- Details
- Hits: 698
The incident of Fadak
Posted by Maulana Muhammed saloojee
(please note that this is quite a lengthy read but important as we need to educate ourselves on the lies of the Shias-Qalamul Haq)
Before moving on to `Umar’s radiya Llahu `anhu relationship with the Ahl al-Bayt, it is necessary that we pause for a moment, to address a question that might arise, and that is: If there was so much love and affection between them as mentioned, then how does one explain the incident of Fadak? It is this incident that the enemies of Islam take out of context to fulfil their objectives, intending to establish that there was disunity amongst the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam and the prophetic household in particular, and the Muslims in general. As if the Ahl al-Bayt was on the one side and the Muhajirin, Ansar, and the rest of the Muslim nation on the other.
It was not and it never will be as such! The matter in essence was not of great importance and significance, as they make it out to be. The incident occurred after the demise of the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam and the Muslims had now pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu. Fatimah radiya Llahu `anha had requested her estate from Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu which the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam had left behind, i.e. that which Allah had granted the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam, viz. Fadak[1]. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu responded,
The Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam said,
“We (the Prophets) are not inherited from, what we leave behind is charity.” The family of Muhammad salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam will eat from this wealth. I swear by Allah I will not change anything of the charity of the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam I will do the exact same with it as the Messenger salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam had done with it.
Then he added:
By the One Who has control of my life, having good relations with the relatives of the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam is more beloved to me than having good relations with my own relatives.
When Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu mentioned the hadith to Fatimah radiya Llahu `anha she retracted and did not discuss the matter again until she passed on.
In fact, it is stated in some Shi`i narrations that she was pleased with it. Ibn Maytham[2] al-Shi`i in his commentary on Nahj al-Balaghah writes:
Abu Bakr said to her, “For you is that of your father. He would take from Fadak what sufficed for your sustenance. Then he would divide the rest and spend of it in the path of Allah. By Allah I will dispose of it in the same manner that he did. She was pleased with that, and took a covenant from him to the effect.[3]
A similar report is transmitted by al-Dunbuli in his commentary al-Durrah al-Najfiyyah.[4]
The fact that Fatimah radiya Llahu `anha was pleased and accepted the judgement so easily was not sufficient for the Shi`ah, rather, they went on writing books condemning the Sahabah. Such books filled with blasphemy and cursing, accusing the Sahabah of being immoral, disbelievers, apostates, and oppressors of the Ahl al-Bayt; whereas the people involved in the incident did not have the least to say! As we have just mentioned, citing their own literature as sources. Their scholars further transmit reports which prove that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu followed up his statement with action.
Ibn al-Maytham, al-Dunbuli, Ibn Abi al-Hadid, and Fayd al-Islam `Ali Naqi writes:
Abu Bakr would take the harvest of Fadak, give to the Ahl al-Bayt that which would suffice them, and devide the remainder as was the practice of the other Khulafa’ who succeeded him: `Umar, `Uthman, and `Ali.[5]
This does not sit well with the Shi`ah and how can it? Al-Majlisi[6] a senior Shi`i cleric states:
The greatest calamity and misfortune was Abu Bakr and `Umar usurping Fadak from the prophetic household… and the most horrifying matter is that Abu Bakr usurped the Khilafah from `Ali radiya Llahu `anhu, then forced the Muhajirin and the Ansar radiya Llahu `anhum to pledge allegiance. His greed then increased wanting Fadak also, fearing that if it were made over to the Ahl al-Bayt, people would be inclined towards them for their wealth, thus abandoning the oppressors (Abu Bakr and his companions). He therefore intended to reduce them to bankruptcy, so that people would have no inclination towards the Ahl al-Bayt, rendering their false Khilafah null and void. It was for reasons such as these that they had fabricated traditions which state, “We the Prophets are not inherited from, rather what we leave behind is sadaqah.”[7]
Many Shi`ah scholars have followed al-Majlisi in attempting to uncover the ‘malice’ and ‘hatred’ which had never existed. Unaware that the refuge they were spinning was nothing more than a web which is blown away with the slightest gust of wind.
Out of rancour and malice towards Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu they have rejected his report not knowing that their fifth infallible Imam—Ja`far al-Sadiq—also transmitted the same from the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam. It can be found in Al-Kafi, which is considered to be the most authentic according to them and regarding which it was said, “It is sufficient for the Shi`ah.”
Al-Kulayni transmits from Hammad ibn `Isa—from al-Qaddah—from Abu `Abd Allah:
The Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam said, “He who treads a path seeking knowledge, Allah facilitates for him the path to Jannah… The virtue of a scholar over a devoted worshipper is like that of the moon at its fullest over the stars. The scholars are the heirs of the Prophets, gold and silver are not inherited from them rather knowledge is inherited, and he who has taken from it has taken a large portion.[8]
Abu `Abd Allah Ja`far al-Sadiq said:
The scholars are the heirs of the Prophets and that is because gold and silver are not inherited from the Prophets but rather the scholars inherit their traditions.[9]
So what weight does the statements of al-Majlisi and those who follow him hold? There is a poem in the Persian language that goes as follows:
If this is a crime, then know that it also being perpetrated in your town.
Here are two additional reports transmitted by al-Saduq which give strength to the previous narrations:
1. It has been narrated from Ibrahim ibn `Ali al-Rafi`i—from his father—from his grandmother, the daughter of Abu al-Rafi`i, who stated:
Fatimah brought Hasan and Husayn to the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam in his final illness.
She said, “Here are your two grandsons bequeath for them.”
The Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam replied, “As for Hasan he has inherited my reverence and prestige, and Husayn has inherited my bravery and generosity.”[10]
2. It is reported that Fatimah radiya Llahu `anha came to the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam.
She said, “O Rasulullah! These are your grandsons bequeath for them.”
The Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam replied, “As for Hasan, I have gifted him my reverence and prestige; and as for Husayn, I have gifted him my generosity and my bravery.”[11]
Yet we still find al-Majlisi and others trying to establish that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu and the Companions only denied `Ali and his family of Fadak so as to bankrupt them and thus lessen their influence over the people. How strange is it! Do they really think that they were people who attained leadership using wealth and bribes as our current politicians do? If we were to assume for a moment that this was true then it would have had no bearing on them as according to the Shi`ah they had an abundance of wealth. Al-Kulayni transmitting from Abu al-Hasan al-Hadi—the tenth Shi`i Imam—states:
Fatimah had seven properties (orchards): Al-Dalal Al-`Auf Al-Hasani Al-Safiyah Wa ma li Umm Ibrahim Al-Muthayyib Al-Barqah.[12]
Do they think that the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam took all the state’s money and made it his own? Does that make any sense? Even in present times, in which plundering has become the norm and people are no longer concerned about religion, if a king or government were to conquer land, they would not make it theirs exclusively, rather they will deal with it in the interest of its people. So is it possible for someone such as the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam—may I and my parents be sacrificed for him—to give preference to himself over others? Especially when he was merciful and compassionate? These are but fabrications!
Hypothetically, if Fadak was the inheritance of the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam, Fatimah radiya Llahu `anha would not have been his sole heir, rather the daughters of Abu Bakr and `Umar radiya Llahu `anhuma would have also inherited. They would therefore have deprived their daughters as well as `Abbas radiya Llahu `anhu, the uncle of the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam, from their inheritance.
Thirdly, the antagonist from amongst the Shi`ah are unaware that according to their jurisprudence, females do not inherit property or land. Their scholars have dedicated a specific chapter in that regard. Al-Kulayni has a chapter titled, Women do not inherit property, in which he transmits a number of reports from Abu Ja`far—the fifth Shi`i Imam—he states:
Females do not inherit anything from land and property.[13]
Al-Saduq ibn Babawayh al-Qummi transmits in his book, Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, from Maysarah:
I asked Ja`far, “What do females inherit?”
He replied, “They do not inherit land and property.”[14]
There are many reports like these in which their scholars[15] concur that females do not inherit land or property. The question thus arises: If females cannot inherit land or property, then how could Fatimah radiya Llahu `anha have requested Fadak?
As for Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu angering Fatimah radiya Llahu `anhuma and saying that she returned after that and did not speak until she had passed away. The truth is that she retracted her view on Fadak and did not bring up the topic again thereafter until she passed away, May Allah have mercy on her and be pleased with her.
As for usurping her rights, al-Majlisi—despite his harshness—is forced to acknowledge the following:
When Abu Bakr realised that he had angered Fatimah radiya Llahu `anhuma he told her, “I do not deny your virtue, and close relation to the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam. I am only preventing you from taking Fadak because I want to execute the command of the Messenger salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam. By Allah I have heard the Messenger salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam saying, ‘We the Ambiya are not inherited from. What we leave behind is the book, knowledge, and wisdom.’ I am not the only one who is of this opinion, rather it was with the consensus of the believers. As for the wealth, if you so wish then take from my wealth, because you are the noble daughter of your father and a pure tree for your children. No one is able to deny your virtue!”[16]
After reading this report is it possible for anyone to say that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu had angered her, taken her wealth forcefully, intended to harm her, cause her distress, or even render them bankrupt for ulterior motives? None except he who has lost his senses will be able to reach such a conclusion!
The building they intended to erect upon this weak and feeble foundation, establishing memorial ceremonies and gatherings to curse those who had supposedly ‘usurped’ the rights of the Ahl al-Bayt, trying to portray that hatred and animosity existed between the Companions of the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam and his household; that very building collapsed the day they intended to erect it, the stories being baseless. `Ali radiya Llahu `anhu has proved its baselessness the day he assumed leadership, as mentioned by al-Sayyid al-Murtada, commonly called `Alam al-Huda:
When the matter of requesting Fadak was mentioned to `Ali he said, “I feel ashamed before Allah to return something that Abu Bakr had withheld, and which `Umar continued to maintain (as before).”[17]
Therefore, when Abu Ja`far ibn Muhammad al-Baqir was asked concerning Fadak:
“Did Abu Bakr and `Umar oppress you in anyway or have they deprived you from anything that rightfully belonged to you?”
He replied in the negative, and said, “By the One Who had revealed the Qur’an to his slave so that he may be a warner to the worlds, they did not oppress us to the extent of the weight of a mustard seed.”
I then said, “May I be ransomed for you, should I associate myself with them?”
He replied in the affirmative, and said, “Associate yourself with them in this life and in the Hereafter, and whatever affliction you are faced with (on account of it) I will take the responsibility.”[18]
The brother of al-Baqir, Zayd ibn `Ali ibn al-Husayn, states something similar to that of his grandfather, `Ali ibn Abi Talib, and his brother, al-Baqir, regarding Fadak, when asked by al-Bahtari ibn Hassan. He states:
I asked Zayd ibn `Ali with the intention of provoking the matter of Abu Bakr by saying that Abu Bakr usurped Fadak from Fatimah.
He replied, “Abu Bakr was kind-hearted and would dislike changing anything that the Messenger salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam had done.
Therefore, when Fatimah came to him and said that the Messenger salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam had given Fadak to her, he asked, ‘Do you have any evidence?’ she then brought `Ali to bear testimony for her and thereafter Umm Ayman. Umm Ayman asked, ‘Do the two of you bear testimony that I am from the people of Jannah?’ they responded in the affirmative.”
Zayd then clarified who were intended by the two and said, “They were Abu Bakr and `Umar radiya Llahu `anhuma”.
He then continued, “She then said, ‘I bear testimony that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam had given Fadak to her.’ Abu Bakr said bring another male or female so that the matter could be resolved.”
Zayd added, “If the matter were raised to me, by Allah, I would have judged in the same manner that Abu Bakr had.”[19]
Does this matter require any more detail?
Before concluding we would like to present these last two reports that are transmitted by al-Kulayni in this regard:
1. He reports that Abu `Abd Allah Ja`far said:
Booty and land, as long as it is not preoccupied by horses, camels, people tending to it or having spent money on it; then it and every other piece of ruined or destitute land and valley belongs to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam or the Imam who succeeds him and he is able to do with it whatever he pleases.”
This report explicitly states that the leader of the believers is at liberty to do with the land whatever he wishes.[20]
2. The following unique report has also been reported in al-Usul min Al-Kafi:
Imam Abu al-Hasan Musa—the seventh Shi`i Imam—came to the Abbassid Khalifah al-Mahdi and saw that he was returning the peoples possessions that were taken unjustly.
He said, “O Amir al-Mu’minin! What about our possessions that were wrongfully taken?”
Al-Mahdi asked, “What possessions are you referring to, O Abu al-Hasan?”
He responded, “Fadak!”
Al-Mahdi then said, “O Abu al-Hasan, demarcate it for me.”
He said, “One of its extremities is Mount Uhud, the other is al-`Arish of Egypt, the third is Sayf al-Bahr, and the last is Dawmat al-Jundal.”[21]
In other words, half of the world! Look at these lies! How is it possible for the village of Khaybar to be equal to half of the world? How strange are all of these exaggerations? This is clear evidence of the extent of their exaggeration and lies.
We now conclude the discussion of Fadak as well as the virtues of Amir al-Mu’minin Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu and his rightful position as the Khalifah after the Prophet salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam. The mutual love that existed between Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu and the Ahl al-Bayt is evident from their mutual interactions as attested to by the Shi`ah sources themselves. We now move on to the discussion of the second Khalifah, Sayyiduna `Umar al-Faruq radiya Llahu `anhu.
Adapted from: Shi`ah wa Ahl al-Bayt By: Shaykh Ihsan Ilahi Zahir
[1] Fadak is a piece of land at Khaybar, which Allah had granted to His Messenger salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam. Some suggest that it is on the outskirts of Khaybar. In it there are springs and date palm trees. (Lisan al-`Arab vol. 10 pg. 473)
[2] He is Kamal al-Din Maytham ibn `Ali Maytham al-Bahrani, born in the seventh century A.H. The pious scholar, philosopher, researcher, wise, scrutinizer, possessor of both logical and transmitted sciences, praiseworthy teacher and poet. Author of Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, he transmits from al-Tusi... It is said that Khawajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi had studied fiqh (jurisprudence) under Kamal al-Din Maytham, who in turn had learnt philosophy from him. He died in 679 A.H. His grave is in Hilta, a village in Mahudh. (Al-Kuna wa l-Alqab vol. 1 pg. 419)
[3] Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah by Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani vol. 5 pg. 107.
[4] Ibid pg. 331, 332.
[5] Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah by Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani vol. 4, vol. 5 pg. 107, al-Durrah al-Najafiyyah pg. 332; Sharh al-Manhaj by `Ali al-Naqi vol. 5 pg. 960, Persian text.
[6] Very seldom would one find someone as bold as al-Majlisi in cursing and insulting. He would not mention a Companion except that he curses him. He writes about Fadak and states that when Abu Bakr sought witnesses who would bear testimony for Fatimah, `Ali asked him, “Are you requesting witnesses?” He replied in the affirmative. Thereafter `Ali asked, “If people were to bear witness that Fatimah had fornicated, what would you have done?” to which Abu Bakr replied, “We would have carried out the capital punishment on her, as would be done with everyone else.” Haqq al-Yaqin pg. 193. Look at his audacity, precipitance, and the manner in which he speaks! Does he not have any shame?
[7] Haqq al-Yaqin pg. 191, Criticism against Abu Bakr.
[8] Al-Usul min Al-Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 34, the book on the virtue of knowledge under the chapter ‘The reward of the teacher and the student’.
[9] Al-Usul min Al-Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 32 ,the book on ‘The quality of knowledge its virtue, and the virtue of the scholars’.
[10] Kitab al-Khisal pg. 77 by al-Qummi.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Al-Furu` min Al-Kafi, Kitab al-Wasaya, vol. 7 pg. 47, 48.
[13] Al-Furu` min Al-Kafi, Kitab al-Mawarith vol. 7 pg. 137.
[14] Al-Furu` min Al-Kafi, Kitab al-Fara’id wa l-Mawarith vol. 4 pg. 347.
[15] Check their books on jurisprudence.
[16] Haqq al-Yaqin pg. 201, 202, translated from the Persian text.
[17] Al-Shafi pg. 231 by al-Murtada; Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah vol. 4 by Ibn Abi al-Hadid.
[18] Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah vol. 4 pg. 82 by Ibn Abi al-Hadid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Al-Usul min Al-Kafi, Kitab al-Hujjah, Bab al-Fay’ wa l-Anfal, vol. 1 pg. 539.
[21] Ibid
