it is not unlawful to apply that name to Him, for the Lawgiver has issued no prohibition against it; hence the matter is left as permissible.

The correct view is a third position: one must distinguish between invoking Him with a name and merely informing about Him by means of it. When He is invoked, He should be called upon only with the Most Beautiful Names, as Allah, exalted is He, says: “And to Allah belong the Most Beautiful Names, so call upon Him by them and leave those who deviate concerning His Names” (al-Aʿrāf 180).

Informing about Him, however, is governed by need. Should it be required, for the sake of clarity, to translate His Names into a non-Arabic language, or to describe Him with a name whose meaning is sound, that is not forbidden.

Those who barred the usage on rational grounds are many. Some maintain that a jawhar (substance) is that which occupies space and bears accidents, and Allah—glorified and exalted—is not of that nature; this is the view of the theologians who deny the attribution. Others say that a jawhar is that whose existence occurs “not in a subject,” a definition that applies only to what possesses an existence additional to its essence, whereas the Necessary Existent’s existence is identical with His very essence, and thus He cannot be—