Sunni Answers to Shiapen: The Shi’a rejection of the Sahah Sittah

Sunni Answers to Shiapen: The Shi’a rejection of the Sahah Sittah

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

This is our refutation of infamous Shiawebsite “” which was formerly known as The following is a response to ShiaPen’s article entitled: “The Shi’a rejection of the Sahah Sittah”.

In this article we will notice, that the reason for Shiapen’s rejection of “Sihah Sittah” was neither academic nor scientific, they selected some authentic traditions from Sunni books, which they weren’t to comprehend due to their Ghulu based corrupt beliefs, incompetence and ignorance, hence they rejected whole Sihah Sittah.

However, Ahl us-sunnah reject the traditions present in Shia books, due to several academic and scientific reasons, some of which were listed in the article. [Why Islamic teachings should NEVER be taken from Shia Sources?]


First Argument

Shiapen stated:


…for the purposes of Hadith literature the litmus test for authenticity should be whether traditions have been disseminated on the authority of the Ahl’ul bayt Imams.

[End Quote]


Shiapen uses hadeeth Thaqalayn and concludes from it that the litmus test for authenticity of hadeeth literature is to check whether those reports were disseminated or spread by Imams from Ahlulbayt. This un-academic and impractical claim of Shiapen is based on their ignorance and misinformation. We suggest the readers to refer our article which shatters the un-academic claim of the Shiapen in regards to accepting ahadeeth only from Ahlulbayt. [Smashing the myth of taking Ahlul-bayt as the only conveyors of Islamic knowledge].

As for the misapplication of Hadeeth Thaqalayn by Shiapen, then in the light of correct version of this hadeeth the right understanding is to follow Quran and to take care of Ahlelbayt. If Allah wills, we will dedicate an article dealing which this subject altogether and clarifying all the doubts and confusions surrounding it. However as for now, the deduction made by Shiapen from Hadeeth Thaqalayn is invalid and incorrect because, if one of the jobs of Imams is to disseminate the ahadeeth of Prophet(saw) to people of their time, then that means their current twelfth Imam isn’t doing his job. Since it’s his job to disseminate the hadeeth of Prophet(saw) to the people of his time, whereas the Shia barely have any authentic hadeeth from their twelfth Imam who they claim to be under Ghaybah(occultation).

If Shiapen, after realizing the fallacy of their un-academic and impractical claim argues back that, they can even take reports from past Imams, who aren’t their current Imams without having the current twelfth Imam disseminate those ahadeeth, then we say that it is irrational and unfair to even reject the traditions of Prophet(saw) which were disseminated by his companions even though not disseminated by Imams from Ahlulbayt, because Prophet(saw) was the original source of Islamic knowledge. And his companions were those who directly received that knowledge, and they were even highly praised in Quran by Allah(swt), by Prophet Muhammad(saw) himself, as well as by the Imams from Ahlulbayt as we find in reliable Shia traditions[Refer Al-Kafi and Al-Khisal].

If Shiapen argues that the companions of Prophet Muhammad(Saw) were fallible and could make mistakes, then we say that the ahadeeth from Imams of Ahlulbayt too are prone to such errors and mistakes, since ahadeeth of Imams too were transmitted by their fallible companions who weren’t even praised in Quran like companions of Prophet Muhammad(saw). Thus we will end up repeating the initial point that, their present twelfth Imam should disseminate the traditions inorder to make Shiapen certain, that those traditions were truly narrated by Prophet(saw) and the past Imams. Therefore, the readers can see how irrational and impractical it turns out to be, if we follow the un-academic claim of Shiapen.

Another major problem with the Shia belief and their claim of taking traditions only from Imams of Ahlulbayt is that, Shia believe that all of their Imams except their twelfth Imam, spend their life under the state of Taqiyyah(dissimulation), and hence, it is one of the reason for the large number of contradictory traditions present in Shia literature. Therefore, if this was the case then this adds more problems to Shiapen’s claim, because there is no academic or standard rule to distinguish the narrations spoken under taqiyyah and without taqiyyah by Imams from Ahlulbayt, which leads to the reasonable conclusion that, one needs to refer back to the traditions of Prophet(saw) which were spread by his companions.

The Quran and Sunnah of Prophet(saw) is the litmus test to verify the authenticity of the sayings of Imams from Ahlelbayt:

Contrary to the un-academic and impractical claim made by Shiapen, we find in Shia traditions that, Imams from Ahlulbayt taught that, the litmus test for their saying was Quran and Sunnah of Prophet(saw), and this is the same, which is said by the people of Sunnah[Ahl us-sunnah].

We read in Shia hadeeth:
عِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ خَالِدٍ عَنْ إِسْمَاعِيلَ بْنِ مِهْرَانَ عَنْ سَيْفِ بْنِ عَمِيرَةَ عَنْ أَبِي الْمَغْرَاءِ عَنْ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ أَبِي الْحَسَنِ مُوسَى ع قَالَ قُلْتُ لَهُ أَ كُلُّ شَيْ‏ءٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَ سُنَّةِ نَبِيِّهِ ص أَوْ تَقُولُونَ فِيهِ قَالَ بَلْ كُلُّ شَيْ‏ءٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَ سُنَّةِ نَبِيِّهِ ص
From Samaa`ah from Abee Al-Hasan Moosa(as) said, I said to him(as): “Is everything in the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of his Prophet(saw), or do you have a say in it?He(as) said: “Rather, everything is in the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of his Prophet(saw)” [Source: Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg. 62, hadeeth # 10. Grading: Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Muwaththaq (Reliable) à Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 1, pg. 209.]

Similarly we read in Shia hadeeth:
عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله (عليه السلام) يقول

كل شئ مردود إلى الكتاب والسنة، وكل حديث لا يوافق كتاب الله فهو زخرف

From a group among our companions, from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid, from his father, from al Nudhr b. Suwaid, from Yahya al Halbi, from Ayyub b. Al Hur said: I heard Aba Abdullah(as) saying “Everything must be referred to the book and the sunnah, and all hadith not in accordance with book of Allah(swt) is a (fake) gold ornament. [Source: Al-Kafi vol 1, page 69, hadith number 3. Grading: Majlisi (Miratul uqul, vol 1, page 229) said: Sahih and Bahboodi (Vol 1, page 11) said: Sahih]

We read in Shia hadeeth:

عن هشام بن الحكم أنه سمع أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول : لا تقبلوا علينا حديثا إلا  ما وافق القرآن والسنة
It has been narrated from Hisham bin Al-Hakam that he heard Imam Jafar(as) say : “Don’t accept from us (i.e a hadith attributed to us) except which is according to Quran and Sunnah. [Tanqih al maqal , Vol. 1 , p. 174]

We read in Shia hadeeth:

عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله (عليه السلام) يقول: كل شئ مردود إلى الكتاب والسنة

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from his father from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya al-Halab from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said the following. “Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said, ‘Everything must be referred to the holy Quran and the Sunnah, the noble traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.)” [Al Kafi H 199, Ch. 22, h 3]

We read in the Shia book al-Bayan fi Tafseer al-Qur’an by esteemed Shia Ayatullah al-Khoei:

وقد دلت الاخبار المتواترة على وجوب عرض الروايات على الكتاب والسنة وأن ما خالف الكتاب منها يجب طرحه ، وضربه على الجدار
The Mutawatir narrations show the necessity of presenting the narration (of the Imams) on the Book (of Allah) and the Sunnah, and that whatever disagrees with the Qur’an must be discarded and slammed against the door.( al-Bayan fi Tafseer al-Qur’an, pg 230)

Also we read in the book of esteemed Shia scholar, Muhyee al-Deen al-Musawi al-Ghurayfi “Qawa’ed al-Hadith” on page 135, in the footnotes the Shia Muhaqiq(Researcher) of this book writes:

ما اضطر الأئمة من أهل البيت (ع) الى استعمال التقية فقد ابتلوا بجماعة من الزندقة الكذابين الذين بذلوا أقصى جهودهم في وضع الأحاديث ، ونسبتها اليهم (ع). فقد روى الكشي بسنده عن محمد بن عيسى أنه قال : إن بعض أصحابنا سأل يونس بن عبد الرحمان « وأنا حاضر فقال له : يا أبا محمد ما أشدك في الحديث ، وأكثر إنكارك لما يرويه أصحابنا فما الذي يحملك على رد الأحاديث؟ فقال : حدثني هشام بن الحكم أنه سمع أبا عبد اللّه  يقول : لا تقبلوا علينا حديثاً إلا ما وافق القرآن والسنة ، أو تجدون معه شاهداً من أحاديثنا المتقدمة ، فان المغيرة بن سعيد ـ لعنه اللّه ـ قد دس في كتب أصحاب أبي أحاديث لم يحدث بها أبي. فاتقوا اللّه ، ولا تقبلوا علينا ما خالف قول ربنا تعالى ، وسنّة نبينا (ص)

As the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (as) were forced to use Taqqiyah they also had a group of Zanadiqah(herectics) and liars who tried their best to fabricate narrations and attribute them to the Imams (as). al-Kashshi narrated with its Isnad to Muhammad bin ‘Isa that he said: some of our companions asked Yunus bin ‘Abdul-Rahman while I was present so he said to him: O Abu Muhammad you are very strict in Hadith and you reject a lot of what our companions narrate, why is this? He said: Hisham bin al-Hakam told me that he heard Abu ‘Abdullah say: DO NOT ACCEPT FROM US A HADITH EXCEPT THAT WHICH AGREES WITH THE QURAN AND THE SUNNAH, or that you find evidence from our early narrations, because Al-Mugheerah bin Sa’eed(la) has inserted into the books of the companions of my father that which he, did not narrate, so fear Allah and do not accept from us that which contradicts with our lord and with the Sunnah of the Prophet(saws).


Second Argument

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]We ask those with open minds, is Sahih Bukhari replete with Hadith whose origins can be traced back through the Ahl’ul bayt Imams (as)? Certainly not, on the contrary we have learned Sunni testimony that Bukhari consciously sought to avoid taking Hadith from the Ahl’ul bayt Imams (as). [End Quote]


As explained above, the main source of Islamic knowledge is Prophet Muhammad(saw) and he delivered this teachings to his companions, he didn’t keep anything secret, and in many occasions companions of Prophet(saw) were the cause of ruling being sent down by Allah(swt), so they understood it better than those who came later. Therefore, the best source for Islamic knowledge is a hadeeth which comes through a connected chain of trustworthy narrators, which was narrated by a Sahabi from Prophet Muhammad(saw). And Sahih Bukhari is filled with authentic reports which reach till Prophet Muhammad(saw). Infact, Al-Bukhari has referred to his book as “Al-Jami’ Al-Saheeh Al-Musanad min hadeethi Rasoolillah“.

As for taking hadeeth from Imams of Ahlulbayt, then we find that Bukhari took narrations from Ali bin Abi Talib(ra), Hassan bin Ali(ra), Hussain bin Ali(ra), Ali bin Hussain(ra) and Muhammad bin Ali ibn Hussain(ra), and these are some of the Imams from Ahlulbayt, this invalidates the argument of Shiapen.

As for the specific argument of Shiapen that, why didn’t Imam Bukhari take narrations from Jafar as-sadiq(ra), then the readers should also know that Bukhari didn’t even narrate from one of the the highly trusthworthy narrator Hammad bin Salama(ra). One of the reason, why Jafar Sadiq(ra) was kept out of the Saheeh was because Al-Bukhari could reach hadiths through a shorter chain.

An additional piece of information for the readers is that, in the other Sahih of Ahl us-sunnah, which is Sahih Muslim. Jafar as-Sadiq(ra) has more narrations than Abu Bakr as-Siddiq(ra).

The question which exposes the true face of Shiapen:

The most important question which exposes the real face of Shiapen and all those propagandists who say that they don’t rely on Sunni Books due to lack of ahadeeth narrated by Imams from Ahlulbayt, then we ask those people that; Are they willing to accept those ahadeeth in Sunni Books, which were authentically narrated by Imams from Ahlulbayt? If no, then why don’t they reveal the actual reason, why do they keep it hidden and distract people with lame excuses?

We recommend our readers to view this detailed article on this subject: [Narrations from Ahl-Al Bayt present in the main books of Ahlesunnah].


Third Argument

Shiapen stated:


The eighth Imam Ali Raza (as) (d. 208 H), this was that Imam that at one time in Nisahbur had more than twenty thousand scholars who benefited from listening to and sought permission to narrate Hadith, attendees included high ranking Muhadatheen such as Hafiz Abu Zurai Razi (d.264 H), Hafiz Muhammad Aslam Tusi (d.242 H) Ishaq bin Rahwiyah (d.264 H) etc.
The ninth Imam, Imam Taqi (as) (d. 220 H)
The tenth Imam, Imam Naqi (as) (d.245 H)
The eleventh Imam, Imam Hasan Askari (as) (d.260 H)

Imam Bukhari lived during the times of these four Imams yet did not take narrations from them.

[End Quote]


In addition the response to previous argument that, some later Imams from Ahlulbayt were kept out of the Saheeh Bukhari, because Imam Al-Bukhari could reach hadiths through a shorter chain. The other reasons are that most of the Imams from Ahlulbayt did not narrate large number of marfoo’ hadith. If they had done so, then we would have found their narrations in any of the book of hadith, either in the Musnads or be it in the books which collect fabricated and weak narrations.

Moreover, not all of the Imams were on the level of Huffaz. Some of them were not known for narrating traditions. That doesn’t mean they were weak. But their Hifz was not scrutinized due to lack of their narrations. They were considered saleh, saduq, righteous but not Huffaz. So, it is totally illogical if one assumes that the Sunni scholars intentionally avoided them while at the same time considering them Thiqah(trustworthy). Instead of assuming that Muhadditheen did not narrate from the Imams, what should be said is that, the Imams did not narrate to Muhadditheen. Because even the worse narrators like Waqidi etc, have their marfu narrations recorded down, just because he used to narrate.

Hence, when we don’t find large number of their narrations in books then that means most of Imams from Ahlulbayt did not narrate large number of marfoo’ hadeeth. If Sunni scholars wanted to avoid these Imams from Ahlulbayt then they would have simply called them weak or muztarib etc, and it wouldn’t have been a big deal to them. All this factors shows the sincerity of scholars.

The reality is that even the Shias don’t have much of the sayings of the Prophet(saw). Rather there is no individual reality of the Prophet as a Shari’ in shia hadith. Those few narrations which are narrated from the Prophet (saw) in Shia books are disconnected between Imam and the Prophet (saw). So not only Sunni scholars but even Shia scholars couldn’t find enough Musnad narrations of the Prophet (saw) through latter Imams. Hence Shias have disconnected reports. After all these, coming back to the real issue which is that Shia Imam did not narrate large number of hadith, and this being the case with Shia books too. Some Shias claim that, there are near 11000 authentic hadith in shia books. We ask them that, how many of these are sayings or actions of the Prophet(saw). And then how many of these are connected till the prophet (saw) without having a generation gap? Obviously Shias won’t be able to present any significant amount of hadeeth that could stand these conditions, which proves that shia Imams, according to shia hadith books, do not narrate large number of Musnad narrations.

If one questions that why would they not narrate large number of hadith then the answer is that, many of the scholars did not narrate good amount of ahadith, either because they were more involved in worship and abstinence or because their interest was in Fatawa and Fiqh or because they were involved in Siyasah or because they were too much fearing that a mistake might not be attributed to the Prophet (saw) and so on.

In order to make the Shiapen understand this in a proper way, we would like to bring up the example of one of the most important Shia narrator Ibrahim bin Hashim, he is extremely important because we do not know of any reliable wasiyyah by Al-Jawad to Al-Hadi other than through the route of Ibrahim bin Hashim. In other words, due to him, Twelvers are Twelvers and not Niners. This Ibrahim ibn Hashim was the contemporary of Imam Jawad(ra) the ninth Shia Imam. Ibrahim bin Hashim was a student of hadith. He narrated a few thousand hadiths from a different narrator Ibn Abi Umair. Ibrahim bin Hashim lived far away from Muhammed bin Abi Umair, but that never stopped him from narrating thousands of hadiths from him. However, this important Shia narrator only narrated two narrations from Imam Jawad(ra) even though being his contemporary. So the question to Shia is that why didn’t Ibrahim bin Hashim narrate directly from the ninth Shia Imam Jawad(ra) ? Even though Ibrahim ibn Hashim claimed that he heard from Imam Jawad(ra) thirty thousand hadeeth(30,000).

We read in an authentic report in Al-Kafi:
أستأذن على أبي جعفر عليه السلام قوم من أهل النواحي من الشيعة، فأذن لهم فدخلوا فسألوه في مجلس واحد عن ثلاثين ألف مسألة فأجاب عليه السلام وله عشر سنين.
Ali bin Ibrahim from his father(Ibrahim ibn Hashim): A group of Shias requested to enter upon Abu Jafa’ar (as). So he let them in, and they asked him in one sitting about thirty thousand issues, and he replied to them, and he was ten years old.(Usool Al-Kafi, 1/317).

So, before criticizing Bukhari, Shiapen should figure out that why didn’t Ibrahim ibn Hisham narrated ahadeeth from Imam Jawad(ra)?

The next question Shia should ponder over is that, why didn’t Muhammad bin Yaqoob al-Kulayni the author of the important Shia book Al-Kafi, take all the hadeeth from the companions of those Imams who were closer to his era; Such as the companions of tenth and Eleventh Imam ? Because these were the shortest chains for him, so why didn’t he prefer narrating from the companions of Tenth and Eleventh Imam who were his contemporaries? When the Shiapen starts figuring out the answer for these questions, then it will realize that the objection on Imam Bukhari is invalid.


Fourth Argument

Shiapen stated:


The same approach of avoidance was adopted by the other Saha Sittah authors. Their enemies fared much better with the Saha Sittah authors taking Hadith from Nasibis and Khwaarij as we have evidenced in our article Sunni myth of love and adherence to the Ahlulbayt [as].

[End Quote]


This un-academic article based on ignorance of the writers from Shiapen has been refuted by the help of Allah(swt). Here is the refutation the Shiapen’s article: [Part 2: The Imams from Ahlebayt whom Shia consider to be their divinely appointed Imams were on the Creed of Ahlesunnah wal Jama’ah].


Fifth Argument

Shiapen stated:


Sahih Bukhari does contain unacceptable, repulsive traditions

As Islamzine took offence to the comments of Abdullah as-Subayti let us by way of example look at some of these hadith, whereby those with open minds will be in a far better position to conclude whether these are true words / deeds or folk tales, we present seven hadith for our readers perusal:

Tradition One: Prophet Moses [as] ran naked (naudobillah)

We read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 616:

Hammam b. Munabbih reported that Abu Huraira reported many ahadith from Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and one, of them speaks that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) is reported to have said: Banu Isra’il used to take bath (together) naked and thus saw private parts of one another, but Moses (peace be upon him) used to take bath alone (in privacy), and they said: By Allah, nothing prevents Moses to take bath along with us; but scrotal hernia. One day when he (Moses) was taking bath (alone) he placed his clothes upon a stone, but the stone began to move along with his clothes. Moses raced after it saying: My garment, stone; until (some of the people) of Banu Isra’il looked at the private parts of Moses, and they said: By Allah, there is no trouble with Moses. The stone stopped after he (Moses) had been seen. He took hold of his garments and struck the stone. Abu Huraira said: I swear by Allah that there were six or seven scars on the stone because of the striking of stone by Moses (peace be upon him).

ype of rubbish? The dash of the stone with the clothes of Moses and the sprint of Moses (nude) after it is such a fabricated story that no rational mind is ready to accept it. This hadith can only best be described as a fable, narrated by Abu Hurayra it cannot be a hadith of The Holy Prophet (s).

[End Quote]


The ignorant writers of Shiapen aren’t aware that the tradition which they are declaring as fabricated based on their emotions, bias and other un-academic reasons was even narrated authentically in Shia books from Imam Jafar as-sadiq(ra)

We read in Shia book:

It has been through Hasan(good) chain from Imam Sadiq that (the Bani Israel thought) that Moses doesn’t have manhood. And when Moses wants to do ghusl(bath), he goes to such a place where no one can see him. One day when he was taking a bath at the bank of a river, and he placed his clothes. God ordered the stone to get away from Moses. Moses ran after it. Till the bani israel saw at Moses and they understood that what they thought was wrong. And this is the meaning of this verse i.e ‘O ye who believe! Be ye not like those who vexed and insulted Moses, but God cleared him of the (calumnies) they had uttered: and he was honourable in God’s sight.’ [Hayat ul Quloob, Vol. 1, p. 240]

Similarly this story was narrated by Imam Jafar(ra) in classical shia Tafseer al-Qummi:
في تفسير على بن إبراهيم حدثني أبى عن النضر بن سويد عن صفوان عن أبى بصير عن أبى عبد الله عليه السلام ان بنى إسرائيل كانوا يقولون ليس لموسى ما للرجال، و كان موسى إذا أراد الاغتسال ذهب الى موضع لا يراه فيه أحد، فكان يوما يغتسل على شط نهر و قد وضع ثيابه على صخرة، فأمر الله عز و جل الصخرة فتباعدت عنه حتى نظر بنوا إسرائيل اليه فعلموا ان ليس كما قالوا، فأنزل الله: يا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لا تَكُونُوا كَالَّذِينَ آذَوْا مُوسى‏
From Abī Baṣīr from Abī `Abd Allāh (as) that the Banī Isrā`īl used to say Mūsa that he was not like (other) men. Mūsa (as) wanted to wash himself, and he went to a place where no one from the people can see him. And it was day, and he was washing himself on the shore of a river and he placed his clothes on a rock. And Allāh commanded the rocket to run away from him until the Banū Isrā`īl saw him, and they knew he is not like what they said, and Allāh revealed, “O those who believe, be not like those who annoyed/harmed Mūsa” (33:69) [al-Qummi, Tafseer, (Qum: Daar al-Kitaab, 3rd ed., 1404), vol. 2, pg. 197].

The problem with Shiapen is that, they are judging an incident based on the views of the civilization they are living in and the morals they follow; due to this they find that incident odd and immodest. However, this would not be the case for the society in which Musa(as) was living in, because this was seen as something normal at that time. To give the readers a better understanding let us give an example of marriage with young girls. Marriage of young girl who is ten years old(who reached puberty) and a man who is in his forties or fifties, it might appear odd for the people of this civilization; however this type of marriage was seen as normal by the people of past civilizations.

From the hadeeth quoted by Shiapen, we find that it was a social norm to bath naked. However, Musa(as) was a Shy man and He used to cover his body completely. Due to this reason he also used to take a bath all alone. What Shiapen quoted is a hadeeth from Sahih Muslim[Book 30, Hadith 5849] not Sahih Bukhari. Here is the version of this hadith in Sahih Bukhari which was reported by Abu Hurairah(ra) that states: “Allah’s Apostle said, “(The Prophet) Moses was a shy person and used to cover his body completely because of his extensive shyness. One of the children of Israel hurt him by saying, ‘He covers his body in this way only because of some defect in his skin, either leprosy or scrotal hernia, or he has some other defect.’ Allah wished to clear Moses of what they said about him, so one day while Moses was in seclusion, he took off his clothes and put them on a stone and started taking a bath. When he had finished the bath, he moved towards his clothes so as to take them, but the stone took his clothes and fled; Moses picked up his stick and ran after the stone saying, ‘O stone! Give me my garment!’ Till he reached a group of Bani Israel who saw him naked then, and found him the best of what Allah had created, and Allah cleared him of what they had accused him of. The stone stopped there and Moses took and put his garment on and started hitting the stone with his stick. By Allah, the stone still has some traces of the hitting, three, four or five marks. This was what Allah refers to in His Saying:– “O you who believe! Be you not like those Who annoyed Moses, But Allah proved his innocence of that which they alleged, And he was honorable In Allah’s Sight.” (33.69). [Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 55, Hadith 616]

Indeed Musa(as) did not intend to show his Awrah (private parts) to his people as he went to a remote place away from any sight. But the stone ran away with his clothes. So, he ran behind it in order to get his clothes and he did not know that he would encounter anybody in the area. Surprisingly a group of his people happened to be in that very area. So, they saw him. Allah wanted to acquit Prophet Musa(as) from his people’s accusations. So, Musa’s innocence was proved through this great miracle. There is nothing in the Hadith nor the verse that decreases the honor of Musa(as). On the contrary, this verse and Hadith express clearly and eloquently, the frankness of Musa(as), and his high qualities both morally and physically. The verse and the Hadith also stress the prohibition of accusing Prophet Musa(as) or any other Prophets of things that are not suitable to him or them.

On the other hand, the Sharia does not deny that Prophets are normal people who could be seen nude. What the Sharia denies is the fact that any Prophet could willingly take his clothes in front of people to show them his naked body. This is impossible.

Anyways, this incident is authentically reported even by infallible Shia Imam in Shia books, therefore it is the corrupt beliefs mixed with Ghulu, ignorance and bias of Shiapen which led them to declare this incident as fabrication of Abu Huraira(ra).

We read in Quran:

Adam and his wife ate (fruits) from the tree and found themselves naked. Then they started to cover themselves with the leaves from the garden. Adam disobeyed his Lord and went astray. (Quran 20:121/ Shia Translator Muhammad Sarwar )

It is most likely, had it been that the above verse of Quran, was instead a narration of Abu Huraira(ra) in Sunni books, then without a shadow of doubt Shiapen would have rejected it and called it a fabrication, they would have argued that it dishonors Adam(as) and degrades his status, this is because Shiapen doesn’t follow any academic or standard rule in acceptance and rejection of traditions, what they follow is their desire and if they can’t comprehend an incident they reject it, so the problem is not with the incident but with their competance.

Any Shia who is rejecting the authentic incident, then we suggest that Shia to ponder that, had it been that the above verse was a hadeeth from Sahih Bukhari and not a verse of Quran, then would they accept it? Contemplate over this fact! If they reach the conclusion that you wouldn’t have accepted then know that, the problem is in their mentality.


Sixth Argument

Shiapen then states:


Tradition Two – the Holy Prophet [s] exposed himself in public (naudobillah)

We read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 360:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
While Allah’s Apostle was carrying stones (along) with the people of Mecca for (the building of) the Ka’ba wearing an Izar (waist-sheet cover), his uncle Al-’Abbas said to him, “O my nephew! (It would be better) if you take off your Izar and put it over your shoulders underneath the stones.” So he took off his Izar and put it over his shoulders, but he fell unconscious and since then he had never been seen naked.

We are sure that any rational mind would agree that for anyone to remove his trousers in broad day light in public is a deplorable act of indignity. No matter how exhausted a person maybe he would never commit such an appalling act, let alone the beloved Prophet Mohammed (s). This is an absolute lie fabricated by the Nasibi Banu Ummayya to degrade Banu-Hashim.

This is hence another tale!

[End Quote]


There are several examples of how Allah protected the Prophet(saw) from wrong deeds during the Pre-Islamic period, that is before his Prophet-hood. One such example was reported by Ali ibn Abi Talib(ra) who said that he heard the Messenger of Allah(saw) say: I never resolved to do any of bad things that the people of ignorance would resolve to do, except on two occasions in life; and on both occasions, Allah protected me from perpetrating those bad things. One night, I was north of Makkah in the company of a young man from the Quraish; we were with his family’s sheep, which he was herding, when I said to him, Watch over my sheep, so that I can while away this evening with conversation and entertainment in Makka, just as other youth while away their evenings with conversation and entertainment. He said, Yes and so I set out(for Makkah). When I reached the nearest house from the houses of Makkah, I heard singing, the striking of Dufoof(drum-like instruments), and (the sound of ) pipes. I asked, What is this? They(people nearby perhaps) said: Such and such man married such and such woman. It was a man from the Quraish who had married a woman from the Quraish. And so I amused myself with that singing and with those sounds until sleep overcame me(right there where I was), and then the only thing that woke me up was the heat of the sun, and so I returned. He(i.e the other shepherd) asked, what did you do? I informed him(about what had happened). Then I made a similar request to him on another night, and he agreed. I set out(towards Makkah), and I heard sounds that were similar(to the sounds of the earlier night), and words similar(to the sounds of the earlier night), and words similar to what was spoken to me(on the earlier night) were spoken to me(again). I amused myself with what I heard, until sleep overcame my eyes. And it was only the touching of the sun that awoke me. Then I returned to my companion, who said: What did you do? I said: I didn’t do anything. By Allah, after that I never again resolved to perpetrate the evil that the people of ignorance would perpetrate. I continued upon that(protected state) until Allah(swt) honoured me by making me His Prophet.[Saheeh As-Seerah An-Nabawiyyah by Ibrahim Al-Ali, page 57)

Another of such incident occurred during the rebuilding of Ka’bah when Muhammad(saw) was carrying stones. We read in Sahih al-Bukhari:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah: When the Ka’ba was rebuilt, the Prophet and ‘Abbas went to carry stones. ‘Abbas said to the Prophet “(Take off and) put your waist sheet over your neck so that the stones may not hurt you.” (But as soon as he took off his waist sheet) he fell unconscious on the ground with both his eyes towards the sky. When he came to his senses, he said, “My waist sheet! My waist sheet!” Then he tied his waist sheet (round his waist). [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 170]

This incident occurred during Pre-Islamic period, when Muhammad(saw) was not granted prophet-hood, he was NOT a Prophet that time. In Arab civilization of Pre-Islamic era, it wasn’t seen as something immodest to walk around naked at times(e.g. People used to perform Tawaaf naked, refer Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 365), so Abbas(ra) suggested to Muhammad(saw) to take off his Izar(waist sheet) and to put it over his shoulders to prevent him being hurt by the stones he was carrying. When Muhammad(saw) did so, he fell unconscious. This is how he was protected by Allah(swt). So this incident occurred before Islam and Prophethood being granted to Muhammad(saw).

The Fatwa Center at Islamweb Answered regarding this stating:

This story, which occurred during the construction of the Ka’bah, took place during the pre-Islamic period of ignorance and before the advent of Islam, and it was reported by Al-Bukhaari and Muslim. What can be deduced from this story is that this is evidence that Prophet Muhammad(saw) was a true Prophet, and that Allaah The Almighty wanted to protect him from vile matters even before He sent him as a Prophet.

In some other narrations, it is reported that he heard a voice from the sky ordering him to put on his Izaar (lower covering). Al-‘Abbaas(ra) asked him (the Prophet), “What is wrong?” Then, the Prophet(saw) said: “I was forbidden from doing so.” Al-‘Abbaas(saw) said, “I concealed this matter until Allaah showed his prophecy [sent him as a Prophet].” [Source]

Therefore we find that, this incident occurred when Muhammad(saw) was NOT A Prophet, and in the Arab civilization of that time, such thing was not seen as immodest, though as per Islamic morals that came later it would appear as despicable, but it is unfair to judge an incident that occurred in Pre-Islamic civilization on basis of Islamic morals. It is like judging the marriages that took place during the era of Prophet Adam(as) between his children, as they were siblings of each other, in accordance to the Islamic morals, as we would end up considering it inappropriate, however it wasn’t something immoral during that time period. Had it been that this incident occurred with Muhammad(saw) after him being granted Prophethood or after he conveyed the Islamic morals, then that would be considered as wrong and unacceptable.

Therefore, this incident should be seen as an unintentional mistake done by Muhammad(saw) before his Prophethood, from which he was protected Allah(swt). An example can be taken from the unintentional mistake of Musa(as) who mistakenly killed a Man before his Prophethood. We read in Quran:

{And he entered the city at a time of inattention by its people and found therein two men fighting: one from his faction and one from among his enemy. And the one from his faction called for help to him against the one from his enemy, so Moses struck him and [unintentionally] killed him. [Moses] said, “This is from the work of Satan. Indeed, he is a manifest, misleading enemy.”(Quran 28:15).}

We read in Shia commentary over this verse that:

Before his prophethood, Moses (a.s.) had some companions and followers, too. Though he was grown up in the castle of Pharaoh, the oppressed people had mostly accepted him as their supporter and leader because of his thought and manner.

The verse says:“… so Moses struck him with his fist and killed him. …” No doubt Moses did not want to kill the Coptic man, and this meaning is also understood from the later verses, not for the sake that they were not deserving to be killed, but for the sequels that this action might have for Moses and the Children of Israel. (Source: “The light of the Holy Quran” by Ayatullah Sayyid Kamal Faghih Imani and A Group of  Scholars, commentary for 28:15)

However, the problem with the writers from Shiapen is that they are Ghulat Shia, who have a myth that all the Prophets are born as Prophets, thus they consider it unacceptable that a Prophet could commit an error at any point of his life. But if this was to be true, then Prophets would have taken birth wearing clothes, which didn’t happen. And this misconception of Shiapen was refuted by one of their biggest classical Shia scholar.

Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Mufeed said:
إن جميع أنبياء الله – صلوات الله عليهم – معصومون من الكبائر قبل النبوة وبعدها وما يستخف فاعله من الصغائر كلها، وأما ما كان من صغير لا يستخف فاعله فجائز وقوعه منهم قبل النبوة وعلى غير تعمد وممتنع منهم بعدها على كل حال، وهذا مذهب جمهور الإمامية، والمعتزلة بأسرها تخالف فيه.
“All of Allaah’s Prophets are protected against major sins before and after prophethood; and from minor sins that make their doer considered astray. As to the minor sins whose doer is not considered astray, it is possible that they are done by the Prophets before prophethood, as non-deliberate acts, but they do not occur after prophethood in any situation. And this is the madhhab of the majority of Imaamiyah(Shia). And the mu`tazilah people oppose (us) in this.”(Awail al maqalat, page 62).

The words of Shia Sheikh Al-Mufeed clearly proves that, he believed that not all Prophets born Prophets, rather he declared that majority of Imamiyah(Shia) believe that a Prophet could commit mistakes before being granted Prophethood.

Here is a report regarding Prophet Nuh(as) in Shia book, Ilal Al-Shara’i’i’ by Al-Saduq:
حدثنا علي بن أحمد بن محمد رضى الله عنه قال: حدثنا محمد بن أبي
عبد الله الكوفي قال: حدثنا سهل بن زياد الآدمي قال: حدثنا عبد العظيم بن عبد الله الحسني قال: سمعت علي بن محمد العسكري عليه السلام يقول: عاش نوح عليه السلام الفين وخمسمائة سنة، وكان يوما في السفينة نائما، فهبت ريح فكشفت عن عورته فضحك حام ويافث، فزجرهما سام عليه السلام ونهاهما عن الضحك، وكان كلما غطى سام شيئا تكشفه الريح كشفه حام ويافث فانتبه نوح عليه السلام فرآهم وهم يضحكون فقال ماهذا؟ فاخبره سام بما كان، فرفع نوح عليه السلام يده إلى السماء يدعو ويقول: اللهم غير، ماء صلب حام، حتى لا يولد له إلا السودان، اللهم غير ماء صلب يافث فغير الله ماء صلبهما، فجميع السودان حيث كانوا من حام، وجميع الترك والسقالبة ويأجوج ومأجوج والصين من يافث حيث كانوا، وجميع البيض سواهم من سام، وقال نوح ” ع ” لحام ويافث: جعل الله ذريتكما خولا لذرية سام إلى يوم القيامة، لانه بر بى وعققتمانى، فلا زالت سمة عقوقكما لي في ذريتكما ظاهرة وسمة البر بى في ذرية سام ظاهرة ما بقيت الدنيا.

Ali bin Mohammad Al-Askari (as) said: Nuh(as) lived for 2,500 years and in one day he was on a boat, so a wind blew on him and he became naked. So, Ham and Yafith laughed. Sam was angry and he forbid them from laughing. Every time Sam wanted to cover something him Ham and Yafith uncovered it. Then Nuh paid attention and saw them laughing and he asked what was going on? Sam told him what happened. So he raised his hand towards the sky and said: Oh Allah change the semen in Ham so that his children would be black, Allah change the semen in Yafith. So, Allah did change their semen and all the blacks came from Ham and all the Turks, Saqaliba, Yajooj and Majooj, and Chinese people came from Yafith. All the white people came from Sam. Then Nuh (as) said to Ham and Yafith: May your children be servants to the children of Sam under the day of Judgement, for he was good to me and you were bad to me, and the sign of your badness to me will be apparent in your children and the signs of Sam’s goodness to me will be apparent in his children as long as the earth last.(Shia book, Ilal Al-Shara’i’i’ by Shiekh Al-Saduq).


Seventh Argument

Shiapen then stated:


Tradition Three – Further traditions attacking the pious character of the Prophet (s)

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 267:

Narrated Muhammad bin Al-Muntathir:
on the authority of his father that he had asked ‘Aisha (about the Hadith of Ibn ‘Umar). She said, “May Allah be Merciful to Abu ‘Abdur-Rahman. I used to put scent on Allah’s Apostle and he used to go round his wives, and in the morning he assumed the Ihram, and the fragrance of scent was still coming out from his body.”

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268:

Narrated Qatada:
Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet the strength for it?” Anas replied, “We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).” And Sa’id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).

[End Quote]


Nothing objectionable is seen here. The Prophet(saw) left for us an example in every walk of life. Here the justice of the Prophet(saw) towards his wives is shown as he gave some time to all his wives in a round, during day and night, though he had fixed days for each of his wives. Had it been that Prophet(saw) would visit his nine wives on their fixed day only, then the other group of criticis, such as orientalists would have accussed Prophet(saw) of being unjust and unfair towards his wives. So nothing would satisfy the biased critics, because the problem is not in the Sunnah of Prophet(saw) but in their mentality.

Similar narration is even present in Shia book Al-Kafi:

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Ali ibn al-Hakam from Hisham ibn Salim who has said the following: “Abu ‘Abd Allah(as) said:.. At dawn Jibril descended with a dish of mashed meat and wheat from paradise and said, ‘O Muhammad, this is made for you by al-Hur al-‘In. You can eat it with Ali and his children; it is not proper that people other than you eat it.’ The Messenger of Allah, Ali, Fatimah, al-Hassan and al-Husayn ate it (the food that Jibril had brought from paradise) and it gave the Messenger of Allah the ability in matters of going to bed with his wives which was equal to that of forty men, thus he (the Messenger of Allah) could go to bed with all of his wives in one night if he so wanted.’”( Al-Kafi: H 10221, Ch. 190, h 41 ; Majlisi said: Sahih in Miraat ul Uqool 20/422)

We read in Al-Kafi

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn Khalid from his father or others from Sa‘d ibn s; from al-Hassan ibn Jahm who has said the following: “I once saw Abu al-Hassan(as) had used dye. I said, ‘I pray to Allah to keep my soul in service for your cause, I can see you have used dyes.’ He (the Imam) said, ‘Yes, readiness is of the matters that increases chastity of women and women neglect chastity because of their husband’s neglect of readiness.’ He (the Imam) then said, ‘Will you be happy to see her without readiness?’ I replied, ‘No, it does not make me happy.’ He (the Imam) said, ‘In the same way it will not make her happy to see you without readiness.’ He (the Imam) then said, ‘It is of the moral behavior of the prophets to maintain cleanliness, use perfumes, shave the hairs and going to bed with one’s wife very often.’ He (the Imam) then said, ‘Sulayman ibn Dawud(as) had one thousand women in one palace of whom three hundred were publicly known and seven hundred of them were secretly married. The Messenger of Allah(saw), had the ability equal to forty men of going to bed with his wives, he(the Messenger of Allah) had nine wives and moved among them every night and day.’”[Al Kafi: H 10230, Ch. 190, h 50]

So, we find that what was narrated in Sahih Bukhari was even narrated in Al-Kafi from the infallible Shia Imam. Therefore, Shiapen has no academic reason to give for their rejection of these traditions, all what they have is their narrow minded, un-scientific and un-objective approach due which they are unable to comprehend these traditions and hence they reject these traditions.

If Shiapen has problems comprehending those traditions from Sahih Bukhari, then we doubt them being competent enough to understand, the tradition which was authentically reported in Shia book, regarding Prophet Sulayman(as).

We read in a tradition with a SAHIH chain from Imam Baqir(as) in Shia book Hayat-ul-Qaloob:

Imam Baqir(as) said: Prophet Sulayman(as) had a fort, having 1000 rooms made by Jinns for him, and in every room one of his wife used to live. From these 300 were his wives and 700 were concubines. Allah gave him the sexual strength of 40 men. He used to daily visit all of his women and used fulfill their desires.(Majlisi declared chain as Sahih, Hayat-ul-Qaloob vol 1, p. 644) .


Eight Argument

Shiapen continues:


Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 296:

Narrated ‘Aisha:
The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur’an while I was in menses.

[End Quote]


By reading this tradition one can truly understand that indeed Prophet Muhammad(saw) is a mercy to the worlds. In the practices of the Pre-Islamic Days of Ignorance and in the traditions of the Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians when a woman reached her period, she was cast out and placed under many restrictions. A tent was set up for her where she used to stay there till the period was over. Nobody was allowed to touch her, and it was regarded that if she touched something impurity would spread. The prophet(saw) put an end to all this injustice and oppressive measures, by showing that it’s okay to touch them as the Prophet(saw) demonstrated that by mere touching a woman does not spread impurity.

If the ignorant and incompetent Shiapen disagree with us, then we would like to educate them the teachings of their own Imams from their own books.

In Shia book Man La Yahdharhu Al-Faqeeh(page 119) we find the following hadith:

وروى جميل عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام أنه قال: لا بأس أن تصلي المرأة بحذاء الرجل وهو يصلي فإن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم كان يصلي وعائشة مضطجعة بين يديه وهي حائض، وكان إذا أراد أن يسجد غمز رجليها فرفعت رجليها حتى يسجد.

Jameel narrated from Abi Abdullah (as) that he said: It is fine for a woman to pray next to a man while he is praying, for the Prophet (pbuh) used to pray with Aisha laying down in front of him, during her menses, and if he wanted to prostrate, he would poke her legs, and she would raise them so that he would prostrate. [Scan page of this hadeeth]

The path of Ibn Babawaih to Jameel is reliable according to Al-Khoei which can be found in the bottom of this link.

Furthermore, a good number of Shia scholars have authenticated this narration:

1- al-Fawa’id al-Tusiyyah, by Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin `Ali, al-Hurr al-`Amili. Pg.62-64, printed Qum, Iran. al-Matba`ah al-`Ilmiyyah,  1st edition year 1403.

أقول: هذا الحديث صحيح السند على اصطلاح المتأخرين

2- al-Hada’iq al-Nadirah, by Yusuf al-Bahrani. Vol.7, pg.178-186, printed Qum, Iran. Mu’assasat al-Nashr al-Islami, 1st edition year 1405.

ما رواه الصدوق في الصحيح عن جميل عن ابي عبد الله

3- Mustanad al-Shi`ah, by Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Naraqi. Vol.4, pg.411-413, printed Qum, Iran. Mu’assasat Aal-ul-Bayt (as), 1st edition year 1415.

و المستفيضة من الصحاح و غيرها المصرّحة بعدم المنع. إمّا مطلقا كصحيحة جميل

4- Jawahir al-Kalam, by Muhammad Hasan bin Baqir al-Najafi. Vol.8, pg.303-311, printed Beirut, Lebanon. Dar Ihya’-ul-Turath al-`Arabi, 7th edition.

Therefore, we see from shia book that Imam Jafar(ra) didn’t see anything wrong in Prophet(saw) during his prayer touching his beloved wife who was in menses, rather the Imam approved the incident by deriving a ruling from it. If he would have felt it was fabricated, then he wouldn’t have used this report as evidence.


Ninth Argument

Shiapen stated:


Sahih Bukhari Volume 2, Book 26, Number 789:

Narrated ‘Aisha:
We performed Hajj with the Prophet and performed Tawaf-al-ifada on the Day of Nahr (slaughtering). Safiya got her menses and the Prophets desired from her what a husband desires from his wife. I said to him, “O Allah’s Apostle! She is having her menses.” He said, “Is she going to detain us?” We informed him that she had performed Tawaf-al-Ifada on the Day of Nahr. He said, “(Then you can) depart.”

[End Quote]


Again! Nothing is objectionable here. This is something natural that any human being possesses. The hadith is actually meant to give a lesson that it is ok to resume relationship after Arafaah on the day of slaughtering.

However, some ignorant might argue that how could Prophet(saw) desire a physical relation with his wife, who was in her menses. To answer this misconception we would like to quote the Fatwa of an esteemed Shia Ayatullah, followed by an authentic Shia hadeeth.

We find in the website of Shia leader Ayatollah Sistani the following religious ruling:

السؤال :

هل يجوز مجامعة الحائض دون القذف من باب المداعبة ؟

الجواب :

يحرم مجامعتها بالدخول في القبل وإن لم يقذف فيه، ولا بأس بالملاعبة من دون إدخال العضو .

The question: Is it permissible for one to have sexual relations with one’s wife during menses without climaxing as a form of foreplay?

The answer: It is prohibited to have sexual relations with her by entering her vagina, even without climaxing; however, foreplay is fine without the inserting of the penis.

محمد بن علي بن الحسين بإسناده عن عبيدالله بن علي الحلبي ، أنه سأل أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن الحائض ما يحل لزوجها منها ؟ قال : تتّزر بإزار إلى الركبتين وتخرج سرتها ، ثم له ما فوق الإزار ، قال : وذكر عن أبيه ( عليه السلام ) أن ميمونة كانت تقول : إن النبي ( صلى الله عليه واله وسلم ) كان يأمرني إذا كنت حائضا أن أتزر بثوب ثم اضطجع معه في الفراش.

This opinion is supported by several(Shia) hadiths, one of which is the authentic narration (refer to this link, which in where Al-Khoei authenticates Al-Saduq’s chain) by Ubaidullah bin Ali Al-Halabi from Aba Abdulla (as) in which he asks about what was permissible for the husband when the wife is menstruating. He responded: She would wrap an izar around her legs, and would reveal her belly, and whatever is above that, is permissible. He mentioned from his father (as): Maymoona used to say: The Prophet (pbuh) ordered me when I was menstruating to wear izar, then lay with him in bed. (Shia book, Man La Yahdharhu Al-Faqeeh, 1/47, Dar Al-Murtadha, First edition)

In other words, there is complete harmony between both sects on this issue, and that the narrations from both parties do not conflict with the Qur’an and are considered authentic. And the ones who object are the Ghulat Shia from Shiapen.


Tenth Argument

Shiapen then stated:


According to these ‘authentic’ traditions we can see clearly that the above hadith prove that the Holy Prophet (s), The Master of all the Prophets was:

  1. So fond of Sexual Intercourse that he used to sleep with his eleven wives in just one night
  2. He couldn’t be patient even in the days of Hajj (pilgrimage)

[End Quote]


The reason why the Prophet(saw) used to visit all his wives in one night was because he was just towards his wives. This was even mentioned in Shia hadeeth.

As for the second statement there is nothing wrong in that because Saffiya was Prophet’s(saw) wife, and the tradition is meant to teach that it is ok to resume relationship on the 10 day of Dhul hijjah. So Shiapen should abstain from applying their perverted connotations to these tradition.


Eleventh Argument

Shiapen then stated:


May Allah give us protection from such vulgar thoughts! As far as his (s) strength and health is concerned Allah (swt) had blessed his Apostle (s) distinctly. He (s) was exceedingly strong both mentally & physically with vital senses many fold more sensitive & powerful then an ordinary human being. Despite this favour, the Holy Prophet (s) used his strengths modestly. He would not utilize this strength by satisfying his libido by sleeping with his wives in one sitting.

[End Quote]


Since the ignorant and incompetent Shiapen has problems comprehending those traditions from Sahih Bukhari, and their sick and corrupt mentality led them to make these vulgar comments, then we are afraid that what kind of perverted conclusions they will make out from the tradition which was authentically reported in Shia book, regarding Prophet Sulayman(as).

We read in a tradition with a SAHIH chain from Imam Baqir(as) in Shia book Hayat-ul-Qaloob:

Imam Baqir(as) said: Prophet Sulayman(as) had a fort, having 1000 rooms made by Jinns for him, and in every room one of his wife used to live. From these 300 were his wives and 700 were concubines. Allah gave him the sexual strength of 40 men. He used to daily visit all of his women and used fulfill their desires.(Majlisi declared chain as Sahih, Hayat-ul-Qaloob vol 1, p. 644) .


Twelfth Argument

Shiapen stated:


The actual Shi’a position

We the Shi’a refuse to accept such filthy traditions, by doing so does that make us kaffir. As far as we are concerned protecting the integrity of the Prophet (S) if far more important than protecting the integrity of Sahih al Bukhari! Hence yes we do regard these as tales we believe that:

  1. It is utterly untrue that the Holy Prophet (s) visited all his wives (i.e. eleven) in just one night.
  2. It is also untrue that the Holy Prophet (s) desired to have sexual intercourse with Hadhrath Safiya on the day of sacrifice.
  3. It is also untrue that the Holy Prophet (s) recited the Holy Qur’an in the Laps of any wife during her menses.

The above traditions are derogatory to the piety & holiness of the Holy Prophet (s). When a Non-Muslim commits blasphemy by quoting these narrations our necks bow down with humiliation & embarrassment.

[End Quote]


This is rather the belief of Ghulat(extremist/exaggerators) Shia, these are the same Ghulat who even reject authentic traditions in their own books if those doesn’t fit in their Ghulu(exaggeration) based concepts. These are the same people who were heavily criticized by their classical Shia scholars such as Shiekh Sadooq, when they even rejected the authentic Shia traditions regarding the forgetfulness(sahu) of Prophet Muhammad(saw) in prayer. So this un-academic position of these Ghulat Shia isn’t weird for us, since they have been rejecting authentic traditions both in Sunni and Shia books, due to their Ghulu based corrupt beliefs, incompetence and ignorance. However, by the help of Allah(swt), we have refuted their ignorance and incompetence based criticism on most of the traditions from Bukhari by providing a reasonable explanation of them and also by using authentic Shia traditions from Shia books, which were narrated by their infallible Imams.

Even though we know that they will continue their rejection of authentic traditions from Sunni as we as Shia books, since those go against their Ghulu based corrupt beliefs. However, the basis of their criticism and rejection isn’t going to be any academic reason, it’s just Ghulu, lack of objectively, bias, and incompetence due to which they reject the authentic traditions.

And, they seem to be more concerned with the blasphemy Non Muslim commit by misinterpreting and misrepresenting the authentic ahadeeth from Sunni books as they feel it’s embarrassing and humiliating. However those evil and corrupt Non-Muslims even misinterpret and misrepresent Holy Quran, and it seems they feel the same when Quran is misinterpreted by Non-Muslims and Orientalists, for example the incident of Prophet’s(saw) marriage with Zaynab bint Jahsh(ra). This seems to be one of the reason why a number of their predecessors held the belief of Tahreef of Quran. However, we Ahl us-sunnah, were, are and will be in the frontline for defending Quran and the honor of our beloved Prophet Muhammad(saw) on intellectual and academic grounds.

If Shiapen feels so humiliated and embarrassed from the attacks on the honor of Prophet(saw) by some ignorant, biased and bigoted Non-Muslims, then they must die out of Shame for the attacks of Non-Muslims on Islam due to the un-civilized and barbaric acts of self-torturing, blood-shedding, which Shiapen endorses claiming it to be an Islamic-custom, from which even small children aren’t spared. Since even these things in which Shiapen believes, too become a reason for the mockery of Islam by Non-Muslims.

May Allah’s (swt) blessings be upon His Messenger, his household, and companions.

5 thoughts on “Sunni Answers to Shiapen: The Shi’a rejection of the Sahah Sittah

  1. As-salamu alaikum, brothers. Please, I would like you to write an article about shubha that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (radi Allahu ‘anhum) banned writing hadiths. Russian-salafi audience need an article about this issue. You would help thousands of people. Please, I ask you to write an article about that. Jazakumu-Llahu hairan!

  2. Shias have narrated through an authentic chain from Al Saduq that Prophet Sulaiman(AS) had a thousand women, and he was given the sexual strength of forty men. (See Mustadrak Al Wasael 14/295 and Bihar Al Anwar 14/72.)

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s