quality:corruption, linguistic:voice_change
Views

Abu Bakr terminated the status of purity of Muhammad's kin by forcing them to rely on general alms which the prophet had forbidden for them in his lifetime. At the same time, Abu Bakr allowed the prophet's widows to inherit his quarters in Medina. In particular, he granted his daughter Aisha some properties in the Aliya part of Medina and in Bahrain. By maintaining their status, Abu Bakr might have signaled to the Muslim community that his daughter Aisha and the rest of Muhammad's widows were the true heirs of Muhammad, according to Aslan. Madelung holds a similar view.

Madelung suggests that the caliphate of Abu Bakr was inherently inconsistent with maintaining the privileged status of Muhammad's kin and applying the Quranic rules of inheritance to them. As phrased by Mavani, if the Banu Hashim had inherited Muhammad's material property, then they might have also been expected to inherit the spiritual authority of Muhammad. Similar views are voiced by Jafri, Margoliouth, Ayoub, and Lalani, while El-Hibri does not view the saga of Fadak as a mere financial dispute. According to Aslan, Abu Bakr's actions are often regarded as a political move to weaken Muhammad's clan and strip his kin from their privileged status. Aslan also argues that Abu Bakr's efforts were intended to undermine Ali's claim to the caliphate. These efforts, writes Aslan, are partly explained by Abu Bakr's conviction that the caliphate must reside outside of Muhammad's clan and partly by the personal enmity between Abu Bakr and Ali. Madelung, Abbas, and Anthony have noted the poor relations between the two men.