is impossible for Allah Most High. As for the Lord Most High not being newly occurring, this has already been established.”

I say: This is known by the agreement of the religious communities and all other rational people who affirm the Maker. It is known through conclusive proofs; indeed, it is self-evident. He has stated that he established this, but he has not. He sought to establish it only by affirming the Necessary Existent, basing that affirmation on denying an infinite regress of causes and ruling out newly occurring things without a beginning. His argument for this is weak.

In his book entitled Daqā’iq al-Haqā’iq (The Subtleties of Realities), he raised an objection to the refutation of an infinite regress of causes, claiming that he knew of no answer to it. Thus, his purported demonstration falls apart. Yet, praise be to Allah, this truth is far above needing such a demonstration.

He said: “As for the proposition that whatever is never free of newly occurring things must itself be newly occurring, this will be established in the discussion of the origination of substances.”

I say: He established this only through the argument for the origination of accidents and the impossibility of newly occurring things without a beginning. He sought to establish this only by ruling out an infinite regress of effects, which he in turn sought to establish by arguing that what is newly occurring cannot be beginningless.

The invalidity of this has already been explained: the expression “newly occurring” may refer to an enduring kind or to a particular newly occurring thing. It is only in the second sense that beginninglessness is known to be impossible, whereas the dispute concerns the first.