25 Early Shia books which believe in the attack on the house of Hazrat Fatima (s.a.) - Part I

 The various narrations scattered about in Shia books which can show that the early Shia believed in Fatimiyya, and shows a level of tawatur ijmali.

Tawatur ijmali is reached where the number of independent attributions of a single concept as found in different contexts and in different wordings is so great, that it cannot be said that each of the attributions of that concept is considered to be a lie. 

Tawatur ijmali is described by Sheikh Akhund al Khurasani as follows:

“Tawātur ijmālī is the existence of a multitude of narrations, about various different subjects, that reach the level of tawātur in such a way that there is some shared and common dimension to them all. This common dimension among narrations that have different contents is called tawātur ijmālī”

Ref : Reflections on Mutawatir Ma’nawi

In other words, there are such a great number of narrations attributed to Ahlul Bayt pointing to the Fatimiyya—each being in different narrations with different contexts and each of them being totally unrelated to each other—that as a matter of probability, it is highly unlikely for all of the attributions of Fatimiyya to the Ahlul Bayt to be incorrect. If this is the case, then without a doubt, belief in the occurrence of Fatimiyya can be successfully attributed to the Imams of Ahlul Bayt.

in this section, we will mention various narrations  from 25 shia books which mention the Fatimiyya in different contexts, with totally unrelated chains. Without a doubt, a Shia reader should have no trouble gaining satisfaction in the attribution of the belief in Fatimiyya to Ahlul Bayt (AS).

1. The book of Sulaym b. Qais al-Hilali (d.76H)

Most modern copies of Sulaym ibn. Qais al-HIlali consists of around 90 narrations, in which a bit below 60 are corroborated by other chains in other books.

1. “…Qunfuz the cursed, had hit Lady Fatimah (AS) with a whip when she came in

between Ali (AS) and the people and Umar had sent him saying: “If Fatimah comes

in between you and her husband, hit her.`` So Qunfuz LA, forced her to take refuge

behind the door and he pushed the door so her rib near the side got broken and she

had a miscarriage. So she was continuously ill until she attained martyrdom in this…”

ATTACK ON THE HOUSE OF JANABE ZAHRA (SA). - VIEWS OF ZAYDI, ISMAILI AND NUSAYRI SCHOLARS

 The Shi’a scholars the Imami scholars and even the  Zaydis and Ismailis have all spoken on this incident, and the Ijma’ of Shi’a on a matter reveals that it is from the Ahlul Bayt, just as in the case of reciting Bismalah loudly or Hayy ‘Ala Khayr al ‘Amal in the call to prayer. 

Even if one doesn’t grant that the ijma of the Shia scholars is enough to prove that Ahlul Bayt (AS) believed in Fatimiyya, what this ijma would at the very least prove is that the belief in Fatimiyya is an early belief .

THE WORDS ZAYDI, ISMAILI AND NUSAYRI SCHOLARS

1. Abu Abdallah al-Shi'i (Ismaili d.298H)

The following statement is of Abu Abdallah al-Shi’a who said: “'You treat the person who stole the clothes from you with a value of two dinars as a wrongdoer and yet you desist in regard to someone who violated the religion of God, repudiated the Sunnah of the Apostle of God, assumed power of the friend of God, tore aside the veil of Fatima (as), daughter of God's Apostle, canceled her inheritance, took away what was in her hands as a gift from her father, murdered her, killed the infant of hers in her womb, and did many things of this kind and incited other to do so.'

Ref : Tathbit al Imamah

2. Yahya b. al-Hussain b. al-Qasim al-Hadi (Zaydi d.298H)

“Abu Bakr said to Omar, gather a group and break the door of this man (Ali b. Abi Talib), so Omar and those who were with him stood up to the door of Ali AS and they struck the door. Fatima a.s. defended the door but he (Omar) pushed her and she fell to the ground. Fatima a.s. pleaded to Umar to not enter the door for her hair is uncovered, Omar replied “Take your thawb (dress) for I am entering”. Fatima AS pleaded once more so he (Omar) pushed her and entered with his companions. She stood up between them and the Bayt (room) that Ali a.s. was in, while she saw that her rights upon them held priority over the rights of Ali a.s. over them due to her weakness and closeness to the Prophet SAWA, so Khalid b. al-Walid rushed to her and hit her with a whip on her upper arm and she cried in pain from that, and then al-Zubayr came out with his sword, and Abdullah b. Abi Bay’ah took the sword from al-Zubayr’s hands and hit it until it broke, so they then entered and forcefully brought out Ali a.s. until he gave bay’ah to Abu Bakr”

Ref : Tathbit al Imamah

Fadl ibn Shazaan (Died 260 A.H) the companion of Imam Al-Reza(a.s) confirms the attack on the house of Hazrat Fatima(s.a).

Fadl ibn Shazaan (Died 260 A.H) may Allah (swt) have mercy on him was the companion of the eighth Holy Imam Al-Reza(a.s), who confirms the attack on the house of Sayeda Fatima(s.a).  

Fadl ibn Shazaan:     

And Abu Bakr said in his illness as a result of which he died,

"I wish I had not attacked the house of Fatima (s.a.), even though it was closed for fight"

. "He regretted" so his repentance is not except due to a sin.

Shia Source: Al-Idhaah. Pg. # 518.

Poets have written about the oppression on Hazrat Fatima (s.a)

 The saying of Fatima (s.a) being killed and her miscarriage isreferred back to the Shi'a for a long time. Poets have writtenabout the oppression which Sayeda Fatima (s.a) underwent.Some of these poets were contemporary to the Imams (a.s),or their time was close to that of the Imams (a.s).

Sayyid Al-Himyari (Died 173 A.H) may Allah (swt) have mercyon him, was contemporary to Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s) and ImamAl-Kadhim (a.s) and he said the following;

Al-Sayyed Ja'far Al-Murtadha:

"Beaten, she (Fatima (s.a)) was, and of her rightsdeprived,

And was made to taste, after his demise, of wounds.

God sever the hands that her did they hit,

And of that who agreed thereto and followed suit.

God may never forgive him nor

Spare him of the horror of leaving the grave..."

Shia Source: Ma'saat ul-Zahra. Vol. 2, Pg. # 15 - 16.

The Anger of Hazrat Fatimah al-Zahra ( s.a.)

We must first understand the significance of the Hazrat Fatimah s.a.

Sayyida Fatima (AS) was no ordinary woman. She is the daughter of the Holy Prophet (sawa). 

She is one of the five on whom the verse of Tatheer was revealed^.

She was the only woman who participated in the Holy Prophet's (sawa) mubahela against the Christians^.

She was compared to Maryam (AS), Khadija (AS) and Asiya (AS) as one of the four women of paradise^.

She took care of theHoly Prophet (sawa) in his most difficult years. She was the one who cleaned the him and consoled him when the munafiqeen would throw trash on the Prophet and hurt him with stones.

She is not a woman whose feelings and thoughts can be cast aside, since the Holy Prophet (sawa) has said: 

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْوَلِيدِ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ دِينَارٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي مُلَيْكَةَ، عَنِ الْمِسْوَرِ بْنِ مَخْرَمَةَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ فَاطِمَةُ بَضْعَةٌ مِنِّي، فَمَنْ أَغْضَبَهَا أَغْضَبَنِي ‏"‏‏.‏

Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

Reference	: Sahih al-Bukhari 3714
In-book reference	: Book 62, Hadith 63
USC-MSA web (English) reference	: Vol. 5, Book 57, Hadith 61

---

Therefore, if it is proven that Sayyeda Fatima (AS) died angry with some people, then we cannot say that this is any ordinary sort of anger.  Indeed, if she was angry with someone, there is no doubt that this anger would be legitimate, and that the one who angered her has committed a grave, unforgivable sin.

Now let us take a look at  authentic evidences taken from books of the Sunni scholars which prove the anger of Lady Fatimah al-Zahra against Abu Bakr

Qazi Nurullah Shustari RA rebuts the justification of Umar's urgency for l securities NG Ali (as) pledge

 In many of the Sunni / Nasibi scholars records on attack on the house of J Zahra s a, they cited Umar sense of urgency in securing pledge of Ali a s / Bani Hashim and stifling dissent and fitna out of concern for the Islamic nation.

Qazi Nurullah Shustari RA rebuts the justification of Umar's defenders thus- 

And I wonder what the urgency was that they could not wait till the burial of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). While in the state of illness, the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) kept asking for pen and paper so that regarding this very matter of selection of Imam he could write down some clear instructions, but the companions declared, ‘Quran is sufficient’.

And the purpose of gathering in Saqifa was nothing but seeking (worldly) leadership, because it is not clear how after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) departure they suddenly became so vigilant for the appointment of an Imam for the protection of religion and how they showed such haste.

That is why all this seems a deception, because until yesterday when the enemies were challenging them in Badr, Uhud and Hunain they were sluggish and showed no vigilance in defending the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and Islam.

And then they fled from the battlefield of Ahzab when Amr Ibn Abd Wudd challenged them with their names and titles, but they remained silent and did not dare answer him and thus they failed to abide by their covenants (to Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)).

And on the Day of (Battle with) Marhab (in Khaibar), they could not face him in battle and all of them fled in a most disgusting manner and on all these occasions they never rose to help Islam in its need, rather they fled from battle (after battle) to save their lives, then how did they get so vigilant about reformation in Islam after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise?!

Clearly, the rush towards Saqifa was nothing but greed for power and position and for seeking the world and out of envy for Aal Muhummad (s.a.w.a.) and that became a reason for all of them going out from the fold of Islam.

Al-Sawarim al-Muhriqah fi Naqd Al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqah p 188-192

Shocking and outrageous justifications by the opponents concerning the attack on the house of the Hazrat Fatemah Zahra (sa), by the second caliph

  

1️⃣ Qadi Abdul Jabbar:

Threatening to burn the house of Fatimah was the legitimate right of Umar ibn Khattab, and there was no problem in it!

He states: Whatever has been mentioned regarding Umar and the burning of the house of Lady Zahra — if it is correct — does not invalidate or criticise Umar in any way, because he had the right to threaten those who refused to pledge allegiance in opposition to the Muslims.

📚 Al-Mughni fi Abwab al-Tawhid wa al-Adl – al-Imamah, vol. 20, p. …

2️⃣ Ibn Taymiyyah:

The attack on the house of Fatimah was to ensure that no public property was hidden inside it!

He writes: The most that can be said in this matter is that Abu Bakr suddenly entered the house of [Fatimah] to see whether any of the wealth of Allah — which was meant to be distributed among the people — was present there, so that he could return it to its rightful recipient.

📚 Minhaj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah, vol. 8, p. 291

3️⃣ Abdul Aziz Dehlawi:

The house of Lady Zahra had become a gathering place for corrupt individuals, and in such a situation, observing courtesy was not necessary!

He argues: If the Noble Prophet (s.a.w.a) threatened to burn the houses of those who abandoned the congregational prayer — which is among the emphasised Sunnahs — then why should it be impermissible to threaten burning the houses in such a case of corruption, whose spark could endanger the entire Muslim community and the whole religion? If the Prophet (s.a.w.a) entered the house of Lady Zahra because of decorative curtains and pictures, and did not leave until they were removed — and even entered the House of Allah for the same reason — then if Umar ibn Khattab, due to the presence of corrupters in that house, and the planning of seditious schemes there, threatened to burn it, what sin could be held against him?

At most, it can be said that observing etiquette did not suit this form of threat. However, evident it becomes that in such grave matters, no one observes courtesy — as proven by the act of Amir with Ayesha the Siddiqah, who was undoubtedly the beloved wife of the Messenger (s.a.w.a), the mother of the believers, and worthy of veneration by all creation. Therefore, anything done by Umar in accordance with the act of the Ma'sum should not become a subject of criticism and reproach.

📚 Tuhfa Ithna Ashariyyah – Nasihat al-Mu'minin wa Fazihat al-Shayatin, p. 593