In other cases, a body may turn black and become apparent while remaining in its place without moving; it moves neither before nor after the alteration. Thus, this is not necessary in every body, but only in certain bodies; nor in every circumstance and at every time, but only in certain circumstances and at certain times. Nor does it precede alteration, as he claimed; rather, it follows it.

Even if this were necessary in bodily changes, it would not be necessary in changes of the soul. And even if it were necessary in changes of the soul as well, the same judgment would not necessarily extend to changes in cognitions and knowledge, resolutions and volitions.

A judgment that holds in particular cases need not hold universally, nor does it extend from some cases to others; otherwise, all things would be in the same state.

He placed this before his discussion of knowledge so that the same judgment would apply to cognition and knowledge. Reflect on this: if this proposition were investigated thoroughly, it might be traced to a sound basis and found valid in a certain respect. Even so, it would not support the position by which they denied Allah’s cognition and knowledge of newly occurring events.

As for the basis to which it might be traced through a thorough examination of how it could be interpreted, it is this: if a thing grows hot after being cold, or grows cold after being hot, and turns white