Is the method of the Khalaf more knowledgeable than that of the Salaf, and is that of the Salaf safer? What are the schools of thought of the Salaf and their sayings regarding the affirmation of attributes without interpretation (ta'wil)? And is it conceivable that all Ash'ari scholars, who are considered the overwhelming majority throughout history, are mistaken, while Ibn Taymiyyah is considered an innovator, an anthropomorphist (mushabbih), and a literalist (dhahiri)?

The article "The way of the Salaf is safer, and the way of the Khalaf is more knowledgeable" is false because it is based on the premise that the Salaf’s method involved tafwid (delegation) of the meanings of the Names and Attributes [of Allah], and it disparages the Salaf while favoring the method of the Khalaf which relies on ta’wil (allegorical interpretation). Knowledge leads to safety, and there is no contradiction between them. The Salaf were safer, more knowledgeable, and wiser.

The methodology of the Salaf is to affirm Allah’s attributes in their true sense, without ta’wil (allegorical interpretation), takyeef (speculating on their modality), or tafwid (delegation of their meaning). The Companions did not differ on the interpretation of the verses concerning attributes; rather, they affirmed them.

The statement that the Ash'aris represent the vast majority is incorrect, as quantity is not evidence of the soundness of a methodology. The imams of the Salaf do not include any Ash'ari, and common people cannot comprehend the complex theological methods of the Ash'aris.

Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari recanted many of his previous positions concerning the interpretation of attributes, and the vast majority of Muslims are Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah.