The disagreement over this is found among the followers of Ahmad, the followers (1) of Mālik, the followers (2) of al-Shāfiī, and others. As for Abū Hanīfa and his followers, they affirm that reason judges acts to be good or evil. This is the position of the majority of groups, Muslim and otherwise. In reality, this disagreement (3) comes down to what is agreeable and disagreeable (4), and to benefit and harm. Censure and punishment are among the things that harm the servant and are disagreeable to him. Thus, good (5) and evil amount to bringing about what is loved and what is hated. A good act is one that brings about what is loved, sought, and desired for its own sake (6), whereas an evil act brings about what is hated and detested. Good therefore comes down to what is loved and evil to what is hated, just as with what is beneficial and harmful, or wholesome and foul. For this reason, it varies as circumstances vary: just as one and the same thing may be beneficial when it meets a need but harmful in another situation, so too an act such as eating carrion may be evil at one time and good at another.

If this is so, the principle remains the same whether the servant himself is the agent (7) without Allah creating the capacity and will for him, or is so through Allah’s creating them for him—just as with everything else that is beneficial or harmful, loved or hated.

Conclusive proofs have established that Allah is the Creator of everything that comes into existence, and the servant’s act is among the things that come into existence. Every contingent thing is capable of both existence and nonexistence: if Allah wills it, it exists, and if He does not will it