of a man, “Is such-and-such to be found in that town, and such-and-such in that mosque?” and he replied, “No, because the default presumption is that it is absent,” he would, by the agreement of all rational people, be denying something of which he has no knowledge.

Likewise, if someone else said, “Only the prophets see Allah twice each day, because the default presumption is that others do not see Him, and the prophets possess distinctions in which no others share,” this would be speaking without knowledge—if it escaped being falsehood.

Nor is there any implied restriction here upon which to rely, such as that conveyed by His saying:

“Flog them with eighty lashes.”

The Messenger did not say that the people of Paradise have two occasions for seeing Him, such that this would exclude all other occasions. Rather, his words indicate the contrary, as we shall explain. Even if we supposed that judgments in such matters could be based on the presumption of continuity, general textual evidence and analogy are two proofs that take precedence over that presumption: “general textual evidence” according to the consensus of the jurists, and “analogy” according to their overwhelming majority. It is known that “general textual evidence” and “analogy” both establish this vision, as explained above. It therefore cannot be denied on the basis of the presumption of continuity.

And if it were permissible to qualify that general scope on the grounds of women’s deficient reason, then one would have to say that the “simple-minded” and the “uncouth” among the Bedouins, and others like them who enter Paradise, do not see Allah. There is no doubt that some women possess greater reason than many men. Indeed, a woman’s testimony counts as half that of a man, whereas the testimony of a heedless man and others like him is rejected altogether, even if he is not insane.

The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“Many men attained perfection, but only four women attained perfection.”

Those women are more perfect than men who have not attained perfection. By what reasoning, then, would vision be granted to the imperfect but not to the perfect?