abedin whom shias consider as their 4th Imam, proves the stupid interpretations of Shiatu dajjal wrong.


Misconception (1)

[Quote] According to Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir, vol. 1, p. 617, Umar himself confessed to his extreme ignorance, saying:

كل الناس أفقه من عمر

All the people are more knowledgeable than Umar!

Commenting on the authenticity of the report, Ibn Kathir states:

وسنده جيد

And its chain is good.


What the shia of dajjal quoted is actually a small part from a lengthy story. This is a story from the time of ‘Umar ibn al-Khatab that he had intended to try to limit the excessses concerning the dower that is paid to women upon marriage. The story states that after ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab had made such a plea from the minbar and stated that if anyone pays more as dower than what the Prophet (peace be upon him) used to pay, he would put that excess amount in the Public Treasury. A woman from the Quraish came to him and said, “O commander of the Faithful, does the Book of Allah have more right to be followed or your statement? He said, “The Book of Allah.” So she then told him, “You have just prohibited the people from giving an excessive amount for dower but Allah has stated in His Book,”And if you have given them a geat amount of gold as dower, take not the least bit of it back.'” [4:20] And then ‘Umar said two or three times, “Everybody has a better understanding than ‘Umar.” [Other narrations state, “The Woman is correct and ‘Umar is mistaken.” – Footnote] Then he got back on the minbar and said, “O people, I used to forbid you from being excessive with respect to the dower of women. Verily a man may do whatever he sees fit with his wealth.”

This story was narrated by both al-Baihaqi in Sunan al-Kubra and Abdul Razzaq in al-Mussanaf. The chains of both al-Baihaqi and of Abdul Razzaq are weak. Al-Baihaqi, in fact, points out that the chain he records is broken. [Abu Bakr al-Baihaqi, Sunan al Kubra, Beirut, Dar al-Fikr, nd., vol 7, p 233] Indeed, al-Baihaqi seems to prefer another narration from Umar that he recorded just prior to the above narration. In that narration, it states that Umar said that he had intended to put a limit on women’s dowers until he read the verse, “A great amount of gold as dower.” Commenting on this narration, al-Baihaqi said, “It is a good mursal chain.” [Footnote: Mursal means the link between Umar and the one who narrated from him is broken.]

Al-Albani points out that not only are the chains of al-Baihaqi and Abdul Razzaq weak because they are broken, they also contain weak narrators that further weakens their chains. Hence, he concludes that this narration from Umar ibn al-Khattab is definitely weak. [Footnote: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, Irwa al-Ghalil fi Takhrij Ahadit Manar al-Sabeel Beirut, al-Maktab al-Islami, 1979, vol 6, p 347.]


Misconception (2)

Shiatu dajjal stated:

[Quote] Shaykh Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Hajar al-Haytami, the supreme Shafi’i jurist and Hadithist during his time, states in his al-Sawa-‘iq al-Muhriqah, Volume 2, page 428 (Lebanon: Muasassat ar-Risalah, first edition, 1417 H, edited by ‘Abdul-Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah al-Turki and Kamil Muhammad al-Khurat):

وفي رواية صحيحة : إني تارك فيكم أمرين لن تضلوا إن اتبعتموهما ، وهما كتاب الله وأهل بيتي عترتي

And in the Sahih report (the Prophet is reported to have said): I will always leave among you Two Commands. You will never go astray if you follow them both. Both are the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt, my ‘itra. [Quote]

Ibn Hajaral-Heythami wasn’t muhadith[hadeeth scholar], and reader of his book Sawaiq could clearly see that he DIDN’T distinguish a lot between saheeh[authentic] and mawdo[fabricated] reports.

Hadith with mentioned wording[i.e TWO COMMANDS]  is found in Hakeem. Mustadrak 4577, Dhahabi pointed that sheikhan didn’t narrated from Muhammad ibn Salamah ibn Kuhail, and that Saade weakened him extremely. Which shows the weakness of this report.


Misconception (3)

shiatu dajjal stated:

[Quote] Shaykh al-Kulayni (رحمه الله تعالى), our greatest Hadithist, records in his Kitab al-Kafi. Volume 1, page 292, Number 3 that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said:

َ إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ أَمْرَيْنِ إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِمَا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كِتَابَ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ وَ أَهْلَ بَيْتِي تِي عِتْرَتِي

I will always leave among you Two Commands. If you hold fast to them both, you will never go astray: the Book of Allah the Glorious and my Ahl al-Bayt, my ‘itra [Quote]

Though this is narration present in Shia book, yet this is Masterpiece of ignorance of shiatu dajjal. It’s a part of bigger hadith. Shia hadeeth scholar Bahbudi in his notes on al-Kafi said regarding this narration that it’s WEAK. Shia hadeeth Scholar Majlisi said in the Miratul uqul 3/270 WEAK ala mashhur.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s