in their view, to change anything in the world. Rather, all this follows from Him necessarily. What this really amounts to is that He has done nothing—indeed, that He does not even exist. Even if they call it “cause and effect,” on close examination their position amounts to nothing definite, for their doctrine contains greater contradictions and errors than that of the Christians.

A group of speculative theologians have observed that their doctrine of cause and effect is of the same kind as others’ doctrine of parent and offspring. Their intention was to place both groups in the same category of blameworthiness. Yet this falls far short of the mark: the latter are better than these philosophers. If you closely examine the statements of those among these philosophers who are nearest to Islam, such as Ibn Rushd the grandson, you will find that, at most, they make the Lord a condition for the world’s existence, not the agent who brings it into being.

The same applies to those heretical Sufis who follow their path and claim penetrating understanding, such as Ibn ‘Arabī and Ibn Sab‘īn. Their doctrine really amounts to saying that this world is a necessarily existent, beginningless being, with no maker other than itself. They say, “Existence is one.” What their doctrine really means is that there is no Creator who has created another being. Their statements concerning resurrection, prophethood, and divine oneness are worse than those of the Jews, Christians, and idol-worshippers, for these people permit the worship of every idol in the world; they do not restrict worship to particular idols.