because he leaves it undone and occupies himself with its opposite. For example, a disbeliever is required to believe while in a state of disbelief, since he is neither incapable of believing nor is belief impossible for him. He is like someone unable to acquire knowledge because he is occupied with earning a living.)”

This position stated by al-Qādī Abū Yaʿlā is that of the majority of jurists and theologians, and of the majority of Imam Ahmad’s followers. Al-Qādī also cited al-Ashʿarī’s explicitly stated position—as reported by al-Qādī himself. He mentioned that Abū Bakr ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz quoted Abū al-Hasan’s statements on this matter, just as an author quotes Abū al-Hasan’s statements on the matter and quotes the statements of those who agree with him and of his associates. For Abū al-Hasan was among the theologians who affiliated themselves with Imam Ahmad and the other imams of the Sunnah, as he stated in his books.

Among Abū al-Hasan’s followers, some agreed with the very position stated by al-Qādī, such as Abū ʿAlī ibn Shādhān and his followers. Others disagreed with him, such as Abū Muhammad al-Labbān, al-Rāzī, and various groups. They said that it is permissible to impose an obligation to do the impossible, such as combining two opposites, or to do something beyond one’s capacity.

The third position, stated by Abū Bakr ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, is that anything possible may be imposed as an obligation, even if it is impossible in the ordinary course of things, such as walking on one’s face or a blind person adding dots to a copy of the Quran.

Abū ʿAbd Allāh ibn Hāmid, the teacher of al-Qādī Abū Yaʿlā, mentioned in his work on foundational principles the two positions of “drawing a distinction and allowing it without qualification” held by Ahmad’s followers. He said: