Shaykh Nāsir ibn Hamad al-Fahd said (pp. 38–43): I wish to draw attention to two matters. The first matter: I doubt that this treatise can be attributed to Shaykh al-Islām, may Allah have mercy on him. Anyone who has read the Shaykh’s writings and is familiar with his characteristic style in his treatises and fatwas will recognize this readily. Either the treatise originally belonged to the Shaykh, may Allah have mercy on him, but his words were mixed with those of someone else without distinguishing between them, or it belongs to one of his students influenced by him, or something similar. That the entire treatise is his, however, strikes me as unlikely. Allah knows best. In general, the manner in which this treatise is written differs from the Shaykh’s style. I shall give some examples: 1 - P. 359: “This is the most astonishing marvel.” 2 - P. 364: “Understand this, for beneath it lies a secret.” 3 - Pp. 365–366: “Understand this, for it clears away doubt and filters out confusion.” 4 - P. 366: “Allah is supremely great.” 5 - Pp. 374–375: “Do not enter the door of denial, rejection, withholding assent, and turning a blind eye, rejecting its outward meaning and finding its inward meaning astonishing, merely to preserve the rules you have formulated through your own faculties and regulated by principles that have kept you from the presence of your Lord. Beware of anything contrary to the predecessors’ affirmation of divine transcendence, and avoid likening or comparing Him to creation. By my life, this is indeed the straight path, sharper than a sword and finer than a hair. Whoever Allah does not grant light has no light.” 6 - P. 352: “I have no knowledge of its true nature”; p. 353: “This is unknown, and Allah knows His creation best”; p. 354: “But what occurred to me—and Allah knows best what is correct”; p. 361: “Perhaps that is so, and Allah knows the realities of things best”; p. 364: “We have no need to interpret our Lord’s words through our own opinions. Allah knows their interpretation best.” 7 - P. 374: “This is a sea in which even a swimmer drowns. None ventures into it except someone supported by the light of guidance; otherwise, he falls into either likening Allah to creation or denying His attributes. Let the discerning person recognize that beyond his knowledge lies a distant reach, and above everyone possessing knowledge is one more knowledgeable.” 8 - P. 375: “Even if it were established that human knowledge in this world comes only through the angels—which, by Allah, is false.” 9 - P. 379: “This, may Allah guide you, is the basis for superiority according to the known grounds, of which we have given an example”; p. 381: “Know—may Allah illuminate your heart and open your breast to Islam.” Second: He describes his opponents in ways unfamiliar in his writings, such as: 1 - P. 358: “Some fools have said that the prostration was only to Allah, with Adam made their direction of prayer.” 2 - P. 362: “Know, first, that this assertion has nothing requiring its acceptance, whether transmitted evidence or rational argument—only passing thoughts, sudden notions, and insinuations whose substance comes from the throne of Iblīs.” 3 - P. 363: “Anyone in whose inner thoughts the possibility of restriction still stirs after this verification and tawkīl (entrusting) should offer himself condolences for his ability to reason from the Quran and understand it, for he cannot trust anything derived from it. If only I knew! If all the angels had prostrated and Allah wished to tell us this, what wording could be more complete and comprehensive? Or could any statement be made of which one would not say: ‘Is this not among the clearest expressions?’” 4 - P. 376: “It is not as this fool claims.” 5 - P. 391: “This is among the clearest statements for anyone who understands Arabic. We seek refuge in Allah from excessive pedantry.” Third: On p. 379, while arguing for the superiority of righteous humans over angels, he says: “How do they compare with those who ‘give others preference over themselves, even though they are in need’? How do they compare with those who call to guidance and the religion of truth, or someone who establishes a good practice? How do they compare with those mentioned in his saying, may Allah bless him and grant him peace: ‘Among my community are those who will intercede for more people than Rabīʿa and Mudar’? How do they compare with the aqtāb, awtād, aghwāth, abdāl, and nujabāʾ?” The compiler, may Allah have mercy on him, commented on the last sentence: “Thus in the original.” This indicates that he found such wording objectionable. The Shaykh, may Allah have mercy on him, has statements refuting these designations and explaining that they occur in neither the Quran nor the sunnah. These include: His statement in al-Fatāwā, 11:433: “As for the names circulating on the tongues of many ascetics and ordinary people, such as the ghawth in Mecca, the four awtād, the seven aqtāb, the forty abdāl, and the three hundred nujabāʾ: these names do not occur in the Book of Allah Most High, nor are they transmitted from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, through either an authentic or a weak chain of transmission…” The fatwa continues at considerable length and in detail. He also said in al-Minhāj, 1:93: “Furthermore, no one has transmitted through a known chain of transmission that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used any of these expressions—ghawth, qutb, awtād, nujabāʾ, and others—or that his Companions did. However, some of the predecessors used the term abdāl, and a weak hadith concerning it is related from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.” In short, the style of this treatise is not the characteristic style of Shaykh al-Islām, may Allah have mercy on him, in his treatises. Allah knows best. The second matter: A few textual corruptions have occurred in this treatise, including: 1 - P. 353: “Within the inferior category there may be something better than many individual members of the superior category, as with a donkey, a mouse, and a disabled horse, and a righteous woman alongside a wicked man.” I say: Kāl-himār wa-l-faʾra (“as with a donkey and a mouse”) should read kāl-himār al-fārih (“as with a vigorous donkey”). 2 - P. 357: “ʿAbd Allāh related it in al-Tafsīr.” He previously mentioned this report on p. 244, saying: “ʿAbd Allāh in al-Sunan.” On p. 369, the title appears as al-Sunnah, which seems more likely. Allah knows best. 3 - P. 360: “Animals do not worship Allah.” Perhaps it should read: “They worship none but Allah.” 4 - P. 364: “If the account has been repeated and contains nothing indicating restriction, then claiming restriction in it is not a false allegation.” I say: The wording appears to be: “Claiming restriction in it was a false allegation,” or: “Then claiming restriction…,” or something similar. 5 - P. 368: He mentions the eighth proof, then says in the twelfth line: “Then he mentioned what al-Khallāl related…” This indicates two things: First, that abridgment has taken place, because the “ninth proof” and the “tenth” were not introduced with their numbers, although hadiths were mentioned. Only on p. 370 does he mention the “eleventh proof.” Second, that this copy has been altered. 6 - P. 369: “Such a statement can only be made on the basis of … [the compiler, may Allah have mercy on him, indicated that there is a blank here in the original] that is clear. Lying about Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is more serious than lying about His Messenger.” I say: The wording appears to be: “Only on the basis of clear knowledge,” or something similar. 7 - P. 373: “As for the angels, their condition today resembles their condition thereafter, for their reward is continuous, and Paradise is not created, and affirmation…” I say: The wording appears to be: “And Paradise is not created for them.” 8 - P. 347: “Indeed, seating him upon the Throne is objectionable”—munkaran. The correct form is munkar. 9 - P. 387: “It should not be said that, because it was not accompanied by a denunciation, this indicated that it was true. Their statement, ‘This is not a human being,’ was mistaken, and their statement, ‘This is nothing but a noble angel,’ was also mistaken, in their failure to recognize that he was human and their assertion that he was an angel, even though it was not accompanied by a denunciation, [indicated that it was true, and their statement, ‘This is not a human being; this is nothing but a noble angel,’ was mistaken in their denial of his humanity and their assertion that he was an angel, even though it was not accompanied by a denunciation] because they lost their senses upon seeing him. They were therefore not blamed for this in that state.” I say: What appears within square brackets seems to be a repetition. Allah knows best.