A hadîth-i-sherîf quoted on the authority of Talha bin Abdullah ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ in the book Masâbîh reads as follows: “Every prophet has a companion. ’Uthmân is my companion in Paradise.”
Enes bin Mâlik ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ relates: ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was absent during (the oath of allegiance called) Bî’at-ur-ridwân. He had been sent to Mekka on a mission. The Messenger of Allah ‘alaihis-salâm’ held one of his blessed hands with the other and stated, “’Uthmân is (away) doing the mission of Allah and His Messenger. So I am making the oath of allegiance on his behalf.” Thereby he made his hand ’Uthmân’s hand.
Murra bin Kâ’b ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is quoted to have related the following event in Masâbîh: Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ was foretelling the imminent fitnas, when someone walked past. The Messenger pointed to him with his blessed hand and said, “On the day of fitna this person will be on hidâyat (guidance, the right path).” When I stood up and looked at the person, I saw that he was ’Uthmân.
The great scholar Mawlânâ Nûraddîn Abdurrahmân Jâmî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ relates the following event on the authority of Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ in his book Shawâhid-un-nubuwwa: (One day) Rasûlullah ‘alaihis-salâm’ said, “Yâ Âisha (O Âisha)! Send for one of my Sahâba.” When I asked, “Shall I send for Abû Bakr?” he did not answer. So I knew that Abû Bakr was not the person he wanted. Then I asked if I should send for ’Umar. There was no answer. I asked once again, “Shall I send for Alî, the son of your paternal uncle?” And his answer was silence once again. When I asked if I should ask for ’Uthmân, he stated, “Send for him. Let him come here.” When the Messenger of Allah ‘alaihis-salâm’ told him something he turned pale. During his caliphate (years later) his house was besieged. When he was asked why he would not resist, he said, “The Messenger ‘alaihis-salâm’ told me many things. I promised him. So I am being patient.” Hadrat Âisha concludes as follows: “Then I realized that that day the Messenger of Allah ‘alaihis-salâm’ had forewarned him about the event.”
Abdullah ibn Abbâs ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ relates: On the day of Hunayn,[53] after the dispersal of the unbelievers Rasûlullah ‘alaihis-salâm’ and I were walking past someone, when the blessed Messenger of Allah said to the person, “O you the enemy of Allah! Allâhu ta’âlâ does not like you.” When I attempted to remind that that person disliked the Qoureishis, the Best of Mankind stated, “Yes, he dislikes ’Uthmân.”
Abdullah ibn Abbâs quotes Rasûlullah as having stated, “I swear (in the name of Allah) that ’Uthmân will save seventy thousand people of my Ummat (Muslims) from going to Hell by doing shafâ’at (intercession) for them.”
Some time after giving his daughter Ruqayya in marriage to ’Uthmân, Rasûlullah asked his daughter, “How do you find ’Uthmân bin Affân?” When the blessed lady replied that she found him virtuous and good, the best of fathers observed, “O my dearest daughter! Show extra deference to ’Uthmân. For, of all my Sahâba he bears the closest moral and behavioural resemblance to me!”
Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was planning to enter into another marriage in addition to his married life with Fâtima-t-uz-zahrâ ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’. Rasûl’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ blessed heart was hurt when he heard about his son-in-law’s intention. He would not forgive him despite his apology and renunciation. Abû Bakr tried to intercede, yet the blessed Prophet would still not forgive him. ’Umar’s intercession was futile, too. Finally ’Uthmân offered his intercession, and Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was forgiven this time. When the blessed Prophet was asked why (he had forgiven his son-in-law upon ’Uthmân’s intercession), he explained, “So virtuous is the person whose shafâ’at (intercession) I have accepted that Allâhu ta’âlâ would replace the earth and the sky with each other if he asked Him to. Or, if he invoked, ‘Yâ Rabbî (O Allah)! Please forgive all the sins of all the Ummat of Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’,’ He would forgive all Muslims.”
Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ did not have the money he needed for his forthcoming wedding with Fâtima-t-uz-zahrâ ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhâ’. He put his suit of armour up for sale. ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ saw the suit of armour as he was walking by the market place, and recognized it at first sight. He beckoned to the salesman, asked him how much the owner charged for the suit of armour, paid the priced four hundred dirhams of silver, took the suit home, and sent it to Alî along with another present, i.e. four hundred dirhams of silver. His brief message said: “This suit of armour is an honour which would weigh too heavy on anyone except you. And please do use the silver for incidental wedding expenditures. We would be so happy to know that you accept our apology.”
The great scholar Imâm Muhammad Pârisâ ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’, one of the greatest Awliyâ, provides the following information in his book Fasl-ul-khitâb: Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ preached the following admonitions: “I have heard that some people hold me superior to Abû Bakr and ’Umar and ’Uthmân. Those people are hypocrites. They do so in order to sow discord among Muslims and to separate brothers from one another. The Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ forewarned me against them and told me to kill them at sight of them. They pretend to be Muslims although they are unbelievers and enemies of Islam. Being dirty inwardly, they boast of their mendacities. They defile the Qur’ân al-kerîm. They agree on irreligiousness. They malign the greatest Sahâbîs and even the Rasûl-i-ekrem. They dwell on the differences among the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Allâhu ta’âlâ will not forgive them. Their seniors tutor the juniors in heresy and discipline them as chronic heretics. They undermine Islam and spread bid’ats. A person who holds fast to the Sunnat (the true path guided by the Prophet) at that time will be superior to martyrs and devout worshippers, and sa’âdat (salvation and happiness) will be with him. (As for those separatists;) no one on the earth is baser than they are. The earth is cross with them. The sky shades them with condemnation. They are the worst people on the earth. They secrete fitna. They are known with the appellation ‘enjâs’ = (dirty beings) in the world of angels. They curse the Sahâba in their mosques, coffee-houses and schools, and they do it in the name of worship. Their hearts do not accomodate any human feelings. Allâhu ta’âlâ strips them of human appearance.” When the Sahâba heard these statements, they asked, “O Amîr-al-mu’minîn! What must we do if we live long enough to see that time?” He replied, “Be like the Hawârîs (Disciples) of Îsâ (Jesûs) ‘alaihis-salâm’! Learn our path. Do your best to adhere to the commandments ofAllâhu ta’âlâ, to obey His Messenger, to love all his Sahâba, and to avoid the words and writings of those aberrant people! Abiding by the true path of Sunnat is better than deviation and heresy.”
Imâm Refî’uddîn, Tâj-ul-islâm ’Uthmân bin Alî Merendî quoted the following hadîth-i-sherîf on the authority of Abdullah bin ’Umar: Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated, “Allâhu ta’âlâ has made it farz (incumbent) upon you to perform (acts of worship such as) namâz (or salât), fast, hajj (pilgrimage) and zakât; and likewise He has made it farz upon you to love Abû Bakr as-Siddîq and ’Umar-ul-Fârûq and ’Uthmân Zin-nûrayn and Alî Murtadâ. If a person dislikes any one of these four people, none of his (acts of worship such as) namâz, fast, hajj and zakât will be accepted. On the Rising Day people with such hapless dislike will be driven to fire[of Hell].”
17– The heretic goes on as follows in the book Husniyya: “Imâm Ja’far Sadîq used to command (the temporary marriage contract termed) mut’a nikâh. For Allâhu ta’âlâ has canonically legitimized the nikâh termed mut’a in His âyat-i-jelîl which purports, ‘Pay the women whom you sexually utilize.’ (Mut’a nikâh means a temporary marriage contract made between a man and a woman. To realize it the man proposes to the woman to lend herself to him for a certain length of time in return for a certain sum of money and the woman accepts it (if she likes to) without any witnesses.) Scholars of Tafsîr and Fiqh agree on the fact that the âyat (we have quoted above) implies the mut’a nikâh. There is not another âyat or a hadîth-i-sherîf to invalidate this âyat. ’Umar, the time’s Khalîfa, took the liberty of banning this temporary marriage on the pretext that its practice had been causing fitna without being based on an âyat or hadîth. ’Umar bin Hasîn stated, ‘We practised the mut’a nikâh. It was never proscribed in âyats or hadîths.’ And Abdullah bin ’Umar observes, ‘My father’s word could not abrogateRasûlullah’s sunnat.’ Everything is canonically permissible unless it is prohibited in âyats or hadîths.”
It is written in all the books of Tafsîr and Fiqh that the twenty-fourth âyat-i-kerîmaof Nisâ sûra, which purports, “... Seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers as prescribed;...” does not imply mut’a nikâh. It implies the mahr, i.e. the money (which the bridegroom has to pay the bride during the Islamic contract of marriage called) nikâh. For instance, the âyat-i-kerîma quoted above is explicated as follows in the twenty-sixth page of the Tafsîr-i-Baydâwî, and in its annotation entitled Tafsîr-i-Shaikhzâda: “This âyat-i-kerîma is about nikâh, which is canonically legal (in the Islamic religion). It does not legitimize mut’a nikâh. As a matter of fact, it commands the payment of mahr. The kind of nikâh termed mut’a was canonically legal formerly. Later, it was prohibited. Islam does not approve of a temporary contract performed in the name of nikâh.”
Mawlânâ Ekmeluddîn [Muhammad bin Mahmûd Bâbertî] provides the following explanation in the two hundred and thirty-first page of the book Inâya, which is a commentary of the book Hidâya, which was written by the great scholar Burhânaddîn Merghinânî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’:
The nikâh termed mut’a is null and void. Yes, it was formerly legal in Islam, as is reported by Abdullah ibn Abbâs. Yet the Ashâb-i-kirâm declare unanimously that later it was proscribed in hadîth-i-sherîfs. In fact, they quote the hadîth-i-sherîfs in which it is proscribed. For instance, Muhammad ibn Hanafiyya narrates as follows: “My father, Imâm Alî, ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’ related: On the very day when the fortress of Hayber was conquered [in the seventh year of the Hegira], Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ proscribed the mut’a nikâh.” In the face of this report on the authority of Imâm Alî, could Imâm Ja’far Sâdiq, who was a most beloved member of the Ahl-i-Bayt, ever be imagined to have commanded the mut’a nikâh? Absolutely not. Indeed, the author of the book entitled Husniyya, a Jewish convert under the nom de plume Murtadâ, is a shameless liar who not only misinterprets âyat-i-kerîmas and denies hadîth-i-sherîfs for the purpose of making others believe his lies and slanders, but also has made a habit of monopolizing the advocacy of the path of Ahl-i-Bayt. He represents his concoctions in the name of hadîth-i-sherîfs and then, so to speak, favours them as if they were the commandments of the Ahl-i-Bayt. This duplicity takes effect with the ignorant, although a person who knows his faith Islam well will not believe his lies. Our scholars have answered lies of this sort in the light of âyats and hadîths and proved that the followers and the true lovers of the Ahl-i-Bayt are the Sunnî Muslims.
Rebi’ bin Maysara ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ relates: On the day we conquered Hayber, the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ made the mut’a nikâh halâl (permissible) for three days. My paternal uncle and I went to a house where a woman lived. Both of us wore overcoats made from thin cloth. My uncle’s overcoat was of a better quality. The woman, a non-Muslim (ahl-i-kitâb), came to the door. She looked at my coat and noticed that I was younger. “This man’s coat is not like the other one’s; nor is his youth, though,” she said, and ushered me in, thus forgoing the coat for the sake of the youth. I spent the night there. In the morning I heard Rasûlullah’s town-crier announce in the streets: “O Muslims! The Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ has forbidden the mut’a nikâh.” So we all ceased from the mut’a nikâh.
That the Messenger of Allah prohibited the mut’a nikâh as he was alive is a fact unanimously acknowledged by the Sahâba. This unanimity, (which is termed Ijmâ’,) does not make changes or amendments in the religious principles, but it discovers and announces the changes and amendments that are made by the âyats or hadîth-i-sherîfs which cancel the religious principles put by other âyats or hadîth-i-sherîfs previous to themselves.
Question: How could there have been such unanimity despite the fact that Abdullah ibn Abbâs used to say that the mut’a nikâh was halâl?
Answer: He was among those who said, afterwards, that it had been prohibited. As a matter of fact, Jâbir bin Zayd reports that ibn Abbâs ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ said before his death that the mut’a nikâh had been prohibited, and that his contribution finalized the unanimity.
They assert that the mut’a nikâh is permissible in the Mâlikî Madhhab. This assertion is inane, especially with the hadîth-i-sherîf quoted on the authority of Alî ibn Abî Tâlib by Imâm Mâlik bin Enes in Muwattâ, [the first book written on Hadîth]. Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is reported (in the book) to have said, “On the day we conquered the fortress of Hayber, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ prohibited consumption of domestic donkey meat and practice of mut’a nikâh.” This is the end of the passage we have borrowed from the book Inâya.
Mîzân-ul-kubrâ is another book in which it is written that the mut’a nikâh is null and void in all four Madhhabs.
In all the Turkish as well as the Arabic literature on the subject, e.g. in the thirteen hundred and twenty-eighth (1328) page of the book of Tafsîr written by Hamdi Efendi ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ of Elmalı, the twenty-ninth âyat of Baqara sûra is quoted, which purports, “It is He (Allâhu ta’âlâ) Who hath created for you all things that are on earth; ...” (2-29) Hence, all kinds of food and drink and apparel are halâl for you unless they are made harâm through âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs. This âyat-i-kerîmaindicates that it is harâm to violate people’s right of chastity and sexual safety. This prohibition borders only on Islam’s dictated area of permissions, (called halâl,) such as the conjugal rights realized by way of (the canonically prescribed marriage contract termed) nikâh. As is seen, the maxim, “Everything is canonically permissible unless it is prohibited in âyats or hadîths,” which the heretics attempt to exploit as a proof to attest that the mut’a nikâh is halâl, has nothing to do with nikâh. Nor does it fulfill the requirements of a scientific or religious argumentation. The Khalîfa ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ did not consider it necessary to authenticate his interdiction of the mut’a nikâh with a hadîth, nor did his interjection meet any objections on the part of the people around him. This shows that everybody knew that the mut’a nikâh had been prohibited (by the Prophet) beforehand.
18– He asserts, “After Rasûlullah’s death, Abû Bakr and ’Umar quoted the hadîth, ‘We prophets do not leave an inheritance behind us. Whatsoever we leave behind is alms,’ and expropriated the date orchard called (Fadak) from Fâtima-t-uz-zahrâ, giving it to the Bayt-ul-mâl. Fâtima was offended with Abû Bakr and pronounced a malediction over him. Indeed the Messenger of Allah had given it to her as a present before his death, and dates from the orchard had been brought to her for three years. Fâtima proved this fact with the testimony of witnesses such as Alî and Hasan and Husayn and Qanber. Yet Abû Bakr rejected their testimony. Indeed, the so-called hadîth was a concoction of that cruel person. His daughter Âisha was the only other person who quoted the so-called hadîth. If there really had been such a hadîth, it would have been in Fâtima’s repertoire of hadîths and she would not have made a demand that was harâm. The Sunnîs are trying to exculpate Abû Bakr from blame at the cost of slandering the Ashraf-i-kâinât (the Prophet). You assert that he (the Prophet) did not communicate Allah’s commandment to Fâtima. If he did communicate it to her, in this case she disobeyed it, which, in its turn, is an act of disbelief. (Since this case is out of the question,) he who concocted this hadîth is a disbeliever. Besides, Abû Bakr should have produced a witness. It was cruel of him also to demand witnesses. Furthermore, it is written at various places of the Qur’ân al-kerîm that prophets do leave an inheritance behind them.”
However, Ahmad Jawdat Pâsha ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ provides the following historical information in the three hundred and sixty-ninth (369) page of his book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ(History of Prophets):
Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, the Khalîfa, gave the weapons and the white mule, which had been the personal belongings of the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, to Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’. He left the (Prophet’s) other belongings to the Bayt-ul-mâl. As for the date orchard called Fadak and the orchards in Haybar; Rasûlullah‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had devoted them as property for pious services before passing away, enjoining how to dispense them. He used to dispense his personal property to envoys who came and left, to guests and visitors, and to travellers and transients. Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ maintained the tradition without any alterations. When Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ asked for the property she believed to have inherited from her blessed father, stated, “No one can inherit (any) property from us, Prophets. The property that we leave behind is alms,” and added, “I cannot change Rasûlullah’s principles. I am afraid to take a wrong course.” Upon this, Fâtima asked, “Who will inherit from you?” “My offspring and my wives will.” “Then, why should I not inherit from my father?” “I heard the Rasûl-i-akram, your father, say, ‘No one can inherit property from us.’ Accordingly, you cannot inherit (property) from him. However, I am his Khalîfa. I give the same people the same alms as he used to give. It is my duty to defray your expenses.” Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ was silent. Never again did she make any mention of the subject.
Ahmad bin Muhammad Shihâbuddîn Qastalânî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’, a great scholar of Egypt, presents the following information in the four hundred and ninety-first (491) page of the first volume of the translation of the book Mawâhib-i-ladunniyya: The six books of Hadîth authenticated by all the Islamic scholars are called Kutub-i-sitta (the Six Books). One of them was written by Ahmad bin Alî Nasâî. That great scholar quotes thehadîth-i-sherîf, “We prophets do not leave inheritance (after death).” The word ‘inherit’ used in the âyat-i-kerîmas, “Sulaymân (Solomon) inherited from Dâwûd (David),” and “Yâ Rabbî! Give me children that will inherit from me,” should not be construed as ‘inherit property’. It means ‘inherit knowledge and prophethood’. The hadîth-i-sherîf that we have quoted above is quoted also by Imâm Abd-ur-Ra’ûf Manâwî, who adds that he has borrowed it from Imâm Ahmad’s book Musnad.
Abdulhaqq Dahlawî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’, a scholar of Hadîth, states as follows in the five hundred and seventy-second (572) page of the second volume of his book Madârij-un-nubuwwa, which he wrote in Persian:
Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated, “We, prophets, do not inherit(property), nor do our relatives inherit (property) from us. What we leave behind is to be dispensed as alms.” When he passed away, the personal property he left behind consisted of household effects, weapons and beasts, and a date orchard called Fadak. He used to give the dates from the orchard to his family and to the poor. After his death, his daughter Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ asked the Khalîfa Abû Bakr to give her (her share of the) inheritance. The Khalîfa quoted the hadîth-i-sherîf (we have written above) and refused to give her any property. Hadrat Fâtima asked, “Who will inherit your property when you die?” “My family and my children will,” was the Khalîfa’s answer. Fâtima pursued, “Then, why do I not inherit property from my father?” Upon this, Abû Bakr as-Siddîq explained, “I heard your father the Messenger of Allah say, ‘We prophets do not leave (property as) inheritance behind us.’ However, I am his Khalîfa. I shall give the same people the same things he would give, and dispense the property he has left in the same manner he would spend it.” Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had promised several people that he would give them property. After his passing away, the people concerned came and demanded the property promised. The Khalîfa satisfied all such demands. Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ was not the only person whom Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ refused to give any inheritance. Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’, and likewise the other blessed wives of the Best of Mankind were all turned down and reminded of the hadîth-i-sherîf stating that prophets did not have worldly inheritors. Whenever the Khalîfa quoted the hadîth-i-sherîf, all the Sahâbîs who heard him acknowledged that they remembered the hadîth-i-sherîf and not a single objection was raised. The Khalîfa did not meet any of the demands for inheritance, although he gave the relatives of Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’ whatever the blessed Prophet himself had been giving them before; he said that he would not change the principles of the Messenger of Allah, and swore that he loved Rasûlullah’s relatives more than he did his own relatives. It is incredibly astonishing to know that there are people who assert that Hadrat Fâtima was offended with Hadrat Abû Bakr on account of inheritance and felt lifelong hatred against him. Could Fâtima ever be imagined to have rejected a hadîth-i-sherîf unanimously quoted by the Ashâb-i-kirâm? It would be justifiable, to some extent, to claim that she was hurt, which would have been natural for her as a human being, but how could she ever be alleged to have held a grudge throughout her life? It is an established fact that Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’, as she was about to pass away, stated that she was pleased with Abû Bakr and they mutually forgave each other for all the offences and unfair acts that they could have committed towards each other. For instance, according to a narration which the great scholar of Hadîth Imâm Bayhakî reports on the authority of Imâm Sha’bî, during Fâtima’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ illness, Abû Bakr as-Siddîq came to the door. Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum’ told Fâtima that Abû Bakr was at the door. Hadrat Fâtima asked Alî if he would like her to admit Abû Bakr. “Yes, please do,” replied Alî. Admitted, the Khalîfa entered and he and Fâtima mutually forgave each other for any injustice they could have done to each other. Hence, Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum’ was pleased with Abû Bakr. It is written in the book Kitâb-ul-wafâ, by Imâm Mustaghfirî, as well as in Riyâd-un-nadara, [by Ahmad bin Muhammad Tabarî-d. 694 (1294 A.D.)]: Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ entered the presence of Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ and they mutually forgave each other (for any mistakes they could have made against each other. Thus Fâtima forgave him. Imâm Awzâî relates: Abû Bakr went to the door of Fâtima and said, “I shall not leave this door unless (I know that) the daughter of the Messenger of Allah has forgiven me.” Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, (who had come to the door to meet Abû Bakr,) went back in and pleaded with Fâtima to forgive Abû Bakr. So she forgave him. Hâfiz Abû Sa’d provides identical information in his book Kitâb-ul-muwâfaqa. Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ was interred at night. Therefore, Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was unable to let the Khalîfa know of the interment. According to some other reports, Abû Bakr attended the funeral and performed the (special prayer called janâza) salât. According to a narration presented in the book entitled Fasl-ul-khitâb, during Fâtima’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhâ’ illness, Abû Bakr came and asked for permission to enter. When Hadrat Alî (went in and) told his blessed wife (Fâtima) the advent of the Khalîfa, she said, “I will give him permission to enter if you give me permission to do so.” “I do,” replied her blessed spouse. Upon Hadrat Fâtima’s permission, Hadrat Abû Bakr entered and talked with her, asking for forgiveness and saying that he had forgiven her for any unjust behaviour she thought she could have committed towards him. So Hadrat Fâtima told the Khalîfa that she had forgiven him. It was sometime between evening and night prayers when Hadrat Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ passed away [in the eleventh year of the Hegira]. Hadrat Abû Bakr, ’Uthmân, Abd-ur-Rahmân bin Awf, and Zubayr bin Awwâm were present. They suggested that Abû Bakr should conduct the salât of janâza. So Abû Bakr conducted the prayer. The burial took place at night.
When ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ became Khalîfa, he dispensed the dates from (the orchard called) Fadak exactly as they would have been dispensed in the time of the Messenger of Allah. Two years later he transferred the management of the job to Alî and Abbâs ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’. Sometime later the two blessed people went to the Khalîfa with the application to divide the orchard between them. Upon this ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ convened the Sahâba and appealed to them to answer his following question in the name of Allah: “Did the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ say, ‘We, prophets, do not inherit property or leave property to be inherited after us. Whatever we leave behind us is alms.’?” “Yes, he did. We heard him say so,” was their reply with one accord, which they emphasized with an oath. Upon this, ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ did not divide the orchard between the two blessed people and told them to resume their former duty and continue to dispense the crops as they had been doing. Later, the orchard was left under Alî’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ charge. Then it was passed down to his children and grandchildren, finally ending up in the possession of Amîr Merwan. When ’Umar bin Abd-ul-’Azîz became Khalîfa, he said, “I will not even touch the property which the Messenger of Allah would not give his own daughter Fâtima.” It is understood from this statement that Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ asked Rasûlullah to give her the orchard and that her blessed father refused to do so. The hadîth-i-sherîfs on this subject are written in Bukhârî. This is the end of the passage borrowed from Abdulhaqq Dahlawî’s book.
It is stated as follows in the two hundred and ninety-second page of the book Mir’ât-i-kâinât: “The wives and daughters of the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ are higher than all the other women in the world ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhunna’. According to Abdullah ibn Abbâs, if a person slanders or maligns Rasûlullah’s wives, his tawba will not beaccepted (by Allâhu ta’âlâ). If a person swears at Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu anhâ’, he must be killed (according to Islam’s penal code). For, to swear at her means to deny the Qur’ân al-kerîm, which in turn is an act of disbelief according to a consensus (of Islamic authorities).”
As for the âyat-i-kerîmas that attribute inheritors to prophets:
Allâhu ta’âlâ quotes Zakariyyâ’s (Zachariah) ‘alaihis-salâm’ invocation in the fifth and sixth âyats of Maryam sûra. The sublime meaning of the âyat-i-kerîmas is: “Now I fear (what) my relatives (and colleagues) (will do) after me: But my wife is barren: So give me an heir as from Thyself,-” “(One that) will (truly) represent me, and represent the posterity of Ya’qûb (Jacob); ...” (19-5, 6) These âyat-i-kerîmas are explicated as follows in the Tafsîr of Baydâwî: “The word ‘heir’ in the âyat-i-kerîma means ‘heir to our religion and knowledge’. For, prophets ‘alaihim-us-salâm’ do not leave property to be inherited after them.” It is stated as follows in the annotation of