Chapter

As for the one who says:

“They are accidents that can subsist only in a composite body; anything composite is contingent and dependent, and that is the very essence of imperfection,”

those who affirm the attributes take three approaches to applying the term [accident] to His attributes.

Some deny that they are accidents, saying, “Rather, they are attributes, not accidents.” This is the position of al-Asharī and many jurists among the followers of Ahmad and others.

Others apply the term “accidents” to them, such as Hishām, Ibn Karrām, and others.

Still others refrain from either affirming or denying it, just as they did concerning the term “other,” and just as they refrained from doing so with terms such as “body.” For the statement, “Knowledge is an accident,” is an innovation, and the statement, “It is not an accident,” is likewise an innovation—just as the statement, “The Lord is a body,” is an innovation, and the statement, “He is not a body,” is also an innovation.

Likewise, in the language, the term [body] denotes the physical body or bodily frame, as stated by al-Asma‘ī, Abū Zayd, and other linguists.

As for the theologians, some use it to mean something composite, applying it—with composition stipulated—to an indivisible atom, or to two atoms, four, six, eight, sixteen, or thirty-two, or to something composed of matter and form.