The first is because glory is associated with it, meaning that only he can attain it because it is resistant to fever with pride, and if this testimony was from creation, it would not be immune to fever from God, so the addition of glory to it indicates that it is God’s testimony to Himself and the wise saying of the existence of this arrangement in giving happiness to the owner of this testimony, where He made it Between two testimonies attributed to God in terms of the first and last names, and the testimony of creation between them

Glory be to Him who destined things according to their destinies, and the world was unable to estimate them according to their true destinies, so how can they truly estimate the destinies of those who created them? This revelation is from the position of inheritance of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, in terms of his message, from his saying, “Invite to God with insight. I and those who follow me, and they are the scholars of God from among the people of God.” God is the one whom the Truth has established in the position of messengers in calling to God with a true tongue based on absolute prophecy. He took care of them in describing them with it, not the prophecy of the laws, but rather the prophecy of preserving a legitimate matter based on insight from the memorizer, not from imitation.

The answer is specific to it and it is also related to it, except that it is in the third place according to the ranks we have presented. The question should have been about this in detail between the prophecy of the laws and the absolute prophecy. They are among the saints if they were prophets of the law in The third level, and if they are in linguistic prophecy, then they are in the second level, and know that the saints are those whom God has entrusted with His support in the position of their struggle against the four enemies: passion, the soul, the world, and Satan, and knowledge of these are the pillars of knowledge according to the accountant .

And if his question was about the position of the prophets among the saints, that is, the prophets of the saints, which is the prophecy that we said was not interrupted, then it is not the prophecy of the laws. Likewise, in the question about the position of the messengers who are prophets, let us say in his answer that the prophets of the saints have their position among the individual divine presences and the divine name that they worship is individual. And they are called individuals. This is the position of the prophecy of the guardianship, not the prophecy of the laws. As for the position of the messengers who are prophets, they are the ones who have characteristics according to what they worshiped their followers, such as Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, in what was said to him, “Purely for you” and not for the believers in marriage by gift. Among the messengers are those who have characteristics over their nation, and from them. He whom God does not single o

Likewise, the saints among them are prophets, that is, they were designated with knowledge that only a prophet possesses of divine knowledge, and their judgment comes from God in what He told them, the judgment of the angels. This is why he said about the Prophet of the Laws, “What you have not known of,” meaning, “What is your taste, O Moses, despite him being God’s speaker?” So he broke up the ship and killed the boy. And the wall was erected to honor creation through the rule of a divine command, such as the eclipse of the land at the hands of Gabriel and whoever was among the angels. For this reason, individual human beings were in the position of the dominant among the angels, and their prophets among them were in the position of the messengers among the prophets.

The answer to your question is that four things are possible. One is that the nominative pronoun in granting it refers to God. The second refers to the third place on the divine name. The fourth is that the pronoun in His names refers to the servant, so the name is a name. The servant is not the name of God. Likewise, the accusative pronoun in granting him, which is the second object, is it the pronoun of a divine name or is it the place? If the nominative pronoun is God or the place, then the one given is the name without a doubt, and if the nominative pronoun is God, the divine name, or the servant’s name, then the place is the one given.

Let the nominative pronoun be God, for what is given is the divine name by which the servant is called in his creation, or the name of the servant, which is the basis for divine closeness, for the servant is not characterized by closeness to God except by his name. God said to Abu Yazid, “Come closer to me by what I do not have.” He said O Lord, and what is not Yours, he said, humiliation and lack. The reason for this is that the origin of the servant is that he must be caused, and the cause is his for his own sake. And every cause is poor and humiliated, without a doubt, there is no hope of cure for this ailment, so closeness to God is an original intrinsic closeness.

And if what is given is a divine name so that the servant may be created by it, such as the Most Merciful name in his homeland and the proud name King in his homeland, then that is a closeness that is presented to him by the Lawgiver who appointed it for him, for the servant has names that he deserves and names that are presented to him, just like the divine names if the servant is created by them, and God has names that he deserves and names that are presented to him from He revealed it to the minds of His servants, and they are the names that belong to the servant by virtue of merit. So is the description of the Truth by them being an creation by God with the names of His servant, or are those attributes to God the truth? We are ignorant of their meaning in relation to Him and we know their meaning in relation to us, so the servant is created by them, even if he deserves them from the point of view of his knowledge of their meaning if they are attributed to him and from the exis