Fadak, Part X: The Shia Who Deny Our Interpretation of the Al-Kafi Hadith
“The Prophets did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance, but they left knowledge.” (al-Kafi, vol. 1 p. 42)
This Shia Hadith in Al-Kafi has two separate narrations, and is considered Sahih by the Shia. The authenticity is confirmed by Ayatollah Khomeini, who used this Hadith to prove his claim of Wilayat al-Faqih. Khomeini said about the Hadith:
โThe narrators of this tradition are all reliable and trustworthy. The father of โAli ibn Ibrahim [namely Ibrahim ibn Hashim] is not only reliable, [but in fact] he is one of the most reliable and trustworthy narrators.โ (Khomeini, al-Hukumat al-Islamiyyah, p. 133, published by Markaz Baqiyyat Allah al-Aโzam, Beirut)
When the Shia propagandist is reminded that the Hadith about Prophets not inheriting is in their own Al-Kafi, he will resort to two measures. Either he will change the topic and discuss the other more tertiary aspects of Fadak, or he will make feeble attempts at rationalizing the Hadith. The Shia will say that the Ahlus Sunnah is twisting this Hadith. This is the general approach taken by such anti-Sunni websites such as “Answering-Ansar.” They will say that this Hadith in Al-Kafi is not referring to the laws of inheritance for relatives but rather has a symbolic meaning that scholars take the place of Prophets.
Let us even accept this fallacious assertion, or any other explanation the Shia give. The fact of the matter is that the Shia are accusing Abu Bakr (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนูู) of fabricating the Hadith. They even say that Fatima (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนููุง) accused him of this. Regardless of the interpretation of this Hadith, the fact is that it at least exists and thus the Shia claims that it is fabricated are simply false. If they claim that Fatima (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนููุง) cursed Abu Bakr (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนูู) and said that he was a fabricator, liar, and all sorts of other things, then in reality the evidence from the Shia’s own Al-Kafi would prove Fatima (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนููุง) wrong! (On the other hand, the Ahlus Sunnah holds the view that Fatima [ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนููุง] made a sincere mistake, and nothing more.)
We remind the reader that–according to the Shia–Fatima (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนููุง) never claimed that Abu Bakr (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนูู) was interpreting the Hadith in the wrong manner, but rather she was claiming that he fabricated it completely! If it was a mere difference in interpretation, then we could say that they both had their individual Ijtihad on the matter, and the Shariah law states that the Ijtihad of the Caliph takes priority. But the Shia’s main issue is not simply that Abu Bakr (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนูู) made an incorrect Ijtihad, but rather that he fabricated the Hadith entirely. Whereas the Shia can certainly always argue senselessly about interpretations of the Hadith, they have absolutely no basis for the claim that the Hadith was fabricated. This claim is rejected on the basis of Al-Kafi, much to the chagrin of the Shia.
Thus, if the reader finds himself debating a Shia propagandist who simply demands that we are interpreting the Shia Hadith in the wrong manner, then force him to accept that Fatima (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนููุง) was wrong to question Abu Bakr (ุฑุถูู ุงููู ุนูู) regarding the existence of the Hadith which is in the Shia’s own Al-Kafi. It is a no way out situation for the Shia propagandist, who will then resort to switching gears and focusing on other aspects of Fadak…anything other than having to talk about the Hadith in their own Al-Kafi.