The latter reading opens the way to a fearless investigation of subjects which all the early Muslims avoided as beyond their province. In the early days of Islam it was held that all parts of the Quran, except the muhkam verses and the purely narrative portions, were mutashabih; that is, all verses which related to the attributes of God, to the existence of angels and genii, to the appearance of Antichrist, the period and signs of the day of judgment, and generally all matters which are beyond the daily experience of mankind. It was strongly felt that not only must there be no discussion on them,[106] but no attempt should be made to understand or act on them. Ibn 'Abbas, a Companion, says: "One must believe the mutashabih verses, but not take them for a rule of conduct." Ibn Jubair was once {122} asked to put the meaning of the Quran into writing. He became angry and said: "I should rather be palsied in one-half of my body than do so."[107] 'Ayesha said: "Avoid those persons who dispute about the meaning of the Quran, for they are those whom God has referred to in the words, 'whose hearts are given to err.'" The first reading is the one adopted by the Ashab, the Tabi'in and the Taba-i-Tabi'in and the great majority of Commentators. The Sunnis generally, and, according to the testimony of Fakr-ud-din Razi (A.H. 544-606), the Shafa'i sect are of the same opinion. Those who take the opposite view are the Commentators Mujahid (died A.H. 101), Rabi' bin Ans and others. The scholastic theologians[108] (Mutakalliman) generally adopt the latter reading.[109] They argued thus: how could men believe what they did not know; to which their opponents answered, that the act of belief in the unknown is the very thing here praised by God. The scholastics then enquired why, since the Quran was sent to be a guide and direction to men, were not all its verses muhkam? The answer was, that the Arabs acknowledged two kinds of eloquence. One kind was to arrange words and ideas in a plain and simple style so that the meaning might be at once apparent, the other was to speak in figurative language. Now, if the Quran had not contained both these styles of composition, it could not have claimed the position it does as a book absolutely perfect in form as well as in matter.[110] Bearing in mind this fundamental difference of opinion, we can now pass on to the consideration of the attributes.