in this, while these possibilities may exist.
Wrongs can be established as such only when no alternative possibility can apply to them.
Many who profess religiosity err in this, rather than those possessing religion: the first concern of those possessing firm religion is caution concerning themselves, especially in condemnation.
Anyone changing a wrong must fulfill conditions in changing it. God has urged us to think well of people, rather than ill of them.
A person of religion does not condemn on suspicion, having heard: ﴿Some suspicion is sin﴾ [al-Ḥujurāt 49:12]. Perhaps this belongs to that ‘some.’ Its sin is his uttering it, even if it agrees with knowledge of the affair as it is. God calls him to account because he supposed rather than knew, and spoke concerning a matter open to possibilities, which he had no right to do.
(Considering the Self and Caution in Judgment)
Thinking ill of one's own soul is more fitting than thinking ill of another, for one has insight into oneself, but not into another.
Strictly, one is not said to think ill of oneself, for one knows oneself. We have said he thinks ill of himself only in conformity with his thinking ill of another: it is a correspondence within the wording.
It also has a ground within the realities of the Revealed Law. In considering himself concerning a deed he condemns within himself, he does not truly know that in doing it he commits a wrong he knows as such. Rather, he supposes it, so thinking ill of himself is more fitting.
For God has servants to whom He has said, ‘Do whatever you wish, for I have forgiven you.’ Thus they have done only
