that accords with external reality; whereas the lying informant who knows he is lying fashions in his mind an estimate that only imitates knowledge. To imagine what exists as non-existent and what is non-existent as existent—in both thought and speech—occurs more times than can be counted (1). Accordingly, the meaning of his statement is nothing but a hypothetical knowledge, not genuine knowledge (2); what is being reported possesses in the external world merely a posited existence, not a real one. What is imagined is not real, neither in the mind nor outside it. Yet because he has imagined himself to be knowledgeable, he likewise imagines the existence of the thing reported outside himself. When the listener believes him and assumes that he is truthful (3), taking what he says to be fact, he does not regard it as imagined but treats it as established. Every unsound belief consists of mental conjectures (4) that have no reality outside the mind. Such conjectures are indeed reports and convictions, even though they are not knowledge (5); yet in outward form they resemble what is real, just as the speech of the liar resembles the speech of the truthful, and his handwriting resembles his handwriting. Thus they are alike in their signification—whether written, spoken, or conceived.
Exactly the same applies to a command issued purely as a test. In reality, the tester is neither truly demanding nor truly willing anything at all; rather, his being a demander and a willer is only hypothesized. For by making that hypothesis, the obedience and compliance of the addressee become manifest just as they would were the demand genuine. Presenting such a test belongs to the realm of indirect allusion (maʿārīḍ): it may be permissible, and it may be impermissible. It is akin to a speaker causing the listener to grasp a meaning the speaker never intended; the wording may point to that meaning from one angle and fail to point to it from another. The speaker’s own meaning is thus something the listener does not apprehend, whereas what the listener understands is something else entirely. Likewise, for the tester the signification of the verbal form, from his own standpoint, is merely a putative request (6) and a putative will, whereas in relation to