with the eyes in the Hereafter and denying it in this world, except for the disagreement specifically concerning the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace.] (1)
As for his appeal [and also the appeal of those who deny it] to His words [Most High] (2):
{No vision can apprehend Him} [Surah al-Anām: 103]
The verse is evidence against them, not for them. For apprehension must mean either vision without qualification, vision itself, or vision qualified by encompassment. The first is false, because not everyone who sees something is said to have [apprehended it, just as he is not said to] (3) have encompassed it. Ibn Abbās [may Allah be pleased with them both] (4) was asked about this and said (5), “Do you not see the sky?”
He replied, “Yes.”
He asked, “Do you see all of it (6)?”
He replied, “No.”
Likewise, whoever sees the flanks of an army or the sides of a mountain (7), garden, or city is not said to have apprehended it (8). He is said to have apprehended it only when his vision has encompassed it (9). In the present context, we are not required to establish that; we have mentioned it merely to explain the basis for denying the claim (10). Rather, anyone adducing the verse as proof must demonstrate that, in the language of the Arabs, apprehension is synonymous with vision and that everyone who sees something is said in their language to have apprehended it. There is no way to do so—how could there be, when between the term