but those theologians follow the prophetic legacy more closely and are nearer to the doctrine of Ahl al-Sunnah than the Mu‘tazilah and others like them in many respects. Hence, many scholars of jurisprudence, hadith and Sufism agreed with them in some of their innovations, for several reasons:

“First”: The considerable truth in what they say and the prominence of the prophetic legacy in their teachings.

“Second”: Their mingling of that truth with rational arguments, some inherited from the Sabaeans and others newly introduced within Islam; the hold that the specious arguments involved have over them; and their belief that people of reason and learning could adhere to the prophetic legacy only in this way.

“Third”: Their limited acquaintance with the prophetic legacy that dispels these specious arguments and makes the path of guidance clear.

“Fourth”: The shortcomings and negligence found among those who affiliate themselves with the Sunnah and hadith: sometimes they transmit reports whose authenticity they do not know; at other times they resemble the unlettered who know nothing of the Scripture beyond mere recitation, and they turn away from explaining how the Quran and Sunnah demonstrate the true nature of things.