As for this man and others like him, they have no rational or revealed proof against these people (1), for their principal argument in denying the vision is that, if He were seen, He would be in a direction and would be a body (2). Yet these people [say, “He can be seen in this world”; indeed,] (3) they say, “He is in a direction (4) and is a body.”

If they proceed to argue that direction and corporeality must be denied, the furthest their argument against these people can reach is that attributes do not subsist in Him (5). Yet these people say, “Attributes do subsist in Him.” If they offer proof for that, the furthest their argument against them can reach is that attributes are accidents, and anything in which accidents subsist is originated. Yet these people say, “Accidents subsist in Him, although He is eternal”; for according to them, accidents subsist in the Eternal.

If they say, “A body is never devoid of motion or rest (6), and whatever is never devoid