and kisses it, it is as though he has shaken hands with Allah and kissed His hand.” Calling this a figurative interpretation is even less justified than doing so in the case of the hadith containing the words “I was hungry.” For the wording is “Allah’s right hand on earth.” The phrase “on earth” is an integral part of the statement and makes its meaning clear. It thus explicitly indicates that the Stone is not Allah’s right hand, which is an attribute of His, since it says “on earth.” This is like a ruler saying to a group of people about a spy of his, “This is my eye among you.” This explicitly means that he is the ruler’s spy, who serves as his eye, not his actual eye, which is an attribute of his. How, then, can this be said to have been figuratively interpreted and diverted from its apparent meaning, when it explicitly conveys the correct meaning and admits no false meaning at all, let alone has an apparent meaning that is false?

Furthermore, the report says, “Whoever touches it and kisses it, it is as though he has shaken hands with Allah and kissed His hand.” Thus, it describes the person touching the Stone as though he had shaken hands with Allah Most High; it does not say, “He has indeed shaken hands with Allah.” What is likened to something is not the very thing to which it is likened. Rather, this wording explicitly establishes a distinction between the two. How, then, can it be said to have been diverted from its apparent meaning, when it explicitly conveys the correct meaning?