and that “Paradise” and “Hell” refer to this; that the descriptions in the divine scriptures are merely parables intended to convey an understanding of the spiritual afterlife; that “angels” and “jinn” are accidents, namely the soul’s good and corrupt faculties; that the “spirit” does not move, but rather the realities of existence are unveiled to it, and this constitutes its nearness to Allah; and that the Prophet’s ascension belongs to this same category—such negation and denial constitute disbelief.

Likewise, what the speculative theologians affirm—that the servant draws near, in both body and soul, to the “specially favored places” where the Lord’s light appears, such as the heavens and mosques, and that the same applies to the angels—is correct. But their claim that they do not draw near to Allah Himself, and that Allah is not upon the Throne, is false. The correct position is to affirm this, while also affirming what the texts teach concerning the servant’s nearness to his Lord and the Lord’s revealing Himself to His servants by removing the veils attached to them and those separate from them. Such nearness and self-disclosure involve the servant’s knowledge—the truth becoming manifest to him—and the servant’s action—his drawing near to his Lord. I have already discussed the Lord’s drawing near and His nearness, and the disagreement among the people of the Sunnah concerning this.

Yet some professed adherents of the Sunnah and some ignorant people, when they see the truth affirmed by those groups, may recoil from accepting it, even though it does not contradict what those groups dispute with the people of the Sunnah. Rather, all of it is correct. Indeed, acknowledging what is agreed upon may be more important than acknowledging what is disputed, since the former is clearer and more evident, and serves as a foundation for the disputed matter. This gives rise to some discord involving a kind of