[Another statement by al-Rāzī in Lubāb al-Arba‘īn]

As for his statement:

“The honour arising from direction belongs intrinsically to the direction itself, and incidentally to whatever is situated within it.”

[Responses to this from several perspectives]

This may be answered from several perspectives:

This can only be said if direction is something that actually exists. If, however, it denotes something non-existent—meaning that He is above the world, distinct from it, with no other existent being there alongside Him—then there is nothing existent besides Him there to which elevation could belong: neither a direction nor anything else, much less anything besides Him deserving elevation, honour, and essence.

These people use the terms “direction,” “space,” and “place,” sometimes meaning something non-existent and sometimes something existent. Thus, among those who affirm the divine attributes—the hadith scholars and adherents of the way of the early generations across all schools—some apply the term “direction,” while others do not. Both positions are held among the followers of Ahmad, al-Shāfi‘ī, Mālik, Abū Hanīfa, and others among the scholars of hadith and legal reasoning.

Likewise, some apply the term “place,” while others prohibit its use.

As for the expression “occupying space,” some deny that it applies to Him, while most neither apply it nor deny it, because these are ambiguous expressions that can convey both truth and falsehood.

Accordingly, the following response may be given: when someone says, “Allah is in a direction, space, or place,” if he means something existent other than Allah, then that is among His creations and the things He has made.

Thus, if they say that Allah is above His heavens, over His Throne, distinct from His creation, it is impossible for Him to be confined or encompassed by anything existent besides Him, whether it is called a place, a direction, a space, or anything else. It is also impossible for Him to be dependent on