not intrinsically, but as a consequence of being situated in that direction above the world,” is rejected—indeed, it is false. For His elevation belongs to Him intrinsically, not on account of anything separate from Him, just as His beginninglessness belongs to Him intrinsically, not on account of anything separate from Him. Saying that His elevation depends upon the elevation of the direction is like saying that He is beginningless because time is beginningless. Both are false imaginings. Rather, He is in Himself the First, before whom there is nothing; He is in Himself the Last, after whom there is nothing; He is in Himself the Manifest, above whom there is nothing; and He is in Himself the Hidden, nearer than whom there is nothing.

The eighth response: Suppose that direction, with respect to elevation, or eternity, with respect to beginninglessness, is something existent that depends upon Him. Its existence would then depend upon the existence of the Real—not that the Real’s elevation and beginninglessness depend upon it. For that would fall within what is meant by His very self, just as it is said that a spatial locus consists of the sides of that which occupies it. Since eternity expresses His beginninglessness, His beginninglessness and His spatial locus fall within what His designation encompasses and are attributes of His. Thus He, glorified be He, would not be dependent upon His attributes. Even if it were supposed to be something external to His attributes, its existence would depend upon the existence of the Real, and the Real would be