of its existence? For the combination of contingent things in a chain of causes and effects depends on every one of those things, each of which is the cause of an effect. Their combination is therefore all the more clearly contingent and further removed from necessity, if it is assumed to have a reality distinct from its individual members.

It is thus established that, if a chain of causes and effects is posited, each of them contingent, it must depend on something external to it. This is agreed upon among rational thinkers and is among the most firmly established certainties and conclusively known truths.

Had groups of later speculative thinkers not discussed this at length, and had some of them, such as al-Āmidī and al-Abharī, not cast doubt upon it, we would not have elaborated on it.

[The aggregate is distinct from each individual member]

This question rests fundamentally on the fact that the aggregate is not any single one of its individual members. Since the aggregate is distinct from each individual member, it may be said that it is necessary through every single member. The aggregate would then be contingent insofar as it is an aggregate, yet necessary through its contingent individual members. This is especially so since these philosophers who have advanced this argument 0—both they and most people—say that not every aggregate must have the attributes of its individual members.

[The words of Ibn Sīnā]

Ibn Sīnā said:

“Just because a judgment holds true of each individual, it does not follow that it holds true