of wording, not meaning. Undoubtedly, the people of the Sunnah and hadith do not describe Him—glorified and exalted—as a locus of temporal occurrences or of accidents, or use similar newly introduced expressions that suggest a false meaning. People understand such language to mean that what they themselves call temporal occurrences, such as defects and afflictions, arise within His essence. Allah—glorified and exalted—is far above that.

When it is said, “So-and-so has been appointed to deal with offenses,” or when the people of the qiblah dispute concerning those who commit offenses, what is meant is prohibited acts such as unlawful sexual intercourse, theft, drinking wine, and highway robbery. Allah is too majestic and great for believers even to entertain the thought that reprehensible things could subsist in Him. The point is that distinguishing between something newly arising and a temporal occurrence is a matter of wording, not a substantive rational distinction. If someone reversed the terminology, calling this newly arising and that a temporal occurrence, his statement would be of the same kind as the original statement.

[The third ground]

The claim that the majority are committed only to newly arising relations, states, and nonexistences—not to anything newly occurring that comes into existence after nonexistence, whether an entity or an attribute—is a disputed claim for which its proponent has offered no proof. Rather, the evidence shows that those groups are committed to newly occurring realities subsisting in His essence. For example, He—glorified and exalted—hears and sees the sounds and visible things that He creates.

The Quran states that this occurs in time, as in His saying:

“And say, ‘Act; then it will be seen by