as for the seventh premise which is their statement that if it is proven that the infallible person must be declared then if there is only one person in the world who declares it then he is that infallible person because he has no opponent or second in the claim so that it becomes difficult to distinguish. this is invalid for two reasons. one of them is that how did they know that there is no one claiming infallibility or declaring it in the regions of the world except one person? perhaps in the farthest reaches of china or in the outskirts of the maghreb there is someone who claims something of that and the denial of that is something that is not known. necessity and not consideration. if it is said that this is known as necessity since if it were it would have spread because such a thing has many reasons for transmitting it. we say that it is possible that it was and did not spread to our country despite the great distance because the one who claims it is not able to mention it except with his scum and his confidant and around him a group of his enemies so he is afraid of revealing the secret and disclosing it and sees the benefit in concealing it or he is divulging it but his listeners are prevented from spreading in the country and informing the people of it because they are besieged by the enemies and are forced to stay in the homeland for fear of the vengeance of those who control them. so what invalidates this possibility which is something that is likely to happen soon or far away so it is possible and not impossible and you claim certainty in what you cite so how can certainty be clear with this possibility?
وأما المقدمة السابعة وهي قولهم إذا ثبت ان المعصوم لا بد أن يصرح فإذا لم يكن في العالم الا مصرح واحد كان هو ذلك المعصوم لانه لا خصم له ولا ثاني له في الدعوى حتى يعسر التمييز فهذه فاسدة من وجهين احدهما انهم بماذا عرفوا انه لا مدعي للعصمة ولا مصرح بها في اقطار العالم سوى شخص واحد فلعل في اقصى الصين او في أطراف المغرب من يدعي شيئا من ذلك وانتفاء ذلك مما لا يعرف ضرورة ولا نظرا فان قيل يعرف ذلك ضرورة إذ لو كان لانتشر لان مثل هذا تتوافر الدواعي على نقله قلنا يحتمل انه كان ولم ينتشر الى بلادنا مع بعد المسافة لان المدعي له ليس يتمكن من ذكره الا مع سوسه وصاحب سره وحوله جماعة من اعدائه فيفزع من إظهار السر وإفشائه ويرى المصلحة في اخفائه أو هو مفش له ولكن المستمعين له ممنوعون عن الانتشار في البلاد واخبار العباد به لانهم محاصرون من جهة الاعداء مضطرون الى ملازمة الوطن خوفا من نكاية المستولين عليهم فما الذي يبطل هذا الاحتمال وهو امر قدر قريبا او بعيدا فهو ممكن ليس من قبيل المحالات وانتم تدعون القطع فيما توردون فكيف يصفو القطع مع هذا الاحتمال