THE LIFE OF THE PROPHET |
This series aims to analyse the discrepancies in the Prophet’s biography, and the differences presented between Shia literature and those from other schools of thought. Unless specified otherwise, all historical accounts henceforth were derived from: “Al-Sahih min Seerat Al-Naby Al-A'tham” (The Correct History the Greatest Prophet) Vol 1. Sayed Jaafar Murtadha Al-Hussaini Al-Amely. Jame'at al-Mudaresseen, Qom, Iran. pp 77-87 ~~~~~~~ The Prophet’s Lineage and Birth Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him and his progeny, has the teknonym “Abul Qasim” and is a direct descendent of Prophet Ismail, son of Prophet Ibrahim, peace be upon them all. His father was Abdullah, the son of Abdul Muttalib, and his paternal lineage until his forefather Adnan is confirmed by all Muslim sources as shown in the figure below. Before Adnan, records show some differences, however, all concur that Adnan was a descendent of Prophet Ismail (pbuh). His mother was Aminah the daughter of Wahab, or the ‘Master of the Sons of Zuhrah’ as he was known. As shown in the figure below, the Prophet’s parents came from the same tribe and family. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hf) was born in Mecca in the Year of the Elephant [1], that is, 40 years prior to the Revelation. The most accepted narration among the Shia is that he was born on the 17th of Rabi-ul-Awwal. Also in Shia traditions, the Prophet was born on a Friday, and in other traditions he was born on a Monday.
His Nursery Assertions from other schools of thought claim that his mother nursed him for two or three days, before he was nursed for a few more days by Thuwaiyba, a servant in the household of his uncle, Abu Lahab. He was then taken into the care of Haleema al-Sa’diyah, and in return she received his family’s protection and providence. She nursed him for two years, then finally returned him to his family when he was five years and two days old - as other schools assert - where he was placed under the care of his grandfather Abdul Muttalib as his mother had passed away. However, Shia traditions suggest he was not orphaned at that time - his father had passed away prior to his birth, or in some narrations a few months after, and that his mother was still alive when he returned from spending his childhood with Haleema in her desert home. A well established practice amongst the Arabs, and in particular the nobility of Mecca, was to send their children to desert locations to be nursed and they determined several benefits in doing so:
Despite such reasonings, a prime factor that led to the decision of sending the Prophet (pbuh&hf) out of Mecca was his grandfather’s fear for his life. The Prophet’s birth was awaited by various groups - Including those of the Jewish and Christian populations of Arabia - who were informed by their respective faiths of the arrival of a saviour through whom they may be liberated and empowered, and anticipated him to be an adherent of their own religion. Moreover, conflicts within the Prophet’s own family, and in particular the animosity of Abu Lahab and his relationship with Prophet Muhammad’s deceased father, further informed Abdul Muttalib’s decision to send his grandson to be nursed outside of Mecca. Narrations indicate that Abdul Muttalib was aware of his grandson’s prophetic standing, and so by sending him away he was not only ensuring his safety but also the safety of his awaited message. There exists a hadith frequenting the literature of other Muslim schools of an event that allegedly took place during Prophet Muhammad’s time spent with Haleema, his wet-nurse. This narration is not validated in the Shia school, and so we shall analyse this hadith in the remainder of this edition. The Hadith of Opening the Prophet’s Chest One of the primary objectives of this series is to address claims made by various Islamic schools of thought on the biography of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hf) and discuss those discrepancies. We shall first begin by presenting the hadith as narrated by other groups and present their case, before detailing the Shia perspective and why we consider some of those claims to be unfounded. The Hadith Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj [2] quotes: ((Anas ibn Malik [3] says that the angel Jibraeel (aka, Gabriel), approached the Prophet as he was playing with other children. The angel grabbed him and threw him on the ground before opening his chest and extracting his heart. He then removed a blood clot from the Prophet’s heart and said: “this is Shaytan’s (Satan’s) share of you”. Then, he washed it in a golden pan filled with Zamzam water, before putting it back together and returning it to its place … Anas ibn Malik says that he used to see the markings of the stitchings on the Prophet’s chest.)) [4] This event was said to be the cause for returning Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hf) to his mother, as quoted by Ibn Hisham [5] and al-Ya’qubi [6], among others. This narration is frequently mentioned in the historical and biographical literatures from other Muslim schools, where it is reported that the Prophet’s chest was opened five times throughout his life - once when he was three years of age, then again at ten, a third time during the Revelation, a fourth at his journey to the Aqsa Mosque in the event of Israa’ and Mi’raaj, and there is some disagreement on the fifth and final occurrence. The repetition of opening the Prophet’s chest is said to be an honour for him. In fact, some say it is a sign or token of prophecy [7], and thus a miraculous wonder. Furthermore, it is asserted that this event is a literal manifestation of the Quranic verses “Have We not expanded for you your breast; And taken off from you your burden”[8], where the verses were interpreted to literally mean an opening and expansion of the Prophet’s chest [9]. The Shia Response to this Narration The general Shia view does not accept this narration or its premise, and Sayed Al-Amely discusses 7 counter arguments, which we shall analyse below. Firstly, Ibn Hisham and other Sunni historians mention that the reason for returning the Prophet (pbuh&hf) to his mother was that a group of African Christians saw him with his wet-nurse, and after inspecting him they expressed their intentions to take him with them to their king. This incident is mentioned in several sources [10] that simultaneously cite the chest-opening event as the reasoning behind the Prophet’s return. The citation of both hadiths together is problematic because they offer two separate scenarios that supposedly led to the Prophet’s return to his mother. Which hadith should be considered as correct? Was he returned because his chest was opened or because a group of people wished to take him away? This second hadith contradicts the former narration, and thus casts doubt over the chest-opening incident. Secondly, how would it be that this incident becomes the cause of his return, if his supposed age at the chest-opening incident was three years, or two years and a few months? The age of the Prophet (pbuh&hf) when he was returned to his mother was five years, so if the incident was the cause of his return then he would have been returned before the age of five. Thirdly, it is not feasible that a gland or a blood clot in the heart would be responsible for a person’s evildoing or instinct to sin such that it must be surgically removed. Further, does this insinuate that any person who undergoes some surgery and has this clot removed from their heart, that they would become pious, God-fearing and benevolent? Or did Allah (swt) specify this gland or clot for the Prophet (pbuh&hf), to the extent that he was the only one among humankind to have this evil clot? If so, why was the Prophet the only person to have it? Fourthly, concerns are also raised on the number of times this incident allegedly took place. The Prophet’s chest was said to be opened up to five times throughout his lifetime to remove the clot, which leads us to question: why is there repetition? Specifically, why should there be any satanic clot in the Prophet’s body that must be removed multiple times, even at the time of his Revelation or during Israa’ and Mi’raaj? And why those specific times in particular? Moreover, was this clot some cancerous growth that repetitively reappeared despite its removal? Why did the so-called “Shaytan’s share” of the Prophet’s body continuously regrow after its grievous extraction? If it continually reappeared, why did the process of extracting it from his chest only occur five times? Why was the Prophet’s chest not opened by Gabriel a sixth or seventh time, and so on? Did the so-called evil clot fail to reappear after a certain number of procedures? Taking this further, why would Allah (swt) want to place His Prophet (pbuh&hf) under excruciation and agony in the first place, having him undergo several painful processes for no committed sin? If evil was truly sourced from a blood clot, surely He would have created His Prophet without it. Fifthly, if God wanted to cleanse his servant from any evil He would not need such graphic and bizarre surgical operations in the presence of onlookers. Furthermore, what medical expertise does the angel Gabriel have such that he could perform this open-heart surgery? Do other angels possess this knowledge as well? Where would they learn medicine from? Does this hadith insinuate that the Prophet (pbuh&hf) was coerced into doing good, and that it was not the result of his own inclination or desire? What role did he play in his own actions, then? Further, point six questions why Prophet Muhammad was chosen and distinguished among all of the 124 000 prophets that Allah (swt) sent for this procedure. If he truly is the greatest and most perfect or complete of God’s messengers, how is it concurrently plausible that he should require an operation such as this? Or did Satan have a share of the hearts of other prophets before him such that they required this operation as well, but angels had not yet acquired the surgical knowledge to perform it? And lastly, this supposed incident infringes numerous verses throughout the Noble Quran. In chapter 15, Satan describes how he will lead humankind astray saying “I will certainly make (evil) fair-seeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to deviate; Except Thy servants from among them, the devoted ones” [11]. Satan himself acknowledges he has no influence over God’s devoted servants - surely His greatest messenger is one of them? Allah declares “Surely (as for) My servants, you have no authority over them”[12] and “Surely Satan has no authority over those who believe and rely on their Lord” [13]. The Resolution We do not accept nor believe that the Prophet’s chest was opened by Gabriel in any case, and certainly not for open-heart surgery. Not only does this account incorrectly suggest that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hf) acquired his piety and excellence through celestial intervention rather than goodwill, which tactfully casts doubt on his prophecy as a whole, but it also provides no real meaning, benefit or lesson to Muslims. In essence, religion should not be exempt from logical reasonings and arguments. While we, within the School of AhlulBayt, do not associate any legitimacy to the discussed hadith purely based on how we analyse and assess narrations - which is a separate and more complex discussion - this article only explored logical disparities in the report to further affirm our stance. Exaggerated stories and misrepresentations are interwoven in popular Islamic historical reports, which sadly may play part in the misguidance of many Muslims of any and all sects, as well as reducing from the integrity and esteem of the Prophet’s character presented to those outside of the religion. It is imperative that we do not simply accept any narration or account to be true without prior justification, proof or logical reasoning, particularly when it impacts our beliefs. All discussion points were directly derived from al-Amely, whose book we mentioned in the opening of this article and will be used to inspire future posts and topics. _________________________ (1) The year during which the Prophet was born was named the Year of the Elephant, memorialising the well-known event when an African king sent troops of soldiers and elephants to destroy the Ka’ba. Suffice to say, they were not successful. (2) Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj is the author of Sahih Muslim, which is one the six main collections of hadith and narrations in Sunni Muslim literature. (3) Anas ibn Malik lived at the time of the Prophet, and is revered by Sunni Muslims as a companion to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hf) and a trustworthy narrator of many Sunni hadiths. He is not to be confused with Malik ibn Anas, who studied under Imam al-Sadiq and founded the Maliki Sunni sect. (4) Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, “Sahih Muslim”, Volume 1, pp 101-102. Similar narrations are also mentioned in various literatures. (5) Abu Muhammad abdal-Malik Ibn Hisham, “Sirat Ibn Hisham”, Volume 1, pp 174-175. (6) Ahmad al-Ya’qubi, “Tarikh al-Yaqubi”, Volume 2, pp 10. (7) Muhammad Said Ramadan al-Bouti, “Fiqh Al Sirah Al Nabawiyyah”, pp 53. (8) Holy Quran 94:1-2 Translated by M. H. Shakir, Ansariyan Publications, Qom, Iran, pp 1137. (9) Mohammed Hussein Heikal, “The Life of Muhammad”, pp 73, among other texts. (10) Abu Muhammad abdal-Malik Ibn Hisham, “Sirat Ibn Hisham”, Volume 1, pp 177. Also see Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, “The History of Al-Tabari”, Volume 1, pp 575. (11) Holy Quran 15:39-40 Translated by M. H. Shakir, Ansariyan Publications, Qom, Iran, pp 462. (12) Holy Quran 17:65 Ibid pp 506. (13) Holy Quran 16:99 Ibid pp 488.
0 Comments
|