Skip to: Site menu | Main content


We believe that a true and comprehensive understanding of Islam would not be possible without careful recognition of the Prophetic Tradition and the Prophet's Household. And Allah is the Source of Strength.

Apropos of: AlHindi's  'Can Mubahila Exclude Wives From Ahlulbayt'

Note: This page answers only selective parts of the article in question
Please Visit's "Mubahila; Curse The Liars".


Question 1: Does the incident of Mubahila excludes wives of prophet(saw) from his ahlebayt?

The incident of mubahila is often used as an evidence to exclude wives of prophet(Saw) from his ahlebayt by the shias, they conclude this by giving the explanation that since wives of prophet(Saw) were not taken for the incident of mubahila, thus they are not ahlebayt, because when the verse (3:61) was revealed prophet(Saw) called Ali(ra), Fatima(ra), Hasan(ra) and Husain(ra) and said: O Allah, they are my family(ahli). And even wives of prophet(Saw) were not the purified ones because mubahila could have only be taken-up by the ones who were pure and infallible.

Now the reason we said that this incident is irrelevant to the issue that are wives of prophet(Saw) ahlebayt or not? Because no where in the verse we find Allah commanding prophet(saw) to call his ahlebayt. The verse does not say: �Let us call Ahlu Baytena, wa Ahlu Baytakum� but It says: �Nisa�ana wa Nisaakum� , Neither does the quran says: �let us call the purified ones�, Nor does it says: �Let us call the infallible ones� . So how can people with some sense claim that the ones who were not taken for mubahila are excluded from Ahlebayt of prophet(saw) or from being the purified ones, when this was not the criteria set by Allah?

Those who have the ability to think, may think, that if the wives of the Prophet (SAW) were not taken to Mubahila (in accordance with the Quran for his (SAW) women), and if the wives were not covered by his (SAW) cloak when the verse of purity was revealed, and only 4 other significant personalities were involved on both occasions, what would it mean?

The event of Mubahila is never solely used to exclude the wives of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) from his Ahlulbayt (AS), or the purified ones. The event of Mubahila is used to protect the honor, dignity and stature of the personalities Rasool (SAW) took with himself to prove the authenticity, truth and spirit of his message.

The author and the readers must not be tight-minded and create this to be a competition between the companions (RA), the wives (RA) and the Ahlulbayt (AS). Each of them had their role in Islam and each contributed in their own capacity.

But when it comes to the difference and putting each one of them in their rightful place, then the difference lies between them in context of spirituality, closeness to Rasool (SAW) and piety. If AlHindi's complete article is read, he proves many points already which might be raised here.

To begin with, let us start with Imam Ali's (AS) own words;

..... Listen O' Mu'awiya! We (Ahlul Bayt, the progeny of the Holy Prophet (s)) are unique examples of the creation of Allah. For such a status, we are not under obligation to any person or tribe but the Almighty Allah who granted us these blessings. Human beings have received and will receive perfection through us. The perpetual supremacy and inherent superiority do not prevent us from making contact with human beings or with your clan, we have married amongst you and have established family connections with your (as well as with others) clan, though you do not belong to our class.

How can you be our equal when the Holy Prophet (s) belongs to us and Abu Jahl, the worst enemy of Islam was from amongst you.
Asadullah (lit. "the Lion of Allah" - a title of Imam Ali (a)) is from amongst us, while Asadul Ahlaaf (lion of the opposing groups, who had sworn to fight against Islam and the Holy Prophet (s)) was from you. The two foremost leaders of the youth of Paradise (Imam Hasan (a) & Imam Husayn (a)) are from us and the children of Hell are from you. The best woman in the world (title bestowed by Allah upon Fatima (a)) the beloved daughter of the Holy Prophet (s) is from us, and the slanderer and the wood-carrying woman who tried to spend every hour of her life in doing harm to the Holy Prophet of Islam (s), was your aunt. ....
Nahjul Balaga, Letter 28, A reply by Imam Ali to the letter sent by Mawiya

The Ahlulbayt (AS), or the part of the Ahlulbayt of Muhammad (SAW) which were taken for Mubahila, included Ali (AS), Fatima (AS), Hassan (AS) and Hussain (AS). This is the group which was born Muslims, this is the group which never worshipped idols even once, this was the group brought up by the Prophet (SAW) himself under his own (SAW) supervision, this was the group which included the leader of the women of paradise (Janab e Zahra (AS)), the princes of the youth of paradise (Imam Hassan (AS) and Hussain (AS)) and the Mawla and Imam of Muttaqeen (Ali (AS)). This is also the same group which is included in the Durood every muslim (irrespective of his sect) sends after his salaat and this is the same group which was included under the cloak of Prophet (SAW) when the verse of purity was revealed. The relation of this group with the Prophet (SAW) commenced at their births and was not "terminable".

The other group, the companions of Prophet (SAW), included men who were drunkards, idol worshippers and adulters before their acceptance of Islam. After acceptance of Islam, their past sins were forgiven, however some of them obeyed Rasool (SAW) in truest of spirits, some became hypocrites, some became renegades, some sinned and fought/killed one another. The relation of this group with the Prophet (SAW) commenced after their acceptance of Islam and was "terminable" upon their reverting back from Islam.

The third group, the wives of Prophet (SAW), were once again idol worshippers before their acceptance of Islam. Some of these women were widows of the kuffars killed by Muslims, some were gifts sent by kings, some were daughters of the companions and some were rich business women who spent all that they had in the way of Islam. Some of these women obeyed Rasool (SAW) in the truest of spirits, some were envious and plotted against one another and forced the Prophet (SAW) not to speak with them for days. The relation of these women with the Prophet (SAW) commenced after their marriage with him (SAW) and was "terminable" at divorce. These women were a part of the family of the Prophet (SAW), but were they also a part of "THE" Ahlulbayt is  to be seen and is discussed in a lot of detail in some of the other Apropos-ed Replies.

But to say that the Shias use the event of Mubahila to prove that the wives are not a part of "THE" Ahlulbayt is a bit premature.


Question 2: Why was the imprecation extended to �sons� and �women�?

There was �only one reason� for the imprecation being extended to family members. And it was because they were closely related to the disputants. Since Allah has put in man the love of his children and family, to such an extent that he puts himself in jeopardy to save them, plunges into perilous situations to keep them safe. That is why Allah extended the curse to family members, to distinguish between truth and falsehood because the ones who were on falsehood wouldn�t have dared to take up the challenge.

Had it been the case that the curse was restricted to the disputants only, then even the ones who were on falsehood would have dared to take up the mubahila challenge. But it was the hikmah of Almighty Allah, So he(swt) extended the curse to family members too. Thus making it impossible for the ones who were on falsehood to take up the mubahila challenge. And this is what happened eventually.

From this we realize that the ones who were taken for mubahila from the side of prophet(Saw) were because they were closely related to prophet(Saw).The other reasonings people have made regarding this issue are incorrect. Neither they were infallible nor the most superior of the whole muslim community or only the ones worthy to be taken, all these are senseless assumptions made. They were only taken because they were closely related to prophet(Saw). And we get to know the same from the authentic narration, where prophet(Saw) gathered ali(ra), Fatima(ra), hassan(ra) and hussain(ra) when the verse (3:61) was revealed and said: �they are my family �(sahi muslim). Indicating that that they were being taken because they closely related to him.

I thank the author for proving and supporting our claim that the greatest assets of Prophet (SAW) were Janab e Zahra (AS), Imam Ali (AS), Imam Hassan (AS) and Imam Hussain (AS). Amongst all of the companions and wives alive in the 10th year of Prophethood, the Prophet (SAW) took these four blessed people and proved that he has brought forward his (SAW) most valued possessions in the way of Allah. This alone is sufficient to prove their superiority over other people that they were considered closest to the Prophet (SAW) by the Prophet (SAW) himself. You and I can write pages and pages stating Mr A was very close to the Prophet (SAW) and Mr B was very close to the prophet (SAW) but what can prove a point other than the prophet (SAW) himself showing who were close to him.

We have also stated earlier in different articles, that Muhammad (SAW) was the prophet of the creator. He loved for Allah and not out of his personal emotions. For stating that Muhammad (SAW) loved his own family due to his natural bonding is only degrading the status of Muhammad (SAW).

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Last of the prophets; and Allah is cognizant of all things.
Quran [33:40]

Muhammad (SAW) is a messenger for Ali (AS), Fatima (AS), Hassan (AS) and Hussain (AS) as well. It must be remembered that the Prophet of Allah was just and his love was for the sake of Allah and his dislike was for the sake of Allah. The closest to the prophet (SAW) would not be his biological children but the ones who were superior most in knowledge, piety and spirituality, because that is what justice of the love of Prophet (SAW) is.

The author has stated that these four people were taken to Mubahila because they were very closely related to the Messenger. The fact is that these were the closest to the messenger, for if some one else was closer, he would have been taken by Prophet (SAW) as per the author's interpretation.

I swear by the star when it goes down. Your companion does not err, nor does he (Muhammad) go astray; Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed, The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him,
Quran [53:1-5]

Did the Prophet (SAW) select the four blessed personalities because he was biologically related to them? Is this fair for the Prophet (SAW) to have a different attitude towards his own family?

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of
knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your
women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and
pray for the curse of Allah on the liars
Quran [3:61]

The Prophet (SAW) had the option to include all of his women, his sons and his near people for this curse. The Prophet (SAW) opted only to include a special group for this event. What does this prove? Is the author trying to reason the decision of the prophet (SAW) with his own limited and inferior intellectual capabilities? That too only to degrade and bring down the status of "THE" Ahlulbayt (AS)?

The author says that they were included only because they were closely related to the prophet and which was proved later on by Prophet's (SAW) hadith labeling them as his (SAW) family members. Then the author should also tell me why did not the Quran tell the Prophet (SAW) to bring his daughters and wives instead of women and why were near people used separately along with sons, given that the prophet (SAW) had no brother or son at that time?

The author and the lovers of people like Mawiya should also tell me what is their opinion about the people who hurt, fought, opposed and killed these greatest assets of Prophet (SAW), the assets for whom the prophet (SAW) himself would, quoting the author, "puts himself in jeopardy to save them, plunges into perilous situations to keep them safe."?


Question 4: Doesn�t it signify that �only� Ali(ra), Fatima(ra), Hassan(ra), Hussain(ra) are ahlebayt because prophet(Saw) in the incident of mubahila prophet(Saw) called them and said they are my family(ahl).

No, this is incorrect understanding of the narration. Prophet(saw) called Ali(ra), Fatima(ra), Hassan(ra), Hussain(ra) in the incident of mubahila and said they are my family(ahl), Prophet(Saw) didn�t say that �ONLY� these are my ahlebayt.

Moreover if we are to agree with this interpretation then let us bring some other examples and apply the similar interpretations to them.

Example 1: In the incident of Ifk prophet(saw) called his wife as �ahlebayt�

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

Example 2: In another narration of sahi muslim prophet(Saw) again addressed his wives as ahlebayt.

Anas(ra) said: I also saw the wedding feast of Zainab, and he (the Holy Prophet) served bread and meat to the people, and made them eat to their heart�s content, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent me to call people, and as he was free (from the ceremony) he stood up and I followed him. Two persons were left and they were busy in talking and did not get out (of the apartment). He (the Holy Prophet) then proceeded towards (the apartments of) his wives. He greeted with as−Salamu �alaikum to every one of them and said: Members of the household(ahle 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. (sahi muslim Bk 8, Number 3328)

Explanation: Now if we apply the similar logic to these examples which shias applied to the narration of mubahila. Then the conclusion will be that only wives of prophet(Saw) are ahlebayt, because in these examples too prophet(Saw) didn�t mention any other member to be from his Ahlebayt. He just said to this wife �my family� (ahli bayti).

But the fact is that we know this is wrong interpretation neither will ahle sunnah agree with such interpretation nor will any unbiased reader, Infact if someone approaches to a shias with these examples to exclude Family of hz ali(ra) from Ahlebayt then they will surely mock at him. Similarly, even we do the same when these shias come up to sunnis with the narrations of mubahila as proof to exclude wives of prophet(Saw) from Ahlebayt.

When prophet(saw) addressed people with the term �ahlebayt� at different occasions, that doesn�t excludes from the ahlebayt the others who were not present in the scene, because its very simple to understand that, while he(saw) addressed a group with the term ahlebayt �only those were present there� , and the rest were not present in that scene.

A wife is a part of the man's family. A son is a part of the man's family. An uncle, an aunt are a part of a man's family. No one says that the wives of the Prophet (SAW) were a part of his family. That is absurd. We only claim that the family or "THE" Ahlulbayt on who we send durood on and on who the verse of purity was revealed, on who zakat is forbidden, does not include the wives of prophet (SAW).

Quoting a detailed write-up dealing with the Shia stand on the wives inclusion in the Ahlulbayt (AS);

This is what happens when you consult dictionaries rather than Quran and Rasool's (SAW) Shariah. But before i go to the Quran, Let us take care of Dictionaries.

"Immediate Family
Definition: Spouse, parents and grand parents, children and grand children, brothers and sisters, mother in law and father in law, brothers in law and sisters in law, daughters in law and sons in law. Adopted and step members are also included in immediate family"

Here is the catch. My multinational company has given medical benefits upto thousands of Rupees to my "Immediate Family". They say I do not need to pay my wife's and children's medical bills out of my pocket. But what about my parents and siblings? Surely they are also a part of my immediate family, no? If i follow the approach of Ahlulbayt's Author, I must sue my company for claiming to provide medical bills for my Immediate family but only including my wife and children in that group. Any wise man will understand that although my nephews and in-laws are also included in the dictionary definition of my Immediate Family, when my company speaks about my Immediate Family, they only cater a small group of them, limiting them to my wife and kids only.

As a conclusion, it is safe to assume that although my parents, in-laws, nephews, siblings, stepmothers etc are included in the lingual term "my immediate family", only my wife and children are referred to that term when my Company uses it in it's contract. It does not mean that my mother is not a part of my immediate family, it only means that she is not included in the benefits provided to my immediate family., Apropos of:'s 'Prophet�s Wives are Ahlel Bayt'

Coming back to the author's interpretation earlier that the Prophet (SAW) took some people because of they were closely related to the Prophet (SAW). Does this mean that the wives were not closely related to the Prophet (SAW)? And if they were also similarly or even more closely related to the Prophet (SAW) then what was the other criteria which the Prophet (SAW) followed and only took his (SAW) cousin, daughter and two grandsons?


Question 5: Were Ali(ra), Fatima(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) included in mubahila because they were infallible/purified and the most virtues in the muslim community?

Had it been the reason then surely Allah would have mentioned this in quran. Allah would have surely said to both the groups that: �call the ones who are infallible/purified among you�, Or Allah would have said that: �call those who were most pious and virtues among you�. But Allah just said: �call your sons , your women, and yourselves� to both the parties.

And even prophet(Saw) would have not said gathering ali(ra), Fatima(ra), hassan(ra) and hussain(ra) that �they are my family�(sahi muslim). He(saw) would have said: They are the infallible ones. Or that �they are most virtues ones�. But nothing such was reported.

Actually the Hikmah behind including the family members of disputants was not because they were infallible or they were the most pious among the community, but �only� because they were the ones who were closely related to them. And this reason is even supported if we look at the condition that, �family members of only one party were not included but of both the parties were to be included�. Now its nowhere mentioned that the christian disputants considered even their family members to be purified/inafflible.

Note: From this, we in no way want to prove that these members were not pious or didn�t have any virtues. (May Allah forbid). We regard them as highly noble , virtues, and pious personalities of Islam. But we even have authentic reports that there were people in muslim community in that period who were more virtues than some of these members. So if at all the criteria was to bring virtues personalities of muslim community then surely someother members would have been brought, but since this was not at all a condition, they were not brought. And even they being not called proves that calling the most virtues ones was not a condition. (Refer sahi bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 20 and 34)

There had always been a group of Muslims, unfortunately, who have had made their duty to degrade the status of Muhammad (SAW) wa Aal e Muhammad (AS) as a hobby, to elevate certain people in status, in order to justify their acts.

A part of the answer to this lies in our answer to Question #2 above, which states who would be the most closest and most beloved to the Prophet of Allah in light of his (SAW) justice and prophethood, his own daughter and cousin, or the best of the pious and the believers and the followers.

Many people do not like that the best of the pious and the believers and followers were infact were his own daughter and cousin and therefore confuse themselves and try to seperate the Prophet's (SAW) personality into two; one that of a normal man who loves his children and who forgets his prayers and one who lacks self control (God Forbid) [This statement is due to many ahadith found in Sahah Sittah], and the other that of a prophet who does only what is revealed to him.

It is true that the event of Mubahila does not point to infallability of this group, but it proves that this group possessed the totality of faith and did not harbor an atom of doubt in what the Prophet (SAW) of Allah declared.

It is funny how the author has referred to a hadith in the event of Mubahila;

Narrated Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiya: I asked my father ('Ali bin Abi Talib), "Who are the best people after Allah's Apostle ?" He said, "Abu Bakr." I asked, "Who then?" He said, "Then 'Umar. " I was afraid he would say "Uthman, so I said, "Then you?" He said, "I am only an ordinary person.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 20

Wise men can always tell a fabricated hadith from the truth. Actions are louder than words. Can the author and propagator of this hadith tell examples from Quran and history which can prove superiority of Abu Bakr, Umer and Usman, collectively, over Ali (AS) in terms of bravery, nobility, blood lineage, chivalry, knowledge, closeness to Rasool (SAW) and piety? Or is the author all words and no play?

This is how the above fabrication looks from our eyes and please understand our view point (which is also backed by countless Sunni and Sahah Sitah traditions and narrations); Ali (AS) was asked as to who are the best people after Allah's apostle? He (AS) said, the one who called the daughter of prophet (SAW) a liar and to who she (AS) refused to speak for as long as she lived, and for who i have already said that he is liar, sinful and dishonest earlier on in another hadith (Sahih Muslim , Book 19, Number 4349). After that, the best amongst the people is he who called the prophet (SAW) delirious, doubted his prophethood at Hudabya, ran away in some battles jeopardizing the life of the Prophet (SAW), and innovating many things in Islam, and for who too I again have already said that he is a liar, sinful and dishonest in the same hadith (Sahih Muslim , Book 19, Number 4349). After that the best is he who brought back the same people and empowered them who the Prophet (SAW) had exiled at conquest of Mecca, and who amounted wealth and gave unjust power to his own family members and who was later killed by muslims (including many companions). The inquirer then inquired about Ali (AS) himself to which Ali (AS) replied; I am the cousin of Muhammad (SAW), i was brought up by him (SAW) since my birth, i was with him (SAW) since the start of the mission, he (SAW) gave me his (SAW) most prized asset, his (SAW) daughter in marriage to me, I was given the flag of Khayber, I was the hero of Badr and I was the savior at Khandaq, I am the gateway to the city of Knowledge and I am the Mawla of all believers who believe in the mawlayat of Rasool (SAW), my sons are the princes of youth of paradise and I was given Zulfiqar, I slept in the bed of Muhammad (SAW) on the night of migration and i was made the brother of the Prophet (SAW) during brotherhood between the Ansars and Muhajirs... Yet I am only an ordinary person, and there are millions of people superior to me, people who worshipped idols, drank and adultered for most of their lives and even those who accepted Islam to save their lives on the conquest of Mecca, like the great Mawiya, and although i fought with him many battles intending to kill him and rid the Muslims of his Fitnah and evil, I hope Allah is pleased with him and his actions.

I hope the above does not offend some one's personal belief but makes them realize the truth. Unfortunately, in the above passage lies the summary of the dispute between the two schools of thought.


Question 7: Why prophet(saw) took �only� Ali(ra), Fatima(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) for mubahila? Were they only the ones who were worthy of being taken for mubahila?

Thus Prophet(Saw) for mubahila particularly took his progeny and the ones from whom his progeny would persist and survive. And what was unique here was that, the lineage of all daughters in general cases is linked to their fathers, not their mothers�. But Holy Prophet (s)�s lineage was linked to their mother because Prophet�s progeny survives and persists today through his daughter Fatima(ra) and her two sons Hasan(ra) and Husain(ra) who are the ancestors of all �Seyyids�.

Thus prophet(Saw) as an example took those members to mubahila from whom his progeny would survive and persist, inorder to establish his truthfulness in the sight of opponents, to show to the world(Christians esp) that he was ready to risk his progeny, so that the non-believers may understand that he was not afraid to risk his progeny and if some things happens to them then it would be the end to his lineage. Because those people traditionally gave much importance to progeny and expansion of lineage because according to them a person was remembered only if his progeny would succeed and a person without progeny would be lost to posterity. Thus, invoking the curse on his only daughter left ,her husband and her sons who were the only ones left from whom his progeny would have survived and persisted was not possible unless he was truthful.

Hence we see that the opponents were caring about their progeny and its succession as it was a very crucial issue during that moment.

Even the opponents were holding the same understanding according to shia narration: Their leaders as-Sayyid, al-�Aqib and al-Ahtam, said: �If he comes for the imprecation against us with his nation (i.e., people unrelated to him), we shall enter into imprecation against him, because then he is not a prophet. But if he enters into imprecation against us with only the people of his House, we shall not enter into imprecation against him, because he will not put the People of his House forward unless he is truthful.� (at-Tafsir, al-Qummi) [taken from tafseer e Meezan, tabatabai, for verse 3:61)

Even today the Prophet�s progeny survives through his daughter Fatima(ra) and her two sons Hasan(ra) and Husayn(ra) only, who are the ancestors of all �Seyyids� (descendants of the Prophet).

Refer these narrations:Al-Hakim has mentioned a tradition through Jabir. Jabir quotes the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) to have said: �For the sons of all the mothers, their agnation returns to their fathers, except the sons of Fatima, as I am their guardian and agnation . Al Mojamul Kabeer, pg. 130 (taken from Ihyaail Mayyit be Fazail-e-Ahle Bayt , translated by shia translator, Syed Athar Husain S.H.Rizvi M.A. (English), M.A. (Persian),M.A. (Islamic Studies)

And people might say that its understood why Fatima(ra), Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) were but why was hz ali(ra) taken? The answer to it is in this narration. The Prophet(saw) said: "Verily, Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, has placed the progeny of each prophet into his backbone (Sulb), and He, Exalted, has placed my progeny into the backbone of Ali Ibn Abi Talib." [al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p239]

Thus prophet(Saw) wanted to take along with him those from whom his progeny would have persisted and survived as an example to establish before the opponents that he was true in his claim.

Mashallah. A very well written piece by the author. Thus we realize the importance of the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). May the curse of Allah be on those who opposed, eliminated and tried to eliminate the progeny of the prophet (SAW). 

Regarding the wives of prophet(Saw) being left:

Reply 1: Well it can be said that though they weren�t taken to the place of mubahila as it was not compulsory to bring the complete ahlebayt, even then they would have been included in the imprecation in the similar way how the families of the Christians even without their presence would have been included.

Reply 2: If the first response doesn�t seem satisfactory to the shias then the other reply to this is that they were not the ones from whom the progeny of prophet(Saw) survived, So prophet(Saw) didn�t take them. He(saw) wanted to take those along with him from whom his(saw) progeny would spread as in those days progeny and is survival was given much importance. Thus there wasn�t any necessity of taking them along with him, as they were not the ones with whom survival of his progeny was related.

Reply 3: It can also be said that by the time of incident of mubahila, the special command for wives of prophet(Saw) (i.e �And stay in your houses�(33:33) ) was revealed . So prophet(Saw) might have left them in their homes as the command of Allah, as he(Saw) thought it was inappropriate or not necessary to take his(saw) wives there.

For Reply 1; The Christians could not bring their women/wives because as per the author in his article (to which this apropos has been made);

It is stated in fath al bari: Najran is rather a big area of land. It was at a distance of seven trip stages southwards of Makkah towards Yemen. It included seventy three villages. It took a fast-rider one day ride to get there�. The delegation comprised sixty �men�. Twenty-four of them were of noble families. Three out of twenty-four were at one time leaders of Najran. [Fath Al-Bari 8/94]

The Christians who came were 60 �men�, so there was no woman among them. And it would have been impossible for the Christians to return back, bring all their families, and come back in time. Rather the Prophet(saw) wanted the Mubahala to take place right then and there, but they asked for it to be postponed one day (as is mentioned in some of the narrations). Thus it would have been impossible for them to have gone back to Najran, get their families and come back in one day, because returning to najran itself would have taken one day, then coming back with families would have taken couple of days because traveling with family make the speed of the travelers slow. So how could they have taken up the challenge of Mubahila the very next day?

This shows that it was not a necessity for the complete family of the disputants to be present there for mubahila. And the ones who were taken for mubahila were just as an example, to establish before the opponents the seriousness and truthfulness of their claim.

It was not possible for the christians to bring their women. Agreed. The wives of the Prophet (SAW) were in Medina. What was stopping him (SAW)?

For Reply 2, the author should go back to his own interpretation of the Quran. The Quran tells the Prophet (SAW) to bring his Sons, Near People and Women, not the ones from who his (SAW) progeny shall continue. Why this justification then? The author is again trying to tell us that his (SAW) progeny was nearer to him (SAW) for biological and emotional reasons rather than spiritual ones?

The reply 3 of the author goes against logical though process of a person. Is the author trying to say, that at one point Allah is telling prophet (SAW) to never allow his (SAW) wives out of their homes,  and on the other, telling the Prophet (SAW) to bring his (SAW) women outside for Mubahila? What will the author then say about Ayesha who left her house to fight a war against the Caliph of time, Ali Ibn Abu Talib in the battle of Jamal... and one may ask what was the need for her to leave her house for this cause when many other prominent male companions were also alive. Not to forget to mention the battle lead to the martyrdom and killing of many companions of the Prophet (SAW). Furthermore, in reference to Mubahila, the Author uses the word "might" and assumes that this is the reason as to why the wives were not taken. The author must respect that the spirit of Quran 33:33 is to ensure that the wives of the Prophet (SAW) not leave their houses in the absence of the Prophet (SAW), after his (SAW) death, in immodest ways, without his permission and for a non-purpose.

Ibn Kathir states;

(And stay in your houses,) means, stay in your houses and do not come out except for a purpose. One of the purposes mentioned in Shari`ah is prayer in the Masjid, so long as the conditions are fulfilled, as the Messenger of Allah said: (Do not prevent the female servants of Allah from the Masjids of Allah, but have them go out without wearing fragrance.)
Tafseer of Surah 33 Verse 33, Tafseer Ibn Kathir

So the author should answer. If we consider Mubahila, then, on permission of the Prophet (SAW), to defend the Tawheed of Allah, were his (SAW) wives allowed to accompany him outside the house, within the level of clothing and modesty prescribed for them in the Quran, or, if we consider the battle of Jamal, after the demise of Prophet (SAW), to fight the caliph of the time, Ali Ibn Abu Talib (AS), were his (SAW) wife(s) allowed to come out of the house and lead a battle against Muslims?


Question 8: Were those who were present on the side of the Prophet for the imprecation � i.e., �Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn � were partners in the claim of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and his Mission.?

All the Christians who had come in the delegation of the Najran were a party to a claim � their claim was that �Isa was God, and the son of God, and one of the three persons of God. There was no discord among them in this matter, nor was there any difference in this claim between their men and women.

Like�wise, the claim on the side of the Prophet(saw) was that; Allah is One, there is no god but He; and �Isa(as) son of Maryam(as) was His servant and His messenger. Now if ali(ra), fatima(ra), hassan(ra) and hussain(ra) were partners in the claim of prophet(Saw) then this claim was even upheld by all the believers; it was not confined to only four of them. Because, obviously every believer of that time held the same claim. And even the most staunch shia will atleast agree that, the claim of hz abbas(ra), hz salam farsi(ra), hz abuzar(ra) etc, was the same. They can�t say that the claim of these companions were different. Therefore, it is out of place to say that those who were brought by the Prophet(saw) for the imprecation were partners in his claim and since other muslims didn�t held this claim, that is why they were not brought.

Moreover, claim and mission are two different things. So how is it that the ones taken for mubahila becomes partners of prophet(saw) in his mission? If mission was to claim that Allah is One, there is no god but He; and �Isa(as) son of Maryam(as) was His servant and His messenger. Then the mission of every believer was the same, and no sane person can reject this.

I do not understand what or why this is suppose to mean, prove or disapprove. I will just say of my personal experience, that in my mission or aim, there are many people who support me with different means; some provide moral support, some provide physical and financial support. Some support temporarily and then there are some who go all the way with me so that I can succeed in my mission. It is also true that no two people hold the same amount of faith, the depth in faith differs from people to people.

It is safe to claim that the companions were believers no doubt and accepted the Kalimah, but the level of faith of the Prophet (SAW) and the Ahlulbayt (AS) was not paralleled by them, even the likes of Salman Farsi (RA) and Abu Dhar Ghaffari (RA) who were close followers of the Ahlulbayt (AS). Maybe this was a reason why some of the companions would leave the Prophet (SAW) alone in prayers when caravans would arrive, or would run away in battle fields for their own lives leaving the Prophet's (SAW) in danger.

And when they see merchandise or sport they break up for It, and leave you
(Muhammad) standing (in prayers alone).
Say: What is with Allah is better than sport and (better) than merchandise, and Allah is the best of Sustainers.
Quran [62:11]

When you ran off precipitately and did not wait for any one, and the Messenger
was calling you from your rear
, so He gave you another sorrow instead of (your) sorrow,
so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell you; and Allah
is aware of what you do
Quran [3:153]

These are the ground realities.

To conclude my set of replies, I will ask my fellow brothers and the author a very hypothetical question and would request a very replica watches uk answer. What if the Prophet (SAW) took with him, Abu Bakr, Umer, Usman, Mawiya and Ayesha with him (SAW) for Mubahila? Would this prove their superiority, spirituality and infallibility over those who were not taken and would this be used as a defense against the Shias and the people who criticize them for their sins and mistakes? Would taking to Mubahila elevate their status in Islam?

If yes, then we rest our case. If no, then I know you did not reply sincerely and without bias.

Feel free to email your comments/replies to this article at or post a message at our Forum, no registration Required.