as for the second premise which is their saying if it becomes clear that the one who is claimed to be infallible no matter how many then there is no need to prove that he is infallible then our companion is the only one claimed to be infallible so if he is the infallible imam then this is a premise in which we accuse them of lying and we do not accept that their companion claims infallibility for himself for we have not heard it at all and it has not been transmitted to us from the tongue of those who heard it from him. rather he only heard that from individual preachers and they are not infallible nor do they reach the level of being transmitted by many and if they had reached the level of being transmitted by many it would not have happened. knowledge of their words and their news is for two reasons. one of them is that those who hear this call from their companion are few for he is hidden and does not appear except
أما المقدمة الثانية وهي قولهم إذا بان ان المدعى للعصمة مهما كان واحدا وقع الاستغناء عن الاستدلال على كونه معصوما فصاحبنا اذا هو المدعى للعصمة وحده فإذا هو الإمام المعصوم فهذه مقدمة نكذبهم فيها ولا نسلم ان صاحبهم يدعى لنفسه العصمة فانا لم نسمعه البته ولم يتواتر الينا من لسان من سمعه منه بل انما سمع ذلك من آحاد دعاتهم وليسوا معصومين ولاهم بالغون حد التواتر ولو انهم بلغوا حد التواتر فلا يحصل العلم بقولهم وخبرهم لوجهين أحدهما ان المشافهين لهذه الدعوة من جهة صاحبهم قليل فانه محتجب لا يظهر إلا