One is that it entails composition in Allah’s essence, which we have refuted in refuting the assertion of corporeality.”

I say:

A respondent might say: The statement, “Either it is divided, which entails composition,” is ambiguous, as has been explained more than once. It could be understood to mean that His essence admits separation, that it was separate and then came together, or that someone assembled it, and other such meanings that they do not affirm.

If this is what someone means by saying that the Creator’s essence, exalted is He, is divided, then they do not affirm such division. Yet denying this does not entail that the essence cannot be sufficiently capacious to accommodate this, that, and the other, with each subsisting where the other does not. This is what he meant by “division” and “composition.”

[Al-Āmidī’s discussion of the denial of corporeality, and Ibn Taymiyyah’s commentary]

As for his claim that he refuted this when refuting the assertion of corporeality, they say that nothing he presented in denying corporeality constitutes an argument against their position.

For he said: “The principal argument for denying corporeality is to say: If