in motion, yet he did not reject loving them or disavow them as he disavowed the objects they associated with Allah when these set. This shows that their motion was not incompatible with Abraham’s purpose; rather, their setting was.

[Section. Ibn Rushd’s discussion in Manāhij al-adilla and Ibn Taymiyya’s commentary on it]

Section.
Ibn Rushd’s discussion in Manāhij al-adilla and Ibn Taymiyya’s commentary on it

Ibn Rushd said:

“Furthermore, time is one of the accidents, and it is difficult to conceive of its coming into being. For everything that comes into being must be preceded in time by its nonexistence, and the nonexistence of something preceding that thing is conceivable only in terms of time.

“Likewise, it is difficult to conceive of the coming into being of the place in which the world exists, since place precedes everything that comes into being. For if place is a void—according to those who hold that a void is place—then, supposing it came into being, another void would have to precede its coming into being.

“If, on the second view, place is the boundary of the body surrounding the body that occupies it, then that surrounding body must itself be in a place. That body would therefore require a body, and the process would continue without end.

“These are all formidable difficulties.

“And their arguments, by which they seek to demonstrate the falsity of