Buku Pelajaran Agama Islam Ajarkan Radikalisme Wahabi Salafi

Berita ini sungguh menyedihkan para Orang Tua dan generasi bangsa ini pendidikan agama di sekolah yang seharusnya sebagai tempat pembinaan iman dan budi pekerti siswa dicoreng dengan masuknya ajaran Radikal Wahabi Salafi pada buku Pelajaran Agama Islam dan Budi Pekerti untuk SMA/ MA/ SMK/ MAK Kelas XI, Kurikulum 2013, Cetakan 2014 dengan kontributor naskah Mustahdi dan Mustakim, penelaah Yusuf A.Hasan dan Moh.Saerozi, penyelia penerbitan:Pusat Kurikulum Perbukuan,Balitbang,Kemdikbud.

Mendikbud Anies Baswedan setelah melihat isinya spontan mengatakan segera menarik buku berjudul Pendidikan Agama Islam dan Budi Pekerti yang beredar. “Buku ini adalah buku yang isinya membuat saya kaget, saya sampai kaget lihat isinya buku yang jadi ini salah satu contoh bila sebuah buku belum disiapkan dengan baik, ditulis secara tergesa-gesa, tidak direview secara lengkap, lalu dipakai untuk bahan ajar. Semua karena dikerjakan mengejar waktu. Akibatnya kita tidak bisa berkompromi dengan kualitas,ini adalah buku kurikulum 2013.

Pada lembaran buku itu banyak ditemukan mengajarkan faham radikalisme wahabi salafi dan terorisme yang sangat berbahaya. Salah satunya mengajarkan untuk membunuh orang yang tidak sefaham dengan ajaran yang diusungnya. Na’udzubillah. Apa jadinya generasi muda kita nantinya kalau buku pendidikan sekolah mengajarkan hal-hal yang radikal seperti ini?

Berikut sedikit kutipannya:
Mari kita simak, pada halaman 170 buku Pendidikan Agama Islam dan Budi Pekerti untuk SMA/ MA/ SMK/ MAK Kelas XI tertulis adanya ajaran tauhid versi wahabi Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. Disebutkan ada 8 poin ajaran tauhid versi Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, yang pada intinya mengajarkan bahwa:

Bahwa orang yang menyembah selain Allah atau orang musyrik adalah halal untuk dibunuh,mayoritas umat Islam menurut Wahabi Salafi adalah musyrik karena tidak mengikuti ajaran tauhid versi Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. Sementara yang tidak syirik hanya golongan yang sefaham dengan tauhid versi Wahabi Salafi saja.

Amaliah seperti tawasul yang dilakukan mayoritas umat Islam dikatakan sebagai perbuatan syirik,bahkan golongan Wahabi Salafi menduduh kafir kepada umat Islam yang menakwilkan al-Qur’an dan lain sebagainya.

Pada halaman 78 buku tersebut juga disebutkan, jika orang menyembah selain Allah atau non muslim boleh dibunuh.Ajaran ini sejalan dengan Ideologi yang dianut oleh Kelompok Wahabi ISIS dan semua firqohnya.Bukan itu saja, pada bagian lain juga terdapat materi yang mengarah intoleransi antar umat beragama.

Sebagaimana pernah terjadi pada kasus Buku SKI Kelas VII MTs Kurikulum 2013 yang telah ditarik dari peredaran. Pemerintah mesti bertindak cepat agar ke depan tidak kecolongan oleh faham-faham radikal Wahabi Salafi.

“Masalah Intoleransi, Radikalisme,dan Terorisme ( Wahabi Salafi / Takfiri) sudah terlalu parah, mereka masuk dan menyebar di semua lini dan di semua sektor dimana tidak bisa diatasi hanya melalui solusi militer semata. Masalah ini harus terlebih dahulu ditangani pada tingkat intelektual, ilmiah dan budaya. Islam, bangsa dan masyarakat sedang terancam oleh pemikiran Ekstremisme dan Radikalisme (Takfiri). Kita harus mengatasi akar masalah, bukan menangani dampaknya.”.

(Sumber)

Mendikbud Kaji Sanksi Terkait Buku Agama Ajarkan Kekerasan

Jumat, 20 Maret 2015, 19:25 WIB

REPUBLIKA.CO.ID, JAKARTA -- Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (Kemendikbud) akan menarik semua Buku Pendidikan Agama Islam kelas XI SMA yang beredar di Jombang karena mengandung unsur radikalisme. Namun, belum ada sanksi yang akan diterapkan bagi penulisnya.

"Saat ini kita tarik dulu bukunya, baru setelah itu kita bicara sanksi lebih jauh," kata Mendikbud Anies Baswedan usai jumpai pers persiapan UN 2015, di Gedung Kemendikbud, Jakarta Pusat, Jumat (20/3).

Menteri Anies menyatakan pihaknya akan menarik keseluruhan buku yang telah beredar tersebut. Terkait sanksi akan dikaji terlebih dahulu isi buku yang memperbolehkan membunuh orang musyrik tersebut. Setelah mengkaji baru bisa ditentukan sanksi yang tepat bagi penulis ataupun penerbit.

Ia mengaku heran buku agama itu bisa lolos dan diterbitkan. Padahal ajarannya sangat berbahaya bagi anak bangsa karena mengandung unsur kekerasan. Buku itu dinilainya tidak layak karena dikerjakan dengan tergesa-gesa sehingga isinya pun bermasalah.

Kemendikbud sudah menyiapkan buku pengganti yang akan digunakan mengganti penarikan buku tersebut. Materi penggantinya digunakan dari kurikulum sebelumnya.

Sebelumnya buku agama yang berdasar kurikulum 2013 itu isinya berbau kekerasan beredar di sejumlah sekolah di Jombang, Jawa Timur. Pada halaman 78 dijelaskan orang yang menyembah selain Allah atau non-Muslim boleh dibunuh. Buku itu juga memuat materi intoleransi.

Diantara berbagai peradaban yang eksis saat ini, memang hanya Islam yang pernah menaklukkan Barat. Dalam buku terkenalnya, “Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order”, Huntington menyimpulkan

Ada sebuah tulisan menarik di Harian International Herald Tribune (20 Juli 2004) yang ditulis oleh Craig S. Smith. Judulnya: Europe fears threat from its converts to Islam. Artikel itu bercerita tentang dua pemuda Perancis, bernama David dan Jerome yang masuk Islam dan akhirnya ditahan karena tuduhan terlibat jaringan terorisme internasional.

Kasus dua bersaudara itu diangkat sebagai representasi, betapa perlunya masyarakat Eropa mencermati dan waspada terhadap kecenderungan meningkatnya konversi penduduk asli Eropa ke dalam Islam, setelah peristiwa 11 September 2001. Tahun 2003, dinas rahasia Perancis, memperkirakan, ada sekitar 30.000-50.000 orang Perancis yang masuk Islam. Islam kabarnya merupakan agama yang paling cepat berkembang di Eropa.

Sebagai sebuah artikel populer di media massa, sebenarnya terdapat aspek generalisasi yang berlebihan dalam menarik satu kesimpulan. Tetapi, dilihat dari sisi pembentukan opini publik di dunia Barat, tulisan semacam ini tampaknya dimaksudkan untuk membangun kewaspadaan terhadap Islam. Kampanye internasional anti-terorisme – yang kini lebih banyak ditujukan kepada kelompok-kelompok Islam – ternyata tidak berhasil menahan laju perkembangan Islam di Eropa.

Tulisan-tulisan seperti ini tampaknya dibuat untuk memperkuat kembali kesadaran Barat terhadap bahaya Islam, yang terus-menerus dibangun oleh media massa dan sebagian politisi Barat, sejak kekalahan komunisme. Era Perang Dingin berakhir, berganti dengan era Perang melawan Islam (tertentu).

Fakta perkembangan Islam di Eropa itu menunjukkan, kampanye anti-terorisme oleh Barat, terutama, AS, yang menjadikan al-Qaidah sebagai musuh utama dunia internasional, ternyata tidak terlalu berhasil.

Bahkan, di Arab Saudi, menurut laporan Newsweek edisi 28 Juni 2004, simpatisan Osama bin Laden ternyata cukup tinggi. Sebuah polling rahasia yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah Saudi menunjukkan, 49 persen responden mendukung gagasan Osama.

Fenomena itu bisa dipahami, mengingat dunia internasional semakin jelas menyaksikan bagaimana berbagai paradoks dan kebrutalan ditunjukkan oleh AS, khususnya dalam kasus Palestina dan Irak. Terbongkarnya kebrutalan tentara-tentara AS terhadap tawanan Irak di penjara Abu Gharib semakin membuka mata umat manusia terhadap apa yang sebenarnya terjadi. Bahwa, kampanye anti-terorisme sebenarnya tidak lepas dari kepentingan politik dan ekonomi Barat untuk mempertahankan hegemoninya.

Sebuah buku berjudul Western State Terrorism (ed. Alexander George), mengkompilasi data-data dari sejumlah penulis, seperti Chomsky, Edward S. Herman, Richard Falk, dan sebagainya, yang menunjukkan bagaimana Barat, terutama AS dan Inggris, menggunakan isu terorisme sebagai alat politik luar negerinya (to employ terrorism as a tool of foreign policy). Prof. Edward S. Herman, guru besar di University of Pensylvania dan Gerry O’Sullivan menulis sebuah artikel berjudul “Terrorism” as Ideology and Cultural Industry.

Mereka menyebut “terorisme, sebagai “industri multinasional”, dimana terdapat hubungan erat antara pemerintah, sponsor swasta, institusi-institusi pemikir, cendekiawan, baik di dalam AS maupun utamanya antara AS, Israel, dan Inggris. Contoh bagaimana biasnya penggunaan istilah “teroris” adalah dalam kasus pembantaian sekitar 3.500 pengungsi Palestina (termasuk wanita dan anak-anak) di Shabra-Shatila pada 1982. Pembantaian itu jelas dilakukan oleh Tentara Kristen Phalangis dengan pemantauan penuh Israel. Namun, Israel sama sekali bebas dari cap sebagai negara teroris. Korban warga Palestina di Shabra-Shatila itu juga melampaui jumlah korban kelompok yang sudah ditetapkan sebagai teroris, ketika itu, seperti PLO, Baader-Meinhof gang dan Red Brigades.

Salah satu peran penting untuk mendukung operasi “industri terorisme” dimainkan oleh lembaga-lembaga studi “quasi pemerintah”, seperti Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) di Georgetown, AS.

Institusi-institusi semacam ini beserta para pakar di dalamnya bekerja bersama agensi-agensi pemerintah untuk memberikan perspektif tertentu tentang terorisme kepada masyarakat. Mereka juga merupakan alat penting bagi propaganda pemerintah Barat. “They are also important vehicles for spesific pieces of government propaganda,” tulis Herman dan Sullivan.

Lembaga-lembaga ini mendapatkan alokasi dana yang sengat besar. Pada pertengahan 1980-an, CSIS, Hoover Institution, American Enterprise Institute (AEI), dan Heritage Foundation, masing-masing mendapatkan anggaran lebih dari 10 juta USD (sekitar Rp 90 milyar) per tahun. CSIS, yang aktif mengadakan diskusi di berbagai negara, memiliki kecenderungan kuat ke kelompok “sayap kanan”. Bahkan, pada awal 1970-an, CSIS memiliki peran penting dalam melakukan destabilisasi rezim Allende di Chili. Setelah menguraikan peran CSIS dalam kasus terorisme, kedua penulis ini menyimpulkan: “The CSIS is a truly “multinational” member of the terrorism industry.”

Adakah hubungan CSIS di AS dengan CSIS di Indonesia?
Lembaga lain yang menjadi bagian penting dari industri terorisme, tentu saja, adalah pers. Pers, atau media massa, bertugas membentuk imej tentang siapa yang harus dipersepsikan sebagai teroris dan siapa yang dipersepsikan sebagai pemberantas teroris. Siapa yang harus dicap sebagai penjahat dan siapa yang dicap sebagai orang baik. Lihatlah, meskipun kejahatan Ariel Sharon begitu nyata, tetapi nyaris tidak ada pers yang secara konsisten menyebut Ariel Sharon sebagai “ekstrimis”, “teroris”, “militan Yahudi”, dan sebagainya. Begitu juga dengan Presiden George Bush.

Sudah jelas berbagai kesalahannya dan tanggung jawabnya terhadap terbunuhnya puluhan ribu nyawa manusia tidak berdosa di Afghanistan, Irak, Palestina, dan sebagainya. Hubungannya dengan kelompok fundamentalis Kristen dan Yahudi pun sangat jelas.

Tetapi, adakah pers di Indonesia yang mau secara konsisten menjuluki Bush sebagai “ekstrimis” atau “militan” Barat?
Pada akhirnya, semua kepalsuan dan standar ganda itu sulit untuk ditutup-tutupi. Dunia pun semakin terbuka. Dan itulah memang konskuensi dari cara berpikir peradaban Barat. Marvin Perry memulai kata pengantar untuk bukunya “Western Civilization: a Brief History”“Western civilization is a grand but tragic drama.” Menurut Perry, peradaban Barat adalah peradaban yang besar, tetapi merupakan drama yang tragis. Meskipun sukses dalam pengembangan berbagai bidang kehidupan, tetapi kurang berhasil dalam menyelesaikan penyakit sosial dan konflik antar negara. Sains Barat, meskipun sukses dalam mengembangkan berbagai sarana kehidupan, tetapi sekaligus juga memproduksi senjata pemusnah massal.

Disamping mempromosikan perlindungan hak asasi manusia, Barat pun memproduksi rejim-rejim totaliter yang menindas kebebasan individu dan martabat manusia. Juga, meskipun Barat berkomitmen untuk mempromosikan konsep kesetaraan manusia, namun sekaligus Barat juga melakukan praktik rasisme yang brutal.

Dalam buku Powerful Ideas: Perspectives on the Good Society (2002), yang menghimpun gagasan pemikir-pemikir besar dalam sejarah manusia, seperti Sopocles (495-406 SM), Thucydides (460-400 SM), Plato (428-348 SM), Aristotle (384-322 SM), Confucius (551-479), Adam Smith (1723-1790), Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), Karl Marx (1818-1883), Nelson Mandela, Edward Said (1935-2003), dimuat tulisan Prof. Syed Naquib al-Attas, berjudul “The Dewesternization of Knowledge”. Tulisan ini membongkar sebab-musabab bahaya yang ditimbulkan peradaban Barat terhadap umat manusia.

Al-Attas memandang problem terberat yang dihadapi manusia dewasa ini adalah hegemoni dan dominasi keilmuan Barat yang mengarah pada kehancuran umat manusia. Satu fenomena yang belum pernah terjadi dalam sejarah umat manusia. Sepanjang sejarahnya, manusia telah menghadapi banyak tantangan dan kekacauan.

Tetapi, belum pernah, mereka menghadapi tantangan yang lebih serius daripada yang ditimbulkan oleh peradaban Barat saat ini. (Many challenges have arisen in the midst of man’s confusion throughout the ages, but none perhaps more serious and destructive to man than today’s challenge posed by Western Civilization).

Kekacauan itu, menurut al-Attas, bersumber dari sistem keilmuan Barat itu sendiri, yang disebarkan ke seluruh dunia. Knowledge yang disebarkan Barat itu, menurut al-Attas, pada hakekatnya telah menjadi problematik, karena kehilangan tujuan yang benar; dan lebih menimbulkan kekacauan (chaos) dalam kehidupan manusia, ketimbang membawa perdamaian dan keadilan; knowledge yang seolah-olah benar, padahal memproduksi kekacauan dan skeptisisme (confusion and scepticism); bahkan knowledge yang untuk pertama kali dalam sejarah telah membawa kepada kekacauan dalam ‘the Three Kingdom of Nature’ yaitu dunia binatang, tumbuhan, dan mineral.

Menurut al-Attas, bagi Barat, kebenaran fundamental dari agama, dipandang sekedar teoritis. Kebenaran absolut dinegasikan dan nilai-nilai relatif diterima. Tidak ada satu kepastian. Konsekuensinya, adalah penegasian Tuhan dan Akhirat dan menempatkan manusia sebagai satu-satunya yang berhak mengatur dunia.

Manusia akhirnya dituhankan dan Tuhan pun dimanusiakan. (Man is deified and Deity humanised). Dengan karakteristiknya semacam itu, maka menurut al-Attas, peradaban Barat juga merupakan tantangan terbesar bagi kaum Muslim. Dan secara konseptual, antara keduanya terdapat perbedaan yang fundamental sehingga akan menimbulkan konflik yang bersifat permanen. Ia juga mengingatkan, bahwa dalam melihat Islam, Barat tidak bersikap pasif, tetapi sangat aktif memerangi Islam dalam berbagai bidang. Dalam sebuah risalahnya kepada kaum Muslimin, al-Attas mengingatkan: ““Shahadan, maka sesungguhnya tiada hairan bagi kita jikalau agama Kristian Barat dan orang Barat yang menjelmakan Kebudayaan Barat itu, dalam serangbalasnya terhadap agama dan orang Islam, akan senantiasa menganggap Islam sebagai bandingnya, sebagai tandingnya, sebagai taranya dan seterunya yang tunggal dalam usaha mereka untuk mencapai kedaulatan duniawi.”

Diantara berbagai peradaban yang eksis saat ini, memang hanya Islam yang pernah menaklukkan Barat. Dalam buku terkenalnya, “Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order”, Huntington menyimpulkan: “Islam is the only civilization which has put the survival of the West in doubt, and it has done that at least twice.” (Islam adalah satu-satunya peradaban yang telah menampatkan keberlangsungan peradaban Barat dalam keraguan, dan ini telah terjadi sekurangnya dua kali).

Dalam kilasan sejarahnya, Islam pernah menaklukkan Barat selama beratus-ratus tahun. Islam pernah menduduki Spanyol selama hampir 800 tahun (711-1492). Kekuatan Islam, yang ketika itu diwakili oleh Turki Uthmani, selama beratus-ratus tahun menjadi “momok” yang sangat menakutkan bagi Barat. Selama dua kali (1529 dan 1683) kota Vienna dikepung oleh Turki Uthmani, yang ketika itu menjadi “The Superpower of the World”.

Jatuhnya Konstantinopel, tahun 1453, oleh Turki Uthmani di bawah pimpinan Sultan Muhammad al-Fatih, juga merupakan pukulan berat bagi Barat. Konstantine adalah nama Kaisar Romawi yang dianggap begitu besar jasanya bagi perkembangan agama Kristen. Dialah yang membangun imperium Romawi Timur. Dia juga yang dikenal memelopori penyelenggaraan Konsili Nicea, 325, yang kemudian merumuskan doktrin-doktrin pokok dalam Teologi Kristen. Setelah runtuhnya imperium Romawi Barat, maka Imperium Romawi Timur masih tetap bertahan sampai masuknya pasukan Islam di bawah pimpinan al-Fatih pada 1453.

Selama dua bulan, sejak 6 April sampai 29 Mei 1453, pasukan al-Fatih (yang ketika itu berumur 29 tahun), mengepung Konstantinopel yang dikenal memiliki pertahanan sangat kuat. Meskipun mengalami perpecahan dalam paham keagamaan dengan Kristen Ortodoks di Romawi Timur, Paus Nicholas V di Roma, mengirimkan tiga kapal perang untuk membantu melawan pasukan al-Fatih. Jadi, meskipun Kristen bersatu, mereka tetap kalah. Begitu juga yang terjadi dalam Perang Salib. Meskipun Barat sudah bersatu padu, tetap kalah melawan Islam.

Memori kolektif sejarah Barat memang menyimpan kenangan pahit dan kekhawatiran terhadap kebangkitan Islam. Apalagi, begitu banyak sarjana Barat yang mengakui bahwa peradaban Barat sedang mengalami kemunduran. Tahun 1917, filosof Jerman Oswald Spengler menulis dua jilid buku berjudul Der Untergang des Abenlandes (The Decline of the West). Buku populer “The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers”, ditutup Paul Kennedy dengan bab “The United States: the Problem of Number One in Relative Decline”.

Sebenarnya merupakan hal yang mudah dipahami, bahwa Barat akan selalu berusaha mempertahankan eksistensinya, dengan menekan bangkitnya peradaban lain, terutama Islam. Kekhawatiran terhadap Islam akan mudah sekali dibangkitkan. Masyarakat Barat, yang secara nominal beragama Kristen, tidak risau jika warga mereka menjadi ateis, Budha, Hindu, atau mengikuti berbagai aliran keagamaan dari Cina. Tetapi, mereka tampak begitu peduli dan risau jika warganya masuk Islam.

Yang justru sulit dipahami, adalah, bahwa ada saja kalangan sarjana Muslim yang justru habis-habisan menjiplak pandangan hidup Barat untuk memimpikan adanya kebangkitan Islam. Mereka berpikir, untuk maju, jangan tanggung-tanggung dalam menjiplak Barat. Ambil semuanya apapun yang dari Barat. Abdullah Cevdet, seorang tokoh Gerakan Turki Muda menyatakan: “Yang ada hanya satu peradaban, dan itu adalah peradaban Eropa. Karena itu, kita harus meminjam peradaban Barat, baik bunga mawarnya mau pun durinya sekaligus.”

(There is only one civilization, and that is European civilization. Therefore, we must borrow western civilizaton with both its rose and its thorn). Banyak yang bermimpi, bahwa dengan mengikuti sekularisme dan liberalisme Barat, Islam akan maju dan mujur. Padahal, yang terjadi bukan mujur, tetapi malah babak belur.

Pernikahan Ummu Kultsum dengan Umar bin Khattab – Sebuah Analisa

Buku ini membahas dan mengkritik riwayat-riwayat tentang pernikahan Ummu Kultsum dengan Ummar bin Khattab.

Dari abad pertama Islam hingga sekarang selalu ada analisa, pertanyaan dan jawaban tentang riwayat “Imam Ali as mengawinkan putrinya dengan Umar bin Khattab” dan ada juga banyak tulisan, buku dan risalah tentangnya.

Download buku ini
https://drive.google.com/?usp=folder&authuser=0#folders/0B_l0We7EQa4JSEtSeTllVGdPZGc

(31) CHAPTER TWO Fadak In its real and symbolic meaning
	Yes, Fadak was in our hands out of all what was under the sky but some people felt greedy for it and others withheld themselves from it. (Fatima’s husband) Amirul Mu’mineen[1]
The location Fadak was a village in Hijaz. Between Fadak and Medina there was a distance of two days and it was said three days. It was a Jewish land in the beginning of its history.[2] It was inhabited by some Jews until the seventh year of hijra when Allah cast terror into their hearts and they made peace with the Prophet by giving him a half of Fadak. Also it was mentioned that they gave him the entire Fadak.[3] [1] Nahjul Balagha; Arranged by Subhi as-Salih, p.416  [2] Mu’jamul Buldan by Yaqout al-Hamawi, vol.4 p.238-239. [3] Refer to Futoohul Buldan by al-Balatheri p.42-46 to see that the people of Fadak had made peace with the Prophet for the half of Fadak and that it was a pure property of the Prophet because he did not get it by war to be considered as booty for the Muslims. In page 46 the author said: “In two hundred and ten of hijra the Abbasid caliph al-Ma’moon bin Haroon ar-Rasheed paid it back to the Fatimites. He wrote to his wali of Medina Qathm bin Ja’far ordering him to do that…”

 

(32) Fadak in its first stages The Islamic history of Fadak started from that when it became a property of the Prophet (s) because it was not possessed by war.[1] Then the Prophet donated it to Fatima.[2] It remained in Fatima’s possession until her father died. Then the first caliph (Abu Bakr) snatched it from her according to the author of as-Sawa’iqul Muhriqa[3] and became as part of the general finance and source of the state’s income. When Omar became the caliph, he gave Fadak back to the heirs[4] of the Prophet (s). It remained in the Prophet’s heirs’ hands until Othman became the caliph. He took it from its real possessors and gifted it to Marwan bin al-Hakam.[5] Then history ignored the matter of Fadak after Othman without mentioning anything about it. But the true fact was that Imam Ali recovered it from Marwan among all the other things that the Umayyads had plundered during the reign of their caliph Othman. During the rule of Imam Ali Some of those, who defended Abu Bakr concerning the matter of Fadak, mentioned that Imam Ali did not recover Fadak and he left it for the Muslims following the same way of Abu Bakr, so if Imam Ali knew that Fatima’s allegation (of Fadak) was true, he would not do that! I do not want to wide-open, in this answer, the [1]According to the holy Quran: (And whatever Allah restored to His Apostle from them you did not press forward against it any horse or a riding camel) 59:6. [2] Futoohul Buldan, p.44. [3] Refer to page 38. [4] Sharh Nahjul Balagha by ibn Abul Hadeed, vol.16 p.213. [5] Futoohul Buldan p.44 and Sharh Nahjul Balagha, vol.16 p.216.

 

(33) door of taqiyya[1] and to try to find an excuse for Imam Ali’s doing, but I never believe that Imam Ali had followed the way of Abu Bakr. History did not show anything of that, but in fact it showed that Imam Ali thought that Fadak was the Prophet’s heirs’. Imam Ali recorded this clearly in his letter to Othman bin Hunayf[2] as you will see in a next chapter. Perhaps Imam Ali intended that the yields of Fadak concerned Fatima and her heirs, who were her children and husband, and so the news did not need to be spread because Fadak was in its legal possessors’ hands, who were him and his children. And probably that he spent its yields in the interest of the Muslims out of his and his children’s content[3] or they might dedicate it and made it as charity. During the reign of the Umayyads When Mu’awiya bin Abu Sufyan became the caliph, he went too far in sarcasm and slighting relating to the wronged right (Fadak). He gifted one third of Fadak to Marwan bin al-Hakam, one third to Omar bin Othman and the last third to his son Yazeed. It was still circulated[4] among them until it was totally possessed by Marwan during his rule. Finally it came to Omar bin Abdul Aziz bin Marwan. When Omar became the caliph, he paid it back to the Fatimites. He wrote to his wali of Medina Abu Bakr bin Amr bin Hazm ordering him to give Fadak back to the Fatimites. Abu Bakr bin Amr wrote to [1] To hide one’s true beliefs when life is in danger. [2] Sharh Nahjul Balagha by ibn Abul Hadeed, vol. 16 p.208. [3] This was the most acceptable possibility because the first was rejected by the letter of Imam Ali to Othman bin Hunayf when he said: “and others withheld themselves from it…” and the third was rejected by the acceptance of Fadak by the Fatimites. [4] Sharh Nahjul Balagha, vol.16 p.216 and Futoohul Buldan p.46.

 

(34) the caliph Omar bin Abdul Aziz: “Fatima has sons (grandsons) from the family of Othman and so and so. To whom would I give it?” The caliph wrote to him: “If I ordered you to slay a cow, you would ask about its color! If my letter reached you, divide Fadak among Fatima’s Sons (grandsons) from Ali.”[1] The Umayyads became angry with Omar bin Abdul Aziz and blamed him for that. They said to him: “You distorted the rulings of the two sheikhs (Abu Bakr and Omar)”. It was mentioned that Omar bin Qayss came to the caliph with a group of the people of Kufa and blamed him for that. He said to them: “You ignored while I perceived, you forgot but I remembered. Abu Bakr bin Muhammad bin Amr bin Hazm told me from his father from his grandfather that the Prophet (s) had said: “Fatima is a part of me. Whatever displeases her displeases me and whatever pleases her pleases me.”[2] Fadak was in Abu Bakr and Omar’s possession during their reigns until it reached Marwan, who gifted it to my father Abdul Aziz. I and my brothers inherited it. I asked them to sell me their shares. Some of them sold me and some gifted me their shares. When I had it all, I decided to give it back to the Fatimites.” He (Omar bin Qayss) said to him: “If you ought to do that, then keep it but divide its yields” and he did so.[3] Then Yazeed bin Abdul Melik seized it again from the Fatimites and it remained in the family of Marwan’s hands until their state (the Umayyad state) declined.[4] [1] Sarh Nahjul Balagha, vol.16 p.278. [2] At-Taj aj-Jami’ lil Ossool, by Mansour Ali Nassif, vol.3 p.353. [3] Futoohul Buldan p.46 and Sharh Nahjul Blagha vol. 16 p.278. [4] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.216.

 

(35) During the Abbasid reign Abul Abbas as-Saffah, the first Abbasid caliph, gave Fadak back to Abdullah bin al-Hassan bin al-Hussayn bin Ali bin Abu Talib. Then Abu Ja’far al-Mansour seized it during his reign from al-Hassan’s family. Al-Mahd bin al-Mansour gave it back again to the Fatimites, whereas Musa bin al-Mahdi seized it again from them.[1] It remained in the Abbasids’ hands until al-Ma’moon came to the caliphate in 210 AH and gave it back to the Fatimites. He wrote to his wali of Medina Qathm bin Ja’far: “Amirul mu’mineen (al-Ma’moon) in his position to the religion of Allah and the caliphate of the Prophet and his kinship with him is worthier to obey the Prophet’s Sunna and to carry out his orders. He has to submit to those, whom the Prophet had donated or gifted with gifts or charities. Amirul mu’mineen looks forward to the blessing of Allah and His safeguard and to be able to do what may bring him closer to Allah. The Prophet had given Fadak to Fatima and that was a very well-known matter without any doubt about it among the Prophet’s family. She kept on claiming that Fadak was hers and she was the worthiest to be believed. Amirul mu’mineen thinks that he has to give it back to Fatima’s heirs approaching to Allah by achieving His justice and to the Prophet by carrying out his order and donation. So he (al-Ma’moon) ordered this matter to be fixed in his books and to be sent in letters to his walis. If it was announced in every season (of hajj) after the death of the Prophet (s) that whoever had a charity, a gift or he was promised of that, he was to mention that and to be granted what he was promised of, so [1] Sharh Nahjul Balagha, vol.16 p.216-217.

 

(36) Fatima was worthier to be believed in her claim about what the Prophet had granted her. Hence amirul mu’mineen writes to al-Mubarak at-Tabari ordering him to give Fadak back to the heirs of Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet, with all of its limits, rights, slaves, yields and others relating to it. It is to be given to Muhammad bin Yahya bin al-Hussayn bin Zeid bin Ali bin al-Hussayn bin Ali bin Abu Talib and Muhammad bin Abdullah bin al-Hassan bin Ali bin al-Hussayn bin Ali bin Abu Talib, whom amirul mu’mineen entrusts with to be responsible of it and to hand it over to its possessors. Know well that this is the opinion of amirul mu’mineen and this is what Allah has inspired him with obeying Him and to be closer to Him and to His messenger (s). Try to inform of it and treat Muhammad bin Yahya and Muhammad bin Abdullah as you treated al-Mubarak at-Tabari before. Help them to repair it and to improve its yields inshallah. With my salaam.”[1] When al-Mutawakkil became the caliph, he seized Fadak from the Fatimites and gave it to Abdullah bin Omar al-Baziyar. It had eleven date-palms planted by the holy hands of the Prophet himself. Abdullah bin Omar al-Baziyar sent a man called Bishran bin Abu Umayya ath-Thaqafi to Medina. He cut off those date-palms. When he came back to Basra, he was afflicted with hemiplegia.[2] The relation between the Fatimites and Fadak ended in the days of al-Mutawakkil when he donated it to Abdullah bin Omar al-Baziyar.[3] This was a summary account about the confused history of Fadak, which was woven by the [1] Futoohul Buldan p.46-47. [2] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.217. [3] ibid.

 

(37) inclinations and formed by the fancies according to what was required by the covetousness and the temporary policies. In spite of that, history did not miss moderation and fairness in some different times and circumstances where Fadak was given back to its real possessors. It was noticeable that the problem of Fadak took a great importance in the Islamic society and the rulers’ attention. Hence you see that its solution differed according to the different policy of the state and submitted to the mainstream of the caliph towards the Prophet’s family directly. If the caliph had a fair look and a moderate thought, he would give Fadak back to the Fatimites but if he was not so, seizing Fadak was on the top of the caliph’s list of priorities. The symbolic and material value of Fadak One of many things that led us to know the symbolic value Fadak had in the Islamic account was a poem said by the famous poet Di’bil al-Khuza’iy, which he composed when al-Ma’moon (the Abbasid caliph) gave Fadak back to the Fatimites. Here is its opening verse: The face of the time smiled, When Ma’moon gave back Fadak to the Hashimites.[1] In the end, a point worth noting; Fadak was not a little piece of land or a small field as some people thought. What I am certain of is that Fadak yielded a great sum generating important wealth to the possessors. I do not have to quantify its outcome although it was mentioned in the historians’ books that it was very great sums. Here is some of what confirmed the high material value of Fadak: [1] The descendents of Hashim, Prophet Muhammad’s grandfather. For the poem refer to Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.217

 

(38)

First: Omar (as you will see later) prevented[1] Abu Bakr from leaving Fadak to Fatima (s) because of the failure in the finance of the state, which was in need of support because of the wars against the apostates and the revolts of the mutinous polytheists.
It is clear that such a land, which was considered so important to assist the finances of the state in the difficult circumstances like wars and revolts, must be of a great production.
Second: the saying of Abu Bakr to Fatima in a dialogue between them: “This property was not the Prophet’s but it was for the Muslims, with which the Prophet equipped the soldiers and spent for the sake of Allah.”[2] Equipping the soldiers would not be possible except with great sums of money required to be expended on the army.
Third: once Mu’awiya divided Fadak into three thirds[3] and gave a third to each of Yazeed, Marwan and Amr bin Othman. It showed clearly the great production of this land. It must be great wealth to be divided among three emirs, who were very rich and wealthy people.
Fourth: considering it as village[4] and estimating some of its date-palms as much as the date-palms of Kufa in the sixth century of hijra.[5]
 

---

[1] As-Seera al-Halabiya vol.3 p.391 and Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.234.
[2] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.214.
[3] Sharh Nahjul Balagha, p.216.
[4] Mu’jamul Buldan by al-Hamawi vol.4 p.238 and Futoohul Buldan p.45 that Surayj bin Yunus said: Isma’eel bin Ibrahim told from Ayyoub from az-Zuhri about the saying of Allah: (..you did not press forward against it any horse or a riding camel) he said: they were some Arabic villages for the Prophet (s); Fadak and so and so…
[5] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.236.

(17) CHAPTER ONE On the scene of the revolution
	Here it is before you. Take it as if it is prepared for you. It will dispute with you on the Day of Resurrection. What a fair judge Allah is on that day and the master is Muhammad and the appointment is the Day of Punishment, on that Day shall they perish who say false things. Fatima (s)
Preface She[1] stood up with no doubt about what she endeavored to prove and with no fear in her great situation. No hesitation crossed her mind, for she was very serious about what she had decided to do. No obsession of worry or confusion occurred to her. Here she was now on the top with her noble readiness and her courageous stability on her ambitious plan and her defensive way. She was between two doors with no time to hesitate. She had to choose one of them and she did. She chose the more tiring way, which was challenging for a lady to walk on, due to her physically weaker [1]Fatima (s).

 

(18) nature. For it was full of difficulties and stress and required courage, effective oratory power, and the ability to formulate the essence of the revolution into words. Indeed it required a great skill to show the indignation and to criticize the existing conditions in a way that gives the words a meaning of life and a chance of eternality to make the words as the soldiers of the revolution and its eternal support in the history of the faith. It is the faith and the death defiance for the sake of the truth that make the weak souls great and give power to the frustrated spirits without any hesitation or feebleness. Hence this revolutionary lady chose this way, which fitted her great soul and her determined personality towards reserving the truth and striving for its sake. She was surrounded by her maids and fellow-women like the scattered stars gathering in disorder. They were all together with the same zeal and the same anxiety. Their leader was among them reviewing what a noble rising she would attempt to do. She was trying to prepare the equipments and the supply for that. As she went further in her review, she became more steadfast and the power of her right became stronger and stronger. She became bolder in her movement and in her rush to defend the robbed rights. She became more active in her advance and more courageous in her great situation as if she had borrowed her great husband’s heart to face her difficult circumstances and what the fate brought to her with. Rather it was what Allah had decided to try her with that terrible tragedy that could shake the great mountains. She was, at that terrible moment when she played the role of the defensive soldier, like a ghost

 

(19) under a cloud of bitter sorrow. She was pale, frowning, broken hearted, depressed, faint, weak, exhausted but in her soul and mind there was a glimpse of happiness and remnant of comfort. Neither this nor that were for enjoying a smiling hope or calmness with a sweet dream or expecting a good result. That glimpse was a glimpse of content with the thought of revolution and that comfort was confidence of success. In the instantaneous failure there might be a later great success. Exactly it was. A nation rose to sanctify this revolution and to imitate this great lady’s stability and courageousness. Her thoughts in that situation took her to the near past, to the happy life where her father was still breathing and her house was the centre of the state and the steady pole of glory that the world obeyed and submitted to. And perhaps her thoughts led her to remember her father hugging her, surrounding her with his sympathy and showering her his kisses, which she was accustomed to and were her sustenance every morning and evening. Then she came to be faced with a different time. Her house that was the lantern of light, the symbol of prophethood and the shining ray soaring towards the Heaven was threatened from time to time. Her cousin, the second man in Islam, the gate of the prophet’s knowledge,[1] his loyal vizier[2] and his [1] According to the famous prophetic tradition (I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate). Refer to Abu Na’eem’s Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.64, As-Sayouti’s Jami’ul-Jawami’, At-Tarmithi’s Sahih and refer to at-Taj aj-Jami’ lil-Usool fee Ahadeeth ar-Rasool of Sheikh Mansour Ali Nassif, ol.3 p.337. [2] With reference to the tradition (This-referring to Ali-is my brother, my vizier and my successor among you…). Refer to the full tradition in at-Tabari’s Tareekh, vol.3 p.218-219 and Tafseer

 

(20) promising Aaron,[1] who would not separate with his pure beginning[2] from the blessed beginning of the Prophet and who was the Prophet’s supporter at the beginning and his great hope at the end, finally would lose the caliphate after the Prophet (s). His morale, which the Heaven and the earth confessed, was demolished and his great deeds became irrespective according to some criteria fabricated at that time. Here she cried bitterly. Her crying was not of that sort that appeared on the lineaments. It was the agony of the conscience, the suffering of the soul and the tremor of the regrets in the bottom of the heart. Tears flowed from her gloomy eyes. Her stop did not last long. She rushed like a flaming spark surrounded by her companions until she reached the struggle field. She stopped her eternal stop and declared her war, in which she used whatever she was allowed to use as a Muslim woman. Her fresh revolution was about to devour the caliphate but the circumstances were against her and the obstacles increased in front of her. The environments of the event That was the veracious Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet, the delight of his eye, the example of al-Khazin, vol.3 p.371. [1] Regarding the true tradition (O Ali, are you not pleased to be for me as Aaron was to Moses, except that there is no a prophet after me). Refer to al-Bukari’s Sahih, vol.5 p.81, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.4 p.1873 and at-Taj aj-Jami’ of Sheikh Mansour Ali Nassif, vol.3 p.333. [2] Refer to Nahjul Balagha, sermon no.192 p.300-302, checked by Dr. Subhi as-Salih. Imam Ali said: (You have known my position to the Prophet in close relation and special rank. He put me in his lab when I was a child…where there was no a single house having Muslims except that house, which gathered the Prophet, Khadeeja (the Prophet’s first wife) and me. I saw the light of the angel and smelt the scent of the prophethood…)

 

(21) infallibility, the radiant halo and the remainder of the Prophet among the Muslims, on her way to the mosque. She lost the father, who was the best at all in the history of mankind, the most sympathetic, the most compassionate and the most blessed. This was a calamity that could make the one, afflicted with, taste the bitterness of dying and find dying sweet and delightful hope. Thus was Fatima when her father left to the better world and his soul flew to Paradise pleased (with Allah) and (Allah) well-pleased (with him). The bitter events did not cease. She faced another calamity, which had a great effect on her pure soul and it moved her sorrow and grief. It was not less than the first calamity. It was the lost of the glory, which the Heaven had granted to the Prophet’s family along history. That glory was the leadership of the umma. The Heaven had decided that Muhammad’s family was to rule his umma and his Shia because they (Muhammad’s descendents) were his examples and derivatives. But the opposite account turned the leadership and the rule away from the real possessors and appointed caliphs and emirs instead. [1] [1] The heaven had decided that Ali and the other pure members of the Prophet’s family were to have the leadership and the imamate of the umma. There was a big step of educational and intellectual preparation for such leadership and caliphate. In fact there was a clear method that its steps succeeded in this way. It was confirmed by the holy Quran and the Sunna that did not let any way of doubt. Refer to The origin of the Shiism and the Shia by Imam as-Sadr and edited by Abdul Jabbar Sharara. We proved by numbers, evidences and texts this fact with reference to the reliable sources and true traditions of our Sunni brothers. Also refer (for example) to at-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.3 p.218-219, as-Sayooti’s Tareekh al-Khulafa’ (History of the caliphs), p.171, ibn Hajar’s as-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa, p.127 and the Summary of Ibn Assakir’s Tareekh by ibn Mandhour, vol.17.p.356 and following pages.

 

(22) With this and that Fatima (s) lost the holiest prophet and father and the most eternal chiefdom and leadership in an overnight. So her grief-stricken soul sent her to the war and its fields and made her undertake the revolution and keep on it. Undoubtedly, anyone else who had the same principles and beliefs could not have done what she did or striven in jihad like her without being an easy prey for the ruling authority that had reached at that time the peak of subdual and severity. There was blame for waving, accusation for saying and punishment for doing.[1] It was not different from what we nowadays might refer to as martial laws. That was necessary for the rulers in those days to support their base and to fix their structure. But since the defending rebel was the daughter of Muhammad (s), a piece of his soul[2] and his flourishing image, she would be kept safe undoubtedly because of the holy prophethood of her father and also the respect and other aspects of woman in Islam that safeguarded her from harm. The tools of the revolution Fatima (s) flew by the wings of her sacred thoughts to the horizons of her past and the world of her great father, which turned, after her father joined his Lord, to a shining memory in her soul. It supplied her every moment with feelings, sympathy and education. It roused in her joy and ease. Even if she was late after her father in the account of time, [1] Refer to the event of al-Saqeefa in al-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.2 p.244 and see what had happened on that day. One was the saying of the second caliph (Omar): “Kill Sa’d bin Obada…” [2] The Prophet said: “Fatima is a part of me. Whoever hurts her, surely hurts me…” Refer to at-Taj al-Jami’ lil-Ossool vol.3 p.353, al-Bukhari’s Sahih vol.5 p.83 tradition no. 232 and Muslim’s Sahih vol.4 p.p/.1902 tradition no.2493.

 

(23) she did not separate from him in the account of soul and memory. So she had inside her an inexhaustible power, a motive for a sweeping revolution, which never went out, lights from the prophethood of Muhammad and the soul of Muhammad lighting her way and guiding her to the right path. Fatima (s) deserted the worldly life when the revolution of her soul ripened and turned with her feelings towards the memory that still lived inside her soul to take from it a torch of light for her difficult situation. She began calling: Come back to me O scenes of happiness, from which I woke up to find unhappiness that I cannot tolerate…. Come back to me O you the dearest and the most beloved one to me. Talk to me and shed on me some of your divine light as you used to do with me before. Come back to me, my father. Let me converse with you if that will relieve you. Let me reveal to you my griefs as I always used to do. Let me tell you about those shades, which preserved me from the flame of this world. Now I no longer have any. She said after the death of her father: There were after you conflicting news and misfortunes, If you were here, no misfortune would happen.[1] Come back to me O memories of my dear past to tell me your attractive speech and make me hear every thing to announce my war with no leniency against those, who ascended-or the people made them ascend- the minbar and the position of my father and they did not pay any attention to the [1] Sharh Nahjul Balagha of ibn Abul Hadeed, vol.16 p.312.

 

(24) rights of the Prophet’s family or to the sanctity of the holy house to prevent it from burning[1] and from being destroyed. Remind me of my father’s scenes and battles. Did not he tell me of the kinds of heroism and jihad[2] of his brother and son-in-law (Ali), his superiority on all his opponents and his steadfastness beside the Prophet (s) in the most difficult hours and the most violent fights, from which so and so had fled and the brave desisted[3] to break into? Was it right after that to put Abu Bakr on the minbar of the Prophet and to bring down Ali from what he deserved?! O my father’s memories, tell me about Abu Bakr. Is not he the one, whom the divine inspiration did not entrust with the announcing of a verse to the polytheists[4] and chose Ali for the task? Did that [1] With reference to the threat of burning the house of Fatima (s). Refer to al-Imama wes-Siyasa by ibn Qutayba p.12, at-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.2 p.233 and Sharh Nahjul Balagha by ibn Abul Hadeed vol.6 p.47-48. They mentioned that Omar bin al-Khattab came to the house of Fatima with a group of Ansar (the people of Medina, who believed and assisted the Prophet in his mission when he and his companions emigrated from Mecca to Medina) and Muhajireen (the Prophet’s companions, who emigrated from Mecca to Medina) and said: “I swear by Him, in Whose hand my soul is, either you come out to pay homage (to Abu Bakr) or I will set fire to the house with whoever inside it”. [2] Refer to at-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.2 p.25 and65-66, when Imam Ali (s) killed Talha bin Othman the bearer of the polytheists’ banner…and killed all the bearers of the banner. The prophet (s) saw a group of polytheists. He said to Ali: “Attack them!” Ali attacked them, scattered them and killed Amr aj-Jumahi. The Prophet saw another group of polytheists. He said to Ali: “Attack them” Ali attacked them, scattered them and killed Shayba bin Malik. Gabriel said to the Prophet: “O messenger of Allah, it is this the real assistance.” The prophet said: “He is from me and I am from him”. Gabriel said: “And I am from you both…” [3] Refer to the tradition narrated by Sa’d bin Abu Waqqas mentioned in Muslim’s Sahih, vol.4 p.1873, at-Tarmithi’s Sahih vol.5 p.596 and ibn Hajar’s as-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa. They all confirmed this meaning. [4] With reference to the story of sura of Bara’a. Refer to Imam

 

(25) mean but that Ali was the natural representative of Islam, who was to undertake every task that the Prophet might not be free from his many duties to do himself? I remember well that critical day where the agitators agitated when my father appointed Ali as emir of Medina and he went out for war. They put for that emirate[1] whatever interpretations they liked. But Ali was steadfast like a mountain. The riots of the rioters did not shake him. I tried to make him follow my father to tell him what people fabricated. At last he followed the Prophet. Then he came back beaming brightly and smiling broadly. Happiness carried him to his beloved spouse to bring good news to her not in the worldly meaning but in a meaning of the Heaven. Ali told how the Prophet received him, welcomed him and said to him: “You are to me as Aaron was to Moses but there will be no prophet after me.”[2] Moses’ Aaron was his partner in the rule, the imam of his umma and was prepared to be his successor. And so Muhammad’s Aaron had to be the wali of the Muslims and the caliph after Muhammad (s). When she arrived at this point of her flowing thoughts, she cried out that this was the reversal, of which Allah had warned in His saying: (And Muhammad is no more than an apostle; the apostles have Ahmad’s Musnad vol.1 p.3 and az-Zamakhshari’s Kashshaf vol.2 p.243. It was mentioned that: “While Abu Bakr was on his way (towards Mecca) in order to inform of the sura of Bara’a, Gabriel came down and said to the Prophet: “O Muhammad, no one is to inform of your mission but a man of your family. So you send Ali…”Also refer to at-Tarmithi’s Sahih vol.5 p.594. [1] At-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.2 p.182-183 and al-Bidayeh wen Nihayeh of ibn Katheer ad-Damaski vol.7 p.340 for more details. [2] At-Taj aj-Jami’ lil-Ossool of sheikh Mansour Ali Nassif vol.3 p.332, Muslim’s Sahih vol.4 p.1873 and an-Nassa’ei’s Khassa’iss p.48-50.

 

(26) already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back on your heels? 3:144) Soon the people turned back on their heels and were overcome by the pre-Islamic thinking, which the two parties (the Muhajireen and the Ansar) exchanged in the Saqeefa[1] when one of them said: “We are the people of glory and strength and more in number.” The other replied: “Who will dispute with us about the rule of Muhammad while we are his assistants and family?”[2] The holy book and the Sunna failed in front of those criteria. She began to say: O principles of Muhammad, which flowed in my veins since I was born, like the blood in the veins. Omar, who attacked you (principles) in your house in Mecca, which the Prophet had made as a centre for his mission, attacked the family of Muhammad in their house (in Medina) and set fire to it or was about to do so…[3] O my great mother’s soul, you have taught me an eternal lesson in the life of the Islamic struggle by your great jihad beside the master of the prophets. I will make myself as another Khadeeja for Ali in his present ordeal.[4] Here I am, my mother. I hear your voice in the [1] A big shed, in which the Muhajireen and the Ansar gathered in after the death of the Prophet (s) to decide who would be the caliph after the Prophet. [2] Refer to at-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.2 p.234 and the following pages and Sharh Nahjul Balagha by ibn Abul Hadeed vol.6 p.6-9. [3] Refer to at-Tabari’s Tareekh vol.2 p.233. He mentioned that ibn Hameed had said: “Omar bin al-Khattab came to Ali’s house and there were some men of Muhajireen inside it and said: “I swear by Allah that I will burn the house with you or you come out to pay homage…” [4] Relating to the situation of Khadeeja (the Prophet’s wife), in which Allah had glorified her when she assisted the Prophet in his ordeal with Quraysh when they considered him as liar.

 

(27) depth of my soul prompting me to stand against the rulers. I will go to Abu Bakr to say to him: “You have done a monstrous thing. Here it is before you. Take it as if it is prepared for you. It will dispute with you on the Day of Resurrection. What a fair judge Allah is on that day and the master is Muhammad and the appointment is the Day of Punishment”[1] and to draw the attention of the Muslims to the bad ends of their doing and the dark future they built with their own hands and to say to them: “It was impregnated so wait until it bears then milk its blood…then they will perish who say false things and the successors will know what bad the earlier ones have established.”[2] Then she rushed into the field of action having in her soul the principles of Muhammad, the spirit of Khadeeja, the heroism of Ali and great pity for the umma that it might face a dark future. The route of the revolution The way, which the revolutionary lady took, was not long because the house, from which the spark and the flame of the revolution were emitted, was the house of Ali. It was called, according to the Prophet (s), the house of the prophethood. It was attached to the mosque.[3] Nothing separated them except one wall. So she might enter the mosque from the door, which was between them (the mosque and the house) and leading to the mosque [1] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.212. [2] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.212. [3] As it was mentioned by Ahmad bin Hanbal in his Musnad vol.4 p.369 and ibn Katheer in his Tarekh vol.3 p.355 that some of the Prophet’s companions had doors (of their houses) opened to the mosque. The Prophet ordered to be closed except the door of Ali’s house.

 

(28) directly or she might enter from the general gate of the mosque. It is not so important for us which way she passed, whereas I think it was the general gate of the mosque because the historical description of her revolutionary movement feels of that. Her entering from her special door did not let her walk in the mosque or to pass a way between her house and the mosque so how could the narrator describe her gait that it was exactly like the gait[1] of the Prophet? If we supposed that she had walked in the mosque itself, so her walk would not lead her to the caliph but it would begin from there because if some one came into the mosque, it would be said that he came in to those, who were in the mosque even if he walked in the mosque, while the narrator considered her coming in to the caliph after her walking. This confirmed what we thought. The women The narration showed that Fatima was accompanied by her maids and some of her fellow women.[2] She came with the women in order to draw the attention of people and to make them notice her passing that way with that number of women to gather in the mosque and to crowd where her destination was to be to know what she wanted to say or to do. Hence the trial would be open in front of the public in that disturbed milieu. A phenomenon It was mentioned that the gait of Fatima (s) was exactly the same as her father’s gait. We have the opportunity to philosophize this accurate imitation. It might be her nature without [1] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.211. [2] Sharh Nahjul Balagha vol.16 p.211.

(29)

any affectation or a special intent. It was not unlikely for she accustomed to imitating her father in sayings and doings. Or she might do that on purpose when she imitated the exact gait of her father to provoke the feelings of people and the sentiments of the public to get their minds back to the near past, to the holy reign of the Prophet and the smiling days, which they spent under the shadow of their great Prophet. By that she tried to soften their feelings and to pave the way for their hearts to accept her glaring invitation and to give some success to her desperate or semi-desperate try.

Hence you see that the narrator himself was moved by this case knowingly or unknowingly and that his affection prompted him to record accurately the gait of Fatima (s).
It was a blessed cry by Fatima that was looked after by the Heaven. It was, at its beginning, the point at which the slaughtered right was focused and the desperate try around which smiles of hope spread and then turned, after its end, to bitter gloom, rigid despair and surrender imposed by the people’s lives in those days.
Unlike the other revolutions, it was a revolution that the rebel did not want an immediate result for as much as to be recorded as a revolution by itself and to be mentioned by history in prominent lines. And it was! It expressed the intent completely with no defect. Indeed this was what happened that we think it succeeded even apparently it failed as we will explain later in one of the chapters of this book.