for it contradicts the established report in the Sahih, which states that Abd al-Rahmān spent three days consulting the Muslims and scarcely slept during their nights. He did not find them placing anyone on a par with Uthmān; rather, they regarded him as more entitled and better suited to the office than anyone else.

Abd al-Rahmān stipulated nothing to Alī except justice. He said to each of them:

“I adjure you by Allah: if I appoint you, you must act justly; and if I appoint the other over you, you must listen and obey.”

Each replied, “Yes.” (1)

Thus, he required justice of the one appointed ruler, and listening and obedience of the one placed under his authority. This is the ruling of Allah and His Messenger, as established by the Quran and the sunnah.

[Response to the Rāfidī’s claims about the many disputes involving Uthmān—may Allah be pleased with him]

As for his statement (2):

“Numerous disputes (3) arose. Among them was his bringing al-Hakam ibn Umayya back to Medina after the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—had expelled him, and he was known as ‘the man banished by the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace.’ This was after he had petitioned (4) Abū Bakr and Umar during their caliphates, but neither granted his request (5). Umar also banished him forty parasangs from his residence in Yemen.”

The response is:

If he calls something like this a dispute, then every ruling issued by a caliph and contested by some people must be called a dispute. Yet your mention (6) of their disagreements concerning inheritance,