category has a single verbal form, as with “I” and “you,” or “this” and “that.” Yet in each instance it denotes a particular speaker, addressee, or person spoken of. These expressions cannot be called equivocal, like the name “Suhayl,” nor univocal, like the word “human.” Rather, they have both a shared element and a distinguishing element. In respect of the shared element, they resemble univocal terms; in respect of the distinguishing element, they resemble terms that share only their wording. They are never used without accompanying indications that identify the referent of the pronoun, the object pointed to, and so forth. Their meaning thus derives jointly from their wording and an accompanying contextual indication that identifies the referent. Everyone agrees that this is literal usage. No rational person calls it figurative, even though these expressions never convey their meaning without a contextual indication specifying the intended referent.

If one asks about the expression “I,” the answer is that it denotes the speaker in general. Yet no one has ever uttered it in the abstract, for there is no abstract, universal speaker common to many individuals. Rather, every speaker is a particular individual distinct from others. Thus, when one seeks to understand what these expressions denote and mean, one asks: Who is speaking these words? Who is being addressed by “you,” whether as subject or object, and by similar expressions?

If the one speaking is Allah, as in His words to Moses:

“Indeed, I am Allah. There is no deity except Me,”

and similar passages, then this expression in this context is a designation for Allah Most High and can refer to no other. No created being can say:

“Indeed, I am Allah. There is no deity except Me, so worship Me and establish prayer for My remembrance.”