then this is the infinite regress that is plainly impossible according to reason. For this reason, it is deemed impossible by the consensus of rational people, just as the impossible form of circularity is prior circularity.

As for an infinite succession of effects—meaning that nothing exists unless something else existed before it, or that nothing exists except after something else—people hold three views concerning it:

Some say that it is impossible with respect to both the past and the future.

Others say that it is possible with respect to both the past and the future.

Still others say that it is impossible with respect to the past but possible with respect to the future. Holding it to be possible without qualification is the import of the position of the Salaf and the leading hadith scholars, as well as that of the majority of philosophers—both those who hold that this world came into existence and those who hold that it is eternal. The arguments of both groups have been discussed at length elsewhere. Indeed, we have discussed the principles of religion that he mentioned many times more extensively than he did and have identified the principal categories of views.] (1)

[Commentary on his statement that the prophets are protected from error and oversight]

[First aspect: Their disagreement concerning the infallibility of the prophets]

(Chapter)

As for his statement (2):

“And that (3) the prophets are protected from (4) error, oversight, and sin—minor and major—from the beginning of their lives until their end; otherwise, there would be no basis for trusting what they convey, the purpose of the prophetic mission would be nullified, and people would necessarily be repelled from them.”

The response is:

First: [Indeed] (5), the Imāmīs disagree among themselves concerning the infallibility of the prophets.