The Issue of Fadak in Brief

Introduction:

Fadak is the name of a village situated near Khayber at a distance of 140 km from Madinah, where the Jews resided. The Prophet (S) conquered the place after the battle of Khayber without any battle on the agreement that half of the produce would be given to the Muslims. Therefore, it would be treated as ‘Fai’. Fai includes every such property of the unbelievers which the Prophet (S) seized without any battle. It is mentioned clearly in the Holy Quran:

And what Allah restored [of property] to His Messenger from them – you did not spur for it [in an expedition] any horses or camels, but Allah gives His messengers power over whom He wills, and Allah is over all things competent. And what Allah restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns – it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and orphans and the [stranded] traveler – so that it will not be a perpetual distribution among the rich from among you. And whatever the Messenger has given you – take; and what he has forbidden you – refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.[1]

Hence, Fadak was to be treated as Fai.

The Inheritance of the Prophets According to the Authentic Narrations:

The Sunnis believe that the Prophets don’t inherit wealth, their inheritance is knowledge. And this is what Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Uthman, Zubair, Saeed ibn Waqas, Abbas and Ibn Awf believed, according to the narration in Sahih Bukhari:

Umar said “Wait I beseech you, by Allah, by Whose permission both the Heaven and the earth stand fast! Do you know that Allah’s apostle said ‘We (Prophets) our properties are not to be inherited, and whatever we leave is to be spent on charity, and he said it about himself”? They said “He did say it”. Umar then turned towards Ali and Abbas and said, “I beseech you both by Allah! Do you know that Allah’s apostle said this?” They replied in the affirmative.[2]

Similarly we read in the Sahih narration in al-Kafi that Imam Jafar said that the Prophet (S) said:

“Truly the scholars are the heirs of Prophets, the Prophets bequeathed not a single Dinar or Dirham, instead they bequeathed knowledge, and whoever acquires it has indeed acquired a generous portion of their legacy”.[3]

The grand Shia scholar Ayatullah Khomeini says regarding the authenticity of this narration:

“The narrators in the chain of transmission of this tradition are all trustworthy, in fact Ibrahim ibn Hisham, the father of Ali ibn Ibrahim, is not moderately trustworthy but outstandingly so.”[4]

This tradition has been authenticated by Mulla Baqir Majlisi as well.

This Shia authentic tradition clearly supports the Sunni view that the Prophet don’t inherit wealth, rather they inherit knowledge only.

The Inheritance of the Prophets in the Holy Quran:

While trying to refute the Sunnis, the Shias try to argue from a few verses of the Holy Quran that the Prophets do inherit their wealth. We will discuss these verses one by one.

1.  Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females.[5]

This verse states the general rule, but the inheritance of the Prophets is a particular case regarding which Sunnis say that there is exception. Even Shias themselves claim that there are certain exceptions to the general rule laid down in this verse. According to Shias, wife can’t inherit land, though this is not mentioned in this verse. Secondly, according to Shias, a Kafir can’t inerit from a Muslim. And the Shias base these opinions on the basis of their own traditions attributed to their Imams. Similarly, we base our opinion on Prophetic traditions.

2. And Solomon inherited David. [6]

This verse doesn’t mention the inheritance of wealth. Only inheritance is mentioned here, and we know that inheritance can be of different types besides wealth. For example, the inheritance of knowledge, the inheritance of book, the inheritance of wisdom and the inheritance of kingdom etc. In this verse, the type of inheritance is not mentioned.  Our view is that this verse can’t be regarding the inheritance of wealth, and there are few reasons. David had 19 sons, and only one son i.e Solomon has been mentioned here. This means that it refers to a particular type of inheritance which the other sons didn’t receive. And that is the inheritance of knowledge and wisdom. It can also refer to the inheritance of prophethood and kingdom. Someone may say that prophethood is not inherited. That is true, but it can be said in a metaphorical way.  For example, wisdom is not necessarily inherited, but if a child is wise like his father, it can be said that the child inherited wisdom from his father.

3. [This is] a mention of the mercy of your Lord to His servant Zechariah. When he called to his Lord a private supplication. He said, “My Lord, indeed my bones have weakened, and my head has filled with white, and never have I been in my supplication to You, my Lord, unhappy. And indeed, I fear the successors after me, and my wife has been barren, so give me from Yourself an heir. Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob. And make him, my Lord, pleasing [to You].”[7]

In this verse as well, it is not mentioned which sort of inheritance is meant here. But since it includes the inheritance of the posterity of Yaqub (as) as well, hence we can understand that this can’t mean the inheritance of wealth. Because no one inherits wealth from a whole posterity. Hence it can only refer to knowledge, wisdom and prophethood.

Was Fadak a Gift?

Fadak was definitely not a gift and there is no authentic Sunni narration which shows that Fadak was a gift. Rather it is against the authentic narrations according to which Fatima (ra) asked Fadak as inheritance from her father, and not as a gift.  Almost all of these traditions include a weak narrator ‘Atiyah al-Awfi’ who is weak according to the majority of scholars. Moreover, how can the Prophet gift a whole piece of land to his daughter, when he didn’t allow a golden necklace to his daughter saying:

“O Fatima (ra)! Will not the people say that Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad (S) is dressed in the attire of the oppressors?”[8]

Similarly, in another Shia tradition, Fatima requested a servant from her father, which Prophet (S) didn’t give to her, and instead taught her a supplication.[9]

This clearly shows that the Prophet (S) didn’t gave worldly objects to his daughter. So how could he gave a huge piece of land to his daughter?

Ali (ra) never returned Fadak to the Children of Fatima (ra)

This is a historical fact that Ali (ra) never returned Fadak to the Children of Fatima (ra) and it clearly shows that he agreed with the view of Abu Bakr (ra). In order to answer this, Shias fabricated a tradition and attributed it to their Imam, according to which Imam Jafar said :

Ali (ra) followed in the footsteps of Prophet (S). When he conquered Makkah, he found out that Aqeel (the brother of Ali) has sold his house, so he was asked, ‘O Prophet (S), why don’t you take your house back? So he said, “Has Aqeel left any house for us?” And we belong to the household who never take anything back that is taken from us unjustly. So that is why Ali (ra) didn’t take Fadak back.[10]

Now this is a very wrong excuse, because Caliphate was also snatched from the Imams. Because when Fadak was purportedly snatched from Fatima, she herself went to the caliph to take it back. Why would she go and ask that Fadak be given to her, if it was snatched unjustly, and if ahlelbayt don’t take back what is unjustly snatched from them? Moreover, the 12th Imam will fight to restore his caliphate, wasn’t caliphate snatched from the ahlelbayt according to the Shias? And most importantly, if Abu Bakr had oppressed Fatima by snatching Fadak as the Shias say, then didn’t Aqeel also oppress the Prophet (S) by selling his home without his permission? Why don’t Shias accuse Aqeel of the same crime, and declare him a tyrant?

Was Fatima (ra) angry upon Abu Bakr (ra) throughout her life?

Fatima (ra) wasn’t angry at Abu Bakr (ra) throughout her life. These are the words of Zuhri, which are mentioned in Sahih Bukhari, and not the words of Ayesha (ra). The evidence is that before these words, the pronoun change from feminine to masculine, which indicate that these words are not the words of a female, but a male. Similarly the words that Abu Bakr (ra) didn’t participate in her funeral also belong to this category. Hence, even if these words are present in Sahih Bukhari, they are the view of a narrator, and not a companion. And the views of a narrator who didn’t witness these events can’t make these statements as facts, even if they are in Sahih Bukhari.

Moreover, this also negates the high status of Lady Fatima (ra). Why would she become angry at someone for her entire life just because of a piece of land? And why would she not allow anyone to her funeral due to it, while her father was the most merciful upon the Ummah, so much so that he forgave a person like Habshi, who had killed his dearest uncle, i.e Hamzah? We can’t expect it from her daughter that she would get angry at someone for her entire life just because of a piece of land.

And all praises belong to Allah!

Kalaam

 

[1] Surah Hashr 59:6-7

[2] Sahih Bukhari, Hadith # 3756

[3] Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 42

[4] Islamic Government, by Ayatullah Khomeini

[5] Surah Nisa, Verse 11

[6] Surah 27, Verse 16

[7] Surah Maryam 19:2-6

[8] Uyun akhbar al-Reza Vol. 2, p. 57

[9] Ilal al-Shara’ie, Vol. 2, p. 288

[10] Ilal al-Shara’ie, Vol. 1, p. 155

 

14 thoughts on “The Issue of Fadak in Brief

  1. Abdul Aziz

    If ibn e qahafa(abu bakar) turned down the request of Syeda Fatima Zahra salama-Allah alaiha. then Omer bin Abdul Aziz why did return the Fada to Syed family at the time? Lanatullahe alal kazbeen….was ibne qahaf at right pr p,er bom abul aziz? who violated the teachings of the Holy Prophet s.a.w.w.

    Reply
    1. abdullah Post author

      Read Omar ibn Abdul Aziz’s stance on this issue.
      We read in Sunan al-baihaqi

      أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَلِيٍّ الرُّوذْبَارِيُّ ، أنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَكْرٍ , ثنا أَبُو دَاوُدَ , ثنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ , ثنا جَرِيرٌ , عَنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ ، قَالَ : جَمَعَ عُمَرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ بَنِي مَرْوَانَ حِينَ اسْتُخْلِفَ ، فقَالَ : ” إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَتْ لَهُ فَدَكٌ ، وَكَانَ يُنْفِقُ مِنْهَا وَيَعُودُ مِنْهَا عَلَى صَغِيرِ بَنِي هَاشِمٍ ، وَيُزَوِّجُ فِيهِ أَيِّمَهُمْ ” ، وَإِنَّ فَاطِمَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا سَأَلَتْهُ أَنْ يَجْعَلَهَا لَهَا فَأَبَى ، فَكَانَتْ كَذَلِكَ فِي حَيَاةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ ، فَلَمَّا وَلِيَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ عَمِلَ فِيهَا بِمَا عَمِلَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي حَيَاتِهِ حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ ، فَلَمَّا وَلِيَ عُمَرُ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ عَمِلَ فِيهَا بِمِثْلِ مَا عَمِلا حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ ، ثُمَّ أَقْطَعَهَا مَرْوَانَ , ثُمَّ صَارَتْ لِعُمَرَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ ، قَالَ : عُمَرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ : فَرَأَيْتُ أَمْرًا مَنَعَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَاطِمَةَ لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ ، وَأَنَا أُشْهِدُكُمْ أَنِّي قَدْ رَدَدْتُهَا عَلَى مَا كَانَتْ ، يَعْنِي عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

      Mughaira said : Umar ibn Abdul Aziz gathered the children of Marwan when he became caliph, and said : The Prophet (S) had Fadak, he would spend from it on the Banu Hashim, and marry off the unmarried amongst them from it. Fatima asked him to give it to her, which he rejected. So it remained in the same position till the Prophet (S) was alive, until he passed away. When Abu Bakr , may Allah be pleased with him, became the ruler, he did exactly the same thing which the Prophet (S) did regarding it in his life until he also passed away. When Umar (ra) became the ruler, he also did the same thing regarding it which the two (i.e the Prophet and Abu Bakr) had done until he also passed away. Then it went to Marwan after him. Then it went to Umar ibn Abdul Aziz. Umar ibn Abdul Aziz said : I am of the opinion that a thing which the Prophet (S) hadn’t given to Fatima, I have no right over it as well. And I make all of you witness that I am reverting it to the same position on which it was in the life time of the Prophet (S).

      Sunan al-Baihaqi, Vol. 2, p. 301

      Hence, the stance of Umar ibn Abdul Aziz was the same as Abu Bakr. This is the best chain of all the chains of transmissions of such narrations in which Umar ibn Abdul Aziz said anything about Fadak.

      Reply
      1. Abdul Aziz

        This is not true. go to Tarikh e Tabri(sunni book of history) umar ab aziz did 2 things. one he banned all the people who used to abuse Imam Ali alaihisallam which was started in the period of muawiah bin sufian and the second he returned the Fadak to the people from Ahle Bait.alaihimussalam. the act of ibne qahafa was against the sunnat and he concocted the hadith regarding not giving Fadak to Zahra salamallah o alaiha. Abu bakar was a lier man and every way he try to deprive the ahle bait.a.s as he had grudge on the Ahle Bait a.s. Lanant ullah e alalkazebeen

  2. Abdul Aziz

    no you wrong and malafide quoted Hazrat Imam Khomeni r.a. Ibne Qahafa(abu bakar) grabbed the right of Zahara s.a, and after many time Hazrat Omer Abdul Aziz r.a returned the bagh e fadak to the faimly had right at this……who committed violation of Mohammad S.A.W.W. abu bakar or Omer bin abul aziz r.a??? if omer bin abdul aziz ruturned the fadak it means that omer.b.a.aziz rejected the act of ibn e qahafa, abu bakar..rejection of an act means an act against the teachings of Holly Prophet. Lanatullah e alal kazbeen…lanat beshumar…..ountless lanat

    Reply
    1. abdullah Post author

      Read Omar ibn Abdul Aziz’s stance on this issue.
      We read in Sunan al-baihaqi

      أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَلِيٍّ الرُّوذْبَارِيُّ ، أنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَكْرٍ , ثنا أَبُو دَاوُدَ , ثنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ , ثنا جَرِيرٌ , عَنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ ، قَالَ : جَمَعَ عُمَرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ بَنِي مَرْوَانَ حِينَ اسْتُخْلِفَ ، فقَالَ : ” إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَتْ لَهُ فَدَكٌ ، وَكَانَ يُنْفِقُ مِنْهَا وَيَعُودُ مِنْهَا عَلَى صَغِيرِ بَنِي هَاشِمٍ ، وَيُزَوِّجُ فِيهِ أَيِّمَهُمْ ” ، وَإِنَّ فَاطِمَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا سَأَلَتْهُ أَنْ يَجْعَلَهَا لَهَا فَأَبَى ، فَكَانَتْ كَذَلِكَ فِي حَيَاةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ ، فَلَمَّا وَلِيَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ عَمِلَ فِيهَا بِمَا عَمِلَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي حَيَاتِهِ حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ ، فَلَمَّا وَلِيَ عُمَرُ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ عَمِلَ فِيهَا بِمِثْلِ مَا عَمِلا حَتَّى مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ ، ثُمَّ أَقْطَعَهَا مَرْوَانَ , ثُمَّ صَارَتْ لِعُمَرَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ ، قَالَ : عُمَرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ : فَرَأَيْتُ أَمْرًا مَنَعَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَاطِمَةَ لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ ، وَأَنَا أُشْهِدُكُمْ أَنِّي قَدْ رَدَدْتُهَا عَلَى مَا كَانَتْ ، يَعْنِي عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

      Mughaira said : Umar ibn Abdul Aziz gathered the children of Marwan when he became caliph, and said : The Prophet (S) had Fadak, he would spend from it on the Banu Hashim, and marry off the unmarried amongst them from it. Fatima asked him to give it to her, which he rejected. So it remained in the same position till the Prophet (S) was alive, until he passed away. When Abu Bakr , may Allah be pleased with him, became the ruler, he did exactly the same thing which the Prophet (S) did regarding it in his life until he also passed away. When Umar (ra) became the ruler, he also did the same thing regarding it which the two (i.e the Prophet and Abu Bakr) had done until he also passed away. Then it went to Marwan after him. Then it went to Umar ibn Abdul Aziz. Umar ibn Abdul Aziz said : I am of the opinion that a thing which the Prophet (S) hadn’t given to Fatima, I have no right over it as well. And I make all of you witness that I am reverting it to the same position on which it was in the life time of the Prophet (S).

      Sunan al-Baihaqi, Vol. 2, p. 301

      Hence, the stance of Umar ibn Abdul Aziz was the same as Abu Bakr. This is the best chain of all the chains of transmissions of such narrations in which Umar ibn Abdul Aziz said anything about Fadak.

      Reply
      1. a2z

        A LOT OF HADEETHS ARE CONCOCTED BY AHLE SUNNA AND WABABI SALFI, THEY ALL ARE DESCENDANTS FROM YAZID BEN MUAWIAH BIN ABU SUFIAN ALAIHIMULLAH. THE ALL WAHABIS SALFIS ARE ARGUING IN FAVOUR OF ANTI PROPHET, ANTI ALI AND ANTI HASSANO WAL HAUSSAIN ALAIHIMUSSALAM. ABU SUFIAN BATTLED AGAINST THE HOLY PROPHET S.A.W.W, AND MUAWIAH BATTLED AGAINST ALI A.S. AND YAZID (LANATULLAH ALAIH) BATTLED AGAINST HUSSIEN (ALAIHESSALAM) SOME ONE WHO BATTLES AGAINST THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH, HIS BROTHER AND HIS GRAND SONS ARE ‘KAFIR’ SO ABU SUFIAN, MUAWIAH AND YAZID (ALAIHIMULLAN) ARE KAFIR, KAFIR, KAFIR. YOU ALL OWNER OF THIS WEBSITES ARE KAFIR AND WAJIBUL QATAL.

  3. Abdul Aziz

    you hadeeth submitted here reveals at the end that umar bin ab.aziz returned but you are distorting the hadith.lana-Allah alal kazibenn

    Reply
  4. sarah ahmad

    fadak was hazrat fatima’s property from hazrat khadija not from the prophet.no one had right to take that from her.aqeel was son of abu talib and abu mutlib’s property was distributed among all family members.abu bakr was not a family member.imams say what prophets said.no one has any right to say anything about prophet mohammad(saww) and his family neithet the khalifas.who are we to judge.who was right and who was wrong

    Reply
  5. a2z

    IBN E QAHAFA WAS A MALOON, HE GRABBED THE RIGHT OF THE DAUGHTER OF MOHAMMAD s.a.w.w. NOW WAHABI SALFI ARE ARGUING IN FAVOUR OF IBN E QAHA. A LOT HADEETHS ARE CONCOCTED BY THE WAHABI SALFI AND DEOBANDI. THEY BOTH SECTS ARE KAFIR AND MULHID.

    Reply
  6. a2z

    THE DAUGHTER OF IBNE QAHAF, AYESHA WAS CAUGHT RED HANDED GETTING FUCKED BY A SAHABI SIFWAN BIN MA’TAL WHILE THEY WERE WITH THE HOLY PROPHET.S.A.W.W. WHEN THE ARMY SET OFF THE AYESHA AND SIFWAN WERE MISSED. THEY WERE CAUGHT FUCKING. IT MEANS AYESHA FORNICATED WITH A SAHABI. AYESHA LIED THAT HER GARLAND WAS MISSED SO SHE WAS SEARCHING IT OUT. I ASK HOW CAN A GARLAND WAS MISSED WHICH WAS ON HER NECK. AYESHA WAS BED CHARACTER. HOW CAN HER FATHER BE A MAN OF PRINCIPAL. NO IBNE QAHAF HAD GRUDGE ON AHLE BAIT.

    Reply
  7. Mehdi

    Instead of doing PhD on hadeeth, I ask one simple question to anyone with brains. Did Fatima (sa) not know whether or not she can inherit from her father? If no, then one must be saying Abu Bakr knows more than Fatima(sa) which is not true. Allah has also removed all kinds of purity from Ahlubayt …Quran 33:33. It’s very shameful how people forget they will be answerable to Allah .

    Reply
  8. abu akram

    @Sarah Ahmad.
    Fatimah r.a. inherited Fadak from Siti Khadijah r.a.? This is the first time that this so-called ‘fact’ ever mentioned by someone for over 1000 years…

    Reply

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