is eternal, an effect of an eternal cause. As for the ancient philosophers, those who held that the celestial sphere came into existence—who constituted the majority—and those who preceded Aristotle agreed with the adherents of revealed religions. Those who maintained that the celestial sphere is eternal, such as Aristotle and his followers, affirmed only a final cause which the sphere seeks to resemble; they did not affirm an efficient cause for it. The intellects and souls whose existence they affirmed are of the same kind as the celestial sphere: all are eternal and necessary in themselves, even if they have a final cause. These philosophers were more extreme in their unbelief than the later thinkers. The point, however, is to make clear that the doctrine of these later thinkers is not that of the earlier ones.

Second:

These thinkers say that the Lord is one, and that from one only one can emanate. By His being one, they mean that He has no positive attribute whatsoever and that no multiplicity of meanings can be conceived in Him, because they regard this as composition. Hence they say that He cannot be both an agent and a recipient, since the respect in which something acts differs from the respect in which it receives. This would entail a multiplicity of attributes, which in turn would entail composition.

Yet they also say that He is the thinker, the object of thought, and intellect; the lover, the beloved, and love; the object of pleasure, the one who experiences pleasure, and pleasure itself—along with other such multiple meanings. They say that each of these attributes is identical to the others, that the attribute is identical to the one possessing it, that knowledge is power and will, and that knowledge is the knower and is the possessor of power.

Some of their later thinkers also said that knowledge is identical to the object known. When a rational person properly comprehends their statements, it becomes clear to him that this One whom they affirm cannot conceivably