they say this about the Messenger himself, what, then, do they say about his followers “among the early generations of the Muslim community”—the Companions and the Successors?

Anyone whose fundamental position concerning the Messenger and the earliest forerunners among the Emigrants and the Helpers is of this kind is opposing them, not agreeing with them. This is especially so if he openly professes the denial which, in his view, the Messenger and his closest Companions concealed rather than proclaimed: in this respect too, he would be opposing them. This approach is adopted by most of those who negate the divine attributes, such as Ibn Rushd the Younger and others. A substantial amount of this also appears in the writings of Abū Hāmid al-Ghazālī. Ibn ʿAqīl and others like him sometimes say this as well. However, when Ibn ʿAqīl departed from the Sunnah early in his life, his predominant tendency was toward Jahmism and Muʿtazilism. His later position was different, for he came to embrace the pure Sunnah.

Abū Hāmid inclined toward philosophy, but presented it in the guise of Sufism and Islamic expressions. For this reason, Muslim scholars refuted him, including even his closest disciple, Abū Bakr ibn al-ʿArabī, who said:

“Our shaykh, Abū Hāmid, became deeply immersed in the philosophers’ thought, then tried to break free of them, but could not.”

He has also been reported to have professed doctrines of the Bātiniyya (esotericists), and corroboration of these reports can be found in his books. The scholars mentioned earlier refuted him.