and Ali—even if they were said to be infallible—the transmission of the Emigrants and the Helpers is more compelling than theirs.
Furthermore, if (1) most people impugn the infallibility of the transmitter, the intended purpose is not achieved. How, then, could it be achieved when many within the Muslim community declare him an unbeliever?
Mass transmission is established through the reports of numerous transmitters, even if their probity is unknown.
The second answer:
It may be said: By this, do you mean someone who is (2) a preserver of the Revealed Law even if he is not infallible, or someone who is infallible? If you stipulate (3) infallibility, this is the same as the first argument, which you have merely repeated, and the answer to it has already been given (4). If you stipulate (5) preservation alone, we do not concede that Ali was better at preserving the Book and the Sunnah or more knowledgeable about them than Abū Bakr and Umar. Rather, they knew the Book and the Sunnah better than he did. His claim of consensus is therefore invalid.
The third answer:
It may be said: Do you mean (6), by his being an infallible preserver of the Revealed Law, that (7) the soundness of no part of the Revealed Law can be known except through his transmission? Or can the soundness of some part of the Revealed Law be known without his transmission?
If (8) you adopt the second view (9), neither his preservation nor his infallibility (10) is needed, for