from some of it and added to it. Even so, because his expertise in speculative theology exceeded his familiarity with hadith and the teachings of the early generations and the leading authorities of the Sunnah, he attributed to them, in more than one place, statements concerning negation and affirmation that are not transmitted from any of them at all in such unqualified terms (1), either in wording or in meaning. Rather, the reports reliably transmitted from them make careful distinctions (2) regarding whether that wording and its intended meaning should be negated or affirmed. They reject the unqualified formulation employed by the one reporting their views, and they also reject part of the meaning he intended by his negation and affirmation.

Al-Shahrastānī reported unreliable views in more than one place, as anyone familiar with people’s doctrines will recognize. Although his book is more comprehensive and more accurate in its reporting than most works composed on sectarian doctrines, this field has nonetheless suffered from such failings. Thus, since he was well acquainted with the teachings of the Asharīs and those of Ibn Sīnā and philosophers like him, his most accurate reports concerned these two groups. As for the Companions, the Followers, and the leading authorities of the Sunnah and hadith, neither he nor others like him know their teachings. Indeed, they have not even heard them presented accurately through the scholars’ transmission of them (3) with recognized chains of transmission. They have heard only general statements containing both truth and falsehood.

Accordingly, when their teachings found in their writings and reliably established through transmission