The Companions of Badr Who Stood With Ali ibn Abi Talib
Examining the historical record
The Companions of Badr Who Stood With ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib
How many veterans of Badr and of the Pledge of Ridwan fought alongside Amir al-Mu’minin at the Camel and Siffin — the reports, the numbers, and eighty-five names — and why the claim that “only one Badri” stood with him does not survive the sources.
A widespread claim — associated above all with Ibn Taymiyya and his school — holds that the Companions largely stood aside from ‘Ali’s wars, and that the veterans of Badr were all but absent from his ranks. Some early ‘Uthmani partisans went further: al-Sha’bi used to swear that none of the people of Badr attended Siffin with ‘Ali except Khuzayma ibn Thabit.
Dr Hassan Farhan Al Maliki’s treatise, written as a response to Ibn Taymiyya and those who followed him, sets out the opposite case from the classical sources themselves. Apart from individuals such as Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas and Muhammad ibn Maslama, he argues, the people of Badr were with ‘Ali — supported by many narrations with strong chains and by historical evidence — while the Syrian party of Mu’awiya did not have a single Badri among them. Below are the reports he gathers, the numbers they give, the eighty-five names he compiles, and the conclusions he draws.
The reports
Report 1 — The Battle of the Camel
Sa’id ibn Jubayr: eight hundred of the Ansar, four hundred of Ridwan
Sa’id ibn Jubayr
On the day of the Battle of the Camel there were with ‘Ali eight hundred of the Ansar and four hundred of those who had attended the Pledge of Ridwan. Narrated by Ja’far ibn Abi al-Mughira from Sa’id; the author grades the chain sound. Khalifa ibn Khayyat, a teacher of al-Bukhari, records it with the chain: Abu Ghassan (Malik ibn Isma’il al-Nahdi), from Ya’qub al-Qummi, from Ja’far ibn Abi al-Mughira, from Sa’id.
Tarikh al-Islam, 1/454; Tarikh Khalifa ibn Khayyat, 1/42
The author’s comment
The people of Ridwan numbered one thousand four hundred, so these four hundred were more than half of those still living — most had already died. After the Camel, further Companions from Kufa and the Hijaz joined ‘Ali.
Report 2 — The Battle of the Camel
Al-Suddi: one hundred and thirty Badris
Al-Suddi
Al-Muttalib ibn Ziyad reported from al-Suddi that one hundred and thirty Badris and seven hundred of the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ attended the Day of the Camel with ‘Ali.
Tarikh al-Islam, 1/454
Report 3 — The Pledge of Ridwan
‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abza: eight hundred of Ridwan, sixty-three slain
‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abza
With a sound chain — ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Harb, from Yazid ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman, from Ja’far (probably Ibn Abi al-Mughira), from ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abza, from his father: “We attended with ‘Ali — eight hundred of those who had given the Pledge of Ridwan — of whom sixty-three men were killed, among them ‘Ammar.” Khalifa gives the chain in full through Abu Ghassan, from ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Harb, with identical wording.
Tarikh al-Islam, 1/467; Tarikh Khalifa ibn Khayyat, 1/46
Report 4 — Siffin
Al-Hakam ibn ‘Utayba: eighty Badris, through several routes
Via Abu Isra’il, from al-Hakam
In ‘Ali’s army there were eighty Badris and one hundred and fifty of those who pledged beneath the Tree. Narrated by Ibn Dizil. Al-Hakam in turn narrates the report from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla al-Ansari, who attended with his father.
al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, 7/255
Al-Hakim’s route
Through two routes — al-Khidr ibn Aban al-Hashimi, from ‘Ali ibn Qadim, from Abu Isra’il, from al-Hakam: eighty Badris attended Siffin with ‘Ali, and two hundred and fifty of those who pledged beneath the Tree.
al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn, 10/358
Further routes to al-Hakam
Via Abu ‘Ali ibn Shadhan, through Yahya ibn Sulayman and Muhammad ibn ‘Umayra al-Nakha’i, from Abu Isra’il al-‘Absi, from al-Hakam: eighty Badris attended Siffin with ‘Ali. And Abu al-Hasan al-Qattan, in his book al-Tiwalat, through Asbat and Malik ibn Isma’il, from Abu Isra’il, from al-Hakam: the same.
Bughyat al-Talab fi Tarikh Halab, 1/81; al-Tadwin fi Akhbar Qazwin, 1/68
Report 5 — Siffin
Ibn Abi Layla: seventy Badris — and Shu’ba’s reported denial
Abu Shayba, from al-Hakam, from Ibn Abi Layla
Seventy men of the people of Badr attended Siffin.
The objection
A group narrated from ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, from his father, from Umayya ibn Khalid, that when this was put to Shu’ba he said Abu Shayba had lied, and that on discussing it with al-Hakam they found no Badri at Siffin except Khuzayma ibn Thabit.
The author’s reply
Abu Shayba is not the liar; the liar is whoever claims only Khuzayma attended. Shu’ba is too great to have said this — and so is Ahmad, who himself narrated in his Musnad that Abu Fadala was a Badri who attended Siffin with ‘Ali. The report is defective, and ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad is suspected in it as part of his campaign against the People of Opinion; Abu Shayba had been a judge in Wasit. In any case, Abu Shayba was not alone in narrating this from al-Hakam, as the routes in Report 4 show.
Report 6 — Siffin
Yunus ibn Khabbab and Yahya ibn Sulayman al-Ju’fi
Yunus ibn Khabbab
From Abu al-Hasan al-Mada’ini, from al-Fadl ibn Dukayn, from Jarir ibn Hazim, from Yunus ibn Khabbab: eighty Badris attended the Day of Siffin with ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.
Bughyat al-Talab fi Tarikh Halab, 1/81
Yahya ibn Sulayman al-Ju’fi
A teacher of al-Bukhari narrated something similar — “seventy Badris” — with a strong chain. The author notes he takes this grading from Tahdhir al-‘Abqari, having not examined the chain himself.
Report 7 — From the Ahl al-Bayt
Al-Baqir, Muhammad ibn al-Muttalib and Zayd ibn Hasan: seventy Badris, seven hundred of the Tree
Scholars of the Successors
Seventy men of the people of Badr attended with ‘Ali in his wars, and seven hundred of those who pledged beneath the Tree, among countless Companions of the Messenger of God ﷺ. Three Successors also fought with him whom the Prophet ﷺ, it was reported, testified would enter Paradise: Uways al-Qarani, killed among the foot-soldiers at Siffin; Zayd ibn Suhan, killed at the Camel; and Jundab al-Khayr.
Tarikh Dimashq, 19/442
A family record of names
Al-Ajlah ibn ‘Abdullah al-Kindi heard Zayd ibn ‘Ali, ‘Abdullah ibn al-Hasan (al-Mahd), Ja’far al-Sadiq and Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al-Hasan (al-Nafs al-Zakiyya) naming the Companions who fought with ‘Ali, each transmitting it from his forefathers. Al-Khatib cites this chain more than once, and Ibn Abi Rafi’, freedman of the Prophet ﷺ, compiled a book naming ‘Ali’s companions that al-Tabarani and other biographers drew on. The author calls this a cohesive route, despite the hadith scholars’ habitual weakening of such reports.
Tarikh Dimashq, 16/53; al-Tabarani, al-Mu’jam al-Kabir
Report 8 — The slain at Siffin
Twenty-five Badris among the dead of Iraq
Ibn Kathir and al-Dhahabi
Among the people of Iraq there were twenty-five Badris — that is, the author notes, among the martyrs alone. Al-Dhahabi reports the same but adds that the narrator Thuwayr is “abandoned.”
al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, 7/275; Tarikh al-Islam, 1/466
The author’s reply
Thuwayr is abandoned only on sectarian grounds. Some declared him trustworthy, imams such as Shu’ba narrated from him, and — as al-Hakim said — nothing was held against him but his Shi’ism. His report has sound corroboration.
Report 9 — Siffin
Al-Mas’udi: eighty-seven Badris, two thousand eight hundred Companions
Al-Mas’udi
Eighty-seven of the people of Badr attended Siffin with ‘Ali — seventeen of the Muhajirun and seventy of the Ansar — along with nine hundred of those who pledged beneath the Tree. In all, two thousand eight hundred Companions attended with him.
Muruj al-Dhahab, 1/314
Report 10 — Kufa
Ibrahim al-Nakha’i: seventy of Badr settled in Kufa
Ibrahim al-Nakha’i
Three hundred of the Companions of the Tree and seventy of the people of Badr settled in Kufa. The author adds this as general corroborating evidence, found after the rest of the treatise was written.
al-Tabaqat al-Kubra of Ibn Sa’d, 6/9
Report 11 — A figure the author rejects
Ibn Sirin: “two hundred and some forty” Badris
Ibn Sirin
With a sound chain — ‘Abd al-Razzaq, from Ma’mar, from Ayyub, from Ibn Sirin: when the fitna erupted the Companions numbered ten thousand, and no more than forty of them hastened into it; two hundred and some forty men of the people of Badr stood with ‘Ali, among them Abu Ayyub, Sahl ibn Hunayf and ‘Ammar ibn Yasir.
al-Mustadrak, 4/486
The author’s judgement
Despite its sound chain, the report is munkar. Most likely the word “some” has been corrupted by a copyist, or a conjunction has been misread. Besides, Ibn Sirin was averse to ‘Ali and would not have said this. His other report — that only forty or thirty took part in the fitna of ‘Uthman — refers to the revolt against ‘Uthman, as do most reports of Companions “withdrawing from the fitna.” The Nawasib, he argues, recast these to suggest that all the Companions sided with ‘Uthman and then all withdrew from fighting alongside ‘Ali.
The numbers at a glance
| Reported by | Battle | Badris | Of Ridwan / the Tree | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sa’id ibn Jubayr | Camel | — | 400 (plus 800 Ansar) | Tarikh al-Islam 1/454 |
| Al-Suddi | Camel | 130 | 700 Companions | Tarikh al-Islam 1/454 |
| Ibn Abza | With ‘Ali | — | 800 (63 slain) | Tarikh al-Islam 1/467 |
| Al-Hakam ibn ‘Utayba | Siffin | 80 | 150 / 250 | al-Bidaya 7/255; al-Mustadrak 10/358 |
| Habba al-‘Urani | With ‘Ali | 80 | — | cited by the author |
| Yunus ibn Khabbab | Siffin | 80 | — | Bughyat al-Talab 1/81 |
| Ibn Abi Layla / al-Ju’fi | Siffin | 70 | — | via Abu Shayba; Yahya ibn Sulayman |
| Al-Baqir et al. | His wars | 70 | 700 | Tarikh Dimashq 19/442 |
| Al-Mas’udi | Siffin | 87 | 900 (2,800 in all) | Muruj al-Dhahab 1/314 |
| Ibn Kathir | Siffin (slain) | 25 | — | al-Bidaya 7/275 |
| Ibn Sirin | With ‘Ali | 240+ | — | al-Mustadrak 4/486 — judged munkar |
| Al-Sha’bi / “Shu’ba” | Siffin | 1 | — | rejected as false |
Struck-through figures are those the author rejects at either extreme.
“Around eighty Badris attended Siffin with ‘Ali — or more, but not exceeding a hundred; or fewer, but not below fifty.” — the author’s conclusion on the number
Al-Mas’udi’s figure, the author notes, stands close to those of Ibn Abi Layla, Habba ibn Juwayn al-‘Urani, Sa’id ibn Jubayr and al-Hakam ibn ‘Utayba — people of knowledge and moderation — and this is the nearest to the truth. He points out the double standard in how these narrators were treated: al-Dhahabi, and before him al-Saji and Ibn al-Jawzi, accused the trustworthy Habba al-‘Urani of lying for reporting eighty Badris, yet none of them called al-Sha’bi a liar for swearing that only Khuzayma attended — though the consensus that ‘Ali and ‘Ammar, both Badris, were at Siffin is itself enough to refute that oath. And whatever the exact count, the rebellious party of Mu’awiya had with it not a single veteran of Badr, nor of Ridwan.
Eighty-five names
So that the matter does not remain general, the author lists the best known Badris who attended with ‘Ali. For some, whether they were Badris — or whether they were present — is disputed; he keeps his own notes on these, including those still “to be researched.” The prevailing view among the authors of the sira and the biographies of the Companions, he says, is that around seventy or eighty Badris fought with ‘Ali. His list follows in his own order and numbering.
The list, as compiled by the author
The people of Badr found with ‘Ali
- 1‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Amir al-Mu’mininNaming him alone would suffice; but the abundance of nasb means some need supports for their belief in ‘Ali’s right. The textual, rational and historical proofs with him are utterly clear.
- 2‘Ammar ibn YasirThe measure of all those wars, through his connection to decisive proofs.
- 3Khuzayma ibn Thabit al-AnsariDhu al-Shahadatayn
- 4Abu ‘Amra al-Ansari
- 5Abu Ayyub al-Ansari
- 6Sahl ibn Hunayf al-Ansari
- 7Abu Fadala al-Ansari
- 8Qays ibn Sa’d al-Ansari
- 9Usayd ibn Tha’laba al-Ansari
- 10Thabit ibn ‘Ubayd al-Ansari
- 11Rifa’a ibn Rafi’ ibn Malik ibn ‘Ajlan al-Zuraqi al-AnsariIbn Hajar’s Tahdhib
- 12Mistah ibn Uthatha al-Muttalibi al-Qurashi
- 13–14Al-Husayn and al-Tufayl, sons of al-Harith ibn al-MuttalibBrothers of ‘Ubayda; both Muttalibis
- 15Mas’ud ibn Aws al-Ansari
- 16Abu Burda Hani’ ibn Niyar
- 17Jabr ibn Anas al-AnsariMu’jam al-Tabarani: the book of Ibn Abi Rafi’
- 18Khalifa ibn ‘Adi al-Bayadi al-Ansari
- 19Rib’i ibn Abi Rib’i al-Ansari
- 20Rib’i ibn ‘Amr al-Ansari
- 21Khuwaylid ibn ‘Amr al-Ansari
- 22Rifa’a ibn Rafi’ al-Ansari
- 23Zayd ibn Aslam al-Balawi
- 24Al-Nu’man ibn al-‘Ajlan al-Zuraqi al-AnsariThe tongue of the Ansar and their poet
- 25Abu Habba al-AnsariAlso called Abu Hanna
- 26Abu Hasan al-Mazini al-AnsariPledge list; ‘Aqabi and Badri
- 27Abu al-Ward al-Mazini al-Ansari
- 28Abu al-Yasar Ka’b ibn ‘Amr al-Ansari
- 29Abu Talha al-Ansari
- 30Abu al-Haytham Malik ibn al-Tayyihan al-Ansari
- 31Ka’b ibn ‘Amir al-Sa’idi
- 32Thabit ibn Qays ibn al-Khatim al-AnsariPledge list
- 33Khawwat ibn Jubayr al-Ansari
- 34Suhayl ibn ‘Amr al-AnsariNot the Qurashi of the same name. The Ansari is an obscure Badri — because he was with ‘Ali — while the Qurashi is famous as one of the Tulaqa’ and of “those whose hearts were to be reconciled.”
- 35‘Abdullah ibn ‘Atik al-Ansari
- 36Al-Fakih ibn Bishr ibn al-Fakih al-Ansari
- 37Abu Layla al-Ansari
- 38Abu Usayd al-Sa’idi
- 39Mu’adh ibn ‘Afra’ al-AnsariOne of the killers of Abu Jahl
- 40Abu Waqid al-LaythiBadri status disputed
- 41Abu Dujana al-Ansari
- 42‘Amr ibn Bilal al-Ansari
- 43Abu Qudama ibn al-Harith al-Ansari
- 44Al-Arqam ibn Abi al-Arqam al-Makhzumi
- 45Al-Harith ibn Hatib al-AnsariAl-Tabarani
- 46Khabbab ibn al-Aratt
- 47Jabala ibn Tha’laba al-AnsariPerhaps Jabala ibn ‘Amr ibn Tha’laba al-Ansari, or Rukhayla ibn Khalid ibn Tha’laba, as Ibn al-Athir said and Ibn Hajar considered possible — to be researched
- 48Al-Harith ibn al-Nu’man al-AnsariAbu Nu’aym
- 49Rib’i ibn Rafi’ al-Ansari
- 50AnasaFreedman of the Messenger of God ﷺ
- 51Hind ibn Abi Hala
- 52Abu Sa’d al-Sa’idi
- 53Abu Mas’ud al-Ansari
- 54Jubayr ibn Hubab ibn al-MundhirMu’jam al-Tabarani
- 55Jabala ibn ‘Amr al-Bayadi al-AnsariBrother of Abu Mas’ud; Mu’jam al-Tabarani
- 56Al-Harith ibn al-Nu’man al-AnsariMu’jam al-Tabarani
- 57Ziyad ibn Labid al-Bayadi
- 58Abu Qatada al-Ansari
- 59Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah al-AnsariBadri status disputed
- 60Anas ibn Malik al-Ansari“And how could I have been absent from Badr?”
- 61Abu Muhammad al-AnsariAl-Tabarani, 20/332
- 62Al-Harith ibn Ziyad al-AnsariAttended Badr; counted among the Kufans and the companions of ‘Ali — Ibn Hajar’s Tahdhib, 2/141
- 63‘Antara al-Sulami
- 64‘Ubayd ibn al-Tayyihan al-Ansari
- 65‘Ubayd ibn Khalid al-SulamiOf the Muhajirun
- 66Al-Fakih ibn Sa’d ibn Jubayr al-AnsariA Muhajir
- 67Farwa ibn ‘Amr al-Bayadi al-AnsariBadri and ‘Aqabi, about whom Malik was silent
- 68Abu ‘Ayyash al-ZuraqiBadri status to be researched
- 69Qaraza ibn Ka’b al-AnsariFought at Uhud; of the rank of the people of Badr
- 70‘Uthman ibn Hunayf al-AnsariFought at Uhud; of the rank of the people of Badr
- 71Tha’laba ibn Qayzi al-AnsariBadri
- 72Al-Hajjaj ibn ‘Amr ibn Ghaziyya al-AnsariTo be researched
- 73Hanzala ibn al-Nu’man al-Zuraqi al-AnsariFought at Uhud; possibly a Badri
- 74Ka’b ibn ‘Amir al-Sa’diPerhaps al-Sa’idi (Badri) — already listed
- 75Abu al-Ward al-MaziniTo be researched
- 76Abu Layla al-AnsariFought at Uhud; Badri status to be researched
- 77Yazid ibn Hawthara al-AnsariFought at Uhud; Badri status to be researched — or Yazid ibn Nuwayra, who had precedence
- 78Sa’d ibn al-Harith ibn al-SimmaTo be researched
- 79Zayd ibn ArqamFought at Uhud
- 80Salih al-AnsariBadri — al-Isaba
- 81Aws ibn QayziTo be researched
- 82Abu Qudama ibn al-Harith al-KinaniFought at Uhud; killed with ‘Ali at Siffin, with some obscurity — Ibn Hajar
- 83Abu Qudama al-AnsariAmong the witnesses of Ghadir; not the previous man. ‘Ali’s governor over Bahrain was one Qudama ibn ‘Ajlan, whom the author could not trace — perhaps this is he.
- 84Abu ‘Ayyash al-Zuraqi
- 85‘Uqba ibn ‘Amir (ibn Nabi) al-Sulami al-AnsariSee the biography of Abu Ayyub
These, the author concludes, are more than seventy Badris — together with those whose being Badris is likely — found by name. Most were killed with ‘Ali at Siffin, and most are comparable in merit to the Ten; some lived on after Siffin, but on the preponderant view no Badri outlived the reign of Mu’awiya, which explains the narration of Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib.
He is candid that the Badri status of some is disputed: the authors of the maghazi never agreed on the names of the Badris in the first place, nor on who attended which battle before and during ‘Ali’s time. That is why the narrations about their attendance should carry more weight than any tally of names. Names are simply hard to fix — the historians report that seventy Badris fought at al-Qadisiyya, yet could not name ten of them.
Those not counted here
Beyond the people of Badr
Eminent Companions and Successors who fought with ‘Ali
Companions who were not at Badr
Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah, Zayd ibn Arqam, al-Bara’ ibn ‘Azib, Ibn ‘Abbas, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, Rafi’ ibn Khadij, al-Mirqal, ‘Abdullah ibn Budayl, Hujr ibn ‘Adi, Abu al-Tufayl, the two learned Jundabs — Jundab ibn Zuhayr and Jundab ibn Ka’b — Sulayman ibn Surad al-Khuza’i, Sahl ibn Sa’d, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, and a great many others.
Eight hundred of the people of Ridwan fought with him — all of the rank of Ibn ‘Umar, some above him in companionship and precedence.
Successors whose blood was shed with ‘Ali
Uways al-Qarani, the best of the Successors, absent from the conquests yet eager to fight beside ‘Ali; the ascetic ‘Amir ibn ‘Abd Qays; ‘Alqama ibn Qays, the senior Successor of Kufa; the ascetic Kumayl ibn Ziyad al-Nakha’i; the famous champion al-Ashtar al-Nakha’i; al-Hudayn ibn al-Mundhir; Abu al-Aswad al-Du’ali; and the family of Suhan.
How, the author asks, can anyone weigh the Tulaqa’ of Syria, with their Bedouins and their Christians, against men like these and treat the two sides as equals? The extremists and Nawasib, he writes, know Mu’awiya, Ibn al-‘As, Ibn Hudayj, Abu al-Ghadiya, al-Dahhak, Marwan, “the two Walids and the two Yazids” — but not these.
“I have fought the bearer of this banner three times with the Messenger of God ﷺ, and this is the fourth; it is no more righteous nor more pious.” — ‘Ammar ibn Yasir at Siffin, to ‘Amr ibn al-‘As · Tarikh al-Tabari, 3/99
What their presence means
The point of the count, Dr Al Maliki writes, is twofold. First: those who killed these men were the people of Syria — the very party some extremists and Nawasib defend on the grounds that it contained Companions from among the Tulaqa’, while forgetting that it slaughtered Companions of Badr. Second: their loss was a grave loss to knowledge and to bearing witness to the truth in hard times. The vacuum they left was filled by lesser men — and worse, by those who justified the oppressor, fabricated hadith for him, belittled the people of justice, and helped produce an alternative culture that downplays the momentous and inflates the trivial. From that came the fitna of doubt, fear and poor understanding of the religion, and in the end, marching in the train of the oppressors.
This is why, he argues, the Companions with the deepest understanding and piety were the most eager to fight the people of Syria. ‘Ammar ibn Yasir urged Hashim forward at Siffin, declaring that Paradise lay beneath the shade of the swords, and the two did not turn back until they were killed. It was of ‘Ammar that the famous hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari was said: “The rebellious party will kill him; he calls them to Paradise and they call him to the Fire.” Among the Successors, ‘Abdullah ibn Salima, who fought at the Camel and Siffin, said he would not exchange them for everything on the face of the earth (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba, 8/739). Ibrahim al-Nakha’i, the greatest jurist among the Successors of Kufa, judged ‘Alqama better than al-Aswad because ‘Alqama fought at Siffin and dyed his sword there. And ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, asked whether ‘Ali or Mu’awiya was more deserving, answered “‘Ali,” explaining that he had only gone out in obedience to his father and never struck with a sword (Sharh Ibn Battal, 19/28).
Today, the author observes, most scholars would say that staying aside was better, conflating the hadiths on withdrawing from fitnas with ‘Ali’s war and forgetting the Qur’anic command to fight rebels — a command whose clearest historical application is precisely the war under ‘Ali’s banner. If his fight against the rebels is not held to be right and obligatory, no application of that ruling anywhere could stand. This is the position of the jurists of all four madhhabs; only Ibn Taymiyya dissented, falsely claiming a consensus for his view. The single exception from his school, the author notes, was Shaykh Ibn Baz, who held that fighting alongside ‘Ali was obligatory. Even Ibn ‘Umar came to this understanding — but late: having seen the disasters of the Umayyads, he regretted not fighting the rebellious party as God had commanded, as Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr reports through several sound routes.
The author closes by explaining why he has dwelt on this at such length: the extremists falter precisely here, going along with Mu’awiya’s demand, even as they make a show of relative revulsion at the Umayyads’ other crimes — al-Harra, Karbala and the demolition of the Ka’ba.
“I am not a controller over them.”