A sermon similar to this is also narrated from ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb, may Allah Most High be pleased with him, as Muhammad ibn Waddāh mentioned in his book al-Hawādith wa-l-Bidaʿ (Events and Innovations).

In these words, they are described as all opposing the Book despite their disagreements concerning it, and as sharing in their departure from it. They use ambiguous language and deceive ignorant people through the confusion they sow, mixing truth with falsehood.

[Summary of the preceding discussion]

In sum, evidence is of two kinds: scriptural and rational.

Among those who claim knowledge of divine matters through their reason—those who associate themselves with wisdom, speculative theology, and the rational disciplines—those who oppose the texts of the prophets say: “The prophets did not know the truth that we have come to know.” Or they say: “They knew it but did not explain it to people as we have. Rather, they spoke in ways that contradicted it, without offering any clarification.”

Those who claim adherence to the Sunnah and the revealed Law and to follow the early generations, yet are ignorant of the meanings of the prophets’ texts, say: “The prophets—and the early generations who followed them—did not know the meaning of these texts which they uttered and conveyed from Allah.” Or they say that the prophets knew their meanings but did not explain their intent to people.

These groups may therefore say: “We have come to know the truth through our reason, and then endeavoured to interpret the prophets’ words in a manner consistent with what reason indicates. The benefit of revealing these ambiguous, difficult passages is the endeavour