is humanly possible is extremely difficult. What makes this investigation more difficult is the fact that the investigator must necessarily have some knowledge of the First Cause as far as it is possible. For this enquiry leads him to investigate whether God, who is blessed, could possibly have existed at first without this world, which He afterwards brought into existence and created, or it is necessary that the world should have always existed with Him. It is, however, evident from the preceding argument itself that it is necessary for a man, desirous of making this investigation as perfect as possible, to know of the essence of God, who is blessed, all that can be attained, so that he may be able to decide accurately whether God, who is blessed, can possibly be active at one time, and cease to be active at another time, or whether this is impossible. This greatly adds to the difficulty of this investigation, since our knowledge of the essence of the First Cause is necessarily slight, as has become manifest from the preceding. Another point which makes this investigation still more difficult is the circumstance that it is hard to know from which essences or attributes of existing things it is possible for us to attain to the truth of this problem. For it is necessary that a man, desirous of making this investigation perfect, should know this at the very outset, otherwise he can only attain to the truth thereof by accident. The statement of the philosopher,[223] as recorded by the author of the _Guide_, points to the difficulty of this investigation. It is as follows: ‘As for the things concerning which we have no argument, and which are too high for us, our statement about them is, according to this, as difficult as our statement whether the world is eternal or not.’[224] This shows that this question was considered extremely difficult by the philosopher, so that he was perplexed and doubtful about it, despite the numerous arguments he mentioned to prove that the universe is eternal. The reason for that is undoubtedly because the philosopher assumed that there were numerous arguments likewise to prove that the universe was created, and that his own arguments did not in any way establish the truth in this matter; and this is the very truth, as will be explained further on. Now if this question was considered difficult by the philosopher, despite his high rank of wisdom, how much more difficult would it be to other men who are lower than he on the ladder of knowledge?