In وإن زنَوا ...

In وإن زنَوا , the إنْ is wasliyyah, and the phrase means, ‘if they acquire ma’rifah, they may do whatever they want, even if it is a major sin.’ The phrase إنا للهِ وإنا إلَيه راجعونَ is an expression of istirja’ and is said at the time of a severe and great calamity, and since this slander or misunderstanding was a great calamity, the Hadrat uttered it in order to dissociate and absolve himself totally from it.

The phrase أنْ تكونَ means في أن تكونَ , that is, ‘they have not been fair to us in [believing] that they would be quit of all accountability for their actions due to their belief in us (i.e. our imamate) while we ourselves would be accountable and answerable (for our acts): The Imam then cl arif ies what he had meant, that [belief in] wilayah is a prerequisite for the acceptability of works [before God], as will be discussed hereafter, God the Exalted willing.

Explanation Of Absence Of Contradiction Between Traditions That Exhort One To Perform ‘Ibadah And Abstain From Sins And Other Traditions Which Apparently Conflict With Them It should be known that if one were to refer to traditions that have been narrated concerning the states of the Noblest Messenger (S) and the Imams (A) of guidance, and study the character of their devotion ( ‘ubudiyyah ) , their painstaking diligence, their lamentations and entreaties, their humility and sense of indigence, their fear and sorrow before the sacred station of the Lord of Majesty, and if one were to study the character of their intimate supplications before the Fulfiller of Needs-traditions whose number far exceeds what is required to establish tawatur -and similarly, if one were to refer to the counsels given by the Noble Messenger (S) to the Commander of the Faithful (A) and also the counsels given by the Imams to one another, as well as to the elect of the Shi’ah and their sincere followers, the greatly eloquent and emphatic exhortations that they would make warning them against disobedience to God, the Exalted-a theme with which the books of tradition and chapters relating to doctrinal and legal duties are replete-he would be convinced that certain other traditions whose apparent and literal import contradicts with these traditions are not to be taken literally.

Therefore, if possible, they must be interpreted in a way that they do not conflict with those explicit and definitive traditions, which constitute the essentials of the faith, or they must be reconciled.