WHY WE CHOOSE THIS TOPIC ?




The aim of this blog is to remove whatever doubts that may have entered some people’s minds regarding denial of any violence against Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) at her home, or against Hazrat Ali (a.s.) at the house of Janabe Fatima Zahra(s.a.).
Authentic references have been provided in the fond hope of a definitive conclusion and the eradication of all doubts Inshallah.



Search This Blog

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

OBJECTIONS AGAINST HAZRAT FATEMAH ZAHRA (SA) AND THEIR REPLIES - OBJECTION NO 3 PART I

Fatima (s)
With reference to the fact that basically Arab civilization more than any other community and nation, is more prominent as being chivalrous to women and is especially sensitive to their condition, how can it be accepted that Umar bin Khattab beat up a woman, and that also Lady Fatima Zahra (s), the beloved daughter of the Prophet and people having Arab chivalry did not display any reaction?!

Can those who consider Arab chivalry to be an obstacle in attack on the house of revelation provide a convincing reply for the following verses of Quran and tell us where Arab chivalry was at the time of burying alive of female infants?
The Holy Quran has mentioned in the following way the defect of pre-Islamic Arabs in burying alive of female infants:
وَإِذَا الْمَوْؤُودَةُ سُئِلَتْ {8} بِأَيِّ ذَنبٍ قُتِلَتْ {9}
“And when the female infant buried alive is asked. For what sin she was killed.” (Surah Takwir 81:8-9)

Ibne Kathir Damishqi Wahabi has written in the interpretation of the above verse:
Sometimes the people of pre-Islamic age, due to fear of poverty and livelihood killed their children…’Maudah’ is a female infant who is buried alive and it was the practice of pre-Islamic Arabs that in comparison to a son, a daughter was considered unlucky.[1]

Sunday, July 14, 2013

OBJECTIONS AGAINST HAZRAT FATEMAH ZAHRA (SA) AND THEIR REPLIES - OBJECTION NO 2

Objection 2: Burial of Hazrat Fatima (sa) in the night was due to another cause and not because of enemity to the rulers

Among the doubts and objections, which they have raised against the topic of martyrdom of Lady Fatima Zahra (s) is that her nocturnal burial is not due to the cause which Shia believe; that it was not due to her enmity to the rulers; on the contrary, it was because she had made a bequest to Asma binte Umais (wife of Abu Bakr) that after her death no stranger (Namehram) should be able to see the shape of her body.
Such objections are mentioned in different words and we present one of them, which is present on Wahabi websites as follows:
Shia always misuse the topic of concealment of the location of the grave of the daughter of the Prophet (s) to instigate emotions and as a tool of propagating their ideas, but they are not aware that if this matter was a crime, the Shia themselves are culpable for it first of all.
We say to Shia: The grave of Lady Fatima (r) was known to Ali, Hasan and Husain (r) and its location was certainly known to their descendants: Sajjad, Baqir, Sadiq and their other descendants. Now, the most important question is whether these Shia Imams went to the grave of Fatima and performed the Ziyarat or not? If they did not do so, why do you want to perform this act and do that which they did not like and which is against Islamic law? And if they did visit it; it can be either of the two: either they did so secretly or openly. If they did so secretly, they had themselves concealed the location of the grave of their mother from the people, and it is not a sin. And if it is a sin, it is their sin and not the crime of Abu Bakr and Umar, but if they visited it openly, the 4000 students of Imam Sadiq (a) should also have been aware of it. Then why do you accuse us of this?[1]

Nocturnal burial, funeral prayers without informing the ruler of the time, with a concealed grave, is a secret having unutterable mysteries. It is correct that this lady wanted this and she made bequest in this way, but what a coincidence that Lady Zahra (s) completed her historical bequest with these requests?!

But is not the most important message of this bequest declaration of her anger and displeasure with those who harassed her?

Saturday, July 6, 2013

OBJECTIONS AGAINST HAZRAT FATEMAH ZAHRA (SA) AND THEIR REPLIES - OBJECTION NO 1

Objection 1: If Fatima (s) was initially angry at Abu Bakr and Umar, she reconciled during her final days

Reply : It is natural that if Wahabis admit that Lady Fatima Zahra (s) had become angry and infuriated at Abu Bakr and Umar and she passed away in that same condition, the legality of origin and foundation of their Caliphate will come under question, as it proves that the only daughter of the Prophet, and the most superior lady of the two worlds, leader of ladies of Paradise had opposed their Caliphate and according to authentic and correct traditional reports, which have come in their own most authentic books, pleasure of Fatima is pleasure of the Prophet and her anger is anger of the Prophet, therefore, they have tried to conceal this fact and fabricated traditions saying:
Suppose we accept that Fatima (r) was infuriated at Abu Bakr and Umar for a period of time and she turned away from the two of then, but as Baihaqi and others have narrated, Abu Bakr and Umar during the final days of Lady Fatima (s) came to meet her and sought her pardon, because it is mentioned in traditional reports that:
When Fatima became indisposed, Abu Bakr came to her to seek her pardon and asked for permission to meet her. Ali (a) asked Fatima (s): Abu Bakr is asking permission to meet you. Fatima (s) said: Do you allow him to enter? Ali (a) replied: Yes. So Lady Fatima (s) accorded permission. Abu Bakr entered and sought the forgiveness of Fatima (s). Abu Bakr said: By God, I have not left home, life, property, wealth and relatives, except for the pleasure of God, Messenger and you, family of Prophet. It was at this time that Fatima (s) became reconciled to Abu Bakr.
( Reference : Al-Itiqad wal Hidaya Ilaa Sabeelar Rishad Alaa Madhhabus Salaf wa As-habul Hadith, Vol. 1, Pg. 354, Ahmad bin al-Husain Baihaqi (d. 458 A.H.), Edited: Ahmad Isamul Katib; Darul Afaqul Jadida – Beirut, First edition, 1401 A.H. )


In reply, we say:
Firstly: As mentioned in the first part of this book, Wahabis have raised doubts about the chain of narrators of Balazari and Tabari regarding martyrdom of Lady Zahra (s) and considered it unacceptable, because it was Mursal; but now they are themselves arguing through a Mursal and false report, because Shobi was a companion of companions (Tabii) and therefore, he could not have witnessed this incident himself.
( Reference: Ansabul Ashraf, Vol. 4, Pg. 315, Ahmad bin Yahya bin Jabir Balazari (d. 279 A.H.); Ihya Uloomiddin, Vol. 2, Pg. 346, Muhammad bin Muhammad Abu Hamid Ghazzali (d. 505 A.H.), Darul Marifah – Beirut. )

Can the reports of Nasibis and enemies of Amirul Momineen (a) be decisive proofs for us?