put him forward as an example, not the Christians. For an “example” may refer both to the original case and to the case inferred from it. It may also refer to an individual case or to the complete argument constituting an inference. As I have already explained, setting forth an example is inferential reasoning. In analogical inference, the example is the individual case. As for syllogistic inference, calling it “setting forth an example” is like calling it “inference,” as I have explained elsewhere. This is because mental concepts correspond to external particulars and resemble them, and because a particular individual corresponds both to the universal concept encompassing its instances and to the other instances.

For a universal concept takes shape in the mind that resembles the particular individual, while each individual resembles the other. Thus, this meaning resembles that one, and each of them resembles the universal meaning encompassing both. This, Allah knows best, is why it is called “setting forth an example” and “inference.” For darb (setting forth) means bringing together; this bringing together occurs in the heart and on the tongue, and consists in generalization and inclusion. Thus, bringing together, setting forth, generalization, and inclusion occur in the mind, both in meaning and in wording. When an example is set forth, either a corresponding generalization or a resembling individual case has been formulated. Reflect upon this, for it is a valuable insight, Allah willing.

You may also say: Every report conveying a likeness that the speaker has formed in the mind is a setting forth of