But many who explain “the One” as meaning that He cannot be divided intend the familiar sense of division: the separation of one part from another. Likewise, by “divisible” they mean that one portion can be separated from another. Yet this is not the only meaning intended by those who deny that He is a body when they say, “He is neither divisible nor separable into parts.” Their intended meaning does not require that such separation actually occur, or even that it be possible.

This usage appears in the statement of Abū al-Wafā’ ibn ‘Aqīl in his book al-Kifāya, in the chapter on denying offspring and division into parts:

“He, exalted is He, is One and cannot be divided into parts, as the Most High says, ‘He does not beget.’ For if He begot, He would be divisible into parts, since offspring are a part separated from the parent. He, exalted is He, says, ‘Yet they have assigned to Him a portion of His servants’ [] [al-Zukhruf 15]—meaning offspring.”

He said: “For division into parts is possible only for composite things, and we have already refuted composition when refuting His being a body.”

He said: “We offer a further proof specifically concerning this, saying: Begetting entails dissolution, and dissolution is possible only in an essence subject to change, over which successive periods of time pass, and within which natural properties contend for dominance—an essence that takes its share of nourishment and discharges the surplus. But the Beginningless One, exalted is He, is an essence that nothing enters and that enters nothing, that is not connected to anything and from which nothing separates, for He is One. Division into parts and partition can be conceived only of individual units that have coalesced through combination and become one