For by the outward form (Ẓāhir) of things, their inward reality (Bāṭin) is inferred. When we see the form of a fig—which is its outward aspect—we know it is sweet in taste; that is only because its fixed image in your mind is its outward aspect. Do you not see that if you see its outward aspect green, then touch it and find it soft, you know it is ripe? This is indicated by its outward aspect.

Likewise, the myrobalan (al-Ahlīlaj): when you see it, you know it [is bitter] by its fixed image in your mind. If you had never seen a fig or myrobalan, you would not know the sweetness of one from the bitterness of the other until you perceived them with the senses of sight and taste. Similarly, you do not know the ripe fig from the unripe until you touch it; thus its outward texture points to its inward reality—that it is red, not white, and sweet, not pungent.

The first thing that perceives existents is the sense of sight, which grasps the outward forms of things. This explanation is sufficient, God willing.

If the intention behind the [religious] laws (Sharā’i‘) were their outward forms, then their commands, prohibitions, permissions, and interdictions would not have differed. For it is not permissible for the Ancient [God] to change from one state to another. Do you not see that the law brought by Moses abrogated what was before it? Moses commanded the alteration of [laws] like the sect of the Sabians and the Brahmins and their belief regarding the planets—that they were