If you claim the former, you are told:
The words of the Imam—and of everyone else (1)—are in the same position. When a ruler addresses the people (2), he must address them in general terms encompassing individuals, actions, and other matters. It is impossible for him, in his address, to specify every act of [every] (3) agent at every moment. Since this is impossible, he can employ only general, universal discourse—and such general, universal discourse is possible for the Messenger.
If you claim that the Messenger’s texts themselves are not general and universal, you are told:
This claim is rejected. Even if it were conceded that such generality cannot be affirmed of the texts of the Messenger—who is more perfect than the Imam—it would be all the more fitting to deny it of the Imam’s texts. Thus, in dealing with the Imam’s discourse, you are compelled to accept one of two things: either that the wording has general application, or that the meanings have general application through rational consideration. Whichever of the two it may be, it can more readily be established in the Messenger’s discourse; hence there is no need for the Imam’s explanation (4) of the rulings.
The eleventh answer:
It may be said: Moreover, (5) Allah Most High says:
“We have never sent a messenger except in the language of his people, so that he might make matters clear to them.”
[Surah Abraham: 4]
And Allah Most High says:
“So that mankind would have no argument against Allah after the messengers.”
[Surah al-Nisā: 165]
And Allah Most High says:
“The Messenger’s duty is only clear conveyance.”
[Surah al-Nūr: 54]
And there are other such verses.
[It is therefore said:] (6) And has (7) the proof been established against creation (8) through an explanation of the outlines, or not?