“al-Mushtarī” is applied to the planet and to a buyer, just as “Suhayl” is applied to the star and to a man named Suhayl, and “al-Thurayyā” to the star and to a woman named Thurayyā. Hence the poet said:

“O you who marry Thurayyā to Suhayl—
May Allah grant you long life! How can they meet?
She, when she rises, belongs to Syria;
Suhayl, when he rises, belongs to Yemen.”

These people contradict themselves in this answer. They, like all other rational people, divide existence into necessary and contingent, beginningless and originated, and similar categories. Yet they know that such division is not possible with homonymous terms unless there is a shared meaning, whether that meaning applies equally or in differing degrees. Some of them reserve the designation “graded” for the latter case. Thus division is possible only with univocal terms in the broad sense, which includes graded terms; or with univocal terms in the strict sense, and with graded terms as well.

With a name such as “Suhayl,” however, one does not say, “Suhayl is divided into the star and the man,” unless one means that the word “Suhayl” is applied to both.

It is well known that division of this kind is not intended to describe how a word is applied in a language, but rather to divide the meaning that the word denotes.

This is why the division of general meanings is valid even when those meanings are expressed differently in different languages: what is being divided is the meaning, which does not change when the language changes.