and in that period there was no one who claimed infallibility for anyone other than them. Thus, the absence of infallibility from the three, coupled with the existence of disagreement over Alī’s infallibility, cannot validly be used as an argument.

The Fourteenth Point (1): It may be said: Either an infallible person must exist in every age, or this is not necessary. If it is not necessary, their position is invalid. If it is necessary, then even on this assumption we do not concede that Alī, rather than the three, was the infallible one. On the contrary, if this position is true, it follows that Abū Bakr, Umar, and Uthmān were infallible. For Ahl al-Sunnah unanimously regard Abū Bakr and Umar as superior and more entitled to infallibility than Alī. If infallibility is possible, those two are more likely to possess it; and if it is impossible, it is even further removed from him.

No one among Ahl al-Sunnah holds that Alī could be infallible to the exclusion of Abū Bakr and Umar. They concede that the three were not infallible only if Alī was likewise not infallible. As for denying infallibility to the three but not to Alī, this is not the position of anyone among Ahl al-Sunnah.

This is analogous to the prophethood of Moses and Jesus. Muslims do not acknowledge the prophethood of either of them without also acknowledging the prophethood of Muhammad. No Muslim affirms their prophethood independently of Muhammad’s prophethood. Rather, Muslims unanimously hold that whoever affirms the prophethood of some of them while rejecting that of others is a disbeliever, and that the disbelief of one who rejects Muhammad’s prophethood while affirming the prophethood of either of those two is graver than that of one who affirms Muhammad’s prophethood while rejecting the prophethood of either of them.

If it is said:

“Belief (2) in Muhammad necessarily entails belief in them, and likewise