As for affirming causes that cannot independently produce an effect, but require a cooperating factor and the absence of a counteracting impediment, while regarding those causes as created by Allah—this is the reality described by the Quran and demonstrated by observation and proof.

This is among the proofs and signs of divine oneness; it has nothing whatsoever to do with polytheism, for it makes clear that nothing created can independently bring anything into being.

The point here is that these thinkers believed that His words,

“Had there been gods besides Allah in the heavens and the earth, both would have been ruined” [al-Anbiyā’: 22],

only indicate the denial of any partnership in divine lordship—namely, that the world does not have two creators. Each of the two then proceeded to set out a way of proving this.

Thus, the philosopher Ibn Rushd established this account of divine oneness as discussed above. He said:

“As for the words of the Most High, ‘Then each god would have taken away what it had created’ [al-Mu’minūn: 91], this is His rebuttal of those who posit many gods whose actions differ. For reason tells us that gods whose actions differ, none of whom obeys another, would not give rise to a single entity, but rather to many entities. There would therefore be more than one world. This is the meaning of His words, ‘Then each god would have taken away what it had created’ [al-Mu’minūn: 91]. Since the world is one, it necessarily follows that it did not come into existence through many gods whose actions are diverse.”

I say: Having first established the impossibility of two lords whose action is one and the same, he then established the impossibility of multiple lords who differ