Umar's innovation in Depriving Ahlul Bayt from Khums!!

Allah (swt) has clearly stated in the Qur'an that one of the part of Khums belongs to the near relatives of Rasool Allah (saww).

And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer.

Al-Qur'an Surah 8, Ayah 41 (Translation by Yusuf Ali)

Thus Khums (literally one fifth of gain) should go to six people:

Allah

His Messenger

The near relative of the Messenger (Ahlul-Bayt)

Orphan

needy

the person who has fallen away from his home-town (and has no money to comeback to his own place).

It was Umar who innovated and changed the rules of Sharia by seizing the right of Ahle-Bayt.

Let's see what the defender of Umar, Maulana Shibli Numani has written in his "Al-Farooq" (page 351, part 2nd, published by Maktaba Rehmania, Lahore).

Shibli Numani writes in Al Farooq:

It is proved from the above verse [8:41] that relatives of Rasool Allah [saww] also have a share in the Khums. Ibne Abbas was of the same opinion. And although Hadhrat Ali didn't give share to Banu Hashim(in the period of his khilafaat), but he was also have this opinion that Banu Hashim had right upon it (Kitabul-Khiraj by Qazi Abu Yousuf, page 11, on the authority of Muhammad bin Ishaq).

And these are not only the opinions of Ibne Abbas and Hadhrat Ali, but there was a consensus of Ahle-Bayt on this. Among the Aima Mujhtahideen (the 4 Sunni imams), Imam Shafii was also of this opinion, and he has written this in his books with great stress.

And it is said about Hadhrat Umar that he never agreed to fact that relatives of Prophet [saww] had also some share in the Khums. That is why he never gave any share to Ahlul-Bayt from the Khums. Among the Aima Mujhtahideen, Imam Abu Hanifa also didn't agree to fact that there is a share of relatives of Rasool Allah [saww] from the Khums.

Abu Hanifa was of opinion that as the share of Rasool Allah [saww] had been ended up after the death of Rasool Allah [saww], in the same way the share of his relatives had also been ended." 

Shibli Numani's defence of Umar and Abu Hanifa

Defence 1: Umar indeed offered the share of Khums to needy people from the Ahlul Bayt

Shibli Naumani in Al Farooq
On the page 353 of the same above-mentioned book, Shibli Numani writes:

"Qazi Abu Yousuf in his Kitabul Khiraj and Nisai in his Sahih have written the following tradition from Ibne Abbas:

Umar bin Khattab offered us that we may take some money from Khums only in order to do marriages of our widows and to pay the debt of debtors among us. But we (Ahlul-Bayt) do not accept anything except to give our whole share in our hands. But Umar didn't accept it."

Reply 1

It's big deception by defenders of Umar that "Khums" was ONLY for the "Needy" people from Ahlul-Bait. During the life of Rasool Allah [saww], every one from relatives of Rasulullah (s) received their share of Khums. For example, Maulla Ali (as) got a horse from Khums in the times of Rasool Allah [saww].

Narrated Ali:

I got a she-camel in my share of the war booty on the day (of the battle) of Badr, and the Prophet had given me a she-camel from the Khums...

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 324

Who gave the authority to Umar to seize this right of Ahlul-Bayt?

Widows and debtors already come under the 4th category of Khums i.e. NEEDY. Who gave the right to Umar to delete the 3rd category, which was revealed by Allah (swt)? Whatever Umar did, it was contrary to Qur'an and Sunnah and constitutes a major innovation in the Sharia of Allah (swt).

2nd Defence: by advocating the Fatwa of Abu Hanifa that relatives of Rasool Allah saww lost their right of Share from Khums after Rasool Allah (saww)

Shibli Naumani in Al Farooq
On page 354 of the above mentioned book, Shibli Numani writes:

The relatives of Rasool Allah saww got the right of share from Khums while they helped Rasool Allah [saww] in the initial times of Islam at Makka. When Kuffar compelled Rasool Allah [saw]w, then whole Bani Hashim, in which those people were also included who didn't accept Islam at that time, all of them helped Rasool Allah saww].

And also that time when Rasool Allah [saww] came out of Makka and took refuge in a cave, Bani Hashim was with Rasool Allah saww.Due to this Rasool Allah saww and Bani Hashim got share in Khums, and all this was for time being. But from this, if we take this result that there is a share for his relatives till day of judgement, without taking into consideration that how much his progeny progress in number, and how rich they may become, but still they get the money, then it is such a rule which is totally against the other rules of society.

Who can believe that one such Truthful founder of religion can make such a rule that his whole progeny get a fixed amount of money till Day of Judgment. And of some founder of religion does so, then what is the difference between him and the Hindu Brahmans?

Hadhrat Ali and Abdullah Ibne Abbas, who were asking for their right from Khums, they would have also not claimed that this right remains till Qiyammah, but only for those people (among Ahlul-Bayt) who had been left from the times of Rasool Allah (saww)

Reply 1: Did all those, who helped Islam in Makka, get their share from Khums?

Shibli Numani claims, Allah gave the share from Khums to Bani Hashim, while they helped Rasool Allah [saww] during the early period of Islam in Makka and when they sought refuge in the Shaib-abi- Talib. But it is only a Conjecture of Shibli Numani. They helped in Makka, but Sura Infal (which has verse of Khums) revealed in Madina after the battle of Badr.

Secondly, Sunni claim that there were Abu Bakr and others too who accepted Islam in the beginning. They also helped Islam in Makka. Did Abu Bakr get share from Khums? Some of them were even punished severely for accepting Islam, or even they had been killed (like the parents of Ammar Yasir). Did they also get share from Khums? Did Ammar Yasir get share for the Martyrdom of his parents?

So, we cannot accept the CONJECTURE of Shibli Numani. There are surely other reasons for Ahlul-Bayt having share in Khums. Don't forget, Sadaqa is Haram on the progeny of Rasool Allah [saww].

Reply 2: Can a Truthful founder of Religion make a rule for a fixed amount of money for his progeny?

First question is, was it Rasool Allah [saww] who made granting a share of Khums to the Ahlul Bayt or was this ordained by Allah (swt)?

There are people who are indeed Jealous of the blessings that Allah bestowed upon Ahlul Bayt (starting from Bani Ummaiyyah and including many others). Such blessings were also bestowed upon the progeny of Ibraheem [a.s] and all the prophets in Bani Israel came from his [a.s] progeny.

Secondly, Sadaqa was made Haram on the Progeny of Rasool Allah [saww]

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Al-Hasan bin 'Ali took a date from the dates of the Sadaqa and put it in his mouth. The Prophet said (to him) in Persian, "Kakh, kakh! (i.e. Don't you know that we do not eat the Sadaqa (i.e. what is given in charity) (charity is the dirt of the people))."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 306

Abu Huraira reported that Hasan b. 'Ali took one of the dates of the sadaqa and put it in his mouth, whereupon the Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: Leave it, leave it, throw it; don't you know that we do not eat the sadaqa?

Sahih Muslim Book 005, Number 2339

(Please see the whole chapters 46 & 47 of Book of Zakat in Sahih Muslim. There are many ahadith, which show that Sadaqa was Haram on Rasool Allah[saww] and his progeny and close relatives)

Defenders of Umar need to tell us, 'who made Sadaqa Haram on the Rasool Allah [saww] and his progeny?'

Allah

Or

Prophet Muhammad [saww] himself?

And can they also tell us why Sadaqa was made Haram on them? The only reason is, Ahle-Bait are chosen by Allah (saww) for this honour. And if defenders of Umar still claim that it was due to the reason that they helped Rasool (saww) initially in Makka, then they have to tell us why it was not made Haram upon Abu Bakr (who accepted Islam in Makka)?

And we ask defenders of Umar to refrain from adopting CONJECTURE, but cite proof from the Qur'an and Sunnah.

At this point, the absence of any proof from the Qur'an and Hadith, makes the Conjecture of Maulana Shibli Numani - FALSE.

Umar introduced holding of Talaq without the witnesses!!

They must also take notice that Qur'an makes it Obligatory to take 2 persons as witness when one wants to give Talaq:

Thus when they fulfil their term appointed, either take them back on equitable terms or part with them on equitable terms; and take for witness two persons from among you, endued with justice, and establish the evidence (as) before Allah.

Al-Qur'an Surah 65, Ayah 2 (Translation by Yusuf Ali)

Umar, by imposing the law of pronouncement of three divorces at same place and same time, also abandoned the rule of taking witnesses. (According to Shia Fiqh, divorce can only take place in the presence of two witnesses).

If you want to know about the evils of this innovation, then you must go to the courts and police stations of Pakistan (and certainly in the other Islamic countries too, but I am only witness in case of Pakistan). You will see strange types of cases in court. For example, women come in courts and claim that their respective husbands divorced them thrice in anger. But their respective husbands deny any kind of divorce.

From the prospect of women, they are telling the judges in courts, that they cannot stay any more with their men as they divorced them thrice in anger. And now they have come back to their senses and don't want to give them freedom. And if they are compelled to go back to them, then it would constitute (as they have become Haram for them after getting divorce).

[Especially, in uneducated families of sub-continent, this evil is very common.]

What choice has been left for these innocent women?

If western world criticize this as humiliation for women, are they wrong and ONLY spreading false propaganda against Islam?

Note:
The Salafi Alim of Saudia published Qur'an, writes in the commentary of 1st verse of Sura Talaq, that Imam Ibne Qayyam and Imam Ibne Taymiyyah don't accept the concept of Talaq Bid'a i.e. the way of divorce innovated by Umar.

Umar Ibn Khattab innovating in relation to the laws on divorce

Allah (swt) has told very clearly in "Sura Talaq", the way of giving divorce:

O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them at their prescribed periods, and count (accurately), their prescribed periods: And fear Allah your Lord: and turn them not out of their houses, nor shall they (themselves) leave, except in case they are guilty of some open lewdness, those are limits set by Allah: and any who transgresses the limits of Allah, does verily wrong his (own) soul: thou knowest not if perchance Allah will bring about thereafter some new situation.

Thus when they fulfil their term appointed, either take them back on equitable terms or part with them on equitable terms; and take for witness two persons from among you, endued with justice, and establish the evidence (as) before Allah. Such is the admonition given to him who believes in Allah and the Last Day. And for those who fear Allah, He (ever) prepares a way out,

Al-Qur'an Surah 65, Ayah 1-2 (Translation by Yusuf Ali)

There have been several innovations made by Umar in the Shar'i practice of issuing divorce.

Umar innovated and changed the ruling of Rasool Allah's by treating three pronounced divorces at one and same time as one.

Let us see the testimony of Ibn Abbas that Umar changed the Islamic Shar'ia by introducing a new law:

Abu al-Sahba' said to Ibn 'Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces (pronounced at one and the same time) were not treated as one during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr. He said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of 'Umar (Allah be pleased with him) people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he allowed them to do so (to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one).

Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3493

Ibn 'Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) reported that the (pronouncement) of three divorces during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and that of Abu Bakr and two years of the caliphate of Umar (Allah be pleased with him) (was treated) as one. But Umar b. Khattab (Allah be pleased with him) said: Verily the people have begun to hasten in the matter in which they are required to observe respite. So if we had imposed this upon them, and he imposed it upon them.

Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3491

Abu Sahba' said to Ibn 'Abbas (Allah be pleased with them): Do you know that three (divorces) were treated as one during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), and that of Abu Bakr, and during three (years) of the caliphate of Umar (Allah be pleased with him)? Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) said: Yes. 

Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3492

Son of al-Khattāb would have perished were it not there `Alī ibn Abī-Tālib.

One morning, `Umar met Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamān and greeted him.

Hudhayfah said, “How do you expect me to be! Indeed, I dislike the right, love the temptation, testify the existence of a thing that I have not seen, learn by heart what has not been created, offer the prayer without ablution, and possess on this earth that which is not possessed by Almighty Allah in the Heavens.”

On hearing this reply, `Umar became so enraged that he left hastily as he decided to harm Hudhayfah for such saying. On his way, he passed by `Alī ibn Abī-Tālib who noticed his rage and thus asked, “What for are you so enraged, `Umar?”

“As I greeted Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamān, he said to me that he dislikes the right,” said `Umar.

“This is true,” said `Alī, “the man dislikes death, which is right!”

“He also said that he liked temptation!” added `Umar.

“This is true,” said `Alī, “the man liked his fortune and sons; and Almighty Allah says,

‘Your wealth and your children are only a temptation.’ [Holy Qur’ān: 64/15]”

“`Alī: he also claimed that he testified the existence of things that he had not seen!” added `Umar.

“This is also true,” said `Alī, “He testifies of Allah’s Oneness, the death, the Resurrection, the Judgment Day, Paradise, Hell, and the Path (al-Sirāt) while he had not seen any of these.”

“`Alī: he also said that he learnt by heart that which was not created!” added `Umar.

“This is also true,” said `Alī, “He has learnt by heart the Holy Book of Almighty Allah—the Qur'ān that is not created.” [1]

“He also claimed that he offered prayer without performing the ritual ablution!” said `Umar.

“This is also true,” said `Alī, “He prays to Almighty Allah to send blessings upon my cousin, the Messenger of Allah, without need for performing the ritual ablution. This is of course permissible.”

“Abu’l-Hasan: he said a more serious thing,” said `Umar.

“What was that?” asked `Alī.

“He said that he possesses on this earth what is not possessed by Almighty Allah in the heavens!” explained `Umar.

“This is also true,” said `Alī, “the man has a wife and sons on this earth while Almighty Allah is too Exalted to have a wife and sons.”

Pondering over the answers of `Alī, `Umar confessed, “Son of al-Khattāb would have perished were it not there `Alī ibn Abī-Tālib.”[2]

[1] Al-Bayhaqiy: al-Sunan al-Kubrā 8:32; Al-Muttaqiy al-Hindiy: Kanz al-'Ummāl 15:94 H. 40234.The question whether the Qur'ān was created or was existent since eternity is one of the issues of disagreement between the Muslim theologians. For details, refer to books of Islamic theology.

[2] Ibn al-Sabbāgh al-Mālikiy: al-Fusūl al-Muhimmah 35; al-Kinjiy: Kifāyat al-Tālib 218-9.

Exaggeration About Caliph Umar in Sunni Hadith

We find in the books of the Sunni scholars and hadith recorders indications that they put 'Umar in a position higher than that of the Messenger of God. The following are some of the hadiths:

Al-Hakim Al-Nisaburi (in his book AI-Mustadrak, part 3, page 84), reported that Ubayy Ibn Ka'b said the following:

"I heard the Messenger of God saying: The first one the Almighty will embrace on the Day of Judgement is 'Umar. The first one the Lord will shake hands with will be 'Umar, and the first one the Almighty takes by His hand and admits to paradise is 'Umar."

Al-Hafiz Muhammad Ibn Majah in his authentic Sunan reported that Ubayy Ibn Ka'b said:

"The Messenger of God said: The first one God will shake hands with (on the Day of Judgement) will be 'Umar. The first one God will greet is 'Umar, and he is the first one Allah takes by His hand and admits to paradise."

These hadiths clearly indicate that 'Umar will be above all the Prophets including the head of the Prophets, Muhammad. When 'Umar is to be the first embraced and his hand shaken by the Almighty, all the prophets will be after him. This is a strange and astonishing hadith.

It portrays the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth as a human who embraces people and shakes hands with them. Al-Hakim also reported that Jabir Ibn Abdullah said that Abu Bakr said that he heard the Messenger say: "The sun never rose on a man better than 'Umar." Al-Hakim said "This hadith is authentic."

(AI-Mustadrak, part 3, page 90).

If the sun never rose on a man better than 'Umar, it means that 'Umar was not less than any of the Prophets of God including their highest, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah. It is reported among the virtues of 'Umar that the Messenger of God said:

"Whenever Gabriel delayed in his visits to me, I guessed that he was sent to 'Umar."

(Ibn Abi Al-Hadid, Vol.6, part 12, page 178).

It is also reported that 'Umar is the lamp of the people of paradise.

 (Ibn Hajar, Al Sawa'iq AI-Muhriqah, page 97).

If the Prophet had been concerned whether Gabriel could have visited 'Umar, 'Umar would have been equal to the Prophet in position and would have been a competitor. Furthermore, how could 'Umar be the light of the people of paradise while the Prophets, including the Messenger of God, are among the people of paradise?

This means that the light of 'Umar is higher than the light of all the prophets. Furthermore, if 'Umar is the light of the people of paradise, and the width of paradise is the Heaven and the Earth, it means that 'Umar's light is the light of the universe. Should that be the case, all the prophets would be in need of his light, and that would mean that 'Umar is above the messengers of God.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I do not mean, through these hadiths, to accuse our Sunnite brothers of placing 'Umar above the Final Messenger of God and the rest of the prophets.

This is certainly not my intention; but I wanted to say that what the Sunnites attributed to the Shi'ites, that Ali is above Muhammad, is an unjustifiable and vicious lie because there is nothing in the Shi'ite books that indicates this allegation. The Shi'ites considers the spread of such a lie a flagrant aggression against the glory of Islam and the honor of the Shi'ites. I wanted to bring to the attention of the readers that the Imamite Shi'ites are too righteous to accuse their Sunnite brothers of placing a man above the Prophet in spite of the fact that there are many hadiths, which are considered by the Sunni scholars to be authentic, indicating that 'Umar is higher than the great Messenger and the messengers who were before him.

Umar suspecting companion of Prophet (s.a.w) to be in “contact” with Satan

Here is what we find in musnad ahmad

 Ibn umar narrates that when ghilan bin salma accepted islam, he had 10 wives; so holy prophet asws told him to select 4 and leave others; and when the era of umar came, he gave divorce to the remaining ones; and distributed his wealth in his sons; when umar came to know of it, he told him that i think that due to secretly listening to satan, you have come to know of your death time; and that he put in your heart; and now you would live for short time only; by god! either you take back your wives and distribution of your wealth or i will make your wives your heir; and order to stone your grave like it was done to grave of abu raghal

[musnad ahmad, urdu, vol 3, page 50-51]

Sheikh shoaib says hadeeth is sahih and all narrators are thiqa [8/251/4631]

ghilan is a sahabi (usd ul ghaba, vol 2, page 786, number 4184); and we see here that umar is charging him of “secretly listening” to satan and not just that, he even went ahead to say that he would order to stone his grave…………….

one can say that it was just suspicion, but is this the way you threaten someone on grounds of mere suspicion????

The Companions of the Prophet(s.a.w)

Mohammed b. Mūsā b. Nasr al-Rāzi narrated, saying: [My father related to me, saying: al-Ridā, peace be on him, was asked about the tradition of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family: 'My companions are like the stars: If you follow any of them, you shall receive guidance.' And about his tradition: 'Leave my companions to me.' So he, peace be on him, replied:

"Yes, he did say this tradition, meaning thereby the companions who did not make any alteration after him or any change (to the Islamic creed)."

The Imām was asked: "How can you tell that they altered and changed?"

He answered: "This is due to what is reported about him (the Prophet), may Allah bless him and his family, that he said: 'Certain individuals among my companions will be pushed away by force from my Pool (of Kawther) on the Day of Resurrection just as strange camels are pushed away from the watering place, and I shall say: 'O Lord! My companions! My companions!' And it shall be said to me:

'You do not know what innovations they invented after you.' So they will be pushed away towards the left side (where Hell is), and I shall say: 'Away with them; ruined they shall be.' Such will be the penalty of those who alter and change (the Prophet's traditions and practices).[1]"

[1] Al-Bukhāri (vol. 6, p. 119, al-Amiriya edition) has narrated on the authority of  'Abd Allah b. Mas'ūd, on the authority of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, who said: "I shall be the first to reach the Pool, then the souls of some men from among you will be resurrected and they shall be prohibited from coming near me, and I shall say: 'O Lord! These are my companions!' And it shall be said to me: 'You do not know what they did after you.'" Narrations similar to this are numerous.

As for companionship, it did not protect the Prophet's companions from making mistakes, for some of his companions were Samra b. Jundub, 'Amru b. al-'Ās, al-Mughira b. Shu'ba, and the like from among the heads of hypocrisy and mischief.

عمر بن خطاب کا خیبر سے بھاگ آنا

حضرت علی بیان کرتے ہیں کہ رسول اللہ خیبر کو روانہ ہوۓ جب وہاں پہنچے تو عمر کو بھیجا اور ان کے ساتھ لوگوں کو روانہ کیا ان یہودیوں کے شہر یا قصر. تو زیادہ دیر نہ گزری تھی کہ عمر اور ان کے اصحاب پسپا اور ہزیمت اٹھا کر لوٹ آۓ..ساتھی ان پر بزدلی کا الزام لگا رہے تھے اور وہ ان پر عائد کر رہے تھے

اس کو اہلسنت کے امام حاکم نے نقل کیا ہے اور شاہ ولی اللہ نے ازالتہ الخفاء میں جلد سوئم صفحہ ١٧٨ پر مناقب عمر بن خطاب میں بیان کیا ہے. ہم کو عمر بن خطاب کی یہ فضیلت قبول ہے .

Omar admitted that he fled from the war of Uhad.

عمر بن خطاب نے تسلیم کیا کہ وہ غزوہ احد میں ثابت قدم نہ رہا

الانساب الاشراف
جلد ١٠

Imam Ali (a.) loved Umar, Abu Bakar, Usman so he kept the names of his sons on their name !!!!!! (Urdu)

  مولا علی کے بیٹوں کے نام عمر، ابو بكر!!!

 

From : Shiaforums.com