Existent, and to the intellects and souls. Some of them establish the Necessary Existent at the outset, on the grounds that existence must include a necessary being.

These methods are deeply flawed, both in their means and in their ends.

As for their ends, after great toil—and assuming one comes through unscathed—they yield little good. They are like the meat of an emaciated camel atop a rugged mountain: neither is the mountain easy enough to climb, nor is the meat fat enough to be worth carrying away. Moreover, these methods cause one to miss obligatory and praiseworthy ends too numerous to set out here.

As for their means, these methods involve numerous premises, and those who follow them often falter before reaching their destination. Their premises are generally either ambiguous and disputed, or obscure and accessible only to the highly intelligent. Hence, scarcely ever do two leading figures among them agree on all the premises of a proof.

Each leading philosopher or speculative theologian has a method of reasoning that differs from that of another, so that the followers of each attack the other’s method. Each believes that Allah can be known only through his own method, even though the majority of Muslims—indeed, the early generations generally—disagree with him about it.

For example, most speculative theologians believe that Allah can be known only by establishing that the world began to exist, and then reasoning from this to the One who brought it into existence.

They have various methods for establishing that it began to exist. Most argue from the origination of accidents, which are the properties of bodies.

Then the Qadariyyah among the Mu'tazilah and others believe that the existence of the Maker and the truth of prophethood can be established only after believing