those who are moderate in faith.

“Those believers who remain behind—except those with disabilities—are not equal to those who strive in Allah’s cause with their wealth and their lives,” and the verses that follow.

“Do you consider providing water for pilgrims and maintaining the Sacred Mosque equal to the deeds of one who believes in Allah and the Last Day and strives in Allah’s cause? They are not equal before Allah.”

Our point is simply that the foundation of faith is commanded, while the foundation of disbelief is its opposite: abandoning this commanded faith. This argument is clear and conclusive.

The second argument:

The earliest acts of disobedience to Allah were committed by the father of the jinn and the father of mankind—the progenitors of the two communities subject to His commands. The sin of the father of the jinn was greater and occurred first: he abandoned what he had been commanded to do, namely prostration, out of defiance and arrogance. The sin of the father of mankind, however, was a minor sin:

“Then Adam received words from his Lord, and He accepted his repentance.”

He merely did what was prohibited, namely eating from the tree. Many who speak on matters of religious knowledge, however, claim that this was not a sin. They maintain that Adam interpreted the prohibition: although he was forbidden the whole kind of tree in His words,

“Do not approach this tree,”

he thought it meant only that particular tree, and so made a mistake; or else he forgot. Neither someone who makes a mistake nor someone who forgets is sinful.

This view is held by groups among the people of religious innovation, speculative theologians, and the Shia, as well as many Muʿtazilites, some Ashʿarites, and others who maintain that the prophets are necessarily protected from minor sins. These people have fled from one thing only to fall into something worse by