Did Muhammad Ever Sin?
- Thread starter wth1257
- Start date
- Replies 44
- Views 22K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
He taught me that.ummsara1108
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 203
- Reaction score
- 13
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
Because all HUMANS make mistakes. Some more some less.
This concept of opting for "lesser good" is basically shia concept adopted by some sunis.
This is just a cover-up to comfort their preconceived idea that prophet's could not sin.
If you claim that they never sinned, kindly explain Quranic aayahs & ahadees i quoted....!!! They all very very clearly use the word "sin"
Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
Tu kaun hai paiiii?
- Messages
- 7,218
- Reaction score
- 920
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
^^Do u speak or understand Arabic? Whats the word in Arabic to denote sin?
Arabic word for "SIN" is "ذنب"
Pleural is "ذنوب"
Now read Quranic verses 47:19 & 48:2 in Arabic.............
Q:47:19:-
فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلأاللَّهُ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لِذَنبِكَ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَـتِ
Q:48:2:-
لِّيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِن ذَنبِكَ وَمَا تَأَخَّرَ وَيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكَ وَيَهْدِيَكَ صِرَطاً مُّسْتَقِيماً
Last edited:
- Messages
- 9,215
- Reaction score
- 1,600
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
47:19
فَٱعۡلَمۡ أَنَّهُ ۥ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُ وَٱسۡتَغۡفِرۡ لِذَنۢبِكَ وَلِلۡمُؤۡمِنِينَ وَٱلۡمُؤۡمِنَـٰتِ*ۗ وَٱللَّهُ يَعۡلَمُ مُتَقَلَّبَكُمۡ وَمَثۡوَٮٰكُمۡ
So, know for sure that there is no god but Allah, and seek forgiveness for your fault, and for (the faults of) the believing men and believing women. And Allah knows your moving from place to place and your permanent abode. [47:19]
Lets see what the mufassireen say about this:
Source: Ma'ariful Qur'an
In this verse the address is to the Holy Prophet :arabic5: and he is, through an imperative verb, commanded to know that there is no object of worship besides Allah. It is quite obvious that every Muslim has the knowledge of this - let alone the leader of the Holy Prophets :arabic5: who should have its knowledge more profoundly. Then why is he enjoined to acquire this knowledge? There can be two responses to this question: it can either mean that the Holy Prophet :arabic5: is enjoined to be steadfast in his worship of Allah or it could mean that he must fulfill the demands of his knowledge. Qurtubi cites the incident of Sufyan Ibn 'Uyaynah رحمه الله تعالى who was asked about the significance of knowledge, he replied: Did you not read verse 19 of Surah Muhammad: فَٱعۡلَمۡ أَنَّهُ ۥ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُ "So, know for sure (O Holy Prophet :arabic5that there is no god but Allah, and seek forgiveness for your fault. It is required in this verse that knowledge should be acquired before action. Similarly, on other occasions in the Qur'an, first it is enjoined to acquire knowledge and then to fulfil its corresponding demands. For example, in [57:20] the Holy Qur'an has said, اعلموا انما الحياة الدنيا لعب ولهو "Know that the present life is but a sport and a diversion ..." Then it was said, سابقوا إلى مغفرة من ربكم "Race to forgiveness from your Lord (57:21)". In Surah Anfal, (verse ) the Qur'an says: واعلموا انما اموالكم واولادكم فتنة "Know that your wealth and children are a trial..." The demand of this knowledge is mentioned in Surah At-Taghabun (Verse 14): فاحذروهم "...so beware of them". Thus on these occasions first the knowledge of different things are imparted, and then it is enjoined to fulfil the demands of that knowledge.
In this context, although the Holy Prophet :arabic5: had prior knowledge of the Oneness of Allah, the injunction here is for the Holy Prophet :arabic5: to fulfil the demand of this fundamental knowledge, that is," وَٱسۡتَغۡفِرۡ لِذَنۢبِكَ ask forgiveness for your faults (47:19)". The Holy Prophet :arabic5: is infallible and immune from sin, and therefore the possibility that he would commit sins is unthinkable. Despite this, the possibility of Allah's Holy Prophets committing misjudgment in Ijtihad cannot be ruled out. But, according to the sacred law, such mistakes are not regarded as sins. In fact, they are rewarded, though the prophets عليهم السلام are told about the correct position, and keeping in view the high status of the prophets, such mistakes too are sometimes referred to as "dhanb" (fault or sin), as for instance in Surah 'Abasa [80] the Holy Prophets] was criticized for his misjudgment. The details will be set out when discussing that Surah. The error of judgement referred to in that Surah was not really a sin. In fact, a reward was promised to him for that, but because it was not in conformity with his high status, Allah Ta'ala expressed His dislike. This type of "dhanb" (fault) is referred to in the current verse.
Note:
Sayyidna Abu Bakr Siddiq رضى الله عنه reports that Allah's Messenger :arabic5: said: Recite لا إله إلا الله la-ilaha-illallah and استغفار istighfar frequently because Iblis (Satan) says, I got people involved in sins and destroyed them, but they destroyed me by reciting la-ilaha-illallah, so I got them involved in false and baseless thoughts and notions which they pursue as true, authentic and righteous, (for instance, the common religious innovations (bid'at), because they treat them as righteous,) hence, they do not feel any need to repent for their practice of innovations.
...
48:2
لِّيَـغۡفِرَ لَكَ اللّٰهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنۡ ذَنۡۢبِكَ وَ مَا تَاَخَّرَ وَيُتِمَّ نِعۡمَتَه عَلَيۡكَ وَيَهۡدِيَكَ صِرَاطًا مُّسۡتَقِيۡمًاۙ
Last edited:
Word of GOD Almighty is very clear. Also i quoted some Ahadees. Kindly review them again. Ur scholar twisted the aayah to suit his pre-conceived ideology.
When quran says "sins" it means "sins".Here's something for giving false meaning to Quranic aayah:-
Quran:41:40:- Verily, those who Yulhiduna Fi(distort) Our Ayat are not hidden from Us.Is he who is cast into the Fire better or he who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection? Do what you will. Verily, He is All-Seer of what you do.
As I said calling something by different names doesn't change it's essence.
Prophet Adam(pbuh) dis-obeyed GOD what would u call it...??? "Tark-e-Awlaa" or "Mistake" or "sin" choice is urs. He did what he did. It's nature is not going to change by choice of words.........
Prophet Yunus(pbuh) disobeyed GOD, & got the punishment then asked for forgiveness....... so on. u know the story.
Prophet Ibraheem(pbuh) called his wife as his sister............ never herd of it??? I'll give u ahadees on that if u want.
So quran is NOT bluffing ....... follow Quran,,, DO NOT make Quran follow u , as above mufissir did.
When quran says "sins" it means "sins".Here's something for giving false meaning to Quranic aayah:-
Quran:41:40:- Verily, those who Yulhiduna Fi(distort) Our Ayat are not hidden from Us.Is he who is cast into the Fire better or he who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection? Do what you will. Verily, He is All-Seer of what you do.
As I said calling something by different names doesn't change it's essence.
Prophet Adam(pbuh) dis-obeyed GOD what would u call it...??? "Tark-e-Awlaa" or "Mistake" or "sin" choice is urs. He did what he did. It's nature is not going to change by choice of words.........
Prophet Yunus(pbuh) disobeyed GOD, & got the punishment then asked for forgiveness....... so on. u know the story.
Prophet Ibraheem(pbuh) called his wife as his sister............ never herd of it??? I'll give u ahadees on that if u want.
So quran is NOT bluffing ....... follow Quran,,, DO NOT make Quran follow u , as above mufissir did.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 9,215
- Reaction score
- 1,600
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
^ I am not going to take an Ayah and interpret it with my own limited knowledge. These 'Ulama and Mufassireen has spent their complete lives researching the Qur'an and Hadeeth.
I believe all the Anbiya ('alaihimus salaam) are pure and chaste servants of Allaah Ta’ala. They are free from minor and major sins. If the Anbiya ('alaihimus salaam) were not pure and chaste, then Allaah Ta'ala would never have ordered their implicit and absolute obedience. He would not have levelled obedience to them as obedience to Him. He would not have said that to take bai't (allegiance) upon their hands is like taking bai't (allegiance) upon His Hands.
"And he who obeys the Nabi has indeed obeyed Allaah"; "Indeed those who had taken bai't (allegiance) with you, indeed they have taken bai't (allegiance) with Allaah, the hand of Allaah is above their hands." [Surah Muhammad: 10]
Ma'soom (sinless) is he who is the chosen and preferred servant of Allaah. His habits, traits and actions are all chosen by Allaah Ta’ala: Their hearts are completely free and pure from evil and satanic effects. Since Allaah Ta'ala has mentioned in the Qur'aan that the Anbiya are His chosen and special servants, it implies that they are so in every aspect of their lives. They are cleansed from internal as well as external faults and evils.
If any slip-up occurs in a Nabi, due to forgetfulness or mistake, then we attribute it to an outside factor and not an inherent fault. For example, the heat in boiling water is due to some outside factor (stove, etc.) and this heat is not an inherent or natural quality of water. The natural quality of water is coolness and not heat. If water is placed in a fire then it will extinguish it. In a similar way, the natural disposition of the Anbiyaa is purity and homogeneity. Hence a slip-up by a Nabi can never be counted as a sin, since they are not naturally disposed to evil. The mistake of Hadhrat Aadam (alaihi salaam) was due to forgetfulness. (I will try to look up the details of what 'ulama said in this regard and say later if required)
As already explained, the supposed 'mistakes' that some try to attribute to prophets are not in fact mistakes, but where prophets have a choice between doing two preferred actions, one perhaps more preferred than the other. Or maybe there is an action that they have done that benefits us to see the result of it.
An example would be the Messenger of Allah SAW showing us the Sajda sahu for when we forget an integral or pillar of the prayer. If not for Allah causing that to happen, then we would have never known what to do.
http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?askid=996a2f7f924fa07341217a93da8fa826
I believe all the Anbiya ('alaihimus salaam) are pure and chaste servants of Allaah Ta’ala. They are free from minor and major sins. If the Anbiya ('alaihimus salaam) were not pure and chaste, then Allaah Ta'ala would never have ordered their implicit and absolute obedience. He would not have levelled obedience to them as obedience to Him. He would not have said that to take bai't (allegiance) upon their hands is like taking bai't (allegiance) upon His Hands.
"And he who obeys the Nabi has indeed obeyed Allaah"; "Indeed those who had taken bai't (allegiance) with you, indeed they have taken bai't (allegiance) with Allaah, the hand of Allaah is above their hands." [Surah Muhammad: 10]
Ma'soom (sinless) is he who is the chosen and preferred servant of Allaah. His habits, traits and actions are all chosen by Allaah Ta’ala: Their hearts are completely free and pure from evil and satanic effects. Since Allaah Ta'ala has mentioned in the Qur'aan that the Anbiya are His chosen and special servants, it implies that they are so in every aspect of their lives. They are cleansed from internal as well as external faults and evils.
If any slip-up occurs in a Nabi, due to forgetfulness or mistake, then we attribute it to an outside factor and not an inherent fault. For example, the heat in boiling water is due to some outside factor (stove, etc.) and this heat is not an inherent or natural quality of water. The natural quality of water is coolness and not heat. If water is placed in a fire then it will extinguish it. In a similar way, the natural disposition of the Anbiyaa is purity and homogeneity. Hence a slip-up by a Nabi can never be counted as a sin, since they are not naturally disposed to evil. The mistake of Hadhrat Aadam (alaihi salaam) was due to forgetfulness. (I will try to look up the details of what 'ulama said in this regard and say later if required)
As already explained, the supposed 'mistakes' that some try to attribute to prophets are not in fact mistakes, but where prophets have a choice between doing two preferred actions, one perhaps more preferred than the other. Or maybe there is an action that they have done that benefits us to see the result of it.
An example would be the Messenger of Allah SAW showing us the Sajda sahu for when we forget an integral or pillar of the prayer. If not for Allah causing that to happen, then we would have never known what to do.
http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?askid=996a2f7f924fa07341217a93da8fa826
Its very simple. Commiting a sin is not the same as making a mistake.
No He did not sin. If he ever made any mistakes, he was corrected by Allah (swt) revelations.
sledge_hammer
New member
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 1
So having more than the "allowable" number of wives was not a sin for Muhammad?
- Messages
- 9,215
- Reaction score
- 1,600
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
^no, in fact he was allowed to marry more than 4. And once Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala Himself made the nikah of our Prophet with one of his wives.
If you need more details, you can visit this link:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503546160
or search this forum, I am sure this must have been answered before. Visit the Family & Society section.
If you need more details, you can visit this link:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503546160
or search this forum, I am sure this must have been answered before. Visit the Family & Society section.
sledge_hammer
New member
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 1
Thank you for the reply AabiruSabeel.
However, the link does not really zero in on the question I have. This article speaks of his "multiple" wives, but really says nothing about having more than 4. Muhammad was married to 11 wives at once, wasn't he? I thought 4 was the maximum any Muslim man could be married to. And he also had many slaves. I don't understand how these things are allowable in Islam. I do understand that things were a bit different back then, compared to the present. But these just don't seem like "godly" things to be doing.
From my understanding many of his marriages were about unity and bringing people together. This seems political, but not religious.
Here are my questions:
Why was Muhammad allowed an exception? Apparently God said this was OK?
Why was he allowed to have sexual relations with his slaves as well as his wives?
-------------------
I don't intend any disrespect by asking these questions. Just trying to understand.
Hmmm...just joined, so i'm learning to work my way through the site. Hopefully this exact same topic hasn't been hashed out here before
However, the link does not really zero in on the question I have. This article speaks of his "multiple" wives, but really says nothing about having more than 4. Muhammad was married to 11 wives at once, wasn't he? I thought 4 was the maximum any Muslim man could be married to. And he also had many slaves. I don't understand how these things are allowable in Islam. I do understand that things were a bit different back then, compared to the present. But these just don't seem like "godly" things to be doing.
From my understanding many of his marriages were about unity and bringing people together. This seems political, but not religious.
Here are my questions:
Why was Muhammad allowed an exception? Apparently God said this was OK?
Why was he allowed to have sexual relations with his slaves as well as his wives?
-------------------
I don't intend any disrespect by asking these questions. Just trying to understand.
Hmmm...just joined, so i'm learning to work my way through the site. Hopefully this exact same topic hasn't been hashed out here before
Beardo
Weirdo + Beard = Beardo
- Messages
- 6,144
- Reaction score
- 1,282
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Why was he allowed to have sexual relations with his slaves as well as his wives?
----
Not true. Could you show me your sources?
And about the multiple marriages, I'll let someone else answer that. I don't think my wording would be good. :X
----
Not true. Could you show me your sources?
And about the multiple marriages, I'll let someone else answer that. I don't think my wording would be good. :X
- Messages
- 9,215
- Reaction score
- 1,600
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
This thread wasn't about Prophet's multiple marriages, but since this topic has cropped up, I will try to answer it.
This is what Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi says here:
To summarize, let's enumerate the reasons:
First: To spread the Religion through eyewitnesses with all the details known only to intimate people. Aaishah RA, being so young, was able to tell all those details to the Muslims for more than 42 years. She had seen and learned so much from him. Her young age was a great advantage in this respect. She could tell what the Prophet used to do or say in all aspects of life, so that people do and say the same in the same situations
Aaishah RA, was the most knowledgeable person when it comes to the daily life of the Muslim and how it should go as was lived by the Prophet himself.
Second: To strengthen the relationships with his companions, he married Abu Bakr's daughter and Omar's daughter, married his daughters to Othman and Ali, May God be pleased with them all.
Third: out of mercy and rewarding to the early Muslim widows and divorcees he gave them the honor of marrying them himself (Husbands either died in battles or were non Muslims who divorced them.). Sawdah, Um-Salama and Habeebah were widows.
Fourth: The Prophet was being a role model for the Muslims being kind to the widows and to the people of the book who newly embraced Islam. He married Safiyah after her father, a Jew, embraced Islam, so giving him and his daughter the honor among his people.
Fifth: He wanted to have ties and links with the different nations of the world. When he married Mariya, all Egyptians were on his side, and when he married Jaweriyah, all her people (they were called the Bani Almustalaq and were captured by the Muslims after a battle),, they all embraced Islam
You can also check: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544596
The Prophet's multiple marriage had Religious, social as well as political reasons.sledge_hammer said:
This is what Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi says here:
To summarize, let's enumerate the reasons:
First: To spread the Religion through eyewitnesses with all the details known only to intimate people. Aaishah RA, being so young, was able to tell all those details to the Muslims for more than 42 years. She had seen and learned so much from him. Her young age was a great advantage in this respect. She could tell what the Prophet used to do or say in all aspects of life, so that people do and say the same in the same situations
Aaishah RA, was the most knowledgeable person when it comes to the daily life of the Muslim and how it should go as was lived by the Prophet himself.
Second: To strengthen the relationships with his companions, he married Abu Bakr's daughter and Omar's daughter, married his daughters to Othman and Ali, May God be pleased with them all.
Third: out of mercy and rewarding to the early Muslim widows and divorcees he gave them the honor of marrying them himself (Husbands either died in battles or were non Muslims who divorced them.). Sawdah, Um-Salama and Habeebah were widows.
Fourth: The Prophet was being a role model for the Muslims being kind to the widows and to the people of the book who newly embraced Islam. He married Safiyah after her father, a Jew, embraced Islam, so giving him and his daughter the honor among his people.
Fifth: He wanted to have ties and links with the different nations of the world. When he married Mariya, all Egyptians were on his side, and when he married Jaweriyah, all her people (they were called the Bani Almustalaq and were captured by the Muslims after a battle),, they all embraced Islam
This has been thoroughly discussed here: http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifications-about-islam/8369-slave-girls.htmlsledge_hammer said:
You can also check: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544596
But your username was suggesting otherwise. :ermm:sledge_hammer said:
Welcome to the Forum. You can visit the different sections of the site and use search option, so that you don't bring up topics that have already been discussed thoroughly.sledge_hammer said:
Last edited:
glo
IB Legend
- Messages
- 8,472
- Reaction score
- 1,785
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
That's very interesting, Yanal.
I have never heard this perspective before.
The biblical perspective is very much that all of God's prophets made mistakes and committed sins, just like all human beings are in the habit of.
Interesting to see that the Qu'ran states the same thing.
As far as mainstream Christianity is concerned, Jesus is the only human to have been without sin.
Does it specifically say anywhere in the Qu'ran that Jesus did not sin?
:salamext:
It is really hard to determine if that is true because none of us have been there but here it describes the sinlessness of all Prophets:
Sura 22: 51: "Never have We sent a single prophet or apostle before you*with whose wishes Satan did not tamper. But Allah abrogates the interjections of Satan and confirms His own revelations. Allah is wise and all-knowing. He makes Satan's interjections a temptation for those whose hearts are diseased or hardened - this is why the wrongdoers are in open schism - so that those to whom knowledge has been given may realize that this is the truth from your Lord and thus believe in it and humble their hearts towards Him. Allah will surely guide the faithful to a straight path."
It is really hard to determine if that is true because none of us have been there but here it describes the sinlessness of all Prophets:
Sura 22: 51: "Never have We sent a single prophet or apostle before you*with whose wishes Satan did not tamper. But Allah abrogates the interjections of Satan and confirms His own revelations. Allah is wise and all-knowing. He makes Satan's interjections a temptation for those whose hearts are diseased or hardened - this is why the wrongdoers are in open schism - so that those to whom knowledge has been given may realize that this is the truth from your Lord and thus believe in it and humble their hearts towards Him. Allah will surely guide the faithful to a straight path."
جوري
Soldier Through It!
- Messages
- 27,759
- Reaction score
- 6,095
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
are Lutherans considered part of the protestant church?
Martin Luther made Jesus into 'thrice' the adulterer
Christ committed adultery first of all with the woman at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: "Whatever has he been doing with her?" Secondly, with Mary Magdalene, and thirdly with the woman taken in adultery whom he dismissed so lightly. Thus even Christ, who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died. (D. Martin Luthers Werke, kritische Gesamtausgabe [Hermann Bohlau Verlag, 1893], vol. 2, no. 1472, April 7 - May 1, 1532, p. 33)
This is to be found in Luther's Table-Talk (Weimar edition, vol. ii, page 107) . . . Here is the original: --
Christus adulter. Christus ist am ersten ein ebrecher worden Joh. 4, bei dem brunn cum muliere, quia illi dicebant: Nemo significat, quid facit cum ea? Item cum Magdalena, item cum adultera Joan. 8, die er so leicht davon lies. Also mus der from Christus auch am ersten ein ebrecher werden ehe er starb.
all the best
Last edited:
glo
IB Legend
- Messages
- 8,472
- Reaction score
- 1,785
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
Not being familiar with the Davinci Code I had not come across that quote until now.
Thank you for sharing it. I have found some interesting discussions and debates on the internet already, and various interpretations and thoughts on what Luther meant. I will spend some more time researching, when I have more time.
However, for the sake of this thread (which is about Muhammed) I will not go any further into the sinfulness or sinlessness of Jesus - it would really take the thread off topic ...
Perhaps in another world and another time ...
جوري
Soldier Through It!
- Messages
- 27,759
- Reaction score
- 6,095
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
Not being familiar with the Davinci Code I had not come across that quote until now.
Thank you for sharing it. I have found some interesting discussions and debates on the internet already, and various interpretations and thoughts on what Luther meant. I will spend some more time researching, when I have more time.
However, for the sake of this thread (which is about Muhammed) I will not go any further into the sinfulness or sinlessness of Jesus - it would really take the thread off topic ...
Perhaps in another world and another time ...
Greetings,
You are the one who brought up the sinlessness of Jesus as per christian understanding.. I am merely pointing out that he has been made thrice the adulterer.. as for interpretation or re-interpretation.. it is of no concern to me personally... I am not of your faith and I don't view Jesus as a God or an adulterer thus, it is something that the christian has to justify to him or herself not a Muslim..
all the best