of people. Thus, there would be no praiseworthy faction whatsoever among the Shiites, nor any faction through whom victory over the enemy could be attained. It would therefore be impossible for ʿAlī, together with the Shiites, to be capable of overpowering the unbelievers.

In sum, one must acknowledge (1) the excellent condition of Abū Bakr, ʿUmar, and their followers; the deficiency (2) that occurred during ʿAlī’s caliphate (3) is thus to be attributed either to the imam, to his followers, or to both together.

On any of these suppositions, it follows that Abū Bakr, ʿUmar, and their followers were superior to ʿAlī and his followers. If the cause of the excellence and deficiency lay with the imam, the superiority of the two over him is manifest. If it lay with the followers, those who acknowledged the imamate of the two (4) were superior to those who acknowledged his imamate. The Sunnis would therefore be superior to the Shiites, and this necessarily entails that the two were superior to him; for that which distinguishes the superior is itself superior to that which distinguishes the inferior.

This is evident to anyone who reflects upon it, for those who pledged allegiance to Abū Bakr, ʿUmar, and ʿUthmān—may Allah be pleased with them—and fought alongside them were superior to those who pledged allegiance to ʿAlī and fought alongside him. Their ranks included those first forerunners among the Emigrants and the Helpers who outlived the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and those who followed them with excellence—Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him (5).