It is also related in the Sahih that, on the Day of al-Saqīfa, Umar said to Abu Bakr—may Allah be pleased with them both:
“Rather, you are our master, the best of us, and the one among us most beloved to the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace.” (1)
This is confirmed by the widely transmitted reports found through multiple chains in the Sahih collections, according to which the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—said:
“Were I to take an intimate friend from among the people of the earth, I would take Abu Bakr as my intimate friend; but instead, there is the bond of affection in Islam.” (2)
This shows that, among all the people of the earth, no one had a greater claim than Abu Bakr to his love and affection. Whoever was dearest to the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—was dearest to Allah; and whoever was dearest to Allah and His Messenger has the greatest claim to the believers’ love, for they love what Allah and His Messenger love [just as Allah and His Messenger love it] (3). The proofs that Abu Bakr has the greatest claim to such love are numerous—quite apart from the claim that one of lesser merit must be loved while one of greater merit need not be loved.
As for his statement:
“Opposing him is incompatible with love for him, while complying (4) with his commands constitutes love for him (5). He must therefore be obeyed, and that is what (6) the imamate means.”
The response may be given in several ways:
First: If love entails obedience, then love for the Prophet’s near relatives is obligatory, and obedience to them must likewise be obligatory. Fatima would therefore also have to be an imam. If this is false, then this (7) is equally false.
Second: Love does not necessarily entail the imamate at the time when that love is obligatory. It does not follow that