When Allah the All-Knowing closed the door on Abu Bakr

For some Muslims, guidance means to spread lies, misinformation and creating differences within the community. One of their attempts is aimed at transferring virtues from one individual to another based on some fabricated reports and traditions. One such virtue relates to closing the doors of the Mosque of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) for all companions save one.

It is surprising to find Muslims groping for answers to the identity of the companion, when the matter is already settled in favour of the chosen companion – Ameerul Momineen Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.) as the only one along with the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) whose door was allowed to be opened into Masjid al-Nabawi (s.a.w.a.).

Argument of the skeptics

First let us examine the tradition introduced by these Muslims to support their claim regarding Abu Bakr.

Zaid b. Arqam states – Allah’s Apostle (s.a.w.a.) addressed the people saying – Allah has given option to a slave to choose this world or what is with Him. The slave has chosen what is with Allah.

Abu Bakr wept and we were astonished at his weeping caused by what the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) mentioned as to a slave (of Allah) who had been offered a choice, (we learned later on) that Allah’s Apostle (s.a.w.a.) himself was the person who was given the choice, and that Abu Bakr knew best of all of us.

Allah’s Apostle (s.a.w.a.) added – The person who has favoured me most of all both with his company and wealth is Abu Bakr. If I were to take a Khalil (friend) other than my Lord, I would have taken Abu Bakr as such, but (what relates us) is the Islamic brotherhood and friendliness. All the gates of the Mosque should be closed except the gate of Abu Bakr.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 5, Book 57, No. 6)

Reply

The only response we can give to such sham reports is by advancing authentic reports that clearly disprove this virtue for Abu Bakr and reposit it in favour of its true owner – Ameerul Momineen Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.).

To make the matter more conclusive we begin by relating the traditions that Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (exp. 852 A.H.) has documented in his Sharh of Sahih-e-Bukhari – Fath al-Baari fi Sharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari.

Ibn Hajar has rejected the tradition in Sahih-e-Bukhari favouring Abu Bakr and has advanced some traditions by way of example to prove this was for Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.).

Ibn Hajar records the following traditions favouring Ali b. Abi Talib (a.s.):

Abu Bakr’s biggest blunder in life?

It has been established in the preceding pages beyond a shadow of doubt that the caliph’s cohorts initially laid siege to Hazrat Faatemah’s (s.a.) house to intimidate the inmates and when that did not have the desired effect, they attacked the house by setting it aflame. In this way, the hooligans violated the sanctity of the house and that of its inmates about whom the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had made innumerable recommendations, some of which have been outlined in the initial chapters. The attack and ensuing violation are established facts and none can raise any doubts whatsoever.

Even Ibne Taiymiyyah did not find anything objectionable as far as the veracity of the chain of incidents is concerned.

If there are still some people who doubt the attacks then they are worse than Ibne Taymiyyah who at least accepts their occurrence. And if some of the deniers include Shiahs, then it is a matter of regret how they can consider themselves as lovers of Ahle Bait (s.a.w.a.) while denying the wrongdoing of the Ahle Bait’s oppressors, a fact accepted by the Shiahs of the oppressors (i.e. Sunnis and Wahhabis)!

The attack was considered with such alacrity and ferocity that it makes one wonder what they were expecting to find over there. Were they expecting to find some wealth or property of Allah that had been embezzled by the inmates through recovery of which they sought proximity of Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.)?![1]

Indeed, it was clear very soon to the oppressors the extent of their wrongdoing. That is why it is narrated that when Abu Bakr’s death was imminent, he confessed:

‘I do not feel remorse over any worldly affair save three actions which I regret performing. Likewise, I feel remorse over three actions which I abandoned while it would have been better if I had performed them. I wish I had sought the answers from the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) for three questions…’

This narration is very important although we will only elaborate on the portion that is relevant in this discussion.

وددت انی لم اکشف بیت فاطمہ عن شئی و ان کانوا قد غلقوہ علی الحرب وددت انی کنت سالت رسول اللہ لمن ھٰذا الامر فلا ینازعہ احد

“I wish I had not forced Faatemah to open her house, even if it had been locked for battle.

I wish I had asked the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) about the identity of his successor so I would not oppose him on any matter.”

Although apparently remorseful, do these words of the caliph ring with sincerity?

If indeed he was remorseful and honest then why did he claim ignorance of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) successor while he was present in Ghadeer?

Was he not among the first ones to congratulate the successor of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)?

Was he not aware of the numerous incidents related to the successorship of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)?

Abu Bakr’s confession can be traced in Taarikhe Tabari.

In addition to this, one can refer to Iqd al-Fareed of Ibn Abde Rabbeh, Al-Amwaal of the great memoriser of the Quran and traditionalist Imam Abu Abeed Qaasim Ibn Salaam, Muruj al-Zahab of Mas’oodi, Al-Imaamah wa al-Siyaasah of Ibne Qutaybah al-Dainoori.[2]

Also notable is that these references have survived despite attempts to distort historical incidents and narrations, as noted earlier. For instance, on referring to Al-Amwaal one finds that instead of ‘I wish I had not forced ….’ it is recorded as ‘I wish I had not done such and such thing.’

It is clear that this is the handiwork of the distortionists. Over here, they deleted reference to a specific event and replaced it with a general reference.

We reiterate a point we have been making consistently in the book – how does one expect to find an accurate representation of the entire chain of events in the face of such distortion?

It is unfortunate that the defrauders of truth have tricked people with lies and a large number of Muslims have fallen prey to them.