No, he wasn't forced. Zainab and Zayd didn't get along.
No, he wasn't forced. Zainab and Zayd didn't get along.
Hence the ayat from Allah (SWT) came that stated the children must acknowledge their biological fathers and no name other then them will be accepted.
@IstarZIt was to show adopted and biological sons are not the same. The same ruling does not apply to them.
No Muslim finds it troubling to accept it. A father cannot marry his son’s ex-wife. However, an adopted son is not the same as a biological son and this is why this Verse was revealed.@IstarZ
The point is not name changing or not as in the seventh century, there were different customs and cultures that doesn’t apply to many living today. I know people who took their mother’s maiden surnames because their fathers disappeared while they were very young or they were abusers. It’s just that marrying your adopted son’s wife and justifying in a Koranic command seems a bit odd. It is legal like Woody Allen’s marriage to his former wife’s adopted daughter. Many Muslims will find today troubling to accept it. Some older men might attempt and justify it.
@IstarZNo Muslim finds it troubling to accept it. A father cannot marry his son’s ex-wife. However, an adopted son is not the same as a biological son and this is why this Verse was revealed.
I don't think many Muslims struggle with the idea of someone marrying their adopted son's wife. It is what it is.
That didn’t take you long. Her age is disputed.
@IstarZThat didn’t take you long. Her age is disputed.
I find that it’s usually ex-muslims who have ants in their pants about certain rulings and laws pertaining to the Islamic faith, They left this religion but find it hard to move on. I mean look at you, you can’t help yourself - you have to inject your disdain and mocking comments in every topic even if it has nothing to do with Islam.
Morality and principles have changed so much that soon incest and bestiality will be accepted but I’m sure you’re okay with that.
Disputed by who? Don't you believe in all these Hadiths stating her age including her own hadiths? Does it make you embarrassed? It has got nothing to do with us. Read this;
Age of the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married her .
Whilst visiting some chat rooms, I read a very strange topic, and I want someone who has knowledge of the Prophet’s biography (seerah) to explain this matter to me, may Allah bless you. To sum up, after researching the accusations the reports narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaari which state that ‘Aa’ishah’s age, when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did the marriage contract with her, was six years, and that he consummated the marriage with her when she was nine years old, a journalist cast doubts on Saheeh al-Bukhaari. The researcher did not only examine the reports from the angle of figures and dates, but also from the angle of the isnaads through which the most famous hadeeths were narrated, as mentioned in al-Bukhaari and Muslim. In both cases he seems to have wanted to demonstrate that he is smart and prove his point.
Praise be to Allah
The definition of the age of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did the marriage contract with her as being six years, and of the age when he consummated the marriage with her as being nine years, is not a matter of ijtihaad (individual opinion) on the part of the scholars, such that we could argue whether it is right or wrong; rather this is a historical narration which is proven by evidence that confirms its soundness and the necessity of accepting it. That is for several reasons:
It was narrated by the individual concerned herself, namely ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), and is not something that someone else said about her, or the description of a historian or hadeeth scholar. Rather it comes in the context of her speaking about herself (may Allah be pleased with her), when she said:
The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married me when I was six years old. We came to Madinah and stayed among Banu’l-Haarith ibn Khazraj. I fell sick and lost my hair, (then I reovered) and my hair grew down to my earlobes. My mother Umm Roomaan came to me when I was on a swing and some of my friends were with me. She called me loudly and I went to her, and I did not know what she wanted of me. She took me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house, as I was gasping for breath, until I had calmed down. Then she took some water and wiped my face and head with it, then she took me into the house. There were some women of the Ansaar in the house, who said: With good wishes and blessings and good luck. She handed me over to them and they adorned me, and suddenly I saw the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) at mid-morning, and they handed me over to him. At that time I was nine years old.
Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3894; Muslim, 1422.
This report from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) is in the soundest of books after the Book of Allah, may He be exalted, namely the two Saheehs of al-Bukhaari and Muslim.
It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) via a number of isnaads (chains of narration), not by one isnaad only, as some ignorant people claim.
·The most well-known chain of narration is that of Hishaam ibn ‘Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, from his father ‘Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). This is one of the soundest narrations, as ‘Urwah ibn az-Zubayr is one of the most well acquainted of people with ‘Aa’ishah, because she was his maternal aunt.
·It was also narrated via another chain, by az-Zuhri from ‘Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, from ‘Aa’ishah. Narrated by Muslim, 1422.
It was also narrated via another chain by al-A‘mash, from Ibraaheem, from al-Aswad, from ‘Aa’ishah, who said: “The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah when she was six years old and consummated the marriage with her when she was nine years old, and he died when she was eighteen years old. Narrated by Muslim, 1422.
·It was also narrated via another chain, from Muhammad ibn ‘Amr, from Yahya ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Haatib, from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). Narrated by Abu Dawood, 4937.
Shaykh Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni compiled the names of those who followed ‘Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, namely: al-Aswad ibn Yazeed, al-Qaasim ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan, al-Qaasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, ‘Amrah bint ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan, and Yahya ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Haatib.
He also compiled the names of those who followed Hishaam ibn ‘Urwah in narrating this hadeeth. They were: Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri and Abu Hamzah Maymoon, the freed slave of ‘Urwah.
Then he named those who narrated it from Hishaam ibn ‘Urwah among the scholars of Madinah. The reader should understand that this hadeeth is one of those that were also narrated by Hishaam in Madinah. They were: Abu’z-Zinnaad ‘Abdullah ibn Dhakwaan and his son ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Abi’z-Zinnaad, and ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn ‘Urwah.
Among the people of Makkah (it was narrated by) Sufyaan ibn ‘Uyaynah.
(It was also narrated by) Jareer ibn ‘Abd al-Hameed ad-Dubbi among the people of ar-Rayy.
Among the people of Basra (it was narrated by): Hammaad ibn Salamah, Hammaad ibn Zayd, Wuhayb ibn Khaalid, and others.
See the lecture given by Shaykh Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni (may Allah preserve him) discussing the ignorance of the one who wrote the article mentioned in the question, and the response to it, on the following link (in Arabic):
See also the following link (in Arabic):
All of these lists are mentioned in order to ward off the specious argument of some ignorant people who say that Hishaam ibn ‘Urwah was the only one who narrated it. Even if we accept [?} that Hishaam became confused at the end of his life, the correct view is that this accusation was made only by Abu’l-Hasan ibn al-Qattaan in Bayaan al-Wahm wa’l-Eehaam, and he was mistaken in doing so.
Adh-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Hishaam ibn ‘Urwah was one of the prominent and authoritative scholars, but when he grew old his memory failed, although he did not get confused, and there is nothing valid in the view of Abu’l-Hasan ibn al-Qattaan, which suggests that he and Suhayl ibn Abi Saalih became confused and changed. Yes, the man changed a little and his memory was not as sound as it had been in his youth. He forgot some of the things he had memorized and he made some mistakes, but so what?! He was not infallible. When he came to Iraq at the end of his life he passed on a great deal of knowledge, among which were a few hadeeths that he did not remember well. Something similar happened to Maalik, Shu‘bah, Wakee‘ and other senior, trustworthy narrators. So forget about this nonsense and mixing trustworthy scholars with weak narrators and those who became confused. Hishaam was Shaykh al-Islam, and may Allah help us against what Ibn al-Qattaan suggested and what ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Kharaash said: Maalik did not approve of him because he got angry with him for going and narrating hadeeth in Iraq. End quote.
Read the rest on
Aussie walaal, the only point I was making is that it was normal then, so you can't use that to score points against Muslims.