recount here. Among those who debated him was Abū ‘Īsā Muhammad ibn ‘Īsā Barghūth, who followed the position of Husayn al-Najjār—and al-Najjār affirmed divine decree. They likewise condemned al-Marīsī and others who affirmed divine decree. It is therefore clear that their condemnation of the speculative theologians was not because they denied divine decree. Rather, their condemnation of the Jahmiyyah was greater than their condemnation of the Qadariyyah.

[Al-Ash‘arī’s Account of the Najjāriyyah in Maqālāt al-Islāmiyyīn]

Al-Ash‘arī said in al-Maqālāt:

“An account of the position of al-Husayn ibn Muhammad al-Najjār: He and his followers held that the deeds of human beings are created by Allah Most High, while they themselves perform them; that nothing occurs in Allah’s dominion except what He wills; and that Allah has always willed that whatever He knew would occur at its appointed time should occur at that time, and that whatever He knew would not occur should not occur. They held that the capacity to act cannot precede the act; that assistance from Allah comes into being at the time of the act, together with it, and that this is the capacity to act; that a single capacity cannot be used to perform two acts; that every act has a capacity that comes into being alongside it when it occurs; that this capacity does not endure; and that its existence entails the existence of the act, while its absence entails the absence of the act.”

He also recorded the rest of his views on divine decree, which were of the same kind as those of al-Ash‘arī and his followers.