It is quoted by the biographers that during the battle of Badr, Abul Aas bin Rabi', the nephew of Khadijah (s.a.) and husband of Zainab, the daughter of Prophet (s.a.w.s.)[227] was in the army of the polytheists and after the battle was arrested by the Muslims and brought to Madinah. When the people of Makkah heard about this, they sent some money as ransom to free their relatives who were prisoners. Zainab, who was in Makkah, also sent something as ransom to Madinah consisting of some goods and a necklace to free her husband. And this necklace was a remembrance of Sayyedah Khadijah (s.a.) that she had given it to her daughter on her night of marriage. When the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) saw the necklace he was deeply moved, and told the Muslims, "If you permit I should release Abul Aas and return this ransom back". The Muslims replied, "May our lives and wealth be your ransom O Prophet (s.a.w.s.) ! Certainly we permit it". The Prophet (s.a.w.s.) thus released Abul Aas without any ransom amount and sent the necklace with him to Zainab in Makkah.
[227] One of the numerous concocted stories of the Non-Shi’ah historians who allege that the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had three daughters throughSayyedah Khadijah bint Khuwailid (a.s.), apart from Sayyedah Fatemah az Zahra (a.s.). The names of these ‘daughters’ are stated as Zainab, Umm Kulsum and Ruqayyah, while in reality they were the daughters of Hala bint Khuwailid (wife of Amr bin Hadam), who after her death, were brought up by their aunt Sayyedah Khadijah (a.s.) and Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s.). The Shi’ah Scholars have put forward several evidences in refutation of this alleged claim, which was raised simply to compete with Sayyedah Zahra (a.s.)’s personality and also because two of them were later married (consequently) to Caliph Usman bin Affan.
The Renowned Scholar of Ahlus Sunnah Ibn Abil Hadeed says that I related the above report to my teacher Abu Ja'far Yahya bin Abi Zaid Naqeeb. He replied, "But Umar and Abu Bakr were not present when this incident took place nor did they witness this episodefrom the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) so as to learn this lesson of mercy, so that they too could please the heart of Fatemah (s.a.) by bestowingFadak to her with mercy and favour. Thus they would ask the Muslims to return back Fadak to her. Then was the status of Fatemah (s.a.) less in the eyes of the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) than her sister Zainab ? Fatemah (s.a.) was the Mistress of the women of the two worlds, rather this grant was to be given when it was not even proved that Fadak was the inheritance received by Fatemah (s.a.) or the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had gifted it to her (in his lifetime)". I asked my teacher Abu Ja'far Naqeeb, "But according to the tradition related by Abu Bakr, Fadak was from among the rights of Muslims, then it was not lawful for Abu Bakr to take it from the Muslims and give it to Fatemah (s.a.)". Abu Ja'far replied, "But then the ransom of Abul Aas too had become a right of the Muslims, and at that moment the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) took it from them and returned it to Zainab". I said, "The Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.s.) was the Master of the Shari'ah, and there was no other command upon his command, while Abu Bakr did not enjoy the same status". He replied, "Then could not Abu Bakr request the Muslims to return Fadak to Fatemah (s.a.) as the Prophet (s.a.) desired from the Muslims to return the ransom back to Zainab the wife of Abul Aas ? Then if Abu Bakr had told the Muslims that O Muslims ! This is the daughter of your Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and has come to claim some palms trees[228] (Fadak), then do you accept this and are inclined to give it to
[228] Some of the defenders of the ‘Caliphs' claim that Fadak was nothing more than a few palm trees, with the intention of lessening the crime. But it is a proven fact of history that it was a large property whose annual income was twenty four thousand or seventy thousand dinars. And also when Abu Bakr confiscated it, he said he wanted touse it to mobilize the army and guard the frontiers, then if it was only a ‘few palm trees’, what use was in it ? It is related in Manaqib of Ibn Shahr Ashob that once Haroon al Rashid asked Imam Moosa al Kazim (a.s.), "You may determine the four boundaries of Fadak so that it can be returned to you". Imam (a.s.) refused to do so for he knew that if he related to Haroon the four boundaries of Fadak, he would never return it to him. But Haroon compelled and Imam (a.s.) pointed out to him the four boundaries of Fadak, hearing which Haroon said, "It seems that you desire the entire Caliphate on the pretext of Fadak"! It is also quoted in Majma'ul Bahrain from Imam Ali (a.s.) regarding the four boundaries of Fadak. One part streches from the hill of Uhud; the second is in Areesh in Egypt, that was probably a town in the area of Sinai; the third being the Red Sea and Armenia; and the fourth being Dawmatul Jundal, which is probably a town in between Kufah and Sham (present day Syria).
Fatemah (s.a.) ? Then would the Muslims refuse ? Certainly not". I replied, "Incidently the Honourable Judge Abul Hasan Abdul Jabbar bin Ahmad too was of the same opinion". Naqeeb said, "In reality those two men did not deal with Fatemah (s.a.) in a courteous manner and fair conduct, although as per the Religion they did fairly".[229]
twenty four thousand or seventy thousand dinars. And also when Abu Bakr confiscated it, he said he wanted to use it to mobilize the army and guard the frontiers, then if it was only a ‘few palm trees’, what use was in it ? It is related in Manaqib of Ibn Shahr Ashob that once Haroon al Rashid asked Imam Moosa al Kazim (a.s.), "You may determine the four boundaries of Fadak so that it can be returned to you". Imam (a.s.) refused to do so for he knew that if he related to Haroon the four boundaries of Fadak, he would never return it to him. But Haroon compelled and Imam (a.s.) pointed out to him the four boundaries of Fadak, hearing which Haroon said, "It seems that you desire the entire Caliphate on the pretext of Fadak"! It is also quoted in Majma'ul Bahrain from Imam Ali (a.s.) regarding the four boundaries of Fadak. One part streches from the hill of Uhud; the second is in Areesh in Egypt, that was probably a town in the area of Sinai; the third being the Red Sea and Armenia; and the fourth being Dawmatul Jundal, which is probably a town in between Kufah and Sham (present day Syria).
[229]At one place, he says that the caliphs should have returned back Fadak to Fatemah (s.a.), following the Customs (Sunnah) of the Prophet (s.a.w.s.), and then immediately says that, “as per Religion they did fairly”. He immediately defends their case and comes up with one excuse or another, as is found in this book.