: “A weak hadith is dearer to me than analogical reasoning.” He therefore supposed that the imam was adducing as evidence a hadith graded weak by someone such as al-Tirmidhī, and he began to favor the approach of whoever he believed adhered more closely (1) to authentic hadith. In this, he was among those inconsistent people who (2) give preference to one thing over another that is more deserving of preference—even assuming that the former is not inferior to the latter.

The same occurs with ascetic shaykhs: a man may seek to disparage certain shaykhs and exalt another, even though the former (3) are more deserving of esteem and further removed from grounds for criticism. An example is someone who prefers Abu Yazīd, al-Shiblī, and others from whom a kind of extravagant utterance is reported, over the likes of al-Junayd, Sahl ibn Abd Allah al-Tustarī, and others who are more firmly upright and of greater stature.

That is because, in their ignorance, these people take the mere making of a grand claim as grounds for preferring the claimant. They do not realize that, at best, such a claim is a forgivable error, not a praiseworthy endeavor. Anyone who fails to follow the path of knowledge and justice falls into this kind of inconsistency. Yet man is as Allah Most High says:

“Yet man undertook it. Indeed, he was ever unjust and ignorant—so that Allah might punish the hypocrite men and women and the polytheist men and women, and turn in mercy to the believing men and women. And Allah is Ever-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”

[Surah al-Ahzāb: 72, 73]

Thus, man is unjust and ignorant, except for one to whom Allah turns in mercy.