REFUTATION OF THE RAFIDAH WITH REGARD TO THE INHERITANCE AND THAT WHICH THEY USED AS PROOF
The Rafidah spoke with ignorance in this regard and over-exerted themselves into that which they have no knowledge of, and denied that which they had no comprehension of and the interpretation of it that came to them. They entered into that which didn’t concern them and some of them tried to reject the narration of Abu Bakr(May Allah be pleased with him)in that which we mentioned – (saying) that it is against the Qur’an, as in the Verse where Allah, the Most High, says: “And Sulaiman inherited Dawood” (Soorah An-Naml: 16). And as Allah, the Most High, says about Zakariyya that he said: “And indeed, I fear the successors after me, and my wife has been barren, so give me from Yourself a heir. Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Ya‘qoob. And make him, my Lord pleasing (to You).” (Soorah Maryam: 5-6)
This argumentation is futile from many angles: one of them is that by His statement: “And Sulaiman inherited Dawood” (Soorah An-Naml: 16)
By this, He only meant in kingship and prophethood i.e. We made him in charge after him over what he oversaw – in terms of kingship and controlling the masses and judging between Bani Isra’eel. And We made him a noble Prophet like his father and just as kingship and prophethood was combined for his father then similarly He made his son after him.
Material inheritance is not intended by this because Dawood, as many of the Mufassiroon (exegetes of the Qur’an) mentioned, had many sons; it has been estimated around a hundred. Why did he single out Sulaiman from amongst them if he intended material inheritance? Thus, the intended meaning is only the inheritance of standing after him in prophethood and kingship and that is why He says: “And Sulaiman inherited Dawood.” He also says, “O people, we have been given from all things. Indeed, this is evident bounty.” (Soorah An-Naml: 16) and the Verses that come after it. And we have mentioned this a number of times in our book, Tafseer, which is sufficient.
As for the story of Zakariyyah, indeed he was from the noble Prophets, and this world was considered lowly by him, how could he ask Allah for a child to inherit him in his wealth? He was only a carpenter, he ate from the earning of his hands as Al-Bukhari narrated, and he didn’t save from it more than his daily provision of food, for him to ask Allah for a child to inherit his wealth from him (would be plausible) if he had wealth. He only asked for a righteous child to inherit him in prophethood and to see the interests of Bani Isra’eel and drive them to uprightness.
And for this reason Allah, the Most High, says:
Kaf- Ha-Ya-‘Ain-Sad. (These letters are one of the miracles of the Qur’an, and none but Allah (Alone) knows their meanings). (This is) a mention of the Mercy of your Lord to His slave Zakariyyah. When he
called out to his Lord (Allah) a call in secret, saying: “My Lord! Indeed my bones have grown feeble, and gray hairs have spread on my head, and I have never been unblest in my invocation to You, O my Lord! And, verily, I fear my relatives after me, since my wife is barren. So give me from Yourself an heir, who shall inherit me, and inherit (also) the posterity of Ya’qoob (inheritance of the religious knowledge and prophethood, not the wealth, etc.). And make him, my Lord, one with whom You are well-pleased!
(Soorah Maryam: 1-6)
The rest of the story follows (after these Verses). He said: An heir who shall inherit from me, and inherit (also) the posterity of Ya‘qoob, i.e. prophethood as we established in the Tafseer (Tafseer Ibn Katheer). It has been mentioned in the narration of Abu Salamah from Abu Hurairah from Abu Bakr that indeed the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “The Prophet is not inherited”. This is a generic noun that encompasses all of the Prophets and At-Tirmidhi declared the Hadith to be good. And in another Hadith it is said, “We, the family of the Prophets, are not inherited.”
And the second angle: Indeed the Messenger of Allah was particularized with ordainments that the other Prophets did not share with him, as we are going to single out a chapter for it at the end of the Seerah, insha’Allah. So if it is hypothesized, that Prophets other than him were to be inherited – which is not the case – then what we mentioned from the Companions, from them the four Imams; Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with them, a clarification of this rule being specific for him.
And the third: Indeed acting on this Hadith is obligatory and ruling by it requisite as the Caliphs (first four) ruled by it. The scholars affirmed its authenticity whether it was from his particular characteristics or not. For he said, “We are not inherited from; that which we leave is for charity.” It can be understood from the point of wording that his statement, “That which we leave is for charity,” is the news (khabar) from his ordainment or the ordainment of all the Prophets before him also, which preceded and is the apparent meaning. If it could be understood initiating his will, it is as though he said: we are not inherited from because all of what we leave is for charity and so he is particularized from the point of rendering all of his wealth for charity.
The first understanding is more apparent and is the path that the majority of the scholars followed.
The second meaning could be strengthened by what has preceded from the Hadith of Malik and others narrated by Abu Hurairah, indeed the Messenger of Allah said: “My inheritors are not to have a single Dinar. That which I leave after the spending on my wives and the wages of my workers is for charity.” And this wording has been collected in the Saheehain and it refutes the distortion of the ignorant ones of the Shias in the narration of this Hadith, who say, ”We did not leave charity,” making the particle “Ma” (Arabic particle of the Hadith) for the purpose of negation. Then how does one deal with the first part of the Hadith and it is his statement: “We are not inherited. And with this narration: “That which I leave after the spending on my wives and the wages of my workers is for charity.”.The affair of this person is similar to what is narrated from some of the Mu‘tazilah that he read to a Shaikh from Ahlus-Sunnah: “And Allah spoke to Moosa directly” (Soorah An-Nisa’: 164) by making the word “Allah” the object of the verb (meaning that Moosa spoke to Allah). So his Shaikh said to him: “Woe be unto you! How do you deal with his statement the Most High: ‘And when Moosa arrived at our appointed time and his Lord spoke to him’.” (Soorah Al-A‘raf: 143)
The point is that it is obligatory to act upon his statement, “We are not inherited, what we leave is for charity,” on every possibility that the wording holds and the (apparent) meaning, because it is a limitation of the generality of the Verse of inheritance and his exclusion from it either by himself or with his brothers from the Prophets.
By Ibn Katheer
Comments
John Doe
23/3/2019Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
John Doe
23/3/2019Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
John Doe
23/3/2019Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.