a body, then He may likewise be knowing by virtue of knowledge and powerful by virtue of power without being a body.

We have already explained that “body” is an ambiguous term, and that unqualifiedly affirming or denying it of Him is an innovation: neither usage is transmitted from any of the early generations or the imams, nor does it have any basis in the Book. One of two courses must therefore be followed: either refrain from using this designation, whether in affirmation or denial, or explain the distinctions involved. Thus, one should say: if “body” means such-and-such, then that meaning is true, although we do not use this designation for Him because of its ambiguity, multiplicity of meanings, obscurity, misleading implications, and innovated character. If, however, “body” means such-and-such, then that meaning is false. There is no need to formulate the denial in terms of such an ambiguous expression; rather, the false meaning should be denied in explicit terms, as indicated by the Book and the Sunnah.

The fourth argument is that those who affirm the divine attributes—both those who deny that He is a body and those who affirm it—have always