Furthermore, if these terms were not univocal, no meaning would be understood from them in their second application until their meaning in that application became known. This is the case with homonymous terms: if a term is used in a context that indicates its meaning, then used a second time with a different meaning intended, that other meaning cannot be understood without an indication pointing to it.

Despite this contradiction, their position agrees in substance with that of the heretics. For if they treat Allah’s names—such as the Living, the All-Knowing, the All-Powerful, the Existent, and the like—as merely homonymous, nothing can be understood from them when they are used to name Allah unless the meaning they signify when applied to Him is known. This is especially so if the meaning ordinarily understood from them is not what is intended when they are used to name Allah.

It is well known that when an individual term is used to name something, its meaning cannot be known until that meaning is first conceived and the term is then known to signify it. Thus, if the term is homonymous, we have no knowledge whatsoever of the meaning assigned to it with reference to Allah. Consequently, no meaning at all can be understood from Allah’s most beautiful names. There would be no difference between our saying “living” and “dead,” between our saying “existent” and “nonexistent,” or between our saying “knowing” and “ignorant,” or (dīz), or (kajz). Rather, these names would be like foreign words we have heard without knowing what they designate, or meaningless expressions that signify nothing, such as dīz, kajz, and the like.

It is well known that this is enough for the heretics. If they make a show of adhering to the revealed law, they do not object to the use of the term; they object only to our understanding any meaning from it.