The commentators side by side

﴿فإن قلت بالتنزيه كنت مقيدا %~% و إن قلت بالتشبيه كنت محددا و إن قلت بالأمرين كنت مسددا %~% و كنت إماما في المعارف سيد فمن قال بالإشفاع كان مشركا %~% و من قال بالإفراد كان موحد فإياك و التشبيه إن كنت ثانيا %~% و إياك و التنزيه إن كنت مفرد فما أنت هو: بل أنت هو و تراه في %~% عين الأمور مسرحا و مقيد قال الله تعالى «ليس كمثله شي ء» فنزه، «و هو السميع البصير» فشبه.﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

للمفعول، وإنما قال عواقب الثناء لأن بعض الأثنية والمحامد حالة في بادئ نظر المحجوب وهو فيها راجع إلى الخلق وحالة ثانية تعقب الآلة الأولى بعد إمعان النظر أو ظهور نور الكشف راجع إليه سبحانه وتعالى. والمراد بعواقب الثناء الأثنية والمحامد الغير الملحوظة باعتبار الحالة الأولى ولا شك أن الكل بهذا الاعتبار راجع إلى الحق تعالى

for the passive, and he said "outcomes of praise" because some praises and laudations are, in the first glance of the veiled one, a state in which he is referred back to creation; and a second state, following the first glance after intensifying his gaze or the appearance of the light of unveiling, refers back to Him, Glory and Exaltation be to Him. What is meant by "the outcomes of praise" is the praises and laudations not considered from the perspective of the first state, and there is no doubt that all of it, from this consideration, refers back to the Real, Exalted be He

﴿فإن قلت بالتنزيه كنت مقيد %~% وإن قلت بالتشبيه كنت محددا وإن قلت بالأمرين كنت مسدد %~% وكنت إماما في المعارف سيدا﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

نتيجة لما ذكره ، فمن علم مقدماته علم معناه

incomparability (tanzīh), you would be restricted; and if you say [only] similarity (tashbīh), you would be delimited; but if you affirm both together, you would be rightly guided, and you would be a leader in the sciences of gnosis, a master] this is a conclusion from what he mentioned; whoever knows its premises knows its meaning.

﴿فإن قلت بالتنزيه كنت مقيدا وإن قلت بالتشبيه كنت محددا … وإن قلت بالأمرين كنت مسددا وكنت إماما في المعارف سيدا﴾

أي، إذا قلت بالتنزيه والتشبيه في مقاميهما كنت مسددا، أي، جاعلا نفسك على طريق السداد والصلاح

That is, if you affirm both incomparability (tanzīh) and similarity (tashbīh) in their two stations, you will be rightly guided (musaddad)—that is, you will set yourself upon the path of rectitude and righteousness.

﴿فإن قلت بالتنزيه كنت مقيّدا﴾

ضرورة أنّ التنزيه يقتضي تقييد الحقيقة الحقّة وتعيّنه بالتعيّن الإطلاقي كما عرفت

since necessarily incomparability requires the restricting of the true Reality and its determination by the absolute determination (taʿayyun iṭlāqī), as you have come to know.

﴿فإن قلت بالتنزيه﴾

من غير تشبيه

without similarity

﴿كنت مقيدا﴾

للحق سبحانه بصور التنزیه

the Real, Glory be to Him, with the forms of incomparability

﴿كنت مقيدا﴾

لله تعالى بالأمر العدمي

God, exalted, by a negative matter (amr ʿadamī).

﴿وإن قلت بالتشبيه قلت محدّدا﴾

لأنّ الصورة لا بدّ لها من الإحاطة والتحديد ، وفيما سبق من الكلام ما يدلَّك على تخصيص الثاني ب « قلت » فلا نعيده هاهنا . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

because form necessarily requires encompassment and delimitation. In what preceded of the discourse there is what indicates to you the specific application of the second [verb] to "you would say," so we shall not repeat it here. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

﴿وإن قلت بالتشبيه﴾

من غير تنزیه

without incomparability

﴿وإن قلت بالتشبيه كنت محددا﴾

للحق بالصفات الثبوتية

the Real by positive attributes (thubūtiyya).

﴿كنت محددا﴾

له سبحانه بحضرة في صور التشبيه

Him, Glory be to Him, to a presence within the forms of similarity

﴿وإن قلت بالأمرين كنت مسدّدا﴾

أي موفّقا للصواب ، من القول والاستقامة من القصد ، وذلك لأنّك بجمعك بين الأمرين وصلت إلى مقتضى الذوق الإحاطيّ الختميّ ، ودخلت في الامّة الوسط الذي هو خير الأمم ، وإليه أشار بقوله : ثمّ لمّا كان الجمع بين الأمرين يتصوّر على وجهين : أحدهما أن يعتبر التشبيه بإزاء التنزيه خارجا عنه وهو القول بالإشفاع والآخر أن يعتبر كلّ منهما في ضمن الآخر متّحدا به - وهو القول بالإفراد - قال رضي الله عنه : فمن قال بالإشفاع كان مشرّك %~% ومن قال بالإفراد كان موحّد فعلم من هذا أنّ من اعتقد أنّ العبد ثاني الحقّ لا يمكن له القول بالتشبيه ، وإلَّا يلزم أن يكون مشركا ، كما أنّ من اعتقد بإفراده معه لا يمكن له القول بالتنزيه - أي التنزيه الرسمي على ما ذهب إليه القائلون به - وإلَّا يلزم أن لا يكون مفردا ، وإليه أشار بقوله : فإياك والتشبيه إن كنت ثاني %~% وإياك والتنزيه إن كنت مفرد فظهر من هذا أنّ التنزيه الذي لا ينافي التوحيد والإفراد ، غير هذا التنزيه ، بل ذلك هو التنزيه الذي في عين التشبيه ، وذلك التشبيه هو الذي يليق بالموحّد ، ولا يليق بالثنوي . وتحقيق ذلك أنّ العبد غير الحق بمجرّد اعتبار التعيّنات النسبيّة والإضافات التي إنّما تتحقّق بمجرّد الاعتبار - كالغيبة والخطاب - وأمّا بالنظر إلى الأمر نفسه فهو عينه ، وهو معنى التنزيه في عين التشبيه ، والمشير إلى ذلك كلَّه قوله : فما أنت هو بل أنت هو ، وتراه في %~% عين الأمور مسرّحا ومقيّد لتنزيه والتشبيه في القرآن الكريم ثمّ لما أشار إلى أن الجامع هو الإمام السيّد ، بيّن ذلك بقوله

i.e., granted success in what is correct, in both speech and rectitude of intention; and that is because, by combining the two matters, you have attained to what is required by the all-comprehensive, Seal-like taste (al-dhawq al-iḥāṭī al-khatmī), and have entered into the middle community, which is the best of communities. To this he alluded by his saying: Then, since the combination of the two matters may be conceived in two ways - one, that tashbīh be considered as set over against tanzīh, external to it, which is the doctrine of pairing/association (al-ishfāʿ); the other, that each of the two be considered as contained within the other, united with it - which is the doctrine of singling-out (al-ifrād) - he, may God be pleased with him, said: "So whoever holds pairing (ishfāʿ) is a polytheist (mushrik), and whoever holds singling-out (ifrād) is a unifier (muwaḥḥid)." From this it is known that whoever believes the servant to be a second to the Real cannot hold tashbīh, otherwise he would necessarily be a polytheist; just as whoever believes in the servant's being singled out together with Him cannot hold tanzīh - i.e., the formal tanzīh as maintained by those who hold it - otherwise he would necessarily fail to be one who singles out [i.e., a unifier]. To this he alluded by his saying: "So beware of tashbīh if you are a second [to Him], and beware of tanzīh if you are one who singles out." From this it became clear that the tanzīh which does not contradict tawḥīd and ifrād is other than this [ordinary] tanzīh; rather, it is the tanzīh that lies within the very essence of tashbīh, and that tashbīh is what befits the unifier and does not befit the dualist. The verification of this is that the servant is other than the Real only by consideration of the relational determinations (al-taʿayyunāt al-nisbiyya) and relative attributions, which are realized only by mere consideration - such as absence and address - whereas, with regard to the matter in itself, he is identical with Him (ʿaynuhu); and this is the meaning of tanzīh within the very essence of tashbīh. That which points to all this is his saying: "You are not He, yet you are He, and you see Him within the very essence of things, both unrestricted and delimited" - for tanzīh and tashbīh in the Noble Qurʾān. Then, since he had indicated that the one who combines [both] is the Imam, the Master, he clarified this by his saying:

﴿وإن قلت بالأمرين﴾

التنزيه والتشبيه وجمعت بينهما من غير تقييد بواحد بل ولا بالجمع أيض

incomparability and similarity, and you combine between them without restricting to one alone, nor even to the combination itself

﴿وإن قلت بالأمرين﴾

أي التنزيه والتشبيه

i.e., tanzīh and tashbīh together,

﴿كنت مسددا﴾

سددك الله على سواء الطريق إن كان اسم مفعول أو سددت نفسك عليه إن كان اسم فاعل

may God guide you rightly to the straight path, if it is a passive participle, or you have guided yourself rightly to it, if it is an active participle

﴿كنت مسددا﴾

أي ظفرت طريق الهداية

i.e., you would have attained the path of guidance.

﴿وكنت إماما في المعارف﴾

أي، في أهل المعارف سيدا باتباعك طريق الرسل، صلوات الله عليهم

That is, you will be a leader, among the people of gnosis, a master, by your following the path of the Messengers, God's blessings be upon them.

﴿وكنت إماما … في المعارف سيدا﴾

مطاعا فيما أمر به فيها

obeyed in what he commands within them

﴿وكنت إماما في المعارف سیدا﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

لأجل تصديقك الرسل في كل ما جاؤوا به

because of your affirmation of the messengers in all that they brought.

﴿فمن قال بالإشفاع كان مشركا، ومن قال بالإفراد كان موحدا﴾

أي من قال بالاثنين وأثبت خلقا مباينا للحق في وجوده ، كان مثبتا لشريك له في الوجود قائلا بمتماثلين في الوجود مشبها . ومن قال بأنه فرد لا يلحقه التعدد وأفرده من جميع الوجوه وجرده عن كل ما سواه وأخرج عنه التكثر للتنزيه ، فقد جعله واحدا منزها عن الكثرة مقيدا بالوحدة ، وقع بالشرك كالأول من حيث لا يشعر ، إذ التعدد والتكثر موجود فقد أخرج بعض الموجودات عن وجوده وثبت التماثل ، ولذلك قال

i.e., whoever asserts duality and affirms a creation entirely other than the Real in its existence has thereby affirmed a partner to Him in existence, holding that there are two similar things in existence — and this is tashbīh (likening). And whoever holds that He is single, not subject to multiplicity, isolating Him in every respect, stripping Him of everything other than Him and removing multiplicity from Him for the sake of tanzīh, has thereby made Him a single one declared incomparable with multiplicity, restricted by oneness — and thus falls into polytheism just like the first, without realizing it. For multiplicity and plurality do exist, so he has excluded some existents from His existence and thereby established a likeness [between them]. That is why he said:

﴿فمن قال بالإشفاع كان مشركا ومن قال بالأوتار كان موحدا﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

من قال بالإشفاع، بصيغة المصدر من (أشفع). أي، صار قائلا بالشفع، كان مشركا، أي، شرك مع الحق غيره بإثباته. ومن قال بالإفراد، مصدر (أفرد) ،كان موحدا، إذ لا يثبت معه غير

"Whoever holds to pairing (al-ishfāʿ)"—in the verbal-noun form from "ashfaʿa"—that is, becomes an affirmer of duality, "is a polytheist," that is, he associates another with the Real by affirming it [alongside Him]. "And whoever holds to oneness (al-ifrād)"—verbal noun of "afrada"—"is a unitarian (muwaḥḥid)," since he affirms nothing besides Him.

﴿فمن قال بالإشفاع﴾

أي جعل الحق الفرد شفعا بإثبات الخلق معه

i.e., makes the Real, who is single, into a pair by affirming creation along with Him

﴿فمن قال بالإشفاع﴾

أي فمن ثبت عند التشبيه

] i.e., whoever halts at tashbīh,

﴿كان مشركا﴾

الخلق مع الحق في الوجود

associating creation with the Real in existence

﴿كان مشركا﴾

أي جعل غير الحق شريكا معه في وصفه وقد ذهل عن وحدة الحق الواجب علمه

i.e., he made something other than the Real a partner with Him in His description, having been oblivious to the necessary oneness of the Real that must be known.

﴿ومن قال بالإفراد﴾

بأن أفرد الحق و حكم بتفرده في الوجود ولم يثبت معه غيره

such that he makes the Real singular and judges Him to be alone in existence, not affirming anything else with Him

﴿ومن قال بالإفراد﴾

أي ومن وقف عند التنزيه

] i.e., whoever halts at tanzīh,

﴿كان موحدا فإياك والتشبيه﴾

بإثبات الخلق مع الحق وتشبيه الحق به (إن كنت ثابتا) ، أي قائلا بإثنينية الحق والخلق بل ينبغي أن تجعل الخلق من صور تجلياته لا موجودة في حد ذاته

by affirming creation alongside the Real and likening the Real to it (if you are a dualist), i.e., one who affirms the duality of the Real and creation — rather, you should make creation among the forms of His self-disclosures, not existing in its own right independently

﴿كان موحدا﴾

أي فقد جهل بكثرة أسمائه وصفاته فما عرف الحق حق معرفته. ولما بين حال صاحب الجمع وحال المنزه والمشبه وكان المنزه فقط والمشبه فقط خارجا عن طريق الرسل حذر السالكين فقال

i.e., yet he is ignorant of the multiplicity of His names and attributes, so he has not known the Real with the true knowledge of Him. Now that he has clarified the state of the one who combines [tanzīh and tashbīh], and the state of the one who merely declares incomparability and the one who merely declares similarity, and that the one who is merely tanzīh-oriented or merely tashbīh-oriented is outside the path of the messengers, he warned the spiritual travelers, saying:

﴿فإياك والتشبيه إن كنت ثانيا﴾

أي إن كنت مثنيا للخلق مع الحق فاحذر التشبيه ، بأن تثبت خلقا غيره بل اجعل الخلق عينه بارزا في صورة التقييد والتعين

i.e., if you posit creation as a second alongside the Real, then beware of tashbīh — by affirming a creation other than Him — rather, make creation identical with His very entity (ʿayn), manifest in the form of restriction (taqyīd) and entification (taʿayyun).

﴿فإياك والتشبيه إن كنت ثانيا وإياك والتنزيه إن كنت مفردا﴾

مفردا على صيغة اسم الفاعل، أي موحدا. و (ثانيا) اسم فاعل من (الثنى.) أي، وإن كنت تجعل الواحد الحقيقي ثانيا بإثبات غيره معه. ولما كان القولب الثاني مقصورا على طريقين: أحدهما أن يكونا قديمين، وهو قول المشركين، وثانيهما أن يكون الأول واجبا قديما والثاني فائضا منه محدثا بحيث لا يمكن أن يكون عين الآخر بوجه من الوجوه، وهو قول المؤمنين الظاهرين والحكماء المحجوبين. وصرح بقوله

"Mufrid" is in the active-participle form, meaning "one who affirms unity (muwaḥḥid)." And "thānī" (dualizing) is an active participle from "al-thanī" (doubling)—that is, if you make the true One into a second by affirming another together with Him. Now, since this "second saying" is confined to two paths: one of them is that both [terms] are eternal, which is the doctrine of the polytheists; and the second is that the First is Necessary and Eternal, and the second effused from Him and originated, such that it cannot in any respect be identical with the other—this being the doctrine of the outward believers and the veiled philosophers. And he made this explicit by his saying:

﴿وإياك والتشبيه إن كنت ثانيا﴾

أي إن وصفت بصفات ثبوتية

i.e., if you describe Him with positive attributes,

﴿وإياك والتنزيه إن كنت مفردا﴾

أي وإن لم تثبت الخلق معه ، فلا تجرده عن التعدد حتى يلزم وجود متعددات غيره ، لغلوك في التنزيه فتقع فيما تهرب منه أو تعطله فتلحقه بالعدم ، بل اجعله الواحد بالحقيقة الكثير بالصفات ، فلا شيء بعده ولا شيء غيره ، واجعله عين الخلق محتجبا بصورهم ، وهذا معنى قوله قدس الله سره . "فما أنت هو بل أنت هو وتراه في %~% عين الأمور مسرحا ومقيدا " لأن أنت حقيقة بقيد الخطاب أي بكونها مخاطبا وهو تلك الحقيقة مقيدة بقيد الغيبة ، ولا شك أن المقيد بقيد الخطاب غير المقيد بقيد الغيبة ، بل أنت من حيث الحقيقة عين هو باعتبار التسريح والإطلاق ، وتراه في عين الأمور ، أي في صور أعيان الأشياء مقيدا بكل واحد منها مسرحا ، أي مطلقا بكونها في الكل إذ الحقيقة في صور الكل واحدة ، وكل مقيد عين المقيد الآخر وعين المسرح . قوله رضي الله عنه

tanzīh if you are one who declares [Him] singular/unique] — that is, if you do not affirm creation together with Him, then do not strip Him of multiplicity, lest it necessitate the existence of multiple things other than Him, due to your excess in tanzīh, so that you fall into that very thing from which you flee, or you divest Him [of all determination] and thereby reduce Him to nonexistence. Rather, hold Him to be the One in reality, the Many in attributes, so that there is nothing after Him and nothing other than Him; and hold Him to be identical with creation, veiled by their forms. This is the meaning of his saying — may God sanctify his secret: "You are not He, yet you are He, and you see Him in / the very essence of things, both unrestricted and restricted." For "you" is the reality restricted by the qualification of address — that is, by being addressed — while "He" is that same reality restricted by the qualification of absence [third person]; and there is no doubt that what is restricted by the qualification of address is other than what is restricted by the qualification of absence. Rather, "you," from the aspect of reality, is identical with "He" when considered from the aspect of release and absoluteness; and you see Him in the very essence of things — that is, in the forms of the entities (aʿyān) of things — restricted by each one of them, [yet] unrestricted, that is, absolute by virtue of being present in the totality, since the reality in the forms of the totality is one, and every restricted thing is identical with every other restricted thing and identical with the unrestricted. His saying, may God be pleased with him —

﴿وإياك والتنزيه … إن كنت مفردا﴾

حاكمة بفرادنیته بل ينبغي أن يكون حكمك بفرادنیته باعتبار أنه منفرد بالوجود في مرتبتي جمعه وتفصيله لا موجود غیره (فما أنت هو) لتقييدك وإطلاقه لاحتياجك وغناه ""استغناؤه عن كل شيء"" . (بل أنت هو) ، لأنك في الحقيقة عينه وهويته الظاهرة ""صورته""

judging by His singularity alone — rather, your judgment of His singularity should be considered in the sense that He alone possesses existence in both His states of comprehensiveness and differentiation, with nothing else existing (You are not He) due to your restriction and His unboundedness, due to your need and His self-sufficiency — "His independence from everything." (Rather, you are He), because you are, in reality, His very identity and His manifest selfhood — "His form"

﴿وإياك والتنزيه إن كنت مفردا﴾

بكسر الراء أي لم تثبت معه غيره ثم رجع إلى بيان جمع التنزيه والتشبيه في أنفسنا فقال (فما أنت هو) بتنزيه الحق عنك بسلب نفسك عنه من حيث بإمكانك وإحتياجك إليه (بل أنت هو) من حيث حقيقتك لأنك مخلوق على صفة الله تعالى: (وتراه) أي وأنت ترى الحق

(with kasra on the rāʾ), i.e., you do not affirm alongside Him anything else. Then he returned to explaining the combination of tanzīh and tashbīh in ourselves, saying: (so you are not He) — by way of declaring the Real incomparable to you, negating yourself from Him, insofar as you are contingent and in need of Him — (rather you are He) insofar as your reality is concerned, because you are created upon the attribute of God, exalted: (and you see Him) i.e., and you see the Real

﴿وتراه في عين أمور مسرحا﴾

أي مطلقا بحسب ذاته ومقيدا بحسب تجلياته وهما حالان عن ضمير المفعول إن كانا اسمي مفعول. وقد سبق معناه وعن ضمير الفاعل إن كانا اسمي فاعل ، أي حاكمة بإطلاقه في حد دانه (ومقيدا) بحسب ظهوراته ووقع في بعض النسخ عيون الأمر مسرحا و مقيدا وعلى هذا يكون مسرحا من الإسراح لا من التسريح ليصح الوزن. وهكذا ينبغي أن يكون فإن المصراع الأخير على النسخة الأولى ليس على وزن سائر المصاريح كما لا يخفى على من له معرفة بالعروض

i.e., unbound in respect of His Essence and restricted in respect of His self-disclosures — these are two states pertaining to the object-pronoun, if they are passive participles. Their meaning has preceded. Or pertaining to the subject-pronoun, if they are active participles, i.e., judging Him to be unbound in His own reality (and restricted) in respect of His manifestations. In some copies it occurs as "the very eyes of the matter, unrestricted and restricted," and on this reading "musarraḥan" would be from "isrāḥ" not "tasrīḥ," so that the meter would be correct. And this is how it should be, for the last hemistich, according to the first version, is not in the same meter as the other hemistichs, as is not hidden from one who has knowledge of prosody

﴿في عين الأمور﴾

أي في ذوات الأشياء (مسرحا) أي مطلقة (ومقيدا) أي منزها ومشبها بعين ما ترى في نفسك. قال رضي الله عنه

i.e., in the very realities of things — (unrestricted) i.e., absolute, (and restricted) i.e., declared incomparable and declared similar, by the very same act by which you see within yourself. He, may God be pleased with him, said:

﴿قال الله تعالى : " لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه شَيْءٌ " فنزه﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

علم أن الكاف زائدة للتأكيد أي مثله شيء أصلا بوجه من الوجوه ، ومعنى التأكيد أن المراد بالمثل من يتصف بصفاته ، كقولك : مثلك لا يفعل كذا ، أي من يتصف بمثل صفاتك من غير قصد إلى مثل بل من يناسبك في الصفات ، وإذا انتفى عمن يناسبه كان أبلغ في الانتفاء ، فيرجع معناه إلى قولك أنت لا تفعل كذا لاتصافك بصفات تأبى ذلك

Know that the "ka" is added for emphasis, i.e., there is nothing like Him at all, in any respect whatsoever. And the meaning of the emphasis is that what is meant by "like" is one who is qualified with His attributes — as you say, "the like of you would not do such a thing," meaning one qualified with attributes like yours, without intending an actual likeness, but rather one who corresponds to you in attributes. And when this is negated even of one who would correspond to Him, that is a more emphatic negation — so its meaning comes back to your saying "you would not do such a thing," because of your being qualified with attributes that preclude that.

﴿قال تعالى: "ليس كمثله شيء" فنزه، "وهو السميع البصير" فشبه. قال تعالى: "ليس كمثله شيء" فشبه وثنى، "وهو السميع البصير" فنزه وأفرد﴾

اعلم، أن (الكاف) تارة تؤخذ زائدة، وأخرى غير زائدة. فعلى الأول معناه التنزيه، لأنه نفى أن يماثله شيء بوجه من الوجوه، وقوله

Know that "the kāf" [in "ka-mithlihi"] is sometimes taken as superfluous (zāʾida), and at other times as not superfluous. On the first reading, its meaning is [pure] incomparability, since He negates that anything resembles Him in any respect whatsoever. And His saying:

﴿وقال تعالى : " لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه ِ شَيْءٌ " فنزّه﴾

بناء على ما تقرّر في فنون البلاغة أنّ انتفاء أمر عمّا يماثل الشيء يدلّ على انتفائه عنه بأبلغ وجه وأتمّ قصد ، كما يقال للجواد : « مثلك لا يبخل » لا على أنّ الكاف زائدة ، فإنّ أصول التحقيق يأبى ذلك

based on what has been established in the arts of rhetoric: that the negation of something from what resembles a thing indicates its negation from that thing in the most eloquent manner and with the most complete intent - just as one says of a generous man, "One like you does not withhold" - not on the supposition that the kāf [in ka-mithlihi] is redundant, for the foundations of verification (uṣūl al-taḥqīq) reject that.

﴿قال الله تعالى :" ليس كمثله شيء" [الشورى: ۱۱]﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

من حيث أنه غني عن العالمين

insofar as He is independent of the worlds.

﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه شَيْءٌ وهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ﴾

فالمفهوم الأول ليس هو مثل الذي وصف بصفاته شيء إذ لا نظير له من غير قصد إلى مثل ونظير ، أو ليس مثله شيء على أن الكاف زائدة وهو محض التنزيه وهو السميع البصير عين التشبيه لكن الخاصة يفهمون من التنزيه التشبيه ومن التشبيه بلا تشبيه التنزيه ، فإن الكاف والمثل لو حملا على ظاهرهما كان معناه ليس مثل مثله شيء فيلزم ثبوت المثل والتشبيه بلا تشبيه ، وتعريف السميع البصير الدال على القصر يفيد أنه لا سميع ولا بصير إلا هو وهو عين التنزيه فافهم . قوله رضي الله عنه

— The first understood meaning is: there is nothing like the One who is described by His attributes, since He has no counterpart, without intending [to affirm] a "like" or a "counterpart"; or [it means]: there is nothing like Him, taking the kāf [of ka-mithlihi] as redundant—and this is pure tanzīh. And "He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing" is identical with tashbīh. But the elect understand tashbīh within tanzīh, and tanzīh within a tashbīh that is no [ordinary] tashbīh. For if the kāf and mithl were taken according to their apparent sense, the meaning would be "there is nothing like His likeness," which necessitates affirming a likeness—i.e., tashbīh without [ordinary] tashbīh. And the definite article in "the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing," which indicates restriction (qaṣr), signifies that there is no hearer and no seer but He—and this is identical with tanzīh. So understand. His saying, may God be pleased with him:

﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه ِ شَيْءٌ … وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ﴾

فشبّه » يعني : على مفهوم العموم على أنّ الكاف زائدة ، وأنّ السميعيّة والبصيرية مشتركتان بين الحق والخلق . ثم قال : « قال الله تعالى

'He likened'" — meaning: according to the general understanding, that the "kāf" [in "ka-mithlihi," "like unto Him"] is redundant, and that hearing-ness and seeing-ness are shared in common between the Real and creation. Then he said: "God, exalted is He, says,

﴿ليس كمثله شيء﴾

فنزه، وهو السميع البصير" (الشورى: 11) فشبه. وقال تعالى: "ليس كمثله شيء

— this is tanzīh (declaring incomparability); "and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing" (al-Shūrā: 11) — this is tashbīh (declaring similarity). And He, the Exalted, said: "Nothing is like unto Him"

﴿قال: "ليس كمثله شيء" [الشورى: ۱۱] فنزه﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

على أن تكون قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

— thus declaring incomparability] such that it reads: the Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

﴿" وهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ " فشبه﴾

لأن الخلق سميع بصير

because creation [too] is hearing and seeing.

﴿" وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ " فشبّه﴾

لأنّه من أوصاف العبد ، وهذا هو الجمع بين التنزيه والتشبيه على ما أشار إليه . ولمّا كان مقتضى الكلمة المحمّديّة والقرآن الختمي أعلى من ذلك وهو التشبيه في عين التنزيه ، والتنزيه في عين التشبيه قال

for that is among the attributes of the servant; and this is the combination of tanzīh and tashbīh, as he indicated. And since what is required by the Muhammadan Word and the Seal-like Qurʾān is higher than that - namely, tashbīh within the very essence of tanzīh, and tanzīh within the very essence of tashbīh - he said:

﴿فنزه "وهو السميع البصير"﴾

من حيث أسمائه ومظاهر صفاته وهو يقتضي إثبات المماثلة في السمع والبصر (فشبه) هذا ناظر إلى زيادة الكاف

insofar as His names and the loci of manifestation of His attributes, and this necessitates affirming resemblance in hearing and seeing — (so He declared Him similar). This pertains to the addition of the kāf [in the verse].

﴿قال تعالى : " لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه شَيْءٌ " فشبه وثنى﴾

على أن الكاف ليست بزائدة والمثل النظير فنفى مثل المثل وأثبت المثل فشبهه به وقال بالتشبيه إن المثل آخر يماثله

on the basis that the "ka" is not added [for emphasis] but rather "mithl" (like) means an actual counterpart — so He negated a likeness of the likeness, and thereby affirmed the likeness itself, likening Him to it, and asserting tashbīh, namely that the "likeness" is another that resembles Him.

﴿قال تعالى : " لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه ِشَيْءٌ " فشبّه وثنّى﴾

إشارة إلى ذلك ، وذلك لأنّ النفي إذا كان متوجّها إلى مثل مثله ، يدلّ على ثبوت المثل بالضرورة وعلى ثنويّة الموجود ، ويلزمه التشبيه في عين التنزيه ، والكثرة في نفس الوحدة . وأمّا عكسه فيستفاد من قوله

pointing to that; for when the negation is directed toward the like of His like, it necessarily indicates the establishment of a like and the duality of the existent, and this entails tashbīh within the very essence of tanzīh, and multiplicity within unity itself. As for its converse, that is derived from His saying:

﴿قال تعالى: "ليس كمثله شيء" فشبه وثنى﴾

أي حكم بالاثنينية على أن تكون الكاف غير زائدة فيفيد إثبات المثل وتثنية الحق به . وقال

i.e., judging by duality, on the basis that the kāf is not extra/redundant, so it conveys the affirmation of a likeness and the doubling of the Real by means of it. And he said

﴿قال الله تعالی "ليس كمثله شيء"﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

من حيث ألوهيته وتعلق قدرته إلى مقدوراته

insofar as His divinity and the relation of His power to the objects of His power.

﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِه ِ شَيْءٌ﴾

فشبّه وثنّى » . يعني : أنّ الكاف غير زائدة ، يكون إثبات المثل المنفيّ عنه مشابهة شيء ما من الأشياء ، وذلك عين التشبيه والتثنية . قال

'He likened and made two'" — meaning: that the "kāf" is not redundant, so that the affirmation of a likeness negated from Him amounts to a resemblance to something among things, and that is precisely tashbīh and duality (tathniya). He said:

﴿ليس كمثله شيء﴾

تنزيها في الأون وبالعكس في الثاني . لأن المراد بالتنزيه والتشبيه كلامان متغايران بالإيجاب والسلب مع اتحاد الموضوع والمحمول من جهة تغايرهما من جهة أخرى. فأيهما سبق في حق الحق يقتضي تعقيبه بالآخر بلا نصل شيء خارج عنهما لوجوب اجتماعهما لكون أحدهما في المعنى جزءا من الآخر فلا يمكن حمل قوله في الموضعين على التنزيه مع وجود أداة الحصر فيهما . وهما الضمير واللام في الخبر لئلا بفوت الجمع فما أنزل الله تعالى في حق نفسه كلاما إلا وهو على طريق الجمع ولا يخفى على من اطلع معاني كلام رب العزة وأسراره . ولما أتم البيان في التنزيه والتشبيه أورد ما جاء من آيات القرآن العظيم في حق نوح عليه السلام وقومه ليظهر فضل القرآن على سائر الكتب المنزلة . وبين ما قال إن ألسنة الشرائع الإلهية إنما جاءت في حق العامة على المفهوم الأول وعلى الخصوص على كل مفهوم يفهم من وجوه ذلك اللفظ . فقال رضي الله عنه

constitutes tanzīh in the first instance and the reverse in the second. For what is meant by tanzīh and tashbīh are two statements differing by affirmation and negation, while the subject and predicate are unified, from the aspect of their difference from another aspect. So whichever of the two comes first regarding the Real necessitates that it be followed by the other, without there being anything separate outside the two, due to the necessity of their conjunction, since one of them is, in meaning, a part of the other. So it is not possible to interpret his statement in both instances as pure tanzīh, given the presence of the particle of restriction (ḥaṣr) in both — namely, the pronoun and the 'lām' in the predicate — lest the combination be lost. For God, exalted, revealed no statement concerning Himself except by way of combination [of tanzīh and tashbīh], and this is not hidden from one who has become acquainted with the meanings of the speech of the Lord of Majesty and its secrets. Now that he had completed the exposition of tanzīh and tashbīh, he brought forth what came in verses of the Glorious Qur'an concerning Noah, peace be upon him, and his people, to show the superiority of the Qur'an over the other revealed scriptures. And he explained that the tongues of the divine Law only came, regarding the common people, according to the first understood meaning, while regarding the elite, according to every meaning understood from the various aspects of that expression. He, may God be pleased with him, said:

﴿فشبه وثني وهو السميع البصير فنزه وأفرد. لو أن نوحا، عليه السلام، جمع لقومه بين الدعوتين لأجابوه فدعاهم جهارا ثم دعاهم إسرارا، ثم قال لهم:﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

استغفروا ربكم إنه كان غفارا" (نوح: 10) وقال: "دعوت قومي ليلا ونهارا، فلم يزدهم دعائي إلا فرارا

two; 'and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing' — thus He declared incomparability and made [it] singular. Had Noah, peace be upon him, combined for his people both calls [tanzīh and tashbīh together], they would have answered him. But he called them openly, then he called them secretly, then he said to them:] 'Seek forgiveness of your Lord, for He is ever Forgiving' (Nūḥ: 10). And he said: 'I called my people night and day, but my call only increased them in flight' —

﴿ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير﴾

سورة الشورى : 11. (بل) شبه ونزه

Sūrat al-Shūrā: 11. (Rather) he affirmed tashbīh and tanzīh

﴿" وهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ " فنزه وأفرد﴾

إذ تقديم الضمير وتعريف الخبر يفيد الحصر أي وحده السميع البصير دون غيره ، يعنى لا سميع ولا بصير إلا هو ، فنزه عن المثل وأفرد فشبه في عين التنزيه ونزه في عين التشبيه ليعلم أن الحق هو الجمع بينهما . قوله رضي الله عنه

since the fronting of the pronoun and the definiteness of the predicate indicate exclusivity, i.e., He alone is the Hearing, the Seeing, none other — meaning there is no hearer and no seer except Him. So He declared Him incomparable with any likeness and asserted His uniqueness — thus likening Him in the very context of incomparability, and declaring Him incomparable in the very context of likening, so that it may be known that the Real is the combination of both together. His words, may God be pleased with him:

﴿وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ﴾

فنزّه وأفرد " يعني على السميع البصير هو الحق في كل سميع بصير له الأذن والحدقة ، وليس السمع والبصر الآلة إلَّا ، للحق ، وفيه التنزيه الحقيقيّ وإفراد الوجود الحق بالانفراد . وقد ذكرنا في أوّل هذا الفصّ ما فيه غنية عن التكرار ، وقد جمع الله تعالى في كل شقّ من الآية تنزيها في تشبيه وتشبيها في تنزيه ، فكان كلّ منهما ذاتيا للحقيقة والعين وهو الحق ، فافهم والله الملهم . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه : « لو أنّ نوحا دعا قومه بين الدعوتين لأجابوه فدعاهم جهارا ، ثمّ دعاهم إسرارا ،ثمّ قال لهم "اسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّكُمْ إِنَّه ُ كانَ غَفَّاراً ". وقال : "إِنِّي دَعَوْتُ قَوْمِي لَيْلًا وَنَهاراً فَلَمْ يَزِدْهُمْ دُعائِي إِلَّا فِراراً ". قال العبد : نوح عليه السّلام أوّل المرسلين أرسله الله تعالى إلى قومه ، وهم بالله مشركون ، يعبدون ودّا وسواعا ويغوث ويعوق ونسرا ، وعن حجّة محجّة المعبود الحق الواحد خارجون . فلمّا رأى الله الواحد الأحد ضلالهم عن الهدى ، واتّباعهم للهوى ، وأنّ في دعوتهم إليه وإجابتهم لدعوته كمالهم وبها يصلح في الدنيا والآخرة أحوالهم . أقام نوحا عليه السّلام ليدلَّهم على أحدية العين ، ويصرفهم عن الإطراق إلى الفرق والبين ، بعبادة التعيّنات الجزوية التقييديّة ، الظاهرة من صور النسب الأسمائية وحجابيّاتها التعديدية ، لكنّ الواجب في العبادة هو الواحد الذي هو أصل الكثير ، فإنّ عبدة الكثير ما لهم من نصير ، إذ الواحد الحق هو موجد الكثرة في عينه الواحدة ، فالحق الواجب على الكثرة عبادة الواحد الحق . لا عبادة الصنميّات و التعيّنات الاسمية ، فلا جرم كانت دعوته ودعوة جميع الأنبياء والرسل والأولياء إلى الله الواحد الأحد ، وكانت دعوة نوح عليه السّلام إلى الأحدية والتنزيه ، عن حجابيّات الكثرة وآلهة التشبيه ، لتصرف وجوههم عن صنميّات العدد ، إلى عبادة الواحد الأحد. فوعدهم وأوعدهم بما وعد وأوعد والقوم عنه معرضون ، وبتكذيبه مصرّحون ومعرّضون ، وبسخط قهر الأحدية متعرّضون ، لكونهم في خصوص قابليّاتهم مظاهر حجابيّة صور الأسماء ، وعبدة صنميّات الأهواء . فلمّا دعاهم إلى ما يباين شهودهم كلّ المباينة وهم لا يشعرون ، وندبهم إلى ما ينافي معهودهم ومعبودهم فيما يشهدون . فاستكبروا استكبارا واستكثروا من أذيّته استكثارا ، فلو كانت دعوته عليه السّلام دعوة جامعة بين وحدة الذات وكثرة الأسماء والصفات بالانتزاح من فرق الكثرة في عين الواحدة إلى جمع الوحدة في عين الكثرة المعدّة كما هو الأمر في نفسه لأجابوه ، وما نفروا عنه ، ولا هابوه ، ولا عيّروه ، ولا عابوه ، لأنّ الكثرة ظاهرة في الشهود ، والوحدة باطنة في عين الكثرة والوجود ، فالكثرة على ظاهر الوحدة ، والوحدة في باطن الكثرة . كبطون الواحد الأحد آخرا فيما يتناهى من العدد ، واشتمال الواحد على النصف والثلث والربع من النسب أوّلا قبل ظهور العدد فيما يتعدّد ، فلو دعاهم على مقتضى الشهود المحمدي الجامع ، لوقعت الإجابة بمقتضى الواقع ، وانقادت ظاهريّاتهم ظاهرا بمناسبة الكثرة الظاهرة التي هم في إظهارها إلى كثرة الأسماء المذكورة في الدعوة الواحدة المشهودة . وانقادت بواطنهم الأحدية أيضا إلى الوحدة ، لوجود المناسبة المشكورة ، ولكنّه عليه السّلام دعاهم إلى باطن السرّ ، وهم في شهود الظاهر وحجابيّة الأمر ، فأثّرت فيهم دعوته الإجابة بالنقيض ، وأثار بضدّ مراده من الآثار . فوقعت الإجابة منهم في صورة النفار ، وحصل الإقرار في صورة الإنكار والاستكبار ، لأنّ مضمون دعائه ينفّرهم عمّا هم عليه ملبّون ، ولدواعيه مجيبون وملبّون ، وعلى عبادته مكبّون ، فوجد النفار عمّا إليه دعاهم وهم في إجابة ما استولى عليهم ، فأصمّهم عن غيره وأعماهم ، فلم تكن الدعوة إذن أيضا باطلة ، ومن الإجابة بالكلَّية عاطلة ، وقد دعاهم جهارا ، إلى ما يزيدهم نفارا . وهم في عين سماع ما جهر به الاسم الإلهي الظاهر ، وأظهره من صنميّات المظاهر ، فإنّ العالم صورة الكلام الإلهي الرباني الذي تكلَّم به في عين النفس الرحماني ، جهر به فسمعه القائمون بظاهريات حجابيات كلامه فأجابوه بالفعل والذات مثل قوم نوح وعاد وثمود وغيرهم من مظاهر حجابيّات الكلمات والآيات ، الذين كانوا في عمارته وعبادته وتكميل أوضاعه وصورته وإسادته ، فأجابوا ظاهر دعوة الاسم الظاهر . وكتابه المفصّل الفرقاني بظواهرهم ، وهم أهل الحجاب والكفر ، حجبوا عن الحق الواحد فيهم بالستر ، فستروا بكفر كثرتهم وجه أحدية الوجود ، وغلب عليهم الحال حال هذا الشهود ، فهم في عين الكشف محجوبون ، وفي الجهر مسرّون ، وفي عين الإقرار على صورة الإنكار مسرّون ، فما وفّوا المراتب حقّها على ما أراد الله من أمره ، و

So He declared incomparability (nazzaha) and singled out — meaning: the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing is the Real (al-Ḥaqq) in every hearer and seer possessing an ear and a pupil, and the hearing and the seeing are naught but the instrument, belonging to the Real; and herein lies the true declaration of incomparability (tanzīh) and the singling out of the Real Existence in its uniqueness. We have already mentioned at the beginning of this Faṣṣ what suffices without repetition. God Most High has combined in each half of the verse a declaration of incomparability (tanzīh) within a declaration of similarity (tashbīh), and a declaration of similarity within a declaration of incomparability, so that each of the two was essential to the Reality and the Entity, which is the Real. So understand — God is the Inspirer. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said: 'Had Noah called his people between the two callings, they would have answered him. So he called them openly, then he called them secretly, then he said to them: "Seek forgiveness of your Lord; verily He is Ever-Forgiving." And he said: "Verily I called my people night and day, but my calling only increased them in flight."' The servant [author] says: Noah, upon him be peace, was the first of the messengers whom God Most High sent to his people, and they were associating partners with God (mushrikūn), worshipping Wadd, Suwāʿ, Yaghūth, Yaʿūq, and Nasr, having departed from the clear proof of the One True Object of worship. So when God, the One, the Unique, saw their straying from guidance and their following of caprice, and [saw] that in their being called to Him and their answering His call lay their perfection, and by it their states would be set right in this world and the next, He raised up Noah, upon him be peace, to point them to the oneness of the Entity (aḥadiyyat al-ʿayn), and to turn them away from inclining toward separation and division through the worship of the delimited particular determinations (taʿayyunāt) manifest from the forms of the relations (nisab) of the divine names and their veiling multiplicity — whereas what is obligatory in worship is the One who is the root of the many, for the worshippers of the many have no helper, since the One Real is the bringer-into-existence of multiplicity within His single Entity. So the truth obligatory upon multiplicity is the worship of the One Real, not the worship of idol-like things and nominal determinations. So necessarily his calling, and the calling of all the prophets, messengers, and saints (awliyāʾ), was to God, the One, the Unique; and Noah's calling, upon him be peace, was to oneness (aḥadiyya) and to the declaration of incomparability (tanzīh), away from the veiling multiplicities and the gods of similarity (tashbīh), so as to turn their faces away from the idol-like things of number, toward the worship of the One, the Unique. He promised them and threatened them with what he promised and threatened, while the people turned away from him, openly and implicitly declaring him a liar, exposing themselves to the wrathful subjugation of the oneness (aḥadiyya), because in the particularity of their preparednesses (istiʿdādāt) they were the veiling loci of manifestation of the forms of the names, and worshippers of the idol-like things of caprice. So when he called them to that which utterly differed from their witnessing while they were unaware, and summoned them to what contradicted what they were accustomed to and what they worshipped in what they witnessed, they grew arrogant with great arrogance, and multiplied their harm toward him greatly. For had his calling, upon him be peace, been a calling comprehensive of both the oneness of the Essence and the multiplicity of the names and attributes, moving from the separation of multiplicity within the single Entity toward the gathering of oneness within prepared multiplicity, as the matter is in itself, they would have answered him, and would not have fled from him, nor feared him, nor reproached him, nor blamed him, because multiplicity is manifest (ẓāhir) in witnessing, while oneness is nonmanifest (bāṭin) within the very entity of multiplicity and existence. So multiplicity is upon the manifest aspect of oneness, and oneness is within the nonmanifest aspect of multiplicity — like the nonmanifestness of the One, the Unique, at the end within what is finite of number, and the inclusion of the One in the half, the third, and the quarter of relations at the beginning, before the manifestation of number in what is numbered. So had he called them according to the requirement of the comprehensive Muhammadan witnessing, the answer would have occurred according to the requirement of what actually is, and their manifest aspects would have submitted outwardly, by virtue of the correspondence between the manifest multiplicity in whose manifestation they participate and the multiplicity of the names mentioned in the single witnessed calling. Their nonmanifest oneness (aḥadiyya) would also have submitted to unity, owing to the existing commendable correspondence. But he, upon him be peace, called them to the nonmanifest of the secret, while they were in the witnessing of the manifest and the veiling of the matter; so his calling produced in them the opposite response, and stirred up effects contrary to his intention. So the response from them occurred in the form of flight, and acknowledgment occurred in the form of denial and arrogance, because the content of his call repelled them from that to which they were responsive, to whose summons they were answering and responsive, and upon whose worship they were bent, so flight occurred from that to which he called them, while they were [already] answering that which had taken hold of them, which deafened them to other than it and blinded them; yet even so the calling was not thereby rendered void, nor entirely devoid of response, for he called them openly, to that which only increased their aversion, while they were even then hearing what the manifest divine Name (al-ism al-ẓāhir) proclaimed openly, and manifested of the idol-like things of the loci of manifestation. For the cosmos is the form of the divine, Lordly Speech which He spoke within the very Breath of the All-Merciful (al-nafas al-raḥmānī); He proclaimed it openly, and those who stood by the outward, veiling aspects of His speech heard it and answered it in act and essence — such as the people of Noah, ʿĀd, Thamūd, and others among the loci of manifestation of the veiling words and signs, who were engaged in its cultivation, its worship, and the perfecting of its conditions, form, and mastery — so they answered the manifest calling of the manifest Name, and His detailed, discriminating Book (al-Furqān), with their outward aspects — they being the people of veiling and disbelief — were veiled from the One Real within them by concealment; so by the disbelief of their multiplicity they concealed the face of the oneness of existence (aḥadiyyat al-wujūd), and the state of this witnessing overcame them, so that they were veiled in the very [moment of] unveiling, and concealed in [the very act of] proclaiming openly, and concealed in [the very act of] acknowledgment in the form of denial. Thus they did not fulfill the due right of the [divine] ranks according to what God willed of His command, and

﴿وهو السميع البصير﴾

تشبيه، لأنهمايطلقان عليه تعالى وعلى غيره من العباد. وعلى الثاني معناه: ليس مثل مثله شيء. فشبه بالمثل في نفى المثل عن المثل، وثنى أيضا بإثبات المثل. ونزه بقوله

is [an instance of] similarity (tashbīh), since both [names, the Hearing and the Seeing] are applied to Him, exalted, and to others among His servants. On the second reading, the meaning is: there is nothing like His like. Thus He likened, by [affirming] a "like" in the negation of a like of the like, and thereby doubled [i.e., posited duality] by affirming a "like"; and He declared incomparability by His saying:

﴿" وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ " فنزّه وأفرد﴾

وذلك من الحصر الدالّ عليه بخصوصيّة تركيبه ، وبديع نظمه وترتيبه . فلئن قيل : أما صرح في نظمه أنّ الجمع بين التثنية والتشبيه ، والإفراد والتنزيه ممّا يحترز عنه في الاعتقاد ؟ قلنا : إنّه من خصائص القرآن الختميّ والاعتدال الحقيقيّ الجمعيّ أنّه قد التئمت الأضداد لديه وتعانقت فيه ، حيث لا يبقى للغير والسوي هناك عين ولا أثر ، كما قيل : تعانقت الأطراف عندي وانطوى %~% بساط السوي عدلا بحكم السويّة فتأمّل . دعوة نوح عليه السّلام إلى التنزيه ثمّ إنّ الإنسان من حيث هو هو إنّما يقتضي بحسب قبوله الذاتي هذا النوع من الكمال ، ولما كان زمان بعثة نوح عليه السّلام ما كان أوان ظهور ذلك الكمال ، بل حكم قهرمان الأمر فيه اختفاؤه ، ما أجاب قوم نوح له

this being by way of the restriction (ḥaṣr) indicated by the particularity of its composition and the marvel of its arrangement and order. If it be said: has he not made explicit in his verse that combining duality with tashbīh, and singularity with tanzīh, is something to be guarded against in doctrine? We say: it is among the peculiarities of the Seal-like Qurʾān and of true, comprehensive equilibrium that the opposites have been conjoined and embraced one another therein, such that no trace or vestige remains there of otherness and disparity - as has been said: "The extremities have embraced with me, and the carpet of disparity has been folded up in justice, by the ruling of equity." So reflect. Noah's, peace be upon him, calling [his people] to tanzīh Then, the human being as such requires, by virtue of his essential receptivity, this kind of perfection; but since the time of Noah's mission, peace be upon him, was not yet the time for the manifestation of that perfection - rather, the governing authority of the affair decreed its concealment therein - Noah's people did not respond to him

﴿"وهو السميع البصير" فشبه﴾

بإثبات السمع والبصر له كما أنهما ثابتان للخلق فيكون تشبيها

by affirming hearing and sight for Him just as they are affirmed for creation, thus making it a declaration of similarity

﴿وهو السميع البصير﴾

[الشورى : 11] تشبيها في الأول وبالعكس في الثاني . وكذا قوله تعالى

[al-Shūrā: 11] constitutes tashbīh in the first instance and the reverse in the second. Likewise His saying, exalted,

﴿فنزه وأفرد﴾

أي فنزه الحق عن عدم السمع وعدم البصر وأفرد فيهما بحيث لا اشتراك لغيره فيهما هذا ناظر إلى عدم الزيادة . وإنما كان قوله تعالى

i.e., He declared the Real incomparable to the absence of hearing and the absence of seeing, and He asserted His singularity in both such that no other shares with Him in them. This pertains to the absence of the addition [of the kāf]. And it was so that His saying, exalted,