And the thinker, the picture, and everything that occurs through perception is nothing but the light. So every known thing has a relation to the truth and the truth is the light, so every known thing has a relation to the light, so by the light I realized the impossible, and if it were not for the appearance of the impossible and its acceptance of what it is in itself, the perceiver would have realized what I perceive. The Necessary Existence in itself must accept non-existence, the impossible for the possible to accept self-existence, and the impossible for the impossible to accept the possible. Likewise, you say in the imperative, a duty of the possible, that the relation of non-existence to him and existence is one and the duty of the impossible not to be described as possible, and no transfer like this in the possible, no less possible for the impossible. That it be on such-and-such, and it is possible for the obligatory to be on such-and-such, so the possible falls under the rule of the obligatory or the impossible, and neither the obligatory nor the impossible falls under the rule of the possible. Therefore, it is not permissible to say in the duty that it can be done with such and not do, but what is said And it is correct to say that it is possible that he can do such-and-such with him or not. Except for God, and in truth, no one knows what he says, nor how to attribute matters even though he makes sense of them, and expressions fail to comprehend them on their face, for God is All-Knowing of everything in terms of the light by which that thing is known, and nothingness and the impossible are known.

There is nothing but the thing, since there is no other than it *** for it is a light surrounded by knowledge

If you verify what we have referred to, you will find the facts of the information, how they are in themselves in terms of their existence, non-existence, non-existence, non-existence, negation or proof.

This is the strange knowledge, so if you are *** of its companions, you are the stranger and you do not know

Likewise, who knows of his strangeness, and this *** is more complete in the study of the matter

Glory be to him who revived the heart with his light *** and his light by thought for a time and by remembrance

As for the light that is not perceivable, which is what he said, may God s prayers and peace be upon him, I see it, because this is because the light of perception is included in it, and he did not perceive it because it is not from him by a foreigner.

It erases its parts, so the part is included in the whole, and the whole is not other than its parts. People differ in knowledge, so the one who knows something is the one who does not have a face left in that known thing except his knowledge of it, otherwise he knows from it what he knows. Nothing is revealed except by the two lights, the light of perception and the light of the perceiving. What is known, sight perceives by it, as we said about the relation of every known thing to the light without which it would not have been known. So sight perceives darkness itself and does not perceive others through it if perception is by sight exclusively.

Wasl As for moral injustice,

Like the darkness of ignorance, it perceives the world as long as the ignorant does not rise to it. If he does it, he does not perceive it, for if he perceives it, he would be a knowledgeable person. And except for the darkness of ignorance is from injustice, then it perceives all of it. Because he has no knowledge of comprehensive information, and therefore God commanded His Messenger, may God s prayers and peace be upon him, to ask for more knowledge. The darkness, for they do not believe in a matter that is in itself contrary to what they believe.