one further from it concerning the very principle on which the latter bases his argument against him, and can agree with the earliest predecessors, who adhered to the truth without qualification.

For example, when the later Ash'arīs debate the Mu'tazilah concerning the vision of Allah, and the Mu'tazilah tell them, “Seeing an object that neither faces the beholder nor is opposite him contradicts the clear dictates of reason,” the Ash'arīs—and those who agree with them in denying such facing and opposition, including a group of Ahmad’s followers and other followers of the four imams—can reply that this vision is established by the widely transmitted—indeed, mass-transmitted—Sunnah of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and by the consensus of the predecessors of the earliest generation. It can also be established through reason, as we have explained elsewhere.

There are only two possibilities: either this vision is possible without its object facing or being opposite the beholder, or it is not. If it is possible, the Mu'tazilah’s argument is defeated. If it is not, the Ash'arīs face two alternatives: either agree with the Mu'tazilah in denying such opposition on the grounds that Allah is neither separate from creation nor above it, or agree with the scholars of hadith in affirming His separateness and His being above, which entails facing and being opposite.

The latter is more fitting for al-Ash'arī’s followers, since it is the position of the leading authorities of their school, such as Ibn Kullāb and others. Indeed, it is also the position of al-Ash'arī himself and other early adherents of the school.

If the Mu'tazilite says to the Ash'arī, “If you say that, it follows that He occupies space, yet you have already agreed with me that this is untenable,” the Ash'arī can reply: “Either it is possible for Him to be above the Throne and separate from creation without occupying space, or