It is attached to the world of the unseen, and the definite nouns are attached to the world of the witnessed because the implicit is valid for every specific person and is not specific to one person without another, so it is absolute, and the specific is restricted, so if you say Zayd, what are the other nouns because it is subject to a specific person, and if you say you, he, or you, then it is a pronoun suitable for every addressee. Ancient and modern, for this reason we differentiate between the implicit and the specific by the noun or adjective, and the adjective is a barzakh between the nouns and the pronouns. If you say the believer or the writer, you have distinguished him from the non-believer, so he resembles Zayd in the sense of what the adjective designated him, and I resemble the pronouns in the sense in which he applies this characteristic to each of them, except that the rhetorical pronoun, for example, is general. Every addressee, regardless of who he is, whether he

So fearing God is the right of His fear, which is the view of the one who fears God as being pious of Him, while he is isolated from it, except for the extent of his obligation to Him, for he is not isolated from it due to what it entails of bad manners with God. The state of the one who fears God is the right of his fear, like the state of one who truly thanks God. The meaning of that has been presented, and this verse is one of the most difficult. A verse passed on to the Companions, and they imagined that God had made light of His servants with the sign of ability in piety, and they did not know that they had moved to the more severe, and we used to say what they said, but when God explained what He meant with the truth in things like this, the matter was easy for us in that, and we knew that fearing God through ability is greater in the obligation, for He is mighty to give. When a person works to the best of his ability, there must be a virtue that he maintains, but in the rig

If the servant had not claimed the ability to perform actions and independence in them, God would never have sent down an obligation or a law. This is why the believer’s share of this claim is that he says, “And You do we seek help.” And he said, “In our right and the right of people like us who disavowed the actions whose existence is apparent from him, say, ‘There is no power nor strength except in God.’” The Most High, the Great, is too great to participate in it, for it is purely His. So how many situations are there between disavowal and claim? The claimant is required to prove his claim, while the acquitter is not required to do so. Do not say that repudiation is a claim, for repudiation does not leave anything behind. Accordingly, the name of the acquitter is used while we are speaking about the verified matter, for this is our book, rather our entire speech. Its basis is in speaking about matters as they are in themselves, and disavowal is a negative divine attribute, and

Since the meaning of piety is to take protection from what is attributed to the pious, if the ratio is present, protection prevents it from reaching him and the pious person from reaching him and harming him, so she received protection, for no one is more patient with harm than God, for the arrow, the stab, the stone, the strike with the sword, and the like, according to the culturalists, only receives protection. It is the shield that is in his hand, and he is holding it behind it, but he needs a strong balance for matters that are accidental and are called reprehensible, so the servant accepts it, and God does not make it a protection for etiquette, even if only God receives it in the matter itself, but etiquette is permissible for the servant in that, and this claim does not harm him because it is an image, not reality. And if God knows that from you, He will reward you with the reward of one who returns matters to Him, and relies on Him in every situation, and lives under the