human speech or actions are eternal is an innovator who opposes the Book, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the early generations of this Ummah and its imams.

Section

As for adding “if Allah wills” to statements about known and certain past matters—for example, saying, “This is a tree, if Allah wills,” “This is a human being, if Allah wills,” “The sky is above us, if Allah wills,” “There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah, if Allah wills,” or “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, if Allah wills”; or refusing to say categorically, “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,” or “This is a tree”—this is an innovation contrary to reason and religion.

We have heard of no one among the people of “Islam” doing this except a group of those affiliated with Shaykh Abū ‘Amr ibn Marzūq. Neither the shaykh nor his sensible followers held this view.

However, someone well informed told me that, after his death, two of his followers, Hāzim and ‘Abd al-Malik, fell into a dispute. Hāzim introduced this innovation of adding “if Allah wills” when speaking about past matters known with certainty, and ceased making categorical assertions about them. ‘Abd al-Malik opposed him in this, agreeing with the Muslim community and the imams of the religion. As for “Shaykh Abū ‘Amr,” he was too sensible to become involved in this sort of