the second proof is their saying if a judge who is seeking guidance doubts a legal or rational issue and claims that he is unable to know its proof then what do you say to him? do you refer him to his mind and perhaps he is a common crude person who does not know the proofs of reason? or he is the intelligent person who has struck the arrows of opinion according to his ability but the issue was not revealed to him and he remained doubtful so you refer him to his mind which he admits to its shortcomings and this is impossible. or do you say to him learn the method of contemplation and the proof of the issue from me? if you say that then you have contradicted your statement by invalidating it. education since you have ordered education and made education a path and it is our school of thought except that you have refused for yourselves the position of education and were not ashamed of your opponent who opposes you and is similar in his mind to yours. this student says your opponent has invited me to learn from him and i am also confused about identifying the teacher. none of you claims infallibility for himself nor does he have a miracle that distinguishes him nor is he unique in a matter that distinguishes him from others. so i do not know whether to follow the philosopher the ashari or the mutazilite and their statements are contradictory and their minds are similar. i do not find in my soul prefers the length of the beard and the whiteness of the faces and i do not see any difference except in that if it is agreed upon. as for the mind and the claim and the deception of each with himself that he is the one who is right and his companion is the one who is wrong like the deception of his companion how severe is the contradiction of this speech for those who know it. the third proof is their saying that unity is evidence of the truth and multiplicity is evidence of falsehood. for if we say how many are five with five then the truth is one which is to say ten and falsehood is many without limit and it is everything other than ten is from what is above it or below it and unity is necessary for the doctrine of education for a thousand thousand gathered on this belief and their word was united and no difference was imagined between them and the people of opinion continue to have differences and multiplicity so it is evidence that the truth is in the division that is necessary for unity in its word and this is indicated by the most highs saying {and if it had been from other than allah they would have found within it much discrepancy.}
الدلالة الثانية قولهم إذا حاكم مسترشد تشكك في مسئلة شرعية او عقلية وزعم انه عاجز عن معرفة دليلها فماذا تتقولون له أفتحيلونه على عقله ولعله العامي الجلف الذي لا يعرف أدلة العقول او هو الذكي الذي ضرب سهام الرأي على حسب امكانه فلم تنكشف له المسئلة وبقي متشككا افتردونه الى عقله الذي هو معترف بقصوره وهذا محال او تقولون له تعلم طريق النظر ودليل المسئلة مني فان قلتم ذلك فقد ناقضتم قولكم بإبطال التعليم إذ امرتم بالتعليم وجعلتم التعليم طريقا وهو مذهبنا الا انكم أبيتم لانفسكم منصب التعليم ولم يستحيوا من خصمكم المعارض لكم المماثل في عقله لعقلكم إن هذا المتعلم يقول قد دعاني إلى التعلم منه خصمك وقد تحيرت في تعيين المعلم أيضا وليس يدعى واحدا منكم العصمة لنفسه ولا له معجزة تميزه ولا هو منفرد بأمر يفارق به غيره فلا أدرى أتبع الفلسفي أو الأشعري أو المعتزلى وأقاويلهم متعارضة وعقولهم متماثلة ولست أجد في نفسي الترجيح بطول اللحية وببياض الوجوه ولا أرى افتراقا إلا فيه إن اتفق فأما العقل والدعوى واغترار كل بنفسه في أنه المحق وصاحبه المبطل كاغترار صاحبه فما أشد تناقض هذا الكلام عند من يعرفه الدلالة الثالثة قولهم الوحدة دليل الحق والكثرة دليل الباطل فإنا إذا قلنا كم الخمسة مع الخمسة فالحق واحد وهو أن يقال عشرة والباطل كثير لا حصر له وهو كل ما سوى العشرة مما فوقها او تحتها والوحدة لازمة مذهب التعليم فانه اجتمع الف الف على هذا الاعتقاد واتحدت كلمتهم ولم يتصور بينهم اختلاف واهل الرأي لا يزال الاختلاف والكثرة تلازمهم فدل ان الحق في الفرقة التي تلازم الوحدة كلمتها وعليه دل قوله تعالى {ولو كان من عند غير الله لوجدوا فيه اختلافا كثيرا}