the words of Shaykh al-Muwaffaq.” The Muslims rejoiced at this unity. I also presented what Ibn ‘Asākir mentioned in his account of al-Ash‘arī’s merits: that the Hanbalīs and Ash‘arīs had remained united until the time of al-Qushayrī, when the discord that arose in Baghdad divided them. It is well known that every group includes both those who deviate and those who remain upright.

Yet throughout my life, up to this very moment, I have never called anyone to a Hanbalī or non-Hanbalī school in the fundamentals of religion. Nor have I championed any such school or mentioned it in my discourse. I mention only what the early generations of this community and its imams agreed upon.

I have told them more than once:
“I give anyone who disagrees with me three years. If he produces a single word from any imam of the first three generations that contradicts what I have said, I will acknowledge it. As for what I state, I transmit it from the imams of those three generations, in their own words and in the words of those from across the various groups who have reported their consensus.”

Moreover, I have always been among those who most strongly forbid declaring a particular person an unbeliever or an evildoer, or accusing him of disobedience—and those who have sat with me know this about me—unless it is known that the proof conveyed by the Messenger has been established against him: a proof whose violation constitutes unbelief in some cases, wickedness in others, and disobedience in others. I also affirm that Allah has forgiven this community its errors. This includes errors in matters of belief and doctrinal statements as well as practical matters.

The early generations continually disagreed over many such questions, yet none of them accused another of unbelief, wickedness, or disobedience. For example, Shurayh rejected the reading of those who recited:

“But you marvel, while they mock.”

He said, “Allah does not marvel.” This reached Ibrāhīm al-Nakha‘ī