The leading scholars of the early generations, Ibn Kullāb, and others like him among the leading Ash‘arī scholars use neither formulation without qualification.

When the early generations were asked, “Is the Quran Allah or other than Allah?” their leading scholars would give neither answer without qualification, because either unqualified answer could suggest a false meaning. This does not establish a third category, neither the entity possessing the attributes nor something other than it. Rather, the meanings of the ambiguous expression must be distinguished, as the early generations did in analogous cases involving the term “spatial location” and similar expressions.

As for their statement, “On this basis, the Ash‘arīs must concede that the Creator is a body, because there would then be an attribute and something possessing it, a bearer and something borne,” the objector may be answered:

“The same implication follows for anyone who says, ‘He is knowing and powerful,’ or says, ‘He knows and is able.’”

Whoever affirms Allah’s Most Beautiful Names and what they entail is bound by the same implications as whoever affirms the attributes. A derived name denotes both the verbal noun and the verb; a person’s assertion and judgment to that effect require that what is asserted be established in reality.

The objector may also be told:

“Every consequence you press upon the Ash‘arīs and others like them for affirming the attributes, they can press upon you with regard to everything you have denied.”

If you say, “Only a body can possess an attribute,” they reply:

“Likewise, only a body can be named the Living, the Knowing, the Powerful; only a body can be said to know and to be able; and only a body can be described by someone as ‘knowing and powerful.’”

If you can affirm this of something that is not a body, they can do so too. If they cannot, neither can you. This objection therefore applies to everyone, just as it applies to the Ash‘arīs and others.