Objection 6: If
Wahabis, in order to deny the attack on the house of revelation,
have raised objections like the one mentioned above:
The Holy Prophet (s) was able to train thousands of loyal persons
and those devoted to Islam; that they should be present on the path of Allah
and defend it; and his Ahle Bayt (a) laid down their lives for its sake. In
case we accept the attack on the house of Fatima (r), which the enemies of
Islam consider to be true, the question arises that why Bani Hashim witnessed
the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (s) being slapped, burning down of the
door of the house, killing of the six month old Mohsin…but not once did they
utter the least protest? All of them were sincere and loyal Muslims, who had
ties of relationship with the Prophet and also had communal ties with him; what
happened that they kept absolutely quiet and did not raise any objection?
With attention to many similarities, which exist between the
previous doubt and the present one, many replies can also be common, but
despite that we will mention some instances.
Firstly, the above statement is having more emotional and
provoking words than reasoning and logical proofs, because reports have been
recorded in Ahle Sunnat books with correct and proved chains of narrators and
we mentioned them in the first part of this book, thus confirming attack on the
house of Lady Fatima Zahra (s) and Amirul Momineen (a) and removing all kinds
of doubts in this matter.
Moreover, with reference to authentic Ahle Sunnat and Wahabi
texts, it can be easily concluded that even if the people of Medina had wanted to defend, they did not
have any power to take any such steps due to the circumstances that arose there.
While Amirul Momineen (a) was busy with the last rites of the
Messenger of Allah (s), Quraish and its leaders: Abu Bakr and Umar usurped his
right and through the greed of characters like Abu Sufyan managed to win the
loyalties of some people of Quraish. By this description it becomes clear that other
tribes did not have the strength to confront Quraish.
Abu Bakr and Umar had gathered in Medina numerous nomad tribes
who had embraced Islam at the point of the sword and attracted the attention of
new Muslims to their personal gains, as Amirul Momineen (a) in all the battles
was the pivot of victory of Islam and they harbored deep animosity with him and
the hypocrites took advantage of this same malice.
Thus, taking advantage of the divisions in this group and also the
nomadic desert tribes of the outskirts of Medina
surrounded the house of Amirul Momineen (a) and wanted to reduce it to ashes.
Tabari in his Tarikh, Mawardi Shafei in Hawiul Kabir and
Abdul Wahab Nuwairi in Nihayatul Arab say:
The Aslam tribe had crowded Medina
in such a way that lanes and by-lanes were overflowing with them so that
allegiance of Abu Bakr may take place. Later, Umar used to say: When I saw the
Aslam tribe, I became sure of victory.[1]
Amirul Momineen (a) has mentioned the absence of defense by the
companions (except Bani Hashim, companions and Ansar) in some of his sermons:
O my Allah! I beseech Thee to take revenge on the Quraish and
those who are assisting them, for they have cut asunder my kinship and overturned
my cup and have joined together to contest a right to which I was entitled more
than anyone else. They said to me: “If you get your right, it will be just, but
if you are denied the right, that too will be just. Endure it with sadness or
kill yourself in grief.” I looked around, but found no one to shield me,
protect me or help me except the members of my family. I refrained from
flinging them into death and therefore, closed my eyes despite the dust, kept
swallowing saliva despite (the suffocation of) grief and endured pangs of anger,
although it was more bitter than colocynth and more grievous than the bite of
knives.[2]
Ibne Abil Hadid says in Sharh Nahjul Balagha:
Amirul Momineen (a), after the incident of Saqifah expressed
anguish and demanded his right; he sought help and protested; because they did
not come to him and pay allegiance to him. He said facing the tomb of the
Messenger of Allah (s):
ابْنَ
أُمَّ إِنَّ الْقَوْمَ اسْتَضْعَفُونِي وَكَادُوا يَقْتُلُونَنِي
“Son of my mother! surely the people reckoned me weak and
had well-nigh slain me…” (Surah Araaf 7:150)[3]
There are numerous other instances as well, but we have not
quoted them all here for the sake of brevity.
On the basis of sources acceptable to Wahabis, Bani Hashim and
other Ansar, by not defending Lady Fatima (s), have in fact obeyed the
directions of the Messenger of Allah (s), because Wahabis in order to prove the
legality of the Caliphate of the Caliphs have narrated in their books that the
Messenger of Allah (s) ordered his companions that they should, at all cost,
obey the Caliphs after him; even if they do not enforce the practice of the
Messenger of Allah (s), seize and usurp the property of people and instead of
guiding the people, encourage them to follow the path of deviation.
Muslim Nishapuri has, in the report of Huzaifah bin Yaman, mentioned
that the Messenger of Allah (s) said:
There will be leaders, who will not be led by my guidance and who
will not adopt my ways? There will be among them men who will have the hearts
of devils in the bodies of human beings. I said: What should I do, O Messenger
of Allah, if I (happen) to live in that time? He replied: You will listen to
the Amir and carry out his orders; even if your back is flogged and your wealth
is snatched, you should listen and obey.[4]
On the basis of this, because of their sources, Wahabis are
compelled to accept that the absence of defense of Bani Hashim and other
companions was in accordance to the command of the Messenger of Allah (s) and
the common good of the Islamic society.
[1] Tarikh
Tabari, Vol. 2, Pg. 244, Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari (d. 310
A.H.), Darul Kutub al-Ilmiyya – Beirut .
Al-Hawi al-Kabir,
Vol. 14, Pg. 99, Ali bin Muhammad bin Habib Mawardi Basri Shafei (d. 450 A.H.),
Edited: Shaykh Ali Muhammad Maooz – Shaykh Adil Ahmad Abdul Majud, Darul
Kutubul Ilmiya – Beirut – Lebanon, First edition, 1419 A.H. and 1999 A.D.
Nihayatul Arab fee
Funoonal Adab, Vol. 19, Pg. 21, Shahabuddin Ahmad bin Abdul Wahab Nuwairi
(d. 733 A.H.), Edited: Mufeed Qamhiya and Co., Darul Kutubul Ilmiya – Beirut –
Lebanon, First edition, 1424 A.H. and 2004 A.D.
[2] Nahjul
Balagha, Muhammad Abduh, Vol. 2, Pg. 202, Sermon 217, - Al-Imamah was
Siyasah, Ibne Qutaibah, Vol. 1, Pg. 134 – Majmaul Amthal, Ahmad bin
Muhammad Maidani Nishapuri (d. 528), Vol. 2, Pg. 282 – Sharh Nahjul Balagha,
Ibne Abil Hadid, Vol. 6, Pg. 95 & Vol. 11, Pg. 109.
[3] Sharh
Nahjul Balagha, Vol. 11, Pg. 65, Abu Hamid Izzuddin bin Hibatullah bin
Muhammad bin Muhammad Ibne Abil Hadid Madaini Mutazali (d. 655 A.H.), Edited:
Muhammad Abdul Karim Namri, Darul Kutubul Ilmiya, Beirut / Lebanon, First
Edition, 1418 A.H. – 1998 A.D.
[4] Sahih
Muslim, Vol. 3, Pg. 1486, Tr. 1847, Kitabul Imarah, Chapter of ‘Instruction
to stick to the main body of Muslims in the time of trials and warning against
those inviting people to disbelief’, Muslim bin Hajjaj Abul Hasan Qashiri
Nishapuri (d. 261 A.H.), Edited: Muhammad Fawad al-Baqi, Darul Ahyaul Turathul
Arabi, Beirut.
