or anything else—you will find that he holds corrupt beliefs and declares anyone who disagrees with him to be an unbeliever, or curses him. The renegade Kharijites are the foremost exemplars of such people in declaring the adherents of the Sunnah and the Muslim community to be unbelievers and in fighting them.

The second respect concerns one who fights (1) for a doctrine that he advocates, even though it conflicts with the Sunnah and the Muslim community—as occurred with those involved in the conflicts of the Camel, Siffīn, al-Harrah, al-Jamājim, and others. He imagines that fighting will secure the desired benefit. Yet that benefit is not secured through fighting; rather, the resulting harm becomes even greater than before. In the end, it becomes clear to them what the Lawgiver had indicated from the outset.

Some of them had not received the Lawgiver’s texts, or did not consider them authentically established. Some regarded them as abrogated, as Ibn Hazm did. Others interpreted them differently, as often occurs with many qualified scholars exercising independent judgment in relation to many texts.

It is for these [three] (2) reasons that some (3) who reason from evidence refrain from acting upon certain texts: either they do not believe those texts to be authentically established from the Prophet—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—or they do not consider them probative for the particular issue in question, or they believe them to have been abrogated.

Among the matters that must be understood is that the causes of these tribulations are shared among the parties involved. Certain impulses then arise in hearts, preventing them from recognizing and seeking the truth. Such tribulations are therefore akin to a state of jāhiliyyah (ignorance), for in jāhiliyyah the truth is neither recognized nor sought. Islam came with beneficial knowledge and righteous action—with recognition of the truth and the resolve to pursue it. It may happen that some