by a preceding occurrence, and that events are only preparatory factors and conditions for the emanation that flows from the Necessary Existent by His very essence. They further assert that the motion of the celestial sphere is the cause of events and changes. We say to them: Grant, for argument’s sake, that this is so. Successive events—whether they be a continuous motion or something else—if they arise solely from a complete cause, must be simultaneous with that complete cause, for an effect must accompany its complete cause. Likewise, whatever necessitates by its own essence is accompanied by what it necessitates; therefore its effect cannot be deferred. Whatever comes later cannot be its effect, and thus none of these events can be attributed to it.

If they contend, “The occurrence of the first event prepared the way for the second,” we reply: The reasoning about the origin of the first event is identical to that about the second. That first event, which serves as a condition for the second, cannot have issued from an eternal complete cause; rather, its complete cause must itself be contingent—whether the contingency lies in the event as a whole or in some of its parts and conditions. They themselves concede this, and it is plainly true.

Accordingly, no event at all possesses an eternal complete cause. Hence, if the First Principle—the Maker of the universe—is an eternal complete cause, yet none of the events has an eternal complete cause, it would follow that no event proceeds from Him. In that case nothing would have an agent or producer, which is the height of ignorance, negation, and sophistry—something they themselves acknowledge to be false. So when they say, “This particular daily event came about only once its conditions were fulfilled…”