our bodies wherever He wills and returns them wherever He wills. Rather, they call that a spirit, distinguishing what is meant by “spirit” from what is meant by “body,” just as they distinguish between bodily frame and spirit, and between physical body and spirit. They do not apply the word jism (body) to air. In their usage, jism resembles jasad (physical body).

Al-Jawharī said:

“Jasad means badan (body). Its corresponding verb is tajassada (to take bodily form), just as tajassama is the corresponding verb for jism.”

As previously quoted from the leading lexicographers, jism means jasad. Thus, these two words are synonymous, or nearly so. Hence, they speak of a fabric as having jasad (body), just as they speak of it as having jism (body), when it is thick, substantial, and closely woven. Scholars say that an impurity may have a substantial physical form, as with blood and carrion, or may lack such a form, as with moisture. They also call blood jasad, as al-Nābigha said:

“No, by the life of Him whom I have visited year after year,
And by the blood poured out upon the sacrificial stones.”

Likewise, they say that it has jism (body). This disproves their claim concerning linguistic usage: that people call anything in which one part can be distinguished from another a body.

As for the “second premise”: even if that were conceded, their claim that people apply the expression “This is a body” when the number of parts increases rests on the view that bodies are composed of indivisible atoms. Even supposing this were true, speakers of the language did not take it into account, nor did any of them say such a thing. It is therefore clear that they considered only its thickness and density.

As for their supposedly taking into account whether the parts are more or fewer, this is something not conceived of by