18. Eighteenth objection
He says: A tradition, which he – Allamah Hilli – has narrated from the
Prophet that Fatima remained absolutely chaste, therefore Almighty Allah
prohibited Fire from her and her children. According to consensus of tradition
experts, it is false. And it being false will now become clear for others as well.
The statement that Fatima remained absolutely chaste, therefore Almighty Allah
prohibited Fire from her and her children, is absolutely invalid, because Sarah
was also chaste, but God did not prohibit fire from all her sons; in the same way,
Safiya, aunt of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), in spite of her chastity had
children some of whom were righteous and some were unjust.
Thus, there are innumerable ladies, who are chaste and their number is
known to God only; and some of their sons are righteous and some sinners; some
believers and some disbelievers; thus precedence of Fatima is not due to her
chastity, because she is same as other believer ladies.1
Reply to the eighteenth objection
It is amazing that this man thinks that he can have consensus on his
inclination and intention to particular verse or tradition, or an issue or a belief and
as if he commands the academic society to have consensus, the dead and the
living would also immediately say here we are (Labbaik! Labbaik!) and have
consensus and at that time he would reason through his consensus! By God, if
man would not have been prohibited from making false statements, this man
would not have said anything more than what he has said.
Alas, if I only knew how it is possible to believe in the invalidity of a
tradition, on whose reliability many scholars, like Hakeem, Khatib Baghdadi,
Bazzaz, Abu Yaala, Aqili, Tibrani, Ibne Shahin, Abu Nuaim, Mohib Tabari, Ibne
Hajar, Suyuti, Muttaqi Hindi, Haithami, Zarqani, Sabban and Badakhshi,2 agree on? Alas, if he would only hint at some of those about whom he states that they
have adjudged it to be false and had mentioned their books to us.
Is it not illogical that he wants to argue against established traditions? Yes,
actually, it is his habit regarding excellence of Ahle Bayt (a.s.), which he does not
like. He should be asked what is the connection between chastity, purity and fire
being prohibited on descendants that it can be refuted through the like of Sarah,
Safiya and other believer ladies?
On the contrary, this precedence is the special quality of Lady Fatima Zahra
(s.a.). And how numerous are the merits, which are restricted to her alone, and
illustrious ladies like Sarah, Maryam, Hawwa and others are not endowed with it;
on the basis of this, if a special precedence is restricted to her children, no
difficulty would arise and such merits of theirs are not less.
Allamah Zarqani Maliki says in refutation of this imaginary requirement in
Sharh Mawahib:
Abu Yaala, Tibrani and Hakeem have narrated this tradition from Ibne
Masud and Hakeem has regarded it authentic and there are numerous testimonies
for it and making fire unlawful for descendants of Her Eminence, with hint at
Lady Maryam, is that: Firstly: It makes her precedence in chastity obvious; and
secondly: quality of chastity is extolled and its importance is made clear,
otherwise, according to Quran, Fire is prohibited on Her Eminence.3
This tradition is supported by a large number of other traditions, like
tradition of Ibne Masud: She is named as Fatima, because on Judgment Day,
Almighty Allah has kept her and her descendants away from the Fire.4
And the statement of Prophet to Fatima: “Almighty Allah will not punish
you or anyone from your descendants.”5 And the statement of Prophet to Ali (a.s.): “Almighty Allah has forgiven you
and your descendants.”
And the statement of Prophet: “My Lord promised that He will not punish
those from my Ahle Bayt, who believe in oneness of God and my
messengership.”6
19. Nineteenth objection
He says: The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said: “Ali is with truth and truth is with Ali;
wherever Ali may be, truth would be present there; and the two of them shall
never separate from each other, till both of them arrive to me at the Cistern of
Kauthar.”
This is the greatest lie, because no one has narrated this tradition from the
Prophet, either with a weak or a proper chain of authorities. Can there be a bigger
liar than its narrator (Allamah Hilli), who has attributed it to companions and
scholars, whereas not one of them has narrated this report. This is the most
obvious falsehood. Also, if it is said that some companions narrated it; it may be
true. It is possible, but such a thing does not exist; on the contrary it is a lie
attributed to Prophet and His Eminence (s.a.w.a.) is free of that.7
Reply to the nineteenth objection
As for the captioned tradition: it is narrated by numerous tradition scholars
and authors, among them being: Khatib in his Tarikh, Hafiz Ibne Marduya in
Manaqib, Samani in Fadailus Sahaba, Ibne Qutaibah in Al-Imamah was Siyasah,
Zamakhshari in Rabiul Abrar.8 With attention to these, how does he claim that no companion and scholar has narrated it?
We ask him, why this statement cannot be correct? Is there logical
impossibility in it like coming together of contradictions?
Does according to his imagination, Ali (a.s.) not have the right that truth
should circle him and he should be the pivot truth?
كَبُرَتْ كَلِمَةً تَخْرُجُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ
“A grievous word it is that comes out of their mouths.”9
The following statement is narrated through authentic chains:
The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said on the day of Ghadeer Khum:
“O God, love those, who love him and be inimical to those, who are inimical
to him….and make him the pivot of truth.”
Raazi says in his Tafseer:10
“Due to the fact Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) used to recite “In the name of
Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful” (Bismillaahir Rah’maanir Rah’eem) in a
loud tone, and it is proved from widely narrated traditions and whoever follows
Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) in his religion, is guided, and the proof is the statement
of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) that: O God, make truth turn in whichever direction Ali
(a.s.) turns.”