The point here, however, is simply this: relying solely on the denial of likeness to deny whatever one seeks to deny serves no purpose, since any two things resemble one another in some respect and differ in another. This is unlike relying on the denial of deficiency, defect, and similar imperfections from which He—glorified be He—is free, for this is a sound approach. Likewise, affirming His attributes of perfection while denying that anyone else is His equal in them denies equality in what rightfully belongs to Him. This is the essence of monotheism: nothing shares with Him anything that is exclusively His. He possesses every attribute of perfection in a manner in which no one is His equal. Hence, the position of the early generations of the Muslim community and its leading scholars was to affirm the attributes with which He described Himself and to deny that He is like any created being.

If it is said:
“When one thing resembles another in some respect, whatever is possible for the latter in that respect is possible for the former; whatever is necessary for the latter is necessary for the former, and whatever is impossible for the latter is impossible for the former.”

The reply is:
“Granted that this is so. But if that shared aspect entails neither affirming what is impossible for the Lord—glorified be He—nor denying what rightfully belongs to Him, then it is not impossible. For example, it is said that He exists and is living, knowing, hearing, and seeing; some created beings have also been described as living, sam‘ī (pertaining to hearing), knowing, and seeing. If it is then said, ‘It follows that whatever is possible for such a created being insofar as it exists and is living, knowing, hearing, and seeing must also be possible for Him,’ the reply is: ‘What this shared aspect entails is not impossible for the Lord Most High, for it entails neither coming into existence, nor contingency, nor deficiency, nor anything incompatible with the attributes of lordship.’”