the disagreements among people concerning each and every one (1) of them. The purpose here was only to draw attention to the [fundamental basis] (2) of the question of purposiveness. This innovator set about vilifying Ahl al-Sunnah, mentioning (3) issues without explaining their true nature or their evidence and presenting them in a distorted manner.

What he reports from Ahl al-Sunnah is either mistaken or a lie against them—or against many of them. Even where he may be granted to have truthfully reported the view of some of them, their position on the matter is better than his. Most of his vilification is directed against the Asharites and those who agree with them, yet the Asharites are better than the Muʿtazilites and the Rāfidīs in the judgment of everyone who knows what he is saying and fears Allah concerning what he says.

If it is said that their discourse—and sometimes that of adherents of the four imams and others who have agreed with them (4)—contains weaknesses, much of that weakness was taken from (5) the Muʿtazilites, who are the root of the error in this matter. In some instances, they themselves erred because the Muʿtazilites had gone to extremes in error, and they responded in a manner that led them to deviate, [like an army fighting unbelievers that may itself sometimes commit excess and aggression] (6). This is discussed fully in its proper place.