The point is that Ibn Kullāb, the leading authority followed by al-Ash'arī and his companions, and by their predecessors such as al-Hārith al-Muhāsibī and others like him, explains that whoever says, “He is neither within the world nor outside it,” makes an invalid claim, outside the bounds of rational inquiry and transmitted reports; that he has rejected Allah’s explicit report; that, were he told, “Describe Him as nonexistent,” he could say no more than this; and that he has said what neither transmitted reports nor reason can admit. They said, “This is pure monotheism,” although it is pure negation. Thus they made pure negation into pure monotheism.

What he says here is what all rational people who speak on the basis of clear reason say, unlike those who discuss rational matters through delusion and false imaginings. Hence he said:

“If they say, ‘He is neither above nor below,’ they have rendered Him nonexistent, for whatever is neither below nor above is nonexistent.”

All of this contradicts the position of those who agree with the Mu'tazilah and the philosophers: the later Shi'a, and those who agree with them among the Hanbalīs, Mālikīs, Hanafīs, Shāfi'īs, and other groups of jurists, who say, “He is neither below nor above.”

He mentioned a third argument, saying:

“You describe Him with impossible attributes, which entail combining opposites in existing things. You must therefore describe Him with all other opposites.”

He said:

“They are told: ‘If we say that a human being—meaning also other entities that subsist in themselves—is neither in contact with nor separate from a place, this is impossible by their own admission.’”

[Ibn Taymiyyah’s Comment]

Yet they say that He is neither in contact with nor separate from a place, thus describing Him with the attribute