BY EBN HUSSEIN

Alhamdulillah, we have got a number of articles in regards to the refutation of the sick belief of the Rafidha named “the broken rib” i.e. their accusation that the Sahaba, particularly Abu Bakr, Omar, Abu Ubaydah Ibn Al-Jarrah etc. burned down the house of Fatimah, slapped her, broke her ribs, caused her miscarriage (killed her unborn son)  and other fabricated stories straight from Bollywood, pardon Rafidhiwood:

Wave of lies. Narrations on broken rib analysed.

Here another analysis

That article is absolutely unique for the English speaking audiance and a must-read, for it refutes every possible Shubha (doubt) and narration that the Rafidha quote from our books to prove “the broken rib” fairy-tale. In fact. In fact, we have already responded even to the narration they bring up in our analyses today, the difference is that this narration  might be considered Sahih (the only Sahih narration in regards to that incident!) so we decided that it is worth to dedicated this narration a detailed analyses, and trust us the result will be the absolute termination of Rafidhism, they will wish to never have brought up this narration in the first place. Alhamdulillah previous articles on the web in Arabic, then the translations into English have forced even Shia scholars (and some laymen) to reconsider their approach, they know that in this age it is not that easy to fool every Muslim layman i.e. the days where a Rafidhi could just throw a bunch of ultra-weak and fabricated Tarikh book narrations (“Sunni sources”) in the face of a Sunni layman are over.

So many of these lies have been responded to, that the Rafidha themselves realised that they can’t just use all the extremely weak and fabricated rubbish in some Tarikh books (and no, multiple lies don’t make a lie true i.e. weak/fabricated narrations with unknown and lying narrators don’t strenghten each other, these are basics of Ilm Al-Rijal). But there is one narration, in fact the only (!) authentic (although it’s authenticity can be disputed due to more than one reason) narration that speaks about the incident of Omar approaching Fatimah’s house, this has been narrated by Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah. Ahl Al-Sunnah, unlike the Ahl Al-Bida’ have nothing to hide, they have authenticated loads of narrations in favour of the Ahl Al-Bayt رضوان الله عليهم, they have weakened (!) loads of narrations in the virtue of Mu’awiyah رضي الله عنه and at the same time they have authenticated loads of narrations in the favour of the major Sahaba رضوان الله عليهم, especially the first four Caliphs رضوان الله عليهم so it is as Shaykh Al-Albani (RH) said:

“That which the People of Hadith are upon is to mention the facts whether they are in their favour or against them, as opposed to the people of desires, as Ibn Taymiyyah has mentioned many times in his refutations of them.” Ad-Da’eefah, Vol. 12/p. 551.

Hence know oh Muslim and Muslimah, may Allah have mercy upon you, that some Rafidha scholars are very well aware of the fact that the only narration worth to be considered a “proof” for the so called “incident of the burning house” is a narration by Ibn Abi Shaybah in his Musannaf. The likes of Yasser Al-Habib  for exampleadmitted that every single narration Shias (laymen and their stupid clergy) mention (Ibn Qutaybah) are extremely weak and forged according to Sunni standards i.e. they are no Hujjah (argument) in any academical dispute, but the Khabith (“Al-Habib”) and his likes see their chance (the straw they clinch to) in the narration of Ibn Abi Shaybah, but we assure you (that as usual) the following ruling can be applied on the Rawafidh:

هكذا أهل البدع لا يكادون يحتجون بحجة سمعية، ولا عقلية، إلا وهي عند التأمل حجة عليهم، لا لهم‏.الكتب » مجموع فتاوى ابن تيمية » العقيدة » كتاب الأسماء والصفات الجزء الثاني

[…] and this is how the people of innovation (Ahl Al-Bida’) are. They barely can argue with a textual or a rational proof, except that after examination (of their ‘evidence’) it turns out to be against them and not in their favour.”

(Majmoo’ Al-Fatawah of Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah, Aqeedah, the Book of the Names and Attributes part two)

As for the narration:

Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah was Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Shaybah, an ocean of knowledge, a Hadith master and a peer of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. In his Musannaf he states the event as follows:

حدّثنا محمد بن بشر، حدّثنا عبيد اللّه بن عمر، حدّثنا زيد بن أسلم، عن أبيه أسلم، انّه حين بويع لأبي بكر بعد رسول اللّه ـ صلَّى الله عليه وآله وسلَّم ـ كان علي والزبير يدخلان على فاطمة بنت رسول اللّه ـ صلَّى الله عليه وآله وسلَّم ـ فيشاورونها ويرتجعون في أمرهم، فلما بلغ ذلك عمر بن الخطاب خرج حتّى دخل على فاطمة، فقال:
يا بنت رسول اللّه ـ صلَّى الله عليه وآله وسلَّم ـ! واللّه ما من أحد أحبّ إلينا من أبيك، وما من أحد أحبّ إلينا بعد أبيك منك، وأيم اللّه ما ذاك بمانعي إن اجتمع هؤلاء النفر عندك، إن أمرتهم أن يحرق عليهم البيت، قال: فلما خرج عمر جاءوها، فقالت: تعلمون أنّ عمر
قد جاءني وقد حلف باللّه لئن عدتم ليحرقن عليكم البيت، وأيم اللّه ليمضين لما حلف عليه، فانصرفوا راشدين، فَرَوا رأيكم ولا ترجعوا إلي، فانصرفوا عنها فلم يرجعوا إليها حتّى بايعوا لأبي بكر

أخرجه أحمد في “فضائل الصحابة” (1/364) وابن أبي شيبة في “المصنف” (7/432) وعنه ابن أبي عاصم في “المذكر والتذكير” (1/91) ورواه ابن عبد البر في “الاستيعاب” (3/975) من طريق البزار – ولم أجده في كتب البزار المطبوعة – وأخرجه الخطيب في “تاريخ بغداد” (6/75) مختصرا : كلهم من طريق محمد بن بشر ثنا عبيد الله بن عمر عن زيد بن أسلم عن أبيه به .

قلت : وهذا إسناد صحيح ، فإن محمد بن بشر العبدي (203هـ) ثقة حافظ من رجال الكتب الستة، وكذا عبيد الله بن عمر العمري المتوفى سنة مائة وبضع وأربعون ، وكذا زيد بن أسلم مولى عمر بن الخطاب (136هـ)، وكذا أبوه أسلم مولى عمر ، جاء في ترجمته في “تهذيب التهذيب” (1/266) أنه أدرك زمان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ، إلا أنه لم يكن في المدينة في وقت أحداث البيعة ، لأن محمد بن إسحاق قال : بعث أبو بكر عمر سنة إحدى عشرة ، فأقام للناس الحج ، وابتاع فيها أسلم مولاه . فيكون الحديث بذلك مرسلا ، إلا أن الغالب أن أسلم سمع القصة من عمر بن الخطاب أو غيره من الصحابة الذين عاشوا تلك الحادثة .

– Muhammad ibn Bishr from Ubaydallah Ibn Omar from Zayd ibn Aslam from his father Aslam the Mawla of Omar.
When Abu Bakr received the pledges of allegiance after the Messenger of Allah, Ali and Al-Zubayr used to enter the presence of Fatima the daughter of the Messenger of Allah and consult with her and hesitate in their allegiance. When news of this reached Omar ibn Al-Khattab, he came out until he entered Fatima’s presence and said: “Daughter of the Messenger of Allah, none in all creation was more dearly beloved to me than your father, and none is more beloved to us after him than you. However, by Allah, this shall not prevent me, if that group gathers in your house, to order that their door be set afire!”  When Omar went out, they came and she said: “Do you know that Omar came to me and swore by Allah that if you were to come back, he shall surely burn the door with you inside! By Allah, he shall certainly fulfill what he swore, so go away in peace (literally: Go away as RASHIDEEN!), flee from your opinion, and do not come back to see me.” They left her and did not return to see her until they pledged their allegiance to Abu Bakr.”

Source: Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah 7/432.

Islamqa.info (under the supervision Shaykh Al-Munajjid) grading:

I say: This Isnad (chain of Hadith) is SAHIH, this is due to Muhammad Ibn Bishr Al-Abdi (203 AH) is THIQAH HAFIDH of the narrators of the six books (“Al-Kuttub Al-Sittah”), so is Ubaydallah Ibn Omar Al-Omri, so is Zayd Ibn Aslam the Mawla (client) of Omar Ibn Al-Khattab (136 AH), so is HIS FATHER Aslam the Mawla of Omar and his TARJAMAH has been mentioned in “Tahdheeb Al-Tahdheeb” (1/266) that he has witnessed the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), except that he wasn’t present in Madinah during the time of the Bay’ah (pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr Khalifatul-Rasulullah), this is because Muhammad Ibn Ishaaq says: “Abu Bakr sent Omar to lead the Hajj in the year 11AH where he (Omar) bought Aslam, that is why the Hadith is Mursal, but as to Aslam, then whatever he narrates is what he heard from Omar Ibn Al-Khattab or other Sahaba who lived during the time the incident occured.

Now before we start analysing the narration in the Musannaf of Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah, let us quote some narrations that the Rafidha don’t like to mention in their foul game of “Hadith picking” (picking and chosing what suits their desires), for the following narrations perfectly explain the narration above, in terms of the how the Bay’ah (pledge of allegiance) was finally given to the Siddiq of this Ummah:

وقد جاء في بعض الروايات القوية أيضا أنه حصلت بعض المنازعات بين عمر بن الخطاب ومن معه ، وبين الزبير بن العوام الذي كان مع علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه ، وذلك في بيت فاطمة رضي الله عنها ، إلا أن الله سبحانه وتعالى وقاهم فتنة الشيطان ، ودرأ عنهم الشقاق والنزاع .
روى إبراهيم بن عبد الرحمن بن عوف : ( أن عبد الرحمن بن عوف كان مع عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه ، وأن محمد بن مسلمة كسر سيف الزبير ، ثم قام أبو بكر فخطب الناس واعتذر إليهم وقال : والله ما كنت حريصا على الإمارة يوما ولا ليلة قط ، ولا كنت فيها راغبا ، ولا سألتها الله عز وجل في سر وعلانية ، ولكني أشفقت من الفتنة ، وما لي في الإمارة من راحة ، ولكن قُلِّدتُ أمرا عظيما ما لي به من طاقة ولا يد إلا بتقوية الله عز وجل ، ولوددت أن أقوى الناس عليها مكاني اليوم . فقبل المهاجرون منه ما قال وما اعتذر به .
قال علي رضي الله عنه والزبير : ما غضبنا إلا لأنا قد أُخِّرنا عن المشاورة ، وإنا نرى أبا بكر أحق الناس بها بعد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ، إنه لصاحب الغار وثاني اثنين ، وإنا لَنعلم بشرفه وكبره ، ولقد أمره رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بالصلاة بالناس وهو حي )
أخرجه موسى بن عقبة في “المغازي” – كما ذكره ابن كثير في “البداية والنهاية” (6/302) – ومن طريقه الحاكم في “المستدرك” (3/70) ، وعنه البيهقي في “السنن الكبرى” (8/152) ، وعنه ابن عساكر في “تاريخ دمشق” (30/287)
قلت : وإسناد هذه القصة صحيح ، على شرط البخاري ، فهو من طريق إبراهيم بن المنذر الحزامي ثنا محمد بن فليح عن موسى بن عقبة عن سعد بن إبراهيم بن عبد الرحمن بن عوف عن إبراهيم بن عبد الرحمن بن عوف به .
قال الحاكم : ” هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين ولم يخرجاه ” انتهى .
وقال الذهبي في “التلخيص” : ” على شرط البخاري ومسلم ” انتهى .
وقال ابن كثير في “البداية والنهاية” (5/250) : ” إسناد جيد ” انتهى ..

“Ibrahim the son of Abdul-Rahman Ibn Awf narrated to us that (his father) Abdul-Rahman Ibn Awf was with Omar Ibn Al-Khattab when Mohammad Ibn Maslamah broke the swod of Al-Zubayr, then Abu Bakr started his speech and apologised to the people and said: “By Allah, I was never cared about leadership, nor did I want it, nor did I ask Allah for it privately or publicly, but I feared fitna. There is no time to rest as a leader, and I have taken upon myself such a heavy duty only with the power of Allah. If only the strongest was in my place today.

Ali [Ibn Abi Talib] and Al-Zubair said: We were not angered by anything except that we weren’t brought into this discussion (Mashawirah/Shurah) sooner. We see Abu Bakr as the most rightful after the Prophet (pbuh) and that he is the companion in the cave, and the second of two, and we know of his status and greatness, and the Prophet (pbuh) had him lead prayer while he was alive.”

Source: Al-Hakim said in his Al Mustadrak 3/70. 4422: Sahih according to the conditions of the Shaykhayn, but they did not narrated it.  Al-Dhahabi agreed with Al-Hakim in his “Al-Talkhis” and Ibn Kathir in his Al Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Vol 5 said: “It’s chain is authentic, walillahi Al-Hamdu wal-Minnah. Musa Ibn Uqba narrated it in his “Al-Maghazi” as mentioned by Ibn Kathir in his “Al-Bidaya ….”. Al-Bayhaqi narrated it in his “Sunan Al-Kubra” (8/152) and also Ibn Asakir in his “Tarikh Al-Dimashq” (30/287).

قال ابن كثير في البداية والنهاية (6\693 ط. دار المعرفة، بيروت) في أحداث سنة 11: وقد اتفق الصحابة –رضي الله عنهم– على بيعة الصديق في ذلك الوقت حتى علي بن أبي طالب والزبير بن العوام –رضي الله عنهما–. والدليل على ذلك ما رواه البيهقي حيث قال:

Ibn Kathir says in Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah (693/6): “The Companions – may Allah be pleased with them – finally agreed with the Pledge of Allegiance to Abu Bakr at that time (After Saqifah, at Saad’s House), even Ali Ibn Abi Talib and Al-Zubayr Al-Awwam – may Allah be pleased with both of them. The proof for that, is what Al-Bayhaqi narrated:

في سنن البيهقي الكبرى (8\143): حدثنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ (الحاكم صاحب المستدرك) إملاءً، وأبو محمد بن أبي حامد المقري قراءة عليه، قالا: ثنا أبو العباس محمد بن يعقوب (جيد) ثنا جعفر بن محمد بن شاكر (ثقة ثبت) ثنا عفان بن مسلم (ثقة ثبت) ثنا وهيب (ثقة ثبت) ثنا داود بن أبي هند (ثقة ثبت) ثنا أبو نضرة (العبدي، ثقة) عن أبي سعيد الخدري (ر) قال: لما توفي رسول الله (ص)، قام خطباء الأنصار (في دار سعد بن عبادة)، فجعل الرجل منهم يقول: «يا معشر المهاجرين، إن رسول الله (ص) كان إذا استعمل رجُلاً منكم قَرَنَ معَهُ رجلاً مِنّا. فنرى أن يلي هذا الأمر رجلان: أحدهما منكم، والآخر منا». فتتابعت خطباء الأنصار على ذلك. فقام زيد بن ثابت (ر) فقال: «إن رسول الله (ص) كان من المهاجرين. وإن الإمام يكون من المهاجرين. ونحن أنصاره كما كنا أنصار رسول الله (ص)». فقام أبو بكر (ر) فقال: «جزاكم الله خيراً يا معشر الأنصار، وثبّتَ قائِلَكُم». ثم قال: «أما لو ذلك لما صالحناكم». ثم أخذ زيد بن ثابت (وفي البداية والنهاية عمر بن الخطاب) بيد أبي بكر فقال: «هذا صاحبكم فبايعوه». ثم انطلقوا، فلما قعد أبو بكر (ر) على المنبر، نظر في وجوه القوم فلم ير علياً (ر). فسأل عنه فقام ناسٌ من الأنصار، فأتوا به. فقال أبو بكر (ر): «ابن عم رسول الله (ص) وختنه، أردتَ أن تشُقّ عصا المسلمين؟». فقال: «لا تثريب يا خليفة رسول الله (ص)». فبايعه. ثم لم ير الزبير بن العوام (ر). فسأل عنه، حتى جاءوا به. فقال: «ابن عمة رسول الله (ص) وحواريه، أردت أن تشق عصا المسلمين؟». فقال مثل قوله: «لا تثريب يا خليفة رسول الله». فبايعاه.

قال البيهقي: أخبرنا أبو الحسن علي بن محمد بن علي الحافظ الإسفرائيني ثنا أبو علي الحسين بن علي الحافظ أنبأ أبو بكر محمد بن إسحاق بن خزيمة (إمام الأئمة) وإبراهيم بن أبي طالب، قالا: ثنا بندار بن بشار (ثقة) ثنا أبو هشام المخزومي (ثقة ثبت) ثنا وهيب (ثقة ثبت) ثم فذكره بنحوه. قال أبو علي الحافظ: سمعت محمد بن إسحاق بن خزيمة يقول: جاءني مسلم بن الحجاج (الإمام صاحب الصحيح) فسألني عن هذا الحديث، فكتبته له في رقعة، وقرأت عليه. فقال: «هذا حديثٌ يسوي بدنة». فقلت: «يسوي بدنة؟ بل هو يسوي بدرة».وهذا يدل كذلك على أنه في الجزء المفقود من صحيح ابن خزيمة. والحديث أخرجه الحاكم في المستدرك على الصحيحين (3\80) وقال: «هذا حديثٌ صحيحٌ على شرط الشيخين ولم يخرجاه»، وهو كما قال. وأخرجه أحمد في مسنده (5\185) مختصراً. وقال مقبل بن هادي الوادعي في تعليقته على المستدرك: (صوابه على شرط مسلم، فالبخاري لم يخرج لأبي نضرة، وهو المنذر بن مالك إلا تعليقاً، كما في تهذيب التهذيب) ، انظر: المستدرك بتعليق الواعي: ج3، ص86 ، دار الحرمين للطباعة والنشر والتوزيع.

[…] on the authority of Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri who said:

“When the Messenger of Allah had died (his companions convened at the house of Saad Ibn Ubadah, AFTER THE SAQIFAH INCIDENT) the speakers of the Ansar stood up and one of them was appointed (as a spokesman) and said: O men of the Ansar, verily when the Messenger of Allah appointed a man from among you, he joined him with a man from among us. We see that this matter [Caliphate] should be given to two men, to one of you and one of us. The speakers of the Ansar followed them in that, hence Zayd Ibn Thabit [from the Muhajir Sahabah] stood up and said: Verily, the Messenger of Allah was from the Muhajireen, and the Imam must be from the Muhajireen, and we are going to be his supporters, just like we were the supporters of the Messenger of Allah. Abu Bakr thereupon stood up and said: May Allah reward you with goodness and keep you steadfast in your word, O’ men of the Ansar.

Zayd Ibn Thabit (and in the version of Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Omar Ibn Khattab) grabbed the hand of Abu Bakr and said: “This is your master, give him your pledge of obedience”. The Ansar and Muhajir Sahabah pledged the allegiance to Abu Bakr and set off. Abu Bakr mounted the platform (Minbar) and looked at the faces of the attendants and couldn’t see Ali amongst the people. He asked about him, then some of of the Ansar went and came back with him (Ali). Abu Bakr asked him: “O cousin of Allah’s Messenger and his son in law. Do you want to split the cause of the Muslims?  Ali said: “Don’t rebuke, o Caliph of the Messenger of Allah*!” Thereupon he gave his pledge to Abu Bakr”. Abu Bakr also couldn’t see Al-Zubayr Al-Awwam. So he asked for him until they came back with him. When Al-Zubayr arrived, Abu Bakr asked him: O cousin of Allah’s Messenger and his Hawari (close disciple, a title givin to him by Rasulullah). Do you want to split the cause of the Muslims? Al-Zubayr said: “Don’t rebuke, o Caliph of the Messenger of Allah!”  Thereupon he gave his pledge to Abu Bakr.”

*Caliph of the Messenger of Allah (Khalifatul-Rasulillah) is a title only given to Abu bakr (!), all other Khulafa’, even Ali were called “Chief of the Believers” (Amir Al-Mu’minin). This is the utmost form of respect and admission Ali could have shown to Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with them both.

Source: by Al-Bayhaqi who said: “[…] Abu Ali Al-Hafidh said: I heard Mohammad Ibn Ishaq Ibn KHUZAYMAH (Imam of the Imams) saying: “Muslim Ibn Al-Hajjaj (Imam Muslim!) entered upon me and asked me about this Hadith, so I wrote it down for him and read it. He said: “This Hadith is worth a Badnah (precious camel).” I said: “A Badnah? Rather it is worth a Badrah (a Badrah is a bag with 10.000 Dinar!)”.  The Hadith was also narrated by Al-Hakim in his Al-Mustadrak  ‘alaa Al-Sahihayn (80/3) and he said: “This Hadith is Sahih according to the conditions of the Shaykhayn who did not narrate it.” It is as he said and it was also narrated by Ahmad (185/5) and in Mujama’a Al-Zawa’ed (5/183), Rijal are people of Saheeh. Al Bidayah wal Nihayah (5/281), chain thabit and saheeh and in al Sunan al Kubrah (8/143) with two SAHIH chains. Also in “Tarikh Al-Islam” by Al-Dhahabi.

More evidence that Ali was finally pleased with Abu Bakr’s Khilafah and gave the pledge of alliance based on the fact that he believed in the superiority and worthiness of Abu Bakr for the Cliphate

Before the Rafidha repeat the old repeated and boring tape of: “Ali was forced and only pledged allegiance to avoid disunity, he saved Islam, blah, blah” let us provide you with the following (although the narrations above are enough for they too clearly state that Ali believed that Abu Bakr is superior to him, worthy of being the Caliph etc.)

Imam Abdullah ibn Ahmad narrated in his “Sunnan” (2/563) via trustworthy narrators:

Narrated Qays bin al Abdi: I Witnesses the sermon of Ali on the day of Basrah, he said: ” He praised Allah and thanked him and he mentioned the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala Aalihi wa sallam) and his sacrifice to the people, then Allah swt took his soul. (After he said that) then the Muslims saw that they should give the Caliphate to Abu Bakr (RA) so they pledged their allegiance and made their promise of loyalty, and I gave my pledge and I promised him my loyalty, They were pleased and so was I. He (Abu Bakr) did good deeds and made Jihad until Allah took his soul may Allah have mercy on him.”

Shia-Mu’tazilite source:

قول أبو الحسن على بن أبى طالب ” و إنا نرى أبا بكر أحق الناس بها , إنه لصاحب الغار و ثاني أثنين , و إنا لنعرف له سنه , و لقد أمره رسول الله بالصلاة و هو حي ” شرح النهج لابن أبى الحديد 1/332

Ali ibn Abi Talib said to Zubair: “(Although) we got angry momentarily at the time of consultation (i.e. Saqifah), we can now see that Abu Bakr is the most deserving of the Caliphate: He was the companion of the Messenger of Allah in the cave. We know of his life and we know that the Messenger of Allah had ordered him to lead the prayers.” And then he (Ali) gave his Baya’ah (to Abu Bakr).

(Sharh Nahjul-Balagha; Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed; Vol.1, p.132)

more sources:

…Ali came to Abu Bakr and said: “I don’t refuse to admit that your virtues entitle you to the Caliphate. My sole complaint is that we are the close relatives of the Prophet, (so) why did you then take Baya’ah at Saqifah Banu Sa’idah without consulting us? Had you called us there, we would have taken Baya’ah at your hand ahead of everyone.”

Abu Bakr said in reply: “To treat the relatives of the Prophet well is dearer and more desirable to me than to do so for my own relatives. I went to Saqifah Banu Sa’idah not for the taking of Baya’ah but for putting an end to the dispute…I did not seek their support (for Caliphate). Rather, they took their oath of allegiance to me on their own…Had I delayed the matter, it would have posed a greater danger to the unity, integrity, and solidarity of Islam. How could I send for you when there was no time?”

Ali listened with rapt attention to what Abu Bakr Siddiq said and withdrew his complaint gracefully. The next day, he (Ali) pronounced his allegiance to Abu Bakr before a large congregation in the Prophet’s Mosque.

Source: Tareekh al-Islam, Vol.1, pp.275-276

In another account, Abu Bakr said:

“Never for a moment was I eager for authority (imara) nor did I want it or pray to Allah for it secretly or publically. But I was afraid of disorder. I take no pleasure in authority. I have been invested with a grave matter for which I have not the strength and can only hope (to) cope with it if Allah gives me the strength. I would (only wish) that he who has the most strength for it were in my place.”

Source: Seerah of Musa ibn Uqba

To which Ali said:

“We were angry only because we were not admitted to the council and we think that Abu Bakr is the most worthy of supreme authority now that the apostle is dead. He was the one with the apostle in the cave and we recognize his dignity and seniority; and the apostle put him in charge of the prayers while he was still with us.”

Source: Seerah of Musa ibn Uqba

Last Shubha (doubt) the Rafidha can bring up is the Hadith in Al-Bukhari, where Aisha reported that Ali did not give Bay’ah for six months, that too has been answered:

———————————————

So far we can conclude:

1. Ali and Al-Zubayr were upset for not being consulted in the Shura at Saqifah

2. Ali (and Al-Zubayr) never claimed that something was “usurped” from them, let alone the alien Rafidhi concept of “Wilayah/Imamah”. They did not do Taqiyyah, hence they openly (at first) expressed their sorrow, but in  the end of the day (after Abu Bakr explained WHY he  had to rush to Saqifah) Ali and Al-Zubayr were pleased and acknowledges in public Abu Bakr’s superiority and his right of being the Khalifah of Rasulullah.

3. Ali never made any Taqiyyah whatsoever, even years after Saqifah he publically praised Abu Bakr and Omar (in undisputed, irrefutable Sahih+Mutawatir (mass narrated!) narrations.

4. Based on the aforementioned points and evidences no one can seriously claim that Ali was forced to give the pledge or that he gave the pledge merely for the sake of keeping unity in the Ummah.

As for the Rafidhi methodoligy in this regards, then no one can put it better than Shaykh Al-Islam:

وأمثال هذه الأكاذيب التي يعلم من له أدنى علم ومعرفة أنها كذب ، فهم دائما يعمدون إلى الأمور المعلومة المتواترة ينكرونها ، وإلى الأمور المعدومة التي لا حقيقة لها يثبتونها ، فلهم أوفر نصيب من قوله تعالى ( وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَى عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِباً أَوْ كَذَّبَ بِالْحَقِّ ) العنكبوت: من الآية68 ، فهم يفترون الكذب ، ويكذبون بالحق ، وهذا حال المرتدين
منهاج السنة النبوية ” 4 / 493.

[…] and such lies are known to be lies to everyone who possesses the slightest amount of knowledge and understanding, yet they [the Rafidha] delibaretely reject KNOWN [authentic] and MASS narrated facts, while at the same time they affirm any sort of falsehood, hence the following verse applies to them: وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَى عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِباً أَوْ كَذَّبَ بِالْحَقِّ – العنكبوت: من الآية And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allâh or denies the truth, when it comes to him? Is there not a dwelling in Hell for disbelievers?(Al-Ankaboot/68). So they invent lies, deny the truth and this is in fact the state of the apostates.

Source: Minhaj Al-Sunnah 493 /4

Indeed, there are tons of MUTAWATIR narrations, proving the superiority of the Master Abu Bakr over Ali Ibn Abi Talib, the Iman of Omar (the final verdict of Ali on Omar AFTER Omar’s death!) etc. yet the Rafidha go and dig for any weak and extremely disputed text, even text that in essence is not in their favour, just with the aim of making Takfir on the Sahaba.

Back to the Ibn Abi Shaybah narration – the Analyses

– Muhammad ibn Bishr from Ubaydallah Ibn Omar from Zayd ibn Aslam from his father Aslam the Mawla of Omar.
When Abu Bakr received the pledges of allegiance after the Messenger of Allah, Ali and Al-Zubayr used to enter the presence of Fatima the daughter of the Messenger of Allah and consult with her and hesitate in their allegiance. When news of this reached Omar ibn Al-Khattab, he came out until he entered Fatima’s presence and said: “Daughter of the Messenger of Allah, none in all creation was more dearly beloved to me than your father, and none is more beloved to us after him than you. However, by Allah, this shall not prevent me, if that group gathers in your house, to order that their door be set afire!”  When Omar went out, they came and she said: “Do you know that Omar came to me and swore by Allah that if you were to come back, he shall surely burn the door with you inside! By Allah, he shall certainly fulfill what he swore, so go away in peace, flee from your opinion, and do not come back to see me.” They left her and did not return to see her until they pledged their allegiance to Abu Bakr.”

Source: Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah 7/432.

Ponder over the following points:

1.  There is a difference of opinion in regards to the authenticity of this narration, some graded it Sahih, some deem it Mursal (disconnected), in any case it is not in the favour of the Rafidha, little they know. Actually accepting this narration should be the option of every Muslim.
2. This narration is a virtue for Omar (RA)
3. Because Omar placed the love of Fatima (RA) right after the love of her father (peace be upon him.
4. Also because Omar would not tolerate or go easy on any man who may cause a division and threaten the unity. This is the Sunnah of the Prophet (the Prophet even threatened to burn down the houses of those who intentionally do not attend the Masjid for no valid reason. Ali also threatened the one who causes the slightest form of disunity in Nahj Al-Balagha. The Prophet said: “Certainly I decided to order the Mu’adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses.” (Bukhari and Muslim)He also threatened to cut the hand of Fatima if she stole:( أما بعد ، فإنما أهلك الناس قبلكم : أنهم كانوا إذا سرق فيهم الشريف تركوه ، وإذا سرق فيهم الضعيف أقاموا عليه الحد ، والذي نفس محمد بيده ، لو أن فاطمة بنت محمد سرقت لقطعت يدها ) Authenticated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim. We hope Rawafidh want suggest that this makes him unjust, ill-mannered, and psychotic.Even the Prophet would be punished by Allah if he were to fabricate against Allah (swt): 69:44 – 47And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us, We assuredly had taken him by the right hand And then severed his life-artery, And not one of you could have held Us off from him.This is supported by the view of Al-Tabtaba’ee as well:والمعنى: { ولو تقوَّل علينا } هذا الرسول الكريم الذي حمَّلناه رسالتنا وأرسلناه إليكم بقرآن نزَّلناه فيؤخذ بيده أو المراد قطعنا منه يده اليمنى أو المراد لانتقمنا منه بالقوة كما في رواية القمي { ثم لقطعنا منه الوتين } وقتلناه لتقوُّله علينا { فما منكم من أحد عنه حاجزين } تحجبونه عنا وتنجونه من عقوبتنا وإهلاكنا.وهذا تهديد للنبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم على تقدير أن يفتري على الله كذباً وينسب إليه شيئاً لم يقله وهو رسول من عنده أكرمه بنبوّته واختاره لرسالته.and there are other Sahih narrations:Rasulullah صل الله عليه و على آله و سلم  says: “The one to whom allegiance is sworn first has a supremacy over the others” (Muslim) . In fact, “When oath of allegiance has been taken for two KhalIfas, kill the one for whom the oath was taken later” (Muslim)
5. The house was never burned (a Shia fairy-tale)
6. Fatima (RA) was never beat, let alone her ribs being broken (a Shia fairy-tale)
7. Mohsin, the unborn son of Fatimah was not killed, Rafidha claim (lots of contradicting fabricated narrations, even in their books) that a number of Sahaba broke her ribs and caused her miscarriage. Nothing but a lie, according to this SAHIH narration.
8. Omar did not even threat Fatimah, it was Fatimah herself, according to her own words who understood that she has been excluded from Omar’s threat, this is because she was an Arab (not like the Rafidha Majoos) who understood Arabic and hence she understood that Omar’s concern was Ali and Al-Zubayr only. In fact every Arab speaker will realise it, but since the Rafidha clergy is made up mainly by non-Arabs who are extremely weak in Arabic, then one can’t expect much from their followers who either due to ignorance or blatant mistranslations don’t realise/mention that Omar said the following to Fatimah: إن أمرتهم أن يحرق عليهم البيت (Yet I swear by God that it won’t stop me from gathering these people and commanding them to burn this house down on them.). As you can see, it is ‘alayhim’ i.e. ON THEM. Omar due to his love for Fatimah عليها السلام right from the very beginning EXCLUDED her from this Fitna and threat as much as he could, and the rest of the narration (which the Rafidha in many cases distort, by cutting out what is against their cult and desires) will prove that Fatimah not just understood Omar well (i.e. she not being threatened AT ALL) rather she AGREED WITH HIM. The narration goes on saying: […] So when ‘Omar left they – Ali and Zubair – came so she told them: “Do you know that ‘Omar came to me and swore by Allah that if you returned he would burn the house on you? […] As you can see my Muslim brother and sister, may Allah have mercy upon you, Fatimah understood Omar very well, she understood that ‘Omar never threatened her, she understood that she’s not the concern AT all, also she understood that it is her hustband and Al-Zubayr who with their DELAY of their pledge were causing problems, hence she said that Omar threatened to burn the house on them.
9. The last part is actually the part that pulverises Rafidism completely, hence you find Rafidha scholars simply OMITTING the last part, the most CRUCIAL part of the narration, for it refutes their ENTIRE sect:
   […] By Allah he would fulfill what he promised so be men of wisdom and FLEE FROM YOUR OPINION and never come back (until you have given Bay’ah).” So they never returned until they gave Abu Bakr the Baya’ah. Source: Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah 7/432. This proves that Fatimah shared Omars view, in fact she WARNED Ali and Zubayr (who according to other Sahih sources did delay the Bay’ah and finally gave the Bay’ah, as proven before) to FLEE from their OPINION. This is indeed the most beautiful part of the narration, proving that Fatimah was a Bakriyyah (Abu Bakr follower) even before her husband. She being upset LATER because of Fadak is a whole other issue, for she never renounced the authority of Abu Bakr (hence she went to him in the first place!). Ali gave Bay’ah, so another Shia lie is exposed (that he never gave Bay’ah).

CONCLUSION:

Abu Bakr (ra) and the Sahaba were done in Saqifa, then they went to give the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr (ra) in public, everyone gave it but when Abu Bakr (ra) looked he never found al-Zubair (ra) and `Ali (ra), he called on them, Omar (ra) went to call on them, he learned that they were meeting in Fatima’ (ra) house and did not attend the Bay`ah, he was angry and went to the house (Then this narration happened), after this Fatima (ra) told al-Zubair (ra) and `Ali (ra) to go give the pledge when they returned, they went and gave it and admitted the superiority and worthiness of Abu Bakr (ra) and said they were only late and upest because they were angry that they weren’t consulted in Saqifa, Abu Bakr (ra) explained to them how things went, and this is what made them happy, otherwise Ali (and even Al-Zubayr) would have never given the Bay’ah, they were not Taqiyyah-mongering cowards as the Rafidha potray them (rather him i.e. Ali, since Al-Zubayr just as 99% of the Sahaba is a Kafir to the Mushrik Rawafidh anyway).

And as you can see, every Muslim should accept the narration (those who weaken it have no strong arguments in our opinion) with open arms, to Rawafidh one could say:

Congratulations for finding a narration that blows up the Rafidhi house burning/rip breaking/cheek slapping/unborn child killing myth and confirms the direct Bay’ah of Ali and the support of Fatimah for Abu Bakr’s Khilafah. Hang it up over your bed, this really should be framed in gold:

To finish this off, let us now make a Hujjah upon the Rawafidh from their own books, precisely the Bible of Rafidhism, the sanad-less “Nahj Al-Balaghah”:

 أغزوهم قبل أن يغزوكم فو اللّه ما غزى قوم فى عقر دارهم إلاّ ذلّوا فتوا كلتم

Translation:

Ali said: “Attack them before they attack you, for by Allah, no people have been attacked in the HEARTS OF THEIR HOUSES but they suffered DISGRACE”!

Our comment: True words, ya Aba Turab, may Allah have mercy upon you. But unfortunately this is how the (so called Shia/followers/supporters) pagan, polytheist Rafidha Ummah potray Omar and Ali in their religious Hindu-like ceremonies:

Must-Read: Omar’s poodle Ali Ibn Abi Talib – It’s a Rafidhi’s world

Shia answer and our rebuttal:

This is a Farsi (Persian) run website, by “Ayatullah Hussein Qazwini” (he is being called the “Shaykh Al-Mufid of our age”, for his knowledge in refuting Sunnis, so say his blind-followers), a Rafidhi “Ayatullah” residing in Qom. He was confronted by rebuttals of Sunnis in regards to our analysed Ibn Abi Shaybah narration, that he too likes to use. Here the link:

بررسي روايت ابن أبي شيبه و تهديد عمر به آتش زدن خانه فاطمه

We will analyse their “rebuttal” so you can be a judge and see how insincere and ignorant their “top” scholars are.

Valiasr-aj website by “Ayatullah” Qazwini:

انياً: با توجه به جدى بودن تهديد، حضرت فاطمه سلام الله عليها براى جلوگيرى از آتش زدن خانه و از بين رفتن فرزندان پيامبر به آنان گوشزد مى‌كند كه ديگر اين جا نياييد

It says that Fatimah took it serious because Omar was about to KILL her SONS (Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein). The two are not even mentioned in the narration, also Omar EXCLUDED Fatimah from his threat, so on where did the confused Rafidhi included her sons into the narration?

ثالثاً: عبارت «فلم يرجعوا إليها حتى بايعوا لا بى ‌بکر» دروغ محض است كه توسط ايادى بنى اميه به حديث افزوده شده است تا ثابت كنند كه تهديد عملى نشده است با اين كه در صحيح بخارى و مسلم با صراحت آمده است كه حضرت علي عليه السلام تا شش ماه با ابوبكر بيعت نكرد

He says that the last part of the narration i.e. where Fatimah tells Ali and Al-Zubayr to go away, to flee from their opinion and NOT TO COME back except in the state of having given Bay’ah to Abu Bakr, is a Umavid (Bani Umayyah) invention. This is not an academical approach, you can’t use a Hadith of your opponent (which is indeed a Hujjah/argument) and then decide which part of it you like and which part you don’t. The opponent will either accept the complete narration or he will reject it, in any case, it is not for the biased Shia scholar to first point to our narrations, and then to tell us what part of the very narration is good and not good according to him. In fact, whatever opposes their desire i.e. Rafidhi Madhab, must be a “Umawid” invention and what they DO like is not a Bani Umayyah invention. He even claims (WITH NO EVIDENCES WHATSOEVER) that the beginning of the narration where Omar expresses his love and respect towards Fatimah is a “Bani Umayyah'”fabrication:

بررسي شبهات دلالي روايت:

شبهه اول (جايگاه فاطمه (س) نزد خليفه دوم:

در روايت آمده است که عمر پيش از هر گونه اقدامى شخصاً نزد فاطمه رفت و مقام و منزلت او را چنين بيان فرمود:
«اى فاطمه! به خدا قسم هيچ کسى نزد ما محبوبتر از پدر گرامى ات نيست، و به خدا قسم هيچ کس پس از پدر بزرگوارت نزد ما محبوبتر از شما نيست ».
عملکرد عمر و بيان منزلت دختر گرامى رسول اکرم (صلى الله عليه وسلم) نشانگر احترام و محبت او به اهل بيت رسول اکرم (صلى الله عليه وآله) مى‌‌باشد.
پاسخ:

1. اين عبارات به ظاهر توسط ايادى بنى اميه به روايت افزوده شده تا عمل خليفه را موجه جلوه دهند؛ ولى به هر حال نتوانسته‌اند موضوع هجوم به خانه وتهديد به آتش زدن خانه فاطمه را انكار كنند، و دموکراسى افسانه‌اى بيعت ابوبکر را به نمايش بگذارند!!

Seriously, this is the level of argumentation of a child. We are discussing the Deen of Allah, yet we see their “Ayatullahs” as usual playing with narrations, hiding narrations, picking and chosing and now even CUTTING the narrations in parts they like US to believe in. What’s next? Remember, this “Ayatullah” run website is a so called “Researchcentre” (‘Vali-e-Asr’) run by Ayatullah Qazwini and his best students, a bunch of Shia clerics. It’s (narration/s) like a soup they like but also don’t like, they fish out what they don’t like and simply say: THAT’S AN UMAVID FABRICATION!

Point is the narration is solid, either you accept all of it or leave all of it. They boldly claim that parts of it MUST BEE a Bani Umayyah fabrication because Bukhari and Muslim reported that Ali delayed his Bay’ah for six month. Little they know:

Ali bin Abi Talib (Allaah is well-pleased with him) firmly believed in the SUPERIORITY of Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (Allaah is well-pleased with him) and gave him the Bay’ah. – INCLUDING AN EXPLANATION OF WHY OUR MOTHER AISHA A P P A R E N T L Y reported that Ali delayed his pledge.

Finally they have the audicaty to state the following:

ما اصلا فرض را بر اين مى‌گيريم كه طبق اين روايت نمى‌توان هجوم به خانه و آتش زدن آن را ثابت كرد؛
(Let’s say for the sake of argument that this narration does NOT proof that the house was burned down …)

“For the sake of argument”? They are being delirious, for it is a fact according to the narration itself i.e. NOTHING burned down, and NOBODY had been touched, in fact it proves that Fatimah DISAGREED with the delay of Al-Zubay and Ali, as we said she was a Bakriyyah, رضي الله عنها, just like her husband and Al-Zubayr.
This “refutation” is one of the most desperate attempts we have ever seen in my life. They raped the narration, crippled it, took what they like, rejected what they don’t, just for the sake of saving their ugly faces and keeping the fariy tale of the “broken rip of Fatimah” alive, a tool to fool and stir up the emotions of their braindead followers, who believe in this lowlife, filthy and useless version of Ali (Allah is well pleased with him):