so these matters cannot be known through either transmitted revelation or reason. This is among the views for which people criticized him and which groups of scholars wrote books to refute. Yet Abū Hāmid’s excuse is that, in what he knew of the methods of the philosophers and speculative theologians, he found nothing that clarified the truth concerning these matters. He knew of no other rational methods, and therefore denied that the truth could be known through rational inquiry.

As for methods based on prophetic reports, he lacked familiarity with the authentically transmitted words of the Messenger and with how those words convey his intended meanings. Sharing certain assumptions with some speculative theologians and philosophers, he supposed that the Messenger had not made his meaning clear through his words. Together, these two positions closed off the paths of reason and transmitted revelation. He thought that the desired end could be attained, not through purification and practice, so he pursued that course, but still failed to attain his objective. Thus, toward the end of his life, he returned to reading al-Bukhārī and Muslim.

Qādī ‘Iyād mentioned several explanations of how “Say: He is Allah, One” is equivalent to a third of the Quran, as did al-Māzirī before him. He reports the Imam—meaning Abū ‘Abd Allah al-Māzirī—as saying:

“It has been said that this means the Quran comprises three kinds of content: narratives, rulings, and descriptions of Allah—exalted is His power. ‘Say: He is Allah, One’ contains mention of His attributes, and thus constitutes a third in this respect.”

He said: “This interpretation may accord with the apparent meaning of the hadith which mentions that Allah divided the Quran into parts.”

I say: This is Ibn Surayj’s view—the one we have defended. Al-Māzirī mentioned it in his discussion of Ibn Battāl’s remarks, as will follow.

He said: “It has also been said that it means a third of the Quran for a person