He criticises the situation where a case is brought before one judge, who rules by his personal opinion, then the same case is presented to another, who gives the opposite ruling—and yet all of them assemble before the ruler who appointed them, and he declares all of their opinions correct. Yet their Lord is One, their Prophet is One, and their Book is One. He asks whether Allah commanded them to differ so that by differing they obey Him, or whether He in fact forbade disagreement, while they deliberately disobey Him by differing. Did Allah leave the religion incomplete and need them to finish it, or does He have partners who share in legislating so that He must be pleased with what they decree? Or did Allah reveal a complete religion but His Messenger fail to convey it? He cites Qur’anic verses affirming that nothing has been left out of the Book and that its parts confirm one another without contradiction: had it been from other than Allah, they would have found in it much disagreement. Its outward form is beautiful and its inward meaning deep; its wonders do not fade and its subtleties never end. By it the veils of ignorance are torn.