“I ascribe to Him neither existence nor nonexistence. I call Him neither existent nor nonexistent—or neither existent nor not existent. Rather, I refrain from either of these contradictories, making neither a denial nor an affirmation.”

Or he may say:

“I never describe Him in affirmative terms, but only in negative terms. Thus, I do not say that He is existent; rather, I say that He is not nonexistent.”

Or it may be said:

“Rather, He is nonexistent.”

The division is exhaustive. Either he describes Him in affirmative terms, in which case the same implications of likening Him to creation and ascribing corporeality to Him that he imposed upon others also apply to him; or he says: “I do not describe Him by affirming existence, but by denying nonexistence. Thus, I do not say that He is existent, but that He is not nonexistent.” Or he commits himself to absolute negation and says:

“Nothing exists necessarily.”

If he adopts the first position and says, “I affirm neither of the two contradictories: neither existence nor nonexistence,” he should be told:

“Suppose you say this with your tongue and believe neither alternative in your heart, choosing instead to turn away from knowing Allah, worshipping Him, and remembering Him, so that you never remember Him, worship Him, supplicate to Him, place your hope in Him, or fear Him. Your denial of Him would then be greater than that of Iblīs, who acknowledged Him. Yet your refusal to affirm either of the two contradictories does not entail that neither holds in reality, for it is impossible for neither of two contradictories to hold. Rather, in reality, anything—whatever it may be—must be either existent or nonexistent: it either is or is not. There is absolutely no middle ground between negation and affirmation. We are speaking of what is actually the case, whether you deny it or acknowledge it, and whether