He spoke about the faction of Ali, the faction of Mu'awiyah, and the group that did not join them.

The Shaykh : ... What occurred in the early days of Islam between two Muslim factions, a lawful faction and an unlawful faction, the latter believing that the truth was on their side. By the first faction, I mean Ali ibn Abi Talib, the rightly guided caliph, and by the other faction, Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan. You know this tragic incident that took place in that ancient time. So what was the position of the noble Companions, the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), in that fitnah (trial, discord or temptation), even though the truth was with the caliph who had been pledged allegiance to by the Muslims? Here lies the lesson we can extract from it to benefit from in our present time, where there is no caliph pledged to. The Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) divided regarding this conflict that occurred between the two camps, the camp of Ali and the camp of Mu'awiyah. A group of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah were with Ali, a group with Mu'awiyah, and a group remained neutral. They did not join Ali, who was more deserving of being joined, let alone did they join Mu'awiyah, who was the governor of Sham as you know, but it appeared to him that he had the right to demand retribution for the blood of Uthman. The point is that the third group did not join the rightly guided caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib. Why? To preserve the blood of the Muslims on one hand, and because the truth had not become clear to many of them, unlike some of them who, when the matter became clear to them, hastened to join Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). That was one of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); his name does not come to my mind now. He had heard from the mouth of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) his saying: , and Ammar was with the caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib fighting, so the group of Mu'awiyah killed him. When the man was killed, that Companion realized that the truth was with Ali ibn Abi Talib, so he joined him because he found that the hadith applied to the reality. As for us today, where is the evidence that the truth is with the one who aggressed against Kuwait, or with the one who brought the disbelievers into the lands of Islam? Whoever speaks and says "the truth is with this one" or "the truth is with that one" is speaking without knowledge. And Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says: I say, as you have heard, that both states are in error. Therefore, one should not be partisan for one of them over the other, but rather we should be partisan against both states, and we say with truth that each of them is contrary to the Shari'ah. Our position is one of complete neutrality, and we should stay in our homes and not stir up differences among ourselves or pre-Islamic partisanship. We have been given enough of division in normal, natural circumstances, so it is not befitting for us to add division to division and conflict to conflict, to revive the conduct of the first pre-Islamic age of ignorance, and to fight out of tribal pride and ignorance...