As for his statement, “Whatever is immense must be composite and divisible, which is incompatible with His being One,” we reply: Granted that whatever is immense in the observable realm must be divisible, why do you maintain that the same must hold in the unobservable realm? Drawing an analogy from the observable to the unobservable without a shared basis for comparison is invalid. Moreover, why could He not be indivisible and exceedingly small?

As for his statement, “He would then be insignificant, which is impossible for Allah,” I reply: That which cannot be indicated by the senses or perceived is akin to what does not exist, and would therefore be even more insignificant. If this is admissible, why should that not be?

The answer to the first point is that we say: If He is immense, He must necessarily be divisible. This is not a matter of drawing an analogy from the observable to the unobservable; rather, it rests on a conclusive demonstration. For we