It is said to them:

“This argument is manifestly false. The Imam whose presence you deem a form of providential assistance is the kind whose efficacy is attested by reason and customary experience—namely, the kind you yourselves described.

You said that whenever a community has an awe-inspiring leader who is obeyed, exercises authority, and has a free hand, his presence brings them closer to righteousness and keeps them farther from corruption. You also stipulated that he must be infallible, saying that the intended deterrence (1) can be achieved only through infallibility.

Yet it is well known that none of those who existed before the Awaited One possessed these qualities. None of them had a free hand or exercised authority. Ali—may Allah be pleased with him—did assume the caliphate, but his exercise of authority and the scope of his power were not equal to those enjoyed by his predecessors. As for the rest, they neither had a free hand nor exercised authority; rather, the same was achieved through any one of them as through his counterparts (2).

As for the absent one, nothing at all has been achieved through him. When someone who affirms his existence knows that he has been absent for more than 460 years, that he is fearful and unable even to appear—let alone enforce the prescribed penalties—and that he can neither command nor forbid anyone, turmoil and corruption do not cease on that account (3).

Hence, one finds (4) the Rāfidī factions to be the factions most rife with turmoil and corruption and most divided in word and deed. The fighting, discord, and mutual oppression found among them are unlike anything found among people who have even a non-Muslim ruler, let alone a Muslim ruler. What providential assistance, then, have his followers received through him?”