FADAK

 

Fadak was North of Madinah, about 2 to 3 days journey. Its annual income was between 24,000 to 70,000 dinars (gold coins). The Jews of Khaybar broke treaty with Muslims. The Noble Messenger (s.a.w.a.s.) went and besieged it. An agreement was reached guarantying the life, religion, and honor in exchange for sharing the profits based on 50:50 while the Jews would continue to work. One fifth of the fortress and land was given to the Noble Messenger (s.a.w.a.s.) as Khumus and four-fifth to the Muslims according to Ayah 41 of Surah al-Anfal, “Know that whatever thing you may come by, a fifth of it is for Allah and the Apostle, for the relatives and the orphans, for the needy….”

 After the fall of Khaybar, a messenger came from Madinah inviting the Jews to Islam. They refused to accept Islam but offered to give half of land to the Noble Messenger (s.a.w.a.s.), share the profit and option if evicted to pay the price of the land. The Noble Messenger (s.a.w.a.s.) accepted the offer. Thus, Fadak became his personal property and he managed it. Ayah 26 of Surah al-Is’ra’ was revealed saying, “Give the relatives (their) right, and the needy and the traveler…” On inquiry from Gabriel, he said, “Give the Fadak to Fatimah as this will be a source of income for her and her children.” Hence, he (s.a.w.a.s.) gave it to her (s.a.). She used it as her personal property. After the sad demise of the Noble Messenger (s.a.w.a.s.) Abu Bakr forcibly took possession of Fadak. Sayyida Fatima (s.a.) protested. Abu Bakr asked for witness. Sayyida Fatima (s.a.) was in possession of the property and according to Islamic principles, possession itself is a sufficient proof of ownership. If Abu Bakr claimed the property for himself or for Muslim nation, then it was he, as claimant, who should have produced witnesses to support his claim. But he put the onus of proof on Sayyida Fatima (s.a.), disregarding the Islamic Law! Moreover, as he was a claimant, he should not have judged the case himself, but he did not care for the judicial niceties so long as his purpose was served.

Anyhow, Sayyida Fatima (s.a.) brought Imam Ali (a.s.) and Umm Ayman (widow of Zaid bin Haritha). Abu Bakr said that there should be either two males or one male and two female witnesses. In family matters-gift of a father to his daughter is a family matter-only one witness is enough; but Abu Bakr conveniently forgot it. Also, Islam accepts one witness coupled with the oath of the claimant, as a sufficient proof. Sayyidah Fatimah was obliged to bring other witnesses; Hasan (a.s.) and Husayn (a.s.) and Asma daughter of Umais (Wife of Abu Bakr himself). Now there were more witnesses than the minimum required. Abu Bakr started discrediting all the witnesses.

Imam Ali (a.s.), Imam Hasan (a.s.) and Imam Husayn (a.s.) were her husband and sons were liable to be moved by self-interest. They were the only ones who were selected by the Noble Messenger (s.a.w.a.s.) to prove his truth against the Christians of Najran and they were Purified by Allah from all sins and mistakes. Asma bint Umais was previously married to Ja’far, brother of Imam Ali (a.s.) and would support the claim of Banu Hashim. Umm Ayman was a non-Arab and could not speak Arabic fluently. (Umm Ayman was a slave girl of Abdullah, father of the Prophet. The Prophet inherited her and later married her to Zaid bin Haritha and according to the Prophet she was one of the people of virtue). Does it mean that only Arabic speaking can be accepted as witness? This ruthlessness of the Khalifa prevented others from coming forward. Jabir ibn Abdullah Ansari, a companion of the Prophet, claimed that the Prophet had promised him so much from the revenue of Bahrain. Abu Bakr accepted the claim without asking for any witness. (Sahih Bukhari)

 

Source: Fadak by Allama Sayyid Sa’eed Akhtar Rizvi