the one washing it has thereby exempted him from commands and prohibitions concerning voluntary actions. This is false.

A “third objection” is that this position effectively abolishes commands and prohibitions for the servant in these circumstances, even though his actions are voluntary. Granted that he has no personal desire, not everything in which he has no personal desire is thereby exempt from commands and prohibitions. Rather, he must love what Allah and His Messenger love and hate what Allah and His Messenger hate.

The reply is: These objections are valid. The decisive explanation is that the spiritual wayfarer may be unaware of what is commanded and prohibited, such that he does not know whether a particular action is commanded or prohibited by the revealed Law. His personal inclination thus remains, so that he has no personal inclination in the matter; he then submits it to the divine decree—which is the Lord’s action—because he does not know what the Lord approves, commands, and loves concerning that action.

This happens to many leading worshippers and scholars. They may encounter actions and statements whose ruling under Allah’s revealed Law they do not know, either because the evidence appears contradictory to them or because it is entirely unknown to them. They are therefore excused because the revealed ruling is unknown to them. A ruling of the revealed Law becomes binding upon the servant only when he is able to