more beloved to them than Uthmān—namely, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and his household?! How could they fight alongside Muāwiyah (1) until their blood was shed with him, although Banū Abd Manāf were divided over him, yet not fight alongside Alī when Banū Abd Manāf stood with him?
Al-Abbās ibn Abd al-Muttalib was the senior member of Banū Hāshim, and Abū Sufyān ibn Harb was the senior member of Banū Umayyah, and both inclined toward Alī. Why, then, did the people not fight alongside him at that time, while the matter was still at its outset? And fighting (2) at that time—had it been justified—would have been more fitting alongside Alī (3), and Alī’s accession would have been easier. If a small group had come forward and said:
“Authority belongs to Alī. He is the caliph and the designated successor. We will pledge allegiance to none but him; we will neither disobey the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, nor wrong his designated successor and household; and we will not prefer the wrongdoers or hypocrites of the clan of Taym over Banū Hāshim, who are the best among us both in the Age of Ignorance and in Islam,”
then the majority of the people would have answered whoever made this declaration; indeed, all but a few would have answered him—particularly since Abū Bakr had neither inducements to offer nor power to inspire fear.
Suppose, then, that Umar and a group with him remained isolated in supporting Abū Bakr (4). They were neither more numerous nor mightier than those who stood with Muāwiyah—may Allah be pleased with him—or with Talhah and al-Zubayr—may Allah be pleased with them both. Yet Alī’s supporters fought them, even though those supporters ranked below the earliest forerunners in knowledge and religion, and only a few of the [earliest] forerunners (5) were among them. Why, then, did not