you have mentioned—the sense which, we maintain, necessarily accompanies His possessing attributes and subsisting by Himself, even if you dispute this necessary connection. This establishes the validity of the first argument on grounds accepted by all parties. For a body and whatever inheres in it must either be separate from something else, occupy the same location as it, or inhere in it. This is agreed upon, for you do not dispute that a body, or whatever inheres in it, must either be separate from something else or occupy the same location as it.

If the consequence of the argument you have pressed upon me obliges me to say that He is a body, and this entails His being separate from the world, then what you have pressed upon me constitutes a second argument that He is separate from the world. You intended to counter each argument with the other, so that the contradiction you alleged between them would negate both His being separate from the world and the proposition that every body originates in time. Yet it has become clear that the two arguments support and confirm one another, and that each demonstrates that He, Most High, is separate from the world.

In the tenth response, he says:

If one of these two self-evident premises entails that He is separate from the world, while the other entails that He is a body, then these premises establish the correctness both of the position of those who affirm direction and of the position of those who say that He is a body. His being a body entails affirming direction, as you agree; and the position of those who affirm direction likewise entails affirming that He is a body, as you yourselves and most rational people maintain, contrary to what your earlier associates say. Denying that He is a body entails denying direction and His being above