Explanation of the author's statement: "Even though some of the people of the Sunnah had differed regarding 'Uthman and 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both) - after their agreement on prioritizing Abu Bakr and 'Umar"

The Shaykh :"Even though some of the people of the Sunnah had differed regarding 'Uthman and 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both) after their agreement on prioritizing Abu Bakr and 'Umar" They differed regarding 'Uthman and 'Ali. "Which of them is better? So some groups prioritized 'Uthman and remained silent" How do we describe the opinion of these people? We say: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman, then who?
The student: 'Ali.

The Shaykh : They do not remain silent. He says: We say: These three, and we remain silent.
He says: "Or they disparaged 'Ali" Or they disparaged 'Ali is better than the word "they disparaged" (wa-rabbi'u) because it is said "they remained silent and disparaged," which is a contradiction. So the correct wording is "or they disparaged 'Ali," meaning that sometimes they remain silent and sometimes they disparage 'Ali. That is, add the hamza: "disparaged" (rabbu).
"And some groups prioritized 'Ali": So they said: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Ali, then 'Uthman. And this is one of the opinions of the people of the Sunnah.
He said: "And some groups refrained from judgment". So they said: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar. And they refrained from judging which is better: 'Uthman or 'Ali? And this is different from the first opinion, in which they said they prioritized Abu Bakr and 'Umar and remained silent. And 'Uthman and they remained silent is different from the first opinion. So the opinions are therefore four:
The well-known opinion: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman, then 'Ali.
Another opinion: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman, then silence, then silence. Okay, and sometimes these people disparage 'Ali. Okay, sometimes they disparage 'Ali, and if they disparage 'Ali, they agree with the well-known opinion. If they disparage 'Ali, they agree with the well-known opinion. We do not count this as an independent opinion.
The fourth opinion, the third: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Ali, then 'Uthman.
The fourth opinion: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then we refrain from judging which is better: 'Uthman or 'Ali. And here there is a difference between those who prioritize Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman and remain silent, because these people say: We do not say 'Ali is better, nor do we say 'Uthman is better. But we do not see that anyone takes precedence over 'Uthman and 'Ali in virtue after Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So these are four opinions of the people of the Sunnah.
But the author said: "But the matter of the people of the Sunnah settled on prioritizing 'Uthman, then 'Ali". This is what the matter of the people of the Sunnah settled on, so they said: The best of this Ummah after its Prophet is Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman, then 'Ali. Okay.
He said: "But although this issue - the issue of 'Uthman and 'Ali - is not among the principles in which the dissenting party is declared misguided according to the majority of the people of the Sunnah". Meaning, the preference between 'Ali, between 'Uthman and 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both) is not among the principles, it is not among the principles of the people of the Sunnah in which the dissenting party is declared misguided. So if someone says, for example: That 'Ali is better than 'Uthman, do we say: That he is misguided? We do not say: This is one of the opinions of the people of the Sunnah, and we do not say anything about it. Yes, so the dissenting party is not declared misguided in this.
"But the issue in which one is declared misguided is the issue of the caliphate"
One is declared misguided in the issue of the caliphate. So we must say: The caliph after our Prophet in his Ummah is Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman, then 'Ali. And whoever says that the caliphate is for 'Ali without these three is misguided. And whoever says: That it is for 'Ali after Abu Bakr and 'Umar is also misguided. Why? Because he contradicts the consensus of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). For the Companions unanimously agreed that the caliph after 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) is 'Uthman, and they pledged allegiance to him, and the matter settled on that for more than twelve years. All this while the Muslims believed that their Imam is 'Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them). For this reason he said: "And only, but the issue in which one is declared misguided is the issue of the caliphate, and that is because they believe that the caliph after the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is Abu Bakr" - And what do you have? - Abu Bakr and 'Umar is wrong, then 'Umar. Write, write as we said: Abu Bakr, then 'Umar, then 'Uthman, then 'Ali.
This is what the Muslims agreed upon in the issue of the caliphate, the people of the Sunnah.
He said: "And whoever criticizes the caliphate of any of these four is more misguided than his own donkey"
The one who criticizes the caliphate of any of these four and says: That he does not deserve the caliphate! He is more misguided than his own donkey.
The author used this expression because it is the expression of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him).
He said: . And there is no doubt that he is more misguided than his own donkey. And the donkey was mentioned because it is the most dull of animals, the most dull of animals absolutely is the donkey. And so some of our contemporary scholars said to me that it is the most intelligent of animals, yes, most intelligent - with the letter dal - that it indicates quickly. So I said to him: Why? He said: Because it does not have, because it is dull, it does not have thinking, it loses its indication, and indication depends on sense. So if you are thinking, you walk in the market and you are like this. Yes, you do not know what passed by you in the market or what is in front of you, or nothing. But the donkey is dull, it does not lose it because it does not have thinking. But this in any case may be agreed upon or may not be agreed upon. The known thing is that the most intelligent and most indicating thing is...
The student: The donkey.

The Shaykh : No, the partridge, the partridge. For this reason the example is struck with it, and it is said: So-and-so, eh? A partridge, a partridge, meaning intelligent. Yes? And he said: Who mocks the Banu Tamim?
"Tamim, by the paths of baseness, is more intelligent than the partridge ** And if it had taken the paths of nobility, it would have been lost" Yes? And the poet says what Allah willed, yes.
In any case, we say: He said "more misguided than his own donkey" because the donkey is dull, so it is the least of animals in understanding. Otherwise, how can we criticize the caliphate of these caliphs when the Companions agreed upon it? And is this not a disparagement of the Muhajireen and the Ansar who pledged allegiance to one who does not deserve the caliphate? So the criticism, therefore, of the caliphate of any of these four is a criticism of all the Companions. Yes.

The questioner : Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : Who said: That 'Ali is better than 'Uthman.

The Shaykh : Yes

The questioner : Who said in it: Shi'ism?

The Shaykh : No, no, it is not said, as long as this is an opinion of the people of the Sunnah and the community, it is not said...
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : No.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : Never, because the deviant Shi'ism is not from the opinions of the people of the Sunnah and the community. But those who said: That 'Ali is better, they took hadiths that were transmitted in this matter indicating his virtue. But we must know that one who is distinguished by a virtue does not necessitate that he has the absolute virtue. So virtue is two types: absolute virtue and restricted virtue. So if the Messenger (may the prayer and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: and all the Companions were present, so he gave it to 'Ali ibn Abi Talib. Do we say that with this distinction he became better than all the Companions who were present? No, he was distinguished by this distinction. Then the Messenger said: And we know that all the Companions love Allah and His Messenger, and Allah and His Messenger love them.
This is a distinction that did not occur for Abu Bakr or for anyone else. But does this specific distinction necessitate that he is the best of the Companions? No. Just as we also see among us now, you find, for example, a man, a man who has a distinction in worship, a worshipper through whom Allah brings much good, such as the healing of the sick or the like of that. And you find others who have other multiple virtues, and they prefer him absolutely. So do we say: That if he prefers them in this, he is better than them in everything? Never. Similarly, some people through whom Allah causes miracles to occur, do we say that this one through whom Allah caused this miracle to occur is better than others absolutely? The days of patience in which the worker has the reward of fifty of the Companions, do we say that this necessitates that we are better than the Companions absolutely? No, and by this, draw the analogy.