The benefits of the saying of Allah the Exalted: ((And had it not been for the favor of my Lord, I would have been among those brought [to Him])).

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Allah Mighty and Majestic said: It is derived from this noble verse that speaking of the favor of Allah Mighty and Majestic is prescribed and commanded, on the condition that the intention is to praise Allah, not to boast over the servants of Allah.
And among the benefits of this noble verse is that a person's salvation from the punishment of Allah is among the greatest favors. For this reason, He said: And this is also indicated by the saying of the Exalted: where He made the completion of the religion part of the completion of the favor. And through the religion comes salvation from the Fire and success in the abode of eternity. So among the greatest favors, indeed it is the greatest of favors, is that Allah grants a person salvation from the Fire and entry into the abode of eternity.
And among the benefits of this noble verse is that this believer said: and he attributed it to the lordship of Allah. And this lordship is among the specific lordships. It has passed us in other gatherings that lordship is general and specific. And in the saying of the Exalted: the first is general and the second is specific. And specific lordship necessitates a more specific nurturing than general lordship, in that Allah the Exalted nurtures this servant with a specific nurturing greater than general lordship.
And among the benefits of this noble verse is the permissibility of attributing a thing to its cause, due to his saying: and he did not say "had it not been for my Lord." But someone might say: if the favor of Allah Mighty and Majestic is intended to mean the action of Allah, then it is among the attributes of Allah, so attributing a thing to it is like attributing it to Allah, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): But is it permissible to attribute a thing to its known, created cause? We say: yes, it is permissible if the cause is truly known. So you might say, for example, "Had it not been for so-and-so who saved me from drowning, I would have perished," and there is no harm in that, but on the condition that you feel in your heart that so-and-so was deployed by Allah for you and did not act independently. And from this, meaning from attributing a thing to its known cause, is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding his uncle Abu Talib: So he said, "Had it not been for me," and he attributed the thing to the known cause.
Is it possible to attribute a thing to Allah and to its known cause, or is it not possible? It is possible to attribute it to Allah and to its known cause, on the condition that it is connected with a particle that does not necessitate equating them. So one should not say "Had it not been for Allah and so-and-so," because this is shirk (associating partners with Allah), due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to the man who said "What Allah wills and what you will": Because the conjunction "and" necessitates equating, so it is not permissible to equate other than Allah with Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He. But if it is attributed with a particle that does not necessitate equating but necessitates ordering, then this is of two types: a type that is permissible with no issue, and a type that has some doubt. If it is connected with "then," such as "Had it not been for Allah, then so-and-so," then this is permissible with no issue, because you made so-and-so a follower with a delayed following, where you connected it with "then," which indicates delay. But if you connected it with the "fa" of ordering and immediate succession, such as "Had it not been for Allah, so-and-so," then this is a matter of consideration, but the closer view is that it is permissible, because you brought the "fa" which indicates ordering. And it is permissible to attribute it to Allah alone and omit the cause entirely, so you say "Had it not been for Allah, I would have perished." And it is permissible to attribute it to Allah by mentioning the cause and clarifying that the cause is merely a cause, such as saying "Had it not been that Allah saved me by so-and-so, I would have perished." So we have four ways:
First, to attribute the thing to its known cause, whether by sense or by Shari'ah. What is the ruling? It is permissible, and its evidence is: And the scholars use this frequently.
Second, to attribute it to Allah alone, so this is permissible.
To attribute it to Allah accompanied by clarifying the cause, such as "Had it not been that Allah saved me by so-and-so," or a person drowning in the sea said "Had it not been that Allah saved me by a plank I climbed onto, I would have perished." This is also permissible.
Third, to attribute it to Allah and the cause connected with a particle that necessitates ordering, such as "Had it not been for Allah, then so-and-so," or "Had it not been for Allah, so-and-so." But "then so-and-so" is better than the second. These are all four permissible.
Fifth: To attribute it to Allah and to its cause with a particle that necessitates equating, such as "Had it not been for Allah and so-and-so." This is haram (forbidden), indeed it is shirk (associating partners with Allah), but it is minor shirk if it is verbal shirk, and major shirk if one believes that this cause is equal to Allah the Exalted in bringing about the effect, because if one makes something other than Allah equal to Allah, it is major shirk.
And if he attributes it to a cause not known by Shari'ah or by sense, then this is shirk, but it may be major or minor. If he says "Had it not been for so-and-so," meaning the one in the grave, "who saved me, I would have perished," then this is major shirk, because so-and-so is not able to save.
And if he attributes it to a cause not known by Shari'ah or by sense, but it is not like the first, such as amulets hung on a sick person other than from the Qur'an, then this is shirk, but it is minor, not major. So the categories are now six. And here: my Lord, six. But the sixth is divided: If what is intended by that is the action of Allah, then it is from the category of attributing a thing to the action of Allah, and it is like attributing it to Allah. And if what is intended by that is the thing by which the favor is given, then it is an attribution to a created thing, but it is a correct cause, and attributing a thing to its correct cause is permissible.