those false beliefs. Even if the truth remains unknown, simple ignorance is better than compound ignorance, and refraining from believing false doctrines is better than believing any of them.] (1).

(2 The Mu'tazila, for their part, deny 2) (2) that temporal events subsist in Him, because they are accidents and therefore cannot subsist in Him. The others say: “Rather, accidents do subsist in Him.”

The Mu'tazila’s principal argument is that, if accidents subsisted in Him, He would be a body; the others accept that He is a body. The Mu'tazila’s principal basis for denying that He is a body is that a body is never devoid of temporal events. Their opponents dispute this and say: “Rather, a body can be devoid (3) of temporal events.”

They also say: “The Creator is an eternal body, just as you say that He (4) is an eternal essence and that He acted after previously not acting [and you regard His effect as identical with His act] (5).”

These people, however, say: “He has (6) an act subsisting in Him and an effect separate from Him.” The others say: “[He has] (7) an effect separate from Him, but no act subsists in Him.”

The Mu'tazila’s principal argument is as follows: If He was at rest in pre-eternity, motion (8) would not be possible for Him, because rest is a positive, pre-eternal reality and therefore cannot cease. If He was in motion, that would entail infinitely many temporal events.

Their opponents say: “Rather, He was at rest in pre-eternity.” They further maintain that (9)