|
2. Sayyid al-Murtada, the Flag of Guidance (d. 436 A.H.)
Sayyid al-Murtada, the flag of guidance (`alam al-huda), rebutting what the afore-mentioned Judge had said, has stated the following:
We have made it quite clear that the narrative regarding such burning has been narrated by non-Shi`as who cannot be charged... The excuse which he used regarding this burning, if true, is quite interesting! How can anyone seek an excuse for someone who wanted to burn the house of the Commander of the Faithful (A.S.) and of Fatima (A.S.)?!”[1]
Rebutting `Abd al-Jabbar’s rejection of Fatima (A.S.) being hit and her house attacked and her being threatened with burning, and in response to his saying, “We neither believe it, nor do we think it is possible at all,” Sayyid al-Murtada says, “You did not base your rejection on any proof or possibility whatsoever so you would defend your viewpoint. Rejecting what is narrated without producing any evidence whatsoever is totally disregarded.”[2] When `Abd al-Jabbar claimed that to day that Fatima (A.S.) was hit reminds one of the narratives regarding the hulal, Sayyid al-Murtada responded to him by asking him: “Do you not know that this sect is referred to by those who believe in the hulal, and that reason proves the error of what they claim?! Do you say that reason concludes that it is impossible that Fatima (A.S.) was hit?! If you say that they both are the same, then prove how reason considers it impossible, just as you explain how impossible it is to believe in the hulal, and you will then nail down your argument. Surely it is well known that you cannot do it!”[3] He also said, “There is no difference between a threat for the reason which he mentioned and hitting Fatima (A.S.) for the same reason, for burning houses is surely a greater offense than whipping someone. There is no sense in the author expressing his anger at such whipping and his calling the transmitter of the incident a liar.”[4] |