for the meaning of the term “interpretation” in Allah’s Book differs from its meaning in the terminology of later scholars of legal theory and jurisprudence, and from its meaning in the terminology of many Quran commentators and scholars of the early generations. Some meanings described as interpretation are sound and have been transmitted from certain scholars of the early generations. I therefore did not deny anything whose soundness is established by proof. Thus, if something is established as sound by proof and is transmitted from the early generations, it is not distortion.

I also told him that, in stating what is denied, I mentioned likening Him to creation rather than resemblance, because Allah expressly denies the former in His Book, saying:

“There is nothing like Him.”

And:

“Do you know of any equal to Him?”

I preferred this to an expression found neither in Allah’s Book nor in the Sunnah of His Messenger, although denying resemblance may convey a sound meaning, just as it may convey a false one.

When I mentioned that they do not deny of Him the attributes with which He has described Himself, distort words from their proper places, or deviate concerning Allah’s names and signs, one of those present began to take offence, sensing the clear refutation of his position in those words. Yet he could find nothing to say. He wanted to steer the discussion towards questions familiar to me, but could not do so because he knew the answer.

When I mentioned the Verse of the Throne, I think he asked the emir about our statement, “No devil will approach him until morning.” I then mentioned Abū Hurayrah’s hadith concerning the one who was stealing the alms for Eid al-Fitr, and stated that al-Bukhārī had narrated it in his Sahīh. They began speaking at length about denying resemblance and corporeality, alluding to what some people attribute to us in these matters.