The two languages also differ in the extent of that meaning and in its generality and specificity, just as they differ in its nature and kind. They also differ in its manner, attributes, and other respects. Indeed, even when two speakers use the same name in the same language, one may conceive of aspects of its nature, quantity, manner, and so forth that the other does not. If the meaning conveyed by a single name is not identical in every respect in the minds of different speakers—or even in the mind of the same speaker at two different times—how can it be said that it must be identical across different languages? This is further illustrated by the fact that what the angels know of it is not of the same extent as what human beings know, nor is what Allah knows of it of the same extent as what the angels know. These differences, however, are differences of variety, not opposition.
As for the claim that the meanings of the revealed Books are identical, its falsity is self-evident. If we expressed the meanings of the Quran in Hebrew and the meanings of the Torah in Arabic, the meanings of the one would still not be those of the other. Indeed, it is self-evident that the meanings of the Books vary, and that these differences of variety are greater than the differences between their letters, given the disparity between Arabic and Hebrew. Likewise, the meanings of al-Baqarah are not those of Āl ʿImrān. Still more far-fetched is the claim that a command is the same as a statement.
It is not denied that these different things may share some common reality, just as languages share some common reality. If they may be called one despite their variety, then the same applies to languages. Indeed, the differences in meaning are greater.
As for the claim that one is a real attribute and the other a conventional one, that is not so.