Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

The Clear Refutation Of Fadak

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salam, 

I put the AhlulBayt a.s. above the Sahaba even before I knew what Imamate was. 

Since day one after the departure of the Prophet s.a.w. they were dealt with very cruel and unjust. It seemed strange to me why they treated those who were the closest to the Prophet s.a.w. by blood and during his lifetime in such a strange manner. (The attack of the House, Fadak, Battle of Jamal, the Refusal of Aisha to let Imam Hassan a.s. be buried next to his grandfather the Prophet s.a.w. and more of that strange and crazy stuff.

I can't and will not consider this a light thing and I do believe this is all about the din.

Let alone the fact how the leaders of mainstream Islam dealt with their own Sahaba and community as well one goes automatically towards the AhlulBayt a.s.

This apart from the concept of Imamate. 

Me personally I would feel responsible for the well-being of the Household of the Prophet s.a.w. after his s.a.w. departure but when one studies what happened it's just the opposite.

Edited by Iskandarovich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Allah(swt) will definitely ask about how we treated the ahlul bayt of Rasulallah(SAWW) after his death. 

 

We will be asked, which side we were in, the daughter of the holy prophet(saww) or with the munafiqeen among the sahaba. 

 

If I existed at that time, I would have definitely sided with Bibi Fatima Zahra(as) without question.

 

Now, how dare they question the actions of the chief of the women of paradise. She definitely had the Quran memorised and she knew the Quran better than any sahaba out there. 

 

By Allah(swt) it breaks my heart when I see muslims siding with someone who wished to be excrement instead of a human at their deathbed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

The discussion of Fadak has nothing to do with solving Shia Muslim and Mainstream Muslim's differences. The discussion will go prolong and may continue till Qayamah with fruitless results.

 

The Shia interpretation of any incident is backed with imposed dogma of Imamate and grudge against majority of Sahaba which would never make them understand the Mainstream Muslim's instance.

 

And on the other side, the Mainstream Muslim's interpretation of such incidents is backed without the dogma of imamate (which negates divine appointment of anyone after Prophet peace be upon him) and the unconditional love for the companions of the Prophet (specially who have been praised in their version of traditions) would never make them even slightest critical against those companions of the Prophet. (pbuh)

 

This is why Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) DURING HIS LIFETIME, made such a great effort to point people in the right direction, as far as who are the leaders of the Ummah after him. Unfortunately, most of the people did not accept this and instead followed the customs of Jahilliyah with respect to leadership. 

 

So once the Leadership of the Ummah was taken out of the hands of it's rightful owners by tricks and propaganda, then unfortunately the case was settled, the battle was over, and the Ummah is the one that lost. If this 'so called'  Leadership that usurped the right of Imam Ali(a.s) cannot settle a simple matter of who owns a piece of property, then of course, we can have no confidence that they can settle other, more complex issues. So the story goes, up till today, if you want to see the most corrupt and inept leadership (with a few notable exceptions of course) just look to the muslim world. This is a direct consequence of not following the great efforts of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) to establish a Just Leadership for the Ummah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Allah(swt) will definitely ask about how we treated the ahlul bayt of Rasulallah(SAWW) after his death. 

 

We will be asked, which side we were in, the daughter of the holy prophet(saww) or with the munafiqeen among the sahaba. 

 

If I existed at that time, I would have definitely sided with Bibi Fatima Zahra(as) without question.

 

Now, how dare they question the actions of the chief of the women of paradise. She definitely had the Quran memorised and she knew the Quran better than any sahaba out there. 

 

By Allah(swt) it breaks my heart when I see muslims siding with someone who wished to be excrement instead of a human at their deathbed.

 

Allah will not ask us about people of past who have passed away. (Interpretation of Quran 2:141) 

 

If we existed at that time then the case would have been different.

 

This is why Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) DURING HIS LIFETIME, made such a great effort to point people in the right direction, as far as who are the leaders of the Ummah after him. Unfortunately, most of the people did not accept this and instead followed the customs of Jahilliyah with respect to leadership. 

 

So once the Leadership of the Ummah was taken out of the hands of it's rightful owners by tricks and propaganda, then unfortunately the case was settled, the battle was over, and the Ummah is the one that lost. If this 'so called'  Leadership that usurped the right of Imam Ali(a.s) cannot settle a simple matter of who owns a piece of property, then of course, we can have no confidence that they can settle other, more complex issues. So the story goes, up till today, if you want to see the most corrupt and inept leadership (with a few notable exceptions of course) just look to the muslim world. This is a direct consequence of not following the great efforts of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) to establish a Just Leadership for the Ummah. 

 

Again brother using such incident to eventually discredit leadership system (which Mainstream Muslims don't consider to be divine) will be fruitless unless you proselytize Mainstream Muslims to believe that Leadership will be divine after Prophet (Salallauhu alahi wasallam) . And on the other side, Mainstream Muslims could proselytize Shia Muslims to believe that there is no concept of divine leadership after Prophet (Salallauhu alahi wasallam). This is the basis. If this gets solved then there will no need to establish a debate related to these under-cover incidents including Fadak, Sifeen etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abu Jafar, bro, there comes a time when you have have to realize that the person you are kicking and slapping to wake up is either pretending to be sleeping or is in a coma. Don't you think that perhaps this is the time to come to that conclusion?

 

You're right 100 percent, but he was a stress test to the thread in order to bring more information to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

You agree that Imam Ali (a.s) is a better judge than Abu bakr.

You agree that Imam Ali (a.s) is a better judge than Umar.

And you agree that Imam Ali (a.s) is a better judge then Uthman.

 

 

Saying that everything I posted has been answered does not mean that you have successfully answered my points.  On the contrary, I have decimated you and everyone along with you.  In fact, I have provided the clear refutation for Fadak, not you.  Now imagine if I knew Arabic and as you say, "kalami issues".  I would have blinded you from every corner.  Not to say that I have not already done so.

 

Again, since I am such a nice guy, let us assume that Imam Ali [ra] was better than Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra].  But he admitted that Abu Bakr [ra] did with Fadak exactly what the Prophet [saw] used to do with it.  If Sunnah was upheld and Imam Ali [ra] desired public service, then what is the problem?

 

Also, if Imam Ali [ra], as the best judge, did not take Fadak (during his own Caliphate) and maintained status quo, why don't you follow him and drop the matter?

 

 

 

 

Indeed no discussion needed.The prophet (sa) gave Fadak to his daughter,when he was alive after 17:26 was reavealed. So no need to inherit it. It was hers before her father died. 

 

 

Again, the verse was revealed in Mecca so you are intentionally ignoring an established historical fact.  Furthermore, the Qur'an says that Fay cannot have sole owners, therefore, you are also disregarding the Qur'an.  Lastly, the verse - just to get a little technical - uses the masculine pronoun, not feminine.  Surely, if it was for Fatima [ra] then feminine pronoun would have been employed. 

 

To recap, you stand against the history, Qur'an and Arabic grammar.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Abu Jafar, bro, there comes a time when you have have to realize that the person you are kicking and slapping to wake up is either pretending to be sleeping or is in a coma. Don't you think that perhaps this is the time to come to that conclusion?

 

 

lol, such desperation.  In reality, you should have included my name, not Herz's.  After proving all that, we still have users like Mina313 still holding on to the lies that have been refuted.

 

Therefore, it is pretty clear.  To maintain the alleged "infallibility" of Fatima [ra], our Shia brothers are willing to disregard Qur'an, Sunnah and history.

 

 

 

 

If you look inside Nahj Al balagha you can see the type of environment Imam Ali (a.s) was ruling in. He didn't take back Fadak because his enemies would accuse of committing illegal land acquisition (even though Imam Ali has a right to it), and because the land was being used for public service anyways

 

 

Thank you for admitting that Fadak was being used for public service.  Translation, Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra] maintained the Sunnah of the Prophet [saw] and did not use Fadak for their own personal benefit.

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Saying that everything I posted has been answered does not mean that you have successfully answered my points. On the contrary, I have decimated you and everyone along with you. In fact, I have provided the clear refutation for Fadak, not you. Now imagine if I knew Arabic and as you say, "kalami issues". I would have blinded you from every corner. Not to say that I have not already done so.

Again, since I am such a nice guy, let us assume that Imam Ali [ra] was better than Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra]. But he admitted that Abu Bakr [ra] did with Fadak exactly what the Prophet [saw] used to do with it. If Sunnah was upheld and Imam Ali [ra] desired public service, then what is the problem?

Also, if Imam Ali [ra], as the best judge, did not take Fadak (during his own Caliphate) and maintained status quo, why don't you follow him and drop the matter?

By looking at your post it clearly shows that you think big of yourself. Don't you think it is about time you came out of your fantasy world and start to think rationally? Point 1,The Prophet (pbuh) said and did many other things, none of them were upheld or considered by the Khalifs. Point 2, What the Prophet (pbuh) did with his property, if Abu Bakar did the same with his property then that would be Sunnah. Point 3, Ali did not use his authority and power to settle personal and old scores, when he got the opportunity and chance. You need to understand the difference and the responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Saying that everything I posted has been answered does not mean that you have successfully answered my points.  On the contrary, I have decimated you and everyone along with you.  In fact, I have provided the clear refutation for Fadak, not you.  Now imagine if I knew Arabic and as you say, "kalami issues".  I would have blinded you from every corner.  Not to say that I have not already done so.

 

 

How did I not see your greatness before? I wish I was destroyed before this day, I'm so blind from your greatness, your eloquence deafens the ears and your sight blinds the onlookers, your intelligence dampens the thinkers. Oh great debater I thought repeating answered questions over and over was a silly and stupid tactic, but you have surely proven me wrong and decimated me as you said.

 

 

Again, since I am such a nice guy, let us assume that Imam Ali [ra] was better than Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra]. 

 

 

Your majesty makes itself apparent once more, changing my words so swiftly from "being a better judge" to "a better person" I had no idea such a debate tactic was possible, you have left me speechless by your skills.

 

But he admitted that Abu Bakr [ra] did with Fadak exactly what the Prophet [saw] used to do with it.  If Sunnah was upheld and Imam Ali [ra] desired public service, then what is the problem?

 

 

Please stop, my eyes, my heart, this is too much for me to handle. You are so right, Abu bakr never used fadak to consolidate his power and fight wars with something that didn't belong to him, you're so correct, how am I still a shia while you exist?

 

 

 

Also, if Imam Ali [ra], as the best judge, did not take Fadak (during his own Caliphate) and maintained status quo, why don't you follow him and drop the matter?

 

 

 

How majestic your words are, you swiftly run away from the opponents question like a white Arabian horse from the legends, your majesty,intellect, skills in debating knows no bounds.

 

What shall I do in the face of such opposition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sunnah is not forcing the way and will of the Prophet (pbuh) on others but to do and act according to the Prophet (pbuh). Sunnah is also a matter of choice and is Mustahab, not wajib.

Abu Bakar used his authority and power to push and force his ideology and ways on others and he used Shariath as an excuse to do it when it had nothing to do with Shariath. Ali governed in a different way and manner than his predecessors and he refused to govern according to the way and manner of his predecessors and this is why he passed on becoming the third Khalif.

"Again, the verse was revealed in Mecca so you are intentionally ignoring an established historical fact. Furthermore, the Qur'an says that Fay cannot have sole owners, therefore, you are also disregarding the Qur'an. Lastly, the verse - just to get a little technical - uses the masculine pronoun, not feminine. Surely, if it was for Fatima [ra] then feminine pronoun would have been employed."

So where is the feminine pronoun when it comes to Ayath e Tat'heer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways, if any Sunni would like to actually answer the question it would be appreciated.

 

If Imam Ali (a.s) is the best Islamic judge on earth including being better in judgement than ibn abi quhafa,  umar, and uthman and one of the most knowledgeable person who has ever lived. Then is it likely or unlikely that he would err on a simple inheritance law presented to him and persist on this opinion for years and years?

 

Is it likely or unlikely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Saying that everything I posted has been answered does not mean that you have successfully answered my points.  On the contrary, I have decimated you and everyone along with you.  In fact, I have provided the clear refutation for Fadak, not you.  Now imagine if I knew Arabic and as you say, "kalami issues".  I would have blinded you from every corner.  Not to say that I have not already done so.

 

Whoa. Is this even a discussion lol?

Edited by The Batman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, such desperation.  In reality, you should have included my name, not Herz's.  After proving all that, we still have users like Mina313 still holding on to the lies that have been refuted.

 

Therefore, it is pretty clear.  To maintain the alleged "infallibility" of Fatima [ra], our Shia brothers are willing to disregard Qur'an, Sunnah and history.

 

lol'ing and calling it desperation just proves your lack of general and basic comprehension of reading. 

 

There is a reason why i don't debate with most people, shia, sunni, christian and jews alike. Because once they lose the plot they start ranting and jumping from subject to subject. Once people do that, it is time to call it quits. If you don't the ranting stops and insults begin. 

 

You like to flex your muscles like the tens of keyboard warriors before you have done and since there is no one to applaud your efforts, you start doing rajaz using words like "i've blinded you", "i decimated you" etc. A king that needs to tell people he is the king, is no king at all. Now go look for your crown, it seems you have lost it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
You like to flex your muscles like the tens of keyboard warriors before you have done and since there is no one to applaud your efforts, you start doing rajaz using words like "i've blinded you", "i decimated you" etc. A king that needs to tell people he is the king, is no king at all. Now go look for your crown, it seems you have lost it. 

 

Ouch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@muslim720

Maujam ul Buldan, Vol.3 p.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

Riyadh al-Nadira,Vol. 1 p.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 ۔۔۔

and other sunni narrations show that she owned it when Rasulullah saas was alive.Did he go against shari'a when he gave it to her?

Abu Bakr took what was hers and she wanted it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Why do people defend Abu Bakr despite knowing he used to make mistakes? He himself admitted this in one of his opening speeches when he became the caliph. Please concentrate on the last sentence of his speech.

“O people, I am like you. And I do not know, perhaps you will heap upon me responsibilities which only the Messenger of Allah (SAW) was able to bear. Verily, Allah chose Muhammad from among all living beings, and He (SWT) protected him from defects and errors. As for me, I am not an innovator; rather, I am nothing more than a follower. If I become upright (in my affairs and in the way I rule over you) , then follow me. But if I go astray, then correct me. When the Messenger of Allah (SAW) died, not a single person from this nation was able to claim that the Prophet (SAW) had wronged him in the least… Lo! Indeed the Shaitan attacks me. So when he comes to me, stay away from me.”

Ibn kathir, Al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (6/307)

Now we can examine this Abu Bakr speech with the holy quran and you can form your own conclusions.

Surah Az-Zukhruf, Verse 36:

وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا فَهُوَ لَهُ قَرِينٌ

"And whoever turns himself away from the remembrance of the Beneficent Allah, We appoint for him a Shaitan, so he becomes his associate."

Edited by goldenhawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Brother, Muslim720 As you are still online, Please clarify one of my points that i had raised? Please clarify what happens to Allah swt share? In verse 7 Al Hushr.

Ofcourse Allah is self-sufficient and independent. The part of the verse only emphasizes that Allah does whatever He wants to do with His property. And this time it wasn't meant to be shared among the people.That's all.

Why make Islam so complex. Why over-analyzing things when the truth is simple and clear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Anyways, if any Sunni would like to actually answer the question it would be appreciated.

 

If Imam Ali (a.s) is the best Islamic judge on earth including being better in judgement than ibn abi quhafa,  umar, and uthman and one of the most knowledgeable person who has ever lived. Then is it likely or unlikely that he would err on a simple inheritance law presented to him and persist on this opinion for years and years?

 

Is it likely or unlikely?

 

Brother Abu Jafar,

       Good luck with him getting him to anwer that question. He has for the past so many months not have had the guts to man up and agree that there is no verse in Quran which negates the verse of inheritance for the kins of Prophets. On the contrary, he has tried his absolute best in desperation to repeat the same lies over and over again. On top of that, he assumes that he has refuted when in reality he has exposed his own ignorance and deceitful nature by going against the Quran.

 

 

 

As far as Fadak is concerned, the reason why Sunnis defend it is because they know that Bibi Fatima (s) decimated their whole system of Caliphate by exposing the fate of the usurpers using Quranic verses.

 

 

As per Quran, we read in 4:7 that

 

[Yusufali 4:7] From what is left by parents and those nearest related there is a share for men and a share for women, whether the property be small or large,-a determinate share.

 

 

By concocting a narration in the name of the Prophet (pbuh) not only has the usurper committed a grave sin but he has also made hell-fire obligatory on himself as promised in Quran 4:10:

 

 

[Yusufali 4:10] Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!

 

 

As we can see certain individuals by their own actions have been destined to hell-fire. The thing which is beyond comprehension is how people who call themselves Muslims can go against the words of Allah swt; all because they have to defend the crimes of certain individuals? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Top Sunni scholar abdul razaq saying in his tafsir ul quran, 3/241

عن معمر عن وهب بن عبد الله عن أبي الطفيل قال شهدت عليا وهو يخطب وهو يقول سلوني فوالله لا تسألوني عن شيء يكون إلى يوم القيامة إلا حدثتكم به وسلوني عن كتاب الله فوالله ما من آية إلا وأنا أعلم بليل نزلت أم بنهار أم في سهل أم في جبل.

Ali said: “Ask me anything; by Allah! you cannot ask me about anything till day of qayamat but that i will tell you about it. Ask me about the Holy Book of Allah; by Allah! there is no verse in it but I know whether it was revealed in the night or during the day, on a plain field or in the steep mountains”

 

Imam Bukhari on abdul razaq: “When Abd Al-Razzaq reports hadiths reading from what he had written, then what he reports is more authentic.” This means that Al-Bukhari would accept hadiths reported by Abd Al-Razzaq as authentic when he is aware that he was reading from his book.

 

To find our more about this sunni scholar click on the below link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%98Abd_ar-Razzaq_as-San%E2%80%98ani

 

 

So despite this great knowledge of Imam Ali, he still got it wrong when he sided with hazrat fatima (as) regarding fadak !!!

Edited by goldenhawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Brother, Muslim720 As you are still online, Please clarify one of my points that i had raised? Please clarify what happens to Allah swt share? In verse 7 Al Hushr.

 

 

It is not gifted to anyone, rest assured!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.  Your majesty makes itself apparent once more, changing my words so swiftly from "being a better judge" to "a better person" I had no idea such a debate tactic was possible, you have left me speechless by your skills.

 

2.  You are so right, Abu bakr never used fadak to consolidate his power and fight wars with something that didn't belong to him, you're so correc

 

3.  how am I still a shia while you exist?

 

4.  How majestic your words are, you swiftly run away from the opponents question like a white Arabian horse from the legends, your majesty,intellect, skills in debating knows no bounds.

 

 

Called me out for not knowing Arabic and it has been established that you know nothing about Fay.

 

1.  lol, you are in over your head.  Semantics aside, Imam Ali [ra], I will concede, was the best judge mankind has ever known bar none, except the Prophet [saw].  That still does not change the fact that he did not reclaim Fadak and that while he moved past the matter, you are still holding on to it.  Clearly, you are not following him.

 

2.  The Prophet [saw] used Fay for the readiness of the Muslim nation in wars.  If the Prophet [saw] used Fay for that purpose, why is Abu Bakr [ra] guilty for doing the same?  Is it a crime to follow the Sunnah?  But of course you want us to believe that he did so to consolidate his power but that is your false accusation.  Desperate times call for desperate measures so your accusation, or line of reasoning, wreaks of desperation.

 

3.  The real question is why are you still crying foul when it has been established that Fadak was maintained as per Sunnah by Abu bakr [ra]?

 

4.  You are a lousy poet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a reason why i don't debate with most people, shia, sunni, christian and jews alike. Because once they lose the plot they start ranting and jumping from subject to subject.

 

You like to flex your muscles like the tens of keyboard warriors before you have done and since there is no one to applaud your efforts, you start doing rajaz using words like "i've blinded you", "i decimated you" etc. A king that needs to tell people he is the king, is no king at all. Now go look for your crown, it seems you have lost it. 

 

 

Have you noticed that ever since my response, no one has brought forth any evidence against it?  So the ranting started after I clarified the matter using Qur'an, Sunnah and history.  But since I was undermined before I even presented my case, I thought I should reply to it at the end.

 

That been said, I love how all the blame is squarely placed on my shoulders when all I did was defend the only person whom the Qur'an declares the "companion" of the Prophet [saw].  It is a lot better to say that I have "blinded" or "decimated" Herz than sealing the fate of Abu Bakr [ra] to Hellfire, as is the opinion of, and consensus, among keyboard warriors here on ShiaChat.

 

I would not ask you why you call me out but give them respite because you and I both know the reason behind it :)

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1.  lol, you are in over your head.  Semantics aside, Imam Ali [ra], I will concede, was the best judge mankind has ever known bar none, except the Prophet [saw].  That still does not change the fact that he did not reclaim Fadak and that while he moved past the matter, you are still holding on to it.  Clearly, you are not following him.

 

 

Ok so you admit that Imam Ali (a.s) was the best judge, thank you.

 

Regarding why he didn't reclaim the land while he was in power, I will again repeat myself for you the 7th the time, in fact I will post what I posted in post 97 

 


If you look inside Nahj Al balagha you can see the type of environment Imam Ali (a.s) was ruling in. He didn't take back Fadak because his enemies would accuse of committing illegal land acquisition (even though Imam Ali has a right to it), and because the land was being used for public service anyways, he allowed Fadak to be used for the poor while using other resources to fund his war against muawiya and aisha, may they both be dealt with justly.
 
Secondly, the Imams have said that the AhlulBayt (a.s) do not take back what is unjustly taken from them out of honor for themselves. This is because they are demonstrating that Allah (swt.) is the sole person who they rely upon and not upon someone who "allows" them to have their rizq which was taken. 

 

 

I think there is a bigger issue here, I think you have a reading disorder or you're in psychological denial. When something is presented to you, your body and face twitches like a computer with a virus in it, your brain can't handle information that causes you to question your world view you so quickly forget information that is given to you.

 

 

2.  The Prophet [saw] used Fay for the readiness of the Muslim nation in wars.  If the Prophet [saw] used Fay for that purpose, why is Abu Bakr [ra] guilty for doing the same?  Is it a crime to follow the Sunnah?  But of course you want us to believe that he did so to consolidate his power but that is your false accusation.  Desperate times call for desperate measures so your accusation, or line of reasoning, wreaks of desperation.
 
3.  The real question is why are you still crying foul when it has been established that Fadak was maintained as per Sunnah by Abu bakr [ra]?

 

Firstly Fadak wasn't Abu Bakr's to "maintain" in the first place, he took Fada weakening the poltiical and financial power of Ahlul Bayt, and this is fact that both Sunnis and Shia accept. Abu Bakr power was also strengthened and consolidated by having Fadak as a means to fight those who didn't agree with him, and this is also a fact that both Sunnis and Shias accept, so you can't say this is my accusation when your own scholars accept it.

 

 

Have you noticed that ever since my response, no one has brought forth any evidence against it?  So the ranting started after I clarified the matter using Qur'an, Sunnah and history.  But since I was undermined before I even presented my case, I thought I should reply to it at the end.
 
That been said, I love how all the blame is squarely placed on my shoulders when all I did was defend the only person whom the Qur'an declares the "companion" of the Prophet [saw].  It is a lot better to say that I have "blinded" or "decimated" Herz than sealing the fate of Abu Bakr [ra] to Hellfire, as is the opinion of, and consensus, among keyboard warriors here on ShiaChat.

 

 
 

You're always crying and complaining, I don't get it. You either claiming false victories and calling yourself the decimator, or you're crying and complaining how you are being "treated". 

 

All you did this entire thread was copy and paste like a parrot, every single point you brought was answered with authentic hadith and tafseer from your scholars. it isn't our fault that you have reading comprehension issues, but none the less let us continue.

 

Now you still have not answered my question.

 

If Ali (a.s) is the best judge on earth, is it likely or unlikely that he would make a mistake on simple inheritance laws, not understand the tafseer of surah maryam, and persist on this mistake for years and years?

 

Yes

 

or

 

No.

 

Answer.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

1.  @muslim720

Maujam ul Buldan, Vol.3 p.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

2.  Riyadh al-Nadira,Vol. 1 p.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 ۔۔۔

and other sunni narrations show that she owned it when Rasulullah saas was alive.Did he go against shari'a when he gave it to her?

Abu Bakr took what was hers and she wanted it back.

 

 

These two narrations cited by ShiaPen have been refuted.

 

1.  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 book on 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 as they are very weak and unreliable.

 

2.  Let us look at the narration in its entirety and see how it backfires.

 

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”.

 

Now, that shows that Fatima [ra] and Abu Bakr [ra] arrived at an agreement so when we read the entire narration, it does more damage (than good) to your cause.

 

But as far as the grading is concerned, this report is unreliable since the chain of narration is broken.  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 so he cannot be a witness to that incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These two narrations cited by ShiaPen have been refuted.

 

1.  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 book on 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 as they are very weak and unreliable.

 

2.  Let us look at the narration in its entirety and see how it backfires.

 

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”.

 

Now, that shows that Fatima [ra] and Abu Bakr [ra] arrived at an agreement so when we read the entire narration, it does more damage (than good) to your cause.

 

But as far as the grading is concerned, this report is unreliable since the chain of narration is broken.  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 so he cannot be a witness to that incident.

 

You're copying and pasting attempts to weaken these two hadith, you don't know if these two hadith are weak you're just giving us the opinions of the anti-shia websites. You did this last time and I had to show you why you're wrong.

 

Anyways, don't worry about them, just answer my question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

1.  Ok so you admit that Imam Ali (a.s) was the best judge, thank you.

 

2.  Regarding why he didn't reclaim the land while he was in power, I will again repeat myself for you the 7th the time, in fact I will post what I posted in post 97 

 

3.  I think there is a bigger issue here, I think you have a reading disorder or you're in psychological denial. When something is presented to you, your body and face twitches like a computer with a virus in it, your brain can't handle information that causes you to question your world view you so quickly forget information that is given to you.

 

4.  Firstly Fadak wasn't Abu Bakr's to "maintain" in the first place, he took Fada weakening the poltiical and financial power of Ahlul Bayt, and this is fact that both Sunnis and Shia accept.

 

5.  If Ali (a.s) is the best judge on earth, is it likely or unlikely that he would make a mistake on simple inheritance laws, not understand the tafseer of surah maryam, and persist on this mistake for years and years?

 

Yes

 

or

 

No.

 

Answer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.  I said, "I will concede", meaning, I will pretend for the moment that Imam Ali [ra] was the best of judges.  Did you already forget that I, temporarily, agree with you to expose the fallacy behind your "logic"?

 

2.  That is your speculation and it is not hujjah upon us.

 

3.  See when I said I "blinded" and "decimated" you, it was at the right time.  I refuted you so I decided to rub it in a little more.  But when you say such things, after having been refuted, with no rebuttals, it shows that you are sour.  It only proves your desperation and I love it.

 

4.  Al-Kafi states that Fay is for the Imam.  Al-Islam.org clearly states that Fay is to remain under the guardianship of the leader of Muslims.  Sunnis accept that Abu Bakr [ra] took Fadak to financially weaken Ahlul Bayt [ra]?  What are you going to say next, that pigs fly?

 

5.  Your question, or the argument you have created, is fallacious.  Now you are talking about inheritance laws and Imam Ali's [ra] competence in this field when not too long ago you were calling Fadak a gift.  Switcheroo, as I have said thousand times before.  First, make up your mind which way you want to discuss Fadak, gift or inheritance.

 

Second, there is no question of gift or inheritance because Fadak was never given to Fatima [ra] and Qur'an restricts Fay to be owned by anyone.  It only remains with the leader of Muslims.

 

Three, Imam Ali [ra], as the "best judge", who knew not only about inheritance but also justice, did not reclaim Fadak.  For not doing so, you can accuse him of being incapable of establishing justice but to those who can think rationally, the matter is clear.

 

Four, didn't you claim that Fatima [ra] would have continued the public service work if she would have been allowed to keep Fadak?  Now you are saying that by taking Fadak, Abu Bakr [ra] financially undermined the Ahlul Bayt [ra], clearly a statement indicating that Ahlul Bayt [ra] would have used Fadak for political and social leverage.  Make up your mind; was Fatima [ra] going to use Fadak for public service or her own interests?

 

 

 

 

 

You're copying and pasting attempts to weaken these two hadith, you don't know if these two hadith are weak you're just giving us the opinions of the anti-shia websites. You did this last time and I had to show you why you're wrong.

 

 

You really think Mina313 pulled those narrations from those two books?  You really think she owns those books or has ever seen them in his or her life?  Have you seen any of those two works?

 

If you reach out to ShiaPen, I will go to any website that refutes it.  It is tit for tat.  Your task is to lie, mine is to expose it.

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Mujam al-Buldan, vol.3 p. 312 and 313

فلما ولي عمر بن عبد العزيز الخلافة كتب إلى عامله بالمدينة يأمره برد فدَكَ

إلى ولد فاطمة رضي الله عنها

فلما كانت سنة 210 أمر المأمون بدفعها إلى ولد فاطمة وكتب إلى قُثم بن

جعفر عامله على المدينة أنه كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أعطى ابنته

فاطمة رضي اللًه عنها فدَك وتصدق عليها بها وأن ذلك كان أمراً ظاهراً

معروفاً عند آله عليه الصلاة والسلام ثم لم تزل فاطمة تدعي منه بما هي أولى

من صدق عليه وأنه قد رأى ردها إلى ورثتها

If it wasn't her right and property why did later caliphs give it back to the family of Fatima Zahra (sa)?

Did she wanted something unlawful?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Mujam al-Buldan, vol.3 p. 312 and 313

فلما ولي عمر بن عبد العزيز الخلافة كتب إلى عامله بالمدينة يأمره برد فدَكَ

إلى ولد فاطمة رضي الله عنها

فلما كانت سنة 210 أمر المأمون بدفعها إلى ولد فاطمة وكتب إلى قُثم بن

جعفر عامله على المدينة أنه كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أعطى ابنته

فاطمة رضي اللًه عنها فدَك وتصدق عليها بها وأن ذلك كان أمراً ظاهراً

معروفاً عند آله عليه الصلاة والسلام ثم لم تزل فاطمة تدعي منه بما هي أولى

من صدق عليه وأنه قد رأى ردها إلى ورثتها

If it wasn't her right and property why did later caliphs give it back to the family of Fatima Zahra (sa)?

Did she wanted something unlawful?

 

 

To be fair to each other, you have thrown many points and have not accounted for them.  I can try to answer this question but what is the use?  Are you going to change your mind on Fadak?  In fact, since you say that later Caliphs gave Fadak back to the family of Fatima [ra] - the fact that they accepted it - refutes the claim that Ahlul Bayt [ra] do not take back anything unjustly taken from them. 

 

Is there a point if I attempt to answer it?  Most likely, you will bring something else.  There is written material in abundance - authentic and fabrications - but there is a lack of sincerity.

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1.  I said, "I will concede", meaning, I will pretend for the moment that Imam Ali [ra] was the best of judges.  Did you already forget that I, temporarily, agree with you to expose the fallacy behind your "logic"?
 
2.  That is your speculation and it is not hujjah upon us.
 
3.  See when I said I "blinded" and "decimated" you, it was at the right time.  I refuted you so I decided to rub it in a little more.  But when you say such things, after having been refuted, with no rebuttals, it shows that you are sour.  It only proves your desperation and I love it.

 

 

Let's go back to my intro post.

 

 
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يُونُسَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سَلَّامٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، عَنْ أَبِي الصِّدِّيقِ النَّاجِي، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: " أَرْحَمُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَقْوَاهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ
قَالَ التِّرْمِذِيّ : هَذَا حَدِيث حسن صَحِيح . وَقَالَ الْحَاكِم : إِسْنَاده صَحِيح عَلَى شَرط الشَّيْخَيْنِ
The prophet said “The most merciful of my ummah is Abu Bakr, the most steadfast on the religion is Umar, the most  sincere is Zayd Ibn Thaabit, and the best judge among them is Ali”.
Tirimizi said :Hasan Sahih. Haakim said: Sahih on the conditions of bukhari and muslim.
 
 

So imam Ali (a.s) is the best judge, moving on.

 

 
4.  Al-Kafi states that Fay is for the Imam.  Al-Islam.org clearly states that Fay is to remain under the guardianship of the leader of Muslims.

 

 

I'll repeat myself again for you, Fay means that property which is for the Messenger, it moves from Imam to Imam after the Prophet (saw) passes away, THE PROPHET GIFTED FADAK BEFORE HE PASSED AWAY.

 

If you need an English dictionary or reading lessons let me know.

 

I even gave you an Authentic narration for this and you admitted the chain was sahih.

 

None the less, Fadak was given to Fatima (a.s) as gift, but the management of this land was still under Imam Ali (a.s). So your point is dead either way.

 

 

5.  Your question, or the argument you have created, is fallacious.  Now you are talking about inheritance laws and Imam Ali's [ra] competence in this field when not too long ago you were calling Fadak a gift.  Switcheroo, as I have said thousand times before.  First, make up your mind which way you want to discuss Fadak, gift or inheritance.

 

 

*face palm*

 

Abu Bakr was the one who pushed the argument into inheritance by citing the hadith regarding inheritance, Imam Ali (a.s) rejected his interpretion, so my question is 100 percent valid.

 

 

If the prophet (saw.) said that Imam Ali (as.) is the best judge, is it likely or unlilely that Imam Ali would err on a simple inheritance law AND the tafseer of surah maryam and persist on this mistake for years even after being given all the hadith on the subject?

 

I'll rephrase the question in another way, did Imam Ali (a.s) who was called the best judge on earth by the prophet reject the opinion that prophets do not inherit, yes or no? 

 

 

Answer the question if you can and stop running away from it.

Edited by Abu-Jafar Herz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

To be fair to each other, you have thrown many points and have not accounted for them. I can try to answer this question but what is the use? Are you going to change your mind on Fadak? In fact, since you say that later Caliphs gave Fadak back to the family of Fatima [ra] - the fact that they accepted it - refutes the claim that Ahlul Bayt [ra] do not take back anything unjustly taken from them.

Is there a point if I attempt to answer it? Most likely, you will bring something else. There is written material in abundance - authentic and fabrications - but there is a lack of sincerity.

What I understand from different sources is that Fadak belonged to Fatima (as) during lifetime of the prophet (saas) after his death it got 'declared' as non inheritable even though there was no need for inheritance.Even if it's treated as fay,she was the owner and distributor and there was no need to take it from her.

Historical sources say that caliphs gave it back because it was her family's right.Why would a caliph give it back if the issue was lawful? That doesn't make sense.

If you can convince me that she had no right to get a gift from her father,then I change my opinion about Fadak.

Edited by mina313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I understand from different sources is that Fadak belonged to Fatima (as) during lifetime of the prophet (saas) after his death it got 'declared' as non inheritable even though there was no need for inheritance.Even if it's treated as fay,she was the owner and distributor and there was no need to take it from her.

Historical sources say that caliphs gave it back because it was her family's right.Why would a caliph give it back if the issue was lawful? That doesn't make sense.

If you can convince me that she had no right to get a gift from her father,then I change my opinion about Fadak.

 

That is also another point that I argue for in my intro, this is the 4th or 5th point being that, if Fadak was the personal property of the messenger, what is stopping him from gifting it if Allah allows it? Nothing.

 

However they haven't even gotten past the first point ! That is, is Imam Ali (as.) the best judge? Then we can speak about Imam Ali's (as.) knowledge which is reported in their books. Etc etc etc

 

Problem is, he can't even get past the first point without me having to hold his hand, I don't get it. If you can't hold down a simple debate on a fiqhi issue, how do you expect to do when it comes to kalam/theology? Your entire basis for believing in Sunnism is absent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Historical sources say that caliphs gave it back because it was her family's right.Why would a caliph give it back if the issue was lawful? That doesn't make sense.

If you can convince me that she had no right to get a gift from her father,then I change my opinion about Fadak.

 

A Caliph is not above Khulafa Rashideen [ra].  We know how the Khulafa Rashideen maintained Fadak.  That been said, why did Ahlul Bayt [ra] retake it?  I thought they do not take back that which was unjustly taken from them?  Either Ahlul Bayt [ra] were tempted or this is a lie (that Ahlul Bayt [ra] do not reclaim their unjustly usurped right).

 

I have provided references from the Qur'an (Fay cannot have owners), Sunnah (the Prophet [saw] used Fadak, among many others, for travelers) and history (Imam Ali [ra] maintained status quo when it came to Fadak).  What else do you need for conviction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have provided references from the Qur'an (Fay cannot have owners), Sunnah (the Prophet [saw] used Fadak, among many others, for travelers) and history (Imam Ali [ra] maintained status quo when it came to Fadak).  What else do you need for conviction?

 

 

The Qur'an never says that Fay cannot have owners. You owner mufsireen refute this claim and say that the prophet (saw.) owned Fadak as his personal property.

 

 
The famous Shafii Mujtahid who the current school relies upon today for mutamad rulings Imam al nawawi says the following in his famous sharh:
 
وكذلك نصف أرض فدك صالح أهلها بعد فتح خيبر على نصف أرضها وكان خالصا له وكذلك ثلث أرض وادي القرى أخذه في الصلح حين صالح أهلها اليهود وكذلك حصنان من حصون خيبر…. فكانت هذه كلها ملكا لرسول الله خاصة لا حق فيها أحد غيره
 
“Half the Land of Fadak, which was given by the Jews following the peace treaty, was purely the property of Rasool Allah (s). Similarly, one third of the Valley of Qura which was given by the Jews after the peace treaty and two forts of Khayber…all these were the exclusive properties of the Prophet (s) and no one else had a share of it”.
 
 
Imam Ibn Habban also testified that:
 
فكانت فدك لرسول الله خالصة
“Fadak was an exclusive property of Allah’s Apostle”
 
Fakhir Ad-deen Ar razi explains in his tafseer:
{ وَمَآ أَفَآءَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُولِهِ مِنْهُمْ فَمَآ أَوْجَفْتُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ خَيْلٍ وَلاَ رِكَابٍ وَلَـٰكِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُسَلِّطُ رُسُلَهُ عَلَىٰ مَن يَشَآءُ وَٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ }
ومعنى الآية أن الصحابة طلبوا من الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام أن يقسم الفيء بينهم كما قسم الغنيمة بينهم، فذكر الله الفرق بين الأمرين، وهو أن الغنيمة ما أتعبتم أنفسكم في تحصيلها وأوجفتم عليها الخيل والركاب بخلاف الفيء فإنكم ما تحملتم في تحصيله تعباً، فكان الأمر فيه مفوضاً إلى الرسول يضعه حيث يشاء.
 
The meaning of the verse is that the companions requested from the prophet that he would divide the fay property evenly among them as the ghaneema property divided, so Allah mentioned the difference between the two, and that is that the ghaneema property is what you acquire through exerting yourselves in acquiring it through military fighting in contrast to fay, for you did not carry yourselves in acquiring it, so the matter is passed on to the prophet to do with as he pleases.
 
A little more down we read :
فصارت تلك القرى والأموال في يد الرسول عليه السلام من غير حرب فكان عليه الصلاة والسلام يأخذ من غلة فدك نفقته ونفقة من يعوله، ويجعل الباقي في السلاح والكراع
So the villages and wealth was in the ownership of rasulallah without battle so the prophet (saw) would take from the produce of fadak its expenditure, and he would leave the rest for the state.
 
Tafsir Ibn katheer :
 
قال تعالى: { فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَامَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَـٰكِينِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ } إلى آخرها، والتي بعدها، فهذه مصارف أموال الفيء ووجوهه. قال الإمام أحمد: حدثنا سفيان، عن عمرو ومَعْمر، عن الزهري، عن مالك بن أوس بن الحدثان، عن عمر، رضي الله عنه قال: كانت أموال بني النضير مما أفاء الله على رسوله مما لو يوجف المسلمون عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، فكانت لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خالصة،
“and this is the dealings of the wealth of fay and it’s aspects. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said “ Sufyan reported to me from amru from zuhri, from malik from umar that he said “the wealth of bani nadheer was what Allah granted to rasulallah which was not acquired by military fighting  by the Muslims, so it was the property of rasullah alone."
 
 
Tafseers:
 
1- Ibn Katheer
2- Imam an-nawawi
3- Ar-razi
4- Ibn hibban
 
Actually go into any tafseer it says that Fay isn't public property it belongs to the messenger.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...