say, ‘This entails an infinite regress.’ Rather, we say to him: ‘The question of wisdom coming into existence is like that of the effect that comes into existence and gives rise to that wisdom. Whatever answer you give concerning the latter is our answer concerning the former.’”

When the second group thus prevailed over the first, a third group—comprising leading scholars of hadith, jurists, Sufis, and theologians—said to them:

“This is a dialectical argument that binds your opponents to their own concessions; you have not provided a satisfying answer. You have neither scriptural nor rational evidence that rules out this infinite regress. Rather, infinite regress is of two kinds, as is circular dependence:

“First: an infinite regress of causes and their effects. This is impossible by common agreement.

“Second: an infinite regress of conditions and effects. There are two well-known positions among Muslims and others concerning whether this is possible. Groups among the theologians, hadith scholars, and philosophers hold it to be possible. Among them are the early generations and the imams who say that Allah has always spoken whenever He wills, and that acts and other things connected with His will and power have always subsisted in Him.

“They have explained that the arguments their opponents use to deny an infinite regress of effects and to establish the impossibility of an infinite past are weak. These include the argument based on putting two sets into correspondence despite one being larger than the other, the argument from even and odd numbers, and similar arguments. They have demonstrated their invalidity and refuted their proponents by invoking future events, numerical orders, and the objects of Allah’s knowledge together with