Biography of Imam `alĪ Ibn AbĪ-tĀlib

The Land of Fadak

Fadak was a personal property of the Prophet (a.s). When the Verse “And give to the near of kin his due, (17/26)” was revealed, he transferred its ownership to Fatimah al-Zahra’ (a.s) through a document. The land was in the possession and use of Fatimah (a.s) until the demise of the Prophet (a.s). When Abū-Bakr assumed power, he evicted her from the possession of the land and the garden thereon. She went into appeal against this action and produced `Ali (a.s) and Umm Ayman as her witnesses. They both gave the evidence that Fatimah (a.s) was right in her claim that the Prophet (a.s), in his lifetime, had made the hibah of the property in her favor. Abū-Bakr rejected the claim saying:

“O Daughter of the Prophet! The evidence is not complete unless there are two male witnesses or one man and two female witnesses!”[1]

Fatimah (a.s) seeing that the evidence of `Ali (a.s) and Umm Ayman was deemed incomplete and the gift of the Garden of Fadak was rendered invalid she claimed it as an inheritance from her father, the Prophet (a.s). The contention was that if Abū-Bakr did not consider it as a donation; he should concede it to her as an inheritance from her father. Abū-Bakr said that the properties of the Prophet (a.s) are not to be transferred to his offspring as inheritance because the Prophet (a.s) had said: “We, the group of Prophets do not make any inheritors and our assets are the sadaqah.”

Fatimah (a.s) rejoined, “Is it written in the Book of Allah that you receive your father’s inheritance and I do not? Has the Prophet (a.s) not said that the right of a person is that his off springs are protected?”[2]

Fatimah (a.s) was so upset with the verdict of Abū-Bakr that she stopped talking to him and was cross with him the rest of her life. This attitude was not a momentary thing. The person, Fatimah (a.s), whose truthfulness and


[1] Futūh al-Buldān, Page 38
[2] Tārīkh al-Ya`qūbī, Vol 2, Page 106

veracity the Prophet (a.s) established and proved on the day of Mubahalah was suspected of making a false claim by Abū-Bakr. Imam al-Bukhari writes:

“Fatimah (a.s), after her father’s demise, claimed from Abū-Bakr al-Siddik that the property that the Prophet (a.s) acquired from the infidels without battling, and had left behind as inheritance, was her right and must be given to her. Abū-Bakr said, ‘Allah’s Messenger (a.s) has observed that the prophets do not give any inheritance. Whatever they leave behind is a sadaqah (charity)’. Fatimah (a.s) was very angry at this and severed all contact with Abū-Bakr until her demise.”[1]

If we presume that neither a donation was made of the Fadak nor it was an inheritance, what was the problem in Abū-Bakr giving away the land to Fatimah (a.s) considering her nearness to the Prophet (a.s). It is considered a right and the duty of a ruler that he can give anything to anyone at his discretion! Therefore, Muhammad al-Khadrami al-Misri writes:

“The Shari`ah of Islam does not prevent the ruler from giving any gift to any Muslim.”[2]

Abū-Rayyah, an Egyptian scholar, writes:

“It is the right of the Khalifah that he can give what he wants to give to anyone!”

Therefore, Abū-Bakr gave to al-Zubayr ibn al-`Awwam a property in the valley of al-Jurf and `Umar too transferred to him a property in the Valley of `Aqiq. `Uthman gave away Fadak to Marwan during his reign. Why did not Abū-Bakr give the garden of Fadak to Fatimah (a.s) in the same manner? Fatimah (a.s) was certainly angry with Abū-Bakr and the gravity of this anger can be judged from what the Prophet (a.s) himself had said:

“O Fatimah (a.s)! Allah is angry if you are angry and if you are happy Allah will be happy!”[3]

It surprises one as to what rule of Shari`ah was followed when the claim of Fatimah (a.s) was turned down. The Prophet (a.s) had given to her the possession of the land and made the document of donation. If the possession was not there, Abū-Bakr could have said that since she was not in possession


[1] Sahīh al-Bukhārī, Vol 2, Page 132
[2] Itmām al-Wafā, Vol 2, Page 132
[3] Al-Isābah, Vol 4, Page 366

of the land the donation was incomplete. Since possession is the proof of ownership, the burden of proof was on Abū-Bakr to establish that the donation was wrong. There was no need for him to ask her to produce witnesses. Could anyone have doubted Fatimah (a.s) would tell falsehoods juts to keep possession of the Fadak and make a claim over something that did not belong to her. Her truthfulness is an established fact and the certificate is issued by no less a person than `A’ishah:

“I have not found anyone other than Fatimah’s father more truthful than Fatimah.”[1]

When Fatimah al-Zahra’ (a.s) presented the witnesses then Abū-Bakr said that the evidence was incomplete. The contention was wrong because the Prophet (a.s) in his time had decided cases on the basis of the evidence of even a single witness. If Abū-Bakr wanted he could have decided in favor of Fatimah (a.s) by taking an oath from `Ali (a.s) that the Prophet (a.s) had given the land at Fadak as hibah to her. In the books of tradition, there are several cases where even the need of a witness was not considered for arriving at a decision considering the personal status of the claimant. In some cases, they accepted the evidence of one witness only. When the sons of Suhayb went to the court of Marwan claiming that the Prophet (a.s) had given two houses and a room to Suhayb, they were asked to produce their witness. They said Ibn `Umar will bear witness for them. Ibn `Umar was called to the court:

“He witnessed that the Prophet (a.s) had given to Suhayb two houses and a room. Marwan gave a verdict in their favor on the basis of the evidence of Ibn `Umar.”[2]

At that time neither Ibn `Umar’s evidence was deemed incomplete nor was there any delay in accepting it. Was `Ali (a.s) not even of the status of Ibn `Umar that his evidence was not accepted. On Ibn `Umar there was a remark that he had owed allegiance to the evil Yazid. Those who bore witness in the matter of Fadak were known for their nobility and strength of character. Therefore, al-Ma’mūn once asked the scholars their opinion about those who bore witness about the hibah of the land of Fadak. All of them said that they were truthful and straightforward:


[1] Al-Istī`āb, Vol 4, Page 366
[2] Sahīh al-Bukhārī, Vol 1, Page 357

“When the scholars unanimously agreed about their truthfulness, al-Ma’mūn gave Fadak to the progeny of Fatimah (a.s) and gave them a certificate to the effect.”[1]

There was no justification of even rejecting the claim of Fatimah (a.s) to the inheritance left by her father, the Prophet (a.s). The tradition that Abū-Bakr quoted in support of his claim is quite contrary to the Command of the Holy Qur’an that says,

وَلِكُلٍّ جَعَلْنَا مَوَالِيَ مِمَّا تَرَكَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَبُونَ.

“And to every one We have appointed heirs of what parents and near relatives leave. (4/33)”

When this verse is there, there is no justification in terming the Prophet’s inheritance as sadaqah and depriving his daughter of the ownership of the land. If it was sadaqah, then the Prophet (a.s) would have immediately distributed it to the poor and needy as soon as it came in his possession. Of course, the Prophet (a.s) used to distribute the produce of the land to the poor and needy. But this does not mean that he had forfeited the ownership of the property. Instead of seeking shelter behind the tradition of ‘we, the Prophets, do not leave inheritances,’ if Abū-Bakr had said that Fadak was not the personal property of the Prophet (a.s) and the question of its going as an inheritance to his daughter did not arise. But when Abū-Bakr accepted it as the property of the Prophet (a.s), and then denying that the Prophets do not leave any inheritance is not tenable. The right of inheritance given by the Qur’an cannot be voided by a tradition which, according to Abū-Bakr, he was himself the sole narrator! Abū-Bakr was silent about the other material inheritance left by the Prophet (a.s). If the tradition narrated by Abū-Bakr pertained only to the property in the form of land, then he should have evicted the consorts from the houses they inherited from the Prophet (a.s)! Eviction was a far-fetched idea; their ownership of the assets was approved by the Caliph. On the basis of this right to ownership that when permission was sought from `A’ishah for the interment of Imam al-Hasan (a.s) near the Prophet (a.s), she asserted the right of ownership of the room and refused permission! Umm al-Mu’minin used these words while denying permission:

“This house is my house and I do not permit him to be buried in this house!”[2]

[1] Tārīkh al-Ya`qūbī, Vol 3, Page 196
[2] Tārīkh Abul-Fidā’, Vol 2, Page 183

In the Qur’an when reference is made about the houses concerning the consorts of the Prophet (a.s) reference is also made about the houses of the Prophet (a.s) as well. If the reference is pertaining to the ownership of the houses, then two persons cannot be the owner of the same premises. Therefore, in one case, that of the spouses, it is the right to live in the house and in the other instance, it the right of ownership of the house that was vested in the Prophet (a.s) If the right to ownership of the houses by the consorts is accepted, we have to know how they acquired the ownership? Did the Prophet (a.s) make a hibah in their favor? If they became owners through donation, then why did not the First Caliph evict them and asked for the examination of the witnesses to the process of hibah? If such a procedure was not followed, then the Caliph had concocted the tradition about the prophets being prohibited from leaving any inheritance for their families!

If it is a fact that the prophets cannot pass on any inheritance to their next of kin. Then why did not he Prophet (a.s) communicate this commandment to the most concerned person, his daughter and the Consorts. He did not talk about it in the open as well. The only person he told about it was Abū-Bakr! It is very surprising that the Prophet (a.s) has left behind detailed instructions about the inheritance of properties for his Ummah, but he mentioned about his personal inheritance only to the First Caliph!

After the demise of the Prophet (a.s), his consorts wanted to claim their share of the inheritance. They preferred their claim through `Uthman. Therefore, `A’ishah said:

“When the Prophet (a.s) passed away the wives wanted to send `Uthman to Abū-Bakr and seek their share of the Prophet’s inheritance. `A’ishah then said, ‘Has not the Prophet (a.s) said that they (the Prophets) do not give any inheritance. Whatever we leave behind is a charity.’”[1]

If the consorts had known about this tradition, they would never have tried to seek their share. If `Uthman had known about it, he could have sounded the ladies about their position. But `A’ishah tells to the other wives of the Prophet (a.s) about this order. Perhaps she had heard this from her father. She once said:

“People differed about the inheritance left by the Prophet (a.s). I found no single person who knew anything about it. But Abū-

[1] Sahīh Muslim, Vol 2, Page 91

Bakr said, ‘I have heard the Prophet (a.s) say ‘We, the Prophets, do not make anyone our inheritor. Whatever we leave behind is a sadaqah.’’”[1]

If instead of denying the right of inheritance to all the prophets, it was thought of for only the last Prophet (a.s), it might have been acceptable to people. But when all the prophets have been included in the order, one starts feeling uneasy whether all the successors of the prophets, from Adam to `Isa were deprived of their fathers’ heritage? And despite all the epochs going by, only Abū-Bakr was fortunate enough to have learned that the prophets have no inheritors! Contrary to this claim, the Holy Qur’an has talked in clear terms about the inheritance of the prophets. Therefore, about the inheritance left by Dawūd (a.s) it says, “Sulayman was the inheritor of his father Dawūd.”

People have tried to interpret this Verse in a way that the inheritance received by Sulayman (a.s) was not material inheritance but it was the inheritance of knowledge and wisdom. They must know that at the time of the demise of his father Sulayman had possessed all the knowledge and wisdom and the inheritance mentioned in the Book is the material assets of his father, Dawūd (a.s). Ibn Qutaybah writes:

“When Dawūd (Prophet David) died, Sulayman (Prophet Solomon) inherited his realm.”[2]

Muhammad ibn Sa’ib al-Kalabi says:

“Those good and pedigree horses that were produced before Sulayman (a.s) were the one thousand steeds that Sulayman (a.s) had inherited from his father.”[3]

Similarly, through Zachariah (a.s) it is related in the Holy Qur’an:

وَإِنِّي خِفْتُ الْمَوَالِيَ مِنْ وَرَائِي وَكَانَتْ امْرَأَتِي عَاقِرًا فَهَبْ لِي مِنْ لَدُنْكَ وَلِيًّا يَرِثُنِي وَيَرِثُ مِنْ آلِ يَعْقُوبَ وَاجْعَلْهُ رَبِّ رَضِيًّا.

“And surely I fear my cousins after me, and my wife is barren, therefore grant me from Thyself an heir Who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Jacob, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased. (19/5-6)”


[1] Tārīkh al-Khulafā’, Page 54
[2] Al-Akhbār al-Tiwāl, Page 20
[3] Al-`Iqd al-Farīd, Vol 1, Page 84

Even interpreting this verse to mean inheritance of knowledge and wisdom is not correct. Knowledge, wisdom and prophethood are not hereditary. If that meaning is taken then the fear expressed by Zachariah (a.s) loses its meaning. Did he have a fear that the people would steal his knowledge and occupy it forcibly? Or was he scared that despite not having the capability of prophethood he was made a prophet? It is evident that such a fear was neither there nor there was any reason of being there. But the fear could have been there that his not having any children, people could have usurped his property and belongings. Zachariah did not want that his possessions went to his tribesmen because they were greedy and avaricious people and they would use the assets for wrong purposes. Therefore, he prayed for such an inheritor who would be liked by Allah and that he should use his assets for good purposes.

After these clear proofs, taking shelter behind the tradition and saying that the prophets do not have inheritors is tantamount to going against facts. Against the evidence from the Qur’an giving credence to a tradition where the narrator is only one person certainly creates doubts about its veracity. The authenticity of this tradition was denied in clear terms by the daughter of the Prophet (a.s) and his Vicegerent (a.s). If Fatimah (a.s) had accepted this tradition as the saying of the Prophet (a.s), there was no reason for her to become angry on Abū-Bakr. To the contrary, she would have sympathized with him saying that he was helpless with regard to her claim. And if `Ali (a.s) had accepted this tradition, instead of taking sides with Fatimah (a.s) he would have asked her to forget her claim. In fact the events prove that even Abū-Bakr did not have doubts about the authenticity of the tradition nor the caliphs after him gave any cognizance to it. Therefore, in the beginning Abū-Bakr acknowledge Fatimah al-Zahra'’s right to inheritance and even he had written down the document and given to her But with the intervention of `Umar he had to retract his decision. `Allamah Halabi writes:

“Abū-Bakr wrote the document about Fadak and gave to Fatimah (a.s). At that moment, `Umar came and asked what it was. Abū-Bakr said that he had written down the document about Fatimah’s inheritance that came to her from her father. `Umar then asked what he was going to spend on the Muslims while the Arabs were raring to battle with them. Saying this, `Umar tore away that document.”[1]

[1] Al-Sīrah al-Halabiyyah, Vol 2, Page 400

If Abū-Bakr was certain about the authenticity of the tradition, and was confident that the Prophet (a.s) was not entitled to an inheritor, he would not have prepared the document in the first instance. When `Umar intervened he did not cancel the deed because Fatimah (a.s) had no right over the property but for other reasons. If `Umar was confident about the tradition he need not have mentioned about the monetary needs of the State and could have only insisted on the disqualification of the Prophet’s daughter from the inheritance. Although `Umar intervened at that time and tore away the document, his agreement with the tradition narrated by Abū-Bakr is not indicated. It is recorded in the books of Ahl al-Sunnah to the extent that, in his own time, accepting the right of Fatimah (a.s) to the inheritance, he had entrusted Fadak to `Ali (a.s) and `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. Therefore, Yaqūt al-Hamawi writes:

“A dispute arose between `Ali (a.s) and `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib about Fadak. `Ali (a.s) says that the Prophet (a.s) had given Fadak to Fatimah (a.s) in his lifetime. `Abbas denied this and said that the Prophet (a.s) died intestate leaving Fadak as his property and that he was its inheritor. This dispute reached `Umar. He said that they understood their matters themselves and he had entrusted it (the Fadak) to them!”[1]

According to this narration the point of dispute between `Ali (a.s) and `Abbas was that whether Fadak was a gifted (hibah) property or an intestate property of the Prophet (a.s). `Abbas was claiming that since it was a legacy, he had a right over it as a close relation of the Prophet (a.s). Now a decision was to be made whether the land was a hibah, legacy a property of the Prophet (a.s) that, according to one opinion, was to remain in public domain. If `Umar thought that it was a hibah property he would have handed it over to `Ali (a.s). If he thought that it was a sadaqah, then it would remain as a public property. He allowed it to remain in the joint hands of `Ali (a.s) and `Abbas. This proves that he neither considered the land as hibah nor sadaqah and since he felt that it was an inherited property he entrusted it to both the persons as they had an interest in it as the inheritors of the deceased. This proves that if `Umar had given any credence to the tradition of “we the Prophets do not leave legacies” he would not have given this decision. In this matter, people invent an excuse. They say that `Umar did not transfer the estate to `Ali and `Abbas. He had just entrusted it to them as the official


[1] Mu`jam al-Buldān, Vol 14, Page 239

representatives! If such was the case, he could have clearly told the persons about his intention while entrusting the property to them.

It is certainly proved from this tradition that `Umar did accept the right to inheritance and as far as the actual handing over of Fadak was concerned, the coming events do not support it but it remained as a ‘no-man’s-land’ for long. The men in power allowed its use to whomever they favored in their time! Therefore, when `Uthman’s reign came, he gifted it to his son-in-law Marwan in 34 H. The historian Abul-Fida’ writes:

“`Uthman gave the Fadak as a gift to Marwan although it was a sadaqah of the Prophet (a.s) and Fatimah (a.s) had claimed it as an inheritances.”[1]

When Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan came into power, he took Fadak in his control and left a third of it in the use of Marwan, gave a third to `Umar ibn `Uthman and the remaining portion to his own son `Abd al-`Aziz When `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz got it as an inheritance, he handed it over to the Progeny of Fatimah (a.s). Yaqūt al-Hamawi writes:

“When `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz assumed the Caliphate, he wrote to the administrator of al-Madinah ordering that Fadak be returned to the progeny of Fatimah.”[2]

It is evident from this action of `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz that he did not give any credence to the tradition of “we, the Prophets, do not leave legacies” and termed the decisions of the past caliphs as absolutely wrong. It is a highly commendable act that he recognized the truth and returned the usurped right of Fatimah (a.s) to her children. But after him, the same things happened that were happening before him. Yazid ibn Abd al Malik, on succeeding `Umar, took back Fadak from Banū-Fatimah and gave it to Banū-Marwan. Until the collapse of Banū-Umayyah Dynasty it remained with Banū-Marwan. When Abul-`Abbas al-Saffah acquired power, he gave Fadak to `Abdullah ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan ibn `Ali. After al-Saffah, al-Mansūr, the `Abbasid ruler, took the land away from the progeny of al-Hasan (a.s). But al-Mahdi ibn Mansūr once again gave the land to Banū-Fatimah. When Mūsa ibn al-Mahdi assumed power he took away the land as a state property. Until the time of al-Ma’mūn Rashid it remained a state property. On sitting on the throne in 210 H al-Ma’mūn ordered the administrator of al-Madinah, Qathm ibn Ja`far:


[1] Tārīkh Abul-Fidā’, Vol 1, Page 179
[2] Mu`jam al-Buldān, Vol 14, Page 239

“The Prophet (a.s) had gifted Fadak to his daughter Fatimah (a.s).It is such a clear and established fact that there is no difference of opinion between the Prophet’s Household about it. Fadak requires from amir al-mu’minin (al-Ma’mūn) that because of his true dedication to the Prophet (a.s) it is most appropriate that Fadak be given back to them who are its true inheritors. This way the rights ordained by Allah will be discharged and the orders of the Prophet (a.s) complied with. Therefore, he orders that this decision be recorded in all offices and the functionaries informed accordingly. At the time of the demise of the Prophet (a.s) it was the practice that during the Hajj it used to be announced that whoever was given any sadaqah or anything was given as a hibah, he should come and prefer a claim for it. The claims used to be accepted and the promises fulfilled. Then Fatimah (a.s) was the most deserving of getting the thing that the Prophet (a.s) had apportioned for her. Her word and claim should have been accepted. Amir al-Mu’minin (al-Ma’mūn) has given written orders to his freed slave, Mubarak al-Tabari that he should return the estate of Fadak to the progeny of Fatimah (a.s) along with the slaves and the grains stored therein.”[1]

Therefore, according to the decree of al-Ma’mūn, Fadak was handed over to Banū-Fatimah. When al-Mutawakkil assumed power, he again withdrew the estate from them. Buladhari writes:

“When al-Mutawakkil became the caliph, he ordered Fadak to be restored to its former state that it was before al-Ma’mūn.”[2]

With the prevaricating stand of different rulers over the ownership of Fadak, it is evident that the tradition narrated by Abū-Bakr was not given credence by many of them. A pious and just ruler like `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz realized the weak points of the tradition narrated by Abū-Bakr and thought that depriving Fatimah (a.s) of her inheritance was a gross injustice. He did justice, but injustice continued to be inflicted on Banū-Fatimah for centuries to come!


[1] Futūh al-Buldān, Page 40
[2] Futūh al-Buldān, Page 41