In general, existence is an attribute of things, and is not part of their essence; this is true for all those beings which have a cause outside themselves. However, God — who is existence qua existence, i.e., whose existence is identical to his essence — does not possess the attribute of existence (the way you or I possess this attribute); instead, he simply “is”.

Thus, God ‘exists’ without having the attribute of existence. In a similar vein, Maimonides posits, God:

  • lives without having the attribute of life
  • knows, without having the attribute of knowledge
  • is omnipotent without having the attribute of omnipotence
  • is wise without having the attribute of wisdom

because of the common underlying principle that God cannot have any plurality, or any elements ‘supperadded to his essence’.

In a similar vein, Maimonides argues that even the ‘attribute’ of Unity is not proper to God: “the accident of unity is as inadmissible as the accident of plurality”, and consequently God is “One without possessing the attribute of unity”. At this point, Maimonides concedes that language itself breaks down and is unable to express the idea he is trying to convey.

It would be extremely difficult for us to find, in any language whatsoever, words adequate to this subject, and we can only employ inadequate language. In our endeavour to show that God does not include a plurality, we can only say “He is one,” although “one” and “many” are both terms which serve to distinguish quantity.

Similarly, the attribute of ‘First and Last’ employed for God is inadmissible for Maimonides because strictly speaking these are attributes which describe a being subject to time; and since God is not subject to time, these terms are “as metaphorical as the expressions ‘ear’ and ‘eye’.”