The Imam has narrated the above-mentioned report through another chain as well. Imam Abu Bakr (may Allah have mercy on him) says that if this narration is proven authentic, then it contains the evidence that the people of Banu Shababa used to give one-tenth of honey as charity for some reason, not because zakat on honey was obligatory upon them, but rather they used to give this charity voluntarily, because two valleys had been specifically leased to them. Have you not seen their argument against Sufyan bin Abdullah and the reply of Sayyiduna Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) in his letter, that if they give the same amount of honey as they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), then it is fine, otherwise their special allotment will be cancelled and the general public will also be allowed to benefit from those two valleys? And it is impossible that a wealthy person would refuse to pay the obligatory zakat on his wealth just because a pasture has not been allocated for his animals, nor is it permissible for the Imam or ruler to allocate a pasture specifically for certain people’s animals so that they may pay zakat on their animals, and if he does not allocate a pasture for them (then they will not pay zakat). And Sayyiduna Umar al-Faruq (may Allah be pleased with him) knew that Banu Shababa used to pay one-tenth of their honey as zakat to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had allocated two valleys for them. Therefore, he ordered his governor Sufyan bin Abdullah that if those people give the same amount from their honey as they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), then both valleys should remain allocated for them, otherwise the general public should also be allowed to benefit from them. And if, according to Sayyiduna Umar al-Faruq (may Allah be pleased with him), the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) taking zakat from them was an obligatory command, just as zakat is obligatory on other wealth, then Sayyiduna Umar al-Faruq (may Allah be pleased with him) would not have remained silent over their not paying zakat, rather he would have fought them for not paying the obligatory zakat, because Sayyiduna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), along with the Companions, fought those who refused to pay zakat, and Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) had sworn that if they withheld even a rope which they used to give during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he would fight them for it. And Sayyiduna Umar al-Faruq (may Allah be pleased with him) agreed with Sayyiduna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) in this opinion. Therefore, if according to Sayyiduna Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) taking one-tenth of honey from Banu Shabana as zakat was obligatory, then the ruling regarding these people in the view of Sayyiduna Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would have been the same as the ruling regarding those who, after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), refused to pay zakat to Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him). And Allah knows best.