The comments of Shi'a Ulema

The comments of Sheikh al Mufid

Afriki as proof that the eminent Sheikh Mufid lied when denying the marriage:

Ansar.org states:

Ash-Shaykh al-Mufid
The lead was taken by ash-Shaykh al-Mufid himself. He wrote an independent treatise about the marriage of Umm Kalthum, and discussed it in his other works as well, most notably al-Masa'il as-Sarawiyyah. The tenth question in this books deal with the marriage of Umm Kalthum. It reads as follows:

TENTH QUESTION: What is his (al-Mufid's) view regarding Amir al-Mu'minin marrying his daughter Umm Kalthum to 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, and regarding the Nabi r marrying his daughters Zaynab (sic) and Ruqayyah to 'Uthman?

ANSWER: The report speaking of Amir al-Mu'minin marrying his daughter to 'Umar ibn al-Khattab so unfounded. It is narrated via Zubayr ibn Bakkar, and its chain of narration is well known. He was untrustworthy in transmission. There is suspicion on him in what he mentions. He used to hate Amir al-Mu'minin. What 'Ali ibn Hashim claims to narrate from him is untrustworthy. This hadith was included by Abu Muhammad al-Hasan ibn Yahya in his book on genealogy, and account of that people thought it to be true, thinking that it is narrated by an 'Alawi (descendant of 'Ali). However, the fact is that he narrates it from Zubayr ibn Bakkar.
The hadith in itself is a forgery. It is sometimes narrated that Amir al-Mu'minin himself performed the ceremony, and sometimes it is narrated that it was 'Abbas who performed it. Sometimes it is narrated that the marriage took place only after menacing by 'Umar and threats against Banu Hashim; and sometimes it is mentioned that the marriage took place freely and voluntarily. The some narrators claim that a child named Zayd was born from this marriage, while others claim he was killed before consummating the marriage. Some say Zayd ibn 'Umar left offspring, while others say he was killed without leaving children. Some say he and his mother were killed, and some say his mother lived after him. Some say 'Umar gave Umm Kalthum a dowry of 40 000 dirhams, others claim it was 4000 dirhams, and yet others claim her dowry was 5000 dirhams. The origin of this claim, as well as the amount of contradiction in it renders the hadith null, so it is of no consequence.

At this point the benefit of investigating the authenticity of the four reports in al-Kafi will become apparent. It can be seen here that al-Mufid places the responsibility for inventing the marriage of Umm Kalthum on the shoulders of the historian Zubayr ibn Bakkar. However, even a cursory comparison with the narrations in al-Kafi and the one quoted earlier from Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd (all of which are but a drop in the ocean) demonstrates clearly that Zubayr ibn Bakkar features nowhere in any of those chains of narration. Each of the narrators of those reports was a Shi'i about whose trustworthiness the 'Ulamaa of the Shi'ah were fully satisfied. Not a single on of those reports originated with Zubayr ibn Bakkar. On the contrary, each one of them is traced back to Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq. Al-Mufid's protestations are thus completely bereft of substance. If anything, it shows the man's desperation for finding some grounds, no matter how flimsy or spurious, on which to dismiss the marriage of Umm Kalthum.

Reply one

First and foremost could this Nasibi show us exactly where in the comments of Shaykh Mufid, he states that he is referring to the traditions from Usul al Kafi? No reference is made and somehow Afriki is suggesting that Mufid is relying from these texts? We have already taken apart the traditions from al Kafi that Afriki pointed out to Umar's marriage to Umme Kalthum and have conclusively proved that his assertion is baseless.

It should also be pointed out that Sunni scholars that have conducted research into this alleged marriage have also concluded that Zubayr ibn Bakkar perpetuated this lie.

Maulana Muhammad Inshallah and Muhammad Siddiq Chisti al Hanafi Badhyanvi in 'al Seerath al Makhthhoom fee Tahqeeq aqd Umme Kalthum' - a detailed study into this alleged marriage state in the preface:

'Readers should know that these narrations are all rubbish, if truth be known these traditions relating to the marriage of Umme Kalthum have been invented the liar Zubayr ibn Bakkar who attributed this slander to Hadhrath Umar (ra) and also lied against 'Ali (ra)'.

Afriki had also attacked al Mufid's comments as follows:

Ansar.org states:

�Al-Mufid tries to dismiss the incident by drawing attention to the discrepancies regarding certain lesser details. A simple response to this is that when a multitude of reports all share one common element, the common element cannot be dismissed because of differences negligible details. An objective scholar who is not prejudiced by his idiosyncratic notion of what history should actually be like will never stoop to the level al-Mufid has. Objectivity here would require thoroughly sifting through the available historical material and accepting the version that fulfils the criteria of authenticity, such as have been demonstrated in the case of al-Kulayni's narrations in al-Kafi. If an historical incident could be denied for a reason as flimsy as discrepancies in minor details, one could well reject the battle of Badr on grounds of the fact that there are differences regarding the exact date on which it took place, or differences in the amount of combatants, or even the amount of persons killed and taken captive. Here we are once again treated to the spectacle of a scholar's desperation to superimpose the idiosyncrasies of his theology over the facts of history, even if it means he has to discard the most basic standards of objectivity.

This Nasibi is in effect stating that if the report has slight discrepancies, even then the whole event cannot be rejected altogether. What this Nasibi however fails to recognise is that these are more than just discrepancies in minor details. These are major discrepancies�

Reply two - The 'common element' in the narrations are that Umar consummated marriage with an underage girl

Ansar.org states:

When a multitude of reports all share one common element, the common element cannot be dismissed because of differences negligible details. An objective scholar who is not prejudiced by his idiosyncratic notion of what history should actually be like will never stoop to the level al-Mufid has. Objectivity here would require thoroughly sifting through the available historical material and accepting the version that fulfils the criteria of authenticity, such as have been demonstrated in the case of al-Kulayni's narrations in al-Kafi.

We do not find a single authentic Sunni reference that concurs with Afriki's assertion that Umme Kalthum wife of Umar was deemed baligh in 17 Hijri. Having objectively sifted through available historical material, we see that Umme Kalthum described by the Ahl'ul Sunnah scholars as Sagheera (Child) some (including al Kafi) as Sabeeya (milk fed). These terms cannot be used for a girl that has attained puberty, and we already cited the fact that in the Arabic - English Dictionary by Hans Wehr page 516, Sagheer is defined as:

"A minor under age".

Arabic - English Dictionary by Hans Wehr page 516

None of the Ahl'ul Sunnah texts indicate that Umme Kalthum wife of Umar was baligh in 17 Hijri, when we know that Umme Kalthum binte Fatima was baligh. The Umme Kalthum that married Umar in 17 Hijri was not baligh (referred as Sagheera or Sabeeya) this is affirmed by the vast bulk of Ahl'ul Sunnah works, we are citing just some for the sake of brevity�

Al Istiab Volume 2 page 772
Zakhair al Akba page 117
Seerath Umar, page 205 Ibn Jauzi
Asmaath Shameen page 257
Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd Volume 8 page 463
Nasab Quraysh Zubayri page 349
Al Ulum al Nisa Volume 4 page 256
Tareekh Ibn Asakir Volume 7 page 25
Al Isaba Volume 2 page 469
Al Mudhahib muwassal page 142
Tadhkira al Khawaas page 331
Al Hidayaath al Saud page 259
Sawaiqh al Muhriqa page 55

To Afriki and his stooges who love singing the praises of this marriage, we ask:

'Is is really a matter of pride that your texts depict an event that points to Umar consummating marriage with an under age girl?'

This completely destroys the credibility of your khalifa and makes a complete mockery of the Shari'a. All that these allege marriage does is give ammunition for Christians, who mock Rasulullah's marriage to Ayesha aged nine, this marriage is much worse. Would it not be matter for Afriki to distance himself from this tradition / marriage altogether? Logically this would be the better approach, but when this is a means of winning favour with King Fahad, then these Nasibi's are willing to sacrifice respect and honour of the Sahaba as long as it means scoring points against the Shi'a!

Reply three - If there are contradictions in an event then in the eyes of Ahl'ul Sunnah, such an event is a lie

We read in Taufa Ithna Ashari page 231, from the pen of Al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi:

"Evidence of an event being a lie can be proven if it has numerous contradictions"

Now analyse these contradictions in an event that Afriki is seeking to pass off as fact:

Imam 'Ali (as) conducted the Nikah on his own
Abbas was witness to the Nikah
Banu Hashim were forced to agreeing to give Umme Kalthum in marriage
Banu Hashim happily married Umme Kalthum off
No children were born from the marriage.
Children were born from the marriage.
Zaid bin Umar had no children
Zaid bin Umar had children
Zaid bin Umar died a natural death
Zaid bin Umar was murdered
Zaid's mother died on the same day as Zaid
Zaid's mother survived him
Imam 'Ali (as) said that his daughter was under age
Imam 'Ali (as) said that his daughter was NOT under age
After Umar's death she married Awn bin Ja'far
Awn bin Ja'far died whilst she was still married to Umar
Umme Kalthum died during the Caliphate of Mu'awiya
Umme Kalthum was alive at Kerbala

These contradictions prove that this event was a complete lie, and can be rejected on account of these blatant contradictions, since your own esteemed anti Shi'a scholar had concluded contradictions make an event null and void.

Reply four - Applying the Sunni criteria to determine tradition fabrication makes these narrations null and void

In addition to analysing the isnad of narrations the Ulema of Ahl'ul Sunnah have also devised a criteria via which one can automatically reject narrations.

We are quoting directly from Sirat-un Nabi Volume 1 page 42, by Hanafi scholar Shibli Numani:

"�the following categories of reports are to be discredited without an enquiry into the characters of their narrators:

The traditions that are contrary to reason

The traditions that go against accepted principles

The traditions that belie common observations and physical experience

The traditions that contradict the Qur'an or a mutawattir hadith�

The tradition that threatens severe punishment for a minor fault

The tradition that sounds absurd and nonsense�

The tradition that promises big rewards for trivial acts of piety

A tradition narrated by a single person who has never personally contacted the man from whom he narrates

A tradition that ought to have been known to all and sundry, but has only a single narrator

Any tradition concerning an incident so noteworthy that, if it had actually taken place, it ought to have been related by many, and yet there is but a single narrator to it".

If any of these criteria are established then such traditions are to be rejected. Now we ask those with open minds, can reason really accept that:

A middle-aged man sought the marriage of a child that happened to be his son in laws granddaughter?
An elderly man was willing to violate the Shari'a by demanding the hand of a girl that was already betrothed?
A respectable father would dress up his daughter and send her to a potential suitor (like some mail order bride)?
A suitor (the second rightly guided khalifa) would fondle the girl, by groping and kissing her?
When the girl complains of her treatment, her father is not bothered in the slightest, on the contrary he deems the individual to be a worthy son in law?
A girl that all traditions deem non-baligh and milk fed managed to give birth to two children?

We could cite many examples but feel that for the sake of brevity these shall suffice to prove that this entire episode is fraud that was concocted in the perverted minds of the followers of Mu'awiya as a means of elevating Umar at the expense of degrading the Ahl'ul bayt (as).

Reply five - The confusion of the Ahl'ul Sunnah Ulema over the identity of Umme Kalthum (as) proves that this event was a lie

As part of efforts of the Ahl'ul Sunnah and Nasibi such as Afriki to cover up the anger of Sayyida Fatima (as) they have given maximum publicity to this lie. What is amusing is that they are still unable to establish:

When she died
Which men she married
When she married these men

Some scholars such as Nawawi, Ibn Sa'ad, Dhahabi and Masudi have asserted that Umme Kalthum was older than her sister Zeyneb was. Such confusion had resulted in clear differences amongst the Ahl'ul Sunnah Ulema, when did she marry Abdullah bin Ja'far? Ibn Sa'd claimed that he married Umme Kalthum after the death of Zeyneb (as) whilst ibn al Najri claims that Abdullah married Umme Kalthum first and then Zeyneb, when she died.

The general consensus is that Umme Kalthum wife of Umar died during Mu'awiya's reign and the vast bulk thought that she married Zeyneb (as) married Abdullah bin Ja'far first. If we were to accept Ibn al Najri's claim that Zeyneb (as) married Abdullah after Umme Kalthum died then it would mean she married at the age of 49. This is a lie since we know that Imam 'Ali arranged the marriage of Zeyneb (as) to Abdullah in 17 Hijri.

The utter confusion is epitomised by famous Sunni scholar Hasan Qasim. On page 23 of his book Sayyida Zeyneb he states:

"Umme Kalthum married Umar and died during Mu'awiya's reign in Madina".

Amusingly in the same book, on page 64 he comments:

"Umme Kalthum died in Kerbala and was buried in Syria".

How exactly did the same Umme Kalthum rise from her grave in Madina (having died during Mu'awiya's rule) travel to Kerbala and then die in Syria?

Reply six - The different lives of both Umme Kalthum's prove that this event is a lie

Umme Kalthum wife of Umar	Umme Kalthum binte Fatima (as) wife of Aun bin Ja'far
1. In 17 Hijri she was a child born 12 Hijri	1. Born in 6 Hijri so was baligh in 17 Hijri
2. She died during Mu'awiya's reign with her son, in Madina	2. Present at Kerbala, died in 62 Hijri
3. Amr bin Aas and Mugheera bin Shuhba were advisers to the marriage (Tabari)	3. Imam 'Ali arranged the marriage (Aqd Al Fareed) with Aun bin Ja'far
4. She had children (al Maarif)	4. She had no children (al Aqd al Mundhum)
5. Umar gave dower of 40,000 dirhams	5. 450 Dirhams were given as Dower (same as Sayyida Fatima) [al Aqd al Mundhum]
6. She died at least seven years before Kerbala	6. Present in Kerbala made captive by Ibn Ziyad, gave a sermon in Kufa
7. Had multiple marriages	7. Only one marriage with Aun

As we have already mentioned the texts confirm that Umme Kalthum wife of Umar was not baligh at the time of marriage in 17 Hijri, whilst Umme Kalthum binte Fatima would have been. This Umme Kalthum was the widow of Umar that died before 49 Hijri, whilst Umme Kalthum binte Fatima (as) remained alive and was witness to the events of Kerbala. An objective historical analysis therefore proves that both of these Umme Kalthum's were different and anyone who claims that they were the same needs to have his head examined. Even a child can reach the conclusion that Umme Kalthum the widow of Umar was NOT the same Umme Kalthum that was in Kerbala.

As we have already mentioned Umar had four wives name Umme Kalthum. If Umar had a wife called Umme Kalthum then it does not automatically mean that her parents were Imam 'Ali (as) and Sayyida Fatima (as) - as we have established the multiple contradictions prove that this event is a fabrication that these Nasibis cannot rely on as proof.

The views of Shi'a Ulema who believed that this marriage took place

In the final part of the article Afriki cites the opinions Sayyid Murtadha, al Tabarsi and Kazmi who subscribed to the viewpoint that the marriage took place under duress.

Reply one - personal views do not constitute proof

These are all 'personal opinions' and as Afriki's own Imam had said personal opinions do NOT constitute proof. Proof has to be based on what can be established from the Qur'an and Sunnah. We have already taken apart the traditions from al Kafi that Afriki deemed proof, and have in addition proven that such a marriage would have contradicted Shari'a, both in the eyes of Ahl'ul Sunnah and Shi'a. We give greater credence to the Shari'a than personal opinions, when the Shari'a would deem such a union Haram, then that is the end of the matter, the personal viewpoints of Shi'a Scholars based on hadith that as we have proven can be refuted via so many angles, makes their opinions just that 'opinions'. We have already cited the fact that Afriki's beloved Shaykh Ibn Taymeeya in Minhaaj as Sunnah Volume 5 page 136 (Egypt edition) stated:

"The personal of views of Ayesha and Umar cannot constitute proof".

If the personal views of Ayesha and Umar do not constitute proof then likewise the personal views of Qummi, Tabarsi etc do not constitute proof. Opinions can be wrong and right, in this situation their opinions were clearly wrong.

Reply two - Imam Ja'far al Sadiq (as)'s rejection of this marriage

We have already proven from the Shi'a traditions that Afriki relied on, that Imam Ja'far Sadiq (as) was referring to Umme Kalthum binte Abu Bakr. If any doubt remains then allow us to quote the comments of Imam Ja'far Sadiq (as) when he was asked about this alleged marriage directly:

We read in Nasehkul Tawareekh Volume 3 page 408:

"Umar bin Adheena asked Imam Ja'far Sadiq (as) 'People claim that 'Ali married his daughter to such a person'. The Imam, who was until then sitting down, stood up and said angrily, "Whoever holds such a viewpoint is misled." Subhanallah! Was Imam 'Ali unable to free his daughter from their clutches? He could have stood between them and her to protect, they have fabricated a lie".

This in effect denies any claims / viewpoints that Imam 'Ali (as) married Umme Kalthum to Umar. Imam Ja'far (as) made it clear that such a viewpoint was false. For us the word of the Imam (as) is final when he says that this marriage never took place then that is the end of the matter, the personal viewpoints of any Shi'a scholar automatically become null and void.

Reply three - The faithful student of four of the Imams rejection of such a claim

Whilst we could finish this article with Imam Ja'far (as)'s clear words we would also like to cite the words of Muhammad Fadli bin Shaza bin Khaleel Nishapuri. He was a leading Shi'a authority of his time and had the benefit of sitting in the midst of Imam Reza (as), Imam Reza (as), Imam Naqi (as), Imam Taqi (as) and Imam al Askari (as). On this topic he stated categorically:

"People have assumed that Umar married Umme Kalthum binte Fatima, rather he married Umme Kalthum binte Jarweela Khuzeema"
Tareekh al Qum Shaykh Saduq, by Muhammad Nishapur page 193, published in Tehran

NIkah of Lady Umm-e-Qulsoom(A.S)

Monday 30 April 2012