If his opponents are among those who (do not) deny (1) composition of either kind, then both parties agree that the Lord is exalted above such composition. One of them, however, says: “Negating the term (2) ‘body’ does not express this transcendence; rather, it is expressed by the term ‘composition’ and the like (3).” The other says: “On the contrary, (negating) (4) the term ‘body’ does express this transcendence.”

As for one who says, “He is a body,” the well-known position of the leading thinkers among the Karrāmiyya and others who say, “He is a body,” is that they explain this as meaning that He is an existent or an entity subsisting in itself, not something composite. People are agreed that whoever says, “He is a body,” intending this meaning, is correct as to the meaning; those who fault him do so only with respect to his wording.

Whoever maintains that a body is something composite says: “You erred (in that) (5) you applied the term ‘body’ to an entity subsisting in itself or to an existent.” As for one who (does not) (6) maintain that every body is composite, he says: “Your calling every existent or every entity subsisting in itself a ‘body’ does not accord with established Arabic usage. None of the early generations or the imams ever used this expression, nor did they say (7), ‘Allah is a body,’