his Lord and has faith in what has come from his Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. This affirmation, faith, aversion, and struggle against the soul involve deeds performed by the purified soul, through which it becomes purer still. By contrast, when it commits evil deeds, it becomes defiled, buried, and stunted, like crops among which tangled growth has sprung up. Reward is granted only for an actual deed, and the same applies to punishment.

As for the mere absence of action, it entails neither reward nor punishment, but rather the absence of both. Allah, glorified be He, has commanded good and forbidden evil. There is agreement that a command requires an actual deed, but disagreement over whether a prohibition requires something positive or merely an absence. One view holds that it requires something positive—namely, refraining. This is the majority view. Another holds that what is required is the absence of evil: that one simply does not commit it.

“The correct analysis” is that when a believer forbids wrongdoing, he must not approach it, must resolve to refrain from it, and must find its commission abhorrent. This is undoubtedly something positive. It is therefore inconceivable that a believer who knows that it is . . . (1) positive in nature. Yet he may have no desire for it, just as one has a natural aversion to eating carrion. Even so, he must believe that it is forbidden and resolve to refrain from it in obedience to the Lawgiver. This goes beyond natural aversion: it is something positive for which he is rewarded. His reward, however, is not like that of someone who restrains his soul and struggles against it to keep it from pursuing