These deniers are perplexed: at times they regard encompassing as contradicting being above, and at other times they regard it as a necessary condition of being above.

We have demonstrated their error in both respects: encompassing neither contradicts being above nor is incompatible with it. Thus, people know that the sky is above the earth and that clouds are above the earth before it ever occurs to them that the sky encompasses the earth.

Likewise, they know that Allah is above the world even if they do not know that He encompasses it. When they know that He encompasses it, this does not prevent them from knowing that He is above it.

It is therefore clear that knowing a thing to be above does not require knowing that it encompasses. If encompassing were a condition of such knowledge, it would be impossible to know what depends upon that condition without knowing the condition itself. Yet, since the celestial spheres are in fact both above and encompassing, encompassing and being above were inseparable in this case—an impossibility. For if every thing that is above is supposed to encompass, then being above and encompassing would be inseparable. But if an entity is supposed to exist that is above without encompassing, then encompassing would not be a necessary consequence of being above.

It is thus clear that, on the supposition that the Lord is above without encompassing, He is above; and on the supposition that He is above and encompasses, He is above. His being above is therefore established on either supposition, which is what was to be demonstrated.

If this is intelligible in the case of two created entities, it applies all the more to the Creator.

I have also set out this argument in another way, as follows:

If it is said: “No side of an encompassing entity is distinguished from another as being above or below. Thus, it is not possible, if something is supposed