is created, insofar as the underlying premise of their doctrine is concerned. For their fundamental premise is that nothing involving choice subsists in the Lord. Thus, neither speech nor action subsists in Him by His choice and will. They said:

“These are occurrences that begin in time, and no such occurrences subsist in the Lord.”

They thereby contradicted authentic revelation and clear reason. They believed that by this they were refuting the philosophers and establishing that the world came into existence. But they were mistaken: they neither defended Islam nor defeated the philosophers. They claimed that, in eternity past, the Lord had no power to utter speech or perform an act, and that He became able after having been unable, without anything new occurring. Or they change their wording and say, “He has always had power.” Yet they say:

“What was within His power was impossible, and acting became possible for Him after it had become impossible for Him, without anything new arising.”

They sometimes express this by saying:

“In eternity past, He had power over what would be possible in the unending future, not over what was impossible in eternity past.”

They thus combine two contradictory claims, affirming that He had power while maintaining that what He had power over was impossible. They failed to distinguish between speech and action as kinds and particular instances of them, just as the philosophers failed to distinguish between the two. Rather, the philosophers claimed that a particular thing He produced was coeternal with Him. In this they went astray and contradicted clear reason and authentic revelation. For the evidence does not establish the eternity of any particular thing in the world. Rather, it establishes that everything other than Allah is created and comes into existence after not having existed, since He acts by His power and will, as is shown by the proofs