and Ibn Hubayrah’s service as their vizier, for he was among the finest viziers in Islam. Thus, his care for Islam and hadith surpassed that of others.

The admissions of the leading scholars of speculative theology and philosophy, their testimony that they and their own peers were misguided, and their testimony against one another to the same effect are too numerous to recount here. Likewise, many of their leading scholars returned to the beliefs of ordinary adherents of the Sunnah and their elderly women. Yet none of the leading scholars of the Sunnah and hadith turns away from his beliefs, because:

“Once the sweetness of faith permeates the heart, no one comes to resent it.”

Likewise, they testify that the people of hadith are safe and free from the various forms of misguidance, whereas they testify to nothing but misguidance concerning the adherents of religious innovation. This is a vast subject, as we have already explained. All the opposing factions among those who follow their desires testify that the people of hadith are more upright than the others and closer to the truth. Thus, what the adherents of sects say about them, and how they deal with them, resemble what the followers of other religions say about Muslims and how they deal with them.

If we compare the two groups—the people of hadith and the people of speculative theology—those who criticize some adherents of hadith and the Muslim community for empty verbiage are, in fact, criticizing either their lack of knowledge or their lack of understanding.

The first consists in their citing weak or fabricated hadiths as evidence, or reports that are unsuitable as evidence. The second consists in their failing to understand the meaning of authentic hadiths. Indeed, they may advance two contradictory statements without knowing how to resolve the contradiction.