He said:

“As for the other approach, we say: What he meant by saying, ‘They are signs and indications of temporal origination,’ was that, once their temporal origination is established, and it is established that the body was never devoid of them and did not exist before the first of them, the body must be temporally originated just as they are. For it must have come into existence either together with them or after them, since its existence before them has already been ruled out.

“If it came into existence together with them, it must be temporally originated just as they are. If it came into existence after them, then there is even stronger reason to regard it as temporally originated, for whatever comes into existence after something temporally originated has even greater reason to be regarded as temporally originated.”

Al-Qādī Abū Bakr said:

“Know that when this proof of the temporal origination of the drop of semen and other bodies rests upon this point and follows this line of argument, it requires four premises:

“First: demonstrating the existence of accidents.

“Second: demonstrating their temporal origination and that they have a beginning to which they can be traced back.

“Third: that the body is never devoid of them and does not exist before the first of them.

“Fourth: that whatever did not precede temporally originated things must itself be temporally originated, just as they are.”

He then discussed how to establish these premises, using the familiar arguments they employ on this subject.

When he was asked, “Why do you maintain that the body is never free of these originated events and does not exist before the first of them?”