if it is said that the denier does not deny the large number of this group in addition to them but the truth does not follow the large number for the truth is hidden and only the few can independently comprehend it and falsehood is clear and the majority hasten to submit to it and you have lost based on the preference for the establishment of power through the large number of supporters and satiation and this is only correct if the imamate in its origin is established by the gathering of creation in obedience for that is not preferred when permitting and disagreeing with the large number and the matter is not like that rather the imamate is established according to the batiniyyah through the text. the one who is explicitly stated is right whether he was pledged allegiance to or not whether those who pledged allegiance to him were few or many and the one who opposes him is invalid whether his state helped him so his followers increased because of it or not. so from what point of view is it correct to use the large number of followers as evidence? we said that the evidence of the large number is only made clear by understanding the source of the imamate and it has become clear that it is not taken from the text as we have estimated in the seventh chapter. we have pointed out the foolishness of the one who claims that the text was transmitted by each one of them to his son rather we have shown the ignorance of the one who claims that in ali may god be pleased with him because if that were the case he would have used it as evidence. and he was not unable to show it nor was he satisfied with it. he is the one who dragged the armies and soldiers in the time of muawiyah until he killed thousands of the heroes of islam in those battles and he did not care about killing them. so what was his tendency and his followers to resort to the evidence of the text of the messenger of god may god bless him and grant him peace? and we have shown that this is met with the claim of the bakris in the text on abu bakr may god be pleased with him and the claim of the rawandis.
فإن قيل ليس ينكر منكر كثرة هذه العصابة بالاضافة اليهم ولكن الحق لا يتبع الكثرة فان الحق خفى لا يستقل بدركه إلا الاقلون والباطل جلى يبادر الى الانقياد له الاكثرون وانتم فقد بنيم الترجيح على قيام الشوكة بكثرة الانصار والاشباع وهذا انما يستقيم لو كانت الامامة في اصلها تنعقد باجتماع الخلق على الطاعة فان ذلك لايرجح عند التجويز والاختلاف بالكثرة وليس الامر كذلك بل الامامة انما تنعقد عند الباطنية بالنص والمنصوص عليه محق بويع او لم يبايع قل مبايعوه او كثروا والمخالف له مبطل ساعدته دولته فكثر بسببها اتباعه او لم تساعده فمن أي وجه يصح الاستدلال بكثرة الاتباع قلنا انما يستبين وجه دلالة الكثرة من فهم ماخذ الامامة وقد بان انها ليست ماخوذة من النص كما قدرناه في الباب السابع ونبهنا على حماقة من يدعى تواتر النص من كل واحد منهم على ولده بل بينا جهل من يدعى ذلك في على رضى الله عنه فان ذلك لو كان لاستدل به على ولم يعجز عن اظهاره ولا رضى به فخو الذي جر العساكر والجنود في زمان معاوية حتى قتل من ابطال الاسلام في تلك المعارك الوف ولم يكترث بقتلهم فما الذي كان نزعه واشياعه عن الاستدلال بنص رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وقد بينا ان ذلك يقابله دعوى البكرية في النص على ابي بكر رضى الله عنه ودعوى الروندية