Section

For no such command has occurred, even if it can be conceived. This resembles matters for which the revealed Law has issued no command: issuing commands to children and those lacking reason, commanding the blind to see, the poor to provide maintenance, or someone with a disabling infirmity to journey to Mecca. The revealed Law has prescribed none of these things. Had it prescribed them, believing in them and affirming their truth would have been obligatory. Thus, statements concerning this should not be qualified.

He said:

A group of our companions held that one may speak without qualification of the permissibility of imposing obligations beyond one’s capacity, whether on someone with a disabling infirmity, a blind person, or others. This is the position of Jahm and Burghūth.

(The second aspect)

The faculties are sound, but capacity is lacking because of the absence of enabling grace and acceptance. This is permissible, with no contrary position. What this means is that an obligation may be imposed on someone who, as determined in Allah’s knowledge, will not perform it. The Muʿtazilah rejected this. The evidence for it is Allah’s statement to Iblīs:

“What prevented you from prostrating to what I created with My two hands?”

And His words:

“From prostrating when I commanded you?”

And other such verses. Thus, He issued a command despite His prior knowledge that Iblīs would not perform the act. The command therefore concerned something that Allah had foreknown he would be unable to do.

(The second position)

This is also transmitted from Abū al-Hasan. Abū al-Maʿālī al-Juwaynī claimed that most of Abū al-Hasan’s answers inclined toward it and that many of his followers approved it.