I personally reject the stories regarding the attack on her house along with breaking her ribs since our Shia history doesn’t prove that this incident has occurred to Sayeda Alzahraa.
The Shias claim that after few days the Prophet (peace be upon him) died, Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) went and beat up Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) when she was pregnant and her unborn baby who was called Muhassan died in her womb. But these fabricated stories were created by the Shias which are hard to be accepted by people who are learned and unbiased. That is why not only the scholars of Ahlesunnah declared these stories to be absurd fabrications, but even some of the esteemed and knowledgeable Shia scholars held the similar view.
The reality behind the story of the unborn baby who supposedly died in his mother’s womb.
Doesn’t this seem to be strange that an unborn child has a name before he was born and that his parents even knew he was a boy? Let us show you the reality that from where and why he got his name. And was it before his birth or was it after it.
We only know of this “Muhassan bin Ali” through the narration of Hani bin Hani who narrates it directly from Ali bin Abi talib RA with a Sahih Chain:
علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه قال : لمَّا ولد الحسن جـاء رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : أروني ابني ما سميتموه ؟ قلت : سمّيته حرباً ، قال : بل هـو حسن ، فلما ولد الحسين قال : أروني ابني ما سميتموه ؟ قلت سميته حرباً ، قال : بل هو حسين . فلما ولد الثالث جاء النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : أروني ابني ما سميتموه ؟ قلت حرباً ، قال : بل هو محسَّن ثم قال : إني سمّيتهم بأسماء ولد هارون شبّر وشُبَيْر ومشبّر
Ali bin Abi Talib RA said: When al Hassan was born the Prophet PBUh came and said: Show me my boy, what have you named him? I said: I called him Harb, he said: Nay He is Hassan, When al Hussein was born the Prophet PBUH said: show me my boy, what have you named him? I said: Harb, he said: Nay he is Hussein, and when the third was born the Prophet PBUH came then said: Show me my boy, what have you named him? I said: Harb, He said: Nay he is Muhassan, then He said: I have named them after the names of the children of Haroun(Aaron) they are Shibr, Shubeir, Mushabbar. Source: مسند أحمد (1/98) إسناده صحيح . Musnad Ahmad 1/98, Isnad is SAHIH.
Of course al Muhassan bin Ali RA died as little baby.
Source:التبيين في أنساب القرشيين لابن قدامة المقدسي 133
Al Tabyeen fi ansab al Qurashiyeen for Ibn Qudamah al Maqdisi p133.
Comment: Thus the story of miscarriage of Fatima(ra) has no base at all, because the son who supposedly died in the womb of Fatima(ra) as per shias. That child took birth in reality during the lifetime of Prophet(saw), but died in a younger age. And the mischievous Shia fabricators took the undue advantage of the early death of this child and manipulated the historical incidents inorder to create one of the most absurd myth that Umar(ra) killed the unborn child of Fatima(ra). But this authentic report exposes the reality of the fairytale of Umar bin al Khattab(ra) slamming the door on Fatima(ra) and crushing her while she was pregnant with Muhassan.
The stance of some esteemed Shia scholars on this fabricated story of miscarriage of Fatima (ra).
1. Shia scholar Ayatullah Fadlullah said: “It has reached my attention that many of our scholars have reported in their books that lady Fatima was viciously attacked while she was staying at her home with Imam Ali, and their children along with some of the sahaba of Rasoul Allah, some of our scholars agree that “the attackers” who attacked the house of Imam Ali did actually do so as we arrogate to the masses, but the truth is that “the man” only threatened her. In his speech “the man” said: “wa in lam yakhrojoo”, the words in arabic “wa in” shows “ee7aa2″/”shame” of Alzahraa, so how can we say that he broke her rib while he showed shame towards her? I personally reject the stories regarding the attack on her house along with breaking her ribs since our shia history doesn’t prove that this incident has occurred to sayeda Alzahraa”. [Sayed Fadhulla, a speech that was given on mothers day, 1999, Beirut lebnan. This is recorded in: “Almula7azat” by Sayed Yaseen Almusawi, Published by “Dar Al9eddeqa Alkubra” in Beirut Lebanon, 2000]
2. Shia scholar Ayatullah al-Sayyed al-Khoei:
When al-Khoei was asked about this incident:
س 980: هل الروايات التي يذكرها خطباء المنبر، وبعض الكتاب عن كسر ((عمر)) لضلع السيدة فاطمة (عليها السلام) صحيحة برأيكم؟ الخوئي:ذلك مشهور معروف، والله العالم. صراط النجاة: ج 3/ ص 314
Question 980: Are the narrations mentioned by the speakers on the Mimbars and some of the books about ‘Umar breaking the rib of Fatima, authentic according to you?
Answer: That is what’s popular and known and Allah knows best. [Sirat al-Najat 3/314].
Note: This reply of Ayatullah khoei shows that he didn’t consider those reports present in shia books to be authentic. Al-khoei said that those reports were popular but he didn’t declare them to be authentic.
To clear this up let us see what al-khoei writes in his books: لا ينجبر ضعف السند بالشهرة
“The weakness of Sanad is not fixed by the popularity of a Hadith.” (Kitab al-Khums 1/18)
Al-khoei
also says about another narration:
وجه
الاشكال هو أن المعروف والمشهور بين
الأصحاب وإن كان ذلك إلا أنه لا دليل
عليه
“The
problem is that even if it is known and popular amongst our
companions, yet there is no proof for it” ” (Mabani
Takmilat al-Minhaj 2/434)
Comment: Thus as we see , popularity of a report doesn’t makes it authentic according to al-khoei himself. And Al-khoei not authenticating that story shows us that even in shia books this story doesn’t have any authentic route.
Even if the above doesn’t seem to be a clear proof from al-khoei to our readers, then here is something which al-khoei said regarding Abubakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) which will clear the issue in a crystal clear manner.
Ayatullah al-Sayyed al-Khoei says while commenting on the first Caliphs in “Fiqh al-Shia” vol 3 pg 126, also in “Mabani Minhaj al-Saliheen” vol 3 pg 250 by Taqi al-Qummi:
ومن هنا يحكم باسلام الأولين الغاصبين لحق أمير المومنين عليه السلام إسلاما ظاهرياً لعدم نصبهم – ظاهراً – عداوة لأهل البيت وإنما نازعوهم في تحصيل المقام والرياسة العامة
Translation: “From this we conclude the Islam of the first two who usurped the right of Ameer al-Momineen (as) an apparent Islam because of them NOT being Nasibis apparently and NOT displaying enmity towards ahlbait (as) but they disputed them for the sake of status and general leadership.
Comment: This shows that al-khoei testifies that Abubakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) were not Nasibis (enemies of Ahlebayt). If khoei believed that Abubakr or Umar attacked Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) or killed her unborn child, then he would have never said that Abubakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) were NOT nasibis.
Points to Ponder:
(i). We find in the authentic ahadith of Ahlul-Sunnah the Prophet(saw) tells Fatima (ra) that she will be the first member of his family (Ahlul-Bayt) who will die after him.[Refer Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 5, Book 57, Hadith 62], but as per the fabricated Shi’ee reports, the first who died is her unborn child Muhassin, so which one is right? Is Fatima the first to follow him from his Ahlul-bayt as stated in the authentic narrations or is Muhassin the first to follow him? A clear contradiction. Which shows that the Shia narrative is fabricated and unreliable.
(ii). Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) died 6 months after death of Prophet peace be upon him. Shias claim that: In these 6 months after death of prophet (peace be upon him), Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) stole caliphate from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) wanted to burn house while Fatima (may Allah be pleased with him) was inside and even killed her unborn son. Keeping in mind these mentioned claims, let us go back to other historical facts.
After these 6 months, Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) married to other women. It’s well known fact that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) had sons from other wives with names Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman. Imam al-Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) named one from his children Talha. Imam al-Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him) named his two sons Abu Bakr and Uthman. So how is it possible to unite historical facts and shia false charges against companions?! Can anyone even think about naming his child with name of person, who stole his rights, who killed his wife?
This is a summarized version, when historical facts and shia charges against companions are combined together:
Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) stole caliphate, Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) tried to killed Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) with door and killed her unborn son who was in her womb (these were shia charges), and after this theft, and her death Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) married other woman and named his son Umar (this is fact). Which sane man could believe in such thing?
Article taken from YouPuncheredTheArch Blog.
