noncomposite. This is a contradiction. Once it is established that its right side is identical in nature to its left, and that two things identical in nature must share all necessary properties, it follows conclusively that whatever touches its right side could come to touch its left, and vice versa. If such separation and detachment of those parts are possible, this once again entails that coming together and separating would be possible for Allah’s Essence, which is impossible. Thus, affirming that He is in any direction leads to these impossibilities, so that position must itself be impossible.

The response is: This argument is an argument against His being a body. It would therefore have been better to present it in the first chapter, which argues against His being a body, rather than here. He presented it here, however, to use it against those who say that He is upon the Throne, and included in it the position of those who say that He is immense but is not a body. The disagreement over this is well known; had he addressed it explicitly, further discussion would have been necessary. If it is established that He is not upon the Throne, he can then deny that He is a body by saying: Were He a body, it would be possible for Him to be upon the Throne—even though this is disputed among those who affirm that He is a body