“I asked Ibn Abī Dāwūd about the ḥadith of the Bird (1). He replied, ‘If the ḥadith of the Bird were authentic, the Prophet’s ﷺ prophethood would be invalid, because it relates an act of treachery on the part of the Prophet’s doorkeeper—meaning Anas—and the Prophet’s doorkeeper cannot be treacherous (2).’

I say: This is deplorable wording and an ill-omened statement. The prophethood of Muḥammad ﷺ is an indisputable certainty, whether the report of the Bird is sound or not. What, then, is the supposed connection? Anas served the Prophet ﷺ before reaching puberty, before legal responsibility applied, so it is perfectly possible that the story of the Bird occurred during that period.

Even supposing he had already reached puberty, he was not infallible against error. He merely committed this minor offence on the basis of his own understanding. It is said that he barred ʿAlī from entering—so what of it? The prophetic supplication had already been uttered and answered. Even if he had detained or turned ʿAlī away several times, no one but ʿAlī could still be imagined as the one who would come in and eat with the Chosen One—unless, that is, the Prophet ﷺ intended by his words, ‘itini bi-aḥabbi khalqika ilayka, yaʾkulu maʿi (Bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You, that he may eat with me),’ a number of the elect, such that the description of being the most beloved to Allah would apply to them collectively, just as it is valid