the limit of others’ attainment, and thus began reporting the statements of those they revered in this light.

We have witnessed instances of this, including judges and leading figures among them who attribute positions to the four imams on a major issue. When asked, “Has anyone transmitted this from al-Shāfi‘ī, or from so-and-so or so-and-so?” one of them replies, “No, but this is what rational people have said, and al-Shāfi‘ī does not disagree with rational people,” or words to that effect.

You will find that these deficient, misguided groups handle transmitted reports just as they examine rational matters: neither sound transmission nor clear reasoning.

The further anyone strays from following the prophets, the more pronounced these two failings become, culminating in the Qarmatian esotericists, whose entire approach rests on sophistry in rational matters and Qarmatian methods in treating revelation.

The Shia are closer to following the prophets than they are, and exhibit sophistry and Qarmatian methods to a corresponding degree. The Mu‘tazilites are better than the Shia, displaying less sophistry and fewer Qarmatian methods. Nevertheless, much of this has found its way into their thought, in proportion to their departure from the Quran and Sunnah.

[Ibn Aqīl’s Condemnation of Speculative Theology]

Having thoroughly examined the discourse of the Mu‘tazilites, Ibn Aqīl was dissatisfied with their approach. He therefore mentioned that