the Karrāmīs and the Hanbalīs! Rather, only a small group among the people of the qiblah have agreed with him.

Even the most accomplished philosophers oppose him on this issue, as Judge Abū al-Walīd ibn Rushd the Grandson, the philosopher, explained. This is despite his immense concern for philosophy, his high regard for it, and his knowledge of it: he draws it from its original sources, reading the books of Aristotle and his associates, commenting on them, discussing them, and explaining the errors of those who disagree with them, such as Ibn Sīnā and his associates. He authored several works, including The Incoherence of the Incoherence, a response to Abū Hāmid’s criticisms of the philosophers in The Incoherence of the Philosophers; An Exposition of the Discourse Establishing the Connection between the Revealed Law and Philosophy; and other works.

He said in the book he entitled Methods of Proof in Refutation of the Theologians—a book in which he explained the beliefs brought by the revealed Law and the obligation to convey them to the general public as the revealed Law presents them. He also explained the demonstrative proofs supporting those beliefs for scholars, alongside the grounds that bring about assent among the general public. In it, he mentioned matters which, according to his approach, must not be explicitly disclosed to the general public, and set out what must be accepted of the matters established by demonstrative proof according to the method of his fellow philosophers. Thus, he stated that it is inappropriate, within the revealed Law, to say that Allah is a body or that He is not a body, although he privately maintains that Allah is not a body. Nevertheless, he affirms direction both privately and publicly, and stated that it was