the groups that agreed with them on part of this principle. Whenever someone accepted part of it, they would call him to accept the rest, if possible; otherwise, they were content with whatever heresy they had drawn him into. This principle is internally contradictory and opposed to the religion of all the Messengers—may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon them.

I have seen a book by one of the leading esotericists, entitled al-Aqālīd al-Malakūtiyya, in which he followed this approach, debating every group with an argument of this kind. They had agreed with him on interpreting revealed texts figuratively and on denying whatever might in any respect be termed likeness to creation. Thus, whenever someone affirmed any of the names and attributes, such as “the Existent,” “the Living,” “the All-Knowing,” “the All-Powerful,” and the like, he would tell him:

“This involves likeness, because the living is divided into the eternal and the originated, and the existent is likewise divided into the eternal and the originated. The concept being divided is shared by its divisions. This entails composition—which is corporeality—and also entails likeness. For if this exists and that exists, they resemble one another and share in what is designated by existence; this is likeness. If one of the two existents is necessary in itself, it shares with the other what is designated by existence, while being distinguished from it by necessity. The ground of distinction differs from the ground of commonality. Thus, what is necessary in itself would be composed of that by which it shares something with another and that by which it is distinguished from it. Whatever is composite is originated or contingent, because it depends on its part, and its part is other than itself. Whatever depends on something other than itself cannot be necessary in itself.”

Thus he led those who conceded these corrupt premises to deny necessary existence, whose reality is self-evident to every rational mind. He then raised an objection against