and they do not listen to the statement of Allah Who says: ﴿أَوَلَوْ جِئْتُكُمْ بِأَهْدَى مِمَّا وَجَدْتُمْ عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَكُمْ﴾[1]; “What if I have brought you something more guiding than that which you have found your forefathers upon?!” Therefore, in this way, they do not actually worship Allah; rather, they worship their ancestors, and this is not strange, as the worship of ancestors is one of the oldest forms of polytheism in the world!

Of course, those who do not consider the intellect as proof view the limitation of its perceptions and think that, given this limitation, it cannot be the criterion for knowing[2]. However, the limitation of the intellect’s perceptions does not mean that they are incorrect, nor does it prevent its authority; rather, it means that they are less compared to divine perceptions, which is a requirement of the created nature of the intellect and the inherent limitation of a creation. Therefore, the intellect does not know everything, but whatever it knows is considered correct, and this is sufficient for its authority; just as, for example, the eye does not see everything, but whatever it sees is considered correct, and the ear does not hear everything, but whatever it hears is considered correct, and this is sufficient for their authority. Perfect knowing belongs only to Allah, and none but He can attain perfect knowing. Therefore, the Sharia that He has sent down is perfect, but the perfection of Sharia does not necessitate its conflict with the intellect; because in matters where the intellect speaks, Sharia does not say anything contrary to the statement of the intellect, and in matters where the intellect is silent, what it says is not contrary to the statement of the intellect; because the intellect does not say anything about them to contradict the statement of Sharia; such as the specific descriptions of Heaven and Hell, which have an unseen nature, and consequently, the intellect is silent about them, but Sharia speaks about them, and therefore, its statement is not considered contrary to that of the intellect; and such as the manner and amount of the acts of worship that have a conventional nature, and consequently, the intellect is silent about them, but Sharia speaks about them, and therefore, its statement is not considered contrary to that of the intellect; especially considering that the intellect understands the authority of Sharia and, accordingly, accepts its practical conventions and its definitive reports about possible events.