And whoever deems it permissible to have two caliphs (1) at one time would say that the caliphate of each was a Prophetic caliphate; for Muʿāwiyah—may Allah be pleased with him—was more praiseworthy in their view at the beginning of his caliphate than at its end.

If it is argued that ʿAlī’s caliphate was established through the pledge of allegiance given by those possessing power and military strength, just as the caliphates of his predecessors were established in that manner, they counter that Talha pledged allegiance to him under duress and that those who pledged allegiance to him later fought him. Thus, those possessing power and military strength were not united (2) in obedience to him.

Moreover, allegiance to him could only be obligatory, like allegiance to his predecessors, if he followed their course. They had been capable of protecting those who pledged allegiance to them from injustice, and they did whatever they could to accomplish that.

These men said: “If we pledge allegiance to him, we shall live under his authority while being wronged by his rule (3), in addition to the injustice that had already befallen ʿUthmān. He will not secure justice for us—whether because he is unable to do so, because of an interpretation on his part, or on account of what others among them attribute to him. Indeed, ʿUthmān’s killers and their allies are our enemies. They are numerous in his army, and he is unable to repel them, as demonstrated by what occurred on the Day of the Camel. When Talha and al-Zubayr sought to exact retribution from ʿUthmān’s killers, their tribes rose up and fought them (4).”

It was therefore in the best interest to refrain from such a course, as ʿAlī had advised Talha and al-Zubayr, and they agreed to that. The killers then became aware of the accord among the leading men, so they stirred up civil strife (5) and began by launching an attack on the army of Talha and al-Zubayr. They said to ʿAlī, “They