The first is that it is not transmitted in either the Book or the Sunnah, nor has it been reported from any of the Companions or those who followed them [in righteousness, or from any of the other Muslim imams] (1). It therefore constitutes a blameworthy innovation.

The second is that its meaning encompasses both truth and falsehood. Those who affirmed it included within it false notions of imperfection and likening, while those who denied it included within it false notions of nullification and distortion.

[The Position of the Negationists, Such as the Muʿtazila and Those Who Agree with Them]

The gist (2) of this is that the fundamental position of those who denied it was that they established the temporal origination of the universe by establishing the temporal origination of bodies. They said:

“A body cannot be devoid of both motion and rest, and whatever cannot be devoid of both cannot be devoid of a temporal occurrence. This is because motion occurs successively, one movement after another, while rest is either the absence of motion or a contrary state opposed to motion. In either case, a body cannot be devoid of both motion and rest. Rest can (3) be replaced by motion. Thus, every body capable of motion cannot be devoid of either motion or its opposite (4). If it is never devoid of motion—as the philosophers maintain regarding the celestial sphere—then it is temporally originated (5). If it is never devoid of that which opposes motion (6), then it [admits] (7) motion; and whatever admits motion can…”