The author also says, that knowing the _true_ doctrine is knowing the unity _of God_. After this illustration, having in several sections exhibited an account of his own faith, and in some established it, he made in other sections a digression upon the creed of others, and the digressive sections are frequent; the proofs and disquisitions by controversy with regard to false religions, and the disquisitions by concordance with regard to the rightfulness of his own religion, are distinct from the totality of those arguments, which are between truth and falsehood, and the contrast between truth and falsehood, and that between small and great _is made evident_. The author further alleges, that in science there is truth and falsehood; but the distinguishing mark of truth is unity, and the distinguishing mark of falsehood is multiformity; unity is related to _authoritative_ instruction, and multiformity is related to opinion; instruction belongs to the assembly, and the assembly to the Imám; opinion is allied with conflicting sects, and these agree with their chiefs. As for the separation of truth from falsehood, and the resemblance which truth has with falsehood, and for the distinction between what is consistent and what is absurd, on both sides, a balance ought to be formed in which every thing may be weighed.[614] The author moreover says, that we obtained the knowledge of this balance from the speeches of the witnesses, and whatever is compounded of negation and affirmation; and whatever is deserving negation is falsehood; and whatever is deserving affirmation is truth; and by this balance we weigh the good and bad, the sincere and the lying, and all contradictions; and the acute distinction and mystery of this speech is, that in the sentences each word relates to truth by proof of evidence, and unity and confirmation. The Imámate unites itself with prophecy in such a degree that prophecy, by the very nature of the Imámate, is prophecy; and this is the scope of the discourse in these topics of inquiry.
Besides, the author forbade the vulgar to dive deeply into science; and he prohibited the nobles the study of the books of the ancients, unless there was a person fit to master the particulars of their contents, and the comparative merits of the men who have delivered speeches. He also determined, with his companions in divinity, to say: _illah illah Muhammed ast_, “God is God the praise-worthy;” so you; but the adversaries say: _illah illah akel ast_, “God is God the wise;” that is, whatever is reason, every reason takes its direction towards the side of this leader (Muhammed); and as some of them raise these questions: “God Almighty is he present or not? one or many? knowing or ignorant? powerful or not?” An answer sufficiently strong is given, namely: _illah ba illah Muhammed_, “God by God is praiseworthy:”[615] as it is God who sent the prophet for leading the creatures, and the prophet is the leader of the creatures.