Investigating the Falsity of Incompatibility of Absence[1] with the Necessity of Continuation of Revealed Guidance, as the Philosophy of Appointment of Imam

The ummah’s need to the “revealed guidance” after the decease of the holy Prophet of Islam (pbuh) is one of the most important reasons for the Shiite to appoint an Imam. After the disappearance of Imam of the Time (A.S) and lack of access of the Shiite to that Imam, some tried to question this issue completely. Ibn Taymiyyah is one of these people. He tried to question the principle of Shiite Mahdism by abusing the issue of the need for the revealed guidance to be continued after the termination of prophecy among the Shiite and its incompatibility with the absence of Imam of the Time (A.S). This paper deals with the main doubt and its answer, with an analytical approach and with reference to the written sources.
The achievement of this research is the rejection of the principle of doubt and the expression of the compatibility of the need for the continuation of revealed guidance with the absence (of the Imam) in spite of lack of access to the Imam of the Time (A.S) and the coordination of the mentioned statement with the subject of Shiite Mahdism and the non-misguidance of Shiite at the time of Occultation (of the Imam).