Greatest fear of the rulers: Fadak today, Caliphate tomorrow

It is evident from the dispute over Fadak that Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) held the upper hand.

In fact she staked her claim with such forceful arguments and irrefutable testimonies that according to some reports, the ruler of the time was compelled to issue a written decree granting her Fadak.

The all-important question is – why were the rulers so nervous about handing over Fadak to Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.)?

Ibn Abil Hadid has tackled the dilemma of the rulers in his Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah.

He writes:

One of the teachers of Baghdad was asked – Wasn’t Fatima (s.a.) truthful in her claim?

Teacher replied – Yes.

The person asked – Then why didn’t Abu Bakr hand over Fadak to her while she was truthful?

Teacher – If he were to grant her Fadak based solely on her claim, then certainly she would have approached him the next day and claimed caliphate for her husband. And in this way she would have displaced him from his position (as ‘caliph’).

Then it would no longer be possible for him to offer an excuse as he had already noted that she was truthful in all her claims.

Ibn Abil Hadid mentions that this dialogue is correct.

• Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah v 16 p 284
• Ithbaat al-Hudaat v 3 p 410

Clearly the rulers deprived Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) of Fadak as their own position as ‘caliphs’ would have been endangered.

Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) sufficient as sole witness on Fadak: Example of Khuzaimah

In the dispute of Fadak, the rulers insisted that Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.) present two male witnesses (or
equivalent female witnesses). When Hazrat Fatima Zahra (a.s.) presented Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) as witness they rejected his testimony as biased and insisted on other / credible witnesses.

This she (s.a.) did, but those witnesses were also dismissed.

Sole testimony of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) was sufficient for Fadak

Fact of the matter is that there was no need for rulers to insist on two (male) witnesses when one was enough.

The personality of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) should have sufficed as a lone witness.

Leave alone Ameerul Momineen (a.s.), by consensus of both sects, Khuzaimah Ibn Thabit was titled Zu-Shahadatain (owner of two witnesses) by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) as he considered his witness equal to two witnesses.

• Al-Ikhtesaas p 64

Others like Abu Zarr, were also known for their truthfulness and the Muslims of the time never doubt his word.

The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) informed:

‘…the green sky has not sheltered, nor has the earth carried a more truthful one than Abu Zarr.’

• Al-Manaqib of Khwarazmi p 84
• Faraid al-Simtain v 1 p 166

The credentials of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) are far higher than those of all other Muslims put together so demanding an additional witness to back his testimony is plain ignorance and stubbornness.

Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) will never deviate others on any issue..and that includes Fadak

Maulana Syed Ali Raza Rizvi, Shahadat-e-bibi Fatema Zahra (s.a)

Excellent majalis on Shahadat of Hazrat Zahra (sa) 

CLICK HERE TO WATCH ON YOUTUBE

يارب محمد عجل فرج آل محمد

 يارب محمد أحفظ غيبة أبنه محمد

 يارب محمـــد أنتقم لأبنه محمـــد

"O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the reappearance of the progeny of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Protect the occultation of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the revenge of daughter of Muhammad.”

Why do we observe Ayyam-e-Fatimiyah(sa). Video Clip in Urdu

CLICK HERE TO WATCH ON YOUTUBE

يارب محمد عجل فرج آل محمد

 يارب محمد أحفظ غيبة أبنه محمد

 يارب محمـــد أنتقم لأبنه محمـــد

"O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the reappearance of the progeny of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Protect the occultation of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the revenge of daughter of Muhammad.”

2018 - Ayyam-e-Fatimiyyah - اياّم فاطميه - Clip 1: Maulan Syed Ahmed Ali Abidi Sahab

يارب محمد عجل فرج آل محمد

 يارب محمد أحفظ غيبة أبنه محمد

 يارب محمـــد أنتقم لأبنه محمـــد

"O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the reappearance of the progeny of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Protect the occultation of Muhammad. 

O Lord of Muhammad! Hasten the revenge of daughter of Muhammad.”

Is Hazrat Fatima Zahra’s (s.a.) stepping out of the house like Ayesha’s coming out in Jamal?

The opponents are quick to raise objections against Shias and quicker still to attack Aal Muhammad (عليهم‏ السلام).

One of their objections against the infallibles is:

Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) stepped out of her house to secure Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (عليه السلام) without permission of her husband and this is just like Ayesha coming out in Jamal.

If Ayesha was wrong in coming out without permission, then Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) was also in the wrong (God Forbid).

Reply

1. Securing the Imam vs Fighting the Imam
2. Ayesha cannot be compared to Hazrat Fatima Zahra (s.a.)
3. Wives are prohibited from coming out of the house
4. Challenging the Imam of the time in battle
5. Journey in disobedience of Allah
6. Perfect obedience of husband

1. Securing the Imam vs Fighting the Imam

Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) stepped out of the house to secure her Imam and husband from oppressors.

Ayesha came out in open confrontation to fight and possibly kill the Imam and unanimously elected caliph.

We fail to see how the two instances are even remotely comparable!

2. Ayesha cannot be compared to Hazrat Fatima (s.a.)

The two personalities cannot be compared for the simple reason that there is divine text (nass) for Hazrat Fatima Zahra’s (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) purity and infallibility in Verse of Purification (Tatheer) that even Ahle Tasannun scholars like Muslim Nishapuri have documented, while there is nothing in favour of Ayesha’s infallibility and purity.

Also, there is consensus among scholars that Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) is the chief of women of paradise while there is nothing to that effect for Ayesha.

This much is enough to end the discussion in favour of Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها). Given her infallible status and standing as chief of all women, Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها) broke no law or moral code in this matter or any other matter, while the same assurance does not exist for Ayesha.3. Wives are prohibited from coming out of the house

There is consensus among scholars of both sects based on the Quranic verse that the wives were ordered to stay confined to their houses.

‘And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore…’

• Surah Ahzab (33:33)

Ayesha was duty-bound like other wives (e.g. Umme Salma (r.a.)) to remain confined to her house. By venturing out of the house she has violated a clear Quranic injunction.

Those who maintain that this command was restricted to the lifetime of the Prophet (صلّى اللّه عليه و آله‏ و سلّم) are unable to furnish proof from the Quran or the Sunnah to support their claims.

Such a prohibition for stepping out of the house did not bind Hazrat Fatima Zahra (سلام‏ اللّه عليها), so comparing her with Ayesha in this context is meaningless.

8TH SHAWWAL -1345 AH / April 21, 1925 - DESTRUCTION OF THE GRAVES IN JANNATUL BAQI MEDINA AND JANNATUL MUALLAH MAKKAH

On 8th Shawwal, Wednesday, in the year 1345 AH (April 21, 1925), mausoleums in Jannatul al-Baqi (Madina) were demolished by King Ibn Saud.

JANNAT UL BAQI  AFTER DEMOLITION

ORIGINAL JANNAT UL BAQI 

In the same year (1925), he also demolished the tombs of holy personages at Jannat al-Mualla (Makkah) where the Holy Prophet (s)'s mother, wife, grandfather and other ancestors are buried.

JANNAT UL MUALLA AFTER DESTRUCTION

JANNAT UL MUALLAH BEFORE 1925 

Destruction of sacred sites in Hijaz by the Saudi Wahhabis continues even today. According to some scholars what is happening in Hijaz is actually a conspiracy plotted by the Jews against Islam, under the guise of Tawheed. The idea is to eradicate the Islamic legacy and heritage and to systematically remove all its vestiges so that in the days to come, Muslims will have no affiliation with their religious history