Hadith 186

Kitab Suleym Bin Qays – From Aban who said, ‘Suleym said, ‘Abu Al-Mukhtar Bin Abu Al Saiq wrote these couplets to Umar, ‘
Suleym said, ‘Umar Bin Al-Khattab, during that year, levied the entirety of his office bearers, half of their wealth due to the poem of Abu Al-Mukhtar, and did not levy Qunfuz Al-Adawy anything – and he was from his office bearers – and returned whatever was taken from him – and it was twenty thousand Dirhams, and did not take any taxation from him, nor had the tax, and he was from his office bearers whom Abu Hureyra had levied upon Al-Bahrain. He counted his wealth and it reached twenty-four thousand, and had levied him twelve thousand. Aban narrates that Sulaym said, ‘I met Ali-asws and asked him-asws about what Umar had done. He-asws said: ‘Do you know why he held back from Qunfuz and did not fine him anything? ’ I said, ‘No’. He-asws said: ‘Because he is the one who struck (Syeda) Fatima-asws with the whip when she-asws came in between myself-asws and them. She-asws passed away, with the effect of the whip on her-asws shoulder having still remained, like the swelling. Aban narrates from Sulaym who said, ‘I ended up near a group in the Masjid of Rasool-Allah-saww. There was no one in it except for the Hashimites, apart from Salman-ra, and Abu Zarr-ra, and Al-Miqdad-ra, and Muhammad Bin Abu Bakr, and Umar Bin Abu Salma, and Qays Bin Sa’d Bin Abada’. Al-Abbas said to Ali-asws, ‘What is your-asws opinion on Umar not penalising Qunfuz like he had penalised the rest of the workers? ’ So Ali-asws looked at the ones around him-asws, then his-asws eyes filled up with tears, then he-asws said: ‘In appreciation for the strike which he struck at (Syeda) Fatima-asws, with the whip. She-asws passed away, and on her-asws shoulder was the effect of it, like a bruise and swelling’. Then he-asws said: ‘The strange thing is what the hearts of this community are drinking from the love of this man and his companion that was before him, and their submission to him in everything ‘new’ that he comes up with. If his (2nd Caliph’s) workers were fraudsters and that this wealth, which was in their hands was fraudulent, it was not permissible for him to leave it (any of it with them), and he should have taken all of it back, for it was the wealth of the Muslims. What made him take half of it and leave the other half (in their possession)? And if it was not fraudulent, then it was not permissible for him to take anything from their wealth, neither little nor a lot. But he (Umar) took half of it. And if that which was in their hands, was fraudulent, and they did not accept it as such, and he did not establish any proof over them for it, it was not permissible for him to take from them, neither little nor a lot. And what is even stranger than that is that he has reinstated some of them back to their positions. If they were fraudsters, it was not permissible for him to keep them as the office-bearers, and if they were not fraudsters,