Muhammad (Arabic: مُحَمَّد, pronounced [muħammad]; c. 570 CE – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious, social, and political leader and the founder of Islam. According to Islamic doctrine, he was a prophet, sent to present and confirm the monotheistic teachings preached previously by Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other prophets.
The whole society of that time was relying on slavery as part and parcel of the social system. Islam brought the rules to decrease and eliminate slavery. The Prophet Muhammad (SAWA) had few slaves but he freed all of them.
Thank you for your question. The view of the Shia is that the ascent of the Prophet (saw) was bodily as well as spiritual, but that does not negate the possibility of certain parts of the ascension being purely spiritual as the body of the Prophet (saw) would remain in the plane that is suitable for a body during that particular part of the journey (even if that is not the corporeal world). So the ascent as a whole was bodily and spiritual.
May you always be successful.
Only Allah swt is All Knowing and no creation can know the reality of His essence. The Prophet Mohammad (sawa) was however given divinely inspired knowledge and revelation from Allah swt. He was also given knowledge of the unseen,
May Allah grant you success
The faith of the parents of the Prophet (SAWA) is a matter in which the majority of Muslim scholars have agreed that the parents of the Prophet were from the best of the believers.
Many evidences from the Holy Qur'an and authentic Hadith prove their faith.
In the Holy Qur'an in Surah ash-Shu'ara (26), verse 219, Allah (SWT) says "you're running on the believers who prostrate to Allah (SWT)".
Ibn Abbas narrated from the Prophet (SAW) that he said "the meaning of this verse is that Allah transferred me from person to person, from Prophet to Prophet until I became Prophet".
This hadith is mentioned in:
· Majma al-Zawa'id by Al-Haythami (vol 7, page 86)
· Musnad al-Bazzar
· Al-Majma' by al-Tabarani
Al-Suyuti in his book of Tafseer known as al-Durr Al-Manthur (vol 4, page 238), narrated that the Prophet (SAW) said "Allah (SWT) transferred me from pious fathers to pious mothers, all purified and noble and made me always in the best parents best grandparents".
Al-Kattani in his book Nazm al-Mutanathir Min al-Hadith al-Mutawatir (vol 1, page 190) narrated the hadith from the Prophet (SAWA) that "all the fathers and grandfathers and mothers and grandmothers of the Prophet (SAWA) were with the pure tawheed".
Bajuri in his hashiya on Jawharat al-Tawhid mentioned that the narrations that the parents of the Prophet (SAW) were all best of believers are unanimous (tawatur).
Those who claimed that the parents of the Prophet (SAW) will be in hellfire are cursed. There is a narration in Sunni books which is in Mawahib al-Jalil (vol 6, page 386). The narration says that Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi was asked by someone that a person had claimed "that the parents of the Prophet (SAW) will be in the hellfire - what do you say about him?" He said "he is cursed (mal'oon) because Allah mentions in the Holy Qur'an that those who hurt Allah (SWT) and the Prophet (SAW) are cursed in this world and the hereafer and they will be facing terrible and insulting punishment". Then he said "there is no hurting greater than claiming that his (SAW) parents are in the hellfire".
Al-Suyuti, the well known Sunni scholar, has written an entire book by the name of Al-ta'zim wa al-minna fi anna abaway an-nabi fi al-janna proving that the parents of the Prophet are in paradise. He mentioned in vol 1, page 25, that Jibra'il came to the Prophet (SAWA) and he told him "Allah is conveying salam to you and informing you that hellfire is forbidden on your fathers and your mothers and those who looked after you". "Your fathers" refers to Abdullah, "your mother" refers to Aamina and "those who looked after you" are Abu Talib and Faitma bint Asad.
The above quotations are from Sunni books only .
As far as Shia faith, no doubt we (the followers of Ahlul Bayt) believe that the parents of the Prophet (SAW) are not only believers but also from the best of believers.
We read in the ziyaaraat of our infallible Imams that all the grandfathers and grandmothers were purified and the best of believers in Allah (SWT).
Forgiveness of sins is in the hands of Allah (SWT) who gave the Prophet (SAWA) the greatest status of intercession ( Shafa'ah) and made it very clear in Quran that those who commit sinful acts should come to the Prophet so that he seeks forgiveness for them ( Had those who did wrong to themselves, come to you and begged for Allah's forgiveness, and the messenger had prayed for their forgiveness, they would have found Allah accepting their repentance and Merciful) Sura 4, Verse 64.
Short answer: The Qur'an and hadith teach us to respect other people, regardless of what they believe. However, they do not give an equal place to all beliefs or practices.
Long answer: While the Qur'an and hadith recognize several different religions, including Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism, they do not recognize the custom of worshipping idols in Mecca or Medina as a distinct religion.
As for whether the Arabs who worshipped idols in Mecca and Medina saw their customs as a distinct religion, it is difficult to say for sure, but there is no indication in the texts that they saw themselves as united as a single faith community or a single religion; appealing to idols was simply customary practice. They focused on tribal and ancestral identity, not religious identity. I am fairly sure that the term "wathaniyyah" was adopted after their time. In contrast, the Qur'an encourages replacing ancestral/tribal identity with a faith-based identity.
The concept of "religion" as we have it today (and as it is used in the English language) is rather modern. In fact, it is heavily rooted ins secularism. Everyone is expected to follow the same way of life (national culture, national laws), and religion is seen as a private matter. Therefore, we should respect everyone's personal decision about their religion (that is, private beliefs); however, everyone must follow the same way of life (national culture and law). So, in essence, national culture and law has taken the place of religion in modernity in most nation-states.
In fact, many languages historically have not even had an equivalent word for "religion" as it is used in English today.
So, talking about religions during the time of the Prophet Muhammad (S) or the Prophet Ibrahim (A) should be done with the understanding that we may be accidentally projecting modern ideas onto the past, or onto other cultures, and then trying to avoid that.
The Qur'an, hadith, and classical Islamic literature tend to use words such as din, millah, and shari'ah to mean "religion". These could be translated as "way of life", "community", and "religious law". From this angle, the communities that were identified as having a specific way of life, scripture, communal identity, and law were Jews, Christians, Sabaians, or other established communities.
For instance, in the classical model of the Islamic state, certain religious communities (in particular, the Ahl al-Kitab, including Jews, Christians, and some others) are allowed to follow their own religious law, abstain from military service in exchange for paying the jizyah, and enjoy protection of their houses of worship. [Of course this model is somewhat theoretical as what happens in practice tends to be more complicated, but this is how things were seen theoretically]
However, neither the polytheists of Arabia nor the polytheists of the time of Ibrahim are seen as having their own communal identity based on religion or what we would call a "religion"; they are simply seen as (a) deviating from the truth, and (b) following common custom.
Conversely, neither the Prophet Muhammad (S) nor the Prophet Ibrahim (A) is presented as a prophet bringing a new or alternative religion to his people (in the same way that, for example, Christianity was seen as a distinct faith community coming from outside the Arabian Peninsula). Both prophets are seen as supporting the ancient message, not bringing a new idea.
This is why the bulk of the arguments in the Quran are not about accepting Islam as a specific religion. Rather, it focuses on why the idol-worshippers (who believed in God as well as demigods) should stop appealing to their demigods and worship only God instead. That is, the idol-worshippers tended to worship their demigods to placate them, with the belief that if they did not, a disaster might strike them. Or they would worship their demigods to appeal to them for wealth or sustenance. Or, they would worship their demigods with the belief that their demigods would appeal to God on their behalf. The Qur'an, basically, says that all of this is unnecessary and/or false since all power belongs to God and their demigods do not control matters of good and evil or sustenance, and that their demigods are not really intermediaries.
They should also give up backwards customs and taboos which are socially harmful and which were passed on along with their customs regarding idols.
For instance, Ibrahim (A) is not telling his people to follow a new religion; rather, he is telling his people to stop supporting falsehood.
Basically, there is a sense that these people should have known better than to be building and appealing to idols and had simply deviated from the truth. One way this is apparent is that the Qur'an does not explain everything anew; rather, there is an assumption in the text that the people hearing about the stories of the prophets are famliar with them and it is all part of a common cultural and religious context, even if some people were appealing to idols.
The Ka'bah, in particular, is seen as originally being a site of worshipping God, built (or re-built) by Ibrahim (A), but the practice in it became corrupted (for instance, through people performing the hajj in the nude, or placing false idols in it). So the job of these prophets is to remind the people of how they have gone wrong, and then to provide some new religious legislation and teachings (such as the shari'ah and Qur'an) to steer the boat in the correct direction in the future.
This is rather different from, say, someone who grows up as a secular agnostic, has no real contact with organized religion, and then converts to Islam as a new faith.
So this is how the matter is understood in Islamic sources.
In any case, that was then and these were prophets; today, there is no need to go around breaking people's idols. Also, most modern idols are invisible things, such as money, celebrity status, number of likes on Facebook, and so forth which cannot be broken even if one tried.
In any case, it is a good question and good to think about.
This narration is mentioned in the Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal in which Abdullah ibn Mas'ood said that I don't mind or in fact I am ready to take oath and repeat it nine times that the prophet was killed rather than taking oath one time that he was not killed.
Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal volume 1 page 408
Our prominent Ulamah have mentioned many authentic hadith that the Prophet was poisoned. Among them is:
· Sheikh Al Mufid in his book Al-Muqni'ah page 456
· Sheikh Al Toosi in his book Al Tahdhib vol 2 page 6
· Al Fattal Al Nisaburi in his book Al Rawdat page 71
· Al Allamah Al Hilli in his book Al Tahrir vol 2 page 118
· Al Shahid Al Awal in his book Al-Durus vol 2 page 6
· Allamah Al Majlisi in his book Mir'at Al Uqol vol 5 page 174
Ibne-Abil Hadeed Al Moathazalee a well known non-Shia scholar mentioned in his book Sharh Nahj Al-Balagha that the Prophet was poisoned and that he passed away as a Shahid (martyr) vol 10 page 221.
There is a narration from Imam Jaffer as Sadiq (as) that Imam Hassan (as) told his family members "I will die by poison as the Prophet Mohammad (saw) was poisoned."
Al-Khara'ij wal-Jara'ih vol 1 page 241
Among the Sunni scholars Al Hakim Al Nishapuri is very well known who compiled the famous book Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain he narrated from Al Sha'bi "by Allah the Prophet was poisoned."
It is not the death but it is the martyrdom of the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him and his Holy Progeny).
Yes, every battle fought by the Prophet Muhammad (SAWA) was defensive. Islam does not believe in enforcing religion on any one as Allah says in Sura Al-Baqarah in Quran (There is no compulsion in religion).
The 12 Imams are not exactly like the Prophet Muhammad in that each of them were separate individuals and had his own life, experiences, personality, features, etc. (That is, they did not share the same soul.)
However, they all shared the same teachings of the Prophet (S). This is the job of the Imams (A) is to correctly explain the teachings of the Prophet (S). According to dominant Twelver Shi'i belief, knowledge of the correct Prophetic teachings is a divine gift transferred to one Imam after the death of the previous Imam; therefore, they do not make mistakes in the teachings or disagree about what the Prophet (S) taught.
Also, the Prophet and 12 Imams are all considered sinless. They all obviously also shared a strong commitment to Islam.
Maybe this is one reason that they tend to appear the same - it is our flaws and faults that oftentimes distinguish us the most from each other!
The rational reason for this is that Allah appointed them to preserve and expand upon the message as was necessary. If you think about it, most Muslims came to Islam in the latter part of the Prophet's life. Many of them really didn't have enough time to learn much about the religion at all, especially because the Muslims were busy fending off attackers and dealing with a lot of practical things. And after the Prophet, not all the Companions agreed on everything. So it makes sense that if Allah is going to appoint a prophet with the final message that Allah would be sure that message is protected; this is done through the imamate.
No this is not the case. The Shia Muslims believe that the prophet Mohammad (sawa) who possesses prophethood, messengership and imamah, is the highest of all creation. Anyone saying otherwise is a deviant and ignorant.
In a narration from Al-Kafi, Imam Ali (as) when asked by a Jew if he's a prophet, replied the following:
إنما أنا عبد من عبيد محمد صلى الله عليه وآله
I am only an 'abd (slave) from the slaves of Mohammad (sawa).
'Abd in this context means a servant or slave in the sense of complete obedience and not worship. The Quran also uses the word 'Abd for the non-worship sense too. Check 24:32.
Therefore, despite the unfathomable status of Imam Ali (as), he shows that he is in a lower position as compared to Rasullah (sawa) by expressing his obedience and veneration to him.
So then imagine the status of rasullah when someone such as Ali expresses such a statement!
May Allah grant you success
The evidence of the prophet hood of Muhammad (SAWA) are too many but Quran and Ahlul Bayt (AS) are the greatest evidence. Any human being who uses his senses will see when reading Quran and the sayings of Ahlul Bayt (AS) that it is miraculous and it can never come from any human being with out link with or support from Allah.
The prophet hood of Jesus (AS) was proven by many miracles which can never be denied by sensible human being. Some people have enmity against Jesus and his mother which is the reason of denying his prophet hood.
In the name of Allah
During the 9 years of The Holy Prophet's life after Hijrah - depending on the definition of battle - between 80 to 100 counts of Battle between Muslims and non-muslims are recorded in history.
The Holy Prophet -Peace be upon him and his Ahlul Bayt- was personally present and leading the Army in 27 of these Battles that are called Ghazwah (غزوة). The rest were lead by his appointed generals.
It's worth mentioning that most of these battles were resolved without any/major conflict like the Conquest of Mecca.
Here you can read more details about some of these battles: