—namely this new statement: what in it could possibly show that his earlier words were erroneous or deviant, so long as it does not contradict them? Leave aside altogether any talk of deserving punishment, or of lying and slander. Unless they can prove that something (1) he said—before they summoned him, imprisoned him, and spread the accusations they leveled against him—actually required such measures, all of this will avail them nothing, for they have been unable to point out any error or deviation in anything he previously (2) wrote or spoke. Indeed, they consistently refuse to engage in argument (3) or debate, whether orally or in writing. They have been told on numerous occasions (4): “Whoever objects to something, let him write in his own hand what he objects to, set forth his evidence, compose the reply, and then let both documents be shown to the scholars of East and West.” Yet they fell silent and were confounded. More than once they were asked (5) to take part in a public discourse, to present their arguments (6), and to debate, but what became apparent (7) of their inarticulateness, their retreat, and their inability to answer has now become famed and widely circulated among townsfolk and Bedouins alike. One of their more distinguished judges even wrote an objection to the Ḥamawiyyah fatwa (8), into which he wove various kinds of