because it is founded on a false, self-contradictory premise. When the proponent of a contradictory position follows it through consistently and is held to its implications, its falsity and objectionable character become apparent in ways that were not evident before. If he does not follow it through, he contradicts himself, and its falsity becomes apparent. Thus, its falsity follows either way.

For this reason, proponents of figurative usage have no coherent position whatsoever. Rather, all their positions are contradictory, and their definitions and the distinguishing signs they mention are unsound. Since the foundation of their position is false, they have invented a division and terminology within the language that have no basis in reality. Indeed, this division is false, so it cannot be accurately conceived or expressed in sound terms. A sound meaning, by contrast, can be expressed in sound words, as Allah Most High says:

“O you who believe, fear Allah and speak words that are right.”

Sound speech is apt and correct, corresponding to the truth without addition or omission; it is just and truthful. This is unlike the speech of someone who seeks to distinguish between two equivalent things and treat them as different—indeed, as opposites. Such speech is not sound. This is discussed at length in its proper place.

The point here is that those who say, “There is no figurative language in the Quran”—if they mean by this that His words,

“Ask the town,”

mean “Ask the walls,” and that “the caravan” means the beasts, and other such things reported from them, then they are mistaken. If they classify an expression used in a particular sense outside the Quran as figurative, but do not classify it as figurative when used in that sense in the Quran, they are also mistaken. If, however, they mean that writings other than the Quran contain exaggerations, reckless assertions, unnecessary expressions, and similar things from which the Quran is free, then they are correct in this.

And if they say: