identifying those means. The Mu‘tazilah are thus blameworthy for introducing methods which, they claimed, were the only means of attaining knowledge of Allah, and for claiming that such knowledge necessarily results from them through the servant’s action, not Allah’s.

Some people agree with them on one of these two innovations but not the other.

Many people have expressed differing views on this fundamental issue at different times. Sometimes they say that knowledge can only be attained through rational inquiry, making the first obligation either inquiry itself or the knowledge attained through it. They may also prescribe a particular method of inquiry, as al-Qādī Abū Ya‘lā did in al-Mu‘tamad, in agreement with al-Qādī Abū Bakr and others like him who concurred with the Mu‘tazilah on this principle. Ibn ‘Aqīl, Ibn al-Zāghūnī, and others did likewise.

One consequence of this is that inquiry yielding knowledge can only consist in examining a proof. The inquiry they require consists in examining something the inquirer knows to be a proof, for if he knew before examining it that it was a proof, he would already know that what it establishes is true. If he already knew this, he would have no need to seek proof of it. They thus require a person to follow a path without knowing it to be a path.

[Abū Ya‘lā’s discussion of why rational inquiry is not obligatory]

Yet in his book known as ‘Uyūn al-Masā’il, which he composed on disagreements with the Mu‘tazilah and the Ash‘arīs, al-Qādī Abū Ya‘lā stated something contrary to this. He said:

“Question: Those who affirm prophethood attain knowledge of Allah through the establishment of prophethood, without examining rational proofs or drawing inferences from them. This is contrary to the Ash‘arīs, who say: ‘Such knowledge is not attained until we examine rational proofs and draw inferences from them.’

Our proof is that, when prophethood is established by a miracle, we know that there is One who sent the prophet, for there can be no prophet unless there is One who sent him. Once it is established that there is One who sent him, there is no further need to examine rational proofs or draw inferences from them to establish His existence.

Furthermore, since the attainment of knowledge did not depend on examining rational proofs, but its obligation was established by revelation, the means of attaining it may likewise be obtained through revelation without proofs