for the verse to be qualified or its apparent meaning to be departed from. Thus, we do not (1) need to say, “We do not see Him in this world,” or, “Eyes do not encompass Him; rather, those who see do,” or, “Not all eyes encompass Him; rather, only some do,” or make other such strained assertions.

[At this point, it is enough for us to say that the verse admits of this interpretation and therefore contains no indication negating vision. Thus, the argument of anyone who cites it as evidence for vision is invalid. If we wish to establish that the verse indicates vision while negating perception—which means encompassment—we can demonstrate that, linguistically, perception is not synonymous with vision but is more specific. We establish this through the language, the statements of the early Quran commentators, and other scriptural and rational proofs] (2).

[Commentary on his words, “And because He is not in a direction”]

As for his statement (3), “And because He (4) is not in a direction,” the response is:

People hold three views regarding the unrestricted use of the term “direction”: one group denies it, another affirms it, and a third makes distinctions (5). This dispute exists among those who affirm the attributes from among the followers of the four imams and their peers, and [the dispute among] the adherents of hadith and the Sunnah (6) specifically concerning denying (7) and affirming it