“The Door of Fatima: The Controversy over the Violation of the House of Sayyida Fatima by Companions, after the Death of the Prophet Muhammad (saw)" By Muhammad Umar ibn Ramadhan Firstly, I would like to thank my beloved learned brother Dr. Mohammad Khalid, Director of The Centre for Intra- Muslim Studies (CIMS) for his leadership, activism, and wisdom in responding to the challenges we face as an Ummah in a modern world. The work of CIMS is unparallel, which endeavours to bring together leading scholars & experts from across different schools of thought to academically critique, analyse and discuss some of the most contentious theological differences between Sunni and Shi'i schools. Only through dialogue and mutual sharing can we put forth relevant frameworks for the mapping of Muslim unity; I wholeheartedly believe that CIMS have clearly set the standards for this noble endeavour, which in years to come will be the setting of academic discussion of analysing how Muslims came together to deal with differences which may well be argued was the underpinning reason why the Ummah was held at ransom for over a thousand years. One of the assertions of researching any part of history is having the capability to filter facts from fiction to truly understand the circumstances of the occurrences that took place. It is the responsibility of the researcher to write in a manner which enables him to be impartial and equally as critical in order to employ biographical reassessment alongside a full historical synopsis without prejudice allowing the reader to form their view. One of the plausible certainties we usually find in the study of any part of history is how it is transcribed. The norm preceding (al-Tabari, Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Ibn al-Athir, Ibn Asakir etc) was where experts and scholars had a tendency of portraying historical occurrences either with biasness or a false depiction which falsified and tainted historical accuracy to such an extent that historical figures were often seen as myth. Many academics highlight that usually history is written by royal biographers with a certain agenda of appeasement rather than being a dissident. Within the various sectarian schools of thought, one of the most contentious disputes that arise due to a number of as the political ر يض هللا عنه incidents that take place during the aftermath of the appointment of Abu Bakr as Siddiq َ َ ُ سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه is what some refer to the incident of the Door of Lady Fatima صىل هللا عليه واله وسلم successor to the Prophet َ It is evident from various literature that arguments commonly put forth by our friends to defend various . َعل ْي َها stances are habitually logical, coherent and adherent to the norms of traditional and modern academic critiquing. َ َ ُ سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه However, scholars view this contentious issue of the violation of the sanctity of the house of Lady Fatimah َ apparently resulted in her miscarriage. According to some scholars, her eventual death, not only lacks common َعل ْي َها sense but is extremely flawed and, certainly, projects the family of the Prophet as being weak, fearful and lacking the courage of speaking the truth in the midst of totalitarianism. This skewed stance, then, contradicts the actions at the plains of Karbala in 60AH. The scholarly community are absolutely clear that one عليه السﻻم of Imam Hussain of the many great qualities possessed by The Family of the Prophet was the ability of speaking the truth in any setting rectification of judicial decrees, to Imam عليه السﻻم let alone the rulers court. Whether this was at Ali ibn Abi Talib forbearance and truthfulness in facing the tribulations of Muawiyah to eventually Imam Hussain عليه السﻻم Hasan’s refusing to be silent in the midst of tyranny and reigns of terror and openly challenging the extraordinary عليه السﻻم fighting force of Syria under the leadership of Yazid. I will endeavour by highlighting the inconsistencies, flawed logical arguments and lack of scholarly analysation regarding what I would call an attack on the Prophet himself if it really occurred. If the aforementioned incident was something that actually did transpire, it would be grounds for the condemnation Furthermore, it would be legitimate justifications for the utilisation of the .ر يض هللا عنه and further refutation of Umar incident to rightly defame Umar’s character, virtues and morals. Further observation made regarding the character by some would fundamentally require irrefutable evidence against ر يض هللا عنه assassination of Umar ibn al Khattab to support their claim: Providing anything divergent to the highly placed benchmark would ر يض هللا عنه Umar ultimately be as I often refer to “intellectual dishonesty” and a clear transgression against one of the most prominent individuals in the history of human beings. To such an extent, that even non-Muslim intellectuals often speak highly regarding his character and political endeavours, this was mentioned by the prominent 19th century as a man of “great powers of mind, inflexible ر يض هللا عنه American author, Washington Irving, described Umar integrity and rigid justice” (Hasan, 2000). Another crucial observation is any incident being cited by a number of scholars doesn’t in any form or way authenticate or give legitimacy to the stated issue. If being quoted by scholars is a precedence for authenticity, then, one may argue for the case of Yazid The Tyrant. What is required is filtering through all the available evidences to trace the earliest sources which are attributed to have mentioned the incident َ َ ُ َ َ ْ َ furthermore in-depth scholarly analyisation in order to scrutinise the ,سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه عليها of the door of Lady Fatima evidences and present findings to the reader without any biasness, naturally we as humans are susceptible to being biased in one way or another, however what is required is an academic approach to the stated issue, presenting one’s findings without attempting to influence the outcome, the findings themselves should be sufficient enough for the facts. َ َ ُ َ َ ْ َ has been cited by a number of scholars, further in-depth سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه عليها The incident regarding the door of Lady Fatima examination clearly unveils that all the narrations are singular and not mass transmitted (Mutawatir). Scholars like Sa‘d al-Din al-Taftazani (d. 793AH), a great authority in Sunni Islam, asserts that singular narrations can be termed Mutawatir but in “meaning only”, however the underlining condition is that the stated narration must be authentic. When these singular authentic transmissions become widespread they can be termed as al-Tawatur bil-ma'na. The The narrations are .عليه السﻻم former equates this example to the role of Yazid in the killing of Imam al Hussain innumerable (singular), widespread and authentic hence reach the position of Tawatur in its meaning (al-Taftazani, 2010). In my research I failed to discover any authentic narration which substantiated the narrative that such an .صىل هللا عليه واله وسلم unimaginable incident took place moments after the passing of The Prophet Muhammad Instead, conflicting narrations, broken chains of transmission and unreasoned arguments were heavily relied on to present a biased perspective and point of view. َ َ ُ َ َ ْ َ is found in Kitāb Sulaym ibn سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه عليها The earliest source which mentions the incident of the door of Lady Fatima Qays al-Hilālī authored by Sulaym ibn Qays al-Hilālī (d.76AH). The former was from amongst the early Muslims, born Al-Hilali, 2009), al-Shaykh al-Mufid) ر يض هللا عنه near Kufa and migrated to Madina during the Caliphate of Umar d.40AH) and after his martyrdom served his two) عليه السﻻم alludes that he was amongst the disciples of Imam Ali d.61AH) then Imam Ali ibn Husayn Zayn al-Abidin) عليه السﻻم d.50AH) & Imam Hussain) عليه السﻻم sons; Imam Hasan d.117AH) (al-Mufid, 1968). Its amongst the earliest) عليه السﻻم d.95AH) and Imam Muhammad al-Baqir) عليه السﻻم Shi’i Hadith reports complied even before Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Al-Kāfī. The cited book mentions in detail the events with the rejection of the outcome of صىل هللا عليه واله وسلم that took place after the death of the Prophet Muhammad at صىل هللا عليه واله وسلم as the political successor of the Prophet Muhammad ر يض هللا عنه the nomination of Abu Bakr with عليه السﻻم physically attacks the house of Imam Ali ر يض هللا عنه Saqifah, al-Hilālī meticulously mentions how Umar َ َ ُ َ َ ْ َ َ َ ُ َ َ ْ َ physically being سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه عليها positioned behind the door. This resulted in Lady Fatima سَلم ٱلل َّٰ ِه عليها Lady Fatima injured, beaten and verbally abused during the attack which also resulted in her miscarriage. Below is the full version of the narration found in Sulaym ibn Qays al-Hilālī, “When Ali saw how people betrayed him and were reluctant to support him, agreeing with Abu Bakr, paying homage to him and respecting him, he remained at home. ‘’Umar said to Abu Bakr, ‘What stops you from calling on him to swear the oath of allegiance to you since nobody else remains to do so except him and these four men?’ Abu Bakr was more soft-hearted than ‘’Umar and more intelligent, as well as more far-sighted, whereas the other (‘’Umar) was the most rough, rude and crude. Abu Bakr said, ‘Who should we send to him?’ ‘’Umar said, ‘Let us send Qunfath to him, for he is a rough and tough man and a taleeq, one of the Banu ‘Adiyy ibn Ka’b.’ He sent him together with helpers to Ali.