As for the “first question,” it rests on two principles:

The first is the distinction between the address that brings things into being and the address that imposes obligations. Through the former, He, glorified is He, does not require any action from the addressee. Rather, He Himself brings the addressee into being and creates it through that address, without any action, power, will, or existence on the addressee’s part. Through the latter, He requires the one commanded to perform an act or refrain from it, exercising power and will—although all of this occurs through Allah’s might and power, for there is no might or power except through Allah.

People have disagreed over this latter address: may something nonexistent validly be addressed on condition that it comes into existence, or may it validly be addressed only after it exists? They do not disagree, however, that the ruling conveyed by the address applies to it only after it exists. Likewise, they have disagreed over the former: is it an actual address, or is it an expression of His power and the swiftness with which He brings things into being through that power? The former is the well-known view among those who identify with the Sunnah.

The second principle concerns whether something nonexistent is a thing while it does not exist. Certain groups among the theologians of the Muʿtazilah and the Shīʿah have held that it is a thing outside the mind—an entity and a distinct reality. They have claimed that essences are neither made nor created, and that their existence is something additional to their essential reality. Certain groups among the philosophers, the Ittihādiyyah (advocates of union), and other heretics have likewise adopted this view.