RESPONSE TO TWELVERSHIAdotNET: “THE LOVE BETWEEN THE COMPANIONS AND THE FAMILY, A QUR’ANIC REALITY”
Article being answered:
https://www.twelvershia.net/2013/04/18/the-love-between-the-companions-and-the-family-a-quranic-reality/
There is no dispute that many sincere Companions loved, honoured and supported the family of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. Islam created genuine brotherhood among believers, and the virtues of righteous Muhajirun and Ansar should not be denied.
However, the TwelverShia.net article makes a far larger claim. It argues that Qur’an 8:62–63, 3:103, 48:29 and 59:8–9 prove permanent, universal and unbreakable love between every Companion and every member of the Prophet’s family, both during the Prophet’s life and after his death.
It then claims that acknowledging later anger, political exclusion, resentment or armed conflict would amount to doubting the Qur’an.
That conclusion is not stated by any of the cited verses. It is an interpretation imposed upon them, and it is contradicted by Sunni tafsir and Sahih Sunni hadith.
1. Qur’an 8:62–63 primarily concerns Aws and Khazraj
The article quotes:
هُوَ الَّذِي أَيَّدَكَ بِنَصْرِهِ وَبِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ
“He is the One who supported you with His help and with the believers.”
وَأَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِهِمْ ۚ لَوْ أَنْفَقْتَ مَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا مَا أَلَّفْتَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَلَٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ أَلَّفَ بَيْنَهُمْ
“And He united their hearts. Had you spent everything on earth, you could not have united their hearts, but Allah united them.”
Qur’an 8:62–63
TwelverShia.net treats this as a declaration about every Companion, every member of the Ahl al-Bayt and every relationship between them until death.
But Imam al-Tabari explains:
إِنَّ اللَّهَ الَّذِي أَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِ الْأَوْسِ وَالْخَزْرَجِ بَعْدَ تَشَتُّتِ كَلِمَتِهِمَا وَتَعَادِيهِمَا، وَجَعَلَهُمْ لَكَ أَنْصَارًا
“Allah is the One who united the hearts of Aws and Khazraj after their division and mutual hostility and made them supporters for you.”
Reference: Al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan, commentary on Qur’an 8:63.
Therefore, the immediate historical subject is the reconciliation of two Medinan tribes which had fought one another for generations.
The verse proves that Allah ended their tribal hostility and united them in support of the Prophet ﷺ.
It does not say:
Every Companion loved every other Companion equally.
Every Companion permanently loved every member of the Ahl al-Bayt.
No political dispute could occur after the Prophet’s death.
Every individual relationship would remain permanently harmonious.
The article changes a specific historical reconciliation into an unlimited guarantee concerning individuals and events that the verse never mentions.
2. The same Aws and Khazraj almost fought again during the Prophet’s own lifetime
The strongest refutation comes from Sahih Sunni hadith itself.
During the incident of al-Ifk, Sa‘d ibn Mu‘adh and Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah argued over ‘Abd Allah ibn Ubayy. Usayd ibn Hudayr accused Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubadah of defending the hypocrites.
Aisha narrates:
فَثَارَ الْحَيَّانِ الْأَوْسُ وَالْخَزْرَجُ حَتَّى هَمُّوا أَنْ يَقْتَتِلُوا، وَرَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَائِمٌ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ، فَلَمْ يَزَلْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُخَفِّضُهُمْ حَتَّى سَكَتُوا
“The two tribes, Aws and Khazraj, became agitated until they nearly fought one another while the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was standing upon the pulpit. The Messenger of Allah continued calming them until they became silent.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, Hadith al-Ifk.
These are the very tribes whose hearts Allah had united.
Therefore:
Allah’s uniting of their hearts was real.
Their Islamic brotherhood was real.
But that blessing did not make them permanently incapable of anger, tribal rivalry or conflict.
They nearly fought again while the Prophet ﷺ was still alive and standing before them.
This alone destroys the article’s central logic:
“Allah united their hearts, therefore later conflict became impossible.”
A divine blessing can be real while human beings remain responsible for preserving it.
3. The Qur’an expressly says believing groups can fight
Allah says:
وَإِنْ طَائِفَتَانِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ اقْتَتَلُوا فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَهُمَا
“If two groups of believers fight, then make peace between them.”
فَإِنْ بَغَتْ إِحْدَاهُمَا عَلَى الْأُخْرَىٰ فَقَاتِلُوا الَّتِي تَبْغِي
“If one of them transgresses against the other, then fight the transgressing group.”
Qur’an 49:9
Al-Tabari explains:
وَإِنْ طَائِفَتَانِ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْإِيمَانِ اقْتَتَلُوا
“If two groups from the people of faith fight.”
Regarding the transgressing side, he explains:
تَعْتَدِي، وَتَأْبَى الْإِجَابَةَ إِلَى حُكْمِ اللَّهِ
“It transgresses and refuses to respond to Allah’s judgement.”
Reference: Al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan, commentary on Qur’an 49:9.
The Qur’an itself therefore establishes that:
Two groups may remain believers in the broad religious sense.
They can nevertheless fight one another.
One believing group can become the transgressing side.
Religious brotherhood does not prevent later injustice or armed conflict.
The article’s assumption that brotherhood and conflict are mutually exclusive directly contradicts Qur’an 49:9–10.
4. Qur’an 3:103 also primarily concerns Aws and Khazraj
The article next quotes:
وَاذْكُرُوا نِعْمَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذْ كُنْتُمْ أَعْدَاءً فَأَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِكُمْ فَأَصْبَحْتُمْ بِنِعْمَتِهِ إِخْوَانًا
“Remember Allah’s favour upon you: you were enemies, then He united your hearts, and through His favour you became brothers.”
Qur’an 3:103
Al-Tabari identifies the former enemies as Aws and Khazraj and explains that Islam ended the long warfare between them.
The article again changes the verse from:
“Allah reconciled these previously warring tribes through Islam”
into:
“Every Companion and every member of the Ahl al-Bayt possessed permanent mutual love which could never change.”
That conclusion is not in the verse.
Even the wording:
وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا
“Do not become divided”
is a command, not a prophecy that division would never occur.
A prohibition against an action does not mean that nobody will commit it. Allah prohibits murder, injustice, dispute and division precisely because human beings may commit them.
5. “Saved from the Fire” does not mean unconditional lifelong immunity
The article argues that because Qur’an 3:103 says:
وَكُنْتُمْ عَلَىٰ شَفَا حُفْرَةٍ مِنَ النَّارِ فَأَنْقَذَكُمْ مِنْهَا
“You were upon the edge of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it,”
the people described must have carried the same mutual love into their graves and could never later deserve punishment.
This is a serious leap.
The immediate meaning is that Islam rescued them from their pre-Islamic disbelief and hostility. It does not state that every individual became immune from all future sin, injustice, rebellion or deviation.
If being once rescued from disbelief created unconditional immunity, then no believer could ever later sin or turn away.
But the Qur’an itself warns:
وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ ۚ أَفَإِنْ مَاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انْقَلَبْتُمْ عَلَىٰ أَعْقَابِكُمْ
“Muhammad is only a Messenger. Messengers passed away before him. If he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?”
Qur’an 3:144
Al-Tabari explains that Allah addressed the Prophet’s Companions and warned them against retreating from the religion after the Prophet’s death.
This verse does not prove that every Companion turned back.
But it proves that reversal after the Prophet’s death was Qur’anically conceivable.
Therefore, the article’s statement that such a change would be “unimaginable” is not a Qur’anic argument. The Qur’an itself warned the community about it.
6. Qur’an 48:29 describes qualities; it does not grant permanent immunity
The article quotes:
مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ
“Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves.”
Qur’an 48:29
Sunni tafsir records more than one interpretation of “those with him.”
Al-Wahidi records from Ibn ‘Abbas:
وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَهْلُ الْحُدَيْبِيَةِ
“Those with him are the people of Hudaybiyyah.”
He also records the broader interpretation that it refers to the believers who were with him.
Even under the broader reading, the verse describes praised qualities:
Firmness against disbelievers.
Mercy among believers.
Prayer and prostration.
Seeking Allah’s bounty and pleasure.
These are descriptions of sincere followers and the qualities they should embody.
The verse does not state:
Every person who physically met the Prophet permanently fulfilled these qualities.
Every future action of every Companion was merciful.
No Companion could ever fight another believer.
No Companion could later act unjustly toward the Ahl al-Bayt.
Qur’an 49:9 already proves that people called believers can fight and one group can transgress.
Therefore, “merciful among themselves” cannot be transformed into “no serious conflict could ever occur.”
7. Qur’an 59:9 concerns the Banu Nadir property distribution
The article quotes:
يُحِبُّونَ مَنْ هَاجَرَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَا يَجِدُونَ فِي صُدُورِهِمْ حَاجَةً مِمَّا أُوتُوا
“They love those who migrated to them and find no need in their hearts concerning what they were given.”
It then interprets this as proof that the Ansar possessed no jealousy or resentment toward any Muhajir in any matter at any later time.
But al-Tabari explains the specific context:
وَلَا يَجِدُونَ فِي صُدُورِهِمْ حَاجَةً، يَعْنِي حَسَدًا مِمَّا أُوتُوا، يَعْنِي مِمَّا أُوتِيَ الْمُهَاجِرُونَ مِنَ الْفَيْءِ
“They found no need in their hearts—meaning envy—concerning what the Muhajirun were given from the fay’.”
Al-Tabari then explains that the Prophet ﷺ distributed the property of Banu Nadir among the early Muhajirun rather than the Ansar, except for two poor Ansari men.
Therefore, the verse proves a great virtue:
The Ansar loved the Muhajirun.
They accepted the Prophet’s distribution of the Banu Nadir property.
They did not envy the Muhajirun for receiving that fay’.
They preferred others over themselves despite their own need.
But it does not prove:
No Ansari could ever disagree with any Muhajir.
Every Muhajir loved every other Muhajir.
Every Muhajir permanently loved every member of the Ahl al-Bayt.
No later political conflict could occur.
8. The article’s argument about the Muhajirun is logically invalid
The article says:
“If the Ansar loved the Muhajirun, how could the Muhajirun not love one another even more?”
This is not a Qur’anic statement.
It is not a Prophetic hadith.
It is not a quotation from Sunni tafsir.
It is merely the author’s assumption.
Logically:
Group A loving Group B does not prove that every member of Group B loves every other member of Group B.
The Ansar accepting the Prophet’s distribution of fay’ does not prove that every Muhajir agreed with every other Muhajir in later politics.
An Ansari sacrificing food for a Muhajir guest does not prove that conflict among the Muhajirun became impossible.
The article presents a non sequitur as though it were a Qur’anic conclusion.
9. Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim record Fatima’s anger
The article claims that strong ties of love and affection continued between the Companions and the Prophet’s family after his death.
But Aisha herself narrates:
فَوَجَدَتْ فَاطِمَةُ عَلَى أَبِي بَكْرٍ فِي ذَلِكَ، فَهَجَرَتْهُ فَلَمْ تُكَلِّمْهُ حَتَّى تُوُفِّيَتْ
“Fatima became angry with Abu Bakr concerning that matter, abandoned speaking to him and did not speak to him until she died.”
The report continues:
فَلَمَّا تُوُفِّيَتْ دَفَنَهَا زَوْجُهَا عَلِيٌّ لَيْلًا، وَلَمْ يُؤْذِنْ بِهَا أَبَا بَكْرٍ
“When she died, her husband Ali buried her at night and did not inform Abu Bakr.”
References: Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.
Sunni scholars may defend Abu Bakr’s legal understanding concerning the Prophet’s property. That is a separate debate.
But the historical facts established by the authentic text remain:
A serious dispute occurred.
Fatima was angry.
She stopped speaking to Abu Bakr until she died.
She was buried at night.
Abu Bakr was not informed of the burial.
This is not evidence of uninterrupted and universal post-Prophetic harmony.
10. Sahih Muslim records Imam Ali’s complaint of political exclusion
The same authentic report states that Ali had not pledged allegiance during those months.
Ali then said to Abu Bakr:
وَلَكِنَّكَ اسْتَبْدَدْتَ عَلَيْنَا بِالْأَمْرِ، وَكُنَّا نَرَى لِقَرَابَتِنَا مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَصِيبًا
“But you acted independently of us in this matter, while we believed that because of our relationship to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ we had a share in it.”
Another authentic wording says:
فَاسْتَبَدَّ عَلَيْنَا فَوَجَدْنَا فِي أَنْفُسِنَا
“He acted independently of us, and we felt something within ourselves because of it.”
Reference: Sahih Muslim, report of Aisha concerning Fatima, Ali and Abu Bakr.
This report does not require claiming that every Companion hated the Ahl al-Bayt.
It proves only what the article denies:
A serious dispute between leading Companions and the Ahl al-Bayt did occur immediately after the Prophet’s death.
11. The Battle of Jamal disproves the claim of permanent political harmony
Sahih al-Bukhari records Abu Bakrah saying:
لَقَدْ نَفَعَنِي اللَّهُ بِكَلِمَةٍ أَيَّامَ الْجَمَلِ، بَعْدَمَا كِدْتُ أَنْ أَلْحَقَ بِأَصْحَابِ الْجَمَلِ فَأُقَاتِلَ مَعَهُمْ
“Allah benefited me through a statement during the days of the Camel, after I had nearly joined the people of the Camel and fought alongside them.”
The report explicitly connects the event with the force gathered around Aisha in Basra.
The issue here is not whether every individual intended evil or whether reconciliation was attempted.
The undeniable point is:
Aisha’s side and Imam Ali’s side faced one another in an armed conflict.
Muslims were killed.
Therefore, earlier Islamic brotherhood did not make later war impossible.
12. The Battle of Siffin and the killing of Ammar
Sahih al-Bukhari records that the Prophet ﷺ said:
وَيْحَ عَمَّارٍ، تَقْتُلُهُ الْفِئَةُ الْبَاغِيَةُ، عَمَّارٌ يَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَى اللَّهِ، وَيَدْعُونَهُ إِلَى النَّارِ
“Woe to Ammar! The transgressing group will kill him. Ammar calls them to Allah, while they call him to the Fire.”
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 2812.
Ammar fought in Imam Ali’s army and was killed at Siffin by the opposing army.
Sunni scholars generally do not declare everyone in the opposing army an unbeliever. But the authentic hadith still calls the group that killed Ammar:
الْفِئَةُ الْبَاغِيَةُ
“The transgressing group.”
This is entirely consistent with Qur’an 49:9:
Two groups may remain within the broad Muslim community.
They may fight.
One may become the transgressing side.
Therefore, earlier companionship and brotherhood did not erase accountability for later actions.
13. The article attacks a strawman
The Shia argument does not require believing that:
Every Companion hated every member of the Ahl al-Bayt.
Every Companion became a legal apostate.
Every positive relationship disappeared instantly.
No Companion remained loyal to Imam Ali.
The actual argument is far more limited:
General Qur’anic praise does not make every individual Companion permanently righteous in every later action.
Some Companions remained loyal.
Some Companions possessed great virtues.
Some Companions later disagreed with or fought other Companions.
Some political decisions harmed or excluded members of the Prophet’s family.
Each individual and each action must be judged through the Qur’an, Sunnah and reliable history.
The article avoids this real argument by replacing it with the extreme claim:
“The Shia believe that everyone immediately began hating the entire family.”
Refuting that caricature does not prove universal harmony.
14. General praise is not immunity from later accountability
A person may possess a genuine earlier virtue and later commit an error.
A tribe may receive a divine blessing and later damage it.
A community may be praised collectively while individuals differ in sincerity and conduct.
Believers may remain brothers in religion while one group transgresses against another.
The Qur’an itself applies praise and blame according to conduct.
Therefore, the correct method is not:
“This person belonged to a praised generation; therefore, every later action must be righteous.”
The correct method is:
“Examine each action according to the Qur’an, Prophetic Sunnah, truth and justice.”
FINAL CONCLUSION
The verses cited by TwelverShia.net prove genuine virtues:
Allah united Aws and Khazraj after long tribal warfare.
Islam created real brotherhood among sincere believers.
The Ansar loved, welcomed and sacrificed for the Muhajirun.
The sincere followers of the Prophet were firm against disbelievers and merciful among themselves.
Many Companions genuinely loved and honoured the Ahl al-Bayt.
None of these virtues should be denied.
But the verses do not prove:
That every Companion possessed the same inward character.
That every Companion permanently loved every member of the Ahl al-Bayt.
That no later anger, political exclusion or injustice could occur.
That Fatima could not become angry with Abu Bakr.
That Imam Ali could not object to being excluded from the political decision.
That Aisha’s army could not fight Imam Ali at Jamal.
That Muawiyah’s side could not fight Imam Ali and kill Ammar at Siffin.
The Qur’an itself says that two believing groups may fight and that one may become the transgressing side.
Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim then record Fatima’s anger, her estrangement until death, her nighttime burial, Ali’s delayed pledge, his complaint of political exclusion, the Battle of Jamal and the Prophet’s description of Ammar’s killers as the transgressing group.
Therefore, acknowledging these events is not denying the Qur’an.
It is refusing to turn contextual Qur’anic praise into permanent immunity from historical accountability.
The accurate conclusion is:
The Qur’an proves genuine love and brotherhood among sincere believers, including many Companions and members of the Ahl al-Bayt.
It does not prove permanent, universal and unconditional harmony between every Companion and every member of the Prophet’s family after the Prophet’s death.
Did the Companions Always Love Ahl al-Bayt?
Primary Category :
Secondary Category :
Loading comments...