Thus, when it is said, “It is nonexistent without any cause,” this does not entail that there is something that entails its nonexistence (1). Rather, it entails that there is nothing (2) that entails its existence. It is evident that, on this supposition, it is not impossible for it to exist.

This is why the Muslims say:

“Whatever Allah wills comes to be, and whatever He does not will does not come to be.”

His will entails the existence of what He wills, while whatever He does not will does not come to be. Thus, His not willing something entails its nonexistence—not that nonexistence (3) itself does anything. Rather, the absence of His will is simply what entails that thing’s nonexistence. If “cause” is interpreted here as that which entails something else, then the dispute is merely verbal, and they have no argument for their position.

When we say, “Its essence entails its existence, or entails its nonexistence” (4), this should not be understood to mean that, in external reality, one thing exists that entails another. For, by agreement of all rational people, the impossible is not a thing at all in external reality. Rather, the truth is that the thing itself is what is entailed, while what entails it is either existence or nonexistence (5). Thus, the nonexistence of the impossible entails its nonexistence, and the existence of the necessary being entails its existence. As for the possible, it has of itself neither existence nor nonexistence entailing [existence] (6) or nonexistence. Rather, if that which brings it into existence occurs, it exists; otherwise, it remains nonexistent.

[The response] (7) is the fourth: It may be said: If every possible thing is nonexistent only through a cause