Veccia Vaglieri () finds certain variants of the treaty impossible to reconcile. She lists several conditions in the early sources and questions their veracity, including an annual payment of one or two million dirhams to Hasan, a single payment of five million dirhams from the treasury of Kufa, annual revenues from variously-named districts in
Persia, succession of Hasan to Mu'awiya or a council () after Mu'awiya, and preference for the
Banu Hashim over the
Banu Umayyad in pensions. Another condition might have been that Mu'awiya should end the ritual cursing of Ali in mosques, writes Mavani.
Jafri () similarly notes that the terms are recorded differently and ambiguously by
al-Tabari (),
Dinawari (), Ibn Abd al-Barr, and Ibn al-Athir, while
al-Ya'qubi () and
al-Mas'udi () are silent about them. In particular, Jafri finds the timing of Mu'awiya's
carte blanche problematic in al-Tabari's account. Al-Tabari also mentions a single payment of five million dirhams to Hasan from the treasury of Kufa, which Jafri rejects because the treasury of Kufa was already in Hasan's possession at the time. Ali is also said to have regularly emptied the treasury and distributed the funds among the public. Jafri then argues that the most comprehensive account is the one given by
Ahmad ibn A'tham, probably taken from
al-Mada'ini (), who recorded the terms in two parts. The first part is the conditions proposed by Abd Allah ibn Nawfal, who negotiated on Hasan's behalf with Mu'awiya in Maskin. The second part is what Hasan stipulated in
carte blanche. These two sets of conditions together encompass all the conditions scattered in the early sources. Jafri thus concludes that Hasan's final conditions in
carte blanche were that Mu'awiya should act according to the Quran, , and the conduct of the
Rashidun caliphs, that the people should remain safe, and that the successor to Mu'awiya should be appointed by a council. These conditions are echoed by
Madelung, who adds that Hasan made no financial stipulations in his peace proposal and Mu'awiya consequently made no payments to him, contrary to the "Umayyad propaganda" reflected in the account of the Umayyad-era
al-Zuhri (), quoted by al-Tabari. The account of al-Zuhri depicts a greedy Hasan eager to renounce his caliphate for money and was likely distributed by the Umayyads to legitimize Mu'awiya's rule in the absence of a council () or election or designation (), suggests Jafri. Since Ali and his house rejected the conduct of
Abu Bakr () and
Umar () in the
after Umar in 23/644, Jafri believes that the clause about following the Rashidun caliphs was inserted by later Sunni authors. That Mu'awiya agreed to an amnesty for the supporters of Ali indicates that the revenge for Uthman was a pretext for him to seize the caliphate, according to Jafri. == Narrations ==