-
The_Savior_from_Spiritual_Error, page : 75
ought to be refuted, and refutation necessitates a statement of the original
doctrine. Certainly, no one should undertake to elaborate on behalf of a
false doctrine where its author does not elaborate. I personally did not do
that. I had already heard the false doctrine from someone who frequented
my company after contacting them and adopting their faith. He related how
they used to laugh at the works composed to refute their views, since the
authors had not comprehended their proof; he mentioned that proof and
gave a summary of it. As I could not be satisfied with the possibility of
neglecting the essential basis of their proof, or of having heard it and failed
to understand it, I repeated it in my book. My aim was to repeat their false
doctrine as far as possible, and then to bring out its weak points.
The result was that there was nothing done on the part of the opponents
and no force in their argument. Had it not been for the mistaken help given
by honest but ignorant men, the heresy would have been too weak to reach
its present degree of success. Violent fanaticism provoked the supporters of
the truth to prolong the debate about the premise of their argument and to
deny all they assert. In particular they denied both their claim that “there is
need of „authoritative instruction‟ (ta’lim) and an instructor (mu`allim)”, and
doctrine. Certainly, no one should undertake to elaborate on behalf of a
false doctrine where its author does not elaborate. I personally did not do
that. I had already heard the false doctrine from someone who frequented
my company after contacting them and adopting their faith. He related how
they used to laugh at the works composed to refute their views, since the
authors had not comprehended their proof; he mentioned that proof and
gave a summary of it. As I could not be satisfied with the possibility of
neglecting the essential basis of their proof, or of having heard it and failed
to understand it, I repeated it in my book. My aim was to repeat their false
doctrine as far as possible, and then to bring out its weak points.
The result was that there was nothing done on the part of the opponents
and no force in their argument. Had it not been for the mistaken help given
by honest but ignorant men, the heresy would have been too weak to reach
its present degree of success. Violent fanaticism provoked the supporters of
the truth to prolong the debate about the premise of their argument and to
deny all they assert. In particular they denied both their claim that “there is
need of „authoritative instruction‟ (ta’lim) and an instructor (mu`allim)”, and