Thus, since what is intended when the names of things are mentioned in connected speech is the things named, these scholars said: “The name is identical with what it names.” They regarded the verbal expression that people ordinarily call the name as the act of naming. As al-Baghawī said:

“The name is the thing named—its very self and essence. Allah Most High says:

‘We give you good news of a boy whose name will be John.’

He declared that his name was John, then addressed the name, saying:

‘O John!’

He also says:

‘You worship besides Him nothing but names you have named.’

He meant the actual objects of worship, for they worshipped the things named. He also says:

‘Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High,’

and:

‘Blessed is the name of your Lord.’”

He said: “The act of naming is also called a ‘name.’ Indeed, this word is used more often for the act of naming than for the thing named.”

Abū Bakr ibn Fūrak said:

“People have differed over the true nature of a ‘name.’ Linguists have discussed it, those concerned with the realities of things have offered explanations, and theologians have disagreed about it. Linguists say that a name is a sequence of letters signifying a single meaning. Some say that it is an expression denoting something spoken of, to which a statement or report is ascribed.”

He said:

“Those concerned with the realities of things have also differed over its meaning. Some say that the name of a thing is its essence and very self, while the act of naming is an expression referring to it and indicating it, and is therefore called a ‘name’ by extension. The Jahmiyyah and the Muʿtazilah say that ‘names and attributes’ are expressions indicating the things named. This is close to what some linguists have said.

“The third view is that the name is neither identical with what it names nor distinct from it, as with knowledge and the world. Some say that the name of a thing is its attribute and description.