although both kinds are invalid in the view of these speculative theologians. In this argument, they are therefore compelled either to accept actualization without a complete determining factor or to affirm infinite regress and circularity, both alternatives being impossible according to them.

It should be understood that the infinite regress deemed impossible here is not the regress whose possibility is disputed. Rather, it is one that all rational people agree is impossible.

For if it is assumed that He had never brought anything into existence and that an event then occurred, it must occur either through a newly occurring cause or without such a cause; this entails actualization without a determining factor. Everyone agrees that, if He is assumed to have become an agent after not having been one, this could only have occurred through a newly occurring cause, and that the same reasoning applies to everything that comes into existence.

If someone says, “The event occurred only through a newly occurring cause,” but then claims that the first event occurs without a newly occurring cause, he has contradicted himself. His statement, “No event occurs,” is a general proposition. Thus, if he allows an event to occur without a cause, he has contradicted himself. This is called an infinite regress.

The term “infinite regress” can refer to a regress of causes, agents, and causal factors: an agent has an agent, and that agent has another agent, continuing without end. All rational people agree that this is impossible.

The second kind is an infinite regress of effects: the second event depends upon an earlier event, which in turn depends upon an event before it, and so on. Rational thinkers hold two well-known positions concerning its possibility. The leading authorities of the Sunnah and hadith—along with many speculative thinkers among the theologians and philosophers—regard it as possible, while many speculative thinkers and others regard it as impossible.