it is not conceivable in the effect to deny the essence from existence. the evidence for this is that if this were conceivable then it would be possible for there to be in the effects an existence that has no reality that shares with the first in having no reality or essence and differs from it in having a cause while the first has no cause. so why is this not conceivable in the effects? and does it have a cause other than that it is not conceivable in itself? and that which is not conceivable in itself by denying its cause it does not become conceivable and that which is conceivable by estimating its cause it does not cease to be conceivable. and going to this extent is the limit of their darkness for they thought that they
لا يعقل في المعلول نفي الماهية من الوجود ويدل عليه أنه لو كان هذا معقولا لجاز أن يكون في المعلولات وجود لا حقيقة له يشارك الأول في كونه لا حقيقة ولا ماهية له ويباينه في أن له علة، والأول لا علة له، فلم لا يتصور هذا في المعلولات؟ وهل له سبب إلا أنه غير معقول في نفسه؟ وما لا يعقل في نفسه فبأن ينفي علته لا يصير معقولا، وما يعقل فبأن يقدر له علة لا يخرج عن كونه معقولا. والتناهي إلى هذا الحد غاية ظلماتهم فقد ظنوا أنهم