…like the well known story of al Qaadee Abu Bakr ibn at Tayyib when he was sent to the Christian King in Constantinople. The Christians respected him and knew of his standing so they feared that he would not bow to the king when he entered upon him, so they made him enter through a small door so that he would enter bowing down. However, he became aware of their plot so he passed through the door backwards, facing them with his backside, he did the opposite of what they intended.
When he sat down, someone tried to speak ill of the Muslims and said to him; ‘What is it that is being said about ‘Aishah, your Prophet’s wife?’ Intending to bring up the story of ‘al Ifk’ that the Shee’ah relate as well.
Al Qaadee stated:
‘Two women have been vilified and falsely accused of fornication; Maryam and ‘Aishah. As for Maryam, she came carrying a child while not having a husband, and as for ‘Aishah, she did not bear a child while having a husband.’
So he defeated the [argument of] the Christians.
The point of his argument was that the innocence of ‘Aishah is a lot clearer and easier to prove than the innocence of Maryam, and that the accusation is closer to Maryam than it is to ‘Aishah. This being the case, since it has been established that those who levied such an accusation against Maryam were liars, then establishing that those who accused ‘Aishah of the same were liars is more rightful.
The model of this debate is that two groups are compared to each other. One group has more and greater virtues as well as less and smaller ills than the other. So if an ill were directed to them, they counter that the ills of the second group are more and greater [1], such as the statement of Allah the Exalted:
They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months. Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is preventing mankind from following the way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid Al-Haraam (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing." [Al Baqarah: 217]
This is the case with the Jews and Christians when compared to the Muslims, and it is the case with the people of innovations when compared with the people of the Sunnah, especially the Raafidah [of the Shee’ah].
It is the same case with Ahlus Sunnah against the Raafidah concerning Abu Bakr and ‘Alee. The Raafidee cannot establish the Eemaan of ‘Alee, his trustworthiness and that he is in Jannah, let alone his Imamah, if he does not establish the same for Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman. Otherwise, whenever he tries to establish that for ‘Alee alone, the evidences would not support him. Just as if the Christians would like to establish the Prophethood of ‘Isa and not of Muhammad, the evidence would not support them either.
______________________________
[1 - Translator's note] In other words: If a religion with errors accuses Islam or the Muslims of a perceived ill or vice as is rampart in present times, then the Muslims should counter with what is worse in the accusing religion. An example is their vile attempt at an accusation that ‘Aishah was young etc, the Muslims should not spend the majority of the time in defense or making excuses that may not even be legislatively accepted, rather they should counter that Maryam was between 12 and 14 when she gave birth to ‘Eesa ‘Alayhi as Salaam, which would make her a ‘child’ when she became pregnant, while ‘Aishah was never pregnant at all. So when they start defending this issue saying that it was normal at the time and so forth, then the response is likewise and more so is the case with ‘Aishah.
todayPublished:May 04, 2008
editTranslator:Abu AbdulWahid, Nadir Ahmad
visibility9913
ruleShould you find an error, please contact us
priority_highPlease keep comments knowledge based and topic related.
كالحكاية المعروفة عن القاضي أبي بكر بن الطيب لما أرسله المسلمون إلى ملك النصارى بالقسطنطينية فإنهم عظموه وعرف النصارى قدره فخافوا أن لا يسجد للملك إذا دخل فأدخلوه من باب صغير ليدخل منحنيا ففطن لمكرهم فدخل مستدبرا متلقيا لهم بعجزه ففعل نقيض ما قصدوه ولما جلس وكلموه أراد بعضهم القدح في المسلمين فقال له ما قيل في عائشة امرأة نبيكم يريد إظهار قول الإفك الذي يقوله من يقوله من الرافضة أيضا
فقال القاضي ثنتان قدح فيهما ورميتا بالزنا إفكا وكذبا مريم وعائشة فأما مريم فجاءت بالولد تحمله من غير زوج وأما عائشة فلم تأت بولد مع أنه كان لها زوج فأبهت النصارى
وكان مضمون كلامه أن ظهور براءة عائشة أعظم من ظهور براءة مريم وأن الشبهة إلى مريم أقرب منها إلى عائشة فإذا كان مع هذا قد ثبت كذب القادحين في مريم فثبوت كذب القادحين في عائشة أولى
ومثل هذه المناظرة أن يقع التفضيل بين طائفتين ومحاسن إحداهما أكثر وأعظم ومساويها أقل وأصغر فإذا ذكر ما فيها من ذلك عورض بأن مساوئ تلك أعظم كقوله تعالى
يسألونك عن الشهر الحرام قتال فيه قل قتال فيه كبير ثم قال وصد عن سبيل الله وكفر به والمسجد الحرام وإخراج أهله منه أكبر عند الله والفتنة أكبر من القتل سورة البقرة 217
وهذا حال النصارى واليهود مع المسلمين وهو حال أهل البدع مع أهل السنة لا سيما الرافضة وهكذا أمر أهل السنة مع الرافضة في أبي بكر وعلي فإن الرافضي لا يمكنه أن يثبت إيمان على وعدالته وأنه من أهل الجنة فضلا عن إمامته إن لم يثبت ذلك لأبي بكر وعمر وعثمان وإلا فمتى أراد إثبات ذلك لعلي وحده لم تساعده الأدلة كما أن النصراني إذا أراد إثبات نبوة المسيح دون محمد لم تساعده الأدلة
باختصار، إذا أصحاب دين آخر اتهموا المسلمين أو الإسلام بما يرونه قدحا كما هو الحاصل اليوم، فعلى المسلمين أن يردوا بما هو أسوء في دينهم. مثال آخر في ذلك محاولتهم القبيحة في اتهام الإسلام بأن عائشة كانت طفلة حينما تزوجها النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم. فلا يقضي المسلمون أكثر وقتهم في الدفاع والأعذار التي قد لا تكون مقبولة شرعاً، بل عليهم أن يعارضوا بأن مريم كانت بين 12 - 14 من عمرها حينما ولدت عيسى عليه السلام، فكانت طفلة على زعمهم وقت حملها، و أما عائشة فلم تحمل. فإذا اعتذروا بالأعذار المعروفة، فتنطبق نفس الأعذار على الإسلام من باب أولى
todayتاريخ الإضافة :May 04, 2008
editالمترجم :أبو عبد الواحد نادر أحمد
visibility9913
ruleإن كان لديكم أي ملاحظة في الترجمة فضلاً ارسلوا الينا
priority_highنرجو أن تكون التعليقات علمية و متعلقة بالموضوع.