A Lady Confined to Her Chamber Never Opens the Door

 

Since al-Zahra’ (A.S.) was a lady confined to her chambers, how did she set out to open the door? One who does not see men nor meets anyone does not do that. Here is the answer:

 

FIRST: Does a lady such as that have no right to defend herself if she, or her children, or her husband, or her honour, or her religion, or her message, is assaulted?!

 

SECOND: Was not Zainab (A.S.) a lady confined to her chambers? Why did Imam al-Husain (A.S.) take her with him to Kerbala’ to meet captivity, calamities, hostile men, to deliver speeches in Kufa and Syria before the tyrants of the land and of her time?!

 

THIRD: Does her being confined to her chambers prohibit her from responding from behind the door, or would such a response expose her to the public, so they would see of her what they are not permitted to see?!

 

FOURTH: If she responded to them from behind the door, this does not mean that she met them face to face. If they broke the door open, so she sought shelter behind it in compliance with her hijab, and they squeezed her between the door and the wall, would she still be responsible for all of that?!

What supports this is the fact that some texts state that she (A.S.) stretched her hand from behind the door, so they whipped both her hands.[1]

 

FIFTH: Is this not the same lady, who was used to being confined to her chambers, who delivered a sermon to people at the Mosque (of the Prophet [a]) as the inquirer himself admits, and those who were distant and near heard her voice?!

Does a woman who is used to being confined to her chambers have no right to defend a just cause and the truth even if she alone had to do it, and even if it necessitated her announcing her being oppressed to the public? Have not the Faqihs made an exception in the way to defend one’s right for the voice of a woman to be heard even if it is said to be prohibitive?

How was it permissible for her to deliver a sermon at the Mosque but not to answer the knock on her house door from behind the door?! Does her confinement to her chambers prohibit her from defending the Imamate and show the truth to future generations when such a very serious task was confined to her (A.S.) alone? Does her confinement to her chambers block her from confronting the oppressors and the usurpers so that she would unveil their identity to people and expose their true intentions and how they dared to do things against Allah and His Messenger and how they went as far as harming women, nay, harming the most holy woman ever, the Head of the Women of Mankind and the only daughter of the greatest of all Prophets of Allah (A.S.) even as soon as he (A.S.) died?

Is there any clearer argument than hers? Could we have come to know who the oppressor and who the oppressed, who the assailants and who the defenders were, any other way? Could we have come to know who dared to insult al-Zahra’ (A.S.) and the Messenger of Allah (A.S.) about whom someone said that he was “hallucinating”? This is so despite those who deliberately distort the facts and commit fabrications.

 

SIXTH: What is really odd is the following statement made by someone:

“All narratives state that Ali (A.S.) was not the only one inside the house when it was assaulted in order to get him out of it and to force him to swear the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr following the demise of the Messenger of Allah (A.S.). A crowd belonging to Bani Hashim was with him, including Fidda, al-Zubayr and al-`Abbas; so, why did any of them open the door rather than she (A.S.)?”

The answer:

The claim that many people from Bani Hashim were inside the house at the time of the incident is not known as a fact for the following reasons:

 

FIRST: The then government, as quoted (by historians), clearly indicates that `Omer was shouting, “Burn her house with everyone inside it!” There were none at home except Ali (A.S.), Fatima (A.S.), al-Hasan and al-Husain, peace be upon them.[2]

His saying that, “There were none at home..., etc,” be it said by the compiler or the author, suffices to support our argument, and it negates the presence of Fidda and al-Zubayr.

 

SECOND: If we take for granted the assumption that other individuals were present at certain times, the attack on the house of al-Zahra’ (A.S.) took place more than once. This is clear from the narrative stated in Al-Imama wal Siyasa.[3] Many other narratives indicate the same especially when you gather and compare them, keeping in mind the particularities of events. Had there been persons at the house of al-Zahra’ (A.S.) during the first attack, it does not necessarily mean that they were there during the second attack or the one that followed it... What is the evidence?

 

THIRD: There is no narrative saying that all Bani Hashim were at the house. Yes, they say that Bani Hashim boycotted the inauguration, and the one saying so may be confused. He may have imagined that they boycotted it at the house of Ali (A.S.) and did not pay attention to the word “boycotted” which simply means they refrained from swearing fealty, not having a sit-in at the house of Ali (A.S.) or at that of anyone else!

 

FOURTH: Some narratives have clearly referred to the presence of only al-Zubayr[4] in addition to Ali (A.S.), Fatima (A.S.), al-Hasan and al-Husain, peace be upon them all, without mentioning anyone else. Yet some narratives have referred to the presence of a number or a crowd of Bani Hashim, not all of them.[5]

These narratives, though not contradicting each other, since what is fixed therein does not contradict one another, but they, especially the last one, deny the presence of all of Bani Hashim at the house of Fatima (A.S.).

 

FIFTH: The house is small. It cannot hold all Bani Hashim, not even half of them, especially since the Prophet (A.S.) was buried there, and its sanctity had to be respected.

SIXTH: What stopped Ali (A.S.), Fidda, al-Hasan and al-Husain (A.S.) from opening the door was the same cause which stopped al-Zubayr and all other members of Bani Hashim from doing the same as will be clarified when the following question will be answered, by the will of Allah.

[1]Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 30, pp. 293-95.

[2]Al-Milal wal-Nihal, Vol. 1, p. 84. Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 28, p. 271. Refer to Buhaj al-Sibagha, Vol. 5, p. 15. Bayt al-Ahzan, p. 124.

[3]Al-Imama wal Siyasa, Vol. 1, p. 12.

[4]Al-Mufid, Al-Amali, pp. 49-50.

[5]Al-Mufid, Al-Jamal (new edition), pp. 117-18.