if it is said: If it is established that this narration is false regarding the Imam, then why did the Imam refuse al-Manṣūr's request to unite the people on his book (al-Muwaṭṭaʾ) and did not comply with it? I say: The best account I have come across is what al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr mentioned in (Sharḥ Ikhtiṣār ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth) (p. 31), which is that the Imam said: "Indeed, the people have gathered and have become aware of things we have not." This is a testament to his complete knowledge and fairness, as Ibn Kathīr, may Allāh have mercy on him, said. It is established that disagreement is entirely evil and not a mercy, but some of it is blameworthy, such as the disagreement of those fanatically devoted to schools of thought, and some of it is not blameworthy, such as the disagreement among the Companions and those who followed them from the Imams. May Allāh gather us among them and guide us to follow them. It becomes clear that the disagreement among the Companions is different from the disagreement of the imitators. In summary: the Companions disagreed out of necessity, but they would denounce disagreement and avoid it whenever possible. As for the imitators - even though they could avoid it, at least a large section of them - they do not agree nor strive for it; rather, they acknowledge it. Thus, there is a vast difference between the two types of disagreement. That is the difference in terms of cause. As for the difference in terms of effect, it is clearer, for the Companions (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhum) - despite their known differences in branches - were extremely diligent in maintaining the appearance of unity, staying far away from anything that would divide or fracture the ranks. For instance, among them were those who believed in the legitimacy of reciting aloud the basmalah and those who did not