When word of this reached Alī, he said:
“Alas for Ibn Umm al-Fadl! How quick he is to seize upon slips.”
Thus, Alī burned a group of people with fire. If what Abū Bakr did was objectionable, then Alī’s action was even more objectionable. But if Alī’s action was of a kind for which leaders are not to be censured, then Abū Bakr has an even greater right not to be censured.
[The Rāfidī’s claim that Abū Bakr was unaware of most of the rulings of Islamic law, and the response to it]
(Chapter)
(1)
The Rāfidī (2) said:
“Most of the rulings of Islamic law were unknown to him. He did not (3) know the ruling on collateral inheritance, and he said: ‘I shall express my own opinion concerning it. If it is (4) correct, it is from Allah; and if it is (5) wrong, it is from me and Satan.’ He also issued seventy different rulings concerning inheritance by a grandfather, which demonstrates his deficient knowledge.”
The response is that this is one of the gravest fabrications. How (6) could most of the rulings of Islamic law have been unknown to him, when no one other than he passed judgment or issued legal opinions in the presence of the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace? The Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—consulted no one among his Companions (7) more than he consulted him and Umar. Nor was anyone more closely associated with the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—than he was, followed by Umar.