and if they claim that we have known that by reason then it is false for two reasons. one of them is that reasoning is false in their view because it is a disposition by reason not by education and the issues of reason are contradictory and are not reliable. therefore they have invalidated the opinion completely and we did not compile this book with the intention of invalidating this doctrine. so how can that be possible from them? the second is that it can be said to the philosophers and those who acknowledge the paths of reason how did you know the inability of the creator to create paradise and hell and to resurrect the bodies as the shariah has stated? do you have anything with you except a sheer impossibility if something like it were presented to someone? the first creation was not witnessed so he excluded it and was exposed to that denial so the response to them is with the argument contained in the words of the most high {say he will give life to it who created it the first time.} and whoever contemplates the wonders of creation in the creation of man from a dirty drop will not exclude anything from the power of god and will know that repetition is easier than the beginning.
وان زعموا أنا عرفنا ذلك بالنظر فهو باطل من وجهين أحدهما أن النظر عندهم باطل فانه تصرف بالعقل لا بالتعليم وقضايا العقول متعارضه وهي غير موثوق بها ولذلك أبطلوا الرأي بالكلية ولم نصنف هذا الكتاب قصدا لإبطال هذا المذهب فكيف يمكن ذلك منهم الثاني أن يقال للفلاسفة والمعترفين بمسالك النظر بم عرفتم عجز الصانع عن خلق الجنة والنار وبعث الأجساد كما ورد به الشرع وهل معكم إلا استبعاد محض لو عرض مثله على من لم يشاهد النشأة الأولى لاستبعده وعرض له ذلك الانكار فالرد عليهم بالحجة المنطوية تحت قوله تعالى {قل يحييها الذي أنشأها أول مرة} ومن تأمل عجائب الصنع في خلق الآدمي من نطفة قذرة لم يستبعد من قدرة الله شيئا وعرف أن الاعادة اهون من الابتداء