nor in the statements of Shi‘i speculative theologians such as al-Mūsawī, al-Tūsī, and their like. I know of no speculative theologian from any Muslim group who made establishing the existence of the Maker dependent upon refuting circular dependence and infinite regress in causes and their effects, as distinct from acts, although these thinkers do reject whatever forms of circular dependence and infinite regress they regard as invalid.

The point is that they did not make establishing the existence of the Maker dependent upon this refutation. Rather, those among them who discuss refuting infinite regress do so in questions concerning attributes and acts, where there is a well-known dispute. They therefore argue against infinite regress without qualification, in both causes and acts, using the argument from one-to-one correspondence and similar arguments to rule out a succession of events with no beginning. As for infinite regress in agents, efficient causes, and final causes, as distinct from acts, although they agree that it is impossible, they do not need to refute it to establish the existence of the Maker.

As for refuting infinite regress in acts and conditions, some of those who deny that acts subject to His power and will subsist in Him needed this refutation—such as the Kullābīs, most of the Mu‘tazilah and the Karrāmīs, and those who agree with them.