the philosophers. Thus they say that, considered in His Essence, He has neither name nor attribute and is not distinguishable. They also say that witnessing the Essence involves neither being addressed nor experiencing pleasure, and other such things. This is because they speak only of the absolute existence they have witnessed, which does not exist as such in external reality. It has no distinct reality that could have a name or attribute, or be addressed.

The point here is that one must acknowledge an eternal, necessarily existent being. Whoever identifies it with these perceptible existents recognizes no attribute possible in existence from which the Lord must be declared free. Consequently, such a person cannot reject any doctrine. He cannot maintain that the world’s coming into being from the Necessary Existent is impossible because it entails His undergoing change and requires a newly arising cause, for his own position involves an even greater absurdity.

But if it is affirmed, in general terms, that there is an eternal, necessarily existent being other than these things that come into being and undergo change, then it is known that whatever is other than