is distinct from it. The aggregate of contingent beings can exist only through something distinct from it; thus, none of them can exist except through something distinct from that aggregate. A part of the aggregate is not distinct from it, so the aggregate cannot exist through one of its parts. By contrast, the aggregate of existing beings does not depend on anything distinct from itself; it depends only on one of its parts.

When the argument is formulated in this way, it becomes clear that there must be an existent being distinct from the contingent beings and external to them—which is what was to be proved—and that the aggregate of existing beings must have an existent being that is part of it and through which the whole aggregate exists.

Thus, the existence of the Necessary Existent follows in either case. The objection they raised therefore serves as a proof affirming the Necessary Existent, not denying Him.

[Section: The Innovators’ Errors Concerning Allah, Glorified Be He, at Two Opposite Extremes]

Know that these people have erred concerning what is meant by the Necessary Existent and what the proof establishes in this regard, until they have reached two opposite extremes. At times, they affirm Him but strip Him of attributes, until they make Him absolute existence. Then they say:

“He is the existence found in existing beings.”

They thus identify the existence of every contingent and originated being with the necessary existence