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
Sign in to follow this  
MohammadAli1993

Did Sayeda Fatimah Zahra (s.a) get really attacks?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

SalamAlaykum Brothers and sisters 

A question that came in my mind was, 

Do we have any narrations of the Caliphs attacking the Daughter of the Prophet in our Books? And if yes are they Authentic. 

I'm not doubting the event but one must look through subjective lenses. 

Would really appreciate if brothers/sisters share Hadiths on this platform. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MohammadAli1993 said:

Would really appreciate if brothers/sisters share Hadiths on this platform. 

Question:

Can you please provide reliable Shia and Sunni sources on the event that led to martyrdom of Lady Fatima al-Zahra (a.s.)?

Answer:

The Eminent Sheikh At-Tusi wrote: “One of the denied facts is that they (Umar and his followers) hit Fatima (the blessing of Allah be upon her) although it has been narrated that they flogged her with a strip and a famous opinion that no one amongst the Shia scholars dispute about, is that Umar hit her on her stomach (womb) until she was forced to have a miscarriage, where the miscarried baby was named Mohassan. The narration (of the event) is even famous amongst them (the Sunnis), as well as the narration of their intention to burn her house when a group of sincere companions who had refused to pay allegiance and sought refuge to her house. And no one can deny this narration because we have proven it from amongst the Sunni sources through the narration of Al-Balathari and others, and the Shia narrations are numerous and our scholars indisputably accept them.”
(Talkhis Al-Shafi 3:156)

 As for the Shia narrations, it suffices to mention a few of them.

1) Ibn Qawlawayh narrated in his book ‘Kamilul Ziyarat’ in a reliable hadith from Hammad Bin ‘Uthman from Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s.): On the night of the Prophet’s ascension, it was said to him (the Prophet): “Allah will test you in three things” and he started counting them… then he said “as for your daughter, she will be oppressed and deprived (of her right) and her right (to Fadak) that you will give to her will be seized from her and she will be hit while she is pregnant, and her house (and privacy of her family) will be entered without permission, then weakness and humiliation will be inflicted upon her and she will not be able to prevent it, and she will miscarry her baby from all the hits she will suffer, and she will die as a result of those hits … and the murder of Muhassan bin Ali will be the first crime that the killer (Umar) will be accountable, and then Qunfuth, so they will both attend (the judgement).” (Kamilul Ziyarat 232)

2) Yunus bin Ya’qub has narrated from Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s.) that the Imam said: O Yunus! My grandfather the Messenger of Allah said “Cursed is the one who will oppress my daughter Fatima after I die, and seize her right and kill her!” (Kanzul Fawa-id 1:149)

3) Al-Kulayni has narrated from Abi Basir from Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s.) who said: Amir Al-mumineen (i.e. Imam Ali) said: “Your miscarried babies whom you do not name before they die, will meet you on the Day of Judgement, and the baby will ask it’s father “Did you not give me a name?” Verily the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) named Muhassan before he was to be born.” (Al-Kafi 6:18)

4) Muhammad bin Harun Al-Talakbari has narrated in a reliable narration from Abi Basir from Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s.) who said: Fatima was born on the twentieth day of Jamadil-akhira, forty-five years after the birth of the Prophet. And the cause of her death was that Qunfuth, the slave of the man (i.e. Abu Bakr), by the command of his master (Abu Bakr), hit her with his sword, from which she miscarried Muhassan, and she became severely ill from this event. And she did not allow anyone of those whom harmed her to enter her house. There were two of the companions of the Prophet (i.e. Umar and Abu Bakr) who asked Amir Al-mumineen (Imam Ali) to intercede on their behalf (and ask Fatima to allow them to enter). He (Imam Ali) asked her and she permitted (for them to enter). When they entered, they remarked “How are you O daughter of the Messenger of Allah?” She replied “I am well, praise to Allah”. Then she told them both, “Have you not heard the Prophet say “Fatima is a part of me, whosoever hurts her has in fact hurt me, and whoever hurts me has in fact hurt Allah”?” They both affirmed that. She said “I swear by Allah that you have both hurt me.” So they both left the house and she was displeased with them.   (Dala-il Al-Imamah 45)

5) Sayyed Bin Tawoos has narrated in his book Al-Turaf on the authority of Imam Al-Kathim (a.s.) who said: When the Messenger of Allah was in the last stages of his life, he summoned people of the Ansar and told them “Verily Fatima’s door is my door and her house is my house, whosoever violates it has in fact violated the sanctity of Allah.” The Imam cried for a while and could not continue his words, then he said: “I swear by Allah, the sanctity of Allah has been violated! I swear by Allah, the sanctity of Allah has been violated! I swear by Allah, the sanctity of Allah has been violated! O my mother, blessings of Allah upon her!”  (Bihar Al-Anwar 22:476).

Allah’s peace and blessings be upon Lady Fatima, the day she was born, the day she passed away, and the day she will be resurrected.

http://www.askthesheikh.com/can-you-provide-reliable-shiasunni-sources-on-martyrdom-of-lady-fatima-al-zahra-a-s/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MohammadAli1993 said:

The 4th Narration it mentions she was hit with a sword but is that true?? 

The most true meaning of it is the scabbard & hitting by its chape

https://fa.glosbe.com/fa/en/غلاف شمشیر

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MohammadAli1993 said:

SalamAlaykum Brothers and sisters 

A question that came in my mind was, 

Do we have any narrations of the Caliphs attacking the Daughter of the Prophet in our Books? And if yes are they Authentic. 

I'm not doubting the event but one must look through subjective lenses. 

Would really appreciate if brothers/sisters share Hadiths on this platform. 

There isn't a single authentic narration that suggests an actual attack took place in a specific manner. However for history, we don't just apply rigid authenticity. What we do have is varying conflicting reports. Some claim the door was broken, some claim Zubayr ran out and was captured, some claim he said so what, and left it there, some remain silent. The truth is, there is very strong evidence and even reliable traditions in Sunni works that claim a threat was made. However, beyond a threat we have no idea what actually took place with any certainty, and no matter how much  we may strongly dislike  some personalities, the truth is we don't know what happened. Furthermore, there were grown men in that house, men from the Bani Hashim, other companions too, who would have broken anyones arms off if they touched Lady Fatima [as].  

To think Umar went in there, hit her a few times, and pushed her over while people all watched i think is one of the most farcical things. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but it is hard to believe and there isn't any good evidence for that version at all. I'm willing to debate anyone on this. I will accept, he threatened to burn down the house of Ali [as] and Fatima [as] and to me, that deserves ultimate condemnation, and anything done after that is insult to injury. 

If your pregnant wife was standing somewhere, and your cousins, closest companions and you - the best warrior in that era- were standing there, and someone walks in, goes to your wife, slaps her, hits her, and then hits her again, but you, grown men around you, do absolutely nothing and stand there, does that even make sense ?   A womans honour was and even today is a massive source of pride. You don't have to go and kill the guy, but the least you can do is block any attacks on your wife and jump instantly. 

Now, given he made the threat, if he decided break down the house, and Fatima [as] thinking these men would respect she was the daughter of the Apostle [saw] was behind the door shouting out to them to leave, and they broke it and hurt her indirectly in the process, that is much more believable and very plausible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"1) Ibn Qawlawayh narrated in his book ‘Kamilul Ziyarat’ in a reliable hadith from Hammad Bin ‘Uthman from Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s.): On the night of the Prophet’s ascension, it was said to him (the Prophet): “Allah will test you in three things” and he started counting them… then he said “as for your daughter, she will be oppressed and deprived (of her right) and her right (to Fadak) that you will give to her will be seized from her and she will be hit while she is pregnant, and her house (and privacy of her family) will be entered without permission, then weakness and humiliation will be inflicted upon her and she will not be able to prevent it, and she will miscarry her baby from all the hits she will suffer, and she will die as a result of those hits … and the murder of Muhassan bin Ali will be the first crime that the killer (Umar) will be accountable, and then Qunfuth, so they will both attend (the judgement).” (Kamilul Ziyarat 232)"

Is this reliable ? If we're going to accept anything because it is in a book, then our religion becomes accepting anything and everything.

Secondly, to think Ali [as], many grown men of the Banu Hashim, and several other companions stood there as the daughter of Muhammed [saw] who was pregnant was being beaten up, i say, is incredibly heard to believe.  

Just imagine Fatima [as] standing there, and grown members of her family and her husband and their companions around her, while Umar walks in. Imagine him starting to beat her up, and these grown men, Ali [as] and their supporters doing absolutely nothing and watching that scene. 

I'm sorry, i don't buy it. Maybe it happened , but given conflicting accounts of what transpired, i am going to withhold judgement and not make bold claims that such and such definitely occurred. 

It's not even an Aqeedah issue, it's not a fundamental article of faith and believing in this or not has no bearing on your salvation. It's a historical debate based on very conflicting information. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 ‘Abdullah ibn Sinan who cites Imam al-Sadiq (as) saying the following:

Abu Bakr wrote a title of her ownership of Fadak, so she went out and the title was in her hand. ‘’Umar [ibn al-Khattab] met her. He said to her, “What is this piece of paper which you are holding, O Daughter of Muhammed?” She said, “A title written for me by Abu Bakr whereby he restored my ownership of Fadak.” He said, “Give it to me.” She refused to give it to him, so he kicked her with his foot, and she was big with Muhsin, causing her to miscarry. Then he slapped her. It is as though I can see an earring in her ear being broken. Then he took the title and tore it to pieces. She left, and she remained sick for seventy-five days because of ‘’Umar thus beating her, following which incident she died

 Al-Mufid, Al-Ikhtisas, p. 185. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, starlight said:

 ‘Abdullah ibn Sinan who cites Imam al-Sadiq (as) saying the following:

Abu Bakr wrote a title of her ownership of Fadak, so she went out and the title was in her hand. ‘’Umar [ibn al-Khattab] met her. He said to her, “What is this piece of paper which you are holding, O Daughter of Muhammed?” She said, “A title written for me by Abu Bakr whereby he restored my ownership of Fadak.” He said, “Give it to me.” She refused to give it to him, so he kicked her with his foot, and she was big with Muhsin, causing her to miscarry. Then he slapped her. It is as though I can see an earring in her ear being broken. Then he took the title and tore it to pieces. She left, and she remained sick for seventy-five days because of ‘’Umar thus beating her, following which incident she died

 Al-Mufid, Al-Ikhtisas, p. 185. 

This is in direct contradiction to the reports that claimed he went to her house. This account here is farcical.  I don't even need to ask for the reliability to judge this as extremely odd. 

'Fake News' isn't something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

This is in direct contradiction to the reports that claimed he went to her house. This account here is farcical.  I don't even need to ask for the reliability to dismiss this.

You think this is absurd?That doesn't change the facts. Maybe you know history better than Al Mufeed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MohammadAli1993 said:

The 4th Narration it mentions she was hit with a sword but is that true?? 

They all contradict, none of them are reliable, and many of them were probably fabricated and motivated by sectarian motives. We don't know what happened, Allah will inform us inshAllah. 

People have cursed the above scholar and spread rumours about him over a historical non-issue . He never denied anything, he just paused and reflected. Either way, he is more well versed than almost anyone who abuses him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, starlight said:

You think this is absurd?That doesn't change the facts. Maybe you know history better than Al Mufeed?

Are you aware that Majlisi has a biography of Muhammed [saw] which i have on my shelf, which is replete with the most weak narrations you may ever have seen ? The author of Bihar al-Anwar who claimed the Quran was distorted. Shaykh Saduq, the teacher of Mufid, differed with his student on so many many issues, and our own scholars clash on many issues. Furthermore, a general principle when it comes to history is that there are many conflicting sources and we sometimes what scholars would do is just put one interpretation up, or two up, and they often differed and contradicted. Appealing to authority here also won't help.

Either-way , how will you reconcile this with the idea he went to her house, walked in, and began violently beating her in front of Ali [as] , grown members of her family, and their companions ? Isn't that where she was meant to have miscarried? 

Out of the dozen or so totally contradicting accounts on what happened, what objective means do you use to ascertain what did happen? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Either-way , how will you reconcile this with the idea he went to her house, walked in, and began violently beating her in front of Ali [as] , grown members of her family, and their companions ? 

Classic sunni argument.

1.Whether companions were present in the house or not is not clear.

2. Prophet (saw) left Ali(as) with a task,for him completing that was foremost. Had Ali (as) reacted to what Umar was doing and allowed himself to get provoked where do you think it would have ended up?The man who lifted the door of Khyber vs the one who ran away from Jihads??  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Rasoul Allah ordered Amir al mo2mineen to be patient.  Rasoul Allah has knowledge of the unseen, just like he knew what will happen to Imam Hussain he also knew what will happen to his daughter.  That's why he whispered in her ear that she will be the first to follow him after death.

Imam Hussain sacrificed his entire family to preserve Islam.  You think Rasoul Allah wouldn't sacrifice his daughter for deen al haq?  Everyday mothers and fathers send their sons to sacrifice for deen al haq, our blood is not more precious than of Sayyida Fatima.

If your Imam of the Time arrives and asks you to do something will you do it?  He tells you to divorce your wife?  Will you do it?  

What do we learn from the knowledge of Khudr compared to Nabe Moussa and how he promised not to ask any questions and be patient.  Nabe Moussa couldn't tolerate but to ask in all three incidents!  I beleive Amir al mo2mineen has a higher status than Nabee Moussa.  I think you have a problem with this view since one particular group does not beleive Imams are higher than the Prophets. 

Sayyid Mohammad Hussain Fad'Allah is now at dar al haq.  He will face his grandmother, if she wants to pardon or forgive her grandson that is her right.  That is all I will say about SMHF.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, starlight said:

Classic sunni argument.

1.Whether companions were present in the house or not is not clear.

2. Prophet (saw) left Ali(as) with a task,for him completing that was foremost. Had Ali (as) reacted to what Umar was doing and allowed himself to get provoked where do you think it would have ended up?The man who lifted the door of Khyber vs the one who ran away from Jihads??  

1. Historically there is far stronger evidence other companions were present. It is pretty much accepted that along with Ali [as], members of the Banu Hashim and other notable companions opposed Umar, and gathered in the house of Ali [as] and Fatima [as] in a show of defiance. Many, many reports give this picture and many of them have been used by many Shias in debates. 

2. Secondly, we aren't saying Ali [as] should have fought Umar. What is being said is that of a man comes into your house, hits your wife, kicks her, and hits her again, and you, and other grown men in your family and other companions who not only love you, but love the Prophet [saw] above you and honour the sanctity of the daughter of the Apostle don't even try to get in the way or break up the assault before it can start , that is extremely questionable.

3. As i have said, you presented an account of her miscarriage which absolutely contradicts what you here on pulpits - how do you reconcile that, and is not bringing forth that only proof of what i am saying in the myriad of contradicting accounts of what happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Laayla said:

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Rasoul Allah ordered Amir al mo2mineen to be patient.  Rasoul Allah has knowledge of the unseen, just like he knew what will happen to Imam Hussain he also knew what will happen to his daughter.  That's why he whispered in her ear that she will be the first to follow him after death.

Imam Hussain sacrificed his entire family to preserve Islam.  You think Rasoul Allah wouldn't sacrifice his daughter for deen al haq?  Everyday mothers and fathers send their sons to sacrifice for deen al haq, our blood is not more precious than of Sayyida Fatima.

If your Imam of the Time arrives and asks you to do something will you do it?  He tells you to divorce your wife?  Will you do it?  

What do we learn from the knowledge of Khudr compared to Nabe Moussa and how he promised not to ask any questions and be patient.  Nabe Moussa couldn't tolerate but to ask in all three incidents!  I beleive Amir al mo2mineen has a higher status than Nabee Moussa.  I think you have a problem with this view since one particular group does not beleive Imams are higher than the Prophets. 

Sayyid Mohammad Hussain Fad'Allah is now at dar al haq.  He will face his grandmother, if she wants to pardon or forgive her grandson that is her right.  That is all I will say about SMHF.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

Sister, Sayed Fadllulah will not require any pardoning by Lady Fatima [as].

He has authored one of the most beautiful books  and given the most beautiful talks on her: 

1. http://english.bayynat.org/History/History_LadyFatima.htm#.WnDdmracZZ0

2. http://english.bayynat.org/infallibles/infallible_SpectacularFatima.htm#.WnDeZ7acZZ0

Key points:

1.  Is Sayed Fadllulah lying when he mentioned that while there is strong evidence a threat was made (and that he says is sufficient enough to condemn the whole affair) what occurred after is hotly disputed because in all the sources there are varying conflicting accounts? 

2. Is he wrong when he merely questions how Lady Fatima could be kicked, punched and repeatedly slapped in a room full of her family members - grown men of the Banu Hashim, other loyal companions as well as Ali [as], who did nothing to even pull her out of the way, or get in the way, even if we argue they were not to fight ?

3. Is he wrong when he says the best position is that it is wrong to deny, or strongly affirm, but to let Allah [swt] inform us what happened ? 

The infallible Fatima (a.s.)

infallible_fatima.jpgThe daughter of the Messenger of Allah (p), and the wife of the Commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali (a.s.), is the subject of a book written by His Eminence, Sayyed Muhammad Hussein Fadlullah.  

Based on another book by His Eminence, Az-Zahraa (a.s.) al Qudwa, compiled by Hussein Ahmad Al-Khisin, “Fatima (a.s.)”, is a compilation of speeches and lectures delivered by His Eminence.

The 80 pages of the book, a publication of Dar Al-Malak, discuss how the example of Lady Fatima (a.s.) serves as an role model for both men and women, shedding the light on the life she had led, and the reasons behind the constant revival of her memory.  

Sayyed Fadlullah explains how the infatuation for the character of Fatima (a.s.) is not an inflation of the past, but rather a revival of her virtues and exquisite morality. When we mention Fatima (a.s.) we cannot but remember her father (p), her message, and her role. We also remember Fatima (a.s.) in our own predicaments; and we feel as if she is living with us in our hopes, concerns, and joys as well.  

The book constitutes of a brief account of her life including her birth and childhood. It is explained how, at a very young age, she was aware of the responsibilities attached to her role. She was the Messenger (p)’s own mother, taking care of him and baring his pain and grief.

She was the first female student in the school of the Prophet (p). She was a spectacular lady in every single detail in her life, especially when it comes to her marriage.  

The issues of her status in the Holy Quran, in the Hadith and among Muslims, the example of a role model and her role as a teacher, write, and an orator. She is the considered the Doyenne of the women of the world, as mentioned by her father (p). The Prophet (p) also narrated that: “Fatima is a part of me…” which further indicates her sanctimony and virtue which we regard very highly.

The fourth and final chapter of the book is dedicated to questions and answers. They cover interesting topics including the difference between her and all other women in Islam, including Virgin Mary (a.s.), why did Fatima (a.s.) demand Fadak, and the controversial issue of Fatima (a.s.)’s rib. The final chapter also explains the concept of infallibility that was given to her by Allah Who wanted her to be a role model for all people, men and women.

Fatima (a.s.), as mentioned by the translator, is a multidimensional personality whose life and trials must be examined, analyzed, and appreciated.

http://english.bayynat.org/Books/Book_Fatimah.htm#.WnDeoracZZ0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to make a very sincere statement: This event is not among the fundamentals of our religion, it is a historical event based on contradictory sources and no-one truly knows what happened. To disparage anyone who might bring question therefore as a deviant and a sinner and one who requires forgiveness is taking it too far, in my humble opinion. Believing or withholding opinion on this event has absolutely no bearing on your salvation. None whatsoever. But as usually in history, free-thinkers have always been abused by orthodoxy.

Had we been living at he time of Shaykh Saduq, Mufid, or Tusi, we would have agreed with their words that reciting the third Shahadah in the Adhan is to be absolutely avoided. However we're  born in another era, and so that goes out of the window.   If our opinion isn't based on a honest and clear reflection, but just appeal to authorities , then we can all play that game. 

A Christian will come and say 'you think you know our bible more than our bible scholar with three PHDs in the new testament'? 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

I want to make a very sincere statement: This event is not among the fundamentals of our religion, it is a historical event based on contradictory sources and no-one truly knows what happened. To disparage anyone who might bring question therefore as a deviant and a sinner and one who requires forgiveness is taking it too far, in my humble opinion. Believing or withholding opinion on this event has absolutely no bearing on your salvation. None whatsoever. 

I want to agree. It seems to me that the imams of Ahlulbayt (a) also performed taqiyyah and wanted to stay silent about this tragedy.

This event is even worse than Karbala :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hussaini624 said:

I want to agree. It seems to me that the imams of Ahlulbayt (a) also performed taqiyyah and wanted to stay silent about this tragedy.

This event is even worse than Karbala :cry:

There is no way of knowing what happened. Anyone claiming they know are only speculating and it would be interesting to see faces when the truth is actually revealed. I withhold having any view other than a threat was made, that is sufficient to condemn it, but to claim she was beaten up when grown family members, her own husband, and their companions stood still and didn't get in the way is just hard to believe, but Allah knows best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Brother if you choose to deny this incident I along with millions of shias will mourn the brutal attack on Sayyida Fatimah and the incident of the door.  

You didn't answer any of the questions I addressed.  I feel we will be going into circles unfortunately.  

I'm sure you have researched this topic at hand, SMHF a charismatic and influential with the youth speaker but his historical account of the incident was for his political interests.

When Imam Zaman arrives he will inform us and we will continue the majalis of Sayyida Fatimah 3laha salam.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Laayla said:

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Brother if you choose to deny this incident I along with millions of shias will mourn the brutal attack on Sayyida Fatimah and the incident of the door.  

You didn't answer any of the questions I addressed.  I feel we will be going into circles unfortunately.  

I'm sure you have researched this topic at hand, SMHF a charismatic and influential with the youth speaker but his historical account of the incident is for his political interests.

When Imam Zaman arrives he will inform us and we will continue the majalis of Sayyida Fatimah 3laha salam.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 

Waalaykum Salaam,

Dear sister, i genuinely feel any discussion on this issue, which of course can get highly emotional , should be done by first putting aside any preconceived views and feelings. We should enter this without such emotions. With the greatest of respect , i have read your post multiple times and they did not directly address the issue. In response, i only asked a few pertinent questions:

1.  Is Sayed Fadllulah lying when he mentioned that while there is strong evidence a threat was made (and that he says is sufficient enough to condemn the whole affair) what occurred after is hotly disputed because in all the sources there are varying conflicting accounts? Could you kindly explain how you are able to choose one over the other? Some claim she was behind the door and indirectly hit. Some claim he went away. Some claim Zubayr ran out and was captured and that was it. Some claim he went in, hit her before Ali [as] grabbed his neck and threw him onto the ground. What do you think happened ?

2. Is he wrong when he merely questions how Lady Fatima could be kicked, punched and repeatedly slapped in a room full of her family members - grown men of the Banu Hashim, other loyal companions as well as Ali [as], who did nothing to even pull her out of the way, or get in the way, even if we argue they were not to fight ?

3. Is he wrong when he says the best position is that it is wrong to deny, or strongly affirm, but to let Allah [swt] inform us what happened ? 

There is strong evidence a threat was made, and Lady Fatima [as] suffered in so many ways after the death of her father, but as i respect your right to hold an opinion on a very muddy event in history, i think you too should respect those who do not deny, but refuse to affirm any particular account when they contradict so much. Furthermore, if you are able to directly answer the three points i have brought perhaps it will help me to understand the strong evidence you may have, inshAllah.

Again, this very muddy historical issue is not a fundamental issue in our religion, and believing in it , or withholding opinion on exactly what took place after the threat will have no bearing on your salvation. No-one can dispute or deny this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Waalaykum Salaam,

Dear sister, i genuinely feel any discussion on this issue, which of course can get highly emotional , should be done by first putting aside any preconceived views and feelings. We should enter this without such emotions. With the greatest of respect , i have read your post multiple times and they did not directly address the issue. In response, i only asked a few pertinent questions:

1.  Is Sayed Fadllulah lying when he mentioned that while there is strong evidence a threat was made (and that he says is sufficient enough to condemn the whole affair) what occurred after is hotly disputed because in all the sources there are varying conflicting accounts? Could you kindly explain how you are able to choose one over the other? Some claim she was behind the door and indirectly hit. Some claim he went away. Some claim Zubayr ran out and was captured and that was it. Some claim he went in, hit her before Ali [as] grabbed his neck and threw him onto the ground. What do you think happened ?

2. Is he wrong when he merely questions how Lady Fatima could be kicked, punched and repeatedly slapped in a room full of her family members - grown men of the Banu Hashim, other loyal companions as well as Ali [as], who did nothing to even pull her out of the way, or get in the way, even if we argue they were not to fight ?

3. Is he wrong when he says the best position is that it is wrong to deny, or strongly affirm, but to let Allah [swt] inform us what happened ? 

There is strong evidence a threat was made, and Lady Fatima [as] suffered in so many ways after the death of her father, but as i respect your right to hold an opinion on a very muddy event in history, i think you too should respect those who do not deny, but refuse to affirm any particular account when they contradict so much. Furthermore, if you are able to directly answer the three points i have brought perhaps it will help me to understand the strong evidence you may have, inshAllah.

Again, this very muddy historical issue is not a fundamental issue in our religion, and believing in it , or withholding opinion on exactly what took place after the threat will have no bearing on your salvation. No-one can dispute or deny this. 

I fully understand your point brother. :)

May Allah strengthen us in faith and knowledge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Intellectual Resistance  I can give the same arguments to you. Bring me a narration saying that companions were present and I will find faults with it. Did you try and go through the book I linked above? 

20 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

you presented an account of her miscarriage which absolutely contradicts what you here on pulpits

How so? So you believe she died a natural death?? Or that she did not have a miscarriage?

Edited by starlight
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

If your pregnant wife was standing somewhere, and your cousins, closest companions and you - the best warrior in that era- were standing there, and someone walks in, goes to your wife, slaps her, hits her, and then hits her again, but you, grown men around you, do absolutely nothing and stand there, does that even make sense ?   A womans honour was and even today is a massive source of pride. You don't have to go and kill the guy, but the least you can do is block any attacks on your wife and jump instantly. 

The following link describes the situation about Imam Ali AS more than the assumptions mentioned by your post:

http://www.seratonline.com/24140/did-ameerul-momineen-a-s-defend-fatima-zahra-s-a-when-she-was-attacked/

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Intellectual Resistance

Do you even realize that the matter you are insisting to deny is accepted by all our present and classical scholars. The rigidity of Ilme rijaal you are trying to apply here is used for fiqh and not to general historical accounts. Additionally, a particular tradition weak in isnad doesn't mean to be rejected. For if a narrator is weak it does not mean he would never tell the truth. There is difference between mawdhu (fabricated) and dhaef (weak). Rijal is not an end to understand religion rather it is a support for traditions verifying it's authenticity. A tradition can be weak and still reliable. The differences in approach of our scholars towards rijal itself tells that it should not be 100 percent relied upon. 

Last time you were discussing tatbir, you were claiming so many marajas are against it. But in this discussion so many scholars have accepted that the event took place but you are hanging on Fadlullah because that sails your unity ship. Cherry-picking. Such a unity be damned whose influence endangers some of our core beliefs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sirius_Bright said:

@Intellectual Resistance

Do you even realize that the matter you are insisting to deny is accepted by all our present and classical scholars. The rigidity of Ilme rijaal you are trying to apply here is used for fiqh and not to general historical accounts. Additionally, a particular tradition weak in isnad doesn't mean to be rejected. For if a narrator is weak it does not mean he would never tell the truth. There is difference between mawdhu (fabricated) and dhaef (weak). Rijal is not an end to understand religion rather it is a support for traditions verifying it's authenticity. A tradition can be weak and still reliable. The differences in approach of our scholars towards rijal itself tells that it should not be 100 percent relied upon. 

I also like to add the following link mentioning the views of our early scholars about the incident:

https://www.al-islam.org/tragedy-al-zahra-doubts-and-responses-jafar-murtadha-al-amili/incident-wording-traditionists-and#what-al-mufid-records-al-amali

From: 

Ayatullah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlullah

https://www.al-islam.org/fatimah-a-role-model-for-men-and-women/chapter-4-questions-and-answers

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Sirius_Bright said:

@Intellectual Resistance

Do you even realize that the matter you are insisting to deny is accepted by all our present and classical scholars. The rigidity of Ilme rijaal you are trying to apply here is used for fiqh and not to general historical accounts. Additionally, a particular tradition weak in isnad doesn't mean to be rejected. For if a narrator is weak it does not mean he would never tell the truth. There is difference between mawdhu (fabricated) and dhaef (weak). Rijal is not an end to understand religion rather it is a support for traditions verifying it's authenticity. A tradition can be weak and still reliable. The differences in approach of our scholars towards rijal itself tells that it should not be 100 percent relied upon. 

Last time you were discussing tatbir, you were claiming so many marajas are against it. But in this discussion so many scholars have accepted that the event took place but you are hanging on Fadlullah because that sails your unity ship. Cherry-picking. Such a unity be damned whose influence endangers some of our core beliefs.

 

Salamualaykum,

Dear brother,

I am aware that when we look purely at historical narratives, using strict Ilm al-Rijal would render the majority of what we have to dust. History should be examined using a more holistic perspective. To give an example, the  account of Kerbala present in Abu Mikhnaf gives us the earliest compiled chronicle of the event, very close to the time. As per our own Rijal the majority of those early in the chain are Majhool (unknown) given most of our Rijal tends to give us information on names in the second century and after. I am more than aware of this. 

I would like to just make one thing clear here, i am not denying anything. Neither did Sayed Fadllulah. No-one is denying anything whatsoever. If anyone claims i am denying any particular version of events , i say to that person or that group of people that this is not what i have ever claimed.  I also want to make it clear truth is truth, and i am only putting a question mark here because of rationality, i don't actually care what Sunnis think. I've probably spent more time debating and refuting Sunnis and Salafis than most members on this board and i only bring this up to clearly demonstrate that where i see legitimate evidence for disagreement, i present it to them - albeit respectfully. 

What i have said is, given the fact that there are varying historical narratives on the event, many of them conflicting, contradicting, painting vastly different accounts of what took place, there is no way of us truly knowing what took place and then claiming that occurred with any degree of certainty. Rather, the best position is to affirm what we know most likely took place: a threat, and make it clear even making a threat on the house of Ali [as] and Fatima [as] is worthy of great condemnation, but whatever comes after Allah knows best and we can not say with certainty. 

To give you an example, which of the accounts will you take?:

1. Umar threatening the house, but Zubayr running out with his sword and being captured and then the men leave?

2. Umar threatening to attack, men breaking down the door, but no actual direct hit on Fatima [as] but an indirect one?

3. Umar going inside, attempting to hit Fatima [as] but Ali [as] grabbing his neck and thrusting him onto the ground and telling him he would murder him had he not made a promise to the Prophet [saw] ? 

4. Umar going inside, in front of not only Ali [as] but grown members of the Banu Hashim, and other companions who had gathered there to oppose Abu Bakr and Umar, and then slapping, kicking , and punching Fatima [as] while these grown members of her family, her husband, and his loyal devotees stood there and didn't even try to get in the way, or shield her?

5. Umar saying 'So what? Have you seen me do it?' 

6. Umar threatening , but not actually going through with it.

 

Sister Starlight presented an account from al-Mufid earlier, claiming the miscarriage actually took place when he punched and kicked her when she went out of her house to him, whereas we are told on pulpits that this occurred when he attacked her house. The events are clearly contradictory, which again shows how sectarian polemics influenced what people narrated about certain events. Do take a read:

22 hours ago, starlight said:

 ‘Abdullah ibn Sinan who cites Imam al-Sadiq (as) saying the following:

Abu Bakr wrote a title of her ownership of Fadak, so she went out and the title was in her hand. ‘’Umar [ibn al-Khattab] met her. He said to her, “What is this piece of paper which you are holding, O Daughter of Muhammed?” She said, “A title written for me by Abu Bakr whereby he restored my ownership of Fadak.” He said, “Give it to me.” She refused to give it to him, so he kicked her with his foot, and she was big with Muhsin, causing her to miscarry. Then he slapped her. It is as though I can see an earring in her ear being broken. Then he took the title and tore it to pieces. She left, and she remained sick for seventy-five days because of ‘’Umar thus beating her, following which incident she died

 Al-Mufid, Al-Ikhtisas, p. 185. 

 

Now, if we have to bring up scholars, you must be aware that polemics play a big role in what can influence, and anyone who diverges from that as has been with with Fadlullah is ostracised and abused. Furthermore, given this is a historical issue, there never seemed to be a need to try to refute it, it had no bearing on our Aqeedah , it was about a man we do not revere , and generally speaking there isn't any real motivation to ty to just get to the facts. 

As for appealing to authority, also remember that Saduq, Tusi, and many of our classical scholars forbade anyone adding 'Ali is the Wali of Allah' into the Adhan, which has actually become a common practise today. Also remember that even our modern scholars clash big time on issues, and as you saw in the Tatbir thread they clash on the issue of self-mutilation. I brought those Fatwahs not to appeal to authority, but to demonstrate how even senior scholars testified to the harms it was doing to our Madhab, so no-one should just claim over zealous individuals online are hating 'Azadari' when many senior scholars who are well informed recognise the ills of the act.

 

Tusi:

و أمّا ما روي في شواذّ الأخبار من قول: «أشهد انّ عليا وليّ اللّه و آل محمّد خير البريّة» فممّا لا يعمل عليه في الأذان و الإقامة. فمن عمل بها كان مخطئا
Translation: "The are some odd (shaadh) reports of saying أشهد انّ عليا وليّ اللّه and آل محمّد خير البريّة. You must NOT do it in the Adhaan and Iqaamah. And whoever does this action is in mukhTi (error)"
Source:
1. Al-Toosi, Al-Nihaayah fee Mujarrad Al-Fiqh wa Al-Fataawaa, pg. 69

 

Saduq:

"This is the Authentic / Correct (SaHeeH) adhaan; nothing is to be added or subtracted from it. The mufawwidah's (form of ghullah), may Allaah curse them, have fabricated traditions and have added to the adhaan مُحَمَّدٌ وَ آلُ مُحَمَّدٍ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ (Muhammad and the family of Muhammad are the best of mankind) twice. In some of their traditions, after saying أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً رَسُولُ اللَّهِ (I bear witness that Muhammad is the Prophet of Allaah) (they add) أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ (I bear witness that 'Alee is the Walee of Allaah) twice. Among them there are others who narrate this أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (I bear witness that 'Alee is the commander of the faithfull) twice. There is NO doubt that 'Alee is the walee of God and that he is the true commander of the faithful and that Muhammad and his family, peace be upon them, are the best of creatures. However, that is not [part] of the original adhaan. I have mentioned this so that those who have been accused of concocting tafweed and have insulated themselves in our ranks should be known."
Source:
1. Al-Sadooq, Man Laa YaHduruh Al-Faqeeh, vol. 1, pg. 290 - 291

 

Nader Zaveris translations. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, skyweb1987 said:

The following link describes the situation about Imam Ali AS more than the assumptions mentioned by your post:

http://www.seratonline.com/24140/did-ameerul-momineen-a-s-defend-fatima-zahra-s-a-when-she-was-attacked/

wasalam

The article does not explain why we should take any of the many conflicting narratives of this event. Secondly, it does not explain how, in a room full of her relatives - brave grown men of the Banu Hashim, and their followers, how Fatima [as] managed to get slapped repeatedly, kicked and punched. You didn't have to actually kill Umar, but the least that could have been done is break it up, get in the way, or shield her. I don't deny it, but i merely put a legitimate question mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, starlight said:

@Intellectual Resistance  I can give the same arguments to you. Bring me a narration saying that companions were present and I will find faults with it. Did you try and go through the book I liked above? The problem here is

How so? So you believe she died a natural death?? Or that she did not have a miscarriage?

Dear sister,

If you're trying to weaken the claim that other members of the Banu Hashim were present with Ali [as] as well as some of their supporters, then this really strengthens where i am coming from. If you feel that it is actually difficult to believe how grown members of her family, and their supporters, and her husband, would just stand there and watch her get repeatedly kicked and slapped, without even trying to pull her to safety, get in the way, shield her even if they were not to fight or kill Umar, then you are just exercising your rational mind which anyone who honestly examines it will do likewise. 

Furthermore my qualm with what you presented was because it gives an entirely different narrative to how Fatima [as] miscarried, and you should know this. One narrative is that Umar went to her house, punched her, and repeatedly kicked and slapped her causing her to miscarry. Now you present another one whereby she was allegedly kicked and slapped and assaulted outside of her house causing her to miscarry:

22 hours ago, starlight said:

 ‘Abdullah ibn Sinan who cites Imam al-Sadiq (as) saying the following:

Abu Bakr wrote a title of her ownership of Fadak, so she went out and the title was in her hand. ‘’Umar [ibn al-Khattab] met her. He said to her, “What is this piece of paper which you are holding, O Daughter of Muhammed?” She said, “A title written for me by Abu Bakr whereby he restored my ownership of Fadak.” He said, “Give it to me.” She refused to give it to him, so he kicked her with his foot, and she was big with Muhsin, causing her to miscarry. Then he slapped her. It is as though I can see an earring in her ear being broken. Then he took the title and tore it to pieces. She left, and she remained sick for seventy-five days because of ‘’Umar thus beating her, following which incident she died

 Al-Mufid, Al-Ikhtisas, p. 185. 

 

Now as for men gathering with Ali ibn Abi Talib [as], this is actually well known. After the death of the Prophet [saw] there were generally three key players: The Ansaar who had gathered at Saqifah comprised of the Aws and Khazraj who had decided to elect Sa'd ibn Ubadah. A small number of the Muhajiroon namely Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Abuaidah and their supporters. Ali [as], members of the Banu Hashim, and notable companions. 

Why do you think Umar ibn al-Khattab even went to the house of Fatima [as] ? He was a man who Sunnis admit had a temper, acted rashly at times, and when he realised that Ali [as] and his supporters were opposing Abu Bakr and had gathered in the house of Fatima [as] he made it his job to go there and try to bring them all out. Many of the sources which speak about the attack on the house of Fatima [as] include the fact Ali [as], members of the Banu Hashim and other companions were gathered with him. 

 

"Umar Ibn al-Khattab came to the house of ‘Ali. Talha and Zubair and some of the immigrants were also in the house. Umar cried out: "By God, either you come out to render the oath of allegiance, or I will set the house on fire.”al-Zubair came out with his sword drawn. As he stumbled (upon something), the sword fell from his hand so they jumped over him and seized him.""

Sunni Reference: History of Tabari, English version, v9, pp 186-187

 

"Umar said to Fatimah (who was behind the door of her house): "I know that the Prophet of God did not love any one more than you, but this will not stop me to carry out my decision. If these people stay in your house, I will burn the door in front of you."

Sunni reference: Kanz al-Ummal, v3, p140

 

"Umar said: "‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Zubair Ibn Awwam and those who were with them separated from us (and gathered) in the house of Fatimah, daughter of the messenger of Allah."

Sunni References:

- Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55
- Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309
- History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, p1822
- History of Tabari, English version, v9, p192

 

"O’ daughter of the Prophet! I didn’t love anyone as much as I loved your father, nor anyone after him is more loving to me as you are. But I swear by Allah that if these people assemble here with you, then this love of mine would not prevent me from setting your house on fire."

Sunni reference: Musnad ibn Abi Shaybah 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...