As for your statement, “The Ashʿarīs’ proof likewise does not establish a first, eternal being that is not composite; it establishes only a first being that is not temporally originated.”

This, too, reinforces the affirmation of the attributes ن, for by “composite” you mean whatever possesses attributes. There is no doubt that the proofs establishing the Maker contain nothing—praise be to Allah—that negates the affirmation of the attributes.

If you say, “They deny corporeality on the basis of the absence of composition, yet they have no proof for this,”

the reply is that this is a dialectical argument. At most, it establishes that they are inconsistent; it does not establish the correctness of the position they disputed with you. They challenged you concerning the affirmation of the attributes, and you said that affirming the attributes entails composition. Yet you have offered no proof negating composition in this sense, so you have offered no proof negating the attributes. They also said to you, “You have no proof negating corporeality either, for your principal argument is the negation of the attributes, which comes down to the negation of composition.” This has already become clear.

If you then say to them, “You, too, have no proof for this, since the proof from temporal origination does not entail it,”

they will reply, “We established temporal origination through the temporal origination of the body, which is what we mean by ‘composite.’” If their proof is sound, the negation of what they call composition is established. If their proof is not sound, this is of no benefit to you.