Waqqās, ‘Ā’ishah, Sahl ibn Sa‘d al-Sā‘idī, and others like them, whom the Rāfidah impugn. If the reports of these men and women and others like them are weak, every reported virtue of ‘Alī is invalidated, and the Rāfidah have no proof. If their reports are authentic, then the virtues of ‘Alī are established, as are those of others whose virtues they narrated, such as Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthmān, and others.”

If the Rāfidī says, “‘Alī’s virtues are established among the Shia through mass-transmitted reports”—just as they say that his designation as imam is established through mass-transmitted reports—he is told:

“As for those ‘Shia’ who were not Companions, they neither saw the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, nor heard his words. Their reports have incomplete, disconnected chains of transmission; unless they trace them back to the Companions, they are not authentic. The Companions to whom the Rāfidah profess allegiance are only a small group—a little over ten, or roughly that number. Their transmission does not establish mass transmission, since collusion is possible among so few people. Yet the Rāfidah impugn the overwhelming majority of the Companions who transmitted accounts of their virtues. Moreover, if they consider lying and concealment possible on the part of the majority whom the Quran praises, then all the more readily may they consider these possible on the part of a small group.”

Furthermore, if the Rāfidī says, “Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthmān sought leadership and kingship, and thus wronged others by assuming authority,” the reply to them is:

“These men did not fight any Muslim over authority. Rather, they fought the apostates and the disbelievers. They were the ones who shattered the power of Chosroes and Caesar, conquered the lands of Persia, established Islam, strengthened faith and its adherents, and humbled disbelief and its adherents.”