3. Sunni Answers to Shiapen’s article on Fadak and inheritance of Prophet(saw) – “Chapter Three”


This is our refutation of infamous Shiawebsite “Shiapen.com” which was formerly known as Answering-Ansar.org; the name of this website was changed because the lies and deception of it were exposed to such an extent that, they had to revise its stuff and come up with a new name. This article is a refutation to Shiapen’s article “Fadak: Chapter Three: The claim of Sayyida Fatima (as) ?”.

 

Argument 1:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Abu Bakr usurped the land of Fadak and Fatima Zahra (as) asked him for her Right

We read in Riyadh:

When the Prophet died, Abu Bakr took Fadak from Fatima. Fatima went to him and said ‘Give the land of Fadak to me, as my father the Prophet (s) gave it to me’.

Tafseer Kabeer:

When Rasulullah (s) died, Fatima claimed that Fadak was land bestowed to me by my father the Prophet (s); Abu Bakr said ‘I don’t know if you are telling the truth”.

[End Quote]

Answer:

Shiapen followed their religious teaching in order to deceive the readers. They half-quoted the report from Riyadh An-Nazirah, to prove their point.

Here is full quote from Riyadh An-Nazirah.
وعن عبد الله بن أبي بكر بن عمرو بن حزم عن أبيه قال جاءت فاطمة إلى أبي بكر فقالت أعطني فدك فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهبها لي قال صدقت يا بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولكني رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقسمها فيعطي الفقراء والمساكين وابن السبيل بعد أن يعطيكم منها قوتكم فما تصنعين بها قالت أفعل فيها كما كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يفعل قال ولك علي أن أفعل فيها ما كان أبوك يفعل قالت والله لتفعلن ذلك قال والله لأفعلن ذلك قالت اللهم اشهد

Abdullah bin Aby Bakr bin Amru bin Hazm from his father who said: Fatima came to Abu Bakr and said “give me Fadak, for the Prophet(saw) bestowed it to me, so he said “you have spoken the truth oh daughter of the Prophet(saw) but I saw the Prophet (saw) distributing it among the poor and wayfarers after he gave you your share of it so what would you do with it”? She said: I’d do the same thing as the Prophet(saw) used to, so he said: and you have my promise to do the same as the Prophet(saw) used to, so she said “By God will you do that” so he said “By God I will”.

If we read the complete report then we find that according to the later part, Fatima(ra) agreed with Abu Bakr(ra) and told him to do as Prophet(saw) used to do. This is just after their talk quoted by Shiapen. It’s a proof against Shias not against Ahlesunnah. Fatima(ra) was happy with Abu Bakr’s decision.

However, we would like to say that this report is unreliable since the chain of narrator is broken because the narrator Abdullah bin Aby Bakr bin Amru bin Hazm (عبد الله بن أبي بكر بن محمد بن عمرو بن حزم الأنصاري) narrates from his father (أبو بكر ابن محمد ابن عمرو ابن حزم الأنصاري). This man died in 120 AH, see Taqrib. So he can’t be a witness of that incident.

Regarding the second quote from Tafseer Kabeer, then it is chain-less hence rejected because a chain-less report is like a body without a head, and anyone can attribute any lie to a person. Moreover, what further proves it to be a fabrication, is that the text of this report goes against the one from Riyadh An-Nazirah, where Abubakr responded, “you have spoken the truth oh daughter of the Prophet (pbuh)”, which Shiapen purposely half-quoted.

Also in the narration of Yazid al-Raqqashi from Anas ibn Malik:

قالت: أَفَلَكَ هُوَ وَلأَقْرِبَائِكَ؟ قال: لا، وَأَنْتِ عِنْدِي أَمِينَةٌ مُصَدَّقَةٌ

[She (Fatimah) said: “Then it is for you and your relatives!?” He replied: “No, and you are trusted and honest in my eyes.”]

 

Argument 2:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Sayyida Fatima (as) deemed Fadak to have been gifted to her

The lying Nasibi seeks to expose a flaw in the Shi’a argument as follows:

All of the above concerns the status of Fadak as inheritance from Rasulullah . On the other hand, if it is maintained that Fadak was a gift from Rasulullah -as claimed by al-Kashani in his tafsir, as-Safi (vol. 3 p. 186)-the matter needs to be looked into.
This claim is first and foremost contradicted by authentic reports of both the Ahl as-Sunnah and the Shi’ah which state that Sayyidah Fatimah radiyallahu ‘anha requested Fadak as her inheritance from Rasulullah ‘alayhi wa-alihi wasallam.

Reply

There is no contradiction over Sayyida Fatima (as) claiming Fadak as a gift and inheritance. The initial demand of Sayyida Fatima (as) was that Abu Bakr returns the land that had been gifted to her by her father. Sayyida Fatima (as) had the land in her possession but Abu Bakr ignored this and the written bequest of her father (s) and refused to return the land.

[End Quote]

Answer:

This response from Shiapen is imaginary and baseless, because people who approach a person for demanding their right from him, then they will demand all things at a time, which they believe as their right, not that asking one property which was a gift first then after it is refused, asking the other properties as inheritance. This doesn’t sound logical.

If supposedly Fatima(ra) believed that Fadak was gifted to her and she wanted it to be returned her and she also wanted inheritance from Prophet(saw), then she would have asked both at the same time, not one after the other.

This is the reason, we don’t find in any of the established and authentic reports, that Fatima(ra) claimed Fadak was gifted to her, but rather we only find that she demanded it as inheritance from Prophet(saw). Not to forget there are several reports where we find that Fatima(ra) denied Fadak being given to her by Prophet(saw).

Secondly, it’s false claim that Fatima(ra) had possession of Fadak, as we have already proven, Fatima(ra) never had possession of Fadak, this claim can never by proven by Shias, because it’s a lie.

 

Argument 3:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Sayyida Fatima (as) deemed Fadak to have been gifted to her

[End Quote]

Answer:

Shiapen made this baseless claim using fabricated reports. If we had wished to quote weak narrations, we could quote narrations that prove that Fadak wasn’t a gift to Fatima(ra), Such as the one in al-Tarikah, where we read with its chain from Anas that Abu Bakr told Fatimah:

أَنْتِ عِنْدِي مُصَدَّقَةٌ أَمِينَةٌ، فَإِنْ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ عَهِدَ إِلَيْكِ فِي ذَلِكَ عَهْدًا، أَوْ وَعَدَكِ مِنْهُ وَعْدًا أَوْجَبَهُ لَكُمْ صَدَّقْتُكِ، وَسَلَّمْتُهُ إِلَيْكِ، قَالَتْ فَاطِمَةُ عَلَيْهَا السَّلامُ: لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ فِي ذَلِكَ إِلَيَّ شَيْءٌ إِلا مَا أنزل اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى فِيهِ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ

[Abu Bakr told her: “You are reliable and trusted in my sight, if Rasul-Allah (saw) had promised you anything concerning this, I would believe you and hand it to you.” Fatimah replied: “The messenger (saw) never said anything, it is only what is written in the Qur’an.”]

In other words she is only relying on the laws of inheritance in the Qur’an, there was no promise or gifts.

Similarly, we read in Sharah Nahjul Balagha of Shia Mutazili Ibn Abil Hadeed:
قال أبو بكر وحدثنا أبو زيد قال : حدثنا عمرو بن مرزوق ، عن شعبة ، عن عمرو أبن مرة ، عن أبى البخترى قال : قال لها أبو بكر لما طلبت فدك : بأبى أنت وأمى ! أنت عندي الصادقة الامينة ، إن كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عهد إليك في ذلك عهدا أو وعدك به وعدا ، صدقتك ، وسلمت إليك فقالت : لم يعهد إلى في ذلك بشئ ولكن الله تعالى يقول : (يوصيكم الله في أولادكم) (2) ، فقال : أشهد لقد سمعت (3) رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول : (إنا معاشر الانبياء لا نورث)
Al-Jawhari reports from Abu Zaid [Umar bin Shabbah the author of Tareekh al-Madinah] from ‘Amr bin Marzooq from Shu’bah from ‘Amr bin Murrah from Abu al-Bakhtari: Abu Bakr said to her(Fatima) when she demanded the Fadak, “May my father and mother be sacrificed for you! You are truthful and trustworthy near me. If the Messenger of Allah (saw) provided you something (of Fadak) or had promised you something I will affirm it and will handle it to you.” She replied, “The Messenger of Allah did not entrusted me anything regarding it but Allah the Exalted has said (Allah commands you regarding your children).” He said, “I bear witness that I heard him saying (we are the group of Prophets we do not inherit).” (Sharah Nahjul balagha,Ibn Abil Hadeed , vol 16, no. 228).

Hammad bin Ishaq (d.267 hijri) said in his expert research on the topic of inheritance in his book “Tarikat al-Nabi”:

فَأَمَّا مَا يَحْكِيهِ قَوْمٌ أَنَّ فَاطِمَةَ عَلَيْهَا السَّلامُ طَلَبَتْ فَدَكَ، وَذَكَرَتْ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَقْطَعَهَا إِيَّاهَا، وَشَهِدَ لَهَا عَلِيٌّ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ، فَلَمْ يَقْبَلْ أَبُو بَكْرٍ شَهَادَتَهُ لأَنَّهُ زَوْجُهَا، فَهَذَا أَمْرٌ لا أَصْلَ لَهُ وَلا تَثْبُتُ بِهِ رِوَايَةٌ

[As for what some folks say regarding Fatimah (as) asking for Fadak and claiming that it was a gift and `Ali (as) giving his account as a witness, then Abu Bakr rejected his testimony for he was her husband; this matter is baseless and not established from any reliable narration.]

 

Argument 4:

Shiapen Stated:

[Quote]

We read in al Milal wa al Nihal page 13, wherein Allamah Sharastani discusses the disputes that arose following the death of Rasulullah (s):

“The 6th dispute concerned Fadak and the inheritance of Rasulullah (s). Sayyida Fatima deemed it her land, and the claim of Fatima to its ownership”
 Al-Milal wa al-Nihal, page 13

This reference proves that Fadak was not the same as the inheritance that Sayyida Fatima (as) was claiming. She (as) already had control of Fadak and now wanted her rights as Heir of her deceased father’s Estate.

[End Quote]

Answer:

This is not a hadeeth, al-Shahrastani simply mentions some of the early historical differences that arose regardless of their authenticity, since some narrations mention Fadak as inheritance and others mention that it was a gift; The author says in the properly translated text:

في أمر فدك والتوارث عن النبي عليه الصلاة و السلام ودعوى فاطمة عليها السلام وراثة تارة وتمليكا أخرى حتى دفعت عن ذلك بالرواية المشهورة عن النبي

[The matter of Fadak and the inheritance from the Prophet (saw) also Fatimah’s claim that it is inheritance at one point and that it was from her possessions at another, and then she was stopped from getting it because of the popular narration from the Prophet (saw).]

This quote from Shahrastani doesn’t prove anything of what Shiapen is claiming, since the second view cannot be proven from any authentic report.

 

Argument 5:

Shiapen Stated:

[Quote]

If Nawasib such as al Khider have lied to the maximum by claiming that Fadak had not been gifted to Sayyida Fatima (as) they should know that this claim is destroyed by the very testimony of the claimant herself. Sayyida Fatima (as)’s claim was that her father (s) had given Fadak to her, and this makes the comments of al Khider null and void. We have already cited this reference from Riyadh al Nadira, Volume 1 page 89:

وعن عبد الله بن أبي بكر بن عمرو بن حزم عن أبيه قال جاءت فاطمة إلى أبي بكر فقالت أعطني فدك فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهبها لي ۔۔۔

“When the Prophet died, Abu Bakr took Fadak from Fatima, she went to him and said: ‘Give the land of Fadak to me, as my father the Prophet (s) gave it to me’….”
 Riyadh al Nadira, Volume 1 page 89

[End Quote]

Answer:

The Shiapen asusual followed their religious teaching in order to deceive people. They misquoted the report to prove their point.

Here is full quote from Riyadh An-Nazirah.
وعن عبد الله بن أبي بكر بن عمرو بن حزم عن أبيه قال جاءت فاطمة إلى أبي بكر فقالت أعطني فدك فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهبها لي قال صدقت يا بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولكني رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقسمها فيعطي الفقراء والمساكين وابن السبيل بعد أن يعطيكم منها قوتكم فما تصنعين بها قالت أفعل فيها كما كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يفعل قال ولك علي أن أفعل فيها ما كان أبوك يفعل قالت والله لتفعلن ذلك قال والله لأفعلن ذلك قالت اللهم اشهد

Abdullah bin Aby Bakr bin Amru bin Hazm from his father who said: Fatima came to Abu Bakr and said “give me Fadak, for the Prophet (pbuh) bestowed it to me, so he said “you have spoken the truth oh daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) but I saw the Prophet (pbuh) distributing it among the poor and wayfarers after he gave you your share of it so what would you do with it”? She said: I’d do the same thing as the Prophet (pbuh) used to, so he said: and you have my promise to do the same as the Prophet (pbuh) used to, so she said “By God will you do that” so he said “By God I will”.

If we read the complete report then we find that according to the later part, Fatima(ra) agreed with Abu Bakr(ra) and told him to do as Prophet(saw) used to do. This is just after their talk quoted by Shiapen. It’s a proof against Shias not against Ahlesunnah. Fatima(ra) was happy with Abu Bakr’s decision.

However, we would like to say that this report is unreliable since the chain of narrators is broken because the narrator Abdullah bin Aby Bakr bin Amru bin Hazm (عبد الله بن أبي بكر بن محمد بن عمرو بن حزم الأنصاري) narrates from his father (أبو بكر ابن محمد ابن عمرو ابن حزم الأنصاري). This man died in 120 AH, see Taqrib. So he can’t be a witness of that incident. Thus narration is very weak and unreliable.

To further investigate however, we tried finding this narration in other books and we only found it in Baladhuri’s book. Out of the kindness of our hearts we will present Shiapen with its chain as a gift:

وَحَدَّثَنِي رَوْحٌ الْكَرَابِيسِيُّ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ الْحُبَابِ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا خَالِدُ بْنُ طَهْمَانَ، عَنْ رَجُلٍ حَسِبَهُ رَوْحٌ جَعْفَرَ بْنَ مُحَمَّدٍ، أَنَّ فَاطِمَةَ

The issues with this chain are as follows:

1- Ruh al-Karabisi : His status is unknown. 2- Khalid bin Tahman is a Shia who was weakened by some, he’s Saduq at best. 3- Khalid never mentions the name of his Shaykh, Ruh assumes it’s al-Sadiq.

This one is again very weak, so dismissed as well and cannot be used as evidence.

 

Argument 6:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Allamah Yaqut al-Hamawi records in Maujam ul Buldan, Volume 3 page 313:

لما قُبض رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قالت فاطمة رضى الله عنها لأبي بكر رضي الله عنه: إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جعل لي فدَك فاعطني إياها

“After the death of the Prophet, Fatima (r) said to Abu Bakr: ‘My father the Prophet gave Fadak to me, thus give it to me’.”

We also read:

وهي التي قالت فاطمة رضي الله عنها: إن رسول اللَه صلى الله عليه وسلم نحلنيها فقال أبو بكر رضي اللَه عنه أريد لذلك شهوداً ولها قصة.

“This is (the land) about which Fatima (ra) said: ‘Allah’s messenger gave it to me’, hence Abu Bakr (ra) said: ‘I want witnesses’. That had a story”.

We read in Futuh al-Buldan, page 35:

وحدثنا عبد الله بن ميمون المكتب قال: أخبرنا الفضيل بن عياض عن مالك ابن جعونه، عن أبيه قال: قالت فاطمة لابي بكر: إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جعل لى فدك فاعطني إياها.

“Malik bin J’auna narrated from his father that he said: ‘Fatima (r) said to Abu Bakr, Allah’s messenger gave Fadak to me, give it to me’.”

[End Quote]

Answer:

Shiapen quoted two reports from Mu`jam al-Buldan by Yaqout al-Hamawi. Mu’jam al-Buldan is not a hadeeth book but rather it is a dictionary of places and cities. And there are no chains provided in this book of geography. However he is quoting them from Baladhuri’s book, so when we go to his book we find a narration with this chain:

وَحَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَيْمُونٍ الْمُكْتِبُ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا الْفُضَيْلُ بْنُ عَيَّاضٍ، عَنْ مَالِكِ بْنِ جَعْوَنَةَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، قَالَ: قَالَتْ فَاطِمَةُ لأَبِي بَكْرٍ

Baladhuri’s Shaykh is `Abdullah bin Maymoun al-Muktib, his status is unknown(anonymous) and the author only narrates this one narration from him. The same goes for Malik bin Ja`wanah who isn’t exactly known(anonymous), so these narrations are dismissed like those before it, as they are very weak and unreliable.

We would to like notify the readers that, there are such reports in books, but just being present in a book doesn’t make them reliable, and when we verify these reports we find that, none of them is true, as either they don’t have a chain, or they are from weak, unreliable or unknown narrators, and they even conflict with other reports on this issue.

 

Argument 7:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Abu Bakr accepted Sayyida Fatima’s existing possession of Fadak

If it was not in her possession then why didn’t Abu Bakr point this out to Sayyida Fatima (as)? Al Mihal proves that Sayyida Fatima (as) had the land in her possession. Why didn’t Abu Bakr dismiss this claim straight away, stating ‘You never had possession of Fadak’? The fact that he didn’t challenge this aspect of Sayyida Fatima (as)’s claim serves as proof that the land was in her possession.

[End Quote]

Answer:

Firstly, Shiapen have refuted this argument couple of lines before in the very same page.

Shiapen wrote:[Quote] Abu Bakr refused her claim that the land was under her control, and he also rejected her claim that she was her father’s Waris (legal heir). [End Quote] (Screen shot).

So, we leave it for Shiapen to, first decide whether Abubakr(ra) accepted the claim or refused it, before making contradictory arguments.

Secondly, the argument that Fatima(ra) claimed Fadak was given to her by Prophet(saw), is not proven, and what comes from a better route compared to the ones used by shias, states the opposite that Fatima(ra) denied Fadak being given to her.

Abu al-Bakhtari said: Abu Bakr said to her when she demanded the Fadak, “May my father and mother be sacrificed for you! You are truthful and trustworthy near me. If the Messenger of Allah (saw) provided you something (of Fadak) or had promised you something I will affirm it and will handle it to you.” She replied, “The Messenger of Allah did not entrusted me anything regarding it but Allah the Exalted has said ((Allah commands you regarding your children)).” He said, “I bear witness that I heard him saying ((we are the group of Prophets we do not inherit)).” [Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah (16/228)]

So, this report shows that why Abubakr(ra) didn’t have to dismiss the claim straight away. If Shias disagree, then they need to prove their claim from an authentic report from Sunni books, not from any random chain-less, or extremely weak report.

 

Argument 8:

Shiapen Stated: 

[Quote]

If Sayyida Fatima (as) had no control of Fadak why did Abu Bakr give written instruction that it be restored to her?

We read in  Seerah al Halabbiyah, Vol. 3, Page 487 & 488:

“Sibt ibn Jauzi narrates that after Fatima made her claim to the ownership of Fadak, Abu Bakr heard her claim and Abu Bakr left a written instruction that it be restored to her, then Umar came to Abu Bakr, and asked ‘Who is this document for?’ The Khalifa said ‘It’s with regards to Fadak this is a written document for Fatima in relation to her father’s inheritance. Umar said ‘then how will you spend for the Muslims, when the Arabs are preparing to fight you, Umar then took the document and ripped it up”.
Insanul Ayun fi Seerah al Halabbiyah, Vol. 3, Page 487 & 488

Comment: This proves that the Hadith ‘Prophet’s leave no inheritance’ is a lie, since Abu Bakr did in fact accept the claim of Sayyida Fatima(as).

[End Quote]

 Answer:

The author of Insan al-Uyun attributed it to Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi as his statement. Sibt Ibn Al-Jawzi said something and it became gospel truth for Shiapen. This Sibt ibn Al-Jawzi was an unreliable Rafidhi according to Dhahabi’s Meezan Al-E’itidal.

Meezan al-‘E’itidal by al-Imam al-Dhahabi vol.4 pg.471:

9880 – يوسف بن قزغلى الواعظ المؤرخ شمس الدين، أبو المظفر، سبط ابن الجوزي . روى عن جده وطائفة، وألف كتاب مرآة الزمان، فتراه يأتي فيه بمناكير الحكايات، وما أظنه بثقة فيما ينقله، بل يجنف ويجازف، ثم إنه ترفض . وله مؤلف في ذلك . نسأل الله العافية مات سنة أربع وخمسين وستمائة بدمشق . قال الشيخ محيي الدين السوسي : لما بلغ جدي موت سبط ابن الجوزي قال : لا رحمه الله ، كان رافضيا

9880- Yusuf ibn Qazghali al-Wa’ith the historian Shams al-Deen, abu al-Muzaffar Sibt ibn al-Jawzi. narrated from his grandfather and others, authored the book Miraat al-Zaman and in it he has gathered corrupt stories, I do not think he is reliable in what he reports but he exaggerates, then he became a Rafidhi. He has a book about this. We ask Allah for protection, he died 654 in Damascus. al-Sheikh Muhyi al-Deen al-Susi said: When my grand-father learned of the death of Sibt ibn al-Jawz he said: May Allah not show him any mercy he was a Rafidhi.

We would like to provide one example from the book of this rafidi which will leave no doubt in the mind of readers that this person was a Shia Rafidi.

At page 321 of Tadhkira al khawas , Sibt ibn Jawzi makes tabarra on Umar(ra) and even insults his mother. Here are the Scan pages from his book.[scan page]. This leaves no doubt that Sibt ibn Jawzi was a Rafidi as stated by scholars of Ahlesunnah.

Shias have a habit of deceiving the readers by presenting the works of Rafidi scholars, labelling them as Sunni sources. Even here they have tried to deceive lay people, by claiming that Sibt ibn Jawzi was a hanafi scholar, thus he is from Ahlesunnah. But we ask those religious deceivers that, how being a Hanafi contradicts being a Shia, specially when a shia has a tool of Taqiyah with him. Sibt ibn Jawzi could have been pretending as Hanafi, but his true belief of Rafidism was exposed from his book.

Moreover, Esteemed Hanafi scholar al-Allaamah Abdul-Hayy al-Luknowi shatters the Shiapen’s misconception, stating:

وبالجملة فالحنفية لها فروع باعتبار اختلاف العقيدة فمنهم الشيعة ومنهم المعتزلة ومنهم المرجئة

In general, the Hanafis differ depending on their aqeedah. Some are Shias, other are Mutazila, others are Murjia.(ar-Raf’ wat-Takmeel, page 43).

For example, Zamakhshari, the author of famous tafseer “al-kashhaf”, was a Hanafi, as said by esteemed Hanafi scholars Ibn Qutlubgha and Abdul Hayy. But how does this negates that Zamakhshari was a Mu’tazali?. Ibn Qutlubgha did not mention his mu’tazali Aqeeda, but Abdul Hayy Lucknowi mentioned it in “Al-Fawaid Al-Bahiyyah”. He said that Zamakhshari was Hanafi in Madhhab and Mu’tazali in Aqeeda.

Sibt ibn Jawzi was Hanafi in fiqh, and no one disagrees with it, this is even mentioned by Dhahabi himself. But at the same time his Aqeeda related to companions of the Prophet and his household (as) wasn’t correct, as it’s evident from his books. When Dhahabi said he has Rafdh in him, then he also said that there is a book written by Sibt on it. And that’s why Allama Al-Mu’allimi also approved Dhahabi’s verdict and said that “Tadhkkirah Al-Khawwas” is proof for the correctness of Dhahabi’s verdict.

Thus, the conclusion is that the report is unreliable since Sibt ibn Jawzi was unreliable as said by Dhahabi, as well as he was a Rafidi.

 

Argument 9:

Shiapen Stated: 

[Quote]

Maula ‘Ali confirmed that Sayyida Fatima already had control of Fadak

The greatest proof that Fadak was in the possession of Ahl’ul bayt (as) comes from the comments of Maula ‘Ali (as). We are quoting from the Sunni commentary of Nahj ul Balagha by Shaykh Muhammad Abduh page 83 letter to Abi Uthman bin Hunayf:

“Of course, all that we had in our possession under this sky was Fadak, but a group of people felt greedy for it and the other party withheld themselves from it. Allah is, after all, the best arbiter.”
 Commentary of Nahj ul Balagha by Shaykh Muhammad Abduh, page 83

[End Quote]

Answer:

Shiapen has quoted the ‘Commentary of Nahjul Balagha’, and this quote is actually from Nahjul Balagha Letter 45. Hence the primary source of this quote is Nahjul Balagha. But from when did Nahjul Balagha became hujjah(proof) for Ahlesunnah, and how come it became greatest proof?

Nahjul Balagha is a book which contains both truth and falsehood. Some of it is undoubtedly forgery as Imam Dhahabi makes clear in his Mizan Al I’tidal. He says regarding Nahjul Balagha’s compiler Sharif Murtada:

وهو المتهم بوضع كتاب نهج البلاغة ، وله مشاركة قوية في العلوم ، ومن طالع كتابه نهج البلاغة جزم بأنه مكذوب على أمير المؤمنين على رضى الله عنه

– He is the one blamed for forging the book Nahj al-Balagha.

Similarly, in his Siyar A`lam al Nubala’ Imam Dhahabi states:

المرتضى : العلاّمة الشريف المرتضى ، نقيب العلوية ، أبو طالب ، علي بن حسين بن موسى ، القرشي العلوي الحسيني الموسوي البغدادي. من وُلد موسى الكاظم. ولد سنة 355 ، وحدّث عن : سهل بن أحمد الديباجي وأبي عبـدالله المرزباني وغيرهما. قال الخطيب : كتبت عنه. قلت : هو جامع كتاب نهج البلاغة المنسوبة ألفاظه إلى الإمام عليّ رضي الله عنه ، ولا أسانيد لذلك وبعضها باطل وفيه حقّ ، ولكن فيه موضوعات حاشا الإمام من النطق بها ، ولكنْ أين المنصف؟ وقيل : بل جمع أخيه الشريف الرضي

– Al Murtada Abu Talib Ali ibn Husayn ibn Musa Al Musawi (355-436) is the compiler of the book ‘Nahj al Balagha’ the words of which are attributed to Imam Ali – Allah be well-pleased with him – and no chains of transmissions exist for such an attribution. Some of it is falsehood and it contains some truth, however, there are in it forgeries of which the Imam is completely innocent and never said – but where is he that judges fairly? It is also said that his brother is the compiler, al-Sharif al-Radiy. Al-Murtada’s diwan (of poetry) is large…. in four volumes.

Hence quotes from Nahjul Balagha aren’t a proof for Ahlesunnah, we reject these type of false attributions to Ali(ra).

Secondly, if Ali(ra) believed that the property that was under their possession was taken away, then instead of regretting over it, he would have invoked the effective pact of hilful-fudul, like his son Hussain(ra) who called for this against the governor of his time, and was supported by Sahaba(ra) who were willing to sacrifice their lives for this, and due to which he got his property back.

Moreover, the text of the quote presented by Shiapen is absurd because it singles out Fadak to be sole property of Ali(ra) and his family, whereas their home comes under their property. And by this statement, if Ali(ra) meant property that would generate wealth for their financial support, then as per the statement and Sunnah of Prophet(saw), Abubakr(ra) and the Caliphs who followed him, did give the sustenance for family of Prophet(saw) from that wealth, as the Prophet(saw) used to do. And Abubakr(ra) didn’t take anything from that wealth nor gave anything to his family from that wealth; So where is the question of greed, as alleged in the forged Letter?

Ironically, We read in Shia book al-Amali lil-Saduq pg.555:

[`Ali (as) sold a garden he owned and distributed what he received among the poor and needy, so Fatimah (as) came to him and she was angry, she said: “I am hungry and so are my two sons and I am sure you are as well, have you not left us one Dirham?”]

Comment: On one hand we find that, we find that Ali(ra) so generous that he sold a property he owned and gave that amount in charity, and on the other hand He was complaining that the only property they had was taken away. A  generous person like Ali(ra) can never complain like this.

 

Argument 10:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Rasulullah (s) gave Fadak to Sayyida Fatima (as) during his lifetime

Further proof can be ascertained from Sunan Abu Dawood Book 19, Tribute, Spoils, and Rulership (Kitab Al-Kharaj, Wal-Fai’ Wal-Imarah), Hadeeth Number 2998:

“…Banu an-Nadir were deported, and they took with them whatever their camels could carry, that is, their property, the doors of their houses, and their wood. Palm-trees were exclusively reserved for the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him). Allah bestowed them upon him and gave them him as a special portion.

He (Allah), the Exalted, said: What Allah has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from them, for this ye made no expedition with either camel corps or cavalry.” He said: “Without fighting.” So the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave most of it to the emigrants and divided it among them; and he divided some of it between two men from the helpers, who were needy, and he did not divide it among any of the helpers except those two. The rest of it survived as the sadaqah(charity) of the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) which is in the hands of the descendants of Fatimah (Allah be pleased with her)“.

[End Quote]

Answer:

Shiawebsite is trying to make a fool out of the readers, how on earth this report a proof that Prophet(saw) gave Fadak to Fatima(ra) during her lifetime ?

The report Shias quoted, is about the property of Sadaqa(charity). It was Umar(ra) who appointed Ali(ra) and Abbas(ra) as trustees over that property and it later came into the hands of descendants of Fatima(ra), and they became the trustees over it, so how come this report is a proof that Fadak was given to Fatima(ra) by Prophet(saw) during his lifetime? Don’t the Shia websites have some shame for attempting to fool people using these reports?

To shatter this Shia claim let us quote an authentic report. We read in Sahi Bukhari:

Urwa bin Az−Zubair said: ” I heard `Aisha, the wife of the Prophet saying, ‘The wives of the Prophet sent `Uthman to Abu Bakr demanding from him their 1/8 of the Fai which Allah had granted to his Apostle. But I used to oppose them and say to them: Will you not fear Allah? Don’t you know that the Prophet used to say: Our property is not inherited, but whatever we leave is to be given in charity? The Prophet mentioned that regarding himself. He added: ‘The family of Muhammad can take their sustenance from this property. So the wives of the Prophet stopped demanding it when I told them of that.’ So, this property (of Sadaqa)was in the hands of `Ali who withheld it from `Abbas and overpowered him. Then it came in the hands of Hasan bin `Ali, then in the hands of Husain bin `Ali, and then in the hands of Ali bin Husain and Hasan bin Hasan, and each of the last two used to manage it in turn, then it came in the hands of Zaid bin Hasan, and it was truly the Sadaqa of Allah’s Apostle .” (Sahi buikhari 5.367).

 

Argument 11:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Proof Six – Maula Ali (as) told Abu Bakr that the Prophet (s) had given Fadak to her during His lifetime

As evidence we shall quote directly from the article ‘Early Differences and Sects in Islam’ – adapted largely from Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq (The Difference between the Sects) by Abu Tahir `Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi that appears on this Sunni Website:
 http://webpages.marshall.edu/~laher1/firaq.htmlCached

“Next, they differed regarding inheritance of the land of Fadak. This was a piece of land which the Prophet had acquired as a form of booty, and which he retained during his lifetime. When he passed away, `Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) had assigned it to Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) during his lifetime”.(Screen Shot)

[End Quote]

Answer:

This quote is suspicious because Shiapen is quoting from an article, regarding the book, “Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq” , but what stopped Shiapen from quoting the book directly along with proper reference? There wasn’t a problem in quoting directly the book, but instead Shiapen, quoted an article from some unknown writer.

Also the un-known writer of the article, made a mistake regarding the name of author of the book “Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq”. It states the name of the author as “Abu Tahir `Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi”, but the correct name of author is “Abd al-Qahir ibn Tahir ibn Muhammad al-Baghdadi”. The incorrect name implies that, He was father of Tahir, where as the correct name means that, He was the son of Tahir.

Now, when we referred the book “Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq”, to find this quote, we found that the lines based on which Shiapen based their argument doesn’t exist in the book.

We read in Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq, Chapter II – The Division into sects:

The first disagreement came when the people disagreed over the death of the prophet. Some among them asserted that he had not died, and that Allah had only wished to raise him to himself as he had raised ‘Isa ibn-Maryam to himself. This difference ceased, and all were agreed upon his death, when abu-Bakr al-Siddik brought to them the words of Allah to his

Prophet : ” Verily thou shalt die, and they shall die.” He said to them : ” Whoever worshipped Muhammad, verily Muhammad is dead ; whoever worshipped the Lord of Muhammad,

lo verily he is living and dieth not.” Then they differed over the Prophet’s place of burial, the people of Mecca wishing the body to be taken to Mecca because that was his birthplace, the place of his calling, the place to which he turned in prayer, the place of his family, and

there is the grave of his ancestor Ishmael; while the people of al-Madinah wished him to be buried in that city because that was the home of his flight and the home of his Helpers. Others desired the body to be taken to the Holy Land and be buried in Jerusalem by the grave of his ancestor, Abraham the beloved. This difference, however, ceased when abu-Bakr al-Siddik related to them on the authority of the Prophet :” Verily the prophets are buried where they die.” They therefore buried him in his chamber in al-Madinah. After this they differed over the Imamate. The Helpers (Ansar) agreed to acknowledge Sa’d ibn-‘Ubadah al-Khazraji. But the Kuraish said : ” The Imamate must not be, save among the Kuraish.” Then the Ansars agreed with the Kuraish because of the saying of the Prophet relating to them : ” The Imams are of the Kuraish.” But this point of difference has lasted till this day, for the Darar or the Khawarij held that the Imam could come from others than the Kuraish. The next difference arose over the affair of Fadak, 1 and over the inheritance of property left by prophets. The decision of Abu-Bakr settled this matter by the tradition coming from the prophet, ” Verily the prophets do not bequeath anything.” They then differed over the view as to what cancels the obligation of alms. But they finally agreed to the judgment of Abu-Bakr concerning the duty of their warfare.[Moslem Schisms and Sects(Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq), page 32] ; [Screen shot of Arabic. (Page 15, page 16)]

So we find that the book Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq doesn’t contain the portions quoted by Shiapen from the article of unknown writer. Thus the claim of Shiapen is null and void.

 

Argument 12:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Moreover, we read in Majmal Buldan, Volume 3 page 312:

فكان علي يقول: إن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم جعلها في حياته لفاطمة

Ali used to say: ‘The prophet (s) granted it to Fatima during His life’.

[End Quote]

Answer:

Mu’ajam al-Buldan is not hadith book. It is a dictionary of places and cities, and this statement is without any chain. Thus this chain-less statement cannot be relied.

Moreover, if we go to that book we read:

والعباس بن عبد المطلب يتنازعان فيها فكان علي يقول إن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم جعلها في حياته لفاطمة وكان العباس يأبى ذلك ويقول هي ملك لرسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم وأنا وارثه فكانا يتخاصمان إلى عمر رضي الله عنه فيأبى أن يحكم بينهما ويقول أنتما أعرف بشأنكما أما أنا فقد سلمتها إليكما فاقتصدا فيما

[`Ali and al-`Abbas were fighting over it, `Ali used to say that the prophet (saw) gave it to Fatimah during his life and `Abbas would deny this and say it was owned by the messenger (saw) and he should inherit it. They disputed in front of `Umar may Allah be pleased with him so he would judge by saying: “You two know better about your issue, as for me I have given to you so use its wealth moderately.”]

No wonder Fatimah was only able to get two witnesses in the fabricated narrations, it’s because in other fabricated narrations like this one even the Prophet’s (saw) uncle Abbas never knew Fadak belonged to Fatima, also since when did `Umar even give them Fadak? He never did, he only placed them in charge of the Sadaqat of Madinah.

In conclusion, not one correct reliable proof from Shiapen to prove that Fadak was a gift, any other narrations they bring will also be just as weak if not weaker than the above.

If we had wished to quote weak narrations, we could quote narrations that prove Fadak wasn’t gifted to Fatima(ra), for example in al-Tarikah we read with its chain from Anas that Abu Bakr told Fatimah:

أَنْتِ عِنْدِي مُصَدَّقَةٌ أَمِينَةٌ، فَإِنْ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ عَهِدَ إِلَيْكِ فِي ذَلِكَ عَهْدًا، أَوْ وَعَدَكِ مِنْهُ وَعْدًا أَوْجَبَهُ لَكُمْ صَدَّقْتُكِ، وَسَلَّمْتُهُ إِلَيْكِ، قَالَتْ فَاطِمَةُ عَلَيْهَا السَّلامُ: لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ فِي ذَلِكَ إِلَيَّ شَيْءٌ إِلا مَا أنزل اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى فِيهِ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ

[Abu Bakr told her: “You are reliable and trusted in my sight, if Rasul-Allah (saw) had promised you anything concerning this, I would believe you and hand it to you.” Fatimah replied: “The messenger (saw) never said anything, it is only what is written in the Qur’an.”]

In other words she is only relying on the laws of inheritance in the Qur’an, there was no promise or gifts.

 

Argument 13:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

If Sayyida Fatima (as) had no control over Fadak then Umar ibn Abdul Aziz would not have returned it to the descendants of Sayyida Fatima (as)

In a renowned biography of Caliph Umar bin Abdul Aziz rendered by Sunni scholar Abdul Aziz Syed al-Ahl translated in Urdu by Maulana Ragihb Rehmani states in pages 256-257:

Marwan bin Hakam then acquired Fadak as it was gifted to him by Muawiya. Then Marwan bestowed it upon his sons, Abdul Malik and Abdul Aziz, it was then divided into three portions between Umar, Walid and Sulaiman. When Walid became the Head of State, he gave his share to Umar. When Umar acquired power, he wrote to the Governor of Madina stating that it be returned to the progeny of Fatima (s). It hence remained under the control of the progeny of Fatima (r) during his reign”.
 Khalifa tuz Zahid-Hadhrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz, pages 256-258 (Nafees Academy, Urdu Bazar, Karachi)

[End Quote]

Answer:

Shiawebsite purposely made an incomplete quote, because the complete quote shows the contradictory views presented by the author, which weakens the Shia stance.

Here is the complete quotation:

Marwan bin Hakam then acquired Fadak as it was gifted to him by Muawiya. Then Marwan bestowed it upon his sons, Abdul Malik and Abdul Aziz, it was then divided into three portions between Umar, Walid and Sulaiman. When Walid became the Head of State, he gave his share to Umar. When Umar acquired power, he wrote to the Governor of Madina stating that it be transferred(muntaqal) to the progeny of Fatima (s). It hence remained under the control of the progeny of Fatima (r) during his reign. Then according to their and their Ruler’s wish it kept on transferring.(Source:Iqd Al-Fareed, vol 4, page435); Some historians has said that, He(Umar bin Abdul Aziz) had transferred Fadak towards bait ul maal(state treasury), not towards progeny of Fatima(ra). Umar(bin Abdul Aziz) said: There is no wealth more beloved to me than this, and I make you witness that I have returned it on the same condition, when it was during the time of Prophethood. And (as it was during rule of)Abubakr(ra), Umar(ra) and Uthman. Then he wrote to the governor of Medina to take control over Fadak and to make such a person its caretaker, who takes it care in the correct way(Source: Ibn Jawzi page 110).

So we find that the author has presented two different views regarding the treatment of Fadak by Umar bin Abdul Aziz:

First view: First view is that it was transferred to progeny of Fatima(ra) and the source of reference is Iqd Al Fareed, Iqd al-Fareed is not a history book at all, but rather it is a literary novel that contains elements of fiction in it. Iqd al-Fareed, is a chain-less literary piece in which inclusion criteria is only that the text be eloquent Arabic; the text in his book was chosen not for its historical accuracy or authenticity, but rather his book was a compilation of any text that was eloquent in nature. Thus this book contains literary pieces which doesn’t have a chain an whose validity cannot be determined, so not worth relying in the sight of Ahle Sunnah.

Second view: Then the author presents the second view which shiapen didn’t quote, and as per second quote, it was not transferred to progeny of Fatima(ra), the source for this quote is Ibn Jawzi page 110. So from the two views presented by the author, first one comes from a chain-less novel, hence is rejected.

Moreover, we read in Biographies of Rightly-Guided Caliphs:

When Umar(bin Abdul Aziz) became the Caliph he gathered the sons of Marawaan and told them: “The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, had money which he might have spent to support the young ones of Banu Haashim and helped their men to pay marriage expenses. When his daughter Faatimah asked him to give some to her, he refused. That continued in the times of Abubakr and Umar, but Marawaan took it. Now it is mine, and since the Prophet refused to give it to Faatimah, I cannot keep it, so, bear witness that things will be just like they were in the days of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. So, Umar bin Abdul Aziz started with his folk and family; he took their possessions and gave their money to the treasury. (Biographies of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, page 382)

Also we read in Sunan Abu Dawood:

Narrated Umar ibn AbdulAziz: Al-Mughirah(ibn Muqsim) said: Umar ibn AbdulAziz gathered the family of Marwan when he was made caliph, and he said: Fadak belonged to the Apostle of Allah (saw), and he made contributions from it, showing repeated kindness to the poor of the Banu Hashim from it, and supplying from it the cost of marriage for those who were unmarried. Fatimah asked him to give it to her, but he refused. That is how matters stood during the lifetime of the Apostle of Allah(saw) till he passed on (i.e. died). When AbuBakr was made ruler he administered it as the Prophet (saw) had done in his lifetime till he passed on. Then when Umar ibn al-Khattab was made ruler he administered it as they had done till he passed on. Then it was given to Marwan as a fief, and it afterwards came to Umar ibn AbdulAziz. Umar ibn AbdulAziz said: I consider I have no right to something which the Apostle of Allah (saw) refused to Fatimah, and I call you to witness that I have restored it to its former condition; meaning in the time of the Apostle of Allah(saw).( Abu dawood Book 19, Number 2966).

Similarly from a different route:
وحدثني عمرو الناقد، قال حدثنى الحجاج بن أبى منيع الرصاقى عن أبيه، عن أبى برقان أن عمر بن عبد العزيز لما ولى الخلافة خطب فقال: إن فدك كانت مما أفاء الله على رسوله ولم يوجف المسلمون عليه بخيل ولا ركاب.
فسألته إياها فاطمة رحمها الله تعالى فقال: ما كان لك أن تسأليني وما كان لى أن أعطيك.
فكان يضع ما يأتيه منها في أبناء السبيل.
ثم ولى أبو بكر وعمر وعثمان وعلى رضى الله عنهم، فوضعوا ذلك بحيث وضعه رسول الله صلى عليه وسلم.
ثم ولى معاوية فأقطعها مروان بن الحكم، فوهبها مروان لابي ولعبد الملك فصارت لى وللوليد وسليمان.
From`Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz that when he got the Khilafah, he delivered a sermon saying: Fadak was a Fay’ from Allah to his Prophet (saw) and the Muslims never rose to battle in order to obtain it. Then Fatima may Allah have mercy on her asked him (saw) for it, so he (saw) told her: “It is not for you to ask me and it is not up to me to give you.” Then he (saw) used to spend its produce on the stranded travelers and such. Then when Abu Bakr and `Umar and `Uthman and `Ali may Allah be pleased with them were in authority, they spent the produce the same way Rasul-Allah (saw) spent it, then Mu`awiyah received authority and he placed it with Marwan bin al-Hakam, who offered it to my father and my uncle `Abdul-Malik, later it was handed to me and to al-Walid and Sulayman.(Futouh al-Buldan, by Baladhuri the Persian)

Thus, Umar bin Abdul Aziz, didn’t believe that Fadak was given to Fatima(ra) by Prophet(saw), nor did he transfer Fadak to progeny of Fatima(ra), the correct view is that Umar bin Abdul Aziz restored it to its former condition as it was during the time of Prophet(saw).

Shiapen stated: “If it didn’t belong to Fatimah, why would the Khalifah `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz return it to her children?” Although the fact is that `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz said: “If the messenger (saw) never gave it to Fatimah I can’t give it to Marwan’s children.”

 

Argument 14:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

If Sayyida Fatima (as) had no control of Fadak then the Just Khaleefa and Hafidh of the Qur’an Mamun would not have restored the land to the descendants of Sayyida Fatima (as)

If Sayyida Fatima (as) had no control of Fadak then this Sunni Khaleefa would not have restored it to her descendants.

[End Quote]

Answer:

Firstly, even if supposedly it’s proven that Mamun gave Fadak to descendants of Fatima(ra) then that cannot become Hujjah on Ahlesunnah, because Mamun was not a Sunni, rather a Mutazili, and he isn’t even counted among the rightly guided caliphs, by Ahlesunnah.

Secondly, if its proven that Mamun gave Fadak to descendants of Fatima(ra) then that would be considered as political move from him, inorder to gain a political benefit. Mamun took several political moves during his Caliphate, such as appointing Imam Reza(rah), whom Shia consider as one of the infallible Imam, as his heir. But even Shias acknowledge this fact that this wasn’t done whole heartedly by Mamun, as they claim that later Mamun poisoned Imam Reza(rah), hence even the issue of Fadak too needs to be looked in the same perspective. Thus, these decisions due to political reasons by Mamun don’t support anything what Shiapen claims. Infact, it is mentioned that, after Mamun’s death al-Khalifah al-Mutawakkil again returned the land after him to how it was before.

Thirdly, As per the reported mentioned by Shiapen, the names of the two individuals from the family of Fatima(ra) who was appointed as agents by Mamun over Fadak were Muhammad bin Yahya bin Husayn bin Zaid bin ‘Ali bin Husayn bin ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib and Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Husayn bin Ali bin Abi Talib, Mamun wrote to his representative that these two should be supported with the production processes, profits should given to them. If Shiapen proves the authenticity of the report they provided, then the second issue would be that, we don’t know the status of these two men, nor do we know whether they were from the misguided ones or guided ones, since we know that not all of the descendants of Fatima(ra) were on correct path. Some of the descendants of Fatima(ra) deviated from the correct path. For example we read in Shia books:

Sheikh Sadooq in his book Kamaal al-deen narrates that Fatima bint Muhammad bin Hushaim states, I was present in the house of Imam Hadi(as) during the time of birth of Jafar the son of Imam Hadi(as). I noticed that all the family members were happy and celebrating upon the birth of the child, except Imam Hadi(as) who wasn’t happy, I asked: O Master! Why aren’t you happy upon the birth of this child? He replied: His occurrence is easy on you;  because many people would go astray through his means. (Manaqib ahl-albayt, part 4, page 388-389).

Also we read:

When Imam Jafar sadiq(as) was martyred, amongst his sons, a son named Abdullah bin Jafar claimed Imamate. (Manaqib ahl-albayt, part 4, page 268)

 

Argument 15:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

The verse ‘Dhul Qurba’ proves that Fadak had been gifted to Sayyida Fatima (as)

Al Khider can bark all he likes but the bottom line is when this verse descended it was incumbent upon Rasulullah (s) to act upon it, and give Sayyida Fatima (as) her rights. We have established from the authentic works of Ahl’ul Sunnah that Rasulullah acted upon this verse accordingly, by gifting the land of Fadak to Sayyida Fatima (as). Possession occurs when a thing is handed over without any conditions. Rasulullah (s) never took it back, nor personally administered it after gifting it to Sayyida Fatima (as).

[End Quote]

Answer:

As we have seen, all those evidences brought forth by Shiapen, fell like pack of cards, all turned out to be either unreliable or deceitfully quoted. Those reports even go against the context of the verse, period of revelation and also the grammar of the verse, since the pronoun used in this verse is masculine, hence this verse cannot be revealed for a female. So those fabricated reports which say that this verse was revealed for Fatima(ra) go against the Quran, hence they are discarded.

Moreover, we even presented reports which state that Prophet(saw) refused to give Fadak to Fatima(ra), and it remain under the possession of Prophet(saw) until he left this world.

 

Argument 16:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

An appeal to justice

If Sayyida Fatima (as) did not have an existing possession of Fadak:

  1. Sayyida Fatima (as) would not have made such a claim.
  2. Why did the other Sahaba and Wives of Rasulullah (s) remain silent? It would have been incumbent on them to interject and point out that she had no existing possession of the land.
  3. Maula ‘Ali (as) would not have permitted Sayyida Fatima (as) to make such a claim in court, nor would he (s) had testified in her favour.
  4. Imam Hassan (as) & Imam Hassain (as) would not have testified in favour of their mother.
  5. Why didn’t Abu Bakr challenge the assertion and demand that she present witnesses confirming her existing possession of the land ?

[End Quote]

Answer:

Before appealing for justice, Shiapen should learn to be objective.

  1. Sayyida Fatima(ra) didn’t actually make such claim, and there is no authentic or reliable evidence proving she made such claim.
  2. They remained silent because nothing as such occurred, all what Shiapen brought were unreliable and rejected reports.
  3. Yes Ali(ra) didn’t testify anything, what was brought by Shiapen are baseless claims.
  4. Hassan(ra) and Hussan(ra) too didn’t testify anything, what is quoted otherwise is baseless and unreliable.
  5. Abubakr(ra) didn’t have to, since such claim wasn’t made by Fatima(ra) in first place, as already proven.

Now we would like to present the evidences that Fadak remained in the hands of Prophet(saw) and he(saw) refused to give Fadak to Fatima(ra), let alone gifting it to Fatima(ra) and not personally administering it.

Here is an authentic report, which tell us that Fadak remained in the hands of the Prophet(saw) until he died:

Narrated Malik bin Aus An-Nasri: Allah favored Allah’s Apostle with some of this wealth which He did not give to anybody else, as Allah said: ‘What Allah bestowed as Fai (Booty on His Apostle for which you made no expedition… ‘ (59.6) So that property was totally meant for Allah’s Apostle, yet he did not collect it and ignore you, nor did he withhold it with your exclusion, but he gave it to you and distributed it among you till this much of it was left behind, and the Prophet, used to spend of this as the yearly expenditures of his family and then take what remained of it and spent it as he did with (other) Allah’s wealth. The Prophet did so during all his lifetime, and I beseech you by Allah, do you know that?” They replied, “Yes.” ‘Umar then addressed ‘Ali and ‘Abbas, saying, “I beseech you both by Allah, do you know that?” Both of them replied, “Yes.” ‘Umar added, “Then Allah took His Apostle unto Him.

Comment: So as we see, both Al-Abbas(ra) and Ali(ra) as well as the other companions testified that the property remained in the hands of the Prophet(saw) until he died. Therefore, this strengthens the point that the Prophet(saw) did not give it to Fatima as a gift, since if had he done so, he wouldn’t have used that money on other his dependants such as his wives because it was no longer his property.

Now here is the “Hasan” report up to `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, which states that Fatimah(ra) asked for the land and was denied it by the Prophet (saw). In Sunan abu Dawud we read:

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، عَنْ الْمُغِيرَةِ، قَالَ: جَمَعَ عُمَرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ بَنِي مَرْوَانَ حِينَ اسْتُخْلِفَ، فَقَالَ: إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ كَانَتْ لَهُ فَدَكُ فَكَانَ يُنْفِقُ مِنْهَا وَيَعُودُ مِنْهَا عَلَى صَغِيرِ بَنِي هَاشِمٍ وَيُزَوِّجُ مِنْهَا أَيِّمَهُمْ، وَإِنَّ فَاطِمَةَ سَأَلَتْهُ أَنْ يَجْعَلَهَا لَهَا فَأَبَى فَكَانَتْ كَذَلِكَ فِي حَيَاةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ، فَلَمَّا أَنْ وُلِّيَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ عَمِلَ فِيهَا بِمَا عَمِلَ النَّبِيُّ فِي حَيَاتِهِ حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ، فَلَمَّا أَنْ وُلِّيَ عُمَرُ عَمِلَ فِيهَا بِمِثْلِ مَا عَمِلَا حَتَّىمَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ

[`Abdullah that Jareer told him that al-Mugheerah said: `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz gathered the children of Marwan when he received Khilafah, he said: “Rasul-Allah (saw) had Fadak, he used to spend from it on the little ones of bani Hashim and marry-off their bachelors, and Fatimah had asked him to grant her it during the life of Rasul-Allah (saw) so he refused and died, then Abu Bakr became in charge so he used it as Rasul-Allah (saw) did until he died, then `Umar…]

At the end he says:

فَرَأَيْتُ أَمْرًا مَنَعَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فَاطِمَةَ عَلَيْهَا السَّلَام لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ وَأَنَا أُشْهِدُكُمْ أَنِّي قَدْ رَدَدْتُهَا عَلَى مَا كَانَتْ يَعْنِي عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ

[So I saw a matter that Rasul-Allah (saw) prevented Fatimah, I have no right (to give it to you) so I ask you to bear witness that I have returned it to the way it was during the messenger’s (saw) time.]

Another narration is from `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz by abu al-Barqan in Baladhuri’s book, it is similar to the one above, it denies that the messenger (saw) gave the land to Fatima(ra):

إن فدك كانت مما أفاء اللَّه عَلَى رسوله ولم يوجف المسلمون عَلَيْهِ بخيل ولا ركاب، فسألته إياها فاطمة رحمها اللَّه تعالى، فقال: ما كان لك أن تسأليني، وما كان لي أن أعطيك، فكان يضع ما يأتيه منها في أبناء السبيل

[Fadak was from what Allah gave as a Fay’ to his messenger (saw) without riding to battle, so Fatimah asked him for it and he (saw) said: “It is not your right to ask me nor is it my right to offer it to you.” He (saw) spent from it on the stranded travellers…]

Next narration is that of Ja`far bin Muhammad al-Ansari in the book of Tabaqat ibn Sa`d, it is a long one but confirms what we previously read, it says:

كانت فدك صفيا لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فكانت لابن السبيل وسألته ابنته فدك أن يهبها لها فأبى رسول الله ذلك عليها

[Fadak was purely the property of Rasul-Allah (saw) so he made it for the stranded travellers, then his daughter asked him for Fadak to grant it to her but he (saw) refused…]

Another example is a weak report in al-Tarikah we read with its chain from Anas that Abu Bakr(ra) told Fatimah(ra):

أَنْتِ عِنْدِي مُصَدَّقَةٌ أَمِينَةٌ، فَإِنْ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ عَهِدَ إِلَيْكِ فِي ذَلِكَ عَهْدًا، أَوْ وَعَدَكِ مِنْهُ وَعْدًا أَوْجَبَهُ لَكُمْ صَدَّقْتُكِ، وَسَلَّمْتُهُ إِلَيْكِ، قَالَتْ فَاطِمَةُ عَلَيْهَا السَّلامُ: لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ فِي ذَلِكَ إِلَيَّ شَيْءٌ إِلا مَا أنزل اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى فِيهِ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ

[Abu Bakr told her: “You are reliable and trusted in my sight, if Rasul-Allah (saw) had promised you anything concerning this, I would believe you and hand it to you.” Fatimah replied: “The messenger (saw) never said anything, it is only what is written in the Qur’an.”]

Comment: In other words she is only relying on the laws of inheritance in the Qur’an, there was no promise or gifts.

Similarly, we read in Sharah Nahjul Balagha of Shia Mutazili Ibn Abil Hadeed:

قال أبو بكر وحدثنا أبو زيد قال : حدثنا عمرو بن مرزوق ، عن شعبة ، عن عمرو أبن مرة ، عن أبى البخترى قال : قال لها أبو بكر لما طلبت فدك : بأبى أنت وأمى ! أنت عندي الصادقة الامينة ، إن كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عهد إليك في ذلك عهدا أو وعدك به وعدا ، صدقتك ، وسلمت إليك فقالت : لم يعهد إلى في ذلك بشئ ولكن الله تعالى يقول : (يوصيكم الله في أولادكم) (2) ، فقال : أشهد لقد سمعت (3) رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول : (إنا معاشر الانبياء لا نورث)

Al-Jawhari reports from Abu Zaid [Umar bin Shabbah the author of Tareekh al-Madinah] from ‘Amr bin Marzooq from Shu’bah from ‘Amr bin Murrah from Abu al-Bakhtari: Abu Bakr said to her(Fatima) when she demanded the Fadak, “May my father and mother be sacrificed for you! You are truthful and trustworthy near me. If the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) provided you something (of Fadak) or had promised you something I will affirm it and will handle it to you.” She replied, “The Messenger of Allah did not entrusted me anything regarding it but Allah the Exalted has said ((Allah commands you regarding your children)).” He said, “I bear witness that I heard him saying ((we are the group of Prophets we do not inherit)).” (Sharah Nahjul balagha,Ibn Abil Hadeed , vol 16, no. 228).

 

Argument 17:

Shiapen stated:

[Quote]

Abu Bakr had no right to seize land under Sayyida Fatima (as)’s possession

If Abu Bakr was indeed the rightful Khaleefa of Rasulullah (s), then he only had a right to control those lands that were in the possession of Rasulullah (s) prior to his death. This was not the case with Fadak; it was in the hands of Sayyida Fatima (as), so what right did he have to interfere in land that was in her possession? Abu Bakr should have had a different approach, inquiring into the matter and then deciding ‘if the truth is established then I shall seize the land’. Abu Bakr’s failure to make a claim, in the absence of proof, and decision to annex the land of another person cannot be deemed appropriate behavior by the State.

[End Quote]

Answer:

According to Shiapen, being successor(Khaleefa) of Prophet(saw), Abubakr(ra) had the right to control those lands that were in the possession of Prophet(saw), and Praise be to Allah! We have firmly established, that Fadak was under the possession of Prophet(saw) and not under the possession of Fatima(ra). Thus, Abubakr(ra) controlling Fadak is justified according to the standards of Shiapen.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s