drawing an analogy between what exists beyond their observation and what they have witnessed—does not conflict with their statement that this entails their necessary knowledge that the One invoked and petitioned is in a direction above. For universal knowledge that is necessary must involve analogy, as explained earlier.

They may, for example, say, “It is known of necessity that whatever is neither inside the world nor outside it is nonexistent.” One who understands the meaning of “body” in the terminology of the speculative theologians says, “It is known of necessity that nothing can exist as a self-subsisting being except what you have called a body.” They say that everyone who returns to his innate disposition and understands what this means knows it, provided that conjecture born of blind adherence, or faulty analogies and desire arising from partisan attachment to a familiar doctrine, do not turn him away from what his innate disposition dictates. They also establish this through rational analogies stronger than those of the deniers.

That being so, the denial of corporealism cannot rest upon a scriptural text or consensus, nor even upon a report from any of the early generations of this Ummah or its imams. Those who deny it have nothing beyond the rational analogies they adduce. Thus, if raising the hands towards heaven in supplication entails that those supplicating believe in corporealism, and they also establish this through rational analogies, their position would carry greater weight even if they did not answer the deniers’ arguments. How much more so if they answer them and demonstrate that the opposite of their position entails negation: negating the Creator’s existence, His essence and attributes, and precluding knowledge of Him, worship of Him, and supplication to Him.