Minhaj as-Sunnah - Ibn Taimiya - (6/435)

Minhaj as-SunnahIbn Taimiya

If he says:

“You believe that the three were not infallible,”

we reply:

“We believe that Alī was not infallible, and we believe that (1) denying his infallibility is more warranted than denying the infallibility of others (2), and that they would have a greater claim to infallibility than he if it were possible. Given this, our own position cannot be used as an argument against us.”

Moreover, we concede that the three were not infallible only because we believe that Allah did not create an infallible imam. If it were assumed that Allah had created an infallible imam, there could be no doubt that they would have a greater claim to infallibility than anyone who came after them. Our denial of their infallibility is based on this conviction of ours.

There is a third response to the argument itself, which is to ask:

How do you know that Alī was infallible while everyone else was not? If they answer that there is consensus affirming Alī’s infallibility and denying the infallibility of everyone else (3), as they stated in their argument, they are to be told:

If consensus is not authoritative proof, this argument is invalid. But if it is authoritative proof for affirming Alī’s infallibility—which is the underlying premise—then it may also be authoritative proof for the intended conclusion: the infallibility of those who preserved and transmitted the revealed law. Yet these people appeal (4) to consensus while rejecting consensus as authoritative proof. How, then, did they know that Alī alone was infallible rather than anyone else?

If they claim that reports from the Prophet affirming his infallibility were transmitted to them through tawātur (mass transmission), then the answer concerning that would be—

(1) “That” is omitted from B. (2) N and M read: “more warranted than denying it of others.” This is a corruption. (3) N reads: “If they invoke consensus that Alī is not infallible and that others are not infallible”; M reads: “If they invoke consensus that others are not infallible.” (4) B reads: “appealing [to consensus].”

وَإِذَا قَالَ: أَنْتُمْ تَعْتَقِدُونَ انْتِفَاءَ الْعِصْمَةِ عَنِ الثَّلَاثَةِ. قُلْنَا: نَعْتَقِدُ انْتِفَاءَ الْعِصْمَةِ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ، وَنَعْتَقِدُ أَنَّ (١) انْتِفَاءَهَا عَنْهُ أَوْلَى مِنِ انْتِفَائِهَا عَنْ غَيْرِهِ (٢) ، وَأَنَّهُمْ أَحَقُّ بِهَا مِنْهُ إِنْ كَانَتْ مُمْكِنَةً، فَلَا يُمْكِنُ مَعَ هَذَا أَنْ يُحْتَجَّ عَلَيْنَا بِقَوْلِنَا. وَأَيْضًا فَنَحْنُ إِنَّمَا نُسَلِّمُ انْتِفَاءَ الْعِصْمَةِ عَنِ الثَّلَاثَةِ؛ لِاعْتِقَادِنَا أَنَّ اللَّهَ لَمْ يَخْلُقْ إِمَامًا مَعْصُومًا. فَإِنْ قُدِّرَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ خَلَقَ إِمَامًا مَعْصُومًا فَلَا يُشَكُّ أَنَّهُمْ أَحَقُّ بِالْعِصْمَةِ مِنْ كُلِّ مَنْ جَاءَ بَعْدَهُمْ، وَنَفْيُنَا لِعِصْمَتِهِمْ لِاعْتِقَادِنَا هَذَا التَّقْدِيرَ. وَهُنَا جَوَابٌ ثَالِثٌ عَنْ أَصْلِ الْحُجَّةِ، وَهُوَ أَنْ يُقَالَ: مِنْ أَيْنَ عَلِمْتُمْ أَنَّ عَلِيًّا مَعْصُومٌ، وَمَنْ سِوَاهُ لَيْسَ بِمَعْصُومٍ. فَإِنْ قَالُوا بِالْإِجْمَاعِ عَلَى ثُبُوتِ عِصْمَةِ عَلِيٍّ وَانْتِفَاءِ عِصْمَةِ غَيْرِهِ (٣) كَمَا ذَكَرُوهُ مِنْ حُجَّتِهِمْ. قِيلَ لَهُمْ: إِنْ لَمْ يَكُنِ الْإِجْمَاعُ حُجَّةً بَطَلَتْ هَذِهِ الْحُجَّةُ، وَإِنْ كَانَ حُجَّةً فِي إِثْبَاتِ عِصْمَةِ عَلِيٍّ الَّتِي هِيَ الْأَصْلُ أَمْكَنَ أَنْ يَكُونَ حُجَّةً فِي الْمَقْصُودِ بِعِصْمَةِ مَنْ حَفَظَ الشَّرْعَ وَنَقَلَهُ وَلَكِنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ يَحْتَجُّونَ (٤) بِالْإِجْمَاعِ، وَيَرُدُّونَ كَوْنَ الْإِجْمَاعِ حُجَّةً، فَمِنْ أَيْنَ عَلِمُوا أَنَّ عَلِيًّا هُوَ الْمَعْصُومُ دُونَ مَنْ سِوَاهُ؟ فَإِنِ ادَّعَوُا التَّوَاتُرَ عِنْدَهُمْ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ فِي عِصْمَتِهِ، كَانَ الْقَوْلُ فِي ذَلِكَ

(١) أَنَّ: سَاقِطَةٌ مِنْ (ب) . (٢) ن، م: أَوْلَى مِنِ انْتِفَائِهَا عَنْ غَيْرِهِمْ، وَهُوَ تَحْرِيفٌ. (٣) ن: فَإِنْ قَالُوا بِالْإِجْمَاعِ عَلَى انْتِفَاءِ عِصْمَةِ عَلِيٍّ وَانْتِفَاءِ عِصْمَةِ غَيْرِهِ، م: فَإِنْ قَالُوا بِالْإِجْمَاعِ عَلَى انْتِفَاءِ عِصْمَةِ غَيْرِهِ. (٤) ب: مُحْتَجُّونَ.