and the motion of every star, for this is comparable to the motions involved in change in our own realm. Some knowledge distracts a person from what he needs. A person needs certain kinds of knowledge and must perform certain obligatory deeds; if he occupies himself with what he does not need at the expense of what he does need, he is blameworthy.

Knowledge is censured on such grounds: it may not truly be knowledge, even though its proponents and others call it knowledge—and this is exceedingly common; a person may be unable to bear it; it may prompt and assist him to do what harms him; or it may prevent him from pursuing what benefits him.

For a particular person, it may also be neither praiseworthy nor blameworthy. All of this concerns knowledge in general.

The same applies to the faculty by which a person knows and reasons, which is called the intellect. Its absence is likewise not praiseworthy unless its presence causes harm. There are people for whom it would be better to lose their sanity, since they would then cease to be accountable for religious obligations, whereas through their intellect they fall into disbelief, wickedness, and disobedience.

The intellect may mean the innate faculty in a person by which he reasons, or it may mean the very act of reasoning, comprehending, and knowing.

The first meaning is expressed in the statement of Imam Ahmad and others among the early generations: “The intellect is an innate disposition, and wisdom is discernment.”