 The Decisive Treatise argues forcefully that philosophy should have a prominent place in religious reflection, and specifically in Islamic law (sharīʿa). This stance, alongside his devotion to Aristotelian demonstration (see §2), might raise the question of Ibn Rushd’s “rationalism”: Does he regard philosophy as having some kind of priority in religious contexts? But this question is not Ibn Rushd’s, inasmuch as he establishes no hierarchy between philosophy and true religion. The law can serve as a kind of preamble to philosophy, addressed to a much wider audience and containing clues to guide the philosopher in theoretical matters. But there is no question of priority. As he famously writes, in a passage that (perhaps tellingly) echoes Aristotle’s Prior Analytics I.32, “Since the law is true, … we, the Muslim community, know firmly that demonstrative reasoning does not lead to disagreement with what the law sets down. For truth does not oppose truth, but rather agrees with and bears witness to it” (Decisive Treatise 12; see Taylor 2000).