Is Hayatus Sahaba Authentic

[Jenelle Centeno]

Sibt ibn Jauzi narrates that after Fatima made her claim to the ownership of Fadak, Abu Bakr heard her claim and Abu Bakr left a written instruction that it be restored to her, then Umar came to Abu Bakr, and asked 'Who is this document for?' The Khalifa said 'It's with regards to Fadak this is a written document for Fatima in relation to her father's inheritance. Umar said 'then how will you spend for the Muslims, when the Arabs are preparing to fight you, Umar then took the document and ripped it up".

The greatest proof that Fadak was in the possession of Ahl'ul bayt (as) comes from the comments of Maula 'Ali (as). We are quoting from the Sunni commentary of Nahj ul Balagha page 45 letter to Abi Uthman bin Haneef Ansari:

"Of course, all that we had in our possession under this sky was Fadak, but a group of people felt greedy for it and the other party withheld themselves from it. Allah is, after all, the best arbiter."

Another thing to be noted here is, AA qouting Mu'jamul Baldan etc doesn't prove anything if it dosn't backed up by authentic sources. Billions of Sunni Ulama lived in this world and many hav their own views. And we are not obliged to follow any of them except if its backed up by text.

(mother of the believers) After the death of Allah 's Apostle Fatima the daughter of Allah's Apostle asked Abu Bakr As-Siddiq to give her, her share of inheritance from what Allah's Apostle had left of the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) which Allah had given him. Abu Bakr said to her, "Allah's Apostle said, 'Our property will not be inherited, whatever we (i.e. prophets) leave is Sadaqa (to be used for charity)." Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Apostle got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Apostle.

So it can easily be concluded that Abu Bakr angered Fatimah (as), taking into consideration the fact that no hadith in Sahih Bukhari is fabricated. Hence your 'first example' goes against what Sahih Bukahri says, and does not stand. Fatima (as) was angry with Abu Bakr, and was nto pleased with him taking away her land, period.

Moreover, if we connect the two ahadith, by this action Abu Bakr not only angered Fatimah (as) but also the Prophet (pbuh) and Allah. You might say that Abu Bakr did not anger the other two as what he was doing was right (i.e. following the right rule), but the hadith does not mention that the Prophet (pbuh) and Allah is only angry with the person who angers Fatimah (as) is angry for a valid reason. I can not say, 'Even if Fatimah (as) was wrongly angered Allah and His Messenger (pbuh) would be angry' as it would be very foolish, but this in my view proves that Fatimah (as) can never be angry for a wrong reason, also giving a hint of Infallibility.

Your second example is that the narration in Seerah al Halbeeya says that Abu Bakr did give the land to Fatimah (as). The written guarantee was only given after Fatimah (as) delivered her strong speech at the Masjid un Nabawi in protest of Abu Bakr's actions. I don't want to be offensive, but the only thing one is led to believe for a reason as to why bu Bakr made a written guarantee to give Fatimah (as) Fadak was because he realized his mistake, and wanted to make up for hit. Now, Umar became the hindrance.

Bassim, what the OP is going for isn't to prove his view over yours, but it is about attacking the credibility of AA. Sure, some of us are aware of the dirty tactics practiced by AA, however, there are some members here that use them as their only source of religion.

(mother of the believers) After the death of Allah 's Apostle Fatima the daughter of Allah's Apostle asked Abu Bakr As-Siddiq to give her, her share of inheritance from what Allah's Apostle had left of the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) which Allah had given him. Abu Bakr said to her, "Allah's Apostle said, 'Our property will not be inherited, whatever we (i.e. prophets) leave is Sadaqa (to be used for charity)." Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Apostle got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Apostle.

Al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Kathir, and Ibn Hajar all authenticate this hadith even though it is mursal through Al-Sha'abi, who has met Ali (raa). As you are aware, some maraseel are accepted, like that of Sa'eed bin Musayib and Mujahid.

This has to be reconciled with other hadith quoted in Ahley Bayt website that show that Hazrat Abu Bakr (ra) and Hazrat Fatima (ra) did not have any negative feelings towards each other.

This has been taken from "Tufa Imamiya" a book written in 1981 by Maulana Hafiz Maher Muhammad. It has been translated from Urdu. The passage is found in page number 183 of the book. It is also available in Urdu for download.

"The number of hadith which mention about Hazrat Fatima RA demand for share of the Fadak land are fifteen in number. There are five hadith in Sahih Bukhari, two hadith in Sahih Muslim, two hadith in Ibn Tirmidhi, four hadith in Sunan Abi Dawood, and one hadith in Sunan Nisai. The word "anger" is only mentioned in the Hadith transmitted from Hazrat Aisha RA. It is not mentioned in the Hadith narrated from other companions like Hazrat Abu Huraira, Hazrat Um Hani, etc. Further the hadith narrated from Hazrat Aisha is of two types, one type mentions the word "anger" while the other type does not mention "anger". The hadith which mention the word "anger" are all narrated by Ibn Shahab Zehri. This means that after Hazrat Abu Bakr RA had mentioned the reason for not giving Hazrat Fatima RA the share in Fadak, the latter had become silent after being satisfied. The narrator equated "silence" to "anger" and added the words to the hadith. This is also known as Mudraj in Hadith sciences". The definition of mudraj according to Hadith sciences is:

"An addition by a reporter to the text of the saying being narrated is termed mudraj (interpolated). For example, al-Khatib relates via Abu Qattan and Shababah --- Shu'bah --- Muhammad b. Ziyad --- Abu Hurairah --- The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), who said, "Perform the ablution fully; woe to the heels from the Fire!"

Al-Khatib then remarks, "The statement, 'Perform the ablution fully' is made by Abu Hurairah, while the statement afterwards, 'Woe to the heels from the Fire!', is that of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). The distinction between the two is understood from the narration of al- Bukhari, who transmits the same hadith and quotes Abu Hurairah as saying, "Complete the ablution, for Abu 'l-Qasim (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: 'Woe to the heels from the Fire!'."

Such an addition may be found in the beginning, in the middle, or at the end, often in explanation of a term used. Idraj (interpolation) is mostly found in the text, although a few examples show that such additions are found in the isnad as well, where the reporter grafts a part of one isnad into another.

A reporter found to be in the habit of intentional idraj is generally unacceptable and considered a liar. However, the traditionists are more lenient towards those reporters who may do so forgetfully or in order to explain a difficult word".

Understand in this way that Prophet (pbuh) meant to say one who make hers angry intentionally. Abu Bakr's intention was not to make her (r.a.) angry. According to him, he was following the command of the Prophet (pbuh) . So even IF Abu Bakr (ra) was wrong in his judgement then also the ruling can't be applied, as Abu Bakr did not do it intentionally. Otherwise the same ruling could be applied on Ali (ra) as he once was the reason of anger of Fatima(r.a.), as qouted by bro Lord Botta.And in this context, the Prophet (pbuh) said above hadith, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry." But we all know Ali did not made her angry intentionaly.

[Al Kanz (Volume 2 page 189)al Isabah (Volume 3 page 55) Al Bukhari (Volume 1 page 59). This Hadith has been mentioned by the above sources with a correct Isnad. Ali bin Madini says that there is gap in this hadith as Ubaidah has not found this story. Abdur Razzaque transmitted it briefly as per the report of Talib.]"

One can see the deception. AA qouted what suites their desire and left what refutes their point, which is present on the same page. They did not commented on the Sanad and based an argument based on Matan.

shia of dajjal are those who think that a person will come before qiyamah and will punish the the righteous and virtuos sahaba(ra) and mothers of believers. (and alhamdulilah im excluded from such blasphemous belief)

"Abu Bakr asked Fatima to produce witnesses to corroborate her claim that Fadak had been given to her. Abu Bakr said 'Do you have any proof? 'Ali gave testimony as did Umm Ayman. Abu Bakr said the witness numbers are not met by the testimony of a male and female. The Shi'a say that Fatima [r] was Masum due to the verse of purification and the words of the Prophet (s) 'Fatima is a part of me', and [they say] that Hasan, Husayn and Umme Kalthum also gave testimonies. That which was said [about Fatima] was merely figurative and said out of love, children are not permitted to testify in favour of their parents.

If it is advanced that Fatima claimed that Rasulullah had bestowed Fadak to her and that Ali, Hassan, Husayn, Umme Kulthum testified in her favour, and the Sahih view is that Umm Ayman testified in her favour and Abu Bakr rejected their testimony which made him an oppressor, so we will reply that the testimonies of Hasan and Husayn were not accepted being her progeny and minors. As for the testimonies of Ali and Umm Ayman, they were rejected being short of the requirement.

3a8082e126