or a narration or report that does not subsist in him but in someone else; nor can he be one who praises or censures, commends or extols, through praise, blame, commendation, or eulogy that subsist not in him but in another; [nor can he be one who privately confides, calls aloud, or supplicates through confidential discourse, supplication, or proclamation that does not subsist in him but only in someone else] (1); nor can he be one who promises or threatens by a promise or a threat that does not subsist in him but subsists only in another (2); nor can he be one who affirms or denies through an affirmation or denial that does not subsist in him but only in someone else; nor can he be one who swears an oath, takes a vow, or forswears by an oath, pledge, or vow that does not subsist in him but only in another. Rather, among the clearest innate and necessary pieces of knowledge (3) possessed by the children of Adam is the certainty that these qualities must reside in the very being (4) described by them, and that it is impossible for them not to do so, subsisting instead (5) only in someone else.

Therefore, whoever claims that praise and commendation [and command] (6) and prohibition, news and report, promise and threat, oath and swearing, calling and confidential discourse, and every other type of speech so named and described cannot possibly subsist (7) in the One who commands and forbids, confides and calls, announces and informs, promises (8) and threatens, praises and extols—namely, Allah the Exalted—but must subsist in someone else, has opposed the universally acknowledged innate disposition of humankind, has altered the languages of all creation, and, in addition to contradicting both reason and language, has belied all the messengers and accused them of the utmost deceit and obfuscation toward their audiences. For all the messengers have declared that Allah has commanded and forbidden, that He spoke and speaks, and it is known by necessity that their intent is that Allah Himself.