Amir al Mu’minin ‘Umar ibn al Khattab, the genius, leader, warrior of Islam and establisher of its glory. It was he who conquered the Romans and Persians, and raised the banner of Islam and its teachings in its lands; which spread to the four corners of the world. He established Islamic rule and justice upon the rich and the poor not fearing the disparagement of anyone in the least! The fragments of polytheism, innovation, disbelief, and misguidance that remained in the Arabian Peninsula were swept away during his Caliphate. He is the victor of truth, distinguisher between truth and falsehood—known as al Faruq—the guide, and reformer. He was loved by the Ahlul Bayt just as he was loved by the beloved Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, who had said regarding him:
I entered paradise… And I saw a palace with a girl in its courtyard and asked, “Who does it belong to?”
They said, “‘Umar ibn al Khattab.”
The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, ‘who does not speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed,’ states:
“While I was sleeping, I saw myself standing at a well, upon it was a bucket. I drew from it as much as Allah had willed. Then ibn Quhafah (Abu Bakr) took the bucket from me and drew one or two buckets but there was some weakness in his drawing. May Allah forgive him for his weakness. It then turned into a large bucket and ‘Umar ibn al Khattab took hold of it. I have not seen a leader among people work as well as he did until the people watered their camels”.
The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had also said:
Indeed Allah has placed truth upon ‘Umar’s tongue and heart.
This was the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam opinion of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The previous traditions we have transmitted were from reliable books of the Ahlus Sunnah, which goes contrary to our undertaking, i.e. that we will only cite Shia sources. However, we have only transmitted these reports because they are corroborated by ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in Shia sources.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu states when mentioning ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and recalling his Caliphate, attesting to the dream that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had of ‘Umar.
و وليهم وال فأقام و استقام حتى ضرب الدين بجرانه
Then such a leader assumed leadership who established religion and remained resolute upon the same until it became firmly grounded.
Ibn Maytham al Bahrani, the Shia commentator of Nahj al Balaghah and al Dumbuli, when explaining this statement write:
The leader referred to here is ‘Umar. As for the second part of the statement, daraba al din bi jirranihi [translated as, “He had established religion firmly.”] is a metaphor used to compare the steady and firmness of Islam to that of a camel that is lying down.
Ibn Abi al Hadid when commenting on this sermon writes:
The leader being referred to is ‘Umar… ‘Ali delivered this sermon in his Caliphate, in which he mentions his close relations to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, the special relationship they had and how he would disclose his secrets to him. He then further states, “The Muslims chose after the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam demise a man from amongst them who approached and fulfilled the responsibility according to his capacity with some weakness therein, thereafter a leader came into power who established Islam.”
Look at the manner in which ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu describes Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, attesting to the dream of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam; considering ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu a manifestation of his glad tidings and attesting to the fact that Islam was further strengthened during his Caliphate. Is there any Shia who will follow and adopt the opinion of his ‘infallible’ Imam?
In addition, the sermon in which ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu praises ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and considers him a manifestation of the glad tidings of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was delivered during his own Caliphate. Thus there was no need to practice Taqiyyah at this time, as some have stated.
How many documented sermons are there in Nahj al Balaghah which carry the same meaning, stating that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was one of the people responsible for the glory of Islam and its followers, raising its flag and expanding the Muslim lands? He had left people on a clear path, uprooting fitnah and straightening the crooked, putting an end to falsehood. The Reviver of the Sunnah, obedient, and fearful of Allah. Look at how ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu—the cousin, son-in-law, and father of Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam grandsons—excessively praises ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He says:
May Allah reward such and such a man who straightened the crooked, cured the disease, abandoned mischief and established the Sunnah. He left this world with a clean slate and little shortcomings. He achieved good and remained safe from its evils. He fulfilled the obedience to Allah and met the demands of piety. He left this world and left people on diverse roads wherein the deviant cannot obtain guidance and the guided cannot attain certainty.
Ibn Abi al Hadid has written in Sharh Nahj al Balaghah that this statement is in reference to the second Khalifah ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and that these words were uttered in his praise, as indicated by the word “‘Umar” written under the word “such and such” in Sayedal Radi’s own hand in the manuscript of Nahj al Balaghah written by him. He further states:
I have asked al Naqib Abu Jafar ibn Abi Zaid al ‘Alawi regarding it and he said, “Yes it is ‘Umar.”
I then asked him, “Did the leader of the believers praise ‘Umar?”
He responded in the affirmative.
Look at ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu announcing at the top of his voice that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu would straighten the crooked, treat the sick, act in accordance with the prophetic teachings, and beat the trials and tribulations. He did not meet the fitnah and neither did the fitnah meet him. He passed on without anyone being able to reproach him for anything he had done. He had attained abundant good in his Caliphate and met Allah in the condition that he was untainted by the infighting that occurred between the Muslims later on. He was obedient to Allah and never disobeyed Him, and feared Allah in fulfilling His rights, never falling short or oppressing another.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the leader of the Ahlul Bayt, considered ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu the sanctuary of Islam and the Muslims. Look at the manner in which he praises him. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was also the one who ‘Umar had consulted before fighting the Romans, and ‘Ali said to him:
إنك متى تسير إلى هذا العدو بنفسك فتلقهم فتنكب لا تكن للمسلمين كانفة دون أقصى بلادهم ليس بعدك مرجع يرجعون إليه فابعث إليهم رجلا محربا واحفز معه أهل البلاء و النصيحة فإن أظهر الله فداك ما تحب و إن تكن الأخرى كنت ردأ للناس و مثابة للمسلمين.
If you yourself proceed towards the enemy and clash with them and fall into some trouble, there will be no place of refuge for the Muslims other than their remote cities, nor any place they would return to. Therefore, you should send an experienced man and send with him people well-seasoned and well-intentioned. If Allah grants you victory, then this is what you want. If it is otherwise, you would serve as a support for the people and a place of return for the Muslims.
Ibn Abi al Hadid writes in his commentary under this sermon of ‘Ali:
‘Ali advised ‘Umar that he should not go himself, warning him that he might be afflicted, thus leaving the Muslims without leadership. Rather, he should send an experienced man on his behalf and remain in Madinah, so that if they were to be defeated, he will be their sanctuary.
When one reads these sermons of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu one can actually see the extent of love between them. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu being protective over him, hoping and wishing that he should stay in power as a reservoir of Islam despite what the Shia want us to believe. It is noteworthy that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was determined to go fight and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu knew that, yet despite all of that he prevented him from doing this so that no harm should befall him which will in turn affect the Islamic state, as he considered ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu a means of glory to Islam. Furthermore, when ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu wanted to leave he desired to put ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in charge of the Muslim capital which would have been a golden opportunity to take hold of the reigns of the Muslims and ‘retake’ his ‘usurped’ rights as claimed by the Shia—which they have filled their books with—whereas the matter is completely contrary to what they portray. This was ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu attitude towards ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu in his Caliphate. He did not want him to endanger himself and looked out for his best interest with sincerity to Allah, and having good will for this nation. Therefore, when he consulted him with regards to fighting the Persians, it was ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu who prevented him, saying:
In this matter, victory or defeat is not dependent on the smallness or greatness of forces. It is Allah’s religion which He has raised above all faiths, and His army which He has mobilised and extended, till it has reached the point where it stands now, and has arrived in its present position.
We hold a promise from Allah, and He will fulfil His promise and support His army. The position of the head of government is that of the thread for beads, as it connects them and keeps them together. If the thread is broken, they will disperse and be lost, and will never come together again. The Arabs today, even though small in number are big because of Islam and strong because of unity. You should remain like the axis for them, and rotate the mill (of government) with (the help of) the Arabs, and be their root. Avoid battle, because if you leave this place the Arabs will attack you from all sides and directions till the unguarded places left behind by you will become more important than those before you.
If the Persians, see you tomorrow they will say, “He is the root (chief) of Arabia. If we do away with him, we will be in peace.” Thus it will heighten their eagerness against you and their keenness to aim at you. You say that they have set out to fight against the Muslims. Well, Allah detests their setting out more than you do, and He is more capable of preventing what He detests.
As regards to your idea about their (large) number, in the past we did not fight on the strength of large numbers but we fought on the basis of Allah’s support and assistance.
Is there any doubt that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu considered ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu to be the manifestation of the dream of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, which he had informed them about, and gave them glad tidings that Islam will reach its peak in his era? It is for that reason that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu had said, “We are on the promise of Allah! Allah will fulfil his promise and assist his armies!”
In ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu statement, he alludes to the statement of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “Then it turned into a large bucket and ‘Umar ibn al Khattab took hold of it. I have not seen a giant amongst people draw as well as he did until the people watered their camels.”
He also directs people’s attention to the verse of the Qur’an:
وَعَدَ اللّٰهُ الَّذِيْنَ أٰمَنُوْا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِيْنَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَىٰ لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّنۢ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا
Allah has promised those who have believed among you and done righteous deeds that He will surely grant them succession [authority] upon the earth just as He granted it to those before them and that He will surely establish for them [therein] their religion which He has preferred for them and that He will surely substitute for them, after their fear, security.
Therefore, what was intended by ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu by this statement, “We are on the promise of Allah,” is that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala had promised the practicing believers that he will establish them in the earth and make them vicegerents on this earth. We are believers and you, O ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, are our leader! Allah will fulfil His promise in your Caliphate. He will aid His armies who will fight under your flag, leadership, and guidance. Because the religion of Allah is surely and will definitely be triumphant, as you are in charge of its affairs and planning. If we were to lose you, the Muslim nation would become weak and divided in such a manner that uniting them will never ever be possible again. Because if order and system is lost, division would come about; which will be irresolvable.
The supplication of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam also alludes to the glory that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu will bring to Islam:
O Allah strengthen Islam with ‘Umar ibn al Khattab.
As transmitted by al Majlisi in Bihar al Anwar from Muhammad al Baqir. The prayer of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam will most certainly be answered!
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the leader of the Ahlul Bayt, informs each and every one of us—including the Shia—that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was no ordinary individual. Rather he was the axis upon which the hand mill (spirit) of Islam rotates. Without an axis it is impossible for anything to rotate. It is for that very reason he said, “If you were to leave this place the Arabs will attack you from all sides and directions,” because they knew that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the root and if he is uprooted then no trace remains. As he is the axis and if he is taken out of the equation then on what axis will the spirit or mill of Islam spin? You (‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu) are also the protector of this nation, thus we will not leave you and let you walk into death, we will not dispense of you, as others readily do!
How beautifully ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu has expressed that which was in his heart and mind. He openly expressed his beliefs and opinions regarding ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu also believed that Allah placed the truth on ‘Umar’s heart and tongue and that he used to convey the teachings of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. It was for that reason that he would not contradict or oppose his example in the most trivial of affairs. Al Dinawari al Shia reports:
When ‘Ali came to Kufah, it was said to him, “O Amir al Mu’minin, will you reside in a castle?”
He replied, “No I have no need for a castle as ‘Umar used to detest it. Rather, I will settle in an open place.”
He then went towards the masjid, performed two units of prayer and went to his place.
Therefore, when the subject was brought up about taking back Fadak, he refused to act contrary to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. al Sayed al Murtada states:
When the matter of requesting Fadak was mentioned to ‘Ali he said, “I feel ashamed before Allah to return something that Abu Bakr had withheld, and which ‘Umar continued to maintain (as before).”
We will now transmit three reports in support of the previously mentioned narrations:
It is transmitted from Hussain ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhuma that he used to say:
I do not know of ‘Ali going contrary to ‘Umar or doing anything different since he came to Kufah.
The people of Najran came to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu complaining about what ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu did to them. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu replied:
‘Umar was a knowledgeable man therefore I will not change anything he had done.
When ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu came to Kufah he said:
I will not untie a knot which ‘Umar had tied.
All of these reports were on account of him considering ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu an inspired man, according to the hadith of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu also considered ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu a practical person whom truth would accompany.
As for ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu being from the people of Jannat, it has been transmitted in the traditions that we have previously mentioned that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and his cousin—one of his reliable leaders and governors—’Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma bore testimony to it.
Ibn Abi al Hadid reports that when ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was stabbed by Abu Lu’lu’ah who was a Zoroastrian and of Persian origin, the two cousins of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam—’Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas and ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhum—entered upon ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Ibn ‘Abbas states:
We heard the voice of Umm Kulthum—the daughter of ‘Ali—wailing, “O ‘Umar!” There were other females crying along with her, the house trembled with cries.
‘Umar said, “Woe to the mother of ‘Umar, he will not be forgiven.”
Then I said, “By Allah! I wish that you only see the extent of the verse,
وَإِنَّ مِّنكُمْ إِلَّا وَارِدُهَا
And there is none of you except he will come to it. [Then We will save those who feared Allah]
We only know that you, O leader of the believers and the Muslims, have judged according to the Book and have distributed with fairness.”
My statement amazed him. He then sat up and asked, “Will you bear testimony for me with that, O Ibn ‘Abbas?”
I hesitated, but then ‘Ali hit me between my shoulder blades and said, “Bear testimony!”
It is mentioned in another report:
Ibn ‘Abbas asked, “Why are you grieved, O Amir al Mu’minin? By Allah! O Amir al Mu’minin, your acceptance of Islam was a glory to Islam and your leadership a source of pride. You have filled the earth with justice.”
‘Umar asked, “Will you bear testimony for me, O Ibn ‘Abbas?”
The narrator mentioned, “It was as if he disliked to give testimony and thus hesitated.”
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu then said to him, “Say, ‘Yes!’ and I am with you,” thereafter he said, “Yes.”
Furthermore, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu believed him to be a man from Jannat, after he heard it from the mouth of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. It was for that very reason, that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu desired to meet Allah with the good deeds of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Al Sayedal Murtada, Abu Jafar al Tusi, Ibn Babawayh, and Ibn Abi al Hadid report:
When ‘Umar was being washed and enshrouded, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu entered upon him and said, “May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him.”
He then stated, “There is not a person on earth whose books of deeds I’d rather meet Allah with than the book of deeds of this personality.”
This report is mentioned in the books of the Ahlus Sunnah as well: al Mustadrak, Talkhis of al Dhahabi, Musnad Ahmed under the Musnad of ‘Ali, and Tabaqat ibn Sa’d and other such reports in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim.
Ibn Abi al Hadid reports:
After ‘Umar was stabbed, and the people had dispersed and he was still laying in his blood and had still not performed Fajr, it was said to him, “O Amir al Mu’minin, salah!”
He lifted his head and said, “Yes there is no lot in Islam for he who does not fulfil it.”
He sat up quickly, and his wound started bleeding profusely. He asked for a cloth which he used to close the wound and then performed prayer.
He then looked towards his son, ‘Abdullah, and said to him, “Put my head on the ground.”
‘Abdullah said, “I did not hasten, thinking that he was not in his full senses.”
He then said for the second time, “Place my head on the ground.”
‘Abdullah said, “I still did not.”
He then said for the third time, “Place my head on the ground! May your mother not have given birth to you!”
‘Abdullah said, “I then realised that he was in his senses. The only reason why he did not do it himself was on account of his weakness. I then placed his head on the ground, until I saw the tips of his beard mixed with dust and looked towards the sand sticking to his eye. I stretched my ears to hear what he was saying. He said, ‘Woe unto you ‘Umar, woe unto to the mother of ‘Umar if Allah does not forgive him.’”
It is mentioned in another narration that ‘Ali came, stood beside him and said, “There is not a person, other than him laying here, whose books of deeds I would rather meet Allah with.”
After all of this is it possible for anyone to deny ‘Umar’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu status when ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu—the leader of the Ahlul Bayt—considered him from amongst the people of Jannat and expressed his desire to meet Allah with ‘Umar’s book of deeds?
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is also reported to have said that the best of people after the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.
He further stated regarding the two of them in his letter:
They were the rightly guided Imams, the leaders of Islam, those who were followed after the demise of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He who follows them is safe.
It had also been transmitted that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had said:
The position of Abu Bakr in relation to me is like that of the ears and the position of ‘Umar in relation to me is like that of the eyes.
Worthy of note is that these reports were transmitted by ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu himself from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and in turn ‘Ali’s son, Hassan, transmitted it from him. May Allah be pleased with all of them.
Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma—the cousin of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and one of the senior members of the Ahlul Bayt—praises ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu saying:
May Allah have mercy on Abu Hafs. By Allah! He was the ally of Islam, the sanctuary of the orphans, the manifestation of kindness and faith, resort for the poor, fortress of the righteous, who fulfilled the rights of Allah, preserved it, and awaited the reward thereof. The one who patiently stood fast with the Right of Allah until the religion became clear, countries were conquered, and the believers became safe.
Similarly, the other members of the Ahlul Bayt praised ‘Umar, as discussed previously under the praise of the Ahlul Bayt for Abu Bakr al Siddiq as narrated from Zayn al ‘Abidin ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali, Muhammad al Baqir, Zaid al Shahid, and Jafar al Sadiq regarding whom it is reported that when he would pass the graves of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, he would greet both of them and associate himself with them.
Before we continue with our discussion, I wish to add to the topic what has been reported by al Kulayni in his book, al Rawdah min al Kafi:
Jafar ibn Muhammad [the sixth Shia Imam] in addition to associating himself to the two of them, would command his followers to do the same. Jafar’s well-known companion [according to the Shia], Abu Basir, states, “I was in the company of Abu ‘Abdullah when Umm Khalid (the one whose hand was amputated by Yusuf ibn ‘Umar) sought permission to enter.
Abu ‘Abdullah then asked, “Would you like to hear what she has got to say?”
I replied in the affirmative, after which he permitted her to enter. He made me sit on the mat. She entered and she was very eloquent. She then asked him with regards to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.
He replied, “Be amicable towards them.”
Thereafter she asked, “What shall I say to my Rabb when I meet Him, that you commanded me to be amicable towards them?”
He replied, “Yes!”
This is their sixth ‘infallible’ Imam—the one after whom they have named their mazhab and jurisprudence, referring to themselves as the Jafaris—who not only associates himself with them and has a good opinion of them but instructs his followers to do the same. May Allah’s mercy envelope him and all those who follow him in loving Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and the rest of Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu wedded his beloved daughter, Umm Kulthum—his daughter from Fatimahradiya Llahu ‘anha—to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu when he asked for her hand in marriage. A sure sign of his pleasure and goodwill towards him. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu recognised his virtue and good conduct, thus he allowed for their relationship to be further strengthened through the bonds of marriage. A fact which burns the hearts of the enemies of Islam. The historians, genealogists, and all Shia scholars attest to this marital contract. We have discussed this topic at length in our book al Shia wa al Sunnah.
For the benefit of the readers and to further strengthen our argument we now wish to transmit a few narrations which we have not transmitted in our book, al Shia wa al Sunnah.
The Shia historian Ahmed ibn Abi Ya’qub writes in his Tarikh, under the title, The incidents of the year 17 A.H in the Caliphate of ‘Umar ibn al Khattab:
In the year 17 A.H ‘Umar proposed for the hand of Umm Kulthum bint ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib—whose mother was Fatimah bint Rasul Allah radiya Llahu ‘anha.
‘Ali replied, “She is still a minor.”
‘Umar then explained, “My intention is not as you presume, rather I have heard the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saying, ‘All relations will be severed on the Day of Resurrection except my relations and associations [through marriage].’ I therefore desire to be connected to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”
Upon that ‘Ali married her to ‘Umar for the dowry of ten thousand gold coins.
Al Tabari in Tarikh al Umam wa l Muluk, Ibn Kathir in al Bidayah wa l Nihayah, Ibn al Athir in al Kamil, Ibn Sa’d in his al Tabaqat, and Abu al Fada’ in his Tarikh, as well as others mention similar reports.
The authors of the four canonical Shia works attest to this fact as well. Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Ya’qub al Kulayni writes in al Kafi:
‘Ali married his daughter, Umm Kulthum, to Umar.
He also transmits from Sulaiman ibn Khalid:
I inquired from Abu ‘Abdullah Jafar al Sadiq regarding a divorcee, as to where she should spend her ‘iddah (the waiting period divorce) and he said, “Should she spend her ‘iddah in her house or wherever she chooses to?”
I asked, “Wherever she chooses?”
He then said, “When ‘Umar passed away, ‘Ali took Umm Kulthum by her hand and went with her to his house.”
Al Tusi transmits from Jafar al Sadiq, who in turn transmits from his father, al Baqir:
Umm Kulthum bint ‘Ali and her son, Zaid ibn ‘Umar ibn al Khattab, passed away on the same day. It was not known who of the two passed away first, thus they did not inherit from one another and their funeral prayers were performed simultaneously.
From among the Shia scholars who transmit this report are: Al Sayed al Murtada in his book al Shafi and Tanzih al Ambiya’; Ibn Shaharashub in Manaqib Al Abi Talib; Arbili in Kashf al Ghummah fi Ma’rifat al A’immah, Ibn Abi al Hadid in Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, Muqaddas al Ardabili in Hadiqat al Shia, and Qadi Nur Allah al Shushtari (who is referred to as “the third martyr”) in his book Majalis al Mu’minin.
Al Shushtari transmits from al Miqdad ibn al Aswad radiya Llahu ‘anhu:
The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had married his daughter to ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali married his daughter to ‘Umar.
He also mentions their marriage in his book Masa’ib al Nawasib.
This marriage was also mentioned by al SayedNi’mat Allah al Jaza’iri in al Anwar al Nu’maniyyah, Mulla al Baqir al Majlisi in Bihar al Anwar, the Shia historian, Mirza ‘Abbas ‘Ali al Qummi, in his Tarikh, Muhammad al Jawwad al Shari in his biography, and ‘Abbas al Qummi in Muntaha al Amal. Only the insanely obstinate and ignorant would deny this reality.
Furthermore, the Shia jurists cite this report as proof for the permissibility of marriage between a Hashimi and non-Hashimi.
Al Hilli writes in Shara;’i’ al Islam:
It is permissible for a slave to marry one who is free, an Arab to marry a non-Arab, and a Hashimi to marry a non-Hashimi.
The commentator of al–Shara’i’, Zayn al ‘Amili—known as Shahid al Thani (the second martyr)—writes:
The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam married his daughter to ‘Uthman, and his other daughter, Zainab, to Abu al ‘As ibn Rabi’—both of whom were non-Hashimi. Similarly, ‘Ali married his daughter, Umm Kulthum, to ‘Umar. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn ‘Uthman married Fatimah bint Hussain, and Mus’ab ibn Zubair married her sister Sukaynah. And all of them were non-Hashimi.
We conclude by transmitting a report from Ibn Abi al Hadid al Mu’tazili al Shia who states:
‘Umar sent a messenger to the Roman King. Meanwhile Umm Kulthum purchased perfume with some gold coins, placed it in two containers, and sent it along with the messenger as a gift for the Roman King’s wife. On return the messenger came back with the two containers filled with gems.
‘Umar entered after she had placed the gems in her lap and asked, “Where did you get this from?”
She then informed him.
‘Umar took it from her and said, “This belongs to the believers.”
She then inquired, “How can it belong to the believers, whereas it was gifted to me?”
‘Umar replied, “Your father will judge between the two of us.”
‘Ali told her, “For you is the equivalent of wealth that you have spent in purchasing the perfume, and the remainder goes to the believers on account of it being their messenger who had transported it.”
A number of their genealogists and biographers have transmitted similar reports, the likes of al Baladhuri in Ansab al Ashraf, Ibn Hazm in Jamharat Ansab al ‘Arab, al Baghdadi in al Muhabbar, and al Dinawari in al Ma’arif.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu often used to give preference to the Ahlul Bayt over his own family by sending them gifts, and tending to their needs. Shia historians record that when ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu allocated stipends from the Bayt al Mal (public treasury), he gave preference to the Banu Hashim over all the other tribes out of reverence for them and their close kinship to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Al Ya’qubi writes:
‘Umar had implemented the register and stipulated the distribution of gifts in the year 20 A.H.
Umar said, “There is an abundance of wealth and it was suggested to me that I implement the register.”
Thereafter he called ‘Aqil ibn Abi Talib, Makhramah ibn Nawfal, and Jubayr ibn Mut’im ibn Nawfal ibn ‘Abd Manaf; and said to them, “Give the people in accordance with their rank. Start with ‘Abd Manaf. He then apportioned five thousand for ‘Ali, three thousand for Hassan, three thousand for Hussain… and four thousand for himself.
This was the first wealth ‘Umar had distributed, which Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu had brought from Bahrain. It amounted to 700 000 silver coins.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
“Give the people in accordance with their ranks.”
They firstly stipulated for Banu ‘Abd Manaf, then for the family of Abu Bakr, thereafter for ‘Umar and his family.
‘Umar observed and remarked, “How I wish that I was a close relative of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam! However, begin with (the family of) the Messenger of Allah, then those who are closest to him, until you have given ‘Umar in the place where Allah has respectively placed him.”
Ibn Abi al Hadid transmits:
He said, “Start with the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his family. Thereafter those who follow in rank.” He started with Banu Hashim, then Banu ‘Abd al Muttalib, ‘Abd al Shams, and thereafter the rest of the tribes of Quraysh.
He records in another narration:
‘Umar distributed garments among the women of Madinah. One garment remained, and some of those present suggested, “O leader of the believers, give it to the daughter of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam who is in your care (referring to Umm Kulthum bint ‘Ali).”
‘Umar then instructed, “Give it to Umm Sulayt, as she was from amongst those who had pledged allegiance to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and she provided water for us to drink on the Day of Uhud.”
It has been proven that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu respected and revered the Ahlul Bayt, and that he would also give preference to them over everyone else, even his own family.
It is reported that the daughter of Yazdegerd (the Persian king) was sent to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu after she had been taken captive along with the people of Persia. Everyone stared at her and thought that she would be gifted to the son of ‘Umar, as he was her equal, and a brave soldier who had fought under the banner of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on numerous occasions. However, ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not take her for himself, nor for any of his relatives; rather he gave preference to the Ahlul Bayt and gifted her to Hussain ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. It was from this union that ‘Ali ibn al Hussain was born—the only son of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu to survive Karbala’ and continue his progeny.
A well-known Shia genealogist Ibn ‘Inabah writes:
Her name was Shaharbanu. It is said that she was taken captive when the cities were conquered. ‘Umar had later gifted her to Hussain.
The renowned Shia scholar Abu Jafar al Kulayni transmits the following narration from Muhammad al Baqir in his al Kafi:
When they brought the daughter of Yazdegerd to the Khalifah ‘Umar, young girls climbed higher (to see her) and the mosque was illuminated by her radiant face.
Once she caught sight of ‘Umar inside the mosque, she covered her face and sighed, “Ah biruz bada Hurmuz, i.e. May Hurmuz be vicious.”
‘Umar became angry and said, “Are you cursing me,” and intended to strike her.
At this ‘Ali intervened and said to ‘Umar, “She is not for you. Allow her to choose a man from among the Muslims and he will pay her price from the spoils he has earned.”
‘Umar then said to the girl, “Choose!”
She stepped forward and placed her hand on Hussain’s head.
‘Ali asked her, “What is your name?”
She replied, “Jahan Shah.”
‘Ali said, “Rather it is Shahar Banuyah.”
Thereafter he said to Hussain, “O Abu ‘Abdullah! She will bear for you the best of those on the face of the earth.”
She then gave birth to ‘Ali ibn al Hussain regarding whom it is said, “The best of both.” Being from the best of Arabs (Hashimis) and none Arabs (Persians). Abu al Aswad al Du’ali says regarding him:
The lad who is crossed between Kisra and a Hashimi, is nobler than a suspended amulet.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had also assisted his father ‘Ali, in his marriage to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu used to begin with the Ahlul Bayt when distributing the khumus and booty, just as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had done and Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu maintained. We have previously mentioned that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu used to take the harvest of Fadak and give the Ahlul Bayt that which sufficed them. Thereafter he would distribute the rest. Abu Bakr was then succeeded by ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali; who all did the same.
As for the honour that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had afforded to the Ahlul Bayt.
Ibn Abi al Hadid transmits from Yahya:
‘Umar told Hussain to come and see him with regards to some of his needs. On his way there, he met ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar. He then asked ‘Abdullah where he came from?
He replied, “I sought permission to enter upon my father, but I was not permitted.”
Hussain then returned.
The following day ‘Umar met him, and asked, “What occupied you from coming to me?”
Hussain replied, “I was on my way to you, however, on my way I met your son, ‘Abdullah, and he informed me that he was not granted permission to enter, thus I returned.”
‘Umar remarked, “Are you and him the same in my eyes? Does our hair stand on end for others besides you?
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu also used to say regarding the Banu Hashim as reported by ‘Ali ibn al Hussain—from his father Hussain—from ‘Ali that ‘Umar used to say:
Visiting the Banu Hashim when they are ill is Sunnah and visiting them in general is Nafl (a supererogatory act)”.
Al Tusi and al Saduq report that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not allow anyone to speak ill of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in his presence:
A person once spoke ill of ‘Ali in his presence and ‘Umar said to him, “Do you know that the Companion of this grave (referring to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) only used to speak good about ‘Ali, and by harming ‘Ali you are harming the Companion of this grave.”
The Ahlul Bayt loved ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and treated him with the utmost respect and honour. They too did not allow anything to be said against ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu in their presence. In fact they would disassociate themselves from those who would do so and rebut whatever had been said.
Furthermore, out of reverence and respect for ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, they married one of the granddaughters of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to him. The Ahlul Bayt would obey ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, have good will towards him, and give him counsel. In addition, ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu used to appoint them as ministers and representatives, which they accepted willingly. They fought under his banner and would not delay in giving him sound advice. They also exerted themselves in fulfilling that which ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had asked from them.
In support of what we have stated, we quote the letter of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu which he sent to his supporters in Egypt, after the assassination of his governor Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr. After mentioning the incidents that had succeeded the demise of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam he states:
Abu Bakr assumed leadership… when he was in the throes of death, he sent for ‘Umar and appointed him. We obeyed him and had good will towards him. [Thereafter he praised ‘Umar as was his habit; whenever ‘Ali spoke about ‘Umar, he would praise him excessively.] Thereafter ‘Umar assumed leadership, who had good conduct and was maymun al naqibah.
In other words, we did not delay in pledging allegiance to him nor is it that we were unwilling to obey him and harboured ill will towards him. His conduct was good, his soul was favourable and blessed, and he was successful in his endeavours.
It is worthy of mention at this point, that the Shia scholar who attempted to refute our writings and concealed his name with the initials S. Kh., even though he attests to everything we have stated, still had the audacity to write after the discussion of the virtues of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar:
Had I been present at ‘Ali’s pulpit when he cried and praised the two of them at length, I would have said to him:
None other than you has emboldened us to oppose and seek vengeance for you; owing to you preventing the Ahlul Bayt of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the select Companions of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from pledging allegiance to the two of them. ‘Umar was then forced to gather firewood and come to your house with the intention to burn it down with all those in it, and the daughter of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was inside. When it was said to him, “The daughter of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is inside [the house],” he replied, “Even if it is so… until we remove you from it forcefully.” You only pledged allegiance after six months, and only after your wife had passed away while she was angry with them for what they had done. She had even instructed you to bury her at night, which you did, on account of what they did to the two of you.
If you knew—O ‘Ali—that this was their status in the eyes of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then why did you, your wives, and your companions react in this manner; emboldening us to criticise them for their actions?
Furthermore, why then—O ‘Ali—in your address to Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, who ridiculed you with this incident saying, “Until they have dragged you out of your house like a camel with scabies,” boastfully respond to him saying, “The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam made my leadership incumbent upon you at Ghadir Khum.”?
How is it possible for you to claim that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam never had the same regard for others opinions as he had for theirs nor did he love others as he loved them when we read in the annals of history many instances where ‘Umar would oppose the opinion of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam? We saw that after the Battle of Badr, ‘Umar suggested that he should take the life of his uncle, ‘Abbas, and you (‘Ali) take the life of your brother. The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then disagreed with him and allowed them to be ransomed. On another occasion—at the Conquest of Makkah—’Umar suggested that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam should take the life of Abu Sufyan but the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam again disagreed, releasing him and making his house a sanctuary for those who feared.
And lastly—but not the last [of his offences]—prior to the demise of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he said, “Bring me a shoulder blade and paper, so that I may write for you a letter after which you will not go astray.” ‘Umar then opposed him and said, “With us is the Book of Allah which does not fall short of that which the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam has got to offer.” Thus he angered him and he instructed them to leave, and they left.
Along with many such examples, so why not say that which is true and correct, O ‘Ali?
Let us assume that you—O ‘Ali—knew that they did not disobey the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam during his lifetime but how can the same be said for after his demise? Did the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam teach you this? Then when they—Abu Bakr and ‘Umar—differed regarding the case of Khalid ibn al Walid with which of them would the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam have sided with?
There is no doubt that ‘Ali would have said, “May the curse of Allah be on the liar and fabricator.”
I am of the same persuasion, “May the curse of Allah be on the liar,” whether it is S. Kh. or al Safi.
Let the worst man be sacrificed for the best.
In all probability ‘Ali would have actually answered him:
O you lying, fabricating enquirer, who has the courage to sit under my pulpit. I do not consider you except from the progeny of Ibn Muljim [the one who murdered ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu] when you curse and insult my in-laws (‘Umar), the husband of the daughter of Fatimah the daughter of the Messenger of Allah, May peace and blessing descend upon him. You have falsely attributed to me that which I did not say or do. You belie ‘Umar and you belie me, yet claim to love me and support me? You claim that I am the one who emboldened you against the two of them; you are most certainly from the progeny of Ibn Saba’, whose existence you deny out of fear and apprehension of being exposed since your actions, views, and words are identical to his. You know very well that I am the one who had set him ablaze after he had intended to cause confusion, unrest, and strife in the ranks of the Muslims. Even your predecessors have discussed him. But now in the fourteenth century you come along and deny his existence, and all the evil he perpetrated! May the curse of Allah be upon the liar and the fabricator. Allah does not like the public mention of evil except by one who had been wronged. So who is the liar and fabricator you or your companion, Ibn Saba’?
As for the leader of the Ahlul Bayt, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu—may Allah protect him from the evil of these statements—how many sermons of his do the Shia reject yet claim to have allegiance with him? We have transmitted this sermon of his from the book which the Shia compiled, commented on, examined, and printed. Thereafter they presented it to the world saying:
It is al Gharat and other such books that became like grazing pastures and sources of legislation for the Shia. Very rarely does one find recognised Shia literature except that they make reference to it. We would now like to bring to your attention some of the scholars who transmit from it, directly and indirectly.
This book, is one of their essential books which is often referenced. By the grace of Allah, despite the Shia attempts, we have established that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, a pledge which he lived up to. Furthermore, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu himself attests to it after their demise. What excuse do these authors then have?
Were they not the ones who had said:
May the curse of Allah be upon the liars.
Al Tusi in his book Al Amali in which he transmits from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, attests to this fact:
I then pledged allegiance to ‘Umar just as you did, and I complied. When ‘Umar was stabbed, he appointed me as the sixth candidate for the Caliphate, and I had entered where he had entered me.
‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu pledged allegiance to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, obeyed him, had good will towards him, and was pleased with what he had commanded.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu formed part of the council ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had appointed, which the Khalifah was chosen from. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was also his minister, councillor, and judge. We have previously mentioned many incidents in which ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu would consult his advisors, amongst whom was ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Most often ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu would take the opinion of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu over the rest. Al Ya’qubi—the Shia historian—writes:
‘Umar consulted the Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam regarding the marsh lands of Kufah.
Some of them said, “Distribute it among us.”
Thereafter ‘Umar consulted ‘Ali, who said, “If you were to distribute it today, then nothing will remain for those who will succeed us. Therefore, leave it in their position to see to and cultivate. Thus we and those who will succeed us will benefit from it.”
‘Umar then remarked, “Allah had truly inspired you with this opinion!”
Similarly there are many reports of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu having had an opinion contrary to the other Companions, and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu would give preference to his opinion over the rest.
Sheikh al Mufid has dedicated an entire chapter titled, Mention of ‘Ali’s legal rulings in the Caliphate of ‘Umar, under which he quotes many reports wherein ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu gave preference to the opinions of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
A lady who had fallen pregnant as a result of fornication was brought to ‘Umar. He commanded that she be stoned.
‘Ali asked, “Is there not a way out for that which is in her stomach? Since Allah states in the Quran, “And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another.”
‘Umar said, “I would have had to live with this dilemma if it were not for Abu al Hassan!”
He then asked “What should I do?”
‘Ali replied, “Practice precaution and grant her respite until she gives birth. After she gives birth and finds someone to look after the child, we can carry out the punishment.”
‘Umar was relieved and ruled in accordance with the verdict of ‘Ali. 
Al Mufid also writes:
‘Umar had summoned a lady, regarding whom people were talking about (that she had fornicated). When his messengers reached her, she was afraid. She went with them but on the way she miscarried. ‘Umar was informed and he gathered the Sahabah. He asked them with regards to its ruling.
They replied “You are the discipliner and your intention was pure, thus you are innocent and do not need to pay blood money.”
‘Ali remained silent not giving any opinion.
‘Umar then asked ‘Ali, “What is your opinion with regards to this matter O Abu al Hassan?”
He replied, “You have heard what they had said.”
‘Umar then asked again, “What is your opinion?”
He responded in the same manner.
Thereafter ‘Umar said, “I take an oath that you will give your opinion.”
‘Ali then said, “If they spoke only what you desired to hear to get closer to you then they have deceived you. However, if they have given it thought and reached this conclusion, then they have fallen short as miscarrying the baby was associated with you.”
At this ‘Umar remarked, “By Allah you have advised me! Do not leave until you delivered the blood money to Banu ‘Adi, which ‘Ali then carried out.”
Al Mufid records elsewhere:
A female who had given birth after six months of pregnancy was brought to ‘Umar. He then wanted to apply the capital punishment (stoning) on her.
‘Ali said, “If I were to engage you, using the Book of Allah I would be victorious, ‘And his gestation and weaning [period] is thirty months.’ And, ‘Mothers may nurse [i.e., breastfeed] their children two complete years for whoever wishes to complete the nursing [period].’ If the female were to complete the two year nursing period, she would be left with six months of pregnancy.”
‘Umar then left her, and institutionalised the ruling which was then followed by the Sahabah, and those who succeeded them up to the present day.
He records elsewhere:
It is reported that witnesses gave evidence against a woman that they had found at one of the watering places of the Bedouins and a man who was not her husband was having intercourse with her. ‘Umar ordered her to be stoned as she had a husband.
She declared, “O Allah, You know that I am innocent.”
‘Umar said, “Do you impugn the witnesses as well?”
‘Ali said, “Let them bring her back and let them question her. Perhaps she has an excuse.”
She was brought back and questioned about the circumstances (of what she had done).
She said, “My family had some camels. I went out with my family’s camels and took with me some water. There was no milk in the camels. A neighbour of ours had camels with him and there was milk in his camels. My water was used up and I asked him to give me a drink. He refused to give me a drink unless I submitted myself to him. I refused. When my life was about to depart I submitted myself to him unwillingly.”
‘Ali said, “Allahu Akbar, whoever is compelled (to do something) without desiring (to do it) is not a transgressor and no sin is (counted) against him.”
When ‘Umar heard that he freed her.
In all of these matters ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had judged in accordance with the rulings of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. ‘Umar often used to say, as transmitted by the Shia:
‘Ali is the best of judges among us.
After all of these rulings and consultations, is it possible for one to say that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu opposed ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu or that there was animosity between them, or even to assume that he did not pledge allegiance to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the other Khalifas’?
Is it still possible for someone to believe that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not approve of their Caliphate, whereas he personally participated in offering consultation, which will then later be implemented?
Furthermore, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not just the judge, advisor, and minister of Amir al Mu’minin ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu but also acted as the representative and deputy of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. In the year 15 A.H, when the people of Syria sought assistance from ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu against the people of Palestine, ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu consulted his companions and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu tried persuading him not to go:
‘Ali said, “Do not go yourself as you are about to face a ferocious enemy.”
‘Umar replied, “I will engage the enemy before ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd Muttalib passes away, because if you were to lose him, evil would overcome you (Muslims) just as how a rope is unwoven.”
Look at the love that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had for the Ahlul Bayt and for the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam uncle in particular. Thereafter ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu set out for Syria and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was left in charge of Madinah.
A Shia historian mentions that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had appointed ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu over the affairs of the Muslims and the Islamic capital on three occasions. The first time was in the year 14 A.H when ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu personally went and fought against the people of Iraq, then the year 15 A.H when he fought against the Romans, and finally in the year 17 A.H when ‘Umar went to ‘Aylah.
It was for that very reason, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu had stated when they wanted to pledge allegiance to him:
Me being a minister would be better for you than me being the Amir.
In which he alludes to the days when he was appointed as the minster in the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar in particular.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, his family, and others would fight under his banner, accept booty, gifts, slave girls, and servants from him. If ‘Umar’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu Caliphate was improper and unlawful, it would not have been correct for him to wage war. As a result all those slaves that were taken captive as a result thereof would have been taken wrongfully. Additionally, it would not have been permissible for the Ahlul Bayt to derive any benefit from it.
However even the Shia attest to the fact that Hassan ibn ‘Ali, the grandson of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam used to fight under the banner of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu during his Caliphate, follow his instructions and guidelines, and formed part of the army that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had sent to Iran.
The Shia state:
In Isfahan there is a Masjid which is referred to as the tongue of the earth. It has been named such because when Imam Hassan came to Isfahan with the Muslim army in the Caliphate of ‘Umar as a soldier and a conqueror, they settled at a place and the earth then spoke to him. Henceforth it was referred to as the tongue of the earth.
This serves as clear evidence of what we have stated.
Lastly we would like to conclude this chapter by presenting a clear depiction of the mutual love that was prevalent among the Ahlul Bayt and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The Ahlul Bayt would name their children after him, out of love and reverence for him, and in honour of his services to Islam. These bonds were also further strengthened through marriage.
The first to have named his son ‘Umar, was none other than their first ‘infallible’ Imam himself.
‘Ali had named his son ‘Umar, who was conceived by Umm Habib bint Rabi’ah al Bakriyyah who was given to him by Abu Bakr. As transmitted by al Mufid, al Ya’qubi, al Majlisi, al Isfahani, and the author of Fusul.
Al Mufid mentions under the chapter, Mention of the children of Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali, their names, and numbers:
Amir al Mu’minin had twenty-seven children in total: 1) Hassan 2) Hussain… 6) ‘Umar and 7) Ruqayyah were twins, whose mother was Umm Habib bint Rabi’ah.
Al Ya’qubi states that ‘Ali had fourteen sons:
Hassan, Hussain, and Muhsin who had passed away in infancy; their mother was Fatimah bint Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
‘Umar’s’ mother was Umm Habib bint Rabi’ah al Bakriyyah.
Al Majlisi states:
Umar ibn ‘Ali was from amongst those who were killed alongside Hussain at Karbala’. His mother was Umm al Banin bint al Hizam al Kalbiyyah.
The author of al Fusul, after mentioning the children of ‘Ali writes:
‘Umar was conceived by the slave, Sahba’ bint Rabi’ah, who was taken captive by Khalid ibn Walid at ‘Ayn al Tamr. ‘Umar lived up to the age of eighty-five, thus he took half of ‘Ali’s estate as most of his half and full brothers who were ‘Abdullah, Jafar, and ‘Uthman were all killed with their brother Hussain. He did not fight with them at al Taf (Karbala) thus he inherited from them. 
‘Ali’s son, Hassan, followed suit in naming his child ‘Umar.
Al Mufid writes under the chapter, Mention of the children of Hassan ibn ‘Ali, their names, and number:
The children of Hassan ibn ‘Ali were fifteen in total 1) Zaid… 5)’Umar, 6) Qasim, and 7) ‘Abdullah whose mother was a slave.
Al Majlisi states:
‘Umar ibn Hassan was from among those who were killed alongside Hussain at Karbala’.
However, al Isfahani is of the opinion that he was not killed, rather he was taken captive. He states:
His family was taken captive (after the martyrdom of Hussain), and amongst them were ‘Umar, Zaid, and Hassan ibn al Hassan ibn Abi Talib.
Hussain ibn ‘Ali had also named one of his sons ‘Umar, as mentioned by al Majlisi when he listed those from the Ahlul Bayt who were martyred alongside Hussain at Karbala’. He writes:
Those who were killed from the sons of Hussain were ‘Ali al Akbar and ‘Abdullah, who was martyred in his (Hussain) lap. Some suggest that ‘Umar and Zaid were also from among those who were martyred.
Hussain’s son ‘Ali, whose title was Zayn al ‘Abidin, had also named his son ‘Umar, which was the name of his uncle, i.e. his aunt, Umm Kulthum’s, husband and the friend of his grandfather, the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
Al Mufid mentions under the title, Mention of the children of ‘Ali:
‘Ali ibn al Hussain had fifteen children in total: 1) Muhammad nicknamed Abu Jafar al Baqir, whose mother was Umm ‘Abdullah bint al Hassan… 6) ‘Umar whose mother was a slave.
Al Isfahani states that ‘Umar was the full brother of Zaid ibn ‘Ali. He writes under the biography of Zaid ibn ‘Ali:
Zaid ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib: His mother was a slave who Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubaid had gifted to ‘Ali ibn Abi al Hussain. She conceived Zaid, ‘Umar, ‘Ali, and Khadijah.
Mukhtar had purchased a slave girl for thirty thousand.
He said to her, “Leave,” and she left, he then called her back and she returned.
Thereafter he remarked, “I do not know of anyone, who is more deserving of her than ‘Ali ibn al Hussain.”
Thereafter he gifted her to him. And she then later gave birth to Zaid ibn ‘Ali.
It is worthy of note that most of ‘Umar’s sons rebelled against the ‘Abbasids and joined the ranks of their cousins.
Similarly, Musa ibn Jafar al Kazim (their seventh Imam) also named one of his sons ‘Umar. Al Arbili mentions under the title, Musa ibn Jafar’s children.
In conclusion this is a clear depiction of the five “infallible” Imams exhibiting their love and support for ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu even long after he had passed on.
Is there any greater manifestation of love and respect for ‘Umar ibn al Khattab?
Despite all of these opinions, the name of ‘Umar carried on in their progeny. As mentioned in the books of history and genealogy, some of which al Isfahani mentions in his book, Maqatil, and al Arbili in Kashf al Ghummah.
Al Isfahani states:
From amongst the progeny of Abu Talib who had revolted, and sought leadership and governance in the reigns of Musta’in was Yahya ibn ‘Umar ibn al Hussain ibn Zaid ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.
‘Umar ibn Ishaq ibn al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain revolted with Hussain ibn ‘Ali, well known by the title Sahib al Fakh, in the days of Musa al Kazim, as well as ‘Umar ibn al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hassan ibn al Hussain ibn al Hassan.
Aside from the Shia, the Ahlul Bayt continued naming their children after ‘Umar, and continue to do so up to the present day. However we have sufficed with the aforementioned five, owing to their claims that these individuals were infallible Imams. This is the attitude and position the Ahlul Bayt adopted towards the Sahabah of theProphet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. They would honour, respect, and support ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu in the same manner that they used to respect Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. They were faithful towards him. They even attempted to keep his legacy alive by naming their children after him and intermarrying into each other’s progenies.
Denying the existence of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ is like denying the presence of the sun on a clear summer’s day. There are none from amongst the predecessors who have denied the existence of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’. We call on the Shia as well and ask them to name one of their predecessors—not ours—who had denied his existence and claimed him to be a fictional character.
From among them is our ‘friend’, who had plucked up the courage to respond to us, if only he were able to. How eager and curious wasn’t I, when I heard that someone had plucked up the courage to rebut me, wanting to know how he would rebut me. If I was wrong, I would have acknowledged my mistakes and shortcomings.
How eager wasn’t I to hear that I have transmitted from an unreliable source, or that I have incorrectly attributed a statement, or that my conclusion was incorrect!
I do not acquit myself from errors, and how can I when ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu—who is considered to be infallible—acknowledges that he himself is not free from error? He states:
Do not suffice with a statement which is said to be true, or known to be said by a person with integrity, as I am not free from error. (See Appendix 1)
I desired so much to be rectified, however, all praises and favours are from Allah. All of these disputes, insults, blasphemy, objections, and repetitive lies have only increased me in faith. And the fact is that it was only Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala Who had guided and aided me in defending the Sahabah of Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, exposing the Shia and their evil intentions by using their own literature to do so.
They are unable to deny or reject anything I have said, because in doing so they would be rejecting their own books, scholars, and leaders.
It is worthy of note that we did not establish the existence of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’s in our book al Shia wa al-Sunnah, by relying upon transmissions from the Ahlus Sunnah—the likes of Ibn Hajar, al Dhahabi, Ibn Hibban, Ibn Makula, or al Bukhari. Rather, we have done so by using al Kashshi—their leading scholar in the science of rijal (transmitters of hadith), al Nawbakhti—their leading scholar in firaq (the study of deviant sects), and a Shia historian in al Rawdah al Safa. All of these books are their own, which were authored, examined, and scrutinised by their senior scholars.
Therefore, it cannot be said that it had been inserted by the examiner or the commentator. So what then gives him the right to question:
But who is ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’? Where did this ability and influence we see in Egypt, Iraq, Basrah, and Kufah emerge from and he was present at every incident, aware of everything transpiring? Where did this ability and influence come from, which enabled him to have done what he had? Why did the earlier historians not make mention of him? Why did ‘Uthman not complain about him in the manner in which he had complained about Abu Dhar, ‘Ammar, and ‘Abd al Rahman; treating them and doing to them what he wished, despite them being the Sahabah of Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the appraised from among the Muslims?
Why did they not reproach him whereas he was just an ordinary Jew? Why is that we do not find any mention of him being made in their incidents or complaints when he was the orchestrator of all the chaos and differences?
He was non-existent except in the imaginations of those who sought to vindicate ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. What is even more astonishing is the manner in which they insist on his existence despite their proofs being fictitious.
Who is he questioning in reality, us or his own scholars the likes of al Kashshi and al Nawbakhti? Woe to the abandoning of the truth for falsehood! Woe to their lies, deceit, and their persistence therein.
Do they really think that their distasteful and repulsive words frighten those who wish to unveil and expose their shameful deeds and abomination? Look at how persistent these lies are! What an insult to the intellect! They have the audacity to forge information merely to deceive those who are not familiar with the incident.
How many have been deceived in this matter and are now preoccupied with such issues which have no basis? Who will now save the Shia from the truth and the clutches of those who know?
In another place he states:
We the Shia have sifted history in search of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’, and we have come to know that he was from the 4th century A.H.
We are thus forced to ask: How have you sifted history? By changing the facts and shutting your eyes which very seldom see the truth? If that was not the case, I would not have needed to write this treatise. You are well aware that there are none from amongst your scholars, prior to the fourteenth century (A.H) who holds that opinion. If what I am saying is incorrect then present your proof, if you are truthful.
You have but followed your desires They have hearts with which they do not understand, they have eyes with which they do not see, and they have ears with which they do not hear. Despite you mentioning in your study of the interpolation of the Qur’an;
It is unfortunate that the only reason why others are saying that the Qur’an has not been distorted is out of adherence to he who had compiled the Qur’an, which in essence is blind following which we unconditionally reject. It is also that very adherence (Taqlid) that Allah censors in the Qur’an when condemning the Jews and Christians for following their Popes and Rabbis, taking their word without examining it. Allah speaks about worshiping them despite them not having physically worshipped them. Rather, it was on account of them considering lawful, and unlawful that which they have rendered lawful and unlawful without any authority. Thus they worshiped them inadvertently.
Look at these contradictions. However, they are all constituents of lies! You prevent from something yet you are guilty of it. Shame on you for preventing from something and thereafter indulging therein.
You condemn the Ahlus Sunnah on account of them denying that the Qur’an was interpolated, due to bias towards those who had compiled the Qur’an namely Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Yet you follow the likes of Sayed Haydar, Muhammad Jawwad Mughniyah, al Wardi, al Shaybi, Taha Hussain, and other orientalists. All of them being from this century, and in addition not having produced any evidence for their renunciation of Ibn Saba’s existence.
Even if they did have supporting evidences, then too, you would not have been forced to say that this individual was from the fourth century, as highlighted earlier, since those from the fourth century contradict what you have said. If you only gave it some thought, you would not have denied his existence, as the source that I relied upon to establish ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’s interaction and activities from, is a reliable Shia scholar who had written, and preceded him by a century, i.e. third century A.H. The book is none other than Firaq al Shia by Abu Muhammad ibn al Hassan ibn Musa al Rida al Nawbakhti, who was a scholar from the third century.
I fail to understand how Ustadh Asad Haydar could deny the existence of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba, and in doing so base his renunciation of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’s existence on statements, which are based on assumptions and the imaginations of the likes of al Wardi, al Shaybi, Mughniyah, Taha Hussain, and others. He states:
Very rarely would one find a book on Islamic history except that it makes mention of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’.
He further states:
The time has come for us to unmask this myth.
Why is it that none of the predecessors have uncovered it, or have they left it to you and your kind to tire yourselves?
We will also discuss the incentives that had made others keep their silence.
Let us analyse their main objective, and incentive for wanting to unmask this “myth”:
Ill-advised is he who considers “reprehensible” the study of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ at this point in time due to it being an issue from the past. Thus, it would not be correct to exhume these matters and to circulate pages which time has consumed.
We are of the opinion, however, that this matter had not been concluded and forgotten, contrary to the opinion that some might hold. Rather, new defects are constantly highlighted and disseminated, which serve as a basis for the objections and criticism levelled against the Shia in contemporary literature.
The impression that some might give about the nature of this matter, that it had concluded, is incorrect. Rather, the more one studies ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ and the history of the Shia, the more one comes to know about their origin, beliefs, and agendas. It is an established fact which cannot be denied irrespective of the passing of time, continuous lies, and the voices of the antagonist being raised without any supportive evidence. The study of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ is a means through which the origin of the Shia is discovered, those who tried to distort this glorious religion of Islam. After writing six pages he states:
The myth, ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ has gained a liking in the hearts of many orientalists, and writers… They have given it special attention and given more explanation with such fascinating expressions. Furthermore, they are repeating it so often, as if factual, and convinced that he existed.
‘Abdullah ibn Saba’s existence is a fact. The author however, wishes to erect a structure on sand that fails to stand. After discussing at length he says:
Perhaps one might think, that there is a reliable source, taking into consideration how often it is mentioned in the books of history. However, all of that is incorrect as it has no basis which will soon be explained.
We would like to say to him: Leave the mudslinging aside and start explaining. However, he continues to writes another four pages, titled al Masdar (the source), in which he states:
We consider it necessary to explain the source of these stories. We pause for a moment and examine the source which was used by many. Furthermore, we have also come across books that were inclined to question the authenticity of these reports, but were not able to state so freely as they were under the impression that these reports were Mutawatir and transmitted from reliable historians, which led them not to question it. However, they do deny the hyperboles.
After another preface, he writes another page (See Appendix 2) saying:
The unprecedented source of these stories is none other than Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari (d. 310 A.H), the author of Tafsir al Kabir and Tarikh al Umam wa l Muluk better known as Tarikh al Tabari. This is the solitary source for all of these incidents connected to ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’. Ibn al Athir (d. 630 A.H), Ibn Kathir (d. 774 A.H), Ibn Khaldun (d. 808 A.H) and others intern all transmit from Ibn Jarir.
After having written 14 pages in his forward, he goes on to write an approximate 24 pages in which he goes through great difficulty in researching and criticising the knowledge of al Tabari and those who had vindicated him.
We say to you, “O he who has adopted the methodology of impartiality, speculation in criticism, and rationality.”
We do not wish to burden you with all of this research, and the trouble of having to go through all of these books of rijal (See Appendix 3). We will simplify matters for you.
We reiterate what we have said to S-Kh and his associates: We are not transmitting from al Tabari, Ibn al Athir, nor Ibn Kathir, rather we are transmitting from al Nawbakhti. And al Nawbakhti definitely does not transmit from al Tabari. No Shia has ever accused him of doing so. In fact, it is highly likely that al Nawbakhti could have preceded al Tabari, but he definitely did not succeed him as he was the contemporary of Thabit ibn Qurrah (d. 288 A.H). Al Nawbakhti is also considered to be the cornerstone for the books of the Shia discussing firaq (deviant sects).
Thereafter, we also transmit from a Shia scholar who is known for insulting and cursing his opposition viz. al Kashshi who was the contemporary of Ibn Qulawiyyah (d. 369 A.H).
Kashshi’s book is considered to be one of the first and most important books discussing Shia narrators:
This book is considered to be one of the four most important books in the science of rijal.
Amongst those who have followed suit in establishing the existence of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ are:
Al Tusi, known as al Sheikh al Ta’ifah, in his book on rijal,
Ibn Abi al Hadid in his commentary on Nahj al Balaghah,
Al Hilli in his Khulasah,
Al Qummi in Tuhfat al Ahbab,
Al Khuwansari in Rawdat al Jannat,
Al Mamaqani in Tanqih al Maqal,
Mirza in Nasikh al Tawarikh,
Al Tusturi in Qamus al Rijal,
Al ‘Abbas al Qummi in al Kuna wa l Alqab,
And many others who do not transmit from al Tabari.
Therefore, he should not burden himself with researching the creed of al Tabari, and his chains of transmission.
We wish to facilitate matters for Ustadh Haydar and his supporters of this epoch, regarding which al Murtada ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:
After me a time will come upon you in which there will be nothing as concealed as the truth, and as evident as falsehood.
Let us facilitate matters for those who deny the existence of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’, as al Tabari was preceded in discussing ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’.
Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al Thaqafi al Kufi is an orthodox Shia who had authored over fifty books propagating his creed. In his book, al Gharat, which is considered to be one of their most important sources and often referenced by the likes of Ibn Abi al Hadid, al Hilli, al Majlisi, al Hurr al ‘Amili, al Nuri, al Qummi, al Shirazi, al Khu’i, al Mirza, Muhammad Taqi, al Mamaqani, and others. He writes:
From ‘Abd al Rahman ibn Jundub — from his father, Jundub: “‘Amr ibn al Hamd, Hujr ibn ‘Adi, Habbat al ‘Awfi, al Harith al A’war, and ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ entered upon Amir al Mu’minin (‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu), after Egypt was conquered and ‘Ali was grieved.
They asked him, “Tell us what is your opinion regarding Abu Bakr and ‘Umar)?”
He replied, “Have you come just for this, whereas Egypt has been conquered, and my supporters have been killed? I will give to you a letter in which I will inform you about what you have asked me. I request that you protect my right which you have overlooked. So read it to my supporters and become aids to the truth.”
It is known that al Tabari wrote and compiled his book after the year 300 A.H. On the other hand al Thaqafi had authored his book somewhere around the year 250 A.H, and died in 283 A.H approximately. He was a known extremist Shia. The Shia narrate many an incident about his extreme Shiasm.
The book is yours, examined by your scholars, and printed by your publishing houses. Furthermore, it was advertised by a Shia committee that was established in order to spread Shia literature.
After proving that Abu Jafar al Tabari was not the first to discuss ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’, and that Shia scholars had preceded him in doing so, does one really need to debate this issue? I wish to liken this to a Persian poem, and how wonderfully was it said:
If this is a crime, then know that its perpetrators are from your city.
Lastly we would like to say to those envious and arrogant Shia who have noticed that this dishonour had met up with them and their brazen and insulting nature. Whenever their school will be mentioned it will be said that the founder of it was ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’.
We beseech you, by Allah, that you do not deny his existence (see Appendix 4) by doing Taqiyyah (dissimulation), out of fear of being disgraced and the truth being unveiled. Because you are part of a religion that believes, “If you conceal it Allah honours you, and if you publicise it Allah disgraces you.” (See Appendix 5)
As for what they attribute to Muhammad al Baqir, their sixth Imam:
Taqiyyah is a need (See Appendix 6). He who is in a situation knows best when to resort to it.
Is there any doubt that these beliefs are still present among the Shia today, being memorised, adhered to, believed in, and practiced upon?
However, it is Allah who guides to the straight path. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala has facilitated that we discuss ‘Abdullah ibn Saba in brief. However, guidance is in His control.
 Sahih al Bukhari; Sahih Muslim.
 Surah al Najm: 3, 4
 Op. cit.
 Jami’ al Tirmidhi.
 Nahj al Balaghah pg. 557 verification of Subhi al Salih; Nahj al Balaghah vol. 4 pg. 107 verification of Muhammad ‘Abdah.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 5 pg. 463 by Ibn Maytham; al Durrah al Najafiyyah pg. 394.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 4 pg. 517 by Ibn Abi al Hadid.
 Nahj al Balaghah pg. 350 verification of Subhi al Salih; Nahj al Balaghah vol. 2 pg. 322 verification of Muhammad ‘Abdah.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 3 pg. 92 by Ibn Abi al Hadid.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 4 pg. 96-97 by Ibn Maytham.
 Ibid pg. 257.
 Ibid vol. 4 pg. 712.
 Nahj al Balaghah pg. 193.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 2 pg. 369, 370.
 Which we will mention in detail shortly.
 Nahj al Balaghah pg. 203, 204.
 Surah al Tawbah: 55
 The doors of trials and tribulations were opened after his martyrdom and was not closed up to this very day. (In reference to a prophetic tradition).
 Bihar al Anwar vol. 4, the book on the sky and the universe.
 He is Abu Hanifah al Dinawari Ahmed ibn Dawood from the people of al Dinawar. Reliable in that which he narrates, known for the truth as Ibn al Nadim described him. He died in 281, 282, or 290 A.H. He would mostly narrate from Ya’qub ibn Ishaq al Layth al Nahwi on account of him being a Shia. He is from Persian origin, making apparent that he is an Imami Shia. (al Dhari’ah ila Tasanif al Shia vol. 1 pg. 338)
 Al Akhbar al Tiwal pg. 152 by Ahmed ibn Dawood al Dinawari.
 Kitab al Shafi fi l-Imamah pg. 213; Sharh Nahj al Balaghah by Ibn Abi al Hadid.
 Riyad al Nadirah vol. 2 pg. 85.
 Al Bayhaqi vol. 10 pg. 130; al Kamil vol. 2 pg. 201; al Tarikh al Kabir vol. 4. pg. 145 by al Bukhari; Kitab al Kharaj pg. 23 by Ibn Adam; Kitab al Amwal pg. 98; Futuh al Buldan pg. 74.
 Kitab al Kharaj pg. 23; Futuh al Buldan pg. 74 by al Baladhuri.
 Surah Maryam: 71
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah by Ibn Abi al Hadid vol. 3 pg. 146 and similar reports in Kitab al Athar pg. 207 and Sirat ‘Umar pg. 193. By ibn Jawzi.
 Kitab al Shafi pg. 171 by ‘Alm al Huda. Talkhis al Shafi vol. 2 pg. 428 by al Tusi and Ma’ani al Akhbar pg. 117 by Al Saduq.
 Vol. 3 pg. 93
 Ahwal ‘Umar vol. 3 pg. 269-270.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 3 pg. 147
 Kitab al Shafi vol. 2 pg. 428
 Talkhis al Shafi vol. 2 pg. 428
 ‘Uyun Akhbar al Rida vol. 1 pg. 313 by Ibn Babawayh, Ma’ani al Akhbar pg. 110 by al Qummi and Tafsir al Hassan al ‘Askari.
 Muruj al Dhahab vol. 3 pg. 51; Nasikh al Tawarikh vol. 2 pg. 144.
 Al Rawdah Min al Kafi vol. 8 pg. 101.
 Tarikh al Ya’qubi vol. 2 pg. 149-150.
 Tarikh al Umam wa l Muluk vol. 5 pg. 16.
 Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 7 pg. 139.
 Al Kamil vol. 3 pg. 29.
 Al Tabaqat pg. 340, Leiden.
 Al Furu min al Kafi, Kitab al Nikah, Bab Tazwij Umm Kulthum, vol. 5 pg. 346. There are many other such narrations in the books of the Ahlus Sunnah which discuss the marriage of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu to Umm Kulthum radiya Llahu ‘anha such as Mustadrak al Hakim vol. 3 pg. 130, Bab al Nazr ‘ila al Mar’ah idha Arada an Yatazawwajaha; Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab al Jihad; Sunan al Nasai, Kitab al Jana’iz, Bab Ijtima’ Jana’iz al Rijal wa l-Nisa’; and Sunan Abi Dawood, Kitab al Jana’iz, Bab Idha Hadara Jana’iz al Rijal wa l-Nisa’ man Yuqaddam.
 Al Kafi fi l-Furu’, Kitab al Talaq, Bab al Mutawaffa ‘anha Zawjuha, vol. 6 pg. 115-116. There is also a narration in the same chapter transmitted by Sheikh al Ta’ifah al Tusi in his book al Istibsar, Kitab al ‘Iddah, Bab al Mutawaffa ‘anha Zawjuha, vol. 3 pg. 353. The second report is transmitted from Muawiyah ibn ‘Ammar which comes in Tahdhib al Ahkam, Kitab fi ‘Iddat al Nisa. vol. 8 pg. 161.
 Tahdhib al Ahkam, Kitab al Mirath, Bab Mirath al Gharqi wa l-Mahdum vol. 9 pg. 262.
 Al Shafi pg. 116.
 Tanzih al Ambiya’ pg. 141.
 He is Rashid al Din Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Shaharashub al Mazandarani. The pride, glory and promoter of the Shia Mazhab. The reviver of the traditions discussing virtues. An ocean that is replete. A leading scholar of the Imamiyyah and the author of al Manaqib, etc. The unrivalled Imam of his time… He is the equivalent of Khatib al Baghdadi to the Ahlus Sunnah. He died in 588 A.H in Halab. (Al Kuna wa l-Alqab vol. 1 pg. 321)
 Manaqib Al Abi Talib vol. 3 pg. 162.
 Kashf al Ghummah pg. 10.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 3 pg. 124.
 Hadiqat al Shia pg. 277.
 Majalis al Mu’minin pg. 76, pg. 82.
 Majalis al Mu’minin pg. 85.
 Masa’ib al Nawasib Pg. 170.
 Bihar al Anwar, Bab Ahwal Awladihi wa Azwajihi pg. 62.1
 Tarikh Taraz Mazhab Muzaffari, Persian, The marriage of Umm Kulthum to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab.
 Amir al Mu’minin, pg. 217, ‘Ali during the Caliphate of ‘Umar.
 Muntaha al Amal, vol. 1 pg. 186, Mention of the children of Amir al Mu’minin.
 Shara’i’ al Islam a book on jurisprudence according to the Jafari Shia, Kitab al Nikah.
 Masalik al Afham Sharh Shara’i’ al Islam, vol. 1, Kitab Lawahiq al ‘Aqd.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 4 pg. 575.
 Ansab al Ashraf vol. 1 pg. 428
 Jamharat Ansab al ‘Arab pg. 37-38
 Al Muhabbar pg. 56, 437, Kitab Ashar ‘Ali.
 Al Ma’arif pg. 92, Kitab Banat ‘Ali wa Awlad ‘Umar ibn al Khattab, pg. 79 and 80.
 All of them were close relatives of ‘Ali, his brother and paternal cousins. This was the character of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
 It is mentioned in the books of the Ahlus Sunnah that ‘Umar gave two thousand silver coins to the children of the participants of the Battle of Badr, with the exception of Hassan and Hussain whom he gave five thousand silver coins each, the same amount that he had given to their father, and al ‘Abbas, due to their close relations to Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. (Tabaqat ibn Sa’d vol. 3 pg. 213-214, Kitab al Kharaj by Abu Yusuf pg. 43-44; Futuh al Buldan pg. 454-455; Kitab al Amwal by Abu ‘Ubaid ibn Salam.)
Al Baladhuri, Yahya ibn Adam and Tarabulusi transmits from Jafar ibn Muhammad al Baqir, from Muhammad al Baqir, from ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib: “‘Umar gave the land of Yanbu and more to ‘Ali”. (Futuh al Buldan pg. 20; Kitab al Kharaj pg. 78 by Yahya ibn Adam; al Is’af fi Ahkam wa l-Awqaf pg. 8.)
 Yet there are those who accuse ‘Umar of usurping the rights of the Ahlul Bayt. Al Ya’qubi brings to their attention that which Allah had inspired him to establish. He states: “Back then ‘Umar was the caliph and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma the subordinate”.
 Yes, Abu Hurairah! The one who the Shia dislike, solely for transmitting the traditions which he had heard from Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in praise of the Sahabah in general and Abu Bakr and ‘Umar in particular radiya Llahu ‘anhum.
 Tarikh al Ya’qubi vol. 2 pg. 153
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 3 pg. 113-114 by Ibn Abi al Hadid.
 Beware of those who claim to be from the progeny of Hussain and curse ‘Umar, consider him a usurper of the Caliphate, and oppressor along with the relatives of Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Had it not been for ‘Umar, they would not have existed. If he was a usurper, why did Hussain accept from him the slave who was taken captive in a battle that was fought under the banner and guidance of ‘Umar?
 ‘Umdat al Talib fi Ansab Abi Talib pg. 192 Chapter two, titled: After Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
 Al Usul min al Kafi vol. 1 pg. 467; Nasikh al Tawarikh vol. 10 pg. 3-4.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 5 pg. 107 by al Maythami; al Durrah al Najafiyyah pg. 332.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 3 pg. 110 by Ibn Abi al Hadid.
 Al Amali vol. 2 pg. 345 by al Tusi.
 Al Amali vol. 2 pg. 46; Al Amali pg. 324 of al Saduq. A similar report is transmitted in al Manaqib vol. 2 pg. 154 by Ibn Shaharashub.
 Al Gharat vol. 1 pg. 307. The word ‘al naqibah’ means soul, it is also said to mean natural disposition. Rajul maymun al naqibah means a blessed soul, successful in his endeavours, as mentioned by Ibn al Manzur al Afriqi. Ibn Sukayt says, “ If a person is maymun in a matter, it means that he is successful in his endeavours.” Tha’labi explains, “When the person is successful in council.” Ibn Majdi ibn ‘Amr, when explaining the phrase maymun al naqibah, says, “It refers to one who is successful in his actions and endeavours.” (Lisan al Arab vol. 1 pg. 768 by Ibn al Manzur al Afriqi)
 Kitab al Shia wa l-Sunnah fi l – Mizan pg. 88, 89 and 90.
 For a detailed discussion on Ibn Saba’ refer to the addendum at the end of this section.
 Muqaddimat al Gharat by al Thaqafi.
 Al Kafi fi l-Usul, al Taqiyyah, vol. 2 pg. 222
 Tarikh al Ya’qubi vol. 2 pg. 151-152
 Al Irshad pg. 109
 Al Irshad pg. 110
 Surah al Ahqaf: 15
 Surah al Baqarah: 233
 Al Irshad pg. 110
 Surah al Nahl: 106
 Ibid pg. 312
 Al Amali vol. 1 pg. 256 by al Tusi.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 2 sec. 8 pg. 370 by ibn Abi al Hadid.
 Al Bidayah wa l-Nihayah vol. 7 pg. 35 and 55; al Tabari vol. 4 pg. 83 and 159.
 Al Tabari.
 Nahj al Balaghah pg. 136 Tahqiq by Subhi al Salih.
 Tatimmat al – Muntaha pg. 390 by ‘Abbas al Qummi.
 Al Irshad pg. 176 by al Mufid.
 Tarikh al Yaqubi vol. 2 pg. 213; Maqatil al Talibiyin pg. 84.
 Jala’ al ‘Uyun pg. 570 Persain text mentioning those who were killed with Hussain at Karbala’.
 Al Fusul al Muhimmah pg. 143; ‘Umdat al Talib fi Ansab Al Abi Talib pg. 321; Tuhfat al Ihab pg 251-252; Kashf al Ghummah vol. 1 pg. 575.
 Al Irshad pg. 194; Tarikh al Ya’qubi vol. 2 pg. 228; ‘Umdat al Talib pg. 81; Muntaha al Amal vol. 1 pg. 240; al Fusul al Muhimmah pg. 166.
 Jala al ‘Uyun pg. 582
 Maqatil al Talibiyin pg. 119.
 Jala al ‘Uyun pg. 582.
 Al Irshad pg. 261; Kashf al Ghummah vol. 2 pg. 105; ‘Umdat al Talib pg. 194; Muntaha al Amal vol. 2 pg. 43; al Fusul al Muhimmah pg. 209.
 Maqatil al Talibiyin pg. 127.
 The details can be found in al Maqatil and other similar books.
 Kashf al Ghummah pg. 216.
 Maqatil pg. 639.
 A valley close to Makkah.
 Maqatil al Talibiyin pg. 456 by al Asbahani.
 Maqatil al Talibiyin pg. 446.
 Kitab al Shia wa I-Sunnah fi al Mizan pg. 31-32.
 Ibid pg. 49, 50.
 Al Imam al Sadiq wa l-Mazahib al ’Arba’ah vol. 6 pg. 456.
 Ibid vol. 6 pg. 457.
 Ibid, pg. 463.
 Ibid, pg. 464.
 Ibid, pg. 468.
 Ibid, pg. 469.
 Refer to pg. 492 of the same book when he concludes his studies.
 The initials with which the author of Kitab al Shia wa l-Sunnah fi al Mizan referred to himself.
 The introduction to Firaq al Shia pg. 14.
 The introduction to Rijal al Kashshi pg. 4.
 Nahj al Balaghah, pg. 82.
 The introduction to al Gharat.
 Al Gharat, vol. 1 pg. 302-303.
 Al Amali, vol. 2 pg. 121.
 Al Kafi fi l-Usul, vol. 2 chapter Taqiyyah.Back to top