without this implying temporal origination, then the same would not be implausible with regard to the succession of the accidents themselves. What the master Abū al-Maʿālī stated entails that the Muʿtazila are committed to affirming that temporally originated events inhere in Him, and that they have no proof for denying this. Nor did he offer any proof for those who agree with him in denying it.

His discussion thus shows that the leading proponents of denying that temporally originated events inhere in Him—those who say that nothing connected with His will and power subsists in Him—have no proof for this. Rather, their position entails that of those who affirm it.

He said:

“We say to the Karrāmiyya: Your affirmation of temporally originated speech, while denying that the Creator is characterized by it, is contradictory. For if a quality could inhere in a subject without the subject being characterized by what it entails, then, in the observable world, speech, knowledge, and acts of will could inhere in subjects without those subjects being characterized by what these qualities necessarily entail. This would confound realities and lead to ignorance.”

He said:

“Then we say to them: If you allow various kinds of temporally originated events to subsist in His essence, what prevents you from allowing temporally originated spatial states to subsist successively in His essence?