Falsehoods and Fabrications.

Second: He alluded to something in paragraph 17—accompanied, as usual, by bluster and reader-misdirection—saying: “They mentioned my name, my lineage, my hometown, my school of law, and the name of my son, yet they failed to mention the rest of the family….”

I reply: We mentioned his son’s name only to prove to the readers how far he has gone in following his teacher al-Kawtharī—so far that he even named his child after him. His remark, “they failed to mention the rest of the family…,” is a cheap piece of sensationalism whose harm rebounds on its author. In several places in his Words he admits that he is a Kawtharī; what we ascribed to him he has acknowledged himself, and that is why we cited his name and his son’s name. From your own mouth I indict you, as the ancients said, “What is inside you overflows onto your lips!”

Third: Regrettably, my suspicion about him has been confirmed, for he has not declared his innocence of his teacher al-Kawtharī, neither in general nor in detail. Even while continuing to boast of his connection to him, he says (p. 37), “Their claim that I adhere to everything al-Kawtharī says is a false claim.”

His answer reminds me of the poet’s words:
Claims—unless you bring for them clear proof—
Are fathered by pretenders.

So where is the proof that the above charge is false, given the many errors and deviations we have quoted from your teacher al-Kawtharī, together with the reverence you lavish upon him as already explained, and our request that you repudiate those errors—which you have not done? The false claim, then, is yours. You remain condemned as a Kawtharī, in whole and in detail, until you meet our demand by publicly disowning him, in whole and in detail, so that we may be done with you and with arguing with you altogether.