new relations to arise with respect to His essence, even though, in their view, a relation is an actually existing accident. This entails that His essence is characterized by temporally originated occurrences. As for Abū al-Barakāt al-Baghdādī, he explicitly affirmed that His essence is characterized by temporally originated attributes.”

I say:

Most of Abū ‘Abd Allāh al-Rāzī’s material on Mu‘tazilite theology comes from what he finds in the books of Abū al-Husayn al-Basrī, his associate Mahmūd al-Khwārizmī, his teacher ‘Abd al-Jabbār al-Hamadhānī, and others like them. His material on the philosophers comes from what he finds in the books of Ibn Sīnā, Abū al-Barakāt, and others like them. Regarding al-Ash‘arī’s doctrine, he relies on the books of Abū al-Ma‘ālī, such as al-Shāmil and similar works, as well as the books of al-Qādī Abū Bakr and others like him. He also quotes al-Shahrastānī and others like him.

As for the books of earlier scholars, such as Abū al-Hasan al-Ash‘arī, Abū Muhammad ibn Kullāb, and others like them, and the books of the early Mu‘tazilites, Najjāriyyah, Dirāriyyah, and similar groups, his writings indicate that he was unfamiliar with their contents. The same applies to the doctrines of the various groups of earlier philosophers. Had he known them, he would have recognized that the view he attributed to Abū al-Barakāt was held by most of the early philosophers who lived before Aristotle, and by many among them, as the writers on doctrines reported concerning them.

Thus, the writers on doctrines who reported the philosophers’ disagreements concerning what the Creator is related the following. They said:

“Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle said that the Creator cannot be referred to