The Fadak Series Part XIII: Fadak was "returned" to Banu Hashim?

< Previous Part: Why didn't Ali reclaim Fadak?

When Fadak was usurped from Banu Hashim initially by Abu Bakr, it underwent many transfers throughout history, moving between various clans and authorities within both the caliphates and the descendants of Fatima (as). According to Shaheed al-Sadr, the ownership of Fadak can be summarized through the following distributions:

• Uthman gave portions of it to Marwan

• Mu’awiyah gave portions of it to his governors

• Umar II gave it to Imam al-Baqir (as)  

• Yazid II took it back and distributed it to Ale Marwan 

• Al-Saffah al-Abbasi gave it to Abdullah b. Hasan b. Imam Husayn

• Abu Ja’far al-Mansour al-Abbasi took it back for his rulership

• Al-Mahdi al-Abbasi gave it back to Ale Muhammed

• His son Musa took it back for his rulership

• Al-Ma’mun gave it back to Imam al-Ridha (as)

• Al-Mutawakil took it back for his rulership and remained with the rulers ever since

This raises an important question: why did the caliphs "return" Fadak to Bani Hashim if they were never considered its rightful owners? How can something be "returned" to a group that supposedly never possessed it? The act of returning Fadak to Bani Hashim suggests not only that the Hashemites collectively viewed Abu Bakr as untruthful but also that the caliphs themselves rejected his hadith and acknowledged the oppression of Fatima (as).

Umar b. Abd al-Aziz

It is famous and well-known that Umar b. Abd al-Aziz returned Fadak back to the Ahl al-Bayt (as), which has put into question the actions of Abu Bakr. If Fadak did not rightfully belong to them as inheritance:

1. Why did the Mujaddid, Caliph of Allah give it to them as inheritance?

2. Why did Imam al-Baqir (as) accept it unless he considered it as his right? 

‘Allama al-Samhudi affirms this in his in Wafa al-Wafa Vol. 3, pg. 158:

أن عمر بن عبد ‌العزيز رد ‌فدك إلى ولد فاطمة

When Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz became Caliph, he restored the land of Fadak to the descendants of Sayyida Fatima.

Similarly, Yaqut al-Hamawi said this in Mu'jam al-Buldan, Vol 4 pg. 271, and so did the Muhaqiq of al-Tabrasi’s al-Ihtijaj, Vol. 1, pg. 117. 

Now Sunnis have attempted to bring several defenses and justifications for this, but before we address them we would like to mention that this was not the only instance of Caliphs returning Fadak to the descendants of Fatima. The later Abbasid caliphs also returned Fadak back to some of the Imams after Yazid b. Abdul Malik (عليه لعنه الله) confiscated it from the Ahlul-Bayt (as) once again.

Another instance involved Imam al-Ridha (as), and it shows the Ahl al-Bayt (as) do not contradict themselves but follow in pursuit of accepting the ownership of the land of Fadak. 

We read in Mu’jam al-Buldan, Vol. 4, pg. 272:

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

In the year 210 Hijri, al-Mamun gave an order to return (Fadak) to the progeny of Fatima. Thus he wrote to his representative in Medina Qatham b. Ja’far and said: ‘Allah’s messenger (s) gave Fadak to Fatima (r) and that was a known and clear matter according to His (prophet) family and Fatima kept demanding it. Hence he (Ma’mun) has decided to return it to her inheritors.’

We read in Baladhuri’s Futuh al-Buldan, pg. 27 - 28:

ولما كانت سنة عشر ومائتين أمر أمير الْمُؤْمِنِين المأمون، عَبْد اللَّهِ بْن هارون الرشيد فدفعها إِلَى ولد فاطمة وكتب بذلك إِلَى قثم بْن جَعْفَر عامله عَلَى المدينة، أما بعد، فإن أمير الْمُؤْمِنِين بمكانه من دين اللَّه. وخلافة رسوله صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ والقرابة به أولى منَ استن سنته، ونفذ أمره وسلم لمن منحه منحة وتصدق عَلَيْهِ بصدقة منحته وصدقته، وبالله توفيق أمير المؤمنين وعصمته، وإليه في العمل بما يقربه إليه رغبته، وقد كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أعطى فاطمة بنت رَسُول اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فدك وتصدق بها عليها، وكان ذلك أمرا ظاهرا معروفا لاختلاف فيه بَيْنَ آل رَسُول اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عليه، ولم تزل تدعي منه ما هُوَ أولى به من صدق عَلَيْهِ فرأى أمير الْمُؤْمِنِين أن يردها إِلَى ورثتها ويسلمها إليهم تقربا إِلَى اللَّه تعالى بإقامة حقه وعدله وإلى رَسُول اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بتنفيذ أمره وصدقته،

 In 210 Hijri Amirul Mu’minin Mamun b. Harun al-Rashid gave an order that Fadak be given to the family of Fatima. This order was given to his representative in Madina Quthum b. Jafar: ‘I Commander of the Faithful as the successor of the Prophet has a duty to follow the way of the Prophet. Anything or Sadaqah that the Prophet (s) gave must be given by me, all his virtues come from Allah, and my aim is to do that which pleases my Creator. I have found that the Prophet (s) gave Fadak as a gift to his daughter and made her the sole owner and this is such a clear matter that carries no doubt amongst the Prophet’s family. Verily the Commander of the Faithful deems it correct to return Fadak to the descendents of Fatima so as to implement the Justice of Allah (swt) and get closer to him in the process, and implement the order of the Prophet (s) and attain a good reward. 

One of many things that led us to know the symbolic value Fadak had in the Islamic account was a poem said by the famous poet Di’bil al-Khuza’iy (رضوان الله عليه), which he composed when al-Ma’mun gave Fadak back to the Banu Hashim:

أصبح وجه الزمان قد ضحكا ... بردّ مأمون هاشم فدكا

The face of time smiled, when al-Ma’mun gave Fadak back to the Hashemites

• Kitab al-Awa’il, pg. 258 by Abu Hilal al-Askari (d. 400 AH)

• Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 29, pg. 348 by al-Majlisi

This leads us to conclude that the Ahl al-Bayt (as) collectively believed in their right of Fadak and inheritance of Fatima (as), and so conclude that Abu Bakr's hadith was false which amounts to him oppressing Fatima (as).

Objections

Sunnis have several responses to these issues that essentially amount to ‘They were mistaken’. This pathetic response however is flawed, as it doesn’t solve the problems mentioned earlier. 

Firstly, both Imam al-Baqir (as) and Imam Ali al-Ridha (as) are well-esteemed figures in the eyes of even the Sunni scholars. So how is it, they are accepting this as inheritance, when the hadith by Abu Bakr opposes such? Either, they love dunya and cared not about this religion, or they deemed Abu Bakr as untruthful. Essentially, this proves the rafdh and tashayu of these esteemed Imams, whom Sunnis try so hard to advocate as one of theirs. By accusing the Ahlulbayt (as) of committing this crime, they would saying the following recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari 3196:

Narrated Salim’s father: The Prophet said, “Any person who takes a piece of land unjustly will sink down the seven earths on the Day of Resurrection.”

Also we read in Sahih Muslim 1610a:

Sa’id b. Zaid b. ‘Amr b. Nufail (Allah be pleased with them) reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who wrongly took a span of land, Allah shall make him carry around his neck seven earths.

Moreover, where were the Sunni clergy during these times!? Did they remain silent out of hypocrisy where they didn’t bother to release fatwas condemning this or stating how this was Islamically illegal? Or was their silence as evidence for their agreement with the caliph's actions? If so, what incompetent scholars they were for the hadith of ‘Our property…’ by Abu Bakr is so famously widely narrated they certainly knew of it but ignored it.

Secondly, these Khalifahs of Allah are following in pursuit of essentially deeming Abu Bakr’s hadith as a lie, for how are they returning inheritance to them if it isn’t for them? This may not seem as big as a problem in the case of al-Ma’mun, but from the viewpoint of ‘Umar b. Abdul Aziz this very much is. Let us firstly remind the Sunnis regarding the status of Umar II as per the words of Ibn Taymiyyah himself in his Minhaj al-Sunnah, Vol. 4, pg. 107:

وبعدهم لم يكمل أحد في هذه الأمور إلا عمر بن عبد العزيز

After them (the 4 Caliphs), no one possesses the perfect qualities except Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz. 

Some have even regarded him as part of the righteously guided caliphs (Rashiddun) such as al-Suyuti in his Tarikh al-Khulafa, pg. 182:

عمر بن عبد العزيز بن مروان : الخليفة الصالح أبو حفص خامس الخلفاء الراشدين

Umar b. Abd al-Aziz b. Marwan Abu Hafs, the pious Caliph and the fifth guided Caliph.

قال سفيان الثوري : الخلفاء خمسة : أبو بكر و عمر و عثمان و علي و عمر بن عبد العزيز

Sufyan al-Thawri said: ‘The Caliphs are five: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali and Umar b. Abdul Aziz. 

Sh. Hasan Saqqaf made the same comments in his Sahih Sharh al-Aqeed al-Tahawya, pg. 718. And one of the most important Salafi scholars, Rashid Reza, stated in his Majalat al-Manar, Vol 1 pg. 506:

الخليفة العادل والإمام المجتهد عمر بن عبد العزيز الذي رفع من شأن آل البيت الكرام بعد اضطهادهم من سلفه الأمويين

The just Caliph and the Mujtahid Imam Umar b. Abd al-Aziz who raised the status of  the Ahlulbayt who were previously oppressed by his Umayyad predecessors.

Now the mention behind all of this praise is intended to be shown because Sunnis have this concept of a Mujaddid. There is a famous hadith in Sunan Abi Dawud 4291 graded sahih by Albani in Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Sahiha, Vol 2 pg. 148:

The Prophet (saw) said: Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it.

This is called a mujaddid and according to many sunnis during the first century after the Prophet (saw), the mujaddid was Umar II. 

Abul Hasan al-Sulaymani wrote in Fiqh al-Tafjeerat, pg. 128:

وقد جرى صنيع السلف في عَدِّ المجددين في كل قرن باعتبار رأس المئة الهجرية، فَعَدُّوا عمر بن عبد العزيز في المئة الأولى

The tradition of following the footsteps of the salaf occurred by the Mujadideen in every era, taking the beginning of each Islamic century as a reference. They included Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz in the 1st century. 

He was, according to them, a pious ruler who Allah (swt) had sent after the Ummah went through a lot of suffering under the Umayyad dynasty. So this man is literally chosen by Allah (swt) on top of being his Khalifa (representative on earth). The value of his words is extremely important, and it is impossible to say that he considered Abu Bakr a treacherous liar, for that would render him outside of Ahlus Sunnah. So how is it that he’s contradicting Abu Bakr? 

Conclusion of the Series

This concludes our series on the issue of Fadak, where we have demonstrated that the Ahl al-Bayt (as) did not agree with Abu Bakr and that he had no justification for seizing Fadak, as it was a rightful and valuable possession of theirs. We have also established, from both Sunni and Shia perspectives, that Fadak rightfully belonged to Fatima (as), who provided sufficient evidence to support her claim, while Abu Bakr offered nothing but falsehoods and contradictions. May Allah guide the sincere and bestow His blessings upon Fatima (as) for the hardships and oppression she endured under Abu Bakr's unjust rule.

< Previous Part: Why didn't Ali reclaim Fadak?