So if these entities, which are manifestations, are characterized by the example of the Rich, and they are called “rich,” then the meaning of that entity is “rich” in God, unlike other entities, not that the entity is rich in itself, and so is every noun of transcendence, then it has these names insofar as it is manifestations. If the one named is the tongue of the apparent in it, then it is because it is a god. The relative relative to the Self is closer than the language of appearance. If it is called rich, then the name “appearance” does not go away from it .