Did Asma bint Umays Rank Abu Bakr Above Imam Ali?

Response to the Nasibi-style article:

“Ali’s wife declares the superiority of Abu Bakr.”

Article being refuted:

https://www.twelvershia.net/2014/01/28/alis-ra-wife-declares-the-superiority-of-abu-bakr-ra/

They quote the story of Asma bint Umays:

Ali married Asma bint Umays after Abu Bakr. Her two sons, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and Muhammad ibn Ja‘far, began boasting. One said: “I am better than you, and my father is better than your father.” Ali told Asma to judge between them.

She said to Muhammad ibn Ja‘far:

ما رأيت شابا من العرب خيرا من أبيك

“I have not seen a young man among the Arabs better than your father.”

Meaning Ja‘far ibn Abi Talib.

Then she said to Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr:

وما رأيت كهلا من العرب خيرا من أبيك

“And I have not seen a mature/older man among the Arabs better than your father.”

Meaning Abu Bakr.

Then Ali said:

ما تركت لنا شيئا

“You left nothing for us.”

And she replied:

والله إن ثلاثة أنت أخسهم لخيار

“By Allah, if three men, and you are the least of them, then they are all excellent.”

References:

Fada’il al-Sahabah by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol. 2, p. 902, report 1720.

Ibn Sa‘d, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, vol. 4, p. 41.

al-Dhahabi, Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’, biography of Asma bint Umays.

Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah, vol. 4, p. 231.

Now the refutation:

1. This does not prove Abu Bakr’s superiority over Ali

The article is laughably stretching the text.

Asma was asked to judge between two boys boasting about their fathers:

Muhammad ibn Ja‘far

and

Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr.

So she praised both fathers in two different categories:

Ja‘far as a young man:

شابا

and Abu Bakr as a mature/older man:

كهلا

This is not a theological ranking of Abu Bakr over Ali.

This is not a nass.

This is not khilafah.

This is not imamah.

This is a mother calming two sons by praising both of their fathers.

Turning this into “Asma declared Abu Bakr superior to Ali” is desperate polemics.

2. Ali was not even one of the two fathers being compared

The dispute was between the sons of Ja‘far and Abu Bakr.

Ali was not the father of either child in that dispute.

So the main comparison was:

Ja‘far vs Abu Bakr

not:

Abu Bakr vs Ali.

Ali’s statement “You left nothing for us” is a playful comment, not a legal declaration of superiority.

The article turns family humour into aqidah.

That is not scholarship.

That is comedy.

3. The report is from al-Sha‘bi, not from Asma directly

The report begins:

عن الشعبي قال

“From al-Sha‘bi, who said…”

It is not:

Asma said to me.

Ali said to me.

I heard Asma.

I heard Ali.

So even if the chain to al-Sha‘bi is accepted, the story is still reported by al-Sha‘bi as a historical report.

And Sunni rijal sources themselves mention that al-Daraqutni said:

لم يسمع الشعبي من علي

“al-Sha‘bi did not hear from Ali.”

Reference:

Eكمال تهذيب الكمال / narrator entry of Amir al-Sha‘bi.

So do not pretend this is like Bukhari-Muslim level direct proof from Ali or Asma.

4. Even if accepted, it proves only praise, not imamah

Let us assume the story is accepted.

What does it prove?

That Asma praised Abu Bakr.

Fine.

Shia do not argue that Abu Bakr had no social status or that nobody ever praised him.

But praise does not prove divine appointment.

Praise does not cancel Ghadir.

Praise does not cancel Thaqalayn.

Praise does not cancel Manzilah.

Praise does not cancel Fatimah’s anger in Bukhari and Muslim.

Praise is not nass.

A family compliment is not khilafah.

5. Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr praising his own father proves nothing

The article also argues:

“How can Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr be Shia if he praised Abu Bakr?”

This is childish.

A son praising his biological father does not prove his political theology.

Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was raised in the house of Ali after Abu Bakr died.

Ali later appointed Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr as governor of Egypt.

So his closeness to Ali is a historical fact.

Trying to erase that because he praised his father is weak argumentation.

6. Asma washing Abu Bakr proves nothing

The article also says Asma washed Abu Bakr after his death.

So what?

She was his wife.

A wife fulfilling funeral duties does not prove Abu Bakr was superior to Ali.

This is the level of argument?

A wife washed her husband, therefore Shia are refuted?

This is not evidence.

This is emotional filler.

7. Compare this with real Sunni evidence about Ali

If they want superiority evidence, then bring prophetic declarations, not family banter.

The Prophet said about Ali:

أنت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا أنه لا نبي بعدي

“You are to me in the position of Harun to Musa, except that there is no Prophet after me.”

Reference:

Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 4416.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2404.

The Prophet said:

علي مني وأنا من علي ولا يؤدي عني إلا أنا أو علي

“Ali is from me and I am from Ali, and no one conveys on my behalf except myself or Ali.”

Reference:

Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3719.

And when people complained about Ali, the Prophet said:

إن عليا مني وأنا منه وهو ولي كل مؤمن بعدي

“Ali is from me and I am from him, and he is the wali of every believer after me.”

Reference:

Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3712.

So on one side we have direct prophetic statements about Ali.

On the other side they bring a family story where Asma praised Ja‘far and Abu Bakr in different age categories.

And they call this a refutation of Shia?

Honestly, laughable.

Final answer:

This narration does not prove Abu Bakr’s superiority over Ali.

It does not prove khilafah.

It does not prove imamah.

It does not refute Shia.

It only proves that Asma bint Umays praised Ja‘far and Abu Bakr while settling a boast between her two sons.

The article’s entire argument is built on exaggeration:

It turns “young man” and “mature man” into absolute superiority.

It turns family praise into theology.

It turns a historical anecdote into aqidah.

And it ignores clear prophetic reports about Ali.

Weak polemics do not erase strong hadith.

Family compliments do not defeat prophetic declarations.

Nasibi-style cherry-picking is not scholarship.