can be broken, but when arrows are bundled together, they cannot (1) be broken. An individual may be overcome and routed by his enemy; but when people form a large group, the enemy cannot defeat them as he could an individual alone.

Furthermore, if consensus can be erroneous, then it is not established that 'Alī is infallible. His infallibility is known only through the consensus that no one besides him is infallible. If consensus could have erred (2), someone else in the Muslim community could be infallible; in that case, it would not be known that he is the infallible one.

It thus becomes clear that their attack on consensus invalidates the foundation upon which they relied to establish the imamate of the infallible one. If his infallibility is invalidated, the foundation of the Rāfidah’s doctrine is invalidated. Thus, if they challenge consensus, the foundation of their doctrine collapses; and if they acknowledge its authority as proof, their doctrine collapses. Their doctrine (3) is therefore invalid in either case.

[Section: The Rāfidī’s statement that a consensus contrary to the text concerning 'Alī would be erroneous by their own standards, and the response to him]

Section

The Rāfidī (4) said:

“We have already established the authenticity of the text indicating the imamate of the Commander of the Faithful. Were they to reach a consensus contrary to it, that would be (5) an error, since, by their own standards, a consensus contrary to the text is erroneous.”