a bad deed and carries it through is recompensed for it with only a single bad deed, as the scriptural text attests. This clarifies the statement of the imams, as Imam Ahmad said:

“Contemplation” is of two kinds: passing thoughts and persistent resolve.

Passing thoughts occur in someone capable of acting, for if his contemplation amounted to firm, persistent resolve while he was able to act, the deed would have taken place. Joseph’s contemplation belongs to this category, as Allah Most High says:

“She certainly desired him, and he would have desired her had he not seen the proof of his Lord.”

As for the intention of the woman who sought to seduce him, it has been said that it was persistent resolve, because she did what lay within her power. Likewise, Allah Most High says of the hypocrites:

“They intended what they could not attain.”

The intention mentioned here is blameworthy, just as Allah condemned them for it. An intention of this kind is blameworthy even if it is not firm, as we shall explain at the end of this answer when distinguishing between what is incompatible with faith and what is not.

Likewise, someone who is eager to commit sins and firmly resolved to do so, prevented only by his inability, receives the same punishment as the person who commits them. This is indicated by the hadith of Abū Kabshah and by the authentic hadith:

“When two Muslims confront one another with their swords, both the killer and the one killed are in the Fire.” It was asked, “That applies to the killer, but what about the one killed?” He replied, “He was eager to kill his companion.”

Another wording states:

“He intended to kill his companion.”

This “intention” is that eagerness: it is firm resolve, accompanied by the action within his power—namely, fighting—although he was unable to kill. This is not the kind of contemplation that goes unrecorded. Nor should it be said that he deserved this merely for saying, “If I had what so-and-so has