Refuting the baseless slander on Umar(as) that he was rapist.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

A Zindeeq Shia of Dajjal stated:

Umar bin Al-Khattab raped Aatikka binte Zayd

We read in a tradition below from Sunni scholar Ibn Sa’ad.
Ibn Sa'ad:

Affan Ibn Muslim Narrated from Hammad Ibn Salma, who narrated from Ali Ibn zayd the following:

    'Aatika binte-Zayd was engaged to Abdullah Ibn Abi Bakr durring his lifetime. Before his death, he made her promise him not to marry after him, and 'Aatika did not marry after him. Men came and asked for her hand, and she rejected them. Omar asked her guardian to tell her about his interest in her and she rejected Omar as well. Omar insisted: "marry her to me", so he married her to him. Omar then approached her and and struggled with her untill he defeated her against her will, then copulated with her. After he was finished, Omar said "Uf..Uf..Ufffff...on her!!!", then left her and did not come back. she later sent him her female servant requesting him to come back, and she will be ready for him


أَخْبَرَنَا عَفَّانُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ، أَخْبَرَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ زَيْدٍ، أَنَّ عَاتِكَةَ بِنْتَ زَيْدٍ كَانَتْ تَحْتَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي بَكْرٍ فَمَاتَ عَنْهَا، وَاشْتَرَطَ عَلَيْهَا أَنْ لا تَزَوَّجَ بَعْدَهُ، فَتَبَتَّلَتْ وَجَعَلَتْ لا تَزَوَّجُ، وَجَعَلَ الرِّجَالُ يَخْطُبُونَهَا وَجَعَلَتْ تَأْبَى، فَقَالَ عُمَرُ لِوَلِيِّهَا: " اذْكُرْنِي لَهَا "، فَذَكَرَهُ لَهَا فَأَبَتْ عُمَرَ أَيْضًا، فَقَالَ عُمَرُ: " زَوِّجْنِيهَا "، فَزَوَّجَهُ إِيَّاهَا، فَأَتَاهَا عُمَرُ فَدَخَلَ عَلَيْهَا فَعَارَكَهَا حَتَّى غَلَبَهَا عَلَى نَفْسِهَا، فَنَكَحَهَا، فَلَمَّا فَرَغَ، قَالَ: " أُفٍّ، أُفٍّ، أُفٍّ "، أَفَّفَ بِهَا، ثُمَّ خَرَجَ مِنْ عِنْدِهَا وَتَرَكَهَا لا يَأْتِيهَا، فَأَرْسَلَتْ إِلَيْهِ مَوْلاةً لَهَا أَنْ تَعَالَ فَإِنِّي سَأَتَهَيَّأُ لَكَ

Sunni Source:
Tabaqat Ibn Saad, Volume 8, page 208

Response:

Firstly, Umar(as) married her, which the Dajjal himself quoted.

Secondly, The report is weak due to two reasons. (i). Narrator Ali bin Zaid is weak and unreliable and has been weakened by following Scholars.(ii). Moreover, he wasn't born during the era of Umar(ra) so he can't narrate an event about Umar(ra) directly as a witness.

This narration is weak and unreliable due to the narrator Ali ibn Zaid. He has been weakened by (1). Ibn Adi al-Jurjani, (2). al-Bayhaqi, (3). Abu Hatim al-Razi, (4). Ibn Hibban, (5). Abu Zur’a, (6). Ahmad ibn Hanbal, (7). al-Nasai, (8 Juzjani, (9). Abu Ahmad al-Hakim, (10). al-Uqayli, (11). Ibn Hajr, (12). Darqutni, (13). Muhammad ibn Saad, (14). Ibn Khuzaima, (15). Ibn Tahir, (16). Bukhari, (17). Busayri, (18). Ali bin Madeeni, (19). Ibn Katheer, (20). Wahyb bin Khaled, (21). Yahya ibn Ma’een, etc [Saheeh wa Da’eef al-Ahadeeth al-Qudsiyyah, vol 2, page 113-114] ; [Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol 7, page 322-324] ; [Mizan al-itidal, vol 3, page 127-129, #5844]. Also by, (22). al-Albani[Al-Adab Al-Mufrad, page 266, #765] ; (23). Shuaib al-Arnaut[Musnad Ahmad, vol 30, page 430, #18479] ; (24). Zubair Ali Za’ee[Jami al-Tirmidhi, vol 5, page 75] ; (25). Hussain Saleem Asad[Musnad Abu Ya’la, vol 2, page 227, #926] ; (26). Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi[Fatawa Rizwiyah, vol 22, page 612] ; (27). Ashraf Ali Thanvi al-Deobandi[Bawadir al-Nawadir, page 135].

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

The Dajjali loser when realized that the report he used is weak & unreliable, He responded this:

Since the nasibis have cried about the previous report of Umar being Mursal, although it can still be sahih, let's take a look at another that can have no question. The previous one has been said to have thiqah narrators but is Mursal, so allow me to show this.

Imam Al Busairi:

Umar bin al-Khatab had a slave girl who used to hate men. Whenever Umar wanted to have sexual intercourse with her, she apologized by advancing an excuse that she was having a period, hence Umar thought that she was telling lie, then (when he had sexual intercourse with her) he found that she was telling the truth. He then he went to the Prophet (saw) and he ordered him to pay Fifty/Half of a Dinar as charity. Footnote: Narrated from Ishaq with a Hasan (Reliable) chain.

Source: Ithaf al-Khiyarah al-Maharah. Vol. 1, Pg. # 404.

This Jahil nor does the donkey(Shia shogun) from whom he had copied that crap know that the narration Munqati(disconnected) not Mursal.

As for the next report the Dajjalis quoted then, this report is also recorded in Daarimi, Musnad Ishaq, Bayhaqi. But I don't know how these morons conclude from it that it was rape. These Juhla needs to educate themselves.

Secondly, This Hadith is clearly Weak. It has such a major gap in the narration that 2 whole generations have been skipped. The Muhaqqiq's grading of the chain being Hasan is incorrect.

Imam Bayhaqi has stated that Abdul Hamid(bin Abdul Rahman bin Zaid bin al-Khattab) never even heard from Umar. so how can he narrate something from him?

Theres also other narrations in Abu Dawud which mention the same narration from Abdul Hamid, but Abdul Hamid doesnt mention Umars name. even that has gaps of more than one person in the narration.

Not only has there been 2 accounts in 2 seperate narrations of more than one generation gap in the narration, but hes narrated both narrations differently..

With all these issues. These lying Rawaafidh still claim this narration is authentic.

Shuaib Arnaut has said in his Tahqeeq on Abu Dawud & Takhrij of Mushkil Al Athar the narration is Mu'dal, has major gaps, its weak

so has Bayhaqi in Sunan Al Kubra and Imam Thahabi in Al Muhatthab. For these scholars opinions on the chain of narrators, refer to Tahthib ul Kamaal.

Also, Ibn Zaid(Abdul Hamid) narrating from Hafsah bint Umar(as) is Mursal(has a gap).

Hence the correct grading of this chain is that, it is Munqati(connected).