then that would be stronger evidence of invalidity than of infallibility (1). It is thus clear that the hadith provides them with no proof whatsoever [for] (2) establishing infallibility. Infallibility in the absolute sense—namely, doing what is commanded and refraining from what is prohibited—is not, according to them, within Allah’s power. Nor (3) can He cause anyone to perform an act of obedience or refrain from an act of disobedience, whether a prophet or anyone else. Accordingly, in their view, it is impossible for someone whom He knows would obey Him if he were to live to do so through Allah’s assistance and guidance; rather, he would obey by his own choice (4). This further demonstrates the inconsistency of their position on questions of infallibility, as explained above.

Even if infallibility were assumed to have been established, we have already explained that infallibility is not a condition for the Imam, nor is there any consensus (5) that others besides them are not infallible. Their argument is therefore invalid in every respect.

As for his statement:

“Ali laid claim to it (6), and indeed (7) it has been established that he was free of defilement; he must therefore have been truthful.”

The response may be given in several ways.

First: We do not concede that Ali laid claim to it. Rather, we know as a matter of necessity [with certain knowledge] (8) that Ali never laid claim to it before Uthman was killed, although (9)