sheets (1), so Uthmān appointed the same man whom Abū Bakr and Umar had appointed. Zayd ibn Thābit had memorized the final review, and the Companions therefore preferred to adopt what had been recited in it. Gabriel had reviewed the Quran with the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—twice during the year in which he died.

Furthermore, Ibn Masūd had objected to al-Walīd ibn Uqba when he drank wine. Ibn Masūd later came to Medina, and Uthmān offered to arrange a marriage for him.

The aim of these innovators is to declare the three caliphs unbelievers or flagrant sinners (2) on account of matters that would not warrant branding even a single ruler a flagrant sinner—so how could those men be branded as such? It is well known that an adversary’s mere statement [about his adversary] (3) does not establish grounds for impugning anyone; nor do the words of one (4) disputant concerning the other.

It may further be said: Even supposing that Ibn Masūd criticized Uthmān—may Allah be pleased with them both—regarding this as grounds for impugning Uthmān is no more justified than regarding it as grounds for impugning Ibn Masūd. If each of them exercised independent judgment in what he said, Allah rewarded him for his good deeds and forgave his error. If either of them committed a sin, we know that both are allies of Allah, that both are among the people of Paradise, and that neither will enter the Fire. Thus, Allah will not punish either one (5) of them in the Hereafter for his sin.