Aligned sentence by sentence
·
Part One · Chapter Fifty-Seven — God's Existence Is Identical with His Essence
.
Concerning the attributes — more subtle than what preceded.
. . .
It is known that existence is an accident that accrues to the existent; therefore it is a meaning additional to the quiddity of the existent. This is the self-evident and necessary proposition for everything whose existence has a cause — its existence is a meaning additional to its quiddity. But as for that which has no cause for its existence — and that is God, mighty and exalted, alone; for this is the meaning of our saying of Him, exalted be He, that He is the Necessarily Existent — His existence is His essence and His reality, and His essence is His existence. It is not an essence to which existence accrues as an accident, such that when it is found, its existence becomes a meaning additional to it; for He is the Necessarily Existent always — nothing supervenes upon Him and no accident befalls Him. Therefore He is existent not through existence; and likewise, living not through life; and powerful not through power; and knowing not through knowledge — but all of it reverts to a single meaning, with no multiplicity in it, as will be explained.
.
It is also necessary to know that oneness and multiplicity are accidents that befall the existent insofar as it is multiple or one — as has been explained in the Metaphysics. And just as number is not the numbered things themselves, so too oneness is not the same as the unified thing itself; for all of these are accidents of the genus of discrete quantity that befall existents capable of receiving such accidents.
.
But the Necessarily Existent — who is truly simple and who admits of no composition whatsoever — just as the accident of multiplicity is impossible for Him, so too the accident of oneness is impossible for Him. I mean: oneness is not a meaning additional to His essence; rather, He is one, not through oneness.
.
Do not assess these subtle meanings — which minds almost fail to grasp — by the conventional words, which are the greatest cause of error; for our expression is exceedingly narrow in every language, such that we cannot conceive that meaning except by a concession in expression. Therefore, when we wish to indicate that the Deity is not multiple, the speaker can only say 'one' — even though 'one' and 'multiple' are species of quantity. For that reason we compress the meaning and guide the mind to the reality of the matter by saying: one, not through oneness.
.
Just as we say 'eternal' to indicate that He is not originated — and in our saying 'eternal' there is a concession that is manifestly apparent, since 'eternal' is only said of that to which time applies, and time is an accident of motion which follows body; and it too belongs to the category of relatives, for to say 'eternal' with respect to the accident of time is like saying 'long' or 'short' with respect to the accident of line. And anything to which the accident of time does not apply — of it, strictly speaking, neither 'eternal' nor 'originated' is said; just as of sweetness one does not say 'curved' or 'straight'; and of a sound one does not say 'salty' or 'tasteless.'
These matters are not hidden from one who has trained himself to understand meanings in their true reality, considering them through intellectual apprehension and abstraction — not through the embellishment indicated by words. Therefore, everything you find in the books describing Him, exalted be He, as 'first' and 'last' is like describing Him with 'eye' and 'ear' — the intent being that no change befalls Him, exalted be He, and no meaning is ever renewed for Him in any way whatsoever; not that He, exalted be He, falls under time, such that a comparison could be drawn between Him and other things that are in time, making Him 'first' and 'last.' All these expressions are only the language of human beings.
:
Likewise our saying 'one' means that He has no peer — not that the meaning of oneness accrues to His essence.