“This person is a disbeliever, if Allah wills,” because he may repent. Those who qualified their profession of faith with “if Allah wills” on this basis thought that this was the position of the early generations.

These people and other speculative theologians like them defend the widely recognized teachings of Islam, just as the Muʿtazilah, the Jahmiyyah, and other speculative theologians do. Thus, they defend the existence of the Creator, prophethood, resurrection, and similar matters. Alongside this, they defend the widely recognized positions of Ahl al-Sunnah wa-l-Jamāʿah, as do the Kullābiyyah, the Karrāmiyyah, the Ashʿariyyah, and others like them. They defend the positions that the Quran is the uncreated speech of Allah; that Allah will be seen in the Hereafter; that those who face the qiblah do not become disbelievers through sin, nor will they remain in the Fire forever; that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, will intercede for those who commit major sins; that the trial of the grave is real, as is its punishment; and that the Pool of our Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in the Hereafter is real. They defend other such positions widely known to be among the foundational beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah wa-l-Jamāʿah. They likewise defend the caliphates of the four caliphs, the excellence of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar, and similar matters.

Yet many speculative theologians, in much of what they defend, are not acquainted with the true teachings of Islam on those matters, with what the Sunnah has brought, or with the positions held by the early generations. They therefore defend the well-known positions of the early generations, but not on the grounds upon which those positions were actually based. Instead, they use other grounds received from people of innovation outside their ranks. Consequently, their discourse contains the very contradictions, inconsistencies, and errors for which the early generations condemned such discourse and its practitioners. Indeed, their statements condemning this kind of discourse are numerous.

The blameworthy theological discourse is that which contradicts the Book and the Sunnah, and whatever contradicts