for we do not find a group whose doctrine is refuted by the same doctrine except this one since its doctrine is to invalidate contemplation and change words from their subjects by claiming symbols and everything that is conceivable that their tongue would utter either contemplation or transmission. as for contemplation they have invalidated it and as for the word it is permissible that the word may mean something other than its subject so they have no refuge. if it is said this turns against you then you also permit the interpretation of appearances just as you interpreted the verse of the ascension and the news of the descent and other things. we say how farfetched is this reversal for we have a criterion in interpretation that which the minds consideration and its evidence indicate the invalidity of its apparent meaning we necessarily know that what is meant is something other than that on condition that the word is appropriate to it by way of metaphor and allegory. the evidence indicates the invalidity of istiwa and nuzul for that is one of the attributes of accidents so it is interpreted as domination and that is appropriate to the language. as for the gathering and spreading and paradise and hell there is no evidence in the mind to invalidate it nor is there any appropriateness between the words mentioned in it and the meaning that they interpreted it to so that it can be said that it is what is meant rather… interpretation is a pure lie. so what is the connection between his saying therein is a flowing spring therein are raised couches and cups set forth and cushions lined up and carpets spread out and his saying in thornless lote trees and arranged banana trees to his saying not cut off and what they believed about the connection of spiritual essences to matters?
إذ لا نجد فرقة ينقض مذهبها بنفس المذهب سوى هذه إذ مذهبها إبطال النظر وتغيير الالفاظ عن موضوعاتها بدعوى الرموز وكل ما يتصور ان ينطلق به لسانهم اما نظر او نقل اما النظر فقد ابطلوه وأما اللفظ فقد جوز ان يراد باللفظ غير موضوعه فلا يبقى لهم معتصم فإن قيل فهذا ينقلب عليكم فأنتم تجوزون ايضا تأويل الظواهر كما اولتم آية الاستواء وخبر النزول وغيرهما قلنا ما ابعد هذا القلب فإن لنا معيارا في التأويل وهو أن ما دل نظر العقل ودليله على بطلان ظاهره علمنا ضرورة أن المراد غير ذلك بشرط ان يكون اللفظ مناسبا له بطريق التجوز والاستعارة فقد دل الدليل على بطلان الاستواء والنزول فإن ذلك من صفات الحوادث فحمل على الاستيلاء وهو مناسب للغة واما الحشر والنشر والجنة والنار فليس في العقل دليل على إبطاله ولا مناسبة بين الالفاظ الواردة فيه وبين المعنى الذي اولوه عليه حتى يقال انه المراد بل التأويل في تكذيب محض فأي مناسبة بين قوله {فيها عين جارية فيها سرر مرفوعة وأكواب موضوعة ونمارق مصفوفة وزرابي مبثوثة} وقوله {في سدر مخضود وطلح منضود} الى قوله {لا مقطوعة} وبين ما اعتقدوه من اتصال الجواهر الروحانية بالأمور