book. The sole purpose here is to point out that the weak views for which the Rāfidah vilify Ahl al-Sunnah are more properly attributed to the Rāfidah themselves, and that misguidance clings more firmly to them. Nevertheless, some concise remarks are necessary to guide one to the correct position.

The subject of divine oneness and the divine names and attributes is one in which those who turn away from what the Messenger brought in favor of what they imagine reason dictates have fallen into grave error. Yet the truths known through clear reason constitute only part of what the Messenger conveyed. Anyone thoroughly acquainted with both will recognize this.

[Disagreement concerning the names applied both to Allah and to His servants]

(Section)

] (1)

This issue has proved difficult for many people, both in wording and in meaning. As for the wording, they disagreed concerning the names applied both to Allah and to His servants(2), such as “existent,” “living,” “knowing,” and “powerful.”

Some maintained(3) that these names are predicated equivocally(4), seeking thereby to avoid affirming any meaning shared by the two. They reasoned that if the two shared in what the term “existence” signifies, the Necessary would have to be distinguished from the contingent by something else and would therefore be composite. This is the position of some later thinkers, such as al-Shahrastānī and al-Rāzī in one of the two positions held by each of them, and al-Āmidī, although he sometimes withheld judgment(5).

Al-Rāzī, al-Āmidī, and those who followed them attributed this position to al-Ashʿarī and Abū al-Husayn al-Basrī, but this attribution to the two is erroneous. They only made(6) this attribution