Fifth: The Analogy of Actions: And the formulation of this analogy. In the evidence, each person who performs an action is described by it. Whoever transgresses or is unjust is called unjust and a wrongdoer. This indicates that God Almighty does not commit injustice or wrongdoing, for if He did, He would be named as such. Al-Mahdi presented this analogy, attributing it to the proponents of actions, without explicitly naming the Mu'tazila who used it to deny God's creation of human actions. He then refuted it with two points: The first is that God is not described by injustice and wrongdoing. The unjust and the wrongdoer are those who have a limit set for them and exceed it. As for God, there is no judge above Him, nor a limit set for Him. God is not described by injustice, not when He creates the unjust actions of His servants, but also even if He were to admit all His servants to Hell. It is justice from Him, just as if He were to admit them all to Paradise, it would be His grace. It is clear that this objection is based on the contradiction inherent in the two parts of the analogy, and therefore it is a flawed analogy.

The second is that what the proponents of this analogy said is only valid with a divine decree from the Lawgiver, and there is no way for this decree to exist at all. We do not know what is meant by what the proponents of this analogy said. If he means by it naming the one who is unjust as unjust and the one who transgresses as a transgressor, then the objection turns into what the Mu'tazila presented as textual evidence that humans are the creators of their actions, and his focus on this analogy becomes incorrect.

The Realm of Reason: Through Ibn Tumart's discussion of reason as a path to knowledge, it becomes clear that he does not limit this means to one field of knowledge over another. Rather, reason is used to acquire various types of knowledge. However, there are two areas where the need arises to clarify the nature of the work.

See the presentation of this analogy by Qadi Abd al-Jabbar, Sharh al-Usul al-Khamsa: (51). This is what the People of the Sunnah have gone with. See, for example: Al-Ghazali, Al-Iqtisad fi al-I'tiqad: (52). And see the refutation of this view by the Mu'tazila in the previous source: the same page and onwards. See this analogy and its critique in: Ibn Tumart, Risala fi anna al-Shari'a la tuthbat bi al-'aql: (53). 1/8