📆 Daily Calendar
🌺 Today: Saturday
🌞 22 Azar 1404 (Solar Hijri)
☪️ 22 Jumada al-Thani 1447 (Lunar Hijri)
✝️ 13 December 2025 (Gregorian)
🕎 23 Kislev 5786 (Hebrew)
---
🌍 Lunar Calendar Observances
✍️ Death of #AbuBakr ibn Abi Quhafah at age 67, after 2 years, 3 months, and 22 days of usurping the caliphate (13 AH).
📚 Untold Stories About Abu Bakr:
📖 Jewish schemes to infiltrate the Prophet’s governing system
👉 https://jscenter.ir/judaism-and-islam/jewish-intrigue/4826
---
🌍 Gregorian Calendar Observances
✍️ Claim of prophethood by #Claude_Vorilhon, known as #Raël, founder of the #Raelian_Movement (1973 CE).
📚 Learn More:
📖 Promotion of the Raelian Movement in the film Prometheus
👉 https://jscenter.ir/jewish-methods/jews-and-sect/12477
---
🗓 Important Notice
This calendar only lists observances related to #Judaism.
✅ Jewish Studies Think Tank:
🇮🇷👉 @jscenter
🌐 @rahyafte_en
🌺 Today: Saturday
🌞 22 Azar 1404 (Solar Hijri)
☪️ 22 Jumada al-Thani 1447 (Lunar Hijri)
✝️ 13 December 2025 (Gregorian)
🕎 23 Kislev 5786 (Hebrew)
---
🌍 Lunar Calendar Observances
✍️ Death of #AbuBakr ibn Abi Quhafah at age 67, after 2 years, 3 months, and 22 days of usurping the caliphate (13 AH).
📚 Untold Stories About Abu Bakr:
📖 Jewish schemes to infiltrate the Prophet’s governing system
👉 https://jscenter.ir/judaism-and-islam/jewish-intrigue/4826
---
🌍 Gregorian Calendar Observances
✍️ Claim of prophethood by #Claude_Vorilhon, known as #Raël, founder of the #Raelian_Movement (1973 CE).
📚 Learn More:
📖 Promotion of the Raelian Movement in the film Prometheus
👉 https://jscenter.ir/jewish-methods/jews-and-sect/12477
---
🗓 Important Notice
This calendar only lists observances related to #Judaism.
✅ Jewish Studies Think Tank:
🇮🇷👉 @jscenter
🌐 @rahyafte_en
اندیشکده مطالعات یهود | Jewish Studies Center
برنامههای یهود برای نفوذ در سازمان حکومتی پیامبر (1) - اندیشکده مطالعات یهود | Jewish Studies Center
جبههی یهود برای نفوذ به درون حاکمیت در پی کسی بودند. شرایط و جایگاه اجتماعی ابوبکر او را گزینه مناسبی برای نفوذ ساخته بود.
Rahyafte (The Guided Ones)
🕵️♂️ Jewish Plans to Infiltrate the Prophet's Governing Structure – Part 1 Source: https://jscenter.ir/judaism-and-islam/jewish-intrigue/4826 --- 📜 Introduction: The Eternal Enemy The Quran repeatedly warns Muslims not to be heedless of the plots of Satan…
· Persecution in Mecca forced secrecy.
· The boycott in the Valley of Abu Talib hindered education.
· After the boycott, the Prophet’s situation became untenable, and many left for Medina.
· In Medina, constant challenges left little time for reflection or suspicion.
Thus, the Jewish infiltration campaign remained largely undetected.
---
🕯 To be continued…
This article is based on the book "Preventing Deviation" by Hussain Elahi, Ali Yazdani, and Hassan Kazemzadeh.
📌 Part 2 will detail further stages of the infiltration plan.
#JewishInfluence #IslamicHistory #ProphetMuhammad #AbuBakr #Infiltration #IslamicStudies
🌐 @rahyafte_en
· The boycott in the Valley of Abu Talib hindered education.
· After the boycott, the Prophet’s situation became untenable, and many left for Medina.
· In Medina, constant challenges left little time for reflection or suspicion.
Thus, the Jewish infiltration campaign remained largely undetected.
---
🕯 To be continued…
This article is based on the book "Preventing Deviation" by Hussain Elahi, Ali Yazdani, and Hassan Kazemzadeh.
📌 Part 2 will detail further stages of the infiltration plan.
#JewishInfluence #IslamicHistory #ProphetMuhammad #AbuBakr #Infiltration #IslamicStudies
🌐 @rahyafte_en
🔷 A Strange Admission by Abu Bakr
One of the well-known principles of Islamic jurisprudence is:
In other words, when a mentally competent person acknowledges something against his own interests, that admission carries significant legal weight.
This principle raises an important historical question concerning Abu Bakr, the first caliph.
According to reports attributed to Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, Abu Bakr, during the final hours of his life, expressed deep regret over three matters. Among the statements attributed to him is:
If this report is accepted as authentic, its implications are profound.
It would mean that, at the end of his life, Abu Bakr himself expressed regret over actions involving the house of Lady Fatimah al-Zahra (peace be upon her)—the daughter of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and a member of the Ahl al-Bayt.
The issue becomes even more serious when considered alongside reports concerning the use of fire as a means of punishment. The Prophetic tradition contains explicit prohibitions against punishing people by fire, reserving punishment by fire for Allah.
Therefore, the historical question remains:
If the report of Abu Bakr’s final admission is authentic, what does his own regret tell us about what happened to the household of Fatimah al-Zahra (peace be upon her)?
For those who study the history of the early Islamic period, this is not merely a question of politics.
It is a question of testimony, responsibility, and the sanctity of the household of the Prophet ﷺ.
May Allah grant us the courage to examine history with honesty, justice, and without fear.
#HistoricalAdmission #FatimahAlZahra #AhlulBayt #HouseOfFatimah #IslamicHistory #AbuBakr #Wilayah #ShiaIslam #ProphetMuhammad #AhlAlBayt #IslamicJurisprudence #HistoryOfIslam #SahebMedia #MuhammadKhaneifarzadeh
🔗 Saheb Media:
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2720
🆔 @rahyafte_en
One of the well-known principles of Islamic jurisprudence is:
“The admission of a sane person against himself is legally binding.”
(Al-iqrar ‘ala al-nafs)
In other words, when a mentally competent person acknowledges something against his own interests, that admission carries significant legal weight.
This principle raises an important historical question concerning Abu Bakr, the first caliph.
According to reports attributed to Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, Abu Bakr, during the final hours of his life, expressed deep regret over three matters. Among the statements attributed to him is:
“I wish I had not opened Fatimah’s house, even if it had been closed for confrontation, and I wish I had not sent men into it by force.”
If this report is accepted as authentic, its implications are profound.
It would mean that, at the end of his life, Abu Bakr himself expressed regret over actions involving the house of Lady Fatimah al-Zahra (peace be upon her)—the daughter of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and a member of the Ahl al-Bayt.
The issue becomes even more serious when considered alongside reports concerning the use of fire as a means of punishment. The Prophetic tradition contains explicit prohibitions against punishing people by fire, reserving punishment by fire for Allah.
Therefore, the historical question remains:
If the report of Abu Bakr’s final admission is authentic, what does his own regret tell us about what happened to the household of Fatimah al-Zahra (peace be upon her)?
For those who study the history of the early Islamic period, this is not merely a question of politics.
It is a question of testimony, responsibility, and the sanctity of the household of the Prophet ﷺ.
May Allah grant us the courage to examine history with honesty, justice, and without fear.
#HistoricalAdmission #FatimahAlZahra #AhlulBayt #HouseOfFatimah #IslamicHistory #AbuBakr #Wilayah #ShiaIslam #ProphetMuhammad #AhlAlBayt #IslamicJurisprudence #HistoryOfIslam #SahebMedia #MuhammadKhaneifarzadeh
🔗 Saheb Media:
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2720
🆔 @rahyafte_en
🔷 What Did Ibn Taymiyyah Say About Abu Bakr?
A Historical Admission—or a Defensive Justification?
Sometimes, when investigating a historical event, the most revealing evidence does not come from its opponents, but from the way its defenders attempt to explain it.
One noteworthy example is a passage found in Ibn Taymiyyah’s famous work Minhāj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah, volume 8, page 291, in his discussion of the reports concerning the house of Fāṭimah al-Zahrāʾ (سلام الله عليها).
Ibn Taymiyyah writes:
This passage deserves careful attention.
🔸 Ibn Taymiyyah himself preserves the claim that Abū Bakr entered Fāṭimah’s house in order to investigate whether public property was present there.
🔸 He uses the expression “kabas al-bayt” (كبس البيت)—a term that does not ordinarily describe a casual visit, but rather conveys the idea of entering upon a place with force or pressure.
🔸 However, it would be historically inaccurate to claim that Ibn Taymiyyah thereby accepted the entire Shīʿī account of the attack. He presents the statement within an argument and then attempts to justify Abū Bakr’s alleged action. Therefore, the passage should be understood in its full context.
So the more precise historical question is not simply:
❌ “Did Ibn Taymiyyah openly accept the Shīʿī version of the attack?”
Rather, we should ask:
Why does Ibn Taymiyyah, while defending Abū Bakr, even discuss a scenario in which Abū Bakr entered Fāṭimah’s house to investigate property?
And more importantly:
What source was Ibn Taymiyyah relying upon when presenting this claim?
This is precisely where historical research must move beyond slogans and enter the realm of source criticism and contextual analysis.
🔸 An Important Point
In the same discussion, Ibn Taymiyyah attempts to argue that Abū Bakr did not harm ʿAlī, al-Zubayr, or the other opponents of his rule, while presenting the alleged entry into the house as an act motivated by concern over “the property of Allah” and its distribution.
Therefore, even someone who rejects the Shīʿī interpretation of these events cannot simply claim:
“There is absolutely no historical report about Abū Bakr entering Fāṭimah’s house.”
Such a statement would be difficult to reconcile with the passage preserved in Minhāj al-Sunnah.
At the same time, intellectual honesty requires another distinction:
This passage by itself does not establish every detail found in Shīʿī accounts—such as the breaking of the door, physical assault, or the martyrdom of al-Muḥassin.
Each of those claims requires its own independent examination of the sources.
But the passage is still historically significant enough to raise an important question:
🔻 This Is How We Should Read History
Do not accept every claim without examination.
But do not reject every uncomfortable report simply because it challenges a familiar narrative.
Read the text.
Examine the wording.
Study the context.
Identify the source.
Then draw the conclusion.
The house of Fāṭimah al-Zahrāʾ (سلام الله عليها) is not merely a historical detail.
It is one of the most important points of dispute in understanding the events that followed the death of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
And if we truly want to understand history, we must be willing to examine both the evidence and the arguments of those who oppose our interpretation.
📚 Minhāj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 8, p. 291.
#IbnTaymiyyah #MinhajAlSunnah #AbuBakr #FatimahAlZahra #HouseOfFatimah #AttackOnFatimahsHouse #AhlulBayt #IslamicHistory #HistoricalResearch #SourceCriticism #EarlyIslamicHistory #AhlulBaytHistory #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2723
🆔 @rahyafte_en
A Historical Admission—or a Defensive Justification?
Sometimes, when investigating a historical event, the most revealing evidence does not come from its opponents, but from the way its defenders attempt to explain it.
One noteworthy example is a passage found in Ibn Taymiyyah’s famous work Minhāj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah, volume 8, page 291, in his discussion of the reports concerning the house of Fāṭimah al-Zahrāʾ (سلام الله عليها).
Ibn Taymiyyah writes:
“The most that can be said is that he entered the house to see whether there was any of the public treasury’s property there…”
This passage deserves careful attention.
🔸 Ibn Taymiyyah himself preserves the claim that Abū Bakr entered Fāṭimah’s house in order to investigate whether public property was present there.
🔸 He uses the expression “kabas al-bayt” (كبس البيت)—a term that does not ordinarily describe a casual visit, but rather conveys the idea of entering upon a place with force or pressure.
🔸 However, it would be historically inaccurate to claim that Ibn Taymiyyah thereby accepted the entire Shīʿī account of the attack. He presents the statement within an argument and then attempts to justify Abū Bakr’s alleged action. Therefore, the passage should be understood in its full context.
So the more precise historical question is not simply:
❌ “Did Ibn Taymiyyah openly accept the Shīʿī version of the attack?”
Rather, we should ask:
Why does Ibn Taymiyyah, while defending Abū Bakr, even discuss a scenario in which Abū Bakr entered Fāṭimah’s house to investigate property?
And more importantly:
What source was Ibn Taymiyyah relying upon when presenting this claim?
This is precisely where historical research must move beyond slogans and enter the realm of source criticism and contextual analysis.
🔸 An Important Point
In the same discussion, Ibn Taymiyyah attempts to argue that Abū Bakr did not harm ʿAlī, al-Zubayr, or the other opponents of his rule, while presenting the alleged entry into the house as an act motivated by concern over “the property of Allah” and its distribution.
Therefore, even someone who rejects the Shīʿī interpretation of these events cannot simply claim:
“There is absolutely no historical report about Abū Bakr entering Fāṭimah’s house.”
Such a statement would be difficult to reconcile with the passage preserved in Minhāj al-Sunnah.
At the same time, intellectual honesty requires another distinction:
This passage by itself does not establish every detail found in Shīʿī accounts—such as the breaking of the door, physical assault, or the martyrdom of al-Muḥassin.
Each of those claims requires its own independent examination of the sources.
But the passage is still historically significant enough to raise an important question:
If there was no historical basis whatsoever for such an incident, why would one of Abū Bakr’s strongest defenders discuss his entering Fāṭimah’s house in the first place?
🔻 This Is How We Should Read History
Do not accept every claim without examination.
But do not reject every uncomfortable report simply because it challenges a familiar narrative.
Read the text.
Examine the wording.
Study the context.
Identify the source.
Then draw the conclusion.
The house of Fāṭimah al-Zahrāʾ (سلام الله عليها) is not merely a historical detail.
It is one of the most important points of dispute in understanding the events that followed the death of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
And if we truly want to understand history, we must be willing to examine both the evidence and the arguments of those who oppose our interpretation.
📚 Minhāj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 8, p. 291.
#IbnTaymiyyah #MinhajAlSunnah #AbuBakr #FatimahAlZahra #HouseOfFatimah #AttackOnFatimahsHouse #AhlulBayt #IslamicHistory #HistoricalResearch #SourceCriticism #EarlyIslamicHistory #AhlulBaytHistory #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2723
🆔 @rahyafte_en
Rahyafte (The Guided Ones)
🔷 Abū Bakr’s Alleged Regret Concerning Fāṭimah’s House A Controversial Report from the Final Hours of His Life One of the most striking reports concerning the events after the death of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ appears in accounts describing Abū Bakr’s final…
And that alone makes this one of the most important reports to investigate when studying the events surrounding the succession after the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
The truth does not become false because it is uncomfortable.
And historical research does not become sectarian simply because it asks difficult questions.
📚 Tārīkh al-Ṭabarī; al-ʿIqd al-Farīd; Tārīkh Madīnat Dimashq.
#AbuBakr #FatimahAlZahra #HouseOfFatimah #Saqifah #EarlyIslamicHistory #IslamicHistory #AhlulBayt #HistoricalResearch #HistoryOfIslam #UmarIbnAlKhattab #UthmanIbnAffan #HistoricalSources #AhlulBaytHistory #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2724
🆔 @rahyafte_en
The truth does not become false because it is uncomfortable.
And historical research does not become sectarian simply because it asks difficult questions.
📚 Tārīkh al-Ṭabarī; al-ʿIqd al-Farīd; Tārīkh Madīnat Dimashq.
#AbuBakr #FatimahAlZahra #HouseOfFatimah #Saqifah #EarlyIslamicHistory #IslamicHistory #AhlulBayt #HistoricalResearch #HistoryOfIslam #UmarIbnAlKhattab #UthmanIbnAffan #HistoricalSources #AhlulBaytHistory #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2724
🆔 @rahyafte_en
It should be answered by returning to the earliest sources, reading them carefully, and allowing the historical evidence to speak.
The standard applied to the Prophet ﷺ must not become weaker than the standard applied to those who came after him.
#RazziyyatAlKhamis #CalamityOfThursday #ProphetMuhammad #AbuBakr #UmarIbnAlKhattab #FinalTestament #SahihBukhari #SahihMuslim #Saqifah #IslamicHistory #EarlyIslamicHistory #AhlulBayt #HistoricalResearch #HistoryOfIslam #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2725
🆔 @rahyafte_en
The standard applied to the Prophet ﷺ must not become weaker than the standard applied to those who came after him.
#RazziyyatAlKhamis #CalamityOfThursday #ProphetMuhammad #AbuBakr #UmarIbnAlKhattab #FinalTestament #SahihBukhari #SahihMuslim #Saqifah #IslamicHistory #EarlyIslamicHistory #AhlulBayt #HistoricalResearch #HistoryOfIslam #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2725
🆔 @rahyafte_en
Rahyafte (The Guided Ones)
🔷 Examples of Censorship and Alteration in Historical Sources How Can We Detect Changes in the Historical Record? When studying the final days of Abū Bakr, we previously examined reports attributed to ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn ʿAwf, according to which Abū Bakr…
A later version is not automatically more reliable merely because it is easier to read or more favorable to a particular narrative.
🔸 The Historian's Responsibility
When we encounter conflicting versions, the correct response is not:
“This proves a conspiracy.”
Nor is it:
“There is nothing to investigate.”
The correct response is:
Find the earliest available version.
Compare every surviving transmission.
Identify what was added.
Identify what disappeared.
Examine the chains of transmission.
Check manuscript and edition differences.
Then determine which reading has the strongest historical basis.
This is the essence of historical source criticism.
And it becomes especially important when the subject concerns the political legitimacy of the earliest Islamic governments.
Because when an event has implications for legitimacy, succession, and the relationship between the ruling authorities and the household of the Prophet ﷺ, the possibility of selective transmission must be taken seriously—but also demonstrated, not merely asserted.
🔻 One Final Point
If a report appears in an early source, and a later source preserves the same report but removes its most sensitive sentence, the disappearance itself becomes a historical question.
The historian should ask:
That is how we move beyond inherited narratives.
History is not understood by repeating the latest version.
It is understood by tracing the history of the text itself.
#HistoricalCensorship #SourceCriticism #AbuBakr #FatimahAlZahra #HouseOfFatimah #IslamicHistory #EarlyIslamicHistory #AhlulBayt #HistoricalSources #HistoryOfIslam #Saqifah #Kallalah #ManuscriptStudies #TextualCriticism #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2726
🆔 @rahyafte_en
🔸 The Historian's Responsibility
When we encounter conflicting versions, the correct response is not:
“This proves a conspiracy.”
Nor is it:
“There is nothing to investigate.”
The correct response is:
Find the earliest available version.
Compare every surviving transmission.
Identify what was added.
Identify what disappeared.
Examine the chains of transmission.
Check manuscript and edition differences.
Then determine which reading has the strongest historical basis.
This is the essence of historical source criticism.
And it becomes especially important when the subject concerns the political legitimacy of the earliest Islamic governments.
Because when an event has implications for legitimacy, succession, and the relationship between the ruling authorities and the household of the Prophet ﷺ, the possibility of selective transmission must be taken seriously—but also demonstrated, not merely asserted.
🔻 One Final Point
If a report appears in an early source, and a later source preserves the same report but removes its most sensitive sentence, the disappearance itself becomes a historical question.
The historian should ask:
What did the earliest form say?
When did the wording change?
Who transmitted the altered version?
And what historical context might explain the change?
That is how we move beyond inherited narratives.
History is not understood by repeating the latest version.
It is understood by tracing the history of the text itself.
#HistoricalCensorship #SourceCriticism #AbuBakr #FatimahAlZahra #HouseOfFatimah #IslamicHistory #EarlyIslamicHistory #AhlulBayt #HistoricalSources #HistoryOfIslam #Saqifah #Kallalah #ManuscriptStudies #TextualCriticism #MuhammadKhoniferzadeh #SahebMedia
https://eitaa.com/Sahebmedia1/2726
🆔 @rahyafte_en