able in that it would restore harmony: If such an argument were sound, then it would have been preferable to abandon all financial obligations, and Gods commands would have become subject to a human decision of whether it is not preferable to abstain from them. It is not far-fetched for al-Razi to suggest something like this, or even worse, to do it in order to deny one of the excellences of Ali b. Abi Talib.
It is appropriate here to cite from Ni am evaluated al-Razis thesis. He writes:
The Qadi says: This-that is, Alis voluntary offerings before the meeting-does not prove his excellence over the leading Companions of the Prophet, because the time pe‌ riod [between the revelation of the verse and its abrogation] may not have been long enough for them to carry out this obligation. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi says: "Let us concede that there was enough time, but carrying out the obligation would have caused anguish for the poor who had nothing to offer, and repulsion for the rich. There was no harm in abstaining from this act, for that which causes harmony is preferable to that which causes estrangement. Additionally, offering alms before the colloquy was obligatory, but the colloquy itself was neither obligatory nor recommended; rather, avoiding it was prefer‌ able, when, as we have explained, it was a source of weariness for the Prophet."

To this, we say that this statement is not free of some prejudice. Why should it be incumbent upon us to establish Alis excellence over others in every trait? Why is it not possible for him to have a virtue that others from the Prophets prominent Com‌ panions did not have?
Indeed, it has been related, on the authority of AbdAllah b., Umar that:

Ali, may God be pleased with him, possessed three excellences of which if I had only one, I would have •been pleased to possess it rather than the red-haired camels: his marriage to Fa ima,
Day of Khaybar; and the colloquy verse. Can a fair-minded person say that the confi‌ dential conversations with the Prophet were shortcomings? More important, it is men‌ tioned in the verse that the conversation with the Prophet was forbidden. What was required was to make a voluntary offering before the conversations. Anyone who car‌ ried out the requirements of the verse attained two kinds of excellences: satisfying the need of a poor person, and getting close to the Prophet by loving to converse with him, solving difficult problems [by asking him for solutions in person], and demonstrating that conversation with him was dearer than worldly possessions. ١٦٣

(٣٦) Whatever spoils of war God has given to His Messenger from the People of the cities belong to God, and His Messenger, and the near kinsman, orphans, the needy, and the traveler. (Q. ٥٩:٨)

It has been related from Qatada that al-fay and al-ghanfma are one, and at the be‌ ginning of Islam, al-ghanfma-that is, the spoils of war-were distributed among these categories [mentioned in the verse]. Someone who participated in the war would get no share of the spoils except if he were one of those mentioned in the verse. Then, God abrogated that in "Snrat al-Anfal," and assigned them a one-fifth (khums) [share of the spoils] and apportioned four-fifths to those who had fought. ١٦٤ God, the Exalted says, "Know that, whatever booty you take, the fifth of it is Gods, and the Messengers, and the near kinsmans, and for the orphans, and for the needy and the traveler" (Q. ٨:٤١).