and as for Muslim, the number they highlighted (1709) is more astonishing than the previous one; because at the beginning of it, Muslim (6/127) states: "Pledge allegiance to me that you will not associate anything with Allāh, and you will not commit adultery..." the ḥadīth (1), and this is another ḥadīth of ʿUbādah from a different chain, and it does not contain a single sentence from the ḥadīth of the chapter! What then can the sincere critic say about such ignorant people who trade in their ignorance?! If they were scholars and traded with their knowledge, they would benefit the people and harm themselves, but as for them: "they went astray and led others astray!" We seek refuge in Allāh from all of them. Furthermore, this ḥadīth contains many benefits and jurisprudential issues, which scholars have discussed in their commentaries, especially al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī in "Fatḥ al-Bārī." What concerns me here is that it contains a clear refutation of the Khawārij who rebelled against the Commander of the Faithful ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu); for they knew without any doubt or suspicion that they did not see from him (clear disbelief), yet they deemed it permissible to fight him and shed his blood and those with him from the Companions and the Followers, forcing him (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu) to fight them and eradicate their influence, with only a few surviving, and then they betrayed him (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu) as is well known in history. The point is that they established a bad precedent in Islam, making rebellion against Muslim rulers a religion throughout time and days, despite the Prophet's (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) warning against them in many ḥadīths, including his saying (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam), "The Khawārij are the dogs of Hellfire" (2)