Is Hazrat Fatima Zahra’s (s.a.) stepping out of the house like Ayesha’s coming out in Jamal?

The opponents are quick to raise objections against Shias and quicker still to attack Aal Muhammad (عليهم‏ السلام).

One of their objections against the infallibles is:

Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) stepped out of her house to secure Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (عليه السلام) without permission of her husband and this is just like Ayesha coming out in Jamal.

If Ayesha was wrong in coming out without permission, then Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) was also in the wrong (God Forbid).

Reply

1. Securing the Imam vs Fighting the Imam
2. Ayesha cannot be compared to Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.)
3. Wives are prohibited from coming out of the house
4. Challenging the Imam of the time in battle
5. Journey in disobedience of Allah
6. Perfect obedience of husband

1. Securing the Imam vs Fighting the Imam

Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) stepped out of the house to secure her Imam and husband from oppressors.

Ayesha came out in open confrontation to fight and possibly kill the Imam and unanimously elected caliph.

We fail to see how the two instances are even remotely comparable!

2. Ayesha cannot be compared to Hazrat Fatima (s.a.)

The two personalities cannot be compared for the simple reason that there is divine text (nass) for Hazrat Fatima Zahra’s (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) purity and infallibility in Verse of Purification (Tatheer) that even Ahle Tasannun scholars like Muslim Nishapuri have documented, while there is nothing in favour of Ayesha’s infallibility and purity.

Also, there is consensus among scholars that Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) is the chief of women of paradise while there is nothing to that effect for Ayesha.

This much is enough to end the discussion in favour of Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها). Given her infallible status and standing as chief of all women, Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) broke no law or moral code in this matter or any other matter, while the same assurance does not exist for Ayesha.3. Wives are prohibited from coming out of the house

There is consensus among scholars of both sects based on the Quranic verse that the wives were ordered to stay confined to their houses.

‘And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore…’

• Surah Ahzab (33:33)

Ayesha was duty-bound like other wives (e.g. Umme Salma (r.a.)) to remain confined to her house. By venturing out of the house she has violated a clear Quranic injunction.

Those who maintain that this command was restricted to the lifetime of the Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله‏ و سلّم) are unable to furnish proof from the Quran or the Sunnah to support their claims.

Such a prohibition for stepping out of the house did not bind Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها), so comparing her with Ayesha in this context is meaningless.

8TH SHAWWAL -1345 AH / April 21, 1925 - DESTRUCTION OF THE GRAVES IN JANNATUL BAQI MEDINA AND JANNATUL MUALLAH MAKKAH

On 8th Shawwal, Wednesday, in the year 1345 AH (April 21, 1925), mausoleums in Jannatul al-Baqi (Madina) were demolished by King Ibn Saud.

JANNAT UL BAQI  AFTER DEMOLITION

ORIGINAL JANNAT UL BAQI 

In the same year (1925), he also demolished the tombs of holy personages at Jannat al-Mualla (Makkah) where the Holy Prophet (s)'s mother, wife, grandfather and other ancestors are buried.

JANNAT UL MUALLA AFTER DESTRUCTION

JANNAT UL MUALLAH BEFORE 1925 

Destruction of sacred sites in Hijaz by the Saudi Wahhabis continues even today. According to some scholars what is happening in Hijaz is actually a conspiracy plotted by the Jews against Islam, under the guise of Tawheed. The idea is to eradicate the Islamic legacy and heritage and to systematically remove all its vestiges so that in the days to come, Muslims will have no affiliation with their religious history

Fadak belonged to Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) based on Islamic laws

The Shaikhain refused to grant Fadak to Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) on one pretext or the other. They  rejected her own witness as also the witnesses of her infallible husband Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) and even Umm Ayman – whose honesty was beyond reproach having been assured Paradise by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).
In the absence of witnesses or rather in the absence of ‘credible’ witnesses, Hazrat Fatima Zahra’s (s.a.) claim on Fadak was rejected.

Over here we do not wish to delve on the infallible personalities (a.s.) and their status near Allah and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and how the rulers made a blunder by ignoring this reality which was evident even to a Muslim child.

We only wish to draw the attention of the reader to the irregularities in the stand of the Shaikhain vis-à-vis Fadak, one of which we have exposed over here.

Granting the claimant her right based on swearing

Even if Fatima Zahra’s (s.a.) witnesses were found wanting, Fadak should have been granted to her based on a simple swearing.

It is strange that when other claims came before Abu Bakr, he allowed them in favour of the claimant merely on the basis of the claim while the claimant was neither asked to furnish any proof of claim, nor to produce witnesses.

In this connection, Bukhari documents:

‘It is related from Jabir Ibn Abdullah Ansari that he said – The Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.a.) had told me that when the spoils of war from Bahrain would arrive, he would allow me such and such out of it, but the spoils of war did not reach us until after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise (martyrdom). It arrived in the days of (the government) of Abu Bakr, so I went to him and told him that the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had promised to give me such and such property out of the spoils of war from Bahrain, whereupon he gave me all of what (was promised to me).’

• Sahih al-Bukhari vol 2, part 27, p 190

In the interpretation of this tradition, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani records:

‘This tradition leads us to the conclusion that the evidence of one just companion can also be admitted as full evidence, even though it may be in his own favour, because Abu Bakr did not ask Jabir to produce any witness or proof for his claim.’

Thus, if it was lawful to grant property to Jabir on the basis of a good impression (of him and his Islam) without calling for witnesses or any evidence, then what stopped the ruler from allowing Fatima Zahra’s (s.a.) claim on the basis of a similar good impression?

Firstly, her known truthfulness and honesty was enough for holding her sincere in her claim, in addition to the witnessing of Ali (a.s.) and Umm Ayman in her favour.

THE INCIDENT OF THE DOOR AND JANABE ZAHRA (SA) FROM SHAI AND SUNNI BOOKS

SALAMUN ALAIKUM

PLEASE FIND BELOW LINK FOR THE EXCELLENT BOOK REGARDING THE FALLING OF THE DOOR ON HAZRAT FATEMAH ZAHRA (SA) FROM SHIA AND SUNNI SOURCES

THE BOOK HAS ORIGINAL SCANNED REFERENCES

THE INCIDENT OF THE DOOR ON HAZRAT SAYYEDA (SA)

THE BOOK IS IN URDU 

يارب محمد عجل فرج آل محمد

 يارب محمد أحفظ غيبة أبنه محمد

 يارب محمـــد أنتقم لأبنه محمـــد

"O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the reappearance of the progeny of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Protect the occultation of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the revenge of daughter of Muhammad.”

TRUTH BEHIND SHAHADAT HAZRAT FATIMA s.a - PART II

 SUBH E HIDAYAT SPECIAL - PART II

FAROOQ NAZAR IS HOSTING THIS IMPORTANT PROGRAMME ON AYYAM E FATIMIYA. GUEST ALLAMA MUHAMMAD ASGHAR YAZDANI.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH ON YOUTUBE

يارب محمد عجل فرج آل محمد

 يارب محمد أحفظ غيبة أبنه محمد

 يارب محمـــد أنتقم لأبنه محمـــد

"O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the reappearance of the progeny of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Protect the occultation of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the revenge of daughter of Muhammad.”

TRUTH BEHIND SHAHADAT HAZRAT FATIMA s.a

 SUBH E HIDAYAT SPECIAL

FAROOQ NAZAR IS HOSTING THIS IMPORTANT PROGRAMME ON AYYAM E FATIMIYA. GUEST ALLAMA MUHAMMAD ASGHAR YAZDANI.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH ON YOUTUBE

يارب محمد عجل فرج آل محمد

 يارب محمد أحفظ غيبة أبنه محمد

 يارب محمـــد أنتقم لأبنه محمـــد

"O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the reappearance of the progeny of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Protect the occultation of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the revenge of daughter of Muhammad.”