ثم يقال لهم: أليس النبي صلى الله عليه وآله اختفى في الشعب ثلاث سنين لم يصل إليه أحد، واختفى في الغار ثلاثة أيام ولم يجز قياسا على ذلك أن يعدمه الله تعالى تلك المدة مع بقاء التكليف على الخلق الذين بعثه لطفا لهم. ومتى قالوا: إنما اختفى بعدما دعا إلى نفسه وأظهر نبوته فلما أخافوه استتر. قلنا:وكذلك الإمام لم يستتر إلا وقد أظهر آباؤه موضعه وصفته، ودلوا عليه، ثم لما خاف عليه أبوه الحسن بن علي عليهم السلام أخفاه وستره، فالأمران إذا سواء، ثم يقال لهم: خبرونا لو علم الله من حال شخص أن من مصلحته أن يبعث الله إليه نبيا معينا يؤدي إليه مصالحه وعلم أنه لو بعثه لقتله هذا الشخص، ولو منع من قتله قهرا كان فيه مفسدة له أو لغيره، هل يحسن أن يكلف هذا الشخص ولا يبعث إليه ذلك النبي، أو لا يكلف.
Moreover, the opponents are asked: Did not the Messenger of Allah (s) hide in Sheb Abu Talib for three years, where no one was able to reach him? Did he not hide in the Cave for three days? Why don’t you apply the analogy there as well that Allah should discontinue his existence for that period, while keeping the duties over public for whom He sent him as a grace? If they say that he hid after he called the people to his message and manifested his Prophethood, and when they threatened him, he went into hiding. We will respond that likewise the Imam did not go into hiding, but after his forefathers manifested his position and qualities and guided the people to him, and when his father Hasan Ibne Ali  feared for his life, he hid him. Therefore, both situations are identical. To clarify the matter further, we tell them: Allah discerns from the condition of a person that it is in the best of his interest that He sends a particular prophet to him who will inform him of what is good for him, and He knows that should He send the said apostle, this person will kill him. If He prohibits him from killing the apostle through force, would it not be disadvantageous for him and others?