to (1) Allah’s allies,” for this is one of the lies that ʿAlī must be deemed above (2) uttering.

If, however, what is meant is that he surpassed others in this respect—the restrictive phrasing thus denoting perfection—then this is true of his own time. Otherwise, it is well known (3) that ʿUmar’s subjugation of the unbelievers was greater, and that the believers benefited more greatly through him. This is known (4) to everyone familiar with the histories of both men. Under the rule of ʿUmar—may Allah be pleased with him—all the believers received a measure of mercy in their religious and worldly affairs, none of which they received under the rule of ʿAlī. Likewise, under the rule of ʿUmar—may Allah be pleased with him—all the enemies of the religion (5)—the polytheists, the People of the Book, and the hypocrites—were subjected to a degree of subjugation, killing, and humiliation that did not occur at all under the rule of ʿAlī.

This is known to the elite and the common people alike. During ʿAlī’s caliphate, [the believers] (6) did not enjoy the mercy they had enjoyed in the days of ʿUmar and ʿUthmān. Rather, they fought and cursed one another, and they wielded no sword against the unbelievers. Instead, the unbelievers had become emboldened against them and seized wealth and lands from them. Given all this, how can ʿAlī be thought superior to ʿUmar and ʿUthmān in this quality?

Moreover, the Rāfidah contradict themselves: they describe ʿAlī as the one who supported Allah’s Messenger—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and without whom his religion could never have been established; then they describe him as helpless and humiliated, which is incompatible with that claim.