The central theme is a critical examination of the Salafi belief that the Prophet Muhammad's parents were polytheists, arguing this view is rooted in politically motivated fabrications from the Umayyad era, rather than divine revelation or sound Islamic tradition.
Mind Map
Expand करने के लिए click करें
पूरा interactive mind map देखने के लिए click करें
Welcome to a controversial issue concerning the parents of the
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Many Salafi sheikhs
have argued that the
Prophet's parents, Abdullah ibn
Abd al-Muttalib and Amina bint Wahb, are considered
polytheists by Salafis in general. This includes Salafis of all schools of thought, whether they
follow Ibn Taymiyyah,
Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, or any other school. All those who consider
themselves Salafis worldwide currently share this
belief: that the Prophet's parents were
polytheists and disbelievers. They have evidence to support their position.
Conversely, there are those who believe
the Prophet's parents were believers or were among the saved people of the pre-Islamic era.
They also have evidence. We
want to divide this issue into three categories.
In short, the issue of the Prophet's parents has three
categories or three groups within Islamic thought.
Muslims are divided on this matter into
three opinions. The first opinion is that they are
disbelievers and will go to Hell. The
second opinion says that they are... Two survivors from the
people of the period of ignorance (between the prophets and the believers) – meaning they are
from the people of the period of ignorance, and we don't know their fate.
But if there is a third opinion that says they are
in Paradise, then of course, this is rare, hardly
anyone says it. But the majority of poor
Muslims say that they are
from the people of the period of ignorance, and a minority says that they are
disbelievers and polytheists, based on the belief in some narrations.
And a rare minority says that they are believers
in Paradise. But the Salafis are
very biased towards this opinion and are very fanatical about it. This is because there is a
problem with the Salafis; they believe that a polytheist should
not only be hated but must be definitively in
Hell. Of course, this will immediately ask you,
who is a polytheist? We already know
that some polytheists will enter Hell
based on such and such and in such and such a context. But also, be
aware that the Holy Quran, in many verses,
grouped those who associated partners with God with the Jews, the believers, and the Christians –
all of these are Christians – and all of these are in
one group. And it said to you Whoever does a
righteous deed will have no fear, nor will they grieve. This means the
polytheists and the believers, who are the Muslims,
Christians, Jews, and the Magians. In some
verses, the Magians are mentioned. The one who will be saved from among them is the one who does
righteous deeds. So the matter will not be based
on name, be aware, because there are people who will even be
polytheists and not monotheists, but they will do
righteous deeds. What is their rank with God?
What is their fate with God? You do not know. This is
something that belongs to God. Do not say so-and-so is in Hell.
You are forbidden from naming people as being
in Hell. You are forbidden from naming people as being in Hell. And God
Almighty will not come on the Day of Resurrection and
say to you, “Why did you not declare so-and-so an unbeliever? Why did you not
say that so-and-so is in Hell?” God will not
ask you that, but He will ask you, “
Why did you judge him as an unbeliever? Why did
you judge him to be in Hell?” Why do you hate him ?
?
These are the questions you will be asked because these questions are
the scale by which good and evil deeds are measured.
Other things are not the basis for
God's actions. He will not ask you what your belief is about so-
and-so, but rather He will ask you about the things upon which
actions are based. If you say so-and-so is an
infidel, will you then go and attack him? If you say so-and-so is
in Hell, will you hate him? You don't even know
the extent of hatred itself, which leads to evil deeds. Then God will hold you accountable. So
now you are commanded to act
according to this matter—even the matter of "that" is considered a doubt, a kind of doubt.
What is the doubt about behavior? If you were given a choice
between two actions, one upon which evil behavior is based, and one upon which
no action is based at all, neither good
nor evil, you would be better off following the first. There is
something called faith: avoid doubts, for this is a protection of the religion and its honor.
This matter is a doubt, so stay away from it. Why do
you, a Salafi sheikh, go out and insult the Prophet's father,
saying, "I hate my father"? The Prophet, you think
that's how it is? You're a man's son, right? Well,
regardless of the fact that even people
who disagree with your Islamic thought, and even Muslims,
tell you that the Prophet's parents were pure
because the loins of the prophets are pure. You'll tell me, "But
Adam's father was a man, and Abraham's father was an
unbeliever according to the Quran." My brother, his father was Adam,
I mean Abraham. In some interpretations, it says that Amr was
Abraham's uncle, not his father. He was his
guardian, but his father was dead.
Abraham himself was a good man. The loins
of the prophets were pure. You can't
tell me that the fathers of the
prophets were unbelievers and polytheists, that their loins were impure.
You're actually admitting something against the
Prophet's status. No
prophet would accept your claims about his
mother and father. And this is a question for you, Sheikh,
Salafi: if you were alive in the Prophet's time,
even if they were his father... And their father and mother were
disbelievers, not their masters, Aminah bint Wahb and Abdullah
ibn Abd al-Muttalib. Even if they were polytheists following the religion of
their people and worshipped idols and died in
polytheism, for example, imagine
asking the Prophet Muhammad, "Do
you love your father and mother?" He would say, "No,
I hate them because they were disbelievers and polytheists." Impossible! Absolutely not!
Because there is a verse in the Quran: "But if they strive to make you associate with Him that of which
you have no knowledge, do not
obey them but accompany them in [this] world with appropriate kindness." This
means you are commanded to love your parents even if they are
polytheists. So, the Prophet didn't love or
hate his father and mother? Why are you telling me I
must hate them because the Prophet would hate the
polytheists? Who told you the Prophet
hated the polytheists? Does
n't the Quran also say, "Indeed, you do not guide whom you
love, but Allah guides whom He wills"? So, who did
the Prophet love? Were they polytheists
who hadn't yet converted to Islam? You didn't
ask that question; you put it in a context that reflects an Umayyad
interpretation. This interpretation emerged during the Umayyad era and
applied this verse to Abu Talib, the Prophet's uncle. They
said this verse was about
Abu Talib, meaning the Prophet was sitting with him and saying, "Say
this, my uncle, and it will save
you from Hellfire."
Then they attributed it to Abu Talib. Of course, this hadith is
questionable and doubtful, and
its Umayyad influence is very clear.
I'll conclude with a simple point: the issue of the
Prophet's father and uncle is a product of
Umayyad culture. The Umayyad culture
ruled from around 40-41 AH
until 132 AH. During this period,
hundreds of thousands of hadiths were fabricated,
all attributed either to the Prophet (raised) or to
the Companions (stopped).
You know there are different types of hadith: raised hadith and stopped
hadith. The raised hadith is attributed to
the Prophet, and the stopped hadith is attributed to a Companion. It's likely that
when these hadiths were compiled, there was a connection to
political events. During the Umayyad era, there were
more than 20 or 30 wars, most of them civil wars.
Imagine, in that period of about 90 years, these wars
wouldn't have affected people or their culture.
If the wars you see
around you now—the war in
Ukraine, the war in Gaza, the war
with Iran, the war with Israel—these things
affect people's thinking, change their beliefs, make
many people cowardly, and make many people
lie. Imagine, more than 20 or 30
wars in the Umayyad era didn't affect
people's thinking at that time. Some people started at that time attributing words to the
Prophet that he was innocent of, using
deliberate lies or fabricated lies. There's
something in psychology called "
fake lies." Some people imagine things that didn't happen, but
they believe them to be true. These things depend on a
person's desires when they are a person who is influenced. He's preoccupied with a very, very
specific desire, and his
entire life or interests are tied to it, so
he imagines things that have no relation to reality.
You, through your own experience of falling into this problem, might
imagine things, or imagine sayings, or imagine
events that have no basis in reality. These are completely imaginary events that never
happened. This phenomenon exists in psychology,
folks. Look it up: the topic of delusions, the topic of paranoia
and such things. Paranoia
makes you imagine many things, like
megalomania, fear, delusions, and schizophrenia—
many things that make a person lie and
live with multiple personalities. It's impossible that
during the Umayyad era, 90 years of more than 20 or 30
wars didn't affect people.
Thousands of hadiths were fabricated that attacked the Prophet's family, and
their source was the Umayyads,
in contrast to other hadiths that praised them. So, with your simple,
natural mind, wouldn't you ask yourself, "What happened?"
Who benefits from spreading these hadiths? I've
seen hadiths that portray Abu Sufyan, Muawiyah, and Hind
bint Utbah as angels, and
other hadiths that contain insults, curses, and vilification of the Prophet's parents and his
uncle Abu Talib. This was even during the Umayyad era; there was also
cursing of Imam Ali and Lady Fatima al-
Zahra. Anyone related by blood to the Prophet was treated as if they were being
imprisoned, oppressed, or killed. You can
see for yourself that
politics was involved, that
tribal superiority was present. Why do
you accept human pronouncements as absolute truth?
Absolute truth is what we take from the
Holy Quran and its clear verses, not the ambiguous ones. Ambiguous verses are
religious, as they can be
interpreted in multiple ways. But the clear verses, supported by
numerous proofs, repeated
frequently, and reinforced by many confirmations, are what we call clear verses.
These are the ones you can take as
absolute truth. So, is there any absolute truth mentioned in the
clear verses? It tells you that the Prophet's family, unlike other
people, are considered infidels, or that the Prophet's parents or his uncle
Abu Talib are considered infidels. Be aware that there are hundreds of books
written in praise of the Prophet's parents and his uncle
Abu Talib.
Islamic thought, and I have
mentioned some of these books on my social media pages. Just the other day, I
wrote an
article about 23 books. Of course, there are
hundreds of books, but I mentioned 23 as
examples, not as an exhaustive list, to show
people that Islamic thought is full of love for the Prophet, full of love for his parents, full of love for his uncle
Abu Talib, full of
love for the Prophet's family. The Umayyad culture, which
vilified the Prophet's family, his parents, and
his uncle
while glorifying Umayyad figures, was all
politically motivated. It emerged during the Umayyad era, during the
persecution of the Prophet's family. You must be
aware of these things. Unfortunately, Salafis are sanctified because they venerate
tradition, and they venerate a specific aspect of that
tradition, a particular current within it. This tradition
contains multiple currents, and we have explained
these currents before. There's a specific current within the tradition,
particularly among the scholars of Hadith. This current is purely Umayyad; it's the one that
brought these hadiths, the one that
spreads them. It's in their interest for everyone to
believe in them so that there's tribal superiority for the
Umayyads over the Hashimites. There shouldn't be any
elevation of the Hashimite tribe.
Instead, the Umayyads should be all about power, tribal and nationalistic
fanaticism. People are fanatical about
their tribe and their tribal leader. Why do you believe
these things now? They were mentioned
1000 or 1400 years ago. Why do you believe them
now? You must immediately question them. You must
say that these things have no basis in divine revelation. This is
the problem the Salafis have fallen into
now: they are fanatical about
historical narratives that were intertwined with political events in the
Umayyad era, and they claim they are religion, nothing
more. This is what has led them into their current predicament. Now, the issue of the
Salafis today... They are punished
for their opinions on some of these things. We will mention this
in another episode, God willing. This episode will focus
on the current state of Salafist movements,
specifically the last two or three years. We will
address this in another explanation, God willing, because it is an
important topic: the state of the Salafist movement in all its
variations, especially the Wahhabi scholarly current.
Video के उस moment पर जाने के लिए कोई भी text या timestamp click करें
Share करें:
ज्यादातर transcripts 5 सेकंड से कम में तैयार
एक Click में Copy125+ भाषाएंContent Search करेंTimestamps पर जाएं
YouTube URL Paste करें
कोई भी YouTube video link डालें और पूरा transcript पाएं
Transcript निकालें
ज्यादातर transcripts 5 सेकंड से कम में तैयार
हमारा Chrome Extension लें
YouTube छोड़े बिना transcript तुरंत पाएं। हमारा Chrome extension install करें और watch page पर ही किसी भी video का transcript one-click में access करें।
