(1) In the recension marked (M) it reads “Bakīr,” which is clearly an error. See its correction in At-Tahdhīb, vol. 1, p. 481. (2) This hadith is fabricated. Ibn al-Jawzī records it in Al-Mawḍū‘āt (1/319), stating: “This is a fabricated report against the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). From Bakr ibn Khunaynis it is only transmitted by Abū al-Ḥārith, whose name is Naṣr ibn Ḥammād.” Yaḥyā declared him “a liar,” Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj said “the report has disappeared,” and al-Nasā’ī assessed him as “not reliable.” See also Al-Mīzān (4/250–251) and al-‘Uqaylī in Al-Ḍu‘afā’ (4/301): “Naṣr ibn Ḥammād is a fabricator.” Al-Daraqutnī includes him among the abandoned narrators in Al-Ḍu‘afā’ wa-al-Matrūkīn (p. 380). As for Bakr ibn Khunaynis al-Kūfī, al-Daraqutnī calls him “abandoned,” al-Nasā’ī and others “weak,” and Abū Dāwūd and Ibn Ma‘īn dismiss him as “worthless.” See At-Tahdhīb (1/481–482) and Al-Mīzān (1/344). Al-Ḏhahabī cites him in Al-‘Ulūw (p. 55), quoting Abū al-Ḥārith: “Unknown; Bakr is weak; his teacher al-Maṣlūb is unreliable; the report is not authentic; may Allah curse anyone who opposes al-Ṣiddīq.” The statement that Abū al-Ḥārith is “unknown” requires caution, since al-Ḏhahabī had already profiled him in Al-Mīzān and presented scholars’ views on his reliability. Al-Maṣlūb—Muḥammad ibn Sa‘īd, who heard from Ibn Nusayy—is a Damascene. Al-Ḏhahabī in Al-Mīzān reports: “He died accused of heresy and was crucified.” Al-Nasā’ī: “Not trustworthy or reliable.” Al-Thawrī and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal: “Liar.” Abū Dāwūd quotes Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal: “He deliberately fabricated hadith.” Al-Nasā’ī adds: “The four well-known fabricators are Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā of Medina; al-Wāqidī of Baghdad; Muqātil ibn Sulaimān of Khorasan; and Muḥammad ibn Sa‘īd of ash-Shām.” Al-Daraqutnī and others label him “abandoned.” See Al-Mīzān (3/561–562) and At-Tahdhīb (9/184–185). Al-Ṭabarānī transmits it in Al-Kabīr (20/67–68) via a chain no less defective, including Abū al-‘Aṭūf, Jarāḥ ibn al-Manhāl al-Jazarī—whom al-Bukhārī and Muslim describe as a denier of hadith—and al-Nasā’ī and al-Daraqutnī deem “abandoned.” Ibn Ḥibbān: “He lied in hadith and drank wine.” See Al-Mīzān (1/390). The chain also contains al-Wudayn ibn ‘Aṭā’: Ibn Sa‘d calls him “weak,” Abū Ḥātim says he is “known but his narrations are rejected,” and al-Jawzjānī finds his hadith “weak.” See Al-Mīzān (4/334). Finally, Abū Bakr al-Ṣiddīq (may Allah be pleased with him) enjoys virtues and merits unmatched by any other companion, transmitted through exceptionally sound chains, as documented in his virtues by al-Bukhārī, Muslim, and other leading muhaddithīn.