—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—for that favor rests with Allah; no one is capable of recompensing him. Thus, the Prophet’s favor to Abū Bakr was religious and could not be repaid, whereas his favor to Alī was worldly and repayable, as well as religious.

The most God-fearing man referred to here had received no favor from anyone that could be repaid. This description applies to Abū Bakr, not Alī.

If it is said:

What is meant by this (1) is that he spent his wealth seeking Allah’s Face, not as repayment to someone who had conferred a favor upon him. Suppose a person gave recompense (2) to someone who had treated him kindly, and gave something else seeking Allah’s Face; the latter would then be something for which no one had rendered him a favor requiring repayment.

The reply is:

Granted that this is so. Nevertheless, if Alī had spent anything, he would have spent only as the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—directed him (3). Yet the Prophet had conferred upon him a favor that could be repaid. Therefore, his spending would not be wholly free of repayment in the way Abū Bakr’s spending was.

Alī was more God-fearing than others, but (4) Abū Bakr embodied the quality of God-fearingness more perfectly. Furthermore, the wording of the verse states that no created being had ever conferred upon him a favor that could be repaid. This describes someone who repays people for the kindness they show him, so that no created being retains any claim of favor over him. This description applied to Abū Bakr to a degree unmatched by any of the Emigrants. Indeed, among the Emigrants—Umar, Uthmān, Alī, and others—there was no man (5) who, before Islam or afterward, did more good for people, both personally and through his wealth, than Abū Bakr. He was