says that reason rules this out and that he is therefore compelled to reinterpret the texts. Indeed, even those who deny the reality of bodily resurrection and actual eating and drinking in Paradise claim that reason rules these out and that they are compelled to reinterpret the texts. Likewise, whoever claims that Allah is not above the Throne claims that reason rules this out and that he is compelled to reinterpret the texts.

Sufficient proof of the unsoundness of their position is that not one of them has a consistent principle governing what reason deems impossible. Rather, some claim that reason permits or even requires what others claim reason rules out. By whose reason, then, I wonder, are the Quran and the Sunnah to be judged?

May Allah be pleased with Imam Mālik ibn Anas, who said:

“Must we, whenever someone comes to us who is more skilled in debate than another, abandon what Gabriel brought to Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, because of these people’s arguments?”

Each of these disputants can be refuted by the same arguments used to refute the others, in several ways:

• (First: demonstrating that reason does not rule these matters out.

(Second: demonstrating that the relevant texts do not admit such reinterpretation.

(Third: it is known beyond doubt that the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, brought most of these teachings, just as he brought the five daily prayers and fasting during the month of Ramadan. Reinterpretation that diverts them from these meanings is therefore comparable to the reinterpretations offered by the Qarāmitah and the Bātiniyyah concerning pilgrimage, prayer, fasting, and all the other teachings brought by the prophets.

(Fourth: demonstrating that sound reason agrees with what the texts teach, even if