They moved from the analogy to newly created things at all, even if we said what they said, we would not modify, for example, from istiwaa, which is stability, to istiwaa, which is seizing, as they modified, especially since the throne is mentioned in the relation of this istiwaa, and the meaning of seizing is invalidated with the mention of the bed, and it is impossible to convert it to There is another meaning that contradicts stability. I used to say that the simile, for example, was made by leveling, and leveling is a meaning, not by leveling it, which is the body, and leveling is a reasonable, moral reality attributed to every entity according to what the reality of that entity gives, and there is no need for us to bother in dismissing leveling from its apparent meaning, for this is a clear and indisputable mistake. As for the three-dimensional word, they should not have gone beyond the wording mentioned to one of its possibilities, given their faith and their standing

Just as God Almighty did not command immorality, likewise He does not want it, but He decreed it and determined it by explaining that He does not want it, because the fact that it is obscene is not what it is, rather it is God’s ruling on it, and God’s ruling on things is not created, and what is not created by creation is not intended. If we oblige it in obedience, we oblige it and say will. For obedience, it was established by hearing, not by reason, so they confirmed it, so they confirmed it in immorality, and we accepted it in faith, just as we accepted the weighing of deeds and their forms, even though they were symptoms, so that does not discredit what we went to, as the evidence required .

The nothingness of the possible that precedes the judgment on its existence is not an intended thing, but the nothingness to which it is legally compared in its state of existence, that if there were not existence, that nothingness would be applied to it is what is meant when the possible exists because it is permissible for nothingness to be associated with it, and the non-possible that is not an intended thing is that which is in opposition to the existence of the necessary for its own sake, because The level of absolute existence corresponds to the absolute nothingness of the possible, since it has no permissibility of existence at this level, and this is in the existence of divinity only.

The fact that the specific is intended for existence is possible, and its specification of its existence in terms of it being existence is not possible, but in terms of its attribution to a possible, which may be attributed to another possible. Existence in terms of the possible is absolutely possible, not in terms of a possible, that which is not intended or reality in the first place, except through some possible, and if it is possible, then it is not it. With what is meant as such, but in terms of its relation to something possible and nothing else.

The evidence indicates that the specific reason is proven, and the evidence indicates, for example, the confirmation of what is attributed to this specification, whether denying or proving, as some of the overseers told us in a conversation that took place between me and him, so we were standing as he claimed, but the evidence indicated that the Messenger was proven on the part of the sender, so we took the divine lineage from The Messenger, so we ruled that he is such-and-such and not such-and-such, so how? And the clear evidence for his existence is that his existence is identical with his essence and not a cause for his essence, due to the proven lack of others, and He is perfect in every way, so He exists and His existence is identical with His essence and nothing else.

The possible's lack of the necessary in itself and the self-dispensation of the necessary without the possible is called God. Its attachment to itself and to the truths of every reality, whether existent or non-existent, is called knowledge. Its attachment to the possible in terms of what the possible are in it is called choice. Its attachment to the possible in terms of the advancement of knowledge before the existence of the possible is called will. Its attachment to the specification of one of the permissible. For the one who is capable of being determined, it is called a will whose connection to the creation of the universe is called power, because it is connected to the hearing of the created, because it is called a command, and it is of two types, by means of and without an intermediary. With the elevation of the mediators, the command must be influenced, and by means of an influence it is not necessary, and it is not a command in the essence of reality, since nothing stops

The mind has a light by which it perceives specific matters, and faith has a light by which it perceives everything unless there is an obstacle. With the light of the mind, one reaches the knowledge of divinity, what is necessary for it and is impossible, and what is permissible of it is neither impossible nor obligatory. With the light of faith, the mind realizes self-knowledge and the attributes of truth to itself. Adjectives