richer than the former.
This assumes that what they have stated in logic is sound. How much more so, then, when it contains the errors and contradictions discussed elsewhere?
[Ibn Rushd’s discussion of divine transcendence in Manāhij al-adilla and Ibn Taymiyya’s response]
He said:
“Chapter Four: Knowledge of Divine Transcendence.”
He said:
“Now that we have established the methods revelation has adopted in teaching people—first, the existence of the Creator, glorified be He; second, the ways it establishes that He has no partner; and third, the ways it teaches knowledge of His attributes—and the extent of what it explicitly states in each of these categories, it remains for us to identify the methods by which it leads people to recognize that the Creator, glorified be He, is free from imperfections, how much it explicitly states on this subject, and why it has confined them to that extent. For the extent already mentioned is such that, if anything is added to it, subtracted from it, altered, or reinterpreted, the felicity available to all will not be attained through it.
“Then we shall discuss the methods by which it leads people to knowledge of