besides these—namely, origination, contingency, and dependence upon a cause. The import of this statement is that, despite this distinctness, they are co-located and share other features in common. Their separateness is therefore less than that between the world and the Creator. This is precisely what these thinkers said: “We know as a matter of necessity that the separateness between the Creator, Glorified is He, and the world exceeds that between a substance, which is the substrate, and what inheres in it.” What he has stated thus affirms their point.

He also says: “As for the Creator, just as He differs from the world in essence and time, He neither inheres in it nor serves as its substrate, nor do they share origination, contingency, or dependence. Since this is so, the difference between the Creator, Exalted is He, and the world is more complete than that between what inheres and its substrate.”

The response is: This reinforces what they said, for they stated that the Creator’s separateness is more complete, since He is not co-located with the world: He neither inheres in it nor serves as its substrate, unlike a substance and an accident. As for their not sharing origination, this comes back to separateness in time, since the eternal precedes what originates, and to separateness in essence, since the essence of the eternal differs from that of what originates. As for the absence of any commonality