is sought only for its own sake or for the sake of something else. Allah is the One sought and worshipped for His own sake; He is the One invoked and petitioned, from whom everything is sought. This makes clear that this judgment cannot be explained by existence in the absolute sense, nor by anything that encompasses necessary existence.

As for his statement in the fifth point:

“Every existent posited alongside the world must be either equal to the world in magnitude, greater than it, or smaller than it. The division of observable existents into these three categories (‘the four’—sic) is a fact that must have a cause. There is no cause other than existence, and the Creator, exalted is He, exists. The Creator, exalted is He, must therefore fall into one of these three categories. Yet these people do not affirm this. Thus, what we have stated establishes that this specious argument is refuted.”

This too may be answered in several ways. First, this is also an argument against an opponent based on his own commitments, rather than an independent proof. Those who deny that the Creator falls into these categories either provide a valid distinction or they do not. If they provide one, their attempt to bind their opponents to this consequence in the argument concerning separation and co-location fails. If they provide no valid distinction, that constitutes an argument against them