a jasad—then the reply to you is:

Affirming His rising over the Throne does not entail that He is a jasad, which is what jism means in ordinary language. We know necessarily that air is above the earth, yet it is not a jasad; and jasad is what jism means in ordinary language.

Thus, the assertion, “If He were established over the Throne, He would be a jism; a jism is a jasad; and revelation rules out His being a jasad,” is misleading.

If by jism the speaker means jasad, then the first premise is disputed. No rational person would say that if He were above the Throne, He would be a jasad. Nor would any rational person say that if He possessed knowledge and power, He would be a jasad, or that if He saw and spoke, He would be a jasad and a physical body. The angels possess knowledge and power, and they see and speak; so too do the jinn. Likewise, air is above other things, yet it is not a jasad.

If, however, by jism he means what the speculative theologians mean—something that can be pointed to, classifying everything that can be pointed to as a jism, and everything that can be seen as a jism; or everything that could be seen or described by attributes as a jism; or everything that is above something else and over it as a jism—then the reply to him is:

Jasad and jism, according to this definition used by the speculative theologians, do not mean jasad in Arabic usage. Rather, what they denote is divided into dense and subtle: that which is a jasad and that which is not.