the All-Seeing. They may also be held to this consequence on the basis of their statement that abrogation is the lifting or termination of a ruling, their affirmation of His knowledge of particulars, and likewise the cessation of the relation of His power and will.

The truth of the matter is that explicit disagreement over this principle exists among most schools; it is not confined to the people of hadith. As for “the deniers,” it may be said that this position follows necessarily from their views if they affirm attributes of Allah that are not eternal; this principle would then become a matter of agreement. They may, however, offer answers to these implications: sometimes valid answers, in which case the conclusion does not follow from their position, and sometimes invalid ones, in which case it does. There is no doubt about this.

As for the texts of the Quran and Sunnah, there is no doubt that their apparent meaning accords with this position. Those holding the former view may, however, reinterpret them or leave the matter to Allah. Those holding this position say that some of these texts admit of no reinterpretation, while those that do are accompanied by contextual indications and corroborating evidence (1) (*) establishing with certainty that Allah and His Messenger intended that meaning, or that this is what is understood from them.

They say that the deniers have no reliable proof: all they have is uncritical adherence to their predecessors, coupled with vilification and intimidation directed at listeners unfamiliar with the subtleties of theological argument. They also say that this is the position of most adherents of religious traditions and of Allah’s elect servants, and that only the innovators within those traditions have opposed it. Those holding the former view may say: “This contradicts consensus; this is disbelief; this entails change and temporal origination.” I have seen astonishing things from people concerning this principle.