in jurisprudence and its principles contradicts this principle, unlike that of other theologians who lacked Abū al-Maʿālī’s proficiency in jurisprudence. For he affirms reasons appropriate to legal rulings, understood as motives and inducements, yet affirming these contradicts this principle.

Abū al-Maʿālī then said: “We do not deny that Allah Most High created some whom He benefited by creating them, and others whom He harmed by creating them. What we reject concerning purpose, and deny of the Eternal One, glorified is He, is that anything newly originated should subsist in His essence, such as a volition, an impelling motive, or a need. The Muʿtazilah agree with us that newly originated things cannot subsist in His essence. Nevertheless, they affirm renewed attributes and states for the Eternal One, glorified is He, arising from volitions that He brings into being without a locus. What is objectionable about newly originated things subsisting in the Creator’s essence is that new attributes would arise in Him—yet they have committed Him to precisely this.”

Abū al-Maʿālī said: “If someone were to say: ‘The Eternal One created the world only to manifest His power and to display proofs and signs through which His divinity may be inferred, and through which He, glorified and exalted is He, may be known by His qualities, majesty, and attributes; so that He may be worshipped and exalted, and those who worship and exalt Him may deserve abundant reward, while whoever turns away from this deserves painful punishment. This is explicitly stated in innumerable verses of the Noble Book, including His saying:

“Allah created the heavens and the earth for a true purpose, and so that every soul may be recompensed for what it has earned.” [al-Jāthiyah 22]