the Necessary Existent. Yet they have also affirmed something eternal that is not necessarily existent. What they affirmed concerning the eternal thus contradicts its being the Lord of all worlds, for they affirmed an eternal category comprising both the necessary and the non-necessary.

Moreover, they say that the Necessary Existent they have affirmed cannot possess any positive attribute. Such a being cannot possibly be necessary, let alone necessarily existent. This has been explained at length elsewhere, where it has been shown that they describe their supposed Necessary Existent as neither an attribute nor anything possessing attributes whatsoever. This can only be imagined in the mind; it has no reality outside it.

If “the Necessary Existent” is understood to mean the Originator of contingent beings, this is true, and the designation refers to the Essence possessing its attributes. If it is understood to mean the self-existent being that has no agent causing it, then both the Essence and the attributes are necessary. If it is understood to mean that which has neither an agent nor an originator, then the Essence is necessary, but the attributes are not necessary. If it is understood to mean that which is neither an attribute nor anything possessing attributes, this is false and has no reality. Indeed, its existence is impossible, neither contingent nor necessary. The further they go in stripping it of attributes, the more deeply they plunge into the denial of divine attributes, as has been explained at length elsewhere.

As for those who claim to have established the existence of the Eternal—the Jahmiyyah, the Muʿtazilah, and those Ashʿarīs and Karrāmīs who followed their path, arguing from the coming into existence of accidents