If by it you mean a positive reality, the argument would be:

“Whatever is not within an existing thing cannot be seen.”

This premise [is not conceded, and there is no evidence establishing it; rather, it is] (1) [false] (2), for the outer surface of the universe can be seen, although the universe is not within another universe.

If by “direction” you mean a privative reality, then the second premise is not conceded, for we do not concede that He is not in a direction according to this interpretation.

This is among the arguments with which I addressed (3) more than one member of the Shia and the Muʿtazila, and Allah caused him to benefit (4) from it. Through this distinction (5), the confusion and denial of the divine attributes that had arisen concerning this matter were dispelled (6). They believed (7) that what (8) they possessed by way of rational arguments denying the vision was conclusive, such that no text from the Messengers could be accepted in support of the contrary (9). When it became clear (10) to them that these (11) were merely specious arguments founded upon ambiguous terms and meanings liable to confusion, it became evident that what is authentically established from the Messenger [- may Allah bless him and grant him peace -] (12) is the truth that must be accepted. But this is not the [place] (13) for a full exposition of this subject, for this denier merely made a passing allusion to their position (14). \ 0 5