“I fell in, but what made you fall in?” He replied, “I was so absorbed in you that I lost awareness of myself and thought that you were me.”

There is no doubt that this is error and misguidance. But if it results from the intensity of love and remembrance, without any prohibited cause bringing about his loss of reason, then he is excused for that loss. He is therefore not held accountable for what he says in this state, in which he has lost his reason without a prohibited cause.

As has been said of the sane among the insane:

“They are people whom Allah granted reason and spiritual states. Then He took away their reason but left their spiritual states, and lifted the obligations He had imposed because of what He had taken away.”

If, however, the cause of his loss of reason is prohibited, the intoxicated person is not excused, although, according to the sounder of the two views, he is not judged an unbeliever. Likewise, according to the sounder of the two views, his divorce does not take effect, although the disagreement over this ruling is well known. We have discussed this at length, as well as whose spiritual state may be accepted and whose may not, in a “treatise” on the subject.

In any case, the self-effacement that leads a person to such a condition is an imperfect state, even if he is not legally accountable. For this reason, nothing of this kind has been reported from the Companions, who are the best of this community, nor from our Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who is the best of the messengers—although those who experience such states find some basis for their position in Moses’ falling unconscious. Loss of reason upon receiving spiritual influxes from Allah occurred only among some of the Successors and those who came after them.

If perfect love entails agreement with the beloved in what he loves and hates, and in his friendships and enmities, then it is clear that whoever