anyone regarded as an example to follow who doubted the superiority of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar over ʿUthmān and ʿAlī.

The majority, however, considered ʿUthmān superior, and this became the settled position (1) of Ahl al-Sunnah. It is the position of the scholars of hadith, the masters of asceticism and Sufism, and the leading jurists, such as al-Shāfiʿī and his followers, Ahmad and his followers, and Abū Hanīfah and his followers. It is also one of the two positions transmitted from Mālik, and the one adopted by his followers (2).

Mālik said:

“I do not regard someone who became involved in bloodshed as equal to someone who did not.”

Al-Shāfiʿī and others said that by this he meant the Hāshimī governor of Medina, who had beaten Mālik, using the issue of divorce pronounced under coercion as the ostensible reason.

This is also the position of the great majority of the scholars of speculative theology: the Karrāmiyyah, Kullābiyyah, Ashʿariyyah, and Muʿtazilah.

Ayyūb al-Sikhtiyānī said:

“Whoever does not consider ʿUthmān superior to ʿAlī has disparaged the Emigrants and the Helpers.”

Ahmad, al-Dāraqutnī, and others likewise stated that they had unanimously accorded precedence to ʿUthmān. Hence, scholars differed over whether someone who did not consider ʿUthmān superior should be regarded as an innovator. There are two views on this, both transmitted from Ahmad.

If the evidence establishes ʿUthmān’s superiority, the other rankings are established all the more firmly.

As for the approach based on transmitted authority (3), it rests on textual evidence and consensus. Regarding textual evidence, the two Sahīh collections report that Ibn ʿUmar said:

“While the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—was still alive, we used to say: ‘The best of the Prophet’s community after him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is Abū Bakr, then ʿUmar, then ʿUthmān’ (4).”