the Throne entails that He is in a direction, occupies space, is divisible, or the like. The other party says that His being upon the Throne does not entail any of this; rather, He may be upon the Throne without being a body. This second position is that of the Ashʿarīs. Thus, the disagreement between them and the Ashʿarīs concerns whether His being upon the Throne necessarily entails that He is a body.

If this is the actual point of disagreement between Ibn Fūrak and his followers and Ibn al-Haysam and his followers, then either Ibn Fūrak or Ibn al-Haysam must be correct. If Ibn Fūrak is correct, it follows that His being upon the Throne does not entail that He is a body, composite, divisible, or anything of that kind. If this holds true, then the claim made by this author of al-Taʾsīs and others like him—that His being above the Throne entails that He is a body—is invalid. Consequently, all the arguments he presents in this book to disprove His being upon the Throne are invalid. If he acknowledges that He is above the Throne, then the foremost objective has been achieved, and his position would then be of the same kind as that of the leading Ashʿarīs