indeed, even qualities subsisting in the soul—so this would constitute a draining. What reinforces this interpretation is that, although a person’s knowledge resides within his soul, it does not adhere inseparably to the soul as colours adhere to coloured objects. Rather, a person may become distracted from it or heedless of it, and may forget it and then remember it. Thus, it is something that is present at one time and absent at another.

When a person speaks of it and knows it, his soul may grow tired and weary, so that he cannot bring it to mind again until some time has passed. In that state, the soul lacks the full realization and conscious presence of that knowledge by which one is a knower in actuality, even though what has departed is not itself the very thing subsisting in the soul of the questioner and listener. Whoever adopts this view says: the fact that teaching consolidates knowledge in one respect does not contradict what we have mentioned.

If such diminution and draining are conceivable in the knowledge of servants, then using the term “diminution” in relation to Allah’s knowledge follows customary linguistic usage in such cases. Nevertheless, He—glorified is He—is far exalted above being characterized by the opposite of knowledge in any respect, or above His knowledge departing from Him. Whether acts and movements subsist in Him, however, is a matter of dispute among people, Muslims and others.

The precise meaning is this: what my knowledge and yours have taken from Allah’s knowledge, what my knowledge and yours have attained of Allah’s knowledge, and what my knowledge and yours have encompassed of Allah’s knowledge—as He says:

“They encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He wills”—

is only comparable to what this sparrow has removed, taken, or obtained from this sea. That is, the proportion of the former to the latter is like the proportion of the one to the other, even though that with which the comparison is made is a body that moves from one place to another and departs