سلسلة قطاف مناسبات الموسم الفاطمي Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library

سلسلة قطاف مناسبات الموسم الفاطمي 8

Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project

Hilal Fatimiyyiah Australia هالل فاطمية استراليا

Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project

2 Who is more qualified to judge about Fadak – Ahlul Bayt or companions?

In the Fadak dispute, arguments of Fatima Zahra (s.a.) from the Holy Quran were rejected and her witnesses viz. Ali (a.s.), Hasanain (a.s.), Umm Ayman, the lady assured of Paradise, were dismissed. The rulers usurped Fadak based on a bogus report that was not witnessed by anyone save themselves.

Even before we analyse all arguments in the matter of Fadak from both parties – what is the verdict of the intellect on the topic? Who is more qualified to judge about Fa- dak with a better understanding of the laws?

Ahle Bait worthier of judging over disputes

Narrator says: I heard Imam Sadiq (a.s.) say while there were some people of Kufa (Iraq) with him: I am amazed at the people that they think they have taken all the knowledge from the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), act upon it and are guided. They also think that we Ahle Bait (a.s.) have not taken his (s.a.w.a.) knowledge while we are his family members and his progeny. In our houses revelation descended and from us emanated the knowledge to them (i.e. the people). Yet they think they know, and they are guided while we are unaware and deviated?! Surely, this is impossible!

Reference

• Basair al-Darajaat v 1 p 12.

• Al-Kafi v 1 p 398.

Clearly, the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) were better informed of all laws including laws of inheritance which were hotly disputed in the Fadak debate. The wives and companions were no match for Ahlul Bayt in this topic or any other topic for that matter.

Prophet (s.a.w.a.) made Ali (a.s.) best of judges.

The leading lights of the Ahle Tasannun – Ahmed Ibn Hanbal and Nesai document this report. Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) narrates: Once, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) sent me to Yemen (as judge) while I was very young.

3 I said: O Messenger of Allah, you are sending me to a group among whom there are a lot of disagreements and troubles (to be settled) and I am a very young man!

He (s.a.w.a.) placed his hand on my chest and supplicated – Surely, Allah will guide your heart and make firm your tongue.

After that, I never doubted while judging between two persons.

Reference:

• Musnad Ahmed Ibn Hanbal part 1, p 88-111

• Khasais trad no. 35, also see 36, 37

• Fazail al-Sahabah v 2 p 580).

However, when it came to Fadak, Ameerul Momineen’s (a.s.) infallible judgement was ignored by the rulers.

Leave alone judgement, even his testimony was rejected, while testimonies of others was deemed more authentic. How the nation has blundered when they had the best judge in their midst!

1,000 doors of knowledge

Imam Jafar Sadiq (a.s.) – While suffering from illness that claimed his life, the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) ordered Ayesha and Hafsah – Call for my dear one. The two of them called for their fathers. When they arrived, the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) looked at them and then turned away and repeated – call for my dear one. The two wives sent for Ali (a.s.). Ali (a.s.) arrived and after that they (a.s.) remained in deep conversation. When Ali (a.s.) left the house the two men met him (a.s.) and asked him – what did your dear one tell you?

Ali (a.s.) – He informed me about a thousand doors of knowledge and each door opened another thousand doors of knowledge.

Reference:

• Basaer al-Darajat v 1 p 314-315.

• Behar al-Anwar v 40 p 216.

4 Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) was informed about everything by the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) but he was not informed about basic laws of inheritance involving his own wife Fati- ma Zahra (s.a.), who is also Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) daughter? But the ‘caliphs’ and wives who did not inherit any knowledge from Prophet (s.a.w.a.) were more qualified regarding the Fadak dispute?

If only the nation had selected Ahlul Bayt for leadership

Abu Thar (r.a.) is reported to have said: O nation in perplexity after their Prophet! Had you not selected for your leadership those whom Allah has rejected, and not rejected those whom Allah has selected and accepted the divinely commissioned leadership of the Household of your Prophet (s.a.w.a.), you would surely have been sustained from above you and from beneath your feet, no shortage would have occurred in the shares of inheritance, and no two individuals would have ever disagreed about any of the laws of Allah. Rather you would have found the knowledge of all these present with the Ahle Bait just as they are found in the Book of Allah and the traditions of the Prophet. Nevertheless, after you had done what you had done, taste then the ill- effects of your own conduct.

Reference:

• Tarikh al-Yaqoobi v 2 p 171.

• Tafseer al-Furaat (r.a.) p 659.

Clearly, only the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) are qualified to resolve disputes and if the nation had selected them for leadership, no two persons would have disputed over inheritance and other issues.

Source: https://www.seratonline.com/31490/who-is-more-qualified-to-judge-about-fadak-ahle- bait-or-companions/

Umm Ayman: The honourable lady whose Fadak testimony was rejected

When the rulers demanded that Fatima Zahra (s.a.) produce witnesses in support of her claim on Fadak, she advanced Umm Ayman as a witness, among others.

Before we venture into the Fadak testimony, it is worthwhile to review Umm Ay- man’s stature in Islam.

Who is Umm Ayman?

Umm Ayman was the maid of the Prophet (s.a.w..a.). Her name was Barkah bint Tha’labah.

She was an immigrant, who had the honour of migrating twice – first to Ethiopia, lat- er to Medina. She witnessed the battles of Hunain, Ohad and Khaibar. She was among the ladies who gave water to the Muslim soldiers and tended to the wounded.

The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) used to address her as ‘Mother’ and used to say – She is my mother after my real mother.

Ibn Hajar records: She narrated traditions from the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and others like Anas Ibn Malik, etc narrated on her authority.

She is mother to Ayman (from earlier marriage to Ubayd bin Zaid) and Osama Ibn Zaid. It is narrated that she was the maid of Abdullah Ibn Abdil Muttalib (a.s.), the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) father. The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) got her as inheritance.

The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) informed the Muslims about her: One who wants to marry a woman of Paradise, should marry Umm Ayman. Zaid Ibn Harith married her and Osa- ma Ibn Zaid was their son.

She passed away in the early part of the third ruler’s tenure. According to some reports, she died six months after the Prophet (s.a.w.a.).

Reference: • Al-Isabah v 4 p 415. • Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb v 12 p 459. • Asad al-Ghabah v 5 p 567.

6 Umm Ayman’s Fadak testimony rejected by rulers

Umm Ayman on being summoned to give witness on Fadak tells Abu Bakr:

I will not give witness O Abu Bakr, until I complete my proof against you based on what the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) informed (about me). I implore you for the sake of Allah, aren’t you aware that the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said – Umm Ayman is from the women assured of Paradise? He said: Yes She said: I bear witness that Allah, the Almighty, revealed the verse on his Prophet (s.a.w.a.) on which he granted Fadak to Fatima (s.a.): َ َ ْ ُ ْ َ َ َّ ُ وآ ِت ذا القرَب حقه And give to the near of kin his due (Surah Isra (17): 26)

The incident continues with the ruler initially handing over Fadak to Fatima Zahra (s.a.) based on the witnesses of Umm Ayman and Ameerul Momineen (a.s.).

However, his companion (Omar Ibn al khattab) walks in and tears apart the letter on the pretext that a woman’s testimony is not reliable and Ali (a.s.) will obviously testify in his wife’s favour.

• Al-Ehtejaaj v 1 p 90-95.

It is shocking how a lady assured of Paradise was deemed an unreliable witness. She spent more time in the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) company serving the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and the Muslim soldiers than many of the companions put together. The rulers did not even give her due consideration as a companion and companions are deemed al- most infallible according to many reports like this:

The consensus of the Ahle Sunnah regarding all the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is that they were just. None opposes this view except the most deviated of innovators.

• Al-Isabah p 17.

Indeed, the witness of Umm Ayman and Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) as also Fatima Zah- ra (s.a.) on Fadak, has placed Muslims in a quandary. If companions are just then why are the witnesses of these truly just companions rejected. And if they are deemed unreliable, then how can they claim that companions are just.

Source: https://www.seratonline.com/28148/umm-ayman-the-honourable-lady-whose-fadak- testimony-was-rejected/

Fakhr al-Raazi defends Fatima Zahra’s claim over Fadak

Fakhr al-Deen al-Raazi (exp 605 AH), the famous Ahle Tasannun theologian and phi- losopher, has countered the Shias on various points related to infallibility of the Imams (a.s.) and virtues of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.).

He was a staunch defender of the companions (Sahaba) and employed knowledge of Kalam (Ilm al-Kalam or “science of discourse” or sometimes called “Islamic scholastic theology”) in justifying their position on various issues. According to some he was the Sultan al-Mutakallimeen (King of Theologians).

There is one area however, where Fakhr al-Raazi departs from his position on the sa- haabah and rules in favour of A’al Muhammad (a.s.).

Fakhr al-Raazi’s view on Fadak

Regarding the so-called report that – ‘Fadak belonged to the Muslims as Prophets (a.s.) do not leave inheritance’, Fakhr al-Raazi argues in favour of Fatima Zahra (s.a.) thus: None except Ali (a.s.), Fatima (s.a.) and Ibne Abbas* could have been aware about the matter regarding the Prophet’s inheritance. And these personalities are among the senior most scholars of religion and well-known for their piety. On the other hand, Abu Bakr had no reason to be aware of the matter of the Prophet’s inheritance (since he was not related to the Prophet) and he would not even have imag- ined that the Prophet would have left behind something for him as inheritance. Then how can a rational person accept that the Prophet informed the one who had no share in his inheritance about this matter and kept his inheritors in the dark on the issue?

Reference:

• Al-Tafseer al-Kabeer v 9 p 218

* It must be noted that according to the laws of jurisprudence of the Jafari sect, pa- ternal uncle is not from the foremost of relatives from the viewpoint of inheritance. If children are alive, inheritance cannot be claimed from the sons of one’s brothers. Fakhr al-Raazi has included Abbas among the Prophet’s inheritors based on the view of his sect.

Clearly even according to the noted scholars of Ahle Tasannun, Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) should have informed Fatima (s.a.) and Ali (a.s.) about Fadak being the property of Muslims instead of informing the rulers about it.

Law of Islamic Shariah

In jurisprudence (fiqh), a report from someone unrelated to the subject is dismissed as unreliable and is never used as basis for passing law.

For instance, regarding the nullification of a man’s wuzu (ablutions) on touching his private part, there is a report to this effect on the authority of a lady – Basrah bint Safwan.

However, Ali (a.s.), Ammar (r.a.), Ibn Abbas, Abdullah Ibn Masood, Huzaifah Ibn Ya- man (r.a.), etc do not consider the wuzu as nullified. If the report by Basrah bint Saf- wan was reliable, they would certainly have known about it.

And those who do believe in the nullification of wuzu from touching the privates, do not advance the report of Basrah bint Safwan as proof.

They reject report of Basrah because it is unlikely that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) would narrate a law to a person when it does not concern him / her, and he doesn’t narrate it to the one who is affected directly by it and hence there are intrinsic de- fects and the narration is deemed incorrect.

Reference:

• Sharh Fath al-Qadeer v 1 p 56. • Masalah Fadak p 47.

It is evident that the report – ‘Prophets do not leave behind inheritance’ is unreliable and cannot be used as the basis for depriving Fatima Zahra (s.a.) of the Fadak inheritance.

The report was clearly an attempt to rob the Bani Hashim of their dues and to cripple them financially so that they would never stand up to the oppressive rulers of the time.

Source: https://www.seratonline.com/28124/fakhr-al-raazi-defends-fatima-zahras-claim-over- fadak/

Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) did not take back Fadak due to divine reward and punishment

The sceptics claim that Ali (a.s.) should have taken back Fadak if it was indeed the property of Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.). By leaving Fadak as it is, Ali (a.s.) has admitted that the property did not belong to Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.).

The hollowness of such claims are exposed in many reports on Fadak, one of which is documented here:

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) informs us why Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) did not take back Fadak on assuming caliphate.

He narrates: Ali (a.s.) did not take it back because the oppressor and the oppressed (Hazrat Fatima Zahra s.a.) had already set forth towards Allah, the Almighty. Allah had rewarded the oppressed (for patience) and had punished the oppressor (for usurping). Then Ali (a.s.) did not wish to take back something for which Allah had already punished the oppressor and had rewarded the oppressed.

• Elal al-Sharae p 155 under Chapter of ‘Why Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) left Fadak علل الشرائع ’as it is on assuming caliphate

عوالم العلوم .Awalim al-Uloom v 11 p 766 •

Clearly, there was a a higher purpose in forsaking Fadak. Ali (a.s.) out of respect for the divine reward and punishment, considered it more prudent to leave it as it is.

Haroon killed Imam Moosa Kazim (a.s.) over Fadak

The debate over Fadak ownership began immediately after the martyrdom of the Ho- ly Prophet (s.a.w.a.). But the repercussions of the debate were felt for decades since the rulers were always anxious that Aal Muhammad (a.s.) would stake a claim over it. The following incident involving Imam Moosa Kazim (a.s.) and Haroon underscores this reality.

Haroon al-Abbasi used to tell Imam Moosa Ibn Jafar (a.s.) take Fadak since I wish to return it to you. But he (a.s.) always declined the offer.

Haroon insisted on it upon which Imam (a.s.) said – I will not accept it until it is rein- stated completely with all its limits.

Haroon asked – And what are its limits?

Imam (a.s.) – If I define its limits you will never return it. Haroon – By your grandfather you must define it. Imam (a.s.) – As for the first limit it is Aden (Yemen). Haroon’s face changed colour. Haroon asked Imam (a.s.) to continue. Imam (a.s.) – The second limit is Samarqand (Uzbekistan). Haroon’s face turned even darker. Imam (a.s.) – The third limit is Africa. Haroon’s face turned black. He said – Continue. Imam (a.s.) – The fourth limit is the sea coast along the peninsula and Armenia. Haroon – There is nothing left for us. Imam (a.s.) – I had already told you that if I define its limits you will never return it. It was then that Haroon decided to kill Imam Moosa Kazim (a.s.).

مناقب آل ایب طالب Manaqib A’l Abi Talib (a.s.), vol. 4, p. 320 •

When Fadak came back to haunt Ayesha

In the dispute over Fadak, the rulers very conveniently presented a forged tradition to the effect that prophets do not leave behind any inheritance – everything they leave behind is for the nation. Among the witnesses of the forged tradition was Ayesha and Hafsa, along with Malik Ibn Aws, a Bedouin. Usman reminds Ayesha of her false testimony It is related by Tabari and Thaqafi in their respective history compilations: During the tenure of Usman, Ayesha approached him and demanded: Grant me (the pension) bestowed upon me by my father Abu Bakr and then by Umar. Usman retorted: I have found nothing in the Book and the Sunnah to back this grant, Rather your father and Umar granted it to you on a whim, but I will not do so. She demanded: Grant me my inheritance from Allah’s Messenger (s.a.w.a.)? Usman shot back: Didn’t Fatima (s.a.) approach you to seek her inheritance from Al- lah’s Messenger (s.a.w.a.)? But you testified along with Malik Ibn Aws al-Basri (al- Nazri) that – ‘Surely the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) did not leave inheritance. In this way you usurped the right Fatima (s.a.) sought from you.’ I will not grant you (the inheritance). Tabari reports further – Usman said – Weren’t you (Ayesha) the one, along with the Bedouin who used to perform ablutions with his own urine, to testify near your father that the prophets do not leave anything as inheritance?

• Bait al-Ahzan p 167.

• Behaar al-Anwaar v 31 p 295.

• Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah v 16 p 220 (Ahle Tasannun) with variation.

• Al-Amaali of Shaikh Mufeed (r.a.) p 25 with variation.

• Kashf al-Ghummah v 1 p 479 with variation Clearly Ayesha by claiming inheritance of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) rejected her own previous testimony. Even to a person like Usman, the contradiction in her stand was obvious, as was the motive behind her false testimony– to deprive Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) of her inheritance. https://www.seratonline.com/27623/when-fadak-came-back-to-haunt-ayesha/