(1). When all the people of Medina unanimously swore allegiance to Amir al-mu`minin Mu`awiyah refused to acquiesce apprehending danger for his own power and in order to contest Amir al-mu'minin's caliphate he concocted the excuse that it had not been agreed to unaulmously and that there fore after cancelling it there should be another general election although the caliphate from which (the process of) election was started was the result of a timely situation. There was no question of the common vote therein so that it could be called the result of the people's election. However it was imposed on the people and assumed to be their verdict. From then it became a principle that whomever the nobles of Medina elected would be deemed to represent the entire world of Islam and no person would be allowed to question it whether he was present at the time of election or not. In any case after the establishment of the principle Mu`awiyah had no right to propose a re-election nor to
refuse allegiance when he had in practice recognized these
caliphates which it was alleged had been settled by the

[ 6 ] ومن كتاب له عليه السلام

إلى معاوية

إِنَّهُ بَايَعَنِي الْقَوْمُ الَّذِينَ بَايَعُوا أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمانَ عَلَى مَا بَايَعُوهُمْ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِلشَّاهِدِ أَنْ يَخْتَارَ، وَلاَ لِلغَائِبِ أَنْ يَرُدَّ، وَإنَّمَا الشُّورَى لِلْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالْأَنْصَارِ، فَإِنِ اجْتَمَعُوا عَلَى رَجُلٍ وَسَمَّوْهُ إِمَاماً كَانَ ذلِكَ لِلَّهِ رِضىً، فَإِنْ خَرَجَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِمْ خَارِجٌ بِطَعْنٍ أَوْبِدْعَةٍ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى مَاخَرَجَ مِنْهُ، فَإِنْ أَبَى قَاتَلُوهُ عَلَى اتِّبَاعِهِ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَوَلاَّهُ اللهُ مَا تَوَلَّى.

وَلَعَمْرِي، يَا مُعَاوِيَةُ، لَئِنْ نَظَرْتَ بِعَقْلِكَ دُونَ هَوَاكَ لَتَجِدَنِّي أَبْرَأَ  النَّاسِ مِنْ دَمِ عُثْمانَ، وَلَتَعْلَمَنَّ أَنِّي كُنْتُ فِي عُزْلَةٍ عَنْهُ، إِلاَّ أَنْ  تَتَجَنَّى (1) ; فَتَجَنَّ مَا بَدَا لَكَ! وَالسَّلاَمُ.

  important people of Medina. That is why when he held this election to be invalid and refused allegiance Amir al-mu'minin pointed out to him the (recognized) way of election and demolished his argument. It was a method known as arguing with the adversary on the basis of his wrong premises so as to demolish his argument since Amir al-mu'minin never at any state regarded consultation (with chiefs) or the common vote to be the criterion of validity of the caliphate. Otherwise in connection with the caliphate about which it is alleged that they were based on the unanimity of the muhajirun and the ansar he would have regarded that unanimity of vote as a good authority and held them as valid; but his refusal for allegiance in the very first period which cannot be denied by anyone is a proof of the fact that he did not regard these self-concocted methods as the criterion of (validity of) the caliphate. That is why at all times he continued pressing his own case for the caliphate which was also established on the basis of the Prophet's saying and deeds. However to place it before Mu`awiyah meant opening the door to questions and answers. He therefore attempted to convince him with his own premises and beliefs so that there could be no scope for interpretation or for confusing the matter in fact Mu'awiyah's real aim was to prolong the matter so that at some point his own authority might get support.