This is not the method of those firmly grounded in knowledge; it is merely a layman’s approach, suited to people whose stock of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah is scant.

By contrast, the true scholars—those worthy of the name—consider aberration and reprehensible dissent to be nothing other than deviating from the Book, the Sunnah, and the statements of the Companions. Nothing else carries weight with them unless the Muslims have unanimously agreed upon a single position (1) and that consensus is known with certainty; such a consensus may not be contravened.

We therefore say to our opponents in this matter: If declaring the muhallil invalid were truly false—contradicting the Book, the Sunnah, and the consensus—then the proofs for its falsity would have to be manifest, unmistakable, and strong, not prone to weakness. It is inconceivable that a view opposing consensus could possess numerous, robust evidences that you are nonetheless unable to refute or challenge.

Should you demonstrate the unsoundness of these proofs with evidence that is clearer and stronger, then returning to the truth is better than persisting in falsehood (2). But if all you have is only some of what we have already quoted from you (3), then know that we have presented proofs wholly absent from your corpus and unmentioned by anyone who has championed your view. Moreover, we have examined them one proof after another (4): if they are indeed invalid, refuting them is both within your power and required (5); but if they are sound, then whoever follows them has done well, and no blame attaches to those who excel in doing good.