The point here concerns this Ibn Rushd, who subscribes to the doctrines of the esotericist philosophers—particularly the Peripatetics, the followers of Aristotle, the author of the teachings, whose philosophical writings are well known. His view of revealed religions is also of the same kind as that of Ibn Sīnā and other heretics like him: they are parables devised to convey to ordinary people what they can imagine concerning belief in Allah and the Last Day, whereas the unambiguous truth suited to people of learning consists solely of the doctrines of these philosophers.

Upon examination, these doctrines ultimately amount to sheer negation and the affirmation of an absolute existence that has no reality outside the mind other than the existence of contingent beings. This is the conclusion reached by the proponents of the oneness of existence and those who profess indwelling and union, such as Ibn Sab‘īn and others like him who fully developed this philosophy and followed the path of these esotericist philosophizers, whether speculative theologians or Sufis. They also include those who adopted whatever accorded with this from the writings of Abū Hāmid and others like him. They claimed to reconcile the divine Law with Greek philosophy, as did the authors of the Epistles of the Brethren of Purity and other heretics like them.

Yet this Ibn Rushd, despite his familiarity with their writings and his agreement with them, says that all the sages have agreed that Allah and the angels are in heaven, just as all revealed religions have agreed on this. He supported this with a rational argument of the same kind as those advanced by Ibn Kullāb, al-Hārith al-Muhāsibī, Ibn al-‘Abbās al-Qalānisī, al-Ash‘arī,