• Misyar Marriage

    is carried out via the normal contractual procedure, with the specificity that the husband and wife give up several rights by their own free will...

  • Taraveeh a Biad'ah

    Nawafil prayers are not allowed with Jama'at except salatul-istisqa' (the salat for praying to Allah to send rain)..

  • Umar attacks Fatima (s.)

    Umar ordered Qunfuz to bring a whip and strike Janabe Zahra (s.a.) with it.

  • The lineage of Umar

    And we summarize the lineage of Omar Bin Al Khattab as follows:

  • Before accepting Islam

    Umar who had not accepted Islam by that time would beat her mercilessly until he was tired. He would then say

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Umar Loved Alcohol !!!

Umar used to keep alcohol in his water flask

We read in Ahl'ul Sunnah authority commentary of Sahih al Bukhari, Fathul Bari Volume 5 page 341 that: 
"On one occasion Saeed bin Zai drank from Umar's water flask and he became intoxicated. Umar began to beat him and Saeed said to him 'My only wrongdoing was that I drank from your flask' (Upon hearing this) Umar replied 'I am beating you, as I want to know why you became intoxicated".

Umar’s love of ‘Nabidh’ alcohol
Nabidh is a drink that is prepared by fermenting crushed dates / grapes. 
It was Hadhrath Umar’s favourite alcoholic drink.
We read in Muwatta of Imam Malik, Book 45, Number 45.6.21, Chapter Madina:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Qasim that Aslam, the mawla of Umar ibn al-Khattab informed him that he had visited Abdullah ibn Ayyash al-Makhzumi. He saw that he had some nabidh with him and he was at that moment on the way to Makka. Aslam said to him, ”Umar ibn al-Khattab loves this drink.” Abdullah ibn Ayyash therefore carried a great drinking bowl and brought it to Umar ibn al-Khattab and placed it before him. Umar brought it near to him and then raised his head. Umar said, “This drink is good,” so he drank some of it and then passed it to a man on his right”.

Umar drank alcohol on his death bed

“Whilst on his deathbed, Umar became deeply affected by the wound and his physician asked Umar ‘Which alcohol would you like to drink?’ Umar said ‘alcohol called nabidh is my preferred choice. This drink was then administered to Umar”.
I quote below a reference form Sunni books:
Riyadh al Nadira Volume 2 page 351

Shia hate Umar. Reason:Umar set fire to the house of Fatema Zehra (s.a.)

This issue has been a matter of debate since times immemorial and it is this issue which in fact explains why the Shias bear enmity toward some sahabas that the Sunnis deem to be their heroes.

The Event of burning of House of Janabe Fatema Zehra(s.a):

The Sunnis first of all have the approach of straight away denying the event, and when cornered say that the sources are not authentic and hence unreliable. Let us take the bull straight by its horns, and quote few references from authentic sunni sources.

First Reference: al Imama wa al Siyasa, pages 18-30, Dhikr Bayya Abu Bakr, by Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutaybah

"When news reached Abu Bakr that the people had gathered in the house of 'Ali and were refusing to give bayya, he sent Hadhrath Umar in their direction. Umar called out to Akraan who was in the house of 'Ali, but he refused to come out. Umar then said: 'I swear by He who controls the life of Umar, if you people do not come out of the house I shall set fire to it, and everyone inside shall perish.

 The people said 'Abu'l Hafs (Umar), Fatima (daughter of Rasulullah (s)) is also in this house'. Umar replied, 'I do not care about this, people should leave the house of 'Ali and give bayya'. 'Ali replied I have sworn that I shall not set foot outside my home until I have completed compiling the Qur'an.'

Sayyida Fatima arrived at the door and said: 'I have no association with those individuals that acted in such a manner as to abandon the funeral of Rasulullah (s) (ie Abu Bakr, Umar and co), and on this matter (leadership) they decided themselves (ie stole the khilafat), they did not even so much as consult us. They also took that which was rightfully ours (Fadak).
Umar then left and he began to dispute with Abu Bakr, 'Do not leave (in peace) those that are refusing to give bayya'. Abu Bakr then sent his servant Qunfaaz to summon 'Ali. Qunfaaz reached 'Ali and said 'The Khalifa of Rasulullah (s) is summoning you'. 'Ali replied (mocking this new title of Abu Bakr) 'You have gone against the words of Rasulullah (s)'. Qunfaaz relayed these words to Abu Bakr, upon hearing this he (Abu Bakr) spent a considerable amount of time weeping. Despite his sending his Servant, 'Ali still did not come.

Then Hadhrath Umar accompanied by a group, arrived at the house of Fatima and began to bang on the door. When Fatima heard their voices she proclaimed loudly:
'O people, after Rasulullah (s), the son of Khattab..'


When the people heard Fatima's voice and her anguish they left in grief weeping, fearing that their hearts would be torn apart… Only Umar and some others remained, the rest returned to their homes. They removed 'Ali from his home by force and brought him before Abu Bakr, and said 'Give him bayya'. Umar said:'By Allah, who alone is worthy of worship, I shall otherwise strike off your neck'.
'Ali replied:
'Would you kill a Slave of Allah (swt) and the brother of the Prophet?'
Umar replied:
'I accept that to you are a Slave of Allah, but not that you are the brother of the Prophet (ie he accuses Ali (as) of lying)'.
Abu Bakr remained silent, and Umar said:
'Why are you not demanding the bayya from him?'
Abu Bakr replied 'As long as Fatima is by his side, I shall not pressure him'.

Then 'Ali went to the grave of Rasulullah, embraced it crying aloud 'Your Ummah now considers me to be weak and they wish to murder me'. Meanwhile Umar said to Abu Bakr 'Accompany me to see Fatima as we have incurred her anger'.

They both wanted to see Fatima and so they approached 'Ali, who took them to see her. He ['Ali] sat them down but Sayyida Fatima turned her face away from them. They both conveyed salaam to Fatima but she did not reply. Hadhrath Abu Bakr then said 'Beloved daughter of Rasulullah (s) I love you more than my own daughters, and I cannot tolerate the fact that I remained alive on the day that your father had died. I know your exalted rank and status, but I did not uphold your claim for possessions as Rasulullah had stated 'Our property will not be inherited, whatever we (i.e. prophets) leave is Sadaqa (to be used for charity)'.

Fatima said 'If I remind the two of you about a hadith that you are aware of, will you then act in accordance with it?'
The two said 'Yes, do tell us'.
She said 'I want you to swear by Allah if you can testify to hearing this hadith:
"Fatima's happiness is my happiness and her anger is my anger. Whoever has maintained friendship with Fatima had maintained friendship with me, whoever upsets her, upsets me".
Both confirmed hearing this hadith from Rasulullah(s). Sayyida Fatima then said: I testify before Allah (swt) and his Angels that you (Abu Bakr and Umar) have upset me, you did not keep me happy and I shall complain to Rasulullah (s) about this when I see him.

Abu Bakr then said 'I seek protection from Allah's anger and your (the Prophet (saws)'s) anger'. At that moment tears filled Abu Bakr's eyes and Sayyida Fatima said:
'I shall curse you in every prayer.'

Abu Bakr left the house hysterical and screamed at the crowd of people that had gathered outside:
'You people have it (so) easy and go to your beds in peace with your wives at night, whilst you have engulfed me in a terrible crisis (of conscience). I do not need your bayya, revoke the bayya that has been given to me.'
The people said 'Khalifa of Rasulullah (s) the Khilafat cannot work without you at the helm'.


Second Reference: • Tareekh Abul Fida Urdu translation by Maulana Karrem'ud Deen al Hanafi pages 177-179, by Abu al-Fida 'Imad al-Din Isma'il b. 'Umar

 Then Abu Bakr sent Umar bin Khattab with the objective that those 'people gathered in the house of Fatima and Ali come out, and that if anyone objects to coming out then you should fight them'. Hadrath Umar approached with fire in his hands to set the house ablaze. At this point Hadhrath Fatima approached and said 'Where are you going, Ibn Khattab? Do you wish to set my home on fire? Umar said 'Give bayya to 'Abu Bakr and enter into that which the majority of the Ummah has agreed to."

Third Reference:   al-Aqdul Fareed by Ibn Abd Rabbah al-Malik,

"Those that were opposed to the bayya of Abu Bakr were 'Ali, Abbas, Zubayr and Sa'd bin Ubada, amongst whom 'Ali and Abbas were sitting in the house of Fatima. At that time Abu Bakr sent Umar with the order 'that you remove those gathered in the house of Fatima, and if they refuse to come out then kill them'. Umar brought fire to the door and Fatima said 'Ibn Khattab have you arrived in order to set my home on fire?'. Umar replied 'I have come with the intention that you people give bayya to Abu Bakr as others have done".

There are many reference which could be quoted from authentic sunni books but to keep it short we quote only the above three.

Conclusion:

1. Abubakr sent Umar to the house of Hazrat Ali (a.s.) to secure their bayyah, and to kill them if they refused.

2.Umar was very angry at that moment

3.He was so angry that he threatened to burn down the House of Hazrat Ali (a.s.) with all its inhabitants if the people failed to come out.

4. Umar was carrying fire in his hands.

5.Umar didn’t care that the daughter of the Prophet (s.a.w.w.) was in the house and he intended to burn her alive.

6. Abubakr , Umar and party had not attended the funeral of the Holy Prophet (s.a.)

7. They had usurped the khilafat.

8. They had usurped the right of the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.).

9. Umar persuaded Abubakr  to take further action. And sent his slave Qunfuz  to call Hazrat Ali (a.s.)

10.Abubakr and party had gone against the orders of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.)

11.When taunted by Hazrat Ali (a.s.) about his new acquired title Abubakr began to cry knowing that he was wrong.

12.Umar once again went to the House of Hazrat Ali (a.s.) and banged on the door, telling the people to come out and threatened them once again.

13.Umar and party dragged Hazrat Ali (as) forcibly to the presence of Abubakr  and forcibly tried to extract allegiance from him.

14.  Abubakr and Umar threatened to kill Hazrat Ali (as).

15.  Abubakr ,Umar and party accused Hazrat Ali (as) of lying.

16.  Hazrat Ali (as) complained about their behavior to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.)

17.  Abubakr and Umar  went to seek pardon of Janabe Fatema (s.a.) as they had angered her.

18.  They conveyed their salams to which the daughter of the Prophet (s.a.w.w.) did not reply. (It should be noted that  in Islam giving an answer of salam is compulsory except answering a disbeliever.)

19.  Abubakr and Umar had upset the daughter of the Holy Prophet and she was not happy with them.

20.  The daughter of the Prophet (s.a.w.w.) used to curse Abubakr and Umar in every prayers.

21.  Abubakr became hysterical on hearing the curse of the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and revoked his allegiance.

The daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) suffered a miscarriage due to the actions of Umar .

Reference 1: Sharh Kushaiji page 407

Abubakr sent Umar when Hazrat Ali (as) had refused to give bayya to Abubakr. Umar went with fire and this caused the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.)  distress as a result of which she suffered a miscarriage.

Reference 2: Abdul Kareem Shahrastani in abubakar(la) Milal wa Nihal volume  page 77

 Umar struck the stomach of the daughter of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) that resulted in her losing the child in her womb.Umar had threatened to set fire to the house, including those inside, this included Hazrat Ali (as), the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.), Hasan, Husayn and others.

Reference3: Hanafi scholar Muhaddith Shah Abdul Haqq Dehlavi in Murujj  Nubuwwa Chapter 4 writes.

Allah (s.w.t.) gave the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.)  following five children, Hasan, Husayn, Zainab, Umme Kulthum and Mohsin, who was martyred following the Ummah’s oppression , this illness and pain led to the death of the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.).

Analysis:
I request the readers to honestly tell that did the HouseHold of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) deserve such type of treatment, as meted out to them by Umar , Abubakr and party. Was the daughter of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) happy with their treatment. Would the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) be happy at what was done with his progeny immediately after his demise.

Final Conclusion

The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and his progeny were the best of Allah (s.w.t.)’s creation and Umar and Abubakr who opposed them, misbehaved with them and even threatened to burn them alive were the worst of the creation.
Now have you got the answer to why Shias hate Abu Bakr and Umar and those companions of Holy Prophet(s.a.w) who misbehaved with his progeny.
Important Note: Shias love and respect all companions of Holy Prophet(s.a.w) except those who mistreated and killed the progeny of Holy Prophet(s.a.w).

Status of Fatema Zehra(s.a) and Umar-An Analysis

1) Narrated 'Aisha:

Once Fatima came walking and her gait resembled the gait of the Prophet . The Prophet said, "Welcome, O my daughter!" Then he made her sit on his right or on his left side, and then he told her a secret and she started weeping. I asked her, "Why are you weeping?" He again told her a secret and she started laughing. I said, "I never saw happiness so near to sadness as I saw today." I asked her what the Prophet had told her. She said, "I would never disclose the secret of Allah's Apostle ." When the Prophet died, I asked her about it. She replied. "The Prophet said. 'Every year Gabriel used to revise the Qur'an with me once only, but this year he has done so twice. I think this portends my death, and you will be the first of my family to follow me.' So I started weeping. Then he said. 'Don't you like to be the mistress of all the ladies of Paradise or the mistress of all the lady believers? So I laughed for that."

2) Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:
Allah's Apostle said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

3) The Prophet (s) said, “The first people to enter Paradise will be Ali (a) and Fatima (a).”
 
Vol 2, ch. 59, p. 479; Kenz Al-Ummal, v. 13, p. 93

4) The Prophet (s) said, “The most beloved of my family to me is Fatima (a).”

5) The Prophet (s) said, “Fatima (a) is part of me. Whatever upsets her upsets me, and whatever harms her harms me.”

6) The Prophet (s) said, “Fatima (a) is part of me, whatever harms her harms me, and whatever is against her is against me.”

7) The Prophet (s) said, “Fatima (a) is part of me and she is my heart and the soul which is between my two sides.”

8 )The Prophet (s) said, “Fatima (a) is a branch of me, what pleases her pleases me, and what saddens her, saddens me.”

9) The Prophet (s) said, “Fatima (a) is part of me – what saddens her saddens me, and what pleases her pleases me.”

10) The Prophet (s) said, “O Fatima (a), verily Allah is angry when you are angry.”
References to the above Ahadees:
1)Sahih al Bukhari Volume 4, Book 56, Number 819:
2) Sahih al Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 61:

3) Nur Al-Absar, p. 52; related by similar wording in Kenz Al-Ummal, v. 13, p. 95

4) [Al-Jami^ al-Sagheer, v. 1, #203, p. 37; Al-Sawaiq Al-Muhariqa, p. 191; Yanabi^ Al-Mawadda,

5) [Sahih Muslim, v. 5, p. 54; Al-Tirmidhi, v. 3, Chapter on the Virtues of Fatima, p. 241

6)[Mustadrak Al-Sahihain, v. 3, p. 173; Sunan Al-Tirmidhi, v. 3, Chapter on the Virtues of Fatima, p. 240; Kenz Al-Omal, v. 13, p. 94; Muntakhab Kenz Al-Omal, in the margin of Al-Musnad, v. 5, p. 96; Al-Sawaiq Al-Muhariqa, ch. 3, p. 190]

7)[Nur Al-Absar, p. 52]

8) [Mustadrak Al-Sahihain, v. 3, Chapter on the Virtues of Fatima, p. 168; Kenz Al-Omal, v. 13, p. 96; Muntakhab Kenz Al-Omal, v. 5, p. 97; Seir Alaam Al-Nubala’, v. 2, p. 132]

9) [Al-Sunan Al-Kubra, v. 7, p. 64, the chapter on what will transpire on the Day of Judgement; Muntakhab Kenz Al-Omal, in the margins of Al-Musnad, v. 5, p. 96]

10) [Al-Sawaiq Al-Muhariqa, p. 175; Mustadrak Al-Hakim, Chapter on the Virtues of Fatima; Manaqib Al-Imam Ali of Ibn Al-Maghazali, p. 351]

Conclusion 1:
The above Ahadees make it amply evident that Janabe Fatema (s.a.)  is the leader of all the ladies of Paradise and leader of all the believing women, she would definitely enter paradise and in fact would be the first to enter paradise. She is the heart and soul of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and who so ever pleases her pleases the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and who so ever hurts her and displeases her has hurt and displeased the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.), and who so ever angers hers has in fact angered Allah (s.w.t.).

Role of Umar in distortion of Islam

Abu Hanifa called words from Umar as words of Shaitan.

Abu al-Fadl told me, Muslim b. Ibrahim told us, Abdulwarith b. Saed told us, he said: Saed told us, he said: “I sat with Abu Hanifa in Mecca and he mentioned something and a man said to him: Umar b. al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him) narrated so and so, Abu Hanifa said: that is the saying of the devil, and another one said to him what does he think about narration from Allah’s prophet (s) : “The cupper and cupped have broken their fast”, he (Abu Hanifa) said: this is a saj (rhyme), so I got angry and said: this is a gathering to which I will not return and I went and left it”.
Abdullah b. Ahmad b. Hanbal, “as-Sunnah”, v.1, p.227, №403, Research: Muhammad Saed as-Salim al-Qahtani

Umar Changed the laws of religion:

Let us see the testimony of Ibn Abbas that Umar changed the Islamic Shar'ia by introducing a new law:

Abu al-Sahba' said to Ibn 'Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces (pronounced at one and the same time) were not treated as one during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr. He said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of 'Umar (Allah be pleased with him) people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he allowed them to do so (to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one).
Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3493
Conclusion 2:
His words are considered by his followers as the words of Shaitan and was the one who made changes in religion.

Final Words:

Thus we come to know that there were two parties the first party consisted of Hazrat Fatema (s.a.), Hazrat Ali (a.s.), Hazrat Hasan (a.s.) and Hazrat Hussain (a.s.).

These were those people who were from amongst the leaders of the youths and leaders of the women of paradise, those who would be the first to enter paradise, those who were the bearers of the knowledge of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.), his helpers, payers of his debts, pillars of faith, guardian of Islam, proof of Allah (s.w.t.) over his entire creation, most obedient to Allah (s.w.t.) and the one who were created of the same light as the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.). Obedience to them means obedience to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.), and pleasing them means pleasing the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.). Peace with them means peace with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and war with them means war with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and war with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) means war with Allah (s.w.t.).

The second party consisted of Umar  whose words were the words of Shaitan and who had made changes in Islam.

Thus we conclude that one of the parties was the party of Allah (s.w.t.) and the other was the party of Shaitan.

Is Abu Bakr the rightly guided Caliph???

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Without hurting your feelings I would Like to post a question for all of us to ponder without any prejudice.
Allah (s.w.t.) sent Islam which was explained to us by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.).
Now the Holy Prophet taught us how to pray and he himself used to pray properly and on time.He taught us how to fast and he also used to fast.He taught us how to do Haj, Pay Zakat, and other acts of religion, and he also used to do the aforesaid acts.

Now Allah (s.w.t.) tells in the Quran that a person should make his will before dying. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) also told us to make a will, then is it possible that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) who himself told us to make a will himself would not do so.

Did the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) not make a will and appoint a successor so that there is no confusion about Islam after him.?????

Now there can be two answers to this.

1. He made a will and appointed a successor
2. He did not make a will and did not appoint a successor.


Before we move ahead lets peep in to history and study what happened after the death of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.). and how Abubakar was appointed as the first caliph.

After the death of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) people assembled at a place called Saqifa e Bani Saadat. and there they elected abubakar as the first caliph. Thus abubakar was elected as the first caliph on the whims and fancy of a few people. The details of this is available in various sunni books.

Now coming back to our first answer.

1. The Holy Prophet made a will and did appoint a caliph.

Now if the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) had already appointed a caliph then the people did not have any right to appoint abubakar as the caliph via elections. Abubakr is the elected representative of the people as we elect via general elections he is not the representative of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w). Obeying and following him in now way is incumbent on the people and his  khilafat is in now was justifiable as the successor ship of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) as he was appointed by the people and not the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.). Now if the Holy Prophet had already appointed a caliph then electing some one is going against the orders Allah (s.w.w.) and the order of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.), and is usurping the rights of the rightfully appointed caliph. Thus the khilafat of Abubakar is wrong and against the orders of Allah (s.w.w.) and the orders of the Holy Prophet (s..w.w.)

Now discussing the second answer.

2. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w) did not make a will and did not appoint a successor.

The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) never went against the commands of Allah (s.w.w.) and never disobeyed him. His not appointing a successor means that Allah (s.w.w.) did not want to appoint one. Did Allah (s.w.t.) commit a mistake by not appointing a successor to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.) and the people rectified it by appointing abubakar. The Holy Prophet not selecting anybody to succeed him means that Allah (s.w.t.) did not want the affairs of the religion to go into the hands of anybody. Thus electing abubakar once against means going against the commands of Allah (s.w.t.). Here also the khilafat of abubakar is against the orders of Allah (s.w.t.)  and the orders of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.).

Thus the khilafat of abubakar is wrong and unislamic. When goes the khilafat of abubakar then automatically goes down the khilafat of umar and usman.

I do not want to  hurt  your feelings and would like to ponder over what I have said without prejudice. I would welcome any comments and arguments and would infact be very happy if some one guides me to the right path if I am wrong.

Any body needing further references to what happened at Saqifa  can visit the following link

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/saqifa/en/index.php

Allahhafiz.

Monday, March 12, 2012

Umar bin Khattab in Sihah-e-Sittah

The Prophet asked for a pen and paper to write something,Umar said the prophet is seriously ill  

Sahih Bukhari,Volume 1, Book 3, Number 114:
Narrated 'Ubaidullah bin 'Abdullah: Ibn 'Abbas said, "When the ailment of the Prophet became worse, he said, 'Bring for me (writing) paper and I will write for you a statement after which you will not go astray.' But 'Umar said, 'The Prophet is seriously ill, and we have got Allah's Book with us and that is sufficient for us.' But the companions of the Prophet differed about this and there was a hue and cry. On that the Prophet said to them, 'Go away (and leave me alone). It is not right that you should quarrel in front of me." Ibn 'Abbas came out saying, "It was most unfortunate (a great disaster) that Allah's Apostle was prevented from writing that statement for them because of their disagreement and noise.  

                                                                                 

Khalifa Umar Insulted Prophet of Allah, Another Narration


Sahih Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 70, Number 573:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
When Allah's Apostle was on his death-bed and in the house there were some people among whom was 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, the Prophet said, "Come, let me write for you a statement after which you will not go astray." 'Umar said, "The Prophet is seriously ill and you have the Qur'an; so the Book of Allah is enough for us." The people present in the house differed and quarrelled. Some said "Go near so that the Prophet may write for you a statement after which you will not go astray," while the others said as Umar said. When they caused a hue and cry before the Prophet, Allah's Apostle said, "Go away!" Narrated 'Ubaidullah: Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was very unfortunate that Allah's Apostle was prevented from writing that statement for them because of their disagreement and noise."

Khalifa Umar Insulted Prophet of Allah Another narration of the Event of Thursday

Sahih Bukhari,Volume 4, Book 52, Number 288:

Narrated Said bin Jubair:
Ibn 'Abbas said, "Thursday! What (great thing) took place on Thursday!" Then he started weeping till his tears wetted the gravels of the ground . Then he said, "On Thursday the illness of Allah's Apostle was aggravated and he said, "Fetch me writing materials so that I may have something written to you after which you will never go astray." The people (present there) differed in this matter and people should not differ before a prophet. They said, "Allah's Apostle is seriously sick.' The Prophet said, "Let me alone, as the state in which I am now, is better than what you are calling me for." The Prophet on his death-bed, gave three orders saying, "Expel the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, respect and give gifts to the foreign delegates as you have seen me dealing with them." I forgot the third (order)" (Ya'qub bin Muhammad said, "I asked Al-Mughira bin 'Abdur-Rahman about the Arabian Peninsula and he said, 'It comprises Mecca, Medina, Al-Yama-ma and Yemen." Ya'qub added, "And Al-Arj, the beginning of Tihama.")



Khalifa Umar disobeyed Prophet of Allah. The Prophet asks the companions to give him a pen and paper

Al-Bukhari,Volume 5, Book 59, Number 716:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:
Thursday! And how great that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah's Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said, fetch me something so that I may write to you something after which you will never go astray." The people (present there) differed in this matter, and it was not right to differ before a prophet. Some said, "What is wrong with him ? (Do you think ) he is delirious (seriously ill)? Ask him ( to understand his state )." So they went to the Prophet and asked him again. The Prophet said, "Leave me, for my present state is better than what you call me for." Then he ordered them to do three things. He said, "Turn the pagans out of the 'Arabian Peninsula; respect and give gifts to the foreign delegations as you have seen me dealing withthem." (Said bin Jubair, the sub-narrator said that Ibn Abbas kept quiet as rewards the third order, or he said, "I forgot it.")(See Hadith No. 116 Vol. 1)

Khalifa Umar disobeyed Prophet. The Event of Thursday that made Ibn Abbas cry.

Sahih Muslim, Book  13, Number 4014:
Sa'id b. Jubair reported that Ibn 'Abbas said:
Thursday, (and then said): What is this Thursday? He then wept so much that his tears moistened the pebbles. I said: Ibn 'Abbas, what is (significant) about Thursday? He (Ibn 'Abbas) said: The illness of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) took a serious turn (on this day), and he said: Come to me, so that I should write for you a document that you may not go astray after me. They (the Companions around him) disputed, and it is not meet to dispute in the presence of the Apostle. They said: How is lie (Allah's Apostle)? Has he lost his consciousness? Try to learn from him (this point). He (the Holy Prophet) said: Leave me. I am better in the state (than the one in which you are engaged). I make a will about three things: Turn out the polytheists from the territory of Arabia; show hospitality to the (foreign) delegations as I used to show them hospitality. He (the narrator) said: He (Ibn Abbas) kept silent on the third point, or he (the narrator) said: But I forgot that.

Khalifa Umar Insulted Prophet(s.a.w).Third narration

Sahih Muslim,Book 013, Number 4016:
Ibn Abbas reported:
 When Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) was about to leave this world, there were persons (around him) in his house, 'Umar b. al-Khattab being one of them. Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Come, I may write for you a document; you would not go astray after that. Thereupon Umar said: Verily Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) is deeply afflicted with pain. You have the Qur'an with you. The Book of Allah is sufficient for us. Those who were present in the house differed. Some of them said: Bring him (the writing material) so that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) may write a document for you and you would never go astray after him And some among them said what 'Umar had (already) said. When they indulged in nonsense and began to dispute in the presence of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), he said: Get up (and go away) 'Ubaidullah said: Ibn Abbas used to say: There was a heavy loss, indeed a heavy loss, that, due to their dispute and noise. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) could not write (or dictate) the document for them.

Khalifa Umar watches the wives of the Prophet when they go answer the call of nature.  

Al-Bukhari.,Volume 1, Book 4, Number 148:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqi at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Allah's Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab" (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).

Note: This tradition severely damage the image of Prophet(s.a.w), as it shows that Prophet(s.a.w) was not keen in the matter of Hijab of his wives.(Astagfirulla) 

We request our Sunni Brothers to ponder on these forged traditions in Sahih Bukhari and see how Bukhari had insulted Prophet to upgrade the status of Umar


Khalifa Umar had a gay/homosexual guy at his home. 

Sahih Al-Bukhari,Volume 8, Book 82, Number 820:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet cursed the effeminate men and those women who assume the similitude (manners) of men. He also said, "Turn them out of your houses." He turned such-and-such person out, and 'Umar also turned out such-and-such person.

Umar was  on the verge of destruction! 
  
Sahih Bukhari,Volume 9, Book 92, Number 405:
Narrated Ibn Abi Mulaika:
Once the two righteous men, i.e., Abu Bakr and 'Umar were on the verge of destruction (and that was because): When the delegate of Bani Tamim came to the Prophet, one of them (either Abu Bakr or 'Umar) recommended Al-Aqra' bin Habis At-Tamimi Al-Hanzali, the brother of Bani Majashi (to be appointed as their chief), while the other recommended somebody else. Abu Bakr said to 'Umar, "You intended only to oppose me." 'Umar said, "I did not intend to oppose you!" Then their voices grew louder in front of the Prophet whereupon there was revealed: 'O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet..a great reward.' (49.2-3) Ibn Az-Zubair said, 'Thence forward when 'Umar talked to the Prophet, he would talk like one who whispered a secret and would even fail to make the Prophet hear him, in which case the Prophet would ask him (to repeat his words)."

Umar threatens to torture a Companion of Prophet(sawa)

Sahih Muslim,Book 025, Number 5356:
Abd Sa'id Khudri reported:
We were in the company of Ubayy b. Ka'b that Abu Musa Ash'ari came there in a state of anger. He stood (before us) and said: I ask you to bear witness in the name of Allah whether anyone amongst you heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Permission (for entering the house) should be sought three times and if permission is granted to you (then get in). otherwise go back. Ubayy b. Ka'b said: What is the matter? He said: I sought permission yesterday from 'Umar b. Khattab three times but he did not permit me, so I came back; then I went to him today and visited him and informed him that I had come to him yesterday and greeted him thrice, then came back, whereupon he said: Yes, we did hear you but we were at that time busy, but why did you not seek permission (further and you must have never gone back until you were permitted to do so). He said: I sought permission (in the manner) that I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said (in connection 'With the seeking of permission for entering the house of a stranger). Thereupon he (Hadrat Umar) said: By Allah, I shall torture your back and your stomach unless you bring one who may bear witness to what you state. 'Ubayy b. Ka'b said: By Allah, none should stand with you (to bear testimony) but the youngest amongst us. And he therefore, said to Abu Sa'id: Stand up. So I stood up until I came to Umar and said: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) say this.                             

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Why Hazrat Zahra (s.a.) demanded Fadak from Abu Bakr and Umar

Hazrat Fatemah Zahra (s.a.) (the chief of all women in Paradise) was least interested in worldly possessions. She being a lady of exalted disposition, enjoyed great spiritual status and this was well-acknowledged by the Islamic world. She had all along remained aloof from the world and was wary of its trappings and deceit. However, after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise, she agitated against the Abu Bakr and Umar to assert her claim over Fadak.

What brought about this change in her outlook to worldly possessions after snubbing them all her life? Why after recognizing the world for what it is ” more worthless than a goat’s sneeze or the bone of a pig in the hand of a leper or lighter than the wing of a fly, did she embark on a prolonged struggle with the government over a piece of property?

What factors made her bear untold hardships, affliction and troubles in her crusade against the government? Were a small piece of land and a few date trees worth so much trouble? After all, she was fully aware that all her efforts would eventually be in vain and the government would not return the land to her. It is natural for conscious readers to raise such questions regarding Hazrat Fatemah Zahra’s (s.a.) anguished demand for Fadak.

The questions are not complex for students of Islamic history, particularly for those who have closely studied the events in the immediate aftermath of the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise. A cursory analysis of these events will provide the readers the answers they are seeking.

The first and primary reason was that Fadak was usurped to deprive Hazrat Fatemah Zahra (s.a.) of her lawful property and thus financially weaken the progeny of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.a.). Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) was already facing opposition in his claim for caliphate; by withholding the property of Fadak, an attack was being inflicted by the government to weaken him economically. It was anticipated by the government that the people would see Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) as financially weak and would disregard his claim to caliphate. In the process, they wanted to dent his social and religious status. This was the very tactic adopted by the hypocrites with regards to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in the early era of Islam, who had imposed economic sanctions against all the companions and helpers of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), thereby aiming to weaken him (s.a.w.a.) and his mission.

The second reason was that the income of Fadak was substantial. According to IbnAbil Hadeed al-Mutazali, the number of date trees in Fadak was equal to the total number of date trees in Kufa. Allama Majlisi (r.a.) quotes from ‘Kashf al-Muhajja’, the annual income of Fadak was 24,000 dinars. Another tradition says that the income was 70,000 dinars.  Disparity in the amounts could be a result of fluctuation in the computation of income over the years. Obviously, such a significant amount did not escape the government’s attention, especially since the Hashimites were the beneficiaries.

The third reason was that the demand of Fadak had a direct bearing on the demand of her illustrious husband, Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (a.s.) for caliphate. To substantiate this point, it is worthwhile to delve on an incident involving the renowned scholar Ibn Abil Hadeed al-Mutazali. The latter was studying at Madrasah al-Arabiyyah in Baghdad, when he once asked the teacher Ali b. al-Faraqi whether Fatemah (s.a.) was truthful.

The teacher answered, ‘Of course.’

‘Then why did Abu Bakr, who knew she (a.s.) was truthful, not return Fadak to her?’ shot back the zealous student.

The teacher smiled and responded: ‘If Abu Bakr had conceded Fadak to Fatemah (s.a.) based on her pleas, she would have claimed that caliphate is the right of my husband which Abu Bakr had usurped. Under the circumstances, Abu Bakr would not have any excuse for denying Ali his right to caliphate (since he had already conceded Fatemah’s (s.a.) claim on Fadak). Consequently, he would be bound to accept every argument advanced by her after making this concession.

The fourth reason was that right, if not given, should always be demanded. So, the one whose right is usurped, is bound to claim his right and struggle for it, since the right is his whether or not he needs it or is attached to it. The right to claim a usurped property is not related to one’s piety or indifference to the world. One can be pious and aloof from worldly possessions and still claim his usurped right vociferously.

The fifth reason is that a man, however aloof he may have remained from worldly possessions, is duty-bound to spend money on religious obligations (like joining relations – Sila-e-Rahm) and other duties enjoined by Allah the Almighty. Finance is required to perform these obligations and duties, and if that money is usurped by someone, he must attempt to recover the same so as to perform his religious duties. Does history not confirm that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was the most pious and God-fearing of all Muslims? Even then, to further the cause of Islam, he needed the property and wealth of Hazrat Khadijah (s.a.).

The sixth reason is that reason demands that one should struggle to assert his usurped right. This can give rise to one of two scenarios:

a)  If his struggle bears fruit, he will get what he wanted. Thus, his objective would be achieved in his struggle.

b) If he fails in his endeavor and cannot reclaim his right, the usurper would stand fully exposed before all those who are aware of the truth. Every time the people see the oppressed man, they will be reminded of the usurper regardless of his good qualities and ethics. In fact, the people will come to realize that these qualities are a façade under which the usurper oppresses and cheats people.

The seventh reason was to invite the attention of the masses towards their oppressed state. Imposters and frauds use money and influence to win the heart of the masses. But the noblemen win over masses with their sincerity and ethics. When oppressed, such people use wisdom and exhortation to prove their point so that the people can clearly differentiate between the oppressor and the oppressed one and support the latter in his struggle against the former.

Thus, keeping in view the abovementioned factors, there was merit in Hazrat Fatemah Zahra’s (s.a.) crusade against the government that made her address the Muslims in Masjid al-Nabavi, the Mosque of her beloved father (s.a.w.a.) in a bid to establish her right.

She (s.a.) did not go to the house of the first caliph for discussions. Instead, she selected a place which was the centre for discussion and the meeting point of Muslims. She (s.a.) also selected the best time to go to the mosque. At that time, the mosque was filled to capacity by the Muhajireen, the Ansaar and people of various social strata. Moreover, she did not go to the mosque alone; rather she was accompanied by a group of ladies, who surrounded her.

Before her arrival in the mosque, a curtain was suspended at a pre-determined place so that she might address the audience from behind it

These arrangements were made so that she could present her arguments without compromising on etiquette. After all, she was the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) who had claimed, ‘I am the most learned and cultured man in the whole of Arabia.’ She was a role-model for all Muslim women till the Day of Judgment as her father (s.a.w.a.) had declared, ‘An angel informed me and gave me glad tidings that my daughter, Fatemah is the chief of all women of my nation…’
(Al-Khasaaes by Imam Nisaai p. 34)

12 Questions Concerning Fadak

Qur’anic verses and historical documents reveal that the land of Fadak situated near the Fort of Khaibar, formerly belonging to the Jews, was the personal property of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h). It was neither a government property owned by the treasury nor was it war booty. The seventh verse of Surah Hashr, explains the point in detail:

“Whatever Allah has restored to His Apostle from the people of the towns, it is for Allah and for the Apostle, and for the near of kin and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you. . .” (59: 7)

Fadak was a piece of land that had come in possession of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) without waging a war. In the seventh century, the people of that place had handed it over to the Muslims fearing reprisal. As it was given voluntarily, this land automatically became the personal property of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), and had nothing to do with the government. The fact was accepted by many commentators and historians.

Reference: 
Bilazaris ‘Futuh al-Bildaan’;  Shaykh Shahabudin Hamui in ‘Mojam al-Bildaan’ under the word ‘Fadak’;  Mohammad Ibn Jurair Tabari in his ‘Tarikh al-Umam wal Molook’, vol.3, p. 14; Ibn Atheer in ‘Al-Kaamil’, vol.3, p.221; Ibn Abil Hadeed in ‘Sharh-e-Nahjul Balagha’, vol. 16, p.210

All the Sunni commentators while explaining the 28th verse of Surah Bani Israel state that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had gifted Fadak to Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h). Thus, automatically it becomes the personal property of Hazrat Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h). Just to prove our point, the following books may be referred to: Suyooti’s ‘Durrul Mansoor’, vol. 5, p.273; Hakim-e-Haskani’s ‘Shawaahed ut-Tanzeel’, vol. 1, p.240. Both these authors have quoted from Abu Saeed Khudri and Ibn Abbas. Also, the following learned men have explained and confessed that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) has gifted Fadak to Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h): Qazi Abdul Jabbar Motazali, Yaqoote Hammui, Ibn Abil Hadeed, Abdul Fattah Abdul Maqsood-e-Misri, etc…

After receiving Fadak from the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) had appointed her own employees there. Thus Fadak remained of the Prophet (p.b.u.h). The first Caliph could not bear to see Fadak in the hands of Fatima (p.b.u.h). So he sent his henchmen to Fadak to drive away the appointees of Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) and grabbed possession. Ameeral Mo’mineen Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) has penned a very meaningful sentence in his book Nahjul Balagha saying that “Under the sky what we were having was Fadak”, which proves that the due of Ahlul Bayt was not given. Whereas how many people have applied their charitable disposition and broad based outlook? Of course, God is an Excellent Arbiter. 
(Nahjul Balagha, Letter no. 45).

Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h), protesting against the step of the government went to the Mosque. There she sat behind the curtain and addressed the first Caliph in the presence of all the people. She questioned him and put up a claim for the return of Fadak, that was given to her by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) and that it had become her property. The first Caliph did not entertain her claim and refuted it by saying that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had not gifted it to her, and asked her to produce witnesses to the effect that Fadak was her property. Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) then produced six witnesses three males and three females, comprising Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h), Imam Hasan (p.b.u.h), Imam Husain (p.b.u.h), Ummul Mo’mineen Janabe Umme Salma, Umme Aiman, maid of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) and Asma Binte Umais, the wife of the first Caliph himself (may God be pleased with her). The first Caliph did not accept the testimony of these witnesses and continued his occupation of Fadak. Even after adopting this attitude the first Caliph could not gain much. First, because the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had himself given it to her. Second, because she (Fatima (p.b.u.h)), being the only daughter of the Prophet (p.b.u.h), it was her parental inheritance. She had to advance the plea of inheritance because her first plea was not accepted by the first Caliph. At this juncture, the Caliph recited a hadith on his own authority (without substantiating it from any source) saying that, “We prophets do not leave behind any property, and if at all something remains, it belongs to all Muslims.” Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) took exception to it, and contradicted the authenticity of this hadith and said it is against the spirit of the Qur’an. Qur’an on numerous places had said about the worldly property of the prophets. When Fatima (p.b.u.h) could no longer bear the Caliph’s obstinacy, she returned home displeased. After that incident, she never spoke with both first and second Caliphs. According to Ibn Qutaybah (‘Al-Imamah wal-Siyaasah’), she cursed them after every prayer. And during her last days, she had requested Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) not to permit these persons to accompany her funeral. Keeping all this in mind, some questions would automatically arise in the minds of decent persons who believe in truth and justice. 

We therefore, would like to pose 12 Questions:

1. Regarding the claim of Fadak, the claim of Fatima (p.b.u.h) was enough because Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) is the main spirit of the verse of Tatheer. She would never talk or utter anything which is not true and correct. Under these circumstances, non-acceptance of her claim tantamounted to casting aspersions on Ayat Tatheer wherein God had certified the purity of the characters of the persons of the Cloak.

2. Why the witnesses of Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) and others were not accepted when the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had repeatedly said, “Wherever Ali (p.b.u.h) goes, Truth goes with him.” Ayat Tatheer was revealed in connection with Hazrat Imam Hasan and Imam Husain (p.b.u.h). Were not these two princes, the leaders of the youths of Paradise? Why the witness of Umme Salma, may God be pleased with her, and Umme Aiman, was not accepted even thought they were among those promised paradise by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h)? Whether the Qur’an for giving witness was not complete? No, because the witness of two men and one woman or two women and one man was enough to complete the Qur’an. Were the witnesses not the upholders of justice? Leave alone the question of being upholders of justice, their infallibility personified.

3.Before arriving at the decision, the wtinessess of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) were driven out. Why? Whther this act was not to be construed as tyrannical or that of high-handedness?

4.This is an undisputed act of Muslim Law that whoever is in possession of anything, be it a property or anything else, it belongs to the person who is possessing it. He would simply say under the oath that a certain property belongs to him. Moreover, witnesses are required by the party who is claiming and not by the one who is having the property in his possession. Under this law calling for witness does not conform with the requirements of Justice. Thus, calling for witnesses from Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) was not right. Her responsibility was to simply say an oath. Presenting witnesses was the duty of the first Caliph. Why then Islamic law was tampered with and circumvented?

5.On many occasions, the first Caliph had agreed to the problems presented by the companions of Prophet (p.b.u.h) without calling for witnesses. For instance, once Janab Jabir came to the Caliph saying that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had promised that he would pay him some amount.

The first Caliph paid him one thousand five hundred dirhams without calling for witnesses. Similarly, once Abu Basheer Maazani had said that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had promised to pray him some amount. The Caliph paid him 1400 dirhams (Sahih Bukhari).

Then what was the reason, that in these cases no witnesses were called for. In some cases only companionship of Prophet (p.b.u.h) was enough for consideration. But, in the case of the Prophet’s daughter why witnesses were required? There were the very persons about whom the verse of Tatheer was revealed.

6.When Fadak was not considered as a property of Fatima (p.b.u.h), why then on previous occasion the first Caliph had issued a certificate of property in her favour, when earlier she had represented in the matter? Why then the second Caliph seeing the certificate in the hands of Fatima (p.b.u.h) had torn it into pieces and had spat on it? (Sharh Nahjul Balagha, of Ibn Abil Hadeed vol. 16, p.174; Seera Halbiya, vol. 3, p.362)

When Fadak was not the property of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h), why was it given to her in the first instance? And if at all it was hers, why was it usurped?

7.If the first Caliph was right in the case of Fadak, then why did he repeatedly repent at the time of remembering Fadak? And why he himself was ashamed of his own act?

8.The hadith that was quoted by the first Caliph for not conceding Fadak was clearly against the spirit of the Qur’an. In Qur’an, there is reference to the property of Sulaiman, Dawood, ‘Aal-e-Yaqub, Zacharia and Yahya – all of them were prophets and property holders (Surah Naml,  verse 16; Surah Mariam, verse 46).

Apart from the above, Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) was infallible, virtue and honest. Why then her statement was not taken as true? The hadith recited by the first Caliph was not conforming with Qur’anic spirit and teachings, and hence, cannot be accepted. Why then was Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) deprived and denied her own property?

9.If it is true, that the Messenger of Allah had not let any property and if at all there is any, it belongs to the government or to all Muslims, why then the wives of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) specially Abu Bakr’s daughter, Ayesha, were not told to vacate possession of their premises? This was also the property left by the Prophet (p.b.u.h). Whether the denial of the right of property was applicable only to Janabe Fatima Zahra(p.b.u.h)?

10.If the property left by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), does not belong to any particular person, then why did Abu Bakr seek permission only from his own daughter, Ayesha, for getting buried besides the Prophet (p.b.u.h)?

If at all the inheritance of property is considered, the wives are not entitled to get a share in it. At the most they can have residential rights. If the property rights are accepted, in the presence of children, a wife’s share is only 1/8th.  And in this very 1/8th only, all wives would get equal share. If it is to be distributed among nine wives, the share of each wife would come to 1/72. In this way, Ummul Mo’mineen, Ayesha could give permission only upto her own share. Why other were not approached and consulted?

11.If it is accepted that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) did not gift Fadak to Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) and that there was no property belonging to the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), even then, why were the Ahlul Bayt deprived of the Khums of the Khaibar and the wars? Has Qur’an not ordained to pay Khums to all your relatives (Zul Qurba) (Surah Tawba: 41, Surah Isra: 28)? In regards to booty, the question of inheritance does not arise.

12.   Had the argument and the stand of the Khilafat been right regarding Fadak, then why Omar II, Omar bin Abdul Aziz, Omavi, Saffah, Mehdi and Mamoon Abbasi, had made offers to return Fadak to the progeny of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h)?

If it was the property of all followers of Islam, then why the third Caliph gave it to Marwan? After that, Muavia distributed it amongst his son, Hakam’s son, the son of Osman?

Thereafter, why was it retaken into possession by Yazid bin Abdul Malik, Mansoor Dawaaneqi and Mutawakkil Abbasi? (Bukhari vol.5, p.3; Tarikh of Ibn Atheer vol.5, p.288, vol.9, p.200)

The truth is that Fadak belonged to Fatima (p.b.u.h) and was her right. But the government (Abu Bakr and Umar)usurped it, most probably for the reason that the land was fertile and populated. Its income was quite good, and it was the base of the economic resources of Ahlul Bayt. Or it was a step towards weakening the economy of Ahlul Bayt and to ease them out from religion and political mainstream.

Anyway, those who possess absolute faith in Qur’an and obey its orders, taking it as their bounded duty and for those who take Fatima (p.b.u.h) as the meaning fo ‘Ayat Tatheer’ and who consider Mubahala as the evidence of her truthfulness and take Surah Hal ‘Ataa in the light of her exalted character and purity, they are sure that in respect of Fadak, Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) was absolutely right and that it was her due. In the words of Qur’an, “After truth, there is nothing but erring.”
“When they are told not to commit corruption in the land, they reply, “We are only reformers.” They are corrupt but do not realize it. When they are told to believe as everyone else does, they say, “Should we believe as fools do?” In fact, they are fools but they do not know it.” (Holy Qur’an)

A Quranic proof on the inheritance of Janabe Zahra(s.a.)

Prophet Zakariyya(a.s.) prayed for a son in his old age in the following words:

He said: My Lord! surely my bones are weakened and my head flares with hoariness, and, my Lord! I have never been unsuccessful in my prayer to Thee:And surely I fear my cousins after me, and my wife is barren, therefore grant me from Thyself an heir, Who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased. 
(Surah Maryam (19): Verse4-6)
When the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.a.) passed away and Abu Bakr was made caliph to rule over the Muslim community he dispossessed the Holy Prophet’s daughter Fatimah(s.a.) of the agricultural land or estate known as Fadak which had been gifted to her by the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.a.)  during his life time and given in her possession. When Janabe Fatimah(s.a.) asked Abu Bakr to restore her estate as it had been gifted to her by the Holy Prophet along with possession, he demanded evidence and refused to accept the evidence of witnesses produced by Janabe Fatimah(s.a.). Then she claimed the estate as the sole heir to her father, the Holy Prophet. This request was rejected by Abu Bakr saying that he had heard the Holy Prophet(s.a.w.a.)  say that “We the messengers of Allah neither inherit nor leave inheritance.”

The above verses prove that the statement of Abu Bakr should be treated as an instantaneous excuse, he thought of, to deprive Janabe Fatimah(s.a.) from the lawful inheritance, her father left for her, otherwise the words of Allah become vague and meaningless. In reply she(s.a.) quoted these verses to prove that he had reported a false tradition because when the Quran has used the word “warith” the Holy Prophet could not say that which the caliph reported. The mention of these verses by her means that the word “warith” refers to all that which a messenger of Allah leaves as inheritance.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:
These verses prove that the prophets of Allah inherit and leave inheritance. To interpret “Warith” as reference to knowledge and wisdom only is a deviation from the real, direct and plain meaning of this word, without any external or internal evidence. If inheritance of personal belongings is excluded, the repetition of the verb becomes meaningless because Prophet Zakariyya(a.s.) himself was a descendant of ale Yaqub, who inherited the prophethood and wisdom of his ancestors, and his son would do the same if Allah so willed as He chooses whomsoever He wills as His messenger (Surah An-am: 124), therefore when Prophet Zakariyya(a.s.) said: “ inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub“, he is referring to his belongings and the belongings of the posterity of Yaqoub separately. The first verb refers to the inheritance of his property which Prophet Zakariyya(a.s.) thought would be appropriated by his relatives if he remained childless; and the second verb refers to the prophethood, he wanted for HazratYahya(a.s.)

No doubt the prophets of Allah did not give any importance to the material possessions and laid emphasis on the knowledge and wisdom, but it does not mean that they did not possess property or did not leave what they had as inheritance to their next to kin. The tradition quoted to deprive Janabe Fatimah(s.a.) of her lawful inheritance was tampered with by the narrator for political reasons. He omitted a clause indicating that they leave knowledge as inheritance, and added a clause, which is not correct from the grammatical point of view, unless it is an objective clause subordinate to the principal clause “We the group of prophets”, and the word be read as “sadaqtan”, the second object to the verb “taraknahu “, but he read the clause as co-ordinative and conjunctive, and read “sadaqtan” as the predicate to the word “ma”, which according to the recitation means “whatever”, whereas according to the correct recitation “ma ” means “that which”.
(adapted from The Holy Qur’an, Pooya/M.A. Ali Engl. Commentary)
Conclusion:

Thus it is clear from the above discussion that Abu Bakr and Umar denied the inheritance to the beloved daughter of Prophet(s.a.w)

The Incident of Pen and Paper from Sunni Sources


On the eve of his demise on Monday, when a group of companions visited the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), he (s.a.w.a.) ordered them:

آتُو ’نِی ’ بِدَوَاتٍ وَ قِر ’طَاسٍ اِک ’تُبُ لَکُ … ’ کِتَابًا لَن ’ تَضِل ’ُو ’ا بَع ’دَہ اَبَدًا

‘Fetch me a pen and a paper so that I write a will for you so that you are not deviated after me.’
Prophet  (s.a.w)  was  denied pen and paper by Umar
Umar said:

اِن ’َ الن ’َبِی ’َ غَلَبَہ ال ’وَج ’عُ وَ عِن ’دَکُ … ’ کِتَابُ اللهِ، حَس ’بُنَا کِتَابُ اللهِ ”

‘Surely the Prophet is overcome by illness (suggesting that his words should not be taken seriously).The Book of Allah is with you. The Book of Allah is sufficient for us!!!”
(Sahih Bukhari Chapter on Knowledge, v 22, Musnad-e-Ahmad b. Hanbal, Research of Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, trad 2,996, Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad v 2, p 244 Beirut Edition)

In Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad we find another narration which reveals that a person present in the assembly declared:

اِن ’َ الن ’َبِی ’َ اللهِ لِیَج ’ہَرَ

‘The Prophet is speaking in delirium.’
(Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad v 2 p 242, Beirut Edition, Sahih Bukhari Chapter on جوائز الوفد from the Book of Jihad v 2 p 120, and the Chapter of Exodus of Jews form the Arabian Peninsula v 2 p 36 has these words

‘The person who said this was the one who said that the Book of Allah is sufficient for us.’ i.e. Umar

The Confession of Umar in Sunni Books
Umar himself has confessed about this lowly and shameful act. While describing the conditions of Umar, Abul Fazl Ahmad b. Abi Tahir in Taarikh Baghdad and Ibn Abil Hadid in Sharh-o-Nahjil Balaagha v 3 p 97 have documented:

On a particular day, there occurred a lengthy discussion between Umar and Ibn Abbas when Umar said:

‘During the illness which led to his demise, Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) wished to put forward his (Imam Ali’s) name but we prevented him from doing so. Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) did not approve of this.’

At that time, some of those present urged:

‘Obey the instructions of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.).’

After a heated debate some people intended to bring the pen and paper upon which the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) declared:

اَو ’ بَع ’دَ  …َاذَا؟

‘(Of what use is it) after this?’
(Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad v 2 p 242, Beirut Edition)

Even if a pen and paper had been provided as per the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) instructions and had he (s.a.w.a.) written a will nominating Imam Ali (a.s.) as his successor, Umar’s calculated remark placed the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) nomination under a shadow of uncertainty. To foil the nomination, all that the opponents of Imam Ali (a.s.) and Islam had to do was summon a group of cronies to testify that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) was speaking in delirium, Allah forbid!!

When voices rose in his presence and events took an ugly turn, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) exclaimed:

قُو ’ …ُو ’ا عَنِ ’ی ’، لاَ یَن ’بَغِی ’ عِن ’دَ نَبِی ’َ تَنَازَعٌ ”

‘Go away from me, it is not appropriate to quarrel in the presence of a Prophet.’
(Taarikh-o-Abi al-Fidaa, v. 1, p. 15)

In Sahih Bukhari in the Chapter on Book of Knowledge v 1 p 22, the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) annoyance is recorded with a slight variation:

قو …وا عن ’ی و لا ینبغی عندی التنازع

‘Go away from me, it is not appropriate to argue in my presence.’

Reference:http://www.seratonline.com

Why Shias don’t pray Tarawih?

The prayer of Tarawih is among the recommended prayers of the Sunnis performed in congregation in the nights of month of Ramadan at an estimated twenty units daily.

There exists a divergence of views between Shias and Sunnis in the matter of Tarawih:
1)It was not prevalent during the eras of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a), Abu Bakr and initial period of Umar’s caliphate.
2)It is a Bidah i.e. innovation.
3)Recommended prayers i.e. Nafila are to be prayed individually.
Tarawih 
Tarawih is the plural of the word ‘tarwih’, meaning, ‘to sit’. The recommended prayers, which were recited while sitting, for the sake of comfort and rest after the four units of recommended Ramadan prayers were referred to as Tarawih. Later, the recommended congregational prayers, which are twenty units were also referred to as Tarawih.
(Behaar al-Anwaar, vol 1 pg 363; Fath al-Baari, vol 4 pg 294; Irshaad al-Saari, vol 4 pg 694; Sharh al-Zarqaani vol1 pg 237, Al-Nihaayah vol 1 pg 274, Lisaan al-Arab)

Tarawih did not exist at the time of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) 
Sunni scholars are unable to prove the veracity of Tarawih from the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) Sunnah. All of them are unanimous that it was started by Umar b. Khattaab in the 14th Hijri during his own caliphate. It neither existed in the time of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) nor during the caliphate of Abu Bakr.

Umar ordered Muslims to pray Tarawih based on his whim. He admitted it was an innovation although a good one. Interestingly, he himself was not regular in the congregation but recited in solitude at home. This fact has been revealed by renowned Sunni scholars like Qastalani, Ibne Qudaamah, Qalqashqandi.

Ibne Shahaab says: The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) passed away and things continued in this manner during the reign of Abu Bakr and the first part of Umar’s caliphate.
(Saheeh-e-Bukhaari, vol1 pg 343)
Qastalaani comments: Umar called this prayer as innovation. This is because the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had not ordered its performance in congregation. It was not performed in the first part of night in the caliphate of Abu Bakr. It was not recited every night. Also, the prayers performed in the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) did not have the same number of units.
(Irshaad al-Saari, vol 4 pg 657)

Ibne Qudaamah says: Tarawih has been related to Umar since he ordered its performance in congregation to Ubayy b. Kaab and he did accordingly.
(Al-Mughni, vol 2 pg 166 )

Al-Aini opines: Umar called it an innovation because the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) has not establhished it as Sunnah. It was also not acted upon in the caliphate of Abu Bakr.
(Umdah al-Qaari, vol 11 pg 126)

Qalqashqandi adds: Among the original actions of Umar is the establishment of Tarawih with a congregational leader in the Ramadan month. This was done in the 14th Hijri.
(Masar al-Anaafah fi maalim al-Khilaafah vol 2, pg 337)

Al-Baasi, Suyuti, Sakhtewari and others have also written: The first person to establish the Sunnah of Tarawih was Umar b. Khattaab. They have also clarified that the order of performing recommended prayers of Ramazan month was an innovation from the innovations of Umar.
(Mahaazeraat al-Awaail pg 149; Sharh al-Mawaaqif)

Ibne Saad, Tabari and Ibne Asir comment: This is the event of 14th Hijri when one leader was appointed for men and another for women.
(Tabaqaat-e-Ibne Saad, vol 3 pg 281; Taarikh-e-Tabari, vol 5, pg 22; Kaamil, vol 2 pg 41; Taarikhe Umar b. Khattaab of Ibne Jauzi, pg 52)

Al-Baasi, Ibne al-Teen, Ibne Abd al-Barr, Kahlaani and Zarqaani have also mentioned this topic and Kahlaani observes the statement of Umar (this is an admirable innovation) saying: If something is an innovation then it can never be liked or be good. It will always convey the meaning of deviation.
(Subul al-Salaam, vol 2, pg 10; Al-Mujtahid, vol 1, pg 210; Sharhe Furqaani, Al Musnif vol 5, pg 264, Al Musnif vol 5, pg 264)

Origin of Tarawih

It has been narrated from Ibne Shahaab, from Urwah b. Zubair, from Abdul Rahman b. Abdul Qaari:

We went to the mosque with Umar b. Khattaab in one of the nights of Ramadan month. People were busy with their individual prayers and some with their tribesmen. On witnessing this, Umar b. Khattaab said: It would be better if I collect them under one congregational leader. Then he chose Ubayy b. Kaab for their leadership. The next night we went to the mosque and witnessed that people were reciting prayer in congregation. Umar remarked:

‘This is an admirable innovation. However if these people perform the prayer after awakening from sleep, it would be better than performing it in the early part of the night.’
(Saheeh-e-Bukhaari, vol 1, pg 342; Abdul Razzaaq, vol 4, pg 285)

Different opinions regarding number of units of Tarawih

More evidence of the fact that the Tarawih is a Bidah with no trace of it during the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) life time can be found in the confusion regarding the number of units of the Tarawih.

While the popular belief is 20 units, many scholars have rejected this idea:

Kahlaani, the author of Subul al-Salaam has rejected it and said: There is no correct (Saheeh) tradition regarding the 20 units. If we talk about Saheeh tradition, it is of only 11 units and the 20 units prayer is innovation.
(Subul al-Salaam, vol 2, pg 11)

Shukaani, in Nail al-Awtaar has followed Kahlani in his opinion calling it an innovation. He opines that we get a legal order for the prayers of the month of Ramadan either in congregation or in solitude. Hence, we do not find reason for limiting it to Tarawih or specific numbers or particular Sunnah prayers.
(Nail al-Awtaar, vol 3, pg 53)

Allamah Majlisi writes �” Even though it is an excellent form of worship, confining it to a specific time and manner deeming it recommended is certainly an innovation and deviation. This is because the Sunnis state it in the nature of emphasized Sunnah and consider its performance as one of the signs of religion.
(Behaar al-Anwaar, vol.29, pg 51)

Conflict regarding number of units in the Naafilah of Ramadan month

There is conflict among the Sunnis regarding the number of units of Naafilah. The reason for this is that they do not have a clear link from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) regarding it. According to many Sunni scholars it is 20 units. However, others have varyingly recorded it to be 36 units, 23 units, 16 units, 13 units, 24 units, 34 units and 14 units.

Ibne Qudaamah says 20, Nauee records 20, Abu Hanifa 20, Shafei 20, Maalik 36, Muhammad b. Nasr Maruzi 11, Qastaani 20, Sarakhsi, Hanafi, Baghvi, Mawrudi and Juzairi as 20
(Al-Mughni, vol 2, pg 168; Al-Masboot, vol 2, pg 145; Umdah al-Qaari vol 11, pg 127; Al-Ikhtiyaar, vol 11, pg 127; Al-Tahzeeb fi fiqhi al-Shafei, vol 2, pg 368; Al-Haadi al-Kabeer, vol 2, pg 368)

According to Shia scholars it is 20 units during the first twenty nights and 30 units in the last ten nights. An additional 100 units are recited in the nights of Qadr (19th, 21st, and 23rd) which adds up to a thousand units.

Concept of congregation of recommended prayers

Shafei, for instance, considers the performance of recommended prayers in congregation as Makrooh (abominable). While others have maintained that the prayers should be performed in solitude and at home. Consequently, the matter of Tarawih is not unanimous among the Sunnis, even if the majority is inclined to reciting it in congregation.

Opinion of the Sunni jurists

Abdul Razzaaq from Ibne Umar: The recommended prayers of Ramadan month should not be recited in congregation.

He also narrates from Mujaahid that a man approached Ibne Umar and said ” I recite the recommended prayers of Ramadan in congregation. Ibne Umar asked ” Do you pray with the recitation? Man replied in the affirmative. Ibne Umar said ” Then you are silent just like a donkey. Get out of here and recite the prayers in solitude at home (instead of in congregation).
(Al Masboot vol 1 pg 144)

In the second part of his book he records that Tahaawi has narrated from Moalla, Abu Yusuf and Maalik that these people were of the opinion that to the extent possible the recommended prayers should be recited in the house. Shafei says: Tarawih should be recited in solitude so as not to make it ostentatious.

Verdict of the Shia jurists regarding Tarawih
All Shia jurists without exception consider the recitation of recommended prayers in congregation an innovation. Sayyid Murtaza (r.a.) declares: As far as the congregation of the Tarawih prayers is concerned, it is without doubt an innovation. In this regard, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had forewarned:

‘O people, the recommended prayers in the nights of Ramadan are an innovation.’
(Man laa Yahzaraho al-Faqih vol 2, pg 137, Chapter of Salaat in Month of Ramadan)

Reference: http://www.seratonline.com

Are Abu Bakr and Umar superior to Ali (a.s.) because they are buried next to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)?

One of the arguments advanced by some Muslims for the superiority of Abu Bakr and Umar over Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) is that the two are buried next to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). They consider this as a virtue in their favour and a sign that they were worthy of being leaders of the Muslims.
Kaaba,the birthplace of Ali(a.s)

Is being buried in a particular place cause for superiority in matter of caliphate?

The only way superiority can be claimed is by virtue of one’s actions and in case of leadership of the Muslims, by divine text (nass) i.e. endorsement by Allah and the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). A claim based on any other argument is a figment of imagination and rooted in falsehood. It can easily be rendered baseless with arguments from the Holy Quran and Sunnah as also intellect and wisdom.
In case of Abu Bakr’s and Umar’s burial in particular it would be groundless to claim superiority as they were not buried based on any instruction from Allah and the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Also, those who permitted them to be buried had no right over the property to grant such permission. In other words, the legitimacy of the property on which they are buried is itself questionable. So, rather than being a source of superiority it is a source of discredit and ignominy.

Moreover, the burial argument is used by these Muslims post-facto to justify the caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar. How did the Muslims who were selecting the caliph in their life time to know that Abu Bakr and Umar would be buried in the vicinity of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)? So it is a case of them buried because they were the caliphs of the time and not because of any superiority. Ironically, Imam Hasan b. Ali al-Mujtaba (a.s.) in favour of whom there are too many Quranic verses and traditions to be listed including the all-important one of he along with his brother, Imam Husain b. Ali (a.s.), being the Chiefs of the Youths of Paradise, was not granted permission even for a token circumambulation (tawaaf) of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) grave.

How can being buried next to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) be a source of discredit and ignominy for Abu Bakr and Umar? A discussion on the subject between Abu Hanifa and one of his peers makes the point clear.

Abu Hanifa in a quandary
One day, Fuzzaal b.Hasan b. Fuzzaal al-Kufi (refer Qaamoos al-Rijaal, vol. 4 pg 313), a companion of Imam JafarSadiq (a.s.), was walking through the streets of Kufa with his friend.

He saw Abu Hanifa surrounded by people who were posing religious questions.

Fuzzaal decided to approach Abu Hanifa with some questions of his own, despite protests to the contrary by his friend, who warned him that Abu Hanifa was an intelligent person.

Fuzzaal: O Abu Hanifa! My brother used to say that after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) Ali  b. Abi Taalib (a.s.) is the best person. But I say that it is Abu Bakr and then Umar. What do you say in this regard?

Abu Hanifa reflected a little and replied:For the superiority of these two (Abu Bakr and Umar) it is sufficient that they were buried in the vicinity of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Don’t you know it?

Fuzzaal: Yes I know, when I said this point to my brother he countered me thus: Either, the place where they (Abu Bakr and Umar) are buried was the property of Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and hence, it  was not permissible for anyone to bury someone on that place without his (s.a.w.a.) permission.

OR

It was property of Abu Bakr and Umar and they gifted it to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Here, again it is illegal for them to partake in an estate which has been gifted to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) (and no longer belongs to them).

Abu Hanifa again deliberated for some time and replied:It was property of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.).But both Abu Bakr and Umar are buried in the shares of their daughters (Aaesha and Hafsah). Since it became the property of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) wives after his death (as inheritance) that is why Abu Bakr and Umar are buried there.

Fuzzaal: Yes, I know I told him that but my brother said: Prophet (s.a.w.a.) left nine wives after his death. So every wife had equal right over that property (and without the permission of other wives Abu Bakr and Umar should not have been buried).

After listening to this, Abu Hanifa said to his companions: Get him out of here he is a Shia.
(Al-Ehtejaaj, pg207)

Prophets do not leave behind inheritance

Another question that needs answering is how Abu Bakr and Umar were buried on a property that did not even belong to their daughters in the first place. Didn’t they advance the argument to Hazrat Fatemah Zahra (s.a.), the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) daughter, when she claimed Fadak ” first as a bestowal and then as inheritance, that Prophets do not leave behind anything as inheritance and what they leave behind is charity (sadaqah)?

When Hazrat Faatemah Zahra’s (s.a.) claim on Fadak as inheritance was summarily denied, and she is the Chief of the Women of Paradise by consensus of both the sects, where is the question of lesser people inheriting the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) property and burying their dead ones?
Effectively Abu Bakr and Umar are buried on usurped property on which neither they nor their daughters had a claim and far from being a virtue, their burial on the property of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is a source of discredit and ignominy for them till the Day of Judgement.

Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) burial

In fact, if we go by the argument of Abu Bakr and Umar that Prophets do not leave behind inheritance and what they leave behind is charity, the burial of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) himself comes into question as he (s.a.w.a.) is buried on property that belongs to the Muslims for which obviously no permission was taken. In fact, even if all the Muslims had granted permission, it would still have been impossible to bury the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) since sadaqah is prohibited on him (s.a.w.a.) and the Ahle Bait (a.s.).

But since usurping and stealing cannot be attributed to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) it means that prophets do in fact leave behind inheritance and the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) burial was in conformity with the laws of Shariah.

Ameerul Momineen’s Ali (a.s.)  superiority

If at all superiority is claimed, it should be in the matter of birth,since its location cannot be manipulated by usurping and people know it beforehand while discussing the person’s merits unlike the burial where they learn of it only after the person’s death.

In matters of birth Ameerul Momineen Ali (a.s.) ranks higher than not just Abu Bakr and Umar, but all mankind.

It is reported by consecutive chains of narrators (tawaatur) that Faatemah b. Asad (s.a.) gave birth to Ameerul Momineen Ali (a.s.) in the center of the Kaabah. 
(Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain vol. 3 pg 483)

None was born in the Kaabah until then (and none was born after that day). 
(Noor al-Absaar pg 69 from Ibne Sabbaagh)

Not only was Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) born in the Kaabah he is likened to the Kaabah by the Prophet (s.a.w.a.):

‘O Ali, you enjoy the status of the Kaabah.’ 
(Kunuz al-Haqaeq fi Hadis-e-Khair al-Khalaeq pg 188 from al-Dailami)

‘You enjoy the status of the Kaabah, it is visited by the people, it does not visit the people.’ 
(Asad al-Ghaabah fi Marifat al-Saḥaabahvol 4 pg 31)
Reference:http://www.seratonline.com

Monday, March 5, 2012

Janabe Fatima Zehra(a.s) was sent back empty handed by Abu Bakr and Umar

Rights of Fatima Zahra (s.a)-Bagh-e-Fadak
In which Allama Nasir Abbas (multan) recite that the Daughter of Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (p.b.u.h) went to darbar(court) of  Abubakr for the inheritance of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) and they sent Janabe Zehra back and said "there is no inheritance or Haq for u and ur family"and tore the letter of Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) into pieces.Eventually when a sunni brother heard this, he converted to Shia Islam.


Friday, March 2, 2012

Sunni Misyar Marriage (Travellers' Marriage or marriage of convenience)

A Misyar Marriage is a unique Sunni Muslim innovation. Marriage institution allows for a lesser form of relationship between man and woman than normal marriage, zawaj.  Misyar marriage is defined as an official marital "relationship" between a man and a woman who do not live together, and where the husband is not financially responsible for a Misyar wife.

the husband and wife give up several rights by their own free will, such as living together, equal division of nights between wives in cases of polygamy, the wife's rights to housing, and maintenance money ("nafaqa"), and the husband's right of homekeeping, and access.

Misyar can be a temporary arrangement, but unlike the Mut'a marriage, which ends on the expiration date of the contract, the Misyar has no certain date for divorce, and it is up to the man to divorce his wife whenever, or if ever, he feels like doing so.

The difference between a Misyar marriage and a normal marriage, is that the couple does not live in one household but remain on a visitor's basis.

Misyar allows the man to have a normal wife in a addition to his misyar-wife(s). The misyar wife is expected to live with her parents, and her husband can visit her according to a predetermined schedule. for sexual relations.

For the women who accept it – spinsters, divorcees and widows – it's a something-is-better-than-nothing option, though they waive almost all the rights that a normal Muslim marriage entitles them to. For men it offers an opportunity for a bit of fun on the side, in secret, and at a huge discount.

The need for this type of marriage is, in part, the result of economic reality. In Egypt, most young men cannot afford to get married and support a wife and long engagements are common. A Misyar marriage allows him to marry a girl who then stays with her parents. The bride's parents feed and maintain her, and they meet on occasion for sexual relations.

Misyar marriage has been practiced in Saudi Arabia and Egypt for many years. It was legalized in Saudi Arabia by a fatwa issued by Sheikh Abdel Aziz bin Baz and was officially legalized in Egypt by the Egyptian Sunni Imam Sheikh Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi in 1999. The Mufti of Egypt is a staunch defender of Misyar marriage.

The practive of Misyar marriage is often different from the original intent for creating this institution. Wealthy Kuwaiti and Saudi men sometimes enter into a Misyar marriage while on vacation. They believe that this allows them to have sexual relations with another woman without committing the sin of adultery. They travel to poor countries, such as Egypt or Syria, and meet middlemen who arrange the marriage for them. Some men arrange Misyar marriages online. The middleman brings some girls and they pick the one that they like most. These men pay the girl's family some money.

Families agree to the arrangement because of the money and the hope that their girl will have some fun and visit places that she can only dream about (i.e. luxury hotels and restaurants). They also hope for some gifts and at the end of the vacation and that the rich "husband" will give her some money and divorce her (although divorce was not a part of the fatwa which created Misyar marriage). Sometimes the husband keeps the wife for next vacation and sends her some money now and then. Many Misyar wives hope to win the love of their husbands so that they may live with them. Since the wife knows that she will most likely be divorced, but she does not know when, most Misyar wives take care to prevent pregnancy.

“Unfortunately, misyar marriage has made it easier for irresponsible, immature individuals to enter a relationship that is supposed to be based on credibility, reliability and respect,” said Abu Zaid, an elderly marriage official. “This isn’t the case. It’s treated as a temporary solution for lust. That’s not what marriage is all about. In regular polygamy all wives have exactly the same rights over the husband, be it financial, be it regarding time spent together or being public. Women think that misyar marriage is for their benefit when in fact on a long-term basis, they pay the price and not just from their pockets but from their emotions, as well.”

Many parents and children of misyar wives stated that they felt the woman as being sold short in such a marriage. Parents mostly said that the only reason they accepted the situation was in recognition of their daughters as adult women with their own needs and their right to respond to such needs. “I begged my divorced daughter not to marry a suitor who proposed a misyar marriage,” said Abu Fahda. “At the end, I gave in because I didn’t want to be the reason for her having an unlawful relationship with a man. I’m an adult, and I know she has her needs, but I’d be lying if I said that I have any respect for this stranger who comes to my house for intimacy with my daughter. I even have trouble looking her in the face,” he said. “My neighbor’s niece was married misyarically for a while, and then when the husband was done with her he just left her — just like that.”

Abu Fahda’s grandchildren share his sentiments — especially sadness. “I don’t know who this man is — this man who comes to our house and spends time with my mother,” said the 6-year-old boy. “He’s not my father, and he can’t be her husband because fathers and husbands live with their families.”

Conclusion:

1. Misyar often called travelers’ marriage, or a marriage of convenience is a form of temperory marriage.

2. The woman let goes here rights like the right to maintainance etc.

3. The man and the woman both stay at their respective houses and the man visits the woman for sexual satisfaction as and when needed or as per a pre determined shedule.

4. The man in now was is responsible for the upkeep of the wife and all he has to pay him is the agreed upon dowry.

5. It has been legalised and is widely practiced in Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

6. Travelers from Saudi and rich countries visit poor nations and perform misyar for sexual satisfaction.

7. 90% of misyar marriages end in divorce.

8. The husband is neither legally bound to maintain his wife nor is he legaly bound to divorce her, this reduces the status of a woman to that of a sex slave.

9. If the husband leaves her wife (as is the case with almost 90% of misyar marriages) without divorcing her then there is no one to take care of her and her children and neither can she marry again as the husband has not divorces her.

10 . In misyar marriage the wife is at the sheer mercy of her husband, without any rights.

11. In short  a misyar marriage can be summarised as “Why buy the milk when the cow is free”.

Popular Posts (Last 30 Days)

 
  • Recent Posts

  • Mobile Version

  • Followers