He remained thus until he died in Syria during the caliphate of Umar.

He remained thus until he died in Syria during the caliphate of Umar.[^6] If that was a mistake (may Allah protect the Muslims from its evil) as Umar put it (and he was one of its architects, and knew what happened to the Muslims as a result of it), and if that succession to the caliphate was illegal (as Imam ‘Ali described it when he said that he was the lawful nominee for it), and if that acclamation was unjust (as according to Saad ibn Ubada the leader of al-Ansar who left al-Jamaah because of it), and if that acclamation was unlawful due to the absence of the leading figures of the , including al-Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet, so what is the evidence and proof which supports the legality of the Abu Bakr's succession to the caliphate?

The answer is that there is no evidence or proof with the Sunnis and al-Jamaah. Therefore, what the Shiites say regarding this issue is right, because it has been established that the Sunnis have the text which proves the succession of ‘Ali to the caliphate, but they deliberately misinterpret it to maintain the Companion's honor.

Thus, the just and fair person has no choice but to accept the text, especially if he knows the circumstances that surrounded the case.[^7] The disagreement between Fatimah and Abu Bakr The subject is agreed upon by the two parties, and the fair and sensible person has no choice but to judge Abu Bakr as being wrong, that is if he did not admit his injustice and bad treatment of the leading lady.

Anyone who cares to follow the events of that tragedy and studies its various facts will recognize that Abu Bakr deliberately hurt al-Zahra and denied her argument so that she could not protest against him - supported by the texts of al-Ghadir and others - regarding the lawful right for her husband and cousin to the succession of the caliphate.