Imam Ahmad regarded Jahm’s argument as being of the same kind as that of those who profess restricted indwelling, since they say that He dwells in some of His creation.

Among these Jahmiyyah are those who say:

“Divinity is in humanity without dwelling within it.”

Likewise, Jahm and his followers regarded the Creator’s existence within created beings as being of the same kind as divinity within humanity. They combine two contradictory assertions, just as the Christians did.

Jahm’s use of this argument against the Sumaniyyah resembles its use by those who deny the divine attributes against those who affirm them. Al-Rāzī and others like him invoked the rational soul to argue for the possibility of a being that is neither separate from the world nor within it, according to the view of those philosophers who say:

“It is neither within this world nor outside it. It resembles God, and philosophy consists in resembling God to the extent of one’s ability.”

Jahm’s purpose in this argument was to demonstrate the possibility of a being that cannot be perceived by the senses. He therefore argued against them by invoking the rational soul, since it cannot be perceived by the senses. This is the argument used by the Peripatetic philosophers against the naturalists among them.

These people use the intelligible realities they affirm as an argument for affirming a being that is not perceptible to the senses. They then claim that the unseen of which the messengers spoke is the intelligible existence they affirm.

At this point, minds have been bewildered and understanding has gone astray, and they are