it seems to me that the ignorant critic of the predecessors sensed the danger of the aforementioned description, realizing that it is rejected both textually and rationally; thus, he resorted to misleading the readers with another phrase that serves his hidden purpose without his general readers noticing. He said in his commentary on Ibn al-Jawzī's book (p. 127): "And here is a very important matter, which is that we do not say that Allāh is present everywhere at all, rather we declare as disbelievers those who say that, and we believe that Allāh, glorified and exalted, exists without a place because He is the Creator of place!" So I say: this statement of yours contradicts your previous statement: that Allāh, exalted is He, is not outside the world, because there is no place outside the world. If you are truthful in this statement; then you have been guided and returned to the creed of the predecessors, which you have been and still are—as far as we know—accusing those who adhere to it of disbelief and anthropomorphism; like Ibn Taymiyyah and others like me. Otherwise, we recite to you the saying of truth: "So woe to those who disbelieve from the Fire" (Sūrah Ṣād, verse 27); reminding with the common proverb: those whose house is made of glass should not throw stones at people! Among the negative effects of the scholars of kalām and those influenced by their philosophy, like that conceited al-Saqqāf, is that they do not give due weight to the efforts of the imams of ḥadīth, their scholars, and critics; for they impose their whims on what they have authenticated or weakened of the ḥadīths. What pleases them, they accept and use as evidence, even if it is weak, and otherwise, they reject it even if it is authentic!! This is very apparent among both the early and later ones, and the clearest example of this is Shaykh al-Kawtharī and ʿAbd Allāh al-Ghumārī; for they weakened