disparaged the Emigrants and the Helpers.” This is reported from several scholars, including Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and al-Dāraqutnī.

The second position is that someone who gives ‘Alī precedence is not deemed an innovator, because ‘Uthmān and ‘Alī were close in rank. The Sunnah is the religious law: what Allah and His Messenger have prescribed as religion, commanding it as either obligatory or recommended. It is therefore impermissible to believe otherwise. A recommended act may, however, be omitted, though it is impermissible to believe that it is not recommended. Knowledge that it is recommended is a communal obligation, lest any part of the religion be lost. Since the “scriptural evidence” established the obligation to follow Abū Bakr and ‘Umar and give them precedence, it was impermissible to abandon this.

As for (‘Uthmān, some of the Zaydī Shi‘ah and the Khārijites also hated him, reviled him, or declared him an unbeliever, alongside the Rāfidah. As for (‘Alī, the Khārijites and many of the Umayyads and their partisans who fought and reviled him hated and reviled him, or declared him an unbeliever. The Khārijites declare ‘Uthmān, ‘Alī, and all other members of the community unbelievers.

As for “‘Alī’s partisans,” who supported him after the arbitration, and “Mu‘āwiyah’s partisans,” who supported him after the arbitration, there was opposition between the two sides, with some cursing one another and some declaring one another unbelievers. The partisans who were with ‘Alī did not display any disparagement of Abū Bakr and ‘Umar, nor did they include anyone who gave ‘Alī precedence over Abū Bakr and ‘Umar. Reviling ‘Uthmān was not widespread among them; rather, some would do so, and others would rebut them. Likewise, preferring ‘Alī over him was not prevalent among them. By contrast, reviling ‘Alī was