Some Muslims are in denial about the displeasure of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) and Fatima Zahra (s.a.) with the pseudo-caliphs and the Sahabah (companions) after the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise. They maintain that both of them (a.s.) were satisfied with these usurpers and relations between them were cordial.
However, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, some do concede that both (a.s.) were indeed upset with the usurpers and made their displeasure unknown in the most uncertain terms. In fact, the way they were treated by these usurpers and Muslims after the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise left no doubt about how Ameerul Momineen Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) and Lady Fatima Zahra (s.a.) viewed the companions and caliphs.
But even after this, these Muslims shrug off the blame from the companions and caliphs by claiming that it was an error in jurisprudence (khata-e-ijtehaadi), a minor sin for which forgiveness is possible and nothing serious must be read into the situation.
Ibn Abil Hadid’s view on Lady Fatima (s.a.) and caliphs
Let us first begin with what Abdul Rahman Ibn Abil Hadid al-Motazeli has to say about Fatima Zahra’s (s.a.) stand vis-à-vis the usurpers. Ibn Abil Hadid al-Motazeli is a noted Ahle Tasannun scholar and although some allege that he was a Shia, it is clear from this statement that he was certainly not a Shia and very much part of the mainstream ‘Sunni’ ideology.
Ibn Abil Hadid writes, ‘In my view what is true is that when Fatima (s.a.) departed from this world, she was angry with Abu Bakr and Umar and had written in her will that they should not even participate in the prayers of her dead body. This act (the disrespect shown to Fatima (s.a.)) is considered a minor sin in the eyes of our scholars but an act which can be forgiven.’
However, it would have been better if Abu Bakr and Umar respected Fatima (s.a.) and considered her eminence (before acting as they did). But they feared discord and controversy and acted upon that which was best in their estimation as they held a prominent position in religion and powerful certitude. If a similitude of this episode is found anywhere, it is not a major sin but rather, a minor one and should not be made a criterion for friendship or enmity (towards them).’
• Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah vol 6 pg 49-50
1. A ‘small matter’ for Muslims could be a grievous matter for Allah
2. Imam Hasan’s (a.s.) reply to those who underestimate Fatima (s.a.)
3. Position of Fatima (s.a.) is beyond the intellect
4. Violating explicit instructions of the Quran
5. Is the murder of the entire mankind a small sin?
6. A small sin also has consequences
7. The unjust and unforgiven caliphs
8. Imamat will never reach the unjust
Back to Top1. A ‘small matter’ for Muslims could be a grievous matter for Allah
Before writing off Fatima’s (s.a.) anger as a ‘small matter’, these so-called Muslims should consider the following verse of the Holy Quran:
‘…and you deemed it an easy matter while with Allah it was grievous.’
(Surah Nur (24): Verse 15)
Have these Muslims considered the possibility that what they consider a ‘small matter’ regarding Fatima’s (s.a.) anger is a grievous matter near Allah the High?
If Lady Fatima’s (s.a.) anger can be dismissed as a ‘small matter’, then any number of crimes and misdeeds can be overlooked under the same pretext like accusing the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) wife – Maariyah Qibtiyyah of adultery (we seek refuge in Allah!). But Allah the High says regarding the accusation – ‘you consider it an easy matter while with Allah it was grievous.’
Back to Top2. Imam Hasan’s (a.s.) reply to those who underestimate Fatima (s.a.)
An incident involving Imam Hasan Mujtaba (a.s.) and the companions is a fitting reply to those who undermine Fatima’s (s.a.) status in Islam and dismiss her anger as something insignificant.
Imam Hasan Mujtaba (a.s.) said the following to Mughairah b. Shobah in protest to Muawiya and his accomplices when Mughairah uttered malicious filth against Ameerul Momineen (a.s.):
‘And then you, O Mughairah b. Shobah! You are an enemy of Allah and (you are) the one who opposed the Quran and belied the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)! You attacked the daughter of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) with the whip and wounded her, an act which led to her losing her child (in the womb). Then, you opposed the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) with such audacity and vilification and considered the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) statement regarding the eminence of Fatima (s.a.) to be unimportant when he said that, ‘O Fatima, You are the chief of the women of Paradise.
O Mughairah! May Allah throw you into hell, and may He load the burden of the extreme guilt of lies upon your neck.’
• Al-Ehtejaaj vol. 1, pp. 269 – 280
If annoying Fatima (s.a.) is a minor sin, why is Imam Hasan (a.s.) so angry with Mughairah (may Allah curse him) threatening him with hell-fire?
Back to Top3. Position of Fatima (s.a.) is beyond the intellect
Clearly, the Muslims have underestimated the importance of Fatima (s.a.):
a. She is the Chief of all Women of all times and the Lady of the women of Paradise.
• Saheeh al-Bukhari, vol. 4, p. 209 Book of Initiation of Creation, Chapter of Virtues of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) relatives;
• Al-Khasaais, p. 34;
• Musnad of Abu Dawood al-Tayaalesi, p. 187;
• Saheeh Muslim, vol. 7, p. 143;
• Al-Tabaqaat al-Kubra of Ibn Sa’d, vol. 2, p. 40;
• Musnad-o-Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, vol. 6, p. 282;
• Hilyah al-Awliyaa, vol. 2, p. 39;
• Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Saheehain, vol. 3, p. 151;
• Sunan-o-Ibn Maajah, vol. 1, p. 518;
• Sunan-o-Tirmidhi, vol. 5, p. 326
There is no defence possible for someone who mistreats her and worse, considers it insignificant and pardonable.
b. A crime against her is in fact a crime against the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.a.) and Allah Himself because she is a part of his (s.a.w.a.) flesh; to anger her is to anger the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.a.).
• Saheeh al-Bukhari, vol. 4, p. 210 Book of Initiation of Creation, Chapter of Virtues of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) Relatives, Chapter of Fatima’s (s.a.) Virtues
• Saheeh al-Bukhari, vol. 6, p. 158;
• Musnad-o-Ahmad, vol. 4, p. 324;
• Saheeh-o-Muslim, vol. 7, p. 141 Book of the Companions’ Virtues, Chapter of Faatemah bint Muhammad’s Virtues;
• Sunan-o-Abi Dawood, vol. 1, p. 460
And one who angers the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is cursed in the Holy Quran:
‘Surely (as for) those who annoy Allah and His Apostle, Allah has cursed them in this world and the hereafter, and He has prepared for them a chastisement bringing disgrace.’
(Surah Ahzab (33): Verse 57)
Is annoying the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) by annoying Fatima (s.a.) a small matter in view of this verse?
c. In fact, Allah Himself is pleased and displeased based on Fatima’s (s.a.) pleasure and displeasure.
• Al-Mustadrak, vol. 3, p. 158;
• Al-Isaabah, vol. 8, p. 266;
• Tahzeeb al-Tahzeeb, vol. 12, p. 392;
• Kanz al-Ummaal, vol. 12, p. 111, vol. 13, p. 674
Back to Top 4. Violating explicit instructions of the Quran
By entering the house of Fatima (s.a.) without permission, the oppressors have disobeyed and violated two verses of the Holy Quran:
‘O you who believe! Do not enter houses other than your own houses until you have asked permission and saluted their inmates; this is better for you, that you may be mindful.’
(Surah Nur (24): Verse 27)
‘O you who believe! Do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you…’
(Surah Ahzaab (33): Verse 53)
Is it a small sin to defy explicit orders of the Holy Quran?
Back to Top5. Is the murder of the entire mankind a small sin?
By killing the unborn child of Fatima (s.a.), Mohsin b. Ali (a.s.), the oppressors have killed the entire mankind.
‘For this reason did We prescribe to the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men…’
(Surah Anaam (5): Verse 32)
Back to Top6. A small sin also has consequences
Incidentally, even small sins are not to be considered lightly as Allah the High warns in the Noble Quran:
‘And he who has done an atom’s weight of evil shall see it.’
(Surah Zilzaal (99): Verse 8)
Back to Top7. The unjust and unforgiven caliphs
What has happened to the so-called strong sense of justice of the caliphs, particularly the second claimant, when it comes to returning Fatima’s (s.a.) right?
Even if a small sin has been perpetrated, where does that leave the sinners behind the crime? Clearly, Fatima (s.a.) has not forgiven them going by her refusal to grant entry to the criminals in her funeral. This means neither Allah nor His Prophet (s.a.w.a.) have forgiven them.
So the pseudo-caliphs were sinners then and will continue to be so till the Day of Reckoning. We are not even venturing into their other sins like abandoning the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in the battles, annoying him on various occasions as highlighted in the Quran and so on.
Under the circumstances, was it fit for them to claim caliphate by virtue of proximity with the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.a.) of all criteria? Can proximity with him (s.a.w.a.) be claimed after trampling over the rights of his (s.a.w.a.) only and beloved daughter and annoying her even if it be a ‘small sin’ as claimed?
Back to Top8. Imamat will never reach the unjust
Imamat can never be the right of the oppressors and sinners, regardless of the magnitude of the sin. Didn’t Allah warn Ibrahim (a.s.) when he requested Imamat for his sons:
‘…My covenant does not include the unjust, said He.’ (Surah Baqarah (2): Verse 124)
In fact, Imamat is the right of the immaculate ones, led by Ameerul Momineen Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.) and his sons (a.s.) who never ever committed a sin, big or small.
The so-called ‘small sin’ in question is big enough to expose the usurpers for what they were and their hollow claims to caliphate and proximity with the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.a.).