corresponds to it, and the meaning of the report concerning Paradise(1) and the Fire likewise corresponds to it. If, then, the meaning of this report were in reality the very meaning of that other report, and both conformed to the realities they describe, it would follow that the reality described here must be identical with the reality described there. Hence all existent realities would have to be a single entity: Paradise would be the Fire, the angels would be the devils, existence would be non-existence, affirmation would be negation—a union of contradictions beyond measure.

This is an unavoidable consequence of their position. A truthful report is a mental judgment, and a mental judgment corresponds to the existing reality; and every report given by Allah is true. If all those reports were but one and the same reality, devoid of any differentiation whatsoever—namely, a single mental judgment—then that reality would have to match the external world. By contrast, a false report need not correspond(2) to external existence. Thus, if one undifferentiated mental judgment corresponds to what is being judged about, the latter must likewise be undifferentiated; otherwise there would be no correspondence.

In the same way, Allah has commanded faith, prayer, and zakat, and He has forbidden disbelief, lying, and injustice. If(3) the reality of a command were identical to the reality of a prohibition, differing only in their relation to actions, there would be no distinction between what is enjoined and what is forbidden. [Indeed, were one to say that the forbidden act is commanded and the commanded act is forbidden,](4) this would not be impossible so long as the underlying reality is one and the same and only the relational attachment differs; and such attachment has no concrete reality that prevents variation. One could just as easily imagine its attachment as a command as its attachment as a prohibition while the underlying reality remains intact.(5)