Ibn Rushd said:

“He means that if they cannot deny the attributes, then, in their view, the First Principle would be an essence possessing attributes. Whatever is of this nature is a body or a power within a body, and they would consequently have to hold that the First Principle, which has no cause, is the celestial bodies.”

Ibn Rushd said:

“This conclusion necessarily follows for anyone who holds the doctrine he has attributed to the philosophers—that is, Ibn Sīnā’s method. But the philosophers—meaning the ancients—do not argue for the existence of the First Principle, which has no cause, using the argument he attributes to them. Nor do they claim that they are unable to demonstrate divine unity or to demonstrate that the First Principle is not corporeal. This question will be discussed later.”

I say: When Ibn Rushd saw the weakness of the method attributed to the philosophers in Ibn Sīnā’s books for denying attributes and corporeality, and saw that it was not the method of