Contact for queries : [email protected]

Historical Jokes and the Incident of Fadak

1) The Third Caliph in his time, had reduced the monthly pension of the wives of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Ayesha and Hafsa complained to the Caliph. The Caliph did not entertain their com­plaint. Adopting another way they claimed the property of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). The third Caliph asked, “Have you not been a witness of the correct­ness of the tradition that Prophets do not leave any property?”  If your witness was correct, why then you are putting up a claim for the property of the Prophet, and if Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had not related a tradition to this effect then the Allah and the verse will curse you for giving a false witness. These people then replied that Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had appropriately had said that you are a Jew.

(Fazl Bin Shazaan, page 258 and 268).

2) Janabe Abu Baseer asked Imam Jafar Sadiq (a.s.) that when Hazrat Ali (a.s.) became Caliph why he did not take Fadak back. Imam (a.s.) said, because both the tyrant and the tyrannized had gone to the Court of Allah. The tyrannised is getting the reward of her patience and the tyrant is being punished. For this reason only, Hazrat Ali (a.s.) thought it proper not to take it back, so that this continuation of reward and punishment should not be hampered

(Elalul Sharaya by Sheikh Sadooq).

3) When Hazrat Imam Husain (a.s.) along with Bani Hashim, took the funeral of Imam Hasan Mujtaba (a.s.) for burial beside Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) Ayesha riding a pony came there with Bani Umayyah and Bani Marwan and began to protest being under the impression that the room in the property of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Janabe Abbas was hurt by the argu­ment of Ayesha, he took exception to it and said:

One day she rode a camel (Battle of Jamal). If remains alive, she would ride an elephant. When she became entitled to l/9th of l/8th share. When children are there, a wife gets I/8th of the property because the Prophet had nine wives, like this the share of each wife come to I/9th of I/8th. But she (Ayesha) became the sole owner. Anyway, to avoid bloodshed they did not bury him there and instead buried him in Jannatul Baqi beside his grandmother, Fatema Binte Asad.

(“Dalailul Sidhq,  Book 3, page 131).

4) Fazzaal, went to Abu Hanifa, the following talk took place between them:

Has this verse saying “Do not enter into the house of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) without permis­sion has been cancelled or not?

Abu Hanifa said: No, it was not cancelled?

Fazzaal: After Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.),  who was best Abu Bakr or Ali (a.s.).

Abu Hanifa: Do not you know that both of them were buried besides the Prophet (a.s.). Can there be any better reason for prominency.

Fazzaal: By having willed to be buried besides the Prophet, these people have committed a great injustice. Because their being burial there is not lawful. It is so because you have just said that the verse was not cancelled. It means today also this house belongs to the Prophet, and as such to enter without seeking permission is unlawful.

Abu Hanifa after casting his head down, thought for a while, and said that it is a fact that this house does not belong to them. These people were buried in a portion of his house. This was the portion that Aysha and Hafza had got in property.

Fazzaal said that Do you know that at the time of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) demise there were nine vives. As the law of property their share was apportioned as l/8 x 1/9, and the share of every daughter comes to 7/8th according to this cal­culation the 7/8th of this house pertains to Fatema (a.s.). As per this calculation, the share of both the wives comes to 2/72. That gather a space of one or two spans (length of extended fingers of the hand). The space that was acquired for burial was much more than what comes as a share. Apart from this, Ayesha and Hafza get their share in the property but Fatema (a.s.), whose share comes to 7/8 of the property would not be conceded her.

When the talk reached to this pitch, Abu Hanifa said that this man seems to be a Raafzi, take him away.

(Kharaij-e-Rawandi,  page-24).