Al-Imāma wa’l-Tabṣira min al-Ḥayra

فلأجل الحاجة إلى الغيبة اتّسعت الأخبار، والمعاني التقيّة والمدافعة عن الأنفس اختلفت الروايات ﴿وَمَا كَانَ ٱللَّهُ لِيُضِلَّ قَوْمًۢا بَعْدَ إِذْ هَدَىٰهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يُبَيِّنَ لَهُم مَّا يَتَّقُونَ﴾. ولولا التقية والخوف، لما حار أحد، ولا اختلف اثنان، ولا خرج شيء من معالم دين الله—تعالى—إلّا على كلمة لا تختلف وحرف لا يشتبه. ولكنّ الله—عظمت أسماؤه—عهد إلى أئمة الهدى في حفظ الأُمة، وجعلهم في زمن مأذون لهم باذاعة العلم، وفي آخر حلماء ﴿يَغْفِرُوا۟ لِلَّذِينَ لَا يَرْجُونَ أَيَّامَ ٱللَّهِ لِيَجْزِىَ قَوْمًۢا بِمَا كَانُوا۟ يَكْسِبُونَ﴾. عظم هذا من أمر وجلّ! ولأمر ما وقع وحلّ! وغير عجب أن يحدث في مثله من الأوقات خبر يحمي خيط الرقبة. ويحرس بفضل المداراة جمهور البيضة.

Thus, owing to the need for the Occultation, reports proliferated, and transmissions differed on account of meanings pertaining to precautionary dissimulation (taqiyya) and the preservation of lives, for ﴾Allāh does not lead any people astray after He has guided them until He has made clear to them what they should beware of﴿ [9:115]. Were it not for dissimulation and fear, nobody would have been confused, neither would any two persons have disagreed, nor would anything from among the monuments of Allāh’s (taa) religion have emerged except in a word upon which none disagree and a letter which none find confounding. However, Allāh, exalted be His names, entrusted the Imams of guidance with the safeguarding of the community, and placed them in one era in which they were permitted to disseminate knowledge, and in another in which they were forbearing, so that they may ﴾forgive those who do not expect Allāh’s days, that He may [Himself] requite every people for what they used to earn﴿ [45:14]. How momentous and magnificent a matter this is! And surely it was for some momentous cause that it occurred and came to pass! Nor is it strange that, in times such as these, a report should arise that protects the neck-vein and, through the virtue of prudent conciliation, safeguards the general body of the community.

وفي مثل هذا الزمن خولف الأمر في العدد، حتى أُوقع في الظاهر أمر ما لا خلاف في استبطانه، وكشف عن سبب لا شك في كتمانه. وليست إشارة مشهورة وإذاعة بيّنة أن يقول وليّ من أولياء اللهِ وثقة من خزّان أسرار الله أنّ صاحب هذا الأمر أثبت منّي، وأخفّ ركاباً. هذا، مع الروايات المشهورة والأحاديث الكثيرة: أنّ الوقت غير معلوم، والزمن غير معروف، ولولا كتمان الوقت والمساترةُ به، لما استدلّ عليه بالصيحة، والآيات وخروج رايات أهل الضلالات، ولقيل: إنّه فلان بن فلان، وإنّ يومه يوم معلوم بين الأيام، ولكن الله—جلّ اسمه—جعله أمراً منتظراً في كل حين، وحالاً مرجوّة عند كل أهل عصر، لئلاً تقسو—بطول أجل يضربه الله—قلوب، ويستبطأ في استعمال سيّئة وفاحشة، موعدة عقاب، وليكون كل عامل على اُهبّة، ويكون من وراء أعمال الخيرات اُمنيّةٌ، ومن وراء أهل الخطايا والسيئات خشية وردعة، وليدفع الله بعضاً ببعض، والسنّة القديمة على هذا قول رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله في أمر الساعة حين أنذر قومه: صبّحتكم الساعة، مسّتكم الساعة، بعثت أنا والساعة كهذه من هذه.

In an era like this, the matter of the number[1] was contested, to the point that there was outwardly brought about a matter concerning that whose inward reality admitted no disagreement, and there was disclosed a reason which there was no doubt ought to have been concealed. Nor does it constitute a well-known indication or an explicit public proclamation for one who is among Allāh’s representatives, and a trustworthy custodian of Allāh’s secrets, to say: “The Master of this Ordinance is more well-established than I am, and lighter in movement,”[2] especially in view of the famous transmissions and numerous traditions stating that the time is unknown and the era unrecognised. Furthermore, were it not for the secrecy surrounding the time and its deliberate concealment, his advent would not have been identified by means of the Cry, the signs and the emergence of the war-banners of the people of misguidance,[3] and it would instead have been said: “He is so-and-so, the son of so-and-so, and his day is a known day among other days.” However, Allāh, magnified be His name, made it an ordinance awaited at every moment and a condition hoped for by the people of every age, lest people’s hearts become hardened by the protracted term that Allāh decrees, and lest the promised punishment for resorting to a misdeed or an obscenity come to be regarded as slow in arriving; and so that every agent may remain in readiness, with hope lying beyond the performance of good deeds, and apprehension and restraint lying before the people of iniquities and misdeeds; and so that Allāh may repel some by means of others. The ancient precedent in this regard is the statement of the Apostle of Allāh (sawa) concerning the Hour, when he warned his people: “The Hour has come upon you in the morning! The Hour has come upon you in the evening! The Hour and I have been sent forth like these two.”[4]

فلولا ما أراد من المدافعة وتقريب المدّة على عامل الخير والشرّ والثواب والعقاب، لعلم (صلّى الله عليه وآله) أن ما جرت إليه الاُمّة الضالّة دون وقوع الساعة، وأنّ ما وعده الله في أهل بيته من إظهارهم على الدين كلّة قبل حدوثها يكون. وعلى هذا مضت الرسل، ودرج الأخيار، كل يقرّب القيامة، ويدني الساعة، ويبشّر بسرعة المجازاة على العقاب والثواب. ولو كان الخبر عن كل شئ بحقيقته مقدّماً، والأجل في كل مدّة مضروباً ممهداً، لكان حق الرسالة وفرض البلاغة على عيسى عليه السلام أن يأمر من يعلم أنّه يبلغ زمن رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله أن يقتصر على ما يعهده في أيّامه، ثقة بأنّ شريعته تنسخ الشرايع، وعلماً بأنّه خير النبيّين وسيد المرسلين. ولأقترف أهل كل فترة ذنوبًا عظيمة وجرائح كثيرة، ولكنّهم كانوا على اقترابٍ من انتظار عقاب أو ثواب وبذلك دفع الله الناس بعضهم ببعض. وهذه السنّة في الأئمة عليهم السلام مستعملة، وعلى أيّامهم جارية، وفيهم قائمة.

So, were it not for what He intended by way of repulsion and of making the term seem near to the doer of good and evil deeds—and likewise the reward and the retribution—the Prophet (sawa) would have made known that what the misguided community would be brought to would occur before the advent of the Hour, and that what Allāh had promised him concerning the people of his House—namely, that He would cause them to prevail over all other religions—would come to pass before its advent. In accordance with this did the Apostles pass on and the chosen ones proceed, each of them presenting the Resurrection and the Hour as near and bringing glad tidings of the swiftness of requital in retribution and reward. And were information concerning everything, according to its true reality, to have been given beforehand, and the appointed term for every period fixed and laid out in advance, it would have been incumbent by the right of the Apostolate and the duty of notification upon ʿĪsā (as) to command those whom he knew would live to the time of the Apostle of Allāh (sawa) to restrict themselves to what he enjoined upon them during his own days, trusting that Muḥammad’s Sacred Law would abrogate the prior Sacred Laws, and knowing that he was the best of the Prophets and the Master of the Apostles. And the people of every interval would have committed horrific sins and countless offences; instead, they remained in a state of expecting imminent retribution or reward, and due to that Allāh repelled some people by means of others. This custom is likewise put into practice among the Imams (as-p), operative throughout their days and established among them.

ولو كان أمرهم مهملاً عن العدد وغفلاً، لما وردت الأخبار الوافرة بأخذ الله ميثاقهم على الأنبياء وسالف الصالحين من الأُمة. ويدلك على ذلك قول أبي عبداللّه عليه السلام حين سئل عن نوح عليه السلام لمّا ذكر « استوت سفينته على الجوديّ بهم »: هل عرف نوح عددهم؟ فقال: نعم، وآدم عليه السلام. وكيف يختلف عدد، يعرفه أبو البشر ومن درج من عترته والأنبياء من عقبه، على شرذمة من ذريّته وبقيّة يسيرة من ولده؟!

Furthermore, had the matter of the number been left neglected and unheeded, none of the abundant reports about the covenant Allāh took from the prophets and the righteous predecessors of the community would have been transmitted. The statement of Abī ʿAbd Allāh (as)[1] when he was asked about Nūḥ (as) proves as much, when the asker mentioned that: “His Ark had settled upon (the mountain of) al-Jūdiyy, with them in tow,” and then asked: “Was Nūḥ cognisant of their number?,” so the Imam replied: “Yes, and so was Ādam (as).” How could a number known to the father of mankind, to those of his progeny who passed on, and to the Prophets from among his descendants, become a matter of disagreement among a mere fraction of his progeny and a scant remnant of his posterity?!

وأيّ تأويل يدخل على حديث اللوح. وحديث الصحيفة المختومة؟ والخبر الوارد عن جابر في صحيفة فاطمة عليها السلام؟ وكيف لا يعلم: أنّ الذي قالـ[ه] العالم عليه السلام: ستّة أيام، أو ستة أشهر أو ستّ سنين، غير معلوم؟! ومن غير شك يجوز أنّ أمراً لا يمتنع أن يجوز وقته من ستّة أيام إلى ستّة أشهر، ومن ستّة أشهر إلى ستّ سنين، غير ممتنع أن يجوز إلى سنين. وهل هذا مفهومٌ؟ فإن كان عليه السلام أراد تسمية الوقت، فقد علم أنّه لم يسمّ. وإن أراد الأغماض منه فغير عجب أن يغمضه بأشدّ ما يقدر عليه، ويستر عنه بأجهد ما يمكنه، لأنّ أمراً يخبر عنه من يوثق بعلمه بالشك بين ستّة أيام أو ستّ سنين، لا يراد به غير المغامضة والسّتّر. ولولا إقحام السؤال عليهم في أوقات غير مسهّلة للجواب، لما خرج حكم إلّا على حقيقته، ولا كلام إلّا على جهته.

And what interpretation could rightly be presented for the tradition of the Tablet,[1] or the tradition of the Sealed Scroll? And what of the report transmitted by Jābir (b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārī) concerning the Scroll of Fāṭima (as-f)? And how could it not be known that what the Scholar (as) said: “six days,” or “six months,” or “six years,” was something indeterminate?! Without any doubt, it is possible that a matter whose time may conceivably extend from six days to six months, and from six months to six years, may just as conceivably extend for years beyond that. Is this not understood? If he (as) intended to specify the time, then it is known that he did not specify it; and if he intended to obscure it, then it is no wonder that he should obscure it to the greatest extent within his power and conceal it with the utmost effort possible to him, for a matter concerning which one trusted for his knowledge speaks with uncertainty between six days and six years can have been intended for nothing other than obfuscation and concealment. And were it not for questions being thrust upon them when answering was disadvantageous, no verdict would ever have been issued except according to its true reality, nor any statement except in its proper tenor.

فأمّا قوله عليه السلام: إنّ صاحب هذا الأمر ابن ثلاثين سنة، أو إحدى وثلاثين سنة، أو أربعين سنة، فإن جاز الأربعين فليس بصاحب هذا الأمر. فإنّه لمعنى المدافعة عن الأنفس، وليتيقّن من لا يشكّ في إمامة من يحدّث بهذا الحديث من أعدائه: أنّه ليس بصاحب السيف فيلهو عنه ويشتغل عن طلبه. ويدلّك على هذا قوله: يملك السابع من ولد الخامس، حتى يملأها عدلاً كما ملئت جوراً. ولو كان صاحب هذا الأمر لا يجوز أن يجوز أربعين سنة، لما جاز لأحد من الأئمة عليهم السلام أن تصلح له الإمامة فوق الأربعين، لأن الإمامة شأن واحد في القيام بالعلم والسيف، وما كان الله ليجعل هذا الأمر العظيم في رجل يختاره، ثم ينزعه عنه لمعنى السنّ.

As for his (as) statement: “The Master of this Ordinance is thirty years old, or thirty-one, or forty; but if he passes forty, then he is not the Master of this Ordinance,” it was intended for the preservation of lives, and so that those among his enemies who heard this tradition and had no doubt concerning the Imamate of the one relating it might become certain that he was not the Master of the Sword, due to that leaving him alone and becoming distracted from seeking him. The Imam’s statement regarding this: “The seventh from among the descendants of the fifth will have dominion, until he fills it with justice just as it had been filled with iniquity,” proves as much. Had it been impossible for the Master of this Ordinance to pass forty years of age, it would likewise have been impossible for any of the Imams (as-p) to remain fit for the Imamate beyond forty, because the Imamate is a single charge, exercised through knowledge and the sword. Nor would Allāh invest this hallowed Ordinance in a man whom He chooses, only then to deprive him of it on account of his age.

ولو طويت ما نطقت به من هذا التأويل على هذا الخبر، لكان فيما يتأوّله من يتعلق به للردّ أقنع حجّة وأبلغ دفعاً، لأنّ الذي يروي هذا الحديث يتأوّل: أنّ امتناع القيام بعد الأربعين سنة من طريق النكير في العقول. وأعوذ بالله أن أقول: إنّهم صلوات الله عليهم بمنزلة سائر الناس، وإنّ عقولهم ممّا يدخلها الفساد في الأربعين وما فوقها. والأسوة برسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله حسنة، وهو سيّد النبيّين والأئمة الراشدين، وحين أناف على الأربعين نُبّي، وبعدها بسنين أظهر الدعوة. فأمّا أمر موسى عليه السلام، وقوله: وإنّه لا يموت حتى يملأها عدلاً كما ملئت جوراً، فإنّ ذلك قاله عند شدّة الطلب وقسوة القلوب، ليقرّب المدّة، ويردع الظلمة. والحجّة، فيمن قال بالوقف عليه، قد استقصيت بصحيح الأخبار في باب إمامته. وإنّما أردت بذكر هذا الحديث إيراد قوله: « بدا لله فيما قلت » لأنّه خرج في أيّام فلان حين اشتدّ الطلب والخوف، حتى وقع بعد هذا الحديث من الغيبة والاختفاء ما اتّصل بهذا العهد وبلغ هذه المدّة، وما كان الله ليبدو له في إمام تسميةً ولا خروجاً. وما أُفرّق—بعد قولي: إن الإمامة أحد الشرائع الخمسة—بين من يقول بالبداء فيها بالعدد والتسمية، وبين من يقول بالبداء في الصلاة والصوم وسائر الشرائع الأربعة. لأنّ مَخْرَجَ الأربعة من الواحدة، وهي الإمامة، فإن جاز أن ينسخ الله أصل الشرائع، جاز أن ينسخ فرعها. وأعوذ بالله أن أقول بنسخ شريعة وتبديل ملّة، بعد أن جعل الله محمّداً صلّى الله عليه وآله خاتم النبيّين، وشريعته خاتمة الشرائع، وواصل القيام على دينه وشريعته بقيام الساعة، والانتقال منها إلى محشر القيامة فأمّا الوقت: فالسنّة فيه الكتمان، والشريعة فيه الامساك عن الإعلان. وممّا يدلّ على التقيّة ويرشد إلى أنّ الأخبار الكثيرة وردت لعلّةٍ ما: قوله عليه السلام: « بدا لله في إسماعيل ». فكيف الحجّة الآن في آدم عليه السلام أنّه حفظ أسماءهم؟ وما القول في أمر نوح أنّه علم عددهم؟ وكيف يثبت أنّ الله—عزّ وجلّ–أخذ على الأمّة كلّها عهدهم، وهو ينسخ أمرهم، ويبدو له في أسمائهم؟. وبأيّ دليل يدفع أمر اللوح؟ فأخبار الأظلّة، والآثار الواردة أنّ الله خلقهم قبل الأُمم، وما كان الله ليأخذ مولى من أوليائه على قوم، ثم يبدو له في ذلك وقد قبض إليه منهم العدد الكثير، إذ هو الحق أن لا يحاسب إلا بحجّة، ولا يعذّب إلّا بحقيقة بلاغ. وحاش لله أن يجعل خلفاء في عباده من ينقض أمرهم ويبدّل سنّتهم وتكون حكمته—سبحانه—بمحل يرشّح رجلاً لحفظ بيضة المسلمين فيكون بمنزلة ينحّى عنها قبل انقضاء أجّله وبلوغ مدّته، أو يجعله بمحل من يحدث في عقله الفساد لبلوغه أقصى العمر وأبعد السنّ، تعالى الله عن ذلك علوّاً كبيراً.

Were I to withhold what I have articulated by way of this interpretation of the report, there would be, in the interpretation placed upon it by one who clings to it for the purpose of refutation, an even more convincing argument and a more decisive rebuttal, because he who transmits this tradition interprets it as meaning that the impossibility of undertaking the Imamate beyond forty years of age is due to the impairment of the intellects. And I seek refuge in Allāh from saying that they—the Ahl al-Bayt (saa-p)—are in the position of the rest of mankind, or that their intellects are susceptible to corruption at forty years of age and beyond. For the Apostle of Allāh (sawa) is the most excellent role model, and he is the Master of the Prophets and the rightly guided Imams: when he surpassed forty (years of age) he was made a Prophet, and for years after that he made the Mission manifest. As for the matter of Mūsā (al-Kāẓim) (as), and his statement: “He will not die until he has filled the earth with justice just as it had been filled with iniquity,” he said that at a time of intense pursuit and hardness of hearts, so as to bring the term near and restrain the oppressors. As for the decisive argument against those who professed the cessation of the Imamate with him, I have exhaustively set it forth through authentic reports in the chapter concerning his Imamate. By mentioning this tradition, I intended only to adduce his statement: “Allāh made a disclosure (badāʾ) concerning what I said,” because it was uttered during the days of so-and-so, when pursuit and fear had become intense, such that after this tradition there occurred an Occultation and concealment which have continued to this very age and reached this duration; and Allāh would never make a disclosure concerning the designation of an Imam or his emergence. Nor do I differentiate, after having affirmed that Imamate is one of the five religious ordinances, between one who professes Divine disclosure, in that context, with respect to the number and designation (of Imams), and one who professes Divine disclosure with respect to the ritual prayer, fasting and the remaining four religious ordinances. For the four proceed from the one, which is Imamate: if it were possible for Allāh to abrogate the foundation of the religious ordinances, it would be possible for Him to abrogate their ancillaries. And I seek refuge in Allāh from saying that a Sacred Law has been abrogated or a religious dispensation changed, after Allāh has made Muḥammad (sawa) the Seal of the Prophets, his Sacred Law the seal of all Sacred Laws, and perpetuated adherence to his religion and Sacred Law until the advent of the Hour and the transition therefrom to the Gathering of the Resurrection. As for the time, the established precedent regarding it is concealment, and the Sacred Law regarding it requires refraining from public disclosure. And among that which demonstrates dissimulation and soundly orients one to the fact that the numerous reports were transmitted for some particular reason is his (as) statement: “Allāh made a disclosure concerning Ismāʿīl.” What, then, becomes of the decisive argument concerning Ādam (as), namely that he preserved their names? And what is to be said concerning Nūḥ (as), namely that he knew their number? And how can it be maintained that Allāh (azwj) took their covenant from the entire community while He would abrogate their ordinance and make a disclosure concerning their names? And by what evidence can the matter of the Tablet be set aside? Then there are the reports concerning the primordial shadows, and the transmitted traditions stating that Allāh created them before the religious communities. Allāh would never appoint one of His representatives as master over a people and then make a disclosure concerning that after He has already taken upon Himself a great number of them, since it is a truth that He holds none accountable except by means of a decisive argument and punishes none except after the reality has been fully conveyed. Far be it from Allāh that He should appoint among His servants caliphs whose ordinance He would overturn and whose custom He would alter, or that His wisdom, glory be to Him, should be such that He would nominate a man for the safeguarding of the body of the Muslims, only for him to become as one who is removed therefrom before the expiration of his appointed term and the completion of his allotted duration; or that He should place him in a position in which his intellect would become susceptible to corruption upon his reaching the utmost extent of life and the furthest reaches of age. Allāh transcends that with a great transcendence.

والحجّة على هذا القول، مثل الحجّة على تسميته: فسمّى إماماً، ولما هو، وأظهر القول فيه بالبداء لمثله، أو جعل البداء لمعنى معارضة في موت أو غم أو رزق أو أجل. والإمامة لا تغيّر، والنسب لا ينقطع، والعدد لا يزيد ولا ينقص. فإن قال قائل: إنّ الذي انتهى إليه الوقت في الغيبة غاية عمر أهل الدهر، ونهاية سنّ خلق هذا العصر، وانّ الآيات قبله لم تظهر، والدلالات المذكورة بين يديه لم تحدث؟! فهلّا يقول بالبداء في هذه الدلالات، ويحتجّ بنسخها، إذ؟ هو جائز عنده أن يبدو لله في إمام، فإنّ ذلك أولى وأحق. وستجده أكثر من يمتنع من هذا، ويحتجّ بأنها من المحتوم! فكيف يجعل هذه الدلالات ممّا (لا) يبدو لله فيها، لأنها من المحتوم، ويقول بالبداء في الإمامة ولا يشكّ أنّها من المحتوم؟! وكيف لا يتّخذ الحجّة في ذلك: أن الله—جلّ اسمه—يعفو عن عباده فيما يتوعّدهم به من عقاب وعذاب محتوماً كان ذلك منه أو موقوفاً. فلا يبدو له في وعد خير صغيراً كان أو كبيراً، حتى تسلم له المدّة ويقرب الله عليه الوقت، ويكفيه أمر الوحشة لطول الغيبة. وإن ترك هذه العلّة في الوقت، وقال بالعمر: أنّه لا يجوز عمر متأخر على عمر متقدم؟! فالخبر شائع أنّ عمر أبي عبداللّه عليه السلام أوفى على عمر من تقدّمه. وكلّما جاز أن يكون في واحد، هو جائز أن يكون في آخر، لا سيّما إذا لم يكن ذلك مما يفسد شريعة أو يبطل سنّة. وعسى أن يعتصم بعد هذه الأحوال مقصّر بالتسليم، فيقول: إنّه واجب استعماله في الأخبار كلّها، ويكره التفقّه، ويرفض القصد فيقول: وردت الأخبار، ولزم القبول ووجب التسليم. ويجعل الوليّ في ذلك بمنزلة العدوّ، فيوجب على أولياء الله استعمال خبر خرج من العلماء عن تقيّة لأعداء الله. ولا يعلم أنّ المجتهد في العمل أفضل من المتّكل على الأماني. ويجهل قول أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: اللّهمّ إنك تعلم أنّه ما ورد عليّ أمران أحدهما لك رضا، والآخر لي هوى، إلّا آثرت رضاك على هواي. وهذا بعيد من هذا النمط، وعميق من القول في هذا الموضع، لكنّ لطيف النظر يذهب إليه، ودقيق الفكر يوجب أنّه إذا لزم الإيثار في أمرين كلاهما حق، لفُضّل رضا الله على هوى وليّ من أوليائه. إنّ استعمال الإيثار في خبر ورد لمكان حجة، واستعبار واجب على خبر وقع لمعنى تقيّة ومكان مدافعة. جعلنا الله ممّن يبصر رشده، ويهتدي سننه، ويجتهد في الدين بُلغته ويبذل فيه طاقته، ويخشاه حق خشيته، ويراقبه مراقبة أهل طاعته، ويرغب في ثوابه ويخاف معاده، وختم أعمالنا بالسعادة والزلفى الحسنة. وقد بيّنت الأخبار التي ذكرتها من طريق العدد، وكل ما وقع في عصر إمام من إشارة إلى رجل، أو دعاية منه بغير حق، واستحالة مجاوزة العدد وتبديل الأسماء، بصحيح الأخبار عن الأئمة الهادين عليهم السلام. متوكلاً على الله تعالى، ومستغفراً من التقصير، ومستعيذاً به سبحانه أن أُريد—بما تكلّفته—إلّا الإصلاح وما توفيقي إلّا بالله، عليه توكّلت، وإليه أنيب.

The decisive argument for this stated principle resembles the argument concerning his designation by name: an Imam was designated, and for what he is; while the stated principle of Divine disclosure was manifested in regard to something analogous to it, or a disclosure was Divinely instituted for the purpose of averting something concerning death, anguish, sustenance or lifespan. But the Imamate does not change, the lineage does not die out and the number neither increases nor decreases. If someone were to say: “The point in time to which the Occultation has reached is the furthest extent of the lifespan of the people of the time and the utmost limit of the years of the people of this age, yet the signs preceding him have not manifested and the indications mentioned as occurring before him have not come about,” then why does he not profess Divine disclosure concerning these indications and argue for their abrogation, since it is admissible according to him that Allāh should disclose something concerning an Imam? Indeed, that would be more fitting and more warranted. Yet you will find that most of them refuse this and argue that these indications are among the predetermined matters! How, then, can he make these indications among those things concerning which Allāh does not make disclosures because they are predetermined, while professing Divine disclosure concerning the Imamate, even though he does not doubt that it is among the predetermined matters?! And why does he not adopt as the decisive argument in this regard that Allāh, magnified be His name, may pardon His servants from the retribution and punishment with which He threatens them, whether that threat be predetermined or conditional, whereas He does not disclose concerning a promise of goodness, be it small or great, so that the duration may remain intact for him, Allāh may render the time near to him, and he may due to that be spared the estrangement caused by the protraction of the Occultation? And if he abandons this explanation concerning the time and instead argues from lifespan, saying that a later lifespan cannot exceed an earlier lifespan, then it is widely reported that the lifespan of Abī ʿAbd Allāh (as) exceeded that of those who preceded him. Whatever is possible in one is possible in another, especially when this is not something that corrupts a Sacred Law or invalidates a custom (of the Apostle of Allāh (sawa)). Perhaps, after all these considerations, the diminisher [1] will seek refuge in submission, saying that it is obligatory to employ it with regard to all reports, while abhorring discernment and rejecting judicious purpose, and will say: “The reports have been relayed, acceptance is incumbent and submission obligatory.” He, on account of that, places the representative in the position of the enemy, obligating Allāh’s representatives to act upon a report that came out from the scholars out of dissimulation before Allāh’s enemies. He does not know that one who strives earnestly in action is superior to one who relies upon mere hopes, and is ignorant of the statement of Amīr al-Muʾminīn (as): “O’ Allāh! You know that whenever two matters presented themselves to me—one containing Your satisfaction, and the other my desire—I preferred Your satisfaction over my desire.” This lies far from the immediate mode of this discussion and constitutes a profound consideration in this context, yet subtle consideration leads to it and precise thought necessitates it: if preference is required between two matters which are both true, the satisfaction of Allāh is to be preferred over the desire of one of His representatives. Indeed, the exercise of preference is required in favour of a report transmitted as a binding argument, while taking admonition is obligatory from a report that was issued for the purpose of dissimulation and the preservation of lives. May Allāh render us among those who perceive their rectitude, are guided to its paths, strive in religion to the fullest extent of their capacity and expend in that their utmost strength, fear Him with the fear that is His due, remain vigilant of Him with the vigilance of the people of His obedience, desire His reward and fear the return to Him; and may He seal our deeds with felicity and excellent proximity to Him. I have elucidated, through authentic reports from the Imams of guidance (as-p), the reports I have mentioned concerning the number, everything that occurred during the era of an Imam by way of an indication toward a man or an unwarranted claim on his part, and the impossibility of exceeding the number or altering the names. Upon Allāh, exalted is He, I rely, seeking forgiveness for my shortcomings and seeking refuge in Him—glorified be He—from intending, through what I have undertaken, anything other than rectification. My success is not but through Allāh; upon Him I have relied and to Him I turn.