One of the most significant indications of this contradiction is the complete control exercised by Aishah over the private chamber of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and the burial of her father, Abu Bakr, within it.
Assessment of the Inheritance of the Chamber
Among the evidence challenging the hadith “We, the prophets, leave no inheritance…” is that Aishah took possession of the Prophet’s chamber as if by inheritance.
If, as Abu Bakr claimed, the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family) left no inheritance and whatever he left was charity, why then did Aishah exercise proprietary authority over property that—by Abu Bakr’s reasoning—should have been classified as charitable endowment? And why, relying on this assumed ownership, did she prevent the burial of Imam al-Hasan (peace be upon him) beside the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)?
This incident is firmly established in reliable Sunni and Shia sources.
Mulla Mahdi al-Naraqi states:
“When Aishah prevented Imam al-Hasan (peace be upon him) from being buried in the chamber of the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family), Ibn Abbas or Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah—accounts vary—said to her:
A wife who leaves no children inherits only one-eighth of her husband’s immovable estate. Since the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) numbered nine, each wife’s share amounted to one-ninth of that eighth—meaning each would receive only one-seventy-second of the chamber.
Despite this, Aishah took control of the entire chamber and buried her father there. The same occurred with Hafsah, who also claimed exclusive control of her chamber and later buried Umar within it, though her rightful share was similarly one-seventy-second.”
The Sunni Argument for the Burial of Abu Bakr and Umar in the Chambers
Some Sunni scholars claim that Aishah and Hafsah buried their fathers only within the portion that constituted their inheritance. Others assert that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had donated these chambers to them and that Abu Bakr acknowledged this alleged donation.
In response:
How did Abu Bakr accept an unproven claim of donation—one lacking witnesses or substantiation—while rejecting Lady Fatimah’s (peace be upon her) claim to Fadak, despite her presenting witnesses who testified to her ownership?
No Sunni or Shia historical or hadith source records any witness supporting the alleged donation to Aishah or Hafsah, nor any legal evidence establishing it.
The Contradiction Between Abu Bakr’s Ruling on Fadak and His Treatment of the Chambers
If it is argued that Abu Bakr lacked knowledge of the Prophet’s grant of Fadak but relied on “certain knowledge” regarding the chambers and that a ruler may judge based on such certainty even without witnesses, then consistency demands that he act on certainty in all cases.
There is no doubt that the claim of Lady Fatimah (peace be upon her), supported by Amir al-Muminin (peace be upon him), the two grandsons al-Hasan and al-Hussain (peace be upon them), Umm Ayman, and Asma bint Umays, would have provided him with certainty. He was fully aware of their truthfulness.
He had repeatedly heard the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) declare:
“Ali is with the truth, and the truth is with Ali, and they shall never be separated.”
Thus, if Abu Bakr was relying on “personal certainty,” consistency required him to accept their testimony. Rejecting the certainty produced by their statements while accepting the unsubstantiated claims of Aishah and Hafsah exposes a clear contradiction.
The Ruling of Uthman Concerning the Chambers
Further evidence that Abu Bakr treated the chambers as inheritance—not donation—is the ruling of Uthman when he prevented Aishah and Hafsah from using them. He said:
“You yourselves testified that the property of the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family) is not inherited. How, then, do you now claim inheritance? By God, I do not doubt that your previous testimony was incorrect.”
The Community’s Double Standard: Deference to Aishah and Opposition to Lady Fatimah (peace be upon her)
Sayed Ibn Tawus notes:
“The community’s readiness to follow Aishah in the Battle of Jamal and its refusal to support Lady Fatimah (peace be upon her) reflect a profound deviation from the Household of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and a state of grave misguidance.”
Quranic Proof of the Prophet’s Ownership of the Chambers
Al-Humaydi narrates that the land on which the mosque and chambers were constructed was either gifted to or purchased by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Thus, the Quranic verse declaring:
“O you who believe, do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is granted to you…”
proves that the chambers belonged to him—not to his wives, who owned no property in Madinah, being originally from Makkah.
Nonetheless, after the Prophet’s passing, Aishah claimed that the chamber in which he was buried belonged to her personally, and Abu Bakr immediately granted her full authority over it while denying Lady Fatimah (peace be upon her) Fadak and rejecting the testimony affirming her ownership.
Conflict with Quranic Laws of Inheritance
Al-Humaydi further notes:
Abu Bakr’s ruling contradicted the explicit Quranic laws of inheritance, which the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) was not exempt from.
If Aishah inherited the chamber by virtue of residency, then why should the other wives not inherit their respective chambers? And if she inherited a chamber, why was Lady Fatimah (peace be upon her) denied her inheritance?
Furthermore, who authorized the burial of individuals within the Prophet’s chamber without seeking consent from all heirs, when the Quran stipulates:
“Do not enter the Prophet’s houses unless permission is given.”
If the chamber was an inheritance, why was collective permission from all heirs not required?
If it was public property, why were others not allowed to bury their dead there?
Refuting the Claim That the Chambers Belonged to the Wives
Some argue that the chambers belonged to the Prophet’s wives because they are attributed to them in historical references. But this is merely a customary attribution based on residence, not ownership—similar to references to “the house of such-and-such tribe,” even when the tribe does not legally own it.
The Quran confirms this interpretation in the verse of Talaq, which directs divorced wives not to be expelled from their husbands’ houses unless they commit a manifest indecency.
Thus, the chambers legally belonged to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), not his wives.
The Hadith: “Between My House and My Pulpit”
Numerous Sunni sources, including al-Humaydi and Muslim, narrate the Prophet’s statement:
“Between my house and my pulpit is a garden from the gardens of Paradise.”
In all variants, he says “my house”—never “the house of Aishah.”
Reports from Ibn Abbas and Tabari likewise confirm that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) referred to the chamber as “my chamber.”
Conclusion
Based on the cumulative textual, historical, legal, and Quranic evidence, the hadith “We, the prophets, leave no inheritance…” attributed to Abu Bakr stands in clear conflict with:
- Quranic inheritance laws,
- the Prophet’s established practice (peace be upon him and his family),
- the realities of property ownership in Madinah,
- and the conduct of those who transmitted or relied upon this hadith.
Accordingly, its authenticity cannot be upheld.
