How can the author claim that the people in the era of Ali—may Allah be pleased with him—ate and drank nothing but "the blood of the innocent, the sweat of the weak, and the tears of the bereaved, the orphans, and the miserable," contradicting the saying, "If governance were in the hands of Ali and his descendants, people would eat from above them and from beneath their feet (milk, honey, manna, and quails)"?

This book is useful, but it contains some flaws, including impugning renowned Islamic figures such as Abu al-Tufayl and Ja'far al-Sadiq, and authentic hadiths like the Hadith of the Cloak. It is also criticized for its sarcastic and scathing style in critiquing the people of innovation, which might be misunderstood as disparaging the Commander of the Faithful Ali and his two sons, although his intention is to establish the correct meaning. The mentioned statement is not a flaw in Ali's character or his management; rather, it is a refutation of the claims of the people of innovation regarding his caliphate, by clarifying the reality of the situation in his era without placing responsibility on him. And his saying: "Would that this blood had been shed in Islamic conquests" might be understood as faulting Ali for fighting the people of Syria, which is contrary to what is right, for both strove and Ali was closer to the truth.