implies that their principles necessarily entail that Allah occupies space and has magnitude, and that He is composite and made up of parts and portions. They themselves acknowledge both the underlying principle and its necessary consequence; this is not something others have established against them by proof. Rather, they themselves have acknowledged it. Yet this is precisely what he denies in this passage. This is not a case of someone demonstrating by argument what another person’s position entails. Rather, he has acknowledged that Allah, glorified and exalted, possesses a certain attribute, and elsewhere acknowledged that possessing that attribute necessarily entails such-and-such. Taken together, these two acknowledgments amount to an acknowledgment of what we have stated.

The twenty-first point: He has acknowledged here that He would be more insignificant than an indivisible atom, and would be nonexistent, if He occupied space and had magnitude while we maintained that He could neither be pointed to nor perceived by the senses. He has stated here that He can neither be pointed to nor perceived by the senses. It therefore follows that He would be nonexistent and more insignificant than an indivisible atom. There is no doubt that this is the reality of their position. He himself has acknowledged the premises leading to this conclusion, but separately, without bringing them together in one place. Had he brought them together, this would not have escaped him. Such is the way of one who advocates falsehood.

The twenty-second point: His opponent says: “It has been established by the self-evident knowledge of the innate disposition, by what is self-evident in revelation, and by the agreement of every rational person of sound