‘The Necessary Existent in Himself is necessary in all His attributes and primary states. In sheer nonexistence, no distinction can be drawn between a state in which it would be more fitting for Him not to bring anything into existence, or for things not to exist from Him at all, and a state in which the opposite holds. No new volition can arise in Him without a prompting cause, nor can it arise arbitrarily.
Nor can a nature or anything else arise without a new state occurring.
How could a volition arise in response to a newly occurring state, when what has newly occurred is in the same position as that for which the conditions of occurrence have been prepared, so that it occurs? If there is no new occurrence, then, so long as nothing new occurs, there is one continuous state following the same course.
It makes no difference whether you attribute the new occurrence to something becoming possible or to something ceasing to exist—for example, to some goodness in the act becoming possible at a certain time, or to a specified time, or to any of the other considerations enumerated; or to some badness that would have attached to it, or that had ceased; or to an obstacle or something else that existed and then ceased.’
They said:
‘If the reason for withholding the Necessary Existent from bestowing goodness and existence is that the effect must necessarily be preceded by nonexistence, then this reason