Moreover, the notion that He produces a particular effect that coexists with Him eternally, without beginning or end, is plainly contrary to reason. Furthermore, you and all other rational people agree that what is merely possible, admitting both existence and nonexistence—what you designate as “the possible in the specific sense,” contrasted with the necessarily existent and the necessarily impossible—can only exist at one time and be nonexistent at another. You also agree that whatever is eternal and beginningless must be necessarily existent, such that its nonexistence is impossible. Aristotle and his followers agreed on this, including Ibn Sīnā, who stated it in his well-known works, such as al-Shifā and others.

He then contradicted himself, claiming that the celestial sphere is possible despite being eternal and beginningless, having always existed and continuing to exist forever. He also claimed that what is necessary through another—eternal and beginningless, with its nonexistence being impossible—can nevertheless be possible, admitting both existence and nonexistence. He further claimed that it has an essence distinct from its existence. The unsoundness and inconsistency of these people’s position have been discussed at length elsewhere.

The “second position” concerning the speech of Allah Most High is held by those who say that no attribute subsists in Allah: neither life, knowledge, power, speech, will, mercy, anger, nor anything else. Rather, He created speech in something other than Himself, and that created thing is His speech. This is the position of the Jahmiyyah and the Muʿtazilah.

This position likewise contradicts the Quran, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the early generations. It contradicts the prophets’ statements and explicit teachings. These people have no statement from the prophets that agrees with their position. Rather, they have flawed rational arguments whose unsoundness we have explained elsewhere than in this