 we said it is not a thing so how did it occur? the meaning of its issuance from him is nothing but that what occurred is attributed to his power. so if its occurrence is understood why is its addition to the power not understood? what is the difference between them and those who deny the occurrence of nothingness at all on accidents and images and say nothingness is not a thing so how can it occur and how can it be described as occurring and renewed? we do not doubt that nothingness can be imagined as occurring on accidents. what is described as occurring is conceivable whether it is called a thing or not. so the addition of that intelligible reality to the power of the allpowerful is also conceivable.
قلنا وهو ليس بشيء فكيف وقع؟ وليس معنى صدوره منه إلا أن ما وقع مضاف إلى قدرته، فإذا عقل وقوعه لم لا تعقل إضافته إلى القدرة؟ وما الفرق بينهم وبين من ينكر طريان العدم أصلا على الأعراض والصور ويقول العدم ليس بشيء فكيف يطرى وكيف يوصف بالطريان والتجدد؟ ولا نشك في أن العدم يتصور طريانه على الأعراض، فالموصوف بالطريان معقول وقوعه سمى شيئا أو لم يسم، فإضافة ذلك الواقع المعقول إلى قدرة القادر أيضا معقول.