Al-Tilmisānī and others of his stripe agree with those philosophers on the fundamental principles, yet they alter the wording: they clothe their own doctrines in Islamic terminology. In the treatise Al-Maḍnūn Bihī ʿAlā Ghayr Ahlih and similar works by its author, one finds passages of this very sort. Because of them Ibn ʿArabī and the like of those Sufi atheists fell in with these philosophers, and for that reason Muslim scholars spoke at great length about those writings. Some people even deny that the words are Abū Ḥāmid’s, having seen the grievous calamities they contain; others say that he repented of such views and that his life concluded with devotion to Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, as is reported in his biography.

These same philosophers and their Sufi followers—such as Ibn Sabʿīn and his adherents—hold it permissible for a person to be a Jew, a Christian, or a pagan idol-worshipper; in their estimation, Islam is not obligatory, nor are Judaism, Christianity, or polytheism prohibited. They may, however, regard the Islamic law as superior to the others. When a seeker comes to one of their shaykhs and says,

“I wish to tread the Path under your guidance,”

the shaykh replies,

“On the religion of the Muslims, or that of the Jews, or that of the Christians?”

If the seeker responds, “But are not the Jews and the Christians unbelievers?” the shaykh says,

“No—but the Muslims are better than they are.”

This is akin to the state of the ignorant Tatars when they first embraced Islam: they held Islam to be better than other religions, yet still considered those other religions permissible and did not ally or disavow on their account.

Such is also the prevalent conviction of the Christian clergy, and of many Jews: they regard the religions of Muslims, Jews, and Christians as comparable to the legal schools within Islam, so that, in their view, a man may