Why did Abu Bakr supplant Ali?

Answer 1

The question depends on whether you believe in the Sunni or Shi'a view of the succession of the caliphs. From the Sunni view, Abu Bakr was the legitimate caliph elected by the community after Muhammed's death, so he did not supplant Ali. The Shi'a view holds that the succession should have remained in Muhammed's family, and so Ali should have been chosen. Ali did eventually become recognized as caliph, but not before Abu Bakr and two others (Umar and Uthman) held the title.

Answer 2

Consider the folowing priorities:

Abu Bakr was older that Ali
Abu Bakr was father in-law to the Prophet, Ali was son in-law
Abu Bakr was influential and brought many early converts while Ali was still a boy
Abu Bakr was a wealthy man and spent all his wealth in the cause while Ali remained poor.
Abu Bakr accompanied the Prophet during Hegra while Ali stayed in Mecca.
Both were not shortlisted as successor/ruler as the right to rule belong to the people of Madinah but the leaders of Madinah had chosen Abu Bakr instead as an honour to the Muhajirin Muslims.

Answer 3

all are brothers ... no difference ... as long as justice was applied 100 % between people


and Ali (KAW) ruled later on

Answer 4

I would answer you if I knew what you meant my supplant!!

Answer 5

Muslims choosed him

Answer 6

because the muslims needed a new kaleefa.

Answer 7

i love you
you love me
we're a happy fam_i_ly
with a great big hug
and a kiss from me to you
won't you say you love me to

Answer 8

I got your number now barney