“and He does not approve disbelief for His servants” (1) as restricted to those servants of His who believe (2). According to your view, He does not approve faith for His servants—meaning the disbelievers among them—because, in your reckoning, whatever a person actually does must be something He has approved for him, and whatever he does not do He has not approved. Hence, in your doctrine, He approved the disbelief of Iblis, Pharaoh, and their likes, while He did not approve faith for them.

You said the same about His words, “Allah does not love corruption” (3), claiming that He does not love it for the believers (4). Some of you amended this to say, “He does not love it as a religion, nor does He approve it as a religion” (5), which is somewhat closer to the truth, yet it is tantamount to your statement, “He does not will it as a religion, nor decree it as a religion.” Consequently, on your principles it would be permissible to say that He loves corruption and is pleased with it—that is, He loves it as corruption and is pleased with it as corruption, just as He willed it to be corruption.

You also censured the Muʿtazilah for that very claim for which all Muslims have censured them: their assertion that Allah is unable to do for the disbelievers anything other than what He has already done for them by way of gracious assistance (6). You further rejected the saying of some of them that whatever contradicts the foreknown is beyond the reach of power. Yet you yourselves then declared that a servant cannot do anything other than what is already known of him, and that he has no capacity whatsoever unless—and only while—he is actually performing the act; as for one who has not acted, you hold that he possesses no capacity at all (7). In so doing, you have opposed His statement: “And upon Allah rests….”