Before proceeding to the next argument, it is necessary to dispel one doubt that arises in the minds of some naïve people—particularly the young—and that is, if God created this universe, then who created God? That is to say, if it is pertinent to ask who is the Creator and Master of this world, then it should also be pertinent to ask who is the Creator and Master of God? The answer is— regardless of the fact that such a question cannot arise vis-à-vis God, as it will be established later—even if we suppose that the Being who is the Creator and Master of this universe has been created by another being, it does no harm to the argument, for in that case, we will call the higher being God and consider the lower being as one of the creation, as one cause out of the chain of causes, and as one of the intermediate links in the creation. If someone asks who is the creator and master of that higher being, the answer is that if that higher being is the creation of a still higher being, then the highest being will be called God and each of the lower beings will be considered one of the creation. In short, whoever will mark the end-point of this chain; i.e. whoever is considered as the first link of this chain, with no one higher, Him shall we call God and all else His creation.
If someone thinks that the question of who is the Creator and Master of a particular being arises on and on ad infinitum about every being, and so, no such being would be established that could be called the first being, the answer is that such an eventuality would be logically impossible. If we accept no one as the first being in this chain, inevitably we will have to deny the existence of all the lower beings, including this universe, which resulted from the first being. In other words, the universe, and everything in it, is nothing but imagination and in reality there is no earth, no heaven, no moon, no sun, no stars, no human beings, no animals, no trees, no water, no air, and nothing else. For instance, let us call this universe ‘A’, and call its Creator ‘B’, and suppose ‘C’ created ‘B’, and ‘D’ created ‘C’, and go on suggesting that every being is created by another higher being ad infinitum. We will never be able to establish a cause that can be called the first cause, and when the first cause cannot be established, none of the subsequent causes would be established; i.e. a failure to establish the first cause will render all subsequent causes void. Reverting to the example above, if ‘D’ is not established, inevitably ‘C’ would not be established; if there is no ‘C’, there would be no ‘B’, and if there is no ‘B’ then there would no ‘A’. Thus denying ‘D’ inevitably leads to denial of ‘A’, whereas existence of ‘A’ (the letter we have assigned to this world) is unanimously accepted—no one can deny that. Therefore, the kind of reasoning that fails to establish the first cause is faulty, because that leads you to deny the existence of the universe. Therefore, we are obliged to determine a first cause; i.e. to believe in a Being above whom there is no being and obviously that can be the only one who is uncreated, and we call Him God. To summarise, however prolonged this chain [of cause and effect] may be, we will have to determine its end point; i.e. we will have to accept some being at the origin of this chain and that first being is God, who is uncreated, and all others below Him—be they superior and more eminent than each other in their natural and inherent capabilities—are without exception part of creation and governed by the One God.
Now I would like to briefly state that the question, ‘Who is the creator or master of God’, is in fact wrong because such a question about God should not arise. The concepts of Divinity and being created are mutually exclusive; it is logically impossible to combine the two. The term ‘God’ has to be reserved for the One highest of all, and the term creation infers the existence of a Higher Being who has the capacity to create. Therefore, these two concepts cannot be combined in any way. Calling someone ‘created’ implies that we believe in the existence of some higher being, who is its creator and master. Thus, if ‘God’ is created, inevitably there should be a being above ‘God’ who is the creator of ‘God’, master of ‘God’, sovereign over ‘God’, and one who sustains ‘God’; in short, one who is above and superior to ‘God’ in every respect. If there is truly such a being then that higher being is God, not the so-called subordinate ‘God’ who is created and possessed and governed. No wise man can use the word God for the subordinate being in the presence of the higher being. Think and think again: you can call a being God only as long as you regard Him as uncreated. As soon as you introduce the concept of him being created, you are compelled to accept the existence of a superior being above him, who should be the creator and master of the former. This immediately transfers the status of God from the subordinate to the superior. In short, the being who is determined to be created cannot be God; the being who is his creator and superior will be called God. So it is established that one being cannot be both God and the creation. It is impossible for a being to be God as well as created, and so, if we accept a being as God, then the question of His creator is totally irrational.
Third, I would like to respond to this doubt, though it is absolutely beyond question. Let us suppose for a moment that God is created and then see the outcome. Obviously, everything has some characteristics and properties which distinguish it from other things. For instance, water has properties not found in air and stone, and that is how we distinguish it from air and stone. If those properties are taken away from water then it no longer remains water. In short, everything has some characteristics and properties that characterise its existence and distinguish it from other things. When we use the word God about one being, our reason suggests some attributes that would make Him worthy of the title, and distinguish Him from other beings; i.e. these attributes are pillars of being Divine, and if stripped of them He would no longer be God. For instance, reason counsels us that if God exists, He should be eternal and immortal; i.e. He should be everlasting. Logic suggests that if there is a God, He should be self-subsisting; i.e. He should be able to sustain Himself without any support from any other being. He should be omnipotent; i.e. His authority should be absolute and no one should be able to interfere with His works. And He should be one; i.e. He should be one and unique with no one else to claim equality with Him. Reason tells us that if there is a God, He should be permanent and independent in His attributes and the existence of His attributes should not depend on the will of any other being.
Thus, whoever we can call God must have some of the attributes I have explained above, because without these attributes, the perpetual system of the universe cannot be sustained. That is, these attributes and the like are pillars for the Divine Throne, without which it [the universe] cannot exist. If we assume that God is created, then He cannot possibly have any of these attributes. For instance, if God is created, He cannot be eternal and we will have to believe that He is recent. A created God cannot be immortal and we will have to believe that He is mortal. If God is created, He cannot be self-subsisting and He would have to be sustained by one who is His creator and master. If God is created, He cannot be omnipotent and we will have to believe that His powers are limited and that the one who is his creator and master can interfere with His works as and when he likes. If God is created, He cannot be one and we will have to consider the possibility of many other gods besides Him, since there is no reason why the being that could create one god would not have created many gods to affirm the vastness of his attributes of creation, power, and sovereignty. If God is created, He cannot be permanent and independent in any of His attributes and we will have to believe that each of His attributes is dependent on the will and mercy of one who created Him, because each attribute of the one who is created is also created and governed by the Creator. In short, as a consequence of believing that God is created, all His attributes—arguably the pillars of Divine Throne—become invalid and God appears like ordinary created beings that seek support from their creator and master in everything and have no independent existence at all.
In short, from whichever angle you look at it, to be God and to be created are so opposed and contradictory to each other that they cannot exist together in one being in any way. Therefore, we are compelled not to deem the Being we call God to be created and not to use the name ‘God’ for the one we deem to be created.