and arguments, something that is true or contains a semblance of truth. When ignorant people take this and alter it, it comes to contain errors amounting to the gravest falsehood and deceit.

The point is that his words contain some truth, but also several falsehoods.

First: His statement, “He does not shy away from hashw and corporealism,” condemns people using labels for which Allah has revealed no authority. The One whose praise confers honor and whose condemnation brings disgrace is Allah. Labels that carry religious praise or blame must be those for which Allah has revealed His authority and which are established by the Quran, the Sunnah, or scholarly consensus, such as believer and disbeliever, learned and ignorant, moderate and deviant.

As for these “three expressions,” they occur neither in Allah’s Book nor in any hadith from Allah’s Messenger. Nor did any of the early generations of this community or its leading scholars use them, whether to deny or affirm them. The first to introduce their use as terms of condemnation were the “Muʿtazilah,” who parted from the main body of Muslims. Following the path of the Muʿtazilah rather than that of the community’s early generations means abandoning the upright speech required in religion and following the path of misguided innovators.

Of these expressions, the only one whose condemnation is reported from some of the early generations is “likening Allah to His creation.” Had he confined himself to that expression, he would have had a precedent among the righteous early generations. Had he mentioned the descriptions that Allah negates in the Quran, such as “equal, rival, and namesake,” and said, “Some of them do not shy away from asserting a likeness between Allah and His creation, or the like,” he would have condemned a statement that Allah negates in His Book and whose proponent the Quran shows to be blameworthy. It would then remain to consider whether the person making that statement actually deserves the blame attributed to him.