Answer:
Dear Ariz Haider,
May Peace, Mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you.
Thank you for your trust and for posing such a thoughtful question. Regarding the narration mentioned in ‘Ilal al-Shara’i by Shaykh al-Saduq (may Allah have mercy on him), Volume 1, Chapter 149, which discusses the incident where Imam Ali (peace be upon him) was reportedly going to propose to the daughter of Abu Jahl and Lady Fatima al-Zahra (peace be upon her) reacted, there are several important points that need to be clarified:
To Begin with the authenticity of the chain(sanad), the chain of the hadith is weak. Among its narrators is ʿAmr ibn Abī al-Miqdām, whose trustworthiness has not been established in Shia biographical evaluation, Ayatollah khoei mentions in his majmua rijal that this individual is unknown. Moreover, the chain also includes Ziyād ibn ʿAbd Allāh, who is considered \"muhmal\"...a narrator neglected in the books of rijāl, without any documented assessment of his reliability. Hence, based on Shia standards of hadith sciences, the sanad is classified as ḍaʿīf(weak), and it cannot be used as a basis for doctrine or certainty.
However, assuming for the sake of discussion that the narration were authentic, a few important clarifications help address the six questions raised. First, regarding the infallibility of Sayyida Fāṭima (sa) and her expression of jealousy: infallibility does not negate human emotions. The narration itself states, \"Verily, Allah has written jealousy upon women, and jihad upon men,\" showing that jealousy is a natural emotion decreed by God and not a flaw. Her reaction was not sinful or unjust but rather a human emotional response to a distressing (and later proven false) piece of information.
Second, the question arises why Fāṭima (sa) believed the report without verifying it, especially in light of Qur’an 49:6, which instructs believers to verify reports brought by sinners. The narration does not suggest that she accused Imām ʿAlī (as) or acted with hostility; rather, she was emotionally affected and left the house out of sorrow. Imām ʿAlī (as) clarified to the Prophet (s) that \"nothing of what she heard was from me,\" confirming that the report was false and putting the matter to rest. Emotional distress in such a moment does not contradict the Qur’anic instruction to verify news before acting unjustly.
The third question mentions a known statement by Imām ʿAlī (as) that Fāṭima (sa) never disobeyed or angered him. This statement remains valid because the narration in question does not depict any act of disobedience or disrespect. She left the house in grief, not out of rebellion. After clarification, she returned in peace, and the emotional episode concluded with harmony. Thus, there is no contradiction between the two narrations.
As for the fourth question, why Fāṭima (sa) would be upset over something the Sharīʿah permits, i.e., polygamy, we again must return to the understanding of human emotion versus religious law. It is entirely possible for someone to feel hurt or uneasy over something that is technically permissible without that emotion becoming sinful or irrational. Even Rasūlullāh (s) himself, according to various Sunni and Shia narrations, discouraged Imām ʿAlī (as) from marrying the daughter of Abū Jahl, not because polygamy is ḥarām, but because it would cause emotional harm to Fāṭima (sa), which he considered unacceptable. Therefore, her emotional reaction is not against Divine Law, but rather a natural part of her human makeup, which Islam acknowledges.
The fifth question asks about the absence of Sayyida Zaynab (sa) in the narration. It is likely that she was not mentioned because she was still an infant or very young during this event. Historical narrations often omit individuals who were not directly involved in a scene, especially children, and this omission does not affect the authenticity or nature of the event.
Lastly, the narration mentions that Sayyida Fāṭima (sa) carried Imām Ḥasan (as) and Imām Ḥusayn (as) while taking the hand of Umm Kulthūm (sa), and a question is raised about why she made Umm Kulthūm walk if she was younger. There is no certainty about their exact ages at the time, and physical ability in children can vary. It is entirely plausible that Umm Kulthūm could walk, while the younger Imāms were being carried for practical or emotional reasons. Such a detail is too minor and circumstantial to discredit the narration solely on its basis.
In conclusion, this narration is weak in its chain and therefore cannot be relied upon as definitive. But even if hypothetically considered authentic, its content does not challenge the established infallibility or moral integrity of Sayyida Fāṭima (sa). Her emotional response, the Prophet’s (s) intervention, and the clarification by Imām ʿAlī (as) all fall within the bounds of natural human interaction and divine guidance, reflecting the deep emotional and spiritual bond between the Ahlulbayt (as).