the sahaaba

 Maula Ali (a.s) was a shaheed..
 Maula Hassain (a.s) was syed e Shuhada.

 

 Yes, thank you very much.

 

 Now please tell me about Imam Uthman, the third Caliph.

 Was he a Shaheed or Not? He was killed in the Capital.

 

You have agreed that Hussain and Ali were Shaheed. But hazrat Uthman was not a Shaheed. Very bad. You are not a momin. You have bad ideology, bad agenda of hatred etc. You can never have the truth and there is now no need to discuss anything with you because you have come out as an open enemy of the First and second and third Imam of the ummah whom Ali gave his allegiance and even served faithfully under them.

I do not want to spoil your show but it is sure that the Shias have many illegal, illogical beliefs against the true principles of Islam. They think that the prophet was an ignorant person and he did not know that his close friends (his dear ones) were hypocrites. According to your theory, the prophet did not produce any good man except hazrat Ali. What a shameful idea.  (But that is beside the point here. It is not for you.)

That is not the only one bad idea but there is a very long list of such bad beliefs. It is such beliefs that ended the Khilafat. hazart Ali and his children were safe and living happily during the time of the Khalifas. But after the death of Hazrat Uthman, all the troubles for the family of Hazrat Ali started. When Hazrat Ali had no complaints against Hazrat Umar then what right have the shias to invent new complaints? Can you not see that you are playing in the hands of the enemies of Islam if you make difference between Abubakr, Umar Uthman and Ali?

Now you have special meanings for the Shaheed too. You do not see that Hazrat Uthman was cruelly killed in the capital by some enemies. Were they the followers of Hazrat Ali who killed Hazrat Uthman? If not then they must be the enemies of Ali who killed Uthman. But you say that Uthman is not Shaheed. I could also say that Hazrat Ali was killed in a battle. He was fighting hazrat Mua'wiyah so he was killed in a battle and he was not a Shaheed. Also Hussian knew where he was going. He was committing suicide. he could not be a Shaheed too because of his politics.

 

Such foolish things do not lead any one to good relations.

Whatever I have written above may not be your beliefs. So please forgive me if I have attributed anything wrong to you. But saying that Hazrat Uthman was not a Shaheed was wrong. In that way nobody could be a Shaheed. I hope you will think over  few things and let us know your good ideas.

 

The Shia say that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) was angry at Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) in the incident of Fadak, but what about their own narrations that say that she was also angry at Ali (رضّى الله عنه) at the same time? We read the following, as narrated by Al-Majlisi�s Haqq-ul-Yaqeen as well as in Al-Tusi�s Amali:

 

�When Fatima asked for Fadak from Abu Bakr and he refused to give it to her, she returned full of anger that could not be described and she was sick; and she was angry with Ali because he refused to help her.� (Al-Majlisi�s Haqq-ul-Yaqeen, pp.203-204; also recorded in Al-Tusi�s Amali, p.295)

 

Thus, based on the simple fact that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) made Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) angry on more than one occassion, we arrive at the following conclusions:

1) The Prophet�s saying �whoever disturbs her, disturbs me� is addressed to Ali (رضّى الله عنه) but the Shia use it only for Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه); if this statement involved punishment from Allah then it would certainly befall Ali (رضّى الله عنه) before Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه).

 

 

2) There are other incidents (narrated by the well-reknowned Al-Majlisi, Al-Tusi, Al-Erbali, and others) that occurred in which Ali (رضّى الله عنه) angered Fatima (رضّى الله عنها). What is the Shia response to this anger? Whatever response they use to defend Ali (رضّى الله عنه), then we could use the same response to defend Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه).

 

No obedience In transgression

When the Shia try to condemn Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) by bringing up the Prophet�s words (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) about making Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) angry, we ask these mindless Shia to think of similar Hadith and Quranic exhortations about not making one�s parents angry. The Prophet has said that if a person makes his parents angry, then this will anger Allah. We are told that if we disobey or anger our parents, we disobey and anger Allah. However, what if a parent asks his daughter not to wear the Hijab, and what if he gets angry if she does wear it? Would it then be sinful for the girl to continue wearing Hijab? Of course not! The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said:

 

�There is no obedience in transgression. Verily, obedience is in good deeds [only].� (Sahih Bukhari, Muslim)

 

We cannot obey another human being above Allah and His Messenger. So how could Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) place the words of Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) above that of the Messenger of Allah (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) who clearly said that Prophets do not leave behind inheritance?

 

It should be noted that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) is not God. Her anger does not decide who will go to Paradise and who will not. Not even the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is God; nor will his anger decide who will go to Paradise and who will not. If the Shia ask us proof of this claim, then we give them the example of Washu who killed the Prophet�s uncle, Hamza (رضّى الله عنه). Washu would later convert to Islam and repent for his crimes; even still, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) could not help but feel anger when he saw the face of the man who killed his uncle. However, this was only the personal feeling of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). It does not mean that Washu would be condemned to Hell-Fire for crimes that he committed prior to his conversion to Islam.

 

In any case, Fatima�s anger (رضّى الله عنها) is not the factor which decides who goes to Paradise and who burns in Hell-Fire. If Fatima�s anger (رضّى الله عنها) is based on something which is wrong from a Shariah standpoint [i.e. Fadak], then how can this be the reason for Abu Bakr�s condemnation (رضّى الله عنه)? Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) was angry at Ali (رضّى الله عنه) on at least one occassion: Ali (رضّى الله عنه) greatly upset Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) on many occassions, and even there were incidents in which she was so angry that she left Ali�s house (رضّى الله عنه) and went to stay with her father. Do we condemn Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as a Kaffir now?

 

The truth of the matter is that people�even loved ones�get in arguments. We have yet to see a husband who does not get in arguments with his wife. Siblings fight all the time, and parents get angry at their children. We even have the example of Prophet Musa (عليه السلام) who lost patience with Khidr (عليه السلام), and yet we find that these are amongst the best of people as mentioned in the Quran (and �infallible� according to the Shia). Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and Umar (رضّى الله عنه) got in arguments, and yet we know that they were best of friends. Likewise, we believe that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) got in arguments with Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and Umar (رضّى الله عنه). And the Ahlus Sunnah has no issue with this, so why do the Shia suddenly think we would cower at the site of anyone getting in one argument with Fatima (رضّى الله عنها)?

 

The Shia exploit the Hadith about whoever makes Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) angry makes the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) angry. The Shia believe that the same is true of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), that whoever makes him angry also makes the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) angry. Likewise, the Ahlus Sunnah believes that whoever upsets the Sahabah makes the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) angry. Thus, the Hadith about angering Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) must be taken into the appropriate context and cannot be taken in such simplistic and stark terms.

 

Furthermore, Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was the Caliph of the Ummah; this is the highest rank possible, and all the subjects must obey him. As such, he deserved the respect and obedience of his subjects, of which includes Fatima (رضّى الله عنها). As such, if the Shia want to argue that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) should have been careful about angering Fatima (رضّى الله عنها), an unbiased observer could easily argue that it was Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) who should have been careful of angering the Caliph of the Muslims who by the Shariah was at a rank higher in status than anyone else. If the Shia want to argue that Fatima�s position (رضّى الله عنها) is higher due to the fact that she is leader of the women of Paradise, then we can also say that Aisha�s position (رضّى الله عنها) is higher than that of Ali�s (رضّى الله عنه) based on the fact that she is �Mother of the Believers� as mentioned in the Quran.

Of course, the Ahlus Sunnah does not judge the Companions and relatives of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), unlike the Shia slanderers. Hence, we do not criticize Fatima (رضّى الله عنها); we think she made a sincere mistake, and nothing more. The Shia propagandists will now resort to rhetoric and emotional arguments whereby they will ask if it is possible that the daughter of the Prophet�who was raised by him�could possibly not know a Hadith or make such a grievous mistake. By this same logic, one could defend all of the actions of Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), for she was the wife of the Prophet who was married to him at the tender age of six. So if the Shia ask why we say Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) made a mistake, we ask the Shia why they say Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) made mistakes (and even worse according to the Shia).

 

The reality is that any human being�even the greatest of Muslims�is capable of making mistakes. We reject the concept of infallibility; it is a form of exaggeration and an extension of Shirk, whereby the quality of Allah (i.e. perfection) is given to humans. Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) did not know of the Prophet�s Hadith which forbade inheritance from him. Thus, her demand for Fadak was not based out of sin, but rather out of a sincere mistake; mistakes are made by everyone, even the most pious individuals.

Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) reconciled with Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه)

In any case, it was only initially that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) was angry at Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). The Shia endeavour to capitalize on her feelings to convey the idea that because she was wronged, she had directed that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) should not attend her Janaazah and that she remained angry with him until her demise. We do not agree with this narrative, and we believe that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) eventually became pleased with Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه).

 

Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was not motivated by ill-feeling or malice for Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) in the dispute regarding inheritance. In fact, placating her, Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) frequently said:

 

�By Allah! Oh daughter of Rasool-Allah! Kindness to the relatives of Rasool-Allah is more beloved to me than my kindness with my own relatives.�

 

According to both Sunni and Shia narrations, Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was greatly saddened by Fatima�s displeasure (رضّى الله عنها). He went to great lengths to please her while remaining firm on the Shariah. He went to her home, stood at her door in the midday sun and asked Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be his intercessor in his sincere attempt to placate and please Fatima (رضّى الله عنها). Ultimately, she became pleased with him and accepted his decision. These narrations appear in Madaarijun Nubuwwah, Kitaabul Wafaa, Baihaqi and in the commentaries of Mishkaat.

 

Kitaabul Muwaafiqah narrates that Anaani said:

�Abu Bakr came to the door of Fatima in the midday sun and said: �I shall not leave from here as long as the daughter of Rasool-Allah remains displeased with me. Ali came to Fatima and giving her an oath urged her to become pleased. Then she became pleased (with Abu Bakr).�

Shia records also confirm that Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) became pleased with Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه).

 

 The Shia author of Hujjaajus Saalikeen states:

�Verily, when Abu Bakr saw that Fatima was annoyed with him, shunned him and did not speak to him after this on the issue of Fadak, he was much aggrieved on account of this. He resolved to please her. He went to her and said: �Oh daughter of Rasool-Allah! You have spoken the truth in what you have claimed, but I saw Rasool-Allah distributing it (i.e. the income of Fadak). He would give it to the Fuqaraa, Masaakeen and wayfarers after he gave your expenses and expenses of the workers.� She then said: �Do with it as my father, Rasool-Allah had done.� Abu Bakr said: �I take an oath by Allah for you! It is incumbent on me to do with it what your father used do with it.� Fatima said: � By Allah! You should most certainly do so.� Abu Bakr said: � By Allah! I shall most certainly do so.� Fatima said: �O Allah! Be witness.� Thus, she became pleased with this and she took a pledge from Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr would give them (Fatima and others of the Ahlel Bayt) expenses therefrom and distribute the balance to the Fuqaraa, Masaakeen and wayfarers.�

 

In the very reliable narration of Sunan Al-Bayhaqi, we read:

 

�When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, �O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.� She answerd, �Do you want me to give him permission?� He said, �Yes.� So she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: �By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.� So he talked to her until she was pleased with him.� (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi)

This Hadith is narrated by Bayhaqi in al Sunan al Kubra (6:300-301) and Dala�il al-Nubuwwa (7:273-281) who said: �It is narrated with a good (hasan) chain.� Muhibb al Din al-Tabari cited it in al Riyad Al Nadira (2:96-97 #534) and Dhahabi in the Siyar (Ibid). Ibn Kathir states it as Sahih in his Al Bidayah and Ibn Hajar in his Fath Al Bari.