Book of Refutation I Verse 33

8/13/2019 Book of Refutation I Verse 33

1/89

Book of Refutations

1

The Book

Of

Refutations IIn-depth refutation regarding

The Shiite claim of Verse 33:33

Compilation of refutations demolishing the Shiite belief


2/89

Book of Refutations

2

Contexts Page

Language and wording in the verse - 4

(A) Masculine wording - 6(B) Masculine wording 8

Commentary on verse 33:33 22

Hadith al kisa - 25

Hadith Al-Kisa indepth Analysis - 29

Linguistics and wording indepth analysis part 1 - 36

Linguistic and wording indepth analysis part 2 44

Sayings of the Shia scholars 48

Tahreef (Distortion) 53

Does verse (33:33) makes anyone infallible? - 58

Final Message - 88


3/89

Book of Refutations

3

Let us Begin with the Quranas our first source of information before dwelling intoHadith:


4/89

Book of Refutations

4

Language and Wording in the Verse

The word in verse 33:33 is:

Now if we take a look at what this word actually means in the English language,translated:

The word which is clearly used isremove;it can also be translated as To Take out orTo keep away:

Now my Question to the Rafidha that Reject the Hadith and Quran, why would Allahneed to remove or keep away impurity, uncleanliness, evil doings from the AhlulBayt?

Ask yourself without twisting the verse to suit your own agenda; are they really infallibleif Allah wished them to be pure? According to your logic The AhlulBayt are infallible,yet it contradicts the fact Allah wanted to purify them?

According to Ayatullah Agha H. M. M. Pooya Yazdi and S. V. Mir Ahmed Ali

"Verily Allah intends to keep off from you uncleanness, O you Ahl ul Bayt and purify youwith a thorough purification"


5/89

Book of Refutations

5

Now let us move on to one of the claims the Rafidha make regarding the wording used inthis verse

When we read verses of the Quran, we should read the entire passage and not justisolated parts of it. We must see what the context of what is being said is. Otherwise, wewill be misled. We are afraid that many people, either knowingly or unknowingly, aretaking the Quran and Hadith out of context simply to win debates. Insha-Allah we shouldread the Quranic verses in their entirity and with an open heart.

The above mentions Verse 33:33 of the Quran. Let us now read to whom this verse inthe Quran is addressed to; let us read the entire sentence, starting from verse 33:32 allthe way to verse 33:34.

O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your

guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and

speak a good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display,like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regularCharity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove allabomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure andspotless. And recite what is rehearsed to you in your homes, of the Signs of Allah andHis Wisdom: for Allah understands the finest mysteries and is well-acquainted (withthem). (Quran, 33:32-34)

Allah Almighty clearly addresses the wives of the Prophet ( ). If wewere to argue that this verse is the verse of purification and that it makes certain peopleinfallible, then we would have to conclude that it is Aisha ( ) and the rest ofthe Prophets wives which were made infallible. We base this on the simple fact that the

verse was revealed with the heading O wives of the Prophet. how can we say that this

verse refers to Ali ( ) and the Infallible Imams when none of them arementioned here, but only the wives are addressed? We understand that it is a popularconcept that this verse makes the Ahlel Bayt infallible. However, it is also the samepeople who spread such conceptions who believe that Aisha ( ) hated Ali ( ). It seems to us that, if anything, it is Aisha ( ) who is made infallible,and if indeed that is the case shouldnt the Shia side with her over Ali ( ?(There is actually not a single verse in the Quran which identifies Ali ( ), Fatima( ), Hasan ( ), or Hussain ( ) to be Ahlel Bayt. Not a singleverse in the Quran mentions the 12 Infallible Imams of the Shia, let alone mentioningthem as the Ahlel Bayt. Nowhere in the Quran does it refer to the Hidden Imam as theAhlel Bayt. How is it then that a very fundamental aspect of the Shia faith is not in theQuran, which is supposed to be the ultimate guide to truth? How can the ultimate guidebe devoid of the essence of belief, as the Shia claim that following their Ahlel Bayt is?The term Ahlel Bayt has been used twice in the Quran, and both times to refer to thewives. The Quran does not say O cousin of the Prophet but rather it says O wives ofthe Prophet.

In conclusion, the verse you have mentioned, Verse 33:33, was addressed to theProphets wives.


6/89


7/89

Book of Refutations

7

May peace be on you O Fatima

Then in Arabic the pronoun used for the noun(fatima) will be ki which is singular

feminine pronoun, because Fatima is a singular feminine noun.

In Arabic it will be in this form.

Salam alai (ki) ya fatima.

For collective noun:

Now here for the same statement when the noun being addressed is changed tocollective noun then regardless of the gender of individuals or their number the

pronoun that will be used for collective noun will be masculine plural. This pronoun will

be same(i.e masculine plural) for a group of males if being addressed with collectivenoun or just a group of females if they are being addressed with collective noun or asingle female if being addressed with collective noun or a single male being addressed

with collective noun. For All these scenarios the pronoun used will be masculine plural,and remember this is not because of the gender or quantity of the individuals beingaddressed but because they were addressed with collective noun then by default thepronoun used will be masculine plural.

Suppose a single women is being addressed with the collective noun (ahlebayt),

For eg: Peace and blessing be upon you O, ahlebayt.

In Arabic it will be in this form.

Salam alai (kum) ya ahlebayt

The pronoun used here for the collective noun(ahlebayt) was kum which is masculine

plural pronoun, because regardless single women is addressed with the collective nounor a group of females or a single male or a group of males , the pronoun that is used forall these scenarios will be masculine plural(kum).

Al-Razi, al-Tafsir al-Kabir (6:615): Allah Most High quit using the feminine pronoun inhis address and turned to the masculine by saying {liyudhhiba ànkum al-rijsa = toremove uncleanness far from you [masculine plural]}, so as to include both the women

of his [i.e. the Prophet's] house and the men. Explanations have differed concerning theAhl al-Bayt but the most appropriate and correct is to say they are his children andwives; al-Hasan and al-Husayn being among them and Àli being among them due tohis cohabitation with the daughter of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam)and his close companionship with the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam).

Al-Baydawi, Anwar al-Tanzil (4:374): The Shiàs claim that verse 33:33 is specific toFatima, Àli, and their two sons Allah be well-pleased with them and theiradducing it as proof of their immunity from sin (ìsmat) and of the probative characterof their consensus, is weak, because restricting the meaning to them is not consistentwith what precedes the verse and what follows it. The thread of speech means that they

are part of the Ahl al-Bayt, not that others are not part of it also.


8/89


9/89

Book of Refutations

9

Here is the SaHeeH hadeeth from Al-Sadooqs Ma`aanee Al-akhbaar that tells us thatthis explanation (i.e. that she menstruated) has been authentically reported from one ofthe Shia infallible Imams.

Thus, It actually says that she didnt have her period for a long time before she got it

this time (refer to the words of Al-Qumi mentioned above which affirms this) meaningthat she was Not pregnant at the time. A pregnant women does not menstruate. Basedon this, my question would be: According to these scholars and Al-Sadiq (who isinfallible according to them), and the understanding they put forth, why would Sarah(as)be addressed with masculine plural pronoun(kum) ?

Example 2:

O Consorts of the Prophet! Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear

(Allah), be not too complacent of speech, lest one in whose heart is a disease should bemoved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just.And stay quietly in your houses,and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; andestablish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger.Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you(kum), ye members of theFamily(ahlebayt)and to make you(kum)pure and spotless. (33:32-33)

Comment:Even in this quranic verse we see that, a group of females (i.e wives ofprophet(saw)) are being addressed, but when they were addressed with collectivenoun(ahlebayt), the pronoun that was used there was masculine plural (i.e kum), So weobserved a change in gender of the pronoun. As said previously that the gender or

quantity of individuals being addressed as ahlebayt doesnt effect the usage of pronounfor collective noun. That is why masculine plural pronoun(kum) was used here.

Example 3:

And We ordained that he refused to suck any foster mother before, so she said: Shall Ipoint out to you the people of a house(ahli bayt)who will take care of him for you, andthey(hum)will be benevolent to him? (Quran28:12)

Comment :Similarly in this verse, the phrase is used clearly in the context of alady, while the gender is masculine again and . It isbecause the collectivenoun (ahlebayt) was used in this verse for mother of moses(as) we see a masculineplural pronoun(hum) used for a single lady.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says: The mother of Musa is referred to as Ahli Bayt, not as the wife ofImran but as the mother of Musa. Likewise Sara is referred to as Ahli Bayt in verse 73 ofHud as the mother of Is-haq.. (28:12) (From Tafseer of Pooya/M.A. Ali. )

Shia scholar says the same, but tries to find his own benefit in it. Anyways atleast heagreed that a single lady was addressed while a masculine plural pronoun was used.

And it is possible that after reading this response the shia out of frustration maydiscredit the scholarship of their scholars too and might try to take a U-turn with their


10/89


11/89

Book of Refutations

11

Example 4:

First verse:

When he saw a fire and said to his wife(ahli),Wait I have seen a fire perhaps Imay bring you an ember from it or find a way upon the fire.(ahmed raza khanbarelwi, kanzul eman , 20:10)

Commentaries for this verse:

1. Allah begins to mention the story of Musa, how revelation began to come to Him, andAllahs speaking directly to him. This occurred after Musa had completed the time agreed

upon between he and his father-in-law that he would herd sheep. He was traveling withhis family, and it has been said that he was headed for the land of Egypt , after havingbeen away from it for more than ten years. He had his wife with himand he became

lost on the way during a cold, wintery night . Therefore, he settled down, making a campbetween some mountain passes and mountains that were covered with snow, sleet,dense clouds, darkness and fog.(tafseer ibn katheer, for verse 20:10)

2. Here we see Moses (peace be upon him) on the road between Madyan and Egypt,close to Mount Sinai, returning with his wife after he had completed the term he hadagreed with the Prophet Shu`ayb. This agreement meant that Shu`ayb would give himone of his two daughters in marriage in return for eight or ten years during which hewould be his assistant. He most probably spent ten years before he felt that he couldleave with his wifeto return to the country where he grew up. There the Children ofIsrael, Moses people, lived in subjugation.(In the shade of quran, by sayyid qutub,

volume XI , surah 20, verse 10.)

3. When he caught sight of a fire and said to his family,namely, to his wife,Wait,here! this was when he was leaving Midian, heading for Egypt Indeed I see a fire[in the distance]. Perhaps I [can] bring you a brand from it, [bring you] a burning wickor a torch, or find at the fire some guidance, that is, someone to guide me by showing

me the [proper] route for he had lost it in the darkness of the night (tafseer jalalaynfor 20:10)

4. When the thought to return to his native place came, he set out withhis wife.((tafseer ul quran by zafar hasan founder of jamia imamia) volume 3, page

243, surah 20 verse 10) [shia commentary]Second verse:

a. When Moses completed the term of the contract and departed from his employer withhis family, he saw a fire (on his way) on one side of the Mount (Sinai). He asked hiswife, Stay here. I can see some fire. Perhaps I will be able to bring some news of it or

some fire for you to warm-up yourselves.(sarwar, shia translator, 28:29)

b. So when Moosa completed his term and was travelling with hiswife,he saw a fire inthe direction of the Mount (Sinai); he said to his wifeStay here I have sighted a fire


12/89

Book of Refutations

12

in the direction of the mount perhaps I may bring you(kum)some news from it, or anember so that you(kum)may warm yourselves.(ahmed raza khan barelwi, kazuleman, 28:29)

c. So when Musa (Moses) completed the appointed term and set out with his wife, he

saw a fire in the direction of Tur. (That was a flash of Absolute Beauty which caught hisheart and fascinated him.) He said to his wife:Stay (here). I have seen a fire. I maybring you some news (about Him) from that (fire in Whose pursuit I have long beenwandering), or (I may bring you) some burning brand from the (febrile) fire so that you(too) may feel the burn. (28:29) irfan ul quran, Dr. tahir ul qadri(the favouritesunni scholar of shias)

Commentary for this verse:

So when Moses had completed the term, of his tending of eight years, or of ten years,which is what is generally assumed and was travelling with his family, his wife,with the permission of her father, in the direction of Egypt, he saw in the distance on theside of the Mount [Tr] a fire (al-Tr is the name of a mountain). He said to his family,

Wait, here; I see a fire in the distance. (tafseer jalalayn for 28:29)

Third verse:

(Recall that incident) when Musa (Moses) said to hiswife: I have seen a fire (or Ihave perceived a flash of love and liking in the fire). Soon I will bring you some newsfrom it (for which we have been wandering in deserts and forests since long), or I bring(you also from there) some burning brand so that you (too) may feel the burn (of itsheat).(27:7)tahir ul qadri, irfan ul quran)

Commentaries for this verse:

Moses accompanied with his wifewho was pregnant, and they were going from Madyantowards Egypt. On one side, the darkness of the night in the cold stormy weather of thedesert, and, on the other side, the childbirth of his wife, forced Moses to search. Theverses under discussion are about this event. The verse says: (Remember) WhenMoses said unto his family: Verily I perceive a fire; soon will I bring you news of

it, or I will bring you a flaming brand, that you warm yourselves. This event happenedby the same night when Moses was in a dark desert on the way towardEgypt, accompanied with his wife, Shuaybs daughter, and he lost the way. Thena terrible storm began to blow and at the same time his wife felt the pains of childbirth.

Moses thought he severely needed to make a fire in order to use its warmth, but therewas nothing in that desert for it. As soon as he saw the light of a flame from distance,he became happy and took it as a sign of the existence of someone or some ones there.He told them that he would go and bring them either some news from it, or a burningfirebrand so that they might warm themselves by it.

It is noteworthy that Moses says he brings them news or a flaming band, (the pronoun

of which plural). This may show that there had been a child or children with him too,because his marriage bad happened in Madyan ten years before that. Or it may be forthe sake that, in that horrible desert, that idea could give some further calmness to hisaddressees. (The Light of The Holy Quran by Ayatullah Sayyid Kamal Faghih

Imani and A Group of Muslim Scholars, under explanation of verse 27:7)


13/89

Book of Refutations

13

Note:This shia mufassir explicitly mentions that hz musa(as) was just with hiswife, buthe makes some hypothetical assumptions just for sake of defending their self madearguments against verse of tatheer. And these assumptions are extremely weak becauseits not compulsory that if a man marries a woman he should have children.. take forexample of hz ibrahim(as) he didnt have children for decades of his marriage. And its

not necessary that if the children were born they should have survived until hz musa(as)started the journey. So such assumptions are simply illogical. However we will refute hisassumptions from his own master, the books which the shias themselves consider veryauthentic, here is Tafseer from Majmua al bayan, it states:

: Al-Zajaaj said: remember in the story of Musa when he told his Ahl ( ) meaninghis Wifeand she was the Daughter of Shuaib (tafseer majmua al bayan, surah namlverse 7)

In the verses above (28:29) (20:10) and (27:7) which are describing a same

incident in different chapters of quran, Masculine plural pronoun(kum) was

used to address wife of hz musa(as). Though majority of translators translated wordahl as family in these verses,but the shia translator muhammed sarwar as wellas couple of sunni translators like ahmed raza khan barelwi and the favourite

sunni scholar of shias Dr. tahir ul qadri specifically translated the word ahl as

wife. And these scholars of Arabic language didnt find it odd or weird translating that

ahli refered in the verse as wife of hz musa(as) though a masculine plural noun (kum)was used to address her. This is because they were aware of the rule were arediscussing here.

And even the shia commentators of quran like Shaykh Abu Ali Fazl ibn al-Hassan ibn al-Fazl al-Tabarsi about whose tafseer its said: Tafseer Majma ul Bayan, that isconsidered to be an authentic commentary by the Shia Ithna Ashari[Mazahib-ul-Islam, Page 447,Allamah Najam-ul-Ghani Rampuri.

It unequivocally states that : In the story of Musa when he told his Ahl ( ) meaning his Wifeand she was the Daughter of Shuaib (tafseer majmua al bayan,surah naml verse 7)

Moreover zafar hasan a shia scholar and sunni commentators of quran ibn

katheer, suyuti and sayyid qutub explicitly mentioned that hz musa(as) was

traveling with his wife.And these masters of Arabic didnt find it weird to mention intheir works that Ahl in this verse was wife of hz musa(as). All these scholars surelywould have noticed the verses before translating or writing its commentary that theverses contain a masculine plural pronoun(kum) and if they had any doubt then it waseasy for them to just mention that hz musa(as) was traveling with his family(ahl), notnamely mentioning his wife , but we find all these shia as well as sunni translators andcommentators who had a great command over Arabic language mentioned that hzmusa(as) was with his wife without any hesitation though a masculine plural noun wasused to address ahl in the verse.

Though we know that there are some recent tafseers from shia scholars which say that,hz musa(as) had two sons too along with his wife (which isnt backed by any authentic

Islamic historical proof, but which is taken from Christian sources whose reliability is notaccepted by muslims and which goes against their classical tafseer considered authetic


14/89

Book of Refutations

14

by them) with whom hz musa(as) was traveling. But our main intention here for bringingthis proof is not to argue along with whom hz musa(as) was traveling because its theirchoice whether to follow corrupted christian sources or their own tafseer which isconsidered authentic among them. But the main reason to mention this proof is to showour readers that, a number of shia as well sunni scholars who mastered in Arabic

language without any doubt translated ahl in that verse as wife though a masculineplural noun(kum) was used there. Or mentioned in there commentaries that hz musa(as)was with his wife what all he said was to his wife. So if some of the shias out of fearof accepting the truth and because of their biasness want to challenge the scholarshipof these shias as well as sunni scholars then its their wish. And if this seems to be aweak proof to them, then we would like to say them that , we just used this proof as abackup for rest of the five examples we are going to give in this article.

The next examples from authentic narrations(ahadees), just to show the usage

of collective noun in Arabic literature.

Example 5:

: . . . . . . .

. : . ! Anas(ra) said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) servedbread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their hearts content, and he (the

Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stoodup and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did notget out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (theapartments of) his wives. He greeted with asSalamu alaikum to every one of themand said: Members of the household(ahlebayt), how are you(kum)? They said:Messenger of Allah, we are in good state How do you find your family? He would say: Ingood state. (Sahih Muslims Book 8, Number 3328)

Similar narration is present in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 316 :Narrated Anas: A banquet of bread and meat was held on the occasion of the marriageof the Prophet to Zainab bint Jahsh. I was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), andso the people started coming (in groups). They would eat and then leave. Another batchwould come, eat and leave. So I kept on inviting the people till I found nobody to invite.

Then I said, O Allahs Prophet! I do not find anybody to invite.

He (the Prophet) said, Carry away the remaining food. Then a batch of three persons

stayed in the house chatting. The Prophet left and went towards the dwellingplace of Aisha and said, Peace and Allahs Mercy be on you(KUM), Ya Ahlel

Bayt (O the people of the house)!

She replied, Peace and the mercy of Allah be on you too. How did you find your wife?

May Allah bless you.

Then he went to the dwelling places of all his other wives and said to them the

same as he said to Aishaand they said to him the same as Aisha had said to him.


15/89

Book of Refutations

15

Comment:here we see that , just a single lady is being addressed as ahlebayt, but stillthe pronoun used is (KUM) which is masculine plural noun was used and as explainedpreviously its because the single lady was addressed with collective noun(ahlebayt). Alsoto note is that, when prophet(saw) in this narration addressed his wife with collectivenoun(ahlebayt) he used the pronoun for it as(kum), but when the wife of prophet(Saw)

replied him she used the pronoun as ( ka)which is singular masculine, because she didnot address him with collective noun.

Example 6:

- - ) : : : : : )- 6/301-When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Alisaid, O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter. She answerd, Do you

want me to give him permission? He said, Yes. So she allowed him (to enter), and he

came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: By Allah, I only left my home and property

and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you(KUM), O AhlelBayt.So he talked to her until she was pleased with him. (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi)

This Hadith is narrated by Bayhaqi in al Sunan al Kubra (6:300-301) and Dalail al-Nubuwwa (7:273-281) who said: It is narrated with a good (hasan) chain. Muhibb alDin al-Tabari cited it in al Riyad Al Nadira (2:96-97 #534) and Dhahabi in the Siyar(Ibid). Ibn Kathir states it as Sahih in his Al Bidayah and Ibn Hajar in his Fath Al Bari.

Comment:In this narration too we see that when hz Fatima(ra) was addressed, andonly she was being addressed until she was pleased but what to notice here is that whenshe was addressed with collective noun (i.e ahlebayt)the pronoun that was usedwas masculine plural(kum) though she was the single lady who was being addressed.

Example from Shia hadeeth, where Wife was addressed in singular feminine

then when Ahl was used for her, Masculine Plural Pronoun was used, and again

it returned to feminine Singular as she was addressed as wife.

Example 7:

In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith of Ali(ra)talking about marriage:

( ) : : 41 220Translation: From Ali (as): So when his wife is wed to him andshe enteredon him,he should pray two Rakaat then wipe his hand onher forelock, then he should say: OAllah bless my Ahel for me and bless me for them, if you have gathered us then gatherus for goodness and if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness.

then if he sits by her sidehe would wipe her forelock.


16/89

Book of Refutations

16

Comment:Above we have highlighted the feminine words and the masculine ones , asyou see Ali(ra) is talking about the wife and he addresses her in feminine however whenhe reaches the part where he calls the wife Ahel he refers to her in masculine plural,

this is because the word Ahel is a collective noun and Ali (ra) could never use feminine

in this location.The same is in Ayatul-Tathir when Allah refers to the wives as Ahlul-Bayt

he uses masculine plural, andthen again after that he switches back to feminine.So from this example we came to know that, it depends on the Speaker to

address wife in the way he wants, that is if he uses word wife he will use

feminine pronoun, but if he uses Ahl for wife, then He will use Masculine

plural and there is NO rule that speaker cannot refer the addressed in the

previous form(feminine singular) after using the other form(masculine plural),

as we find through this Shia hadeeth.

Reason we are emphasizing on the usage of collective noun and why it is very

important to understand?

The reason is that many shia scholars have completely misunderstood verses of quranand some of them not only misunderstood but they made blunders just because of themisunderstanding in this issue. They concluded that the verses of quran , like ayat etatheer(33:33) are not in the proper order in which it should have been, and they weredeliberately placed in the place where it is present now, which in short means there havebeen tahreef done in quran. And the main reason for this view of theirs is because inverse (33:33) masculine plural pronoun(kum) was used. And as the gender changedfrom feminine(while addressing to wives of prophet(saw)) to masculine they wereconfused and eventually concluded that the verse itself is not in the proper order.

Here are some examples:

Example 1:

The Tafseer e Farman Ali is relied upon heavily by the Shia. It is a translation of theQuran along with commentary by Farman Ali. The book is used by Answering-Ansar andhence there should be no question about its authenticity in the eyes of the Shia. In thecommentary of verse 33:33, this Shia Tafseer reads: If we take out this verse (of

purification) from the middle, and then we read the verse (addressed to the wives) fromthe beginning to the end, we then find no fault in it and it looks better in this form. Fromthis, it is clear that this verse (of purification) does not belong to this place and it wasadded deliberately for some special purpose.

(source: Tafseer e Farman Ali, Commentary on Verse 33:33)

Example 2:

In the commentary of verse 11:73, this Shia Tafseer reads: In the verse before this one,Hadhrat Sara (as) was addressed with the present feminine singular form and in thisverse she was addressed with the singular masculine present form, which clearly showsthat the people who are addressed in this verse are not the same people and this versewas inserted here without any (justifiable) reason.

(source: Tafseer e Farman Ali, Commentary on Verse 11:73)


17/89

Book of Refutations

17

Example 3:

The Khateem al-Muhhaditheen al-Majlissi says a similar thing in Bihar al-Anwar

It is possible that the purification verse was added at this part (of the verse)

claiming that it was referring to the wives, or they added in the verses

addressing the prophets wives, to suit their religious needsEven if we accept

that there was no tampering (by the Companions) in the order (of the verses), we saythere are many narrations which discuss the removal/canceling of Quranic verses.[Maybe there were verses before and after the verse of purification and they wereremoved]; if these verses were not removed before and after the verse (of purification),we would see the apparent link between them.(source: Bihar al-Anwar, pp.234-235

Example 4:

Shia Allamah Sharaf al-Din in (Kalimat al-Ghurra, p.213) said:Although we are convinced that no distortion has taken place in the verses of the Noble

Quran and that our heavenly Book has not been tampered with in any way, it is by nomeans clear that the arrangement and recension of the verses is precisely that

in which they were revealed. For it is quite possible that the purification verse

concerning the People of the House was revealed separately and then, when

the verses of the Quran were being assembled, was placed in the middle of the

verses relating to the wives of the Prophet, either in error or deliberately.

Example 5:

The great Shia Mufassir of this era, Tabatabai, writes: The verse (of purification), in

accordance to the (order of) revelation, was initially not a part of the verse

about the Prophets wivesand had no link to these verses, but rather it was lateradded between these verses either by the Prophet,or after his death when theQuran was compiled.(source: al-Mizan, Vol.16, p.321,)

Example 6:

Question: Did Uthman reorder some of the verses to be in line with the politics of thattime, for example did he take part in placing the verse of Tatheer between theverses that are speaking about the wives of the Prophetin Surah Al-Ahzab?

The answer of Al-Sayid Ali Al-Milani (Shia scholar)

Yes, we believe that the location of the verse of Tatheer, and the verse: ([On] Thisday I have perfected for you your religion), and others like it is from the action ofthose people

And there are many, thus we request the readers to concentrate in understanding theusage of collective noun in Arabic grammar , because if its not understood then they arebound to make mistakes like the shia scholars above committed.


18/89

Book of Refutations

18

Another reason for such change in gender of the pronoun.

If the above explanation doesnt seem to be satisfactory to shias then there is anotherway of explaining them the reason for sudden change in gender of pronouns fromfeminine to masculine, and this is held by some scholars of Ahlesunnah.

The verse was revealed to the Prophet (saw) and was referring to his wives, and thusthe term Ahlel Bayt was used, in reference to the Prophet and his wives. It should beclear that the Messenger of Allah(saw) was the head of his household(ahlebayt), evenBukhari has narrated from Abu Bakr(ra) that he said: Muhammad (peace and blessings

be upon him) should be considered to belong to his Ahlul Bayt. (Ibn Hajar in SawaaiqulMuhriqa, pg. 228). And there are even narrations where prophet(Saw) included himselfAmong the Ahlebayt, for eg: Ibn Adi mentions in his book from Abu Saeed Khudri that

the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: One who hatesus, the AhlulBayt, is a hypocrite. (Zakhairul Uqba, pg.180). So, in order to include him, it wasincumbent to use the article Meem that denotes talking about a group of men. For he

was a man and a leader of his household, thus necessitating the usage of the collectivemasculine tense. If there is even one male in a group of females, then the collectivemasculine tense becomes necessary. Its not that if there are women out numbering menthen a feminine pronoun should be used, no! even if there is a single man present ingroup of females then a masculine plural pronoun becomes necessary. As we know thatwomen are some times included even when people are addressed with masculine noun.Like ( )(O you who believe!) (33:69)For more explanation of this, we should refer to the verse wherein Allah talks aboutProphet Ibraahim (Pbuh).

They said: Do you wonder of Allahs decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings on

you, oh ye people of the house ! For He is indeed worthy of all praise, full of glory.

Quran 11 : 73

Since Abraham was also included in his family, the Holy Quran addressed his wife using

musculine plural of men with the article Meem as it is customary in the Arabicgrammar. For the plural of men is applied even though there is only one man in thegroup of females according to the classical Arabic. So, if there is even one male in agroup of females, then the collective masculine tense becomes necessary.

If Allah was purposefully switching tenses and this so clearly showed Allahs intention,

why then do the Shia Ulema(as shown above) argue that there had been Tahreef bit

Tarteeb (i.e. tampering in the order of verses) of the Quran? How was Allah purposefullyswitching tenses when it was supposedly the Sahabah who manipulated the Qurans

order and it was they who decided the order, not Allah? This, to us, does not make anylogical sense. How can the Shia further two contradictory claims, on the one handclaiming that the Sahabah may have purposefully placed the purification verse in themiddle of the verses to the Prophets wives, and on the other hand claiming that this was

Allah who was purposefully switching tenses to prove some point?

Thus, these were the reasons because of which you find the sudden change

from feminine pronouns to masculine plural pronouns, and People who are

familiar with Quran to some extent, know that such a change is not a weird-

thing, and it has been applied to several places in Quran as well as some

authentic narrations as we have proved above.


19/89

Book of Refutations

19

Answering some of shias

Argument 1:

a sharp change of addressee is not a weird-thing, and it has been applied to severalplaces in Quran. For instance we read in Quran:O Joseph! pass this over and (O wife ofAziz!) ask forgiveness for your sin, for truly you have been at fault.(Quran 12:29)

In the above verse, O wife of Aziz has not been mentioned and the address to Joseph

(AS) looks to continue. However the transition of the address from masculine gender tofeminine gender clearly shows that the second sentence is addressing the Azizs wife and

not Prophet Joseph (AS).

Answer:

We have already given sufficient proof that what was the reason for the sudden changein gender of the pronouns. But the ones who are biased may not consider it sufficient toremove their misconceptions. But at the end of the day we have proved the actual andmost important argument of shias (i.e the change in gender of pronouns in 33:33) fromthe proofs of classical arabic literature.

And the example they used in not at all a proof in their favor because if you read thewhole passage from where they quoted the verse, you can easily find out that for whomthe feminine pronoun was used. And it is nothing out of context. Its a part of the story.The women who is referred there for whom the feminine pronoun was used is not aliento the passage if you refer the verses (12:23-32) you can easily make out that the one

who was addressed with feminine pronoun was the lady who was addressed in the initialand later verses of the same chapter. How will it appear to shias if someone comes upand says that the one being addressed there with feminine pronoun was not the one whowas addressed in the initial verses? Will they not mock the one who holds this view,because its apparent from the context itself that the one who was addressed withfeminine pronoun was the very same lady, and views other than that are wrong.

So why dont they do the same for the verse 33:33, because the whole passage is forthe wives of prophet(Saw) (who too are Ahlebayt atleast in general senseaccording to shias)the initial and later verse of 33:33 address the wives ofprophet(saw), then why is it that they think the ones who were not even mentioned in

the whole surah(ahzab) are suddenly addressed even without a noun but a pronoun.As we have said that wives of prophet(Saw) according to shias are ahlebayt in generalatleast, then why did Allah put the verse of quran in the middle of the passage wherewives of prophet(Saw)(who too are general ahlebayt) were being addressed. And evenwith usage of pronoun not even a noun, so if this was revealed for Ahle kisa who arenowhere even mentioned in the whole chapter then how can the shias claim that book ofAllah is easily understandable. Allah has mentioned it many times in the Quran that it isa Book of clear guidance, and that it is written in an easily understandable form. AllahAlmighty says in the Quran: These are the signs of the clear book. (12:1) How clear isthe Quran if an unbiased reader will think that it is the Prophets wives who are being

referred to but in reality it is supposed to be Alis family(ra)? What prevented Allah fromsimply ending this confusion and instead clearly saying O cousin of the Prophet and his


20/89

Book of Refutations

20

family instead of O wives of the Prophet? Why this confusion? Why did Allah place this

verse of purification in the middle of commands directed towards the Prophets wives?

Wouldnt this mean that this is far from a clear bookbut rather it is a cryptic andconfusing book?

But if you see this from a correct perspective then you will easily understand that it wasfor wives of prophet(Saw) and the change in gender of pronouns was nothing weird aswe have proved from other examples from quran.

Argument 2:

Feminine pronouns are used in the whole passage, before and after, for the wives buthere in the middle all of a sudden the plural masuline is used and why does immediatelyafter this verse does it revert back to the feminine AGAIN?

Answer:

Reply 1:The Quran is the book which is not arranged in chronological order, rather,after Allah had completely revealed the Quran to the Prophet (pbuh),he(saw) wasinstructed to arrange each verse and chapter in the place we find them

today.For example Read [O Muhammad!] in the name of your Lord who created.(96.1) He created man from a clot , we find that the first verse revealed was placed in96th chapter, and the last verse revealed was , Al yawma akmaltu lakum dinakam wa

atmamtu alaikam nimati wa raditu lakumul islama dinan, which means Today Iperfected your religion for you and completed my favor to you and have chosen for youAl-Islam as your religion. (5:3) , which is in the third verse of the 5th chapter. Thus wefind that the Quran is not arranged in chronological order, rather, after God hadcompleted revealing the Quran to the Prophet (pbuh), he was instructed to arrange each

verse and chapter in the place we find them today. There is consensus that it wasProphet Muhammad who identified the place of each verse within its

chapter.There are a number of hadiths in the Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal (164-241 H/ 780-855 CE), Sunnan of at-Tirmithi (209-279 H / 824-892 CE), and other hadithsources that state that the Messenger used to tell the recorders of the revelation inwhich chapters to place newly revealed verses.

So the above question can be answered by saying that the verse of tatheer was notrevealed in serial order with the verses before and after it , it was revealed seperately asevident from various ahadees and those verses which were before and after tatheerwere already revealedbut prophet(Saw)commanded verse of tatheer to be placed in that

position. That is why we find the verses before it and after it in feminine form. YET it didnot change anything because we know that the masculine forms that were used intatheer were because of the collective noun AHLEBAYT(as mentioned by al-samarkandi(d. 375 AH)) in tafsir bahrul ulum) and since the wives were addressed with that , it isntstrange from the grammatical point of view and It is evident from various otherexamples from arabic literature (11:73) etc.

So the biggest argument shias had was why was such a change from femine tomasculine in the initial part of the verse. Which led some of them to think that the verseof tatheer was deliberately placed in place where it is found now by some evilsahaba. But in our article we have dealt this reason for a sudden change from feminineto masculine in a detailed manner providing several proofs from Quranic verses (11:72-73 , etc) and authentic arabic literature. So now the argument that why again the


21/89

Book of Refutations

21

gender changes back to feminine should not be a concern, as we have already explainedthe reason behind it.

Reply 2:In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith ofAli(ra) talking about marriage:

( ) : : 41 220Translation: From Ali (as): So when his wife is wed to him andshe enteredon him,he should pray two Rakaat then wipe his hand onher forelock, then he should say: OAllah bless my Ahel for me and bless me for them, if you have gathered us then gatherus for goodness and if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness.then if he sits by her sidehe would wipe her forelock.

Above we have bolded the feminine words and the masculine ones , as you see Ali(ra) is

talking about the wife and he addresses her in feminine however when he reaches thepart where he calls the wife Ahel he refers to her in masculine plural, this is becausethe word Ahel is a collective noun and Ali (ra) could never use feminine in this

location.The same is in Ayatul-Tathir when Allah refers to the wives as Ahlul-Bayt heuses masculine plural, and then again after that he switches back to feminine.There is NO rule that speaker cannot refer the addressed in the previous

form(feminine singular) after using the other form(masculine plural), as we

find through this Shia hadeeth.

Reply 3:We have already answered the reason why the change in gender of thepronouns took place from feminine to masculine, as the similar thing happened in(11:73) . Regarding the query that why did the gender of pronouns again changed backto feminine gender, then another answer to it is, because when the word Ahlebayt wasused even prophet(Saw) was included since messenger of Allah(saw) was the head of hishousehold(ahlebayt) and even Bukhari has narrated from Abu Bakr(ra) that he said:

Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) should be considered to belong to hisAhlul Bayt. (Ibn Hajar in Sawaaiqul Muhriqa, pg. 228). Thus if the same gender wouldhave been continued then the commands in the verse(34) which were given to wives ofprophet(Saw) would have been applied to prophet(Saw) also. So, inorder to prevent thatthe verse again switched to its normal manner in which it was addressing the wives ofprophet(Saw).

Argument 3:

Word Ahl Al Bayt is collective noun, So pronoun attached with noun depends uponnumber of persons addressed as well as their gender.

ahlihinna(4:25) their family 3rd person feminine plural possessive pronounahlihi (4:25) his family 3rd person masculine singular possessive pronounahlih(4:25) her family. 3rd person feminine singular possessive pronounahlika(12:25) your wife 2nd person masculine singular possessive pronounahlikum(12:93) your family 2nd person masculine plural possessive pronoun


22/89


23/89

Book of Refutations

23

cleansing} from the filth of sins. Al-Tabari, Tafsir (22:7) [after citing reports explainingAhl al-Bayt to mean the Ìtra] and al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul (p. 299 #734): FromÌkrima concerning 33:33:It is not as they claim, but the verse was revealedconcerning the wives of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam).

Al-Zamakhshari, Tafsir al-Kashshaf (2:212): In this [33:33] there is an explicit proofthat the wives of the Prophet Allah bless and greet him - are among the People of hisHouse (min Ahli Baytihi).

Al-Shawkani, Fath al-Qadir (4:278-280) and al-Mubarakfuri, Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi (9:48-49): Ibn Àbbas, Ìkrima, Àta, al-Kalbi, Muqatil, and Saìd ibn Jubayr said the wivesof the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) are specifically meant [in 33:33],and by house are meant the houses of his wives as mentioned before in the verses.While Abu Saìd al-Khudri, Mujahid, and Qatada it is also related from al-Kalbi saidthat those meant are specifically Àli, Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. They adducedthe fact that the pronouns are in the masculine, but this was refuted by the fact that the

noun Ahl is masculine and therefore necessitates a masculine gender as in the verse[Hud 73]. A third group stands midway between the two and includes both [the wivesand the Ìtra] A number of the verifying authorities consider this the most correct

explanation, among them al-Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir, and others.

Al-Jalalayn: Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33] i.e. the wives of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa alaalihi wa sallam). Al-Sawi, Hashiyat al-Jalalayn: It was said the verse [33:33] iscomprehensive (`mma) to mean the People of his House in the sense of his dwellingand these are his wives, and the People of his House in the sense of his lineage andthese are his offspring.

Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur (6:603): [after citing the narrations of the Ìtra] Ibn Sa`dnarrated from Ùrwa that he said: Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33] means the wives of theProphet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) and it was revealed in the house ofÀisha.

Ibn al-Jawzi, Zad al-Masir fi Ìlm al-Tafsir (6:378): Then He showed their superiorityover all women when He said: {You [feminine] are not like anyone [masculine] of thewomen} (33:32). Al-Zajjaj [the philologist] said: He did not say, like any otherwoman in the feminine, because the masculine form denotes a general exclusion of

both male and female [human beings], one and all.

Ibn Juzayy, Tafsir (p. 561): The Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi

wa sallam) are his wives, his offspring, and his near relatives such as al-Àbbas, Àli,and all for whom receiving sadaqa is unlawful.

Al-Bukhari, Sahih: Hadith from Anas: The Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wasallam) visited Àisha and,upon entering her house, said: As-Salmu àlaykum Ahl al-Bayt! wa rahmatullah. Whereupon she responded: Wa àlayka as-Salam warahmatullah, how did you find your wives [ahlak]? May Allah bless you. Then he wentaround to see all of his wives and said to them exactly what he had said to Àisha.

Al-Wahidi, al-Wajiz fi Tafsir al-Kitab al-Àziz (2:865): Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33] meaning,the wives of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) and the men [and

women] of the People of his House.


24/89

Book of Refutations

24

Al-Thaàlibi, Jawahir al-Hisan fi Tafsir al-Quran (2:212): This verse [Hud 73] showsthat the wife of a man is part of the People of his House (min Ahli Baytihi) and the

House in Suratal-Ahzab [33:33] refers to the dwelling quarters [i.e. of the wives].

Ibn Kathir, Tafsir (3:532) and al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul (p. 299 #733): From Ibn

Àbbas: This verse [33:33] was revealed concerning the wives of the Prophet (sallalahualaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam).

Ibn Jamaà, Ghurar al-Tibyan fi Ma lam Yusamma fi al-Quran (p. 421 #1201) and al-Suyuti in Mufhamat al-Aqran fi Mubhamat al-Quran: Ahl al-Bayt in verse 33 are theProphet and his wives. It was also said they are Àli, Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn,and it was also said they are those for whom sadaqa is unlawful [i.e. l Àqil, l Àli, lJa`far, and l al-Àbbas].

Al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi Ùlum al-Quran (2:197): The phrasing of the Quran [in Surat

al-Ahzab] shows that the wives are meant, that the verses were revealed concerningthem, and that it is impossible to exclude them from the meaning of the verse. However,since others were to be included with them it was said with the masculine gender: {Allahdesires to remove uncleanness far from you [masculine plural], O Folk of theHousehold}. It is then known that this desire comprises all the Folk of the Household both male and female as opposed to His saying {O wives of the Prophet} and it showsthat Àli and Fatima are more [specifically] deserving of this description ["Ahl al-Bayt"]than the wives.

Al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Quran (4:378-379): It [the verse Hud 73] shows that the wives ofthe Prophet Allah bless and greet him are of the People of his House (min Ahli

Baytihi) because the angels names Ibrahims wife as being of the People of his House,and so has Allah Most High said when addressing the wives of the Prophet Alah blessand greet him when He said: [33:33]. His wives are part of those meant because thebeginning of the address concerns them.

Abu al-Suùd, Irshad al-Àql al-Salim ila Mazaya al-Quran al-Karim (7:103): This[33:33], as you see, is an explicit verse and a radiant proof that the wives of the ProphetAllah bless and greet him are among the People of his House (min Ahli Baytihi),ruling once and for all the invalidity of the opinion of the Shiìs who narrow it to meanonly Fatima, Àli, and their two sons Allah be well-pleased with them. As for what theyclaim as their proof [hadith of the Mantle], it only shows that they [the Four] are part of

Ahl al-Bayt, not that other than them are excluded.


25/89

Book of Refutations

25

Hadith Al-Kisa

'Aisha reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out onemorning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came

Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him

under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took herunder it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah onlydesires to take away any un-cleanliness from you, O people of the household,

and purify you (thorough purifying)

(Sahih Muslim Book 031, Hadith Number 5955)

Firstly where are the remaining 9 Shia Imams mentioned here? Because this hadeeethexcludes them from the list of Ahlelbayt.

Secondly, this was a dua made by Prophet(Saw), since the verse 33:33 was revealed forthe wives of Prophet(Saw). So Prophet(Saw) made a dua inorder to include family of

Fatima(ra). Now the question to Shias is that, since the verse 33:33 was alreadyrevealed then why would Prophet(Saw),make Dua to purify family of Fatima(ra)?

The Shiite adherents claim that all members of the household of the Prophet and theirposterity are infallible. And thus, it is a must to obey them.; For they deserve to beImams. They do support their claim categorically with the above mentioned Quranicverse and the Prophetic Tradition. How true is their claim?

Both the Ahlul Sunnah Muslim and the Shia believe that the Prophet (s) also calledSalman Al-Farsi the Persian to be part of Ahlul Bayt. It is transmitted by at-Tabarani andal-Hakim that in one incident some people spoke very lowly about Salman al-Farsi. Theyspoke of the inferiority of Salman's Persian ethnicity, and upon hearing this theMessenger of Allah (s) declared, "Salman is from us, the Ahlul-Bayt." This narration isaccepted by the Shia.

Now, let us examine how the Shia makes sense of this Hadith:

"The reference to Salman Farsi as a member of the Ahlul-Bayt is honorary. SalmanFarsi's conversion to Islam left a great impression on the HolyProphet (S) and others.Throughout the years of the Holy Prophet's mission, Salman Farsi was one of thecompanions most dedicated in the service, defence and propagation of Islam. His serviceto the household of the HolyProphet and his sincere love for them earned him greatrespect from all quarters of the Ahlul-Bayt. Thus, as an honor for him, the Prophet (S)

referred to him as one of the Ahlul-Bayt (AS). We pray that he will be raised in thehonorable company of the ones he loved so dearly."

Source: http://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00450.html

This makes obvious sense. Ahlul Bayt refers to the people who lived under the house ofthe Prophet and his wives, offspring, etc. This was clearly mentioned at the beginning ofthis article where we defined what does "Ahlul Bayt" mean. Now, the Prophet (s) wantedto honor Salman Al-Farsi by calling him family, despite the fact that biologically he wasnot so. For example, I have a good friend which is very close to me, so I refer to him as"brother." Also, when I refer to old women who are very close and dear to me, I say to

them "O, you are my mother!" Indeed, this pattern is noticed in the Quran, in whichAllah says : "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their ownselves, and his wives
http://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00450.htmlhttp://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00450.htmlhttp://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00450.html


26/89

Book of Refutations

26

are their mothers." (Quran, 33:6) Obviously, they are not biological mothers of thebelievers, but they are honorary mothers. It is honorable to liken someone to be so closeas to be family. Indeed, this is why the Prophet (s) called Salman Al-Farsi to be part ofAhlul Bayt.

Allah calls the Prophet's Wives as Ahlul Bayt and said that He desired to make them pureand spotless. Let us see the verse again (since the Shia have the nasty habit of splicingQuranic Ayat so we must remind them of the verse in its entirity):

"O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on yourguard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; andspeak a good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display,like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regularCharity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove allabomination from you, you Ahlul Bayt, and to make you pure and spotless." (Quran,33:32-33)

When this verse was revealed, of course this was a great honor for the Prophet's Wives.It was like when the Quran mentioned Zayd (ra) by NAME, what an honor that was forhim! Indeed, Zayd (ra) was sad that he would not get to keep the honor of Islaamicallyhaving the Prophet's family name, despite the fact that he was adopted by the Prophet.(This would be a technical violation of the Islaamic laws of inheritance.) So it was thatZayd (ra) was very saddened, and Allah then gave him a greater honor in compensation--being mentioned in the Quran by name! What an honor!

Indeed, the Prophet's Wives were honored multiple times in the Quran, and were giventhe name of BOTH Ahlul Bayt and Umm Ul Mumineen (Mothers of the Believers) by Allahin His Book. Indeed, when the verse was revealed, the Prophet (s) wanted to alsoinclude other people in his Ahlul Bayt so that they would not feel left out. Rememberthat the Prophet (s) called Salman Al-Farsi as Ahlul Bayt when people were mocking himfor being Persian; so the Prophet (s) wanted to include him and honor him, so he calledhim as also part of Ahlul Bayt.

When the verse was revealed honoring the Prophet's Wives as Ahlul Bayt, the Prophet(s) did not want to exclude the other members of his household from this honor. So hegathered them around under his mantle (cloak) and made them honorary members ofAhlul Bayt just like he would do with Salman Al-Farsi.

The Prophet (s) spread his cloak over Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Hussain; then he said:

"These are Ahlul Bayt." In a similar way, the Prophet (s) would say to Salman Al-Farsi:"Salman is from us, the Ahlul-Bayt." So it was that the Prophet (s) made all of thesepeople honorary members of Ahlul Bayt, despite the fact that the word "Ahlul Bayt" isnot used in this manner and really only means the Prophet's wives and his children. Howcan it really mean Hasan and Hussain (ra) who did not even live under the same houseas the Prophet? Neither did Ali (ra) live in the same house as the Prophet! Indeed, this iswhy the Prophet (s) had to clarify that he (ra) also wanted to include these people aspart of Ahlul Bayt.

The Shia will quote the Hadith of Al-Kisa (the Cloak) and yet fail to interpret it in thesame way they do with Salman Al-Farsi. The Shia is very keen on saying that Salman(ra) is an HONORARY member of Ahlul Bayt, and not really a biological family member.Yet, they do not see the same for Ali (ra), who was NOT part of the Prophet's nuclear


27/89

Book of Refutations

27

family. Nuclear family refers to the immediate children, spouse, and immediate parents.And more specifically, the term "Ahlul Bayt" is used in the Arabic langauge as a kind andmodest way of referring to a man's wives. Ali (ra) is thus not technically part of the AhlulBayt, but rather only an honorary member like Salman Al-Farsi.

The Prophet (s) wrapped these members in the cloak asking Allah to grant them thesame status as his own Ahlul Bayt. One of the Prophet's Wives asked if she was also atsuch a lofty status, and the Prophet (s) affirmed this by praising her.

Almighty Allah revealed the verse "O Wives of the Prophet...Allah only desires to...". TheHoly Prophet (s) covered Ali, Fatimah, Hasan, and Husayn (peace be upon them all) withthe cloak and then stretched his hand toward the sky and said: "Allah! These are theMembers of my Household, so purify them of all uncleanliness'. Umm Salamah said: "Iasked him: "Am I also with you?" He stated: "You are on good and virtue!".

First, the Prophet's wife did NOT ask if she was part of Ahlul Bayt. That would be aridicolous question to ask. By the textbook definition linguistically she was part of AhlulBayt, and an entire verse was just revealed about her! She simply asked if she too waswith the Prophet, and he replied in the affirmative!

How distorted is the Shia interpretation of this. They say that Umm Salamah (ra) askedif she could be part of Ahlul Bayt. Why would she ask such an obvious question? That's

like me asking my parents: "am I your son?" The answer is too obvious, since I am bydefinition my parent's son. My parents sometimes meet my good friends and out ofkindness they say "you are our beta" (which translates to "you are our son"). Theywould not need to say this to me, but itssimply out of an honor that they are referringto my friend in this manner to be kind and raise his status to a status that I already haveby birth. Likewise, the Prophet (s) was simply raising the status of Ali, Fatima, Hasan,and Hussain to a level that the wives of the Prophet were intrinsically already at, andwere specifically mentioned in the Quran as.

The Shia love to add parenthetical insertions to the Quran and Hadith, adding words andphrases that do not really appear, praying and hoping that these additions can

successfully change the meaning. Let us see how the Shia adds ludicrous parantheticalinsertions in the Hadith about Umm Salamah. This is what they added:

I asked him: "Am I also with you?" He stated: "You are on good and virtue" (but did notsay that you are a member of my Household)'."

I laughed when I read this, because nowhere does it appear in the Arabic, and did theProphet (s) start talking about himself in the third person suddenly? Not only is thisfunny, but it is KUFR (disbelief) to change the meanings of the Messenger's words; Allahsays these are the disbelievers " who know not the Book, but see therein their owndesires, and they do nothing but conjecture. Then woe to those who write the Book with

their own hands, and then say: 'This is from Allah,' To traffic with it for a miserableprice! Woe to them for what their hands do write..." (Quran, 2:77-78)


28/89

Book of Refutations

28

Umm Salamah (ra) did NOT ask if she is part of Ahlul Bayt, so why are the Shiaresponding with this in paranthesis? It is as if they want to add their own propagandawherever they can! Umm Salamah (ra) simply asked if she was with the Prophet, and he(s) said "YOU ARE ON GOOD AND VIRTUE" meaning that of course she is.

Allah Himself says in the Quran that He will purify the Wives of the Prophet and makethem "pure and spotless." So then, the Prophet (s) wanted Allah to also purify the otherswhom he loved including Ali, Hasan, Hussain, and Bibi Fatima. Suppose the verse wasaddressed to these people, confirming that Allah had purified them, why would theProphet (s) ask Allah to include them in the purification?! Think of the logic. Allah says "Ipurify Ali." Then, the Prophet (s) immediately responds "O Allah, please purify Ali!" Doesthis make any sense!? The Prophet (s) had to ask Allah for something Allah just said thatHe already did. This is nonsense talk. Obviously, the Prophet (s) is asking Allah to givethe same honor to Ali's family that He gave to his wives.

The Prophet (s) would refer to the Family of Ali (ra) as his own family out of honorarylove. In fact, he (s) would go to the prayer and stop on the way to collect Ali's Family,and then he would say "O people of the House" despite the fact that none of them livedin the same house as the Prophet. Again, this is out of honorary kindness, to includethem on a status as high as his wives who were mentioned as Ahlul Bayt by AllahAlmighty. So the Shia can claim that the Prophet (s) called Ali (ra) to be Ahlul Bayt, butcan they claim that Allah did as well? The Prophet's Wives can claim both honors!

The entire verse is addressed to the WIVES of the Prophet:

O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any of the (other) women. If you do fear(Allah), be not too complaisant of speech, lest one in whose heart is a disease should bemoved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just. And stay quietly in your houses,and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former times of ignorance: andestablish regular prayer, and give regular charity, and obey Allah and His Messenger.And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlul Bayt, and to makeyou pure and spotless. And recite what is rehearsed to you in your homes of the signs ofAllah and His wisdom: For allah understands the finest mysteries and is well-acquainted(with them) (Quran 33:32-34)

So before and after the part about being pure and spotless, the Quran is clearly talking

about the wives of the Prophet. Funny how the Shia argue that all the admonitions ofAllah are for the Prophet's Wives and all the praises are to Ali's Family. Is this style ofreading intellectually fair?

Now the Shia claim Ahlul Sunnah has no Hadith indicating that the Prophet indicated theWives as Ahlul Bayt at the time of the Hadith of Al Kisa:

Ibn Asakir in his Arbain fi ummahatil muminin(p 137, hadis 28) narrated fromUmm Salama:While the messenger of Allah (pbuh) was in my house one day, the servant

came and said: Ali and Fatima are at the door. He said: Withdraw, and I

withdrew to a corner of a house. Ali and Fatima enter with Hasan and Husayn

who were young children. He took Hasan and Husayn and sat them in his lap,


29/89


30/89


31/89

Book of Refutations

31

We have one authentic narration from the Mother of believers 'Aisha (ra) in Sahih

Muslim in which she says that Allah's Apostle SAWS went out one morning wearing a

striped cloak of the black camel's hair.

And where did he go? He went to Umm Salama's (ra) house and these verses wererevealed in her house as she states in the authentic narrations:

: : :

: ! : : : : : - : - : 2/150

: Translation:Umm Salmah (ra) said: In my house these verses were revealed "Allahonly wills to remove what is foul from you Ahlul-Bayt and to purify you thoroughly." So

the Prophet PBUH called for 'Ali and Fatima and Hasan and Husein and then said: "These

are Ahlul-Bayt", In the Hadith of al Qadi and al Summi he said: "They are my Ahel". So I

said: "O Messenger of Allah! aren't I also from your Ahlul-Bayt?" He said: "Yes you are

Insha-Allah."

Muhaddith: Al Hakim from al Sunan al kubrah for Bayhaqi.

Hadith rank: Isnad SAHIH narrators all trustworthy.

There are several narrations one says "yes you are insha-Allah" and in another you are

upon goodness. (twice)"

What we need to know here is that the clear authentic narrations state that the verses

were revealed before the event of the cloak and that in this event the Prophet SAWS

only read the verses for them and made Du'ah to them, he did not exclude the wives or

anyone else from his Ahlul-Bayt, all he did was include the four.

So if the verses were revealed before the event then the saying of the Shia "They (the

four) are the cause of revelation" is incorrect.

As you all know there is something in Quranic sciences called "Asbab al-Nuzoul" which translates to "The causes of the revelations", this is basically an event

which takes place and causes a verse to be revealed as a result, such as:


32/89

Book of Refutations

32

So why was this revealed? What is the cause for revelation OR "Sabab al-Nuzoul"? we

read in Sahih Muslim that it is related to the bounties from the battle of Badr:

This above illustrates the cause for the revelation for verse [8:1], it is an event which

takes place then Allah reveals a verse because of it, but in our case it is incorrect to say

that the four are the cause for the revelation of [33:33] because the cause must precede

the revelation, this contradicts the authentic narrations that show that this verse had

already been revealed before the event of the cloak.

Secondly a Shia may say that the narrations or the "form" of the narration shows that

this was an independent verse that was revealed separately, this is because we only

read in the Hadith of Umm Salamah (ra) a part of the verse and not a complete verse:

((In my house these verses were revealed "Allah only wills to remove what is foul

from you Ahlul-Bayt and to purify you thoroughly."So the Prophet PBUH called for

'Ali and...))

They will ask you why didn't Umm Salamah (ra) mention the entire verse? Why only the

last part? Then they will say that according to them this means that it is a separate

verse altogether.

This is incorrect, all you have to do is look up to the verse I provided as an exampleabove in [al-Anfal 8:1] and then read the authentic narration in Sahih Muslim to see that

They ask you, [O Muhammad], about the bounties [of war]. Say, "The [decision concerning] bounties

is for Allah and the Messenger." So fear Allah and amend that which is between you and obey Allah

and His Messenger, if you should be believers. [al-Anfal 8:1]

. . : . . : 8/1 } { :

: : - : - : 8471 : Translation:Sa'ad bin abi Waqqas (ra) narrates: My father took a sword from the Khums then

he went to the prophet SAWS and told him: "Grant me this sword" but the Prophet SAWS did not

agree to grant him the sword, thus Allah revealed: {They ask you about the bounties. Say, "The

bounties are for Allah and the Messenger."}


33/89


34/89

Book of Refutations

34

Surely that is wrong.

And another example from the Hadith of Mu'ath ibn Jabal (ra) regarding Surat al-

Baqara:

We read the Hadith of Mu'ath (ra) in Sahih Sunan abu Dawoud by al-Albani:

Would this by any chance mean that the three different colours are three different

verses?

A quick final example before we leave this matter, Surat al-Noor verse 31:

#

O you who have believed, decreed upon you is fasting as it was decreed upon those before

you that you may become righteous - (183) [Fasting for] a limited number of days. So

whoever among you is ill or on a journey [during them] - then an equal number of days [are

to be made up]. And upon those who are able [to fast, but with hardship] - a ransom [as

substitute] of feeding a poor person [each day]. And whoever volunteers excess - it is better

for him. But to fast is best for you, if you only knew. (184) [al-Baqara 2:183-184]

( : )

Translation:Mu'ath (ra) said: The Prophet SAWS used to fast three days from each month

and he would fast the day of 'Ashura so Allah revealed: {decreed upon you is fasting as it

was decreed upon those before you that you may become righteous - (183) [Fasting for] a

limited number of days. So whoever among you is ill or on a journey [during them] - then an

equal number of days [are to be made up]. And upon those who are able [to fast, but with

hardship] - a ransom [as substitute] of feeding a poor person [each day].}

O you who have believed,decreed upon you is fasting as it was decreed upon those before

you that you may become righteous - (183) [Fasting for] a limited number of days. So

whoever among you is ill or on a journey [during them] - then an equal number of days [are to

be made up]. And upon those who are able [to fast, but with hardship] - a ransom [as

substitute] of feeding a poor person [each day]. And whoever volunteers excess - it is better

for him. But to fast is best for you, if you only knew.(184) [al-Baqara 2:183-184]

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their

adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to

reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their

sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their

women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of

women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their

adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed. [al-Noor

24:31]


35/89

Book of Refutations

35

And in Sahih al-Bukhari we read:

So now this makes it three separate verses according to the Shia?

So I hope that you have understood from the above what is meant by "Asbab al-Nuzoul"

or the causes for the revelations and how they work and how the companions may refer

to a part of a verse and not necessarily all of it in a Hadith, this is very common as you

see.

So far what we have is:

1- Nothing in the Hadith proves that the last part of [33:33] is a different verse like the

Shia scholars claimed.

2- The authentic narrations show us that the verses were revealed and then the Prophet

SAWS would call on the four, they are not the cause of revelation.

3- Ayatul-Tathir is a part of a verse and not a separate verse; it is tied logically with

what is before it and after it in terms of context.

: : } . } : : - : - : 9574

: Translation:Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba: 'Aisha used to say: "When (the verse): "They should

draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets

at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces."

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their

adornment only that which is apparent, andto draw their veils over their necks and

bosoms,and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands'

fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters'

sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know

naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide

of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may

succeed. [al-Noor 24:31]


36/89

Book of Refutations

36

Linguistics and Wording indepth Analysis

Part 1

During the course of the verses we observe the feminine usage of words suchas "Waqarna" and "Waothkurna" so the speech is directed at the wives since allcolours in red before and after are feminine with the Arabic letter "called "Nun al-Niswaat the end of each word to prove that it is talking about females.

Everything highlighted in Red above is feminine in the Arabic Quranic text, it contains

the speech to the Prophet's SAWS wives ordering them to do things and forbidding them

and promising them other things. So how can the Shia know that the part "Allah intends

only to remove from you the impurity, O people of the household, and to purify you a

thorough purification"is an independent parenthetical phrase detached from all

surrounding verses? is this apparent from the context of the verses and the verse itself

or did you reach this conclusion based on an outside source other than the words of

Allah?

I explain:

If an Arab or your average Muslim or a Bedouin in the desert during the time of the

Prophet SAWS reads these verses, would he notice that Allah switched in the second half

of verse [33:33] from addressing the wives and started addressing somebody else?

If the Shia answer is yes then by all means show us something in the verses, a sign that

hints that the previous topic ended and Allah stopped addressing the wives and he

switched to talk to some other people about some other topic, show us the linguistic

proof that supports your claim that a subject had ended and a new subject was opened

in the middle of [33:33].

If the Shia answers by saying that the proof is in Hadith al-Kisaa then this is a pathetic

argument which shows ignorance in the language of the Arabs, because the claim thatthere is a parenthetical phrase in the middle of a discourse without any signs or hints or

O wives of the Prophet, youare not like anyone among women. If you fearAllah, then do not

be softin speech [to men], lest he in whose heart is disease should covet, but speakwith

appropriate speech. (32) And abidein your housesand do not display yourselvesas [was] the

display of the former times of ignorance. And establishprayer and givezakah and obeyAllah

and His Messenger. Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the

[Prophet's] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification. (33) And rememberwhat is

recited in your housesof the verses of Allah and wisdom. Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and

Acquainted [with all things]. (34)


37/89

Book of Refutations

37

proofs from the phrase itself shows that there is no eloquence in the speech of Allah and

it contradicts the definition of a parenthetical phrase as defined by the Arab scholars of

language:

Here we have quoted the linguists such as Ibn Junay in al-Khasaes 1/335 & Ibn Hisham

al-Ansari in al-Mughni page 506, they both define the parenthetical phrase saying that it

comes in the middle of the discourse or between two connected phrases with the

purpose of strengthening the meaning or giving an explanation or making a clarification,

and that it should not matter to the original purpose of the sentence nor should the

sentence be dependent on it for completion of meaning, and that the parenthetical

phrase must come with a sign or hint which proves it.

So the parenthetical phrase must be understood from the context of the language - it

cannot be left to an external source to prove that it is parenthetical. No Arab hearing this

verse on its own (which is how the Arabs understood the Qur'an) would imagine that

these words are not meant for the Mothers of the Believers. Furthermore, if there is no

contextual evidence that this phrase is parenthetical, this would mean that the

parenthetical phrase is completely random - yet Allah's Speech is not random! I seek

refuge in Allah from those who hint to this.

So as we said the Arabs understood the Quran in its apparent form and this was their

religion, this is why the proof needs to be presented from the content itself and not from

an outside source, Ayatullah al-Khoei says in his book of Tafseer "al-Bayan fi Tafseer al-

Quran" page 264:

:

533 1 :

605 :


38/89


39/89

Book of Refutations

39

One of many examples is from this Sahih Hadith:

Anas said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served

bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their hearts content, and he (the

Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood

up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not

get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the

apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as-Salamu alaikum to every one of them

and said: Members of the household (Ahlul Bayt), how are you?? They said:

Messenger of Allah, we are in good state How do you find your family? He would say: In

good state.

(Sahih Muslim Book 008, Hadith 3328)

(B):The feminine was used for all surrounding verses but Allah addresses Ahlul-Bayt with

masculine.

Answer:The answer to this is split into two parts, the first one is that we must first

check the context of the verses, because the context gives us the meaning as the Shia

scholars says:

How I wish al-Milani would apply what he actually says to verse [33:33] that would help

solve the whole problem I suppose.

- - 32 :

Translation:"In the science of Usool we say: The context is a proof, meaning that when we

need to know the meaning of some words or the meaning of a word, we look at what

surrounds it and in what context it is found in, because the words that surround it and thecontext of the phrase that contains it will aid us in understanding that word or phrase, this is

something they mention in 'Ilm al-Usool and this is something Sahih(correct) and no one

argues about it." [Ayat al-Tathir, pg 23 - by: Grand Ayatullah Sayyed 'Ali al-Milani]


40/89

Book of Refutations

40

So we go back to the context to see who is Allah talking to?

In verse 28, Allah says:

O Prophet, Tell your wives

In verse 31, Allah says:

O Prophet, Tell your wives

So the divine speech is directed to the Prophet SAWS and the mothers of believers (ra),

then after Allah tells them what they must do he clarifies that he only intends to purify

the prophetic household, so he addresses all of them together by saying:

In verse 33:

Allah but wills to remove from you all that is foul O people of the household...

So he gives this advice to the wives in order to purify the entire prophetic household that

contains the Prophet SAWS and his wives.

That is a reason for the use of masculine in:

The main reason for the use of masculine (above in blue) however is not necessarily the

reason I just presented, the main reason for the use of masculine around the word

"Ahlul-Bayt" in the above verse is that the word "Ahlul-Bayt" or "Ahel", this word in

Arabic is a masculine word so Allah would never use feminine to refer to a masculine

word, if Allah were to actually use feminine then that'd be a grammatical error and Allah

never commits grammatical errors. In English this would be called "collective noun" and

they are always masculine, this in short is the answer as to why masculine is used.

And one needs to know that words in the Arabic language are categorised to either

"masculine" or "feminine", a quick example of this would be:

The word "sword" in Arabic is a masculine word, while the word "table" is a feminine

Allah but wills to remove from youall that is foul O people of the household(AHLUL-BAYT) and

to purify youa thorough purification

"innama yureedu Allahu liyuthhiba AAankumualrrijsa ahla-albayti wa yutahhirakum tat-

heeran"


41/89

Book of Refutations

41

word.

So the way you refer to both is different:

In case of the sword:

In case of the table:

As you notice, both of them are referred to as "it" in English but the difference is that in

the Arabic language the way you write "it" is different for masculine and feminine

objects, notice for sword it is written like this as if saying "carried HIM" but fortable it is written like this as if saying "carried HER", this shows that in the Arabicyou refer to something based on whether the word itself is a feminine word or a

masculine word, this is the case with "Ahlul-Bayt" and "Ahel", they are masculine words

so Allah can never use feminine.

In the classical Arab book of language "Lisan al-'Arab" volume 11 page 28:

Translation:I saw a sword so I carried iton my back

Translation:I saw a table so I carried iton my back

82 11 Translation:Seebaweih said about the plural of Ahel: Ahloun, and al-Khalil was asked: why

did they make Taskeen on the letter "Haa" of the word Ahel and did not make Tahreek for it

like the word Ardeen? He replied:Because the word Ahel is masculine.


42/89

Book of Refutations

42

And in the same volume on page 29:

I provide some examples:

In Mustadrak al-Wasael by al-Mirza al-Noori 41/220, we read the Hadith of 'Ali (ra)

talking about marriage:

Above we have coloured the feminine words with Red and the masculine ones inBlue, as

you see 'Ali (ra) is talking about the wife and he addresses her in feminine however

when he reaches the part where he calls the wife "Ahel" he refers to her in masculine,

this is because the word "Ahel" is a masculine word and 'Ali (ra) could never use

feminine in this location.

The same is in Ayatul-Tathir when Allah refers to the wives as Ahlul-Bayt he uses

masculine and these are the rules of the Arabic tongue, and what is meant here is that

by following these orders and prohibitions from God they would be purified, as Allahsaid:

: : : : : :

: Translation:Ahlul-Madhab: those who follow the Madhab. and Ahlul-Islam: those who believe

in Islam. and Ahlul-Amr: the Wulat. and Ahlul-Bayt(Household): are those who live in it(House).

and Ahlul-Rajol (Ahel of a man): are those who are closest to him. and Ahlul-Bayt of the

Prophet SAWS are: his wives,his daughters, his brother in law, I mean 'Ali peace be upon

him, it is also said: The wives of the Prophet SAWSand the men who are from his Aal.

( " : ) :

- 022 14 Translation:From 'Ali (as): ...So when his wife is wedto him and she enteredon him, he

should pray two Raka'at then wipe his hand on her forelock,then he should say: "O Allah bless

my Ahel for me and bless me for them,if you have gathered us then gather us for goodness and

if you wish to separate us then make our separation into goodness." then if he sits by

her sidehe would wipe her forelock.


43/89

Book of Refutations

43

Another example is the verse about the Prophet Musa SAWS and his wife:

Here the "Ahel" is referring to only his wife but Musa (as) addressed her in the plural of

masculine, even the Shia scholars of Tafseer admitted it such as al-Tabrasi in his

"Jawami'i al-Jami'i" 2

Book of Refutation I Verse 33

Documents