with its left hand”—either you include the Lord of all worlds in this proposition, on the supposition that He is upon the Throne, or you do not. If you do not include Him, this establishes nothing, and the statement serves no purpose. If you include Him in this syllogism based on a universal proposition, you have likened Allah to every body, lowly or otherwise, by comparing Him to a mosquito and similar things composed of differing parts. This involves associating partners with Allah Most High, setting up an equal to Him, and assigning Him rivals and a counterpart. All of this is impossible with respect to Allah Most High.

It cannot be said, “This only involves associating partners with Him and likening Him to others on that supposition.” For the reply is: the falsity of this supposition is a conceptual possibility, so the supposition may actually be true. It is therefore impermissible to assign Allah a partner on a supposition that may actually be true before its falsity is known. Once its falsity is known, this argument cannot be what establishes that knowledge.

It might, however, be said, “This is a second proof.” The reply is: your opponents regard this supposition as true, because the Quran and reason have shown that Allah is above the Throne. Thus, if you have assigned Allah rivals, likenesses, and a counterpart on this supposition, which is established by the Book and reason, then the Book and reason have likewise established that you have assigned Allah an equal, a counterpart, and a likeness. It may then be said to you in