They are therefore told, first: If his words bring them nothing but misguidance, while they derive guidance only from their own reason, then the Messenger would have provided them with the means of misguidance, but not the means of guidance, leaving them to rely on themselves for guidance. Their position thus entails that being left in the state of pre-Islamic ignorance would have been better for them than this message, which brought them no benefit but instead harmed them.

Second, they are told: The Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, explained affirmation, which is more evident to reason than the deniers’ position. He mentioned, for example, Allah’s creation, power, will, knowledge, and similar matters, which are known through reason far more clearly than the Jahmīs’ negations. He said nothing that contradicts this affirmation. How, then, could he leave them to rely on reason alone for negation, which is more obscure and subtle, when his words did not indicate it, but indicated its very opposite? Whoever attributes this to the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, will have Allah to call him to account for what he says.

There are three possibilities: either he speaks words of guidance, speaks words of misguidance, or remains silent about both. It is well known that remaining silent about both is better than saying what leads people astray. Here, reason recognizes that he did not remain silent about affirmation; rather, he explained it, and what revelation conveyed agreed with reason. Thus, concerning what reason negates, he ought to have explicitly negated it, just as he explicitly affirmed what reason affirms. If he did not do so, remaining silent about it would have been safer for the Muslim community.

But if he spoke about it in terms indicating affirmation, while intending them to believe only in negation because their unaided reason would make it known to them, then attributing this to the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is among the gravest forms of heresy and hypocrisy.