and Umar*; rather,(1) they are not unique to him, but are virtues in which others shared, unlike the established virtues of Abū Bakr and Umar* (2). Many of the latter were unique to them—especially the virtues of Abū Bakr, nearly all of which were unique to him and shared by no one else.

As for the criticisms he mentioned, not a single(3) criticism can be levelled against the three caliphs without an equivalent or graver criticism being levelled against Alī.

It is thus clear that what he stated under this line of argument is among the grossest falsehoods. We shall explain this in detail.

As for his statement:

“They made him their imam because opponents and supporters alike declared him above reproach(4), while they passed over another because someone who believes in that person’s imamate narrated criticisms that impugn his imamate.”

The reply is:

This is a manifest lie. Alī—may Allah be pleased with him—was not declared above reproach by his opponents. Rather, several groups denigrate Alī, and they are better than those who denigrate Abū Bakr, Umar, and Uthmān. Those who denigrate him are better than those who go to extremes concerning him. The Khawārij unanimously hold him to be an unbeliever, and all Muslims(5) regard them as better than the extremists who believe in his divinity or prophethood. Indeed, they—together with those among the Companions and Successors who fought him—are, in the view of the great majority of Muslims, better than the Twelver Rāfida, who regarded him as an infallible imam.