between us and them (1) concerns not only the manner in which the attribute exists, but first and foremost the very way one is to conceive of its essence (2); second, the proof of its actual existence (3); and third, the demonstration of its eternality (4). Anyone who wishes to present a concise treatment of this issue must grasp these three points (5). With the help of Allah Most High, we shall now set forth an argument that addresses all three.
Section (6) Two: On His being a Speaker and on establishing the eternity of His Speech
The proof (7) for this (8) begins with the universally accepted fact that He commands, forbids, and informs. This reality (9) entails one of two possibilities: either His commanding and forbidding consist of nothing more than the uttered words themselves, or they do not (10). The first option is untenable, for the word conventionally assigned to convey a command could just as well have been assigned to convey a piece of information, and vice-versa (11)(12)(13). Accordingly, a given word counts as a command, prohibition, or report only because it points to the underlying essences (14)(15) of request, deterrence, or judgment. These very essences
(1) In Nihayat al-ʿUqul: “wa bayna al-muʿtazila” (and among the Muʿtazilites).
(2) In the original: “am la” (or “or not”), which is erroneous; the correct reading is attested in manuscripts S, T, and Nihayat al-ʿUqul.
(3) The phrase “thumma fī ithbātihā thāniyan” is omitted in manuscripts S and T.
(4) Text between the quotation marks is an addition from Nihayat al-ʿUqul.
(5) In Nihayat al-ʿUqul: “liman arāda” (for whoever wills).
(6) In manuscript S: “fasl” (section).
(7) In manuscript T: “fal-dalīl” (then the proof); in Nihayat al-ʿUqul: “wal-dalīl” (and the proof).
(8) The word “ʿalayhi” is omitted in manuscripts S and T.
(9) In Nihayat al-ʿUqul: “āmir wa nāhī wa mukhbir fa-lā yakhlu…” (commanding, forbidding, and informing, so that nothing is omitted…).
(10) The word “kadhālik” is omitted in Nihayat al-ʿUqul.
(11) The preposition “min” is repeated in manuscript S.
(12) In manuscripts S and T: “al-jā’izāt” (the permissible cases).
(13) In all copies: the term was inserted to convey the sense of command… and perhaps the passage aligns with the reading preserved in Nihayat al-ʿUqul.
(14) In Nihayat al-ʿUqul: “innamā kānat li-dalālatihā” (it was included solely for its demonstrative force).
(15) In the original: “hiya,” which is a scribal error; the correct form is confirmed by manuscripts S, T, and Nihayat al-ʿUqul.