or a condition, a limit, or an appositional substitute. They have proceeded to report differing views on this matter, as may be found in the writings of some authors on the principles of jurisprudence. Yet no one is known to have maintained this—that a general expression qualified by descriptive attributes, limits, or conditions is figurative. Rather, when some authors stated without qualification that a general expression becomes figurative once its scope has been specified, those reporting their views assumed that they meant connected specification. In those authors’ terminology, however, an expression was called a general expression that had been specified only when its scope was specified by something separate from it. As for connected specification, they never called the expression a general expression that had been specified, since it conveyed its meaning only together with the qualification, whose connection to it precluded generality. This is the terminology of many scholars of the principles of jurisprudence, and it is correct.

An expression qualified by a condition, a descriptive attribute, or the like should not be classed among cases in which generality has been specified, nor among general expressions that have been specified. Rather, one must qualify the term and say, “connected specification.” This qualified term does not fall within “specification” used without qualification.

In short, the reply is: if this is figurative, then qualifying an otherwise unqualified verb with a direct object, an expression of time or place, or a circumstantial qualifier must also be figurative. The same would apply to anything qualified by any qualification. It would follow that all speech is figurative. Where, then, is literal speech?

If it is said, “A distinction is drawn between connected and separate contextual indicators: an expression accompanied by a connected indicator is literal, whereas one accompanied by a separate indicator is figurative,” the reply is: “By ‘connected,’ do you mean something contained in the wording, or something present at the time of the utterance?”

If you mean the former, it follows that anything already known about the circumstances of the speaker or listener must be a separate contextual indicator. Thus, an expression used with the definite article to refer to what both already know—as when someone says, “The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said,” meaning, among Muslims, the Messenger of Allah; or, “al-Siddīq said,” meaning, among them, Abū Bakr; or when a man says to his companion, “Go to