is included in what His name denotes, just as His attributes are included in what His name denotes, and just as a thing’s boundaries and limit are included in what its name denotes, then His occupying it is necessary, and it has positive existence. His statement that “it would be divisible” has already been discussed more than once: divisibility is an equivocal term whose meaning varies according to terminological convention. It is denied in a sense that does not follow from this, whereas the sense that does follow entails nothing objectionable; indeed, it is necessary for every existent thing.

Eighteenth response: One who holds that movement and change of place are impossible for Him maintains that His occupying the particular spatial region is necessary. As for the statement, “If that were so, the nature of that spatial region would differ from that of others, and thus it would have positive existence,” he replies that this is not conceded. For occupying that particular region need not be due to a feature of the region; rather, it is possible that