And the impossible is that which cannot be, like the combination of opposites. Then this necessity is established in the souls of all rational beings. It is established in their souls that an action must have an actor. And there is no doubt about the existence of the actor. And this meaning has been proven from the necessity of knowing the existence of God by His saying, the Almighty: "Is there any doubt about Allah, the Originator of the heavens and the earth?" (Ibrahim/10). So Allah has informed that there is no doubt about the existence of the Originator of the heavens and the earth. And what is removed from it is doubt, it must be a helper.

Does Ibn Tumart mean by this statement that the existence of God is known intuitively and necessarily, and thus belongs to the category of knowledge that is inherently and inseparably attached to the created being? It seems that this was not his intention. Rather, he meant that knowledge of God is attained by directly employing a necessary principle of reason, which is the principle of causality, and does not depend on complex and intricate inferences. This is what is understood especially from his saying: "And this necessity is established in the souls of all rational beings. It is established in their souls that an action must have an actor." The necessary thing is the principle of causality, and through it, knowledge of God's existence is directly attained, starting from His visible action in the universe. It is, in reality, inferential knowledge and not compulsory. But his inference is direct and simple.

The path of inference: -b We found two proofs in the works of Ibn Tumart that he used to prove the existence of God, which are the following: See the same source and page. (16) This is the drowning of necessary knowledge in the drowning of the two parties. Al-Aiji mentioned it in Al-Mawaqif, (17) Theology: Ibn Tumart (18) Al-Dawani mentioned (19) that some imams, like Imam Al-Ghazali and Imam Al-Razi, went to the extent that the existence of the Necessary is intuitive and does not need contemplation. However, the works of the two imams speak to the contrary in some of their statements, explicitly and in the rational inferences they made to prove the existence of God. See, for example, Al-Ghazali: Al-Iqtisad fi Al-I'tiqad, and Al-Muhassal, and Al-Razi: Al-Tafsir Al-Kabir, and thereafter. (5) And see also a verification of this issue in: Muhammad Salih Al-Zarkan, Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi. (196)