they can require the Muʿtazilah to accept that newly arising occurrences subsist in Him even if He does not occupy space, provided that each question has its own distinct basis and the two have points of both agreement and difference.

Furthermore, there is no apparent reason to mention their position concerning the Throne here, unless the argument is that they hold that He occupies space, that whatever occupies space is composed of indivisible atoms, and that a single accident cannot subsist in two atoms; hence neither will nor speech can subsist in Him.

If this argument is valid, it constitutes an objection to their affirmation of attributes for Allah in principle, whether eternal or newly arising. It is not specific to the question of newly arising occurrences subsisting in Him.

The Karrāmiyyah hold two views concerning the existence of the indivisible atom. Those who deny it are not bound by this objection. Those who affirm it would answer it as do others who affirm the divine attributes when discussing attributes subsisting in angels, human beings, and others. They would also have other answers, as has been discussed at length elsewhere.

[The Fifth Argument]

Al-Āmidī said:

“It is that, according to their doctrine, the basis of things brought into being is none other than newly arising speech or newly arising will, while the basis of speech