by those among the “speculative theologians” who introduced it. This is neither the language of the Arabs nor that of any other nation. It is found neither in the language of the Quran nor elsewhere, nor in common usage, nor in the terminology of most of those engaged in scholarly inquiry. Rather, those who devised this terminology are among the “people of innovation” who introduced innovations into the Muslim community and are included in the censure pronounced by the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him.

In any event, merely adopting this terminology and calling these qualities “accidents” and “temporal occurrences” does not prevent them from being perfections, such that one who possesses them is more perfect than one who cannot possess them—or who can possess them but does not.

Furthermore, suppose there are two beings: one possesses attributes of perfection which, in their terminology, are accidents and temporal occurrences—such as knowledge, power, action, and forceful seizure—while the other cannot possess these attributes, which they call accidents and temporal occurrences. The first would be more perfect, just as a living being that possesses these attributes is more perfect than inanimate objects.

Likewise, suppose there are two beings: one loves the attributes of perfection, rejoices in them, and is pleased with them, while the other makes no distinction between attributes of perfection and attributes of deficiency—loving neither, being pleased with neither, and rejoicing in neither. The first would be more perfect than the second.

It is well known that Allah, blessed and exalted, loves those who do good, the God-fearing, the steadfast, and those who act justly, and that He is pleased with those who believe and perform righteous deeds. All of these are attributes of perfection.

Likewise, suppose there are two beings: one hates those characterized by the opposite of perfection, such as injustice and ignorance—