the contrary. In this respect, they contradicted both reason and revelation, and came to oppose anyone who upheld what sound reason or authentic transmitted evidence required.

Although some of their statements correctly defended certain aspects of Islam, their departures from the Sunnah empowered the enemies of Islam against both themselves and the Muslims. Thus, they neither supported Islam nor defeated the philosophers.

[An objection raised by those who deny the attributes]

If it is said:

“The early generations of believers and the earlier unbelievers did not object to these texts because they were eloquent Arabs who understood their intended meaning. They did not understand them to affirm that His very Essence is above the Throne, or anything similar that entails corporealism. Since they did not understand these texts to convey the affirmation that later generations understood from them, their understanding did not conflict with any rational proofs. But when later generations began citing these texts as evidence for an affirmation that entails corporealism, those seeking to refute them countered with rational proofs for negation.”

This is the essence of what those who deny the attributes while venerating the Messenger and the early generations might say.

[The invalidity of this argument on several grounds: the first ground]

The response is:

This is false on several grounds. The first is as follows:

On this assumption, the apparent meaning of these texts would not affirm that Allah is above the world or affirm His attributes. It would therefore be impermissible to say, “The apparent meanings of these texts are not intended,” or, “The transmitted and rational proofs conflict.” For if it is assumed that these texts do not indicate affirmation, either conclusively or in their apparent meaning, then the claim that their apparent meaning conveys affirmation is untenable.