an analogy for Him in respect of something that constitutes a deficiency in a created being. They thus attribute this deficiency to the Creator by analogy with the creature.

This may be addressed in several ways. First, it may be said: Their judgment concerning His acting after not having acted must rest either on knowledge of Allah’s particular essence and of this being impossible for Him—just as nonexistence is impossible for Him because it contradicts His necessary existence—or on a syllogism incorporating a universal proposition, or on an analogy.

If they claim the first, their claim is invalid for three reasons. First, they acknowledge that they do not know the particular essence of the Lord. Second, it may be asked: What is this distinctive nature from which an act cannot arise and which cannot bring anything into being? They have no way of knowing or identifying it. Third, knowledge of a thing itself is attained only through the inner or outer senses. This would require knowledge of Allah to be self-evident or sensory, yet they do not affirm this. Those who do affirm it know that the matter is contrary to what they claim.

If they claim that their judgment derives from a syllogism or an analogy—which is their method—it may be said: It is not valid to subsume Him and anything else under a universal judgment in this matter. For no single thing among created beings is a complete cause of an act; rather, nothing proceeds except from two or more things. If there is no complete cause among existing things, and nothing other than Him is a fully effective agent, it is not possible to