on the atom. At times, some of them claim that all accidents are originated, supposing that an accident cannot persist for two moments. They further maintain that no body can be devoid of the accidents it is capable of receiving or of their opposites. This gave rise among them to doctrines and disputes too lengthy to recount.

As for the second premise, it initially seemed more evident. Hence many of them accept it without proof: whatever is never devoid of an originated occurrence accompanies and coexists with it, without preceding it. If two things are assumed to coexist, neither preceding the other, and one is originated, then the other is originated as well.

The wording, however, is ambiguous. Statements such as “Whatever is never devoid of originated occurrences is itself originated,” “Whatever does not precede originated occurrences is itself originated,” or “Whatever is subject to successive originated occurrences is itself originated,” and similar formulations, admit of two meanings:

The first concerns whatever is never devoid of particular originated occurrences that have a beginning. There is no doubt that whatever precedes something that has a beginning itself has a beginning.

The second concerns whatever is never devoid of originated occurrences as a kind—such that an act of its own has always subsisted in it, like motion occurring successively. Such a thing is not known to be originated unless it is known that this kind cannot be