The purpose here is to discuss composition, both as a term and as a concept, and to show that these people use it in a technical sense at odds with that of most rational people, and that they are compelled to acknowledge the reality of what they deny. Yet they say, “This is commonality, and commonality is resemblance.” They also say, “These are parts, and this is composition from these parts.” Nevertheless, they cannot deny what they have called commonality and resemblance, nor can they deny these things that they have called parts, composition, and division. For they say, “He is the one who apprehends, the object of apprehension, and intellect itself; the object of pleasure, pleasure itself, and the one who takes pleasure; the lover, the beloved, and love itself.”

They may also say, “He is knowing, powerful, and willing,” and then say, “Knowledge is power, and power is will,” thus identifying each attribute with the other. They also say, “Knowledge is the knower”—and may say, “It is the object known”—thus identifying the attribute with the one possessing it, or with created things.

These are the statements of their leading authorities, and they are utterly unsound in the light of plain reason. They are compelled to acknowledge what they call resemblance and composition, while claiming to deny resemblance, composition, and division. Let the discerning reader reflect on their falsehood, inconsistency, bewilderment, and misguidance. This is why they ultimately end up either affirming both of two contradictories or denying both.

Moreover, they deny of Allah what He has affirmed of Himself and what His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, has affirmed of Him, claiming that this entails resemblance and composition. They apply these labels to those who affirm the attributes, yet it is they themselves whom their own principles bind to these things, with no way to escape them.

They are thus as the saying goes:
“She accused me of her own disease, then slipped away.”