Where variation is permissible, disagreement has no real substance. If two practices are prescribed at different times or through different messengers, both are valid. If the disagreement concerns which of the two is prescribed, this is known through transmitted reports from the revealed Book. The revealed Book itself consists of commands, prohibitions, and statements; it contains the revealed law, and whatever contradicts that law cannot itself be revealed law.

Thus, Ibn Sīnā and others like him are correct in stating that the Quran contains no indication of their conception of divine oneness. This, however, proves that their conception is false and has no reality, and that whoever agrees with them on it is ignorant and misguided.

Likewise, he noted that there are passages whose wording admits only one meaning and cannot bear the metaphorical or figurative meanings they claim. He cited the words of Allah Most High:

“Are they waiting for anything but that Allah should come to them in canopies of clouds?”
Al-Baqarah: 21.

And His words:

“Are they waiting for anything but that the angels should come to them, or your Lord should come, or some of the signs of your Lord should come?”
Al-An‘ām: 158.

With the alternatives distinguished in this way, it would never occur to the mind that the wording is metaphorical or figurative. If such a meaning was implicitly intended, then He has accepted that error and confusion should arise. This is an argument against those who deny the divine attributes and reject what these passages affirm; it is also an argument against him and against all of them, and their agreement with him does not