He also said:

“This is an appalling view, among the most appalling, for it defeats Allah’s wisdom in granting messengership and prophethood. Those granted messengership and prophethood were commanded first to present Islam to the unbelievers. If embracing Islam were not valid on the basis of that presentation and acceptance on authority, the wisdom of messengership would be defeated. Nevertheless, reasoning from evidence ranks a thousand times higher than acceptance on authority: the more a person engages in reasoning from evidence and drawing inferences, the more radiant his faith becomes.”

He made further remarks.

[Ibn Taymiyya’s commentary]

I say:

The appalling and false position is to declare unbelievers those whom the Lawgiver has judged to be believers: ordinary believers and others who have not followed innovated methods, such as the method based on accidents and similar methods.

Whether the faith of ordinary people rests on acceptance on authority or not, and whether they are sinful or not, is a separate question.

As for the Muʿtazilīs and Ashʿarīs, they have well-known disagreements and distinctions concerning this matter.

The second category of those who make rational inquiry obligatory—and they constitute the majority—say that it is within the reach of ordinary people. This is the view of Judge Abū Bakr, Judge Abū Ya'lā, and others who hold this position.

[Abū Ya'lā’s words on the obligation of rational inquiry]

They said:

“If it is asked: ‘Do you then hold that knowledge of Allah and of the prophethood of His messengers is obligatory upon every morally responsible person, including those who engage in rational inquiry, ordinary people, and the uncouth among