later poets, orators, letter writers, and preachers labored to produce, this was not the practice of the orators and eloquent speakers among the Companions and Successors, nor was it something to which the Arabs paid much attention(1).

Most who rely on such devices embellish their wording without conveying any worthwhile meaning, like a warrior who ornaments his weapon even though he is a coward.

For this reason, one finds that the more deeply a poet indulges in praise and satire, the more he goes to extremes in lying, resorting to fantasies and analogies(2).

Moreover, most of the orations related by the compiler of Nahj al-Balāgha are falsely attributed to Ali. Ali—may Allah be pleased with him—was far too noble and exalted in rank to have spoken such words. Yet these people fabricated lies and imagined that they constituted praise, although they are neither true nor do they constitute praise.

Whoever says, “Ali’s speech—or that of any other human being—is above the speech of created beings,” is mistaken. The Prophet’s speech—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is superior to Ali’s, and both kinds of speech are created.

But this resembles the sort of statement made by Ibn Sabīn, who says: “This is the speech of Bashīr(3), which in some respect resembles human speech.” Such a view tends toward regarding what lies within human souls as the speech of Allah. This is not something Muslims say.

Moreover, the sound meanings found in Ali’s speech are also found in the speech of others. Yet the compiler of Nahj al-Balāgha and those like him took many statements made by other people