the one in whose favor you acknowledged it and called so-and-so and so-and-so to witness against you,” and the like.

This is why Moses answered him with words that affirmed and established what he had denied, saying:

“The Lord of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them” [al-Shuʿarāʾ: 24].

And he said:

“Your Lord and the Lord of your forefathers” [al-Shuʿarāʾ: 26].

For knowledge of this Lord’s existence is firmly established in human nature and deeply rooted in people’s hearts.

This becomes clear when we consider that a question about the essence of something existing in external reality follows acknowledgment of its existence. As for something that is denied and does not in fact exist, it has no essence in external reality about which to ask. Someone may, however, be asked to explain how he conceives of what he describes, even if it has no reality outside the mind.

If, however, something is claimed to exist in external reality but its existence is denied, the claimant is not being asked to explain the essence of something that has no reality. Rather, he is questioned by way of denial, not in order to seek information.

If the thing being asked about does not exist, the person questioned is required to distinguish and define it, so that it may be made clear to him that it does not exist and that he is asserting the existence of what does not exist. Thus, someone who claims that there is a mountain of rubies here, or a sea of mercury, is asked: “Where is it? What is it like?”

Likewise, someone who claims the existence of the awaited, infallible one who entered the cellar in Samarra is asked: “How can he be identified? How old was he when he entered? What prevents him from appearing?” Such questions demonstrate either the nonexistence of the thing being asked about or the absence of what the person questioned attributes to it.