of their views, we affirm the same and adhere to it.”

This is his position in this book, in which he agreed with Ahl al-Sunnah and the adherents of hadith, contrary to the position he defended in al-Mūjaz. The point here is that most groups within the Muslim community include acts of the heart within faith. Even most groups among the Murjiʾah affirm this. As for the Muʿtazilah, the Khawārij, Ahl al-Sunnah, and the adherents of hadith, their position on this is well known. Only those Murjiʾah who followed Jahm ibn Safwān disputed it. This position is anomalous, just as the position of the Karrāmiyyah, who say that faith consists merely of verbal profession, is also anomalous.

This, too, deserves careful attention. Many who discuss “the question of faith”—whether deeds are included in it and whether it consists of speech and action—suppose that the disagreement concerns only bodily deeds, and that “speech” means verbal profession. This is mistaken. By Muslim consensus, mere verbal profession without inward belief does not constitute faith. Nor, according to Muslims generally, does inward assent alone constitute faith, apart from certain outliers among the followers of Jahm and al-Sālihī. Their position involves greater intellectual sophistry and more serious conflict with religious rulings than Ibn Karrām’s position does, except in the case of certain outliers among Ibn Karrām’s followers.

Likewise, the heart’s assent, when unaccompanied by love or reverence for Allah, but instead accompanied by hatred and hostility towards Allah and His messengers, is not faith by Muslim consensus.

Ibn Karrām’s position differs in designation, not in judgment. Although he calls the hypocrites believers, he says that they will remain in the Fire eternally. Thus, he differs from the Muslim community in designation, not in judgment, whereas the followers of Jahm differ in both designation and judgment.