Uthmān is superior to everyone who spoke against him. He is superior to Ibn Masūd, Ammār, Abū Dharr, [and] others (1) in many respects, as has been established by abundant evidence.

Thus, taking the words of one of lesser merit as grounds for impugning one of greater merit is no more justified than doing the reverse. Rather, if the matter between them can be discussed with knowledge and justice, then that should be done; otherwise, one should speak of what is known of their respective merit and religious commitment, while leaving to Allah the matter of what occurred and was disputed between them.

For this reason, they counseled (2) refraining from discussing the disputes that arose among them, for we will not be questioned about that (3).

As Umar ibn Abd al-Azīz said:

“That is blood from which Allah kept my hands clean, so I do not wish to stain my tongue with it.”

Another said:

“That was a nation that has passed away. It will have what it earned, and you will have what you have earned. You will not be questioned about what they used to do.”

[Surah al-Baqarah: 134]

However, when an innovator appears and falsely impugns them, they must be defended, and whatever invalidates his argument (4) must be set forth with knowledge and justice.

The same applies to what has been reported of Ammār speaking against Uthmān and to al-Hasan’s statement concerning him. It has been reported that Ammār said:

“Uthmān has indeed committed an egregious act of unbelief.”

It is also reported that al-Hasan ibn Alī reproached him [for that] (5), as did Alī, who said to him:

“O Ammār, do you disbelieve in a Lord in whom Uthmān believed?”

It has thus become clear that a believing man who is an ally of Allah may deem another believing man who is an ally of Allah an unbeliever, while being mistaken in this judgment. Nor does