—a faith that affirms the attributes as real, with neither taʾwīl (figurative reinterpretation) nor tafwīd (relegating the meaning altogether).

How, then, could Abū Ghuddah possibly grasp the Salafī creed when he has spent his life nestled in the lap of its greatest contemporary enemy, studying under him until he proudly claimed affiliation with him? By his own admission he is “the Ḥanafī Kawtharī”!

For that reason we continue, insistently, to demand that you answer the seven questions with frankness—no evasion, no deception—and that you proclaim your total and detailed disavowal of al-Kawtharī. Declare that you do not side with him in any of the criticisms we leveled against him in the Introduction (pp. 24–46) and in many other places, and explicitly renounce your attachment to him. Everyone knows that if you repudiate al-Kawtharī you are not repudiating Islam; you attest to the two testimonies of faith and to the sound creed they entail, so long as you claim to uphold that creed. Therefore give the requested answers, announce your break with your Kawtharism, and let both your friends and your foes know exactly where you stand. Peace be upon those who follow guidance.

Fifth: As for paragraph (20), the poor fellow has done nothing more than reproduce from the Introduction what I stated at its conclusion about “the reports submitted by spies and informers,” without naming anyone. Yet he recognized himself and then remarked, “Here ends their verbatim quotation—they mean me by all of this.”

I reply: You have identified yourself, so own it—and then feel remorse for what “your hands tied and your mouth blew!” (1) As for what is contained in the paragraphs before this