on istiwāʾ (the divine rising), transcendence, and the narrative attributes. We shall treat them exactly as you treated those passages; and the very principles that moved you to reinterpret theirs are, in our view, principles that oblige us to reinterpret these outward indications.

Whenever the Jabrites argue with the Qadarites, citing the proofs that the servants’ deeds (1) are created by Allah and occur by His power and will, the Qadarites reinterpret those texts in precisely the way their opponents had re-read the texts that state, in unmistakable terms, that the deeds truly belong to the servants and take place by their power and choice—and the Jabrites reciprocate in kind.

If an allegorist who affirms the beatific vision in the Hereafter adduces evidence against one who denies it, the latter replies, “I (2) interpret these apparent texts exactly as you interpreted the verses and hadiths concerning the narrative attributes.”

Likewise, when an interpreter who affirms that Allah’s knowledge embraces every single particular and universal brings forward the revelatory proofs for it, the objector retorts, “These passages are no more numerous than the texts that speak of exaltedness, loftiness, the Lord’s rising over His Throne, the descent of His command from Him, and the ascent of the angels to Him. Since, in your view, all of those—despite their multitude and corroboration—are open to allegorical reading, then these are even more so.”

It is therefore evident that it is impossible (4) for the allegorists to establish, against any opponent, a proof from