propositions derived through reasoning and grounded in self-evident truths? Such an argument does not silence the disputant, so it benefits neither the person refuting him nor the inquirer, as explained earlier. But if someone claims that a premise is innate, he must be regarded as either lying or telling the truth. If he is believed to be lying, he is treated as others like him among liars who knowingly deny the truth are treated, in accordance with the teachings of the Sharia. As Allah Most High says:

“They denied them, though their souls were convinced of their truth, out of injustice and arrogance.” [al-Naml: 14]

Most disbelievers fall into this category. If, however, he is believed to be truthful in what he reports about himself, but mistaken because he confuses one meaning with another, [أ] and one expression with another, or for some other reason; because of a defect in his sensory or rational perception; or because some desire has become mixed with his belief—then the proper course is to explain to him what will dispel the confusion. This should make clear to him that what he knows necessarily is not the matter under dispute, but something else. Alternatively, his perception should be corrected by removing the desire, [أ] and the corrupt belief that led him to regard something not necessarily known as necessarily known. As Allah Most High says:

“We will turn their hearts and eyes away, just as they did not believe in it the first time, and leave them wandering blindly in their transgression (110).” [al-An‘ām: 110]

He also says:

“When they deviated, Allah caused their hearts to deviate.” [al-Saff: 5]

And He says:

“And for their saying, ‘Our hearts are covered.’ Rather, Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief, so little do they believe (155).” [al-Nisā’: 155]

And He says: