Sura 111 of the Quran is Sura 111, Thorns (Al-Masad), and is about the condemnation of an individual identified as Abee Lahab and his wife.
[111:1] Condemned are the works of Abee Lahab, and he is condemned.
[111:2] His money and whatever he has accomplished will never help him.
[111:3] He has incurred the blazing Hell.
[111:4] Also his wife, who led the persecution.
[111:5] She will be (resurrected) with a rope of thorns around her neck.
تَبَّتْ يَدَآ أَبِى لَهَبٍۢ وَتَبَّ
مَآ أَغْنَىٰ عَنْهُ مَالُهُۥ وَمَا كَسَبَ
سَيَصْلَىٰ نَارًۭا ذَاتَ لَهَبٍۢ
وَٱمْرَأَتُهُۥ حَمَّالَةَ ٱلْحَطَبِ
فِى جِيدِهَا حَبْلٌۭ مِّن مَّسَدٍۭ
Sura 111 is traditionally regarded as the sixth revelation to the Prophet, highlighting Abu Lahab and his wife as the primary figures expected to oppose the Prophet and his mission. One might assume that the Hadith and Sirah would have much to say about these two individuals. However, the material on these two is almost nonexistent.
When we examine the Kutub al-Sitta (كُتُب ٱلسِّتَّة), the six most highly esteemed collections of Hadith, we find that there is only one story about Abu Lahab that provides any real insight into his character. This narration, as reported by at-Tirmidhi, is similar to the account found in other collections.
Ibn Abbas narrated: “One day the Messenger of Allah ascended As-Safa and called out: ‘O people! Come at once!’ So the Quraish gathered before him. He said: ‘I am a warner for you before the coming of a severe punishment. Do you think that if I informed you that the enemy was preparing to attack you in the evening or in the morning, would you believe me?’ So Abu Lahab said: ‘Is it for this that you gathered us? May you perish?’ So Allah, Blessed is He and Most High, revealed: Perish the hands of Abu Lahab, perish he.”
حَدَّثَنَا هَنَّادٌ، وَأَحْمَدُ بْنُ مَنِيعٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو مُعَاوِيَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا الأَعْمَشُ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ مُرَّةَ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَالَ صَعِدَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ذَاتَ يَوْمٍ عَلَى الصَّفَا فَنَادَى ” يَا صَبَاحَاهُ ” . فَاجْتَمَعَتْ إِلَيْهِ قُرَيْشٌ فَقَالَ ” إِنِّي نَذِيرٌ لَكُمْ بَيْنَ يَدَىْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ أَرَأَيْتُمْ لَوْ أَنِّي أَخْبَرْتُكُمْ أَنَّ الْعَدُوَّ مُمَسِّيكُمْ أَوْ مُصَبِّحُكُمْ أَكُنْتُمْ تُصَدِّقُونِي ” . فَقَالَ أَبُو لَهَبٍ أَلِهَذَا جَمَعْتَنَا تَبًّا لَكَ . فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ : ( تبَّتْ يَدَا أَبِي لَهَبٍ وَتَبَّ ) . قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ .
Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3363
https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3363
Other narrations state that Abu Lahab’s name was a nickname (kunya), which translates to “Father of a Flame” because he supposedly had red cheeks. He was an uncle of the prophet, making him part of the Quraish tribe. Aside from that, it is narrated that he used to follow the prophet around the market and denounce him if he saw him preaching. It states that he died in 624 because a woman by the name of Lubaba hit him with a tent pole, and he died from the wounds.
Regarding his wife, she is identified as Arwā bint Ḥarb, better known as Umm Jamīl, yet there is almost no mention of her in Hadith or Sirat literature.
How could these two individuals, whom the Quran names as the head opposition to the prophet, historically have almost no mention in the Hadith literature?
Interestingly, another couple is historically found to be ardent opponents of the prophet throughout his mission. This is Abū Sufyān ( أبو سفيان ) and his wife Hind bint Utba. Abu Sufyan was the leader of the Quraysh, the head of the Ummayad clan, and the main opposition to the prophet, along with his wife.
He was the chief orchestrator fighting Muhammad and the believers at the Battle of Badr in 624 CE. This battle caused the death of one of his sons and one of his fathers-in-law while another son was taken captive. Then, the following year, Abu Sufyan inflicted significant losses on the Muslims at the Battle of Uhud in 625 CE.
After that battle, Abu Sufyan’s wife, Hind bint Utba, along with other women, mutilated the bodies of the Muslims, making their appendages into necklaces. It has been documented that Hind bint Utba personally cut out and ate the liver of Muhammad’s uncle Hamza as revenge for her father’s death at the Battle of Badr.
According to “The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah” p. 385 it states:
According to what Salih b. Kaysan told me, Hind d. ‘Utba and the women with her stopped to mutilate the apostle’s dead companions. They cut off their ears and noses and Hind made them into anklets and collars and gave her anklets and collars and pendants to Wahshi, the slave of Jubayr b. Mut’im. She cut Hamza’s liver and chewed it, but she was not able to swallow it and threw it away.
Then it is claimed that when Muhammad conquered Mecca in 630 CE, Abu Sufyan and Hind bint Utba and their family “accepted” Islam and are claimed to have become outstanding righteous believers.
It doesn’t make sense to think that these people who fought the believers in such a vicious way all of a sudden came to their senses once they lost the war. It makes more sense that Abu Lahab and his wife are actually a reference to Abu Sufyan and Hind bint Utba.
The problem with this association is that it puts the traditionalist in a bind. Suppose they admit that Abu Lahab is Abu Sufyan. In that case, it would discredit the Quran’s claim that they were destined for Hell because their history claims that the two embraced the religion after the conquest of Mecca and became solid and righteous believers pivotal in the expansion of Islam.
But who could have had the power and the motivation to want to hide the true identity of Abu Lahab? Well, it just happens that Abu Sufyan’s son was no other than Mu’awiya I (r. 661-680), the first caliph of the Ummayad dynasty. The Umayyad dynasty, established by Muawiya, the son of Abu Sufyan, had a vested interest in maintaining a positive image of their ancestors. He and the subsequent Ummayad rulers would have much incentive to keep the true identity of their father, Abu Lahab, hidden.
Further research is needed to explore this idea, as the current narrative surrounding Abu Lahab’s identity seems suspicious based on the traditional historical accounts.
Appendix:
The narrations regarding Abu Lahab in the Sitah (Credit @hadithcritic)
Additional Reading:
Quran Talk Blog 