acts only for a purpose, and a purpose is something that brings him harm or benefit, which is impossible for the Eternal.”

I say:

These two arguments, too, were originally directed against the Mu‘tazilah, for they are Jahmiyyah who affirmed His existence through negative attributes, and they are also Qadariyyah. This argument then passed to the Murji’ah, who answered their second premise with part of the Mu‘tazilah’s response. Regarding the attributes, they gave an answer that is said to be self-contradictory.

Abū al-Ma‘ālī said:

“The third category consists of drawing inferences from the observable realm about the unseen, without considering a common ground that warrants the comparison.”

He said:

“The fourth category of their discourse comprises various forms of obfuscation.”

I say:

We have already drawn attention to the third category. What concerns us here is the second category, in which they argued for denying the Maker. This is the most substantial part of their argumentation, and the principal argument relied upon by Ibn al-Rāwandī, author of The Crown on the Eternity of the World, and Muhammad ibn Zakariyyā, the physician, in what he wrote