of the cosmos, for they contend that the motions of the celestial spheres are a necessary condition for the coming-to-be of sublunary events.

Fifth, we say: their entire argument is built on two claims—the impossibility of giving preference without a complete determinant, and the impossibility of an infinite regress—yet they themselves affirm both. They maintain that events proceed in an endless sequence and that these events occurred without any complete determinant. When they declare, “We have refuted those who posited a self-subsistent essence that was inactive and then began to act,” we reply: this is merely the view of certain kalām theologians; it is not stated by the Prophets in the Torah, the Gospel, or the Qur’an. The falsity of that view does not entail the eternity of the universe or a denial of what the Messengers have proclaimed. Rather, we say: if that view is possible, your refutation of it is invalid; and if it is impossible, the only consequence is the perpetual activity of the Agent—not the pre-eternity of these spheres, nor the pre-eternity of any particular contingent being.

Sixth, we say: your doctrine is even more untenable than theirs. Those theologians attributed all events to the primordial, eternal Agent and said that He acted after not acting, thereby assigning a maker to the events without positing any newly-arising cause. You, however, have made events occur without any agent whatsoever. In your view, the pre-eternal, Necessary Agent is inseparable from His effect—His emanation and entailment—so nothing can be delayed from Him and nothing new can come forth from Him. Consequently, these events cannot have proceeded from Him, and your position implies that events have no producer at all—a conclusion far more corrupt than the view that assigns them a Producer who brought them into being without a newly-arising cause.