has been indicated in the discourse itself, either alongside the passage or in another text.

Thus, because they have no sound standard or straight path for dealing with the texts, none of them can distinguish between texts that require interpretation and those that do not except by reference to the interpreter who hears the discourse, rather than to the speaker who delivers it. We therefore find that those who have recognized the contradictions in the statements of speculative theologians and philosophers—such as Abū Hāmid and others like him, who believe that the path of purification will enable them to attain what they seek—rely in this matter on their spiritual experience and unveiling. They say:

“Affirm whatever you have recognized through the light of your insight, and interpret whatever you have not recognized.”

Those who believe that the statements of speculative theologians contain guidance to the truth say:

“Whatever contradicts what reason indicates must be interpreted; otherwise, it need not be.”

The Mu'tazilite—and the philosopher who agrees with him—then says:

“Reason precludes affirming the attributes and the possibility of seeing Allah.”

The dahrī philosopher says:

“It precludes affirming bodily resurrection, eating and drinking in the Hereafter, and similar matters.”

These people, despite their contradictions, do not consider the Messenger himself to have set out in his discourse