Thus, people agree that revelation indicates affirmation, even though they disagree over whether its indication is conclusive or merely probable.

By contrast, the speculative theologians and philosophers who oppose this have not agreed upon a single rational proof. Rather, each group says of its opponents’ proofs that reason establishes their invalidity, not their validity. Those who affirm the attributes say that reason establishes the invalidity of the deniers’ position, just as the deniers say that reason establishes the invalidity of the affirmers’ position. Those who affirm the vision of Allah say that reason establishes its possibility, just as those who deny it say that reason establishes its impossibility.

As for those who dispute whether acts subsist in Him, they say that reason establishes that acts subsist in Him, and that creating, originating, and producing effects constitute an existent reality subsisting in the Creator, Originator, and Agent. Many of them then say that infinite regress is impossible only in causes, not in effects and conditions. Their opponents say that creating is nothing but the created thing, and acting is nothing but the product of the act; that originating and creating are nothing other than the act itself and its product, which is separate from Him; and that this is known by reason, since otherwise an infinite regress would follow.

The same applies to purely rational questions, such as the indivisible atom, the similarity of bodies, the persistence of accidents, the perpetual occurrence of events in the past or future, and other such matters. All these are rational questions over which rational people have disagreed, and this is a vast subject. Among those who rely on rational arguments, whether deniers or affirmers, each claims that reason establishes his own position, which contradicts the other’s. As for revelation, however, rational people agree on what it indicates.