He launched the ... Al-Hussain and Ghul from Al-Rantain, and not only that, but also their circumstances and actions. This is evident in his saying: "A chapter on the explanation of the sects of the falsifiers from the veiled and the anthropomorphists and their signs." All their signs are apparent. Their signs are apparent from their appearance in the land, and some of them are apparent from their circumstances and actions. Despite the political goals of these designations, where they were placed in honor of the Ansar and in denigration of the enemies, the practical dimension of Tawhid (Oneness of God) in the conception of the Mahdi is clearly revealed.

Evidence of Tawhid: One of the manifestations of the Mahdi's concern for Tawhid is that he gathered evidence for it that he did not gather for any other issue. He devoted to building and refining the evidence what he did not devote to anything else. We have encountered the following collection of evidence in his various writings and in what is attributed to him.

First: The Argument of the Companion: This argument was presented by the commentator of "Azz Ma Yutlab" and attributed to the Mahdi, and its formulation is as follows: If God had a partner, then either they would both create, or neither would create, or one would create and the other would not. It is false that they would not both create because of the existence of actions. And it is false that one would create and the other would not, as neither is more deserving than the other. So, if both possibilities are false, then only the possibility that they both create remains. If this is established, then we say: This substance is either created by both, or not created by either, or created by one and not the other. It is false that they both create it due to the impossibility of division. And it is false that they do not create it, due to the existence of actions, and because the action is possible, and the possible is not impossible to exist. And it is false that one creates it and the other does not, as neither is more deserving than the other. These three scenarios are impossible scenarios. This impossibility is either due to the action, or due to the essence, or due to the estimation of the second. It is false that it is due to the action because the action is possible, and the possible is not impossible to exist. It is also false...

Ibn Tumart - Risala fi Bayan Taw'if al-Mubtilin: (68) Perhaps he means (69) the impossibility of a possible thing between two capable beings. See on this issue Al-Iji - Al-Mawaqif: 207