have supporters who agreed with him in what he commanded, whereas Muāwiya’s supporters agreed with him. He believed that fighting would achieve the desired aim, but it achieved only the opposite. Some in Muāwiya’s army accused Ali of acts of injustice of which he was innocent (1).
One who sought the truth among Muāwiya’s army would say:
“We cannot pledge allegiance to anyone unless he treats us justly and does not wrong us. If we pledge allegiance to Ali, his army will wrong us, just as Uthmān was wronged (2). Ali is either incapable of treating us justly or unwilling to do so. We are not obliged to pledge allegiance to one who is incapable of treating us justly or who refrains from doing so.”
The leading authorities of the Sunnah know that this fighting was not commanded—neither obligatory nor recommended—but they excuse anyone who exercised reasoned judgment and erred.
As for his statement:
“Muāwiya was among those whose hearts were won over.”
Yes, and the majority of all the freedmen (3) were among those whose hearts were won over, such as al-Hārith ibn Hishām; his nephew Ikrima ibn Abī Jahl; Suhayl ibn Amr; Safwān ibn Umayya; and Hakīm ibn Hizām. These were among the finest Muslims. Most of those whose hearts were won over became good Muslims (4). A man among them might accept Islam at the beginning of the day out of desire for worldly gain, yet by the end of that same day Islam would be dearer to him than everything upon which the sun had risen.
As for his statement:
“He fought Ali, though in their view Ali was the fourth caliph and a rightful imam, and anyone who fights a rightful imam is an aggressor and a wrongdoer.”