The first premise needs no proof for its clarity. As for the second premise, its proof is that a thing is only repelled by its opposite. Darkness is only repelled by light, misguidance by guidance, injustice by justice, and disobedience by obedience. Therefore, the Imam must be infallible from falsehood to demolish falsehood, because falsehood does not demolish falsehood, and infallible from misguidance, because misguidance does not demolish misguidance. Likewise, a misleader does not demolish misguidance. Likewise, a corruptor does not repel corruption, because corruption does not repel corruption. And God Almighty said in this regard: "And when Abraham was tested by his Lord with certain words, and he fulfilled them, He said: 'Indeed, I will make you a leader for the people.' He asked, 'And from my descendants?' He said, 'My covenant does not reach the wrongdoers.'" (Al-Baqarah: 124). Therefore, the covenant of God does not reach them. This proof was not included among the proofs relied upon by the Shiites in establishing the infallibility of the Imam. This is because it does not specifically address the meaning of infallibility as they defined it, but rather points to what should be available to the Imam in terms of refraining from falsehood and injustice. This may result from an inherent refusal due to piety, and it does not necessarily mean infallibility. Ibn Tumart's preference for this proof over other proofs cited by the Shiites for the Imam's infallibility indicates again that it is more evidence for the necessity of infallibility in the Shiite sense than for the Imam's possession of knowledge and justice to the highest degree. Ibn Tumart, Kitab al-Imamah: 244-245. A proof similar to this has been narrated from them, but it is not the same. It is their saying: "The Imam is always guided, and every guided person must be guided." (98) How can something give what it lacks? So it must always be guided, as stated in the transmitted evidence from them, the verse that the aforementioned Al-Mahdi used as proof, but with a difference in the interpretation of the proof. See: Ahmad Mahmoud Sobhi, Theory of Imamate: 2/466 onwards. And Al-Aiji, Al-Mawaqif: 253.