Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The story of Fatima (as), daughter of the holy prophet (pbuh)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The story of Fatima (as), daughter of the holy prophet (pbuh)

    For those who seek the truth:

    From Sahih Bukhari:

    Volume 4, Book 53, Number 325:

    Narrated 'Aisha:

    (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.

    She used to ask Abu Bakr for her share from the property of Allah's Apostle which he left at Khaibar, and Fadak, and his property at Medina (devoted for charity). Abu Bakr refused to give her that property and said, "I will not leave anything Allah's Apostle used to do, because I am afraid that if I left something from the Prophet's tradition, then I would go astray." (Later on) Umar gave the Prophet's property (of Sadaqa) at Medina to 'Ali and 'Abbas, but he withheld the properties of Khaibar and Fadak in his custody and said, "These two properties are the Sadaqa which Allah's Apostle used to use for his expenditures and urgent needs. Now their management is to be entrusted to the ruler." (Az-Zuhrl said, "They have been managed in this way till today.")

    The hadith shows that Abu Baker made the holy prophet's (pbuh) daughter angry. The holy prophet (pbuh) said:

    Volume 5, Book 57, Number 61:

    Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:

    Allah's Apostle said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

    The holy lady of Light, Fatima Zahra (as), was so angry with Abu Baker, that she refused to talk to him till her death.

    May Allah (swt) guide us to the truth.

    [This message has been edited by a1shah (edited January 11, 2002).]

    #2
    If u care A1Shah in Sahih Bokhari hadis..Hazrat Abu Bakr is referred as Abu Bakr Saddiq ..a title given by Prophet Muhammad (pBUH) himself..now dont bring these petty day to day business among those hoily people and make part of ur religion.. Hazrat Fatima didnt minded for that thing much than u r lamenting bout wordly things.. we all love hazray Abu Bakr and Hazrat Fatima.. dont blow mole hills into mountains..do try to attenf faraiz first.. these affairs are just normal things among peopel and not a part of Islam..
    .. secondly the secong hadis u referred i have never heard..
    Saints are fine for Heaven, but they are hell on earth.

    Comment


      #3
      .

      [This message has been edited by Degas (edited January 11, 2002).]
      Saints are fine for Heaven, but they are hell on earth.

      Comment


        #4
        Degas;

        Pls stick to the issue.

        The authentic hadith from Sahih Bukhari tells you that Abu Baker's actions angered Fatima (as).

        As to the second hadith, pls satisfy yr curiosity at the following link:
        http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamen...i/057.sbt.html

        Volume 5, Book 57, Number 61:
        Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:

        Allah's Apostle said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

        Angering Fatima (as) is equivalent to angering the holy prophet (pbuh).
        ws

        Comment


          #5
          so hundreds of times Hazrat Abu Bakr had made Prophet Muhammad so happy.. ands how is it related here? u think the whole illustrious and pious life of Hazrat Abu Bakr and his tremendous service to Islam goes away for that piece of land.. u must be kidding..
          Saints are fine for Heaven, but they are hell on earth.

          Comment


            #6
            It is the majority that claim that Abu Baker was pious and led an illustrious life.

            We are here to study whether such assertions are true.

            Angering and dis-obeying the holy prophet (pbuh) is equivalent to angering Allah (swt) and can void "good" deeds.

            So much so, that raising one's voice in front of the holy prophet (pbuh) can void yr deeds, as the qur'an testifies:

            [Shakir 49:2] O you who believe! do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet, and do not speak loud to him as you speak loud to one another, lest your deeds became null while you do not perceive.

            May Allah (swt) reward Abu Baker for his deeds.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by a1shah:
              May Allah (swt) reward Abu Baker for his deeds.
              .. yes Inshalaah he would be rewarded .. we trust Holy Prophet to have life long friend Hazrat Abu Bakr Sadiiq .. please call him Sadiq as Prophet Muhammad called him .. u didnt mentioned his battle againast musalama kazzab..
              Saints are fine for Heaven, but they are hell on earth.

              Comment


                #8
                a1shah for Allah sake dont follow miscreants and read this account also..

                For six months Ali(rA) and some of his relatives did not pledge loyalty to Abu Bakr. That was because of a difference of opinion with the Caliph. The holy Prophet had some land at Medina and Khaibar. His daughter, Fatima, and his uncle, Abbas, laid claim to this land. But Abu Bakr set aside the claim, in the light of what the holy Prophet himself had said. "We Prophets cannot be inherited," was his saying; "whatever we leave behind is public property."

                Fatima(rA) knew nothing of this saying of her father. She thought she was perfectly right in her claim. This created a little bitterness in her mind, and the mind of her husband, Ali. The hypocrites were quick to add to the misunderstanding.

                But Abu Bakr and Ali were equally unselfish. During Fatima's illness, Abu Bakr himself went to see her and cleared away the misunderstanding. After her death, Ali went to Abu Bakr and said, "O Siddiq, we admit your superiority. We do not envy the position Allah has given you. But as relatives of the holy Prophet, we thought Caliphate to be our right. You had taken away this right of ours."

                These words brought tears in Abu Bakr's eyes and he said, "By Allah, the relatives of the Prophet are dearer to me than my own relatives."

                The assurance satisfied Ali. He went to the mosque and publicly took the pledge of loyalty.

                At least try to follow what Hazrat Ali(RA) did..

                Saints are fine for Heaven, but they are hell on earth.

                Comment


                  #9
                  thank you for sharing!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Thanks Degas! But a1shah et al will never understand they can only see negative things.

                    ------------------
                    Rabbeshrah lee sadree; wa yassirlee amree; yafqahoo qaulee.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by a1shah:
                      It is the majority that claim that Abu Baker was pious and led an illustrious life.

                      We are here to study whether such assertions are true.
                      Ibrahim says: salaams to all


                      Just so that Alshah can sleep in peace

                      Al-Tirmidhi HadithHadith 6111 Narrated byAnas ibn Malik


                      The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "The most compassionate member of my people towards my people is AbuBakr, the most rigorous regarding Allah's affair is Umar, the most genuinely modest is Uthman, the one who knows most about obligatory duties is Zayd ibn Thabit, the one who knows best how to recite the Qur'an is Ubayy ibn Ka'b, and the one who has most knowledge about what is lawful and what is prohibited is Mu'adh ibn Jabal. Every people has a trustworthy guardian, and the trustworthy guardian of this people is AbuUbayd ibn al-Jarrah.

                      Ahmad and Tirmidhi transmitted it, Tirmidhi saying this is a hasan sahih tradition. It is also transmitted in mursal form, on the authority of Ma'mar who cited Qatadah as his authority, and it contains the phrase "The most learned in legal matters is Ali."


                      was salaam
                      Ibrahim

                      Sleep in Peace Allah (swt) is AWAKE!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        It seems that A1shah either has an extremely short memory or something else, but let me repost a question that I put to all shia a few months back on this very topic....a question which neither he/she nor anyone else failed to answer

                        A question for all of the Shia.
                        If Abu Bakar as-Siddiq did indeed deny Fatimah (ra) of the oasis of Fadak, who came after him? - Umar, ok so he carried on with this gross injustice and again denied her this inheritence, so who came after him? - Uthman, ok so he carried on with this gross injustice and again denied her this inheritence, so who came after him?
                        Obviously Ali and by your assertions then he also denied her this inheritence???????? What say you now>>
                        In fact staying with this, once Ali did became the next Amir ul Mumineen why did he not to strive to reverse all the wrongs against him and set the record straight? And why did he not speak up when he was opressed again? Why did not Allah's kalam tell us to follow the 12 Shia Imams, why did Allah almighty not strike lightning into the hearts of those who opressed the shia Imams and thier progeny? And if the the Ashariya Shia swear at the companions, why did Ali not do so as well and say to all the rest of mankind that they too should swear at them?
                        The reason for my opening this thread is to show the weak arguments of the Rafidah Shia, Rafidah (Rejecters) because they rejected Zayd ibn Alee when he refused to disassociate himself from the first three rightly guided Caliph of Al-Islam.
                        I believe it was HelloHello who in another post gave us his reasons why he hated the Sahaba. He said that Abu Bakr as-Siddique denied the inheritance of Fatimah, the noble daughter of the noble Nabi (saw). This assertion is nothing new, it is a classical ploy to convince the mainstream to accept their heresy playing on the emotions of the Muslims. In fact this whole Rafidah Shia facade is all based on emotions, not even on intelligence, for if intelligence is used just look at the posts by A1Shah et al who at the one hand agree that Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) did not say anything or complain of anything about the Sahaba, but then the Rafidah Shia seem to have some special cause to claim that Ali was persecuted. For the Rafidah Shia it has become sawaab (rewarding from Allah) to curse and swear. This is nothing less than jahiliya.
                        Note that I specifically use the term Rafidah Shia to distinguish this particular group of the Shia as other Shia groups are more closer to the Sunnah and are not inclined towards this heresy.
                        The following is an excerpt from the book entitled “Talbees Iblis” (The Devil’s Deception) by Ibn al-Jawzee. In this book, he describes in great detail the deviations of some of the main sects who have gone astray. In it he says:
                        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Quote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
                        Once after As-Saffah [Caliph Abul-Abbaasid 750-754 CE the first of the Abbasid Caliph] delivered a speech, an Alawiyah stood up and said, “I am among Alee’s descendants, may Allah be pleased with him, O Ameer al-Mumineen, help me against those who have wronged me.” When he asked the Alawiyah who wronged him, he replied “I am one of Alee’s grandchildren and the one who wronged me was Abu Bakr when he took the oasis of Fadak from Fatimah.” As-Saffah asked him whether Abu Bakr continued to perpetrate this wrong, and he replied that he had. Then he asked him who took charge after Abu Bakr and he replied , “Umar”. So he asked him if he also continued the wrong and he replied that he had. He then asked him who took charge after Umar to which he replied, “Uthmaan”. Again he asked him if he also continued the wrong and he replied that he had. Then he asked him who took charge after Uthmaan and he began to look around here and there to find a place where he could hide.
                        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>End-quote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
                        So either Alee (who took charge after Uthmaan) continued with this oppression of himself and his family or Abu Bakr was right in not giving Fatimah the oasis of Fadak.
                        Firstly, what was this property? Fadak was an oasis town near Khaibur which the Prophet (saw) had received as Fay (war spoils taken without a fight) and it remained in his possession during his lifetime. After his death Alee said that the Prophet (saw) had given it to his daughter, Fatimah , her son, and the Prophet’s uncle al-Abbaass ibn Abdul-Muttalib. Caliph Abu Bakr ruled that it could not be inherited. After Abu Bakr’s death, Caliph Umar allowed al-Abbaass and Alee to take benefit from the oasis town, but did not allow them to own it. (Abdul-Qaahir al Baghdaadee, ‘al-Farq bain al Firaq’, Beitut Daar al-Marifah, pp 16-17).
                        So why did Abu Bakr not allow the family of Ali to take ownership of this town? ‘Aa’isha reported that Fatimah sent asking Abu Bakr for her inheritance from what Allah had given the Prophet (saw) as Fay, Sadaqah (charity) in Madeenah, the oasis of Fadak and the remainder of the Khums (one fifth) of the war spoils turned over to the Prophet (saw) from the battle of Khaibar. Abu Bakr replied. “Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, ‘What we Prophets leave behind is charity and not inheritance. Muhammad’s family may take from it, but no more than they need.’ By Allah, I will not change the status of the Prophet’s Sadaqah but will keep them as they were in the Prophet’s lifetime and dispose of them as Allah’s Prophet did.” Alee then exclaimed, ‘I testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is His Messenger.’ Then he added, ‘O Abu Bakr, we acknowledge your good qualities’. Then Alee mentioned their relationship to the Prophet (saw) and their rights. Abu Bakr replied, “By He in whose hands lies my soul, I love to do good to the relatives of Allah’s Messenger more than I do to my own relatives.” (Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 Chapter 13, pp 49-50, Hadeeth no. 60 – Madeenah Daar al-Fikr).
                        So the reason was that Allah’s Messenger (saw) had said that what the Prophets of Allah leave behind is Sadaqah, and if the spoils were given to Alee and Fatimah, then this would have changed the status of the Sadaqah of the Nabi.

                        Ultimately, why do the Shia malign the Sahaba-e-karam? The companions of the noble Messenger of Allah. Ibn al-Jawzee goes onto explain this in the same book:
                        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Quote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
                        Ibn Aqeel said that it is obvious that those who formed the Raafidiyah intended an attack on the foundation of religion and prophethood. For what Allah’s Messenger brought is something from the past not experienced or witnessed by us and we can only be sure about what has been conveyed to us if we believe that is was conveyed by the righteous and the knowledgeable among the early generation of Muslims (i.e. the Sahaba). It is as if we understand only what those, whose practice of the religion and intelligence we have confidence in, understood on our behalf. So if someone were to say that the first thing the Sahaba did after the Prophet’s death was to oppress his family by depriving them of the Caliphate and their inheritance, this could only be a result of the Sahaba’s disbelief in the Prophet (saw). For, correct belief, especially about the Prophets, necessitates the protection of their laws after their deaths; especially those concerning their families and their descendants. Hence if we accept the Rafidah’s claim that the Sahaba made these things permissible after the Prophet’s death, our confidence in the Sharee’ah would be lost. Because there is nothing between us and the Prophet (saw) besides what the Sahaba conveyed and our confidence in them. So if the sum of what happened to them after the Prophet’s death makes us doubt what they conveyed and destroys our confidence in following their reasoned decisions which we have relied upon, it could also be that they did not narrate certain compulsory aspects of the religion, but instead they related only what was in their material interest. That is they abandoned the Shareeah after the Prophet’s (saw) death and only a few of his family members continued to follow the religion. With that, beliefs would fall and souls would become too weak to accept any narrated information from the early generations and would find it difficult to accept the Quran itself.
                        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>End-quote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
                        This is the ultimate aim of the Rafidah Shia, the Shia who slander the companions of the Messenger of Allah. To weaken our faith in Islam, and to make us accept in its place their heresy.
                        That’s why my brothers and sisters, it is futile to discuss the sharia, fiqh, seera, or any other aspect of Islam as they seek to deny its existence.
                        May Allah the all mighty, the all knowing, the eternal, in whose hand is the soul of every living being, guide us all to the sirat al mustakeen - the rightly guided path. Allah is pleased with the companions as indeed they are pleased with Allah. May Allah curse those who curse them.

                        Comment


                          #13

                          May Allah curse the liars and the slanderers of those with whom Allah and Allah's Rasool (SAW) are pleased with. Ameen




                          [This message has been edited by Alpha1 (edited January 11, 2002).]

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by a1shah:
                            ....
                            The authentic hadith from Sahih Bukhari tells you that Abu Baker's actions angered Fatima (as).
                            ......
                            Allah's Apostle said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."
                            ....
                            So does it mean that all requests/demands of Hazrat Fatima RA had to be complied with?

                            To comply with Prophet PBUH's sayings:
                            "Allah's Apostle said, 'Our property will not be inherited, whatever we (i.e. prophets) leave is Sadaqa (to be used for charity)."

                            or to conform to Prophet PBUH's sayings:
                            "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

                            should we not let Allah SWT to decide if Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq RA was right or not? or should we take this matter in our hands and decide his fate and make it part of our beleif?

                            ------------------
                            May Allah SWT guide us all towards right and help us follow the right

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Changez,

                              May Allah (swt) bless you and yr family for seeking the truth, as your signature suggests.

                              Only by knowing who was on the right path can we follow those who were Siratal Mustaqium.

                              I would also like to request the brothers and sisters not to get emotional and resort to name calling, as this will just lead to the thread being banned.

                              First, please note that it is Sahih Bukhari that tells us that Abu Baker refused to give back Fatima's (as) property. So much so, that she was ANGRY with Abu Baker and refused to talk to him till her death.

                              This, coming from the Chief of all women in paradise, is AN EXTREMELY SERIOUS ISSUE.

                              By equating Fatima's (as) anger with that of the holy prophet (pbuh), the prophet (pbuh) has told us that Fatima (as) is ON THE SIDE OF THAT WHICH IS RIGHT AND CORRECT.

                              Now, please objectively analyze if Abu Baker was correct.

                              Abu Baker said:-

                              The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said:

                              We (prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is to be
                              given in charity.

                              It is amazing to believe that this hadith was not known to the holy prophet's (pbuh) own daughter as well as to Imam Ali (as).

                              Now, let's look at what the qur'an tells us.

                              DO PROPHETS (PBUT) LEAVE INHERITANCE

                              The Holy Qur'an says:

                              [Pickthal 27:16] And Solomon was David's heir.

                              While both Sulaymaan and David were prophets and very wealthy. they were
                              kings at their era. Allah , Exalted, also says:

                              [Shakir 19:5] And surely I fear my cousins after me, and my wife is barren, therefore grant me from Thyself an heir,
                              [Shakir 19:6] Who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub,
                              and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased.

                              These are examples that Prophets left inheritances, and as might you have
                              seen that they seem to contradict the hadith that was narrated by Abu Bakr.

                              The traditon mentioned by Abu Bakr is fabricated otherwise it would not
                              contradict Quran.

                              Now brothers / sisters, you draw your own conclusion. Do you believe in what Abu Baker said, or that which the holy qur'an states ?

                              ws

                              [This message has been edited by a1shah (edited January 13, 2002).]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X