of the Messenger’s Sunnah, or because he is driven by some ulterior purpose and carnal desire that conflicts with it. Such a person is far more deserving of being charged with ignorance of the Sunnah and with following his whim without guidance from Allah—“And who is more astray than one who follows his own desire without guidance from Allah?” (Qasas 50)—than someone who is (1) actually better acquainted with the Sunnah than they are and further removed from caprice and self-interest in opposing it: “Then We set you upon a way of the command, so follow it, and do not follow the desires of those who do not know. They will never avail you in the least against Allah; indeed, the wrongdoers are allies of one another, whereas Allah is the Protector of the God-fearing.” (Jathiya 18–19)

This is a matter of great magnitude and far-reaching consequence; its true import will, without doubt, become plain in due course.

The Shaykh then wrote on that sheet some words, not all of which can now be read, for the lines have been effaced. After that he said:

“They were clamoring for the rest of al-Ikhnāʾiyya, yet what lies with them would overwhelm them many times over, with stronger legal argumentation and an even sharper clash with their aims. Indeed, in al-Zamalkanīyya (2) it has been demonstrated, from roughly fifty different angles, that the judgment they issued and the decree they wrote run contrary to the consensus of the Muslims. What they did—had its perpetrator been someone who knew what the Messenger brought and deliberately (3) defied it—would have constituted unbelief and outright apostasy from Islam. But they are ignorant people who involved themselves in a matter they did not understand, never imagining that it would thereby become clear that the Sultanate itself stands opposed to their designs; and the affair is more serious still…"