Then ignorance—or outright injustice—drives someone to censure one of the two approaches or to give it precedence without a righteous purpose, without knowledge, indeed with neither proper intention nor understanding.
Contradictory disagreement occurs when the two statements cannot both be true, whether the issue lies in fundamentals or in subsidiary matters, according to the majority who maintain, “Only one view is correct.” Those who say, “Every mujtahid is correct,” would class such a case as mere diversity, not mutual contradiction. This kind of dispute is more serious, because the two positions negate one another. Yet we often find that the erroneous opinion held by one disputant still contains a measure of truth, or is backed by evidence that points toward some truth. The opponent, however, rejects that truth wholesale, and thus ends up mistaken in certain points, just as the first was mistaken in the main issue. I have observed this among many Sunnis in discussions of predestination, the divine attributes, the Companions, and similar topics.
As for the people of innovation, their situation is plain—and, as I have likewise witnessed among many
(1) In MS A the reading is adam ("non-existence").
(2) The printed edition reads: ahaduhuma ("one of them") or tafdiluhu ("preferring it").
(3) The printed edition adds: wa-bila ilm ("and without knowledge"); this phrase is otherwise absent.
(4) The pronoun huwa ("he / it") is omitted in MS Ṭ.
(5) The word fihi ("in it") is omitted in MS A.
(6) The printed edition inserts: fi hadha al-asl kullihi ("in this entire principle"). This is a transposed explanatory gloss that clarifies the sentence, but all the manuscripts read as in the present text.
(7) That is, in some of his statements, proofs, and disputes—even though he is fundamentally in the right—like certain Sunni scholars.
(8) That is, while the basis of his statements, proofs, and disputes is erroneous, he may still possess a measure of truth that should be acknowledged together with his underlying error, as is the case with the innovators (ahl al-bidah).
(9) That is, the invalidity of the innovators’ positions and disputes is obvious, for the Quran and sunnah have already established the proof against them; they hold no truth that would oblige an opponent to concede any point to them.
(10) MS B reads: wa-li-dhalika ("and for that reason"), whereas the printed edition has: wa-kadhalika raaytu minhu kathiran ("I have likewise seen much of that from him").