Section

Among the things you should know is that these people—Ibn Makhlūf and the others—are utterly unequal to debating the merits of the dispute. They have deliberated among themselves and know that, in such a debate, they would be defeated and confounded. Al-Taybarsī has asked me more than once to abandon such debate.

I said to him:

“I have not oppressed anyone, nor have I said to anyone, ‘Agree with my beliefs, or I will take action against you.’ Nor have I compelled anyone by word or deed. Indeed, I have never written anything on this subject except in response to a request for a religious ruling, after the questioner’s insistence, intense concern, and repeated requests. It is not my practice to initiate discussions of this subject with people.

“It is these people who have called others to what they advocate and honored them for it. They must therefore explain to people what they have commanded them to do and what they have forbidden them to do.

“If they have commanded them to do what Allah and His Messenger have commanded, then obedience is due to Allah, His Messenger, and whoever commands what Allah and His Messenger have commanded. But if they have enjoined both truth and falsehood, forbidden both truth and falsehood, and issued commands and prohibitions concerning matters whose true nature they do not understand, then they would thereby be among the ignorant and unjust. The judge who rules on that basis would be among the two kinds of judges who are in the Fire. Obeying them in this would not be permissible; rather, it would be forbidden.