I wish to differentiate between a researcher who investigates issues from the perspective of their history and political and social impact, and a preacher who speaks in support of a doctrine or criticizes it. The historian is not concerned with what the adherents of this doctrine did, or whether they are right or wrong. Rather, they are concerned with historical research, whatever the results may be, black or white. If criticism is to be made, it should be based on the weakness of evidence or an error in deduction, not on the basis of emotions that the adherents of the doctrine have agreed upon. As for the preacher, they call for a specific goal and try to interpret what was against it according to their own view, not according to the truth. For this reason, I deeply regret if anything in my words in this treatise, or in "The Dawn of Islam and its Brightness and Midday," offends our Shiite brethren. I assure them that these are historical findings, not proselytizing results. Let them accept them as they are. Nothing would please me more than to eliminate the enmity between Sunnis and Shiites. How much we need friendship, especially in this era. For this reason, I was eager to join the "Unity Group" because it is the ultimate goal I wish for. I do not want to stir up new seditions to add to the old ones. Rather, I wanted to clarify the truth for scholars and researchers. And God guides whom He wills to the straight path.