Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Hadiths On The Incident Of The Door.

Rate this topic


Al-Hadi

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam Alaikum

Can anyone who has hadiths on the actual burning of the door post them on this thread please? Not one's from Tabari- preferably ones that actually state Umar Ibn Al Khattab going into the house and then the rest of the incident.

many thanks in advance :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Hadith on Omer going into the house and threats to burn down the door:

Omer ibn al-Khattab is quoted as having said

Fatima clutched her hands on the door trying to stop me from opening it. I sought to open it, but I found the challenge too great, so I hit both her hands with the whip, and it caused her pain... I kicked the door, and she had stuck her belly on the door to fortify it... I forced the door open and entered. She faced me with a look which caused my vision to go into a trance, so I slapped her on her cheeks from outside her face’s veil, breaking her earring which scattered on the floor. Ali came out. When I felt his presence, I rushed to get out of the house and said to Khalid (ibn al-Walid) and to Qunfath and those in their company, “I surely have been spared a momentous event.” I gathered a large number of men not to subdue Ali but to make my heart more daring. I went to him, and he was besieged at his house, and took him out of his house..., etc.

Ibid., Vol. 30, pp. 293-95.

Also refer to Sunni historian Abul Hasan, Ali Ibn al-Husain al-Mas'udi who in his book 'Isbaat al-Wasiyyah' describes the events in detail and reports that: "They surrounded Ali (as) and burned the door of his house and pulled him out against his will and pressed the leader of all

women (Hadhrat Fatimah (as)) between the door and the wall killing Mohsin (the male-child she was carrying in her womb for six months).

When the assailants reached her house, `Omer called out, “O Fatima daughter of the Messenger of Allah! Get those who have sought shelter at your house out so that they may swear the oath of allegiance and join the other Muslims who have already done so; otherwise, I, by Allah, shall set them all to fire.

Al-Jamal, pp. 117-18 (new edition). Nahj al-Haqq, p. 271. Al-Imama wal Siyasa, Vol. 1, p. 12. Ibn Shuhnah, Tarikh (referred to in a footnote in Al-Kamil), Vol. 7, p. 164. Abul-Fida’, Tarikh, Vol. 1, p. 156. Al-`Iqd al-Farad, Vol. 4, p. 259. Al-Ya`qabi, Tarikh, Vol. 2, p. 126.

She (A.S.) has said, “They brought the fire to burn the house and our own selves, so I stood at the door’s latch and pleaded to them in the Name of Allah..., etc.”

Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 30, p. 348, citing Irshad al-Qulab by al-Daylami.

In another text, he is quoted as having said, “O daughter of the Messenger of Allah! By Allah! Nobody is dearer to me than your father and your own self! By Allah! This does not stop me from setting the door of those who have assembled at your house ablaze!”

Muntakhab Kanz al-`Ummal (referred to in a footnote in Ahmed’s Musnad), Vol. 2, p. 174, from Ibn Aba Shaybah. Ibn Abul-Hadid, Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Vol. 2, p. 45 from al-Jawhari and al-Mughni to the judge `Abdullah, Part 20, Section 1, p. 335. Al-Murtada, Al-Shafi, Vol. 4, p. 110.

Also, refer to http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter4/5.html.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets look at it logically.

Is there a saheeh hadith of Umar threatening to burn down the door?

Did Bibi Fatima also have a miscarrige and die?

Did she not want any of the first three caliphs to come to her burial?

If so, the above few statements are not conclusive that she died by her door being burned down, but they suddenly do add a credible stance by which to begin to make such a claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salam brother,

Would you mind posting that narration? JazakAllah,

Wsalam

Depends firstly on what base you're authenticating it, if it's on the basis of Motawattir then there is a narration like that, if it is on the notion and basis of thiqqa narrators, there are narrations like that, if it is on the basis of a Saheeh Sanad, there are narrations like that, all about this event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends firstly on what base you're authenticating it, if it's on the basis of Motawattir then there is a narration like that, if it is on the notion and basis of thiqqa narrators, there are narrations like that, if it is on the basis of a Saheeh Sanad, there are narrations like that, all about this event.

Okay post these hadiths please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Okay post these hadiths please

Actually, let me give you one such Hadeeth, in Tareekh al-Islaam of al-Dhahabi (The famous Mohaddeth) writes a narration of Abu Bakr regretting three things he had done in his life, while on his death bed, one of those is the attack of Sayyeda Faatima [as]. (Content Page 117, 118). In al-Hadeeth al-Mokhtaarah, al-Maqdisi recorded narrations which he found to be Saheeh (Comments of al-Soyooti on the book saying he recorded only Saheeh narrations), in the content of the book (Pages 88, 89, 90) he recorded the tradition as he found it to be Saheeh (note the annotator does Tad`eef of this narration, not al-Maqdisi, and as per al-Soyooti as well as Maqdisi himself in his mission, he recorded only Saheeh narrations). I'm considering looking into the Tad`eef of the annotator and possibly answering the flaws of it. But you have two scholars who found the narration which includes the regret of Abu Bakr of this incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, let me give you one such Hadeeth, in Tareekh al-Islaam of al-Dhahabi (The famous Mohaddeth) writes a narration of Abu Bakr regretting three things he had done in his life, while on his death bed, one of those is the attack of Sayyeda Faatima [as]. (Content Page 117, 118). In al-Hadeeth al-Mokhtaarah, al-Maqdisi recorded narrations which he found to be Saheeh (Comments of al-Soyooti on the book saying he recorded only Saheeh narrations), in the content of the book (Pages 88, 89, 90) he recorded the tradition as he found it to be Saheeh (note the annotator does Tad`eef of this narration, not al-Maqdisi, and as per al-Soyooti as well as Maqdisi himself in his mission, he recorded only Saheeh narrations). I'm considering looking into the Tad`eef of the annotator and possibly answering the flaws of it. But you have two scholars who found the narration which includes the regret of Abu Bakr of this incident.

Nice research there, brother. But, if you want to have a really strong case for this, you should do a background check on al-Maqdisi, and his book. You need to see how much weight his opinion (that all the hadiths in his book are Saheeh) holds for Sunnis. Remember, that some Sunnis scholars, for example, Ahmed Sahkir, are very lenient with gradings, and thus, their gradings will not hold much weight for Sunnis, so it will not be really useful to use against them. If you can establish that al-Maqdisi's gradings are strong, and are heavily relied upon by Sunnis, then you will have a very strong case. Also, do you know what al-Dhahabi's grading for that hadith is? It would be great to see more muhaddith's opinions on this hadith.

Edited by Naruto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Nice research there, brother. But, if you want to have a really strong case for this, you should do a background check on al-Maqdisi, and his book. You need to see how much weight his opinion (that all the hadiths in his book are Saheeh) holds for Sunnis. Remember, that some Sunnis scholars, for example, Ahmed Sahkir, are very lenient with gradings, and thus, their gradings will not hold much weight for Sunnis, so it will not be really useful to use against them. If you can establish that al-Maqdisi's gradings are strong, and are heavily relied upon by Sunnis, then you will have a very strong case. Also, do you know what al-Dhahabi's grading for that hadith is? It would be great to see more muhaddith's opinions on this hadith.

Ayatullah al-Qazwini in a debate said that al-Dhahabi said this is weak because "His heart bears witness this is false" (يشهد القلب أنه باطل). Yup, clearly a very strong argument for Tad`eef. As for al-Maqdisi, he is just one example, I'll gather more examples of narrations, and I'll try looking into the Minhaaj of al-Maqdisi as well. Though obviously it'll never match the minhaaj of people like al-Bukhaaree. However, it is the mission of Maqdisi to collect the reliable narrations, and Jalal al-Deen al-Soyooti said he had succeeded. Nevertheless, as I gather more evidence I'll look into the matter. As for the moment I'm trying to translate what the annotator said the reasoning the Hadeeth is Dha`eef, so I can see if it is Dha`eef on legitimate reasons or no. But like I've quoted above from Asnaab al-Ashraaf, al-Dhahabi's work is not the only one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ayatullah al-Qazwini in a debate said that al-Dhahabi said this is weak because "His heart bears witness this is false" (يشهد القلب أنه باطل). Yup, clearly a very strong argument for Tad`eef. As for al-Maqdisi, he is just one example, I'll gather more examples of narrations, and I'll try looking into the Minhaaj of al-Maqdisi as well. Though obviously it'll never match the minhaaj of people like al-Bukhaaree. However, it is the mission of Maqdisi to collect the reliable narrations, and Jalal al-Deen al-Soyooti said he had succeeded. Nevertheless, as I gather more evidence I'll look into the matter. As for the moment I'm trying to translate what the annotator said the reasoning the Hadeeth is Dha`eef, so I can see if it is Dha`eef on legitimate reasons or no. But like I've quoted above from Asnaab al-Ashraaf, al-Dhahabi's work is not the only one.

May Allah (swt) help you in this task. I'll be looking forward to your thread.

Edited by Naruto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

May Allah (swt) help you in this task. I'll be looking forward to your thread.

InshaAllah. Also it seems that the narration is rejected on basis of `Olwaan Ibn Dawood al-Bijaalee, who is rejected in al-Majma`a al-Zawaa'ed. I'll need to look more into this narrator.

So am I. Personally I don't believe this incident occurred, at least not in the way generally portrayed by shias and nor do I think there are any saheeh narrations about the event (completely authentic that is...).

Would you mind if I asked your beliefs, and your doubts, so I'd have an idea of what I might need to address?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you mind if I asked your beliefs, and your doubts, so I'd have an idea of what I might need to address?

I like to approach things objectively, leaving traditional sunni and shia beliefs aside. However, I grew up as a shia so am very much aware of the story, and its variations. As I said, as far as I know, there are no authentic narrations on this, and the blame seems to lay on Umar, Qunfuz or even Khalid. Then there's a common narration which I think has a problem in the sanad with Abu Hussein Mohamed Bin Harun Bin Moussa.

In any case, I'll wait for your thread and then we can take it from there inshallah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So am I. Personally I don't believe this incident occurred, at least not in the way generally portrayed by shias and nor do I think there are any saheeh narrations about the event (completely authentic that is...).

I don't really have any problems with someone for doubting the incident, I previously have had doubts about it myself, and I have thought that Sayyed Fadhlallah's arguments against it were quite logical, but I haven't made a full decision about it yet. I need to look at both sides of the story. Perhaps Al-Ajal's thread will help finalize my decision... :D

I like to approach things objectively, leaving traditional sunni and shia beliefs aside. However, I grew up as a shia so am very much aware of the story, and its variations. As I said, as far as I know, there are no authentic narrations on this, and the blame seems to lay on Umar, Qunfuz or even Khalid. Then there's a common narration which I think has a problem in the sanad with Abu Hussein Mohamed Bin Harun Bin Moussa.

In any case, I'll wait for your thread and then we can take it from there inshallah.

You must be referring to this hadith, (http://realtashayyu.blogspot.com/2012/08/martyrdom-of-fatima.html) where Qunfuz is reported to have struck Fatima (as). The narrator you are referring to, is the first one in the isnad.

InshaAllah. Also it seems that the narration is rejected on basis of `Olwaan Ibn Dawood al-Bijaalee, who is rejected in al-Majma`a al-Zawaa'ed. I'll need to look more into this narrator.

Would you mind if I asked your beliefs, and your doubts, so I'd have an idea of what I might need to address?

If you haven't already, check him in Ibn Abi Hatim's rijal book, I heard it was the most important Sunni rijal book, http://shiaonlinelib...=الجرح والتعديل

Good luck. ;)

Edited by Naruto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't really have any problems with someone for doubting the incident, I previously have had doubts about it myself, and I have thought that Sayyed Fadhlallah's arguments against it were quite logical, but I haven't made a full decision about it yet. I need to look at both sides of the story. Perhaps Al-Ajal's thread will help finalize my decision... :D

If you haven't already, check him in Ibn Abi Hatim's rijal book, I heard it was the most important Sunni rijal book, http://shiaonlinelib...=الجرح والتعديل

Good luck. ;)

http://almujtaba.com/books/tragedy/ This was written as an answer to FadhlAllah's stance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

I like to approach things objectively cynically

I think that's the more correct word. Also, the narrator isn't really that controversial, Sayed Fadhlallah only put aside the hadith for being having "ibn Sinan" in it (saying it is either Abduallah or Muhammad)...but the hadith in its source says Abdullah b. Sinan.

في امان الله

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

If you haven't already, check him in Ibn Abi Hatim's rijal book, I heard it was the most important Sunni rijal book, http://shiaonlinelib...=الجرح والتعديل

Good luck. ;)

(bismillah)

(salam)

I did a bit of research on `Olwan b. Dawood al-Bijaalee. b. Hibban (Author of Saheeh Hibban and more) has included him in his book, al-Thiqqat (Volume 8 Person 14, Dār al-Fikr Beirut Lebanon 1975-1395 AH inspected by Sayyed Sharaf ad-Deen Ahmad) (scan-thank you to brother ___Nazm___ for getting it for me)

In the Hadeeth Business, b. Hibban's word carries some serious weight, here is a statement of Dhahabee on him: "The source of knowing reliable narrators is Bukhaaree's Tareekh, b. Abi Hatim, and b. Hibban." al-Moqaza Fee `Ilm Mastilah Hadeeth page 79.

Going further, to show more defence of b. Hibban it is also said about him: "And the one who speaks in regards to b. Hibban, b. Hibban was inconsistent in Hadeeth, that statement is wrong". Tadreeb ar-Rawi Fee Sharh Taqreeb an-Nawawee Volume 1 page 108, `Abd al-Rehman b. Abee Bakr as-Soyootee, Maktab ar-Riyaadh al-Hadeetha Riyadh, Inspected by `Abd al-Wahab `Abd al-Lateef.

I'm going to write more about this being Motawattir and the 3 chains later, but this is enough for the moment.

(salam)

Edited by Al-Ajal Ya Imam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

I did a bit of research on `Olwan b. Dawood al-Bijaalee. b. Hibban (Author of Saheeh Hibban and more) has included him in his book, al-Thiqqat (Volume 8 Person 14, Dār al-Fikr Beirut Lebanon 1975-1395 AH inspected by Sayyed Sharaf ad-Deen Ahmad) (scan-thank you to brother ___Nazm___ for getting it for me)

In the Hadeeth Business, b. Hibban's word carries some serious weight, here is a statement of Dhahabee on him: "The source of knowing reliable narrators is Bukhaaree's Tareekh, b. Abi Hatim, and b. Hibban." al-Moqaza Fee `Ilm Mastilah Hadeeth page 79.

Going further, to show more defence of b. Hibban it is also said about him: "And the one who speaks in regards to b. Hibban, b. Hibban was inconsistent in Hadeeth, that statement is wrong". Tadreeb ar-Rawi Fee Sharh Taqreeb an-Nawawee Volume 1 page 108, `Abd al-Rehman b. Abee Bakr as-Soyootee, Maktab ar-Riyaadh al-Hadeetha Riyadh, Inspected by `Abd al-Wahab `Abd al-Lateef.

I'm going to write more about this being Motawattir and the 3 chains later, but this is enough for the moment.

(salam)

Good find, but I have read that there is some criticism about Ibn Hibban with regards to doing tawtheeq on majhool narrators. Take a look: http://islamic-forum...showtopic=14818

This should also be useful to you: http://islamic-forum...402#entry129599

(I know you don't trust the thread poster, but he does provide references :P)

I think it would be safer to see another muhaddith's opinion on 'Alwaan.

Edited by Naruto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Good find, but I have read that there is some criticism about Ibn Hibban with regards to doing tawtheeq on majhool narrators. Take a look: http://islamic-forum...showtopic=14818

This should also be useful to you: http://islamic-forum...402#entry129599

(I know you don't trust the thread poster, but he does provide references :P)

I think it would be safer to see another muhaddith's opinion on 'Alwaan.

As far as I've read, he's Dha`eef on the basis of him narrating Monkar traditions, to quote Ibn Hajr al-Asqalanee on that: 'If it is ruled one who has narrated Monkar traditions should be included amongst weak narrators, in that case no one will remain valid.' Leesaan al-Meezaan volume 2 page 207, Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani ash-Shafi`ee, Mausasal `Aalamee Lee al-Matba'oot Beirut, 1986-1406 AH, third edition, inespected Dairat al-Ma`rifah Nizamiyya India.

Furthermore, the Hadeeth is reported on three chains, such as: from Tabranee (The author) and it goes: Hameed b. Mokhallad al-`Azdee (Thiqqa by b. Hajr), `Othmaan b. Saleh as-Sahmee (Narrator of Bukhaaree and Muslim-b. Hajr), Layth as-Sahmee (Narrator of Bukhaaree and Muslim-b. Hajr), `Olwan b. Dawood (as discussed thiqqa to b. Hibban), Saleh b. Kisaan (Narrator of Bukhaaree and Muslim-b. Hajr), Homayd b. `Abd ar-Rehman b. Awf (Narrator of Bukhaaree and Muslim-b. Hajr), `Abd al-Rehman b. Awf (Sahaba and thus his standing is clear by the Sunnis).

Another: Ibn Wahab, Ibn Ayyaz, Layth b. Sa`ad, Saleh b. Kisaan, Homayd b. `Abd ar-Rehman b. Awf, `Abd ar-Rehman b. Awf

Another that b. Asakeer uses: Abu al-Barakat `Abd Allaah b. Mohammad b. Fadhl & Omm al-Moayyad Nazieen, Mohammad b. Fadhl b. Abee Harb, Abu Bakr Ahmad b. Hassan, Abu al-Abbas Ahmad b. Ya`qoob, Hassan b. Mokarram b. Hassan Bazzar Aboo `Alee Baghdad, Abu al-Haytham Khaled b. Qasim, Layth b. Sa`ad, Saleh b. Kisaan, Homayd b. `Abd ar-Rehman b. `Awf, `Abd ar-Rehman b. Awf

Allahu `Alam how many more there are, these are what I've found so far. It's a Mash'hoor Hadeeth, so in the case that it truly is that b. Dawood is really just weak and useless, you have 2 more paths making Mash'hoor. I'll keep searching for a few more chains, about 2 more and it is considered Motawattir.

Edited by Al-Ajal Ya Imam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

I talked about the reliability of the narration provided in Asnaab al-Ashraaf, let me give a breakdown of the chain of narrators over here. Firstly, let me give the report of Asnaab al-Ashraaf again to be seen: Madaa'eni->Muslimah b. Maharib->Sulayman Teemee->Ibn `Awn: Abu Bakr sent for `Alee [as] to pay allegiance to him, and when he refused, he sent `Umar to the house of FaaTimah [as] with a burning torch. FaaTimah [as] said 'Oh son of al-Khattab, do you want to burn down my door?' `Umar replied 'Yes, this would strengthen the religion of your father.' as recorded in al-Baladhuri's Asnaab al-Ashraaf volume 1 pp. 586. Now the examination of the chain of narrators:

1. Madaa'eni: "Allamah, Hafiz, Sadiq, Abu al-Hasan `Alee b. Mohammad b. `Abd-Allah b. Abee Sayf Madaa'eni Akhbaaree: He was a historian, and knowledgeable on battles, expeditions, and poetry. and regarding these matters, he is included among the reliable reporters. Yahya b. Mo'en has said regarding him thrice: He is reliable, he is reliable, he is reliable." Seeyaar `Alam an-Noblah volume 10 page 401, by al-Dhahabi (d. 748 ah.) mawsisat ar-Risaalah, Beirut, 9th edition, published 1413, inspected by Shoo`ayb ar-Rna`oot

2. Muslimah b. Maharib: He is recorded in Ibn Hibban's ath-Thiqqat (Book of reliable narrators) volume 7 pp. 490

3. Sulayman Teemee: "Rabi` b. Yahya narrated from Sho'bah b. Hajjaj that: 'I have not seen anyone more truthful than Sulayman, Wherever he narrated traditions from the holy Prophet [saawaws], his expression would change.'" as recorded by al-Mizzi in Tahdheeb al-Kamaal volume 12 pp. 8 under the biography of Sulayman b. Tarqan at-Teemee.

4. `Abd-Allah b. `Awn: This is where this narration comes to question, as he has usually been seen having the status of Tabi'ee, not Sahaba, thus they say this chain is cut off. However, argument is swiftly killed with the following biographies of him: "Ibn `Awn was very eager to see the Prophet [saawaws], and shortly before the passing away of the Prophet [saawaws], he had the chance to see him, and was extremely elated due to this." Recorded in Tabaqat al-Kubra volume 7 page 198, under the bio. of `Abd-Allah b. `Awn b. Arabatan (3232), Daar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyya, Beirut, Lebanon. Therefore he was present during the Prophet [saawaws]'s last days, so whether he is given the status of Sahaba or Tabi`ee, it doesn't matter seeing as he was present with the Prophet [saawaws] and in Madeenah in those days. Now as for his grading: "I have not seen anyone superior to Ibn `Awn, and Sho'bah has said: 'My doubt about Ibn `Awn is better and more acceptable than the certainty of others." Seeyar `Alam an-Noblah volume 6 pp. 265 of al-Dhahabi same edition as mentioned above. Mizzi also records him with good statements in Tahdheeb al-Kamaal volume 15 pp. 369 (1980 Beirut first edition, Mawsisat ar-Risaalah inspected by Dr. Bishar Ma`roof).

(salam)

This is undeniable fact that Umar attacked the House of Fatima s.a.

Sunni try to play hide and seek with this incident becoz their hatred towards Fatmah s.a and love towards Abu Bakr.

They do also have a siqah play. It is like this they feel bad with good people if they tell truth. Everything is alright but "my heart does not accept" etc etc...

Edited by ___NAZM___
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is undeniable fact that Umar attacked the House of Fatima s.a.

Sunni try to play hide and seek with this incident becoz there hatred towards Fatmah s.a and love towards Abu Bakr.

They do also have a siqah play. It like they feel bad with good people if they tell truth

They'll always come up with an excuse. ;)

They'll do their best to weaken this hadith, I'm sure of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

What was Imam Ali doing when this was happening? I cannot imagine him not able to fight Umar khattab .

(bismillah)

(salam)

From what I have written here. As per history, he did fight in the first place, to quote the narration:

"`Omar asked for the fire and ignited it at the door of the house and the door broke. He opened it and entered. Sayyida FaaTimah az-Zahra [as] came to him and screamed: 'Oh Father, Oh Rasool Allah [saawaws]!' `Omar raised his sword while it was covered and hit at the side of FaaTimah [as]. FaaTimah called out again: 'Oh father!' `Omar raised the whip and hit at the side of FaaTimah [as]. She called out again: 'Ya Rasool Allah [saawaws]! See how Abu Bakr and `Omar are behaving with your family!' Alee [as] came all of a sudden and seized the collar of `Omar and pulled him down so hard that he fell down. Then he punched him on his nose and neck and wanted to eliminate him, but he remembered the statement of the Prophet [saawaws] the request of Him [saawaws], so he stood up and said: 'Oh son of SaHHak, by the one who sent Mohammad [saawaws], if divine covenant of the Prophet [saawaws] had not been there on my neck, you would have known that you would not have been able to enter my house.'"Kitaab Solaym b. Qays al-Hillali pp. 568, written by Solaym b. Qays Hillali, Intisharat Hadi, Qum, First Edition, 1405 ah.

What this request that the Imaam [as] stopped for, it is written in al-Khasa'es:

"Imaam Kadhem [as] says that he asked his father, Imaam as-Sadiq [as]: 'What happened when Rasool Allah [saawaws] had swooned?' My father replied: 'Ladies entered and started wailing. MoHajireen and Ansaar gathered and expressed sorrow and grief. `Alee [as] said, Suddenly they called me; I entered and threw myself on the body of Rasool Allah [saawaws]. He [saawaws] said: My brother, these people would abandon me and become engrossed in their worldly activities, but all this should not prevent you from attending to me. Your smile in my Ummah is like the smile of the Kaabah that Allah has made it a sign so that they may come to it from far off places...when I am no more and when you have concluded what I have willed you to do, and you have placed my body in the grave, sit at home and compile the Qur`aan as I have ordered, on the basis of obligatory acts, laws, and sequence of revelation. I advise you to observe patience in what befalls you and FaaTimah [as] at the hands of these people. Make patience your habit till you meet me.'" Khasa'es al-Aa'ima [as] pp. 73, Abu al-Hasan Mohammad b. Hussain b. Moosah al-Moosawi al-Baghdadi, Shareef Raadhi, edited and compiled by Dr. Mohammad Hadi Amini, Majma'ul Bahuth al-Islamiyya Astana Rizvia Moqaddasia, Mashad, Iran, 1406 ah. Also recorded in BiHaar al-Anwaar volume 22 pp. 484, written by Allamah Mohammad Baqir Majlisi [ra], edited by Mohammad Baqir Bahbudi, Mausas al-Wafa, Beirut Lebanon, Second Corrected edition, 1403-1983.

Another huge reason he did not and could not fight was due to lack of support, it would have had been foolish to fight:

O' People! Steer clear through the waves of mischief by boats of deliverance, turn away from the path of dissension and put off the crowns of pride. Prosperous is one who rises with wings (i.e. when he has power) or else he remains peaceful and others enjoy ease. It (i.e. the aspiration for Caliphate) is like turbid water or like a morsel that would suffocate the person who swallows it. One who plucks fruits before ripening is like one who cultivated in another's field. If I speak out they would call me greedy towards power but if I keep quiet they would say I was afraid of death. It is a pity that after all the ups and downs (I have been through). By Allah the son of Abu Talib is more familiar with death than an infant with the breast of its mother. I have hidden knowledge, if I disclose it you will start trembling like ropes in deep wells. [Nahj al-Balaghah speech 5]

And another reason for the peacefulness of the Imaam [as] in this situation, the more obvious reason as well. If he had hypothetically fought, he would have had been eventually killed, Imaam Hussain [as] was just as much a lion as Imaam `Alee [as], and he killed hundreds if not thousands of men on `Ashoorah until he was eventually killed. Muslim b. Aqeel [as] fought hundreds of men the day of his capture in Koofah, and killed many, but was eventually captured himself as well. The thing is that Shiism was more widespread in those days than the days of ImaamAlee [as]. Only 5 men could afford to come openly Shi`a (Hudhayfa, Salman, Miqdad, Abu Dharr, and Ammar if you refer to the narration of the shaving of the heads), whereas the rest whoever stuck with Imaam `Alee [as] could not afford to come out. So due to lack of support, and lack of options, and the fact that if he had fought, they all would have died and Shi`ism would have died then, he chose to remain silent. However, as quoted he did beat the [Edited Out] out of `Omar until he regained his calm. But another issue appears, if being forced to remain quiet means you are a good for nothing coward, then wasn't Rasool Allah [saawaws] a coward (AstaghfirAllah as he was not) when he was unable to help the early Muslims who were tortured to death by the Qoraysh. Even the bull series "`Omar" that was produced by MBC shows the torture on a mass scale, and remember the killing of the family of Ammar b. Yassir [ra], Rasool Allah [saawaws] did nothing in those days because he was unable to, but we don't deem him a coward for that.

Based on all this we see that the Imaam [as] did fight, but due to the reccomendation of the Prophet [saawaws], and due to the fact that it would've been foolish to fight, he chose patience.

(salam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another reason for the peacefulness of the Imaam [as] in this situation, the more obvious reason as well. If he had hypothetically fought, he would have had been eventually killed,

(salam)

From what I have written here. As per history, he did fight in the first place, to quote the narration:

asalam alaikum did he or didnt he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

asalam alaikum did he or didnt he?

I believe he did fight but stopped before going any further. When Fatima A.S got hurt by Umar, imam Ali stepped in, there is no way he just watched, but we know Fatima A.S didn't die that instance therefore Imam Ali attacked them and stopped because he knew what the prophet said, also the ummah was in his hands, he will not destroy the ummah. Then we know Fatima stayed angry with Omar abu baker till her death. BTW this is the daughter of the prophet if you didn't know. How can you defend a "companion" over the flesh of the prophet?

All of the infallibles sacrificed their life for Islam, not for desire or anger. Imam Ali never fought cause of anger. It was always for Allah.

*I'm on my phone I can't type a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe he did fight but stopped before going any further. When Fatima A.S got hurt by Umar, imam Ali stepped in, there is no way he just watched, but we know Fatima A.S didn't die that instance therefore Imam Ali attacked them and stopped because he knew what the prophet said, also the ummah was in his hands, he will not destroy the ummah. Then we know Fatima stayed angry with Omar abu baker till her death. BTW this is the daughter of the prophet if you didn't know. How can you defend a "companion" over the flesh of the prophet?

All of the infallibles sacrificed their life for Islam, not for desire or anger. Imam Ali never fought cause of anger. It was always for Allah.

*I'm on my phone I can't type a lot.

wow thanks for the insight ok ......what do you mean by ummah in his hands?he didnt want to destroy the ummah? in what sense? for you are still saying he umar ra did it but the ummah is still one and not destroyed we would defend daughter of prophet saws than a sahabi ra but somehow for the orthodox majority sunni muslim this never occured to the 1.3 billion sunnis of the ummah only a minority believe it

and for your last comment all the infallibles sacrificed for islam and not for desire or anger then........why did ali ra grab umar ra? was it a divine revelation?

Read what I wrote there, I was crystal clear

lol in one you say IF HE WOULD HAVE FOUGHT then next you say HE DID FIGHT its confusing then you write a qiyas of martyedom of sumayyah ra and how prophet saws didnt act but kept silent but on the other you say ali ra fought with umar ra? the two incidents differ greatly especially if you know the story of sumayyah ra

and anyway i heard that shia arent allowed to do qiyas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

lol in one you say IF HE WOULD HAVE FOUGHT then next you say HE DID FIGHT its confusing then you write a qiyas of martyedom of sumayyah ra and how prophet saws didnt act but kept silent but on the other you say ali ra fought with umar ra? the two incidents differ greatly especially if you know the story of sumayyah ra

and anyway i heard that shia arent allowed to do qiyas?

(bismillah)

(salam)

Let me dumb it down since you don't seem to understand. He did fight `Omar at the beginning, however, stopped himself due to what the Prophet [saawaws] had advised him, and the added issue that he had not enough support, so if he did fight and got eventually martyred, then Shi`ism would stop, not something wanted, therefore, he chose the better path and remained patient in this issue. Also, Qiyaas=Personal interpretation, I said we don't accuse the Prophet [saawaws] of cowardice for not fighting when these things were happening and that was backed with the Daleel of him not fighting when Somayya [ra] and Yasser [ra], amongst other early martyred Sahaba were killed, and what was the difference of the two situations?

(salam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

wow thanks for the insight ok ......what do you mean by ummah in his hands?he didnt want to destroy the ummah? in what sense? for you are still saying he umar ra did it but the ummah is still one and not destroyed we would defend daughter of prophet saws than a sahabi ra but somehow for the orthodox majority sunni muslim this never occured to the 1.3 billion sunnis of the ummah only a minority believe it

and for your last comment all the infallibles sacrificed for islam and not for desire or anger then........why did ali ra grab umar ra? was it a divine revelation?

First I will give you articles in which you can see for yourself. They ONLY use AUTHENTIC SOURCES.

http://valiasr-aj-english.weebly.com/uploads/7/5/6/8/7568784/why_didnt_imam_ali_as_react_when_he_witnessed_his_wife_being_attacked.pdf

http://valiasr-aj-english.weebly.com/uploads/7/5/6/8/7568784/final_why_did_lady_fatima_as_open_the_door.pdf

Brother, can you type clearly, I cant really understand your english. I will break down your post.

1. What do you mean by ummah in his hands?

-Simple, Imam Ali was family of the prophet, not only that but his position to Prophet Muhammad was Aaron as to Musa A.S. The ummah looked up to him. He represented the prophet and his family. The prophets daughter was married to him. He had lots of responsibility. Even if you dont believe in the imamate of Ali A.S, logically you have to agree a divine imam must be the protector of the religion. That is the main duty of an imam. Therefore, his actions must be precise in Allah's plans. The ummah was starting to crack at the result of illegally choosing a person to succeed. All of the best of the prophets companions were with Imam Ali. If Imam Ali ended up killing omar, there would have been even more bloodshed, and the religion would have been destroyed from the outside. Remember the prophet just completed the message of Allah, other religions and regions were still trying to destroy Islam. If a civil war began as a result of self defense by Imam Ali, would do you think would happen. Also, as a divinely chosen being, he must not act in anger or desire.

2. "umar did it but the umah i still one"

-In what sense, bidha being prevalent in the religion? Tawheed being changed, wrong wudhu, wrong theology, bringing and banning new laws without Allah's permission...etc. Another thing, if it wasnt for our imams, our religion would have been no different then Christianity, for all we know there would have been no quran or "Allah". What do you think Imam Hussain's sacrifice was for? What about all the imams up to Imam Sadiq? New source of knowledge and information, looking into the deen of Allah, jurisprudence, fiq, philosophy...Dont forget Imam Mahdi who inshAllah will bring peace.

3. Why did Ali grab umar? divine revelation?

-Seriously brother?! You think Imam Ali will just watch Fatima A.S get attacked. Self defense, Allah allows it.

Just for a side note: You dont have to be an imam or prophet to get divine revelation, proof from the quran:

And We REVEALED to the mother of Moses: Suckle (thy child) but when

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

thou hast fears about him cast him into the river but fear not

nor grieve: for We shall restore him to thee and We shall make

him one of Our apostles. (Quran 28:7)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...