Salam `alaykum:

Regarding the primary evidence of the Book of Allah addressing the wives of
the Prophet (SAWS) (Sura 33) as "Ahl al-Bayt":

28. O Prophet! Say unto THY WIVES: If ye desire the world's life and its
adornment, come! I will content you and will release you with a fair
release;

29. But if ye desire Allah and His messenger and the abode of the
Hereafter, then lo! Allah hath prepared for the good among you an immense
reward.

30. O ye WIVES OF THE PROPHET! Whosoever of you committeth manifest
lewdness, the punishment for her will be doubled, and that is easy for
Allah.

31. And whosoever of you is submissive unto Allah and His messenger and
doeth right, We shall give her reward twice over, and We have prepared for
her a rich provision.

32. O ye WIVES OF THE PROPHET! Ye are not like any other women. If ye keep
your duty (to Allah), then be not soft of speech, lest he in whose heart
is a disease aspire (to you), but utter customary speech.

33. And stay in your [F] houses. Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment
of the Time of ignorance. Be regular in prayer, and pay the poor due, and
obey Allah and His messenger. Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness
far from you [M/F], O FOLK OF THE HOUSEHOLD, and cleanse you [M/F] with a
thorough cleansing.

34. And bear in mind that which is recited in your [F] houses of the
revelations of Allah and wisdom. Lo! Allah is Subtile, Aware.

It is clear that a switch from feminine to masculine with reference to the
address to Ahl al-Bayt means (1) the grammatical value of Ahl is masculine
and/or (2) at least one man is included with the feminine group being
addressed. The latter group would thus consist in the wives of the Prophet
(SAWS) *together* with the Mantle (`Itra): `Ali, Fatima, and their children.
This is confirmed by the majority of the scholars of Qur'anic commentary.

In addition, it includes the zak�t-forbidden Muttalibi families of `Ali,
`Aqil, Ja`far, and `Abbas; while Haqqi in Ruh al-Bayan added Salman
al-Farisi according to the explicit hadith "Salmanu minn� Ahl al-Bayt" as a
proof that the freedman is part of a man's household, while Shaykh Muhyi
al-Din Ibn `Arabi in his Futuhat (2:126-127) explained Ahl al-Bayt in the
Salman hadith as referring to each Muslim that acquires the attributes of
his Master i.e. the Prophet (SAWS). The latter sense is confirmed by the
narrations stating: "Do not come to me with your lineages on the Day of
Resurrection! My Family is every Godwary believer" and "Every Prophet has a
Family and carriage; my Family and carriage are the Believer" (�l� wa
`iddat� al-mu'min).

In conclusion, Ahl al-Bayt has many meanings according to context, and the
context of 33:33 is: first the wives of the Prophet (SAWS), then the wives
together with the noble `Itra, and Allah knows best.

Al-Razi, al-Tafsir al-Kabir (6:615): "Allah Most High quit using the
feminine pronoun in his address and turned to the masculine by saying
{liyudhhiba `ankum al-rijsa = to remove 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 the 'Ahl al-Bayt' but the
most appropriate and correct is to say they are his children and wives;
al-Hasan and al-Husayn being among them and `Ali being among them... due to
his cohabitation with the daughter of the Prophet (SAWS) and his close
companionship with the Prophet (SAWS)."

Al-Baghawi, Ma`alim al-Tanzil (2:393): "In this verse [Hud 73] there is a
proof that wives are part of Ahl al-Bayt. ... (3:428) He means by Ahl
al-Bayt [in 33:33] the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) because they are in his
house and this is the narration of Sa`id ibn Jubayr from Ibn `Abbas."

Al-Baydawi, Anwar al-Tanzil (4:374): "The Shi`a's claim that verse 33:33 is
specific to Fatima, `Ali, and their two sons - Allah be well-pleased with
them - ... and their adducing it as proof of their immunity from sin
(`ismat) and of the probative character of their consensus, is weak, because
restricting the meaning to them is not consistent with 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."

Al-Khazin, Lubab al-Ta'wil fi Ma`ani al-Tanzil (3:490): "They [Ahl al-Bayt]
are the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) because they are in his house." Then he
mentions the other two explanations, namely, that they are the `Itra or that
they are the families of `Ali, `Aqil, Ja`far, and al-`Abbas.

Al-Nasafi, Madarik al-Tanzil wa Haqa'iq al-Ta'wil (3:490): "There is in it
[verse 33:33] a proof that his wives are part of the Folk of his Household
(min ahli baytihi). He said 'from you [M] (`ankum)' because what is meant
are both the men and women of his family (�l) as indicated by {wa
yutahhirakum tath�ran = and cleanse you [M/F] with a thorough cleansing}
from the filth of sins."

Al-Tabari, Tafsir (22:7) [after citing reports explaining Ahl al-Bayt to
mean the `Itra] and al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul (p. 299 #734): From `Ikrima
concerning 33:33: "It is not as they claim, but the verse was revealed
concerning the wives of the Prophet (SAWS)."

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

Al-Shawkani, Fath al-Qadir (4:278-280) and al-Mubarakfuri, Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi
(9:48-49): "Ibn `Abbas, `Ikrima, `Ata', al-Kalbi, Muqatil, and Sa`id ibn
Jubayr said the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) are specifically meant [in
33:33], and by house are meant the houses of his wives as mentioned before
in the verses. While Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, Mujahid, and Qatada - it is also
related from al-Kalbi - said that those meant are specifically `Ali, Fatima,
al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. They adduced the 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 wives and
the `Itra]... 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 (SAWS)."

Al-Sawi, Hashiyat al-Jalalayn: "It was said the verse [33:33] is
comprehensive (`�mma) to mean the People of his House in the sense of his
dwelling and these are his wives, and the People of his House in the sense
of his lineage and these are his offspring."

Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur (6:603): [after citing the narrations of the
`Itra] Ibn Sa`d narrated from `Urwa that he said: "Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33]
means the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) and it was revealed in the house of
`A'isha."

Ibn al-Jawzi, Zad al-Masir fi `Ilm al-Tafsir (6:378): "Then He showed their
superiority over all women when He said: {You [feminine] are not like anyone
[masculine] of the women} (33:32). Al-Zajjaj [the philologist] said: 'He did
not say, "like any other woman" 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 (SAWS) are his
wives, his offspring, and his near relatives such as al-`Abbas, `Ali, and
all for whom receiving sadaqa is unlawful."

Al-Bukhari, Sahih: Hadith from Anas: The Prophet (SAWS) visited `A'isha and,
upon entering her house, said: "As-Sal�mu `alaykum Ahl al-Bayt! wa
rahmatullah." Whereupon she responded: "Wa `alayka as-Salam wa rahmatullah,
how did you find your wives [ahlak]? May Allah bless you." Then he went
around to see all of his wives and said to them exactly what he had said to
`A'isha.

Al-Wahidi, al-Wajiz fi Tafsir al-Kitab al-`Aziz (2:865): "Ahl al-Bayt [in
33:33] meaning, the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) and the men [and women] of
the People of his House."

Al-Tha`alibi, Jawahir al-Hisan fi Tafsir al-Qur'an (2:212): "This verse [Hud
73] shows that the wife of a man is part of the People of his House (min
Ahli Baytihi)... and 'the House' in Surat al-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 `Abbas: "This verse [33:33] was revealed concerning the wives of the
Prophet (SAWS)."

Ibn Jama`a, Ghurar al-Tibyan fi Ma lam Yusamma fi al-Qur'an (p. 421 #1201)
and al-Suyuti in Mufhamat al-Aqran fi Mubhamat al-Qur'an: "Ahl al-Bayt in
verse 33 are the Prophet and his wives. It was also said they are `Ali,
Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and it was also said they are those for
whom sadaqa is unlawful [i.e. �l `Aqil, �l `Ali, �l Ja`far, and �l
al-`Abbas]."

Al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (2:197): "The phrasing of the
Qur'an [in Surat al-Ahzab] shows that the wives are meant, that the verses
were revealed concerning them, 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: {Allah desires to remove
uncleanness far from you [masculine plural], O Folk of the Household}. 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
shows that `Ali and Fatima are more [specifically] deserving of this
description ["Ahl al-Bayt"] than the wives."

Al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur'an (4:378-379): "It [the verse Hud 73] shows that
the wives of the Prophet - Allah bless and greet him - are of the People of
his House (min Ahli Baytihi) because the angels names Ibrahim's wife as
being of the People of his House, and so has Allah Most High said when
addressing the wives of the Prophet - Alah bless and greet him - when He
said:... [33:33]. His wives are part of those meant because the beginning of
the address concerns them."

Abu al-Su`ud, Irshad al-`Aql al-Salim ila Mazaya al-Qur'an al-Karim (7:103):

"This [33:33], as you see, is an explicit verse and a radiant proof that the
wives of the Prophet - Allah 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 Shi`is who narrow it to mean only Fatima, `Ali, and their two
sons - Allah be well-pleased with them. As for what they claim 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."

WAllahu a`lam.

Hajj Gibril

--

GF Haddad

Salam Rami,

Did I miss something?

It is obvious from posting these Tafsir that there is no consensus among the Sunni scholars regarding the meaning of the term "Ahly Al-Bayt" in Quran, 33:33. Was that the point of this post, or did I miss the point?

Salam

Salaam

I just wanted to post quickly and say that it is obvious that there will be differences of opinion among scholars (Sunni or Shia) is quite common, whether it be in interpretation of Quran or other issues. I think anyone with various Sunni or Shia tafseer books can attest to this fact quite readily, because a verse can have more than a single dimension.

However, in the case of this Ayah, I believe one huge question that our Shia brothers will need to answer is whether Umm Salama (the wife of the Prophet who reported the Hadeeth-e-Kisa) is agreed upon as being a Shia by all Imaami Shia Aalims.

Salam (and Welcome back) to Jello!

REGARDING UMM SALAMA

Was Umm Salam a Shia?

Do you mean "is she considered part of the Ahly Al'Bayt?", or " Did she support Imam Ali as the rightful successor to the prophet?"

In regards to the first question, she is not considered part of the Ahly Al'Bayt (although she is highly respected by the Shia, and she is considered a reliable narrator of Hadith from the Holy Messenger (a.s.)).

"

Salaam

I wanted to ask one thing about this that is quite interesting:

Why call it the "Verse" of purification? It is obviously the last part of Ayah 33:33, so it is a portion of a verse. Also, why was it included in this series of Ayats, if the reason of revelation is altogether different?

Salam Jello,

Before answering your question, I would like to ask for your explanation of the (for accuracy, maybe) "statement" of purification in light of the (agreed upon) fact that the Ahly Al'Bayt cannot refer only to the wives of the prophet (as the rest of the Ayat refers) because

"The beginning of verse 33:33 and subsequent statements are addressed to the wives of the Prophet (s) as is evident from the feminine pronouns used. However, in the verse ofpurification, the gender changes to the masculine or mixed gender. "

There are only two possible explanations of this that I can see, either,

1.) It is permissible in Arabic grammer to use a masculine pronoun to refer to a group of only women, or

2.) The term "Ahly Al-Bayt" is a group composed of both women AND MEN.

So, Jello, which explanation do you favor? (or is there an alternate explanation)

Salaa alaykum.

The group being refered to in this case as Ahl-ul-Bayt comprises of both men and women. The women are the wives of the Prophet (SAW), and the man is the Prophet (SAW) himself, since in any household, the "ahl" is the man plus his wives, and in Arabic if there is one man among a group of women, the proper pronoun becomes the masculine one. Thus, it conforms to Arabic grammar without any problem.

Salam Jello,

You are correct regarding your point (and if I would have read through all the conflicting tafseer above, I would have already seen it.) regarding your proposed "third" explanation.

I find it amazing that all of these various tafseer come from one school of though (i.e., Sunni scholars). Do the Sunni scholars consider this verse of so little importance that they do not make any effort to come to an agreement on it? I think the tafseer of this verse clearly illustrates the need in our Umma today for more leadership among the Ulama.

These tafsir also illustrate why the Shia scholars always return to the hadith from the Ahly Al'Bayt to explain Quran. In fact, the Holy Messenger (a.s.) has already told us that these two are joined together and "will not part from eachother" (in the famous hadith of the "Two Weighty Things"). However, if our Sunni brothers cannot even agree on the identity of the "purified ones", then they will not be able to rely on them. Particulary if the scholar believes that the "purified ones" includes the (real) Ahly Al'Bayt AND the wives of the prophet, because some of the wives of the prophet openly fought against some members of the Ahly Al'Bayt.

Salam

Al-Baydawi, Anwar al-Tanzil (4:374): "The Shi`a's claim that verse 33:33 is
specific to Fatima, `Ali, and their two sons - Allah be well-pleased with
them - ... and their adducing it as proof of their immunity from sin
(`ismat) and of the probative character of their consensus, is weak, because
restricting the meaning to them is not consistent with 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."

Salam Br. Rami,

I am really quite surprised at your (and others) insistence that this verse includes the wives of the prophet for two reasons. The first and most important is the Tafseer of this verse from your own scholars. You say that only 1 of the scholars you quoted says that the verse was revealed only about the five, however, there are many, many more well known and respected Sunni scholars who have the same opinion (and have transmitted hadith to support their claim) . I have included only those for which I have a precise, academic reference that can be verified. Here is a partial list;

1.)     Imam Fakhru'd-d Razi in Tafsir-e-Kabir, vol. VI, p. 783;

2.)     Jalalu'd-din Suyuti in Durru'l-Mansur, vol.V,p.199

3.)     Khasa'isu'l-Kubra, vol. II, p. 264;

4.)     Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Isaba, vol. IV, p. 208

5.)     Ibn Asakir in Ta'rikh, vol. IV, pp 204 and 206;

6.)     Muhibu'd-din Tabari in Riyazu'n-Nuzra, vol. II, p. 188;

7.)     Muslim Bin Hajjaj in Sahih, vol. II, p. 133 and vol. VII, p. 140;

8.)     Nabhani in Sharafu'l-Mu'ayyid, Beirut Edition, p. 10; Muhammad Bin

9.)     Seyyed Abu Bakr Bin Shahabu'd-din Alawi in his Kitab-e-Rashqatu's-Sa'adi min Bahr-e-Faza'il Bani Nabiu'l-Hadi (printed by A'lamiyya Press, Egypt, 1303 A.H.), ch. 1, pp 14-19, narrates from Tirmidhi, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Munzir, Hakim, Ibn Mardawiyya, Baihaqi, Ibn Abi Hatim, Tibrani, Ahmad Bin Hanbal, Ibn Kathir, Muslim Bin Hajjaj, Ibn Abi Shaiba, and Samhudi on the basis of studies of the works of your ulema, that this holy verse was revealed in praise of the Holy Five persons.

Also, In Jam'i-Bainu's-Sihahu's-Sitta, Mauta of Imam Malik Bin Anas, Sahih of Bukhari and Muslim, Sunan of Abu Dawud and Sijistani, and Tirmidhi, Jam'u'l-Usul and other books, your ulema and historians generally admit that this verse was revealed in praise of the Holy Five.

CONTEXT VS. PROOF

The second reason for my surprise is that you are using the context of the verse to prove that it was revealed in reference to the wives. In fact the verse itself proves that this cannot be relied upon, as within the same Ayat it quickly changes from addressing an all female group (with a femine pronoun) to either a mixed or exclusively male group (with a masculine pronoun). This shows that two different groups are addressed within the same Ayat, so showing that the statements before and after the "statement of purification" are addressing a different group.

In addition to this, if we have numerous Hadith from the Prophet (a.s.), such as the "Hadith of the Cloak" and others in which the prophet was asked directly who the Ahly Al'Bayt were and he gave a direct answer (i.e., he gathered (himself), Ali (a.s.), Fatima (a.s.), Hassan (a.s.) and Hussien (a.s.) under the cloak), then how can we ignore these and rely on the context.

There is also a third point, which I wish to avoid (to not potentially offend anyone) regarding Muslim history.

Salam.

I am really quite surprised at your (and others) insistence that this verse includes the wives of the prophet for two reasons. The first and most important is the Tafseer of this verse from your own scholars. You say that only 1 of the scholars you quoted says that the verse was revealed only about the five, however, there are many, many more well known and respected Sunni scholars who have the same opinion (and have transmitted hadith to support their claim) . I have included only those for which I have a precise, academic reference that can be verified. Here is a partial list;

You have not provided any Tafsir of the verse from any Sunni scholars!

The second highlighted statment is where the mistake is, The hadith that is refrenced is not an indication of the respected scholars opinions on the matter this is your asumption, sunni scholars do not accept or reject ahadith simply becouse we agree with them or we dislike them, we have a complete science to verify the authenticity of hadith those which are authentic we include. This science also deals with hadith contradictions between authenticated ahadith, If you pay close atention to the ahadith non say the verse was revealed becouse of such and suach they only mention time and place unless there is a clear statment to the effect "the reason for this verse to be revealed was this" "the prophet was asked about such and such, and so Allah revealed such and such" it is not considered to be amongst asbab an Nuzool.

Further all that has been given are refrences to "a" hadith without the actual commentary by any scholar.

The second reason for my surprise is that you are using the context of the verse to prove that it was revealed in reference to the wives. In fact the verse itself proves that this cannot be relied upon, as within the same Ayat it quickly changes from addressing an all female group (with a femine pronoun) to either a mixed or exclusively male group (with a masculine pronoun). This shows that two different groups are addressed within the same Ayat, so showing that the statements before and after the "statement of purification" are addressing a different group.

Ya Kafirun means the verse is adressing the Kafir, Ya Munafiq means the verse is adressing a Munafiq, Ya Mu'minuun means the verse is adressing a Mu'min, YA NISAA means O women (adressing women), verse 33 is not seperate from verse 32 it only changes to masculine in the second half of the verse 33 it doesnt change topic read the arabic 32 continues to 33 and only in the second half does it adress the entire group as Ahl al bayt, Sayidah Fatimah was among those included a "female". You can not ignore the context of the Quran, "This is confirmed by the majority of the scholars of Qur'anic commentary" meaning The clear majority of Sunni scholars who are expret in the field of Tafsir hold this opinion The above article are Quotes from these said Scholars.

It is clear that a switch from feminine to masculine with reference to the
address to Ahl al-Bayt means (1) the grammatical value of Ahl is masculine
and/or (2) at least one man is included with the feminine group being
addressed. The latter group would thus consist in the wives of the Prophet
(SAWS) *together* with the Mantle (`Itra): `Ali, Fatima, and their children.

The verse was revealed in the house of Aisha here is exact Quote from Imam Syuti who you may not know is one of Islams Greatest Sunni scholars.

Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur (6:603): [after citing the narrations of the
`Itra] Ibn Sa`d narrated from `Urwa that he said: "Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33]
means the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) and it was revealed in the house of
`A'isha."

you should also note that "2.)     Jalalu'd-din Suyuti in Durru'l-Mansur" 
is the same person (aparently in the same work) clearly saying the oposite of what 
you claim on the basis of only citing a hadith which 
you interprate the intention and his commentary for him.

Al-Jalalayn (one of islams greatest tafisr works, it is held as the standard 
by which to judge other tafsir works): "Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33] 
i.e. the wives of the Prophet (SAWS)." 

Al jalalayn is Imama suyuti's Tafsir.

1)Imam Fakhru'd-d Razi in Tafsir-e-Kabir, vol. VI, p. 783;

Al-Razi, al-Tafsir al-Kabir (6:615): "Allah Most High quit using the
feminine pronoun in his address and turned to the masculine by saying
{liyudhhiba `ankum al-rijsa = to remove 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 the 'Ahl al-Bayt' but the
most appropriate and correct is to say they are his children and wives;
al-Hasan and al-Husayn being among them and `Ali being among them... due to
his cohabitation with the daughter of the Prophet (SAWS) and his close
companionship with the Prophet (SAWS)."

6)Muhibu'd-din Tabari in Riyazu'n-Nuzra, vol. II, p. 188;

Al-Tabari, Tafsir (22:7) [after citing reports explaining Ahl al-Bayt to
mean the `Itra] and al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul (p. 299 #734): From `Ikrima
concerning 33:33: "It is not as they claim, but the verse was revealed
concerning the wives of the Prophet (SAWS)."

A clear contradiction to what you and the website are saying.

In addition to this, if we have numerous Hadith from the Prophet (a.s.), such as the "Hadith of the Cloak" and others in which the prophet was asked directly who the Ahly Al'Bayt were and he gave a direct answer (i.e., he gathered (himself), Ali (a.s.), Fatima (a.s.), Hassan (a.s.) and Hussien (a.s.) under the cloak), then how can we ignore these and rely on the context.

Br you just said Hadith are over Quran. Many ahadith seem to contradict the Quran that is why the science of hadith authentication and commentary developed to clear these apparent contradictions, no scholar has ever said we take a hadith above the Quran or interprate it in such a way to contradict the Quran.

And how do these hadith exclude his wives being part of Ahl al Bayt, there are other ahadith which also call them ahl al bayt it is only your willingness to put one hadith verse another which is causing confusion, rahter you should say our prophet didnt contradict him self.

There is also a third point, which I wish to avoid (to not potentially offend anyone) regarding Muslim history.

You mean shia version of muslim history, it is unfortunate br you converted to shia islam beffore learning about Sunni Islam from Sunni's .

I sincerely suggest br you impartialy and objectively learn about sunni islam from traditional Sunni scholars not from books written about sunni beliefs by our shia br's, there is a real documented history of fabrication from the shia side, not by respected scholars, but the works have non the less gained popularity and thus influeced Shia popular beliefs and atitude. One such work Is peshwar nights which i can give you clear examples of fabrications concerning sunni sources in order to suport there argument. You may like to further consider this point, early shia muslims used to have names like Abu bakr and Umar and Uthman it is only in modern history that hatred for such companions has fostered.

Look at pure facts without interpretation and you will see how much is opinion.

Salam to Rami,

A GENERAL (and maybe a good ending) POINT

On the subject of the meaning of this particular Ayat, we may just have to "agree to disagree for now." No hard feelings!

REGARDING OTHER POINTS

If you read my posts, you will see that I have never insulted Abu Bakr, Omar or Uthman (although many Shia do this, I'll admit). I do not believe that they were deserving of the title of Caliphate, however, that is not an insult. You are correct (and I think other Shia have mentioned this) that in early Muslim history there were Shia with these names. The exagerations and demonization that takes place among both the Shia and Sunni communities is related to the oppression of the Shia by the (in name only, possibly) Sunni Caliphs from 80 A.H. until the 1920's. At this moment in history we have an unprecedented opportunity for dialogue. Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself.

You wrote;

" Look at pure facts without interpretation and you will see how much is opinion."

We (and I include myself) are very poor at realizing where the line between fact and opinion is in our own arguments, however, we are very good at pointing it out in other peoples argument. This is the human condition, and this is why we are all wholly dependent on the guidance of Allah (s.w.a.). May Allah (s.w.a.) remove the prejudice from our hearts, and guide us to clear and straight path.

Salam

A GENERAL (and maybe a good ending) POINT On the subject of the meaning of this particular Ayat, we may just have to "agree to disagree for now." No hard feelings!

this is my last comment on the subject,

I believe the verse is adressing the wives and Ali, fatimah and there children, if we were to say the masculine pronoun was purely adressing an all male group then certainly fatimah would be excluded. Since it is adressing both, the wives must be included as it is the context of the verse and versus prior and later.

I will add and you can verify this that generaly you will find else where in the Quran when no gender or both genders are intended Allah (swt) always talkes in the masculine.

REGARDING OTHER POINTS If you read my posts, you will see that I have never insulted Abu Bakr, Omar or Uthman (although many Shia do this, I'll admit). I do not believe that they were deserving of the title of Caliphate, however, that is not an insult. You are correct (and I think other Shia have mentioned this) that in early Muslim history there were Shia with these names. The exagerations and demonization that takes place among both the Shia and Sunni communities is related to the oppression of the Shia by the (in name only, possibly) Sunni Caliphs from 80 A.H. until the 1920's. At this moment in history we have an unprecedented opportunity for dialogue. Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself.

May Allah (s.w.a.) remove the prejudice from our hearts, and guide us to clear and straight path. Salam

Ameen