including even followers of Abū al-Maʿālī, such as al-Rāzī, al-Āmidī, al-Urmawī, and others.
They dispute his assertion that “the invalidity of this is known from the first principles of reason.” They say that various groups of rational people have considered this possible, without deriving this view from one another: adherents of the religious communities—Muslims, Jews, and Christians—as well as earlier and later philosophers and others.
Indeed, they may even say that this is the position of the prophets, their followers, and the eminent figures of the various groups. They do not mean that the beginningless existence of the world is the prophets’ teaching. Rather, they know that Allah created the heavens, the earth, and everything between them in six days, as the prophets have reported. But they say that Allah Most High has always been speaking and has spoken whatever He willed; or that He has always been acting, Himself doing whatever He wills; or that He has always brought events into being, one after another; or they make similar statements. They maintain that these agree with the teaching of the prophets—may Allah’s blessings be upon them—and that the prophets’ teachings cannot be upheld without them.
As for the beginningless existence and perpetual continuance of the celestial spheres, this is the view of only a small group, such as Aristotle and his followers. Writers on doctrines have reported that he was the first philosopher to assert their beginningless existence, and that the earlier philosophers held a contrary view on this matter. This position of Aristotle and his followers is among the doctrines of the atheists who oppose the Messengers. For statements that contradict what is known from the prophetic texts are among the doctrines of the atheists, and whoever opposes the prophetic texts with his own reason is one of the atheists.
As for statements that the Messengers themselves made, or that follow necessarily from what they said, without their having stated anything to the contrary, these are not to be attributed to the atheists. Rather, someone who opposes the prophetic texts with his own reasoning, claims that his reason takes precedence over the prophets’ statements, and bases this on a principle over which rational people disagree and which the prophets have not endorsed, is closer to the views of