that the Messenger of Allah—Allah bless him and grant him peace—had mentioned a servant whom Allah had given the choice between this world and the Hereafter. He said: “The Messenger of Allah—Allah bless him and grant him peace—was himself the one given that choice, and Abū Bakr understood him better than any of us.”

The Prophet—Allah bless him and grant him peace—thus mentioned an unspecified servant without identifying him, and nothing in his wording indicated his identity. Yet Abū Bakr, through his thorough understanding of the Messenger’s intentions, knew that the Messenger was that servant. Thus, Abū Bakr was not singled out from the others for an inner meaning that contradicted the apparent meaning. Rather, his understanding agreed with it and did not contradict what the Prophet’s words conveyed or meant.

As for the report transmitted by certain liars, attributing to ‘Umar the statement:

“The Prophet—Allah bless him and grant him peace—and Abū Bakr would converse, while I was like a man of the Zanj between them.”

This is among the most obvious fabrications. No Muslim scholar has transmitted it in any scholarly work. Its falsehood is plain, for ‘Umar is the best of this community after Abū Bakr. He was one inwardly addressed and inspired, upon whose tongue and heart Allah placed the truth. He is the foremost of those in this community who are addressed and inspired. If he was present, hearing the words, yet understood the conversation no better than a man of the Zanj, could anyone else conceivably have understood it better than he did? What, then, of someone who never heard the Messenger’s words, but merely asserts that the meanings he claims are those intended? Such an assertion would not be accepted even without evidence against it; how, then, when evidence establishes the falsehood of the person making it?

As for the report concerning Hudhayfah, it is established in the Sahīh: “Hudhayfah was