of negation. Thus sophistry ultimately amounts to denying the known truth (1), or denying knowledge of it.

The third is the assertion of those who make realities dependent upon beliefs. They say: “Whoever believes the universe to be eternal, it is eternal; and whoever believes it to be originated, it is originated.” If what is meant by this (2) is that it is eternal in his view and originated in his view (3), then this is correct, for that is indeed his belief. Sophistry, however, lies in intending that it is actually so (4) in external reality.

That being so, to impugn what is known about the Messenger—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—in relation to the three caliphs, as well as what is known of their conduct after him, on the basis of reports narrated by the Rāfidah, regarding which the overwhelming majority of the ummah (5) accuse them of lying, is among the gravest forms of sophistry. Whoever relates virtues of Muʿāwiyah and his companions that would entail preferring him to ʿAlī and his companions is a liar, a purveyor of falsehood, and a sophist.

Even so, the lies of the Rāfidah who (6) relate (7) reports that impugn the faith of the three caliphs and entail ʿAlī’s infallibility are graver than the lies of one who relates reports by which he gives Muʿāwiyah preference over ʿAlī; and their sophistry is greater still. For, in many respects, the three caliphs’ faith is more plainly evident than ʿAlī’s superiority over Muʿāwiyah, and affirming ʿAlī’s infallibility is further from the truth than affirming Muʿāwiyah’s superiority.