A Different Umm Kulthoom?
Answering-Ansar has repeatedly used the preposterous argument that the Hadith in question refer to Umm Kulthoom, but not that Umm Kulthoom. We could look at various Hadith and say to ourselves that maybe it wasn’t that Umar, or maybe it wasn’t that Hamza, or maybe it wasn’t that Aisha. Maybe then we could argue that the Hadith which mention Ali do not actually refer to that Ali but rather to another one. We could easily then render useless many of the Shia Hadith by furthering such a claim. Perhaps the Hadith about Ghadeer Khumm refer to another Ali? Or what if it wasn’t that Umar who threatened to burn down Fatima’s house? Or perhaps it wasn’t that Aisha who was involved in the Battle of the Camel? This tactic is akin to saying that a certain Hadith which starts off with “the Messenger of Allah said” doesn’t actually refer to Prophet Muhammad, since it didn’t mention him by name; after all, there were other Messengers of Allah, so maybe it is referring to them? When you play this game, there is no way you can establish anything, not from the Hadith nor even from historical sources. You could always claim that the reference is to someone with the same name, but not that one.
Like there is no question that the Ghadeer Khumm Hadith refers to Ali (yes, that Ali), there is also no question that the Hadith documents the marriage of Umar bin Khattab and the daughter of Ali (yes, that Umm Kulthoom). In the Sunni narrations (many of which were kindly quoted by Answering-Ansar), the narrations which document the marriage also tell us that Ali sent Umm Kulthoom to Umar’s house. So there can thus be no confusion as to who this Umm Kulthoom is. As for the four Shia Hadith in Al-Kafi, the first two talk about how Umar threatened Ali in order to get Umm Kulthoom; why would Umar threaten Ali if that Umm Kulthoom wasn’t his daughter? Does this even make sense? We see that the Shia argument falls apart, and I have a vague feeling that the Answering-Ansar kids made it up for themselves, and I doubt any reliable Shia scholar would claim this. As for the other two narrations in Al-Kafi, those clearly say that:
“When Umar died, Ali came and took Umm Kulthoom to his house.” (Furoo al-Kafi, vol.6, p.117)
Again, why would Ali come to collect someone else’s daughter? Does this make any sense? Since all four of the Shia Hadith state that this was Umm Kulthoom, the daughter of Ali, then how in the world is Answering-Ansar claiming that it is referring to another Umm Kulthoom!?
To bolster this claim of “mistaken identities”, Answering-Ansar has stated that Umar had many wives that were named Umm Kulthoom.
Answering-Ansar says
1. Umme Kalthum Jameela binte Asim bin Thabit …
2. Umme Kalthum binte Jarweela Khuzeema - Her actual name was Maleeka. She was the mother of Zaid bin Umar.
(Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 22).
3. Umme Kalthum binte Ukba bin Abi Mayyath …
4. Umme Kalthum binte Rahab …
5. Umme Kalthum binte Abu Bakr …
However, this is just plain false, and another sign of Answering-Ansar’s weakness. Umar had only one other wife that went by the name of Umm Kulthoom, and that is the second one mentioned above. Before we examine each of the names given above by Answering-Ansar, we should clarify for the reader what a “kunya” is. A kunya is an Arabic nickname, such as “Abu Turab” which was used for Ali.
Let us analyze each of the five that Answering-Ansar claimed were married to Umar.
1. Her name was Jameela bint Asim bin Thabit. It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Abd Al-Bar (d. 463 A.H) and Ibn Al-Atheer (d. 630 A.H) that her kunya (Arabic nickname) was Umm Asim and not Umm Kulthoom.
2. Her name was Umme Kulthoom bint Jarweela Khuzeema. She was the only other wife of Umar who went by the name “Umm Kulthoom”, but this was only her kunya (Arabic nickname). As mentioned by Answering-Ansar, her real name was Maleeka. As such, this is a differentiating factor and there can be no confusion on the matter between Umm Kulthoom bint Ali and Maleeka.
3. Her name was Umm Kulthoom bint Uqba, and the Prophet recommended to her to accept Abdul Rahman ibn Awf’s proposal to her, and so she married him. Abdul Rahman would eventually pass away, leaving Umm Kulthoom bint Uqba as a widow. Umar bin Khattab could not possibly have married her because she was married to Abdul Rahman Ibn Awf who outlived Umar by almost ten years!
4. Answering-Ansar mentioned Umm Kalthoom bint Rahab. She does not exist.
5. Lastly, we have Umm Kulthoom bint Abu Bakr, who was the daughter of Abu Bakr. Umar proposed to her before he sent his proposal to Ali’s daughter, but Abu Bakr’s daughter refused him. Saad ibn Waqas recommended to Umar that he marry Ali’s daughter instead. As for Abu Bakr’s daughter, she married Talha and gave birth to his daughter Aisha. Thus, Umar was not married to this Umm Kulthoom.
To conclude, it is an unfounded claim by Answering-Ansar that Umar had many wives named Umm Kulthoom. He had only two wives who were named that, and they were very much able to be differentiated because one’s real name was Maleeka.
Having said that, even if we accepted that there were many Umm Kulthooms, let us examine the Hadith in Al-Kafi to see if any of them could possibly refer to anyone other than the daughter of Ali.
As for the first two narrations mentioned in Al-Kafi, they were both in the same chapter which was entitled “bab tazwig Umm Kulthoom” (the marriage of Umm Kulthoom). In these two narrations, we read:
NARRATION 1
“Abu Abdullah (a.s) said about marriage of Umm Kulthoom: ‘That was the vagina that we were forced to give.’” (Furoo al-Kafi, vol.5, p.347)
NARRATION 2
“When [Umar] proposed to Amir al-Mu’minin [Ali], he said, ‘She is a child.’ Then he [Umar] met Abbas and asked him, ‘What is wrong with me? Is there a problem with me?’ Abbas asked, ‘Why?’ Umar replied, ‘I asked your nephew for his daughter’s hand in marriage, and he rejected me. Oh, I swear by Allah, I will fill the well of Zamzam with earth, I will destroy every honor that you have, and I will set up two witnesses to testify that he stole, that I may cut off his right hand.’ Abbas thereupon came to Ali and informed him of what had transpired. He asked Ali to put the matter in his hands, and Ali complied.” (Furoo al-Kafi, vol.6, p.117)
In these narrations, Umar is mentioned by name (see the bolded part above), and it vividly describes Umar’s actions of threatening Ali. How can this not refer to Ali’s daughter? Why would Umar threaten Ali demanding for him to give another man’s daughter to him? What right would Ali have to give another man’s daughter to Umar? Does this make any logical sense? Let us say that it was another Umm Kulthoom. In that case, why would the Shia Imam feel the need to say that it was a woman “stolen from us” (us here referring to the Ahlel Bayt)? The fact that he says she was stolen indicates that she comes from the very same Ahlel Bayt. If I ran off with my neighbor’s daughter, would you say that I ran off with your daughter? Obviously not. You would only say that I stole her from you if she was your daughter.
It is upto the Shia if he wants to live in an imaginary world. Maybe it wasn’t Umar bin Khattab above, and maybe it wasn’t Umm Kulthoom bint Ali, and maybe it wasn’t even that Ibn Abbas. It is very difficult to live in this imaginary world since the narration mentions all three people by name, and it would be folly to say that any of them are different since by virtue of Ali being mentioned in the story, it makes it clear that it is in reference to his daughter.
How can the Shia propagandist deny that these Hadith in Al-Kafi refer to Umm Kulthoom’s marriage to Umar when Imam Al-Kulayni himself mentioned that these Hadith are in reference to Umm Kulthoom’s marriage to Umar? The Shia reader can even read the Hadith for himself as posted on Al-Shia.com: http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/al-kafi-5/213.html
On the top of this page, we find the words written:
Al-Shia.com says
باب تزويج ام كلثوم [Translation: Chapter of Umm Kulthoom’s Marriage]
After this, the Hadith is mentioned. Then, we read in the foot-note on the same page, in which we read that the Hadith are in reference to Umm Kulthoom bint Ali and Umar bin Khattab:
Al-Shia.com says
ام كلثوم هذه هى بنت امير المؤمنين عليه السلام قد خطبها اليه عمر في زمن خلافته فرده اولا فقال عمر ماقال وفعل مافعل
Translation: “[Regarding] Umm Khulthum, who is the daughter of Ameer al-Mu’mineen Ali, Umar proposed to Ali for her hand in marriage during his [Umar’s] caliphate, and at first Ali refused him. So then Umar said what he said, and did what he did [i.e compelled Ali by words and force].”
Thus, there can be absolutely no confusion as to who the two people in question are in this Hadith. Al-Shia.com itself admits, by posting that footnote from Imam Al-Kulayni’s work, that it is Ali’s daughter and the Caliph Umar which are being referred to in the Hadith. This should be an earth-shattering blow to the Answering-Ansar Team and their childish antics. I think that in debates with the Shia, this point should be vigorously stressed, and the hyperlink I gave above should be mentioned so that the Shia will have to answer the bottom line point: how can the Shia deny that this refers to Ali’s daughter when Al-Shia.com has Imam Al-Kulayni’s footnote which clearly states that he was referring to Ali’s daughter and Umar bin Khattab. Imam Al-Kulayni is the one who compiled those Hadith, so shouldn’t he be the authority on who he is referring to?
Moving on to the third and fourth Hadith in Al-Kafi, we find that those are even harder for the Shia to claim that they don’t refer to that Umm Kulthoom and that Umar bin Khattab. These two narrations both have the following line in them:
Al-Shia.com says
1) (10902 1) حميد بن زياد، عن ابن سماعة، عن محمد بن زياد، عن عبدالله بن سنان، ومعاوية ابن عمار، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن المرأة المتوفى عنها زوجها أتعتد في بيتها أو حيث شاءت؟ قال: بل حيث شاءت، إن عليا عليه السلام لما توفي عمر أتى أم كلثوم فانطلق بها إلى بيته
2) (10903 - 2) محمد بن يحيى، وغيره، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن الحسين بن سعيد، عن النضربن سويد، عن هشام بن سالم، عن سليمان بن خالد قال: سألت أباعبدالله عليه السلام عن امرأة توفى زوجها أين تعتد، في بيت زوجها تعتد أو حيث شاءت؟ قال: بلى حيث
شاءت، ثم قال: إن عليا عليه السلام لما مات عمر أتى ام كلثوم فأخذ بيدها فانطلق بها إلى بيته
Translation: “…When Umar died, Ali came and took Umm Kulthoom to his house.” (Furoo al-Kafi, vol.6, p.117)
So is their any confusion as to which Umm Kulthoom it is? How can the Shia apply their argument here and say that this refers to another one of Umar’s wives? It is obvious that the father, Ali, is going to take care of his daughter, Umm Kulthoom, after the death of her husband. Why would Ali just pick up a random woman? Obviously, it is his daughter, and nothing else makes sense. It is a normal practise for a woman whose husband dies to go to her father’s house if he is still alive.
Thus, the argument of the Shia–that it wasn’t that Umm Kulthoom–doesn’t work because it doesn’t apply to any of the four Shia Hadith on the topic. Let us review the narrations and why the Shia cannot apply this argument:
1. NARRATION 1: Why would the Imam have said it was a woman stolen from us, unless it was a woman from the Ahlel Bayt? So then how could it refer to any of the other wives of Umar, who were not part of Ahlel Bayt? Why would the Imam have said that a woman was stolen from the Ahlel Bayt if she wasn’t part of the Ahlel Bayt? It doesn’t make sense. A secondary point here is that it cannot possibly be a coincidence that this Hadith refers to a woman being stolen from her father, and then in the second narration (which is in the same chapter of Al-Kafi, all labelled by Imam Al-Kulayni as “the marriage of Umm Kulthoom”) we see that Umar is accused of stealing Umm Kulthoom from Ali. Thus, the two Hadith support each other and strengthen the idea itself that the Shia texts believed that Umar stole Umm Kulthoom from Ali.
2. NARRATION 2: How could this refer to another one of Umar’s wives, when it clearly mentions that Umar was threatening Ali that he give his daughter. Surely, there would be no point in Umar threatening Ali for anyone else’s daughter, so we can conclude that it is Ali’s daughter that is being referred to, especially since the name “Umm Kulthoom” is being used. Unless of course it wasn’t that Ali and it wasn’t that Umm Kulthoom…a very comical way of looking at things.
3. NARRATIONS 3 and 4: When Umar died, Ali comes to pick up Umm Kulthoom to take care of her. Why would Ali come to pick up Umm Kulthoom unless it was his daughter? Unless this is another magical coincidence that not only was it another Umm Kulthoom, but that Ali was supposedly also taking care of another Umm Kulthoom other than his daughter–would the Shia really like to believe that it was some random woman whom Ali decided to take care of her after her husband’s death?
In addition to all of this bullet-proof logic, we have yet another proof that destroys Answering-Ansar’s argument that it wasn’t that Umm Kulthoom: not a single classical scholar of the Shia ever said that these Hadith refers to another Umm Kulthoom other than the daughter of Ali. Not a single Shia scholar denied this marriage for four centuries.
Not a single Shia scholar denied this marriage for four centuries, and the Ansar article mentioned such Shia heavyweights as Abul Qasim Al-Kufi, Sayyid Murtada (brother of the compiler of “Nahjul Balagha”), at-Tabarsi (the Shia mufassir of the 6th century), Shaykh ‘Abd an-Nabi al-Kazimi, and pretty much every other Shia scholar before the 5th century AH. So how come not a single one of these Shia founding fathers ever interpreted the Hadith in Al-Kafi as referring to another Umm Kulthoom other than Ali’s daughter? I doubt that any of the later Shia scholars even used this argument, but rather most of them just said that those four Hadith in Al-Kafi were when the Imam was doing Taqiyyah (deceit). Of course, this argument sounds foolish nowadays and is a severe blow to the credibility of the Shia sources of religion, and hence, Answering-Ansar did not use this argument. Instead, Answering-Ansar invented this new excuse that it wasn’t that Umm Kulthoom, but this argument doesn’t stand up for the reason that the classical Shia scholars didn’t view those Hadith in this way nor could any of the four Hadith be understood logically in this manner.
To add to the comedy of the Shia argument that it could be another Umm Kulthoom, we observe that Answering-Ansar claimed at one point in time that the Umm Kulthoom in question must be Umm Kulthoom bint Abu Bakr. In the same article, they later claimed that it actually referred to Umm Kulthoom bint Jarweela. And then elsewhere, they would claim that it referred to Umm Kulthoom bint Junth.
Answering-Ansar says
We have already proven from the Shi’a traditions that Afriki relied on, that Imam Ja’far Sadiq (as) was referring to Umme Kalthum binte Abu Bakr.
Answering-Ansar says
“People have assumed that Umar married Umme Kalthum binte Fatima, rather he married Umme Kalthum binte Jarweela Khuzeema”
Tareekh al Qum Shaykh Saduq, by Muhammad Nishapur page 193, published in Tehran
Answering-Ansar says
UMME KALTHUM here refers to UMME KALTHUM binte Junth
For some odd reason, the Shia is willing to accept any other Umm Kulthoom, even if it were Umm Kulthoom bint Mickey Mouse! Just so long as they don’t have to accept the one thing that actually makes sense based on the Shia Hadith, namely that it was Umm Kulthoom bint Ali. In fact, no other possibility makes sense when we take into account that it is Ali who is mentioned in three of the Shia Hadith we mentioned, and he is implicitly referred to in the other one as well. Therefore, it is only possible to conclude that it was another Umm Kulthoom if one wishes to belie common sense and reasoning.
Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com
|
|