Thread by @Shiahism

Why Ali (a.s) did not avenge the killing of Fatima Zahra (sa) – #thread 🧵 #AyyameFatimiya

The skeptic’s intent behind this line of questioning is to deny the attacks. If there had been an attack, Ali (a.s.) would certainly have avenged the killing. Since he (a.s.) did not avenge, there was no attack.1/10

Ali did not retaliate based on Prophet (s) bidding to be patient in face of oppression and lack of support. He (a) placed higher priority on avoiding factionalism in Islam and preventing hypocrites from gaining upper hand, rather than retaliate for a seemingly personal grievance.

Also, avenging and retaliation is from the traits of Arab jahiliyyah while Islam preaches patience and forbearance to the extent possible, with the promise of greater reward for the oppressed and greater chastisement for the oppressor./3

This means the more prolonged the oppression, the greater the reward and punishment for the oppressed and oppressor, respectively By not retaliating Ali and Fatima Zahra s.a are oppressed till date and rewarded continuously and their oppressors are likewise punished continuously

Quran was the guiding light for the Ahle Bait (a.s.) which says:
And if you take your turn, then retaliate with the like of that with which you were afflicted; but if you are patient, it will certainly be best for those who are patient. (Suran Nahl (16): 126) /5

There are many instances when Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) likewise did not avenge or retaliate even for profoundly serious crimes./6

Example of Khalid Bin Waleed From Sahih Bukhari" /7

Abu Sufyan ,Muawiyah ,Amar Aas who for years had tormented the prophet (s)

The mercy of Hazrat Ali (as)../9

All these examples show that non-retaliation was the norm for Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and Ahle Bait (a.s.) and just because there was no retaliation for Fatima Zahra (s.a.) killing it does not mean there was no attack./10