that claim—namely, that He is not a body—apart from his affirmation that the rational soul is not a body. He has also demonstrated, with clear proofs, the invalidity of the arguments advanced by the speculative theologians to show that He is not a body. Yet it is well known that the premise on which he based this negation—namely, the question of the soul—is far weaker. Most rational people find the negations by which these men describe the soul more laughable than the position of those who affirm that something can be seen which, in their terminology, is neither a body nor in a direction, as we have explained elsewhere.

As for his claim, and that of other Jahmīs among the Mu'tazilites and their like, that the vision reported by the Messenger is increased knowledge, anyone who hears the scriptural texts knows beyond doubt that the Messenger was speaking of direct vision. Moreover, clear rational proofs establish the possibility of this vision, even without following the weak approaches he mentioned. Those approaches were weak only because their proponents affirmed the vision of something that is neither in a direction, nor occupies space, nor inheres in something that occupies space. They therefore had to dispense with conditions without which vision cannot occur