and weaker, and less (1) hostile to the truth (2) than those disbelievers had been at the beginning of the Prophet’s mission. Likewise, at the time Uthmān was killed, they were fewer and weaker than those disbelievers and less hostile to the truth (3) than those disbelievers had been when Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was sent. For the entirety of the truth for which Alī fought was only part of the truth for which the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) fought. Whoever denied the truth with which Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was sent and fought him on account of it also denied that part of it for which Alī fought.
Thus, if Alī, under these circumstances, was weak and incapable of supporting the truth and repelling falsehood, what would his condition have been at the beginning of the Prophet’s mission (4), when he was even weaker and less capable, while the enemies of the truth were more formidable, more numerous, and more intensely hostile?!
In this respect, the Rāfidah are like the Christians: they ascribe divinity to the Messiah, claiming that he is the Lord and Sovereign of all things and has power over all things. Yet they portray his enemies as slapping him, placing thorns upon his head, and crucifying him, and say that he began crying out for help but they gave him none. Thus, they did not [succeed], either by claiming (5) such overwhelming power or by affirming such utter humiliation.
If they say:
“This took place with his consent (6),”
the reply is:
“The Lord is pleased only to be obeyed, not disobeyed. If his killing and crucifixion occurred with his consent (7), that would constitute worship and obedience to Allah, and the Jews who crucified him would thus be worshippers