religion, which rest upon sensory knowledge and its premises, and in inquiry concerning the foundational sources—the Book and the authentic Sunnah—which leave no room for excuse.”

He said:

“We have not gone beyond this general framework in the theological discussion presented in our book Shiʿār al-Dīn (The Emblem of Religion). What we criticized in our discussion on dispensing with speculative theology was the other approach mentioned earlier: that of extremism and excess. Its opposite—the approach of those who advocate uncritical imitation and reject rational proofs—is as deficient and neglectful as the approaches of the speculative theologians are extreme and excessive.

“The best path is the balanced, moderate course. This is what we choose and follow.”

He said:

“Our approach to what we undertake or refrain from in this field is like our approach to analogical reasoning: we employ it in some circumstances and reject it in others, without thereby contradicting ourselves. The same applies when we permit theological discussion in one context and disapprove of it in another.

“People’s various approaches rest upon three basic positions:

“Accepting sense perception alone: this is the approach of the Dahriyya, who accepted what the senses perceive but accepted neither rational knowledge nor transmitted reports. Others accepted sense perception and rational knowledge alone, but did not accept transmitted reports. This is the approach of the philosophers, since they do not affirm