And this constitutes their consensus on giving ‘Uthmān precedence over ‘Alī. Hence Ayyūb, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and al-Dāraqutnī said:

“Whoever gives ‘Alī precedence over ‘Uthmān has disparaged the Emigrants and the Helpers.”

For if ‘Uthmān was not more entitled to precedence, yet they gave him precedence, they must have been either ignorant of his merit or unjust in preferring the less virtuous without any religious grounds for doing so. Whoever accuses them of ignorance and injustice has disparaged them.

If someone were to claim that they preferred ‘Uthmān because some of them harboured resentment towards ‘Alī, and that those harbouring this resentment wielded power—or make similar claims of the kind advanced by people who follow their own desires—he would be accusing them of being unable to uphold the truth, and claiming that the adherents of falsehood among them prevailed over the adherents of truth. All this when they were at the height of their honour and strength!

When ‘Umar died, Islam enjoyed unparalleled strength, honour, ascendancy, unity, and harmony. ‘Umar had strengthened the believers and humbled the unbelievers and hypocrites to such an extent that the strength and ascendancy he achieved are evident to anyone with even the slightest knowledge of these matters. Whoever portrays them, in such circumstances, as ignorant, unjust, or unable to uphold the truth has disparaged them and portrayed the best nation brought forth for mankind in a manner contrary to Allah’s testimony concerning them.

This is the foundation of “the doctrine of the Rāfidah (rejectionists).” The man who introduced rejectionism was a Jew who hypocritically professed Islam and insinuated subversive ideas among the ignorant, thereby undermining the very foundation of faith. Thus rejectionism has been one of the greatest gateways to hypocrisy and heretical unbelief. A man may initially withhold judgment, then become