Objection 5: If CONTINUED FROM PART 1 ......
One who has raised the above doubt and said: Why Ali (a) did not
stage an uprising? Or how his modesty permitted him to watch such a treatment
being meted out to his wife; should reply to the same objection regarding
Prophet Lut (a):
The wife of Prophet Lut (a) was a disbeliever, the community of
Lut (a) was sinful; the disbelievers forced themselves into the house of Lut (a)
and saw handsome youths there. They expressed their satantic desires with
regard to those youths. Prophet Lut (a) said: Fear Allah; if you refrain from
this vile deed, I will marry my daughters to you.
Now, a number of questions arise at this point, which the doubt
raisers should reply:
Why Prophet Lut (a) was not ashamed of the evil behavior of his
disbelieving community, why he did not take to arms and attack them? On the
contrary, he suggested to them that he was ready to give his daughters in
marriage to them. Can – God forbid – Prophet Lut (a) be blamed from
shamelessness?
Pay attention to the translation of the verse of Quran in this
regard:
وَلَمَّا جَاءتْ رُسُلُنَا
لُوطًا سِيءَ بِهِمْ وَضَاقَ بِهِمْ ذَرْعًا وَقَالَ هَـذَا يَوْمٌ عَصِيبٌ {77}
وَجَاءهُ قَوْمُهُ يُهْرَعُونَ إِلَيْهِ وَمِن قَبْلُ كَانُواْ يَعْمَلُونَ
السَّيِّئَاتِ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ هَـؤُلاء بَنَاتِي هُنَّ أَطْهَرُ لَكُمْ فَاتَّقُواْ اللّهَ…
“And when Our messengers came to Lut, he was grieved for
them, and he lacked strength to protect them, and said: This is a hard day. And
his people came to him, (as if) rushed on towards him, and already they did
evil deeds. He said: O my people! these are my daughters- they are purer for
you, so guard against (the punishment of) Allah…” (Surah Hud 77-78)
If not staging an uprising by Amirul Momineen (a) is an occasion
for some questions, why with regard to not staging an uprising by the Holy
Prophet (s) in Mecca
for thirteen years is not having any objection?
Did the Messenger of Allah (s) not witness tortures and unlimited
oppressions on Muslims in Mecca ?
Amirul Momineen (a), by this same argument did not show any reaction that the
Messenger of Allah (s) at the time of killing of Sumayyah, mother of Ammar
Yasir at the hands of the idolaters and his confrontation with them did not
show any reaction.
Ibne Hajar Asqalani has written in Isabah:
Sumayyah binte Khabbat…mother of Ammar Yasir is the seventh to
embrace Islam. Abu Jahl harassed her and stabbed her in the lower abdomen with
a spear till she achieved martyrdom. She was the first female martyr in Islam
and since she had embraced Islam and did not give it up, the family of Bani
Mughira tortured and harassed her till she was martyred. The Messenger of Allah
(s) witnessed the scene of torture of Ammar and his parents in Mecca and said: O family of Yasir, be
patient, as Paradise is promised to you.[1]
Since the Messenger of Allah (s) was seeing that idolaters like
Abu Jahl were harassing Muslim ladies, he did not display any reaction to it and
also ordered them to be absolute patient in all this.
Was the Messenger of Allah (s) not the most modest and valiant
person of the world? Thus, why he did not defend the Muslim ladies? Why he did
not take up the sword to strike off the head of Abu Jahl?
Whatever replies the Wahabis give with regard to the absence of
staging uprising by the Holy Prophet (s), we will give the same reply to the
topic of Amirul Momineen (a) not staging an uprising.
Umme Jamil was well known for her wantonness and was the target
of accusations by one and all; and that Mughira bin Shoba had committed
fornication with her was a well known historical fact.
Among the instances about which the Wahabi objection makers
should reply is that:
On the basis of Wahabis claims, Umme Kulthum, daughter of Amirul
Momineen (a) was the wife of Umar. If we believe that this was nothing more
than fiction, and the fact is something else; and that except casting numerous
doubts on its fabricators it will achieve nothing; that if Allah wills we would
also reply to the continuation of this objection – but in case we accept the
supposition, the same objection is applicable to why Umar did not defend his
wife, Umme Kulthum, which the Wahabis should reply?
The matter was that Mughira bin Shoba committed fornication with
Umme Jamil and three persons testified as eye-witnesses and if the fourth testimony
had been obtained, Mughira would have become eligible for penalty of
fornication. During the journey of Hajj, Umar asked Mughira about Umme Jamil,
who at that time was his partner in fornication: Are you familiar with her?
Mughira with all impudence compared Umme Jamil to Umme Kulthum. And said: Yes,
she is Umme Kulthum, your wife. In fact Mughira was extremely insulting to the
wife of Umar in this reply and he made allegation of fornication on Umme
Kulthum. However Umar did not display any shame at this and he did not show any
reaction and defense.
Ibne Khallikan in Wafayatul Ayan and Abul Faraj Isfahani
in Aghani have written that:
During Hajj, Umme Jamil (about whom three persons testified that
Mughira has committed fornication with her and because the testimony of the
fourth person could not be obtained, she was saved from the penalty of
fornication) was in the company of Umar and Mughira was also present in Mecca at that time. Umar
asked Mughira: Do you know who this woman is? Mughira replied: Yes, this is
Umme Kulthum, the daughter of Ali. Umar said: Are you pretending to be
ignorant? By Allah, I think that Abu Bakra didn’t lie about you and whenever I
see you, I fear that a stone will drop on my head from the sky.[2]
It was when Mughira bin Shoba was an old friend and an official
of Umar and was under his control at that time, but despite that Umar did not argue
with him at all.
Now, with numerous contradictions, which exist on this occasion,
whatever justification Wahabis offer, we will give the same reply to the
absence of defense of Amirul Momineen (a) for his wife.
Wahabis should also reply to this subject:
When the companions of the Messenger of Allah (s) attacked the
house of Uthman and cut off the fingers of his wife, Uthman did not defend his
wife.
Whatever justification Wahabis offer here, we will give the same
reply to this matter.
Tabari has written in his history:
Sawdan bin Humran came forward to attack Uthman, Naila binte
Farafisa (Uthman’s wife) threw herself upon him. Sawdan took the sword and cut
off her fingers and then hit at the teeth of Uthman’s wife and said: What a
great bodyguard he is having! Then he hit Uthman and killed him.[3]
Ibne Athir has mentioned the same point in his Al-Kamil fit
Tarikh[4]
and Ibne Kathir Damishqi Wahabi in Al-Bidaya wan Nihaya.[5]
Why Uthman did not defend his wife when he was a man, having
modesty and he should have defended his wife? Thus, why did he not show any
reaction when he witnessed companions of the Messenger of Allah (s) insulting
his wife and confronting her?
Amirul Momineen (a) was the most valiant person of his time,
there is no doubt that he was so brave and daring that his name deprived Arab
stalwarts of their sleep; so much so that Umar bin Khattab said:
By Allah, if the sword of Ali (a) had not been there, the
foundation of Islam would not have become stable.[6]
So much so that when all the unfaithful companions of the
Messenger of Allah (s) during the Battle of Uhad and Hunain deserted the
Prophet and fled from the battlefield, Imam Ali (a) circled the Messenger of
Allah (s) like a moth going around the flame, and he defended him, but why Imam
Ali (a) did not participate in any of the battles of the Caliphs?
One, who during the time of the Messenger of Allah (s) had actively
participated in all the battles of Muslims against infidels, Jews…and was at the
forefront bearing the standard of Islam before all the stalwarts and crushed
one enemy warrior after another, why he was not present in any of the battles during
the time of Caliphs?
Had he lost his valor, or he did not regard fighting at the side
of the Caliphs as Jihad? Or the Caliphs opposed the practice of the Messenger
of Allah (s) did not choose to take his help?
With attention to the references and sources of the first part of
the book in proving oppression and martyrdom of Lady Zahra (s) and also
rational and polemical replies, which were given to reply to this objection,
and supposing we accept that Amirul Momineen (a) did not defend his wife, does
this statement imply that he overlooked oppression of others and was satisfied
with it?
[1] Al-Isabah
fee Tamizus Sahaba, Vol. 7, Pg. 712, no. 11342, Ahmad bin Ali bin Hajar
Abul Fazl Asqalani Shafei, Edited: Ali Muhammad Bajawi, Darul Jeel – Beirut,
First edition, 1412 – 1992.
[2] Wafayatul
Ayan wa Anba Abnaul Zaman, Vol. 6, Pg. 366, Abul Abbas Shamsuddin Ahmad bin
Muhammad bin Abu Bakr Ibne Khallikan (d. 681 A.H.), Edited: Ahsan Abbas, Darul
Thaqafa – Lebanon .
Al-Aghani, Vol. 16,
Pg. 109, Abul Faraj Isfahani (d. 356 A.H.), Darul Fikr at-Taba-a wan Nashr,
Lebanon, Edited: Ali Mahna and Samir Jabir.
[3] Tarikh
Tabari, Vol. 2, Pg. 676, Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari (d. 310),
Darul Kutubul Ilmiya – Beirut .
[4] Al-Kamil
fit Tarikh, Vol. 3, Pg. 68, Izzuddin bin Athir Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad
Jazari (d. 630 A.H.), Edited: Abdullah Qadi, Darul Kutubul Ilmiya – Beirut,
second edition, 1415 A.H.
[5] Al-Bidaya
wan Nihaya, Vol. 7, Pg. 188, Ismail bin Umar bin Kathir Abul Fida Qarashi
Damishqi (d. 774 A.H.), Maktabul Marif – Beirut .
[6] Sharh
Nahjul Balagha, Vol. 12, Pg. 51, Egypt Ibne Abil Hadid Madaini Mutazali Abu
Hamid Izzuddin bin Hibatullah bin Muhammad bin Muhammad (d. 655 A.H.), Edited:
Muhammad Abdul Karim Namri, Darul Kutubul Ilmiya – Beirut / Lebanon, First
Edition, 1418 A.H. – 1998 A.D.