As for consensus, reliable reports establish that ʿUmar entrusted the matter to consultation among six men, and that three left it to the remaining three: ʿUthmān, ʿAlī, and ʿAbd al-Rahmān. These three agreed that ʿAbd al-Rahmān would choose one of the other two. ʿAbd al-Rahmān spent three days consulting the Muslims, swearing that he had slept little during that time (1).

Those empowered to decide the community’s affairs had gathered (2) in Medina, including even the leaders of the Helpers. They subsequently agreed to pledge allegiance to ʿUthmān, without being swayed by desire or fear. It follows that ʿUthmān must have been the most entitled to the office, and whoever was most entitled was also the most excellent. For the most excellent of people is the one most entitled to take the place of the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar.

We say that he must have been the most entitled because, otherwise, this would necessarily imply either ignorance or injustice on their part. If he was not the most entitled, and someone else had a stronger claim, then, if they did not know this, they were ignorant; if they knew it but passed over the person most entitled (3) in favour of someone else, they were unjust.

Thus, it is clear that if ʿUthmān was not the most entitled, this would necessarily imply either their ignorance or their injustice. Both possibilities are ruled out: they knew ʿUthmān and ʿAlī better than we do, knew better than we do what the Messenger had said about them, and understood better than we do what the Quran indicated concerning this matter. Moreover, they were the best of generations. It is therefore impossible for us to know more than they did about such matters, especially since their need to know them was greater than ours. For if they had been ignorant of matters concerning the fundamentals of their religion while we knew them, we would have been superior to them—and that is impossible.