and an eminent teacher, and upon all the imams of the Muslims.”

He then set out the creed in outline, discussing Allah’s being above the Throne, seeing Allah, the question of the Quran, and similar matters. This is discussed at length elsewhere.

“The point here” is that those who deny the divine attributes, or some of them, do not base this denial on what the Messenger brought, since what the Messenger brought contains affirmation, not negation. Rather, they rely on what they suppose to be rational proofs and use these to oppose what the Messenger brought. Their position amounts to saying that the Messenger provided nothing on this subject to which one could turn, whether from revelation or reason. According to them, he neither conveyed a report that clarified the truth nor presented rational proofs that established the correct position on this matter. Other matters are different: they acknowledge that the Messenger presented rational proofs in the Quran for the existence of the Lord and the truthfulness of the Messenger.

They may also say that he spoke of the Hereafter. Yet they denied the attributes when they saw that the negation they advanced had not been mentioned by the Messenger: he neither conveyed it nor presented any rational proof for it. Rather, he mentioned only affirmation—which, on their account, is not actually true—thus leaving people in need of reinterpretation or consigning the matter to Allah. So, when they alleged that what the Messenger brought contained neither scriptural nor rational evidence—neither a report clarifying the truth nor