That is, I do not claim what is beyond reason. [Mahmoud said: "That is, I do not claim what is beyond reason ... etc."] Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, said: It is based on the previous principle regarding the preference of angels over prophets. Truly, the apparent meaning of this verse supports it. Therefore, I took the opportunity to use it as evidence, and to oppose the claim that the verse was revealed in response to the disbelievers when they said, 'What is this messenger that eats food and walks in the markets? If only an angel were sent down to him to be with him as a warner, or a treasure were cast down to him...' The verse refutes their saying: 'What is this messenger that eats food,' by stating that he is a human, and that is the nature of humans. He did not claim to be an angel so that his eating food would be surprising. Hence, it does not necessitate the preference of angels over prophets, as there is no disagreement that prophets eat food while angels do not. This distinction is agreed upon, and it does not imply agreement that angels are better than prophets. Similarly, it refutes their saying, 'Or a treasure be cast down to him,' by stating that he does not possess the treasures of Allah, the Exalted, so that he can bring them to them according to their suggestion, nor did he say that to them so that a proof could be established against him. This verse has a sequence that contradicts the sequence of the saying: 'The Messiah does not disdain to be a servant of Allah, nor do the close angels.'

Al-Zamakhshari said: Because they are higher than the prophets, and he has postponed here the claim of kingship from the claim of divinity, as divinity is more exalted and higher, while kingship is lower. There is no place for that except the preparation I have mentioned, and I have made the matter of precedence and postponement dependent on the context. The eloquence in some of it may require the opposite of what it requires in another. Al-Zamakhshari was not correct in his saying: The divinity is not considered a rank higher than the rank of the angels, for he has made divinity one of the ranks like kingship. Such an absolute statement is not permissible. The rank is a term for the position in which Allah places the servant, whether high or low. Thus, applying it to divinity is a distortion, and Allah is the guide to what is correct. It is not appropriate for a human to possess the treasures of Allah - which are His distribution among creation and His provisions, and knowledge of the unseen - while the angels are of a more noble kind. The saying 'of the angels who are of a more noble kind' means according to the Mu'tazilites, but according to the Ahl al-Sunnah, humans are more noble, as established in monotheism. (A) Allah, the Exalted, created him and preferred him and brought him closer to Him. That is, I do not claim divinity or kingship, for there is no rank higher than divinity above the rank of the angels, so that you would reject my claim and find it strange. Rather, I claim what is similar to what many humans have, which is prophethood. Is the blind equal to the seeing? It is a parable for the misguided and the guided. [[He returned to his words. He said: The blind and the seeing are a parable for the misguided and the guided... etc.]] Ahmad said: His saying or claiming the impossible means the impossible, and thus he contrasted it with the straight, meaning the possible. This is a consequence of the claim of divinity, as claiming it is not permissible rationally. As for the claimant of kingship, he is not comparable to the claimant of divinity in rational impossibility. It is permissible in ability for a human to be a king and for a king to be a human, just as it is permissible for humans to be prophets. This permissibility is indicated by His saying: 'And if We had made him an angel, We would have made him a man.' This is while reason permits it in the power of Allah, the Exalted, because substances are similar, and the meanings that exist in some can exist in all. Thus, the meanings by which a king is a king can be created by Allah, the Exalted, for humans and vice versa. The non-occurrence of it does not negate its correctness and possibility, and Allah is the guide. It is permissible for it to be a parable for whoever follows what is revealed to him, and for whoever does not follow, or for whoever claims the straight, which is prophethood, and the impossible, which is divinity or kingship. Do you not reflect? So do not be misguided like the blind. Or learn that I have not claimed what is not suitable for humans. Or learn that following what is revealed to me is something I absolutely need. If you say: What is the grammatical position of 'I know the unseen'? I say: It is in the accusative case, in conjunction with His saying: 'I have the treasures of Allah,' because it is part of what is said, as if he said: I do not say to you this saying nor that saying.