them to be put to death? This combines two opposites.

If you say:

“His aim was to have Ali put to death,”

the reply is:

Had they all pledged allegiance except Ali, that would not have harmed the rule, for one only kills someone one fears. Sa‘d ibn Ubāda withheld his pledge of allegiance to Abū Bakr, yet they neither beat nor imprisoned him, let alone killed him.

Likewise, whoever says:

“Ali and Banū Hāshim withheld their pledge of allegiance to Abū Bakr for six months,”

also says (1): “They did not beat any of them or compel him to pledge allegiance.” If no one was compelled to pledge allegiance to Abū Bakr, though he regarded allegiance to Abū Bakr as specifically required, how could he have ordered people killed to secure allegiance to Uthmān, when he did not regard allegiance to Uthmān as specifically required?

Throughout their caliphates, Abū Bakr and Umar never ceased [showing] (2) the utmost honor to Ali and the rest of Banū Hāshim, giving them precedence over all other people. [Abū Bakr] (3) would say, “O people, be mindful of Muhammad concerning the members (4) of his household.” Abū Bakr would go alone to Ali’s house, where Banū Hāshim were gathered. He would speak to them (5) of their merit, and they would speak to him of his merit. They acknowledged his right to the caliphate, apologized for the delay, and pledged allegiance to him while he was alone among them.

The mass-transmitted reports of the love and concord that existed among them (6) establish that whoever reports anything contrary to this is lying.