who said, “Shurayh is merely a poet who is impressed by his own knowledge. ‘Abdullāh was more knowledgeable than he was, and he used to recite: ‘But I marvel.’”

Likewise, ‘Ā’ishah and other Companions disagreed over whether Muhammad saw his Lord. She said, “Whoever claims that Muhammad saw his Lord has uttered a monstrous falsehood against Allah.” Nevertheless, we do not say that Ibn ‘Abbās and others who disagreed with her fabricated falsehoods against Allah. She also disputed whether the dead hear the speech of the living, whether the deceased is punished because of his family’s weeping, and other matters.

Discord among the early generations even culminated in fighting. Yet Ahl al-Sunnah agree that both parties were believers and that their fighting did not negate their established uprightness. For even if a combatant was a rebel, he was acting on an interpretation, and that interpretation precludes a judgment of wickedness.

I would explain to them that the statements reported to them from the early generations and the imams, declaring in general terms that whoever says such and such is an unbeliever, are also true. However, one must distinguish between a general declaration and its application to a particular individual. This is the first of the major questions of religious fundamentals over which the community disagreed: the question of “threats of punishment.” The Quranic texts concerning threats of punishment are unqualified, as in His words:

“Indeed, those who consume the property of orphans unjustly”—and the rest of the verse.

The same applies to all other statements of the form: “Whoever does such and such will receive such and such.” These are unqualified, general statements. They are comparable to the statements of some of the early generations: “Whoever says such and such is such and such.”

In the case of a particular individual, the threatened punishment is then averted by repentance, good deeds that erase sins, afflictions that expiate sins, or accepted intercession.