By distinguishing between these two kinds of power, you will understand the statements of those who say, “Power accompanies the act,” and those who say, “It precedes it”; those who say, “All acts entail imposing what is beyond one’s capacity,” and those who reject this. You will also grasp the subtleties underlying these positions.

If this explanation remains unclear to you, consider an example from your own experience. When you write with a pen, strike with a stick, or shape wood with an adze, does the pen become your partner, or is any part of the act itself or its attributes ascribed to it? Would it be right, on the other hand, to disregard its effect, dismiss it altogether, and treat its existence as no different from its absence? Or should one say, “He acted through it and accomplished his work through it”?

And to Allah belongs the highest description. The means at the servant’s disposal are not of his own making, and he needs them: he can act only through them. Allah, glorified is He, however, created the causes and their effects, making the creation of some a condition and a cause for the creation of others. Yet He has no need of conditions or causal means. He has linked them to one another for a wise purpose connected with the causes and pertaining to them. Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.

As for his statement, “If we deny causal efficacy, it follows that Allah, glorified is He, alone acts. Compulsion necessarily follows, and the entire framework of the revealed Law—commands and prohibitions—is swept away,” we reply:

If by the causal efficacy you deny you mean independent efficacy with respect to the act itself or any of its attributes, then you have indeed spoken the truth, although some adherents of the Sunnah disagree with you concerning the second category. But if you mean that the existence of power is no different from its absence, and that the act did not occur through it