Three Theological Treatises

The Third Action to be Refrained From: Morphological Derivation

By this, it is meant that when the word "He established Himself" original: "istawa" is mentioned in the text, one should not say that He is "the one established" or that He possesses "the quality of being established." This is because the meaning can change through derivation. The implication of saying "He is established upon the Throne" suggests physical settlement more strongly than the verse: "It is He who raised the heavens without pillars that you can see, then established Himself upon the Throne." Quran 13:2 Rather, it is like His saying: "He created for you all that is on the earth, then He directed Himself toward the heaven." Quran 2:29; original: "istawa ila al-sama'" This indicates an "establishment" that follows an act of turning toward His creation or toward the governance of the kingdom through an intermediary. Therefore, changing the morphological forms of words affects the meanings and the possibilities of interpretation. One must avoid derivation just as one avoids adding words to the text, for within derivation lies both loss and addition of meaning.

The Fourth Action to be Refrained From: Analogy

This refers to logical deduction or "branching out." For example, if the word "Hand" original: "al-yad" appears in a report, it is not permissible to affirm a "forearm," a "finger," or a "palm" by reasoning that these are necessary components of a hand. If "Finger" original: "al-isba'" is mentioned, it is not permissible to mention the "fingertip," just as it is not permissible to mention "body," "flesh," or "nerve," even if a well-known [human] hand is never free of such things. Even more remote than that is the "addition" of affirming a "leg" simply because a "hand" was mentioned, or affirming a "mouth" because an "eye" or "laughter" was mentioned, or affirming an "ear" and "eye" because "hearing" and "seeing" were mentioned. All of that is impossible, false, and an unauthorized addition. The fools among the Literalists Hashawiyya: a derogatory term for those who focus on the literal surface of texts without considering their deeper meanings or rational constraints and the Anthropomorphists Mushabbiha: those who liken God to His creation have dared to mention exactly what we have just described.

The Fifth Action: Combining What is Scattered

It is a great failure of success for someone to compose a book specifically to collect these reports and arrange a chapter for every "limb," saying: "Chapter on Affirming the Head," "Chapter on Affirming the Hand," "Chapter on Affirming the Eye," and so on. For these were originally scattered words
Reached original: "balagha" - a mark indicating the text has been collated or checked against an original

---

that were issued by the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) at separate and distant times. They relied on various principles of speech to organize in the listeners' minds specific meanings. However, when they are mentioned as a collection—following the template of "the creation of a human being"—the gathering of these scattered parts in the hearing all at once becomes a powerful suggestion that reinforces a physical system and gives the illusion of "likening" original: "tashbih" God to man.

The problem then becomes greater in the soul: why did the Messenger of God not speak them all on a day when the truth was at stake? For a single, isolated word may allow for various interpretations, but when a second, third, and fourth of its kind are joined to it in succession, the possibility of a non-literal interpretation weakens in relation to the whole group. To illustrate: one gains a level of suspicion or belief from two or three reports that one does not get from a single report. In fact, one gains "certain knowledge" from a mass-transmitted report tawatur: a report transmitted by so many people that it is impossible for them to have agreed upon a lie which is not obtained from solitary reports. Certainty is also gained from the gathering of circumstantial evidence that is not found in individual pieces. All of this is a result of "the gathering." Since the possibility of error or alternative meaning exists in the word of every upright person and in every single piece of evidence, when they are gathered, that possibility is either cut off or weakened. For this reason, it is not permissible to combine what is scattered.

End

The Sixth Action: Separating What is Joined

Just as one must not combine the scattered, one must not separate what is joined. Every word that precedes or follows a specific term affects the understanding of its meaning and may favor an otherwise weak interpretation. If words are separated and detached, their intended indication falls away. An example is the word of the Exalted:

"And He is the Subduer, above His servants." Quran 6:18

It is not permissible for a speaker to say "And He is Above" in an absolute sense. When "The Subduer" original: "al-Qahir" is mentioned before it, the indication of "aboveness" original: "al-fawqiyya" becomes clear as the superiority of a subduer over the subdued—which is a superiority of rank and status. The word "Subduer" points directly to this. Furthermore, it is not permissible to say "He is the Subduer above His servant [singular]"; rather, one should say "above His servants [plural]." Mentioning "servitude" original: "ubudiyya" in the description of those whom God is "above" generates the probability of the "aboveness of Lordship" original: "fawqiyyat al-siyada". This is because it is linguistically correct to say "The master is above his servant," even if it is not correct to say "Zaid is above 'Amr" [physically], unless one is demonstrating their difference in the context of mastery and servitude, or the dominance of subdual, or...