(1) Ibn Tāhir al-Baghdādī states in *al-Farq bayn al-Firaq*, p. 45: “Our teacher Abū al-Hasan said: What unites the Kharijite sects is that they declare Ali, Uthmān, the participants in the Battle of the Camel, the two arbitrators, and anyone who approved of the arbitration and considered either or both arbitrators correct to be unbelievers.” Al-Asharī states in *Maqālāt al-Islāmiyyīn*, 2/126, that some Kharijites regard the unbelief of Ali and the two arbitrators as *kufr al-shirk* (polytheistic unbelief), whereas others regard it as *kufr al-ni‘ma* (ingratitude for divine blessings), not polytheistic unbelief. See *al-Milal wa-l-Nihal*, 1/106, 107, 109, and compare p. [0–9]18. See also Ibn Tāhir al-Baghdādī, *Usūl al-Dīn*, pp. [0–9]86–287; and al-Khayyāt, *al-Intisār*, p. 102. (2) A and B read: “all.” (3) Al-Khayyāt states in *al-Intisār*, p. [0–9]04: “As for his assertion—that is, Ibn al-Rāwandī’s—that no one among the Shi‘a considers it possible for all the Companions to be united in unbelief, all the Rāfidites have in fact claimed that every Companion fell into unbelief and polytheism except for a small handful—five or six. Their doctrine is so well known that there is no need to elaborate upon it.” See also pp. [0–9]00, 101, 102, 103. After discussing the Imāmī sects, al-Isfarāyīnī states in *al-Tabsīr fī al-Dīn*, p. [0–9]4: “You should know that all the Imāmī sects we have mentioned agree on declaring the Companions unbelievers.” Even the Jārūdiyya branch of the Zaydīs declare all the Companions unbelievers for failing to pledge allegiance to Ali. See *al-Tabsīr fī al-Dīn*, p. [0–9]6; and *al-Milal wa-l-Nihal*, 1/140. Confirmation of this may also be found in Shi‘a works; see the material Ahmad Amīn quotes from them in *Duhā al-Islām*, 3/249–250. In *Minhāj al-Sharī‘a fī al-Radd alā Ibn Taymiyya*, the author attempts to establish the permissibility of reviling Abū Bakr and Umar—may Allah be pleased with them both—and then states (vol. [0–9], p. [0–9]1): “They deemed lawful what Allah had made inviolable concerning the Prophet’s family and placed themselves ahead of the two of them. These are the arguments of one who reviles them. Those who accept these arguments regard them as sound, and there is no counterargument to them. Rather, they are reinforced by the two men’s violations of the Sharia and acts of opposition to Allah and His Messenger, as will be explained. Whoever declares a person who reviles them to be a sinner is in grave danger, for he falls under the report: ‘A judge who knowingly renders an unjust judgment will be in the Fire.’ This is because the person making that judgment knows that they deserve to be reviled on the basis of the traditions cited above.” The author further maintains (vol. [0–9], p. [0–9]8) that “the proposition that the class of believing Companions is superior to all other classes is a manifest fabrication.” He then states: “It is known with certainty from the widely transmitted reports that those martyred on the day of al-Taff—Yāqūt describes it as a tract of land on the outskirts of Kūfa—alongside the beloved grandson of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) were superior to the Companions martyred at Badr and elsewhere.”