its apparent meaning and what it signifies, nor that he directed them to any rational proof by which they could know the truth. Thus, according to their claim, he clarified the truth neither through transmitted evidence nor through rational evidence.

Their statements have many implications that expose the falsity of their position. Just as their position entails disbelief in the Book and the Messenger, in the rational proofs to which he pointed, and in the transmitted evidence he conveyed, it is also utterly unsound and false on rational grounds. They themselves acknowledge in several places that their denials are unsound and contradictory. We have already cited statements by al-Rāzī and others that make this clear. Thus, they themselves testify that the rational arguments with which they opposed the Messenger are false. The earlier and later generations likewise testify that the theological arguments with which they opposed the Book and the Sunnah are false, and that these people do not know Allah.

Careful reflection and thorough examination of these arguments reveal their falsity, and show that these people have neither rational nor transmitted evidence for the negations they assert. Rather, they are like the enemies of the messengers who said:

“If only we had listened or used our reason, we would not be among the inmates of the Blaze.” (10) [al-Mulk 10]

They are also like those of whom He said:

“Have they not travelled through the land, so that they may have hearts with which to reason, or ears with which to hear? For it is not the eyes that are blind, but the hearts within the breasts.” (46) [al-Hajj 46]