The Torah itself phrases the matter thus: “We shall create a human being in Our image, resembling Us.” It does not say, “according to Our exemplar.” This is similar to the Prophet’s—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—authentic ḥadīth: “Let none of you say, ‘May Allah disfigure your face and the face of the one who resembles your face,’ for Allah, Exalted is He, created Adam in His image.”

Hence the prophets—Allah’s blessings and peace be upon them—such as Moses and Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned only the term shibh (resemblance) and did not employ the term mithl (likeness).

People have differed over whether shibh and mithl carry the same meaning or two distinct meanings. Two positions are recorded:

1. They are synonymous, and whatever the word mithl denotes—whether used without restriction or with a qualifier—is likewise denoted by shibh. This is the view of a group of theoreticians.

2. Their meanings diverge when the words are used unqualified—linguistically, legally, and rationally—although, when bound by a qualifier and contextual clue, either term may be intended with the sense of the other. This is the opinion held by most scholars. The dispute turns on a rational question: May one thing resemble another in certain respects while differing in others?

Those who deny that partial resemblance is possible maintain that mithl and shibh are identical. Those who affirm that a thing can indeed resemble another in one aspect but not in another distinguish between the two terms when they are used without qualification.