—a sheer fabrication whose chain of transmission contains a person of wholly unknown stock, someone of whom it is uncertain to what species of creature he even belongs—such as Shīḥa, who is mentioned in none of the ḥadith collections; it is very likely that one of the forgers merely derived the name from the shrub called shīḥ. The report alleges that when the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was asked, “Where is Allah?” he replied, “One does not ask ‘where?’ of Him who created the very notion of ‘where.’” Thus they set this feeble, awkward narration—which even ordinary people would be ashamed to voice, let alone the Master of the children of Adam—against the sound, widely transmitted ḥadiths in which the Messenger of Allah ﷺ himself used the word “where” and approved its unrestricted use.

And he says (p. 723): “For this reason, when these people realized that it was impossible to conceal the matter from his closest companions, they fabricated ḥadiths claiming that he addressed his inner circle in terms different from those he used with the general public—such as the concocted slander attributed to ʿUmar, who supposedly said: ‘The Messenger of Allah ﷺ would speak with Abū Bakr while I was like a black slave between them.’”

• Ibn al-Qayyim frequently cites the statements of the righteous predecessors—the Companions, the Successors, and those who followed them in excellence—and he draws many of these citations from Imām al-Bukhārī’s work Khalq Afʿāl al-ʿIbād (The Creation of the Servants’ Acts).
• He likewise quotes a great deal of poetry, sometimes citing verses in order to refute them. At times he names the poet; at other times he omits the name. It seems to me that some of these poems are Ibn al-Qayyim’s own composition, as on pp. 372 and 617–619.
• Ibn al-Qayyim combines transmitted evidence and rational argument, which enables him to distinguish sound statements, opinions, and schools from the weak, and truth from falsehood—something that is evident throughout the book.
• In every issue he precisely identified the point of contention, clarified the meanings of ambiguous technical terms, and exposed the mixture of correct and incorrect ideas they contained; and he was aided in this by