The aim of article is to critical edition of the work of Khatībzādah named Risāle fī kalām Allāh wa ruʾyātih. The main content of the work is based on two separate metaphysical problems. The first of these is about the God’s speech, and the other is the seeing of God. Both issues are discussed within the framework of the science of kalām. Although it looks like an annotation, the treatise contains the author's own ideas and questions. In the treatise, there are mostly references to the late period of the theologian’s books. Under the first title of the treatise, the meaning of God as a speaking being and the grounding of the divine word, the criticism of those who oppose this justification, the division of the word as word-meaning, the separation of the word from phrases, science and will are emphasized. Finally, the problematic relationship between the word and the lie is analyzed here. The second title grounds that God will be seen by people, the nature and physical conditions of seeing are listed, and the objections of those who oppose it are refuted. Although reason is considered as an evidence in the proof of both problems, it is stated that the main evidence is the transfer of prophet (ḥadīth). In the evaluation made in terms of reason, it is pointed out that it is not impossible for God to speak and be seen. As it is known, if a subject is not impossible in terms of reason, it is evaluated in the category of possible by theologians. In both cases, the boundaries of reason were drawn and the basis of proof was the transfer. However, as can be seen in the article, maximum attention has been taken to ensure that the discourses used in the explaining the issues do not conflict with reason. As a result, Khatībzādah does not advocate an approach that contradicts the views of the public. However, this should not mean that he does not review the accumulation of tradition and conveys it as it is. Because he sees his success in the effectiveness of the process rather than changing the outcome of the issue. In this context, the approaches of the schools formed on a single subject are summarized in detail. Then, the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence supporting their approach are analyzed. Here we look at the level measurement determinations of some kind of evidence. This is the method of verification (taḥkīk) Khatībzādah maintained throughout the treatise. Therefore, taking into account the consequences of the problems, it is wrong to prejudge that it does not bring any innovation. Because it focuses on how the difficult paths of the process were passed rather than suggesting a new result. If we go back to the beginning, Hatibzâde, with this treatise, shows the next generations that the mentioned evidence on the subject should be reviewed instead of saying the last word on the subject of Allah’s kalām and vision.