than to the other, just as parchment, before anything is written on it, merits neither the praise accorded to a copy of the Quran nor the censure accorded to Musaylima’s “Quran.” Likewise, earth, before a mosque or a church is built upon it, has the status of neither.

In short, anything equally receptive to what is praiseworthy and what is blameworthy deserves neither praise nor blame.

Allah Most High says:

“So set your face toward the religion, inclining to truth—the natural disposition with which Allah has created mankind. There is no altering Allah’s creation.”

Thus, He commanded him to adhere to the natural disposition upon which He created mankind. How, then, could it warrant neither praise nor blame?

Moreover, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, likened it to an animal born whole and intact, and likened the unbelief that subsequently affects it to cutting off its nose and ears. It is well known that its completeness is praiseworthy and its impairment blameworthy. How, then, could it be neither praiseworthy nor blameworthy before being impaired?

If, however, this statement is intended in the sense proposed by a group of people—namely, that they were born with a sound natural disposition which, if left intact, would choose recognition over denial and faith over unbelief, but which departed from this state because of the corruption that befell it—then it may be said that this view is not subject to the objections raised against the preceding one. For its proponent maintains that the natural disposition contains a faculty by which a person inclines toward recognition and faith, just as