itself and in its very essence, a perfection. Thus, if the Creator, exalted is He, were supposed not to possess these attributes, He would be imperfect compared with those of His creatures who possess them. Yet it is impossible for the Creator to be less perfect than the creature.”

I say: The substance of this argument is sound. It has been employed by as many of the early and later scholars as Allah has willed, though the ways in which it is framed and expressed vary. This very same substance can be applied to the first argument, which he dismissed as unsound, by saying: If He did not possess the attributes of perfection, He would possess their opposites, which are attributes of imperfection, and would thus be less perfect than some of His creatures.

Second, it may be said: Grant that the two are opposed as privation and possession. Your statement, “Negating one does not entail affirming the other unless the subject is capable of possessing it,” can be answered as follows:

Existing things are of two kinds: those capable of possessing either of these two opposed attributes, such as living creatures, and those incapable of doing so, such as inanimate objects. It is known that whatever is capable of possessing either is more perfect than what is capable of possessing neither, even if it is blind, deaf, and mute. A living creature in that condition is closer to perfection than something capable of possessing neither one nor the other. For a mute, blind, deaf creature can possess attributes of perfection, and whatever is capable of possessing attributes of perfection is more perfect than what is incapable of possessing them.

Since it is known that the Lord, exalted is He, is above possessing these imperfections while being capable of possessing attributes of perfection, then all the more must He be held above being incapable of