Biography of Zaynab bint Jahsh (رضي الله عنه)

Zaynab bint Jahsh – The Prophet’s wedding with Zaynab Bint Jahsh (rA) is unique in that it is explicitly commanded by the Qur’an. In spite of the religious as well as social and legal motives that the Qur’an declares as the main reason for the contract of marriage however, it has been an issue of contention for many centuries. The controversy stems from a few narratives which claim that the Prophet was able to see Zaynab before their wedding and was enthralled by her beauty. 

Then, he got married to her following her divorce from the son he adopted Zayd Ibn Harithah (rA). Muslim reactions to the narrations have mostly focused on a few notable contradictions in the narrative and also the weakening of the hadiths which report the story. This article focuses on the many inconsistencies both internal and external that define the story, including some that render the love story difficult to implement. 

Furthermore, the history of the tale reveals that the story actually evolved in the course of a century following the Prophet’s death, and slowly transformed into its present shape as we know it as it is today. The reason for the evolution of the narrative will be analyzed as one that was a result of responses to Byzantine fabrications marketed as anti-Islamic polemics.

Zaynab bint Jahsh – They were among the first to portray the marriage as that was based on love. Furthermore, the story developed due to a parallel made between the Biblical story, which claims the existence of an illicit affair between David and Bathsheba and the Prophet’s marriage to Zaynab (rA). The article will highlight the role that three specific Qur’an commentators–Qatadah, Ibn Jurayj, and Muqatil ibn Sulayman–played in the development of the story with their commentary on Surat al-Ahzab.

 In addition, the article offers an analysis of the social context within which the Prophet’s marriage with Zaynab was conducted. It proves that not a wedding of convenience , based on love the marriage was a necessity one that enacted particular marital reforms and social reforms to eliminate unfair practices that harmed vulnerable people as well as to take down the oppressive structure.

Suggested Read : How Many Chapters in Quran? ,la ilaha illa anta subhanaka, Has The Quran Been Changed?, How Many Pages in Quran? , Allahumma Ajirni Minan Naar, Allahu Mahdina, Allahu Alam , Allah Yashfeek , Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala

Introduction

Zaynab bint Jahsh – The Prophet’s wedding with Zaynab ben Jahsh (rA) is distinct from other marriages of his because it is directly mentioned within the Qur’an in a way that it is not just endorsed, but also contracted. The primary goals of the marriage are clarified after the contraction. 

The Qur’an provides a dual raison to the wedding. The first one was to eliminate the pre-Islamic practice of patronym of one’s spouse for an adoptive child. Zaynab (rA) had been married to Zayd harithah (rA) and was later identified to be the Prophet’s hisadopted son, and identified with his patronym and the Prophet’s marriage to Zaynab (rA)subsequent wedding to Zaynab (rA) was a reversal of the pre-Islamic prohibition against marriage to the spouse of an adopted child when they divorce. 

The prohibition was based on the misinterpretation the child adopted by an adoption agency with a biological child which was a violation of any legal foundation for the conjoining. The second reason was that there was no male offspring that could be attributed to the Prophet , both at the time of the point and also in the future and, as such, the prophethood ended with the passing of Prophet. Following the death of the Prophet, none of his descendants could claim the claim of the prophethood of his or his leadership in politics.

 It was instead placed with Abu Bakr (rA), an individual whose sole power in the realm of politics and spirituality came from his personal characteristics due to the fact that he was from a humble background that only joined with that of the Prophet’s seven generations prior to. 

The Qur’an’s assertion it was the case that Prophet Muhammad wasn’t and never would be the father of male offspring was especially prescient because no of the Prophet’s biological sons reached the age of maturity despite the good health of all his daughters. In fact some of the Prophet’s sons died shortly after his revelation in this verse.

Despite the declared sociological, legal, and theological objectives that were ultimately achieved by the marriage, which was accomplished in one stroke, the marriage has gained a lot of attention and the interest of a number of scholars and critics about the Prophet especially over the last few centuries. 

Nearly all of the most popular Western biography of the Prophet, no however tinny their handling of other issues of concern contain the intricate details of a variation of this incident that is not included in all Muslim biography books. ¹ The complete specifics of this particular variation differ between different versions, but the basic idea can be summarized as follows: One day, the Prophet HTML3went in search of Zayd Ibn Harithah (rA) who was later wed with Zaynab (rA) (who is also was his paternal uncle). 

After arriving at the house of Zayd when he arrived, he noticed Zayd (rA) had left. Zayd (rA) was gone out in the morning, with there was only Zaynab (rA) was there to welcome Zaynab. Zaynab (rA) invited the Prophet inside, however, her appearance stimulated an attraction to her from the Prophet, and he left immediately, saying, “Glory be to Allah, who causes hearts to turn!” Zaynab immediately informed Zayd of his visit and the statement which he recognized as having a meaning and proposed to divorce Zaynab to the benefit of the Prophet. 

Zaynab bint Jahsh – However, the Prophet suggested Zayd to keep his vows to Zaynab. However, Zaynab concealed his desire to have Zayd divorce her in order to marry her later. Zayd due to reasons of his own, decided to take his own decision of divorce Zaynab. The Prophet was then presented with an immediate announcement (preserved in the previously mentioned Surat Al-Ahzab) that, even though it criticized the Prophet for hiding his desire, it also allowed him to marry Zaynab HTML1with Zaynab (rA) nevertheless and fulfilled Zayd’s long-held desire.

The entire event described above, or perhaps an abridged version that is completely absent from the documents of the earliest maghazi or sirah compilers particularly such doyens as ‘Urwah Ibn al-Zubayr (d. 1994/712) Ibn Shihab al Zuhri (d. the year 124/741), Musa ibn ‘Uqbah (d. 141/758) Ma’mar ibn.

Rashid (d. 153/770) and, of course, Muhammad Ishaq (d. 150/767).2 But the story is found in a small number of narratives that are found in more recent and obscure works of tafsir as well as hadith. The argument advanced by those who advocate of the authenticity of what is referred to in this article “the lovestruck narrative” for conciseness is quite straightforward and focuses on an argument based on the “criterion of embarrassment.

” This means that the stories which relate to the above version of events can be found in the exegetical and hadith the exegetical and hadithworks written by Muslim writers and compilers It is highly unlikely that Muslims were able to invent a myriad of fake stories which portray the Prophet in an negative way. So, the stories have to be authentic. ³

Muslim response and interpretations this incident especially modern interpretations have generally rejected this narrative but throughout various times there have been those who have accepted its authenticity with an utterly nonchalant attitude. 

The typical repudiation made by the majority of modern Muslim biography writers of Prophet and a host of as well as a number of Qur’an as well as a number of medieval Qur’an and hadith commentators is portrayed by the pious Ibn Qayyim al-Jawzi who scorned those who considered the romantic account to be authentic and a sham. He also described those who deemed the love story veracious “ignorant” claimants who “don’t respect Allah’s Messenger of Allah in the way he is worthy to be regarded ( man lam yaqdir rasul Allahi h aqqa qadrihi ).

” ⁴ Many Muslim scholars, who claimed to have deemed the story untrue, refused any detailed rebuttal or even a reference to the love story. ⁵ This is illustrated in the brief affirmation by Isma’il ibn ‘Umar Ibn Kathir that this story can be described as “one that we would prefer to strike from the pages because of its dearth of authenticity.

” ⁶ The interpretation of the verses in al-Ahzab by those who rejected the romantic narrative, whether explicitly or implicitly, they would prefer to tell instead a straightforward story, developed by Qadi ‘Iyad in his renowned Kitab al-Shifa It is referred to in the form of the “more sound view,” and praised by Ahmad Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, who described it as “a lucid, satisfactory narrative.” ⁷ In this version the Prophet was told in some way of his imminent wedding with Zaynab (rA) by divine revelation. 

However, the moment that Zayd (rA) approached the Prophet seeking divorce from Zaynab (rA) The Prophet was apprehensive of the criticisms of his numerous critics in the event of the marriage’s violation of the established marriage norms, according to Ibn Hajar notes ( kana yastahi … wa kana yakhsha al-nas an ya ‘ ibu ‘ alayhi wa yaqulu tazawwaja imra ` ata ibnuhu )–instead recommended to him to maintain his marriage. In the end, Allah punished Muhammad in the Qur’an for comparing himself with the aversion of critics, and then performed the marriage in His own presence.

The views that support the love-struck story are found in Muslim literature. They are mostly in a range of exegetical and commentary works of Surat al-Ahzab. However, they also appear in a number of modern works.8 Certain contemporary clerics are been inclined to this viewpoint due to the wide spread of narrations that refer to it.

They are not inclined to consider the narrative to be problematic however they ignore the stated goals of the marriage that are referred to by the Qur’an, as in the absence in any divine guidance contained in the Qur’an that would ever require shame the Prophet by broadcasting this storyline. They also appear to be unaware of the theological implications of the quick and timely revelation of Qur’anic passages that occurred to endorse the Prophet’s current personal desires. 

They claim that the revelation reveals the Prophet’s human nature and desires, which he was, at most outwardly, in total the control of. A different and somewhat bizarre explanation is offered from Muhammad Hamidullah, who accepted the truthfulness of the narrative. He states that the Prophet’s emotionemotion when he saw Zaynab (rA) to not in a desire, but instead to amazement over Zayd’s (rA) marital discord. This is which is cited as a reason of his eventual divorce in certain narrations with a wife of stunning elegance. ¹⁰

The arguments against this event made by medieval and modern Muslim biographers are centered around three arguments. According to Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi claims, not narration that does refer to this event is devoid of narrative weaknesses.11 There is no sequence of Narrators (isnad) which actually goes in a continuous manner all the way back (muttasil) back to Prophet . 

One of them goes back to the Companion ( sahabi) as well as an unidentified Companion who didn’t have any knowledge of the incident in question. Furthermore, none is missing at the very least one impugned Narrator in the isnad,and many have no isnad in the first place. This makes all the hadiths, at best, fragile (da’if) and not suitable to be used as a cumulative confirmation (tashih Li-ghayrihi) If not, they’re fake (mawdu’).12

Zaynab bint Jahsh – The second, Qadi Iyad, and also Ibn Al-‘Arabi point out the fact that Zaynab (rA) did not appear to be a woman who was foreign to the Prophet, she was his paternal cousin and at a time that hijab regulations and hijabhad not yet been implemented and it is hard to believe that Prophet would not have seen Zaynab before the incident at Zayd’s home. 

Some hadiths have direct contact between them that would have preceded the romantic narrative.13 It is likely that Prophet recognized Zaynab’s beauty and was attracted to her just after seeing a glance towards the final stages the time he lived (and it was also when she was only 38 years old when she was preparing for her wedding to the Prophet , which would make her the most senior of his wives when they were married, apart from Khadijah bint Khuwaylid).14

In the end, the Prophet was Zaynab (rA) got married to Zayd (rA) as well as with a lot of reluctance on the side of Zaynab and her brother ‘Abd Allah ibn Jahsh and ‘Abd Allah ibn Jahsh, both of whom needed to be convinced by the Prophet, and later the Qur’an, until they relented.15 Zaynab and ‘Abd Allah’s indifference is due to the fact that Zayd was previously slave. slave.

16 If the Prophet had wanted to wed Zaynab at this point it is possible that he would have done so instead of persuading her marry Zayd. The Jahsh family was certainly happy about Zaynab’s wedding to the Prophet , who , not had been slave, but also came in the Quraysh and was also from one of the highest-ranking clans. Zaynab herself couldn’t claim the Prophet’s aristocratic status, since although her mother was a Qurayshi and the majority of Arab tribes had ascribed lineage on agnatic ancestry and Jahsh ibn Riab was a descendant of Banu Asad the b. Khuzaymah and was not able to command the same acclaim like the Quraysh.

 It is believed that the Jahsh family was eager to wed Zaynab in the presence of the Prophet isn’t mere speculation, since ‘Abd al-Razzaq Al-San’ani as well as Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari both mention how when Prophet Muhammad came to Zaynab to offer an offer of marriage for Zayd’s sake She initially interpreted the invitation as coming that came from him, and was elated. After it was clear it was the Prophet proposing to Zayd and not for himself and she refused to accept the proposal until she heard about al-Ahzab, 36. It required obedience to the Prophet even in matters pertaining to marriage.17

Certain of these assertions are merely circumstantial in their own right however, they are credible and even persuasive as well. A number of Muslim historians have thus declared the love-story highly unlikely. However, there is a lot more that can be said about this incident, which ranges from mere improbability to total absurdity when you take a closer examination of the primary sources which deal with the incident. 

The study examines these texts, which include that of the Qur’an as the only primary source to document the wedding at the time of its happening as well as the hadiths that arethat describe the love story. They provide an abundance of data that raises serious doubts to the narrative of the love-struck. The research then proceeds to examine the real motivations behind the Qur’anic enjoinment of marriage to Zaynab (rA). 

The study will concentrate on the pre-Islamic social context within which Zaynab’s marriage ceremony to the Prophet was enacted, and show that it was not a marriage of convenience , based on love the marriage was a necessity one to implement particular marital reforms and social reforms in order to eliminate inhumane practices against vulnerable individuals. 

Zaynab bint Jahsh – The research then examines the events from the viewpoint of the hermeneutical and historiographic foundations used by Qur’an commentators who reported on the incident, which help to determine the time and manner in which opinions on the matter were developed, as well as the possible etiologies that led to their evolution. The article also explores Muslim historical responses as well as their evolution in relation in relation to the Prophet’s response to the Prophet’smarriage to Zaynab (rA).

Suggested Read: Travel Dua, Morning and Evening Duas, Ghusl Dua , Entering House Dua and Dua For Wake Up

The Qur’anic proof

Zaynab bint Jahsh – The Qur’anic evidence is contained in the a few verses of the Surat Al-Ahzabthat directly reference Zaynab’s marriage ceremony to the Prophet. (rA):

[37] Remember the time you said to those who were loved by Allah and was favored by Allah, “Hold fast to your wife and fear Allah.” You were obfuscating from your mind what Allah was about to reveal, and you were frightened of people, but Allah is more able to be revered by you. Therefore, when Zayd completed his union with his wife, we married you to her so to ensure that there isn’t any obstacles for Believers to marry the wives that they adopted their sons after they divorce the couple. This was the reason Allah’s commandment must be followed.

[38] There’s no harm to the Prophet performing what Allah has committed to his followers; that has been] the method of Allah and those who been before him. The word of Allah is a definite decree.18

[39] [That’s the method] used by people who transmit the message from Allah and fear Allah with a fear that is only Allah. And Allah is sufficient to account for them.

[4040 Muhammad has not been the parent of all of you but rather, he is the messenger from Allah and the last of the Prophets. And Allah is the only one who knows everything.

Certain elements of Prophet’s several aspects of the Prophet’smarriage with Zaynab (rA) are made clear in these verses. The first is that the Prophet of the Prophetsinstructed Zayd (rA) to continue his union with Zaynab (rA). It’s not obvious at first the reason he directed Zayd to perform this task in the light of these verses however the Qur’an declares that the Prophet was hiding something inside his mind that was he was afraid of public awareness of. We also know that regardless of what the Prophet knew about the secret that the Prophetconcealed, Allah wanted him to disclose it. He rebuked the Prophet for failing to do so immediately, and then promised to the prophet that He will disclose it in the end.

The scriptures clarify that following the time that Zayd decided to divorce his relationship with Zaynab, Allah then married the Prophet Zaynab himself. The reasoning behind the Prophet’s wedding to Zaynab is instantly identified: to create precedent for the Prophet to establish the precedent set by the Prophetmarrying his ex-wife who was his adopted son, who assumed the title of a biological father ( ad’iya`) in order that the prohibition for this practice would be severely halted. 

The Qur’an also asserts in support of the Prophet , and no doubt in order to prevent the condemnation of the Prophet’s wedding to his son’s former wife and it states that the Prophet HTML0cannot be blamed for committing an act that Allah required him to perform. 

It goes on to state that Allah’s order on the Prophet HTML0is only one of the lengthy chain of commands which He had given to the prophets of the past who also faithfully communicated His message, despite the admonition and ridicule they were in no doubt under. The verses end with their main point saying that the Prophet was not parent of any child therefore, he was not able to be punished for the union due to legal reasons.

 Additionally, as a person who was not legally inheritor to his political, spiritual and physical inheritance He was the last in the prophetic lineage. The annulment of his adoption and his absence the biological lineage cleared any doubts regarding his legacy, as nobody could claim to prophethood, or claim political power based on hereditary descent.

The exact wording of these verses immediately snuffs out the romantic story from any chance of being plausible. The primary issue concerns how the Prophet’s secretsecret that Allah punished him for hiding. In the event that Prophet HTML0were hiding a temptation to Zaynab (rA) and the Qur’an’s condemnation of him for not disclosing his secrets is as if being a reprimand for him not having publicly displayed his love for the wife of a married woman. 

This basic idea appears to have been ignored by the exegetes and chroniclers who have embraced the romantic narrative. Muhammad ‘Ali al Sabuni and Adil Salahi both pointed out this issue. The latter asks slyly, “Suppose that a man finds himself in love with another woman’s wife. Is he morally bound to discuss the love publicly? Should God be able to punish a man who was unable to control his feelings, if he kept a lid on the love of his life and kept the secret from his own self? Would he be more rewarded should he write poems about his love that express his feelings?” ¹⁹

The Qur’an clarifies it is the reason for Prophet’s revelation ofconcealment was due to his anxiety about the reaction of the public and also reveals Allah’s assurance that He will reveal what the Prophet had concealed known to the public at large. However, we have heard of none of criticisms against the Prophet for his lust for Zaynab (rA) in any of the primary sources or any evidence of any one of his contemporaries ever saying that the Prophet’s concealment was his wish to get married by Zaynab. 

The fact that there is no criticism of this subject is all more impressive, given that the truth of his story had to been made public in order to be known to us millennia after in addition to the fact that the Qur’an promises its disclosure. In the event that his desire to marry Zaynab (rA) was revealed without any repercussions, as evident from the primary report’s overwhelming silence, it is likely that the Prophet HTML0miscalculated and underestimated the amount of criticism directed at the Prophet. 

The conclusion is that either it was not considered taboo for a man to want a wife (even even though the Prophet was not aware of that) or his critics at the time became more accepting of him, and missed an opportunity to draw attention to what was deemed to be a moral flaw in many societies. 

There is no mention of criticizing the Prophet’s love for Zaynab’s love, the primary sources do include a rebuke by the Prophet’s critics for wedding to an adopted son’s ex-wife.20 To allow the romantic narrative to be able to match the facts available that would require massive oversight by the Prophet when he was anxiety over the revelation of his love for Zaynab (rA)–a minor issue, it appears due to the indifference to the incident–but not recognizing the scandal his marriage to an ex-wife from his adopted son would cause.

If we believe that the Prophet did not reveal a need to marry Zaynab (rA) that was later revealed to the public (as is necessary for the story to have been passed on to us) and then hurriedly removed the issue of the absence of any documentation of the time period of censure that it could have brought but there is still the issue of the method of disseminating this information to the general public. 

There is no evidence in the Qur’an in itself that reveals the details of this. Did the Prophet HTML0compelled to confess his feelings publicly? If yes, what is the reason there is no evidence of this? Where do the rumors of the love-struck story originate? We also have to ask what the Prophet HTML0could justify the appropriate duty to get married to Zaynab (rA) which was just in line with his wishes. 

It is clear that the Companions (sahabah) weren’t naive and uncritical of their devotion and an event that swayed so heavily to the Prophet’s own preferences could not have been overlooked by his wise and respectable deputy. Some of them have expressed reservations in less controversial episodes within the Prophet’s life.21 In fact it is the Scottish orientalist William Muir, having taken the truth of the story for granted but recognizing the issue, and wonders how anyone from the Companions was able to keep faith in the Prophet’s honesty in the aftermath of the wedding. 

In the absence of any evidence that suggests that the romantic story might be false Muir relied on an uncertain speculation regarding the Companions their intellectual weaknesses (which was often the case in his writings using the racial undertones) and also a mysterious supernatural power that the Prophet had over the Companions. ²²

Contrary to this the interpretation of the event given by medieval and contemporary Muslim historians and exegetes who rely on the love story is substantially more closely with the passages of al-Ahzab. According to this story, Allah indicated to the Prophet the possibility of his marriage to Zaynab (rA) to aid in the process of implementing specific marriage changes. 

The Prophet HTML0immediately realized the confusion and discord that his marriage to the wife of his adopted son’s ex-wife could cause, given that the marriage was not only unfit for a marriage according to pre-Islamic Arab standards, but also it was also incompatible with marrying your biological son’s wife. 

Apart from the actual issue of giving his adversaries with a pretext to make his character look shadier The Prophet himself, the model for modesty, discretion and opulence surely experienced a sense of discontent with the idea which is why, the moment that Zayd (rA) came to the Prophet on his own initiative to seek separation from his wife Zaynab (rA) due to an ongoing domestic dispute the Prophet recommended against it.

 In response, Allah censured him in the Qur’an for fearing public’s disapproval over His own dissembling of His decree even though Allah himself had said He would reveal it, and delay in observing it by instructing Zayd to keep his marriage. The Qur’an is then able to instantly reveal the reason of the Prophet’s hesitation according to its wording: his wedding to Zaynab that Allah immediately arranged. The Prophet, of course was able to fulfill.

This interpretation is captivating in its simplicity and is in line with the Qur’anic passages in their entirety, without the need for fanciful stories that are found in obscure books to understand the verses, as opposed to the romantic narrative. It is independent and is easily understood by reading the literal text of the Qur’an. This is likely the reason why no Companions (rA) had ever thought of providing an explanation or context for the verses of Al-Ahzab, except for one comment from ‘Aishah’s (rA) which is in line with this interpretation and will be discussed in the future. 

It also addresses all inconsistencies that are a result of the love story. It first explains the Prophet’s condemnation by Allah HTML0for not disclosing certain details, which is much more plausible if the not disclosed information that led to the divine directive to be revealed in public were a serious knowledge of his marriage plans in contrast to his intimate love affair. 

In addition, it explains the Qur’an’s rebuke to the Prophet HTML0for telling Zayd (rA) to keep his wife. This is, in fact, acceptable if he had been in advising the couple in the context of guilt for his love for Zaynab (rA). Thirdly this verse fulfills the Qur’anic vow to disclose the secrets (the Prophet’s wedding to Zaynab)

 However the love story is in no place within the Qur’an. Fourthly, this passage provides the reason for the next chapter in al-Ahzab38 where the Qur’an defends Prophet Muhammad against his critics for admirably doing a deed of God regardless of the personal cost that it caused. The actions of the Prophet would not be described as admirable or worthy of celebration in the event that the Prophet was engaging in his sexual desires. In addition, it is in line with the historical records in that a variety of hadiths HTML0reveal the outrage exhibited from the Prophet’s HTML1critics regarding his marriage to the ex-wife of his adopted son’s adoptive father as well as the mention of it in al-Ahzab38 and the reverse absence of any records of criticism over being in the love of a married lady.

The hadiths that refer to the love story

Zaynab bint Jahsh – It is now time to focus our attention on the hadiths that are found inthat refer to this incident. For starters the complete report of reports that detail either the whole love story or a portion of it are provided below. The reports will be examined from a textual viewpoint that will show an array of unsolvable internal and historical inconsistencies. Isnads are provided here to aid in the arenads are included to help in an analysis of the isnad analysis to follow as well, since the identity as transmitters play an important part in the process of the narrative which will be analyzed in the future.

1. Ahmad ibn Hanbal from Mu`ammal Isma’il Hammad ibn Zayd from Thabit from Anas ibn Maklik: 24 The Prophet was at the house at the home of Zayd harithah (rA) and saw his wife, Zaynab (rA) and then something sank into his heart (fa kaannahu dakhalahu).25 Mu`ammal ibn Isma’il states regarding the Prophet’s visit to Zayd’s house and something slipping into the Prophet’s heartin the following way “I do not know if this is the statement of Hammad or from the hadith.” Zayd came to him to express his displeasure over [his wifeand children], but the Prophet stated, “Keep your wife and fear Allah.” Then it was disclosed: “And you were concealing in your heart what Allah was going to reveal” (al-Ahzab, 37).26
   
2. Al-Tabari and al-Hakim al Naysaburi as well as Ibn Sa’d all narrate from Muhammad ibn “‘Umar” (al-Waqidi) in ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amir al-Aslami from Muhammad ibn Yahya Habban: The Prophet stayed in the house of Zayd Ibn Harithah (rA). He went to his home looking for him but could not locate him. Zaynab bint Jahsh (rA) is his wife, rose up to greet him in a single dress ( wa taqumu ilayhi Zaynab bint Jahsh Zawjatuhu Fudulan). The Prophet HTML0turned away from her and she informed the Prophet: “He is not here, Messenger of Allah, but enter, you who are dear to me as my father and mother!” However, the Prophet HTML1refused to go in. Zaynab was dressed quickly after she was informed by Allah’s Messenger of Allah was waiting outside and she leapt up in a rush that attracted the admiration by Allah’s Messenger of Allah ( fawathabat’ ajla fa a’ jabat Rasul Allah). He left, muttering something that was barely understood, if not because “Glory is to Allah the All-powerful! The glory belongs to Allah who makes hearts to change!” When Zayd returned to his home, his wife told Zayd that Prophet Muhammad HTML0had visited his home. Zayd asked, “Why did you not invite him in?” She responded, “I did, but he refused.” “Did you hear anything [from him]?” Zayd inquired. She responded, “As he left, I heard him speak a few phrases, but I could not understand them. is to Allah the All-powerful! All praise goes to Allah who causes hearts to change to turn!'” So Zayd went to the Prophet and stated, “O Messenger of Allah It was my understanding that you visited my home. Why didn’t you come in the house, you who are my dearest as my mother and father? Messenger of Allah Maybe Zaynab has enthralled your admiration. If you chooseyou want to] I will divorce with her.” In the words of Allah, the Prophet stated, “Keep your wife and reverence Allah.” ²⁷
   
3. Al-Tabari is a reference to Yunus ibn ‘Abd al ‘A’la from Ibn Wahb from Ibn Zayd the Messenger of Allah had been married by Zayd Ibn Harithah in the presence of Zaynab bint Jahsh who was the daughter of his maternal aunt. One day , the Prophet HTML0set out to search for Zayd. The haircloth covered the doorway. However, winds lifted up the cover to expose the doorway Zaynab who was inside her room in dishabille ha hiya fi hujratiha hasiratanwa hiya fi hujratiha hasiratan. The Prophet’s heart’sheart was full of admiration for her “fa waqa’ a i’ jabuha fi qalb al-nabiAnd when this happened she was deemed disloyal to the man who was in the opposite. He then came to him and declared, “O Messenger of Allah, I want to separate myself from my wife.” Muhammad demanded: “What is wrong? Do you have any evidence about her?” “No, by Allah,” replied Zayd, “nothing on her part is troubling messenger of Allah. I’ve observed nothing about her other than excellence.” A. The Prophet advised him to “Keep your wife and keep your eyes on Allah.” ²⁸
   
4. Sulayman Ibn Ahmad al-Tabarani, a.k.a Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah al Hadrami from al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali al ‘H of Muhammad Ibn Khalid Ibn ‘Athmah from Musa Ibn Ya’qub, a descendant of the ‘Abd Al-Rahman ibn al -M Abu Bakr ibn Sulayman ibn Abi Hathmah The Prophet visited the home of Zayd ibn Harithah to ask permission to enter. Zaynab bint Jahsh allowed permission. The woman was not wearing a head covering ( la khimara ‘alayha) which is why she put a cloth over her head. The Prophet HTML0asked she about Zayd and she responded, “He left not long ago.” The Prophet wasstood talking about something. Zaynab says that I followed him, and heard him say, “Blessed is Allah, the One who causes hearts to turn!” 29 He continued talking about it until he’d left.30
   
5. Ibn ‘Adi, from al-Saji from al-Hasan ibn al-Wasiti of ‘Ali Ibn Nuh from Muhammad Ibn Kathir from Sulaym the client (mawla) in al-Sha’bi al-Sha’bi. The Messenger of Allah saw Zaynab bet Jahsh and declared “Glory be to Allah, who causes hearts to turn!” This is why Zayd requested, “Should I divorce her, O Messenger of Allah?” He replied, “Keep your wife.” Yunus Ibn Bukayr introduces an addition (ziyadah) for his recitation of Ibn Ishaq’s Al-Maghazi this transmission.31
   
   
6. Al-Tabari, from Bishr and Yazid of Sa’id in Qatadah in addition to ‘Abd al-Razzaq Al-San’ani of Ma’mar ibn Rashid from Qatadah concerning Surat al-Ahzab, 36: What he hid within himself was a desire to have [Zaydbe divorced from her. Qatadah claimed, “al-Hasan (al-Basri) would declare, “If the Prophet was a prophet, and ifwould have concealed any revelation from him and he had not, he would have concealed this.” Regarding the following verse from the Surat Al-Ahzab, 37–“There is no harm to the Prophet performing what Allah has obliged him to do and that has been the practice of Allah and those who preceding him. .”]–Qatadah declares: “Similar to how the Prophet Dawud wanted the woman whom his eye was drawn and he was married to her. In the same way, Allah decreed that Muhammad would marry Zaynab in line with the custom (sunnah) that was followed by Dawud when he was married to the same woman.”32 Notice that, in addition to the two mentioned above Al-Tabarani and Ibn Hatim al-Razi also narrate the same story within their compilations and all contain Qatadah’s quote of al-Hasan’s words immediately after his own.33
   
7. Al-Tabari and Al-Tabarani are both come from ‘Ali Ibn al-Mubarak and al-San’ani both from Zayd ibn al-Mubarak , a descendant of Muhammad Ibn Thawr of Ibn Jurayj in relation to Surat al-Ahzab, 37 The only thing he concealed within his own heart was a desire to have Zayd should divorce her and that he get married to her instead. Therefore, Allah refused to grant the request. In the following verse, the Surat al-Ahzab, 38–“There is no fault on the Prophet for doing the things that Allah has obliged him to do. This is the practice of Allah in the past with those who came before him. “]–Ibn Jurayj says: “[This refers] to Dawud and the lady who he got married. Her name was al-Yas’iyah. it was also the way of life (sunnah) in the case of Muhammad with Zaynab.34
   
8. Muqatil ibn Sulayman tells the story with no wasnad( mu’allaqan) It was not long after Zayd got married to Zaynab that he began complaining to the Prophet concerning Zaynab’s behavior. The Prophet then went to Zaynabto persuade her. When he conversed with the woman, he became struck by her beauty, beauty and her charm ( fa lamma kallamaha A’jabahu Husnaha wa jamalaha wa Zarfaha). It was that was ruled by Allah the Great and High. The Prophet returned but her thought kept him in his thoughts ( wa fi nafsihi minha). The Prophet would inquire of Zayd “How is she with you?” He would be angry and the Prophet would reply to Zayd, “Fear Allah and keep your wife.” However, within his heart was something else ( wa fi qalbihi Ghayra Dhalik).
   
   The Prophet The Prophetcame looking for Zayd one day and saw Zaynab who was there on the ground. She was beautiful, fair well-built, and an extremely stunning women from Quraysh ( wa kanat baydaa jasimatan jasimatan min atamm nisai Quraysh). Thus, the Prophet felt an intense love for the woman ( fa hawiyaha) and said, “Glory be to Allah, the one who causes hearts to turn!” Zaynab heard him, and she mentioned the matter to Zayd who understood the significance. Zayd responded: Zayd declared: “O Prophet, permit me to divorce her since she is arrogant and believes she is more superior than me and hurts me with her tongue (fa inna fiha kibran the tu’azzimu’s ‘alayya, wa lisaniha). However, the Prophet said to him, “Keep your wife and be afraid of Allah.”35
   
9. Al-Tha’labi Al-Naysaburi as well as al-Baghawi are based on Ibn ‘Abbas without isnad in regard to Surat al-Ahzab 37, the thing he concealed in his own mind wasthe “love for Zaynab (hubbuha).”36
   
10. Jalal al-Din alSuyuti tells without an isnad to the effect that Ibn alMundhir narrate on authenticity from ‘Ikrimah (likely ‘Ikrimah al-Barbari who was one of the clients Ibn Abbas) The Prophet walked into the home in the house of Zayd the other day, and glimpsed Zaynab and it appeared like [the] thought of her possessed him (fa kaannaha waqa’at fa nafsihi).37

Zaynab bint Jahsh – A quick look at the data may give an air of confidence to the notion that there exists numerous accounts about this event that make it an enticing account, even though many have been concluded in a hurry However, closer inspection reveals numerous issues.

 One of the biggest issues is that most of these stories were published more than 100 years after the alleged incident. Even though the lengthy and complex isnads the lengthy HTML1may obscure this, none of these accounts traces all the way back to Prophet HTML2through the eyes of a witness or concludes with any Companion other than the first one, which is said to have been written by Anas Malik (rA). 

In addition, the stories of Ibn Abbas (rA) together with the ones of ‘Ikrimah as well as Muqatil Ibn Sulayman (rA) were written without isnadat at all ( mu’ allaq) as well as in a mysterious manner, appear to have appeared about 100 years later. Apart from Anas the first narration with which one isnad arenads are narratedterminates is Qatadah Di’amah who passed away in 120/737. It is also interesting to note that many of these stories are presented as exegesis of the section from surat al-ahzab 38, which speaks of the Prophet performing the customary practice of the other prophets of the past and specifically named Dawud through the narrations.

In contrast are some hadiths in contrast are some hadithsabout the Prophet’s The Prophet’smarriage with Zaynab (rA) that add certain additional information. There are numerous of them, but we’ll focus on some that are reliable or offer an insight from a historical perspective.

Hadiths (6) as well as (7) are valid until they get to Qatadah and ‘Abd Al-‘Aziz Ibn Jurayj however, they are simply the views of two later commentators who lived just one century after the Prophet, and whose sources will be later discussed in detail. The hadiths (8), (9) and (10) concerning which a lot will be discussed later do not have an arenad and thus have no significance from an evidence-based viewpoint. 

Al-Tha’labi’s quote of hadith(9) that states Ibn Abbas is claimed to have isnadto interpret al-Ahzab 36 (36the identical to Qatadah and Ibn Juriyj is an inexplicably wrong interpretation Ibn ‘Abbas could has been misunderstood by Qatadah because of the latter’s traditional trust in Ibn Abbas’s views. Qatadah’s views on this subject was widely propagated through a variety of narrations, as reflected in the hadith (6).(6)

However, Ibn ‘Abbas was never acknowledged as having this view until about four centuries after by al-Tha’labi. All of the older Tafsirs ofthat reference Qatadah’s opinions like the opinions that are from al-Tabari, Ibn Abi Hatim and ‘Abd al-Razzaq and others, fail to include any reference to Ibn Abbas. Incorporating Qatadah’s view while ignoring Ibn Abbas’s, the most well-known Qur’an commentator throughout history it would have been an omission that could have been fatal to any of the authors or even the entire group of authors. 

(Ibn Abi Hatim specifically explains on his exegetical approach within the intro to his Tafsir and is extremely instructive: “When I come upon remarks from the Prophet, I avoid mentioning the opinionof one members of the companions… When I discover a statement that was made by Companions in case there was a consensus among them, I mentioned the most prestigious of them their position… If I could not locate an official statement from the Companions, or If I only found itfrom the followers I added what I learned from them. ….

And that’s what I did in relation to the following generation and later on.” ⁵⁶ Ibn Abi Hatim’s words make clear that his quote of Qatadah was due to the fact that He, as well as the great wasith scholars of Rayy who he derived his knowledge , such as His father Abu Hatim and Abu Zur’ah al-Razi were unaware of the commentary by Companion like Ibn Abbas’s comment regarding this passage. It is the same of al-Tabari and ‘Abd Al-Razzaq.) 

The absence of Ibn ‘Abbas from three of the most important ancient tafsirauthorities can only be explained by the fact that his expository was not his at all , and wasn’t available when the exegesis were written. Al-Tha’labi is a sloppy in attribution of the love-struck story to Ibn ‘Abbas was later discovered to have became part of the commentary of al-Baghawi which mentions Ibn ‘Abbas comes not from a specific source, but rather from al-Tha’labi himself. It is easy to spot since al-Baghawi copied al-Tha’labi’s entire argument with regard to the inaccurate reference to Ibn ‘Abbas, and the paragraphs preceding and following and incorporated them into its own commentary, and every error made by al-Tha’labi copied verbatim.

Hadith (10) It is mentioned by al-Suyuti who quotes it to the prophet Muhammad without being isnadto Ibn al-Mundhir and ‘Abd Ibn Humayd. It is not mentioned in their works on hadith published by them. ⁵⁷ Ibn al-Mundhir and ‘Abd ibn Humayd however, even though they may tell this hadith of ‘Ikrimah were alive for more than a century before his time, and must hear it at the least from two transmitters during the time between. 

However, it is impossible that any of ‘Ikrimah’s many students were able to record this hadith in the event that this was one of his views. The quote is not included in earlier Tafsirworks like those of al-Tabari, and the others mentioned earlier. All of them often quote ‘Ikrimah’s different views due to the prolific nature of his expository narrations. This is especially remarkable since they all cite his contemporaries, Qatadah and Ibn Jurayj regarding this subject without hesitation. This means that we can claim that this is not a genuine custom.

Concerning the hadith (14) that is the variant of al-Tha’labi’s the meaning of the passage from al-Ahzab the only Narrator from Sufyan ibn the ‘Uyaynah can be identified as Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Abi ‘Umar (d. 233/857). Muhammad ibn Yahya is the sole transmitter from Sufyan who recounts that al-Hasan’s interpretation of this verse from al-Ahzab 37, which refers to the Prophet’s affection to Zaynab (rA) in the same way that the other versions from different transmitters in Sufyan were silent on the interpretation of al-Hasan (Figure 2.).

 Concerning Muhammad ibn Yahya, Abu Hatim al-Razi declared, “He was a righteous man, yet was reckless ( wa kana bihi ghaflah) and would recount fake hadiths that were fabricatedattributed to Ibn ‘Uyaynah. But his narration did not lie. truthful.”58 There are other issues regarding this isnad such as its presence Talhah ibn Muhammad Ja’far al-Shahid (d. 308/920) who was regarded as weak and unreliable when it came to narrations of hadiths and Abu ‘Abd Allah Fanjawayh who was, despite his own credibility was known for his narration of strange hadiths that were transmitted by unreliable transmitters (kathir al-riwayah li al-manakir).59

Suggested Read:  Dua Leaving House, Dua of Forgiveness, Dua of Taraweeh, Dua of Musa Alayhi’salam, Dua For Success, Dua For Marriage , Dua For Rain, Dua For Parents, Powerful Dua and Dua For The Sick

The social circumstances that led to the Prophet’s marriage to Zaynab (rA)

Zaynab bint Jahsh – It is possible that despite the more apparent fictional aspects of the story that the less shady account of the Prophet marrying Zaynab (rA) reluctantly in order to abolish the long-standing Arab prohibition of marrying women who were adopted by sons of the same family is concocted and at best somewhat useful. (It must be remembered that any doubts about convenience only result from the untrue lovetruck narrative , and without it there would not be any convenience to be enjoyed). 

In the end, what is it that makes this problem, and numerous others that plagued Arabia at the time and was so important to warrant the Qur’anic call to end its prohibition as well as the fact in the sense that the prophet himself violated the pre-Islamic rules in order to establish the precedent for it? This is due to an inability to recognize the Prophet’s role as more than an individual of the religious world and leader of a nation as also social reformer seeking to end the social ill-health that had ascended into the Arabian peninsula prior to Islam.

His adoption and the regulations that followed with it comprised just one aspect. The issue also stems from an inability to place the criticism of this particular norm in the context of the multi-faceted assault that the Prophet hurled against a wide range of community and social customs that were considered to be sacred within Late Antique Arabia. 

These customs, which often controlled marriages, frequently violated the rights of the weaker citizens of society like orphans and women. ⁶⁰ examples of this rule include the pre-Islamic sanctioning of a coercive marriage of a son and his step-mother following the death of the father, without considering the consent to the consent of the wife of the father. It was not just the son, but all of the male’s heirs allowed to marry any female members of the deceased’s family which included wives and daughters.61

The previous revelation in al-Nisa 19-23 had already criticized and condemned this type of marriage one year preceding the Prophet’s wedding to Zaynab (rA).62 While the Qur’an deals specifically with issues of relatives who took advantage of female relatives but the problem was also prevalent to all women, as they were considered to be guardians of their children and were able to marry at will. The Prophet himself had the opportunity to limit this practice when a woman came to him with a complaint that her father had made her marry her cousin.

The Prophet revoked the wedding. ⁶³ In another aspect, Prophet notably limited the amount of dowers paid to families of bridesmaids instead of the bride’s own. The previous marriages permitted an allowance of the dower paid to the guardian or father of the bride. Furthermore, the Qur’an has already provided for women should directly receive their dowries within the al-Nisa 4. The Prophet also prohibited an act of marriage called shighar in which two males exchanged their daughters or sisters to marry, but without dower, since it would benefit the family, but at the expense for the woman.64

Another rule more closely related to the matter in the present debate is the practice pre-Islamic of zihar where men would be able to divorce his wife, by taking an oath in which he considered she as his mother. The same was also criticized in the same way, based on the fact that an untrue and fake relationship was constructed in order to infringe the rights of a person that had no right of justice.

The verse of the Qur’an which prohibits ziharis is the same verse that is against “adoption,” underscoring the common injustice of both practices. The word “adoption” however is inexact and doesn’t do justice to the many institutions that were governed by that definition that existed at the time. 

While the exact details of these complicated practices are out of the topic of this article it appears that at the very least two distinct, interconnected practices were popular acknowledgement of biological paternity which did not exist previously (istilhaq) and the attribution of one’s name to an unrelated person (tabanni).65

The latter was a part of the pre-Islamic era of licentious Arabia wherein practices like the prostitution of women, temporary marriages and divorce, as well as the attendant disputes over the parentage of newborns created a climate of suspicion where aspersion was thrown at legitimate births.66 This is evident in Zayd’s son Usama who, being of darker hue than Zayd was accused of being unlegitimate and was subsequently questioned by a specialist who relatives (qa`if) established their relationship.67

It was the Islamic approach to solving this issue was diverse, but the most important aspect to the adoption issue was the desire to limit the frequency of situations in which lineage disputes can arise. In addition to the obvious prohibitions against sexual prostitution and other relationships outside of marriage in the Qur’an set a time limit (‘ iddah) following divorce or loss of her husband, in which time she was not able to be remarried. 

⁶⁸ This permitted for any pregnancy resulting from the previous marriage to be obvious and traceable to the paternal right. Additionally there was no way to establish artificial lines of descent that could cause confusion, such as the practice of making false claims to genealogy or adoptions where an unbiological “son” took on his adopted father’s identity was forbidden.

Separate from the interconnectedness between the social reforms the Prophet initiated and the necessity to limit adoption practices prior to Islam is the fact to suggest that tabanni was a form of oppression that could be inherently oppressive regardless of its harmful side effects. The term that is used to describe adoptive children, which is ad’iya it does not refer to the concept of adoption that is in the current context and instead referred to the coercion to take the name of another’s name.69

There was certainly an oppression of vulnerable people in the name of adoption, which permitted the denial of rights of normally disadvantaged individuals to non-biological “guardians” who could then lose their rights at any time like be able to do with their biological children. This is apparent in the instance of Khalid ibn Sa’id whose biological father Sa’id al-‘As was brutally abused by him and later disowned and divorced his property after he refused convert to Islam. 

⁷⁰ In the instance for the case of an “adopted” child, however there was no shared bloodline that could give any protection from the harms caused by. A good illustration of this concept is given by the al-Miqdad ibn ‘Amr who was adopted and accepted as confederate ( halif) by the Al-Aswad Ibn ‘Abd Yaghuth of the Banu Zuhrah ibn Kilab clan of Quraysh. Al-Miqdad was, like Khalid was forced to move to Abyssinia in order to avoid the repression of his father’s adopted the clan. ⁷¹

The dynamic power of a powerful person taking to an adopted child is portrayed by the Qur’anin which it instructs adopted fathers to not address their adopted sons with their names “Call them by their [real] fathers,” immediately after declaring, “[Allah] does not consider your adopted sons [ad’iyaukumas your real sons.

“72 The Qur’anic instruction directed at the fathers of adopted children indicates that it is more common that the appropriation took place in the event that an person took on the role of the title of “son” instead of a joint decision that brought about a mutual benefits. While more attention is traditionally placed on the imperative to refrain from naming adopted sons as their adopted fathers, this directive slams the oppressive nature of adoption that is referred to through the use of a metonym. This is the reason why al-Miqdad was identified by his adopted patronym al-Miqdad ibn al -Aswad for after the revelation of this verse. ⁷³ The following warning in the Qur’an “That is more just in the sight of Allah,” makes this whole concept much clearer, because it reveals the inequity which was in the adoption process.

The well-known story of the Prophet’s total incorporation into the family of Zayd (rA) within his own home could be a reason to believe that his upright behavior was the norm and that adopted children were able to achieve complete integration and legal equal rights with biological sons, particularly in light of the outdated conceptions of adoption in the modern world as an organization for charitable purposes. 

However, closer inspection shows that not all adoptions are popular, only a few rights of a biological son were given to children adopted regardless of whether they were granted through their adopted fathers or through society. An evident instance of this is the Zaynab’s (rA) initially refusing to get married Zayd (rA) due to the fact that she believed that he was from a lower lineage and, as the son of the Prophet and a Hashimi one would be considered to have superior lineage. 

Another example can be that of al-Miqdad who’s marriage plans were rejected with contempt by several Qurayshi families however, even though Zayd was also an Halifof Banu Zuhrah, and the halifs of HTML2were tied to Qurayshis to their wives. (As as he did when he married Zayd (rA) who was the Prophet , who was a socially benefactor, took on the responsibility for the wedding of al-Miqdad’s maternal cousin Duba’ah al -Zubayr and Abd al-Muttalib).74 Furthermore the Prophet’s enemies were quick to slam his character and refer to him as al-abtar, meaning someone who had no male offspring who could inherit from the Prophet and keep his legacy alive in perpetuity.

The Qur’an was able to defend him.75 It is clear that the Quraysh (and as a result earlier pre-Islamic Arabs) were not of the opinion that adoptees to be an acceptable substitute for an actual biological child. And that despite the Prophet’s famous speech to the Quraysh when he adopted Zayd (rA) in the role of his own sonand declared “Zayd has become my son. He will be my inheritor and Zayd will inherit from me.

” The very wording indicates the idea that inheritance wasn’t common for adopted children and thus was required to be defined. ⁷⁶ This is clear when it comes to al-Miqdad who is evidently not have been inherited by al-Aswad ibn Yaghuth upon the day of his death. Another person who was not able to inherit was Sufyan Ma’mar, who was adoptive by Ma’mar Habib from Banu Jumah Ibn ‘Amr, who was from Quraysh. 

While he was not able to inherit from his adopted father following Ma’mar’s demise, Sufyan was not able to live in Mecca and was required be returned to his ancestral tribe along with his sons, even though he retained Ma’mar’s patronymic. ⁷⁷ All of this explains the absence of any evidence of conflict or litigation regarding inheritance between adopted and biological children, which would be inevitable.

The fact that the majority of adopted children were confederates (hulafa) and also clients (mawali) for their names is a further indication of the differences in the social estimation of adopted sons versus biological ones in that the former did not have the need to be confederates of their biological parents.78

Additionally is that it demonstrates the practice of adoption that was prevalent in pre-Islamic Arabia as an unnecessary and otiose practice. The adoption process did not provide any additional social benefits to those who could gain a greater benefits by becoming tribal confederates without any social obligations. ⁷⁹ In this sense it was essential to completely eliminate an institution that , at best, was unproductive and, at worst, promoted oppression. For an institution that was well-established in the society as it was, this would not have been achieved in the absence of Prophetic precedent.

An historical assessment of the development of the love-struck story

Zaynab bint Jahsh – If the love story of the couple is completely incompatible with the Qur’anic text and other sources, how do we explain the source of the story , and the few transmissions that make reference to the story? Shu’ayb al-Arnaut who was the late hadith the late hadithexpert who was also the editor of Ibn Habal’s Musnad He suggested a possible explanation in his commentary to the hadith ofof Anas (rA).

 He suggested that the romantic account was confused with the account of Zayd Ibn Harithah’s (rA) trip to the Zaynab’s (rA) home following their divorce, to ask to the Prophet in the hadith ((12).(12). Numerous sound stories of the event speak to the reverence and awe Zayd felt when he was in front of Zaynab following the time that her Prophet suggested to her (interestingly despite their personal disputes that led to their divorce several months before) And that it was the feeling of awe in Zayd, that he was unable to think of looking at Zaynab. 

Al-Arnaut made a parallel between the two accounts, and also noted their similarity that in one Zayd visit Zaynab and is overwhelmed with wonder as well as in the second story, it is the Prophet visit Zaynab and is stunned. 

Since there is a resemblance between the two stories, and because version about Zayd’s journey Zaynab is a factual story and has been recorded by Anas in numerous authentic sources of hadith ,he believed the versions to have been unclear. ⁸⁰ While this explanation seems plausible, there isn’t any concrete evidence to support the conflation. Furthermore, it’s not enough to explain the wide circulation of this narrative, or that of other narrators who have also reported the incident, using completely distinct narration chains.

The primary clue as to its source is the time that it was suddenly on the market as well as mostly among raconteurs ( qussas) that are renowned for exegesis instead of those who are more rigorous transmitted and hadith-based critics. 

It happened around 100 years or so after the date at which the incident is believed to have occurred. place. It is clear it was an gradual progression of the tale, starting with a simple observation that the only thing that the Prophet covered up was his desire to marry Zaynab (rA) as he explained as an explanation for the mention of a secret chapter from al-Ahzab in the verse of al-Ahzab, to a complete story with a myriad of details that are included.

 (In various versions, Zaynab (rA) jumped over the moon when she realized of the Prophet was coming to visit her, or she ran to him without covering her head, and then put on a dress that she employed as a spur of the moment in order to protect her hair. She also was able to follow to follow the Prophet out to hear his speech, along with other details that are vivid). Another clue that we notice is the connection of the Prophet’s tale to an unusual story about Dawud that is not located in Islamic sources, but is entirely rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition. In fact, it is the next verse in al-Ahzabwhere the connection was created. 

The verse states, “There is no harm for the Prophet in doing what Allah has obligated for him; [that has been] the way of Allah with those who have preceded him” was used first in reference to Dawud by Muhammad ibn Khan al-Qurazi. a senior follower ( tabi’i) who was a Jewish convert from Banu Qurayzah, and thus very familiar with the portrayal of Judeo-Christianity of Dawud. 

Instead of understanding the meaning of the verse, he based it on its obvious meaning, namely that there is no way to impugn the actions of the Prophet, as it was portrayed in ‘Aishah’s (rA) review within Sunan al-Tirmidhi for fulfilling an obligation Allah had given him, and also that his obedience to the command was comparable in the way that other prophets fulfilled their obligations to God.

prophets. Mohammed Ibn Ka’b stated that the verse referred to the tradition of prophets having multiple wives. Ibn Ka’b even specifically furnished Dawud’s wedding to 100 women and Sulayman’s wedding to 1000 , as recorded within the Bible as an illustration in this practice.81 He also said that the Prophet’s marriage with Zaynab (rA) even though he was in having several wives at the time is merely the realization of a customary prophetic practice that was practiced in previous centuries.82

The Prophet did not other extrapolations and neither did he make any reference to an authority higher than him, like a Companion for his interpretation of the verse. It is important to note the fact that Ibn Ka’b lived during the Rashidun Caliphate, and died in the year 108/726. There was no other commentator who had considered the verse in the same way as Ibn Ka’b did, and also, the love story was not available throughout his life, except for a sketchy prototype in the latter period during his final years.

Why did Ibn Ka’b interpret the verse in such an unique and unique way? The record of the past is not able to provide direct proof of the motive or the source of his interpretation. But, we are able to think about it, due to the development of anti-Islamic rhetoric, which had begun to develop, and of which the Prophet’s marriage to Zaynab (rA) played a crucial part. In the face of increasing interactions among Muslims and Christians and Christians, they commenced an aggressive defence of their religious principles that had been faced head-on by the Qur’an. The ultimate advocate of the Qur’an was John from Damascus (d. 143/74)

He began his own campaign towards Arabs collectively (whom were he scathingly referred to as “Ishmaelites”), Islamic principles and the Prophet specifically. His main argument was his denial of his Prophet’s status as an philanderer, and an false prophet who invented revelations as a way to fulfill his sexual desires. He criticized the Islamic condoning of polygyny condemning the Prophet as the most accountable culprit. John however went on to say more, and specifically made reference to the Prophet’s wedding to Zayd’s (rA) wife.

 John did not mention Zaynab specifically, since the writer isn’t aware of her name, nor did he mention the last version of the love story where the Prophet visited her home only to be fascinated by her. The story he portrayed was likewise less well-crafted, and quite flamboyant, since in his remark the Prophet did not just be in love with the wife of Zayd, but also directed Zayd to get rid of her to allow him to become the new Zayd. John did not even mention the verses in the Qur’an where Zayd’s Prophet was quoted to have sincerely telling Zayd instead of keeping his marriage to be a good marriage. ⁸³

John’s journal, because of deliberate ambiguity or ignorance, was pivotal in strengthening Christian apology in in the face of Islamic objections to theology, and was subsequently adopted with others Christian theologians. ⁸⁴ Other Christian condemnations concerning the prophet’s concupiscence

however, although not as well-documented or developed they are cited even earlier in the records of history. The ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al’Aziz (d. 101/707) is said to have been in contact to the Byzantine Emperor Leo III (d. 124/741) who was adamant that the Prophet was guilty of seducing a woman whose name was Zeda. ⁸⁵ The fact that the woman’s name sounded so similar to Zayd’s to dismiss without a second thought This could be a sloppy mention of Zayd himself. This implies that the Christian narrative was going through its own development.

Early Christians with no aware of the Qur’anic texts and whose understanding of it was unclear and sporadic, knew that Zayd had played a certain but unidentified part in one of the Prophet’s marriages. John’s version that was written some time later, seems to be an improved version which reveals that the Prophet was not married to Zayd however, but his previous wife, but isn’t aware of the name of the woman. It is appealing to assign the whole loverstruck story to the fictions, particularly since they are the first prototypes that have been identified of it found in the historical records. 

But the love story that is found within Islamic texts is much more precise and specific and its place in the Islamic historical and exegetical corpus must be explored further. This is especially so since the most fervent Muslims were unlikely to include the unflattering image of the Prophet into their own works. The most likely reason for these stories getting into Muslim writings is that they could have triggered certain Muslim responses that were indirectly influenced by the tale they were trying to deflect.

 In this case, the claims could be an plausible motive for Ibn Ka’b’s expository essay: his explanation of the Prophet’s marriage with Zaynab (rA) as being akin to Sulayman and Dawud’s marriages, might have been a way to emphasize how the Prophet’s multigynous weddings are not any different from those depicted in the Bible’s revered patriarchs. I’m not aware any evidence to prove that Ibn Ka’b was aware of or even of Leo III or John’s allegations or the fact that his exegesis was an explicit response to them or other Christians. 

But, Ibn Ka’b was keenly aware of current Jewish as well as Christian theological assertions and as a favored participant in Ibn ‘Abd al’Aziz’s court He was very aware of these arguments, and tried to counter the claims in the same way he had to be able to do with other claims of Judeo-Christianity. ⁸⁶ In addition it is evident that some other earlier Muslims had a keen understanding of Christian assertions against the Prophet . that would be the reason for the strange commentary of al-Ahzab38 which Ibn Ka’b proffered.

No matter what the origins of Ibn Ka’b’s exegesis was a key base for the subsequent step in the hermeneutical development of al-Ahzab38 which is apparent in both Ibn Jurayj’s expository works. Both of them went much beyond Muhammad ibn Ka’bin that they believed that the verse could refer not only to Dawud’s or Sulayman’s weddings to several women, but also in relation to the sordid affair Dawud was accused of having according to the Judeo-Christian literature. The Biblical account of Dawud’s relationship with Uriah’s wife Bathsheba was known to Muslims who were been settling in Byzantine regions in the time of the caliphate the ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (rA) The story was widely circulated, and it is believed that the spread of the tale has led to a certain degree of acceptance by Muslims.

 Abi Talib (rA) is believed to have been aware of the widespread recounting of the story, and he attempted to halt the spread of the story and warned that those who were involved in its transmission could be punished 160 times — 80 times for falsely accusing the false accusation of adultery ( qadhf) and 80 for the denigration of the prophetic nature from Allah. ⁸⁷ The complete Biblical account goes like this: Dawud was one time walking up the top of his palace and he saw a beautiful woman who was bathing. Infatuated by her she captivated him, he inquired as to her identity and was told by a source that Bathsheba was (or Bath-shua in a different book of the Bible) she was her husband Uriah dawud’s highest lieutenants. 

Dawud was able to have Bathsheba taken to his residence and an affair ensued during which Bathsheba was pregnant. Believing that Uriah would discover the affair Dawud ordered Uriah to the front in hopes that Uriah along with his wife might have a relationship to whom this pregnancy might be attributable. 

But Uriah refused to release his troops without a commanding officer despite numerous efforts of Dawud in trying to persuade him that he was not. In desperate circumstances, Dawud requested Uriah placed in the front line of a battle in which Uriah was likely to be killed. Uriah was killed in the battle as well as Dawud was able to keep him from his discovery. He later was married to Bathsheba when the news of Uriah’s demise reached him. ⁸⁸

As the knowledge of this Judeo-Christian pattern of events increased the Qur’an’s experts argued that it was the justification for an than atypical event found within Surat Sad.in the story, two defendants suddenly arrive in the chambers of Dawud. They present an argument for Dawud to arbitrate. One of the litigants has 99 ewes while the other has only one. The less fortunate one complains that his richer partner wanted to take the single ewe, and then had overpowered the other with his words. 

Dawud decides to the advantage of the litigant. In the absence of any explanation within the Qur’an. Dawud is aware that Allah has tested him and he kneels in a prostration asking Allah’s forgiveness for his lapse. Muslim commentators have used the Bathsheba story to the event since a parable similar to this was found in the Bible where Nathan, the Biblical Prophet Nathan was present before Dawud and made a case for Dawud to decide. Nathan’s story was similar that of the Qur’anic one, in the case of a man who was wealthy and had numerous ewes takes over a less wealthy man’s one ewe. However the Biblical account was more explicit in its mention of the Bathsheba affair. When Dawud decided against the less fortunate man. Nathan condemned Dawud’s insincerity and specifically referred to the Bathsheba incident: “You are the man! 

The God of Israel: God of Israel”I am the one who crowned you as the king of Israel in the first place, and me who helped you escape the hands of Saul. And I also gave you your master’s home and master’s wives on your lap. I gave you the houses of Israel and Judah. If that’s too much, I will give you more in the future.

“Why did you not respect the order from Lord? Why did you not obey the command of Lord to do something that is considered to be evil to Him? Uriah the Hittite you killed by the sword and his wife you adopted as your wife, and he you killed with using the swords of Ammonites?” ⁸⁹ According to this, certain Muslim commentators widened the Qur’anic parable to include the additional details in the Biblical account. They considered the parable of 99 ewes as a representation of Dawud’s 99 wives, in spite of that he was seeking the single wife of another.

The similarities between the story of Dawud’s alleged improprieties and Bathsheba in the last version of the story about the prophet’s trip Zaynab’s (rA) house are clear (though at the moment it is not clear whether Qatadah or Ibn Jurayj specifically quote the complete report about the prophet’s trip) They are both married to various wives, yet despite that they are both in love with a different woman.

 Zaynab bint Jahsh – In both cases, the woman is actually the spouse to one of the lieutenants they trust. The love affair is brought about by the accidental glance at the woman who is unclothed, in Dawud’s instance while watching Bathsheba taking bath as well as in the case of the Prophet, in the Prophet’s case, when Zaynab (rA) is quick to greet him with no protection. The hurried attempts by Bathsheba to cover her face when she realized that Dawud was gaze, as portrayed in various accounts of the incident as well as Zaynab’s (rA) similar effort to cover her hair using an improvised veilthat is described in the hadith in hadith(4).

 The main distinction to the love-struck account the Prophet promptly leaves and keeps the appearance of absolute courtesy even though he is able to internally admire Zaynab. This is in contrast in the Biblical Dawud who has fully realized the immorality, and also murders an innocent man in order to conceal his crime. 

However, this distinction is restricted to the Biblical account, since it is the Qur’an commentators who have quoted the account did not include the adulterous element (for instance, al-Tabari’s comments in Surat Sad24 with a reference to a report that goes all the way back to Ibn Abbas). According to the more moderating “Islamic” version of the commentators, which was increasingly included within the commentaries on Surat Sadas the knowledge of Judeo-Christian tradition was expanded.

Dawud is depicted as being fascinated by the woman however, rather than committing an act of adultery the first thing he does is get her husband killed after which, if his plan succeeds, he gets married and begins to have relations with the woman. It is not clear if the absence of reference to adultery was due to the fact that the commentators were unaware of the true Biblical depiction or if the intention was to whitewash is not relevant. The most important thing is it is that it is evident that the version that was based on that of the Bathsheba affair that circulated within the Qur’an commentators, with no explicit reference to adultery, is largely identical to the romantic narrative that was later developed later. ⁹⁰

Ibn Jurayj and Qatadah were not the sources al-Tabari and other commentators referenced when they reminisced about their accounts of the Bathsheba affair. However, it is evident that this is the tale Ibn Jurayj and Qatadah were talking about when discussing al-Ahzab38 in the sense that there was no fault on the Prophet for following the rules Allah had ordered, as the Prophet’s behavior was comparable to Dawud’s alleged conduct which was whose sunnah was just adhering to.

 If there’s no doubt Ibn Jurayj and Qatadah envisaged this particular tale and of the prophet’s behavior as “similar to the Prophet Dawud [who] desired the woman upon whom his gaze fell upon” is a clear indication that did indeed think it was Bathsheba that he was thinking of. Ibn Jurayj also named the woman–al-Yasyah–which may have been an Arabized version of Bath-shua or a scribal error by a copyist who was not familiar with the pronunciation: as the names essentially share the same consonantal skeleton, the differences can be accounted by the addition of a dot to the b into a y.⁹¹ Regardless of the precise name given to the woman Dawud is captivated by, Ibn Jurayj clearly was referring to this specific Biblical account.

It is interesting to consider that again, just like in Muhammad Ibn Ka’b’s instance, the direct understanding of Biblical stories is a prevalent subject, this time with Ibn Jurayj who hailed from an Byzantine background. His father’s name. Jurayj is the Arabic equivalent that derived from his Christian name Georgios.92 Ibn Jurayj’s credibility as a transmissionist of hadith is not doubted and his hadiths appear in the of the six canonical Sunni hadith compilations.

However, his personal opinions that are included in these compilations, for which this is an instance, have not received the same amount of acclaim.93 This is especially striking since each of Ibn Jurayj and Qatadah studied with a wide range of the most senior followers, through whom they would often recount their experiences with isnads directly to the Prophet, but that they did not make when they interpret al-Ahzab 38.

This exegesis by Ibn Jurayj and Qatadah’s is only theirs to be interpreted and both offered their own interpretation, without attribution to any higher authority. It is interesting to note that when they did give exegesis to al-Ahzab, 38 through transmitting an interpretation of higher-ranking person, like Sa’id ibn al Musayyab, this unusual and explicit mention of love was not present in their transmissions.94 It is worth noting that both of them are recognized for heavily relying on sources from the Judeo-Christian tradition (known as Israiliyyat within earlier Muslim texts) to support their positions and beliefs, which is a fact that has been widely acknowledged by experts in the field of hadith.

specialists.95 Ibn Jurayj lived from 80-150/699-767. He was also the successor to Muhammad Ibn K’b, which was the case for Qatadah who passed away in 120/737, during which the further development of the Zaynab story was likely to have occurred. The two figures did not Qatadah neither Ibn Jurayj furnished all of the detailed details in the complete version of the love story in their commentary, as they simply stated that the Prophet had wished to see Zayd (rA) break off from Zaynab (rA) to ensure to marry her. 

Zaynab bint Jahsh – However, they appear to be the first to make the step of expanding the meaning of al-Ahzab38 in the form ofby using the Bathsheba narrative to it and then applying it to Prophet’s wedding to Zaynab (rA). This was likely to be due to the the Prophet’s worry about the public learning about his wedding plans to Zaynab (rA) was mistakenly associated with his actual intentionto be married to her and also the worry of the public learning of this desire. This error was made even more palatable due to their misguided ascription for al-Ahzab 38 38to his involvement in the Bathsheba affair.

The end result of the story was the idea of Muqatil Ibn Sulayman. Muqatil is a fascinating historical figure, but it’s his position in the role of a andteller that we’re focused on. He isn’t an authentic hadith in the sense of annarrator as he did not divulge the majority of sources as isnad however Muqatil was aware of numerous circulated hadiths, which were merrily embellished by him. 

It is likely due to the embellishments these critics like Yahya ibn Ma’in Waki’ ibn al Jarrah the al-Nasai and al-Daraqutni who declared him a liar even though he was a jurist of the quality of Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafi’i nevertheless, considered his exegesis as a pioneering research in this field.96 His savagery of stories frequently drew influence from the Judeo-Christian faith which was acknowledged and criticized by IbnHibban, who also classified his work as fabricator.97

Muqatil is the first Muslim author of the full version of the love story in the form we have today and his version is more detailed and precise than any other that came after his. In the complete version of his story, we discover details that are not present in the narratives of other authors. He constructed his own version of Qatadah and Ibn Jurayj’s accounts and crafted a dramatic tale that is much earlier than the excerpt mentioned above in the the hadith (8).(8).

 ⁹⁸ Muqatil gives an exhaustive chronology of the Prophet’s apparent attraction to Zaynab (rA) and Zaynab (rA), which is what he claims to have bloomed earlier, in the time he visited Zaynab to offer advice on her domestic conflicts with Zayd. The Prophet was in awe of her beauty ( husnuha) as well as her elegance ( jamaluha) and attraction ( zarfuha). 

It wasn’t until a while later, when he accidently saw a light-clad Zaynab (rA) and his love for her developed to the point of exhaustion and her appearance provoked an intense and immediate attraction. According to his version, Zaynab (rA) is a singularly described by numerous images of her stunning, attractive look, as well as the beauty in her complexion as well as the an attractive appearance of her figure.

Muqatil was among the first (and the only narrator that I am familiar with) to specifically declare that the Prophet wanted to marry his wife ( hawayaha) while other narrators who later take this tale as their own were able to use more reserved language, declaring rather that the Prophet was adamant about marrying her, or perhaps was awed by her. Zayd’s criticism of Zaynab is extremely shrewd and exaggerated, particularly when compared with the narratives of other narrators where the narrator omits criticism of her, and he acknowledges her strengths. Muqatil’s source for this story was again the Bathsheba narrative , of which he was aware , and that he attributed to the story, and he substantiates the relationship in the exegesis of al-Ahzab in 37 and where he draw the same shady parallel. 

Furthermore, just when he crafted the love-struck narrative with meticulousness and embellishments, he also embellished his Dawud as well as Bathsheba narrative more lavishly than Ibn Jurayj and Qatadah’s relatively more slack version. In relation to the verse “The way of Allah with those who have preceded him,” he wrote, “This is the practice of those who were before Muhammad and that includes the Prophet Dawud who coveted ( hawaya) the woman to whom he was infatuated ( futina). 

The woman is the spouse of Uriyah Ibn Hanan and Allah joined Dawud to the woman he sought after similar to Allah’s bringing Muhammad with Zaynab after Dawud also desired her.” ⁹⁹ A close analysis of Ibn ‘Abbas’s expository of Sad24 and Muqatil’s version is extremely instructive. While Ibn Abbas said that Dawud saw an unwashed woman, Muqatil described, “He saw a woman in a bath, and he was drawn with her beautiful appearance. 

The woman was able to see his shadow and she shed hair and covered her body. This only increased Dawud’s desire to her.”100 However, while Muqatil is not liable for the development of this tale that is Biblical in its origin, with details that are more graphic than Muqatil’s account, and that was widely circulated in the community of Muslims before his time and his tendency to make headlines of his accounts is obvious.101 The reason for this was that he placed an extensive reliance on sources from the Judeo-Christian tradition for his stories and it’s due to this dependence that one must question whether Muqatil was influenced, in addition to Qatadah in addition to Ibn Jurayj, also from Christian polemicists.

They embellished his narrative based on the sources they created, but also eliminating information that he was certain would not be palatable to his Muslim readers and making it appear in an easier to digest manner. In his commentaries on al-Ahzab in particular the author attempts to minimize the guilt of both prophets in their actions by appointing their love for fate, which Allah had fulfilled through the legalization of their marriages to the women they liked. Evidently, Muqatil is overreaching here, and has forgotten his own interpretation to this Bathsheba incident and Sad 24. Allah apologizes to Dawud for his inattention.

Despite the general acceptance of the unreliability of Muqatil’s work in Muslim research, the influence of Muqatil on this story , as well as in the tafsirin generally, can’t be overstated. For instance of a scholar who is no less an exegete or hadith is a greater hadith scholar andexpert than al-Baghawi author of the well-known tafsir, Ma’alim Al-tanzil contained Muqatil’s version of the love story complete with lurid details in fullin his review of the al-Ahzab.

 Al-Baghawi may have drew inspiration from al-Tha’labi’s the tafsiral-Baghawi reduced, and also quoted the Muqatil account completely himself. The two authors did not identify sources for the quotation as Muqatil and omits the significance of his contribution to the story’s transmission. This isn’t just one example of his stories that made their way in a way that was sly into other works. ¹⁰²

When Muqatil’s story became famous in the world of Qur’an commentators It was a straightforward incident of innocent, but uninformed hadith thenarrators interpolating the story in a haphazard manner into genuine narratives. It’s not a coincidence that eachof those hadiths that use HTML1that contain the entire story includes transmitters that had been criticized for the lack of memory and that the transmitter that was faulty was discovered shortly after Muqatil’s narrative was released into circulation.

 It is for this reason that we can find hadiths which arethat were passed down over the long periods of time by more authentic narrators in a more benign form, yet these variations have been misinterpreted. An excellent example is the version of Anas in the hadith (1) (1), where Muammal was ibn Isma’il the weak link in the chain explicitly stated that he’d forgotten the specifics of who spoke exactly what was said in the Hadith.

 Muammal, who was not a coincidence passed away in 206/821, just a few years after Muqatil was killed, and was well-known for his poor retention which resulted in his inadvertently introducing the controversial features of the hadith in the hadithin the issue. It’s not a surprise that seven additional hadith narrators retell the exact same hadith as Muammal’s source, Hammad ibn Zayd, and there is not one that in the same way as Muammal’s version (see the figure 1). Then, Muammal admitted his memory loss when he spoke to Ahmad ibn Hanbal, admitting that he was unable to remember whether it was Hammad’s view or part of the text of the Hadith. It wasn’t, since seven other reverent and attentive Narrators all received that same hadith The hadith was transcribed inwithout adding the account in Hammad’s or within that body given by Anas.

Another example is al-Tha’labi’s account of the ‘Ali Zayn Al-‘Abidin, in which the al-Hasanal-Basri interpretation of that Qur’anic verse to suggest that the Prophet was hiding affection for Zaynab (rA). We find however that several hadith are in fact contradictory.experts like Ibn Abi Hatim and al-Bayhaqi had gathered the hadiths from various transmitters before al-Tha’labi did however neither of the two transmitters reported that al-Hasan had come up with the same interpretation.

 Al-Tha’labi is also a narrator with a reputation who are known for their forgetfulness and weak memories. The narration of the narrator that al-Tha’labi’s link differs from other narrations of sounders is Muhammad ibn Yahya Abi ‘Umar an narrator who was who was known for his recklessness and who passed away in 243/857, and was resurrected after Muqatil Ibn Sulayman (Figure 2.). The erroneous attribution to al-Hasan may have been prompted by the fact that it was immediately following each of the many transmissions of the hadith (6) (which was(6) (Qatadah’s assertion that the Prophet concealed within his own mind a desire to have Zayd (rA) break off Zaynab (rA) to ensure to marry her), Qatadah immediately referred to al-Hasan’s assertion that If the Prophet could conceal a verse from the Qur’an, he’d be able to find the same verse. 

(The immediately quoting al-Hasan’s view by Qatadah is often shared by ‘Abd al -Razzaq ‘Abd Ibn Humayd Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Tabari and al-Tabarani. Qatadah believed that he did this because he probably believed that the statement of al-Hasan–which was actually ‘Aishah’s (rA)–supported his own account of events, but paradoxically, it weakened the credibility of his account). Since Qatadah often quoted Al-Hasan’s innocent assertion after his own exegesis al-Hasan’s comment was misinterpreted with Qatadah’s in the eyes of one inattentive n.

To confirm this notion If we take the year of death of the impugned authors of the hadiths, as an unreliable date for that the hadith wasoriginated and evolved, the evolution process becomes clearer. We start with Muhammad Ibn Ka’b, Qatadah Ibn Jurayj, and Qatadah as the earliest movers of the notion connecting the Judeo-Christian tale about Bathsheba and the prophet . 

They died in 108/726; 120/737, and 150/767 , respectively. The list of the first poor or forgetful narrator’s in each of the is a listof hadith The hadiths inavailable that reference the lovetruck story, as well as the year they died is presented chronologically, as well as an enumeration version of the hadith. Muhammad Ibn Ka’b, Qatadah along with Ibn Jurayj are included for comparability due to their role in the historiographic development of the narrative even though they are not considered to be as forgetful or weak. Hadiths The Hadiths(9) as well as (10) do not have an isnadand thus are not included here.

The crucial role of Qatadah, Ibn Jurayj, and Muqatil in the creation of the love story is evident from the above image in that no narrator prior to in mentioning or telling the story for over a century following the Prophet’s death. It’s not surprising that among the most distinguished early compilers and doyens in the sirahand maghaziliterature who could have been the ones to precede the development and spread of the story and its retelling, including ‘Urwah al-Zubayr (d. 94% 94/713), Musa ibn ‘Uqbah (d. 141/758) Ibn Shhab al-Zuhri (d. the year 124/741) Ma’mar Ibn Rashid (d. 153/770) and, most notably, Muhammad ibn Ishaq (d. 150/767) The fact is that none of them was aware of this, and all of their works that are available do not mention the story. 

It is the same for earlier exegetes who predated the story, such as Mujahid who was a.k.a. Jabr (d. 104.722) and even exegetes who were regarded as lazy transmitters who routinely recited non-sound exegetical texts like al-Dahhak ibn al-Muzahim (d. 105/724).103 The omissions are especially striking because the compilers were meticulous in capturing other information about the Prophet’s life as a married man as well as the details of his marriages to different wives.104

The development of the narrative can be assessed, beginning with an unassuming yet critical reflection of Qatadah as well as Ibn Jurayj that the Prophet did not reveal his desire to wed Zaynab (rA) and was based completely in their understanding of the verse, which was applied to Dawud to Muqatil’s blatant forgery of the entire version of the story. 

The fact that he was the initial Narrator of the entire story provides the firstevidence the authenticity of his writing however his status as a well-known sculptor of hadithsaffords the identification of his work more easily. His story gave later narrators with the essential elements of the love-struck story that is believed to have circulated following his death. Other hadiths thatrelating to the story of HTML1were inspired by it even though the entire story wasn’t retold by all. Muammal’s Hadith, for instance, isn’t complete in its specifics, but it does refer to the Prophet’s vision at Zaynab (rA) in addition to his emotional turmoil that followed and the obvious relics of the story told by Muqatil.

Muslim reactions on the historicality of the love-struck story

With this development in the historical context of the story and the fact that it is a short overview of the evolution of Muslim responsesto the love story once it became famous is a good idea since it is usually discussed in connection with the authenticity of the story the event itself. The subject has been featured in the works of academics like Kecia Ali and Ze’evMaghen.

 ¹⁰⁵ The second suggests an opposite development in the direction that we have suggested He takes the historical significance of the event as a given and then examines the development in Muslim historians’ reactions by saying that earlier Muslims recognized and even acknowledged the Prophet’s carnality, that he uses to explain the informal quoting of the lovetruck narrative by the authors of the tale. The story,

however, swiftly changed into the representation of al-insan al-kamil “the perfect man” as a man who had been freed from temptations in the physical world. It’s not clear from the Maghen’s writings on the time period in which the development and the subsequent expulsion of the love-struck story occurred, however Maghen does provide examples in Abu ‘Abdallah Al-Qurtubi (d. 671/1272) Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah (d. 751/1350) Isma’il Ibn the ‘Umar Ibn Kathir (d. 774/1373) as prominent exegetes who opposed the narrative. This suggests that by the 8 ⁸/14 ^8th/14th centuries the bowdlerization process had already begun.

It is important to state in the beginning that the possibility of a change in the Muslim reaction were to occur and was able to inform Muslim conceptions of the Prophet’s humanity and infallibility, as well as the cultural and religious sensibilities that define Muslim culture, not the actual historicality of the event in the meaning of which it is not. 

The second issue that comes up in the studies that advocate for the gradual evolution of a more prudent Muslim reaction to the love-struck story is the notion of earlier work that recited the story are more reliable than works later on that disproved or didn’t replicate the story. This approach is flawed for two reasons. The first is that, as was demonstrated previously, the first work of the period were not able to have toinclude the specifics of the incident (as the events was not conceived prior to the creation of these works). 

This is also flawed because the notion that later works refined through cumulative historical research were not historical is itself an assumption based on ahistorical facts. Historical research by nature is a process of revision. Indeed, it was due to “early” hadith fabrications that hadith the field ofnarrator criticism was born as an academic discipline. ¹⁰⁶ If there was a gradual change that Muslim scholars began to sift the story from their works but it is not essential that this occurred as a result of creation of primitive sentiments that were anachronistically applied on the Prophet . The argument could be made that it was a result of the widespread recognition that the account is ahistorical. the narrative.

The issue is what Muslim scholars could give credibility to the story of love and romance. If there was any change in the perception of the event in particular, it was within the exegetical tradition It appears that after the story gained traction the story was more frequently referenced in the early exegetical literature compared to more rigorous hadith andcompilations. 

A few early exegetes were not very thorough when it came to the reports they relied upon for their understanding of the Qur’an and weren’t well-versed in hadith andsciences. Indeed, hadith scholars frequently differentiated between exegetical skill and transmission of hadith, despite the former’s dependence on transmission to interpret (such as the al-Shafi’i’s acknowledgement of Muqatil’s exegesis skills even though the latter’s weaknesses are well-known when it comes to hadith).

107 Ibn Hanbal is quoted to have stated that the tafsir tafsir style had no foundation (usul) due to the fact that it was based on of the dubious information that was that were transmitted in the genre at his time.108 This is why later hadith masters attempted to identify the sources of the numerous popular, but weak (and even fake) reports, which were not properly references in popular Qur’anic commentaryaries like Jamal al-Din alZayla’i’s and even Ib Hajar’s takhrij work on Mahmud ibn ‘Umar al Zamakhshari’s renowned al-Kashshaf.

The the recognition of the crucial role of hadith in Qur’anic hermeneutics was heightened, later commentators got more proficient in the technical aspects of criticism. By the middle of the age, most well-known expository works were written by the best hadith masters of Islamic academic history. 

It’s not surprising that experts that had beenrigorously taught in Hadith the discipline ofcriticism and had a solid foundation in the field of criticismoften opposed the narrative, for example, Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn Kathir, and other scholars. Therefore even when there was an ongoing rejection or removal of the love story in exegetical writings the claims that it resulted from an evolution in the perception that the prophet’s authority is infallible fail explain the corresponding increase in hadith in the form ofexpertise within the field, which is a confusing factor.

A lack of knowledge about the hadith discipline is not enough to explain the way that the early Qur’an commentators could have accepted the love-struck story due to theological reasons. It is important to be noted that exegetes frequently provided every possible report, often antithetical, to meet hermeneutical goals. When exegetes mentioned the lovetruck narrative without hesitation they did so because they were trying to be encyclopedic and were simply having reports that explained the al-Ahzab. 

In reality, they usually provided ‘Ali Zyn al-‘Abidin’s alternative to the love-struck story, in the case of the report. This was often done in conjunction with other reports on the lovetruck narrative.109 In a time when Islamic belief was at the forefront it was not necessary in defending the Prophet’s integrity or engage in debates concerning the weaknesses of the narrative in order to determine the truthfulness of the story. Even the most rigorous experts in hadith were not required to engage in the rigorous hadith appraisals they were famous for. Isnadcriticism was a mere probabilistic proof in the majority of cases, while the argument that relied upon the prophet’s irrefutable nature founded on a certain certitude.

 Based on this epistemological view, it was more reasonable to discredit the report in a concise manner because of their infraction to the second precept. This is why hadith scholars such as Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Kathir ridiculed the report by merely stating that this kind of conduct was unfit for the position of prophets. Furthermore, since this particular event was pre-Islamic and ascribed to the abolished norm of adoption, this event had no legal social, linguistic, or cultural significance–things that exegetes were more concerned with. 

Some jurists who were skilled like al-Shafi’i could obtain various legal rulings pertaining to marriage as well as matters of emancipation based on the relevant al-Ahzab verses, but to no avail was any explanation of the events described within.110 Thus, even though many exegetes were aware of the flaws in the narrative but they did not provide any explanation of the event and, in all appearances, in a way promoting it.111 It was this absence of necessity and the insignificance given to this particular event during the Prophet’s lifetime which led to the essentially innocuous transmission of the story as opposed to the gradual development and acceptance of the Prophet’s status as al-insan al-kamil.

However it is the reality that there is no obvious change in the record of history in the preceding age within the larger Islamic academic tradition. If we disregard the fact that early sirah compilers did not include the love story the love story is unnoticed in a huge amount of Muslim historical works even after its introduction in the works of Muqatil. 

In reality the story was not even discussed by a significant variety of Muslim historians, a majority of whom were aware of it.112 The works that don’t include it include most of the early important historical works that describe the Prophet’s life by prominent authorities like Khalifah the Prophet ibn Khayyat (d. 239/854) and al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar (d. 258/870),

Abu Bakr ibn Abi Khaythamah (d. 279/892), Ibn Wadih al-Ya’qubi (d. 284/897) Ibn Hibban al Busti (d. 354/965) and Ibn Zayd al Qayrawani (d. 386/996).113 In addition there were exegetes who, prior to the time of Muqatil like Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d. 333/944) and others, rejected the lovetruck narrative on the basis of a critical reading.114 Although a handful of later sirah and tafsir writers were able to include and freely accept the love story

However, the few instances were transhistorical, and were present after the narrative’s purported expulsion from the works of Muslim historical exegetes and historians, such as Al-Qurtubi as well as Ibn Kathir in the 8th/14th century. For instance, it’s reported as a historical fact in the writings from Nasir al-Din alBaydawi (d. 991/1316), Jalal al-Din al-Mahalli (d. 864/1460), Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 911/1505), Nur al-Din al-Halabi (d. 975/1568), Abu al-Su’ud Efendi (d. 981/1574) in addition to Martin Lings (d. 1425/2005). ¹¹⁵

With the difficulty of determining the position of everyone or even the overwhelming majority of Muslim historians, exegetes and theologians and their respective influence on Muslim theology It is hard to draw broad conclusion about the dominant Muslim academic view of the love story at any time without extensive further investigation. 

However we can say with certainty that Muslim intellectuals who defended and disapproved of the authenticity of the lovetruck narrative were present in every period of Islamic history. Furthermore, there is no evidence that supports the widespread support for the Prophet’s chastity, virtue and purity specifically in connection with the love story until recent times. 

The amount of refutations as well as apology-giving has only increased in the last few years due to the scathing criticism of many Western critics who have targeted the Prophet over this marriage. This is mostly the modern arguments for the Prophet that are pushed through Maghen and others to back the idea of a homogeneous Muslim front that is advancing in defense of the Prophet’s character. In this way, they suffer from sampling biases in their skewed and unrepresentative sampling of of the sirahcorpus of which contemporary works aren’t a great representation. and the incorrect conclusions that result are completely predictable due to this bias.

Suggested Read:

CONCLUSION

Zaynab bint Jahsh – It is regrettable that this incident was so widely and unresponsibly reported, especially when the Prophet’s union and the marriage of Zaynab (rA) was based on origins in certain sociological, religious, and legal concerns that were then implemented successfully. 

This is especially so because those goals are clearly stated within the Qur’an. These goals, which include the affirmation theologically of the completion of prophethood that does not require the hereditary nature of succession, which could have been mistakenly taken from the hereditary lineage of prophets from the past and also the abolition of the unjust customs of pre-Islamic adoption which are described above, remain fundamental to the wedding. In this regard it is the recognition of other motives to the wedding, like the infatuation and love which are portrayed in the love-struck story, which lead to incongruous and arbitrary conclusions that are incompatible with Qur’anic purposes.

In light of this contradiction with the Qur’an’s stated purposes the fictitious aspects of the story are evident. The flaws of simplistic explanations based on the notion that all tales have to be authentic are extremely striking. The prevalence of a story is historically based since this particular story was not even mentioned in the history books in the first century following the Prophet’s passing . The fact that it is mentioned of it in “early” tafsir works like al-Tabari’s not significant because these early works were written just three centuries after the time of the Prophet and the narratives relating the love story were already being circulated in the early days.

 It’s only when you take an in-depth historiographic approach by collating all transmission chains and looking at the subtle variations in each of the reports that the evolution of the narrative is revealed starting with the Prophet’s fear of that his marriage would be slammed by Zaynab (rA) and doing it following the Qur’anic commandment to perform the marriage in a specific manner as he desired the marriage, and finally his total adoration for Zaynab (rA) and his joyous acceptance of the Qur’anic approval of the marriage, all due to a single glance at Zaynab (rA) which was precisely similar to Dawud’s view in Bathsheba within the Bible. The narrative, which was already being circulated among racial raconteurs who are reputable written by the author, was later written in the Tafsirliterature by a small group of more discerning Qur’an commentators.

A story of love that was preserved for eternity, and disguised as reality was birthed.

Notes

1 For instance, Washington Irving, Mahomet and His Successors (New York The Cooperative Publishing Society, 1849) 141-42 William Muir, The Life of Mahomet (London: Smith, Elder and Co. 1861) 3:231 David Margoliouth, Mohammed and the Rise of Islam (New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons 1905), 321-21; William Tisdall, The Religion of the Crescent or Islam: Its strength, its weakness and Origin, its influence (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge 1895) 171; Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1971) 205-8. Nabia Abbott Aishah the Beloved One of Mohammed (London: Saqi Books 1998) 16-18. Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Times (New York, Harper Press, 2007) 163. The most well-known Western biography of Muhammad who challenged about the historical authenticity of the romantic narrative can be found in Montgomery Watt, who situated the incident in the complete setting of the social reforms the Prophet was trying to bring about. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1956), 282-83. Recently, Wilferd Madelung has also challenged this story. Wilferd Madelung “Social Legislation in Surat al-Ahzab,” in Islam and Globalization The Future of Islam: Historical and Contemporary Views (Proceedings from the 25th Congress of L’Union Europeenne des Arabisants et Islamisants), Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 226 (Leuven: Peeters, 2013), 193-203.

2. David Powers intimates that the work of Ibn Ishaq Kitab al-maghazidoes not exist in entirety and is predominantly in the work by Abu Muhammad ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Hisham, who was adamantly able to expurgate some of the less appealing parts of Ibn Ishaq’s writings, it is probable the case that Ibn Hisham also bowdlerized the love-struck story. David Powers, Zayd, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014), 15. But as Sean Anthony notes in his critical review of the book Powers monograph, the love-story is not present in the Ibn Hisham’s version of Ibn Ishaq, but in all three of the surviving versions from IbnIshaq’s Maghazi that is, the ones of Ziyad al-Bakkai Yunus Ibn Bukayr, and Salamah ibn al Fadl. So, the simple reference to the love story that Ibn Hisham and the other three consistently make about Zaynab’s marriage ceremony but without any mention of the love story is a faithful reinterpretation of the original version by Ibn Ishaq. Sean Anthony, Review of Qur’anic Research1 (2015) 1- 5 (online pagination).

3 Tor Andrae, Mohammed: Sein Leben und Glaube, (Gottingen: Vanderhoek and Ruprecht, 1932), 124-125; Rodinson, Muhammad, 205-8.

4 Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Zad al-ma’ad fi hadi khayr al-‘ibad, ed. Shu’ayb al-Arnaut, ‘Ab the Arnaut (Beirut: Mu`assasat al-Risalah, 1998) 4:244-46; Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah al-Da wa al-dawa (Mecca Dar al-‘Alim al Fawaid 2008) 528, 554-55. See also, Abu Ishaq al-Tha’labi, al-Kashf wa al-bayan ‘an tafsir al-Qur’an (Jeddah: Dar al-Tafsir: 2015); Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Qurtubi, al-Jami‘ li-ahkam al-Qur’an,ed. ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki (Beirut: Mu`assasat al-Risalah, 2006), 17:153-58; Shibli al-Nu’mani, Siratun Nabi (Lahore: Darul Ishaat, 2003), 2:351-54; Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad (United States: American Trust Publications, 1976), 275-89; Idris Kandehlawi, Siratul Mustafa (Karachi: Zam Zam Publishers, 2015), 3:306-10; Abu al-A’la al-Mawdudi, Tafhim al-Qur’an (Lahore: Tarjuman al-Qur’an, n.d.), 4:99-101; Muhammad ‘Ali al-Sabuni, Safwat al-tafasir (Beirut: Dar al-Qur’an al-Karim, 1981), 2:527; Adil Salahi, Muhammad: Man and Prophet (Leicestershire: The Islamic Foundation, 2014), 487-94.

5 Among the authors who disdain any mention of the narrative today is Safiur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri and al-Raheeq Al-Makh (Saudi Arabia: Maktaba Darussalam, 1979) and Abul Hasan ‘Ali Nadwi Prophet of Mercy (London: Turath Publishing, 2014) and ‘Ali Muhammad as-Sallaabee: The Noble Life of the Prophet (Saudi Arabia: Maktaba Darussalam, 2005).

6 Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Adhim (Riyadh: Dar Tayba lil-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’, 1997), 6:425, 8:48.

7 Al-Qadi ‘Iyad, al-Shifa` bi-ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa, (Beirut: Dar al-kitab al-‘arabi, 1984), 876-879; Ahmad ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-bari bi sharh sahih al-Bukhari, ed. Shu’ayb al-Arna`ut, (Beirut: al-Risalah al-‘Alamiyyah, 2013), 14:158-159.

8 Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari: Jami’ al-bayan ‘an ta`wil ay al-Qur’an, ed. Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki (Cairo: Hijr 2001) 19:116; Abu al-Layth Al-Samarqandi, Bahr al-‘ Ulum(Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah 1993) 3:51-53. Martin Lings, Muhammad His Life based on the Oldest Sources(Rochester: Inner Traditions, 1983) 213-13.

9 Yasir Qadhi, “Seerah of Prophet Muhammad 69 – The Prophet’s Marriage to Zaynab,” Yasir Qadhi, YouTube video, November 18, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbaorsGGFio; Yasir Qadhi, “Mothers of the Believers pt. 12 Zaynab bint Jahsh,” Memphis Islamic Center, YouTube video, August 5, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuguiukqJCQ&t=2892s. Qadhi says that the stories of the love story are so commonplace that they’re multi-tassilaq(i.e. the mass transmission of information in order to provide evidence of epistemological validity of the historicality of the event). In addition, ‘Aishah’s Abd al-Rah (commonly called as her pseudonym Bint al-Shati`) claims like Qadhi that the lovetruck story shows the Prophet’s human nature and ‘Aishah’s ‘Abd al-Rah Bint al-Shati`, Nisa al-nabi, (Beirut: Dar al-kutub al’ilmiyya in 1979) 161.

10 Muhammad Hamidullah, Le Prophete de l’Islam: Sa vie, son oeuvre (Paris: El Falah, 1959), 454-455.

11 Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 2003), 3:576-78.

12 This means that report that is fabricated, weak and reports that are derived of the same source can’t be used to confirm one another or raise the grade of a particular hadith, even if slightly flawed reports that have a multitude of sources can be used to support this. This is because of obvious reasons. Two fake reports do not add any epistemological significance to a document even though they contain identical information, especially in the case of the same report that was fabricated. This is exemplified by the love story, whose multiple transmissions have the same origin and will be proved in the future. This is the reason why the mutawatirreports need a majority of transmitters at every level of the isnad. All the accounts of the love story do not contain the singleeyewitness and, with the exception of one is missing an narrator in the first century following the death of the Prophet which is why the claim that has been recently made that all of these reports are mukhatiris in the end is a lie. Ibn al-Salah al-Shahrazuri, Muqaddimah, ed. Nur al-Din ‘Itr (Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 1986), 33-35; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Nuzhat al-nazar, ed. Nur al-Din ‘Itr (Karachi: Maktabat al-Bushra, 2011),60-61; Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-rawi fi sharh Taqrib al-Nawawi, ed. Muhammad’s ‘Awwamah (Jeddah as well as Medina: Dar al-Minhaj and Dar al-Yusr, 2016) 3:72-76.

13 The Prophet travelled to Zaynab’s residence (fa dakhala ‘ala Zaynab bint Jahsh) to propose to her on behalf of Zayd however she declined. After he asked her once more she asked him “Oh Messenger of Allah, are you commanding me regarding my own [marriage], and I am a member of my people and also your cousin?” Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari 19:112-13. It is important to note that the report isnadincludes the narrators accused of impugning the report, however there are additional distinct narrations supporting it which reveal the interactions between Zaynab with the Prophet with Zaynab in the days prior to her marriage to Zayd. See additionally, ‘Ali ibn ‘Umar al-Daraqutni, Sunan al-Daraqutni, ed. Shu’ayb al-Arnaut (Beirut Muassasat al Risalah, 2004) 4:461-62, hadith 3796. Ahmad ibn al-Husayn al -Bayhaqi Sunan al-kabir in ed. ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki (Cairo: Markaz li’l Buhuth wa al-Dirasat al-‘Arabiyyah wa al-Islamiyyah, 2011), 14:176-77, hadith 13896.

14 Muhammad Sa’d mentions the fact that Zaynab aged 53 old at the time of her age when she passed away in 20/652. She also mentions that she was married to Prophet Muhammad in 5/637, which was when she was 38 years old. Ibn Sa’d also cites an inscription from ‘Uthman ibn ‘Abd Allah that she was 35 years old at her time of wedding. Muhammad ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, ed. ‘Ali Muhammad ‘Umar (Cairo: al-Nashir Maktabat al-Khanji, 2001), 10:111. It is also worth noting the hadiths which mention Khadijah being 28 years old at the time of her aged at the moment she was married with the Prophet even though the most common belief is that she was aged 40. If Khadijah was indeed 28, this would make Zaynab as the oldest of the wives of the Prophet when she was in marriage to him. Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir10:18.

15 Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 19:112-15; Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, al-Dur al-manthur fi al-tafsir al-ma`thur, ed. ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd-al Muhsin (Cairo: Markaz li’l Buhuth wa al-Dirasat al-‘Arabiyyah wa al-Islamiyyah, 2003), 12:49.

16 Zaynab stated her initial refusal to wed Zayd in the presence of Prophet by saying, “I am of superior stock than he (ana khayrun minhu hasaban).” Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 19:113; al-Suyuti. Al-Dur manthur 12:49. The narration isnadis is also faulty and includes the discredited transmitters.

17 ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-San’ani, Tafsir ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-San’ani (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 1999), 3:40, hadith 2345; al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 19:113.

18 Farada Allahu Lahcan be read in two different ways, according to Abu Mansur al Maturidi in his exegesis that Allah has commanded and required to marry or allowed and authorized the wedding. The Arabic word farada could encompass both meanings, but the majority of exegetes have understood the word as something that is permissible according to the lexical interpretation. Ibn Kathir appears to favor the view that it encompasses each meaning (fima ahalla lahu , amruhu bihi min Zaynab) and so did Mulla Al-Qari and others Abu Mansur al-Maturidi Tawilat ahl al sunnah (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah 2005) 8:393 Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al’Adhim, 6:427. Mulla ‘Ali al Qari, Sharh al-Shifa li’l Qadi ‘Iyad (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah 2001) 2:348.

19 Al-Sabuni, Safwat al-tafasir, 2:527; Muhammad ‘Ali al-Sabuni, al-Nubuwwah wa al-anbiya` (Damascus: Maktabat al-Ghazali, 1985), 100; Salahi, Muhammad, 489.

20Al-Tirmidhi, Sunan al-Tirmidhi, ed. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf (Beirut: Dar-al-Gharb al-Islami, 1996) 5:264-65. Hadiths 3207 3, 3208.

21 For example’Umar ibn al-Khattab’s well-known resistance to the Hudaybiyah treaty as well as Ubay Ka’b’s doubts about the Qur’anic versions ( ahruf).

22 “Our sole point of surprise is in that revelations made by Mahomet continued to be seen by his followers as divine messages from the Almighty at the time they were so clearly designed to safeguard his own goals and serve his desires for evil. There are none of the doubts or doubts, and we are able to be sure that we can attribute the trustful and confident attitude among his adherents to total dominance of his mind over everyone those who were under its the influence of his.” William Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 3:231.

23 The reason for the Prophet’s recognition of his wedding with Zaynab is not mentioned from any original texts however, there exist three ways of revelation that are plausible. The Prophet’s instruction to Zayd to keep the marriage may be read in a variety of ways, depending on the situations. One possibility is that it was an indirect revelation wherein Allah encouraged the Prophet by informing him of his impending marriage Zaynab at the time that Zayd approached him to request divorce. A person as shrewd as the Prophet might have anticipated the need to marry Zaynab, based on Allah’s habit of resolving misperceptions by having His prophets be a part of the corrective actions for that social issue and the inspiration of Allah’s might not have come from a an official revelation, but instead by guiding the Prophet’s brain to this conclusion on the basis of his own logic. In this instance the divinely-ordained obligation to marry Zaynab occurred following an announcement of al-Ahzab37 that spelled out the wedding. So, the Prophet’s counsel to Zayd could have been his method of avoiding the possibility of having to wed her to avoid the chaos that might ensue-a possibility that he could have anticipated using his own intuition (albeit in the form of divine inspiration) instead of through the direct revelation.

Another possibility is that Allah immediately and clearly informed the Prophet about his imminent marriage to Zaynab via a the formal revelation. He also directed to fulfill the prophecy given to the Prophet by committing himself to wed Zaynab. In this scenario the imperative could be predated the divorce of Zaynab with Zayd. In this case was likely to have been aware of Allah’s commands, unlike the first instance. This is the opinion of ‘Ali Zayn al’Abidin the al-Suddi, Qadi ‘Iyad and many others. If he were forced to marry a woman The Prophet was faced with three options to fulfill the obligation. One option would be to instruct Zayd to disengage from his spouse in order to fulfill Allah’s directive. The instruction to a married person to break up with his wife in order that he could get married was obviously not the most appropriate method to carry the instructions of Allah. In reality, Zayd was already involved in marital conflict with his wife and was by himself to request divorce. The Prophet was therefore confronted with another alternative to comply with the commandment to suggest a divorce, so that he could get married in place of Zayd. The possibility would be unworthy for someone with the Prophet’s shy nature so he decided to go to pursue a third option. This was to tell Zayd to keep his marriage and that the Prophet played none of the role in the divorce that he was certain would result. The Prophet was likely to marry Zaynab in a moment that was more favorable, after Zayd took the decision to divorce of his own choice, that the Prophet was aware of as just a matter of time when it came. The Prophet probably thought that encouraging Zayd to get divorced from Zaynab in order to make his marriage possible is not the most wise method. In addition, his advice was in line with his mandate to give advice (in this instance, the protection of the marriage ceremony as a sacred institution) regardless of whether his suggestion was followed. In this case the advice he gave was valid, (and also, it must be mentioned, it was the same advice would have been offered even without any order) with the exception that the Prophet’s advice was also motivated by a fear of the negative consequences that could arise-both because the Prophet had advised divorce from one of the women was later married as well as the fact that he was married to his ex-wife from his adoption son. This concern of his that caused his condemnation by the Qur’an. Notably, his delay in the completion of the divine directive to marry Zaynab just after Zayd divorced herself was in his discretionary limitations as an ordained messenger of Allah. The Prophet did use this authority at other times throughout his life. This is manifested in the Qur’an where Allah enjoins a number of injunctions as well as in hadiths where the Prophet expounded on some directive that he was responsible for discharging-directives that clearly did not warrant prompt action. Instead, they were open edicts to be followed in the most prudent date, location and manner, as established by the Prophet’s judgement.

A third option, proposed by Abu al-A’la Al-Mawdudi is related to the meaning of Allah’s order. If Allah’s command on the Prophet’s behalf was based on the conditionsof the condition ofZayd’s separation of Zaynab (i.e. the Prophet is only legally bound to wed Zaynab shouldZayd separated from her) It is possible that the Prophet be attempting to delay the divorce so that he could keep the obligation out of the first in the first place. In all these situations the Prophet’s counsel for Zayd falls within the bounds of his prophetic discretion and the reason for his condemnation within the Qur’an is not the advice he gave to Zayd in itself but rather the motivation for his advice is his displeasure with the anger that might result from the marriage. Abu al-A’la Al-Mawdudi Tafhim the Qur’an 4:101.

24 The chains of transmitters are portrayed by the individual links of the isnad divided by the common word “from.” Therefore, in the hadith of Anas, “Hammad ibn Zayd from Thabit from Anas ibn Malik” refers to the fact the fact that Hammad ibn Zayd received a report from Thabit and then got the information from Anas ibn Malik and it goes on. The traditional Arabic terminology for transmission, along with their various variation ( haddathana, akhbarana ballaghana ‘ an, etc. ) important in the eyes of people who consider themselves a hadithexpert and are not distinguished in the translation provided in order to keep it short.

25 The language here is unclear and could be understood in different ways. However, the sequence of events that occur in this narrative–that Zaynab was seen by the Prophet after which he said, fa ka dakhalahu annahusuggests that Prophet felt an emotion. That is in line with the interpretation of other exegetes , such as Ibn Kathir and al-Qurtubi, who disproved the hadith as a source of evidence.

26 Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad al-Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, ed. Shu’ayb al-Arnaut (Beirut Muassasat al-Risalah 1995) 19:492, hadith 12512.

27 Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, 10:98-101; al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Rasul wa al-muluk (Cairo, Dar al Ma’arif, 1967), 2:562-64; al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn, Kitab ma’rifat al-sahabah (Beirut: Dar al-Ta`sil, 2014), 7:50, hadith 6955.

28 Al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Rasul wa al-muluk, 2:562-64, 1/1461; al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 19:116.

29 Ibn Hajar al-Haythami explains within his Majma’ al-Zawaidthat even though al-Tabarani claims that Zaynab was a follower of the Prophet In other versions, it is stated the fact that it was Umm Salamah bint Abi Umayyah who claimed that she listened to the Prophet and heard him praising Allah, “the turner of hearts.” This could be a mistake, since Umm Salamah is featured nowhere in the report. It is possible that Ibn Hajar al-Haythami had access to different sources, but the other compilers I know of who refer to this specific report this isn’tall include Zaynab saying this (Ibn Abi’Asim Al-Ahad wa al-mathani and Abu Nu’aym’s popular Ma’ rifat al-sahabah). If the hadith HTML0were authentically reported by Umm Salamah it is a further proof of the absurdity of the narration. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami Majma’ al-zawaid wa’manba’ u al-fawa`id(Jeddah: Dar al-Minhaj, 2015) 18:709, hadith number 15338.

30 Sulayman ibn Ahmad al-Tabarani, Mu’jam al-kabir (Cairo Maktabat Ibn Taymiyyah 1983) 24:44. It is also reported by Abu Nu’aym Al-Isbahani using the same isnad as the book Marifat al-sahabah. Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani, Ma’rifat al-sahabah (Riyadh: Dar al-Watan li al-Nashr, 1998), 3224, hadith 7423.

31 Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil fi al-du’afa` (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Rushd, 2013); 5:402, hadith 7816; Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Jabbar al-‘Utaridi, Kitab al-siyar wa al-maghazi, ed. Suhayl Zakkar (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1978), 262. Yunus Bukayr has made numerous additional information to his account of Ibn Ishaq, which are called ziyadat almaghazi. The truth the fact that Yunus found himself having to search for the love-struck story, which evaded Ibn Ishaq establishes furthermore that Ibn Ishaq would have been ignorant of the story. This explains why it wasn’t never shared via Yunus as well as any one of the other pupils of Ibn Ishaq’s (see Footnote 2.). It was also not transmitted by al-Tabari , a pupil of Ibn Ishaq who would often transmit from Ibn Ishaq via his own isnads . For additional information about the numerous studies of Ibn Hashaq’s work, consult Sean Anthony’s book on the earliest Islamic historic sources. Sean Anthony, Muhammad and the Empires of Faith(Oakland: University of California Press, 2020).

32 Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 19:116; al-San’ani, Tafsir ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-San’ani, 3:41, hadith 2346.

33 Al-Tabarani, Mu’jam al-kabir, 24:42; Ibn Abi Hatim al-Razi, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Adhim (Riyadh: Maktabah Nizar Mustafa al-Baz, 1997), 9:3136, hadith 17693.

34 Al-Tabarani, Mu’jam al-kabir, 24:43.

35 Muqatil ibn Sulayman, Tafsir Muqatil ibn Sulayman (Beirut: Dar Ihya` al-Turath, 2002), 3:491-93; al-Qurtubi, al-Jami’ li ahkam al-Qur’an, 17:156.

36 Al-Tha’labi, al-Kashf, 8:48. It is not surprising that Ibn ‘Abbas’s supposed expository is also quoted by al-Baghawi, but without an Isnadin his more well-known version of al-Tha’labi’s exegesis Ma’alim al Tanzil. Given the Tafsirwork’s popularity and its ubiquity, it is through the reading of al-Baghawi that the idea that Ibn Abbas was the one who endorsed the love-struck story is likely to come from. Al-Baghawi, Tafsir al-Baghawi: Ma’alim al-tanzil (Riyadh: Dar Tayba, 1989), 6:355.

37 Al-Suyuti, al-Dur al-manthur, 12:60.

38 Muhammad ibn Isma’il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-tawhid (Beirut: Dar al-Ta`sil, 2012), 9:337, hadith 7415; al-Tirmidhi, Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 5:264-65, hadiths 3207, 3208.

39 Muslim Ibn al-Hajjaj Sahih Muslim(Beirut Beirut: Dar al-Tasil, 2014.) 4:45 Hadith 1450.

40 Al-Razi, Tafsir al-Qur’an Al-‘Adhim, 9:3137, hadith 17695.

41 Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 19:116; al-Bayhaqi, Dala’il al-nubuwwa (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 1988), 3:466.

42 Al-Tha’labi, al-Kashf, 21:458-60.

43 Al-Razi, Tafsir al-Qur’an al ‘Adhim, 9:3137, hadith 17696.

44 Other hadiths Other hadithsmention her testimony of her marriage to Zayd and her divorce later on. They confirm that she did not feel any feelings that the Prophet might have felt: “I abused [Zayd] verbally, and I complained in front of the Prophet. However, the Prophet said to him , ‘Hold on for your beloved wife, and trust Allah. But, Zayd told him, I been divorced from the couple.'” This account is a testimony to Zaynab’s understanding the Prophet’s role of acting as mediator in his guidance to Zayd and she was not even the slightest doubtful of any love affair that the Prophet might or may not have had. This report isnad has a few flaws regarding the form of its isnad but it contains multiple transmissions which connect direct into Zaynab with an uninterrupted chain of transmitters that connect Madhkur, her patron. Madhkur, in contrast to the transmissions from the love-struck story that are mentioned about Zaynab through transmitters living for a 100 years following her passing. Al-Daraqutni, Sunan al-Daraqutni, 4:461-62, hadith 3796; al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-kabir, ed. ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki (Cairo: Markaz li’l Buhuth wa al-Dirasat al-‘Arabiyyah wa al-Islamiyyah, 2011), 14:176-77, hadith 13896; Abu Nu’aym al-Isfahani, Hilyat al-awliya` wa tabaqat al-asfiya` (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al ‘Ilmiyyah, 1988), 2:51-52; Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, 10:99.

45 The Prophet was asked by the Prophet to have ‘Aisha’s wedding hand and Abu Bakr responded, “[Even though] I am your brother?” The Prophet responded, “Rather, you are my brother in Allah’s book and religion. It is legal and I am able to get married.” Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-nikah 7:14. hadith #5071. A condensed version of the events as reported by al-Bukhari is elaborated in a narrative which is told by Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad:After Khadija bint Khuwaylid passed away, Khawlah bint Hakim suggested to the Prophet to marry ‘Aisha. He then allowed her to ask for his permission. Khawlah was taken to Abu Bakr’s home and declared, “Umm Ruman! What a blessing and excellence has Allah bestowed on You!” So Umm Ruman inquired, “And what is that?” Khawlah said, “The Messenger of Allah has asked me to make a proposal on his behalf to ‘Aisha.” Umm Ruman replied, “Wait until Abu Bakr returns.” When Abu Bakr arrived, Khawlah informed him of the Prophet’s suggestion. Abu Bakr asked, “Is she befitting for him (wa hal tasluhu lahu)? Because she is the sister of the brother he is.” Khawla then returned to the Prophet, and told him what Abu Bakr had said to her. To which she responded “Return back to Abu Bakr and say to him that I am your brother, just as it is my brothers however, in Islam. Your daughter is the right one to my needs ( wa ibnatuka tasluhu si ).'” Ibn Hanbal, Musnad al-Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, 42:501-4, hadith 25769. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani graded this more in-depth hadith by Ibn Hanbal as sound ( hasan); Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-bari 11:429. The Prophet also had to assure Asma’ of ‘Umays that the legality of ‘Ali’s marriage was valid for his daughter Fatima for marriage, something Asma’ was skeptical about the validity of since Ali is the Prophet’s “brother.” ‘Abd al-Razzaq Al-San’ani Musannaf, Kitab al-maghazi (Beirut Dar al-Tasil 2015) 5:114, hadith 10548.

46 Ibn al-Hajjaj, Sahih Muslim,4:45, hadith 1450.

47 Yusuf al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal fi asma al-rijal, ed. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf (Beirut: Mu`assasat al-Risala, 2002), 29:176-78.

48 Muammal recounts from Hammad Ibn Zayd’s Thabit in Anas in this version. Other narrators in addition to Muammal who narrate the exact hadith as Hammad Ibn Zayd of Thabit from Anas however, without the passage of the Prophet’s visit Zayd Mu’alla ibn Mansur Ahmad ibn ‘Abdah al Dabbi, Muhammad ibn Sulayman, ‘Affan Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr al Muqaddami ‘Aram Abu al-Nu’man and Muhammad ibn al Fadl, by al-Bukhari and al-Tirmidhi. Al-Nasai (in al-Kubra), Ibn Hibban, al-Bayhaqi Al-Tabarani the ‘Abd ibn Hulayd, according to. Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-tafsir, 6:320, hadith 4769; al-Tirmidhi, Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 5:266, hadith 3212; al-Nasa`i, Sunan al-kubra, ed. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf (Beirut: Mu`assasat al-Risala, 2001), 10:220, hadith 11343; Ibn Hibban, Sahih Ibn Hibban, ed. Shu’ayb al-`Arna`ut (Beirut, Mu`assasat al-Risalah, 1988), 15:519, hadith 7045; al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-kabir, Kitab al-nikah, ed. ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki (Cairo: Hijr, 2011), 13:524, hadith 13491; al-Tabarani, Mu’jam al-kabir, 24:43; ‘Abd ibn Humayd, al-Muntakhab min musnad ‘Abd ibn Humayd (Riyadh: Dar Balnasiyyah, 2002), 2:234, hadith 1205.

49 Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib (Beirut, Mu`assasat al-Risalah, 2014), 2:323-24.

50 Al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal, 17:114-17.

51 Al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal, 25:144.

52 Al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal, 29:171-73.

53 Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-tahdhib (Riyadh: Dar al-‘Asamah, 2000), 987.

54 I was unable to locate him by the same name within al-Mizzi’s Tahdhib al-kamal Ibn Hajar’s Lisan al-mizan or Ibn ‘Adi’s al-Du’afa, al’Ijli’s Al-wa al-matrukun, Ibn Abihatim al-Razi’s book al-Jar wa al-ta’dil and Ibn Hibban’s al – as well as al-Daraqutni’s al Du’afa al-matrukun and al-Nasai’s al Du wa al-matrukun, or even in Khatib al-Baghdadi’s Tarikh Baghdad. The hadith at issue is in the Mu’jam of al-Tabarani’s al-kabir. The editor of the book, Hamdi ‘Abd al-Majid al-Salafi is noted in his footnotes to the work that he was unable to determine the authenticity or identity of the narration. Be aware that al-Bukhari is also a reference to this narrator through the transmission of an identical hadith that isin his biographical Encyclopedia Tarikh al-kabir. It is based on the same wasnadas al-Tabarani’s with the only difference is that he refers to the ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Al-Mun the ‘Abd Al-Rahman ibn Allah musayyab . His account is also reduced. (“The Prophet visited the home in the home of Zayd the Prophet ibn Haritha and asked permission to be allowed to enter]. Zaynab granted him permission however, the Prophet walked away. Zaynab says that I followed him and overheard him say, “Blessed is Allah, the One who causes hearts to turn!”) It is interesting to note that there are no references to Zaynab’s locks falling out or other specifics that can be mentioned in the al-Tabarani version. It’s unclear to me why al-Tabarani Abu Nu’aym Al-Isbahani, or Ibn Hajar al-Haythami refer him as ‘Abd Al-Rahman Ibn al-Munib whereas al Bukhari does not. However, regardless of the title of the narrator his credibility and position as a transmissionist of hadith HTML0remains undetermined; al-Bukhari himself only mentions his name and this hadith as an example among his radio transmissions from Tarikh al-kabir and doesn’t comment on his credibility. In addition, this transmitter is unreferenced in many of the biographical encyclopedias for the hadith The same is true forcritics as well as the name’Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Al-Mussayy. I was able only to locate the name found in the Ibn hibban’s al-Thiqat, where there is no evidence to believe that he is reliable, and says, “He narrated from Abu Bakr ibn Sulayman ibn Abi Hathmah who in turn narrated from Musa ibn Ya’qub.” The innocuous mention of a narrator isn’t enough to explain why no other of the famous hadith that are cited in thecritics are aware of his identity. Ibn Hibban appears to identify the person only through the specific hasith HTML3of Zaynab instead of by any personal connection. In any event the flaw of the narration is not based on the identity of ‘Abd al Rahman Ibn al-Munib, but rather on the acknowledged weaknesses of other transmitters, as Ibn hajar al-Haythami outlines in his Majma’ al-zawaid. Al-Bukhari, Tarikh al-kabir (Hyderabad Da’irat al’Ma’arif al’Uthmaniyyah 1958) 5:02 entry 986; Al-Haythami, Majma’ al-zawa`id, 18:709; hadith 15338. Ibn Hibban, Kitab al-thiqat (Hyderabad Dairat Al-Ma’arif Al-Uthmaniyyah 1973) 7:82.

55 Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Lisan al-Mizan, ed. ‘Abd al-Fattah AbuGhuddah (Beirut: Maktabat al-Matbu’at al-Islamiyyah), 4:187 entry 3668; Entry 3668.Ibn ‘Adi al-Kamil f du’afa 5:402 Hadith 7816.

56 Al-Razi, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Adhim, 1:14.

557 ‘Abd ibn Husayd wrote two works that include his Musnadand his Tafsirwork. The latter is included in Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani’s compilation of eight lesser-known mu’nads, entitled al-Matalib Al-‘aliyah Bi Zawaid al-masanid al-thamaniyain that ‘Abd ibn Husayd’s entire musnadis included. The hadith that is the basis ofof ‘Ikrimah does not appear in the work of Ibn Hajar’s al-Matalibhowever. It is possible that al-Suyuti stumbled across it in Ibn Humayd’s Tafsirwork as well, and I’m not aware that it is accessible and printed. Dr. Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd Al-Muhsin al-Turki, the expert in tafsir and editor of manuscripts for a variety of works on tafsir such as those of al-Tabari, al-Qurtubi, and al-Su the al-Dur al manthur, does not seem to be able to find the source of this wasith, since his al-Dur edition contains annotations that include crossed-references (takhrij) of the majority of hadiths which are not explicitly referred to specific works by al-Suyuti’s text in the work, however he didn’t do that in this case. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Matalib al-‘aliyah bi zawa`id al-masanid al-thamaniya (Riyadh: Dar al-‘Asamah and Dar al-Ghayth, 1998); al-Suyuti, al-Dur al-manthur, 12:60-61.

58 Al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal, 26:639-42.

59 Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tarikh madinat al-salam, ed. Bashshar “Awwad Ma’ruf” (Beirut Dar al-Gharb Al-Islami 2001) 10:40; al-Tha’labi, al-Kashf, 21:460; Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi, Siyar al-nubala, a’lam’ in edited. Shu’ayb al-`Arna`ut (Beirut, Mu`assasat al-Risalah, 1982), 17:383-84.

60 Watt, Muhammad at Medina, 282-83.

61Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-tafsir, 6:86-87 and 9:62, hadiths 4558, 6945; Abu Dawud al-Sijistani, Sunan Abi Dawud, Kitab al-nikah, ed. Shu’ayb Al-Arnaut (Beirut, Dar al-Risalah al-‘Alamiyyah 2009) 3:431 and 2089, hadith.

The Surat al-Nisa’ was probably disclosed over several years, spanning from 3/624 until 4/625 in accordance with the many topics it discusses and includes instructions on the legacy to the martyrs from Uhud which took place in 3/624. Also, instructions on prayer during war, that was made public in the Expedition of Dhat al-Riqa’which occurred in 4/625 and a warning issued to people of Banu Nadir, prior to their exile, also in 4/625. See also’Abd Al-Razzaq Husayn Ahmad, Al-makki wa al-madani fi al Quran al-karim, (Cairo: Dar Ibn ‘Affan 1999) 55, 77 150, 174, and 55

63 Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-nikah, 7:48, hadith 5128; al-Sijistani, Sunan Abi Dawud, Kitab al-nikah, 3:436, hadith 2096; Ibn Majah, Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-nikah (Beirut: Dar al-Ta`sil, 2014), 286-87, hadiths 1860-63.

64 Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-nikah, 7:33, hadith 5102; Ibn Majah, Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-nikah, 3:290-91, hadiths 1871-73.

65 For a more contemporary study of the pre-Islamic adoption process of the concept, refer to Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s “Al-istilhaq wa Al-tabanni fi il-Shari’ah alIslamiyyah, (Cairo: Maktab al-Wahbah 2000).

66 ‘Aishah described the different types of sexual relationships that were prevalent in Arabia before the time of Islam. The most notable was a man directing his wife to engage in sexual relations with a nobleman, so that she would be able to become pregnant with an infant of noble blood that he could then lay claim. Furthermore, a woman could have sexual relations in a group of up to ten males together, and if she gave the birth of a child she would attribute its lineage in a arbitrary manner to any of the men. Finally, a woman could prostitute herself and later choose any one male who referred to her as the father of her child Al-Bukhari Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-nikah 7:41-43. Hadith 5117.

It is 67 Al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-faraid 8:432 and 33, hadiths 6777 and 78; also found in Bab al-manaqib, 4:499, hadith 3551; Ibn al Hajjaj, Sahih Muslim, 4:89-90, hadith 1481. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari bi sharh Sahih al-Bukhari and ed. Shu’ayb al-`Arna`ut (Beirut: al-Risalah al-‘Alamiyyah, 2013), 21:402.

68 Qur’an 2:228.

“69” The Arabic Language Academy define “da’i” as “someone whose lineage is suspected, someone whose lineage is ascribed to someone other than his father.” Edward William Lane defines it as “one who makes a claim in respect of a relationship, one who claims as his father a person who is not his father; or one who is claimed as a son by a person who is not his father.” Al-Mu’jam al’wasit (Cairo Maktabat al-Shuruq Al-Dawliyah 2004,) 287. Edward William Lane, the Arabic-English Lexicon (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society 2003) 3:885.

70 Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, 4:88-89.

71 Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, 3:149.

72 Qur’an 33:4-5.

73 Al-Qurtubi, al-Jami’ li-ahkam al-Qur’an, 17:58.

74 Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, 3:149.

75 Qur’an 108:3.

76 Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-tabaqat al-kabir, 3:40. It could be that the Prophet’s words were intended to emphasize a particular point rather than to emphasize some exceptions to the norm However, the absence of other instances of inheritance being left to adoptees indicates this is not to be the case.

77 Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh madinat Dimashq (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1995), 22:471-72; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Isabah fi tamyiz al-sahabah, ed. Al-Turki, ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Muhsin (Cairo: Markaz li’l Buhuth wa al-Dirasat al-‘Arabiyyah wa al-Islamiyyah, 2008), 2:114-15.

78 In addition to al-Miqdad ibn ‘Amr Other instances of people that were adopted as well as confederates , or customers include ‘Amir Ibn Rabi’ah, the confederate adopted son and adopted son from al-Khattab Ibn Nufayl (the parent of the ‘Umar who was al Khattab); Waqid ibn ‘Abd Allah the adopted son and client of al-Khattab. Salim his adoptive son of Abu Hudhayfah Ibn Utbah.

80 It was suggested by Ella Landau-Tasseron adoption might aid in attainment of confederacy in families, since the adoptees’ children were nearly always confederates with the adoptive. However, regardless of whether it is true however, the majority of confederates weren’t adopted children and were able to attain confederacy through different ways, which highlights the redundant nature tabanni. Tabanni. Ella Landau-Tasseron, “Adoption, Acknowledgement of Paternity and False Genealogical Claims in Arabian and Islamic Societies,” School of Oriental and African Studies 2 (2003): 169-92.

80 Ibn Hanbal, Musnad al-Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 19:492, hadith 12512.

81 The numbers were supplied by Muhammad Ibn Kha’b and, in actuality the Bible gives 700 wife and 300 concubines Solomon and numerous, but non-numbered wives for David. 1 Kings 11.

82 Al-Suyuti, al-Dur al-manthur, 12:58.

85 In a narrative that is rife with errors in fact and disdain, John of Damascus writes “Muhammad had a close friend named Zayd and he had a gorgeous wife with whom Muhammad loved. When they were having dinner in a circle, Muhammad said: ‘Oh I’m sorry, but God has given me the order to get divorced from your spouse. Zayd was divorced from her. A few days later Zayd told Zayd”Now, God has commanded me to seize her. After Zayd had taken her away and had committed adultery, Zayd came up withthe laws” to justify his adultery. John, Saint John of Damascus: Writings,trans. Frederic H. Chase (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1958), 157.

85 John’s writings reference a variety of Qur’anic chaptersthat is a sly way of mocking and deriding. This implies that he studied the Qur’an and that his remark about the Prophet’s sexual affair was malicious and insincere. However there are some Byzantine scholars have expressed doubt regarding whether John did indeed refer to the Qur’an and have suggested that it could have been interpolated later by Christians. Michael Bonner, Arab-Byzantine Relations in Early Islamic Times (New York: Routledge, 2017), 223.

85 Arthur Jeffery, “Ghevond’s Text of the Correspondence between ‘Umar II and Leo III,” The Harvard Theological Review, 37/4 (1944) 324. Leo III is believed to be somewhat familiar with al-Ahzab 37 is the only reference in this correspondence.

See , for example al-Suyuti Al-Dur al-manthur 12:436.

87 The record of ‘Ali’s verdict regarding transmitters involved in the Bathsheba affair is presented in a variety of exegeses which include those of al-Zamakhshariand al-Tha’labi as well as the al-Alusi and al-Qurtubi. It is believed that it was recorded by Sa’id Ibn al-Musayyab as well as al-Harith al’A ‘Ali. Both are august hadith and august hadithtransmitters. But Jamal al Din al-Zayla’i did not provide the original source of this information within the course of his Takhrij(hadith insourcing) study of Al-Zamakhshari’s tafsir although the scholar does not deny having knowledge of it. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, however clearly states in his abridgement of al Zayla’s work that he was unsuccessful in finding the source for the report. Al-Zayla’i, Takhrij al-ahadith wa al-athar (Saudi Arabia: Wazarah al-Shu’un al-Islamiyyah wa al-Awqaf wa al-Da’wah wa al-Irshad, 2003), 3:188; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Kafi al-shaf (Beirut: Dar Alim al-Ma’rifah, 2017), 142; al-Zamakhshari, Tafsir al-kashshaf (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’arif, 2009), 922; al-Alusi, Ruh al-ma’ani (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 2014), 12:178.

88 2 Samuel 23:34; 2 Samuel 12:1-6.

89 2 Samuel 12:1-13.

90 David Powers also acknowledges the resemblance between Zayd to Uriah The Hittite as depicted by the Bible. However, he goes more than what I am arguing in this article and claims inconclusively the Zayd’s entire life as told in Muslim sources of the past were concocted to serve various theological and political motives. He lays out a variety of commonalities and tropes that Muslims were drawn, not only with Uriah but as well with other Biblical figures like Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph and Dammesek Eliezer through various periods of Zayd’s existence. Although Powers does not seem to be concerned on Zayd’s historical background historicZayd (insofar as it is even possible to determine through Powers revisionism) since Powers is more concerned with the development of historiography around Zayd’s character, his arguments are worthy of consideration. One, Powers is unable to provide any concrete connection to his Biblical Parallels Muslim historians claimed to draw from. It is true that the Uriah parallel is convincing as a basis for the love story because the Ibn Jurayj, Qatadah also Muqatil (on whom further later) affirm that connection within their exegesis and exegesis, a connection that is in stark contrast to Powers Parallels. Furthermore, many of these connections are made up and exaggerated. For example, Powers likens Zayd’s rejection of his family to the Prophet after his father finds his presence in Mecca to Biblical Joseph whom Joseph sold into slavery but fought to return to his family. Zayd’s determination to stay with his master an important difference between his story and Joseph’s? In contrast, Uriah and Bathsheba’s resemblance is not distinct from Zayd as well as Zaynab in the romantic narrative. Then, Powers spends considerable efforts discussing the motives Muslim historians used to justify their fictional work. For a thorough analysis of his motives an interested reader should refer to the reviews of Walid Saleh and Sean Anthony’s review. David Powers, Muhammad Isn’t the Father of any Of Your Men(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press 2009.); Powers, Zayd; Walid Saleh, “Review Article: Muhammad is Not the Father of Any of Your Men,” Comparative Islamic Studies 6, no. 6.1-6.2 (December 29, 2011); Anthony, Review of Qur’anic Research, 1-5.

91 The woman’s name was varied in Muslim accounts. ‘Ali Ibn al-Hasan ib Asakir’s account, which he tracked through to Wahb ibn Munabbih for example, called her Sabi’ Bint Hanana Ibn ‘Asakir. Tarikh Madinat Dimashq 17:100.

92 Yusuf al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal, 18:338.

93 For example his opinions regarding and practice of the temporary marriage ( mut’ah). See Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi, Tadhkirat al-huffaz (Hyderabad: Da’irat al-Ma’arif al-Uthaaniyyah, 1954), 1:170-71.

1994 Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani, Ma’rifat al-sahabah, 3205. Hadith 7368. Abu Nu’aym unfortunately bundles Said ibn al-Musayyab’s narration from Qatadah along with a variety of other narrators and therefore it’s difficult to discern the part that is his. Abu Nu’aym does state, however, that the primary design of his report ( sulb al-hadith) is derived from the reports of the two. This report Ibn al-Musayyab states that al-Ahzab 38 was revealed due to the fact that the Prophet kept a thoughts or emotions within him and basically paraphrasing the verse since he doesn’t explicitly specify what the Prophet hid. According to Qatadah’s account, which is based on Ib al-Musayyab’s authority no explicit mention of the role of love in the marriage, just as Qatadah’s message in which he presented his own interpretation.

95 Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Adhim, 1:360; Muhammad Husayn al-Dhahabi, al-Isra’iliyyat fi al-tafsir wa al-hadith (Cairo: Maktabah Wahbah, 1990), 87-88.

96 Al-Daraqutni, al-Du’afa’ wa al-matrukun (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ma’arif, 1984), 371; Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-i’tidal fi naqd al-rijal (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah, n.d), 4/173-174; Ibn Hibban, al-Majruhin min al-Muhaddithin (Riyadh: Dar al-Sami’i, 2000), 2:347-49.

97 Ibn Hibban, al-Majruhin min al-muhaddithin, 2:347-49. Ze’ev Maghen suggests that the widespread disdain for Muqatil as a transmitter of hadith is due to the factof his telling of the lovetruck story first and, therefore can be described as unjustified animus. However, Maghen does not provide any proof to support his assertion. Maghen also is unable to explain the authenticity of other transmitters that also supported the Prophet’s obsession with Zaynab and Zaynab, like Qatadah as well as Ibn Jurayj as well as in accordance with the consensus of the hadith as well as the consensus ofcritics. In the same way, Ibn Hibban graded the unidentified hadith the unrecorded hadith oftransmitter ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Allah ibn al-Musayyab to be trustworthy even though he was a messenger of the lovetruck story (see the footnote 53). However, he also called Muqatil as a liar and forger. What is the reason that other transmitters not considered with the same cynicism that was given to Muqatil? After having analyzed Muqatil’s work and comparing his narrations to others from other hadith as well as othertransmitters and those related to the love story and a host of other transmitters, it can be said with certainty that those who believed in fakes to him were completely justifiable in their decision. Ze’ev Maghen, Virtues of the Flesh: Passion and Purity in Early Islamic Jurisprudence (London: Brill, 2005), 75-110.

The 98th chapter of Muqatil describes: Zayd Ibn Haritha demanded, “Prophet of Allah, propose on my behalf.” The Prophet asked him “Does any woman interest you?” He responded, “Zaynab bint Jahsh.” The Prophet warned him “I do not imagine that she will accept because she is nobler than that (la araha taf’alu annaha akramu min dhalika nafsan).” Zayd was insistent, “Prophet of Allah, maybe you can talk to her and inform me that you are the person who you most cherish. She is such a gorgeous woman that I am afraid she’d decline my offer and it could be very stressful for me!” Zayd then proceeded to ‘Ali and asked him to speak behalf of him in the name of the Prophet. He pleaded “Please go to the Prophet, for I do not think he would ever refuse a request from you!” Therefore, ‘Ali went along with Zayd before the Prophet The Prophet obliged and said: “I will do [what you ask] and be your representative to her family, ‘Ali.” . . . He went to them , and offered, “Truly, it would please me that you marry Zayd, so [accept him] for marriage.” The Prophet then gave them a dowry proposal consisting of ten gold coins 60 silver coins and a cloak blankets, coats of mail and shawls, fifty kilos ( mudd) (mudd)of food and ten loads of dates that he left together with Zayd. Ibn Sulayman, Tafsir Muqatil ibn Sulayman, 3:491-93.

99 Ibn Sulayman, Tafsir Muqatil ibn Sulayman, 3:496.

100 Ibn Sulayman, Tafsir Muqatil ibn Sulayman, 3:639-40; al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, 20:64-65.

101 Muqatil likely got his version of the Bathsheba affair from the al-Suddi newspaper which has the same information as Muqatil. Al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Rasul wa al-muluk, 20:66-67.

102 Al-Baghawi, Tafsir al-Baghawi, 6:355. There are numerous instances of Muqatil’s words being reprinted by historians and exegetes from the past in a literal manner, without credit to his original source. See, for instance, al-Halabi, Insan al-‘uyun fi sirat al-Amin al-Ma`mun (Egypt: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1964), 3:427.

103 Mujahid ibn Jabr, Tafsir al-Imam Mujahid ibn Jabr,(Dar al-Fikr al-Islami al-Hadithah 1989) 555; Al-Dahhak ibn Al-Muzahim, Tafsir al-Dahhak (Cairo: Dar al-Salam, 1999) 1:675.

in his defense of the historicality of the love story, Yasir Qadhi does not mention its obvious omission by earlier authorities like Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri and Ma’mar Ibn Rashid. However, he does address the omission of Ibn Ishaq by accusing him of not giving enough attention to women, and, consequently, the Prophet’s marriage. This is a false description of Ibn Ishaq by Qadhi, since Ibn Ishaq actually does refer to the Prophet’s marriagewith Zaynab however not the romantic narrative. Ibn Ishaq (in multiple recensions as well as Ibn Hisham’s) states that the Prophet was married to Zaynab who was married to Zayd but later is referring to the al-Ahzab verse as the text in which the story is referenced. The terse account of the wedding is instructive since it confirms that the early Muslims believed the al-Ahzab completely explained the events of the wedding without needing to add additional information. In addition, Ibn Ishaq actually does give careful attention to the marital problems that afflicted the Prophet, such as the whole sectionon women who were wives to the Prophet and a thorough explanation of the circumstances which led to the Prophet’s marriages to wives like Khadija of Khuwaylid, Juwayriya bint al-Harith, Safiyyah bint Huyay, and Maymuna bint al-Harith. In addition, he provides details on the slander against ‘Aisha as well as details regarding his daughters, including the decision of Zaynab, the Prophet’s daughter, in Medina as well as Banu ‘Abd al-Shams’s efforts to stop her from doing this. These are only some of the examples Ishaq cites, and many others can be mentioned with regard to prominent women who were part of the life of Prophet Muhammad. The assertion of Ibn Ishaq eschews acknowledging the Prophet’s marriage to Zaynab as well as women generally is way off from what is expected. Qadhi, “Mothers of the Believers, pt. 12 Zaynab bint Jahsh”; ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham, al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah (Beirut: Dar Ibn Hazm, 2009), 661.

105 Maghen, Virtues of the Flesh, 75-110; Kecia Ali, The Lives of Muhammad(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2014), 124-44. This ahistorical development has also been explicitly promoted by Yasir Qadhi in his talks in which he argues about the gradual development of a prudent Muslim reaction to the romantic narrative is subject to the same sampling bias that is present in Ali’s and Maghen’s. Qadhi, “Mothers of the Believers: Zaynab bint Jahsh.”

Internet Explorer 1.0. The author is grateful to Dr. Ovamir Anjum for drawing my attention to this issue.

707 The 107 format has many such examples to be supplied. Yahya Ibn Sa’id al-Qattan for example, wrote that one could write exegetical statements from people like al-Dahhak ibn alMuzahim, as well as the al-Layth of Abi Sulaym. They did not have the highest reliability of hadith in the field oftransmitters however, they were noted for their expository writing. Al-Bayhaqi, Dala’il al-nubuwwa, 1:36-37.

108 Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil fi al-du‘afa’, 1:298.

109 This is the case of al-Tabari too, for example, who gave two different reports on the Prophet’s marriage to Zaynab and didn’t clarify his personal version in contrast to other subjects in which he did.

110 Muhammad Idris al-Shafi’i Tafsir al-Imam Al-Shafi’i(Riyadh Dar al-Tadmuriyyah 2006) 1199.

111 This isn’t to say that every commentator did not believe in the lovetruck story. A few, as discussed below, did support it without even mention of the alternative narrative.

112 For example, Ibn Hibban provides an illustration of the love-struck narrative as a transmission from the unidentified Narrator Abu Bakr ibn Sulayman ibn Abi Hathmah. However, he does not include the narrative to his personal sirahwork. Refer to Footnote 54 for additional information. Ibn Hibban, al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah wa akhbar al-khulafa` (Beirut: Mu`assasat al-Kutub al-Thaqafiya, 1987).

113 Ibn Khayyat, Tarikh Khalifah ibn Khayyat (Riyadh: Dar Taybah, 1985); al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar, ed. Akram Diya` al-‘Umari, al-Muntakhab min kitab azwaj al-nabi, (Medina: Matba’ah al-Jami’ah al-Islamiyyah, 1981); Ibn Abi Bakr al-Khaythamah, al-Tarikh al-kabir, (Cairo: al-Faruq al-Hadithah li al-Taba’ah wa al-Nashr, 2006); Ibn Wadih al-Ya’qubi, Tarikh al-Ya’qubi (Beirut: Sharkah al-A’lami li al-Matbu’at, 2010); al-Qayrawani, al-Jami’ fi-l-sunan wa-l-adab wa-l-maghazi (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, 1990).

114 Al-Maturidi, Ta`wilat Ahl al-Sunnah, 8:393.

115 Notably the overwhelming majority writers are again exegetes, however, in contrast to al-Suyuti, they do not have the scholarly status of masters in the hadith in the hadithdisciplines. Al-Baydawi, Anwar al-tanzil wa asrar al-ta’wil (Beirut: Dar Ihya` al-Turath 1997) 4:232; Al-Mahalli and al-Suyuti Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Riyadh: Madar al-Watni li al-Nashr 2015) 423; Al-Halabi, Insan al-‘uyun fi sirat al-Amin al Mamun, 3:427. Tafsir Abi al-Su’ud (Beirut: Dar Ihya` al-Turath al-‘Arabi in 2010) 7:105. Lings, Muhammad, 211-213.