is subordinate to that love and branches out from it; for whoever does not love a thing cannot possibly love drawing near to it. Drawing near is only a means, and love of the means follows love of the end. It is therefore inconceivable that the means leading to the beloved should itself be loved while the very object sought by that means is not. The same applies to worship and obedience: when it is said of the One who is to be obeyed and worshipped that a person loves His obedience and worship, such love is contingent upon love for Him. Whoever does not love Him will not love to obey or worship Him.
As for the one who acts for someone else solely to obtain a reward from him, or merely to ward off a punishment, he is bargaining with that person or ransoming himself from him; he is not his lover. It may not be said of such a man that he loves the one in question, interpreting this claim as love of obedience or worship. Love of the goal—even when it does, or does not, entail love of the means—requires us to speak instead of “love of recompense” or “love of safety,” not of love for the deed itself. Love of Allah, however, has no connection whatsoever to the mere love of recompense.
Consider: when someone hires a labourer for wages, we do not describe the labourer as loving his employer on that basis alone; indeed, a man may hire someone he does not love in the least, even someone he detests. Likewise, when a person ransoms himself by some deed from the torment of a tormentor, no one says that he loves that tormentor—on the contrary, he hates him. Hence it is clear that when Allah portrays His believing servants as loving Him, this cannot possibly mean nothing but love of the deed by which they obtain certain desired benefits while their Lord Himself is not loved at all.
Moreover, the very word ʿibādah (worship) inherently combines love with humility, as noted earlier. For that reason the heart’s love for human beings unfolds in stages: first comes ʿalāqah, attachment of the heart to the beloved; then ṣabābah, the heart’s outpouring toward him; then gharām, clinging, enduring love; then ʿishq; and the final degree is tatayyum, enslavement to the beloved. One who is mutayyam is captivated in worship, and the phrase taym Allah means “slave of Allah.” The lover remains ever mindful, devoted, and humbled before his beloved.
Likewise, the very name inābah (turning back to Him) also implies love, as do other similar terms mentioned earlier. Furthermore, had their contention been sound—that these expressions are merely metaphors involving ellipsis and implicit wording—figurative language can only be employed when an accompanying context makes the intended meaning plain. Yet it is known that nowhere in the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Messenger is there any indication, direct or indirect, that would negate Allah as the actual object of love and restrict love solely to deeds; reason, too, provides no such support.
A hallmark of figurative usage is that its negation may be uttered without impropriety; consequently, it would have to be permissible to say, “Allah does not love and is not loved,” just as their leader al-Jaʿd ibn Dirham declared, “Allah did not take Abraham as an intimate friend, nor did He speak to Moses directly.” It is, however, unanimously agreed by the Muslims that such a statement is impossible. Consensus therefore proves that the matter is not figurative; it is literal fact.
In addition, Allah clearly distinguishes between love for Him and love for deeds done for His sake in His words: “more beloved to you than Allah, His Messenger, and striving in His path…” (al-Tawbah 9:24), just as He differentiates between love for Him and love for His Messenger in the same verse: “more beloved to you than Allah and His Messenger….” Had love for Him meant nothing but love of the deeds, the verse would amount to needless repetition, or at best to mentioning the specific after the general.